Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

[V5] The official Sabbat speculation thread

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

  • Originally posted by Nitenshi View Post
    I mean, Necromancy is really about the rituals anyway so I really can't see why they can't be good with both Obtenebration and Necromancy.
    I wonder what will be the new Mytherceria, though.
    As written, specific Oblivion powers are required for each ritual or Ceremony. For example, the ritual to summon a ghost requires the power to identify a fetish, which itself requires one dot of Auspex. So a Kiasyd, or any Lasombra or Hecata for that matter, could theoretically be good at Obtenebration or Necromancy or have limited ability with both. Ceremonies need to be taught, which makes them much more accessible to Hecata (except for Abyssal Ceremonies), although I should think that Kiasyd would be more likely to have that advantage than most Lasombra, given that obscure occult research is almost all of what they do.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Nitenshi View Post
      I mean, Necromancy is really about the rituals anyway so I really can't see why they can't be good with both Obtenebration and Necromancy.
      I wonder what will be the new Mytherceria, though.
      You think so? I looked at it and decided it was just as path based as thaumaturgy. Communing with the dead, Raising corpses, entering the underworld... All path magic. All that important stuff was path magic although yeah, you could consign some of those paths as rituals because they were sometimes pretty ritual like. I'll admit that I'm opposed to doing this with necromancy because I'm way more opposed to doing this with thaumaturgy and their systems are rather similar (moving one would move another) but In a vacume i'd probably be OK with it. That said, I do not like what I've seen of Oblivion so far.

      Mytherceria.... it'd probably be lumped into Auspex?


      Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.

      Comment


      • I really wonder what the Sabbat could look like in V5. I really think the Camarilla and the Anarchs are two sides of the same coin (the establishment vs the revolution). So, the authors should find a way to clearly separate The Sabbat from the two other Sects in order to have a proper Camarilla vs Anarchs vs Sabbat that is thematically coherent. For that, I guess they need to figure out what they want the Sabbat to be about in this edition, so that it's not "the Camarilla but different" or "the Anarchs but different".

        I see two directions, which are not necessarily exclusive. The Sabbat as religious institution (just like the Camarilla is about political power). An objection I sometimes see for that is that Camarilla has cults in it now and so it stole the religious aspect of the Sabbat. But I don't necessarily think that's an issue because the Camarilla can be secular and have religion within it, just like real world countries can have secular institutions and yet, having religious people and institutions. I guess the ideology of the Sabbat still makes it at odds with the Camarilla and I can see the Anarchs wanting to fight against it.
        Also, there is the Sabbat as monsters. I think this part is fondamental for the identity of the Sect but I guess it implies to change the Morality system in order to make inhumane monsters a viable option for players. Either by reintroducing Paths of Enlightenment or otherwise. I don't have strong feelings about Paths but I'm not sure it's a good system to simulate inhumanity (among other things because it forces Humanity as just another Path instead of being its own thing) but I may be alone on that.

        So I guess my take on the Sabbat would be that Conservatives rules it, now? I think V5 goes for more decentralized factions, so there's that.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Baron John View Post
          Back on Sabbat Speculation.

          Perhaps a 'mind the gap' chronicle detailing the changes to the Sabbat between V20 and V5.

          Civil war, beckoning, antidiluvian hunting etc etc.
          I do not want the Gehenna War to be something that took place entirely off stage and in the past, at all, at all. It deserves at least a standalone chronicle product like the Transylvania/Ventrue/Giovanni Chronicles. At least.

          Catching up late to this thread, the idea of diablerie always carrying a risk of at least some form of possession pleases me for aesthetic reasons - even if it's just being haunted by a voice if the victim was weaker than the diablerist. If what gets devoured is the soul, the soul should be eternal. It should be capable of being trapped until the diablerist meets Final Death, sure, but the idea of a mere vampire destroying something that divine doesn't gel with the rest of the game line's mythology.
          Last edited by Reasor; 07-19-2020, 01:40 AM.

          Comment


          • Let me break diablerie down

            Goals I think we can agree on:
            1 Characters AND players who commit diablerie should want to do it again for that "this is addicting" experience
            2 Single Diableries should not unbalance the party in the long run.
            3 Acquiring a low generation should be a desirable goal; ambition should be encouraged.
            4 Diablerie should Horrify without breaking any of the above tennets

            I've gotta say, V5 doesn't do any of these well:
            1- Diablerie gets worse the more you do it, as the good and bad is dependent on, and subtracts from, your humanity.
            2- Based on luck, High amounts of XP are gained for successful diablerist players, unbalancing parties.
            3- Low generation has many new disadvantages, such as a narrowed food choice, I would argue that a Vampire in V5 should be content with their lot in life and just accept what they were embraced with.

