Lots of stuff about the rules.
Do you think that lowering the default target number by one would help the problem?
|
Lots of stuff about the rules.Do you think that lowering the default target number by one would help the problem?
I'm not sure to be honest. Something does need done. I've read a bit of shadowrun 4th, and WoD and SR have always been stealing each others ideas. I was thinking of portinf something from SR over. Just like in WoD, you have your Attribute + Ability for a pool (typically). They use d6's, but still same concept. However, for each (I think) 4 dice in you pool, you can trade them in for a success. So, lets say you have a 11 dice pool. You could take out 4 dice, for 1 free success, and still roll the other 7, take out 8 for 2 successes, and still roll the last 3.
|
|
One other thing. I ran a very long lasting Mortals game in the oWoD, so it can be done.... Think Supernatural.
It can, but WoD didn't really give a lot of info on mortals. It was always from the particular settings perspective, and didn't always actually work all that well. For example, in Vampire 2nd Ed, vamp fangs and Protean claws dealed Aggrivated damage.
Mortals could not heal aggrivated damage in any way short of a miracle. So, any vampire that fed of a human and didn't lick the wound left a permenant wound. This was later changed to be more realistic, but the game was never really designed to be played a s amortal. With a few exceptions, Arcanum, Hunters Hunted, and the other one did a nice job, but never got updated. It could be done, and I've also done so, it just took more work.
One other thing. I ran a very long lasting Mortals game in the oWoD, so it can be done.... Think Supernatural.It can, but WoD didn't really give a lot of info on mortals. It was always from the particular settings perspective, and didn't always actually work all that well. For example, in Vampire 2nd Ed, vamp fangs and Protean claws dealed Aggrivated damage.
Mortals could not heal aggrivated damage in any way short of a miracle. So, any vampire that fed of a human and didn't lick the wound left a permenant wound. This was later changed to be more realistic, but the game was never really designed to be played a s amortal. With a few exceptions, Arcanum, Hunters Hunted, and the other one did a nice job, but never got updated. It could be done, and I've also done so, it just took more work.
Something to point out: Mortals couldn't heal Agro damage because they couldn't take argo damage. Anything Agro just got dropped down to lethal when it hit a mortal. It's covered a couple of times but it's always a little side note in the corner instead of properly addressed.
Only supernaturals could take Agro (mages being supernatural could also, even though they were the closest to being "human")...
Actually it does go into this specifically in the Hunter book.
EDIT: Humans can't soak Lethal either.
|
Count me in on the oWoD side of things (we only played Vamp/Were). We couldn't get into the nWoD. I know there is much talk about flawed botch mechanics etc, but we found that stats aside the system worked fine in the context of the game.
We played most games of vampire at least based more on the TV show setting rather than canon from the Vamp book.
S.
|
|
Something to point out: Mortals couldn't heal Agro damage because they couldn't take argo damage. Anything Agro just got dropped down to lethal when it hit a mortal. It's covered a couple of times but it's always a little side note in the corner instead of properly addressed.
Thats is what I'm trying to say. This was not true in the older editions. It even brought it up in the Storytellers Guide for 2nd Ediotion, basically that humans with the bad luck to run in with a Gangrel and survive, useually wished they hadn't as that claw wound down their chest would mysteriously never heal. Feral Claws themselves, did Agg Damage, not Vampires and Werewolves took Agg damage from them. It wasn't until later that it was changed the concept of Agg Damage as a whole.
|
Do you think that lowering the default target number by one would help the problem?
It would definitely speed it up. Skill uses would succeed more often, attacks would hit more often and do more damage.
Original editions had Difficulty numbers varying from 4 to 10, depending on what you were trying to do. That variability had been moved to the 'number of successes required' mechanic instead, and Difficulties became a static 6. Then, in Trinity, a static 7. And now, in nWoD, a static 8.
Backing it down to 7 would, IMO, at least allow the average human with three dice (2 in Attribute, 1 in Ability) a reasonable chance (~60%) of getting the one success needed to succeed at a basic task. At Difficulty 8, that same mortal, flailing around with a wrench at something that jumped out of the shadows at him (with a Dex of 2 and Melee of 1) would have only ~30% chance of getting a single success!
(And yes, chance does not equal probability. Please ignore my ignorance of all things math-y.)
