Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Characters with multiple Covenants

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by SoulGambit View Post
    Its not wnough to be God's monster. You want to be the BEST monster God has. If God has objectively allowed the means by which enlvolution is possible then why not pursue it?
    The Ordo accepts the existence of God, because Dracula did, though they're otherwise indifferent to him. A vampire in both covenants might serve God, but consider the Coils a reward made available to a good servant (and perhaps transcendence of the vampiric condition an escape from Hell). I imagine they'd be zealous in proselytising to other Dragons, perhaps zealous enough that the other Lancea would overlook the heresy.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by SunlessNick View Post
      The Ordo accepts the existence of God, because Dracula did, though they're otherwise indifferent to him. A vampire in both covenants might serve God, but consider the Coils a reward made available to a good servant (and perhaps transcendence of the vampiric condition an escape from Hell). I imagine they'd be zealous in proselytising to other Dragons, perhaps zealous enough that the other Lancea would overlook the heresy.
      I'm not say that would be punishable by death, but I think he'd have to be damn useful to the Ordo for them to tolerate persistently being told a.) to serve a god whom they hold in contempt and b.) that the coils are a gift from a higher power rather than the fruits of their own dedication and brilliance. Although the Tismanu seemed to get by.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Spencer from The Hills View Post

        I'm not say that would be punishable by death, but I think he'd have to be damn useful to the Ordo for them to tolerate persistently being told a.) to serve a god whom they hold in contempt and b.) that the coils are a gift from a higher power rather than the fruits of their own dedication and brilliance. Although the Tismanu seemed to get by.
        The Tismanu and Vedma are both bloodlines tied to the Ordo that have strong thematic links to another covenant- the Sanctified and the Acolytes, respectively. I could easily see members of those bloodlines acting as ambassadors to those covenants, or even having some participation in their ceremonies, permitted by the Ordo due to their historical ties to the Defiant.

        Comment


        • #19
          This is a rather dangerous thing to allow in my book. On one hand, Yes. There's nothing preventing someone from being part of two covenants which do not opposed each other inherently. That is to say, the Lancea et Sanctum and the Circle of the Crone, as well as the Carthian Movement and Invictus. On the other hand, something we should probably keep in mind is that these groups will expect their members to have full loyalty to them. If the Ordo Dracul wants to push for more freedom to conduct horrific experiments in the name of transcendence, a practice which I think some of the younger and thus more humane Carthians might oppose, then they will expect their dual-covenant friend to support them. And if an Acolyte is asked to fight their own when they're a member of the Invictus as well, they might run into trouble particularly given the Invictus' close ties to the Lancea et Sanctum in some Praxes.

          In fewer words, beware powergamers. They will look at this concept as a great way to gain more power. If you are faced with one, play up conflicting loyalties that might just tear them down the middle. It's a potent advantage, but should come with equally potent costs. If you are inclined to take this for the same reasons one might take dual-kith in Changeling 2e's playtest? That is to say your character doesn't quite fit in one group or the other and thus must be both, I would argue that you should consider strongly the idea of whether or not someone would set themselves up with conflicting loyalties like that, something that not only they might find trouble with naturally but that an enemy might also exploit.


          Raksha: The Heart of Chaos (3E Raksha conversion)
          Lunars: An Eternal Grudge (3E Lunars conversion, posted in an old thread used for a previous writeup)
          Support me on Patreon if you like my writing and feel so inclined!

          Comment


          • #20
            Also, don't expect to keep such divided loyalties secret if ~20% of the population has a natural affinity for Auspex.
            Last edited by Rathamus; 01-10-2017, 05:06 PM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by BlitzKitty View Post
              TOn the other hand, something we should probably keep in mind is that these groups will expect their members to have full loyalty to them.
              The first edition expressly said that characters could be members of multiple covenants, but couldn't have more than three total dots of Status between them, due to lack of trust on their parts and commitment on the vampire's.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by SunlessNick View Post
                The first edition expressly said that characters could be members of multiple covenants, but couldn't have more than three total dots of Status between them, due to lack of trust on their parts and commitment on the vampire's.
                And second edition expanded the threshold to a maximum of five Status dots between the various covenants in normal conditions. It also provided several Merits that can be used to bypass normal membership restrictions (Twilight Judge, Right of Return), gain conditional extra Covenant Status (Nest Guardian), and/or allow partial membership (Casual User, Chorister, One Foot in the Door, Laity, Independent Study). This seems to indicate a relatively more tolerant and relaxed attitude of Kindred society towards multiple covenant membership than what was assumed in first edition. Certainly not enough to dispel recurrent social complications from divided loyalties as a plot hook, nor it should, but just as certainly not something as greatly dangerous and heavily discouraged as BtlizKitty would suggest, especially for Covenants whose practices and ideologies are not inherently at odds. E.g. I am rather skeptical the possible reasons for animosity between the Ordo and the Carthians they suggest would realistically apply in most circumstances. On the other hand, yes, we may certainly expect any Covenant would harshly sanction any member caught seriously damaging their interests for the sake of their other group. And second edition says revealing Covenant secrets to non-members is a very serious, potentially lethal violation.
                Last edited by Irioth; 01-12-2017, 09:22 AM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  A Invictus that takes the Oath of Matrimony can share covenant statuses with another Vampire, like say its with a CoC member, the CoC gets Invictus Status • dot, even if the CoC member has CoC status ••••• .

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X