Set and Osiris thread

[Penelope]

I agree with Prometheas. Wr20 makes the Orpheus Group and their competitors a part of the Wraith universe.

[Trollroot]

According to the Mage timeline, there was a call sent out to all mages to set up two organizations in Egypt, one that used device driven abilities and one that did not. There are hints that a version of the Spell of Life came from here, possibly untied to the South American version. Also, as Bardo is a Tibetan term, I find it difficult to find that an Egyptian wraith would use it, although the speech of the dead is a runaround. Charon is definitely later in the timeline, coming about just before the founding of the Roman Empire into a world power. Ends of Empire for Wraith suggests a team-up between the Ferrymen and the Mummies with Anubis as the go between in destroying Enoch/ the Black Hand. The animosity between the two is not made clear, not even in the 20th Anniversary book. One final note, the True Brujah were forming some sort of alliance with the Setties, as mentioned in Nights of Prophecy. (I think. it has been so long that I've read/had some of these books that I can't pinpoint the place.). I'm not sure where this could be leading, but a separate Children of Osiris source book is needed to clear some of these inconsistencies. Or add to them.

I am not sure the notion that Mages came up with the Spell of Life rings true to me. Would they not have put it to some kind of use in the millennia since, if they had?

On Charon, I could easily be wrong here, but didn’t the historical Charon take the name and position from a previous Charon? Who might have been one of the Fallen who constructed the afterlife of Wraith ? I think I remember Demon author Adam Tinworth saying something about a connection there. This far back we would be dealing with the original, if that is right. It is probably before the time of the Mycenean Charon. I would find it more understandable if the Halaku Charon had significant insights on the condition of vampirism. Vampirism depends heavily on curses levied by Angels, his former peers after all. And death was his portfolio. He could have suggested workarounds and hacks to Osiris.

You are right that the Setites and the Trujah were allying in the modern day. With their connection to Lazarus it was almost if they were forming a mini-sect of their own. But if it was Set who diablerized Brujah, that fact would need to be VERY well hidden from the Trujah. Although that would be quite World of Darkess.

Or as we discuss further below, maybe Brujah just finished devouring Set from the inside.

I would be wary of inventing new vampires to take on the role of Apep/Apophis. Second Edition sources make it fairly obvious that Set himself is but a servant of some even greater being. For example, The Vampire Players Guide (1993) suggests in the Path of Typhon writeup that the path may have been developed by Set himself, and the text then asks: "What could inspire an Antediluvian, himself a virtual god, to formulate a code of belief and worship?" Mummy Second Edition (1997) finally makes it explicit that Set is a servant of Apophis, and Apophis is none other than the Wyrm. Instead of tying the origins of Set to, say, the Gangrel, I would suggest that the snake theme of the Followers of Set is nothing but a manifestation of the entire clan's Wyrm corruption.

It is as people note, possible that there are more entities named Apep or Apophis. But on the “What would inspire an Antediluvian to formulate a code of worship?” I would ask “What would inspire an Antediluvian to name his code of worship after an older vampire?”

I mean we have multiple accounts from several different sources, some of which were there in person, many of which hate each other and they all agree that Typhon was a different and older vampire from Set. And Typhon is the one who has the serpent imagery associated with him in the myths. But at some point, Set made a code of worship named for Typhon, he made an animal Ghoul he named for Typhon, and he started calling himself Typhon Set.

Your otherwise comprehensive account leaves out one tidbit from early Setite writeups that I've always found more interesting than what the clan later became: The Followers of Set are all sired only after about 900 BCE. The first Setite writeup in the Players Guide (1991) states that when Set was banished from Egypt, all his old followers were slaughtered. The First Edition Mummy (1992) repeats this point, saying that the real Followers of Set were created only after Set was driven out for the second and last time, here around 950 BCE (page 64). What I like about this is that this portrayal of Set in the World of Darkness roughly coincides with the demonization of Set in the real world. Just as the formerly heroic deity fell into disrepute in real-world religion, so did (in my view) the Set of the World of Darkness fall to the Wyrm around this period. If any Follower of Set has a writeup that makes them seem older than about 950 BCE, there's a good chance that their biography is mere fabrication.

Now that is really interesting!

