No announcement yet.

Garou Control over Kinfolk - a discussion (warning: triggering subject matter)

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Garou Control over Kinfolk - a discussion (warning: triggering subject matter)

    How much control do Garou exercise over their kinfolk in your chronicles?

    It's not something I see much discussed. Obviously, there are differences between tribes, and the extent of control over some kinfolk (like immediate family) is different from others (you know there is a settlement of kinfolk of your tribe several hours away that belongs to your tribe, but you don't know them well and out of sight is out of mind). But I think certain general rules can be determined and any exceptions noted.

    And by control, I mean just that - Garou telling kinfolk what to do. Who to marry, whether to mate with a Garou - even if it means being unfaithful to a spouse; how many resources to make available to the Garou, pack, sept, or the cause; career decisions because the Garou need a kinfolk at certain places of employment or skills; or any other major decision or action the Garou may want. And of course, the Garou want their kinfolk to be very loyal - so I suspect there is a lot of influence provided in terms of "educating" kinfolk, particularly children, in the appropriate Garou values, loyalty, and secrecy just like a cult does. And cults exercise a LOT of control over their members. And the Litany applies to Kinfolk too, so besides the human law authorities, kinfolk could be brought up to trial by Garou for something they've done.

    The Kinfolk background itself implies a level of control over that number of Kinfolk. And while at low levels this can be used to describe family and friends, once it is 20 or 50 kinfolk that's a very different scenario. And while a common scenario is that a Garou controls the kinfolk that "belong" to him as his family, it might also be kinfolk friends and neighbors without family relations.

    And what about kinfolk that isn't tied to a specific Garou? Can the local tribal or sept leader exercise such control over that "protectorate" in lieu of any specific Garou that does have such immediate ties? And if so, is that authority more limited than say it was a Garou who was a son or sister or nephew or cousin or grandmother? I think this is something the local Litany has to address.

    I think this is something often overlooked in games. PCs only look after the specific Kinfolk as indicated on their background, and they typically describe their relationship in ways that are sympathetic. And in online games that have a lot of Kinfolk PCs, those Kinfolk PCs are almost always enthusiastic collaborators to the Garou because those players are looking to Play House with a Garou mate, or be otherwise useful in game since its fun to do stuff. But those aren't typical NPCs. The typical NPC Kinfolk of a tribe does not have any immediate Garou relative, and probably wants to get on with their life with as little trouble as possible - even if they don't mind donating some cash just like people do their church or favored charity or political party. But those groups don't have the power to stop by and issue them instructions or make decisions for them.

    I think this is an issue that makes players uncomfortable. That's both understandable and weird. Understandable because it brings up lots of ethical issues. But also weird because vampire players don't have that issue with Ghouls and Retainers, and the Kinfolk background is basically a variation of that.

    So I'm prepared to hear lots of dissenting views on this.

    Moderator Edit: I've added a trigger warning due to the later discussion of sexual assault and rape in the discussion before shutting it down.
    Last edited by CTPhipps; 06-17-2020, 06:00 AM.

  • #2
    I definitely agree that this varies radically from tribe to tribe, sept to sept, and garou to garou.

    However assuming a baseline traditional stance, I imagine most garou would treat their kinfolk as valued and beloved family members... as well as feeling entitled to, or even obligated to, provide guidance and direction to them.

    I've largely imagined it as a case where traditional families tend to gravitate around garou of their bloodline, those related to them as closely as possible, but if need arise (as tragically becomes the case with the high garou mortality rate) distant kin can also gravitate towards certain garou and at some point if a family is desperate enough any garou of the same tribe may qualify as a patron.

    I imagine that this is the remnant of an old siege mentality that has lived within the Garou Nation for millennia. A mentality that began as early as the Impergium when kinfolk were kept close and secure for their own safety and to ensure the survival of the Garou community which would continue to be the case as Garou culture drove kinfolk to cleave together and further more to cleave towards their patron Garou.

