W5 QA

[Spencer from The Hills]

and then V5 goes all 'very human vampires (that you should be playing) fucking love sex'..

Oh come on, it says that at Humanity 8 e.g, a starting character who refuses to feed on humans/without consent, they can "perhaps even enjoy it" and 7-4, they can only fake intercourse (whatever that means).

[Heavy Arms]

I truly ponder how the heck will they handle lupus in W5, when everything is so clearly geared for a solely human experience.

The official answer that you can say your character is a lupus if you want, but it doesn't have any bearings on the mechanics.

[ZakRulz]

Oh come on, it says that at Humanity 8 e.g, a starting character who refuses to feed on humans/without consent, they can "perhaps even enjoy it" and 7-4, they can only fake intercourse (whatever that means).

I mean it does but so many folks seem to just ignore that rule. I'm convinced there's a lot of VtM players who play as if they are playing Monster Hearts instead.

[Ragged Robin]

The official answer that you can say your character is a lupus if you want, but it doesn't have any bearings on the mechanics.

Seems silly, lupus are one of the more interesting aspects of wta if they're done right. They give any reason?

[Knightingale]

Seems silly, lupus are one of the more interesting aspects of wta if they're done right. They give any reason?

It was called a "legacy-concept". And the attitude towards it is expressed in this part of the Q&A:

Will there be any technical distinction at all between garou who were human or wolf before the first change?
There's no significant (systemic) distinction between whether you were human or wolf before the First Change. It's a character detail you can express as you wish.

So, it's just a "character-detail" the player is supposed to figure out. Furthermore, in the interview it was also mentioned that W5 assumes the majority of Garou are human-born.

But I guess with the new Garou-Kin-dynamic you can at least explain why people would wanna kill as many wolves as possible since random wolves at random times can turn into rage-fueled monsters...

[Damian May]

It was called a "legacy-concept". And the attitude towards it is expressed in this part of the Q&A:



So, it's just a "character-detail" the player is supposed to figure out. Furthermore, in the interview it was also mentioned that W5 assumes the majority of Garou are human-born.

But I guess with the new Garou-Kin-dynamic you can at least explain why people would wanna kill as many wolves as possible since random wolves at random times can turn into rage-fueled monsters...

I do still find it amusing that in W5 6 month olds can wander out of the wilderness with an equivalent of a PhD in Computer Science and its fine by RAW.

[Ana Mizuki]

So, it's just a "character-detail" the player is supposed to figure out. Furthermore, in the interview it was also mentioned that W5 assumes the majority of Garou are human-born.

Ironically, I feel this systemic lack of difference is going to mean people will no longer accept lupus characters in online games. Now that lupus is no longer a core book thing and has no mechanics, I get the feeling they are once more relegated to someone wanting to be a snowflake.

[Knightingale]

I do still find it amusing that in W5 6 month olds can wander out of the wilderness with an equivalent of a PhD in Computer Science and its fine by RAW.

Hey! What do you mean, "amusing"?! A lot of lore and worldbuilding had to be destroyed to give you the freedom to play wolfborn Garou starting-characters with PhDs in Computer Science!

Joking aside, at this point it's still kinda hard to imagine for me how exactly wolfborn Garou are supposed to fit into the setting with this new Garou-Kin-dynamic.

Ironically, I feel this systemic lack of difference is going to mean people will no longer accept lupus characters in online games. Now that lupus is no longer a core book thing and has no mechanics, I get the feeling they are once more relegated to someone wanting to be a snowflake.

Yeah, the way it's talked about in the previews, even there it already felt like Lupus are just an afterthought for W5. I think you're correct because if the corebook already has no interest in the idea then why would anyone wanna play a Lupus...?

[Ana Mizuki]

I do still find it amusing that in W5 6 month olds can wander out of the wilderness with an equivalent of a PhD in Computer Science and its fine by RAW.

I mean, it is all about not limiting the player, if they want to play a hacker wolf all of 1 year of age, why stop them? /s

Seriously, though, that really showcases how little effort is put into including the lupus. I don't mind the lack of the 5 gnosis, but you got to at least give some sense of realism into it.

Especially as the Nation is in shambles, so the ones teaching the lupus is their pack and not a sept.

Yeah, the way it's talked about in the previews, even there it already felt like Lupus are just an afterthought for W5. I think you're correct because if the corebook already has no interest in the idea then why would anyone wanna play a Lupus...?

I mean, me. I meant it in a "yuck, why do you want to play a lupus you freak!?" way. In that people will judge you for wanting to play it because it 'implies' things about you.

[MrNatas]

I can definite see a thing of, "Oh you want to play a lupus? You are one of those types of players eh?" The lack of breeds also makes tribes like the Red Talons more bland. It's one of those thing which I think the intent was 'Oh you should just be allowed to be whatever and it have no impact on a mechanical level' but it doesn't end up working that way.

[Knightingale]

If it follows what we got from the WtA: Retaliation boardgame (who did talk to the WOD-team about W5 canon but W5 was still in development at the time, though), the Red Talons are a Tribe that cares about protecting wilderness and animals (the same way Black Furies are about fighting injustice). And because of that, it's a Tribe with lot of wolfborn members. That's the new take on Red Talons.

