I am prepping a horror game and would like anyone's input to the challenges such a game poses to all participants.

I am playtesting Hite’s Trail of Cthulhu, which adapts Laws’ Esoterrorist mechanics to the Lovecraft Mythos.  I can’t talk about the the specifically "Lovecraftian" rules tweaks because I have accepted an NDA, but I will make reference to the GUMSHOE mechanics as they have been published in "Esoterrorists" and "Fear Itself". 

I am interested in setting up moments of play that touch on a particular aspect of horror fiction – the "uncanny" or the “unheimlich” as they are discussed in Freud’s paper of the same name. 

http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~amtower/uncanny.html

No, I am not interested in manipulating my players’ neuroses (even if Freudian psychodyamics were true).  But Freud’s remarks on German Gothic fiction capture a lot of what I have found to be unsettling moments in horror narratives and in moments of my own life.

Multiple Meanings of the Uncanny Teased Out By Freud
- the unfamiliar or disturbing that upsets the “heimlich” world, the “domestic” or “familiar” world
- that which opens up the sheltered, enclosed, protected, or secret (other connotations of “heimlich”)

Uncanny/Unheimlich Incidents
1. The familiar (domestic, everyday) reveals hitherto unnoticed menacing qualities
2. The enclosed, protected, hidden (less common connotations of “heimlich”) is brought into the open and destroyed or brought, shamefully, into daylight [this fits with Freudian notions of repression]
3. Supposedly free and voluntary actions bring the subject into the same situations again and again
4. The subject’s fatal double appears
5. A non-sentient and/or inanimate object begins to exhibit sentience or animation
6. A supposedly sentient being is actually a lifeless automaton
7. The subject has a compulsion to repeat actions associated with its deepest fears
8. Subtle threats to the subject’s body come at him/her from different sources and in various guises, and eventually are realized
9. A primitive belief that current culture deems impossible or unacceptable  is proven to be true [Personal note: I remember insomniac nights in childhood spent watching late-night TV and flipping myself out by imagining that all the Apocalypse/Armageddon/Rapture ravings of TV preachers were actually true]
10. Infantile anxieties (loneliness, darkness, silence) take on a horrifying dimension
11. Individual anxieties acquired in infancy and child re-appear in horrifying guises (castration, Oedipal fantasies, the gamut of neuroses catalogued by psychoanalysts.

I am especially interested in 3, 7, 8, 4; somewhat interested in 1, 2, 5, 6; not especially interested in the rest.

3, 7, 8, and 4 present the challenge of Making Powerlessness Interesting
1, 2, 5, and 6 present the challenge of Making Hidden Menace Interesting

Challenges of Making Powerlessness Interesting
- challenge to players: can you find ways to make it fun/interesting to send your character towards a fate that you know is coming but of which your characters are unaware?
>> Possible outcome: “Wow! I totally loved the way you had your guy re-enact his wizardly grand-dad’s deranged ambition to turn his grandson into a slave of the Elder Things!”
- challenge to GM: creating a surprise that turns out, upon the player’s reflection, to have been fated all along [I don’t think that this is really possible except in the improvised development of Colour]
>> Possible outcome: “Wow GM: I loved the way you picked up on the way I had my character shriek at the sight of the spider and then you made the Elder Beastie take the form of a giant shrieking spider.  I actually did not see that coming.”
- challenge to GM: getting player buy-in to a course of events among which a fated event will occur
>> Possible outcome: GM: “You said early on that your guy would find his doom in a book”; Player: “Yeah, I’ll pick up a book off of the antiquarian’s shelf and that’ll be my doom book”; GM: “Cool beans!”;
Other Player: “Oh man, we were supposed to be ducking in here to avoid the degenerate cultists trailing us in the street.  You are totally messing with my mind, you magnificent bastards!”: GM and Player: “Heh, heh, heh”.

