Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

V5- The Masquerade was always untenable.

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

  • MyWifeIsScary
    started a topic V5- The Masquerade was always untenable.

    V5- The Masquerade was always untenable.

    I've found that I like V5 far less for, amongst other things, a completely undermined masquerade. Not only is the masquerade mostly-broken with the inquisition, but it never would have worked given the rule changes. Infact, I'm pretty sure if you ran the v5 scenario with v20 rules, your average coterie would've nipped the second inquisition in the bud by now.

    Look, Vampire: the masquerade's one of those things where at first you think 'Nah, vampire's could never hide amongst humans', but then as you get into it and understand the context, you can justify it quite handily
    -The world is vastly more overpopulated than the real world, law an order is half as competent and twice as corrupt
    -Missinformation campaigns, 'Fake news', Identity politics, hollywood vampires, photoshop, CGI and so on and so forth keep the populace ignorant. The average human is weak willed, gullible and under-educated and they're all sure they're in the right. Oh yes, this applies doubly for the World of darkness.
    -Vampires are mostly in control of their beasts
    -Obfuscate is a powerful discipline
    -Dominate is a powerful, covert and subversive discipline.
    -Technomagic is an excellent tool for aiding the masquerade in modern nights, disseminated throughout the tremere and anarch free states. Constant development is put into this emerging magic to better safeguard against the emerging threat of the information age.
    -player characters are clowns that aren't really representative of your average, well selected and groomed Vampire. Storytellers use the messiest cities during times of turbulence rather than the standard, well oiled machines.

    Yeah, it's a stretch, but it works more than not. The more you know, the less 'vampires run the world' seems ridiculous. Sometimes when I look at the news I have to remind myself that there probably isn't any literal vampires and that I do not live in the world of darkness (I cannot be sure though)

    Now, Let's turn to V5
    The first point's true (I think), the second point's arguably true. But then we move on
    -The beast is constantly being a pest and making vampires commit stupid acts.
    -Obfuscate is twice the investment for half the benefits. Still useful? Yes, when you're an ancillae.
    -Dominate is an entirely different discipline. No longer with dominate two can you implant a false thought, set a trigger for a behaviour or have someone repeat acts or not-do-something for months. Now, you tell them what to do and they go "Yes master" and sleepwalk themselves to a an immediate task. The greatest boon to the masquerade became one of the greatest liabilities. With old dominate, you could easily have the inquisition tear itself apart. With new dominate, you just can't use it. Sure, maybe at elder levels it becomes valid, but most Kindred don't have access to dominate at elder levels.
    -Blood sorcery. Honestly you'll have to fill me in on that one. It seems a lot more gamey and obviously nobody at nu-White Wolf has ever heard of paradigms. Once disorganized Thinbloods have somehow disseminated fantastic rituals between themselves.
    -Disciplines in general are more overtly flashy and supernatural, most of them (as opposed to almost none of them in v20) use blood or 'rouse the beast' for additional problems.
    -Player characters being clowns is entirely representative of the rest of the vampire population. House Carna (and arguably the Vienna bombing) is obviously the result of someone's wish fulfillment rather than something that could actually happen within the context of clan tremere (they're smart and picky to say the least). Theo Bell'd be killed for killing Hardestadt without question, instead he's acting intermediary for two factions who'd more realistically strap him to a rocket so he could meet the sun. The camarilla has, for no reasonable reason, decided to become an old-boys club and have all the neonates and territories become anarch, which is what they've been fighting since the camarilla's inception (and this is of course harmful for the masquerade!) Plus every vampire is subject to the beast constantly being a pest and committing stupid acts. Clowns everywhere!

    There could have never, ever been a masquerade with v5 rules. There can be no suspension of disbelief for anyone decently familiar with the setting.

