W5 QA

[Knightingale]

I think "equipment" isn't the right way to look at it even. It's more about that in a story-focused game the granular details of who has what equipment at any given time shouldn't become a distraction to telling the story. So when the thief tries to pick a lock there's no need for a previous scene to exist where the thief buys or builds lockpicks, for example. Or a player suggesting that his character with high Animal Ken has a trained dog, for example... Sure, why not. Let's keep the story moving. Sensible assumptions based on player-character-builds are a way to not get bogged down in the details. Especially, as Justin said, these pre-square-one concerns can be un-fun and disruptive.

What's strange is that both H5 and what his rework of the Resources Background show is that it doesn't seem like he understands this concept. That concept I just described is all about not letting details get in the way of telling the story. The moment when scarcity is created with "once per session", it turns into the kind of equipment-management Justin Achilli wants to avoid. Suddenly you do have to care about this once-per-session power on your char-sheet and when to use it.

[Damian May]

I think "equipment" isn't the right way to look at it even. It's more about that in a story-focused game the granular details of who has what equipment at any given time shouldn't become a distraction to telling the story. So when the thief tries to pick a lock there's no need for a previous scene to exist where the thief buys or builds lockpicks, for example. Or a player suggesting that his character with high Animal Ken has a trained dog, for example... Sure, why not. Let's keep the story moving. Sensible assumptions based on player-character-builds are a way to not get bogged down in the details. Especially, as Justin said, these pre-square-one concerns can be un-fun and disruptive.

What's strange is that both H5 and what his rework of the Resources Background show is that it doesn't seem like he understands this concept. That concept I just described is all about not letting details get in the way of telling the story. The moment when scarcity is created with "once per session", it turns into the kind of equipment-management Justin Achilli wants to avoid. Suddenly you do have to care about this once-per-session power on your char-sheet and when to use it.

Very True, I suppose it does speak a bit to my tendency to play hard scrabble street level games where pretty much any one of those possesions would be a life changer.

Perhaps it would run into the granularity issue but perhaps you could implement something that would allow you to use the background more often at a risk of reducing its rating?

[MrNatas]

I think the big thing is that itemization can be enjoyable but, part of that is make sure that it isn't tedious. Like if you are going to play low resource grunge hunters that are trying to live by scrapping together their megger resources to survive the night. Then you can have a whole session that is just getting a gun because it's a big step forward for your players.

On the flipside, if you are vampires that all own businesses and you have enough liquid cash that you don't have to want for 'basic' thing then the scene of getting a gun isn't important to the story.

What is the issue here for me is treating your background dots in this instance like a plastic equipment sheet. You pseudo have whatever you need once. So, you could spend you once lockpick on a lock but, you "lose" you lockpick. If you have to pick two locks in a session? Well, you already used your ghost pair and are now on recharge, so you have to do it without your buff. Which seems like an oversight to me.

[TwoDSix]

Honestly, I've never seen the point of tracking anything that lets you roll with no bonus and penalty. As long as it makes some kind of sense for you to carry it around you can have it. What I want to track are the things that grant bonuses.

What Justin's Resources rules mostly tell me is that he doesn't want me playing rich characters. Which is fine, except it's yet another one of his ways to kick you out of the world-spanning conspiracies. A +5 bonus once per session is much less impressive than being able to get a +2 outfit for any social situation on short notice (which is just one of the things a CofD character with Resources 5 can do).

But it's weird here. IIRC then Garou shapeshifting means that it's very likely that PCs might be down to the stuff in their pockets* multiple times a session. It doesn't matter if you can casually but plane tickets, in the field you might be left with whatever you can scrounge up right now.

* And that's only via the Rite of Dedication!

[AnubisXy]

I don't think anyone cared about mundane equipment, at least when it came to things like "a knife" or "a set of lock picks", unless there was something in that particular game that would make having those things difficult. However, just being like 'resources add to a roll once per session' seems like a copout move and something that a player would have to save for a dicepool they are bad at or use on the last roll of the session just to "maximize" the usefulness of the background.

Yeah, I know I'd run into the "Final Fantasy Elixer Syndrome" where I wouldn't want to use the Resources background unless I absolutely had to, so I'd probably just end up saving it until the very last roll of the session every time.

[Saur Ops Specialist]

Honestly, I've never seen the point of tracking anything that lets you roll with no bonus and penalty. As long as it makes some kind of sense for you to carry it around you can have it. What I want to track are the things that grant bonuses.

What Justin's Resources rules mostly tell me is that he doesn't want me playing rich characters. Which is fine, except it's yet another one of his ways to kick you out of the world-spanning conspiracies. A +5 bonus once per session is much less impressive than being able to get a +2 outfit for any social situation on short notice (which is just one of the things a CofD character with Resources 5 can do).

But it's weird here. IIRC then Garou shapeshifting means that it's very likely that PCs might be down to the stuff in their pockets* multiple times a session. It doesn't matter if you can casually but plane tickets, in the field you might be left with whatever you can scrounge up right now.

