Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Changing Ways thoughts

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

  • #91
    Originally posted by Ana Mizuki View Post

    Most likely, but I don't think that is what makes it so aggravating in the long run. It is the fact that a bunch of people read those descs on the tribes, and have stuck to them from then on. It isn't the actual writing as much as the popularity, in other words.
    It’s just an incredibly reductive and simplistic view of the tribes that makes them less interesting overall. All Get are Nazis, all Furies are feminazis, all Fianna are drunken Irish louts, all Fangs are inbred. I like a world with more nuance and everything I have read after 2nd ed seems to go out of its way to distance itself from the previous bad writing.

    Most people seem to have dropped the crappy parts of that edition but it seems then that the one thing that won’t die is the bad stereotypes of the Furies. Honestly, I’m not surprised.
    Last edited by Lunar Falcon; 01-05-2018, 06:19 PM.


    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by Lunar Falcon View Post
      I see. I have stuff from 1st ed, Revised, and W20. From what I have seen in other discussions online isn’t 2nd ed the one that’s seen as having some of the worst writing and botched stereotyping amongst all the various editions?
      No cmon, the first ed was the worst, by far. Too much incoherence in lore between manuals, too little background and some bad mechanic that was fixed with 2nd.


      Originally posted by Lunar Falcon View Post
      It’s just an incredibly reductive and simplistic view of the tribes that makes them less interesting overall. All Get are Nazis, all Furies are feminazis, all Fianna are drunken Irish louts, all Fangs are inbred. I like a world with more nuance and everything I have read after 2nd ed seems to go out of its way to distance itself from the previous bad writing.

      Most people seem to have dropped the crappy parts of that edition but it seems then that the one thing that won’t die is the bad stereotypes of the Furies. Honestly, I’m not surprised.
      Stereotypes are there to give a direction, not to be always true. The W20 wording makes me think that the tribe is roughly split in half between radicals and equalitarians, so it's not like the whole tribe is against men. But they still killed born males in the past, their totem still hates every man and they still believe women to be superior because of the stronger bond with Gaia tied to their child-birthing ability.
      Most of the Furies will follow some core behaviour of their tribe while disregarding some others, but at their core they're still clearly defined as a tribe of amazons and feminine pagan cultists. I don't know why you're trying to make the Furies something they are not. The Garou are not paragons of virtue and the Furies are just as flawed as the other tribes.


      Originally posted by Ana Mizuki View Post
      Once the kin has been claimed, then they belong to their mate and their mate is responsible if the kin does anything wrong.

      Is that effed up and borderline slavery? Heck yeah. But that's how it was taught to me.
      I don't really think it's a standard procedure, like, at all. I don't remember this being in any of the books I've read and it's certainly not in Kaba, where kinfolks-garou relations are mostly described as somewhat romantic. Kinfolks will not (normally) just breed with you out of duty and you may actually have to go through regular dating before marrying; you may not even have availlable kinfolks to marry with since they may be already married or simply of the wrong age.
      Your campaign had a fight club and a ready mates for everyone but that's just a specific campaign setup.

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by Ana Mizuki View Post
        I think this is where our experiences differ pretty vastly, as I'm used to seeing most kinfolk mated to a garou. Maybe due to my forum game experience, but having a kinfolk who -isn't- mated to a garou has been a rarity indeed and one that was usually recktified -very- quickly. This possibly ties back to the whole issue of kinfolk-PCs as useless, but that is a topic for another time.

        Do I think some Furies rape men? Absolutely. But I think in general it might be a more insidious harem set-up where the kinfolk men are forced to have sex with selected Furies, and since these kinfolk men have drank the kool-aid thinking this sort of abuse is correct they don't fight back. Much easier for the Furies in long term than just forcing themselves on unwilling kinfolk.
        I disagree, most Kinfolk cant be mated with Garou. Simply put there arent that many Garous of matching tribes with Kinfolks. Kinfolk-kinfolks should be the most common and the ideal be Kinfolk-Garou.

        Originally posted by Ana Mizuki View Post
        Once the kin has been claimed, then they belong to their mate and their mate is responsible if the kin does anything wrong.

        Is that effed up and borderline slavery? Heck yeah. But that's how it was taught to me.
        Yeah thats really depends on the situation. What happens when its a kinfolk from one tribe and a Garou of another tribe. Is not as clean cut as that. Normally when everything is arranged then the ownership of the kinfolk and the offspring comes into negotiations.

