Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Modiphius taking over Vampire: The Masquerade

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

  • Asmodai
    started a topic Modiphius taking over Vampire: The Masquerade

    Modiphius taking over Vampire: The Masquerade

    As they note on their site https://www.modiphius.com/modiphius-...n-v5-chronicle

    4 new upcoming products:
    • Player's Guide (with support for alternate and oldschool playstyles)
    • London Chronicle (starts with characters waking from Torpor just as SI has wiped the vampires out of London)
    • Second Inquistion Book
    • Starter Set

    The interesting thing is that they seem to be the ones in charge of coordinating with all other licensees now - including Onyx Path

  • Camilla
    replied
    Originally posted by jamiemalk View Post

    Nope, and as a general rule, any attempt at this kind of drastic setting and rules change should be a different game in my opinion. Calling this Masquerade is kind of dishonest to me.




    Eh, other than this forum, the people i know and play with in the real world all think the changes are godawful. Amusingly enough, the one guy who was excited by all the shiney new changes, once he read the book, thought it was the worst thing he'd ever seen.

    This guy gets it.

    I've had similar experience with my fellow WoD fans here where I live IRL and even in some online circles dedicated to more general RPG's such as RPG Pub.

    Onyx Path Forums has a very distinct zeitgeist and forum culture regarding "the proper way to do WoD" and while there is nothing wrong with that mindset, it can be misleading if you're gauging the opinions of the greater WoD fandom solely on the most common recurring opinions on Onyx Path Forums (and to a lesser extent, RPG.net since there's a sizable overlap in some of the regulars and mods on both sites)

    Based on my own experiences in the greater gaming communities, I can safely say the following...

    Here on Onyx Path, I'm an extremely controversial iconoclast for my opinions regarding Vampire (and WoD in general)

    In my IRL gaming group, I'm just one of the many in the group that share my views

    On RPG Pub, I'm just one guy with an opinion about WoD and the WoD fans there all have differing opinions on VTM and so there is no clear consensus on the game and how it should be approached and we mostly all just do our own thing

    On The RPG Site, I'm an extremely controversial iconoclast for just liking Vampire to begin with

    TL;DR It's a bad idea to judge the general opinions of an entire fandom based on the common board culture of one forum

    Leave a comment:


  • Ana Mizuki
    replied
    Originally posted by The Gentleman Gamer View Post
    The challenge with presenting history and modernity in a Vampire book is you need to refer to human society and culture to make the book feel relevant and connected to the mortal and moral aspect of the game, while you need to refer to the timeless / slow changing side of vampire society to remind you that vampire society is like that of an ancient crumbling empire, just clinging on. Lean too far one way and you make a game that's set at a specific point and no longer relevant in a year or two's time, lean too far the other way and you lose the human aspect.
    I mean, Children of Revolution in V20 did it pretty well. Yeah, it discussed Occupy Wallstreet, but it didn't leave the character based on it as just that. The earlier books about New York referenced how it was in the 80s,etc.

    I think the best way to handle recent events, is to build around them rather than on them. Just like how WoD treats WW2, no one supernatural is pulling the strings, but people can be involved/affected by it. In the case of Checenya, just detailing how it would affect the local vampire population would have worked. I mean, having the threat of losing your herd or ghoul due to them being escorts/sex workers or just openly gay is a big enough issue without adding anything to it.

    Leave a comment:


  • PMárk
    replied
    Originally posted by Bluecho View Post
    My problem with the bluntness of V5's politics is that it guarantees the material will become dated before long. Rather than being a timeless story, like all good vampire fiction ought to be.

    Making vampires into literal neo-Nazis is not an invalid concept for specific movements. However, it gets so close to those specific, "topical" references as to miss the forest for the trees. That is, it makes it about Nazis specifically, rather than as an examination of general themes about man's inhumanity to man, or the degree to which both rebellion and conservatism can be bent towards evil ends when it just becomes a vehicle for hatred.

    Further, because it's all topical themes, it sort of misses one of the big strengths and themes of vampire fiction: the melancholy that accompanies having become an unliving relic of a bygone age. How vampires quickly (or rather slowly) cease being the New Hotness, and become shadows of the past, trying to stay relevant in a living world that passes them by. And the accompanying conflicts that arise when a vampire DOES try to reinvent themselves (a la Lestat), for good or for ill.