I think Kheminitri is firmly established as being a bit older and dating to the 19^th dynasty under Seti I. But she was clearly outside of the power of Set around 950 BC, being either in Tibet or in Wassail in the western desert. There may have been the occasional survivor, kindred have a tendency to ride out things when deep in torpor. But the notion that most Setites belief about the history prior to 950 BCE are false and that older biographies are simply faked is really interesting.
It is worth noting that the narrator of the 2^nd ed Clanbook noted that the records of his records-obsessed clan drop off further back and people start to disagree, it is always some other temple has the notes. And once you get back to the Old Kingdom era, nothing. Sadly the old kingdom was back to the 24th century BCE. But there is the story of the Eternals of Sothis in Tanis. The Setites believed six of their eldest, the Eternals, was buried in their crypts within the temple to Set when an earthquake caused the lake to inundated the temple. 550 BCE. But when they tried to recover them before mortal archeologists found them in the 19^th century, they found nothing there at all.

Anyway, it is possible that Set had some kind of change around 950 BCE and wiped out his original clan. It would not have been the first time a Kindred has changed and grown less human over time. It is possible that Set originally was a more agreeable warrior god/antediluvian and that something changed him. It is too late for the diablerie of Typhon, but is it possible that Set lost a long battle of wills akin to the one between Saulot and Tremere ? Would Setites who managed to uncover actual documents from this time find mention of a very different Set and no serpent imagery?

Another problem assumption the OP makes is that Set must've diablerized his way to 3rd gen being too young. It's more likely that a hidden second gen, or a third gen who promoted to second gen, embraced set.

It is often assumed that Zillah was Sets sire. She seemed to like the Great Hunter thing and it would give him Obfuscate in common with the Nosferatu and Assamites. However, while the sources we have are unreliable, conflicting, old and possibly intentionally deceptive, they are what we have. We can weigh them up against each other, but if we totally disregard them, there is no point, because we have nothing. I must disagree that an unknown 2^nd generation is more probable.

The murder of the 2^nd generation is perhaps the biggest event in kindred history. All the clan curses are said to have been levied because of it, and it was why Caine left the Kindred. Every Clan who was around then has history with tales of why their clan was the blameless one, about why everyone else was cursed, or why their clan was especially cursed etc.
(Well, except the Setites who don’t mention it, really. Almost as if their history-obsessed clan wasn’t there for it. )
But my point is, even before you bring in all the other supporting points, pulling out a surviving member of the second generation is a massively much bigger thing than just supposing Set diablerized someone. Diablerie happens now and then, surprise 2^nd Generation vampires not so much.

Using "Typhon" bothers me. The Egyptians predate the Greeks. Also Typhon's just a shit name.

I would suppose that in the fictional world of the WoD the Greeks got the name Typhon from other sources. Those Greek, the Cabiri, who got a copy of the Spell of Life probably got a lot of the lore around it too.

But anyway, in our world it is possible the Greeks got it from a much older Indo-European root, meaning “Abyss”.

There are lots of tales of Typhon around the near east, going back to the Ugaritic Tablets battle of Baal Sapon against Yammu (And interestingly enough, all the tales end with Typhon being buried deep, and my copy of the Ugaritic writings also refers to Yammu as Naharu, an alternate spelling of Namtaru)

They have some things in common though. Typhon is always the snake guy who gets killed by the redheaded storm god.

One interesting thought is that Typhon was a pseudonym for the Antediluvian Set diablerized to achieve his 3rd Gen status.

This would also explain the massive power advantage Set had over Osiris; he encountered and diablerized the same Antediluvian who’d Embraced Osiris into the 4th Generation before his return. He wasn’t just a young vampire of the 3rd Generation (i.e. all the potential, little of the actual power) with a few years on Osiris, he was one who’d gotten there by consuming the soul of a legitimate millennia-old Antedeluvian (basically what Tremere did only fully successful). .

This mirrors my thought on the matter except for the “fully successful” bit.

Like Tremere it might have seemed that way at the start, but eventually, Set started referring to himself as “Typhon Set”, his philosophy as “the path of Typhon” and at least one of his animal Ghouls as “The Typhonic Beast” This may indicate less than total success. It seems that around 950 BC Set also has total turnover of his clan which may or may not be related. Interestingly, if Typhon/Brujah has been eating Sets soul from the inside and just finished, it puts a new perspective on the recent Trujah/Setite alliance.