            Thus, to meet these goals, the most broadly appealing system would be as follows:

            -A Diablerist should gain Temporary disciplines after they diablerise, to excite the player. (1) they should not gain permanent dots (1,2)*
            -The Humanity loss for Diablerie should be rolled rather than automatic (1,3) which makes diablerie a gamble you can take again and again even at humanity 1 (1,3,4)
            -Generation should only concern how much blood you have and can use (3) A side effect of this is that if one player gets too far ahead of others, they can embrace snacks for other players so that the other players can catch up (2, 4)
            -Players should start in the 13-10th generation range (2, 3)
            -The primary problem with Diablerie should be the social fallout (4) and short term effects (erie pressence, black aura marks) that drive this problem and set diablerists against mainstream society for as long as problems persist(1,2,3,4)

            *Granting players very small amounts of xp for disciplines might be acceptable in otherwise high-xp games.

            concerning possession if you really want to do it:
            Really, I think this should be limited to Vampires with Garbage willpower consuming vampires with formidable willpower. Hypothetical chart of excess willpower:
            x- You meet or exceed victim's willpower: They go quietly
            1- you dream of a few vague memories of your victim that never truly become your own for few days.
            2- You have a good amount of dream-like memories from your victim, which might be confusing for a week or so.
            3-The victim's experiences will influence you to a degree depending on your willpower (2 Vs 5 will be more dramatic than 6 vs 9) for a duration of Diablerie's erie presence. This influence is not malicious or resentful (because the victim is not conscious inside you) it's merely a side effect.
            4- influence lasts as long as the black marks.
            5+ Victim's conscience is awake, Possession contests are made.

            This is good for 1 and 4 (2 isn't touched upon, 3 is subjective because you might actually like the experience of another's memories) The Temporary nature gives horror and makes metaphysical sense but isn't so long lasting or severe as to discourage diablerie (at worst, you just choose your targets better) Personally I think possession works better as hearsay/propaganda/what happens when low level suckers bite off way too much vampire, not something you get when a 13th gen brujah eats a 12th gen Tremere
            Last edited by MyWifeIsScary; 07-18-2020, 06:55 PM.


            Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by MyWifeIsScary View Post
              Let me break diablerie down

              Goals I think we can agree on:
              1 Characters AND players who commit diablerie should want to do it again for that "this is addicting" experience
              2 Single Diableries should not unbalance the party in the long run.
              3 Acquiring a low generation should be a desirable goal; ambition should be encouraged.
              4 Diablerie should Horrify without breaking any of the above tennets
              I'm afraid that no we can't "agree" an any of your points.

              1. "Wanting" and "addiction" are two very different things. And in game diablerie is not addictive UNLESS you gain the appropriate disadvantages. In my experience as a storyteller and as a player those "addicted" to diablerie are a certain specific group of players desperate for "levelling up" in a game where the concept does not even exist. Strangely enough these are the same players who actively search for shortcuts to more power in other RPGs and tend to skrew up their fellow players when it comes to gaining mopre power for themselves (the usual justification? "I'm only playing my character!").
              2. Unless you plan to ask your storyteller to give "the party" (it's called "coterie" but the D&D lingo works well for this kind of discussion I guess) a lot of potential low generation "targets" diablerie is going to unballance play, period, because no matter how you try to sell it, lower generation means more power and one player haveing more power than others is not going to work well in most games, which by the way is pretty clearly what you want to accomplish.
              3. Actively acquiring low generation should be a desirable goal for some PCs, the antisocial power hungry murderhoboing kind to be precise and no, ambition shouldn't be encouraged when it entails killing and devouring souls for the sole purpose of gaining more power. On the contrary, it's something that should carry an high price, which seems to me is what you reject with your incessant bickering about V5 "not being VtM" and all your arguments summing up to "I want more power and an easy way to get away with it".
              4. It should horrify for sure but that's pretty difficult to accomplish when the players actively pursuing the deed for power

              Diablerie is one element in a vampire game, a potent one if done well. It's rare, forbidden, NEVER EASY and carries an HIGH COST. I've had players wanting to commit diablerie because they saw it as a shortcut for increasing their power but when they realized the drawbacks I was redy to enforce they had a change of heart. I did not tell them "it's something you should not do" but rather "it's something that you've better do in an extremely smart way or not at all because if you do and you get caught you are going to pay" and since in my games actions matter and have consequences they decided that hunting down and murdering a primogen or two because of their blood was not that great of an idea after all. Had they decided to do it anyway I would have crafted a story but it would not have been about power and success would have been rather difficult to achieve (I'm a fervent believer that elders are never easy to take down, especially not for satisfying power gamers), the reward would have been there but also the consequences. I would never have allowed the game to devolve in something like "we go meet the primogen, murder him and suck him dry...".

