Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Doing away with Bloodlines

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

  • Doing away with Bloodlines

    I'll be running a straight up CoD game at the end of the month and as I looked it all over, I'm beginning to think that bloodlines should be done away with and made into covenants. This is especially true of Toreador, Bron,Cockscomb Society and others. You would still get certain things for joining, but all clans can become members (at least in most of them.Certainly not the Cockscomb society). Has anyone done this, and what was the results?

  • #2
    While I'm generally against mechanical bloodlines, I'd say some of them are defined more by their own origins than their practices or philosophies. So that includes the Norvegi, Vedma and Bron.

    Comment


    • #3
      If you don't want Bloodlines then don't use them, I like them but I'm not allowing them in my current game because I'm the only one with a copy of the rules and I want to keep things simple.

      Comment


      • #4
        I like them myself. I could be wrong. There are only like... 3? The ones you are talking about are either from 1E or were printed in the New Covenant book which I don't have. So they don't even fit into the 2E rules which you are saying that you want to use.

        I do not think that you should allow bloodlines to be taken by any clan because it waters down what they are. They are not like covenants at all and probably shouldn't be grouped into it like that. If you don't like them, don't use them, but I would recommend not altering what they are.

        A covenant is about practices and philosophies like Spencer said. A bloodline is like...being born Scandinavian or Chinese or whatever.

        Comment


        • #5
          Just because they're 1E doesn't mean they don't exist as perfectly viable options to use in 2E, often with no reworking at all. 2E didn't automatically discard all 1E material. Only the material that has been explicitly changed between editions. And for all we know Blue Thomas might run a 1E game.

          Some Bloodlines could be better represented as groups with common interests. Others are so focused on internal change that I believe Bloodlines is the best way to represent them.
          Dragolescu is one example of a Bloodline that could easily be a subgroup of Ordo Dracul that has a shared interest in ghosts.
          The En is an example of a Bloodline that could lose the Clan requirement. Making a deal with a demon is hardly exclusive to just one Clan. However, they won't naturally (or at least not often) form an organization just because what kind of individuals belongs to that Bloodline.
          The Khaibit (2E) is a Bloodline whose Bloodline Gift expresses a dramatic internal change and would be lessened, imo, if it could be taught to non-members. I also find Mekhet being so much more thematically fitting than any other Clan, so the Clan requirement serves a purpose.

          Edit: To actually contribute to the topic. My group generally keep to Clan requirements, but not as rigidly as the books. For example Essentiaphagia is available to all and can even be spontaneously learned (but still payed for with XP) by interacting with ghosts. I find that it works well and that particular example makes the world seem more fleshed out by the implications that there exists a Discipline that isn't in-clan for any of the known Clans. We also use Blood Tenebrous the same way, but that one was never connected to a Bloodline as far as I recall. Can't be bothered to read the book right now.
          Last edited by Tessie; 01-09-2017, 10:23 PM.


          Bloodline: The Stygians

          Comment


          • #6
            I think by saying "straight up CoD" he means 2e as 1e was nWoD. I might be wrong though.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by TGUEIROS View Post
              I think by saying "straight up CoD" he means 2e as 1e was nWoD. I might be wrong though.
              Point of order: 1e was nWoD, up until December 12th, 2015, when the new White Wolf Publishing officially announced that the intellectual property formerly known as World of Darkness (colloquially referred to as "new" World of Darkness) was being re-named Chronicles of Darkness, and the intellectual property formerly known as Classic World of Darkness (and World of Darkness before that) was being re-named World of Darkness (again). Now, 1st edition is called Chronicles of Darkness, First Edition (being the first edition of the tabletop game series based on the newly re-named Chronicles of Darkness intellectual property). Likewise, prior to December 12th, 2015, Chronicles of Darkness, Second Edition was known as (new) World of Darkness, Second Edition.

              I know, it's stupidly convoluted. But the old White Wolf Publishing kind of dug this hole for their predecessors when they gave the IP the same name as their old IP. Only 24 years later did the new White Wolf correct the old White Wolf's mistake, ironically making the whole thing even more convoluted in so doing.
              Last edited by Charlaquin; 01-10-2017, 02:06 AM.