  • Morbus
    replied
    Originally posted by Cifer View Post
    SchreckNet (at least the non Anarch20 version...) is a computer system. It doesn't run on blood, it isn't an immortal predator, it doesn't have mystical powers. You don't need to know anything about vampires to hack it - you just need to know it might be out there and have a clue regarding how to access it. On the plus side, since vampires are mostly still taught the basics of their existence in person, it's somewhat likely the files that were siphoned off between the spook clicking on "Download All" and the Nosferatu pulling the plug on a server somewhere didn't actually contain a "How to vamp 101".
    Yeah Nos couldn't delete in time all the intel about havens/elysium locations which probably was limited access to even Nos neonate and that the Inquisition used to wreak havoc on the Camarilla and the Sabbat but deleted in time the huge pile of more casual and less strategic intel on sects/clans/cities organisations that would give any moderatly competent agency more than enough of information to get a pretty accurate picture of how vampire society and culture actually works.

    How awfully convenient.

    Since faith hunters existed since first edition (possibly second, I don't know when the Leopoldians were introduced), that problem isn't exactly new. It's possible that there's a consensus about the flock best being protected in secret and you don't get to enter the society unless you agree with it.
    Yeah the old excuse was that the Camarilla controlled the government and the medias and so Hunters had to be discreet not to get the attention of the threat they were fighting against.

    Not a perfect excuse I'd agree but I can't say that the current situation makes more sense because it does not.

    Admittedly, meeting the people whose headquarters this is within those headquarters isn't too outlandish. Especially if the job has really been helped along by some insiders.
    It's not outlandish. It's... How did I say? Awfully convenient.

    You're assuming that this is a status that has to hold up forever rather than just until the end of a chronicle, if that. Maybe the SI comes crashing down soon. Maybe even the Masquerade does. Maybe vampires are eradicated before then. There's a lot of directions this can go in if you don't think there needs to be a status quo to be stable for eternity.
    Well it should hold up for 15 years at the very least since apparently the Inquisition went public in 2004 and is supposedly operating to the present days.

    15 years is a long time in human time.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vysha
    replied
    Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post
    I actually proved my case just fine, but thanks for showing that you're only actual counter-argument is, "if I insult you enough and yell Fake News! I'm right and you're wrong."
    lol /10char

    Leave a comment:


  • MyWifeIsScary
    replied
    Vampires being an evil that's plagued the worlds of politics and finance and "we humans need to exterminate them all" is a kind of disgusting mix betweeen the excessive wish fullfillment present in scams that you just can't trust (...There's attractive women in your neighbourhood just wanting to get boned/ the Nigerians want you to have all their money) and 'We just need to curb your civil liberties while we protect you from some ultimate nebulous threat"
    IE
    It wouldn't fly. Maybe some fringe members of society will fall hook,line and sinker, but the overwhelming majority of people will be terrified you're just trying to screw them somehow.

    Also, enough with the spike launchers
    That's dumb as fuck. It's dumb on so many levels. From "Why would you want to stake them when you know damn well there's better ways to dispatch them" to "You could just use a crossbow' or "At the very least you don't need to mass produce these things and you could easily recruit an armourer to modify weapons to do this" and even if you were the combination of influential and stupid to get spike launchers made; You'd at least write something else down on the manifest.

    Nasty idea? Flare gun with a fishing hook attached to the projectile. Bring an extinguisher if you miss.

    Leave a comment:


  • Heavy Arms
    replied
    Originally posted by CTPhipps View Post

    1:100,000 vampires

    But what about ghouls, mages, werewolves, fairies, mummies, formori, or others? 1:10,000 may be closer to the number there.
    OK, if you want to get more serious about this:

    Depending on how you define "know" most people know somewhere between ~250 to ~1,000 people (generally over a spectrum of closeness). ~500 is usually where sociologists settle on the balance of where Western cultures tend to subjectively draw the line between people you know vs people you've met and are one or two degrees separated from you core group (so people you know of instead of know).

    So, lets say the normal humans to any sort of supernatural is actually 1:5K

    This would mean that most people know someone that's not a normal human. But most of those people are going to be things like kin, cultists/acolytes, low level ghouls, a person with a few dots in a Numina, etc. This means there's a fairly significant buffer between your average human and full bore supernaturals. The main-splat types are still, on average, going to be one to three degrees separated from most people. The masquerade/veil/etc. all drops tomorrow, you most likely don't find out that Alice is a werewolf, you find out that Alice's paternal grandparents were werewolves. You most likely don't know any changelings, but you probably know a social worker that's been put on a working group to figure out how to deal with the fact that some kids invisible friends aren't imaginary. You most likely don't know a mage, but it turns out that your pal Bob's AA sponsor is an acolyte and his support group is regularly visited by a mage that uses faith healing to help keep them sober.

