The Onyx Vault

About Me

Readers Online

0 Members, 1 Guest

Dec 12

Vampire: The Reqiuem

As one who spent some time briefly loving the new setting, and then converted and hated it with a passion for a couple of years, I feel very qualified in naming the flaws in the New World of Darkness. Having then changed my opinion BACK to appreciating its beauty, I also feel qualified to name its new strengths and benefits. For the sake of avoiding confusion, I need to warn you that I will alternate between talking about the World of Darkness as a whole, and Vampire specifically. I do this because this article discusses the transformations in the World of Darkness, using Vampire as a case study in how they manifest in one setting.

Here's the briefest summary of the difference between the old and new worlds of darkness.
OWoD: "Our ancestors messed things up so bad that no matter what we do we're all screwed. Life is a prison."
NWoD: "Our ancestors messed things up so bad that if we do nothing we're all screwed. It's our responsibility to do the best we can to fix it."

For those of us who believe that horror is the same thing as losing all the time, the Old WoD is certainly the way to go. That setting has a thousand fail-safes in place, and encourages the Storyteller to create more, which ensure that the characters end up being cogs in the great machine of their own destruction. This is indeed terrifying. The new world of darkness, rather that focusing on "hopelessness," then, focuses on responsibility. This is also terrifying. Now, for some, this is a problem, because it does in fact empower the characters to make their own fate. But I believe that focusing on that fact really misses the point. The key is that the characters in the New WoD have lost all excuses for anything. No matter what happens, good or bad, the characters cannot "escape" their responsibility for what they do. It's their fault, good or bad. I know what you're thinking: "Old WoD did that too." Yes... AND... The New WoD has it more directly built into the setting. Let's look at some of the "escapes" that were removed to make the New WoD, specifically in Vampire: the Requiem.

All Paths except Humanity are now gone. That's right, as "scary" as those inhuman philosophies were, and as brilliant as they were, they provide a solution to the problem of holding on to your Humanity. I mean really imagine NOT having those paths to turn to when you reach five-hundred, or a thousand, or two thousand years. NO MORE. In the Old Wod, eternity really lost some of its terror, some of its ability to destroy you, because it allowed you to keep your sanity in exchange for your soul (Paths). Now every single time you lose any humanity, you get to ask yourself how the hell you're going to hold on to what's left. There is absolutely nothing in between you and oblivion. Similarly, Golconda is gone. There really is no escape from this one. I am certainly willing to grant that the previous system posed these challenges, and can allow a group to explore these issues, AND I need to point out that this system does it better.

All the Methuselahs and Antedeluvians are gone. I know, there was a lot of rich material there, a lot of wonderful plot writing, hidden lore, backstory, and the like that is now missing. We will all miss the bad guy who's plans we're falling into without even knowing it. We will all miss the idea that there are enemies that we can't defeat even after another Ten Thousand years. Several things are gained by giving them the boot, however. PAY ATTENTION TO THIS: I know this is the big beef our group has to the game, so listen up. Since it isn't a God-ling that ensures our doom, its actually OUR FAULT if the world blows up. If we can't get a job, if no one will listen to us, if innocents are murdered, if we lose our souls, if all the politics goes wrong, that's 100% ON US. When volcanoes explode or an entire bloodline dies, we don't get to blame anyone. We simply have to deal with the fact that life is hard, and that we COULD have done more. Weirdly enough, by taking away that enormous mountain of power that hates us, the game has made us more vulnerable to the universe at large. When some one dies, it's not because some one else won... It's because YOU DIDN'T SAVE THEM. Here's the second thing that's gained: With no Ten-Thousand-Year-Old-Vampires around, with no One-Thousand-Year-Old-Vampires around... your security blanket of knowing that its possible to survive that long is GONE. The Epic struggle is gone. In other words... It really makes the fact that everything you do is meaningless stare you in the face, because even as an "immortal," the fact is you are not capable of creating anything of lasting value. As the centuries go by, your soul IS going to wither into nothingness. You aren't part of some one else's plot. THAT creates a kind of meaning to your actions. No, you're just one more drop in an endless history of people living and dying. And your plots and manipulations will only be able to feed you for so long, but eventually you won't be able to gain nourishment from even THAT. Try to hold on to your hope and meaning and morality NOW, sucker. You don't even get to have an enemy that is WORTH fighting. Because whether its you or that Primogen who wins this political contest, your sanity and your souls are only going to last so long...