        You can mate as a Garou with a kinfolk of another tribe and say, remain married but the kinfolk still belongs to the tribe but in exchange the offspring will belong to the kinfolk´s tribe. For example

        Originally posted by Maris Streck View Post
        I don't really think it's a standard procedure, like, at all. I don't remember this being in any of the books I've read and it's certainly not in Kaba, where kinfolks-garou relations are mostly described as somewhat romantic. Kinfolks will not (normally) just breed with you out of duty and you may actually have to go through regular dating before marrying; you may not even have availlable kinfolks to marry with since they may be already married or simply of the wrong age.
        Your campaign had a fight club and a ready mates for everyone but that's just a specific campaign setup.
        Well its a middle ground between those 2 extremes. Garou society basically push the 2 parts (Garou and Kinfolk) to procreate. So yes, as you said before legally speaking they are property.

        That said there is a nuance to that. Say Garou A owns Kinfolk A and Garou B has the hots for Kinfolk A.

        Garou B goes and ask Kinfolk A for a date, and kinfolk A responds with "Go ask Garou A". Now at simple view this would look like slavery, Kinfolk A lovelife seems to the in the hands of Garou A as some kind of tyrant.

        And sometimes it is just that. The tyrant Garou that sees kinfolk as breeding stock to be change for political favors. But other times, is more complex than that. As both Garou B and Kinfolk A departs, the latter goes to Garou A and tell him/her that this Garou B wants to date and tells them either yes or no the prospect. And when Garou B comes to ask Garou A for the right to date Kinfolk A then Garou A says Yes or No.

        Why this system? Because it allows Kinfolk an easy way out of rejecting a Garou. Romantic rejection is humiliating and painful, now picture having to reject the advances of someone that has anger problems, can turn into a giant wolf monster and that the status in society is objectively better than yours. Now with the previous system the Kinfolk can "say no" to Garou without the Garou directing his/her anger at the kinfolk.

        "Sorry my Garou doesnt allow me to date you" put the blame squarely on the "owner Garou" which normally can take care of himself/herself. Even legally the Garou is more safe because even if the spurned Garou is angry enough to press the issue, both stand on the same level on their society. The spurned Garou has to challenge and that has to pass through the master of challenge.

        Now does that mean the Kinfolk is 100% free to choose whom they mate with? No it isnt. There is family and tribe pressure to mate (nor marry mind you) and put his/her part on the fight. Sometimes the pressure is about an mating that gives the tribe an edge or simply that the Garou actually succeeds on the challenge and get the mate.

        Breeding out of duty is way more common, for one there is the mating rite of kinfolk that has a set duration (one of which being "until we produce a child") and on the other hand it allows enough emotional distance to "solve" the this problem:

        Originally posted by Maris Streck View Post
        Maybe the kin already loves a schoolmate or a work collegue, maybe he hates you for how you treated his family or maybe he's just not attracted by your huge web of scars.
        Then Garou society say "Okay, you dont have to marry this person. Just bear his/her child. After that you both walk and continue with your lives."

        It would say that is more common on the more asshole tribes (SFs, SLs, Fenrir, Fianna, etc)

        Originally posted by Lunar Falcon View Post

        The Furies as a whole are portrayed as being an avenging Tribe. It’s even their tribal glyph, the scales of justice and a lightning bolt for swift punishment. Rape in general is seen as one of the worst crimes against Gaia’s law and natural order and is something the Tribe actively seeks to punish. The Bacchantes camp is one of the most traditional camps and their entire purpose is punishing rapists, murderers, abusers, etc. I don’t think as a rule the Black Furies would condone rape in any way, that level of a lack of self awareness would be comical. I know it’s the “world of darkness” and things are shitty but how dense would they need to be to say, “rape is terrible, kill the rapists! Now let’s rape these men for babies!” It’s comically stupid.

        Besides, the tribebook even says that as a whole the tribe recognizes that a man and a woman are required to have children and are smart enough to not take anti-male aggression out on their kin and that they don’t live in fear. Now I’m sure there are exceptions but it’s most definitely not the rule. Not even close.