Challenges of Making Hidden Menace Interesting
- I find myself inscribing incidents like 1, 2, 5, and 6 in my games all of the time.  It’s easy to add Colour like these at any time.
- The trick is to make the decisive, to have them linked to the long or short-term fates of the characters, or to turn them into challenges to the players’ agendas for their characters.

Perhaps I am trying to do something impossible: to create, along with my players, stories of powerlessness, compulsion, and fate without deprotagonizing the protagonists or railroading the players.

Is uncanny horror – what I like about the Cthulhu Mythos and not the hunting down and eradication of squamous freak-beings from other dimensions – an impossibility in story gaming.  Do I , to paraphrase Stephen King, go for the tentacled gross out when I can’t get the macabre?

My reports on my attempt to bring unheimlich moments to the game table will begin after the first playtest on October 11.  I would appreciate anyone’s advice or reports of their own experiences in these areas as I begin to prep for the session.

Hi epweissengruber, welcome to the forge!

You know aversion therapy, where someone who's phobic of spiders exposes themselves to them as a healing process? I think you can get roleplay like that to, where imagined events are an exposure that may assist healing/strengthening.

However, I think you can get roleplay where your exposed to the spider, so to speak, but your supposed to run. Well, your PC is supposed to run. To change would be to do it wrong.

Sorry, long post to just ask your direction. I know it sounds fiddley to ask, but the feature of one is the healing, the feature of the other is the integrity of how it's done. They both need different approaches.

Or if none of it sounds right, that's cool - hope this posts not too long :)

Another challenge:

Linking character-specific uncanny experiences to the mystery.

The guidelines in the GUMSHOE rules suggest writing up the mystery and setting clues BEFORE character creation.  The mystery is set in stone.  The clues are set in stone.  The characters spend investigation points to find clues and to try to buy bonus information relating to the clues.  But you are not supposed to break the suspense by giving too many clues about who did what to whom and why.

This has worked in the past to get some fun Esoterrorist games.  But I don't know if such scenario prep will help me create uncanny moments for my players or give them the tools for creating such moments for themselves and for each other.

Callan wrote:
Hi epweissengruber, welcome to the forge!

You know aversion therapy, where someone who's phobic of spiders exposes themselves to them as a healing process? I think you can get roleplay like that to, where imagined events are an exposure that may assist healing/strengthening.

I've no experience with the Gumshoe system, but it sounds to me like you're looking for a system that rewards the player for hosing the character in appropriate ways.  Since the system apparently has a point mechanism for figuring out secrets, perhaps one way to get those points is to fall further into your doom. 

Sort of like TSoY keys, but linked to self-destruction.  "Doom of the book" -- get a point each time you focus on with the book to the detriment of your character's overall situation.  Get 3 points when you finally read the damn thing and trigger horrible consequences. 

Wushu has a few interesting ideas here:
--one, you can use horrific details as fodder to make your play more effective -- it makes no difference, mechanically, if you describe your character freaking out as the monsters approach or describe the character standing steely-eyed, sniping at them with a homemade slingshot. 
--two, in Roanoake, you can use "doom points" to boost your effectiveness now at the expense of a bad outcome later.  This is handled more narratively than mechanically, though. 

Is any of this at all helpful?

I'll admit that your post has me confused, somewhat, and the (paradoxical) reason is that it has so many examples and particulars.

So I'll just wing it and hope I'm at least in the neighborhood.