The Clans have been collapsed into Five. Now, its true that some of the clans that were lost were pretty darn cool. And not just because of their powers and curses. Some of them had philosophies that are SO FUN to swim around in. Like the Tzimisce. One of my favorite clans ever, when done the way I think they should be (which is what every role-player says). Guess what was gained though? You don't get to blame anything on your clan now. Nothing. None of your behaviour comes from your clan anymore. What I mean by this is that when there were 13 known clans plus a few weird ones, with a hundred bloodlines, there would often be only one or two clans who actually WOULD embrace any given character, and then a clan or two for whom your character would be the "mismatch that makes good RP." Now all the clans could conceivably embrace your character, and all of them will fit well some of the time, but all of them will be a mismatch some of the time as well. Gone are the days when Hannibal Lecture has to be a Malkavian or a Tzimisce or a Nosferatu, "but if you make him a Toreador that adds some awesome RP to it." Gone are the days when a Painter needs to be a Toreador or a Tzimisce or a Malkavian, "but if you make him a Gangrel that adds some awesome RP to it." No. ALL the clans have plenty of room for Hannibal, plenty of room for a Painter, plenty of room for bankers and mafia leaders and priests. You, the player, and not your clan, are responsible for your backstory and your attitude. What's far more important is your covenant, your actual ideology. Your elders have survived by giving a damn about something. Rather than a game inwhich "All that's left for the elders is the desire for power," you now have elders who have had to force themselves to still care... and who have had that caring twisted by centuries of hunger.

Gone is the eternal bliss of ignorance. I absolutely LOVED the way that Old WoD (particularly Vampire) had thousands of pages of hidden lore, thousands of pages of "the darker truth" that the characters didn't know about. I absolutely ADORED the fact that the truth was always more horrifying, and the way the players and characters had to fight tooth and nail for every scrap of information. I loved the fact that hiding knowledge was one of the primary tools of power used by the elders against the neonates, the real elders against the elders, the methuselahs against the real elders... I loved it. AND... it provides an escape. I mean exactly how accountable are our characters (or us, the players) for what they do if we don't know the "truth?" If all we have is lies told by our parents and grandparents (oops, I mean elders and methuselahs), then we can't really be blamed for what we do, can we? We can't REALLY, HONESTLY be blamed for the fact that the world sucks and for the fact that third world nations are starving (oops, I mean that elders are using mortals as pawns) if all we know about our history is that the pilgrims sailed here for freedom (I mean, that vampirism was caused by Caine getting cursed), right? The REAL bad guys, the ones who are really to blame, are the MORE POWERFUL ones who know the truth, the corporations and our ancestors who owned slaves (i mean, the elder vampires with more disciplines who feed on us). That excuse is gone. Nobody knows more than you. It's all been forgotten, and even if you did know, it wouldn't change the fact that the world suffers today. And it certainly wouldn't make you more powerful, or a better person. So you know some things, you understand the world. Big deal. NOW WHAT? What are YOU, a responsible person, going to DO now?

The iron wall of the Generations is gone. Your "Blood Potence" now increases very slowly over time (or very quickly, depending on your perspective), so if you hang around long enough, you'll have BP of 10, which is equivalent to the Antedeluvians of Old WoD. Very few make it that far... and any who do are forced into Torpor very quickly, during which time their blood potence drops considerably. So when they wake up they aren't God-lings anymore, they're just "Solid Ancillae." So they don't last long either. Granted, having the super-dupers way in the background was fun and scary. And knowing that you'd NEVER, EVER be their equal was its own kind of terrifying. I'm sure by now you can fill in the blanks of where I'm going to go with this: The gods are gone. Not even the gods are invincible. You will never be safe. And you are DOOMED to growing up some day (oops, I mean you'll be some one else's hated monster some day). All the things you think about the older vampires and how they've let their humanity go... Some day a young neonate will think the same thing about you... and then you'll grow old (powerful) and die just like your grandparents have.

To summarize the difference between the two settings differently... The New WoD has grown up from being a teenager that hates its parents to a young adult with a job and bills to pay. The Old WoD let you feel the teenage angst of always feeling isolated, of always feeling that your future was outside of your control. The New WoD tells you that your isolation is an excuse you created to avoid really dealing with reality and taking charge of your own life. Man up and take the world by the horns already. You may not control your future, but whining about it makes you useless.

Now that I've talked about how awesome the new setting is, and how happy I am that they've added levels of responsibility that were not previously so inescapable, its time to point out two of the flaws that I see in the setting. I'll have to warn you in advance that my problems with this setting are in some ways minor. They are all things that were done under a good idea, that executed poorly. One of them can be fixed by a good Storyteller (which means deliberately DITCHING part of the published canon), while the other seems rather solidly in the way.

My first problem with NWoD Vampire is this:
They want the Camarilla, the Anarchs, the Sabbat, the Tremere, and the Lillim ALL to live in the same city. And they expect one prince to be able to hold the peace. Not really, those are Old WoD parallels to Reqiuem covenants. I'm just wording it that way so Old WoD folks can understand what I mean.