        I find that those who often see or portray the Furies as “feminazi man haters”, and “woman supremacists” usually have a very poor understanding of the tribe and what it actually represents.
        I would add that considering that most kinfolks are indoctrinated from birth the Tribe would have a better view of their male kinfolks than other males after all they were raise with the ideology of the tribe from birth.
        Last edited by LokiRavenSpeak; 01-06-2018, 12:18 AM.

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by LokiRavenSpeak View Post

          I disagree, most Kinfolk cant be mated with Garou. Simply put there arent that many Garous of matching tribes with Kinfolks. Kinfolk-kinfolks should be the most common and the ideal be Kinfolk-Garou.
          Oh yeah, I know it isn't universal (thank god). These kinfolk claimed were also PCs, to add to the mess. Nothing like seeing a new Shadow Lord at the sept just grab a free Lord kin and say 'mine'.


          My gallery.

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by LokiRavenSpeak View Post
            Why this system? Because it allows Kinfolk an easy way out of rejecting a Garou. Romantic rejection is humiliating and painful, now picture having to reject the advances of someone that has anger problems, can turn into a giant wolf monster and that the status in society is objectively better than yours. Now with the previous system the Kinfolk can "say no" to Garou without the Garou directing his/her anger at the kinfolk.
            Yes, the kinfolks still are slave-objects for the Garou society. But slavery still means protecting your own slaves so it's not only a one-way relation.

            Then Garou society say "Okay, you dont have to marry this person. Just bear his/her child. After that you both walk and continue with your lives."
            It would say that is more common on the more asshole tribes (SFs, SLs, Fenrir, Fianna, etc)
            Kinfolks are still humans though.Not many people are willing to have sex with another person when they're already in a relationship, it's something on the line of the "Indecent Proposal" movie. =p

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by Maris Streck View Post

              Kinfolks are still humans though.Not many people are willing to have sex with another person when they're already in a relationship, it's something on the line of the "Indecent Proposal" movie. =p
              This is assuming these kin haven't been taught from day one that mating with a garou is a sacred duty and they must fulfill it.

              Just out of curiosity, do you see kinfolk as more of random relatives to the garou who just happen to be related? Or do you see them as part of the sept-running machine?


              My gallery.

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by Maris Streck View Post
                Kinfolks are still humans though.Not many people are willing to have sex with another person when they're already in a relationship, it's something on the line of the "Indecent Proposal" movie. =p
                This basically:

                Originally posted by Ana Mizuki View Post
                This is assuming these kin haven't been taught from day one that mating with a garou is a sacred duty and they must fulfill it.
                A raise-in-the-know kinfolk will have been indoctrinated from birth that is whats expected of him/her. But then a already married/in a relationship kinfolk depends on his partner.

                If his/her partners is a Garou then it comes into the question is the proposing Garou has any kind of claim followed by a formal challenge and/or negotiation with the handler of the kinfolk.

                If his/her partner is a Kinfolk, both knew what is expected of them. They wont be happy about it but still.

                If his/her partner is a human. This complicate things, the question is that of why a valuable kinfolk (for breeding purposes) was allowed to pursue a relationship outside of the nation. The fact that the kinfolk has to lie to his/her partner constantly about that other side of her/his life also puts her/him in a position of "what just another lie to the pile?"

                Now this are specific examples though. As I said before there are more Kinfolks than Garou around and not all Kinfolks are put to breeding constantly. A kinfolk can be more useful to a sept or tribe in his/her current position than in breeding.

                Most non-idiotic Septs will try to dissuade Garou from breaking relationship willy nilly. If there are plenty of kinfolk around, the Garou can just pick another. If he/her press the issue, then the Sept and tribe of everyone involve has to balance out the contributions of the Garou, the kinfolk, the union in question, etc.

                Example: Is not like a BGs with PB 0, who just barely made Cliath can just see the SL Sept Alpha´s daughter who is married to another kinfolk and both hold an important human jobs to the sept and say "Hey i wanna put a baby there" and expect the Sept Alpha to even lay a challenge.

                The Sept alpha can just raise an eyebrow and tell the Garou a million of reasons why the Garou doesnt have a claim. Pull rank and give him a socket to calm his needs.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by Ana Mizuki View Post
                  This is assuming these kin haven't been taught from day one that mating with a garou is a sacred duty and they must fulfill it.