First, regarding "uncanny," perhaps you could leverage the Uncanny Valley but in a narrative sense (not engineering/animation). One example of this would be setting scene elements that are "not quite right": perhaps you tell the players that they notice that none of the NPCs in the scene will make eye contact with each other, or that a room is brighter than the handful of candles in it would make it, or that they hear tree branches scrapping the house's siding... but the house has no trees next to it. (Don't remind them! The players have to recall the absence of trees for themselves. Otherwise, if you remind them, it's just "woo-woooo!" pseudo-uncanny moment.) There's some "old tricks" that might go along with such narrative, too. Ask the players for their "Perception stats" (or whatever), roll some dice (or whatever), and then say, "OK, where were we... ah, yes, you were about to enter the overly bright room." Smile a bit, as if to yourself. Another example is the narration of innocuous--even trivial--details that have no relevance. No, not red herring "clues" in a mystery; I'm talking about (for example) making a point of describing the buttons on an NPCs coat and the way his lazy eye seems to look around on its own, without his seeming to be aware of it, or going into a bit too much detail about a room's carpet. Your players might seem unperturbed, but their subconsciouses will be in overdrive, trying to make the details fit with whatever notion that they have of the "threat" in the story. While not strict an "uncanny" feeling, it's suspension, and suspension is always your friend, in horror games.

Second, I'd recommend you buy or borrow Cthulhu Live, if only for some of the essays in the back about the Mythos. My memory is failing me at the moment, but I recall being impressed by the way the author(s) explained the whole "extraplanar" thing--why Cthulhoids appear as "tentacled menaces" on our dimension and why they can do terrifying things like appear out of nowhere (if you've read Flatland, you know the answer). One particular analogy really grabbed me, which you could leverage: We 4-dimensional beings are, to Cthuloids, like the 3rd or 2nd dimension is to us. Ponder that a bit; when was the last time you felt any empathy (or remorse) for the 2nd dimension and its inhabitants? That perspective--"who are these ants in my picnic basket, and where did I leave my can of Raid?"--is the root, I believe, of the horror of Lovecraft. It's that realization that drives (most of) his protagonists off the cliff, and thus it might be something to keep in mind when you're driving your PCs off the cliff.

Finally, if your game is going to involve investigation of any kind, let your players use abductive reasoning, rather that deductive. A common way to do a "mystery" or "investigation" in RPGs is for the GM to pre-determine the Solution (who, how, and why) and to seed the setting with what he feels are enough Facts (what, where) to lead the players from the Scene (initial situation that launches investigation) to the Solution. There's your railroad, Mr. Holmes; hop on. But abductive reasoning goes about it differently (and with much less work required by the GM, and with much more credibility granted to the players): the GM provides the Scene and knows the Solution (which usually advances the overarching story), but he or she leaves it to the players to come up with Facts. Players try to assert them and, if they do not violate any aspects of the Solution, the GM allows them into the narrative; the PCs are then narrated as going to "find" this established Fact (with or without knock-on conflict due to the find). Eventually, those Facts will build a Case for the Solution, leading them to the next plot gateway (chase, encounter, conflict, etc).

Anyhow, long post, hope this helps, let us know how it goes. Techniques, in particular, would be useful for me (I like Lovecraftian horror, and I LARP it as much as possible);
David

The comments that I am getting are feeding into my scenario prep.

The most important part of this thread will come once my players and I reflect on the actual play experiences that grow out of this prep.

David: I am trying to bring a wider sense of the horror genre to our Cthulhu game.  I am trying to have uncanny moments be created at the table.  I don't just want to put the stock monsters of the Mythos into play an leave it at that.  Simply describing the ooginess of a Shoggoth is no more thrilling than describing a big werewolf or nasty vampire.

I want my players to become creators of Gothic horror fiction or uncanny moments.

1) The Gumshoe rules recommend laying out a crime, scripting the various scenes related to that crime and the criminals' attempts to cover their tracks and/or continue their illegal activities, and detailing the clues that can be found at each point.

I will follow that and not give myself the chance to improvise or alter the back story once the scenario gets underway.

2) Out of the occult crime that I have laid out I will find which generic uncanny threats might be applicable.  I will give my players a chance to choose which of these uncanny threats they wish to be attached to their characters.  So the Mythos threat and its attendant crime will be set in stone.  The way in which the crime threatens each character will be established by the players.

3) The Gumshoe rules include an ability called "Stability."  When you encounter stressful, awful, or occult events, this ability ablates so that one becomes increasingly vulnerable to instability and breakdown.

