Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

V5 new preview is out!!!

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I get the feeling the Touchstones only have the purpose to bait VTR players
    and it's also trying to appeal to the new generation of vampire fans
    who want their Human and Vampire chronicles,
    when a vampire gets so involved in their mundane lives and activities.

    Like those rules said if you want to regain Humanity, then you need to abandon the Jyhad,
    not drink blood (what about the Hunger?) and get involved in what Mortals do.
    Last edited by NEN; 07-01-2018, 09:42 AM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Beckett View Post
      The Sabbat is not and does not have to be correct, and the fact that neither the Tzimisce or Lasombra nearly became extinct when their Antideluvian died should be a huge problem for the Sabbat.
      On the specific issue of "yes the Antediluvians are real, and yes they're going to wake up and kill us all," thing, the Week of Nightmares does prove the Sabbat to be correct and the Camarilla to be wrong. Which is Anubis' direct complaint there. Not the consequences of killing one, or everything else the two sects disagree on.

      But if a major difference between the sects is that the Camarilla think the old blood-god stuff is just myth that's might be based in some truth, while the Sabbat absolutely think it's true and immediately relevant to prepare for... you do make one side look stupid if a metaplot event 100% sides with one sect over the other.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post

        On the specific issue of "yes the Antediluvians are real, and yes they're going to wake up and kill us all," thing, the Week of Nightmares does prove the Sabbat to be correct and the Camarilla to be wrong. Which is Anubis' direct complaint there. Not the consequences of killing one, or everything else the two sects disagree on.

        But if a major difference between the sects is that the Camarilla think the old blood-god stuff is just myth that's might be based in some truth, while the Sabbat absolutely think it's true and immediately relevant to prepare for... you do make one side look stupid if a metaplot event 100% sides with one sect over the other.
        Well to be fair at the end of the week of nighmares the sabbat didnt do nothing crucial

        The ones to finish Zarapatsura were the technocrazy , a bunch of humans with to power to call the might of the sun.
        .
        With means that the camarilla has good reasons to say that the humans are dangerous and triying to keep low profile.

        But i am with you , Noddism being almost 100% true and the figure of the antes as almost invincible blood gods that if awake the world is fucked kill the mistery.Wish the figure of the founders existed but as a very powerful vampires playing true Jyhad and covered in more mythos than Noddism.


        Hunger pool

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post
          On the specific issue of "yes the Antediluvians are real, and yes they're going to wake up and kill us all," thing, the Week of Nightmares does prove the Sabbat to be correct and the Camarilla to be wrong. Which is Anubis' direct complaint there. Not the consequences of killing one, or everything else the two sects disagree on.

          But if a major difference between the sects is that the Camarilla think the old blood-god stuff is just myth that's might be based in some truth, while the Sabbat absolutely think it's true and immediately relevant to prepare for... you do make one side look stupid if a metaplot event 100% sides with one sect over the other.
          I understand what you are saying, but just because one Antediluvian destroyed their own Clan does not mean all of the others will. So, again nothing really changed much, except that the Sabbat may have been a little right on at least one thing. A great deal of the Camarilla's elders and powers absolutely believe in the existence of the Antediluvians, possibly meeting one.

          We also see that other Antediluvians did not slaughter their childer or feed from them, (though the Camarilla did from the top down). Haqiim killed those that had fallen and Saulot had no intention of killing or mass feeding.
          Last edited by Beckett; 07-02-2018, 04:40 AM.

          Comment


          • @Sabbat and Camarilla "wrongness" and "rightness":
            It was always my understanding that the Sabbat had the right basic idea. Gehenna is coming. Every player knows it's coming and every player knows the Antedeluvians are absolutely real. No halfway experienced player ever built a character who scoffs at the idea of Antedeluvians existing and expected that PC to be proven right by the chronicle, because OOC, it was never in doubt that the big guys would rise some day. Just like it was never in doubt that the Sabbat are vampire-supremacist monstrous assholes and even characters who recognize that the Sabbat is right regarding Gehenna would think twice about joining the freak show, because "having the right end goal in mind" is not all that counts.