Backing it down to 6 would make things that much more fast and furious, and might be an option for a more beer and pretzels 'old Werewolf style' game with lots of combat.
In a way, it's kind of cool how making all Difficulty numbers the exact same target allows the ST to change *one thing,* and so radically affect the 'fun level' of the game. Back Difficulty down to 7, and mortals become playable. Back it down to 6, and you have a chance to recapture some of the impressive superhuman feats that have players telling stories about for years that characters could accomplish back in old World of Darkness.
Or, yanno, you could just play in the old World of Darkness. :)
|
|
Do you think that lowering the default target number by one would help the problem?It would definitely speed it up. Skill uses would succeed more often, attacks would hit more often and do more damage.
Original editions had Difficulty numbers varying from 4 to 10, depending on what you were trying to do. That variability had been moved to the 'number of successes required' mechanic instead, and Difficulties became a static 6. Then, in Trinity, a static 7. And now, in nWoD, a static 8.
Backing it down to 7 would, IMO, at least allow the average human with three dice (2 in Attribute, 1 in Ability) a reasonable chance (~60%) of getting the one success needed to succeed at a basic task. At Difficulty 8, that same mortal, flailing around with a wrench at something that jumped out of the shadows at him (with a Dex of 2 and Melee of 1) would have only ~30% chance of getting a single success!
(And yes, chance does not equal probability. Please ignore my ignorance of all things math-y.)
Backing it down to 6 would make things that much more fast and furious, and might be an option for a more beer and pretzels 'old Werewolf style' game with lots of combat.
In a way, it's kind of cool how making all Difficulty numbers the exact same target allows the ST to change *one thing,* and so radically affect the 'fun level' of the game. Back Difficulty down to 7, and mortals become playable. Back it down to 6, and you have a chance to recapture some of the impressive superhuman feats that have players telling stories about for years that characters could accomplish back in old World of Darkness.
Or, yanno, you could just play in the old World of Darkness. :)
Saddly, that would mean that WW would need to put out errta for their own DICE. ha ha
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
As a game mechanics fan, I was really excited when I was introduced to the original Storyteller system. The number of dice measured your character's simple competence, the difficulty threshold represented how challenging the attempted action was, and the number of successes indicated how well you accomplished your task. It was elegant, intuitive, and rich. (Rich, because changing the difficulty threshold did different things to the probability than adding more dice or requiring more successes.)
The static success threshold of the new mechanics is a simplification, but not a good one.
--+--+--
the original games didn't sync together well, and that was deliberate. Vampires in Vampire weren't the same vampires your Garou encountered in Werewolf, nor were they the same static menaces you had to deal with in Mage.
Most everyone I know played a cross-over campaign (Kindred and Garou, or Garou and Fae), which made for a myriad of house rules.
|
|
The original games didn't sync together well, and that was deliberate. Vampires in Vampire weren't the same vampires your Garou encountered in Werewolf, nor were they the same static menaces you had to deal with in Mage.
Most everyone I know played a cross-over campaign (Kindred and Garou, or Garou and Fae), which made for a myriad of house rules.
They really didn't require all that much, to be honest. The main difference was in the different areas of focus throughout the games. It was ok for a Mage or Werewolf to slaughter enemies, but Vampires would risk losing Humanity, for example. A vampire could feast on a drugged out crackhead, but that might screw a Werwolf over with Wyrm taint. The rules themselves, though, actually worked very easily together. A Werewolf or Vampire just muttering "I don't believe it" in a Mages general direction might kill the mage.
|
|
Most everyone I know played a cross-over campaign (Kindred and Garou, or Garou and Fae), which made for a myriad of house rules.
Vampire was written before the other four 'core' WoD games, and each game added a successive layer of richness and depth to the World of Darkness, and each book had a caveat, 'This new awesome thing / place / integral part of the WoD we've added? Vampires can't touch it. Blah, blah, eternally alone patsy suckers that everyone hates.'
Kindred of the East was *far* better designed, in this respect, with the Kuei-jin being much better mechanically balanced against the Garou, Fae, Wraiths and Willworkers, and much more a part of the complex layers of the World of Darkness, and not eternally shut out of all the 'cool kids places' like the western Kindred.