* And that's only via the Rite of Dedication!

Do we know what he thinks of Craft/Repair, by any chance?

[heinrich]

Well, if you don't manage your equipment precisely, then the Rite of Talismandedication will need a major rework. Or they just forget about it and create a logic whole.

Well, I agree that you usually have the equipment to use with skill, if it makes sense. I mean, Medicine 4 doesn't mean I have a completely equipped mobile OR in the back of a truck following me all day. Also, in Germany there are a lot of people who are rifle sport enthusiasts, but rarely does anyone carry a rifle or gun around, because of, well, laws.

And does Drive grant you a car, a bike, a motorcycle, a quad? Does a dot of sailing entitle the character to a $20 Mio. yacht?


In any case, I find a hard limit, like once per session, silly. I mean, if you get together on a Saturday and play all the way through to Sunday morning, is that one Session, or does the Session reset when everyone walks to grab a pizza?
How is that balanced against playing for three hours once a week, in the evening?

It would be more suitable to allow things like Resources on a level that makes narrative sense. If one wants to limit the usage, one could always have a special "Background Die" that might block the Background for a while if it comes up a 1.

In general, I would prefer to have examples of rolls involving backgrounds than static tables what a background does. Rolls could be either attribute + background, double background, ability + background. But it should not necessarily be defined once, like it is in H5 with assets. Resources + Streetwise might be a roll to get something blackmarket-like, but so could be Resources + Contacts.

Mechanics and inspiration for combinations like that would be far more beneficial for the gameplay, imo.

[Ana Mizuki]

What Justin's Resources rules mostly tell me is that he doesn't want me playing rich characters. Which is fine, except it's yet another one of his ways to kick you out of the world-spanning conspiracies.

I mean, most of the changes seem geared towards that. You are a nobody and if you try to get too big for your britches, you get pushed back down.

All of this really makes it seem that all characters are rather samey. They are all at most middle-class and stuck living regular lives AND weekend warrior garou lives. The fantasy of playing a rich person who does not have to worry about rent is, I guess, not personal enough.

[Knightingale]

I think, as Justin rightly points out it is more interesting to play with the idea of what a character does with the equipment in the scene rather than make it a point of contention in the game whether the character has the equipment or not. Of course, the narrative setup sets some limits for how far you can go with that. And for big asks you have stuff like a "preparedness-roll".

But the rules for Asset-Edges in H5 were all about making it a point of contention whether the character has the equipment or not. And setting a "once per session" similarly goes for the same thing by giving your Resources-Background an "on/off-button".

The only reason I could see why you would wanna make it "once per session" is that it's a mechanic that makes your dice-pool bigger. And one of the core-mechanics of WOD5E is that if your dice-pool is twice as big as the difficulty then you don't roll any dice and instead the player just gets to narrate how he succeeds. So any mechanic that makes your dice-pool bigger potentially triggers that.

[Damian May]

Just seems a bit too ' gamey' to my old simulationist brain I guess. That kind of mechanic tends to take me out of game world and back to the sheet.

[Knightingale]

More tweets from Justin Achilli about why he wants Resources to be a once-per-session dice-pool-bonus:

(Somebody's asking about how this new system figures into like, for example, buying a corporation with Resources 5 or something like that)

"I'd do this as something that was part of a narrative scene or even story rather than relegating it to something minor like a systems die roll. "I own a company" is going to have significant impact on a story (as you can see with Victor Temple, etc.)."

"Yeah, the "regeneration" aspect is why we tagged it as a per-session use. Resources shouldn't dominate the story, it should be a tool among the individual's problem-solving assets. Once per session still lets it help with a problem and reinforces character aspects like wealth."

"Resources and vast wealth always have an outsized benefit unless the Storyteller reins them in (which is what the new system aims to help), because money literally solves so many problems in the real world. It's not as interesting in a narrative, though."

"(There's a follow-up paragraph in W5, too, about describing out where your money comes from. If you have Resources 4 or 5, you're likely part of the exploitative problems that Garou oppose. And if you're a Hunter with Resources 5, you might have common interests with an org...)"

"I want it to work this way for all of the supernatural creatures. Resources generally reflects the means to acquire mundane or one-off special stuff. Edges confer more or a right or expectation to certain things, that are often themselves special. It's a fine line, I know."

"Part of it actually makes for good antagonists, in that them outspending a Hunter protagonist to gain advantage is a point of conflict. But I readily recognize Resources can be allowed to be a universal wildcard, which is the intent behind the rework."

Pretty much confirms what we've already suspected. Justin thinks that high Resources is bad for the game and with high Resources your player-character is probably a bit of a bad guy anyway and it's once-per-session so that it doesn't "dominate the story" even in its changed form.

Also, again, I have to reiterate this: Asset-Edges do not give the character a right or expectation for for having something, at least not according to the rules-as-written in H5.

He also talked a bit about what he thinks of combat in W5:

Somebody replies to Justin Achilli talking about not liking equipment in RPGs: I also feel this way about powers that require a “warm up” round as part of their mechanical balancing. Especially in combat where V5 assumes a 3rds and done.

