Anniversaries, Writings

[tcpip]

Three days ago was the civil union anniversary for caseopaya and I. That evening was a simple and pleasant affair of a homecooked meal (braised chicken maryland) and enjoyment of each other's company. The following night however we decided to spend at night at the Rendezvous Melbourne, which is certainly has some beautiful art noveau features. Yes, there is silliness in spending an evening in a hotel approximately 7 kilometres from home, but it was enjoyable silliness just the same. We kept a bottle of Moët in reserve for tonight, being the end of the 13th b'ak'tun, in accordance to the old Mayan calendar (and issue I spoke about some three years ago).

Also, because the stars are right, I have finished a review of Call of Cthulhu, which does point out its brilliance and some oft-overlooked flaws; it will find itself on RPG.net soon. On a related matter, have picked up a small mountain of gaming material which should keep me going for a year of two. In other writings, the Isocracy website has reprinted and added a couple of quotes to an excellent article by Matt Barsan on the limitations of the "anarcho"-capitalist position of voluntaryism. I am less convinced by the psychological approach by William Hathaway on the inevitability of war.

Comments

[zenicurean.livejournal.com]

I really like the Call of Cthulhu review. I think it's an excellent summary of both the good old classic's strengths and weaknesses; the mood and theme has always been so magnificently strong in this game, and yet the rules have always been a tiny bit borked somewhere at the core. More so in the old days, when the skill list used to have Linguistics &c. in it. Incidentally, I entirely agree with your point about the combat. I've noticed that the way combat skills receive extra attention can easily compel any character with some past competence in violence -- a police officer, a war veteran, what have you -- to over-specialise in it, since academic skills tend to be sweeping and broad-based ("You are now suddenly an expert in all branches of biology!") whereas combat skills are not. ("You are now expert at rifles! But you're still pants at firing shotguns!")

I like the percentile system well enough, but I often run into a problem a bit like this in games that use it. Trying to roll up a competent herbalist in Stormbringer takes putting points in one skill. Rolling up a competent burglar takes putting endless reams of skills points to jumping, climbing, sneaking, running, rolling over, fetching, sitting, staying... Although, in CoC, I find people don't go for the professionally violent types very often anyway. I mean, what are they going to do, punch Nyarlathotep? Why does this game bother to assign stats to some of these monstrous gods, anyway?

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

Yes, skill systems which have breadth problems are common. Remember weapon proficiencies from AD&D1e and beyond? Same issue. Rolemaster tried to resolve the problem in the Companions by having a wide range of defaults, which was followed up with some more careful design in GURPS. FUDGE, I think did an excellent job of structuring skills into various categories of depth, although most of the work was left for the GM.

A comparison with AD&Ds Dieties & Demigods is unavoidable, although I think the stats for CoC mythos. I suppose at least the CoC gods are meant to be naturalistic and with within the range of possible action (even if they did return). Of course no stats are provided for said critters in Trail of Cthulhu.