    However tribes have not always co-existed peacefully in the Nation. As such, with inner and inter tribe conflicts over the course of millennia, many kinfolk families would rely upon their Garou members for protection. The Garou cleaved together into packs and septs and those packs and septs often led the involved kinfolk to flock together as well. This siege mentality dynamic is a large part of what drives the garou and kinfolk to maintain their close proximity to this day.

    The importance of religion and culture also cannot be understated. Regardless of tribe, becoming garou is seen as a blessing. Many if not most kenning kinfolk will be given rites and have auspices read to predict and make them turning more likely. That helps develop the culture of garou superiority which is then reinforced by the fact that the garou wield a monopoly of violence alongside the ability of being able to contact the spirits.

    This combination alone makes them prime to lead their families and that doesn't even begin to mention the sense of deference that many kinfolk would have to develop as a survival instinct to avoid triggering a garou to rage and frenzy. This alongside the garou's sacred roles and their ability to defend their kinfolk against marauding garou and fomori alike paves the way for garou supremacy.

    Yet garou are still part of the family. Many, if not most, truly do love their kinfolk. They are raised in a highly spiritual and communal culture. Most probably value the lives of their kinfolk over their own, somewhat extraordinary in the more individualist culture of the modern west.

    However this love does not mean the Garou don't lead their kinfolk, in fact it may even make them feel more obligated to do so. They've been taught since birth that to be garou is a manifestation of The Goddess' blessing and to become an avatar of warfare and spirituality. Most garou would truly believe that they have a responsibility to lead their family, because kinfolk can never truly comprehend the Rage or Gnosis that a garou feels as their birthright.

    So garou lead their kinfolk and they dictate to them as the head of any household might. They become patriarchs and matriarchs with the only check-and-balance being higher ranked garou of the same pack, sept, and perhaps tribe. Aside from that garou are obligated to steward the kinfolk.

    Kinfolk can't understand the spirits and the messages they deliver of Gaia's Will. Kinfolk can't go toe to toe with a marauding lone wolf or a Black Spiral Dancer. Kinfolk can't be expected to. It's (probably) not their fault. That's the garou's obligation.

    The first of the kill to the greatest in station...

    Now, there are definitely kinfolk who would chafe under this sort of patronizing and while it would naturally vary in extremity, it would lead many kinfolk, particularly in the modern night's, to depart the Garou Nation.

    To me, I've never understood how it could be that the Garou Nation was shrinking. They should be able to slowly but steadily constantly increase their numbers as more and more kinfolk are born.

    Yet as garou die and the modern world draws many kinfolk away, I can begin to see why some garou fear that the Nation is shrinking.

    It's not really because so many garou are dying in the war. It's because so many kinfolk have turned their back on the Nation.

    For whatever reason, they have decided to abandon the War. To abandon constant fear. Constant anxiety. Constant service. Constant threat of bloody death from friend and foe alike.

    The greatest threat to the Garou Nation may not be either the Weaver or the Wyrm, but the Garou themselves.

    Same as it ever was...


    • #3
      I guess this is not addressed in Kinfolk: A breed apart? I haven't read that book yet...

      "No, no, don't look any further, my profile is actually more handsome than me"


      • #4
        Originally posted by Gryffon15 View Post
        So garou lead their kinfolk and they dictate to them as the head of any household might. They become patriarchs and matriarchs with the only check-and-balance being higher ranked garou of the same pack, sept, and perhaps tribe. Aside from that garou are obligated to steward the kinfolk.
        I think comparison to a family is appropriate, but I think it hides a lot of potential conflicts. And those conflicts will lead to hard choices that will be problems for many people.

        For example, parents often have to make hard decisions in order to keep the family going. But they can do so because children are dependent on their parents, and many have been conditioned to obey their parents in ways they wouldn't other adults. While the Garou see themselves in that same role, I think many kinfolk do not. Garou see kinfolk as weak and dependent because they don't have the powers of the Garou or their knowledge. But adult kinfolk aren't in the same situation as children to parents - they're responsible and providing for themselves. So not only will they chafe against Garou authority in ways that a child may, they'll also behave in ways that adults chafe against other adult authority figures. Many kinds of people see themselves in some paternal fashion to people - religious figures, political authorities, and civic leaders. That doesn't mean their demands are always met.

