Share

Run

Most tabletop RPGs put a focus on fighting the monsters and this trend has continued in CRPGs. When confronted with horrors, many players choose to fight. But when dealing with unearthly horrors, how do you convince the players to run?

There are only a few non-combat tabletop RPGs that I can think of in which characters may face monsters but direct battle is not suggested. Call of Cthulhu and some of its spin-offs are the first that come to mind. Tales from the Loop is a more recently-published example, but one of its core tenets is “kids don’t die.” There are other games with horrors, but many of them still include plenty of combat-action beats.

In a one-shot game of Call of Cthulhu most players expect their characters to go insane and/or die; many welcome such fates and it’s why they play said one-shots. In a campaign, however, players can grow more attached to their characters and, for the GM, there’s a challenge of constantly integrating new characters into the narrative when other sheets need to be “retired.” This can often lead to the GM fudging rolls or skipping rules in order to keep characters in play. This “kid gloves” approach as a GM can lead to more cavalier acts for the players, making the “fight or flight” choice lean more towards the former.

My last Darker Down Trails scenario (write-up to be posted soon) included a potential run-in with Serpent Men and many of my players opted to stay and try to fight. Because other sessions had combat with lesser monsters, the characters showed more bravado than fear. As characters were wounded and put near death, they realized the best option was to run. But I had to ask myself. In a game where the horror eventually wins, had I been leading the players down the wrong path? Had I been subtly encouraging dungeon-delving, monster-bashing style play?

There’s nothing wrong with games in which the characters battle monsters. But, as I opened, this is the default. Games where, even in the game’s mechanics, the right decision is to flee and attempt to win with intellect over brawn are few and far between. So, when players even initially attempt to stand their grown in a system of easy deaths, it got me to wondering: how do I convince my players to be cowards?

Conversation is key. When starting a game that rejects the norm of “Go. Hunt. Kill Skuls.” it’s important to remind players that character lives are cheap. Make sure that a game where a showdown with evils is not the goal is the type of game they want to play. Then, keep having that conversation. There doesn’t need to be a “state of the union” after every session, but the goal is to have a shared enjoyment. This applies to the GM, too. If the players are more interested in a game the GM doesn’t want to run, there should be no shame or blame if a different group needs to be found. A difference of styles doesn’t mean there’s a “bad player” or “bad GM,” it’s simply a taste preference.

Once the group is aware and in agreement that the game they want to play is a deadly game where the best way to fight is run and out-think the monsters, allow characters to die if they put themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time. Not only might characters fall by trying to stand their ground some might perish simply by following the wrong lead. This is the nature of that type of game.

This style of campaign may lead to a revolving door of characters so it’s important that the GM not be forced to do all the work to determine why the new character becomes involved in the campaign. Let that be part of the player’s character-building process. If the character has a personal drive to be involved it could mean that the player becomes a bit more invested and protective of the character, in the hopes to resolve that character’s personal story. In this sort of “run, don’t fight” campaign, death and insanity should not be the only ways out. Let players retire characters for other reasons, as well.

Finally, a lasting campaign of non-combat may be slow. Each session may no longer be an encapsulated scenario. Figure out ways to handle player absences so the game may go on, but let the horror be subtle and insidious rather than a surprise beast every time. The two most popular Call of Cthulhu campaigns “Horror on the Orient Express” and “Masks of Nyarlathotep” are long-run campaigns in a system normally built for disposable characters because the pacing is kept personal, slow, and with a focus on mystery.

The latter item is something I’m still working on. As a GM, I’ve been running “every session is a TV episode” style games for the past 20 years. Sometimes it can be just as rewarding to run “every session is just a chapter or chapters in a book.” This is a style change where it’s not required for every session to have a monster or direct conflict, but simply foreshadowing with a focus on characters and, in some cases, ominous events. A slow boil game gives the supernatural and monsters potentially more meaning and gravitas, encouraging the player characters to flee.

Power fantasy has its place and will likely remain the primary style of RPG mechanics and game. But it’s not the only flavor out there. And it’s October, so why not have your horror creep in over the course of the month… or year?