    V5 seems to be of the opinion that only the Present is important, to the expense of History. Not just in the Meta sense - where they jettison the metaplot - but in-universe WITH the loss of ancient elders and their schemes, and the focus exclusively upon Neonates. Even rewriting how vampires work, in order to make the immediate more important over the long term (focus on Hunger) and the nerfing of elders (loss of attributes above 5). It's an approach to vampirism that doesn't appreciate antiquity, or moments where one just slows down and considers the passage of time. By sending both elders and the Sabbat away, it disincentivizes stories that arise from old history coming back to the haunt the world.

    There was something poignant and, yes, Gothic about getting involved in the rivalry between two ancient vampires, that started over a seemingly small event hundreds or even thousands of years ago. It's a pattern that not only makes matters tragic, but also very personal. Which, ironically, makes it timeless, because it strips away immediate context in favor of themes applicable to the broader human experience.
    I'd say too, that it's one of the best putting into words what I feel and why I feel V5 is missing the gothic.

    However, I'd add a couple things:

    I think neo-nazi vampires and such things worked. Now, I disagree with the notion some expressed that VtM is primarily about the here and now, but I do think that it's about the here and now and about the more timeless themes both. What I always felt the books did well, in this particular case of neo-nazi Brujah, is listing a bunch of ideologies individual Brujah could latch themselves to, as they always did and it was just one of them. Naturally, most of the examples were contemporary, as the game assumed young vampires as default. Things like that anchored the game to our reality and was good. However, they were examples and the focus of the writeup was more on the timeless characteristics of the clan.

    In shot, it was a bit "these are the most important generalities of the clan's lookout and this is how they're being expressed in the modern world".

    It was also true to the whole presentation of the setting. It wasn't just about the cultural phenomena of here and now. Half of it was that and it made the game, again, relevant and anchored into our reality and relatable. The other half, again, you could say the "gothic" half was about things that are always relevant. The first half could and should change, yes, as time and culture changes. Yes, some of the content of the old books feel outdated today, sure. But without the later half, the game feels... more empty, in terms of background.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Gentleman Gamer
    replied
    The challenge with presenting history and modernity in a Vampire book is you need to refer to human society and culture to make the book feel relevant and connected to the mortal and moral aspect of the game, while you need to refer to the timeless / slow changing side of vampire society to remind you that vampire society is like that of an ancient crumbling empire, just clinging on. Lean too far one way and you make a game that's set at a specific point and no longer relevant in a year or two's time, lean too far the other way and you lose the human aspect.

    Leave a comment:


  • Growls
    replied
    Originally posted by Bluecho View Post
    -snip-
    Alrighty. Best argument I've heard in a while. Of course, V5 is going to be dated as all hell in a decade or so. The other books, 1st Ed, 2nd Ed and Revised were very much products of their own time, the post-cold war world of the 1990'ies. It felt dated as all hell to read, both in the terms of culture, but also in the terms of the progressive politics presented in there, which were quite progressive for the time. It was just focusing on something else.

    I'm pretty sure we're getting a lot of different angles covered in the books that are to come. The V5 core is a book about the vampyric life in 2018, and we do live in a very politically charged time. It'll change, and it will grow, as the line continues to shift and turn in different authors hands. And that's a good thing.
    Hell, it was even mentioned that the whole Beckoning business was not as clear-cut as we thought it was at the start.

    The Anarch book, even though it was not what I hoped it was, doubled down on that feeling in a lot of ways, while the Camarilla book started to delve into a few more of the mysteries. We'll return to the ancient lore at point, I suspect. It's a big world after all.

    Of course, that's not going to alleviate the concerns for now.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trippy
    replied
    One of the novelties of playing Vampire: The Maquerade is that it is set in the here and the now, as a dark reflection of the real world around us. While this can make the setting prone to becoming dated, it's also providing a very visceral snapshot of time that gamers living in the 'near and now' can immediately relate to.