As a result, the best 'balanced' games of any sort tended to ignore the official rules for the other supernaturals. In a vampire game, Garou rules would be hideously over the top. (Most starting vampires can't soak Aggravated damage at all, and seven levels of it would kill them forever. A starting Garou could pump out thirteen Aggravated Damage on a lucky roll. She could also do that a half dozen or more times in a single attack, if she was willing to blow all of her Rage. Best of all, she can move through a dimension that the vampires don't even know exists, appear in the middle of someone's highly fortified manor house, which she's been imperceptibly scouting from the Umbra, right over their unconscious body, in the middle of the day, and kill them without them getting a chance to wake up and realize that combat has started! It's like 'I rolled a Garou. I win the game!')
Plus Vampires, unlike the other four supernaturals, spend 50% of their game time unconscious, because of that whole Anne Rice 'must sleep during the day' thing, making them an enormous pain in the butt for crossover parties, as even players who ignore the fact that every other Supernatural on the planet loathes them for no valid in-game reason and decides to group with a vampire, is going to have to put up with Sam the Vampire missing half of the game. "Oh, we found the secret lair of the who-si-mi-whatsis! Check the time, almost sunrise. I'll be back in 13 or so hours. Let me know how it went!"
Similarly, using the full Wraith rules in any other game or the full Mage rules in any other game could be terribly unbalancing (since both of those supernatural types have ways of attacking people with zero chance of retaliation or personal danger, like the WoD equivalent of Scry and Die).
From what I've heard, nWoD has come a long way towards rebalancing this stuff, but since I found it horribly frustrating and unfun to play, I haven't gotten around to attempting any cross-type games (and, indeed, despite owning pretty much *all* of the VtM, WtA, WtO and MtA stuff, as well as most of the Dark Ages, Kindred of the East, Hunter, Mummy, etc. stuff, I never got around to buying anything after the first two Vampire the Requiem offerings).
I miss the Sons of Ether (and Men in Black) too much to even look at Mage the Awakening.
Thats is what I'm trying to say. This was not true in the older editions. It even brought it up in the Storytellers Guide for 2nd Ediotion, basically that humans with the bad luck to run in with a Gangrel and survive, useually wished they hadn't as that claw wound down their chest would mysteriously never heal. Feral Claws themselves, did Agg Damage, not Vampires and Werewolves took Agg damage from them. It wasn't until later that it was changed the concept of Agg Damage as a whole.
Something to point out: Mortals couldn't heal Agro damage because they couldn't take argo damage. Anything Agro just got dropped down to lethal when it hit a mortal. It's covered a couple of times but it's always a little side note in the corner instead of properly addressed.
What I'm saying is that was the way it was the last time I looked in an oWoD book, however I think the last time I checked was in the oWoD hunter book were it specifically stated damage done to a mortal that should be Agg is instead lethal.
Most everyone I know played a cross-over campaign (Kindred and Garou, or Garou and Fae), which made for a myriad of house rules.Vampire was written before the other four 'core' WoD games, and each game added a successive layer of richness and depth to the World of Darkness, and each book had a caveat, 'This new awesome thing / place / integral part of the WoD we've added? Vampires can't touch it. Blah, blah, eternally alone patsy suckers that everyone hates.'
Kindred of the East was *far* better designed, in this respect, with the Kuei-jin being much better mechanically balanced against the Garou, Fae, Wraiths and Willworkers, and much more a part of the complex layers of the World of Darkness, and not eternally shut out of all the 'cool kids places' like the western Kindred.
As a result, the best 'balanced' games of any sort tended to ignore the official rules for the other supernaturals. In a vampire game, Garou rules would be hideously over the top. (Most starting vampires can't soak Aggravated damage at all, and seven levels of it would kill them forever. A starting Garou could pump out thirteen Aggravated Damage on a lucky roll. She could also do that a half dozen or more times in a single attack, if she was willing to blow all of her Rage. Best of all, she can move through a dimension that the vampires don't even know exists, appear in the middle of someone's highly fortified manor house, which she's been imperceptibly scouting from the Umbra, right over their unconscious body, in the middle of the day, and kill them without them getting a chance to wake up and realize that combat has started! It's like 'I rolled a Garou. I win the game!')