    It's certainly a decidedly different world, but the numbers really don't add up to most people having direct and regular contact with full supernaturals instead of contact with parts of the supernatural world. Vampires, werewolves, mages,and so on are in the friends of friends etc. sphere of social interactions rather than suddenly finding out your uncle's a werewolf, you coworker's boyfriend that shows up at the bar after all the office folks go get a drink and is always the designated driver is actually a vampire, your landlord is a mage, etc. That might happen to some people, but not most.

    Originally posted by Vysha View Post
    You should probably read that survey, because it's not saying what you think it's saying.
    ...
    Not ghosts
    I love getting accuses of not reading things by people that are just putting their foot in their mouth.

    There is literally a header called, "Ghosts, Fortunetellers, and Communicating With the Dead."

    Maybe finish the whole thing?

    Again; if you're saying "it's the opposite of what you just said",
    Also maybe stop putting words in my mouth, again? I didn't say "opposite," since there's two situations where my statements are valid: the majority thinks the alternate, or the plurality do.

    Ultimately, for the point of the argument, there isn't a significant difference between, "45% of people actively believe in X, 20% actively disbelieve in X, and 35% are unsure," and "65% percent believe in X, 20% actively disbelieve in X, and 5% are unsure." Because? More people believe than actively disbelieve, and unsure means open to persuasion (which is where things like, "authorities say there's no such thing as vampires, but someone just leaked a giant pile of documents showing the government has scientists working on anti-vampire technology and has secret anti-vampire spec-ops units" is going to push the public desire for investigations besides the believers just wanting confirmation).

    Actually, my whole point has been that people are trained to be skeptical in the WoD,...
    Citation needed, again. And your lack of citation as previously requested is significantly noted.

    The masses of the WoD are trained to be ignorant which is an ongoing process because people are curious. They're not trained to be skeptics because skeptics ask questions instead of keeping their heads down and not wanted to know more. Training people to be skeptical would damage the efforts to keep the supernatural hidden, not help it, because skeptics aren't going to be satisfied with a convenient answer instead of a complete answer. A true skeptical response to a Snowden like leak out of Firstlight is not, "well that's silly vampires don't exist." It would be, "While vampires existing seems irrational, a vast amount of resources may have gone into an international conspiracy specifically to fight vampires, this warrants more information." That second response isn't what anyone that wants to keep things secret wants to hear.

    I said that initially, I've said that repeatedly, but you are trying to get caught up in the weeds, thinking it's the whole garden.
    Your initial statement was actually:

    "We just have to accept that in the World of Darkness, the human consciousness ignores anything that is a conspiracy of a global nature. WoD humans have a different brain chemistry due to existing in a supernaturally influenced world.

    As long as you put a bandaid on it, any information leak in the WoD almost instantly heals. Like in all the bandaid commercials."

    Going on about skeptics as the second statement after asserting at the masquerade keeps itself because humans have been magically warped to ignore everything.

    Lets get back to some of those points though:

    "We know they are as skeptical (more or less) because Vulgar magic exists for things beyond what's seemingly possible in our real world." This is objectively false as Mage defines things. Vulgar magic isn't because of human skepticism, but human belief. What is and isn't vulgar changes with reality zones. Take the most skeptical Sleeper on Earth into a mage's Sanctum, and the mage's magic is all coincidental. Revised introduced the idea that apathy had settled into the mainstream Consensus ruled Reality Zone that dominates Earth, which mostly makes life harder for the Technocracy and has minimal impact on mystic mages.

    "We know they're like this because the fantastical elements themselves have fostered this disbelief in the fantastical." Again, they foster ignorance more than disbelief, because outright disbelief doesn't work. This is especially true for the Technocracy because outright disbelief would destroy them, and as quoted above, their difficulty in culling RDs is because there's latent if subconscious level belief that's greater in the WoD than IRL.