It might even be the reason Set decided to return from his exile; in diablerizing Typhon he got some of its memories including what Osiris had become and the certainty that having consumed Osiris’ maker he could easily overcome his brother. .

I never thought of that. It makes a lot of sense.

This could also explain Noddist accounts of Set having been in the First City (ex. in the Book of Nod); they were confusing the Antediluvian [Typhon] (who was in the First City) with Set who later diablerized them.

It might also explain some of the matters about Apophis; because the monstrous imagry of Typhon could easily be linked to the monstrous serpent imagery of Apophis and Set being empowered with the might of Apophis might be an oblique reference to his diablerie of [Typhon]. .

I very much agree. I just learned that the Indo-European root of Typhon means “Abyss”. Which is interesting when we remember that Setite Methuselahs who draw upon the power Set took from Apophis turn into Obtenebration-darkness.

Perhaps Set didn’t even develop/acquire Serpentis until after the diablerie of [Typhon] while his oldest bloodline was begun BEFORE he diablerized [Typhon] (and thus didn’t have Serpentis yet). .

My thoughts exactly. Also I just read through Kheminitris entry in “Kindred most wanted” and she early on got an Animal Feature. Serpent eyes. Possibly Sets oldest childe and she goes and get animal features.

There’s still some generational weirdness, but some of that might be solved if we presume at least one of the third generation diablerized one of the second and so was, effectively, 2nd Generation (though the advantage of that is pretty marginal since that was before generational weakening occurred... by default the 3rd and 2nd Gen are equal in power and Caine is only stronger still because of age and God’s mark upon him making him essentially unkillable).

At least one account of Troile places her in the First City. It is also possible she was sired before the generational weakening.

One solution is that Troile never diablerized [Brujah] at all; they were 3rd Gen because [Brujah] diablerized one of the 2nd before the Flood. Instead it was Set who diablerized [Brujah/Typhon], but because he was only 4th Gen to begin with, that act only brought him up to 3rd Gen.

Perhaps Set even framed Troile for the act even as he was getting out of Dodge (possibly another factor in his decision to return from exile) and Troile just ran with it because it gave them control of the rest of Clan Brujah.

Possibly. Possibly Troile knew about the potential effects of diablerizing someone older and stronger than you, while Set, who by multiple accounts were recently embraced when he arrived in the Second City did not.

Maybe Troile set Set up. Might not be that difficult. They had a lot in common, both of them being described as warriors and beings of unrestrained passion. ( Who vanished from history at the same time and in the same area… you don’t suppose…?) Both of them Fourth Generation in a city ruled by the Third. But Troile probably knew far more about being a Kindred.
Gehenna mentions that Troile never completed the diablerie of Brujah. There has also been speculation that Troile fell on Venture just after the fall of the Second city and diablerized him. Maybe she and Set helped each other out.

Another possibility is, given how stupid powerful Enoia has been depicted as being, including some oblique references to people even saying she was directly sired by Caine, is that SHE diablerized and became 2nd Gen pre-Flood so, when she embraced Set c. 3100 BC, he started out 3rd Gen naturally and later picked up the added moniker of Typhon because he decided to run a long con on the Greek mortals after Troile ate [Brujah/Typhon] and basically stole their identity for his own purposes.

I don’t know, Ennoia has been a frequent embracer and her childer younger than Set are still 4^th generation.

I thought the First City was destroyed by the Great Flood unleashed by God/El/YHVH and the Second City was destroyed when the Third Generation destroyed the Second. My timeline puts Set’s Embrace at around 4000 BCE (long after the Flood) and the destruction of the Second City at around 3500 BCE.

Yes the first/second city issue is correct. The normally so lore-obsessed Setites seem to be making some rather strange mistakes in their account. And my bracketing put both Sets embrace and the fall of the Second City a couple of centuries before 3 100 BCE. Just very close to each other.