It seems like the only ways for that system to work are as follows:
A) For nothing to ever happen, because it's always a stalemate and no one can make a move without starting a full on 5-way war.
2) For it to just be an all-out 5-way war (which means RP goes out the window).
Third) For only one covenant to live in the city, and for all the plots to be arguments WITHIN that one covenant in that city. (This would be the natural conclusion to option 2, and really seems the most viable and the most intense RP).

For those who haven't read the Core Book,
There are 5 covenants, which are inbetween a political faction and an ideology. They would be Paths except that in NWoD all vampires are on the Path of Humanity, and have to STRUGGLE to keep their humanity AND their ideology.
1-- Invictus: all about secular forms of control, Neo-Feudalism, Ventrue-style. ((similar to old Camarilla))
2-- Lancea Sanctum: religious power, trying to do God's will, which means being a predator of darkness ((similar to Sabbat, but more hierarchical))
3-- Carthians: Anarchs who read sociology books and go to Marxist school, social engineers trying to create utopia. ((similar to non-gang-banger Anarchs))
4-- Ordo Dracul: changing and perfecting the vampiric curse through experimentation and magic. ((They merged the Path of Metamorphosis and the Tremere.))
5-- Circle of the Crone: mix wicca with "pain creates self-realization and awakening." ((Lillim or Bahari))

That really is a rich setting. It's great, as was the prior setting. But the idea of getting them all to sit down for tea in the same city is just ludicrous to me. If you really start to look at it, each covenant can get along alright with one other covenant, but should have REAL difficulties even talking to the others. Exactly how does a social activist (Carthian) talk to the Nazi Doctors in the Ordo Dracul, or the religious fanatics in the Sanctum, or the iron-fisted rich folk of the Invictus? Exactly how does a dude in the Sanctum have a chat with some one who is deliberately trying to circumvent the curse handed down by GOD HIMSELF (the Ordo Dracul)? I'm torn between dearly LOVING that conflict of philosophy and adoring how rich it is in possibility... and having no idea how they can ever coexist. It would be like dropping a Drag Queen down in the middle of Jerry Falwell's church.

My second big beef is this:
The Old WoD had a problem of assuming that every single myth and every single sub-culture needed its own bloodline and its own special discipline. So you ended up with 70 bloodlines, 60 disciplines, 30 Paths of Enlightenment, 20 Political Factions... The New WoD said, "Screw that, let the subcultures just be groups of normal vampires who had a different philosophy, but who had to deal with it just like everyone else." I fully support that move (now), because it transformed cultural differences into... CULTURAL differences, rather than supernatural ones. It took some of the magic out of the universe and put responsibility back in its place. You want to be a Nosferatu from Africa? FINE, be that and deal with the consequences. You don't get any extra bells and whistles. Gone are the days when an NPC owes his awesomeness to his obscure bloodlineage. "Dude, what if they met a Kue-jin (or Kyasid) but didn't know what it was?" Screw that. It's time for Storytellers to step up on their NPC creation.

And then... they killed it. Every new book has 3 to 5 new bloodlines. Most of those get their own signature discipline that only they can learn. Each of them represents a certain mythology, a certain sub-culture. We're right back where we started in the Old Days, when every single character type can only be embraced by one group, "Or by its opposite for awesome RP." And now every player gets to play a character defined ENTIRELY by their bloodlineage. "Dude, I'm gonna be a Khaibit. Wait, no, a Morotrophian... they're creepy."

This problem can be solved Easily: Storytellers, tell your group you think Bloodlines rob the game of RP and of believability, that they explain too much of the universe instead of making those things an aspect of human culture and choice. And PLAYERS... do the same. Just flat out tell your Storytellers you want a game in which bloodlines don't exist because they are LAME and STUPID.

Well, that's the first of my two cents. Maybe my buck fifty.
Your turn.

Posted at 7:15 pm · 17 comments

Comment by x8xid, Dec 15 2008, 02:08 PM
This IS an interesting way to think about it. Of course one of the main factors about the OWoD is conspiracy. I LOVE the jyhad and anything having to do with the idea of conspiracy.

I disagree that Requim is more "grown up" than the other. Maybe it's the way you worded it, but it sound like you are accusing anyone who plays the old system of being juvinile. That's how it comes off.

Requim does have a certain amount of polish that I admire, but I hate that they got so far away from thier historical and biblical paralles. The history and the lore are what I like and the new Vampire just doesn't do it for me. It also feels like somewhere allong the line White-Wolf forgot that vampires are bad guys. They want you to fix things, they want you to WIN and save humanity somehow. IT's just not DARK. Granted there's a level of that in the old game, but the underlining factor was always "You are a monster (beast), live with it."
Comment by King_Rat, Dec 15 2008, 04:23 PM
The great thing is, the nWoD is polished and pretty and full of opportunities. And there's no history. No meta-plot.
There IS the whole Torpor-makes-you-forget-everything bit, though. Which means...NO ONE KNOWS THE TRUTH.

