Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

User Profile

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

  • Also, it's not about relatonships with icky mortals, but the kind of relationships Touchstones supposed to be and their tie to Convictions, as above and their near-compulsory nature.There are several background that could be fleshed out relationships to mortal npcs and they're okay. They're not obligatory, they are useful for the character in a broader way and your morality doesn't depend on them....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • I didn't like the VtR version either, though I still like that more than the V5 version.

    At its core, my problem with Touchstones is tying the moral outlook and the characters' Humanity to extrenal things. I'd be okay with extrenal things could reinforce one's connection to the world, to people etc. but I dislike the idea that you need to have those extrenal things.

    The VtR version works, becuause Touchstones could be other things and it's a particular take o vampirism and Humanity, where Humanity isn't a morality system, but about how much do you bother to be like...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Very simple. Some people like to play rpgs in a way, that the rules apply similarly to everyone, pcs and npcs alike. That the world works along consistent lines, not due to "dramatic appropriateness". It could help immersion (if you're someone who thinks along these lines) and gives a feeling of "fairness". It's absolutely not about bad or good styles of gaming, just preference.


    It's just, some people want a "good story" and are willing to handwave lots of things in order to get the desired result . Others want a good story, but want it through...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • No, we probably won't, and I think too, that it's okay.




    Back to that later.




    It's seems more flexible and in a way, it is, if you look at it from the angle that it allows you more leeway than the old system, in modifying the base Humanity. However, it's less flexible, as I mentioned earlier, in allowing characters with differing morality systems and different themes and circumstances to run within the same chronicle, by the merit of being an externally enforced set of moral rules, not something confined to the character. Also,...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Well said.





    That's true too, though I'd say some systems and ideas have a higher probability to lead to tyranny, or tyrannical at their core, if you examine them closely. Usually the ones that have an "idealised" picture about society at their core and attempt to enforce society to conform to that, so it's also about philosophy, IMO. Capitalism, on the other hand, when, as you say, is going unchecked could lead to horrendous conditions too, albeit through different manners, I'd never argue about that and it's also undesirable....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Also, that you have to look at fiery revolutionaries and revolutions in general with a wary eye, because a lot of the time, it's not about freedom, it's about who's making the calls and there's no guarantee the next group will be better, on the contrary, if they are fervent idealists, it's most likely they will be worse.




    I tend to say, I'm just against any totalitarian system. I'm seeing enough around me how the different dictatures, based on high and mighty ideals could cripple the soul of society and cause tremendous suffering. My country suffered Nazism, suffered...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • I agree. In our ongoing Shadowrun game, we all play members of a criminal organization, but the characters absolutely have conflicts with each other along personal morality lines, different boundaries and such. It's working, because we're willing to work them out and to give some ground to each-other....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • I'd reiterate, the problem with Tenets, in my eye, is that they work like moral judgment from above, which applies to all. The group decides on three tenets and those three tenets apply to everyone, from the prince to the sheriff to the scourge to the Sabbat inflitrator, to the Anarch ganger to the Setite pimp etc, etc. They apply when the chronicle starts with neonates struggling with leaving behind their human lives at the start of the Chronicle and when they're defending the city (or attacking another) in a war-like scenario later on. Convictions are not providing alternative moral systems,...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • They are necessary for a big part of the Humanity system to work. I call that fundamental.



    They mechanically support one kind of take on morality, yes.



    You could golden rule everything, it's irrelevant.

    T

    The problem remains: needing Touchstones for a character, to have convictions (with a mechanical efect, otherwise it's just window dressing) just rubs a lot of people the wrong way and also, not everyone likes to play the whole touchstone-herding game with humans, just to have a character with strong beliefs. Again,...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • The Autarkis are a non-group.

    Anarchs are (original Anarchs espceially were) a group, just a less homogenzied and centralised one. They had leaders, persons of some authority, cooperation between parts of it. It is/was an, ahhem, anarchist-type group. But it's still a group. Being an Anarch was always a distinctive thing, from being a vanilla Camarilla member, but you were a Camarilla member too.

