Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Vampire: The Masquerade fifth edition pre-alpha playtest

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Vampire: The Masquerade fifth edition pre-alpha playtest

    The Vampire: The Masquerade fifth edition pre-alpha playtest rules and a scenario are now online at White Wolf, along with a survey. It looks much like the Berlin playtest, with the same scenario, and the testing focus on the Hunger rules.


    Craig Oxbrow
    The Trinity Continuum freelancer

  • #2
    thank you!!

    Comment


    • #3
      Just got an email about this from DriveThruRPG! I missed the Berlin playtest, so I'm looking forward to giving it a thorough read when I get off work.

      Comment


      • #4
        How profoundly strange. I am thinking about asking my players tomorrow to play V V or at least look at it in depth. The discipline changes for Celerity and Potence seem adequate.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Barachiel View Post
          Just got an email about this from DriveThruRPG! I missed the Berlin playtest, so I'm looking forward to giving it a thorough read when I get off work.
          Here's the DriveThru link as well!


          Craig Oxbrow
          The Trinity Continuum freelancer

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Crytash View Post
            How profoundly strange. I am thinking about asking my players tomorrow to play V V or at least look at it in depth. The discipline changes for Celerity and Potence seem adequate.
            I like those changes too. I'd incorporate Hunger into the existing Blood Pool system, though, and keep nine Attributes but maybe switch Perception and Appearance like CofD.

            Comment


            • #7
              Just read through the rules, and I'm just not going to bother. Rules lite is just not for me, and as a trend in RPG design, I'm pretty disappointed with modern games, and am very quickly becoming the old guy who remembers how it was back in the "good ol' days" when crunch was not a bad thing.


              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by CaptOtter View Post
                Just read through the rules, and I'm just not going to bother. Rules lite is just not for me, and as a trend in RPG design, I'm pretty disappointed with modern games, and am very quickly becoming the old guy who remembers how it was back in the "good ol' days" when crunch was not a bad thing.
                Rules lite? Were we reading the same playtest? It seems like it didn't really change enough of the rules, and that's a shame.

                Comment


                • #9
                  The adventure can go to hell by the way. If a GM presented an adventure where there's a PC pregen who feeds only on children and there are freaking 1 year old feeding targets, I'd walk out because the GM is clearly a pervert getting off on this.
                  But what's even worse is the number of save-or-die/die-no-save situations that make the whole thing look like a Sierra quest. Like for example:
                  The pedo-ventrue can die the moment you meet Anarchs, and the adventure railroads you by saying that winning a combat encounter is impossible.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I can already tell that I do not like it. It could be an interesting new game if polished up a bit but it doesn't feel like Vampire the Masquerade to me.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Having just read the rules, I find it interesting they include predatory taint and blood potency. Didn't they make a disparaging comment about Requiem, or am I misremembering?


                      Ortam + Malkavia makes a Requiem fun.
                      Posts in this colour are Persuasion.
                      Posts in this colour are Seduction.
                      Posts in this colour are Intimidation.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        dropping to 3 attributes is a terrible idea as it makes characters much less interesting. The current 9 is a bit much as some aren't that useful, but 2 each for physical, mental and social would probably work well.

                        Why use d10s if you always have a 50/50 chance of success per die?

                        The hunger/ blood mechanic seems really convoluted and would make people really hesitant to use any vampire abilities. Everyone would need to feed, and likely frenzy, during or after a fight.

                        The only thing that might be better is the new disciplines, and even that I am not sure about.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Browman View Post

                          The hunger/ blood mechanic seems really convoluted and would make people really hesitant to use any vampire abilities. Everyone would need to feed, and likely frenzy, during or after a fight.
                          The player's characters do not understand the mechanics of the game. I like this hunger mechanic because it makes every new vampire a potential frenzy threat. This makes it quite understandable that elders would reluctantly give anyone the right to sire.

                          It also means young vampires are understandably scared of older vampires. I really like the idea that at some point vampires are going to have to kill to sate their hunger. It helps explain how vampires tend to lose their humanity and become more monstrous with age. Imagine facing an eternity of hunger unless you kill? At some point, nearly everyone is going to kill just to stop the constant pangs of hunger.

                          The player characters from the test scenario are great examples. They all seem crazy and broken in their own way. Thats how a game of vampire should be like, which a bunch of broken monsters still trying to play human.......or not.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Kammerer View Post
                            Rules lite? Were we reading the same playtest? It seems like it didn't really change enough of the rules, and that's a shame.
                            I can only imagine you're a big fan of Fate Accelerated, because this is a vastly lighter system rules-wise than any of the four previous editions of the game.

                            Here's a list of the things they've eliminated:
                            • the possibility for shifting target numbers (so less moving parts = more rules lite);
                            • 1's subtracting from successes
                            • botches generally
                            • 10 again and/or exploding dice
                            • 2/3 of the attributes
                            • a slew of abilities
                            • all three virtues
                            • the blood pool (in favor of the "Rousing" system)
                            • damage rolls
                            • soak rolls
                            • the distinction between bashing, lethal, and aggravated damage
                            And the rousing system has some pretty serious incongruities baked in as written. You are said to have "Hunger" as a result of "rousing" your blood... but you can never go to zero hunger without explicitly killing someone by drinking them dry. I'm not saying this is an invalid dramatic/game design thing to want to do (i.e., obligate vicious monsters to commit murder to be fully at peace or satisfied), but it really shouldn't be called "Hunger", because I shouldn't have to drink someone dry to cease being hungry; that is, if I drink 1/5 of the blood in 20 people back-to-back-to-back, I should not still be hungry, because there is nothing about the last drop of blood in someone's body that makes it substantively different from the first drop drawn; additionally, you don't have to drink all the blood in a person to kill them (V:tM recognized this and has a provision for rolling Stamina after a certain amount of blood has been drained from a vessel to see whether they die);and since when do vampires in V:tM just categorically need to murder people to be truly satiated? Salubri can't even feed from the unwilling, so I guess they're just walking around hungry all the time?


                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Wissenschaft View Post

                              The player's characters do not understand the mechanics of the game. I like this hunger mechanic because it makes every new vampire a potential frenzy threat. This makes it quite understandable that elders would reluctantly give anyone the right to sire.

                              It also means young vampires are understandably scared of older vampires. I really like the idea that at some point vampires are going to have to kill to sate their hunger. It helps explain how vampires tend to lose their humanity and become more monstrous with age. Imagine facing an eternity of hunger unless you kill? At some point, nearly everyone is going to kill just to stop the constant pangs of hunger.

                              The player characters from the test scenario are great examples. They all seem crazy and broken in their own way. Thats how a game of vampire should be like, which a bunch of broken monsters still trying to play human.......or not.
                              Smart characters would quickly realize that they need to feed about every 6 (8 if they are killing people) times they use any of their vampiric gifts. How quickly will players justify why they need juiceboxes captive humans nearby to feed on? How does anyone maintain the masquerade when vampires are feeding several times a night, and a large subset is killing people on a regular basis.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X