We are FREE of the metaplot, so those gamers and storytellers who hated Caine and the Antediluvians don't have to worry about them anymore.

We are also FREE to HAVE a metaplot. If you like it, make it your truth. It's that easy.

The biggest change from oWod to nWod is freedom from a decade of source material. Everything is up to the Storyteller to a degree that was not found in the Old WoD. Any Storyteller had the option of ditching the backstory, but it was SO prevalent that it was impossible to do without at least one of your players saying, "That's not what the Black Hand is up to!". Now, NO ONE knows what you're going to do, and I think it's wonderful.
Comment by Onyx, Dec 15 2008, 05:39 PM
So Rat... I take it you hate Forgotten Realms material because it IMPRISONS you in all the setting and metaplot details, because it FORCES you to play in a rich and detailed context? You'd like to have "freedom from" all that "source material?" Too bad they published all those In Nomine books that detailed the Archangels and such, huh? Would have been better if they had left you "FREE" without the constraints of backstory and the like, yeah? I mean Dominic's personality and methodology is "SO prevalent" that you can't have Judgment be a nice hippy without your players whining about it, right?

I disagree with you.
Comment by King_Rat, Dec 15 2008, 06:09 PM
But, you see, the difference is in how the background and metaplot are seen by those who use them. The way Old WoD material was written, the way it was presented, it took over the entire game.

From our Storyteller's comment:
"Of course one of the main factors about the OWoD is conspiracy. I LOVE the jyhad and anything having to do with the idea of conspiracy.

I disagree that Requim is more "grown up" than the other. Maybe it's the way you worded it, but it sound like you are accusing anyone who plays the old system of being juvinile. That's how it comes off.

Requim does have a certain amount of polish that I admire, but I hate that they got so far away from thier historical and biblical paralles. The history and the lore are what I like and the new Vampire just doesn't do it for me"

Conspiracy, jyhad, historical and biblical parallels, lore...it's all about playing out the story the way White Wolf wrote it. There's too much, and it drowns the game. How many of the oWoD books do you own/have you read/have you basically memorized? Could you and Acid pretty much give me the complete history of any bloodline/clan/Methuselah from the oWoD canon? It's very likely.

The problem that I always had was the lore. How long was it before any of us we ALLOWED to read our Clan Sourcebooks? (Not a shot at Acid, BTW, just commentary on how the system worked out). Any player in the nWoD can read any of the source material, and as long as he/she doesn't get his/her hands on my/your notes about the campaign, nothing is learned. Because they included Mist of the Ages to do exactly what it was meant to do. Make everything fluid, mutable, and now we can tell any story we like.

You can read all the In Nomine material, as well.
And did anyone ever ask us not to purchase or read the D&D material? Not me.

The point is, if I read The Giovanni Chronicles, it would totally F up your game.
If you read Superiors 1: War and Honor, I could still run you as a Servitor of Stone with no issues whatsoever.
Comment by x8xid, Dec 15 2008, 10:58 PM
Ahhh but your talking about CAMPAIGN books... The not reading certain books was MY preference alone. I wanted you to REALLY experience being NEONATES was the idea, and it worked very well for a while. It was a successful experiment until other things intervened into our gaming.

"it's all about playing out the story the way White Wolf wrote it." - To have this discussion you HAVE to take out the GM factor. A setting can NEVER stay intact with a GM's personal preference. We are talking simply about what is on the books. I can take oWod and run it like NWod if I WANT TO. It has nothing to do with what is written, which is why we have to approach these games objectively without our own flavors getting in the way of the material when discussing the GAMES content.

Which brings me what I PERSONALLY don't like. The lack of content. Basically what it boils down to is;

R@t enjoys this world because it has created a GENERIC horror setting WITH some basic cannon to get him started on his own plot. There's some Merritt there. I feel that the new setting depends TOO heavily on the storyteller to make their own story. This sounds hypocritical right, well it is... but I'm being objective. Here's the logic - This game presents itself as a full game with setting, background and history - but once you get it home you find that it's a little empty and assumes that you have already decided what YOU want to run as far as your plot... Thats great... if you had intended to pick up a generic system (like the RPGX system) that clearly advertises on the back cover "hey I'm not a real setting." Basically, by FREEING us from the meta-plot they have released an incomplete product.

Now that's not really even my insight, that's just objectivity. The argument against OWod is that theres too much - well objectivity would dictate that this is right. But to throw it out the window, the GM can do the same with the source material. I NEVER RAN ANYTHING RIGHT OR BY THE BOOK. The whole don't read books thing was a mind game, the whole no peaking was a trick. I played the jyhad in real life to keep you guessing. The truth is I NEVER READ HALF OF WHAT I OWNED OR SAID I READ.