        For example, let's take a kinfolk whose a successful businessman. He was raised to be very pro-Garou, and because of his role in the human community he's been able to provide resources and influence to the Garou. But for whatever reason - justifiably or not - the Garou have gone to that well several times and keep asking for more. The first time, the kinfolk was more than happy to write the check. The second and third time, he did it as well, but with much less enthusiasm. Now he's being asked once again. To the Garou, this is a reasonable "request" - they feel they have a legitimate need for it (you can come up with a variety of reasons). To the kinfolk, this is jeopardizing the success of his business and his livelihood. It's not that either is "wrong". It's ultimately who controls that decision. Who really "owns" things. Does the (local verison) of the Litany prohibit Garou from demanding things? Or does it say that the Garou ultimately have a veto.

        It is easy to say that the Garou should (or even that they do) try to "balance" their needs with the needs/rights of the kinfolk. But they will always see things different from that kinfolk. They could very well think they are balancing things correctly, and any kinfolk complaints are ultimately just selfish. At the end, it doesn't matter if the Garou think they are being fair or balanced at all as long as they ultimately get to make the decision. And that is a matter of legal authority in the Litany and how far the Garou are prepared to exercise it.

        So where does that authority end? Do kinfolk have rights? If so, what are they? Or are they, in a legal sense, always dependents?

        We can use a real world example to illustrate. In the beginning of motion pictures, there were child stars that earned incredible amounts of money. At one point, all that money was essentially considered the parents because the child was a minor. The result was that some famous child actors were essentially penniless when they became adults because their parents spent it all. In response, California passed a law that guaranteed a portion of the child performer's earnings be safeguarded in order to protect them from abuse (though even that was only 15% of earnings). Prior to that law, the minor had no right at all to the income they earned. And even with this protection, it's still a minority amount that is protected.

        So what's the status of a kinfolk's wealth in regards to the Garou? Is everything protected and anything provided is a "gift"? Is everything really the property of the "proper" Garou authority over that kinfolk? Is there a portion that is protected, but everything else is available to be used by the Garou? Or is it like a feudal tithe that the kinfolk "owes" the Garou in exchange for that Garou's "protection"?

        And in certain human societies, the authority of one's parents could be very great in certain cultures today and historically. A Roman family's pater familias could legally exercise autocratic control over all his descendants. He held certain duties to them, but also held the power over life and death over them. This did not mean fathers exercised all those powers given to them, but they legally could (at least until the laws eventually changed and restricted some of these powers). So we have lots of examples we can use to govern this.

        Another point is that we use the metaphor of a family. And some Garou actually are family or another close connection to kinfolk? But what happens if say there is an isolated community of 50 or 100 kinfolk. But there isn't a local Garou spawned by them. Can another Garou simply move in and "adopt" them (assuming this is done with whatever legally appropriate means so that it is accepted by other Garou)? And therefore some outsider Garou shows up and says, "I'm now in charge. You that owns that gas station down there, be sure to keep my car tank filled up. You that owns the local grocery, be sure to deliver several bags of groceries to this address here." And so on. All these requests might be low cost to the kinfolk and even reasonable, but it'll still be very different to provide them to someone who just showed up as opposed to someone who grew up with them. Or is this something that falls to a sept collectively until a Garou of that kinfolk community's blood is born and can claim it?

        Currently, I'm working on including kinfolk more in the chronicles I run, so I'm working through these things.


        • #5
          Originally posted by Gryffon15 View Post
          Yet as garou die and the modern world draws many kinfolk away, I can begin to see why some garou fear that the Nation is shrinking.