[Trollroot]

Things I learned when writng the post above:

• The name Typhon may be from an Indo-European root meaning "Abyss"
• Kheminitri may be Sets oldest extant childe and shes gained an animal feature.
• My texts on Baal use the Ugaritic term for Typhon, Yammu, interchangeably with a version of Namtaru. Typhon i supposed to be buried somewhere under a volcano in the Mediterranean and Namtaru is the buried entity the Baali call one of the "Children" The one Neregal tried to awaken below Maskan-Shapir when the darkness of Obtenerbration swept him away, and which he later tried to awaken at Crete. Also the one whom Azaneals Angellis Ater worshipped in Chorazin. And whose gigantic midnight black liquid basal hand was worshiped by Izhim abd Azrael, and through him put the blood curse on the Assamite Warriors. The 4th generation Baali, Ma-ri-ah the Black is said to have supplanted part of him in the 18th century.

It is an interesting possible perspective on one of the Baalis Children.

[Elphilm]

Anyway, it is possible that Set had some kind of change around 950 BCE and wiped out his original clan.

I like where you're going in general, but I wouldn't credit the destruction of Set's original progeny to himself. Mummy is clear that it took a coalition of vampires, mages, mummies, and fera to break the power of Set and drive him out of Egypt for good. It feels cheap to then say that this was Set's plan along. I would much rather have an apocalyptic war at the dawn of time in the deep background of the setting.

I realize that many people inherently dislike crossovers in the World of Darkness, but I think they're entirely harmless as setting background material, such as the whole topic of this thread. Mummy was always intended to be a crossover splat, and that's where a lot of the details about Set and Osiris were first laid down. Mixing the various splats together is thus kind of inherent to the background of the Followers of Set.

[Elphilm]

Using "Typhon" bothers me. The egyptians predate the Greeks.

I would suppose that in the fictional world of the WoD the Greeks got the name Typhon from other sources.

I don't think the name presents an insurmountable problem. You can simply say that [Typhon] is a much later appellation for a mysterious and unnamed Antediluvian, and that predynastic Egyptians certainly would not have called the vampire by that name. Official books always put the names of Antediluvians in square brackets to indicate that the actual names of the clan founders were not known. I've never understood why the fandom sometimes insists that, say, [Lasombra] and its clan must have literally been called "Lasombra" before the Spanish languages even existed! Vampire society is stagnant but not static, and my base assumption about the setting is that every single proper noun in use in the Modern Nights must have gone through a hundred permutations through history.

[Ravnos]

The Setite Clanbook 2^nd ed (2001) does not go into this history much. No dates or much in the way of details. It does contain a few interesting facts:
It is claimed that the First Citys name was Annu and that it was located where the outskirts of Cairo stand today. The Setites claim that Set became a vampire through the defeat of the entity/god called Apep, the Worm of Darkness and eating its heart. The Tlacique is a Setite bloodline so old its origin is lost. And the 9^th level Serpentis power, Shadow of Apep, draws upon the power of the God/creature whose heart Set drank and turns the user into a giant serpent made of Obtenebration-darkness.

Comments: The Tlacique, the oldest Setite bloodline, does not have Serpentis at all, they have Protean. That’s interesting. “Eating its heart” sounds suspiciously like drinking the hearts blood. And south of Egypt, south of Nubia, south even of their southern neighbor Punt (That was only located in December 2020), Becketts Jyhad Diary mentions Kindred with Obtenebration that does not seem connected to the Lasombra.

I recall somewhere in the revised edition corebook that some Setites or some followers of the Path of the Typhon do know Obtenebration. It was written as if it was nothing very odd.
One of the things that led me to believe that Disciplines weren't intended to be as much "clan exclusive" in 3rd edition at first. To be fair, discipline exclusiveness was cementified in earlier and also later books

Something in my headcanon I always used to reconcile real world Set mythology with the WoD set (if that's really necessary) is that Set devouring Apep acquired the current weakness and the serpentis discipline and became altered in body and mind (he became eeeeevil). A hero fall from grace maybe?

Never thought too much about the Tlacique but the implication might be that they're sort of the True Brujah for the Followers, the original clan that got abandoned after some diablerie shenanigans or the acquisition of some eldritch power (Serpentis 10) by good old Set.
It would be a nod to real world too because snakes were never associated to Set, but a beast with various animals traits was

Of course the easiest explanation is always that our real history isn't "real", because the history books were rewritten and manipulated (who said punic wars?)...
But that's boring, isn't it?
Serpent eldritch egyptian god coming from primordial darkness who may or may not have been a hero fallen from grace is way more interesting and cooler
And the incosistencies with the real world clearly aren't a bad thing

[Chris24601]

Regarding the actual names of figures like [Typhon], it’s further worth remembering that Set isn’t even the actual name he had back in the day. Set is taken from the Greek (i.e. where the stories of the mythical Typhon originated) “Seth”, which is itself a transliteration of Swth (which is now transliterated directly as “Sutekh” and was probably pronounced something like Soo-teh).

