Alternate Clan Bane & Animalism?

[Neros]

All these great examples are just making it more clear that it needs changing. Its way to wonky and complicated. There are tons of small areas and things you have to take into consideration, and it is starting to seem more a nuansence than something that adds to the game.

[Tessie]

I prefer my previous suggestion of reducing the dice bonus from attached Touchstones by one (or two, if you prefer that). It affects the Ventrue at all Humanity levels while also not being extremely punishing at lower Humanity levels.

[Rathamus]

Yeah I adjusted it to be more evenly tough since the other way it would only really kick in when you're knocking on the door of Draugrhood

[Tessie]

In my group we joke about Humanity 3 being high. Which it kinda is when Humanity 2 is the average and neither character has been at Humanity 4 for at least one in-game year.

Edit: But you have a point. In groups where nobody will hit Humanity 3 the bane becomes a non-issue (other than the fact that Humanity 4 would be capped at one attached Touchstone) similarly to the published bane.

[MCN]

I've only had one vampire ever fall to humanity 3, and I had to make the PC deliberately designed to fall.

[Tessie]

If Ventrues only can have equal to Humanity -1 they'd have no attached Touchstones at Humanity 3. That's pretty brutal.

As for resisting Detachment, that would have no effect or even a positive effect depending on how to interpret it. Current Humanity is not a modifier when rolling for detachment. And if you treat the Ventrue as having lower Humanity when checking to see if something is a Breaking Point they'd actually suffer less Breaking Points.

[Rathamus]

One could say that the Ventrue weakness is that they can't have two attached touchstones when at Humanity 2 and can't have any attached touchstones at Humanity 1, ensuring they have an easier time falling to Draugr once they've reached the low end of the scale.

That's a good idea. The 2E Ventrue bane always felt like a cop-out to me.

If you want to play it up as the Aloof Curse, then how about something similar to the Mekhet Bane: Treat your Humanity as 2 lower for resisting Detachment.

Or perhaps: May only purchase new Touchstones in a slot 1 lower than current Humanity(Cannot place them higher OR lower) and can not benefit from having more than one Touchstone attached to any given Humanity level.

I think both would make for more of a struggle to maintain Humanity instead of just being a 1xp tax.

[tsusasi]

I don't know if it's been mentioned yet, but there's another problem with the Daeva bane. For the vast majority of kindred it simply has no effect when at BP6+.

Yes it does. Their dependant condition doesn't go away just because human blood doesn't sustain them anymore. In fact they are going to be inclined to blow willpower to feed off their pet humans who they got addicted to being blood dolls in the first place to make them happy. Or offset the vitae loss they need to spend to keep them around for eternity, as a ghoul.
If they've fed off a vampire three times, which would normally invoke the dependant condition, they're "worse off", they're under a 3 stage vinculum instead. That's still a risk at higher BP levels

[Tessie]

Unless you find another way of gaining Vitae, such as through Unnatural Affinity.
Either way it's completely unrelated to the clan bane. The other four clans still suffer from their banes when they reach BP6+.

[RomulusGloriosus]

But, I mean, by that point (BP6+) you are literally being blood-bonded by drinking from vampires instead of being metaphorically blood-bonded to mortals, so it still sucks??

[Neros]

That is true.. You can do it, but as you said, you have to put more effort into it..

[Tessie]

Because the bane is only triggered by mortals, and drinking from mortals at BP6+ requires very special techniques or such a high Willpower expenditure that it's not a sustainable method of gaining Vitae.

[Neros]

Why wouldn't it affect vampires with Blood Potency 6+? What makes them immune to being "blood bonded"?

[Tessie]

I don't know if it's been mentioned yet, but there's another problem with the Daeva bane. For the vast majority of kindred it simply has no effect when at BP6+.

[Neros]

Ventrue Bane
It is true you gain nothing from losing that first Touchstone (didn't pay for any merits). And i can see the interesting thing of investing the dots in a different place to give it more narative.

But so far, I am thinking the worsened link to the Touchstone Tessie and others on the other Threads have suggested, is the best. It is simple and still follows the "not as connected to even the Touchstone"-theme.

Both Banes
After MCN's great examples, I can more clearly see the problem me and my group are having (especially with the Daeva bane).
When going deeper as he did, the Daeva bane feels to us, very wonky and complicated, especially when compared to the other banes. But with the Daeva and Ventrue, before they really become a bane, allot of roleplay is needed. This is a problem since not everybody is equal in how strong they are at roleplaying. So the Daeva and Ventru will be very hard to play, even though they may be interested in playing them.