No announcement yet.

Big misconceptions

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by reaperfrost8 View Post

    These do crop up from to time from other places outside the forums specifically the mage one and wisdom.

    As for my personal misconception I usually assumed that mummies sekhem drained really fast due to how other people kept pushing the whole just wait until your low leveled I played it myself and realized it wasn't that big of a problem especially realizing that you have access to your tier 3 until you hit sekhem 5 and 4.
    I don't have the new descent schedule memorized, but it's definitely a curve in 1E. It's a pretty quick to drop, barring actions, to 7, and a decent jog over to 5-but then swiftly starts taking forever to hit drops, barring actions.

    Kelly R.S. Steele, Freelance Writer(Feel free to call me Kelly, Arcane, or Arc)
    The world is not beautiful, therefore it is.-Keiichi Sigsawa, Kino's Journey
    Feminine pronouns, please.


    • #17
      Originally posted by ArcaneArts View Post
      It's been too long since I got into the game to remember my own misconceptions, and I'm pretty lucky to get players who are good at grokking what I lay down with Chronicles, so instead I'm gonna spitball at what I think were some of the more common misconceptions(though some are "changing the core and missing the point") previously and then comment on if I think it's still a problem or not.

      Requiem-"You can only play evil people/this game is too dark/bleak/hopeless/evil/boring because of this conception/etc.": I haven't really seen this one in a while-between the blood-slicked cool of the core and the continuing confidence of supplements both official and STV from None More Dark, alongside things like Contagion making a clear show of heroics, I feel like most people grok the headspace of both being a monster and just a person for this game.

      Forsaken-"So you're a furry spirit cop?" and "Hey, combat doesn't combat right, what gives?": The former really doesn't come up anymore-2nd Edition has well and murdered that one. The second one still happens a lot-it's kind of shocking how many people don't get how Chronicles combat and violence is supposed to work, I need to get around to writing on that.

      Awakening-"Mages are the good guys!/Mages aren't Monsters!/Mage is the occult superhero good guys contrasting the rest of the Chronicles' darkness!": While I don't see this one really cropping up anymore, long experience with the Mage fandom leaves me to assume the number of fans who think this does not hew particularly close to zero.

      Created-"Why isn't this more transhumanist?": This argument never goes away, it rises and falls with the related attention to Promethean. Since Promethean isn't really being looked at right now, we're not dealing with it.

      Lost-"What do you mean it's not escapist fantasy?/What about non-abusive durances/humane Keepers?": Like with Created, this argument never goes away, though it's a little less tied to the tide of attention. Still, it's not as here as it usually is.

      Vigil-"Hunters are the good guys/Hunters aren't monsters!": In a similar boat to Mage, though I think they're more at peace with the actuality of it when confronted with it. Not really a big topic these days.

      Sin-Eaters-"Sin-eaters are the good guys!/Sin-eaters aren't monsters!": and a third time, I don't think this ever approaches zero, but I'm more forgiving of it in this case. Not really an open bit of discussion as it used to be, but one never assumes it's away.

      Curse-"This game is too limiting!/What about non-Iremite mummies/no Descent/no Judges/Apotheosis as Power/etc?": I actually think the franchise has either turned around everyone still hung on this or successfully proved itself to not be worth the time and attention to fight against it. There'll always be a few hangers-on, but as is, I think Curse has mostly moved past that.

      Descent-"Why techgnostic?":I haven't seen this one in ages and it feels so good to say that I safely think it's been put to bed. Might that change with a Second Edition? Don't jinx it for me.

      Primordial-actually, I'm so vocal on this subject that you either know what I'm gonna say or have a fun time reviewing the mountain of spilled ink I have on it.

      Deviant-Actually, honestly, most of the misconceptions just comes from how fiddly the system can be, and I get that.

      Despite more or less the consistent tenor, I feel like the community has either figured out or come to peace with the Chronicles' actual text in all but one case, and I get the whys behind that one case.

      This reminds me of that time I ran a chronicle for a bunch of players that came mainly from oWoD, they just couldn't fathom that the city only had 12 vampires total and the one they had to deal with didn't try to screw them over in any way and was perfectly content to be left alone, that the indie rock band was a werewolf pack that needed rescuing from an hunter ambush (the apocalypse player just couldn't stomach it) and that the local mage was a serial killer that liked to murder children and trap their souls for his own sick amusement, most people only remember the 1st edition stuff and think "WoD with another name" when in reality they couldn't be more different.
      Last edited by Newb95; 10-03-2022, 07:17 AM. Reason: Spelling


      • #18
        Originally posted by Primordial newcomer View Post
        I will say another misconception I've seen is the way the Shadow works. There's a surprising number of people who think spirits are pretty stable beings, rather than dynamic and evolving as they prey on other spirits. It's not a big deal if there is no focus on Shadow Ecology, but it does take away from what makes it so unique
        I suspect part of this is ease of running, and part is having difficulty quite picturing it for many. It can be tricky to imagine a true "ecosystem" when you also have characters with connections to certain spirits. Imagine trying to portray a realistic ocean ecosystem in the context of, say, The Little Mermaid, with anthropomorphized sea creatures. Even the Lion King doesn't give personality to most of the "prey" animals - it gives characterization to the Lions and Hyenas and the key characters like Timon, Pumba, Zazu, and Rafiki, but you don't get attached to, say, an antelope. Thus, if you want to have interactions with specific spirits, you have to at minimum create two separate systems - one for your "contacts" and one for "everything else."

        And I think for players and GMs alike, imagining and describing and interacting with a vibrant alien ecosystem isn't intuitive. Even in a Werewolf game, it's not necessarily going to matter how I describe the Shadow, as long as there's consistency in my descriptions and the anomalies are clear. Thus, it's easier to imagine a relatively static (rather than homestatic) system, or a system that is more delineated and firm (i.e. court hierarchies) than the jungle.

        That said, I think ANOTHER part of it is, at least in some books, a lot of references to the idea that spirits don't necessarily like to "mingle" their essences - I think that came up in at least one 1e book, that spirits were careful about eating too much resonance of another type to avoid becoming something "other."


        • #19
          Originally posted by wyrdhamster View Post

          You clearly did not read Storypath in Scion or Trinity ( not mentioning They Came From ) - Storypath is much more rules lite that CoD 2E - even when they come from the same source rules engine.
          I did read them! I just incorrectly assumed CoD was more similar to Storypath in that respect than it actually was.