              Comment


              • Consider the belivability of your setting: why would diablerists exist and be feared if eating a person is badWrongAwfulNo-good and everyone who partakes it immediately regrets it and vows to never do it again?

                On my use of the word 'party' rather than Coterie: If English isn't your native language, that's fine; but... Party is a correct term, you aren't doing anyone favours with that diatribe.

                Also, yeah, Vampire's literally do see diablerie as leveling up. Generations exist, dude. Every step up the ladder brings you one closer to Caine and God. You just sound like a malicious Game Master loathing the prospect of your players having fun with something immoral (never mind that they're playing blood sucking parasites that should meet the sun)


                Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by MyWifeIsScary View Post
                  -Generation should only concern how much blood you have and can use (3) A side effect of this is that if one player gets too far ahead of others, they can embrace snacks for other players so that the other players can catch up (2, 4)
                  and if they don't want to embrace snacks?


                  -

                  Comment


                  • Let your imagination run wild (and land on reasonable assumptions of what your players might actually do, but then again it's unlikely that a player will be so far ahead of the others in terms of Generation if you assume they all start within the 13-10 range. If you're running a game with many player diablerists, it's also unlikely that all the victims they find will be conveniently perfect for one PC; there's a rubber band in that the players with higher generations have more oppertunity to advance than players with lower generation)


                    Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by MyWifeIsScary View Post
                      Consider the belivability of your setting: why would diablerists exist and be feared if eating a person is badWrongAwfulNo-good and everyone who partakes it immediately regrets it and vows to never do it again?

                      On my use of the word 'party' rather than Coterie: If English isn't your native language, that's fine; but... Party is a correct term, you aren't doing anyone favours with that diatribe.

                      Also, yeah, Vampire's literally do see diablerie as leveling up. Generations exist, dude. Every step up the ladder brings you one closer to Caine and God. You just sound like a malicious Game Master loathing the prospect of your players having fun with something immoral (never mind that they're playing blood sucking parasites that should meet the sun)
                      Funny, because it seems to me "my setting" is pretty in line with what VtM preached since first ed.

                      Diablerie is cannibalism and is a grave crime in vampire society UNLESS you have the means (and/or the smarts) to get away with it. Do diablerist exist in the setting? Yes for sure, but it's not like they have it easy. Again they have the power to keep their actions secret (a lvl 6 obfuscate power that would be a lvl 5 power in V5 and let's hope no one wins a contested auspex check and realizes they are diablerists) or they have the power to have them sanctioned as legitimate by the powers that be ("Yes, I diablerized Count von Chockula, but I was forced to! He was plotting with the Sabbat to overthrow the prince so me and my friends here took matters in our own hands and suceeded stopping the nefarious plot! The prince has been informed, of course! In fact he commended our actions sanctioning the diablerie... it's a sacrifice I did for the good of us all but one that weights heavily on my conscience..." - note that this implies a lot of work and gameplay where the coterie made the right moves against Count von Chockula convincing the prince to sanction their actions. It's not like they decided to diablerize an elder and the prince just said "be my guests"). Even so once a PC becomes known as a cannibal other vampires will start to change their attitude towards them because again, in the setting Diablerie is a crime and people who are so stupid to flaunt their preference for it don't live for long and cannot expect to be socially accepted as "normal members" of vampire society.

                      As for "levelling up" no it's not. VtM has no "levels", during play you may become richer, more skilled, stronger and have more mystical power but nothing implies you have to lower your generation to compete the game is simply not built that way. As for players wanting to have fun by diablerizing their way to Caine... sure, in theory that may work but in practice it's unrealistic in the extreme and in my experience games revolving around vampires murderhoboing their way through chronicles have a tendency to fizzle really quickly. These are games where the ST needs to give players what they want (meaning: lots of low gen vampires who exist only to be diablerized by the players) and it's not much different than games of D&D where players are able to convince the DM to give them uberpowerful equipment and then they proceed to wreak the campaign.

                      TL; DR: In the VtM setting diablerie is considered one of the gravest crimes as it implies an act of utter depravity (devouring someone's soul) AND it also causes those who are more powerful than you (and even those on your level because you are a cannibal who likes to eat your own kind) to consider you a threat. It's not impossible to accomplish but it's very risky and difficult to do so. As most of the stuff in the WoD the concept is just an excuse to have goos stories it's not something that is "required to compete" because you need to face tougher challenges.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Haquim View Post

                        Funny, because it seems to me "my setting" is pretty in line with what VtM preached since first ed.
                        Wrong again. "diablerie is bad" only came into play during the revised era. During 1e Diablerie went like this:

                        -Eats elder-
                        I gain a dot of generation
                        I get dark lines in my aura
                        I roll humanity for murder
                        I get some temporary disciplines from elder blood.

                        And that was it. That's far closer to what I've written than the masochism you've suggested. I want to emphasize: There was no automatic loss of humanity, you just rolled for murder, Diablerie was just an interesting form of murder. Socially it was suicide if you got caught doing it in the Camarilla or other nice circles, but I've never said that it wasn't. I will execute diablerist players if they do so in the Camarilla without setting up a safety net first.

                        Infact a big crux of my argument was that making diablerie give you health problems kinda kills the need to make it a social no-no; because after shooting yourself in the foot who wants to shoot the other foot? It's counterproductive to execute a diablerist when she's a gibbering, regretful posterchild of why diablerie is bad. Why would the Sabbat want to do what they do when it's destroying them (trick question; the sabbat want to destroy themselves)?

                        Finaly, diablerie is not "a shortcut to power", it's long term planning. Diablerie is only a shortcut to power in editions where it grants bucket loads of XP, which sadly is the current edition. 1e did not give a bucket load of XP, it just gave a dot of Generation (and elder blood gave you temporary disciplines diablerie or not in 1e)


                        Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by MyWifeIsScary View Post
                          Wrong again. "diablerie is bad" only came into play during the revised era. During 1e Diablerie went like this:

                          -Eats elder-
                          I gain a dot of generation
                          I get dark lines in my aura
                          I roll humanity for murder
                          I get some temporary disciplines from elder blood.

                          And that was it. That's far closer to what I've written than the masochism you've suggested. I want to emphasize: There was no automatic loss of humanity, you just rolled for murder, Diablerie was just an interesting form of murder. Socially it was suicide if you got caught doing it in the Camarilla or other nice circles, but I've never said that it wasn't. I will execute diablerist players if they do so in the Camarilla without setting up a safety net first.

                          Infact a big crux of my argument was that making diablerie give you health problems kinda kills the need to make it a social no-no; because after shooting yourself in the foot who wants to shoot the other foot? It's counterproductive to execute a diablerist when she's a gibbering, regretful posterchild of why diablerie is bad. Why would the Sabbat want to do what they do when it's destroying them (trick question; the sabbat want to destroy themselves)?

                          Finaly, diablerie is not "a shortcut to power", it's long term planning. Diablerie is only a shortcut to power in editions where it grants bucket loads of XP, which sadly is the current edition. 1e did not give a bucket load of XP, it just gave a dot of Generation (and elder blood gave you temporary disciplines diablerie or not in 1e)
                          You seem to mistake mechanical workings with the background of the game, but given the "quality" of your arguments thus far that's not really surprising... anyway:

                          Originally posted by VtM 1st ed CRB page 15
                          I have already mentioned the Blood Bond, which is urldertaken by drinking the Blood of another Vampire (usually one's Sire or Prince). It is known that taking the Blood of one's own Get carries no such bond, and it seems also that the Antediluvians - and those others who habitually prey on their own kind - are able to do so without creating any kind of bond or obligation. This fact, more than anything, makes the practice of Diablerie (as it has come to be known) a shocking and perverted thing to the Kindred, and any vampire who is a known Diabolist may be killed out of hand ,by any who find him. The diabolist must hunt with care, for he stalks the most dangerous game in the world. Doubtless some find a great exhilaration in this existence.
                          Who was wrong, again?

                          P.S.

                          Thanks for making me spend half an hour rummaging through cardboard boxes in my attic in search for the old 1st Ed CrB.
                          Last edited by Haquim; 07-19-2020, 03:05 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Whoosh.

                            The Perils of Diablerie in 1st and 2nd edition were purely social. IE Diablerists were reviled and persecuted. However, that was as far as it went. Beyond the black marks in your aura, Diablerie was beneficial. Thematically the argument could be made that in these first editions, the players, who were meant to be rebels doing their best to punch up, were meant to topple the elders and eat the rich (or become human again, which was a more obtainable goal back then) just as their elders had toppled those that came before them.

                            The Perils of Diablerie in Revised and V20 were social, physical and mental. Diablerie was no longer just bad for vampire society, it was now also bad for you personally. Thematically, the argument was that Vampires can only win by obtaining humanity 10 and getting the right Gehenna scenario. You shouldn't fight with the elders as you'd become like them, you should just try to be a moral vampire.

                            Perhaps you could say the thematics shifted; 1e was more punk, revised was more gothic. 1e was Gnostic-old testament, Revised more Christian. 1e was radical, revised was reactionary...

                            So, the short of it, is that your interpretation is in line with the later games, not the early ones.
                            1e Diablerie- You have improved on yourself at the expense of an elder, Elders hate you.
                            Rev Diablerie- You just ruined your character, Elders hate you.



                            Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by MyWifeIsScary View Post
                              Whoosh.

                              The Perils of Diablerie in 1st and 2nd edition were purely social. IE Diablerists were reviled and persecuted. However, that was as far as it went. Beyond the black marks in your aura, Diablerie was beneficial. Thematically the argument could be made that in these first editions, the players, who were meant to be rebels doing their best to punch up, were meant to topple the elders and eat the rich (or become human again, which was a more obtainable goal back then) just as their elders had toppled those that came before them.

                              The Perils of Diablerie in Revised and V20 were social, physical and mental. Diablerie was no longer just bad for vampire society, it was now also bad for you personally. Thematically, the argument was that Vampires can only win by obtaining humanity 10 and getting the right Gehenna scenario. You shouldn't fight with the elders as you'd become like them, you should just try to be a moral vampire.

                              Perhaps you could say the thematics shifted; 1e was more punk, revised was more gothic. 1e was Gnostic-old testament, Revised more Christian. 1e was radical, revised was reactionary...

                              So, the short of it, is that your interpretation is in line with the later games, not the early ones.
                              1e Diablerie- You have improved on yourself at the expense of an elder, Elders hate you.
                              Rev Diablerie- You just ruined your character, Elders hate you.
                              I quoted the very first VtM book to prove the notion that diablerie was a crime punishable with death was a thing even back then (yep, what you call "purely social perils" were a bloody death sentence on diablerists...).

                              If you want to say that mechanically diablerie had few drawbacks in 1st ed that's true but that's a consequence of the fact the concept of the diablerized vampire being able to take control of the diablerist if the diablerie failed was introduced in later editions and rules followed suit (because the narrative parts of the game determine its mechanical aspects...). So Mithras was diablerized but only partially so, Tremere did not really subsume Saulot's soul after all and Augustus managed to turn Cappadocius into a wraith intead of wholly consuming him, and rules for diablerie slowly adpated and changed for players as well.

                              As for your interpretation of the thematic shifts between editions I find it flawed on the deepest possible level. Aside from the fact you can't "win" while playing an RPG (unless your definition of winning is "having fun with your friends without ruining their fun") vampire characters can accomplish their goals and generally improve themselves in 1st ed, 2nd ed, Revised, V20 and V5... if they do things right (i.e. they play smart according to their goals). If their "goal" is diablerizing their way to Caine and rule the planet as blood gods then I'd say their goal is... unrealistic.

                              Humanity 10 is NOT a way of "winning the game" it's an extremely difficult goal to accomplish when you are a cursed bloodsucking monster who needs to feed on the living to keep existing, and let's not forget that Humanity 10 means "way more human than human" ("living saint") which is a pretty difficult status to keep when the whole vampiric society is based on selfishness and the abuse of those weaker than you.

                              One last thing: I wasn't making an argument about the actual rules of diablerie but mechanically speaking the current version of diablerie is an high risk/high reward enterprise. If you manage to accomplish the deed you can get large amounts of experience you can spend to increase your disciplines but you also risk eroding your humanity really quickly. Since the act is you eating someone's soul for power it seems to me the rules manage to represent quite well what diablerie is.

                              Note that now you get extra xp for diablerizing even vampires of an higher generation than yours but can lower generation only by diablerizing those of stronger blood, which makes it easier for "politically savy" vampires to diablerize to their dead heart's content with little to no repercussions (again, if they play smart, other vampires don't like cannibals for obvious reasons).
                              Last edited by Haquim; 07-19-2020, 07:59 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Haquim View Post
                                Other vampires don't like cannibals for obvious reasons.
                                Unless that's what their entire clan is known for then the get invited to join the Camarilla.

                                I would as argue that you can in fact "win" and rpG, but that's part of a bigger discussion.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X