No announcement yet.

User Profile

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
  • Source
Clear All
new posts

  • If that's the way you wanna play it, that's up to you, but nothing in the book (I just double checked) says it has to be anywhere near that harsh.

    Exactly how is that not still the case?

    You aren't filling up to Hunger 0. You're fulling up to Hunger 1 and Hunger 1 isn't a problem. If you insist on treating Hunger 1 like a crippled junkie then that's entirely on you; the book doesn't suggest anything of the sort from what I just read.

    And if you actually read pg 205, you'll notice that it's described as, "part appetite, part lust, and part addiction,"...
    See more | Go to post
    Last edited by Schwann145; Today, 05:03 AM.

    Leave a comment:

  • Both sides of this discussion have had aggressive comments, yet only one side is getting any fingers pointed at it.
    How bout we stop the finger pointing and continue civil discourse? (And no, cursing is not enough to derail civility - context matters.)


    On another note:
    Sorry about the post-chain. I'm playing catch-up and,well, thoughts/desires to reply come when they come (I figured I could delete posts and edit it all into one, but apparently not, sooo... my bad. )

    Aside from that, can we stop with equating V5 to "blood...
    See more | Go to post
    Last edited by Schwann145; Today, 01:58 AM.

    Leave a comment:

  • When I read the source(s) directly, I do not come away with the same idea you present here, that V5 is a radical change away from what previous iterations of VtM defined a vampire as.
    So please, in no uncertain terms, detail what a V20 or prior Vampire is defined as, by the game, and how it is so drastically different from what V5 defines a vampire as, and remember to either quote your source, provide page numbers, or both....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:

  • Looking at page 228 in Revised right now and nowhere does it define "hungry."
    "(When hungry)" is used to help determine difficulties in resisting Frenzy, but it is never spelled out.
    If you have a blood pool of 10, are you hungry at 9? 8? 3? If your blood pool is 30 are you hungry at 29? 20? It's spelled out exactly nowhere.
    So, sorry, but I gotta call you on your bluff. Frenzy is clearly explained - Hunger is not....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:

  • You're not supposed to overcome your hunger. It is always supposed to be nagging at you unless you're willing to give in to the monster inside and drink your victims dead.
    The alternative is called Golconda, and it's treated as a myth for a reason (you're not supposed to reach Golconda, it's supposed to be that goal that's basically always out of reach).


    This is where I think the disconnect really comes from. From my perspective, at least, it sounds like people just don't want to play vampires; they want to play mages that use blood as a resource. However,...
    See more | Go to post
    Last edited by Schwann145; 08-18-2018, 06:25 AM.

    Leave a comment:

  • I mean... to be fair... you accomplish this by making yourself less of a vampire than normal.
    Seems pretty relevant to his (our) point. ...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:

  • It seems we've moved the goalposts from "It's not the theme of the game," to, "It's one theme of the game among many."
    Supplements are supposed to build off the core. The core establishes itself as a game around feeding/hunger/frenzy, etc, among other things such as undead politics, but primarily it's about the hunger, the beast, and keeping (or losing) control of both.
    Every core book since the line started has made that clear.
    Chicago By Night focuses on the politics around Chicago because you're already supposed to know about the hunger/beast/you're a vampire...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:

  • The focus is baked into the core concept of the game. It should be wholly unnecessary to repeat it in every single additional book that comes out, because it should be forefront when you intent to play a game about vampires.
    That many of the player base made the home-brew decision to ignore a core and fundamental aspect of the game is not a design feature. There's nothing wrong with ignoring that part of the game, if you'd rather not concern yourself with the drawbacks of being one of the damned, but it's exasperating reading everyone claim X when the very published material is saying Y...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:

  • If we're going to quote the books, it's kind of disingenuous to start with supplemental extensions of the core game. It's easy to see why you would though, since the core book doesn't support your initial statement at all.

    Here's Revised, pg 29-30:

    Bold text relevant....
    See more | Go to post
    Last edited by Schwann145; 08-15-2018, 08:23 AM.

    Leave a comment:

  • I really don't understand the comparisons to 4th Ed D&D.

    To me it goes like this:
    V3 (Revised) is 3rd/3.5 Edition. Probably the most widely popular for the longest amount of time.
    V4 (Requiem) is 4th Edition. A drastic shift in tone to appeal to a new audience, which was met pretty soundly with dislike from the old audience to the point that it directly affected sales.
    V20 is Pathfinder 1st Edition. A "we're gonna do a little cleanup of the mechanics" edition that was here to say people weren't finished with the old(er) game yet, and branching out so...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:

  • Can you explain specifically what makes you feel this way?
    I ask because V4 was a drastic leap into an entirely new story/meta plot. The mechanics were tweaked some to make it a new game, but what really made it different was abandoning the Masquerade lore and going in a totally different direction.
    V5, by comparison, is going back to Masquerade lore, albeit with some tweaks and adjustments, as well as collabing the mechanics between V3 and V4.
    So I genuinely cannot even begin to fathom how V5 is closer to Requiem than it is to Masquerade....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:

  • I gotta say, I love when people bring up 4th edition when saying that the company should listen to the old-guard more.
    4th Edition D&D is exactly what happened when the company listened to the fanbase and actually gave them exactly what they asked for - and they haaaated it.

    Actually, not at all this.
    The large majority of AD&D 2nd Edition players were sounding a lot like the fans here who don't like V5. 3rd edition was not D&D, it was going to ruin the game, ruin the hobby, etc etc etc. Those players (among which you can count several very prolific...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:

  • That sounds like an unwinnable position for White Wolf to be in, honestly.
    How do you do one without the other?
    New, but not really new. Progression, but not too much. Sounds like what we already had: V20....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:

  • Here's the thing though - Hunger, as a mechanical concept, never existed in past editions. Never. The developers are even on record stating that it was a flaw of the old system that they specifically felt needed fixing. There was absolutely nothing to distinguish between "full/peckish/hungry/starving" other than being totally out of Blood Points.

    If you don't think V5 is getting the struggle right, that's fine. But say how you think it's flawed; let's not pretend that any of the older editions addressed hunger at all.

    Power gaming isn't a negative...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:

  • I wasn't intending to suggest that the game is "Players vs ST, and ST always wins."
    Rather, good storytelling is driven by compelling conflict. When the balance of power between NPCs and players is as drastic as it is between low gen Elders and high gen players, there's no real sense of conflict - you're pushing against the immovable object, and the story will suffer; either because your success feels contrived (ie: PIS, to steal a comic book acronym), or because you will have no way to find any success.

    In other words, the antagonist Prince of the story (pulling a...
    See more | Go to post
    Last edited by Schwann145; 08-13-2018, 04:23 AM.

    Leave a comment:

  • What's with all the V5 sour grapes?

    I can't help but notice a trend of 3 common complaints about V5 so far, and I frankly don't understand any of them:
    •Culling of Elders
    •Hunger mechanics getting in the way
    •Preference for cWoD disciplines

    Re: Elders - How is this an issue? There's basically two types of Elders in Vampire; the active kind who are basically unstoppable, and the inactive/newly active kind who are also basically unstoppable but give you a sliver of hope in that you're educated on modern tech/politics/etc.
    For active Elders, they totally dominate the story of a game even though...
    See more | Go to post
    Last edited by Schwann145; 08-13-2018, 01:10 AM.
No activity results to display
Show More

Profile Sidebar

Profile Picture
Last Activity: Today, 05:04 AM
Joined: 02-10-2017