    This is, of course, juxtaposed against the historical aspects of playing an immortal monster, but I don't really read anything in V5 that denies this as such. Yes, the metaplot culls out some of the backstory characters established through the years, but this isn''t necessarily the same thing. The corebook wasn't designed to be standalone and 'complete' as much as the first of a series of books that will gradually expand the setting. The notion of playing against the long term rivalries of elder vampires is still valid in the game as written.

    Leave a comment:


  • Illithid
    replied
    Bluecho That is a really well written blurb on the changes, It sums up exactly what I feel is wrong for a "Vampire" game in a way I didn't know how to put in to words.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bluecho
    replied
    My problem with the bluntness of V5's politics is that it guarantees the material will become dated before long. Rather than being a timeless story, like all good vampire fiction ought to be.

    Making vampires into literal neo-Nazis is not an invalid concept for specific movements. However, it gets so close to those specific, "topical" references as to miss the forest for the trees. That is, it makes it about Nazis specifically, rather than as an examination of general themes about man's inhumanity to man, or the degree to which both rebellion and conservatism can be bent towards evil ends when it just becomes a vehicle for hatred.

    Further, because it's all topical themes, it sort of misses one of the big strengths and themes of vampire fiction: the melancholy that accompanies having become an unliving relic of a bygone age. How vampires quickly (or rather slowly) cease being the New Hotness, and become shadows of the past, trying to stay relevant in a living world that passes them by. And the accompanying conflicts that arise when a vampire DOES try to reinvent themselves (a la Lestat), for good or for ill.

    V5 seems to be of the opinion that only the Present is important, to the expense of History. Not just in the Meta sense - where they jettison the metaplot - but in-universe WITH the loss of ancient elders and their schemes, and the focus exclusively upon Neonates. Even rewriting how vampires work, in order to make the immediate more important over the long term (focus on Hunger) and the nerfing of elders (loss of attributes above 5). It's an approach to vampirism that doesn't appreciate antiquity, or moments where one just slows down and considers the passage of time. By sending both elders and the Sabbat away, it disincentivizes stories that arise from old history coming back to the haunt the world.

    There was something poignant and, yes, Gothic about getting involved in the rivalry between two ancient vampires, that started over a seemingly small event hundreds or even thousands of years ago. It's a pattern that not only makes matters tragic, but also very personal. Which, ironically, makes it timeless, because it strips away immediate context in favor of themes applicable to the broader human experience.
    Last edited by Bluecho; 02-22-2019, 01:37 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • PMárk
    replied
    Originally posted by Ana Mizuki View Post

    My issues with the playtest characters had nothing to do with the content, if a player I trusted wanted to play such a character and the whole group was fine with that, no issue.

    But it was a public playtest and pregenerated characters, especially at a con. Therefore, a very high risk of someone coming in with trauma related to abuse/antisemitism. Luckily, I have heard many who ran it DID ask if people were comfortable with the pedophilia angle, so that is good.
    That's a legitimte criticism too. I'm all for WoD (and WoD products) being able to handle dark things. As I said, neo-nazi Brujah were always mentioned in the corebook clan writeup and the ventrue had naked children among possible feeding restrictions, at least in Revised and V20. I don't have any problems with that.

    However, I can see, how giving a character like that, to an unwary player, in a playtest and at a con could lead to a disaster, especially, since it was also tied to a very strong scene with the refugee children's center, which has a whole another pile of politically (and emotionally) sensitive baggage on it. It's fortunate the STs were considerate enough to ask the players before starting the playtest games about those things.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ana Mizuki
    replied
    Originally posted by PMárk View Post

    Hmmm.

    To be fair, I never had problems with most of the things that enticed a lot of controversy since the playtests. I don't have problems with child-eating Ventrue and neo-nazi Brujah, because those were always how WoD and Vamire worked, were always a part of the game, right in the corebooks. I'm expecting those things to be here.

    The Cechnya part was unfortunate, I'd agree.

    I think what WW did wrong, in their "making WoD dark again" attempt is that they tried to be too recent, too contemporarily relevant, too bluntly politicized, if that makes sense. Old WW used those things in a more... general way, I think. They've spoken about things, but in a less particular way and maybe in a more neutral tone.