The reason, I knew you would read it anyway. And you did. Everything you played was made up (for the most part.) But, the mystery of the books kept you yearning to want to know more. You trusted my world MORE because it seemed like a published setting. The problem was, I was never confident enough in MY stories to let you know they were mine. I wanted so badly for you guys to like playing them I had to keep you thinking that my ideas were coming from PRE APPROVED sources. Ask Onyx - he's out read me at this point, knows how it all goes and he'll flat out tell you - "Yep, you lived a lie." The point was "Was it fun?"

So back on topic - I like game settings that shotgun their ideas at you. OWod offered 100,000 possible truths to CHOOSE from. Anyone who has ACTUALLY READ THE CANNON (I have now) will tell you - yes there is meta plot; but there are 27,562,098 to choose from to use in your game. Those books were written open ended. NWoD Offers how many truths? Well, that's not a bad thing UNLESS your GM is going straight by the book because they aren't good at writing EVERYTHING on their own. (Even I have to get ideas somewhere.)

So does it sound like I HATE the new game... yep. Do I? NO!!!!!! I love it right now. I'm sad that some cool clans and powers are gone, BUT I think it's awesome. I just ALSO enjoy my aging Methuselahs who sit waiting to devour the planet and planning their schemes.
Comment by x8xid, Dec 15 2008, 11:03 PM
Oh yeah... and BLOODLINES SUCK. PERIOD.
Comment by thedixman2000, Dec 16 2008, 12:57 AM
Okay, as a oWoD neonate, and almost totally unfamiliar with nWoD, I feel a little out of place here. That said, I'm going to chime in anyhow. First, congratulations to Onyx on a good article. It really put a perspective on both WoDs, although I agree with 8xid on how the whole 'juvenile' thing came off. Second, and the real reason I'm commenting, is because the Realms were invoked (seriously, it's like saying 'Candyman' at your mirror). And I feel like Onyx misrepresented metaplot in the Realms, such as it is. As I understand it, in V:tM, the source books actually gave a semi-detailed account of plots going on. In the Realms, however, such things are limited to, "There are dragons in the Forest of Wyrms" and "The Zhentarim control Daggerdale, and keep trying to conquer Shadowdale." Much more vague*.

Obviously, which is better comes down to a matter of GM and player preference. How much does the Storyteller WANT to be responsible for? How much time are they willing to dedicate to a story that (assuming it's not to be published) is ultimately disposable? How capable is the Storyteller of creating a QUALITY story to run? How many of the players WANT to be totally left at the mercy of the Storyteller for (basically) every detail? I mean, the GM says, "He's Zhentarim" (Or Sabbat, or whatever), then the player has a good idea, where he's from, who he serves, and probably what he might be up to. In addition to being a real time saver, this also acts as a security blanket for the player, keeping him/her grounded, and makes it easier to stay in character by already knowing many of the things that the character would know. Whereas the other option creates more of a sense of wonder, and can really establish a more intense mood if the players are hanging on every word, instead of trying to remember some detail from a sourcebook, or worse, are actually trying to look it up.

*This refers to primary sourcebooks such as the Player's Guide to Faerun. Obviously, if you have an adventure module or a Forgotten Realms novel, it is much more specific.
Comment by Onyx, Dec 16 2008, 06:14 PM
I have no problem holding contradictory feelings at the same time.
1-- I really DO think that NWoD is way more grown up than OWoD.
2-- I really DO think that OWoD is way more grown up than NWoD. But that's a different article.
A-- I think it was a very wise move that they ditch all the things I said they got rid of in this article.
B-- I think it was FREAKING STUPID AND DUMB that they got rid of all those things I said they got rid of in this article.
First-- I think the people who like OWoD better are being unfair and stupid.
Second-- I think the people who like NWoD better are being unfair and stupid.

So yeah, you picked up on one side of that in this article. The other side is equally true as far as I'm concerned. I may address that in a future article. For now just know that I love both of them and I hate both of them (so that's really four feelings total). None of those four feelings completely wins, and if you try to pin me down on it, I'll take the opposite side as you. This article was written because our forums were addressing the problems with what was LOST in the move. So I wrote an article of what those losses GAINED for us.
Comment by Onyx, Dec 16 2008, 06:15 PM
BY THE WAY:
Dix Wrote: "*This refers to primary sourcebooks such as the Player's Guide to Faerun. Obviously, if you have an adventure module or a Forgotten Realms novel, it is much more specific."

To this I say PWNED ON A STICK.
Comment by x8xid, Dec 17 2008, 04:45 PM
It's hard to write an article when you are so prone to playing Devils Advocate all the time. Of course the comments I made, I realize that there is no way that you would think these things are absoloute. And, everyone should understand that this work is not intended to BASH anyones game. I know for SURE Onyx and I enjoy both games - it easy to spot when people say what they DONT like about something, but to hear what they doo like is a little harder to swallow.

