Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

[V5] How I'm splitting up the Sabbat

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by CTPhipps View Post
    I feel the bigger issue with Mass Embraces is that there's only so much you can do to control shovelheads. Just because they were buried alive doesn't mean that they're automatically Humanity 0 monsters.
    Even he Vauldrie only goes so far.
    I've talked with some people about the Shovelhead embrace being a kind of ritae that helps erode the humanity and predispose vampires to paths.
    But even without that; the people don't need to be monsters. But having one blood in your system (or none) when you wake, with a ravenous hunger you don't know how to control and a beast urging you to do things?
    Combined with a max 1 dice to resist frenzy - the problem is frenzying vampires hungry for blood draining locals. The former personality of the Meat-Suit for the Beast doesn't matter.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Illithid View Post
      I've talked with some people about the Shovelhead embrace being a kind of ritae that helps erode the humanity and predispose vampires to paths.
      But even without that; the people don't need to be monsters. But having one blood in your system (or none) when you wake, with a ravenous hunger you don't know how to control and a beast urging you to do things?
      Combined with a max 1 dice to resist frenzy - the problem is frenzying vampires hungry for blood draining locals. The former personality of the Meat-Suit for the Beast doesn't matter.
      I've always seen shovelheads as their main function is distraction. They occupy Cam kindred, who want to save some semblance of a functioning masquerade. Meanwhile, the real sabbat could go for the real players unhindered.


      If nothing worked, then let's think!

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by PMárk View Post

        I think we went through that earlier.

        I'm currently reading the Cam book. Actually, it's not bad, as writing goes, it's an enjoyable book. I still prefer the classic portrayal. Also, one criticism I have, that it just doesn't make as good of a guide to the sect as the Revised one was. It's all over the place, much of in-character stuff, but pretty sparse on actual information. Lots of name-dropping, without explanation. It feels more like a plot book targeted to existing players, than a sect guide for new ones.

        Also, I still don't like the visuals, by and large. What's the thing with these geometric, star-like penline things at the start of chapters anyway? They just feel out of place.

        As for the Anarchs: I didn't read their book yet, so I don't have the full picture. However, as I said many times, regarding V5, I like the core idea they've had about it, but not how far they went with it. I like that the Anarchs took over in multiple main cities and not a laughingstock, folding over to the Cathayans and the Cam. I don't like that they are completely a separate sect, at open war with the Cam, I liked the dichotomy of their earlier relationship, I think it had more gray areas and was a lot more interesting.

        My favorite portrayal of Anarchs was Anarchs Unbound. competent, but maintaining their halfway status.
        I know, I just wanted to share it here.

        I don't think the Anarchs can be part of the Camarilla and be taken seriously as a sect. In simple terms, they're an organization which can and has previously taken entire portions of the Camarilla's domain. Once you're in open revolt against the Princedom system then there's really nothing that can be said other than fighting over it. Mind you, I like how it's depicted in Chicago by Night where the Prince is actively persecuting the Anarchs but they're in large enough numbers that if they don't have overwhelming support, it can just lead to the Sheriff staked to the wall.

        So now cities are divided into territory of Camarilla and Anarch.

        Which makes things much more exciting.


        Author of Cthulhu Armageddon, I was a Teenage Weredeer, Straight Outta Fangton, Lucifer's Star, and the Supervillainy Saga.

        Comment


        • #19
          Do you have any plans for Joseph Pander, Sascha Vykos and Francisco polonia?

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Nicolas Milioni View Post
            Do you have any plans for Joseph Pander, Sascha Vykos and Francisco polonia?
            Vykos was recently the main villain of one of my chronicles and I'm about to describe how that ended. It was a shame because while the PCs outfoxed me (and Vykos), I was quite fond of their use.

            Panders I haven't had any ideas for yet but I would be interested if he was willing to form his own Panders/Caitiff Sect or try to take over the Anarch movement via violence.

            Polonia is a tough call as the Gehenna Crusade is massively important but I also heavily imply it's charging straight into the Antediluvians jaws.


            Author of Cthulhu Armageddon, I was a Teenage Weredeer, Straight Outta Fangton, Lucifer's Star, and the Supervillainy Saga.

            Comment


            • #21
              Honestly, I'm a little disappointed how the Gehenna Crusade is being used as just a way to return the Sabbat to their first edition boogey-man status. What I have always loved about the Sabbat is that however monstrous they are, however ultimately corrupt and compromised they may be, they are RIGHT (at least, the party line is right). The Antediluvians are scary mofo's that want to eat their children the way they ate their parents. So I always thought there was a bit of a tragic nobility to them.

              I am absolutely okay with sect going through another Civil War, but I will be absolutely bored if the side holding onto the legacy of the Sabbat returns to infernalism or pure unadulterated evil. Even if they are meant to be antagonists only going forward, antagonists are always more interesting when they are at least somewhat relatable. That's why the Technocracy works better than the Nephandi (at least as written, I try to make the Nephandi a bit more nuanced).

              So, I actually think I would prefer if the Sabbat LOST the Crusade, and the fracture that happens is a result of the survivors arguing over the ashes on how to rebuild. As a Sabbat player, I think I would find that more satisfying.
              Last edited by emmameta; 12-03-2018, 10:20 PM.

              Comment


              • #22
                I think the Sabbat needed to be updated because, bluntly, they were encroaching a little too much on the territory of the Anarchs. Over in the Facebook Vampire: The Masquerade, one of the single most annoying things I encounter plenty of people who say:

                * The Anarchs are just Neonates who haven't grown up.
                * The loyal opposition to the Camarilla.
                * Guys who can't commit to the Sabbat or the Camarilla

                Basically, the Sabbat has taken their role as the defenders of freedom and neonates against the Elders in the War of Ages. I think that sucks for the Anarchs who, always, will be the real protagonists of the setting and the Camarilla's greatest enemy.

                I think removing the War of Ages element from the Sabbat and letting the FREEEDOM types be more the Anarchs will help matters. I think, also, the Sabbat being monstrous and embracing that monstroscity that it drowns out most else makes them unique.

                But that's just me.

                I feel like the Sabbat, as is, has too many hats and it's taken some hats from other factions.


                Author of Cthulhu Armageddon, I was a Teenage Weredeer, Straight Outta Fangton, Lucifer's Star, and the Supervillainy Saga.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Well it's not like the Sabbat overtaking the Anarch role is something new. It happened in 1992 with the Player Guide to the Sabbat, just one year after the pubblication of the first book of Vampire the Masquerade.
                  The Anarch have been the main opposition of the Camarilla for...1 year? 1 year of 20 years of pubblications?

                  So no, the Anarchs are not "the real protagonist of the setting", they are a footnote in the history of the brand.
                  Vampire the Masquerade didn't ended in 1991. Its boom, its real commercial and cultural explosion on the shelves was with 2nd edition, when the Anarchs were already the underdog of the setting.

                  So when you meet players who says "
                  * The Anarchs are just Neonates who haven't grown up.
                  * The loyal opposition to the Camarilla.
                  * Guys who can't commit to the Sabbat or the Camarilla"

                  It's not because they do not get it, it's because that's the truth about the Anarchs, because the anarchs have been so for 19 years of pubblications out 20. Their identity is not the one of the First Edition, their identity is the one that was established at the time of the Second Edition with the Anarch Cookbook (1993).
                  Otherwise is like saying that Dungeon's and Dragons should be what D&D was with Advanced Dungeon's and Dragons, discarding all that came later, even if it was much more important in the history of the brand.
                  Last edited by Undead rabbit; 12-04-2018, 09:36 AM.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X