            @Week of Nightmares:
            I agree with Beckett as well: Hitting the Ravnos was a good move. There is really no aspect of the clan I can see that was actually adversely affected - no clan structure was disrupted because there was none. No high Ravnos population was culled because there was no high Ravnos population in any setting. No political weight was destroyed because the Ravnos never had any. The typical Ravnos characters were loners before and they are loners now and if your chronicle calls for "the players meet a Ravnos here", that's just as possible now as it was before. Compare that with what would have happened if the Nightmares had hit the Tremere, Ventrue, Giovanni or Setites - suddenly, half your clan's concept is gone.
            (That said, I must admit I do not know too much about the Ravnos, so if their clan book changes the clan's concept as much as CB Setite did, please tell me!)

            @Applicability of V5 for different settings:
            I think the magic word has already been mentioned: Adaptation. Night's Black Agents has shown the developers know how to take one basic game setting and provide the tools to tune it towards multiple moods and genres. You want to go for the "Beckett and friends realize that the staff is one kadam too long" chronicle without bothering about Hunger too much? Just take the Rouse mechanic and make it so that you only gain a point of Hunger upon rolling a 1-2 or 1 rather than 1-3. Instantly, you need one third or two thirds less blood in your chronicle. More interested in vampire politics than mortal connections? Allow Touchstones to be places or concepts rather than people.
            We haven't seen these adaptations in the preview yet, but the developers already hinted at adaptability to different genres and that might be a way to achieve them.
            Last edited by Cifer; 07-02-2018, 12:33 PM.

            Comment


            • (That said, I must admit I do not know too much about the Ravnos, so if their clan book changes the clan's concept as much as CB Setite did, please tell me!)
              They have had various material in various points of the gameline that had given them well more fleshed out internal clan development and culture than "a bunch of loners", right down to some of the takes in part of the V20 era. Castes, families, internal philosophical clashes, rising influence of ancients on younger members, you name it. When you blow up the clan, all of that explodes with it. Again this is mostly just "well I didn't really know from or care from the Ravnos anyway, so obviously that was a good idea". The point would be, there were people into that stuff about them just fine. Blowing them up for a plot point removes the option. Arguing "well blowing them up for a plot point was a totally awesome idea anyway" is at its heart just another "if you don't like this change, you were doing Vampire before it wrong anyway and you don't know how to like cool things."

              Just take the Rouse mechanic and make it so that you only gain a point of Hunger upon rolling a 1-2 or 1 rather than 1-3.
              You are still, inevitably, rolling hunger dice on basically everything, and it can still do things like murder you in combat along with all the other things it can do.

              Like I say, you can ignore stuff like plot or style changes you don't like, and you can ignore.. well it's kinda hard to ignore hunger without fundamentally changing the game when hunger is on functionally every single die roll and that's the main way the game at this point represents feeding/blood/wanting blood now, and you can change touchstones, but at some point you're spending a lot of money on a game, and then doing a considerable bunch of work with it to actually use it how you want to.

              Anyway, and well more to the point as far as what the idea of "well adapt it" brings to mind lately, a lot of this "well change it yourself then" talk, it relies on you, the person theoretically doing these adaptations, being the one running said game to set said changes. Did you want to all of play? Are you honestly kinda not that great at running a game nor really inclined to? (not everyone is and there's no actual shame in that, any number of people play rpgs, to be on the player side of things, games would not happen at all if they did not) Well, you best hope I guess you can find a game where you can convince people to make those changes.

              And even if you're running instead, when a considerable amount of non D&D based rpg gaming happens via online interaction these days, the easiest, or certainly most effective as far as avoiding extra complications way to organize a group of strangers to play a game is to mostly just use that game.

