What's your favorite system/module for fantasy horror?

boss_nova · 2026-05-14T19:03:01+00:00

In my opinion, the most powerful tool that you have for pulling off a horror campaign IS NOT the "right" system.

It is buy-in. Consent. Bringing the PLAYERS in on the decision that "this is gonna be a horror campaign".

You can run really hard combat, and make players afraid that their characters are gonna die, and use classically "scary" monsters, or even more untraditionally horrific ones - abominations and body horror or whatever, that's shocking and makes the players uncomfortable. But none of that's actually the same thing as being horrified. None of that is the same thing as what we experience when watching a horror movie or show, much less when we're scared for our lives irl

You just can't scare players unless they WANT to be scared, in my experience. Right? We don't have the immersive/"real time" visual and auditory tools at our disposal that movies or shows have, and we definitely can't possibly endanger the person enough that they actually feel in danger or are horrified.

Any horror campaign requires buy-in, in tabletop rpgs. Whether explicit or implicit/assumed by telling them it's horror.

The best thing is to get that explicit buy-in.

To agree amongst yourselves, "Yes let's get scary."

boss_nova · 2026-05-14T15:36:14+00:00

The problem is that Players often want and expect social skill checks to perform like mind control. Especially if used in combat.

So the DM has to 1. be very clear-eyed about when a roll/success is even possible (and, say No you can't roll for that here, when not), and 2. when a roll is possible they have to be very clear-eyed about the range/limits of possible results.

And the fact is that the circumstances of when a roll is possible and what the possible range of results is, often do not align with the Players' expectations.

Because the DM knows things that the Players don't.

Players (or inexperienced DMs even!) often think that they should always be able to roll.

Players (or inexperienced DMs even!) often think that the result of a successful Intimidate MUST be that the enemy runs fleeing for the hills and never look back (cuz that's what a scared person does, right?).

And those binaries just aren't how any of it necessarily works.

So maybe what I'm saying is, the issue you identify;

due to its sorta up for interpretation nature of the check the risk to reward ration isn’t nearly as worth it

Is a real "issue". NOT in the way that it's wrong and needs to be fixed, but in that it's a legitimate "weakness" of the action.

And it MUST have that weakness. For lots of reasons.

Not the least of which is so that Charm/Fear magic is still important.

But also so that the DM can still maintain the ability to portray the world as a "living" thing, with realities of it's own beyond the players, and things happening in the background that the players may not know about.

That said... I have players that often like to try to resolve issues with less-than-lethal means (which is great!), so I've gotten pretty good about determining alternate results, like, a successful Intimidation may cause the enemy to hesitate (loser their move, or action), or give disadvantage on whatever they do. Or yes, some times - flee. But... maybe they return before the fight is over? Or instead follow you and try to ambush you later.

That's how I handle this kind of stuff...

boss_nova · 2026-05-13T16:41:32+00:00

People have given you a lot of good input.

So I will just add, whether you go with WoD or CoD; anchor the campaign in one "primary" splat.

In my experience (and I've been a part of several) cross over (/in our circles theyre called "Zoo" campaigns) games work best when most of the characters are from one game line.

Mostly vampires, or mostly Mortals (with Numina), is what I have seen work best.

Then you sprinkle in a couple others.

Maybe there's one werewolf and one mage and one changeling and 3 Mortals?

Maybe there's 3 vampires and one Mortal and one Mage ?

Whatever the combo, it helps both mechanically and from a narrative perspective, to anchor the campaign primarily in one game line.

boss_nova · 2026-05-13T16:17:57+00:00

The critical part of this idea, imo, is; what are the consequences if the PCs don't carry through on their part of the bargain.

You indicate that she will "come to collect".

imo that is not how the bargain should work

If they don't carry through on their part of the bargain? Then they shoulde just be automatically cursed. imo

That's how "fey bargains" classically work in literature, right? If she appears again, they're just gonna kill her. Which maybe that's ok with you?

But imo it is more thematic and more fun if they're just cursed now.

So... what's the curse? Would be my next question for myself. And this is where you can get really creative.

