I was thinking about it the other day, and I'm not sure. Obviously horror suggests fear. But is it fear for the players? Or the characters? Or both?
When I think of a "horror" game, I think of something that actually freaks out the players, whether that be through creepy atmosphere and suspense, or impossible odds (I had an idea of pitting players against waves of skeletons whose power increases wave by wave, until they're near-impossible to kill, provoking fear of character death).
But I could be wrong. Maybe a horror game is meant to use the shaken/frightened mechanics of the game.
Or maybe a sanity mechanic, similar to Call of Cthulu.
Note that I have no intentions of running a horror game right now, I'm just wondering in hypotheticals.
What do you all think? What would be the goal of a horror game? Who are we trying to scare?
-The Beast
First, you want to scare the characters. If you do a good enough job with the atmosphere, and creepy game elements, the players will pick up on the fear rush too.
Be warned, while some players love this kind of game, myself included, many can't stand it. Think of any horror movie or book, and you'll see that they don't contain plots about winning. They're full of plots about either dying, or just barely surviving. Common themes include mystery, loss, fear, difficult choices, injury & pain, death of friends or loved ones, etc.
Although we usually tout player/character separation, you are correctly perceiving that horror gaming loses most of its draw if you're not actually scaring the players a little, too.
If it helps, I wrote an essay on horror in gaming from what I learned running a lot of horror games (both games dedicated to horror like Call of Cthulhu but also running horror-intensive D&D). Mechanics to apply fear to PCs have their place, but they are secondary to actually capturing the imagination of the players.
AHH DOPPLEGANGER KILL IT WITH FIRE
But is it fear for the players? Or the characters? Or both?
While technically it'll be a horror game if you only get the characters scared, but if you scare the players you're ensured a quality game (if they like horror). Only scaring the characters won't get the right reactions from the players who are ultimately the ones who determine how the characters respond.
I think the goal is to scare the Players.
Horror is really hard to pull off. You only need one player not to take things seriously to ruin the mood for the entire table. I think a lot of people believe the purpose of Horror is to survive, which, from the character perspective, they are absolutely right. However, that all too easily leads to a lot of metagaming which can also kill the mood of the table.
There are just too many moving parts, in my opinion. I have never seen a horror game work well except as a parody of itself.
Firstly, the main goal is to have fun. Now that is somewhat flippant but if it's not working/people don't enjoy it then play a different type of game.
However, the idea is to get the players out of their comfort zone. Examples include presenting them with a challenge that they can't deal with in a conventional way or presenting conventional places/monsters in an unsettling way. Ideally, this is done with a slow build-up to unsettle them - drawing things out before the fighting starts.
I'm not you actually need to scare the players - I don't think I was ever "scared" by, say, any Call of Cthulhu adventures I've played... but that didn't stop us descending into a mad panic trying to stop the monsters.
I think the goal is to scare the Players.
Horror is really hard to pull off.
Yes and yes.
IMO, if you haven't scared the players, you haven't pulled off a horror game. And that's hard to do, because some players just don't want to go there in their gaming. So you need a group that's willing to play along, otherwise it won't happen.
But when it does work it's pretty awesome, and probably my favorite kind of gaming (so much so that I used one campaign for the basis of an entire book, and also became a wholehearted Pathfinder fan the day I read the Misgivings section in Skinsaw Murders).
If you die in the game, YOU DIE FOR REAL.
I would describe horror as 'scary things happen'. Even if the players aren't really afraid, and even if the characters are exceptionally brave, it can still be a really good horror game. The IMPORTANT thing is that there be some level of vicarious thrill; i.e, that the game is good enough that the players can feel for their characters and even immerse themselves a bit. And that's not just a horror thing, it's a "good gaming" or "good storytelling" thing.
Of course, if the players ARE immersed enough to feel fear, you're doing an awesome job, but it's possible to thoroughly enjoy a horror game without really being afraid. "Morbid suspense" might be a better term for what you're going for. You want them to be worried that horrible things are going to happen.
Here's something a lot of 'horror' games and GMs overlook: if horrible things are GUARANTEED to happen, then there's no reason to worry. Which means that it's not really horror.
This is why, in my opinion, a lot of Call of Cthulhu games aren't even close to being real horror. The PCs are guaranteed to fail, so there's no sense of suspense. They're just along for the ride. It can still be fun, in a hilarious kind of way (I think this is a lot like how I love Lovecraft even though he isn't scary), but it isn't horror. The games which do manage real fear are the ones where the story gives the PCs some sliver of power or hope, then watches them scramble like rats.
