Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Beating a dead horse: The Venture Bane

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by Tabanese View Post
    Capping social rolls by humanity is:
    1. Something humanity already does.
    2. A Nossy thing.
    No in both cases; the Nosferatu bane is "treat your Humanity as two dots lower for the purposes of penalties to social rolls with mortals, with the specific exception of Touchstones," and Humanity capping social rolls was a general rule in 1e that in 2e most readily manifests through the effects of the Face of Hunger bane.

    If I could make a suggestion: mirror the Nosferatu weakness to reflect the Ventrue mindset — treat the Lord's Humanity as two dots lower for the purposes of their Humanity's penalties to Mental rolls to relate to humans and treat failures on those Intelligence and Wits-based rolls as dramatic failures; Touchstones are exempt.

    This slant on the Aloof Curse doesn't make the Ventrue more intrinsically offputting than a similarly monstrous member of another clan, but it does stifle their insight into human behavior. A Lord who can't prepare the field with Disciplines is worse at predicting how their marks will act and react, and their planning and strategies suffer accordingly — no amount of success on a Persuasion roll is going to let the character realize they convinced the mark of the wrong course of action.


    Resident Sanguinary Analyst
    Currently Consuming: Changeling: the Lost 1e

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Satchel View Post
      No in both cases; the Nosferatu bane is "treat your Humanity as two dots lower for the purposes of penalties to social rolls with mortals, with the specific exception of Touchstones," and Humanity capping social rolls was a general rule in 1e that in 2e most readily manifests through the effects of the Face of Hunger bane.
      I stand corrected.

      In that case, seems like a solid stance to take with the Ventrue. Nos gets it but can't express it; Ven can express it but has nothing to say. Rule from below and from on high, never to meet but needing each other.

      Comment


      • #18
        I know it’s kind of like the Deva Ban but what about becoming Obsessed with their ‘touchstone’ I put it in quotation marks because once they start trying to Control them their no longer touchstones. They become possessive, controlling, If Human they’ll probably by repeatedly Dominated tell there brains fall out,

        Comment


        • #19
          The best way to design a bane is to make it in a way that encourages roleplaying and helps explaining the state of the clan in the modern era that is why if I were to rewrite the Ventrue weakness i would just import the old one from masquerade but tied to humanity.

          "The Hunger of Lords"
          The ventrue are selective pickers not every pint of blood has the same taste or has the same amount of nutrients
          Mechanic:You cannot feed from animal blood and if the vessel does not fit your tastes you do not get blood unless you consume from them at least 10-Humanity blood point , this doesnt apply to other supernaturals.

          Elder Version:"Blood Allergy"
          At blood potency 6 when an elder drinks from an unfitting vessel they take 1 unsokable lethal damage level for each blood point consumed , animal blood is agravated.


          Hunger pool

          Comment


          • #20
            I loved that bane when I first played Masquerade. Plus, dietary restrictions do have daily effects and could change how you view things.

            However, compared to the Requiem bane, it seem arbitrary.

            By arbitrary, I mean that it does not seem to grow out of the Ventrue theme: Greatness. For me, being a snob or limited in your feeding is not a pursuit of power or victory. In fact, the latter is a weakness. The Masquerade bane seems superficial, as if the writers created the mental image of a Ventrue and then settled on a flaw that suited that image. Given the number of clans and their cohesion, that was fine. In Requiem though, I think the point is to explore things in a deeper way. Hence, the aloof curse: it is lonely at the top. My bane is actually a lot weaker for this reason, as it started with the Ventrue's (fictional) history. A lot of others have suggested variants on frustration with failure, or an overwhelming desire for victory. These are better and I think a telling element that they are 'on theme' is that many players seem to homebrew similar banes. Would we think of a dietary restriction sans Masquerade? Maybe, but I doubt it.

            Like my bane, I think the Masquerade bane update might work better as a bloodline bane.

            That said, I like your update. Though, I'd be compelled to make it 'realistic' by making the qualities more objective. So, only humans in their prime taste good. Or link it to a preferred blood group.

            (again, in my opinion and whatever works at your table.)
            Last edited by Tabanese; 04-07-2019, 05:18 PM. Reason: To explain.

            Comment


            • #21
              I’ve been thinking about this and came up with this.
              Beastral Drive. A Venture must make meaningful progress towards an aspersion or have a meaningful interaction with their touchstone. If they go more nights than their Humanity without either of these they gain the Tempted condition.
              Simple and uses existing rules while scaling with humanity loss.

              Comment


              • #22
                I'd drop the touchstone part, Live Bait. And make it that you need to get a beat from an aspiration every (HUMANITY) scene or gain the tempted condition. Otherwise, love it.