              Onyx Path Forum Moderator

              My mod voice is red. I use it so you know when I'm speaking in an official capacity, not as an indication of tone.

              Going by Willow now, or Wil for short. She/Her/Hers.

              Comment


              • #8
                To be fair the WoD world had ended (as I understand things) so no one was expecting to revisit it and both movies and computer games do the remake with the same name thing (can you imagine the reaction to id software declaring the original Doom games were back in canon and the 2016 game was being renamed?)

                Comment


                • #9
                  Well, one way to do away with Bloodlines without doing AWAY with them is simply have them be Kindred Dynasties. Becomes one is like being adopted or embraced into the Dynasty and just keep their Covenant affiliations as they were written up. Non-Covenant ones can be their own minor Covenants like you originally postulated.
                  Last edited by Dusksage; 01-10-2017, 05:15 AM. Reason: Sellcheck

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Charlaquin View Post

                    Point of order: 1e was nWoD, ...
                    I don't know if your "point of order" is meant as means to start an explanation or correction, but that was exactly what I said.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      As covenants? Probably not the best. As Spencer said, there are many that define themselves by origin and what they are, rather than practices. That noted, I could see bloodlines being centered around sub-groups that use the Mystery Cult Initiation model, perhaps representing the overarching lineage with a more strongly supernatural bent to their advantages. If you want to take this a step further along the organizational line of thought, maybe bloodlines could be converted to something like mage's nameless orders. Smaller groups that have no real presence beyond a region, regardless of what power they may or may not have there. Perhaps their rituals and practices have mutated The Blood or else, provided a unique insight into its properties and thus a variety of benefits.

                      Another reason to not make them covenants is largely that covenants are more fleshed out, more overarching. An MCI style approach would likely be better to me. But then, this is my two cents here. No need to follow it just 'cause I said it.


                      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


                      • #12
                        I find they work best as a mix. I've been recently going through and deciding which ones are worth keeping in my campaigns, and in what form. Some, like the Sta-au, work best using Bloodline mechanics that anyone can join. Others work better as traditional bloodlines, like the Norvegi, or the Morbus (which I opened up for both Mekhet and Nosferatu). Some work better as mere sub-groups of other covenants, like the Agonistes become a group of dark historians within the Invictus. Others work best as other types of cults, smaller than covenants, with their own teachable blood sorceries, like the Voudoun cults, the Egyptian cults, and others.
                        In sum, I find three classes of bloodlines;
                        a) True Bloodlines, those which are dramatic perversions of the Blood, Body, and Beast, usually (but not always) with a reason why this is limited to a single clan
                        b) Blood Sorcery Cults, those whose abilities are better modelled as a teachable Blood Sorcery.
                        c) Other Cults, those whose abilities don't seem too special, or don't fit the new 2e setting, and can be modelled simply as a separate cult or as part of a covenant.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by TGUEIROS View Post

                          I don't know if your "point of order" is meant as means to start an explanation or correction, but that was exactly what I said.
                          Just a clarification.


                          Onyx Path Forum Moderator

                          My mod voice is red. I use it so you know when I'm speaking in an official capacity, not as an indication of tone.

                          Going by Willow now, or Wil for short. She/Her/Hers.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Blue Thomas View Post
                            I'll be running a straight up CoD game at the end of the month and as I looked it all over, I'm beginning to think that bloodlines should be done away with and made into covenants. This is especially true of Toreador, Bron,Cockscomb Society and others. You would still get certain things for joining, but all clans can become members (at least in most of them.Certainly not the Cockscomb society). Has anyone done this, and what was the results?
                            I personally don't like most of them but they're popular with some of my players. I decided to combine the Bron and the Khaibit into a cabal called Balor's Eye that traveled around the world looking for the Holy Grail and preventing incursions into Earth by extradimensional and extraplanar creatures. Over the centuries they accumulated a lot of odd magical items and books. They were a go-to group if you required information or issues of an occult nature and were largely apolitical.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I'm personally anti-Bloodlines in any game I run, why does a Daeva need to have Toreador blood in her to be obsessed with art and beauty? The base clans are okay with any concept you can think of, and the Disciplines available in 2ED are more than enough, if not, create Devotions.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X