    " WoD mortals are as skeptical as us because WoD factions have groomed them to be this way." And thus the evidence that we're not all that skeptical is pretty relevant.

    Which then makes, " It was confirmation and expansion, not anything really new and unbelievable." an uncompelling argument.

    The only counter argument you've managed to come up with amounts to "no, you're wrong, let me misrepresent you to prove it".
    The amount of projection here is staggering.

    And then fail to actually follow through and prove it.
    I've cited the books... have you?

    So let's examine a hyperbolic one from you again.
    Calling it hyperbolic isn't examining it, it's just dismissing it.

    The public believing in UFOs is a different beast than believing in vampires in the modern age.
    No shit? Really!?!

    That's not the point of the example. The point of the example is the amount of persuadable people between the 2/3s of people that think the US is covering something up but don't know what, and the 1/3 that think they know what.

    Humanity has by-and-large put the notion of vampires-as-real to bed long into the past.
    Yep, vampires bottom out around 10% belief... slightly better than werewolves, but well below most other supernaturals closer to 30% to 45% (keeping in mind that in real world beliefs the lines that the WoD draws are rarely present).

    Someone bleeding to death, then getting back up and walking around to bite people is implausible to our modern sensibilities. Saying people's belief in one informs the other in any way is a faulty premise. Yet, you said that.
    First, that's not what I said, see above.

    Second, you're vastly overstating this "modern sensibilities," thing. Again, belief in things like ghosts and demons is relatively high even in the modern world, the lack of belief in vampires comparatively can't just be explained by "modern sensibilities," because ghosts and demons are just as implausible to that position.

    You are falsely equating a love of the fantasy of monsters with believing in the reality of monsters.
    No, I presented a whole slew of reasons why people wouldn't balk at the existence of the supernatural being revealed to them and just disbelieve harder.

    I didn't equate these things to each other. The love of fantasy monsters was one of the examples of why people would accept the reality of monsters in the WoD (largely ignorantly of how bad it would actually be for them).

    There's a reason people using the excuse you're using here are sent to prison instead of an exorcist;
    Because the courts don't acknowledge that demonic possession is a real thing. The courts would be in a pretty different situation if an exorcist could prove in a court of law that a defendant was possessed.

    That's the whole point there though. People want to believe in these things because it externalizes evil for them, thus wouldn't reject reasonable evidence out of hand.

    This is such a false argument to defend your point, I'm not sure why you bothered.
    The real question is why you bothered making this bullshit up.

    You've hinged your point of view, as represented by you, on things that aren't actually the case or are utterly unrelated.
    I actually proved my case just fine, but thanks for showing that you're only actual counter-argument is, "if I insult you enough and yell Fake News! I'm right and you're wrong."

    Originally posted by TheCountAlucard View Post
    There seems to be something of a false dichotomy to some of these arguments, where the options are "believe or disbelieve." I see no reason to take "not be convinced that there's enough evidence in front of me to believe or disbelieve, but still be open to either if something definitive turns up" off the table.

    ​If someone whips out a jar of jelly beans and asks if I believe the number of beans is odd or even, I'd ask, "How about we open the jar and count them?"
    I mean, to a certain extend eventually things come down to the binary choice here. It's just the thresholds of how to get people on the fence off it. Counting something in a jar is pretty straightforward. Proving vampires exist in the WoD is less so.

    Leave a comment:


  • TheCountAlucard
    replied
    There seems to be something of a false dichotomy to some of these arguments, where the options are "believe or disbelieve." I see no reason to take "not be convinced that there's enough evidence in front of me to believe or disbelieve, but still be open to either if something definitive turns up" off the table.

    ​If someone whips out a jar of jelly beans and asks if I believe the number of beans is odd or even, I'd ask, "How about we open the jar and count them?"

    Leave a comment:


  • Vysha
    replied
    Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post

    https://www.pewforum.org/2009/12/09/...ltiple-faiths/

    As an example. Pew notes that interestingly belief in the supernatural is trending up, not down, despite all the Internet fakes out there, and ~65% of Americans believe they've had some sort of supernatural or spiritual personal experience.
    You should probably read that survey, because it's not saying what you think it's saying. Religious or mystical experience. Not ghosts, not demons, not even the belief in a religion; a "moment of sudden religious insight or awakening", as stated in the article. Believing in god does not equate to believing in vampires, werewolves, wizards, ghosts, faeries, etc.


    Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post
    You're putting a lot of words in my mouth there. I mean you just quoted me not using the words "majority" or "minority."
    Again; if you're saying "it's the opposite of what you just said", and I'm saying "a minority", then what are you trying to say if not "a majority"? Please be specific, I don't want to put words in your mouth by using your own statements correctly.

    Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post
    The whole point here is simple: your premise is based on the idea that the public finding out about the SI through leaks wouldn't work, because people wouldn't believe it due to existing confirmation bias against the supernatural existing. The problem is far more people believe the supernatural exists, even if they believe totally wrong for the WoD, then people that activity disbelieve. Thus the confirmation bias goes in the wrong direction from your assertion.
    Actually, my whole point has been that people are trained to be skeptical in the WoD, and a leaked email or series of other documents alone wouldn't make a difference. I said that initially, I've said that repeatedly, but you are trying to get caught up in the weeds, thinking it's the whole garden. The only counter argument you've managed to come up with amounts to "no, you're wrong, let me misrepresent you to prove it". And then fail to actually follow through and prove it.

    But you mentioned rhetorical arguments. So let's examine a hyperbolic one from you again.

    Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post
    Keep in mind that ~33% of Americans believe UFOs are extraterrestrial aliens visiting our planet, and at the same time ~66% of Americans believe the government knows more about UFOs and is covering something up. So sufficiently credible proof that UFOs are extraterrestrial (even if something like automated probes instead of actual alien life) that the government is covering up has a lot of room for support in the gap between those two numbers.
    The public believing in UFOs is a different beast than believing in vampires in the modern age. Humanity has by-and-large put the notion of vampires-as-real to bed long into the past. Aliens are a recent phenomenon, based ultimately on a simple enough premise; if life started here, maybe it also started over there and maybe they come here to check us out, like how we go to other planets to check them out. On the face of it, it's not implausible to our modern sensibilities. Someone bleeding to death, then getting back up and walking around to bite people is implausible to our modern sensibilities. Saying people's belief in one informs the other in any way is a faulty premise. Yet, you said that.

    But let's try another one.

    Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post
    But they do. People love monsters. Demons are more believed in than a lot of other supernaturals.

    Why? They're the ultimate excuse for our own bad behavior. "I didn't want to kill him! A demon used his infernal powers to make me do it!"
    You are falsely equating a love of the fantasy of monsters with believing in the reality of monsters. There's a reason people using the excuse you're using here are sent to prison instead of an exorcist; people might love the idea that their bad behavior is caused by Cthulhu, but the public (even those who believe in demons) don't actually believe Cthulhu made you kill Steve. People love the Avengers and Batman. People would want the Avengers and Batman to be real. That love of the idea of them doesn't mean people believe they're real.

    This is such a false argument to defend your point, I'm not sure why you bothered.

    .....

    I was about to keep going, but my point there is made. You've hinged your point of view, as represented by you, on things that aren't actually the case or are utterly unrelated. You've based your counter-points on an assumption that people saying "nope, I get why the SI has been kept a secret thus far" are actually saying "the truth can never and will never come out". And your whole premise, repeated over and over, is that some leaked documents using veiled language would absolutely unravel the entire ball of twine to the public.

    Because believing god is real means Caine had to be a vampire from Krypton.

    Leave a comment:


  • GilbyTheFat
    replied
    Originally posted by jamiemalk View Post
    We used to joke about a game where all the splats were fighting over the one person who wasn't actually a part of any of the gamelines, an actually totally mundane person...
    Make the twist that the one entirely mundane person in the entire world is actually the person who will cause a mundane apocalypse, something nobody's clued in about yet...

    I would love the irony in that.

    Leave a comment:


  • jamiemalk
    replied
    Originally posted by CTPhipps View Post

    1:100,000 vampires

    But what about ghouls, mages, werewolves, fairies, mummies, formori, or others? 1:10,000 may be closer to the number there.
    We used to joke about a game where all the splats were fighting over the one person who wasn't actually a part of any of the gamelines, an actually totally mundane person...