Another little fun bit to add to the mix is that in classical myth Typhon was the child of Gaia intended to overthrow Zeus (a sky/storm god). There are also connections noted between Typhon and Python (another snake child of Gaia who lived underground).

One oft overlooked part of mythical Set’s portfolio was storms (which in Egypt rolled in from the deserts). So, consider that the story of a storm god overcoming a dark serpent birthed by Gaia (grandmother of Zeus) may not have Zeus overcoming Typhon... but Set overcoming and diablerizing [Typhon], the childe of Enoia (who might have pulled off 2nd Gen status somehow and was already taking on the role of Gaia with all her Earthmelding).

It doesn’t quite square with the likelihood that the Typhon who embraced Osiris was either [Brujah] or one of his childer, but it’s not like a name like Typhon (if the root being basically “Serpent of Darkness” is correct) would be uncommon for outsiders to attribute to an unknown powerful Kindred (basically, Typhon may not be a unique name, but akin to the title Baal).

Serpents in myth are often associated with transformation and immortality (shedding their old skins and biting their own tails to create an endless loop) so “Typhon” as a generic title for “bringer of dark immortality/transformation” could explain a number of potential misattributions. They’re actually a number of different vampires, perhaps those known for rather prolific embracing (or the embracing of certain important people.

[Black Fox]

I like where you're going in general, but I wouldn't credit the destruction of Set's original progeny to himself. Mummy is clear that it took a coalition of vampires, mages, mummies, and fera to break the power of Set and drive him out of Egypt for good. It feels cheap to then say that this was Set's plan along. I would much rather have an apocalyptic war at the dawn of time in the deep background of the setting.

I agree. As written, the destruction of Set's childer and lineage is clearly a result of a defeat after a prolonged war. Set's enemies destroyed them. But there is always the possibility that Set decided to purge those that had "failed" him either before his exile, or after he left. In any case, I think what the text is telling us is that the Followers of Set as we know them today in terms of clan culture and organization ("strict hierarchy"), basically started sometime after 900 BC. It was probably done to rectify what Set thought were weaknesses that lead to his defeat.

This does not necessarily mean every single Setite vampire before 900 BC was destroyed. Just that most of them were. There could always be ones in torpor that wake up later, lone survivors from Egypt, or ones that existed outside Egypt. But they are few in number, and perhaps either were designated as enemies by Set since they remember the "old" ways. Or when they do wake up, are a potential source of heresy or trouble since they don't fit into the new clan.

There's a lot of ways an ST could play with the situation while keeping to this.

I realize that many people inherently dislike crossovers in the World of Darkness, but I think they're entirely harmless as setting background material, such as the whole topic of this thread. Mummy was always intended to be a crossover splat, and that's where a lot of the details about Set and Osiris were first laid down. Mixing the various splats together is thus kind of inherent to the background of the Followers of Set.

I think crossover in the sense of PCs from different lines is very difficult because of mechanic issues. And trying to keep each faction properly presented can create problems for an ST to run a game that treats everyone equally. However, in terms of the setting itself - when these other elements are simply NPCs controlled by the ST - it's not a problem especially as you said as deep background lore.

The early game was meant to be part of a single setting. It wasn't until Revised when bickering over what took precedent caused the Developers of each game line to declare they were actually separate from each other. This unfortunately is all too common in many "shared universe" settings. The old Thieves World series of fantasy books collapsed because of that kind of bickering. And comic companies have tried to deal with it in numerous ways.

However, in practice it can be very hard to incorporate creatures from other game lines because it means mastering lore and abilities found in other game books that people may not own. Every so often someone posts here asking for help for wanting to incorporate some werewolves or ghosts into the game, and the thread just becomes an info dump that becomes increasingly complicated. So many STs just choose not to use those elements at all. And to be frank, Vampire probably is the best game line where these other elements can be ignored entirely and concentrate just on the line's own elements to exclusion of others.