Like it is stated; This was not a review. If it had been, I would have required it to be more in the objective direction (still an opinion) but more of a "clean" shot at rating the game itself. But this is more of a comparitive article than an actual guage of how good the product itself is. As long as that's understood THEN we can have a good conversation about what is presented.

A review would be interesting to see. How does one review this kind of game? Is the review based on the GM that the player was subjected to, or only the quality of material? - And if you pick the obvious ladder, how do you decide the quality of material that... well... is in your imagination. You're almost writing a review of your own imagination.

I think really it comes down to TWO QUESTIONS ALONE:

1) How well does the content inspire you run a game in the proposed setting?

2) How well does the system allow for it to happen?
Comment by King_Rat, Mar 20 2009, 03:43 PM
I know I'm way late, but I saw this article and HAD to read it again.

"My first problem with NWoD Vampire is this:
They want the Camarilla, the Anarchs, the Sabbat, the Tremere, and the Lillim ALL to live in the same city. And they expect one prince to be able to hold the peace."

The problem is, the Covenants disagree, but they don't have the same kind of open animosity we saw between the Camarilla and the Sabbat, either. They are (to use an admittedly weak metaphor) different branches of Christianity as opposed to different street gangs. Street gangs will kill other gangs if the so much as see them. Baptists and Methodists just avoid each other in the liqour store before paying the Catholic at the register. Also, your Covenant is a choice. You become a vampire, and are, initially, at least, Unaligned (nominated for Largest Number of Appropriate Commas In a Sentence). You see what the political climate in your area is like (its an industrial town on the upper north-eastern seaboard, but flanked on two sides by heavy forest), and decide that while the Circle of the Crone seems to have fun worshipping at the forest ruins that drew them to the area, and the Ordo Dracul have some new ideas about making the curse more manageable, your family is an old family, and the cigar-filled boardrooms of the Invictus really seem more your speed.

I think it's a common misconception that the Covenants are enemies. Political enemies, yes. Ideological enemies, certainly. Blood enemies? Not by default, no. Not like the Camarilla and the Sabbat.

Concerning bloodlines: They. Are. Rare.
So are serial killers. And, compared to humans, so are vampires. The problem with bloodlines isn't that they exist. It's that they are abused. I've created an entire city filled with mortals and Kindred. There is ONE vampire from a bloodline. Because they are rare. Like mutants. Or retards. Or queers with poor fashion sense.

Ahh. I love the smell of discussion.
Comment by Onyx, Mar 22 2009, 09:35 PM
I will return to your idea that the Covenants can get along just fine in one city later.
Right now I want to demonstrate how not-rare Bloodlines are. My post after this one, whenever I write it, will describe the ways inwhich rarity will not solve the problem of Bloodlines ruining RP.
Here is the list of published Bloodlines on the White Wolf wiki site. Before you read it, go ahead and ask yourself just how few of them there have to be for there to be only one or two per major city. We're talking about "Each bloodline has ONLY one member of itself in existence at a time EVER" unless you want them to overrun your cities.

Keep in mind that this list is incomplete, as it does not include the bloodlines added in the 5 Clanbooks (I happen to know that the Gangrel clanbook adds two bloodlines, so I assume the others do as well).

Begin Copy and Paste from this site. http://whitewolf.wikia.com/wiki/Bloodline_(VTR)

The list of known bloodlines mentioned in Vampire: The Requiem include:

The list of known bloodlines mentioned in Vampire: The Requiem include:

[edit] Daeva
Anvari (VTR: Bloodlines: The Hidden, pp. 20-29)
The Asnâm (VTR: Circle of the Crone, pp. 165-167)
The Carnival (VTR: Bloodlines: The Legendary, pp. 23-37)
Children of Judas (VTR: Bloodlines: The Legendary, pp. 38-50)
Duchagne (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, p. 105; Bloodlines: The Chosen, pp. 36-45)
Gulikan (VTR: Bloodlines: The Legendary, pp. 64-77)
Kallisti (VTR: Invictus, p. 162)
Malintzin (WOD: Shadows of Mexico, pp. 101-102)
Mortifiers of the Flesh (VTR: Lancea Sanctum, pp. 170-172)
Nelapsi (VTR: Bloodlines: The Hidden, pp. 88-95)
Spina (VTR: Invictus, p. 173)
Toreador (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, pp. 246-248)
Xiao (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, p. 105; Bloodlines: The Chosen, pp. 85-104)
Zelani (VTR: Carthians, pp. 166-169) [