              So, I mean, people can keep noting "well adapt it", but that only goes so far realistically.
              Last edited by MarkK; 07-02-2018, 01:17 PM.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by MarkK View Post
                They have had various material in various points of the gameline that had given them well more fleshed out internal clan development and culture than "a bunch of loners", right down to some of the takes in part of the V20 era.
                I think you are overstating things to make your point seem more founded and mistakenly believing I and others dislike the Ravnos. Clanbook Ravnos Revised introduced a history for the Clan in India, where the Clan is different than the version the rest of the world knows. They form small broods to fight against the Eastern Kindred (allegedly), and see themselves as on a holy mission of sorts. They rarely leave India, and disavow the rest of the Clan as lost.

                The rest of the Clan remained largely the same as other editions, having very little contact with each other aside from Sire/Childe or sometime mortal family relations. They do not have any real Clan structure, status, bases of power, etc.., and in fact, by choice usually want little to do with each other. They tend not to settle anywhere for long, make enemies quickly, and not care for anyone else's politics or rank structures. Ravnos Antitribu are probably the group that breaks many of these molds.

                No one is saying you are doing it wrong or whatever, just you do not seem to actually understand your own arguements. Next to nothing actually changed about the Clan unless your playing in India, (which I doubt is that common). They where barely a Clan to begin with, never being that common, not having a great deal in common with each other, not really having any unifying goals or beliefs. That is not an insult, that is their identity. And let's face it, they could repopulate their Clan in one night if they wanted, and be bag on track in a few years. However, right now, pre-Gehenna event, they are poised to do whatever they want. They have no more Elders and ne Antediluvian pulling their strings, something almost completely unique to any Clan, INCLUDING the Tzimisce, Lasombra, and Salubri. They have no fate now, because they survived it.
                Last edited by Beckett; 07-02-2018, 01:43 PM.

                Comment


                • I think you are overstating things to make your point seem more founded and mistakenly believing I and others dislike the Ravnos.
                  I don't think disinterest to the point of only finding interest in their use as a plot point is entirely the same as dislike.

                  They were also fleshed out at several points outside their clanbook. Their Libellus Sanguinius entry in Dark Ages for instance worked pretty hard at giving them a varied identity, one that extended beyond India. V20's Lore of the Clans entry for them extended out clan culture and character to them that the clan carried with them outside of India as something of a baseline, offering the castes as something that while not having the same authority, were still respected. Or the clan being varied enough to have multiple takes on the path of paradox, with the bit on the antagonism with those on the Western Path. Even Beckett's Jyhad Diary was doing things like giving them some plot options as far as the ancients of India now deciding to reach out to the rest of the clan to try and marshal/command things to their conflicts/bid them to weave into kindred society at large. And such Ravnos as either choosing to align with or refuse such things (if the note is going to be "well then that compromised their identity as loners that I just said was also no identity") gave them things like plot options that didn't require exploding most of them.

                  You might have found such things uninteresting or what have you, but they existed. It didn't get as much space or effort as, say, the Assamite fleshing out, but if someone was partial to the clan, it meant they were given stuff to work with. I'm of the philosophy that giving options is a better choice than taking them away.

                  No one is saying you are doing it wrong or whatever, just you do not seem to actually understand your own arguements
                  "I'm not saying you're doing it wrong, just that you have no idea whatsoever what you're talking about" is.. kinda exactly telling someone they're doing it wrong.

                  Next to nothing actually changed about the Clan unless your playing in India
                  When you blow them up, any place that was suggesting they have some society and culture blows up with it.

                  Or even just for something recent, when there's all these statements of "we're using BJD as our plot continuation baseline" it's pretty sharp for "here are these options to do something interesting with the Ravnos" to then end with "kabloooey!"

                  When it looks like something is going "here are a bunch of options for things to do with this group", the next immediate thing going "we're taking them away", it's both a sharp change, and kinda just removes options as its main achievement.

                  Even something really, really basic like "they can get together do to the Treatment or meet for a kris arbitration" kinda goes away with "kablooey! now they're a bloodline at best."