Plus Vampires, unlike the other four supernaturals, spend 50% of their game time unconscious, because of that whole Anne Rice 'must sleep during the day' thing, making them an enormous pain in the butt for crossover parties, as even players who ignore the fact that every other Supernatural on the planet loathes them...
The Vamps have unlimited money and political power, so one werewolf could take down a coven of vamps easy but the elders that survive will use their temporal power to hunt down and kill all wolves and kinfolk in a 500 mile radius. Also for every one werewolf there is about 100 8th gen vamps. Money, power and time are all on the vamps side even though they are meta-physicaly weaker.
|
|
I'm a huge fan of the NWOD. My gaming group as a whole started to hate running and playing the OWOD because no matter what you did you were doomed. Werewolf, Vampire, Mage it all came to an end. S owhy bother playing if in the grand scheme of things whatever you accomplished meant nothing.
At least with Nwod they removed the metaplot. It's also easier to have a mixed group of characters. In the owod Vampires hated werewolves, werewolves ahted vampires etc. In Nwod they still do yet not to the extent that they would kill each other on site. I'm also liking the more generic rulebooks for the Nwod. Books that are not tied to any specific line such as Armoury and spirits. No you would have to pay a large amount of money to play let alone run an Owod.
|
|
For example, Mortals. They have done an excelent job with the mortals as perfectly playable characters. I also like their off games, slasher, immortal, things like that, and I really like their story setting plug and play studd like Urban Legend and Ghost Stories.
In this edition it makes it worthwhile to play one and their core lines of Wod are for the most part execellant.
They really didn't require all that much, to be honest. The main difference was in the different areas of focus throughout the games. It was ok for a Mage or Werewolf to slaughter enemies, but Vampires would risk losing Humanity, for example. A vampire could feast on a drugged out crackhead, but that might screw a Werwolf over with Wyrm taint. The rules themselves, though, actually worked very easily together. A Werewolf or Vampire just muttering "I don't believe it" in a Mages general direction might kill the mage.
Actually, nope.
A Werewolf or Vampire, being themselves supermatural creatures, does not cause paradox when witnessing High Magick. :) Never have, in any edition.
Do you think that lowering the default target number by one would help the problem?It would definitely speed it up. Skill uses would succeed more often, attacks would hit more often and do more damage.
Original editions had Difficulty numbers varying from 4 to 10, depending on what you were trying to do. That variability had been moved to the 'number of successes required' mechanic instead, and Difficulties became a static 6. Then, in Trinity, a static 7. And now, in nWoD, a static 8.
Note that Exalted still uses the "6" as teh static target number.
Or, yanno, you could just play in the old World of Darkness. :)
Easier said then done. Finding books and players is harder then it sounds.
I miss the Sons of Ether (and Men in Black) too much to even look at Mage the Awakening.
Well, you could also port them into Mage: The Awakening.
The Free Council faction functions in many ways like a combination of an Etherite and a Virtual Adept.
I miss the Sons of Ether (and Men in Black) too much to even look at Mage the Awakening.Well, you could also port them into Mage: The Awakening.
Interesting Idea though:
Could the Traditions of Mage: the Ascension be ported into the new Mage?Would it be worth the effort?
|
|
I think they could. It would just be a lot easier if you ignore the Atlantian mythology. The Darker Days podcast (I want to say episodes 4 & 5) did this with the Sabbat to the new vampire, and I was very skeptical until I heard some of the idea and things that they did to smooth it over. All in all, it is incredibly interesting,and actually made me want ot play VtR.
I think they could. It would just be a lot easier if you ignore the Atlantian mythology. The Darker Days podcast (I want to say episodes 4 & 5) did this with the Sabbat to the new vampire, and I was very skeptical until I heard some of the idea and things that they did to smooth it over. All in all, it is incredibly interesting,and actually made me want ot play VtR.
But, the other question. Would it be worth the effort?