When I first played (and ST'd) Vampire, that's what we did. Vampire only - everything else was just ignored. And it worked great. However, as I did slowly play other games (or at least extensively read them) my perspective changed, and I now like to include some amount of crossover in the setting. Not just historical background, but elements that could happen in game (usually as sandbox style groups the PCs could run into based on their own actions). But it takes care and skill to portray them in a manner that fits the main setting you play in, as opposed to a distractive monster mash type of game that overwhelms distinctive Vampire themes. It requires a lot more preparation on the part of the ST, so I understand why many people exclude it.

[blackshade]

Interesting thread. Would love to see something similair for some of the other antes. Maybe Haqim.

[MyWifeIsScary]

Interesting thread. Would love to see something similair for some of the other antes. Maybe Haqim.

He's probably the most well-documented, least controversial ante by a long shot. Only Lasombra is rivals him for transparency (pun unintended).

[Trollroot]

I like where you're going in general, but I wouldn't credit the destruction of Set's original progeny to himself. Mummy is clear that it took a coalition of vampires, mages, mummies, and fera to break the power of Set and drive him out of Egypt for good. It feels cheap to then say that this was Set's plan along. I would much rather have an apocalyptic war at the dawn of time in the deep background of the setting.

I agree. As written, the destruction of Set's childer and lineage is clearly a result of a defeat after a prolonged war. Set's enemies destroyed them. But there is always the possibility that Set decided to purge those that had "failed" him either before his exile, or after he left. In any case, I think what the text is telling us is that the Followers of Set as we know them today in terms of clan culture and organization ("strict hierarchy"), basically started sometime after 900 BC. It was probably done to rectify what Set thought were weaknesses that lead to his defeat.

This does not necessarily mean every single Setite vampire before 900 BC was destroyed. Just that most of them were. There could always be ones in torpor that wake up later, lone survivors from Egypt, or ones that existed outside Egypt. But they are few in number, and perhaps either were designated as enemies by Set since they remember the "old" ways. Or when they do wake up, are a potential source of heresy or trouble since they don't fit into the new clan.

There's a lot of ways an ST could play with the situation while keeping to this.

You are right. I was thinking without checking. If you wanted to do the war at the dawn of time, it is also possible to say Set was changing at the time, and purged his clan to fit into his new vision -and then the coalition attacked, at a time when Set had no childer of age and power left. Sort of an analogy to how Stalin purged the military right before WW2. There is nothing I know to support or deny that, but it makes for an interesting story. Also, maybe the first Tlacique escaped to South America at this time?

There was alot of Antediluvian activity going on just before that, around the Bronze Age Collapse anyway. Interestingly, I think 950 BC would be around the time of David and Solomon?

I recall somewhere in the revised edition corebook that some Setites or some followers of the Path of the Typhon do know Obtenebration. It was written as if it was nothing very odd.
One of the things that led me to believe that Disciplines weren't intended to be as much "clan exclusive" in 3rd edition at first. To be fair, discipline exclusiveness was cementified in earlier and also later books

Something in my headcanon I always used to reconcile real world Set mythology with the WoD set (if that's really necessary) is that Set devouring Apep acquired the current weakness and the serpentis discipline and became altered in body and mind (he became eeeeevil). A hero fall from grace maybe?

Well, there is that Obtenebration connection again. It does keep cropping up, and it doesn't fit what we know of Brujah. Doesn't go against anything we know of him either though.

What we know so far is:

• Typhon by description is a pretty exact match for Brujah, and Osiris seems to have been that as well. Kindred legend peg Brujahs demise to around the time he failed to show up for Osiris.
• Typhon is associated in myth with serpents and Set was not, he was a redheaded storm god.
• In the Typhon myths he keeps getting killed by a redheaded storm god.
• Set changed in a way that is highly consistent with a more powerful kindred taking over a diablerist.
• Typhons name may come from an old word for Abyss. (The timing works out nicely here, according to the most popular hypotesis of the origin of the Indo-European langages, they were spreading around the Pontic steppe at exactly this time. When Typhon introduced himself at Osiris court he may have been saying "I am the Abyss" in a language current at the time)
• Pulling on the power Set drew from eating the heart of Apep with Serpentis makes you a serpent of Obenebration-dark
• Followers of the Path of Typhon often pick up Obtenebration.