                  And let's face it, they could repopulate their Clan in one night if they wanted, and be bag on track in a few years. However, right now, pre-Gehenna event, they are poised to do whatever they want. They have no more Elders and ne Antediluvian pulling their strings, something almost completely unique to any Clan, INCLUDING the Tzimisce, Lasombra, and Salubri. They have no fate now, because they survived it.
                  So, I don't want to tell someone they're not understanding their own arguments or something like that, but it seems mostly like you're arguing at this point that the only thing that makes the Ravnos interesting is having blown them up. That really does read like "if someone was previously interested in the Ravnos without that event, they just didn't like interesting things."

                  Edit: Let me put this a much more direct way. Have you particularly played Ravnos in campaigns? Run for people that want to play them? I've done the second thing a few times by this point, and when people that want to do so come to me with ideas like "I'd like to play off this stuff about the clan, it's given me these ideas" that's a lot better for giving me what to work with than "you're a bunch of glorified caitiff with illusion powers, no identity, nor much of anything, but hey, you're 'free'" They have options as players that interest(ed) them, and as a result I have options as an ST.

                  I know, I know "you can do that if you want to anyway." I kinda feel like I've replied to that bit a bunch.

                  The people that liked the clan, certainly as I've run into, reaaallly liked the clan, and it didn't particularly hurt anyone or ruin anything that they did, nor that they had some material that let them play around a bit, nor that they liked the idea of the Ravnos, as, a clan. Proclaiming to them "well whatever, this does much cooler things as a plot point, meh to your clan" with a helping of "you should understand why this is also for the best" doesn't really accomplish anything.
                  Last edited by MarkK; 07-02-2018, 03:09 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Beckett View Post

                    I understand what you are saying, but just because one Antediluvian destroyed their own Clan does not mean all of the others will. So, again nothing really changed much, except that the Sabbat may have been a little right on at least one thing. A great deal of the Camarilla's elders and powers absolutely believe in the existence of the Antediluvians, possibly meeting one.

                    We also see that other Antediluvians did not slaughter their childer or feed from them, (though the Camarilla did from the top down). Haqiim killed those that had fallen and Saulot had no intention of killing or mass feeding.
                    I don't think Saulot could do anything to his childer. They didn't die while he was being taken out because he wanted a new body that would control the Tremere. I think he did try to kill them all, but that was more of a temper tantrum when he realized he lost the connection to the old lines despite controlling the Tremere when he took over Tremere's body.

                    Blood Bonds that he no doubt held over his kids broken, Dominate discipline speak through the blood no longer working on his old clans the Baali and Salubri. That was why he launched the crusade against the Salubri, petty spite over their freedom.

                    Edit: If he really made the Baali. Aslo explains why the Warrior Salubri went after Salouts new toys the Tremere, no doubt going against what he wanted.
                    Last edited by Vamps Like Us; 07-02-2018, 03:36 PM.

                    Comment


                    • MarkK
                      They have had various material in various points of the gameline that had given them well more fleshed out internal clan development and culture than "a bunch of loners", right down to some of the takes in part of the V20 era. Castes, families, internal philosophical clashes, rising influence of ancients on younger members, you name it. When you blow up the clan, all of that explodes with it. Again this is mostly just "well I didn't really know from or care from the Ravnos anyway, so obviously that was a good idea". The point would be, there were people into that stuff about them just fine. Blowing them up for a plot point removes the option. Arguing "well blowing them up for a plot point was a totally awesome idea anyway" is at its heart just another "if you don't like this change, you were doing Vampire before it wrong anyway and you don't know how to like cool things."
                      You do realize that I was literally asking whether there was more to the clan than I knew, right? Also, there's the question of how those relationships function - if it's just one-on-one, you can still believably meet enough others for the plots to work in your chronicle. There's different degrees of "blown up" and Ravnos definitely got the lesser one if one compares them to, for example, the Tremere Antitribu, where even one running around in a campaign would be a major sensation.