          It's not really because so many garou are dying in the war. It's because so many kinfolk have turned their back on the Nation.
          Yes. And therefore it's critical to answer the question of how much authority do Garou have to control those kinfolk, at least in regards to how a sept or tribe views that authority so it is legal in the sense it is approved in the Litany (regardless of whether that authority is used, or theway the Garou decides to go about exercising it). Can they tell a kinfolk, "No, you can't leave town." or 'You'll need to go to the local community college that is nearby as opposed to heading out of state to the university of your dreams?" or "I've decided you're to marry my packmate because she is ready to have kids and always liked you (or altenratively to strengthen the bonds between packmates, you'll marry my packmate's sibling so we'll always be family.)"

          Obviously, that specific level of control can't be exercised on all kinfolk everywhere, but it could be used against a certain number of individual kinfolk that one Garou could have in their span of influence. So what can they legally do in terms of the local Litany?

          If we stop talking about things in general, and deal with specifics, things can get tough. And ugly.
          Last edited by Black Fox; 06-09-2020, 09:12 PM.


          • #6
            Originally posted by Black Fox View Post
            If we stop talking about things in general, and deal with specifics, things can get tough. And ugly.
            I very much agree with this in particular as well as a great deal of everything else you just said.

            The Garou Nation is a culture from another era, one that pre-dates the renaissance and the industrial revolution and everything that came with them. Those that seem particularly interested in these developments are often viewed with suspicion or outright anger, as the treatment of the Urrah by the High and Pure tribes show.

            While I definitely think that the specific case of individual garou, packs, septs, and tribes are important to take into account; with details often becoming the messy stuff of great stories, speaking generally has a limited effect, although it can still be quite informative.

            I definitely agree that while close family might be more likely to accept the interests of the Garou, there would still be messiness. How do parents deal with the fact that their child is now considered to be above them in every way that matters in much of Garou society? How do brothers and sisters deal with it? Garou culture even keeps cousins close, but the more degrees of separation there are, the stranger things are likely to become.

            I most certainly agree that adult kinfolk, particularly proud and capable individuals, would probably nurse lifelong bitterment that because of what seems to be a fluke of chance, they will forever be second class citizens. That some brash child deserves respect for turning into a monster and their decades of faith and service is seen as being worth less then one lucky little brat's ability to tear apart a few fomori.

            Many Garou probably do recognize this and I would say that dismissing the wisdom of capable kinfolk should indicate a loss of some wisdom renown and perhaps honor... yet even then, those penalties do nothing to resolve the fact that a garou will always be viewed as more important to society and have a vastly greater opportunity for renown.

            Garou culture offers great renown to Garou for serving in battle. Kinfolk gain a fraction of that renown for years of dutiful service. For this reason alone, as Garou are often arrogant and seem self-important, those kinfolk aware of the option may simply leave the Nation. Others may even rebel against it.

            When this happens, the garou have a choice. Do they let a member of their tribe leave? A person who could help the war effort and has the potential to sire or birth the next generation's warriors? Wouldn't it be a failure to let them leave? Yet what is the alternative? To drag them home for punishment? To make an example of them? Or just... let them go?

            It's up to the garou and the kinfolk and that's what stories are made of.


            • #7
              Originally posted by Gryffon15 View Post
              When this happens, the garou have a choice. Do they let a member of their tribe leave? A person who could help the war effort and has the potential to sire or birth the next generation's warriors? Wouldn't it be a failure to let them leave? Yet what is the alternative? To drag them home for punishment? To make an example of them? Or just... let them go?

              It's up to the garou and the kinfolk and that's what stories are made of.
              I agree, but I am trying to figure out guidelines for this. This is the kind of thing that can make PCs nervous. They look to me as an ST to provide them those guidelines as I'm the expert of my own chronicle of course. So I need to figure some things out in my head. Some PCs will avoid the issue entirely. Others want to clearly play it safe, and therefore need to know where that spot is. And even those who want to be at the edge or even just over it in terms of exploitation, still need to have an idea of where it stands. Either so they can attempt to justify they are not over the line, or be aware when they would be clearly over it.

              So that means I need do the heavy thinking beforehand. And getting feedback from you and others (eventually, I hope) I can gauge whether my ideas seem to be acceptable, or wildly out of line. I'd rather debate this first here than with my players if something turns out to be outrageous.