I think the easiest hypothesis here is that Brujah was a heavy Obtenebration user, and that neither the Trujah or Troile inherited it. After all, Haquims spawn has Celerity, Obfuscate, Quietus, Auspex, Presence, and Assamite Sorcery in-can, Cappadocious blood got Necromancy, Fortitude, Potence, Auspex and Dominate, and god only knows how many in-clans Saulots or Ennoias get totals.
At the time Typhon sired Osiris he was clearly going around Africa building a power-base. I'd speculate some of the Obtenebration.using legacies of Africa such as the Ramanga or the Kindred Beckett spoke with with the peculiar Obtenbration effect may have gotten their origin at this time.

One oft overlooked part of mythical Set’s portfolio was storms (which in Egypt rolled in from the deserts). So, consider that the story of a storm god overcoming a dark serpent birthed by Gaia (grandmother of Zeus) may not have Zeus overcoming Typhon... but Set overcoming and diablerizing [Typhon], the childe of Enoia (who might have pulled off 2nd Gen status somehow and was already taking on the role of Gaia with all her Earthmelding).

Serpents are also associated with bringing knowledge, particularily in the Judo-christian tradition. And also known for being cold-blooded. That does fit Brujah of the Learned Clan.

Anyway, I don't buy Ennoia hitting 2nd generation. Her sirings, include Odin the All-high, Enkidu, Ereshkigal, Hukos, Rufus, Kurru and Vola the Red. Most of which would have been after this time. So potentially seven extra Antediluvians. That seems ...improbable.

I'd like to suggest another possibility if we need a "Gaia" equivalent: The Crone. Didn't we have a thread here a while ago on who "The Dark Father, Bastard of Caine" could be? TBH, the only thing we have to go on here is the presence of a Gaia foure in some of the myths on Typhon, nothing from White wolf or Kindred, so its thin.

[Black Fox]

There was alot of Antediluvian activity going on just before that, around the Bronze Age Collapse anyway. Interestingly, I think 950 BC would be around the time of David and Solomon?

Yes, that is around its time.

This period of Egyptian history is a time when Egypt became dominated by the Libyans who lived west of the Nile. This is actually referenced in first edition Mummy which states "...Horus, allied with foreigners from the west, drove Set out of Egypt...". Which shows the people who wrote this actually knew something about Egyptian history!

[Banu_Saulot]

I ain't got lore knowledge enough nor history acumen to add much to the discussion, but I gotta say, this thread is awesome. It makes me feel the fun and exciting side of WoD community, and the value of the OnyxPath Forum. Great job people, it's been awesome.

But now, I wonder how the use of mummies tipped the balance between the Set x Osiris conflict. Was it game-changing, or something that helped more to the sides than the fronts?

[Chris24601]

Anyway, I don't buy Ennoia hitting 2nd generation. Her sirings, include Odin the All-high, Enkidu, Ereshkigal, Hukos, Rufus, Kurru and Vola the Red. Most of which would have been after this time. So potentially seven extra Antediluvians. That seems ...improbable.

Leaving aside that newly sired 3rd Gens are not the same as Antediluvians (they still start with mortal attributes/abilities and have to train up all the disciplines... who knows how many XP the 10th dot in a discipline actually costs), I’m not actually married to the notion thaf Ennoia became 2nd Gen so much as some 2nd Gen involvement smooths out some of the generational weirdness.

Specifically, if Typhon = Brujah and was diablerized by Set then how does Troile get to 3rd Gen?

Perhaps the easiest thing to take care of the weirdness is just that Set was embraced by Zillah before she met her end. The second generation did survive into the Second City period in some accounts and the White Wolf wiki lists Zillah’s final death possibly being as late as 2500 BC or 600+ years after Set was embraced. In which case Set could have been embraced by Zillah, was always 3rd Gen and never committed diablerie on Typhon/Brujah (that was Troile) and his adopting the name was either happenstance (i.e. Typhon as generic title like Baal, not a given name) or part of some scheme (stealing some of Brujah’s followers before Troile could get them after the diablerie of Brujah).