                Indeed, way back in another trend, someone was debating the Gangrel bane. They made a good point about the workarounds for banes aligning with clan stereotype. Basically, the way the clans act should have something to do with their beast avoiding their weakspot. Mekhet are secretive because of unique banes. Daeva sleep around to avoid loving too much. Nos don't talk to people because it keeps going wrong. Gangrel and Ventrue didn't seem to fit this mold, and given they seem like sister clans, I thought it be fun to do Tempted based conditions, wherein Gangrel are tempted if they don't have FREEDOM FREE while Ventrue are tempted when they lack FREEDOM TO. One is anarchy, the other totalitarian, both freedom obsessed. :P

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Tabanese View Post
                  I'd drop the touchstone part, Live Bait. And make it that you need to get a beat from an aspiration every (HUMANITY) scene or gain the tempted condition. Otherwise, love it.
                  Given that some posts were about linking the Ventrue bane to touchstones I wanted to make something that would allow everyone to play their type of Ventrue and I like how it made your touchstone a way to step back from that call in your blood to WIN and let yourself be human again. What could be better than a rule that encourages a player to seek out their touchstone when they just can't make something work or gives an elder reason to worry when a neonate is spending time with their touchstone instead of working.
                  On the timeframe I tend to think in real world terms because I don't want to assume everyone will define a scene the same way I do so I don't like to suggest rules that depend on others agreeing on it.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Tabanese View Post
                    Gangrel and Ventrue didn't seem to fit this mold
                    Gangrel ride the wave and get real stubborn and real cool-headed to maximize their way around being stuck in frenzy until they hit a breaking point. Alternately, they lean really hard into the game's frenzy-management systems in the same way that the Ventrue's standard bane pushes them to lean really hard into the game's detachment-management systems. The Savages are survivors, and that's an archetype that feeds really well into being backwoods hermits.

                    There's a thing I'm fond of observing about the Ventrue and the Daeva as contrasting points, and that's the while the Ventrue are basically spending their nights on the fast track to the alien mindset of an elder, the Daeva wheelhouse is basically Neonate Vampire Grand Central Station — the Serpents are encouraged to socialize and obsess and keep the blood flowing, and if you didn't know better you'd be hard-pressed to notice the note of desperation in the siren song they're singing for the Requiem.


                    Resident Sanguinary Analyst
                    Currently Consuming: Changeling: the Lost 1e

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I just had a take on the Aloof Curse that I really like:

                      Ventrue do not take willpower from interacting with, or defending attachment to, Touchstones. Instead they now gain willpower as well as beats from Touchstones Aspirations.

                      Your Ventrue hangs out with their Touchstone, but it's a means to an end. They don't find it to be inherently rewarding. They find checking the Touchstone off a todo list rewarding. Maybe they're clunky and rigid. in person, or maybe they're just not paying attention, or it feels like work. Or maybe they just are super goal driven.
                      Last edited by DubiousRuffian; 04-08-2019, 12:49 AM. Reason: Well that was embarassing.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by DubiousRuffian View Post
                        Ventrue do not take willpower from interacting with, or defending attachment to, Touchstones. Instead they now gain willpower as well as beats from Touchstones.
                        I'm confused—you say they don't get wp from Touchstone interactions, then you say they do, but also get Beats?

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Sorry -- that's what I get for typing while distracted.

                          I meant to say that rather than interactions with Touchstones yielding willpower, Ventrue could get beats and willpower from Aspirations.

                          I think it might be a subtle change in gameplay, but what I see happening is that the character/player starts thinking of interacting with their Touchstone as something they have to "put time into" , until something climactic happens plot-wise and the character needs XP. So the player starts to put all of their Aspirations into vampire plot-stuff rather than their human relationships, and we start getting that workaholic dynamic. The Touchstone starts to feel rejected, and starts detaching, and the Ven character barely notices.

                          You can also get something similar to the OP idea of the Lare Bane. The player starts setting Touchstone-related Aspirations that interest themselves (get a new car for the Touchstone, murder the Touchstone's irritating coworker), and the plot starts to become focused less on introspection and relationships and more on all of the fun stuff surrounding the Touchstone. All the while the Touchstone gets neglected and the relationship is objectified. It's less in character horror, and more of a meta-level tragedy.

                          The weakness of the idea is that you can get a detached Touchstone that you're still farming XP off of because you're setting Aspirations that have to do with the Touchstone. But I feel like a lot of interesting plot can happen then, about how emotionally dishonest that behavior feels to the Touchstone.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by DubiousRuffian View Post
                            The weakness of the idea is that you can get a detached Touchstone that you're still farming XP off of because you're setting Aspirations that have to do with the Touchstone.
                            To be fair, everyone can do that. Also, remember that Aspirations are player-level and so, technically, all the banes we have listed that use Aspiration as short-hand for 'character goal' can backfire. After all, if I set my Aspiration as 'Lose Everything' then my Venture, with your bane, will get willpower from doggedly pursuing their own destruction. Just a RAW problem though; it be easy to house-rule that you can stipulate some Aspirations as 'character goals', which must make in-world sense, and the bane only applies to those.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Not a big fan of this iteration. Given how much of a judgment call "you haven't spoken with your touchstone in ages, he's detaching" is, it's bound to create unnecessary disagreements between the ST and the player, or be a complete non-issue.


                              My Bloodline conversions
                              My House rules

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X