    Leave a comment:


  • CTPhipps
    replied
    Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post

    But... you don't probably know one. I mean, do you know 10,000 people... while the "ideal" vampire to human ratio is 1:100,000? You might have met one... maybe... but most people don't actually know one.
    1:100,000 vampires

    But what about ghouls, mages, werewolves, fairies, mummies, formori, or others? 1:10,000 may be closer to the number there.

    Leave a comment:


  • Undead rabbit
    replied
    Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post



    But they do. People love monsters. Demons are more believed in than a lot of other supernaturals.
    Even more, Mage the Ascension states that not only people can believe in monsters (and not in wonder), but that every human being DOES believe in monsters, it's the main explanation the Technocracy use to explain how vampires, werewolves ang ghost have survived the consensus : because, in its ancient reptilian brain, evey human KNOWS that something lurks in the dark.


    Vampires
    The rumormongering among the vampires of an end
    of days, of a time when their legends rise up, has come and
    passed without incident. To be honest, that comes as a bit
    of a surprise, as the Statisticians calculated catastrophe in
    line with their prophecies.
    There is no open hostility between vampires and the
    Technocracy. They are content to keep to their “Masquerade,”
    and we are content to let them. Given our manpower issues,
    we’re thankful not to have to police two different groups of
    Reality Deviants that wish to work in the open.
    Recently, the Collegia have settled the matter of Clan
    Tremere, vampires who work some form of blood magic.
    While there is still debate over theory regarding why their
    magic does not violate the stability of reality (most likely
    due to humanity’s latent belief in vampires,
    reinforced
    by the surge of vampires in popular media), the fact that
    it doesn’t makes the debate over reasons a moot point.
    As a threat, they have been downgraded as not worth the
    additional manpower, since they respect the Masquerade
    and do not risk Sleeper exposure

    Leave a comment:


  • Heavy Arms
    replied
    Originally posted by CTPhipps View Post
    The level of belief in the supernatural is one of those things that depend on the writer and the sourcebook.
    Not really. The books mostly just default to "our world levels, but ignorant of the real way things work."

    ....and hardened by millennia of influence from a variety of powers.
    Centuries... it hasn't been that long in the books since those powers really got started.

    Breaking through that disbelief is HARD because people don't WANT monsters to be real.
    But they do. People love monsters. Demons are more believed in than a lot of other supernaturals.

    Why? They're the ultimate excuse for our own bad behavior. "I didn't want to kill him! A demon used his infernal powers to make me do it!"

    A world of monsters is a world were far too many people would be happy to have a way to absolve themselves of moral responsibility. Not too mention all the people that believe they deserve bad things should happen to them that want that to be validated by monsters running around.

    And then there's all the people that want monsters to be real because monsters are cool, or misunderstood, or the monsters will clearly pick them as favored humans, and all the other things far too many people imagine would somehow make the revelation of the supernatural a good thing for them personally at least.

    The presumption of the idea that humans don't want monsters to be real is predicated on them knowing what they'd be getting. People think they're getting Louisde Pointe du Lac or Edward Cullen, not Sascha Vykos. In the WoD the ignorant masses don't have any idea of how bad things really are, but the world they live in sucks...from their perspective anyway. Why not cling to "happier" monster fantasies and want to believe in monsters? How bad can vampires be compared to the corrupt cops, gangs, politicians, and random acts of violence? To someone in the WoD, they don't know how bad that can really be, so there's far less of a reason to be certain it's such a hard no.

    There's little hope that humans will do the right thing....and THAT keeps it secret.
    But that's the whole problem here. Yes, that's why people want to keep it secret, but that's not what keeps it secret. What keeps it secret is everyone stopping the assholes of the WoD that don't care what humans will do (or worse happily believe humans will do their worst), and just want to burst the dam open.

    Edit:

    But... you don't probably know one. I mean, do you know 10,000 people... while the "ideal" vampire to human ratio is 1:100,000? You might have met one... maybe... but most people don't actually know one.
    Last edited by Heavy Arms; 11-30-2019, 08:52 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • CTPhipps
    replied
    Mind you, there's a big difference between, "Believes in ghosts, believes in vampires and werewolves. Even more so, that they are EVERYWHERE and you PROBABLY KNOW ONE."