              For example, I have a small kinfolk community of several hundred out there that is isolated and kind of orphaned. They are there for the PCs to run into and adopt if they want. But I need to figure out what are expectations in terms of how they can "adopt" these kinfolk, and what they could reliably expect from them, and what they could "earn" from them, and what they really shouldn't do.


              • #8
                This is just how it has been in some online games I've been, but if the kinfolk doesn't have family to watch over them, they are under a decided garou -guard.-

                When it comes to being mated, it isn't uncommon for garou the challenge either the kinfolk guardian or a rival for the right to mate with the kinfolk. Sometimes, the kin doesn't have a say.

                My gallery.


                • #9
                  Prefacing by saying that Werewolf is one of the lines I know less about, I have a couple of thoughts to offer on this interesting subject.

                  I do think that discussing the relationship between Garou and Kinfolk has to focus on discussing each Tribe in particular. The culture and history of each Tribe leads them to view the Litany differently, emphasizing or ignoring different parts. This inevitably includes Kinfolk relations. I think asking your question about each Tribe in turn would be better than trying to find a baseline for all Garou, which would likely be so vague as to be useless.

                  To use an example, Tribes like the Silver Fangs or Get of Fenris would be more likely to take a top-down Garou-first attitude I think, given their cultural focus on hierarchy and combat ability respectively. Tribes with more compassionate or "progressive" cultures, like the Children of Gaia or Bone Gnawers, seem more likely to treat their Kin in a more equitable fashion.

                  In addition to this, I think an important consideration is the proximity of a given pack/Sept to the homeland of their Tribe. I think Garou that place higher emphasis on tradition and Tribe culture will likely be more hardline and literal in interpreting the Litany. And those Garou will likely want to live closer to the "centre" of those traditions. Conversely, Garou that are less interested in following those traditions will likely move away from the Tribe's traditional heartland, where they'll likely have more freedom to live and interpret the Litany their own way. Again, this would include views on Kinfolk relations. Again, speaking broadly and with little expertise, I think more traditional interpretation of the Litany, even among more "progressive" Tribes, leans towards a feudal hierarchy with, at best, extremely limited protections of Kinfolk independence or rights.

                  P.S. Start work soon, but a quick note on Kinfolk views, versus Garou. Broadly speaking, Kinfolk raised more in Garou/Tribe culture, who understand "the stakes" of the Garou's struggle, are more likely to accept harsher conditions or give greater support to the cause. The more they are kept in the dark, for their own protection or not, the more likely they are to resent more extreme examples of domination from their Garou relatives.
                  Last edited by Kharnov; 06-11-2020, 01:29 PM.


                  • #10
                    The Garou get away with as much as they can. Staying 'honourably mated' is what you should do, not what most young garou actually do: Wolves may be monogamous but a lot of men aren't if they can pull it off, and contrary to what W20 says, that animal magnetism power works on any human without the willpower to stave it off, regardless of their orientation or preferences. Garou are monsters. They are not nice people, they just think they're nice people.

                    Even in, say, a "nice" tribe like the black furies, who would largely never force an innocent woman to do something they wouldn't (This may or may not apply to men, depending on the individual) they still heavily engage in tactics to keep their people in line, be it guilt, love bombardment, gifts/luxuries/nice assignments for good behaviour... the Kinfolk likely don't have any money to their name, it'd be difficult to leave. Of course, some kinfolk are kept off the reservation and have normal lives beyond the occasional weird relative who comes in to check up on them. A garou is free to cuck a kinfolk and the only thing you can do about it is get another garou on your side (Unlikely) or take advantage of the fact that the perpetrator has probably given some beneficial treatments to your partner and... Yeah, Skindancers are doing the right thing.