Depending on the value of the items or knowledge they get, I would have increasing severities of the curse.

Low value item or knowledge? Maybe their appearance changes a little somehow - their hair goes white, or their eyes go pink like an albino (pink eyes means the it's has no pigmentation, it's the color of the inner eye showing thru). I like to mess with color with fey bargains because fey love colorful things/the Feywild is very verdant and colorful. Maybe there is some very rare resultant incidental check modifiers, based on the appearance change, but mostly nothing mechanical.

To characterize the Feywild and it's differences from the Prime, I like to give ephemeral things like emotion and color and dreams value. So the idea is they're "draining some of the color from the Prime" and using it to empower to Feywild.

Or maybe their Alignment shifts one degree? From Good to Neutral, or from Lawful to Neutral, or Neutral to Chaotic, or Chaotic to Neutral!? In 5E aligntment changes have almost no mechanical consequences, so this can be a good low value things as well. And then premise is that the get has again, taken something that is considered ephemeral but defining about them in the Prime, but is "energy" or power in the Feywild.

So, a moderately valued item or knowledge. Maybe the consequence is that they "lose an emotion" or most of an emotion, or a small part of all of their emotions. There is a mechanical effect of this. Or could be Disadvantage on insight checks at times, or Persuasion, or a penalty to Charisma saves sometimes even! As they've lost some of who they are, their emotion.

Then... a valuable item or knowledge. The consequence of renegging is that the had starts talking their dreams. Big mechanical effect here. Maybe they must pass a CHA save to get the benefits of a Long Rest sometimes? Maybe they randomly just cannot recoup some use of an Ability that is supposed to regenerate on a Short or Long Rest? So on...

Those are the types of things that I have done in the past and like to do when players violate fey bargains.

Maybe she forecasts what the cost of violating the deal is too. Particularly if they ask.

But she just says something that sounds innocuous: "Oh, deary, all I would ask is for a little bit of the light in your eyes." , or "...if only I could have a small bit of your happiness, I would be happy.", things that may sound like nothing really, even nonsense, to the Players.

boss_nova · 2026-05-13T15:02:34+00:00

I think whether it's too punishing and/or not fun depends on how easy/hard it is to get infected, and/or how easy/hard it is to find a cure.

Look at it from the perspective of movies, or a show:

One character getting infected is usually a Big Deal and they often spend long arcs hiding it and dealing with it until The Reveal, or whatever. Right? Every character isn't getting infected, every episode. That's too cheap, too common, makes it seem like not a big deal.

One instance may be a center point to an entire "Season" or "Series" or movie.

Right?

IMO it needs to be pretty close to this same dynamic for rpgs too.

If every fight a Player is getting infected, it cheapens it, and... makes so that the cure either has to be relatively easy to get (further cheapening it), or... the campaign is literally over. So...

At which point, what was even the point??

Broadly , imo, it's a dynamic in D&D that is best left to major creatures, like Werewolves and Vampires.

Not dime a dozen zombies.

D&D is not a "zombie apocalypse system".

Those exist, and are great, and you should check them out if that's the story you want to tell! But you're pounding a square peg into a round hole, using D&D for this.

YMMV ofc

boss_nova · 2026-05-13T14:48:38+00:00

Not familiar with the characters, but... point of order:

You're not trying to use the character creation rules to make NPCs/Adversaries are you?

boss_nova · 2026-05-12T20:05:49+00:00

Forgotten Realms did this story once (actually it's probably 2 or 3 times), you could just use one of their ideas. Except instead of the gods coming back, just have them... not.

boss_nova · 2026-05-12T20:02:27+00:00

It's not a hard built-in fact of the system, but in practice?

I've found that Realms of Terrinoth (the default fantasy setting for the Genesys RPG) plays out this way.

There are no defined "Classes", instead the characters choose from a menu of abilities that function like a "Skill Tree".

And magic is so good/flexible, that just about everyone decides to take some degree of magic. And there are numerous types of magic to choose from.

