Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

My review of SABBAT: THE BLACK HAND 4.5/5

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

  • Originally posted by Ragged Robin View Post

    So how do you remove a superior from a position of power the Sabbat? Which does occur.
    On a Pack level, it occurs via monomacy. A truly awful pack leader is going to face challenge after challenge until he either loses, or the whole pack just gets fed up and quietly offs him. On a larger level, leaders need the support of multiple packs to keep/ascend to power. So the potential leaders court the favor of the most powerful packs in the region, likely resulting in mini-civil-wars until someone is victorious. The very top guys seem to be elected Pope-style by elites, but those electing them need to consider whether that election would spark a larger civil war, so that election must at least keep in mind largescale appeal, meaning it won't be too far away from who would win a human style democratic election.

    Comment


    • That's the Revised answer where the Sabbat has some democratic trappings since the Code of Milan does say that leaders lead at the consent of those beneath them in its way. Not the answer to the situation that CT posits where the Sabbat have absolute control over their followers.

      If the leaders have absolute control, they don't have to worry about challenges from within.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post
        That's the Revised answer where the Sabbat has some democratic trappings since the Code of Milan does say that leaders lead at the consent of those beneath them in its way. Not the answer to the situation that CT posits where the Sabbat have absolute control over their followers.

        If the leaders have absolute control, they don't have to worry about challenges from within.
        here's a wild suggestion: maybe CT was wrong

        Comment


        • I'm not sure CT is wrong in V5's take on the Sect. Though it creates the logical inconsistency Robin noted.

          Comment


          • I always thought that was part of the Sabbat's "joke." Monomancy is meant to make it seem like the Sabbat have a perfect way of resolving disputes and order. Except the nature of monomancy is that the Elders will always win in a one-on-one challenge. Which is why the Elders rule and the Neonates obey.

            An Anarch is a threat to the Elder only as a group.

            Part of what I loved about the Old Sabbat is they WERE every bit as hypocritical and corrupt as the Camarilla. They just lied about the whole freedom thing. The biggest twist for V5 for me is the idea that anyone over the age of 50 in the Sabbat believed in the whole, "defeat the Antediluvians" thing.


            Author of Cthulhu Armageddon, I was a Teenage Weredeer, Straight Outta Fangton, Lucifer's Star, and the Supervillainy Saga.

            Comment


            • If I could just interject to say that the archaic term for a duel is monomachy. Single combat. Not "monomacy," like it was misspelled in The Players Guide to the Sabbat, and therefore carried over to every subsequent Sabbat-related product. And certainly not "monomancy," which would be, what, "single divination"?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Elphilm View Post
                If I could just interject to say that the archaic term for a duel is monomachy. Single combat. Not "monomacy," like it was misspelled in The Players Guide to the Sabbat, and therefore carried over to every subsequent Sabbat-related product. And certainly not "monomancy," which would be, what, "single divination"?
                Yeah, the translations aren't great. As mentioned earlier in thread:

                Palla Grande also means "The Grand (Soccer) Ball" in Italian not the Grand Dance.


                Author of Cthulhu Armageddon, I was a Teenage Weredeer, Straight Outta Fangton, Lucifer's Star, and the Supervillainy Saga.

                Comment


                • The triick with Sabbat monomancy isnt Steve the pander neonate vs Theoderic the Tzmisce elder, the danger/operunity is from your immediate superiors, subordinates and peers. If you're a Lasombra Bishop whose on the shit list, the monomancy you have to worry about is the guy whose next in line for your job or personally hates you. Likewise an inept ductus might find the rival packs ductus issuing challange after he fox-frenzies in a siege. The Lasombra (had) an entire system set up to kill bad Lasombra at any age.

                  Which ironically brings me back to my original point as were discussion actual complex sect law and how they operated on a day to day Something the anarchs don't have.
                  Last edited by Ragged Robin; 10-13-2021, 07:49 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Ragged Robin View Post
                    The triick with Sabbat monomancy isnt Steve the pander neonate vs Theoderic the Tzmisce elder, the danger/operunity is from your immediate superiors, subordinates and peers. If you're a Lasombra Bishop whose on the shit list, the monomancy you have to worry about is the guy whose next in line for your job or personally hates you. Likewise an inept ductus might find the rival packs ductus issuing challange after he fox-frenzies in a siege. The Lasombra (had) an entire system set up to kill bad Lasombra at any age.