                      You are still, inevitably, rolling hunger dice on basically everything, and it can still do things like murder you in combat along with all the other things it can do.

                      Like I say, you can ignore stuff like plot or style changes you don't like, and you can ignore.. well it's kinda hard to ignore hunger without fundamentally changing the game when hunger is on functionally every single die roll and that's the main way the game at this point represents feeding/blood/wanting blood now, and you can change touchstones, but at some point you're spending a lot of money on a game, and then doing a considerable bunch of work with it to actually use it how you want to.
                      The question is how much of the work is already done for you. If there's a page "If you want more courtly intrigue, change X, Y and Z" and one "If you want a chronicle about pursuit of knowledge, change A, B and C". everyone gets the chronicle they're interested in - the group tenet rules already point in that direction. Plus, we don't know how much Hunger dice may have changed in the meantime - I still somewhat hope they've realized that one 1 shouldn't have any effect as that just happens way too often.
                      Last edited by Cifer; 07-02-2018, 04:19 PM.

                      Comment


                      • You do realize that I was literally asking whether there was more to the clan than I knew, right? Also, there's the question of how those relationships function - if it's just one-on-one, you can still believably meet enough others for the plots to work in your chronicle. There's different degrees of "blown up" and Ravnos definitely got the lesser one if one compares them to, for example, the Tremere Antitribu, where even one running around in a campaign would be a major sensation.
                        You can't really do caste traditions, gatherings for arbitration, or something like "word of a Ravnos getting screwed up spreads through the clan, a bunch of them gather to do the Treatment" if it's just one on one. Nor something like paths being prevalent enough in the clan to have violent rivalries between them. The smaller it goes, the vastly more implausible all that becomes.

                        Comparing them also to "well all your elders died off and so many of you otherwise died off that you're now a bloodline at most" to "near completely wiped out" is a bit.. yes, what wouldn't come off better compared to that?

                        (With that said? Wasn't ever similarly thrilled about the treatment the Tremere antitribu either, and even that got walked back a little bit in v20).

                        edit: Ehh, nah, my dislike of the pre revised Ravnos clanbook (there were two Ravnos clanbooks) is maybe overstating some things. According to the internet it seems to have fans to this very day! But man, it had some things in it..

                        edit edit: I think the most I can say with regards that particular thing is that when I say there have been efforts in several places in the gameline to give the Ravnos a culture, an identity, a loose sense of belonging to something, what have you, it's not a statement I'm pulling from thin air. Some of them were all the same better done than others.
                        Last edited by MarkK; 07-02-2018, 07:57 PM. Reason: typo

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by MarkK View Post
                          I don't think disinterest to the point of only finding interest in their use as a plot point is entirely the same as dislike.

                          They were also fleshed out at several points outside their clanbook. Their Libellus Sanguinius entry in Dark Ages for instance worked pretty hard at giving them a varied identity, one that extended beyond India. V20's Lore of the Clans entry for them extended out clan culture and character to them that the clan carried with them outside of India as something of a baseline, offering the castes as something that while not having the same authority, were still respected.

                          I'm not saying you're doing it wrong, just that you have no idea whatsoever what you're talking about is.. kinda exactly telling someone they're doing it wrong.

                          When you blow them up, any place that was suggesting they have some society and culture blows up with it.

                          So, I don't want to tell someone they're not understanding their own arguments or something like that, but it seems mostly like you're arguing at this point that the only thing that makes the Ravnos interesting is having blown them up. That really does read like if someone was previously interested in the Ravnos without that event, they just didn't like interesting things.
                          Maybe you could stop trying to twist my words or attribute false intentions to me?

                          I don't find the Ravnos uninteresting, in any version actually. This idea that most of the Clan dying ruins them is simply false, and you keep trying to present the different groups of Ravnos as a singular cohesive entity is not helping. They are almost like different Bloodlines, (and very much are lowercase bloodlines) that generally hate each other, and the way I see it, most of the Clan dying makes a lot of these differences a lot more important to the survivers.