edit] Gangrel
Anavashra (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, p. 107)
Annunaku (VTR: Invictus, p. 159)
Anubi (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, p. 107)
Barjot (VTR: Carthians, pp. 156-159)
Bohagande (VTR: Bloodlines: The Hidden, pp. 38-47)
Bruja (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, p. 235-237)
Carnon (VTR: Circle of the Crone, pp. 168-171)
Childer of the Morrigan (VTR: Circle of the Crone, pp. 172-175)
Dead Wolves (WOD: Shadows of Mexico, pp. 102-103)
Larvae (VTR: Requiem for Rome, pp. 228-230)
The Mara (VTR: Circle of the Crone, pp. 181-183)
Matasuntha (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, p. 107)
Moroi (VTR: Ordo Dracul, pp. 159-169)
Nepheshim (VTR: Lancea Sanctum, pp. 160-161)
Oberlochs (VTR: Bloodlines: The Hidden, pp. 96-105)
Taifa (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, p. 107; Bloodlines: The Chosen, pp. 75-84)
Vedma (VTR: Ordo Dracul, pp. 169-171)

[edit] Julii
Licinii (VTR: Requiem for Rome, pp. 231-232)

[edit] Mekhet
Agonistes (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, p. 109; Bloodlines: The Chosen, pp. 16-25)
Alucinor (VTR: Bloodlines: The Hidden, pp. 12-19)
Khaibit (VTR: Bloodlines: The Hidden, pp. 58-67)
Kuufukuji (VTR: Bloodlines: The Legendary, pp. 78-90)
Libitinarius (VTR: Ordo Dracul, p. 155-158)
Lynx (VTR: Invictus, p. 165)
Mnemosyne (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, p. 109)
Morbus (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, pp. 244-245; Requiem for Rome, pp. 233-235)
Norvegi (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, p. 109)
Osites (VTR: Lancea Sanctum, pp. 173-175)
Players (VTR: Bloodlines: The Legendary, pp. 116-128)
Qedeshah (VTR: Bloodlines: The Hidden, pp. 106-115)
Sangiovanni (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, p. 109; Bloodlines: The Chosen, pp. 65-74)
Tismanu (VTR: Ordo Dracul, p. 164-168)

[edit] Nosferatu
Acteius (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, p. 111)
Azerkatil (VTR: Ordo Dracul, pp. 145-149)
Baddacelli (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, p. 111; Bloodlines: The Chosen, pp. 26-35)
Burakumin (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, pp. 238-240)
Calacas (WOD: Shadows of Mexico, pp. 99-101)
Galloi (VTR: Bloodlines: The Legendary, pp. 51-63)
Gethsemani (VTR: Bloodlines: The Hidden, pp. 48-57)
Licinii (VTR: Requiem for Rome, pp. 231-232)
Moroi (VTR: Ordo Dracul, pp. 159-169)
Morotrophians (VTR: Bloodlines: The Hidden, pp. 68-77)
Noctuku (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, p. 111; Bloodlines: The Chosen, pp. 46-55)
Rakshasa (VTR: Bloodlines: The Hidden, pp. 116-125)
Yagnatia (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, p. 111; Bloodlines: The Chosen, pp. 105-114)

[edit] Ventrue
Architects of the Monolith (VTR: Bloodlines: The Hidden, pp. 30-37)
Beni Murrahim (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, p. 113)
Bron (VTR: Bloodlines: The Legendary, pp. 10-22)
Cassians (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, p. 113)
Deucalion (VTR: Carthians, pp. 160-165)
Dragolescu (VTR: Ordo Dracul, p. 150-154)
Gorgons (VTR: Circle of the Crone, pp. 176-179)
Icarians (VTR: Lancea Sanctum, pp. 167-169)
Licini (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, p. 113)
Macellarius (VTR: Bloodlines: The Legendary, pp. 90-102)
Malkovians (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, pp. 241-243)
Malocusians (VTR: Invictus, p. 168)
Melissidae (VTR: Bloodlines: The Legendary, pp. 103-115)
Nahualli (VTR: Bloodlines: The Hidden, pp. 78-87)
Rötgrafen (VTR: Vampire: The Requiem Rulebook, p. 113; Bloodlines: The Chosen, pp. 56-64)
Sotoha (VTR: Invictus, p. 170)
Comment by Onyx, Mar 22 2009, 11:51 PM
That's 75 bloodlines, plus any that are in the clanbooks (probably between 7 and 12 more, guess of 10). Average 15 bloodlines per clan.

Considering that Vampires are supposed to stay at a ratio of 1 Vamp :: 100k humans, that means that with a human population of 6 billion, we're left with a total of 60,000 total vampires on the planet.

Assuming even distribution among the 5 clans, that leaves 12,000 per clan total on the planet. If we assume a grand total of only 600 vampires in bloodlines (which would be 1%), that means 120 vampires in bloodlines PER CLAN. This would make an average of 8 vampires per individual bloodline on the planet. That's still assuming we're only using the 75 listed there and none of the additional ones in the clanbooks, or in any other VtR books to be published later. Once those are out, the number of vamps per line will have to reduce further.