    Then they did it in a way that was sometimes just badly written (like Cechnya), or presented in a way that sometimes felt a little like a... blunt instrument applied to the head.

    Also, let's not deny the fact that in the current political climate, even mentioning some things will lead to an outrage from some people. Like the neo-nazi thing was laughable (especially since I felt the Brujah writeup being a lot more bluntly leftist-activism oriented than it was in earlier editions -which I wasn't a particular fan of- and clearly not endorsed neo-nazism).

    It's somewhat funny, how they've managed to piss off every ideological side.
    My issues with the playtest characters had nothing to do with the content, if a player I trusted wanted to play such a character and the whole group was fine with that, no issue.

    But it was a public playtest and pregenerated characters, especially at a con. Therefore, a very high risk of someone coming in with trauma related to abuse/antisemitism. Luckily, I have heard many who ran it DID ask if people were comfortable with the pedophilia angle, so that is good.

    Like you said, the issue was bluntness about the matters more than anything. A lot of the issues in writing, to me, was that there was no effort to make things subtle or vague. Which would serve WoD better. Hence why the issue was tone-control and not content control.

    Leave a comment:


  • PMárk
    replied
    Originally posted by Ana Mizuki View Post

    The tone control was also an issue. The Chenya thing was just the tip of a very large iceberg of very unsubtle writing and choices. Heck, I think I saw some of that end up in the latest W20 book.
    Hmmm.

    To be fair, I never had problems with most of the things that enticed a lot of controversy since the playtests. I don't have problems with child-eating Ventrue and neo-nazi Brujah, because those were always how WoD and Vamire worked, were always a part of the game, right in the corebooks. I'm expecting those things to be here.

    The Cechnya part was unfortunate, I'd agree.

    I think what WW did wrong, in their "making WoD dark again" attempt is that they tried to be too recent, too contemporarily relevant, too bluntly politicized, if that makes sense. Old WW used those things in a more... general way, I think. They've spoken about things, but in a less particular way and maybe in a more neutral tone.

    Then they did it in a way that was sometimes just badly written (like Cechnya), or presented in a way that sometimes felt a little like a... blunt instrument applied to the head.

    Also, let's not deny the fact that in the current political climate, even mentioning some things will lead to an outrage from some people. Like the neo-nazi thing was laughable (especially since I felt the Brujah writeup being a lot more bluntly leftist-activism oriented than it was in earlier editions -which I wasn't a particular fan of- and clearly not endorsed neo-nazism).

    It's somewhat funny, how they've managed to piss off every ideological side.
    Last edited by PMárk; 02-21-2019, 01:41 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ana Mizuki
    replied
    Originally posted by PMárk View Post

    Yup.

    It's also like that regarding the visual presentation of the game.
    The tone control was also an issue. The Chenya thing was just the tip of a very large iceberg of very unsubtle writing and choices. Heck, I think I saw some of that end up in the latest W20 book.

    Leave a comment:


  • PMárk
    replied
    Originally posted by Aleph View Post
    It's not only subjective but also relative, and the last part it's what's often missing in these arguments: Individual people have their own opinions but there's also a demographic. The fanbase of Vampire it's not identical to the fanbase of D&D. The fanbase of Vampire was accustomed to edition changes that were little more than metaplot updates. Compare the changes of V5 with the changes of Revised and you will see why people thinks the changes were drastic.
    Yup.

    It's also like that regarding the visual presentation of the game.

    Leave a comment:


  • Aleph
    replied
    Originally posted by moogle001 View Post
    Whether those changes were too drastic is entirely subjective. That's why I find all these comments about "V5 changed too much too fast" to be really silly. Quantity of changes is entirely subjective; what's good for me isn't good for you, and there's little the writers could do about that. Quality of specific changes is worth debating, even though there's subjectivity there too.
    It's not only subjective but also relative, and the last part it's what's often missing in these arguments: Individual people have their own opinions but there's also a demographic. The fanbase of Vampire it's not identical to the fanbase of D&D. The fanbase of Vampire was accustomed to edition changes that were little more than metaplot updates. Compare the changes of V5 with the changes of Revised and you will see why people thinks the changes were drastic.
    Last edited by Aleph; 02-20-2019, 03:49 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X