The game also allows players to find clues by spending points from their abilities.

So here is how hook each character's individual dread into the occult crime:

They will choose one "uncanny" aspect that will relate to their characters.

If they pick up on a clue and -- following the standard rules -- want to develop it, learn more about it, get a special advantage from it, they can spend 2 points of Stability as if it were an investigative ability ...

but ONLY if they can frame the scene in such a way that what they are dreading (a menacing double, a threat to their person, anything from my list has come to bear in this scene.

So a clue at a crime scene might have a photo.  Let's say its of a bunch of big game hunters who have bagged something nasty in Africa 60 years before the events of the scenario.  One of the players could say --

PLAYER: I want to see if I can get a benefit out of this.  I am doing a
GM: History spend?
PLAYER: Nah, a Stability spend!
GM: Ok, let's hear it.
PLAYER:  I pick up the photo. "Ohmigawd!  Saints preserve us!"
GM as NPC: What is it father O'Hanrahan?
PLAYER: I drop the photo an, through the cracked glass, you see that the lead hunter looks exactly like me.  "Why do I keep seeing myself killing things.  Whenever there is bloody killing, I keep seeing my face!  Why?  Why?"
GM as NPC: Brace yourself dear boy!  Have a swig of this.  Let's press on into the mansion.

And we will see how this plays out.

Epweissengruber? Let me be a dissenting voice here.

You're playtesting this game, right? But it sounds as though you just added a rule: the idea you can spend Stability to get a clue.

Now, as it happens, I like the idea. But, if you're playtesting, I think you should playtest the rules as written: not with that new rule about spending stability.

Could I suggest this way of doing things instead?

GM: OK, it's time for horror. Bob, something nasty happens to your character! Describe it!
PLAYER:  OK...I pick up the photo. "Ohmigawd!  Saints preserve us!"
GM as NPC: What is it father O'Hanrahan?...

PLAYER: Right, I need some excitement. Give me a Stability check?
GM: OK. Any ideas or shall I provide something?
PLAYER: Well, OK, let's say I pick up the photo. "Ohmigawd!  Saints preserve us!"
GM as NPC: What is it father O'Hanrahan?...

Graham, you have hit a nagging doubt in the back of my mind.

I promised to play the game straight, no chaser, no houseruling, etc.

I was not given the rules to bang out the kinks in my understanding of how to do horror games.

Maybe I will just have to write up characters that are subjected to fatal events and uncanny moments closely tied to the scenario that I have prepped.

But thanks for the suggestions on how to fit my ideas into the existing GUMSHOE framework.

Oh, listen, have you seen the Fear Itself scenario "The Final Case"? It's in The Book Of Unremitting Horror.

In that, there are floating scenes, which are random things you put in to increase the tension. Like, graffiti that writes itself. And a creature that watches the characters from the rooftops.

These scenes are connected to the main plot, but not part of the major scenes. I think you might want something like that.

Graham

Hey guys;

Dave here.  I'm going to play in Erik's game come Thursday.

I'm planning - based on what I've read about CoC - to have my PC drive towards madness and/or death at the tentacles of some undulating horror.  Genre emulation and the fact that I'm trying to author for the audience - the other players.  I've never played a horror game or a CoC game before, but that seems to be the coolest way of doing it.

epweissengruber wrote: Maybe I will just have to write up characters that are subjected to fatal events and uncanny moments closely tied to the scenario that I have prepped.

Talk? ... to human beings? ... that's madness!

I will hit the ground running with a prepped scenario and get to character creation ASAP.  I don't wanna delay the playtest anymore than I have.

So, the random musings are out of the way and I have a direction for scenario prep.