Justin Achilli: W5 also encourages taking half in combat where it’s expeditious. Yes, you can kill the guard — don’t bother rolling, but tell me what happens. Player can exult in the win and not stress the statistically possible crummy roll that gets them thrashed.

Under Justin Achilli WOD5E apparently is really trying to put an emphasis on the mechanic where when your dice-pool is twice as big as the difficulty, you don't roll any dice and instead, the player just narrates what happens.

[Ana Mizuki]

"(There's a follow-up paragraph in W5, too, about describing out where your money comes from. If you have Resources 4 or 5, you're likely part of the exploitative problems that Garou oppose. And if you're a Hunter with Resources 5, you might have common interests with an org...)"

Pretty much confirms what we've already suspected. Justin thinks that high Resources is bad for the game and with high Resources your player-character is probably a bit of a bad guy anyway and it's once-per-session so that it doesn't "dominate the story" even in its changed form.

Also, again, I have to reiterate this: Asset-Edges do not give the character a right or expectation for for having something, at least not according to the rules-as-written in H5.

So, putting aside the generational wealth that Fangs and Lords can have, what about Glass Walker's main form of fighting the Wyrm? Are they just stuck using technology gifts and not fighting the companies in the field of politics/business? You know, where the fomori politician is?

Also, power fantasy not only exists but is a BIG part of playing some tribes. People don't make Fangs with resources 5 purely for tactical reasons, a huge part if also the power the wealth has. And yes, eat the rich and all that, but your PCs are not supposed to be paragons of morality anyway.

EDIT: The amount of 'no, your PC may NOT be anything greater than lower to the middle class, if they aren't entirely homeless' is really making things feel WAY too samey. Even if a tribe is a collection of like-minded garou over a lineage thing, you still have a community and a community can pool up its resources. If you have a community like Fangs who come from high born people, Lords who play the game of favours or Glass Walkers whose very powers involve things wee have seen make people rich.

[Knightingale]

It's bizarre. Like when he says "because money literally solves so many problems in the real world. It's not as interesting in a narrative, though.". Yeah, but this game isn't about being a human in the real world. You play a frigging werewolf with supernatural powers and there's a spirit-realm and you fight against a cosmological power called the Wyrm. Who cares if somebody decides to play a rich character?

He says "Resources and vast wealth always have an outsized benefit unless the Storyteller reins them in" which is true. So... just let the Storyteller handle it. Easy peasy. If a player shows up with a character that has Resources 5 you can talk to the player and also think about your own game and whether it fits or if it doesn't, you can talk to the player and tell them to make some changes. But instead when he says "(which is what the new system aims to help)", what he really means is "I, Justin Achilli, do not want any player-character to have access to great amounts of wealth and use it however they please.".

Also to further add to the idea that it really seems like Justin looks at Garou as humans with shapeshifting powers and spirit-magic, this is a question he tweeted:

What in your mundane life did you have to stop doing because your Rage jeopardized it? What have you had to give up?

[Ana Mizuki]

Also to further add to the idea that it really seems like Justin looks at Garou as humans with shapeshifting powers and spirit-magic, this is a question he tweeted:

"What in your mundane life did you have to stop doing because your Rage jeopardized it? What have you had to give up?"

A comic reviewer once pointed out how the Zack Snyder Superman gets constantly told that he owes no one anything and he should not risk his life doing heroic things for nothing. I get a very similar feeling from this. "What have you lost, how much has this cost you?"

Yet, the whole point of WtA is that the situation is bigger than you, it is bigger than your everyday wants. You are risking your life and limb because what you are saving is far more important than your own comfort. WtA has its issues, but one strong message is to put aside your own desires for a greater goal.

[Knightingale]

A comic reviewer once pointed out how the Zack Snyder Superman gets constantly told that he owes no one anything and he should not risk his life doing heroic things for nothing. I get a very similar feeling from this. "What have you lost, how much has this cost you?"

Yet, the whole point of WtA is that the situation is bigger than you, it is bigger than your everyday wants. You are risking your life and limb because what you are saving is far more important than your own comfort. WtA has its issues, but one strong message is to put aside your own desires for a greater goal.

From what we've been told so far, I feel like in W5 Rage is something that Garou struggle against in an effort to keep their humanity. And the mindset of "Let's fight and risk our lives" is bad because that way you give in to the Rage and become like the Get (who are bad guys, of course). Meanwhile, keeping your humanity is important because 1) Rage is bad 2) the Garou have failed and 3) the only force left to defeat the Wyrm is therefore humanity and your werewolf-player-character is just there to help them do it.

But if that's how W5 really turns out, I don't think I will like it. It's like the game really wants to hammer home that being a werewolf is not fun and actually, the Garou are a bunch of losers anyway who have lost the war before the game even began and you're just struggling to achieve some minor victories on the local level in order to inspire humanity to do better. That's a really gloomy and depressing take where I don't really see what even the point of playing it is.