Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Paths and the Sabbat in 5e

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by Monalfie View Post
    Not terribly far off. The comment in question doesn't even indicate it is related to losing humanity, though. It indicates just being a vampire makes you lose memories.
    "Most vampires lose Humanity as they age, and as the alien Blood within them gnaws away at their sentiments, their memories, and their connections to the daylight world."
    I don't see how that's any bit new? Fog of ages you go to sleep you wake up confused. People's memories naturally twist when they age. Applying to it that those who interact less and less with the mortal world is not really all the different from being human.

    Which would be fine if it was presented to be that way. So far the only ways to clearly do that are 'completing a major personal story arc involved (at least) gaining a new touchstone and deliberately turning away from Kindred society and power.'
    OR
    Go an entire year without using a discipline or drinking human blood. Whereas you can lose humanity in a plethora of ways.
    So there's some sort of reason to drop out of vampire society for extended periods of time and not to be constantly on game...


    It is a fair concern when in V20 most Sabbat aren't on a Path, but are also meant to be reasonably viable characters. Paths were never a necessity before to remain Sabbat, though now it would seem like they are given how Humanity functions here.
    No they aren't. Pathless sabbat are shovelheads. They are meant to die. The majority of the sect is meant to last a couple of years and burn out. Having to jump on a path to mass embrace is not an OUNCE different than having to be on a path to handle constant Monomancy.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Nosimplehiway View Post
      I wonder if anyone has considered just going ahead and writing a sourcebook for Vampions. That's where we keep winding up anyway.
      I do need to get around to finishing my SpyCraft/FantasyCraft (that being a d20 flavor) conversion, but I'm too lazy and employed.

      The upshot is that I don't port Humanity/Paths very directly at all. The closest thing is a D&D-like alignment system, but with 3 axes: instead of Good/Evil and Law/Chaos, there's Conscience/Conviction, Temperance/Instinct, and Faith/Courage. An alignment is mostly flavor text unless one takes the Zealot class, which is similar to the Cleric in D&D or Priest in FantasyCraft. Being a Zealot represents having True Faith or 8-10 Humanity/Path, and allows access to special abilities associated with the character's specific Path.

      The only other game mechanic associated with alignment is the "Crisis of Faith" subplot. Subplots being a sort of long form version of "encounters" in D&D. The character with the subplot is entitled to a number of related scenes an opportunity to gain XP or other rewards. Crisis of Faith also includes a possibility to change alignments.

      Basically, I would prefer to have Humanity be a character option that tells the GM that you want your character's story to be focused on morality. I don't actually like forcing everyone to be on a Path at all. Just make both Path and Touchstones into Backgrounds.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Murder-of-Crows View Post
        Honestly, until we hold the finalized V5 book in our hands, this whole discussion seems a lot premature..
        I don't feel it is actually. I've been reading most of them to keep up to date on what people think. This isn't much different than test audiences for films. Just because people seem to be on a sliding scale towards no doesn't make it invaluable or less valid. If anything it gives developers who might read this an idea of what their audience will and will not go for.



        Lost Tribes Gaming:
        Cyberpunk 2020 Phoenix:1st and 3rd Saturdays of the month 6pm to 9pm AZ time (-7GMT)
        http://www.twitch.tv/losttribesgaming.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Sycophant View Post

          I don't feel it is actually. I've been reading most of them to keep up to date on what people think. This isn't much different than test audiences for films. Just because people seem to be on a sliding scale towards no doesn't make it invaluable or less valid. If anything it gives developers who might read this an idea of what their audience will and will not go for.

          We objectively know 5e WON'T have Paths. We have some ideas on humanity, but we know the base book will not in any fashion cover playing Sabbat. So while there are valid points of discussion and saying whether you think the humanity rules work with the cam/anarchs seems on point. Discussing how the game handles Sabbat seems about as on point as discussing how well it handles Garou.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Murder-of-Crows View Post
            Honestly, until we hold the finalized V5 book in our hands, this whole discussion seems a lot premature. It's based entirely on an Alpha playtest, where the developers have been trying out somethings. I have participated in other playtests, and often it turned out that stuff from the alpha or beta got completely discarded. So I will buy V5 and I think it's going to be a game I like. The direction of the metaplot has been shown in BJD giving me a lot of confidence in the future development.
            This is now an age where roleplaying games are putting out public Alphas, unlike early editions. The only reason to publicly release this early a version is to get crowd sourced feedback (and not pay as much for playtester wages...) Already we've seen a dramatic change on a number of issues raised in the Pre-Alpha
            As to your experience on Playtests - that's exactly why things change from Alpha to Beta onwards, because of the discussions like this one.

