Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

[V5] Feeding from Kindred

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

  • Crimson_red
    started a topic [V5] Feeding from Kindred

    [V5] Feeding from Kindred

    Just curious,

    Of the V5 Storytellers out there, when you have one vampire feed from another (page 213), do you allow it to reduce Hunger below Resting Hunger (1 for Blood Potency 1-4; 2 for BP 5-7; 3 for BP 8-10)? I have yet to find any reference to indicate that this is an exception to the rule that draining and killing a Human is the only way to reach Hunger 0 (page 211).

    I'm inclined to allow it given the potential dangers of feeding from vampires, and given that other supernatural beings, werewolves for example (page 376), come with their own implications (in the case of killing werewolves, being able to satiate multiple kindred). It also helps justify, to me, why some elders feed from Kindred (in addition to the flaw). I suppose it does have the potential for abuse, but generally I'm not worried about my players gaming the system.

    I just had one of my PCs, with Hunger 1 and a Blood Potency 3, feed from a SPC elder with Blood Potency 8 (They had been maneuvered into accepting the first stage of a Blood Bond) and I had to make a ruling.

    I feel pretty good in ruling that it can go below Resting Hunger, but I was curious how others ruled, if they have considered it at all, or if I'm just missing a reference in the books. Not to mention, there could be some significant pitfalls that I have not considered, mechanically or narratively.

    P.S. - I guess I should note, I am a fan of the rule that draining and killing a Human is the only way to reach Hunger 0, and like what it implies about Hunger. It just happens, in the case of feeding from vampires, I was inclined the other way.
    Last edited by Crimson_red; 07-10-2019, 11:06 PM.

  • CTPhipps
    replied
    Originally posted by blailton View Post

    Wrong. You lose 1 point.
    Well they're ignoring that rule and I think thta's a good idea.

    Leave a comment:


  • blailton
    replied
    Originally posted by CTPhipps View Post

    Diablerie doesn't have to be a automatic loss of humanity in V5. It's only if it's against the Chronicles tenants or the Conviction of the person involved.
    Wrong. You lose 1 point.

    Leave a comment:


  • Crimson_red
    replied
    Yeah, I agree about the “suitably but not nearly as much as they should be” . . . The implications and the potentially accumulating costs.

    I do believe Alex has a solid grasp of his character though, how did he put it? “Jasper believes he right, he’s wrong, but he believes he’s right” - I’m sure I’m bumbling that up even as a paraphrase :P lol either way, having a degree of contradiction in a character is properly . . . Human

    Leave a comment:


  • CTPhipps
    replied
    Originally posted by Crimson_red View Post
    Yes, I’ve enjoyed L.A. By Night immensely, which surprises me given my inability to watch or even listen to other table top RPG games for any length of time.

    And I’ve been wondering how Jasper got some of his prey. I’m still a little leery on the details, because if he is embracing his own meals, doesn't’ he have to arrange to feed them too? Until he does, wouldn’t the only sustenance they could provide be what he himself used to embrace them?
    Jasper Embraces a Nosferatu from someone who deserves to die, feeds them people who deserves to die, then kills them. The others are suitably but not nearly as much as they should be...horrified.

    Leave a comment:


  • Crimson_red
    replied
    Yes, I’ve enjoyed L.A. By Night immensely, which surprises me given my inability to watch or even listen to other table top RPG games for any length of time.

    And I’ve been wondering how Jasper got some of his prey. I’m still a little leery on the details, because if he is embracing his own meals, doesn't’ he have to arrange to feed them too? Until he does, wouldn’t the only sustenance they could provide be what he himself used to embrace them?


    As others have pointed out, I don’t think LA by Night is a good place to look if you want RAW. Yet I do think it is a solid place if you want to see a storyteller adapt the rules (while remaining relatively consistent) to best serve the players, the audience (which happens to include more than just the players for his chronicle), the narrative, the tones and themes, and the action (among other things). And I’m a believer that these are important skills for a storyteller to have.

    I also feel as if, going back to the original topic of reducing Hunger below it’s resting point, it may have been left vague on the subject of feeding on vampires partly to allow storytellers to make the call that works best for their games. I could tell interesting stories either way, each with its own story implications and elements.

    Downside is it can leave a storyteller scratching there head, like it did me before I made the call in my game, and hence why I thought to ask what others have decided was best for their games? Have you had to make the call, and why? What implications this might have on your games?

    Leave a comment:


  • CTPhipps
    replied
    Originally posted by elmerg View Post
    Jason has strayed a lot from the rules throughout. Not adding 1/3rd of Humanity to Frenzy rolls comes immediately to mind.
    If Jasper killed a vampire by draining them, then that's killing... and thus it meets the precedent of 'killing to reduce to HUnger 0'.
    I loved the casual revelation last episode on Twitch that he's a habitual serial killer....of killers.

    Jasper is Dexter.
    Last edited by CTPhipps; 08-01-2019, 02:34 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • elmerg
    replied
    Originally posted by Nosimplehiway View Post
    Either way, Jasper's feeding makes it, "yes, draining a vampire gets you to zero hunger". He fed unto destruction, and was declared to be at Hunger zero. It's hard to imagine the slightly later act of actually consuming the soul would then increase Hunger back to 1.