                    then again v5 Sabbat are orcs so maybe sauron tells them what to do.
                    My impression of the Pre-V5 Sabbat was basically the Elders of the Sabbat were every bit as hostile and inclined to oppression of their Neonates/Ancilla as the Camarilla but they have taken the Henry IV route:

                    To lead out many to the Holy Land,
                    Lest rest and lying still might make them look
                    Too near unto my state. Therefore, my Harry,
                    Be it thy course to busy giddy minds
                    With foreign quarrels;


                    Or in Modern English: The Sabbat make sure no one attempts to overthrow the local Archbishop, Cardinals, Bishops, and Priscus by sending the excess Kindred all out on Crusades against Camarilla territories. If they succeed then they gain a new city to divide up among themselves as well as increase the Sabbat's power. If they fail then they lose the excess population their society can't sustain.

                    The Elders still engage in all of their petty bickering and power jockeying but they have used this as a solution for their Anarch problem. Theoretically. As we've seen with the various Sabbat Civil Wars, the Antitribu and Loyalists have steadily gained more and more power that has eroded the traditional Clans of Lasombra and Tzimisce.

                    As a Sabbat fan, I would want to know how the Loyalists have apparently TOTALLY destroyed the Old Order and replaced it with the mob that was previously a bunch of useful idiots. I'm not saying it couldn't happen but it deserved a trilogy or fiction.


                    Author of Cthulhu Armageddon, I was a Teenage Weredeer, Straight Outta Fangton, Lucifer's Star, and the Supervillainy Saga.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by CTPhipps View Post

                      My impression of the Pre-V5 Sabbat was basically the Elders of the Sabbat were every bit as hostile and inclined to oppression of their Neonates/Ancilla as the Camarilla but they have taken the Henry IV route:

                      To lead out many to the Holy Land,
                      Lest rest and lying still might make them look
                      Too near unto my state. Therefore, my Harry,
                      Be it thy course to busy giddy minds
                      With foreign quarrels;


                      Or in Modern English: The Sabbat make sure no one attempts to overthrow the local Archbishop, Cardinals, Bishops, and Priscus by sending the excess Kindred all out on Crusades against Camarilla territories. If they succeed then they gain a new city to divide up among themselves as well as increase the Sabbat's power. If they fail then they lose the excess population their society can't sustain.

                      The Elders still engage in all of their petty bickering and power jockeying but they have used this as a solution for their Anarch problem. Theoretically. As we've seen with the various Sabbat Civil Wars, the Antitribu and Loyalists have steadily gained more and more power that has eroded the traditional Clans of Lasombra and Tzimisce.

                      As a Sabbat fan, I would want to know how the Loyalists have apparently TOTALLY destroyed the Old Order and replaced it with the mob that was previously a bunch of useful idiots. I'm not saying it couldn't happen but it deserved a trilogy or fiction.
                      This Is certainly correct sabbat eldars are vile, but again this leads away from my point-sabbat and carmarilla politics have a depth the anarchs don't and this is going to be detrimental moving forward unless addressed

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Ragged Robin View Post

                        This Is certainly correct sabbat eldars are vile, but again this leads away from my point-sabbat and carmarilla politics have a depth the anarchs don't and this is going to be detrimental moving forward unless addressed
                        I think part of the issue is you want there to be complex labyrinthine games and the appeal of the Anarchs is that you don't have them. Even then, your character is an Anarch just by not wanting to be ground underfoot.


                        Author of Cthulhu Armageddon, I was a Teenage Weredeer, Straight Outta Fangton, Lucifer's Star, and the Supervillainy Saga.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by CTPhipps View Post

                          I think part of the issue is you want there to be complex labyrinthine games and the appeal of the Anarchs is that you don't have them. Even then, your character is an Anarch just by not wanting to be ground underfoot.
                          No, I want depth from a major sect which is apparently the settings primary protagonist group. Something the anarchs fundemently lack because they're incredibly underwritten.

                          Comment


                          • I don't think there needs to be complex labyrinthine Anarch games as such, but the sect does need much more flavour.

                            So for instance, my Anarch faction that's trying to take control of Glasgow is mostly made from some local gangs and ex-Sabbat packs led by a Child of the Dracon Tzimisce. They are trying to fulfill the Dream by making Glasgow the "Carthage of the North." The way they plan to do this is to apply the Vaulderie to not just every kindred in the city, but also, eventually, when the time is right, apply it to every kine as well. Then there is also a bunch of Ministry influence (who claim to be the original religion of Carthage) and a bunch of conflict with the Camarilla in Edinburgh, which of course is all about the Cult of Mithras.