I haven't played a lot of nWoD; used to be a huge oWoD player, but gave up because they kept changing the gameworld every new edition or book. I liked a lot of the oWoD, but was a bit bitter when they decided that rather than just cancel Wraith: the Oblivion, they had to BLOW UP the place where that game took place... which then affected the MECHANICS of how certain things functioned in future revisions and supplements. Because I happened to have a campaign world that used Wraith's setting as an integral part of the overall world and had no interest in blowing it up, I had to start doing an insane amount of house ruling and blending of rules and rules revisions, and it soon became a pain in the ass to work with. (Specifically, I wanted to use Mage: the Ascension 3rd edition rules, but had to practically re-write/retcon in the old Spirit rules to account for the fact that, yes, the Shadowlands was still there and no, the Gauntlet doesn't rend you to smithereens.)
But aaaanyway.... having had a lot of experience playing oWoD and having read over nWoD and talked to people who've played it:
oWoD, before the metaplot ate my soul, had a more compelling setting overall. Mage the Ascension in particular was way cooler, with a lot of neat philosophical stuff underlying the gameplay. System wasn't bad, but it was hard to do crossovers (Mage magic worked quite different from Werewolf Gifts, frex, and it was hard to see how they balanced w/ each other). Combat could get very bogged down.
nWoD--taken with the grain of salt that I haven't actually played it--has generally better mechanics and is designed MUCH better for crossing over/mixing supernatural creatures. The core book, where you just have human investigators, is very well done, and I'd LOVE to just play a core nWoD game. But some of the add-ons are better than others. Vampire and Werewolf are a little blander, Mage: the Awakening's magic casting system caused a very solid gaming group I know fall completely apart in bitterness, tears, and rage (slight exaggeration). Changeling on the other hand looks fantastic. Not sure about Promethean and Scion.
nWoD--taken with the grain of salt that I haven't actually played it--has generally better mechanics and is designed MUCH better for crossing over/mixing supernatural creatures. The core book, where you just have human investigators, is very well done, and I'd LOVE to just play a core nWoD game. But some of the add-ons are better than others. Vampire and Werewolf are a little blander, Mage: the Awakening's magic casting system caused a very solid gaming group I know fall completely apart in bitterness, tears, and rage (slight exaggeration). Changeling on the other hand looks fantastic. Not sure about Promethean and Scion.
That's not good.
I wonder what was so bad about Mage: The Awakening?
nWoD--taken with the grain of salt that I haven't actually played it--has generally better mechanics and is designed MUCH better for crossing over/mixing supernatural creatures. The core book, where you just have human investigators, is very well done, and I'd LOVE to just play a core nWoD game. But some of the add-ons are better than others. Vampire and Werewolf are a little blander, Mage: the Awakening's magic casting system caused a very solid gaming group I know fall completely apart in bitterness, tears, and rage (slight exaggeration). Changeling on the other hand looks fantastic. Not sure about Promethean and Scion.That's not good.
I wonder what was so bad about Mage: The Awakening?
According to said gaming group (and again, take it with the grain of salt that this is hearsay, though understanding I discussed it with them a lot because I had been interested in the game), the magic system was vague (as opposed to "loose" as the Ascension version was) and things like what you did as a spell versus a rote was confusing, and had contradictory descriptions in different places. It was easy to misinterpret, and resulted in the group--despite generally being a savvy group of players who were all intimately familiar with other White Wolf products--constantly dissolving into rules interpretation arguments and gameplay was slowed down immensely.
WW published a book dedicated JUST to explaining how spellcasting worked about a year after the book came out, which theoretically was supposed to help, but also contradicted some stuff in core. Also as the Game Master for that campaign pointed out, "If you have to publish an entire book just to explain how something is supposed to work in the original rulebook, you're not doing it right."
I wonder what was so bad about Mage: The Awakening?
According to said gaming group (and again, take it with the grain of salt that this is hearsay, though understanding I discussed it with them a lot because I had been interested in the game), the magic system was vague (as opposed to "loose" as the Ascension version was) and things like what you did as a spell versus a rote was confusing, and had contradictory descriptions in different places. It was easy to misinterpret, and resulted in the group--despite generally being a savvy group of players who were all intimately familiar with other White Wolf products--constantly dissolving into rules interpretation arguments and gameplay was slowed down immensely.
Oh dear.
Mage: the Ascension's "loose" magic rules caused arguements - but that was an unavoidable result of creating a system that would support many different mystic paradigms.
