SabrinaTeenLich Community

As I have said before, I am pretty new to GMing, so I'm still in the learn how to do it phase, not the how to improve phase.

I am far away from being in a place where developing a game or mechanic is a real possibility for me, though I have written a few short adventures/modules for the systems I run. All pretty basic, but I figure if I am going to make it I may as well make it so it works/looks like all of the other modules I have seen.

As for being a player, though this sounds pretty basic, I am working on better roleplaying. I am personally very private and introverted, so the idea of being the center of attention and being a bit of a fool is very intimidating to me, regardless of any username that I might be known as. But I am making a genuine attempt step more out of my box when playing. It seems like it would come naturally to anyone interested in TTRPGs but that is far from the truth for me. This obviously also ties into GMing, as you roleplay everything in the world not controlled by players. It pushes me in that direction, that is the main reason I really wanted to try DMing, so that it would force me to actually interact more.

A clinical psychologist writing/running a horror game sounds like the most terrifying experience ever. "As you feel your way around the darkened street, you eyes catch a fleeting reflection in a shop window. You stare, spine strait and mouth agape as a soft whisper finds your ears, 'You are not enough, no matter how hard you try, you will never amount to anything.'" And that is when I quite playing forever.

Seriously though, having someone like that run a game would have to be an insane experience. Just their knowledge of human behavior and how we react to things would give them a crazy ability to pull the right strings. Not to mention that I'm sure, for legit schooling purposes, they have read some of the most depraved acts done to, for, and or by humans, and nothing cold be more terrible than what we have truly done to each other.

While I do enjoy horror quite a bit, I have unfortunately not had a lot of experience with horror TTRPGs. I think the only thing I have played that classifies as horror is Candela Obscura and it was quite enjoyable, granted, it was also the first narrative focused game I had played and might hold a higher esteem for that reason. However, since playing it I have looked into a few other games and I can see many of them pull off the same concepts but with far more polish and pizzazz than CO.

I have thoroughly enjoyed a Call of Cthulhu actual play that is working their way through Masks of Nyarlathotep, so much so that I bought the module myself. I've also seen several APs done by Chaosium themselves, also very good and more theatrical than anything else I've seen. Most recently I have been reading about The Old Gods of Appalachia, and I'm this close to buying it just for the cover art, but I'm holding to my wallet with just my fingernails.

My depth of knowledge of the horror TTRPG landscape is unacceptably thin and I am looking forward to reading everyone's suggestions to broaden my horror horizons!

I do actually like the idea for a totally randomized turn order. I imagine that it would toss a good bit of variety and keep everyone on their toes. Everyone gets to go each round but it could be at any time. The only thing that comes to mind that could cause a problem are effects that have the "until the end of my next turn" type of language. If a player goes last in a round then first in the next, but that would be relatively easy to fix.

Unless I misunderstood and it is only one pull per fight, then you can ignore me!!

@StraussBelial said:

I haven't seen the DH system in detail (just some minutos of gameplay on youtube), but I THINK that the GM spend some "Fear" points between player turns to take enemie's actions, or something like that.

Correct. The initiative system is generally as I explained, but there are two separate resources that players/GMs have, Hope and Fear respectively. Hope powers different character features (somewhat replacing spell slots) or to combine their rolls to attack an enemy. GMs gain Fear to activate some attacks for the NPCs/Monsters. Fear can also be used to break into players turns or change the environment of the fight. I typically only do this if the PCs have had an unusually high number of consecutive successful rolls, not giving the enemies a shot, or if they are being indecisive and leave an opening for mayhem.

I really do enjoy the system, but some don't like the extra resource management, I find it enjoyable. I do however struggle a bit with challenge ratings and building a challenging fight. I think that mostly comes from my inexperience. I also have a particularly large table when I GM, about 6-8 PCs, and that I believe is something everyone struggles with until they "just figure it out". I, am still working on that part.

The dice pool success/fail roll sounds interesting, I would like to see it in action.

As far as the initiative question, I lean towards a more amorphous approach. Having a set order has its benefits, but I personally see more downsides. To me it has a tendency to grind the game to a snails pace. Players, especially in current times, have an attention span of just a few minutes (I'm not pointing fingers, I'm as bad as the next player), having to wait on each person to take their turn leads to players "drifting off". Especially if a player waits until the start of their turn to begin to come up with an idea, or if the action of the player before them completely changed the battlefield.

A looser, more open initiative leads to players acting when an opportunity arises leading to a more attentive audience, in my humble opinion. The down side is, if the group isn't looking out for that quiet player, that player could sit quietly by and have the entire encounter take place without saying a word if no one brings them into the action.

My favorite initiative so far, while I don't believe they are the first to come up with it, has been Daggerheart from Darrington Press. Theirs is a loose, act when you want style with play shifting back and forth between the players and the GM via failure. The players act, and will continue to do so until they fail an action, at that time play returns to the GM. It seems to keep a better balance of player action and GM action. There are more specifics, but that is the basics of their initiative system.

I fully admit I have limited experience as a GM, so I am far from an expert, but the system that allows the players to be more active and have a larger role in the pacing of the game is certainly the better choice for my style. Now will a loose system work for a Play-by-Post? That I have no idea. I can see many more problems with that style if everyone is not seated at the same table, or at least in the same timezone. Strauss and I can have an entire encounter wrapped up before Sabrina even knows there is danger if there is nothing holding us back. For games that have a delay of some sort would likely need a bit more of a structured system to work best.

There are certainly pros and cons to both styles I have mentioned, and like all things I'm sure some swear by one and hate the other, and I don't think that will change anytime soon. Each person has their own style of play that they enjoy, and initiative is just another part of that. The day that I find the perfect initiative that has no flaws and everyone loves I will be sure to let you all know!