    Said as a religious person with a spiritual experience.

    Leave a comment:


  • Heavy Arms
    replied
    Originally posted by Vysha View Post
    Ok, based on what?
    https://www.pewforum.org/2009/12/09/...ltiple-faiths/

    As an example. Pew notes that interestingly belief in the supernatural is trending up, not down, despite all the Internet fakes out there, and ~65% of Americans believe they've had some sort of supernatural or spiritual personal experience.

    I mean, clearly not based on anything published, because we know from repeated statements in the published works that the majority of humanity (the only assumption of quantity I've made) do not believe in the supernatural.
    The WoD books don't say that. It would really suck for mages and changelings if humanity actually disbelieved on that level.

    You're conflating "don't know the reality of," with, "don't believe in." Most people in the WoD believe in some concept of the soul/spirit/etc. that persists beyond death. That doesn't mean they know jack-shit about how the Underworld and ghosts really work in the WoD, or any other expression of this (ancestor spirits, reincarnation in Mage, etc.).

    So where do you get a "much higher" number than "the minority of people"? Where does your assumption of "the majority (the only possible interpretation of "much higher than the minority") of people believe in the supernatural evil" stem from?
    You're putting a lot of words in my mouth there. I mean you just quoted me not using the words "majority" or "minority."

    The whole point here is simple: your premise is based on the idea that the public finding out about the SI through leaks wouldn't work, because people wouldn't believe it due to existing confirmation bias against the supernatural existing. The problem is far more people believe the supernatural exists, even if they believe totally wrong for the WoD, then people that activity disbelieve. Thus the confirmation bias goes in the wrong direction from your assertion.

    Since we're reducing each others' points down to just the extremes, I'm arguing that convincing the majority of people in the WoD would require far more would require something huge,...
    Because the G20 nations institutionally believe vampires exist to the point of forming an international anti-vampire taskforce isn't a "huge" thing....

    But again, see rebuttal to point one that undermines this.

    The WoD isn't built on humans default position being disbelief. It's built on the opposite which is why there's so many supernatural conspiracies dedicated to keeping knowledge of the supernatural to a minimum (even the Technocracy lacks the ability to put it to zeo, and they really tried for awhile). Vampires need the Masquerade because without active measures humanity would find out, and believe, and it would be a disaster. The Garou need to protect the Veil, not just trust the Delirium to cover enough of their tracks. The Traditions have the Rule of Shade breaking reality in front of Sleepers has consequences besides personal Paradox concerns. Etc. Etc. Etc.

    The whole conceit of the setting is if these measures weren't in place, humanity would realize what was going on. That means they don't need some titanic shove to get them to believe, or that threat wouldn't exist.

    (from the post you quoted and didn't fully read)
    Ignoring your bullshit rhetorical traps doesn't mean I didn't read them. It just means they're not worth responding to. Engaging with the "vampire does tricks on TV" rabbit hole is pointless because it's an absurd hypothetical.

    ....or that the black budget funding being funneled to some multinational military operation has anything but a mundane explanation". You're arguing it just takes leaked emails getting out.
    Right. Leaking the documents showing that Firstlight is about killing vampires, because Firstlight is actually dumb enough to put that in recorded documents. How else, exactly would, "black budget funding being funneled to," anything going to be exposed besides leaks?

    that the number of people willing to buy into the existence of the supernatural is more than the canonical minority stated throughout the history of the World of Darkness, in every game line,
    Citation needed.

    Here, let me quote V20 for you:

    "The Masquerade: It’s the very foundation of Vampire. Once the character is Embraced, they
    are drawn behind the curtain, and everything they know is changed. The Kindred try to keep the
    curtain closed, convincing their prey that monsters do not, in fact, hide among them. Inevitably,
    cracks appear in the façade and the Damned are revealed for who they are. What happens when
    this occurs? For more information about the Masquerade as a concept, see p. 22."