It sounds like the new Mage kept (and may have made worse) the arguments, while losing the "coolness", diversity, and flexability of the old "sphere based" magic system. :(
Right jumping to the new Mage's defense here real quick. Don't knock until you at least read it. I must say it's a lot easier to figure out were a particular effect should be and how to use it IMO. It actually gives several examples of different effects for each level of each sphere of magic, and goes into some detail about how to do both quick spells and long term ritualistic spells.
HOWEVER!
It does require actually reading the sections. This isn't 3.5 Prestige classes folks -- you can't skip all the fluff (and complain about fluff not being there, tangent!) and proceed directly to the tables and charts and build your character. You MUST spend the time to read the system.
Huh, imagine that... the actual magic system takes longer and is a bit more difficult than the paint by numbers powers of the fighter... err vampire, but also can be more powerful. Crazy uh? Almost like it's magic...
Right jumping to the new Mage's defense here real quick. Don't knock until you at least read it. I must say it's a lot easier to figure out were a particular effect should be and how to use it IMO. It actually gives several examples of different effects for each level of each sphere of magic, and goes into some detail about how to do both quick spells and long term ritualistic spells.
Mage: the Ascension did this also. Rotes have always been part of the game.
It was just that the individual was not locked into this effect only (i.e., a player did not have to "Buy" rotes.) ;)
Until (the Apocriphal) 2.5 edition, there was no penalty for not using a rote.
HOWEVER!
It does require actually reading the sections. This isn't 3.5 Prestige classes folks -- you can't skip all the fluff (and complain about fluff not being there, tangent!) and proceed directly to the tables and charts and build your character. You MUST spend the time to read the system.
Huh, imagine that... the actual magic system takes longer and is a bit more difficult than the paint by numbers powers of the fighter... err vampire, but also can be more powerful. Crazy uh? Almost like it's magic...
You are assuming that we did not do so. ;D
Believe me, veterain players coming from Mage: the Ascension do grok that one needs to understand the magic system pretty thouroughly.
You can still do magic without a rote -- it just automatically costs you a point of juice. You can also achieve other effects than those listed, they just give you a starting point.
****
I don't mean to infer that people hadn't read all the way through the rules (other than the ones that have stated that they haven't and don't think they like a system when they haven't even read it) I'm just pointing out that it is a requirement to actually having understanding of what you are doing. Kind of a note to the aduiance thing.
You can still do magic without a rote -- it just automatically costs you a point of juice. You can also achieve other effects than those listed, they just give you a starting point.
More Importantly, they also make you give up a third to half of your dice pool
A pretty large penalty in most cases.
It gets even better. Creating a new rote requires that the mage:
And it is unclear to me if the mage then has to also buy the rote itself.
I'm pretty sure they do not. I could have sworn I just happened to have red that yesterday while reading up on Mage 2.
And it is unclear to me if the mage then has to also buy the rote itself.
You are correct. (Mage: The Awakening p. 291)
What a deal. :)
|
|
Sacrifice a permanent point of Willpower - which is insane.
While we used that mechanic ourselves for Kindred embracing people (temp willpower cost for ghouls), representing the vampire needing to impart a fraction of his Beast to the Childe-to-be, and not just bleed in his mouth, I do find it kinda amusing that, due to the XP costs for raising Willpower, it's the people who are borderline batpoop insane (really low Willpower) who are going to be most able to afford creating new stuff with Willpower expenditures.
For someone with Willpower 8 or 9, it's unbearably expensive to have to buy back a lost point. If your Willpower was 2, it's no biggie to blow a point and buy it back.
The 'creative' sorts, pumping out Rotes (or whatever) are going to be the ones cackling in the basement, talking to themselves, with all the stability and self-control of a pack of rabid ferrets...
|
|
For Vampire, I understand why they did this. I don't like it, but I get it. nWoD is based off that idea that the group is localized. They are in one city, the entire game. The ability to create Ghouls at no cost is way to easy to Ghoul an entire city in a few weeks. So what if the Prince and Elders have 500+ xp worth of stats on you, you have nearly the entire city. . .
Also, I might be wrong, but I think it only costs you a Temp. Willpower to create a Ghoul. I know a new vampire is a Perm. Willpower, but I am pretty sure the Ghoul is only a Temp. Willpower, and after the first time, they can actually spend it themselves, if you let them.
|
|
Also, I might be wrong, but I think it only costs you a Temp. Willpower to create a Ghoul. I know a new vampire is a Perm. Willpower, but I am pretty sure the Ghoul is only a Temp. Willpower, and after the first time, they can actually spend it themselves, if you let them.