            Originally posted by Lian View Post
            We objectively know 5e WON'T have Paths. We have some ideas on humanity, but we know the base book will not in any fashion cover playing Sabbat. So while there are valid points of discussion and saying whether you think the humanity rules work with the cam/anarchs seems on point. Discussing how the game handles Sabbat seems about as on point as discussing how well it handles Garou.
            I agree with you Lian, it as important to discuss how it handles Garou. It's very important ;P
            The updated Metaplot and setting might not have Sabbat in it. Great, I can appreciate that. But what about ongoing games that are interested in converting to V5? Or a new game that wants to include them as a part of the story; the fact that a small part isn't covered will cut a large potential out of what you can run with the system.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Illithid View Post
              I agree with you Lian, it as important to discuss how it handles Garou. It's very important ;P
              The updated Metaplot and setting might not have Sabbat in it. Great, I can appreciate that. But what about ongoing games that are interested in converting to V5? Or a new game that wants to include them as a part of the story; the fact that a small part isn't covered will cut a large potential out of what you can run with the system.
              It has nothing to do with the Metaplot changes. The books do not offer the Sabbat as an option. Nothing about the tools revealed have been intended to cover the Sabbat as Pcs. As npcs you don't need to know how they get away with inhumane actions and not wassail that's been a thing since 1e.

              Now complaining about a lack of path rules, a lack of ritae a lack of mechanics for each and every clan and bloodline under the moon is a legitimate complaint but that's not what is going on here. Looking at Humanity, touchstones and saying "they don't work for sabbat" is self obvious.. they aren't meant to be used for Sabbat. Sabbat will have its own book with special rules for it. These tools aren't meant to be used whatsover for them though.

              Now saying "They don't work for Cam/anarch" that's legit criticism. They intend them to work for that, so calling them out on what they try and fail at is a legit thing.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Lian View Post

                It has nothing to do with the Metaplot changes. The books do not offer the Sabbat as an option. Nothing about the tools revealed have been intended to cover the Sabbat as Pcs. As npcs you don't need to know how they get away with inhumane actions and not wassail that's been a thing since 1e.

                Now complaining about a lack of path rules, a lack of ritae a lack of mechanics for each and every clan and bloodline under the moon is a legitimate complaint but that's not what is going on here. Looking at Humanity, touchstones and saying "they don't work for sabbat" is self obvious.. they aren't meant to be used for Sabbat. Sabbat will have its own book with special rules for it. These tools aren't meant to be used whatsover for them though.
                Is it legitimate to say that I think making Camarilla and Sabbat different games, and not making Sabbat playable, are both bad design choices? I think they both unnecessarily constrict play potential, and are likely to alienate a lot of players. I think focusing an entire game on a specific type of story arc and point of view is something that's more appropriate in a rules lite indie game that doesn't waste time having you spell out your character's every skill if it's not going to give you total freedom in deciding who your character is.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Lian View Post
                  It has nothing to do with the Metaplot changes. The books do not offer the Sabbat as an option. Nothing about the tools revealed have been intended to cover the Sabbat as Pcs. As npcs you don't need to know how they get away with inhumane actions and not wassail that's been a thing since 1e.
                  I'm not trying to argue about what they've done with the metaplot, because love it or not, the system should be able to exist outside of it. That's one of the complaints about the existing 1st ed to V20 that they are trying to fix; making it more Metaplot-Agnistic so that you can play what you want (Give or take) without needing to be up to date on all the in game plot changes.

                  I understand that they aren't offering it as an option for PCs, I'm trying to express that is the issue.
                  If it won't cover being able to play Sabbat or Sabbat-adjacent style characters (Ones with little to no connection to humans), it is limiting the games that can be played compared to the current edition, especially for groups that are considering moving an existing game (Or existing story ideas that haven't been started yet) into this new system.

                  The reason this is an issue is because the rules as presented now can't be fudged a little from old rules or reliably extrapolated from the new rules to get what is needed.

                  With V20 you could fudge the clan or Disciplines and use revised rules until there was an update. Done, easy.
                  With V5 we can probably fudge clan compulsions and maybe disciplines (Same rules as before, just give them a Rouse the Beasts check to activate) but just can't make a compatible system with the tools we're starting off with

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Illithid View Post
                    This is now an age where roleplaying games are putting out public Alphas, unlike early editions. The only reason to publicly release this early a version is to get crowd sourced feedback (and not pay as much for playtester wages...) Already we've seen a dramatic change on a number of issues raised in the Pre-Alpha
                    As to your experience on Playtests - that's exactly why things change from Alpha to Beta onwards, because of the discussions like this one.
                    Sometimes things also change, because they were never intended as final rules. Humanity in the alpha playtest was clearly geared toward the adventure. The NPCs needed a way to pressure the PCs into a course of action. Also, even though humanity rules were included, they seemed to be very simple on purpose. I don't think that there are only a couple of ways of losing humanity like those mentioned in the alpha.