                            Basically I'm trying to make the sect feel as flavourful and unique as possible, which tbf kind of ends up being a "kinder" Sabbat with the numbers filed off.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Ragged Robin View Post

                              This Is certainly correct sabbat eldars are vile, but again this leads away from my point-sabbat and carmarilla politics have a depth the anarchs don't and this is going to be detrimental moving forward unless addressed
                              I mean that is kind of the problem. The Camarilla and Sabbat each have a long history with various practices, engagement with other groups, internal schisms and the like. Meanwhile... well there have been "Anarchs" around for a long time, but they're not any sort of unified faction. You don't really have this sense of history when dealing with the Anarchs. And Anarchs holding their own major territories and running things is a fairly recent phenomenon - previously most major metropolitan areas were under the control of the Camarilla, the Sabbat or were in parts of the world well outside of the Camarilla/Sabbat/Anarch conflict (the Middle East, India, China, Africa, etc). Anarchs might have technically held territory, but it was usually just some hole-in-the-wall place that neither the Sabbat nor the Camarilla was interested in. And if their territory did end up getting big and important the Sabbat or Camarilla would move in and that would be that.

                              Then you got the the idea of the Anarch Free States and now the idea that the Anarchs can hold territory and are a fully equal faction to the Camarilla and the Sabbat. But that's an extremely modern idea. So there's not really any history or long-standing politics among the Anarchs. For all intents and purposes the Anarchs, as a political faction to rival the Camarilla and Sabbat, only started back in 1943 with the start of the Anarch Revolt, but realistically they only became a real faction in the 80's. So they have less than 40 years of history behind them.

                              I think they just need to spin the fact that the Anarchs don't have that historical depth as a positive - here's a faction that's very new and that has all sorts of opportunities for newer, younger vampires who would largely be little more than gofers or worse in the Sabbat/Camarilla. Players will sort of be in on the "ground floor" and likely be helping to create the politics and depth of the Anarch faction.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by AnubisXy View Post
                                I mean that is kind of the problem. The Camarilla and Sabbat each have a long history with various practices, engagement with other groups, internal schisms and the like. Meanwhile... well there have been "Anarchs" around for a long time, but they're not any sort of unified faction. You don't really have this sense of history when dealing with the Anarchs. And Anarchs holding their own major territories and running things is a fairly recent phenomenon - previously most major metropolitan areas were under the control of the Camarilla, the Sabbat or were in parts of the world well outside of the Camarilla/Sabbat/Anarch conflict (the Middle East, India, China, Africa, etc). Anarchs might have technically held territory, but it was usually just some hole-in-the-wall place that neither the Sabbat nor the Camarilla was interested in. And if their territory did end up getting big and important the Sabbat or Camarilla would move in and that would be that.

                                Then you got the the idea of the Anarch Free States and now the idea that the Anarchs can hold territory and are a fully equal faction to the Camarilla and the Sabbat. But that's an extremely modern idea. So there's not really any history or long-standing politics among the Anarchs. For all intents and purposes the Anarchs, as a political faction to rival the Camarilla and Sabbat, only started back in 1943 with the start of the Anarch Revolt, but realistically they only became a real faction in the 80's. So they have less than 40 years of history behind them.

                                I think they just need to spin the fact that the Anarchs don't have that historical depth as a positive - here's a faction that's very new and that has all sorts of opportunities for newer, younger vampires who would largely be little more than gofers or worse in the Sabbat/Camarilla. Players will sort of be in on the "ground floor" and likely be helping to create the politics and depth of the Anarch faction.
                                I dunno, yes and no. One of the things I was very interested in (as introduced by ANARCHS UNBOUND) was the idea that the Brujah Council was an Anarch Free State before the California one because that really changes just about everything we know about the Anarchs.

                                That for 100 years, the Soviet Union's vampire Illuminati were Anarchs.

                                It's sort of like introducing the Romulans in Star Trek and then never following up on that. It changes the entire power dynamic of the setting and the Anarchs as a whole.


                                Author of Cthulhu Armageddon, I was a Teenage Weredeer, Straight Outta Fangton, Lucifer's Star, and the Supervillainy Saga.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X