What percentage of the time do you run each sect?

[CajunKhan]

I run about 90% Sabbat, 5% Camarilla, 5% sectless

By sectless, I occasionally run games in which vampires are too rare for sects to be a thing. In such games, the mood is about struggling to be a vampire in a world without institutional support of any kind. Basically a darker version of "The Santa Clarita Diet".

[CTPhipps]

About 50-50 Anarch/Camarilla.

Often moving between these two sects.

[Amethyst]

How do you justify having a coterie of Kindred all clustered together in the same place when vampires are so rare? Not being snarky, just curious.

[Black Fox]

I've only run 100% "Camarilla" games. That means it takes place in a domain populated by vampires of the original 7 clans. That mostly means domains that nominally accept the authority of the Camarilla, but I'd have no problem if it was technically independent (meaning the local Prince openly defies the Justicars). However, PCs can include supporters of the Camarilla, indifferent members, Anarchs, sympathizers to Anarchs, etc. I try to limit PCs to the original 7 clans and Caitiffs as I believe the Independent Clans, if run properly, do not lend themselves well to coteries of other vampires outside those clans. They work best as NPCs. But I am open to players advocating for a strong concept of other clans that would still work well as a PC.

I like the Sabbat as a story element in the setting, but I've never wanted to actually play in it. However, I have met players who were really big on the Sabbat, and their enthusiasm convinced me there is something that is interesting. But I still like it more as NPCs that might be encountered than running it.

In such games, the mood is about struggling to be a vampire in a world without institutional support of any kind.

I actually like that aspect of the game because this is where the "personal horror" comes in. In very early Vampire games, I think this was much more common. When the game was brand new and players (and STs) knew very little about the setting, the early games were just about exploring and dealing with their condition. But as the setting was more detailed, the focus shifted away from more personal aspects of a PC dealing with being a vampire, and more like a traditional combat oriented game where the PCs would kill the monster of the week - maybe that monster was a political enemy, an Independent clan, the enemy sect, or some other plot imposed by the ST through an intermediary vampire PC (like the Prince).

In my own experience, the early Vampire games I played in mostly focused on PC interactions with individual vampires plus some humans associated with us through backstory or sheet Backgrounds. But when LARP or online games became a big thing, focus shifted on PCs interacting solely with other vampires and in particular attending court (because there needs to be a place where the PCs have an excuse to go to in order to have the game). And that now dominates the game. Where before a Prince's court or Elysium was something mainly NPC elders did, now it's something a lot of games default for the PCs. There's nothing wrong about that, but it changes the game a lot. First edition Chicago By Night was written in that PCs simply KNOWING there were Primogen - not even who they were - was a secret to be learned in game. A lot of the things players think all PCs should know were actually mysteries to be revealed.

So I like a balance of things so there is a variety of things that PCs can do if they are interested in that. I tend not to include sect conflicts except in a fairly limited manner.

[CajunKhan]

How do you justify having a coterie of Kindred all clustered together in the same place when vampires are so rare? Not being snarky, just curious.

The players tend to just roll with it. It may be a plot hole in my sectless games, but if so it's a plot hole that's never hurt anything.

[Rhywbeth]

Giovanni and co: 30% [Family dramas and Wraith]
Autarkis coteries/Shovel heads/Nomadic packs: 20% [Sandbox experiments and survival]
Sabbat 20% [Vampires as vampires, the Apocalypse, infernalism and fun politics]
Camarilla 15% [Espionage, conspiracy and crime drama]
Anarch 10% [Anarchy, turf warfare, modern warlords, organised crime, survival and power grabbing]
Other independents 5% [Assamite schisms and caste squabling, weird shit from the Du'at and religion, that 1000 demons and paradox thing the Ravnos have going, Kolduns, the Wu Zao, hopefully one day the Tal'Mahe'Ra]

[Karos]

Probably:
50% Camarilla - I find the Camarilla is the best sect to run for newbies (who I've run a lot of games for) there's enough structure and consistency there. It's also a good way to give them a lore introduction without just spewing exposition.

35-40% Sabbat - Sabbat are probably my favourite sect to run, but they're also the hardest to run in my opinion. You really need mature players that are going to engage with what being Sabbat really means. When done right its probably some of the best VTM out there for my money, but when done poorly it swiftly becomes a game of discipline-stacking murder-hobos.

10% Autarkis - Autarkis are always interesting to spice things up, Hecata especially. I know they're not to everyone's taste, but personally, I've found having all the clans of death working together makes them much more versatile from a story perspective.

0-5% Anarch - Anarchs are probably the least engaging for me. Yes, you can do interesting stories about clinging to humanity, trying to resist authority, etc and that can be fun. However, I think moral questions and the battle with authority is much better handled by a well-run Sabbat game, the Anarchs feel like a half-measure.

[Damian May]

40% Camarilla. 40% Sabbat. 20% Multi-splat oddness ( Mostly KotE+)

[Lysander]

I tend to play with the Anarchs mostly and in our setting the Sabbat has all but crumbled when they learned that they doing the antidulvians bidding and that shook up there ideals of freedom.

So we deal with Camarilla and Anarch conflicts with each other currently, but I'm sure some Sabbat die hards will pop up in the future. So I'd say 90% Anarch and 10% Camarilla.

[Astriarch]

I tend to run the Camarilla most often, there's something appealing about the neo-feudal aspects of it that really fit with the vampire ideal. I am interested in doing more with the Anarchs though. I think I would like the Anarchs more if they were more than just a pale reflection of the Cam with their Barons. I would like to see not only gangs, and Barons, but different ideologies as well all playing off of each other.

[Chris24601]

Sect? Dhampirs don’t have a sect. If I run, I let the players choose.

[Amethyst]

I’ve never run VtM but I’ve played in one Camarilla game, one Anarchs game, one game set in Ancient Rome and one Sabbat one shot.

CajunKhan I’m impressed. You must’ve run a lot of Vampire games.

[CajunKhan]

I’ve never run VtM but I’ve played in one Camarilla game, one Anarchs game, one game set in Ancient Rome and one Sabbat one shot.

CajunKhan I’m impressed. You must’ve run a lot of Vampire games.

I've been running vampire games since...probably 92 or 93, I don't remember for sure. Mind you, there have been multiple periods when I lost interest in roleplaying games altogether for a couple of years. But back in the nineties I ran games constantly.

[Amethyst]

I've been running vampire games since...probably 92 or 93, I don't remember for sure. Mind you, there have been multiple periods when I lost interest in roleplaying games altogether for a couple of years. But back in the nineties I ran games constantly.

Wow. That’s cool. I’m not that old and I didn’t start playing WoD till college.

[AnubisXy]

Overall I tend to run Dark Ages games more often than modern ones, so usually things will be pre-sect. When I do run modern VtM games it tends to be Camarilla, simply because a lot of the cities I want to run things in are Camarilla cities.