    "The Kindred remember the Burning Times. Before
    such things as the Camarilla and Sabbat existed, Cainites dwelled in a superstitious world of ignorant peasants, venal clergy, and decadent aristocracy. In that
    age of muck and misery, few Kindred saw any reason
    to heed the Tradition of the Masquerade, reasoning
    that mankind had enough of its own social problems
    to occupy them and would be powerless to resist local,
    feudal lords of decidedly darker origin."

    That second one is pretty hard to get around for the idea that this extends to the whole history of the WoD and not just modern times.

    But the first one is just the books saying what I said before: humanity naturally believes in the WoD, and it takes active measures to stop them. Take away the active measures, and humanity will believe, not shrug.

    ...that documents leaded online will suddenly convince...
    And right back around to the, "whistle-blowers in the WoD have to be stupid," as the only counterargument to what I actually said.

    These must be your points, because you keep insisting I'm wrong about them.
    I mean, you're quite directly wrong about this whole idea that mortals in the WoD somehow believe in the supernatural vastly less than they do IRL.

    I await you to show the books saying humanity doesn't believe, because I'm pretty sure your best quotes are just going to be misrepresenting, "humanity is ignorant."

    Leave a comment:


  • Cifer
    replied
    Originally posted by Morbus View Post
    There's also the problem that the SI has so much contradictions in it that also make it very hard to not see the glaring inconsistencies.

    In the Camarilla book it is hinted that the SI knows very little about vampires (except for the society of Leopold) yet they know enough to pirate Shrecknet and supposedly got from there a ton of information on vampire, their societies, their culture and their haven... How ?
    SchreckNet (at least the non Anarch20 version...) is a computer system. It doesn't run on blood, it isn't an immortal predator, it doesn't have mystical powers. You don't need to know anything about vampires to hack it - you just need to know it might be out there and have a clue regarding how to access it. On the plus side, since vampires are mostly still taught the basics of their existence in person, it's somewhat likely the files that were siphoned off between the spook clicking on "Download All" and the Nosferatu pulling the plug on a server somewhere didn't actually contain a "How to vamp 101".

    Originally posted by Morbus View Post
    The SI despite having everything it needs to irrevocably shatter the Masquerade and go nuclear on Vampires chose to protect them because... reasons? Despite the fact that apparently the group is composed of very different kinds of hunters, many of them having fairly good reason to go public both ethical and moral (public agent going whistle blower, devout Christian warning others of the danger of the devil etc.)
    Since faith hunters existed since first edition (possibly second, I don't know when the Leopoldians were introduced), that problem isn't exactly new. It's possible that there's a consensus about the flock best being protected in secret and you don't get to enter the society unless you agree with it.

    Originally posted by Morbus View Post
    Because of the above the SI has to act in the shadows, and is severely weakened by the fact it has to go against whomever they are supposed to serve (the government, The Church or whatever) to get shit done because again... reasons?
    And apparently is far from being an united organisation as the books paints it as little more than an informal alliance between various Hunters group that may hoard Intel and Funds whenever they feel like so...

    ...And yet they can bomb Vienna, in broad daylight and not only get away with it but wipe out the Tremere Chantry and the whole Council of Seven who coincidentally happened to be there when the Inquisition struck.
    Admittedly, meeting the people whose headquarters this is within those headquarters isn't too outlandish. Especially if the job has really been helped along by some insiders.

    Originally posted by Morbus View Post
    Also this create a new problem for this new weak Inquisition. It has the very same problem covering its own little Masquerade than vampires did. Here the writers dug their own holes.

    'Cause if humans can discover vampire because everything these days can be traced and rediscovered then the same problem afflicts our human hunter. Eventually someone (their superiors, other agencies, Black hat hackers, overzealous media you name it) WILL discover their activities and reveal the existence of vampire to others and so on until you get to enough people that the Masquerade is shattered forever just as the one in the original vision of the Inquisition . Which makes the whole covering for vampire... because reasons? even more pointless.
    You're assuming that this is a status that has to hold up forever rather than just until the end of a chronicle, if that. Maybe the SI comes crashing down soon. Maybe even the Masquerade does. Maybe vampires are eradicated before then. There's a lot of directions this can go in if you don't think there needs to be a status quo to be stable for eternity.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X