Why is everyone talking about things focused on "my character may die"? We roleplay characters to be someone, and to do things we can't do for real, right? Taking up arms against a crushing tyranny, seeing the retaliation destroy things you care about, and eventually fighting merely for the possibility of inspiring someone else to carry on the fight, knowing it WILL cost you your lives... that is heroism. Regret, grief, defiance and despair are also aspects of the human psyche that we rarely see in our games, and pure gold for roleplaying.
Why is everyone talking about things focused on "my character may die"?
Rereading the thread, I'm not sure how you read it that way.
You're right, though. You don't want to kill them all, because then the game is just over; sure, the threat of death should still be there, but you should also threaten them with things that they know you might actually go through with!
This is why, in my opinion, a lot of Call of Cthulhu games aren't even close to being real horror. The PCs are guaranteed to fail, so there's no sense of suspense. They're just along for the ride. It can still be fun, in a hilarious kind of way (I think this is a lot like how I love Lovecraft even though he isn't scary), but it isn't horror. The games which do manage real fear are the ones where the story gives the PCs some sliver of power or hope, then watches them scramble like rats.
I wouldn't say they're guaranteed to fail... at least not in the short term. In the long term, that's essentially what the loss of sanity is about as you gain mythos knowledge - the giving up of hope. But for the scope of your typical cultist conspiracy to foil, there's usually a way to thwart the machinations of mind-blowing alien evil for now. And that's the point of CoC - fighting the good fight even if you eventually come to realize it's not a final victory.
The fun part of CoC for horror is how much of it you can build in just below the surface with a veneer of normality. Or how much you can imply something that seems normal if just a bit mysterious is part of an unspeakable horror (sphinx in Masks of Nyarlathotep, I'm looking at you).
I wouldn't say they're guaranteed to fail... at least not in the short term. In the long term, that's essentially what the loss of sanity is about as you gain mythos knowledge - the giving up of hope.
I think you're right (and that I worded my last post poorly; you can be guaranteed to fail "eventually" and still have some good, meaty horror). That you know you're doomed sets a powerful tone and can make for great roleplaying, and there remains plenty of tension in the struggle over "when".
However, in this genre I think it's all to easy for GMs to actively minimize the impact of what the PCs do (for instance, tending to have monsters burst through whatever defenses the PCs rig, or track them down with the same ease no matter what evasive measures they've taken). I'm making the case that that's actually antithetical to horror.
This is why, in my opinion, a lot of Call of Cthulhu games aren't even close to being real horror. The PCs are guaranteed to fail, so there's no sense of suspense.
Excellent point. I think the counter, however, is that the victory is so much a presumption of other sorts of of RPGs, or defeat is only the product of a mathematical construct going wooba-wooba, that a game where loss is the premise is striking.
OT: Of course the players, but that's /any/ RPG, not merely horror. Fantasy, for instance, surely isn't about amazing the characters, who almost have to become decidedly ho-hum about all the fantastic elements.
Don't forget there is a difference between horror and terror. I think that horror is a lot more atmospheric, and terror is more in your face.
This is one of those "ideally" things.
As in, IDEALLY, scaring the players is the goal. Horror is there to scare the audience, whether that be an audience in a theater, reading a book, or playing a game.
For the most part, one would hope everybody was there because they like The Scary.
That said, actual scary horror is one of the most difficult things to pull off, for a lot of reasons. Not everybody is frightened of the same things, for one. And, despite being very gifted at horror (if I do say so, myself, it is one of the aspects of my games I am most highly praised for by my players), even I run into the trap of players who are not able to let down their guard enough to allow themselves to be scared. (We all know the type: they are often the players who roleplay the least, citing embarrassment. My theory is that for horror to work, you have to be willing to allow yourself to be vulnerable, and some players are not happy with doing that).
So all that said, you can always just go for the goal of everybody agreeing that whatever is happening would be enough to make the characters scared. It's like the fear spell. There's nothing at all scary about it to any of us. But whatever it does, we all agree it makes our characters pee their pants. You can run it that way, and as long as it's interesting, everybody should be for the most part happy.
But even then, count on hearing somebody say, "that wasn't really very scary, though, was it?"