                    With BSD, (Warning: You may not want to read this) Kinfolk are literally property to by and sell. both sexes have harems and breed like crazy, their offspring are raised to be sacrificed for Chimage or sold off to other spirals for services, fetishes or are exchanged for fresh less-related partners for which to have more children with. Kinfolk are brutalised if they step out of line and are encouraged to work against one another, werewolves are very good at tracking down their "lost property"

                    Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Ana Mizuki View Post
                      This is just how it has been in some online games I've been, but if the kinfolk doesn't have family to watch over them, they are under a decided garou -guard.-
                      I think that is easy in online games when there is a limited number of Garou and Kinfolk PCs, and things like that can be arranged. Often for the purposes of encouraging roleplay and including new PCs into the game quickly. I would be surprised if the STs of those online games would have many Kinfolk NPCs they would do would this with. It seems to me that this is something restricted to PCs.

                      In the actual setting, I wonder if such a thing is truly possible. Certainly not on a one to one basis. Depending on the setting assumptions, there can easily be 50, 100, 200 or more Kinfolk for every Garou. A single Garou could not keep track of that, much less combined with any other responsibilities they have.

                      However, I could see certain Garou appointed "Guardians" over a defined Kinfolk population in the sense of 1) giving those kinfolk an official liasion to the sept and keeping a Garou eye out for those kinfolk, 2) distinguish "ownership" in regards to other Garou in order to prevent turf wars and regulate disputes between Garou to those kinfolk, and 3) encourage relationship building between unaffiliated Garou and unaffiliated Kinfolk so that both groups have someone to bond to and strengthen ties to the sept and encourage mating. Those "guardians" would be appointed to those groups that don't already have a Garou connected to them in terms of blood or other connection. I suspect the majority of Garou appointed to such positions would be Philodox and then Ragabash. Theurges would have too many distractions due to the spirit world. Ahrouns would have too much Rage. And Galliards are too entwined with the Garou society.


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Kharnov View Post
                        I do think that discussing the relationship between Garou and Kinfolk has to focus on discussing each Tribe in particular.
                        This is definitely true, but I do think we can identify a baseline for most tribes, and then diverge from that baseline as needed given the dynamics of any particular tribe or sept.

                        This is how I would divide up the tribes in general categories:

                        Tribes that Exercise the Most Control over Kinfolk, including Despotic Tendencies
                        Silver Fangs
                        Shadow Lords
                        Black Furies

                        Tribes that Exercise Much Control over Kinfolk, but tend to avoid Despotic Tendencies
                        Glass Walker

                        Tribes that Exercise Control over Kinfolk, but known for their Fairness and Compassion
                        Children of Gaia
                        Get of Fenris
                        Silent Strider

                        Tribes that don't Exercise Much Control over Kinfolk outside Immediate Family
                        Bone Gnawer

                        I think the first, most despotic, category is obvious. Silver Fangs are obsessed with Pure Breed and use to being in charge. Shadow Lords are known for their intimidation and severity. Black Furies might be surprising, but I consider them to be particularly controlling of the male population of their kinfolk. And they are most in need of kinfolk to populate the Garou since their lack of male Garou to sire offspring makes them more dependent on their kinfolk, and thus more of a need to make sure they do their duty. I also see them as promoting a certain kind of propaganda of how Black Fury kinfolk women are supposed to behave or believe. We are going to see most of the abuses in these tribes.

                        The second category is what I consider to be the baseline. They exercise control, but avoid most of the worst abuses of the first group. However, I'm likely to reconsider where some of these tribes should be. I'm fairly confidant that the Fianna here. They're among the most traditional of the Garou. Wendigo too are traditional in their other ways, and their kinfolk often live in easily controlled small population centers. Uktena are more expansive of incorporating new kinfolk into the tribe, but I also see them as strongly working to enculturate those new members. I thought long about Glass Walkers and initially put them elsewhere, but eventually decided to include them here. As living in urban environments, their kinfolk are constantly exposed to "unGaian" culture. In response, I think they need to exercise a lot of control over certain kinfolk. Although I also see them as more willing to let certain kinfolk slip away, and more willing to bring in new kinfolk.