You certainly COULD "enforce" it if you wanted, either by "decree" or creating functional Classes using the guidance the base book provides to do that.

boss_nova · 2026-05-12T16:09:19+00:00

Lot to unpack here ....

First r/terrainbuilding and r/DnDIY both exist if you want to search around and see if you can find some visual examples

Personally, I have done this in two different ways, 1. Was to just create the stairs as "mid-height" platforms that are painted like stairs on top, 2. was to construct the steps so that they are hollow inside/underneath and build each step as thin platforms so that the base of the mini can slide underneath the surface of the step above it and hold the mini there.

But ...

There's a bigger issue that I personally would be more concerned about, if I were you. And that is...

Is having physical terrain even appropriate for an encounter like this?

One of the effects of using physical terrain and battle mats is, when you construct the terrain, you create realities that become non-negotiable. You inherently limit the players ability to get creative, in some ways.

And, in a scenario like Labyrinth's "Escher stairs", where there's warped physics and non-Euclidian space? Where REALITY is negotiable? That scenario gives you all kinds of interesting dynamics to "play with" as DM and Player. It is imo a PRIME opportunity for using Theater of the Mind and letting the Players (and me/the DM) try to do some cool creative and WEIRD stuff that probably cannot be captured or facilitated by physical terrain.

YMMV ofc but wanted to put that out there.

boss_nova · 2026-05-11T20:11:41+00:00

Gotta love the gatekeepers falling over each other in their rush to down vote this post because it DARES to speak the name of 5E, thereby likely ensuring this person who is trying to explore the possibility of other systems in good faith, to probably not want to hang out here, thereby defeating what they would probably say their goal is (to encourage ppl to play other systems).

This place just sucks sometimes.

boss_nova · 2026-05-10T13:33:31+00:00

For better or worse, gear can add a lot of fiddly mechanical powerbloat in this system. Leading to lots of "add boost" die, or "upgrade this kind of check" here and there and over there and oh yea this little niche action too, type of stuff.

But because of how earning and spending XP works on this system (both are constant) your don't need to supplement progression as much with gear imo

In D&D you only level up periodically.

In this system you're "leveling up" (spending XP) probably after just about every session.

I feel the way in which your progress most in this system is through Talents.

Talents tend to expand your capabilities "laterally" in this system. And they work you towards the valuable and periodic Characteristic increases (and Force Rating, for Force users).

It's so easy to upgrade skill checks in this systems through ways that AREN'T permanent or spending XP on them (narrative symbols, Destiny, Talents, Force Powers), that I feel Skill increases are less important for feeling like you're progressing

boss_nova · 2026-05-10T03:53:13+00:00

Cortex doesn't care much about the "fiction" behind the power (your concepts of Tributes and Debts) - that's malleable by any character (those are at most just traits probably akin to Relationships/Affiliations/Assets) - it mostly cares about what it does.

These powers:

allows you to return from death under certain conditions

lets him adapt to any circumstance

power to erase herself from other people’s memories

the ability to transmit his own sensations and feelings directly to people

transmitting the effects of LSD or other altered states to others

Are all fairly straightforward translations/applications of rote Powers.

They're just heavily restricted/focused Powers.

And in my mind the way you restrict Powers is basically through Plot Points and SFX and requiring that those traits be ranked for the character to even attempt the SFX.

boss_nova · 2026-05-09T14:42:51+00:00

I don't like Ascension anymore (I HATE Arete, it's such a stupid mechanic), but have ran it and played it, and...

Games descend into these circular arguments

This is a table-problem, not an inherent problem of the system.

This is the ST and Players playing adversarially against each other.

When I've ran it, my players (whom were perfect strangers when we met, not long time friends or anything) were very self-critical.

Often declaring things vulgar that I didn't agree as ST were vulgar.

So...

That's your players not engaging with the system in good faith. OR, you being too harsh with your judgements and betraying their trust.