1) What I am Doing!
Playtesting: sticking to the GUMSHOE rules and reporting on the Actual Play results

2) How Will I Do It

I can address all of the following areas while still addressing the preceding premise and playtest the game without houseruling it.

a) Pursue the 2 Challenges I Have Set Myself
Challenge of Making Powerlessness Interesting
Making Hidden Menace Interesting Instead of Cliche

b) Incorporate Advice I Have Gleaned From the Board
- Reward the player for hosing the character in appropriate ways
- playes can initiate the horror via a Stability check.
- spice things up with prewrittnen floating scenes (which are random things you put in to increase the tension)
- leverage the Uncanny Valley
- bring abductive logic to the investigation.

In that case I'll make some forward predictions, which might be useful latter
* They'll turn up bright and bouyant, having a chat and maybe you explain some of what you want to do, but they sort of just nod as it has no context to them right now to grock it

* Sitting down, they turn expectantly to you and go quiet, as they see you as the source of entertainment and need to be quiet to experience that.

* You start filling out the situation to them, which furthers their belief that your the source of entertainment.

* At some point in play you prompt them for adding something horrific themselves. The old hands who 'know how to roleplay' although they came for entertainment, have learnt what to do - they try and do something that entertains you. And you will look at them to see how that entertains them. And they will look at you to see how that entertains you. It'll be a bit of a mexican stand off. After awhile of this, you just sort of move on as no ones actually being entertained. Although sometimes someone will break the standoff by just doing what they want, but odds are its so ideosyncratic to them it doesn't fit the group as a whole and just seems obtrusive, selfish and not right at all. A bit like a sienfield moment where someone double dips.

If there are any newbies to roleplay, they will decline to offer anything with a confused expression - this goes against what they came for and what was confirmed at the start - your the source of entertainment, not them.

* You'll pretty much go through your material as you had it planned - god forbid you decided to wing anything, because it'll show up horribly since all the players are passive and wont help carry the game during these parts. You'll find that if you wrote well, it goes well - but latter will realise the amount of time spent for the one session (never to be used again) is a crazy amount. It went well but the effort/payoff ratio is pretty shit.

* If you try and rouse the passive players, you will eventually encounter their very reason for coming to play - to be passively entertained. Err, except for some people which have some ideosyncratic bit of roleplaying they have to do that everyone else will see as showboating (ie, everyone else has been resisting showboating themselves and resent someone else just letting go and doing it). The reason they came in the first place is indistructable, it can't be fractured a bit by anything in the imagined space - there is no rousing them - they'll just see it all not as rousing, but as more entertainment (or worse, some sort of social slip on your part). It's like a comic book collector who buys a comic and seals it in plastic without ever having read it - no matter how fantastic the stuff in the comics imaginary world is, it wont change the collectors plan.

I make these predictions as something to measure the eventual play against - kind of like a yardstick. I'll take it on the chin if it's way out of wack, but even if it's off center it's still useful to predict how a game will go. It's good to think 'So, why did that deviate from what I predicted as much as it did?'

We gave Trail of Cthulhu playtesting GMs the chance to either convert an existing adventure, write a new one, or improvise an adventure. You don't have to set in stone what is going to happen in a GUMSHOE game any more than you do in a game where you make rolls to get information. You can improvise scenes just as you can in such games. GUMSHOE does have a strong GM model, so it's not a collaborative mystery creation system. The PCs are specifically investigating something pre-determined. I've no problem with either way of running mysteries, both make for a good, if different game. We do intend to release a version of GUMSHOE called McGuffin which does work in exactly this way - you don't spend points to discover clues, you spend points to create them. This would work very well with the idea that you spend Stability to get additional information.

Second, both Fear Itself and Trail of Cthulhu have specific tools for character development, and for screwing over your own characters to gain a reward (or avoid a punishment). Each character has a Drive, the thing which causes the character to go down into the dark basement or investigate the eldritch horror. You lose Stability if you decline to follow your drive. The Drives in Fear Itself and ToC are different, but genre appropriate.