                    Also, WWE has asked for feedback in a feedback forms a long time ago. Now we have May 2018. The game is supposed to be published in August 2018 (pre-orders and probably GenCon). The game needs to be printed and shipped to the warehouse. I assume that takes around a month for shipping and a month for printing. That's June for printing, July for shipping to the warehouse. That means: final print proofing is happening around now. So this discussion will not change anything at all.

                    We also know that a Sabbat book will be released about half a year after the main game. It's not a stand-alone game, but a book detailing additional rules to play Sabbat.

                    Let's take a look back at editions: V1 and V2 only had the Camarilla Seven and Caitiffs in the corebooks, V3 had all clans but only clan specific paths in the corebook. Most paths were released much later in the Guide to the Sabbat. Only V20 the anniversary editon gave you everything to play right at the beginning. But that was an anniversary offering. So, V5 is returning to the tradition of V1/V2.

                    And yes, initially games you could play with V1 and V2 were limited. But the Masquerade universe expanded to include other options. Since we already know that the Sabbat book is going to be published, it's only a matter of time until the options start comming back.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Lian View Post
                      I don't see how that's any bit new? Fog of ages you go to sleep you wake up confused. People's memories naturally twist when they age. Applying to it that those who interact less and less with the mortal world is not really all the different from being human.
                      Fog of Eternity was a built in aspect that when you went into torpor, especially for long periods to burn off blood potency, your memories were jumbled up and unreliable. Average people's memories naturally twist, but this is a mechanic of the inherent nature of the blood in question. It was an aspect that encouraged VtR's extremely strong 'we don't know where we came from' stuff.

                      So there's some sort of reason to drop out of vampire society for extended periods of time and not to be constantly on game...
                      If the only two ways to regain Humanity are 'don't play the game for a bit, involving multi-year time gaps' or 'complete a major character arc', that's not good for a system you think is designed to encourage continual rise and fall of Humanity. As I said, with the comparatively numerous and easy ways to lose it? It'll be brutal.

                      No they aren't. Pathless sabbat are shovelheads. They are meant to die. The majority of the sect is meant to last a couple of years and burn out. Having to jump on a path to mass embrace is not an OUNCE different than having to be on a path to handle constant Monomancy.
                      That's not true, that's why V20 had the primary on Paths it did.
                      Paths are exclusive. Few Kindred are initiated into the secrets of the Paths. Most vampires — even thoseof the independent Clans and the Sabbat — follow the ways of Humanity; they simply tend to degenerate to very low levels over time. Not just anyone can follow a Path; becoming such an inhuman creature requires discipline and spiritual strength, albeit of a distinctly alien sort. A person seeking to join a Path must have the capacity to discard her human nature, as well as the fortitude to survive the process.
                      I'm not sure why you'd think there's a necessity to be on a path to deal with 'constant monomancy', there isn't under this alpha or in V20. In V20 killing someone in a monomancy might be 2-4 sin at worst. Under this system you lose it from Touchstone stuff, embracing, and 'At the Storyteller’s discretion, a vampire loses 1 Humanity by engaging in a truly bestial and appalling act: heinous mass murder and painting walls with blood and offal, etc.' And monomancy is hardly even close to mass murder. So in the Alpha and V20, monomancy would never be causing you to automatically loss all humanity, far as I know.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Mr. Sluagh View Post

                        Is it legitimate to say that I think making Camarilla and Sabbat different games, and not making Sabbat playable, are both bad design choices? I think they both unnecessarily constrict play potential, and are likely to alienate a lot of players. I think focusing an entire game on a specific type of story arc and point of view is something that's more appropriate in a rules lite indie game that doesn't waste time having you spell out your character's every skill if it's not going to give you total freedom in deciding who your character is.

                        Yes, its perfectly legitimate to say "v20 offered the full range of kindred experiences while v5 does not" I just don't think "the tools which aren't intended to cover the the sabbat at all can't cover the sabbat" is legitimate criticism. Does that make sense? Its the difference between complaining that a Multitool doesn't have a screwdriver and that a hammer is a shitty screwdriver.



                        Originally posted by Illithid View Post

                        I'm not trying to argue about what they've done with the metaplot, because love it or not, the system should be able to exist outside of it. That's one of the complaints about the existing 1st ed to V20 that they are trying to fix; making it more Metaplot-Agnistic so that you can play what you want (Give or take) without needing to be up to date on all the in game plot changes.