    This raises the unusual question of whether online games run by people involved in the creation of V5 create canon precedents. Do I remember Jason Carl mentioning that LA by Night would largely use canon rules, but might stray here and there?


    Jason has strayed a lot from the rules throughout. Not adding 1/3rd of Humanity to Frenzy rolls comes immediately to mind.
    If Jasper killed a vampire by draining them, then that's killing... and thus it meets the precedent of 'killing to reduce to HUnger 0'.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cifer
    replied
    Originally posted by CTPhipps View Post
    Diablerie doesn't have to be a automatic loss of humanity in V5. It's only if it's against the Chronicles tenants or the Conviction of the person involved.
    That is not the case:
    Effects of Diablerie
    Once the diablerie is complete, the
    diablerist must assert control over
    the alien Blood in their system or
    risk falling prey to their victim’s
    spirit. This process resolves as fol-
    lows:
    ■ The diablerist loses 1 point of
    Humanity.
    [...]
    ■ Should the roll fail, the diabler-
    ist loses an additional point of
    Humanity for each success by
    which they failed.

    Leave a comment:


  • CTPhipps
    replied
    Originally posted by Cifer View Post
    That definitely wasn't Diablerie.
    Spoiler stuff, highlight to read: If it was Diablerie, Jasper would be a Wight in no time at all since it appears he regularly drains his victims before getting blood-bound to them. Additionally, in a chronicle where Jason Carl always notes when something might be a Stain or barely not a Stain, he doesn't particularly mention the whole "You just lost a full dot of Humanity, you monster". (why doesn't this forum have proper spoiler tags?)

    As for the original question, I think allowing feeding from vampires to reduce Hunger to 0 without killing the vampire allows some exploits, particularly since there are ways to avoid the blood bond (bleed the vampire and wait for the blood to cool down or drink from a Tremere). Obtaining Hunger 0 should be a Big Thing. If you find a way to do it reliably and without doing something really questionable, it's probably not intended.
    Diablerie doesn't have to be a automatic loss of humanity in V5. It's only if it's against the Chronicles tenants or the Conviction of the person involved.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cifer
    replied
    Originally posted by CTPhipps View Post
    I think that was the implication but I don't know.

    I think Jasper ate his soul by Jason saying something passed through him.
    That definitely wasn't Diablerie.
    Spoiler stuff, highlight to read: If it was Diablerie, Jasper would be a Wight in no time at all since it appears he regularly drains his victims before getting blood-bound to them. Additionally, in a chronicle where Jason Carl always notes when something might be a Stain or barely not a Stain, he doesn't particularly mention the whole "You just lost a full dot of Humanity, you monster". (why doesn't this forum have proper spoiler tags?)

    As for the original question, I think allowing feeding from vampires to reduce Hunger to 0 without killing the vampire allows some exploits, particularly since there are ways to avoid the blood bond (bleed the vampire and wait for the blood to cool down or drink from a Tremere). Obtaining Hunger 0 should be a Big Thing. If you find a way to do it reliably and without doing something really questionable, it's probably not intended.

    Leave a comment:


  • Redwulfe
    replied
    I do think you can use LA by Night as a way to look at how one of the creators intended the system to be used but not as a cannon resource to determine what you should do in your game.

    I think the intent in the books are very clear to do as you wish with the system. in the core, they list various ways that you can get to the same place using the rules in various methods. The Player's Guide is going to continue that line by adding even more options to the system. to me, the intent is clear they wish you to use the system to have fun however you wish to use it.

    Back to the OP: According to RAW no you would have to kill to get to hunger 0, but also according to RAW play it how you want and if the guidelines don't suit you then change them. If you want to be able to get down to hunger 0 by feeding on a Vampire to increase the enticement and dangers of blood bond then do so. Whatever you think your game will have more fun with.

    I think that is a cool idea and I am going to steal it. I am still going to have the hunger transfer though on a 1-1 basis so the one doing the feeding gets a hunger for every hunger that is slaked. Just to keep the party from doing some weird conga line of 0 hunger. I also think I am going to add the caveat that it will not work for Vampires who can only feed on other vampires and it still triggers prey exclusion since it is not human blood but Vitae.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nosimplehiway
    replied
    Either way, Jasper's feeding makes it, "yes, draining a vampire gets you to zero hunger". He fed unto destruction, and was declared to be at Hunger zero. It's hard to imagine the slightly later act of actually consuming the soul would then increase Hunger back to 1.

    This raises the unusual question of whether online games run by people involved in the creation of V5 create canon precedents. Do I remember Jason Carl mentioning that LA by Night would largely use canon rules, but might stray here and there?

    Leave a comment:


  • CTPhipps
    replied
    Originally posted by Crimson_red View Post
    True. . .

    Wait, did Jasper actually diablerize the kindred? I know he fed unto destruction, but did he keep going after that?
    I think that was the implication but I don't know.

    I think Jasper ate his soul by Jason saying something passed through him.

    Leave a comment:


  • Crimson_red
    replied
    True. . .

    Wait, did Jasper actually diablerize the kindred? I know he fed unto destruction, but did he keep going after that?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X