                        The third category is similar to the second category, and therefore close to their baseline. However, in this category are tribes who are much less likely to abuse the influence they have over their kinfolk. Their tribal culture, and thus interpretation of the Litany, prevents that. Children of Gaia are obvious. As are Silent Striders, who typically live in small family units that travel, and thus exercise limited control of people they always live around, as opposed to larger settlements. Get of Fenris may seem to be an outlier here, but a distinguishing feature of the tribe has been the care they have for their kinfolk. This was introduced early on, and I think was done in order to deliberately show a different side to the tribe than their reputation would normally inspire. I think the second category of Garou see themselves ideally in this category, but actually aren't.

                        The fourth category are Garou who I feel barely bother to exercise control over kinfolk. Both Bone Gnawers and Stargazers are known for eschewing temporal power. Gnawers are too disorganized to assert control over their own tribe, much less its kinfolk. And Stargazers are too busy contemplating and meditating things to exercise much control. They just have other priorities.

                        I didn't include Red Talons because I feel lupus kinfolk are an entirely different matter. And I agree that the Black Spiral Dancers treat their kinfolk as a disposable resource, limited to whatever their imagination, needs, or desires are.

                        I'm still thinking of what "the guidelines" actually mean. But in terms of tribal divergence, this is how I see how the tribes divide in their interpretation.
                        Last edited by Black Fox; 06-11-2020, 07:41 PM.


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by MyWifeIsScary View Post
                          The Garou get away with as much as they can.
                          I think this is true, but with caveats. Garou can easily intimidate kinfolk, but there are limits. First, kinfolk know enough that they can be dangerous if they defect to the enemy - and the enemy can include normal human hunters who can be dangerous armed with silver and if they know details on human identities of werewolves and where they live. It doesn't mean just betrayal to the Wyrm. Kinfolk have more than one option. Second, Garou are codependent on their kinfolk. They need the relationship to work and to be consensual in general. This does not mean there are not abuses. Sometimes being run along cult lines, kinfolk under intense propaganda and isolated from other influences can willingly agree to a lot of things people in general wouldn't. And a Garou can be exploitative to a small number of individuals while still retaining loyalty of the greater population.

                          But I think the biggest caveat is that the Garou are a people of law. I don't think Garou adherence to the Litany is perfect, but its better than vampires adhering to the Traditions. Furthermore, unlike the Traditions, the Garou have a real law code in the Litany. Even if it is crude and primitive by today's standards, it wouldn't be out of place for many humans for multiple thousands of years. A ghoul or other retainer has ZERO protection from a vampire in terms of the greater vampire community. I do think there are protections for kinfolk in the Litany, particular under the section of Respect Those Beneath You, but also other sections. A vampire who mistreats a retainer doesn't face any sanction by his fellow vampires. A Garou who mistreats kinfolk might see himself brought to justice by his fellow Garou - loss of renown, possibly even a Punishment Rite.

                          So I do think kinfolk do have some kind of rights, or at least that Garou have some kind of guidelines in how they treat them. There is reciprocity involved since Garou have obligations as well. But like any unequal power relationship, it is easier for the more powerful - the Garou - to not fulfill their duties and expect more than what's required from the less powerful. So its easier for them to get away with abuse. But I do think there are limits to that abuse before other Garou of the sept step in and intervene. It's a matter of figuring out where that lies.


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Alqamar Alaswad View Post
                            I guess this is not addressed in Kinfolk: A breed apart? I haven't read that book yet...
                            You should. There it is described saying that Black Furies, Children of Gaia and Bone Gnawers are the libarete and Shadow Lords, Silverclaws and Get of Fenris are the most controlling.

                            As I am from Austria I need to clarify two things.
                            First my native language is german and so please point out if the english I write is broken so I can improve.
                            Second I do not own VTMV nor any line after M20 because it is not out there and I wait for the translation.


                            • #15
                              Black Fox I would reverse the Black Furies and the Get of Fenris. I would think the Furies would be much more compassionate toward their Kinfolk than the Get.

                              “No one holds command over me. No man, no god, no Prince. Call your damn Hunt. We shall see who I drag screaming down to hell with me.” The last Ahrimane says this when Mithras calls a Blood Hunt against her.