I'm really not a fan of this take with both H5 and W5 where worldbuilding/lore is purely seen as a way for writers to restrict player-options and so removing that would give players and Storytellers more freedom to do their own thing. It's true to some extent but the way it's done here things get removed only to be replaced by nothing and then it's simply assumed that every ST and/or player should be ready to shoulder the burden of dealing with the lack of lore/worldbuilding. Because it isn't just about giving more freedom to STs and players, there's this blatant aversion to the idea of lore/worldbuilding in general. It reminds me of that write-up for the Loresheets in the V5 Players Guide where the writer is overly concerned with making it clear just how unimportant lore is and if a player wants to use a Loresheet, it's only that one player who cares. Period. And Storytellers better not think lore are "mandatory history lessons".

And the result is stuff like things becoming more bland, the setting becoming ill-defined and overly vague and the game putting a large burden on people at the table to take the various pieces and put in the work to actually produce a playable setting (because the core-game doesn't have one).

[MrNatas]

I tend to think that, from a creativity stand point, working within restrictions and rules can make things more creative and interesting then if you have no limits. It allows for problem solving of issues that arise due to these rules and makes for a more deep world.

Plot holes are not something to just shrug at and then let the players do something about but, an opportunity to fill in areas that are lacking to make the game colorful and rich. It's one thing to give storytellers openings for hooks and their own stories and its another to not make enough details for verisimilitude.

[Prometheas]

If it follows what we got from the WtA: Retaliation boardgame (who did talk to the WOD-team about W5 canon but W5 was still in development at the time, though), the Red Talons are a Tribe that cares about protecting wilderness and animals (the same way Black Furies are about fighting injustice). And because of that, it's a Tribe with lot of wolfborn members. That's the new take on Red Talons.

I'm really not a fan of this take with both H5 and W5 where worldbuilding/lore is purely seen as a way for writers to restrict player-options and so removing that would give players and Storytellers more freedom to do their own thing. It's true to some extent but the way it's done here things get removed only to be replaced by nothing and then it's simply assumed that every ST and/or player should be ready to shoulder the burden of dealing with the lack of lore/worldbuilding. Because it isn't just about giving more freedom to STs and players, there's this blatant aversion to the idea of lore/worldbuilding in general. It reminds me of that write-up for the Loresheets in the V5 Players Guide where the writer is overly concerned with making it clear just how unimportant lore is and if a player wants to use a Loresheet, it's only that one player who cares. Period. And Storytellers better not think lore are "mandatory history lessons".

And the result is stuff like things becoming more bland, the setting becoming ill-defined and overly vague and the game putting a large burden on people at the table to take the various pieces and put in the work to actually produce a playable setting (because the core-game doesn't have one).

This mindset was unfortunately popularized by D&D 5e's unprecedented success.

This was rumbling in hollywood and the video gaming industry even before then though, with roots tracing to the 2000's era writer's strike.

[TyrannicalRabbit]

If it follows what we got from the WtA: Retaliation boardgame (who did talk to the WOD-team about W5 canon but W5 was still in development at the time, though), the Red Talons are a Tribe that cares about protecting wilderness and animals (the same way Black Furies are about fighting injustice). And because of that, it's a Tribe with lot of wolfborn members. That's the new take on Red Talons.

I'm really not a fan of this take with both H5 and W5 where worldbuilding/lore is purely seen as a way for writers to restrict player-options and so removing that would give players and Storytellers more freedom to do their own thing. It's true to some extent but the way it's done here things get removed only to be replaced by nothing and then it's simply assumed that every ST and/or player should be ready to shoulder the burden of dealing with the lack of lore/worldbuilding. Because it isn't just about giving more freedom to STs and players, there's this blatant aversion to the idea of lore/worldbuilding in general. It reminds me of that write-up for the Loresheets in the V5 Players Guide where the writer is overly concerned with making it clear just how unimportant lore is and if a player wants to use a Loresheet, it's only that one player who cares. Period. And Storytellers better not think lore are "mandatory history lessons".

And the result is stuff like things becoming more bland, the setting becoming ill-defined and overly vague and the game putting a large burden on people at the table to take the various pieces and put in the work to actually produce a playable setting (because the core-game doesn't have one).

i was not aware of that loresheet blurb but it makes sense in the context of how official 5e channels have treated fans of the older editions. It makes me always return to a simple question of why? It feels like something you build through a combination of promotion of it as a reimagined version of the IP, which was botched for reasons of some blame on Paradox and I think some things out of their control, and built through writing and world building organically. Constant reminders like that just feel like insecurity to me and lack of trust in both a fan base and the writing. It also I think highlights a contradiction in that on one hand they seemed to be quite excited by the IP and it's history but also disdainful of it. The cynic in me wants to say this is because it really comes out of a desire for a video game market. And maybe I'm simply naive of the industry but I feel you get more accomplished by having a vision, executing it and presenting it. A simple explanation that it's an edition built so you don't need to research decades of lore would have sufficed.

I freely admit bias in this but some of this feels like a Marvel vs DC movie situation because it feels like Paradox wants to establish what CofD did, particularly 2e.

[Heavy Arms]

I do still find it amusing that in W5 6 month olds can wander out of the wilderness with an equivalent of a PhD in Computer Science and its fine by RAW.

To be a bit fair, it's also "fine" by the older RAW too: just plop 8 freebies into Computers at chargen. What's stops this is what's always stopped this: humans running the games.

Though I think the concerns that humans running the games will just want to skip the headaches of the few bad-faith types completely is a very valid (and feels almost like the intent).