I was referring to house rules that we were using in VtM (no willpower cost to maintain someone who is already a Ghoul, 'though).
When I brought them up on the WW forums, Justin Achilli opined that they were stupid and he didn't see the point of them. I reserve the right to be amused if my 'stupid' house rule is now a part of the nWoD. :)
|
|
It was in part to subvert the 'baby on a stick' trope.
Was that some variation on the Diablerie Mill(tm) concept?
(Acquire some blood from an older vampire. Say, 7th generation. Feed it to some random schlub in a coma ward, making him 8th generation. Feed his blood to the lady in the next bed over, making her 9th generation. Feed her blood to the dude in the next bed over, making him 10th generation. Have your 11th generation Ventrue slurp them down in reverse order, and become 8th generation in about 10 minutes.)
We house ruled the willpower expenditure to end the Diablerie Mill (since the 'Sire' in each of these cases would be unable to spend a Willpower to create a Childe, and 'bottled blood' taken from an unwilling / unaware kindred wouldn't be useful to Sire *or* Ghoul), and to end the mass embrace tactic used first by the Sabbat against the Camarilla, and then by the Camarilla and Anarchs against the Kindred of the East.
Extending it to temporary Willpower loss for Ghouling was to turn off the little light that would pop up in some player's eyes when they heard that one of the Cappadocian elders in a published 'module' was described as having over 50 Ghouls, and the suggestion that any newbie vampire could go spike the hell punch on pledge night at I Tappa Keg and Ghoul entire fraternities worth of up and coming young businessmen, politicians and used car salesmen.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
It was in part to subvert the 'baby on a stick' trope.Was that some variation on the Diablerie Mill(tm) concept?
Extending it to temporary Willpower loss for Ghouling was to turn off the little light that would pop up in some player's eyes when they heard that one of the Cappadocian elders in a published 'module' was described as having over 50 Ghouls, and the suggestion that any newbie vampire could go spike the hell punch on pledge night at I Tappa Keg and Ghoul entire fraternities worth of up and coming young businessmen, politicians and used car salesmen.
Yeah, baby on a stick was the sabbat version, using a nursery.
We capped the ghouling thing by requiring 1 BP per ghoul. So no spiking the punchbowl. :-)
Side note on the nWoD ghoul... it takes a will point expenditure each week in addition to the blood to keep them ghouled. However the will point (not dot, just the temporary point) can be expended by either the vampire or the ghoul. Lots of vampires don't tell the ghoul this as it keeps them in complete control (at the cost of the will power point) however some make the ghoul pay the will power (and most "wild" ghouls pay the will power themselves).
|
|
Yeah, baby on a stick was the sabbat version, using a nursery.
Ew. Our naughty party was superstitious enough to be unwilling to use people who were mentally active. There was a rumor that one could be possessed / influenced by mental remnants of the victims, and the idea of having a pack of infants wailing in my skull for all of eternity sounds... un-fun. (Hence picking brain-dead / comatose folk.)
Although I suppose it would explain the average Sabbat members tenuous grip on sanity. :)
|
|
Well, first and foremost would be WoD Core. I assume you mean NWoD. It containes the basic system for all game lines. If you wanted to play for example, vampire, the basic rules are not in the vampire book. Only the added on rules specifically for vampire the reqieum.
But, core WoD is a good game for just playing a "human" in the WoD setting. As for the best supernatural setting, hard to say really. My guess would be Mage, Vampire, than Changling. WoD core mortals line also sells other books, like Second Sight, that allows you to play magical and psychic humans.
Actually, I would suggest avoiding the whole "World Of Darkness" thing, and go with either Scion or Exalted. :)
IMHO, both games "play better" then the nWoD right now.
|
|
Scion is good. Exalted is good, too, but very complicated and can be difficult to get into, both as a reader and a guy looking for a group).
Scion is not so complicated, but has a bad tendency of having it's rules all over the place (and sometimes hard to find), and being easily broken (Dex). It is also very fun and easy to get into though. As far as finding a group, though, I honestly don't know.