As Graham mentioned, there are free floating scenes. There are also mechanics for Directed Scenes and Flashbacks. Fear Itself offers a very loose structure, and introduces floating clues, which the GM can introduce in any appropriate scenes. Fear Itself gave me and my group some of the best in character roleplaying we've experienced particularly in flashback, where the main character interacted with NPCs from their past played by the other players.

The Stability rules give the option for the other players to help simulate a character's madness, for example, if a character was paranoid, you could send the player out of the room, and tell the remaining players to whisper and pass notes when she gets back.

I have enjoyed GUMSHOE games in the past and that's why I keep playtesting and buying the products.

I am still working out how to make my own interest in supernatural horror hook up with the rules.

epweissengruber wrote:
I have enjoyed GUMSHOE games in the past and that's why I keep playtesting and buying the products.

I am still working out how to make my own interest in supernatural horror hook up with the rules.

Dave here.

I found the session unsatisfying.  I really felt that I had no agency in the game.  I wasn't able to do much but respond to what happened.

My PC was driving into town with an important NPC who was injured with a really nasty bug bite.  I wanted to have my PC, Blake, drive into town to meet up with another PC (who is a doctor).  There was a storm raging and a road crew was trying to reinforce a retaining wall in case of landslide.

The wall gave way and I had to make a Driving roll to avoid hitting some people.  Nice, I made it.  But what I really wanted was to get to town to hook up with my fellow PCs!  I didn't feel like I could do that using the rules.  I didn't think I had the authority to say, "If I win this roll I get into town in time," or the ability to frame a scene myself.

So really I felt like I was sitting back waiting for something to happen.  When that happens to me I get antsy and I try to leap on any opportunity to make something happen.  I do two things: I have my PC take radical actions (usually violence) and I make unsolicited suggestions like "Shoot him in the face."  Both of which I did in the game.

So, yeah.  That was my experience.

Actual Play: Session #1

PHYSICAL SETUP

- Circular table, GM with books piled in front of him, 4 players arrayed on opposite side of circle (we shall call them M., D., B., and S.).
- Esoterrorists rule book, 2 copies of playtest rules, Call of Cthulhu 4th ed. for reference, 10 six-sided dice of various colours
- Visual aids: photos of 1940's flood in England, cholera victims, destruction wrought by 1938 Hurricane in New England, big and small maps of Mass. near Pittsfield and Mt. Graylock [a real place, highest peak in Mass.]
- Play aids: a stack of notecards with 6 uncanny situations written on them, 1 card that says "I'm bored: send something uncanny my way", 1 card that says "Who wants to be hit by something uncanny?"
- Scenario notes: a stack of notecards, divided into part #1, part #2, part #3 but otherwise in no chronological order.  I tried to make it so that the scenes, apart from the terrifying conclusion" could be played in any order.  In each part there were several optional scenes and a few ones that HAD to happen.

Notes:
* The physical set up gave us lots of space.  The playtest rules need page numbers printed on them just to make it easy to put them back together after they have been flipped through frantically.  Maps are very useful for an investigative scenario in that build up the shared imaginative space, and they are useful for horror games because they build up the premise that the world with which we are familiar is being corroded by something awful.
* The play aids were inspired by comments on this board and by similar devices in With Great Power, and by some of Robin Laws' suggestions on how to give signals to players.  Sad to say, I did not get to use them.  I did a round of scenes to hook the characters into the scenario, hit them with a number of external challenges, and dealt with repercussions.  I will make sure to use them next time.
* In our first session my "HAD to happen" scenes took precedence over player choices.  This was not, as Callan predicted, my response to player passivity but the consequence of an interior demand to "get the story going in the direction I wanted."

CHARACTERS & CHARACTER CREATION

-I sent this message to my players:
Here are the rules.

"I am looking for investigators from 1 of 7 different backgrounds -- and only one of each.  If you could get back to me about what trips yer various triggers, that'd be nice.

