DnD vs CoC

>>51680745
>Would there be any point in getting Call of Cthulhu if I already have Dungeons and Dragons?
yes, lots of it

>A deft GM won't need other systems
straight WOTC propaganda

i don't think it matters that much which CoC edition you use - they are not THAT different, even 7th.

>>51680745
>A deft GM won't need other systems

It's literally impossible to run a good horror campaign in D&D unless you rewrite all of the rules and all of the fluff to be a different game entirely.

Games are designed with one mode of play in mind. Even "generic" systems have a specific tone they're aiming for, and trying to run something contrary to that tone in them is like trying to dig a pit with a pitchfork: technically possible, but boy you're making things unnecessarily hard for yourself.

so you don't know whether you even need CoC

but you do know the CoC 7E "ruin[s] the atmosphere"

...

just keep running generic fantasy

>>51686185
or more likely running nothing

>>51686144
>literally impossible to run a good horror campaign in D&D
Depends on edition...and your given value for "good". I think you could do it in B/X, BECMI, Rules Cyclopedia, or probably AD&D. But I'm pretty steadfastly against advising people to try it in 3.x.

>>51686563
4E could work with fenegling, but 5e and 3.5 are right out. The scariest thing you could pull in 3.5 is running a game with all the splats. All of them.

5e is just to heavily skewed towards Noble and/or Bright settings.

You can run a Nobledark setting, you can run a GrimBright setting, but you can't run a GrimDark Scary game in 5e because while the game isn't broken, it's still heavily skewed towards the players winning most of the time. The DMG does include Sanity rules though.

This is part of why 5e is everyone's second favorite system, and why it's taken so long to release settings outside of Forgotten Realms. It's good for D&D, but not much else.

File: thisisbait.jpg (140KB, 1232x626px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 1232x626px

> I won't be getting 7th ed, a lot of the Investigator-friendly mechanics ruin the atmosphere

Confirmed for not reading the book.
There is no addition in 7th ed that is optional or which can be directly used to negatively impact the players.

>But muh luck.
It's optional, says so right in the book.
And nothing's more sweet that letting investigators spend luck and then putting an extreme luck check at the stories climax.

>>51686887
Not really. Running succesful horror game needs player buy-in - that they want to be scared - and atmosphere. The system itself is fairly inconsequential. Consider a low-level party in D&D being chased by an unending mob of zombies or high level monsters, or being trapped in a compound with a shape shifter, those are spooky situations.

File: 1486757435148.png (2MB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x960px

>>51680745
>Unironically comparing two systems that have nothing to do with each others

This is either bait or huge faggotry, this kind of shitposting is the worst.

In any ways here's your (you)

>>51680745
A deft gm won't need other systems, much like a determined lumberjack can cut down a tree with a pocket knife. A system is a tool, and it helps to use the right one. D&D is not built for horror, certainly not lovecraftian horror.

>> but there are monsters and gods in the splat books that are explicit references to lovecraft

And there are cthulhu plushies, that doesn't make them horrifying.

D&D is fundamentally about the accumulation of power, and that is not a lovecraftian theme. In fact, it's the opposite.