                        I understand that they aren't offering it as an option for PCs, I'm trying to express that is the issue.
                        If it won't cover being able to play Sabbat or Sabbat-adjacent style characters (Ones with little to no connection to humans), it is limiting the games that can be played compared to the current edition, especially for groups that are considering moving an existing game (Or existing story ideas that haven't been started yet) into this new system.

                        The reason this is an issue is because the rules as presented now can't be fudged a little from old rules or reliably extrapolated from the new rules to get what is needed.

                        With V20 you could fudge the clan or Disciplines and use revised rules until there was an update. Done, easy.
                        With V5 we can probably fudge clan compulsions and maybe disciplines (Same rules as before, just give them a Rouse the Beasts check to activate) but just can't make a compatible system with the tools we're starting off with
                        Intent matters. They are offering a very V1/v2 pared down experience. You don't get elder discplines. you don't get half the clans. You don't get paths. But they aren't offering them. That you can make up rules based on older editions.. isn't something they are responsible for?

                        Complaining about their intent is a valid point. Complaining if they fail at their intent is a valid point. Complaining that you can't do something with the tools they provided that the tools aren't intended for is not a valid point. I mean there's a Get of Fenris NPC in the alpha, should I be using that to "Fudge" W5 because I want it early and then complaining I can't get it right?

                        Originally posted by Monalfie View Post
                        Fog of Eternity was a built in aspect that when you went into torpor, especially for long periods to burn off blood potency, your memories were jumbled up and unreliable. Average people's memories naturally twist, but this is a mechanic of the inherent nature of the blood in question. It was an aspect that encouraged VtR's extremely strong 'we don't know where we came from' stuff.
                        No its not. Elders act and think differently than Neonates has been baked into the game since 1e. People's memories are naturally unreliable, that's why we have writing.


                        If the only two ways to regain Humanity are 'don't play the game for a bit, involving multi-year time gaps' or 'complete a major character arc', that's not good for a system you think is designed to encourage continual rise and fall of Humanity. As I said, with the comparatively numerous and easy ways to lose it? It'll be brutal.
                        Well on a "Sim" vampire level, Kindred move naturally to a slower pace. This may not be the best method of pushing this, but trying to push the idea that elders hold onto their humanity by forcing Neonates and Ghouls to do the shit that costs humanity could be a thing.

                        Though it doesn't push a level of fluidity which you are right about.


                        That's not true, that's why V20 had the primary on Paths it did.
                        The Majority of the sabbat have been consistantly portrayed as canonfodder who aren't going to survive for 5 years as a vampire either. That's what a humane sabbat has previously been portrayed as.

                        I'm not sure why you'd think there's a necessity to be on a path to deal with 'constant monomancy', there isn't under this alpha or in V20. In V20 killing someone in a monomancy might be 2-4 sin at worst. Under this system you lose it from Touchstone stuff, embracing, and 'At the Storyteller’s discretion, a vampire loses 1 Humanity by engaging in a truly bestial and appalling act: heinous mass murder and painting walls with blood and offal, etc.' And monomancy is hardly even close to mass murder. So in the Alpha and V20, monomancy would never be causing you to automatically loss all humanity, far as I know.
                        Diab is an automatic loss of humanity. The Sabbat has always been portrayed as being the pro diab faction. I see no difference between that humanity fails to allow diab as humanity fails to allow mass embraces. When we got sabbat rules intially the work around for the diab issue was Paths. IT seems likely since the sabbat is getting itsown book that it will include work arounds for being able to Sabbat things!

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Lian View Post
                          No its not. Elders act and think differently than Neonates has been baked into the game since 1e. People's memories are naturally unreliable, that's why we have writing.
                          I feel like you are missing the point. Elders acting and thinking differently? Makes sense. People's memories being naturally unreliable? Makes sense. A deep lore aspect for it (previously Fog of Eternity and not this vaguely referenced aspect of 'the blood gnawing at memories') is both unnecessary and gives me some negative implications. Again, that was the point of Fog of Eternity, that most of the elders out there were extremely conflicted on the nature of history. More-so than VtM where you did have important disagreements on facts, but everything wasn't as extremely unreliable.

                          Diab is an automatic loss of humanity. The Sabbat has always been portrayed as being the pro diab faction. I see no difference between that humanity fails to allow diab as humanity fails to allow mass embraces. When we got sabbat rules intially the work around for the diab issue was Paths. IT seems likely since the sabbat is getting itsown book that it will include work arounds for being able to Sabbat things!
                          The difference is how often someone diablerizes other Kindred is going to vary wildly, whereas you can maybe take part in one mass embrace ever in this alpha system? Arguably you could get more mileage based on planning, though it would probably count as at least two.