                  Just out of curiosity, do you see kinfolk as more of random relatives to the garou who just happen to be related? Or do you see them as part of the sept-running machine?
                  It really depends by the kinfolk. Kennings are in the machine, working with the Garou and sometimes even watching the Caern, other kinfolks don't even know what a kinfolk is supposed to be.
                  But kenning kinfolks are not mindless drones. Your mother tells you to breed with a Garou since when you're little, then you go into high school an meet an handsome boy you fell in love with; or maybe during middle school you see grampa beating your mother into the ground after overcooking his meat and your myth of the Garou breaks down. And now you're 19 and the Garou world can just go fuck himself because you already have your life.

                  Indoctrination and psychological coercition in western society won't work too much since we have safeguards meant to protect people from such abuses. We are quite big on freedom nowadays and I just can't see all the 200 kinfolks around a Caern submitting to the archaic Garou wishes; some of them, let's say 20-50? Sure, but mostly they're not going to just lay down and get pregnant because you say so.

                  Bone Gnawers and Glass Walkers even less so. SFs are ofc going to have the thickest loyal kinfolk network.
                  Last edited by Maris Streck; 01-06-2018, 09:48 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by Maris Streck View Post

                    Stereotypes are there to give a direction, not to be always true. The W20 wording makes me think that the tribe is roughly split in half between radicals and equalitarians, so it's not like the whole tribe is against men. But they still killed born males in the past, their totem still hates every man and they still believe women to be superior because of the stronger bond with Gaia tied to their child-birthing ability.
                    Most of the Furies will follow some core behaviour of their tribe while disregarding some others, but at their core they're still clearly defined as a tribe of amazons and feminine pagan cultists. I don't know why you're trying to make the Furies something they are not. The Garou are not paragons of virtue and the Furies are just as flawed as the other tribes.

                    I’m not saying they are without problems as a tribe but with the expanded lore in the other books like the tribe books really flesh out the tribes and show for all the bad, there’s still a lot of good there too. Several tribes have high ideals even if they aren’t often able to reach them. Hell, I even like the Get as there are legitimate things to admire about them. I guess I hold the unpopular interpretations that has a little more hope in the world, that even with all of the bad there are good things about most every tribe that keeps them from being completely awful. That’s what I like about Revised and W20, for all that the Garou have fucked up in the past and still do every day, a good chunk of them are trying to be better and have started to pull their heads out of their asses.


                    Comment


                    • Well, to get this thread back to its original topic, I think we all can agree that Furies and Talons won't do the homid-male-forcing.

                      Though the Errata thread is closed, I present you guys a deformity from the metis chapter that would have been a better general flaw.

                      Originally posted by Changing Ways p.73
                      Spiritual Deformity Spirits loyal to the Garou cause can sense that you are
                      the result of a breach of the Litany and the spirit world itself rejects you. You suffer a +1 difficulty to step sideways anywhere except a Blight or Wyrm caern, and a similar penalty when interacting with any spirit that respects Garou. Finally, Totem is a discouraged Background for you (see p. 135 of W20). On the other hand, you gain a -1 difficulty on all social interaction with Banes, who find you very interesting. Black Spiral Dancer metis never have this deformity.


                      My gallery.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Ana Mizuki View Post
                        Well, to get this thread back to its original topic, I think we all can agree that Furies and Talons won't do the homid-male-forcing.
                        No, I think the Furies could do it, did you read anything I wrote?
                        But the Talons wouldn't. Anyway, opinions.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Maris Streck View Post

                          No, I think the Furies could do it, did you read anything I wrote?
                          But the Talons wouldn't. Anyway, opinions.
                          Kinfolk, yeah, but not homid members of the tribe, I hope.


                          My gallery.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Ana Mizuki View Post
                            Kinfolk, yeah, but not homid members of the tribe, I hope.
                            Oh, that one. Sorry! Yea, that really feels nonsensical.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Ana Mizuki View Post
                              Though the Errata thread is closed, I present you guys a deformity from the metis chapter that would have been a better general flaw.
                              What Metis Deformity doesn't also work as a general Flaw though? A non-Metis could easily replicate this with the Cursed Flaw.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Heavy Arms View Post

                                What Metis Deformity doesn't also work as a general Flaw though? A non-Metis could easily replicate this with the Cursed Flaw.
                                I just meant that this deformity -should- have been a cursed-flaw from the get-go. As it is such that it makes more sense as -that-, than as a metis deformity.


                                My gallery.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X