                          Try going back and reading Lore of the Clans, under the assumption that the Week of Nightmares already happened. Seriously, try it, and tell me what really changes?

                          A few things do sure. It makes sense that the different factions and followers of the Paths of Paradox are attempting to unite or at least talk about things. The Clan has no place to go but up. Individual's mortal families amd connections become much more important.
                          Last edited by Beckett; 07-03-2018, 02:34 AM.

                          Comment


                          • Maybe you could stop trying to twist my words or attribute false intentions to me?
                            When most of your talk on this as far as saying why no one should really have a problem with using the Week of Nightmares is about how the Ravnos aren't really a clan anyway, nor had any identity to speak anyway, and the thing you feel that is the most interesting thing about them as far as giving them some plot was an event that exploded most of the clan and left them as remnants, it's difficult to see what it is you find interesting about them, other than that? You're basically saying that the thing you find most interesting about the Ravnos is using them as vice addled caitiff with illusion powers, and that any other use of them was either not emphasized enough for your regard or notable enough. That's not actually anything but you, stating your way of reading the clan, the one that specifically excludes some other way of reading them, is the most valid way of reading the clan.

                            This idea that most of the Clan dying ruins them is simply false
                            Yes, I get that your repeated emphasis is that people who dislike most of the Clan dying both don't like cool things in vampire, and don't and I guess understand the Ravnos clan either, now.

                            and you keep trying to present the different groups of Ravnos as a singular cohesive entity is not helping.
                            They're given a loose enough sense of belonging for ritual arbitration to be possible, to have taken some of the caste traditions out of India to see some use in the clan, for enough to follow rival path interpretations to create a violent rivalry between them, for there to be enough of a sense of identity to enact revenge for clan ill treatment and have enough teeth behind the practice that other vampires recognize them doing so as a thing.

                            You're complaining about your words being twisted, but I've noted that yes, that's not anything like the attention to detail given to the efforts to give, say, clan Assamite a more fleshed out identity, but regardless those details were worked at enough to give people who liked the clan some material to work with, be it in a couple of places I thought were decently done, be it in some at that incredibly recent efforts to give them a whole bunch of plot, or even in a well previous thing I personally super disliked, but both has its fans and certainly went deeply at length to work on the clan. You seem to want to talk like anyone putting any stock in that being the case is arguing the Ravnos are now the Tremere as far as exaggerating an argument so that you can completely dismiss it in order to hold onto this one thing that is the only thing you feel defines them (which is, ironically, a lack of any definition). There seems to be no middle ground possible for you given the time you're spending staking out/advocating takes of "have no identity, barely a clan, bunch of loners, anything that said otherwise was minor and off to the side", such that we've reached the point that anyone saying otherwise are "saying false things".

                            And that's kind of my point, and you illustrate it pretty well, choices like these remove middle grounds of options that people might have liked. It feels disingenuous to say "actually killing most of them doesn't ruin them as a clan" when we're how many posts after you saying they weren't really a clan anyway? Yes, if you didn't think they were much of a clan in the first place, I can see how you would think killing a lot of them wouldn't change that, and that's why you need to dismiss any other thing.

                            For anyone that instead thought differently than you, and could make use of material to feel that way, it would feel ruinous. So all you can say is, like you're saying now "well then those people are bad at vampire, and bad at reading vampire." And again, yes, I get that this is V5, the removing options game, and that at this point its main justification seems to be "those options were meaningless/those options never actually existed, you only thought they did because you're bad at Vampire"

                            (If you want to roll with "I don't like V5, you're twisting my words again", well dude, you certainly seem to be pleased with that they put the Week of Nightmares back in, so at least that one part really works for you, to the point that we're both x number of posts in of discussing it).