ONLY 8?
Go read the "Covenant:" section on any bloodline. It will read something like this: "The vast majority of the XYZ's find the religious trappings of the Lancaea Sanctum necessary to do their work, and they have no trouble with the hierarchichal nature of it. Their penchant for research also makes the Ordo Dracul a natural place for them to continue their work, though this is less common. Few XYZ's turn to the social demands of the Invictus or the Carthians, though increasing numbers of them are finding a home in the self-determination of the Circle of the Crone." Sounds innocent enough... except that when you're dealing with EIGHT FREAKING INDIVIDUALS terms like "vast majority" and "a few" and "increasing numbers" start to sound pretty darn meaningless. How do you divide 8 into "most, some, a few, and very few?"

And if we're dealing with EIGHT of them, then wouldn't a term like "increasing numbers" or "more often these days" mean that right now, fully HALF of them would be in that Covenant? Or a whopping THREE of the Eight? You know... they never used to go there, but in the last century a whole THREE of them went Crone, and so now this is "increasing numbers..." Problem with that is... If that's the case, it should totally read more like "There used to be none of them, but today, three-eights of them are Croners."

The language used in describing the political organizations of the Bloodlines can only function if there are large enough number of them for bloodlines to be "Kinda uncommon, but totally not rare."

THE PUNCHLINE: The only way I can imagine you getting out of this at this point is to say that the books are written with bloodlines being common, but that you believe as a GM that they should be rare, and are improving the game by re-writing the prevalence of those bloodlines. If you go this route, you're going to sound dangerously close to what I recommended when I wrote " Storytellers, tell your group you think Bloodlines rob the game of RP and of believability..."

The only question then becomes one of degree: Is it better for the game to make them rare to the point of 1% ridiculousness, or is is better for the game to scrap them entirely without even looking at their merits? ((I tried to make both options sound bad for the sake of fairness))

I will now leave it to you to convince us that this ONE NPC that you gave a bloodline really is a better NPC with that bloodline added than he/she would have been if left as an eccentric or focused member of its larger clan... Show us how it helps RP to make that one a bloodliner.
Comment by King_Rat, Mar 23 2009, 02:26 PM
Okay, well in my opinion, the deal is, bloodlines are rare because they are so concentrated. Now, I have only read up on the bloodlines presented in a few books, but those have all seemed to come from ONE PLACE. Each bloodline is like a tribe. There aren't very many, and they're usually only found in this one little backwoods village in eastern Italy. So...again, IMO, finding a vampire from any given bloodline (that I've read about) is RARE, because, unless you're running your campaign in that one little backwoods village in eastern Italy, the vamp you found is FAR FROM HOME, INDEED.

The NPC in question is Sokol Daja, a member of the Khaibit bloodline. He has moved from the bloodline's modern role as a sort of vampiric servitor class back to the old Khaibit role of protecting the environs from spiritual activity (ghosts, demons, etc.).

More info on Sokol Daja can be found here:
http://www.obsidianportal.com/campaign/wod-quinsigamond/wikis/sokol-daja

The idea is that if I have a member of the Khaibit that holds to the old traditions, I can write in supernatural elements, barely held in check by the lone vampire guardian, waiting to overrun the city. It's a hook. And I like it. Lol.
Comment by Onyx, Mar 23 2009, 05:10 PM
It sounds like you're saying that the entire purpose of his bloodlineage is to serve as a plot device.
It sounds like he gains most of his function in the setting from his bloodline, as if you put him there so that he could BE from that bloodline. Like his job... is to be a Khaibit. In his particular case, even his stark independence and unswerving willpower suddenly took a back seat to his lineage once he was embraced. All of a sudden he's following some one else's tradition and having Daddy-Issues because "He's the last of his line."

Pwned.
Comment by King_Rat, Mar 23 2009, 06:27 PM
EVERYTHING IS A PLOT DEVICE, FOOL.

Lol.

I read about the Khaibit, and it gave me an idea, so I used it. I'm no Joss Whedon, so I don't need a freak of the week, and, therefore, necessary BLATANT plot hooks (and, therefore, bloodline Kindred) are rare in my world.

The clans and Covenants are plot devices, yes, but they help shape the everyday world in-game. They're the regulars. They are frequently used to drive the plot forward (Steal holy relic A from Lancea Sanctum Vamp B to use in Ordo Dracul ritual C), but as far as the scope of the game goes, they're mundane. That bloodline NPC provides an unusual "sidequest" option. It's weird, it's unusual, it's freaky.

That's my final opinion on bloodlines. They're sidequests. Or character crutches for uncreative RP'ers. But I don't know anyone like that, so they're sidequests only.
Comment by Onyx, Mar 24 2009, 07:06 PM
All characters and all backstories should be plot devices, I agree.
But bloodline should not, imho (pronounced "I'm-a-ho.").
Add new comment: