Modiphius is bo longer the publisher of vtm,Renegade studios is.

[Trippy]

When I first encountered WoD/VtM in 2004, I was both fascinated by the maturity and grittiness of the setting compared to everything else RPG I've encountered, and then imagine my amusement when I found out that people thought having 13 (!) clan progenitors back thousands of years ago was a great idea which could lend to the narrative weight and atmosphere of the game. But then, I proceeded with reading on my native region, and laughed even harder. Having a Nosferatu Methuselah named Baba Yaga is somewhere near having 13 clans in terms of seriousness and atmosphere. To be honest, I don't think VtM origin was a fairy tale.

Origins of the game are not a sacred cow to be guarded and worshipped at all costs, especially since the game grew much larger than it's original audience in the 90s. It all sounds like 'well well don't upset your grandma with your crazy progressive ideas now'.

I'm not their spokeperson but it looks like I'm the only one who bothered checking on their opinion on the matter and staying in touch with their media accoutns to know of their ideas and suggestions on the setting development.

It doesn’t look like you check out others opinions as much as you are projecting your own in this instance. You haven’t actually answered the point that the latest version of Vampire actually, explicitly, refers to 13 Clans still. Moreover, the origins of the game, generally, are still canon - you still have the same original Clans named in the core game, and it is not as if the Salubri, Ravnos or Tzmisce are new either. The simple fact here is that is that the current developers have simply redeveloped what was already existing in the 1990s, but just haven’t explained how there has come to be 14 Clans rather than 13 Clans that is currently and historically written in the game. They may well do so in the descriptions and explanations in the Companion. If you actually find the number 13 or integrating real world folk lore like Baba Yaga into the game’s background as a source of amusement, then I’m not entirely sure where your humour is coming from on the matter. Nevertheless, real world cultures and religions do lend historical narratives that people relate to, and Vampire as a game sources these things heavily.

I think the main strength of Vampire, as a game, is the effectiveness that it creates its atmosphere - and the current version of the game still refers to itself as ‘gothic’, incidentally, if that also amuses you still. The use of symbolism in its background detail lends to that atmosphere, as attested to the fact that the whole game is based around the supernatural existence of Vampires (along with werewolves, ghosts, etc). This is all based on folklore and romantic symbolism, intermixed with contemporary culture. If you change aspects of it, without explanation or just for some misguided notion of ’sacred cows', you risk affecting that atmosphere.

[Val_Nir]

It doesn’t look like you check out others opinions as much as you are projecting your own in this instance. You haven’t actually answered the point that the latest version of Vampire actually, explicitly, refers to 13 Clans still. Moreover, the origins of the game, generally, are still canon - you still have the same Clans named, and it is not as if the Salubri, Ravnos or Tzmisce are new either. The simple fact here is that is that the current developers have simply redeveloped what was already existing in the 1990s, but haven’t explained how there has come to be 14 Clans rather than 13 Clans that is currently and historically written in the game. They may well do so in the descriptions and explanations in the Companion. If you actually find the number 13 or integrating real world folk lore like Baba Yaga into the game’s background as a source of amusement, then I’m not entirely sure where your humour is coming from on the matter. Nevertheless, real world cultures and religions do lend historical narratives that people relate to, and Vampire as a game sources these things heavily. I think the main strength of Vampire, as a game, is the effectiveness that it creates its atmosphere - and the current version of the game still refers to itself as ‘gothic’, incidentally, if that also amuses you still. The use of symbolism in its background detail lends to that atmosphere. If you change aspects of it, without explanation or just for some misguided notion of ’sacred cows', you risk affecting that atmosphere.

did you take off your monocle to write all that stuff or not, that's what really bothers me here.

on a more serious note, stop trying to elevate the stupidly, positively juvenile origins of the game to some perceived heights only you and the chosen few of the players are supposedly entitled to encompass and fully understand.
real world folk lore baba yaga is the simplest fairy tale out here, akin to paul banyan or robin hood. silly, funny, stupid and low key. the moment you stop aggrandising stuff like that you'll get my point.

[Trippy]

did you take off your monocle to write all that stuff or not, that's what really bothers me here.

on a more serious note, stop trying to elevate the stupidly, positively juvenile origins of the game to some perceived heights only you and the chosen few of the players are supposedly entitled to encompass and fully understand.
real world folk lore baba yaga is the simplest fairy tale out here, akin to paul banyan or robin hood. silly, funny, stupid and low key. the moment you stop aggrandising stuff like that you'll get my point.

So what bothers you is that somebody has a different opinion to yourself.

On a more serious note (how could it be less serious?), your own attitude to the origins of the game is juvenile. We can see that in the way in which you choose to talk in pejorative terms about it, name calling the people who originally created it and the people who played it. All of which eventuated in the game we have today, that apparently you are a fan of - although I am not sure why, going on all your comments here.

Baba Yaga has been used as a boogeyman figure in all sorts of media references and, whether you think it is silly or not, they have integrated into the WoD lore also. Maybe, the moment you start appreciating that your own views aren’t really that important, then we might have a dialogue that doesn’t resemble your own kindergarten experiences.

[Shakanaka]

Damn all this argument over number 13... lol

[Trippy]

Damn all this argument over number 13... lol

Well, it takes two (or more) to tango, but for me, it is part of the game world that has always established 13 Clans. What people choose to read into that is up to them, I guess, but I like the symbolism and it was obviously something that each edition has felt it needed to establish as part of its lore.

[Resplendent Fire]

Damn all this argument over number 13... lol

It was over but then he had to insult people over it out of the blue

[Trippy]

It was over but then he had to insult people over it out of the blue

If you were offended by anything then I apologize, but I thought the arguments against having 13 Clans got silly, especially because there hasn’t been any official statement on the matter. And I’m not the person who thought it sensible to start attacking 90s goths.

[Resplendent Fire]

The amount of time, effort and, let's be honest, at times even talent some people put into pounding on V5 in their every single post is simply anecdotal at this point.

I do admit it's kind of weird given that edition warring is frowned upon here.

I'm just glad I could find stuff in V5 to like.

[Resplendent Fire]

If you were offended by anything then I apologize, but I thought the arguments against having 13 Clans got silly, especially because there hasn’t been any official statement on the matter.

They're not really arguments against 13 clans, more like arguments that having 14 would be fine.

I'm fine either way. If they bring back the Bloodline language, that'll be great and consistent. If they decide everything's a clan, that'd be weird but okay. If they're like well the Salubri are a clan because they were before, that's fine too. I'm not so much committed to a specific outcome as I am to seeing what we get in the Companion.

[Taggie]

I can't account for your group's tastes. I've only played RPGs since 1980 and the stuff that came out in the 2010s took RPGs to more interesting, more imaginative, and more flexible places. Give me Monsterhearts over the 90s any day.

Also, crunch is not something to universally aspire to.

Finally, I'll always love V:tM, regardless of era.

Crunch does, I find correlate fairly well with playability , fun, and quality. The better and more detailed the crunch, the better and more detailed the story and setting tend to be, the more 'streamlined' the rules, the less coherent and fun the setting. Not universally true, but more crunch more better is a decent rule of thumb for me.

[Trippy]

They're not really arguments against 13 clans, more like arguments that having 14 would be fine.

I'm fine either way. If they bring back the Bloodline language, that'll be great and consistent. If they decide everything's a clan, that'd be weird but okay. If they're like well the Salubri are a clan because they were before, that's fine too. I'm not so much committed to a specific outcome as I am to seeing what we get in the Companion.

No they weren’t. They were arguments trying to belittle the symbolism used in every edition, including V5, that made a point of there being 13 Clans. They were silly because of it. I await and see what the official explanation about Clans/Bloodline distinctions will be, but the canon has always had 13 Clans. This is not something that is insignificant in the game, and liking them does not make somebody a 90s Goth or a barrier towards the games’ innovation - so claiming these things has not been helpful.

[CTPhipps]

No they weren’t. They were arguments trying to belittle the symbolism used in every edition, including V5, that made a point of there being 13 Clans. They were silly because of it. I await and see what the official explanation about Clans/Bloodline distinctions will be, but the canon has always had 13 Clans. This is not something that is insignificant in the game, and liking them does not make somebody a 90s Goth or a barrier towards the games’ innovation - so claiming these things has not been helpful.

While 13 is very symbolic, the fact is that multiple clans exist now beyond the 13 because of Antediluvians being diablerized.

* True Brujah
* Salubri
* Cappadocians

There's also 14 Antediluvians because Tremere ascended to 3rd generation after losing his body and performing a mass sacrifice of the Tremere Antitribu.

[Trippy]

While 13 is very symbolic, the fact is that multiple clans exist now beyond the 13 because of Antediluvians being diablerized.

* True Brujah
* Salubri
* Cappadocians

There's also 14 Antediluvians because Tremere ascended to 3rd generation after losing his body and performing a mass sacrifice of the Tremere Antitribu.

I know that, but the point was they kept to the 13 Clan motif by establishing that these were the result of Diablerie and succession. All these are 'ex-Clans' because of it - that is what I am getting at. The power of the Tremere backstory, for example, lies in the fact that they stole the status of one of the 13 Clans, who are now relegated to being merely a (rare) Bloodline.

And actually, you can help me with this because I am only slowly reading through Cults of the Blood Gods right now, but what is the relationship/status of the Cappadocians/Giovanni/Hecata Clan? When did one become the other and how?

[Resplendent Fire]

No they weren’t. They were arguments trying to belittle the symbolism used in every edition, including V5, that made a point of there being 13 Clans. They were silly because of it. I await and see what the official explanation about Clans/Bloodline distinctions will be, but the canon has always had 13 Clans. This is not something that is insignificant in the game, and liking them does not make somebody a 90s Goth or a barrier towards the games’ innovation - so claiming these things has not been helpful.

The arguments aren't silly, and no the belittling didn't happen. What happened was people said that 13 was just a number and it's okay to depart from that symbolism, and then you listed several unrelated 13s as examples of cultural importance of 13, but "They can have more if they want" isn't silly, nor was my analogy about planets and dwarf planets, nor was anything else.

But continually bringing it back to calling disagreements silly is precisely the problem I referred to previously.

I think we've established where we stand on this, and further discussion won't go anywhere new. I don't think your reasons are silly, and I don't think 13 clans are silly. I'm just chill with having 13 or 14 or 15 or 16 or 12 or whatever. This one setting feature is not that important to me. I don't think it's central to Vampire's identity.

[Resplendent Fire]

Crunch does, I find correlate fairly well with playability , fun, and quality. The better and more detailed the crunch, the better and more detailed the story and setting tend to be, the more 'streamlined' the rules, the less coherent and fun the setting. Not universally true, but more crunch more better is a decent rule of thumb for me.

Anyone can prefer more or less crunch that's a personal matter, but my experience in running RPGs is that adding crunch has a tendency to put players off, whereas the fewer things between the players and what they want their characters to do, the more fun it's been for me. I had one player who simply did not click with the Mage combat rules and I had to do a flowchart for combat, and said player still needed help with combat.

Also Fate can be as crunchy as you want. Dresden Files RPG vs. FAE Dresden Files RPG shows two ends of a spectrum in that regard. But overall, I want players to spend more time thinking about playing their characters than how many dice to roll in like 50 very specific different contexts.

But also I love to roll multiple D10s and I'd even play Exalted again despite its heavy crunch.