                            Try going back and reading Lore of the Clans, under the assumption that the Week of Nightmares already happened. Seriously, try it, and tell me what really changes?
                            Off the top of my head? The shattered, embittered ruins of a clan who need to work that much harder to survive, with the source of a lot of their cultural mores wiped out would not really have the numbers or sense of any tradition to carry on things like caste outlines in any way that wasn't self parody, to feel enough of a loose presence to feel like some of them can gather for arbitration, there's certainly not enough following any given path for it to feel viable that such philosophies could spread enough to survivably sustain a philosophical feud. In fact, the path of paradox being a thing at all, with the elders who take care to see its spread being super dead, is itself a thing to feel far less viable. Even something like the treatment becomes a bit laughable when if that many Ravnos died, the odds of them being capable of avenging each other drop that much harder.

                            That they travelled in small groups or on their own didn't change that there was an identity there for them to fall back on, if they wished to do so. As far as one of the things that actually managed to grab my own eye about the clan, that was an interesting contrast. However far afield they were, there was all the same enough of a shared sense of an underlying, shared atmosphere to provide grounds to, either via genuine desire, via cajoling/guilt/leverage, via stress or need, reach out towards that atmosphere and see it expressed somehow. And that being the idea, it allowed for, say, someone super insistent on them otherwise being loners who are barely a clan and with no real identity to play them that way, but also allowed for people who felt they had more going on, to play them that way and define them against such things.

                            Options. They're helpful.

                            I realize this is going to lead to "here's how they could totally still all do that and that you, or who all ever has otherwise posted to gripe, or click like, or whatever don't see that is again proof that you don't know how to read Vampire", but I'd have to say that would be a response that would come from a really disingenuous place considering your arguement that they had no real identity beyond "wandering loners with no real identity" anyway. Obviously for the people that liked that sort of thing, part of it was feeling like there was enough of an existing clan for that to flow around in.

                            More to the point "shattered bloodline" and "enough continuity of some clan cultural mores, philosophies and practices" are concepts that don't really gel in a satisfying way. Is there no chance that you can see that such itself is part of the problem some people have? When "kablooey!" happens, that is instead what feels like forces itself over everything as its big definition. To the point that you yourself stress it as the big definition and just argue that people are wrong or can't read if they don't like that.

                            Hey, since we're there, try going back and reading Beckett's Jyhad Diary, under the assumption that the Week of Nightmares happens. How do all those plot options given for the clan end as far as using them in any viable way? One of the complaints expressed by someone else in thread on not liking blowing up the clan was that, as someone what did like the clan, they found it interesting/exciting that the clan were being given a bunch of stuff that players could respond to. And now all ends in kablooey. You really can't see how that takes those options away and feels sharp for doing so when basically the very last thing with the Ravnos before V5 was "here's some future plot options"?

                            When your ongoing take on this is "they never had enough clan identity for any efforts to say that they did to matter", I can see why you need to keep posting so dismissively of an opinion otherwise, but that doesn't mean there weren't efforts to give them some, nor that people didn't like them and try to use them for focus. Your tack now seems to be "anyone who is saying they were different than what I said is trying to argue they were the Ventrue or something" They don't actually need to be the Ventrue for them to have had some sense of identity worked at for them. Again, this is a whole lot of "Clan Ravnos: No Middle Ground For Anyone."

                            One of the things blowing them up certainly accomplishes is to push anything about them that wasn't "being blown up" off into a much smaller corner. And considering that aligns really well with the take on the Ravnos that you keep, at this point seemingly demanding (because hey, anything else are false, exaggerated statements), be the only one people should be viewing as mainline valid, I can see why you like it, sure. Other people don't. The options they did like, in the face of exploded clan, feel much less possible, and much smaller.

                            And, I guess to re-ask it:

                            Have you particularly played Ravnos in campaigns? Run for people that want to play them?