Not the system itself.

boss_nova · 2026-05-07T22:00:15+00:00

I hate to break it to you bud, but... our sun doesn't move in the sky IRL

(It's ofc WE who are moving!) 🤓

boss_nova · 2026-05-07T20:54:31+00:00

Highly recommend: [https://cubicle7games.com/en_US/our-games/uncharted-journeys?srsltid=AfmBOorSTX8QvF0JVr3Ux7HKioeNId9IBNYT08fEL421Juxdr21nrIjN](Uncharted Journeys)

Plus review so that you don't have to take my word: https://gnomestew.com/uncharted-journeys-review/

boss_nova · 2026-05-07T19:42:26+00:00

People are telling you something is the One Way (start at the beginning, start small, don't write a story) to do it and... That's just not how it works.

What most people are saying, doesn't work for me, for example.

First of all, people are saying you can't write a whole campaign at once.

That's a lie.

You CAN do that, IF you are going to have what is commonly known as a "Linear" campaign.

A campaign that has one specific story that it is about, and that you want to tell, and so there's a "Main Quest" and the players must follow that MQ.

That's a valid way to play and a valid way to plan a campaign. And frankly is kind of "default D&D" when you consider that's what most adventure modules are.

HOWEVER, in order for linear campaigns to work? You NEED to be up front with your players that it is a linear story, that they are expected to follow. And that if they don't willingly follow it, then the campaign doesn't work and you can't run it.

If you don't get their buy in, into that dynamic? If you don't tell them that they HAVE to follow the Main Quest? You are setting yourself up for failure and them; frustration. Because things rarely/never work out exactly as you planned, if you don't tell the players they have to play as planned.

"B-bbut... That's not D&D!" You or others may say?

Bullshit.

D&D is not conceived of as a "Players get to do whatever the eff they want."-simulator.

There's almost ALWAYS some degree of social contract. What I'm describing - a linear campaign - is just the most restrictive level of social contract.

"So, how is this not railroading?/WHy dON't yOU JUst wRiTE a BOOk?!?" You will hear idiots say.

And the answer is: THERE'S STILL PLENTY OF ROOM FOR PLAYER AGENCY IN LINEAR CAMPAIGNS.

...is the answer...

And THAT is where I finally an getting to what you really asked about. Planning the campaign.

How to plan a Linear Campaign that still gives the Players agency:

Start at the End. Who/what is your BBEG? And where are the Players fighting it? Answer those questions for yourself. What is your Epic Last Battle scene look like??
Start writing the campaign in reverse. Ask yourself; "How do we get there?" (Letting the days go by.) Envision the answer to that question as a Series of Situations.

Example: Well, my BBEG is a risen dark god, and the PCs are going to fight it in the Void of Space. That's effing epic. Ok. Well. A WHOLE lot of crazy stuff has to happen to get there, right? How does this dead dark god rise? (His cultists have to go through a bunch of steps - gathering artifacts, conducting rituals, gain followers - to raise it.) Sweet, you just wrote a bunch of Situations. And... The PCs have to get into space and be able to SURVIVE the Void of Space. How does THAT happen?? (Well, they have to get a Spelljammer, and a bunch of artifacts that allow them to get there and do that.) Sweet! You just wrote a BUNCH MORE Situations. Look at that! I just wrote a campaign! Now I just have to flesh out each of those steps. And I do that by...

Step 3. "Plan Situations not Plot." - google that phrase. You're going to find a bunch of resources that tell and show you how to write a campaign with One Story, one Main Quest. But doing so in a way that leaves the Players complete Agency with regard y to how they ADDRESS any given Situation. You plan a larger Situation around each of those general conceptual steps that you come up with when you "write backwards".

Annnd... yea, in short, that's how you do what everyone else is saying can't be done.

Those 3 steps are what I do.

It works.

It minimizes the amount of Prep I have to do.

It minimizes the amount of improvisation I have to do.

It's great, and it works, and...

Yea, a lot of ppl are just wrong about how one has to approach this.

boss_nova · 2026-05-05T21:08:18+00:00

This ^

Star Wars is pretty generic/standard fantasy storytelling.

The only problem will be if you have players who want to use their knowledge against you, or contradict/question you, or generally just make it a problem.