    Also, most of them did acknowledge the Convention of Thorns (and those who didn't went and founded the Sabbat) and even modern Anarchs use the rights given them in the Treaty...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Agree with the assesment with the caveat that, as you mentioned at the beginning, only those hardcore personal-horror fans see it as a bug (and most of the push came from them, not just now but back then, when VtR came to be too and it was always there in the community, even in the books, from the writers' side, just read the revised VtM ST Guide... at some places it's the epitome of badwrongfun-ing). For others, like me, it's a feature. The setting is wide and the old system was general enough that you could play anything from personal horror to survival horror to dark urban fantasy etc. It was...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • I'd say Convention of Thorns and leave it at that.



    Yeah, tastes and preferences differ, no problem with that. What I don't like is calling the Anarchs collectively, as pictured in the prior material, as "jokes", or "meaningless". Honestly, the bunch I'd label as a "joke" the most is precisely the Free States ones, because that shows what happens when the "full independency from the Camarilla" folks won and how much that is workable. Also, I absolutely think they were an alternative (and my favorite group), they just weren't a totally...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Yes, that's the problem in general with Tenets. they're great, at first sight, that you could "tailor the morality of the chronicle to your desires". Sounds good on paper. Problem is, it makes crossing themes over time in the same chronicle and characters with differing worldviews and philosophies actually harder to work alongside in a chronicle. If the morality system the character upholds is only an internal thing and you have several different ones, that works. Everyone just follow their thing and degenerates according that. The Tenets make it so, that if anyone is acting against...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • That is a qutie good assesment, thank you! Though I tend to view it as idealists are the ones with the, well, ideological agenda they want to supplant with the existing system and rebels are the ones refusing any overbearing authority. In that, both could be intellectual and rabble, so it's a two-axis coordinate system in my mind.




    Agree, though I think that includes making the Cam better, more egalitarian. As I see it, Anarchs don't necessarily want to burn down the system and supplant it with a new one (though many do, or just going as far as burning), but want...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • I'd just say that Shadowrun did gangs a lot better....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • I didn't say tha they're just punks and rabble (though that was an important part of it) and I also mentioned their lineage and history. However, in my eyes, even at the heights of the anarch movement, it was more like a collection of ancillae and neonates saying "fuck the elders",than a "movement", centered around an ideology. Well, besides "fuck the elders".

    In short, what is the most important part of the Anarchs, IMO, is that they're refusing to blindly bow to authority, not any kind of idealism, or utopistic beliefs beyond that. Those are depending...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Respectfully, I disagree. I loved the old Anarchs, but I really-really didn't like the Carthians. Why? Because for one, the Anarchs had their specific roots in vampiric society and history, not just trying to adopt and implement human ideologies among the kindred.

    But, the more important thing for me was the whole different feel of the two groups. The Carthians are much more centered on collectivist (and frequently extreme) ideas, much more of an idealistic movement, as a whole. The Anarchs were called a movement too, but it's a lot less structured and individualism was a big part...
    See more | Go to post
    Last edited by PMárk; 05-14-2019, 12:11 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Re-posted from FB, because while it's not strictly about Touchstones, but it might be an interesting conversational piece:

    A bit rambly, but one thing just came to my mind, when looking at the two covers side-by side (V20 and V5, although it could work with the original cover with the rose too, maybe even more soo), is that how accurate they are in representing the differences between V5 and the other editions and how well they communicate the overall feel of them. To me, at least. The V20 one is an "occult" symbol on a green marble plate, which hints at mysteries and ages-old...
    See more | Go to post
    Last edited by PMárk; 05-12-2019, 04:38 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Yeah, 1e was initially marketed mostly to teenagers, in a time rebellious musical subcultures were on a high. Pretty soon afterwards, they didn't just try, they made the Camarilla the go-to player faction as the backstabbing night society with all the Elysia and halls of power, favors and the usual stuff (which people liked and tend to associate with VtM) and the Anarchs a subset of that for those who wanted to play the rebels. It worked and it was like that during the overwhelming majority of the game's run.

    We were through this before, but I never thought of the Anarch as a joke,...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Ah, okay then, I'm glad to hear that!

    My impression was that we tended to be of differing oppinion on several arguments over the pst few years (which is okay), but it's entirely possible that the parts where we agree just didn't came up in direct conversation and we both just clicked a like and such....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:

No activity results to display
Show More

Profile Sidebar

Collapse
PMárk
PMárk
Member
Last Activity: Yesterday, 06:42 PM
Joined: 06-09-2015
Location:
Working...
X