                            My big thing here is just to say "these were options, it was nice that people had options, that some people really liked those options was fine". A thing that makes those people feel like those options are less possible at all as they go forward? Kinda sucks. An extended riff of "they were wrong to think they ever really had those options because they just didn't understand Vampire as well as I do, they should be happy they can maybe use some much lessened take on them if an ST especially is generous enough", not great either.

                            Edit: And you know, I kind of initially thought this was a smaller thing in the face of all the stuff V5 is leaning into that I'm not partial to and just was overall a sort of microcosm reflecting the spirit of those things, but damn, I guess not? We're both at this point quite a few posts deep into arguing this. For my part it's because I guess I just really dislike the underlying attitude beneath changes like these and what it implies for a game/for people playing that game/for people who had the apparent effrontery to all of like being given options over options being denigrated.
                            Last edited by MarkK; 07-03-2018, 11:50 AM. Reason: clarity, typos

                            Comment


                            • Im just going to say this and move on. If you want to debate it via PM, that is fine, but I was not meaning to hijack the thread.

                              I like the Ravnos. I enjoyed the additional options. I disagree with you that the Week of Nightmares removes ANY options. Ravnos have never really been a highly populated Clan outside of India or the Sabbat. The Treatment was never really all that common.

                              Yes, I like the Week of Nightmares. I also liked a lot of Gangrel leaving the Camarilla, the Assamites attempting to join, and a lot of other things.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Beckett View Post
                                Ravnos have never really been a highly populated Clan outside of India or the Sabbat.
                                I'll assume it wasn't your intent. But this sentence is astoundingly dismissive of India. It's the second most populous country in the world, and the subcontinent has thousands of years of history.

                                To say the Ravnos aren't relevant because their seat of power is in India smacks of Western bias. I won't accuse you of doing this intentionally - it's very easy for people in the English-speaking world to overlook India - but that bias is there all the same.


                                This segues into a point I wanted to bring up. If the Week of Nightmares happens, that means the Kindred power structures in India are changed irrevocably. And that change is for the less interesting, rather than the more. If the Ravnos are the elder powers in India - if they, as a Clan, are the backbone of vampire politics in the country - then decimating them means the native Indian undead power structure gets dismantled.

                                Sure, other Clans exist in India, but they weren't the "majority party" in native vampire power. They had to work around and with the Ravnos, in much the same way vampires in Western countries have to work around and with the Ventrue.

                                Before you start saying "well, the non-Ravnos in India will fill the void", that's true. But the ones that are native aren't the only ones who will rush to fill that vacuum. Ever since British occupation, the Camarilla has been there too. And unlike the native vampires, the Camarilla vampires didn't rely on centuries of co-dependence upon the ruling Ravnos majority. The natives would have pinned their powers on the Ravnos for centuries. It's just logical to make alliances with them. Those same natives would have reason to hate and stand apart from the Camarilla, because of the whole Western invasion and occupation thing.

                                So if the Ravnos destroy each other, those natives left behind will have no bargaining power, nor the force needed to stand their ground. And the Camarilla territories elsewhere have plenty of their own ambitious ancillae and neonates, willing to immigrate en masse when they find out whole swaths of India's power structure just disappeared overnight. The result is that the natives will basically be run roughshod over by the Westerners, and be forced to capitulate, die, or be pushed out. Bob's your uncle, India is now a completely Camarilla region.

                                And that's boring. It makes a country with a unique and varied culture into a more ethnic variant of the same Camarilla Prince-Primogen society found everywhere else. Maybe you'll get Sabbat moving in as well, but that's, again, par for the course in other regions of the world. You don't get to have a uniquely Indian Kindred society. Nor can there be any sort of ongoing tensions between an existing native power structure and one imposed by foreign powers. Not in India, at least.

                                That's a missed opportunity, right there. What if some gaming group actually WAS interested in running a Vampire game in India? Well that game just became a lot less interesting if the Ravnos imploded. I refute the idea that the stories able to be told with Clan Ravnos intact function perfectly well with them being exploded. They do not.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X