Medicine
Folklore/Anthropology
Occultism
Architecture/Government/Business
A Working-Class Schmoe
Someone with a strong love interest (the genders of lover and beloved don't matter)
Law Enforcement

If you have another strong concept, let me know."

- I had prepped scenes a scene to hook character of these broad types into the mystery.

* 2 players (female) came with completed characters.  They helped the others make theirs.  One player wanted an aviatrix who was married to one of the other characters.  Once players got around the table she "proposed" to them.  One player with a strong character concept accepted the proposal, so I had a wedded couple with a kid.  But, the players agreed, their marriage was on the rocks.  Some of the most effectively creepy scenes involved me improvising the child's bizarre behaviour in a way that only aggravated the problems between the couple.  And the improvisation hooked into the GUMSHOE mechanics in a neat way: the aviatrix used her military background to help bring the child to its senses. 

She used the currency of the game to: a) get more screentime; b) buy extra information that will help her character in later stages, in exactly the way the rules are designed to work.

- Character creation in the GUMSHOE rules is fairly quick.  I tried to make sure that every one of the important investigative abilities was covered by one of the players.  But the momentum of the character creation overwhelmed me.  So now I will have to frame my clues to the abilities that players have selected and not the other way 'round.

- My players are inveterate doodlers and their character sheets are decorated with very evocative little sketches of their characters and the free associations that arose during play. 

* Dr. Henry Milward
Background: From the player's pre-game correspondence:
"An idealistic young graduate of medical science, Beatrice [changed to Henry after the "proposal" from the player with the aviatrix] set out to Europe to become a contract surgeon during WWI in the hopes that she would be recruited as a physician.  It was during her time abroad that she met her future husband, Henry Milward.  While the no-hire policy of the US Military did not change, Beatrice was still witness to many horrors perpetrated by men on men.  Her experiences only strengthened her resolution that human life and modern civilization be protected at all cost."

The character was modified somewhat but the player did so enthusiastically.  If only the GM (a.k.a. "Me") had been as willing to adapt pregame preparation to the players' at-the-table input.

The character's beliefs include: confidence in professional abilities, the inherent importance of human life, the advancements of modern civilization.  (Sounds a little like Burning Empire's Beliefs!)

B. created the following NPCs for her character:
Wife: Marcia Milward [originally "Husband: Prof. Henry Milward)
Son: Terence Milward, age 9
Nurse/Assistant: Rita Brady

* Marcia Brady
Background: Englishwoman who became involved with flying during WWI.  Met Henry Milward and ended up in Mass.  She continues to fly (the Milwards are very well off and have a pretty manse away from the town).

S. created the following NPCs for her character:
Wife: Henry Milward
Son: Terence Milward, age 9
Francois: French-Canadian supplier of all things aviator-y, mechanical, and electrical
Jimmy: local farmboy who wants to learn how to fly.

* Blake Winthorpe
[D. contacted me during the week regarding his character.  He was thinking Hemingway, I was thinking Lovecraft.  Must remember to pay attention to players' wishes!]

Background: A man of action who served in WWI.  He has retired to his family home in the hills near the Housatonic River where he is attempting to write a new kind of weird fiction, and where he can engage in the outdoor pursuits that give me great satisfaction.  He likes guns and punching people and things. 

His personal beliefs include "I am better than everyone else because I don't wallow in denial," and "Honesty."

D.'s NPCs include:
Housekeeper: Old Widow Miller
Publisher: Sam Goldstein in NYC [a little detail that possibly grew out of our discussion of Lovecraft's prejudices]
Curio Shop Keeper: Mr. Hallorhand
Shell-Shocked School-chum from Miskatonic U: Dirk

* Wesley Robbins
Background: A creative modern architect who keeps a home in a remote, picturesque area (shades of Wright!).  He is also involved in the electoral campaign of local politician Hollis Mulwray.  Mulwray was the first of the grisly occult murders to be uncovered.