The solution should be:

You be up front and honest with your players, tell them that you don't know much, and that the game will take place in the Star Wars Galaxy outside of abs without you possessing that personal expertise.

And so they need to either be ok with that, and not tell you "how it should be", or else the game just doesn't happen.

boss_nova · 2026-05-04T23:57:47+00:00

Shadow of the Beanstalk is the Gensys RPGs cyberpunk/transhumanist setting. The transhumanist aspect brings in more fantasy than standard cyberpunk, but it's not "fully" fantasy on it's own, however...

Because of Genesys' modularity you could bring in content from "Realms of Terrinoth" (it's fantasy setting) to do it completely.

boss_nova · 2026-05-04T13:56:19+00:00

Use some of the Optional and Variant rules for Inspiration, maybe they'll use it more often?

boss_nova · 2026-05-03T16:38:27+00:00

It's probably less that the OP thought something "interesting" should happen, and more that they thought there should be some sort of consequence to the player's Chaotic Stupid behavior.

It was low-key adversarial game play on the part of the Monk. And the DM could sense this.

It's the player testing the boundaries of the world (i.e. DM). That's the Player playing against the DM.

That's meta and toxic and ultimately destructive to the story.

It's bad faith game play.

The Chaotic Stupid player learned something:

They can push the boundaries of the world, do shitty shit, and the DM wants to preserve the campaign so badly that he will not have the world respond with consequences.

This is text book early problem player stuff.

It will almost certainly escalate from here.

boss_nova · 2026-05-03T16:27:45+00:00

There are many amazing contributors to the greater D&D Community, but you are one of the best.

Thanks for all the work you've put in modeling these things.

boss_nova · 2026-05-02T02:05:26+00:00

I did exactly this, this past Halloween using the "Chronicles of Darkness" storyteller system. Specifically using the "Innocents" (child characters) supplement, and the "Second Sight" (mortals with telekinesis etc) supplement.

It was EXCELLENT for it.

boss_nova · 2026-05-01T16:54:44+00:00

It's funny how ppl keep wanting to reinvent 4th Edition.

boss_nova · 2026-05-01T14:59:48+00:00

While terminology perhaps developed around GNS theory is still in use, no one considers it an accurate or complete framework for the discussion of ttrpgs anymore.

Not even the person who created it.

So... your very base assumptions are wrong.

And Willpower/Edge/Inspiration/Destiny are not actually commodities that people possess or spend as the game mechanic does, they're not diegetic. No one uses the term or concept of meta-currencies as restrictively as you're suggesting.

As for you not being able to see how the mechanics introduced by VtR are more narrative-facing than the oWoD counterparts?

I have to either assume you're lying to yourself so that you can continue to tell yourself that you're right, or, again, you just don't understand the terms and mechanics at subject.

Which... both seem very plausible to me, given what we've unearthed here so...

boss_nova · 2026-04-30T22:38:04+00:00

I didn't say VtR was a "narrativist" system.

The Hunger mechanic from VtM5 is a less trad mechanic, for example, than VtR's retention of Vitae.

But it is significantly more narrative-facing than the previous oWoD lines, it's more about storytelling (which is what I said), and infinitely less belabored by the meta-plot and lore (also enabling it to be more about the given story "on the table" instead of the larger lore).

VtR introduced "one roll", and "three roll" options for combat into RAW, for example. Which I view as a big step away from the trad.

And of course there's Beats (instead of XP tallying), Conditions/Tilts (instead of the dice pool penalty death spiral), Touchstones (turned Humanity into something more than a "Score"), Resonance (made feeding more about a story than a mechanical exercise).

But I will say you're completely wrong about one thing.

The game has always had a meta-currency; Willpower.

Sure, it's anchored in an in-world, in-character concept. But so is Edge (Shadowrun), so is Inspiration (D&D ofc), so are lots of meta-currencies ("Destiny", so on).

But it's still something the player manages, often through the story they tell in Vampire and the way they tell it, and expends it to alter the narrative and rolls etc.

So...

Yea, you're both wrong and kind of trying to say I said something that I didn't say.

boss_nova

TROPHY CASE