                          That said, I don't like how diablerie automatically loses a Humanity anyway and have argued against that as well. Much like the other aspects, if they make a reasonable workaround, so be it. Though I'm not a fan of this Humanity system for typical play or Sabbat. But I guess we'll have to see.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Lian View Post
                            Yes, its perfectly legitimate to say "v20 offered the full range of kindred experiences while v5 does not" I just don't think "the tools which aren't intended to cover the the sabbat at all can't cover the sabbat" is legitimate criticism. Does that make sense? Its the difference between complaining that a Multitool doesn't have a screwdriver and that a hammer is a shitty screwdriver.

                            Intent matters. They are offering a very V1/v2 pared down experience. You don't get elder discplines. you don't get half the clans. You don't get paths. But they aren't offering them. That you can make up rules based on older editions.. isn't something they are responsible for?

                            Complaining about their intent is a valid point. Complaining if they fail at their intent is a valid point. Complaining that you can't do something with the tools they provided that the tools aren't intended for is not a valid point. I mean there's a Get of Fenris NPC in the alpha, should I be using that to "Fudge" W5 because I want it early and then complaining I can't get it right?
                            If we wanted a pared down V1/V2 experience, we could just use our old books. V20 offered the full range of clans and options in one book, and as a consumer, I can and will complain that they are not providing the necessary tools to actually play Masquerade. V20 has become the benchmark, and it is what the consumers expect. nuWW is putting out a watered down, crappy system without a lot of the necessary content that makes V:tM, well, V:tM. Vampire has been out for over 25 years at this point; Vampions for Dummies is not what this game should become. So far, what I have seen out of nuWW is Midichlorians-level stupid.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Monalfie View Post
                              I feel like you are missing the point. Elders acting and thinking differently? Makes sense. People's memories being naturally unreliable? Makes sense. A deep lore aspect for it (previously Fog of Eternity and not this vaguely referenced aspect of 'the blood gnawing at memories') is both unnecessary and gives me some negative implications. Again, that was the point of Fog of Eternity, that most of the elders out there were extremely conflicted on the nature of history. More-so than VtM where you did have important disagreements on facts, but everything wasn't as extremely unreliable.
                              The Beast changes how you think. That has always been thing. A Long lived Elder Misremembering aspects of their mortal life as it becomes more and more distant. Has well always been a thing.

                              And no.. the facts have always been unreliable, because vampires lie. Vampire lie to themselves Vampires lie to their childer. They lie to mortals. The idea that Kindred have a more reliable history back to before the Bronze age collapse is hilarious.



                              The difference is how often someone diablerizes other Kindred is going to vary wildly, whereas you can maybe take part in one mass embrace ever in this alpha system? Arguably you could get more mileage based on planning, though it would probably count as at least two.
                              No, the system is not meant to cover a vampire who engages in Mass embraces. That the mechanics thus lead to why the Anarchs and camarilla do not engage in Mass Embrace makes sense..

                              Now "it cuts into all these other concepts that used to be staples of the cam/anarchs" is a legitimate issue. That there's NO tools for sabbat when it says these tools aren't meant to cover sabbat comes off as silly.


                              That said, I don't like how diablerie automatically loses a Humanity anyway and have argued against that as well. Much like the other aspects, if they make a reasonable workaround, so be it. Though I'm not a fan of this Humanity system for typical play or Sabbat. But I guess we'll have to see.
                              You also aren't a fan of any previous form of humanity and how it interacts with typical sabbat play so I don't actually see a difference here.

                              Except those previous editions said they were intended to be used in the Sabbat, while v5 seems to be going with the v1/v2 vision where the sabbat were completely theirown thing having only slightly more in common with cam vampire as werewolf.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by KRB View Post

                                If we wanted a pared down V1/V2 experience, we could just use our old books. V20 offered the full range of clans and options in one book, and as a consumer, I can and will complain that they are not providing the necessary tools to actually play Masquerade. V20 has become the benchmark, and it is what the consumers expect. nuWW is putting out a watered down, crappy system without a lot of the necessary content that makes V:tM, well, V:tM. Vampire has been out for over 25 years at this point; Vampions for Dummies is not what this game should become. So far, what I have seen out of nuWW is Midichlorians-level stupid.
                                Is a totally different argument than. "I can't run sabbat with the camarilla tools" that they don't give you the tools you need to play the game you want, is a complaint you should express. That the tools they give suck at their intent. Also a complaint one should express.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X