Personal Beliefs: Superiority of modern architecture, the power of personal initiative, clarity of rational thought (shades of Roark and Ayn Rand!) (also, HPL would have hated this guy!)

It seems as if M. has created a character that runs counter to the nihilistic ethos of the Mythos  Nice.

NPCs include:
Friend: Hollis Mulwray (dead!)
Belle: Doris Gayle

Plans for the Future:
- Slow down the pace.  Now that I have the setup and the basic clues are out, I can let the investigators do what they want, collaborate more, pursue their own agendas.
- Challenge beliefs.
- Deliver some uncanniness via. the NPCs.
- Work off of a relationship map that ties PC, NPC, and villainous creeps together.

OVERALL PACE:
- I tried to do this like a tightly-packed horror movie.  The railroading that results is not fun.
- Even an HPL story doesn't give much time for character interaction.
- I am thinking of a Ramsay Campbell novel like "The Darkest Part of the Woods."  General spookiness, then crawling corruption, then full blown devil-osity.

HOW AM I DOING IT?

I can address all of the following areas while still addressing the preceding premise and playtest the game without houseruling it.

a) Pursue the 2 Challenges I Have Set Myself
Challenge of Making Powerlessness Interesting
- not doing so well on this one
Making Hidden Menace Interesting Instead of Cliche
- yeah, there has been some original weirdness (the black pyramid appearing in a picture in a well-thumbed children's history book about England)
- will see what originality arises when players attempt to use Mythos knowledge

b) Incorporate Advice I Have Gleaned From the Board
* Reward the player for hosing the character in appropriate ways
- not done anything on this score
* players can initiate the horror via a Stability check.
- again, must leave openings for this to happen
* spice things up with prewrittnen floating scenes (which are random things you put in to increase the tension)
- I find that I can improvise scenes well enough and players can use their investigative abilities to get their gist or spend Ability points to gain more info/add info/make their characters look cool
* leverage the Uncanny Valley
- interesting concept but I am leaving it aside for now
* bring abductive logic to the investigation.
- will use it in later mysteries but now that the characters' agendas are on the table, I won't be thinking about this too much.

Playtest results are supposed to be under an NDA. Could you please remove these posts and submit your results in the approved format.

I am sorry to have broken the NDA

I thought that I could discuss horror gaming making reference to the standard rules of GUMSHOE.

I will have the moderator remove the posts and return to the procedures of the playtest document.

Hello,

I've thought a little bit about this since the posts about the NDA occurred.

My first moderator point is to say that I (the moderator) have no interest or obligation in protecting NDAs. You establish one for playtesters at your peril; playtesters post about such play at their peril. It's between the two of you; it has nothing to do with the Forge as an entity; and therefore I as moderator am disinclined to participate in any negotiation about it. Violate the terms of the NDA here in Actual Play, or support them, it's all the same to the Forge.

My second moderator point is to say that all posts here at the Forge are considered copyrighted by their authors. They are your posts and your words. It's not my job to protect anyone from themselves.

Please don't PM or post to dispute this decision. It is still provisional. I'm going to think about it more, and come to a final conclusion over the next day, in consultation with Vincent.

Best, Ron

The decision is now jiointly determined, by Vincent and me, to be final: the thread remains unchanged.

1. The "deletion" issue is a red herring. It's reserved for egregious spam and for duplicate posts. The only option available is removal to the Inactive File.

2. I move things to the Inactive File because they violate Forge content standards. Spam gets moved there. So do off-topic comments or threads. Rude or stupid posting might get moved there, but rarely; I prefer to let those stand and be moderated visibly.

I don't see any reason why person X doing something that person Y doesn't want them to fits those criteria. Even if person X is willing to agree.

As I said in the thread, and it still seems reasonable after a night or two of sleep, the Forge does not play nanny to contractual interactions like those of an NDA. It is not a law-enforcement device.

Speaking not as moderator for a moment, I have some advice for all concerned: merely stop posting to this thread and let it slip down the page over time.

Best, Ron