The Order of the Stick: Utterly Dwarfed
The Order of the Stick: Utterly Dwarfed - Coming in December and available for pre-order now
Page 3 of 25 FirstFirst 12345678910111213 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 722
  1. - Top - End - #61
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    fishyfishyfishy's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    DFW, Texas
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Quote Originally Posted by Ignimortis View Post
    Except all of this basically went out the window by Revised or so, and is definitely not really true in V20. True Faith works for several religions, gypsy Ravnos are the minority of the clan, their vices as diverse as Malk insanity or even more, and Assamites, while predisposed towards assassination due to their clan disciplines (aggravated damage, many actions and stealth? only City Gangrel have it better, with less blood expenditure), aren't that fanatical, and, in fact, are rather fractured with some following the Camarilla, some going to the Sabbat, and the others still saying "k then, Ur-Shulgi it is.". There are stereotypes in the setting - but those are internal, not external.
    I think his comment about Christianity is in reference to the Vampiric origin story and not True Faith.
    Most of my posts are made on my mobile device. Please excuse any errors from auto correct.

  2. - Top - End - #62
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Das Kapital

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    It was indeed. The Caine story as I understand it is presented as Truth, and it means the Abrahamic story is true.

    Additionally, I prefer the decoupling of political allegiance and clan in VtR. Seems more natural than Clan being both family and political allegiance, especially in the modern day.
    Steampunk GwynSkull by DR. BATH

    "Live to the point of tears"
    - Albert Camus


    Quote Originally Posted by Wyntonian View Post
    What. Is. This. Madness.

  3. - Top - End - #63
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    fishyfishyfishy's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    DFW, Texas
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    I agree, and I'm more in favor of Requiem than Masquerade in most circumstances. Though I do prefer Ascension over Awakening, if only by a smidgen.

    russdm it really comes down to preference and what type of game you like to run. They both have their merits and strengths. I find that Masquerade excels at the Ghenna/Apocalyptic type scenarios that the canon follows. It was made for it. If you want to run the official story you can provide a really fun experience for your players. When it comes to creating your own story Requiem is more adaptable, and offers more opportunities for in depth character development and personal experiences. It really exemplifies the "personal horror" aspect of Vampire. You could take the fluff of one setting and adapt it to the other, but then why not just play that game instead?
    Most of my posts are made on my mobile device. Please excuse any errors from auto correct.

  4. - Top - End - #64
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Ignimortis's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Quote Originally Posted by Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll View Post
    It was indeed. The Caine story as I understand it is presented as Truth, and it means the Abrahamic story is true.

    Additionally, I prefer the decoupling of political allegiance and clan in VtR. Seems more natural than Clan being both family and political allegiance, especially in the modern day.
    Can't argue with clan politics, they're still there. But the Caine story is also suspicious and has lots of counter-proof in later editions.

    Eh. To each his own, I guess.

    To those who do play VtM: Do your STs use secondary abilities? Like...Camarilla lore, clan lore, masquerade as a skill, hunting, and so on.
    Elezen Dark Knight avatar by Linklele
    Favourite classes: Beguiler, Scout, Warblade, 3.5 Warlock, Harbinger (PF:PoW).
    78% of DM's started their first campaign in a tavern. If you're one of the 22% that didn't, copy and paste this into your signature.

  5. - Top - End - #65
    Orc in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Mar 2010

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Quote Originally Posted by Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll View Post
    The Caine story as I understand it is presented as Truth, and it means the Abrahamic story is true.
    Sort of?
    It's vaguely true, but if you read Old-Demon you'll see that it's more of a multiple-choice past where the only correct answer is "all of the above"...regardless of the mutually contradictory nature of those answers.

  6. - Top - End - #66
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    SolithKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    By Bellevue, WA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    So is the Whitewolf nWoD books on amazon for V:tR all from the first edition? Is there really any reasons that make buying the 2nd edition more worth it than picking up the first edition?

    How much change occurred? Were there only minor changes? Or major ones? How much changed between editions occurred and how important are those changes?
    Blog Read and Comment! I use green for joking and Blue for sarcasm.
    Published two Kindle Books on Amazon, both are 99 cents. Ask Me about them!
    Quote Originally Posted by Peelee View Post
    Wookiee. 2 E's. [I am obsessed with this]
    My First Let's Play -- Temporary Haitus (I plan to get back to it eventually)

  7. - Top - End - #67
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Milo v3's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Quote Originally Posted by russdm View Post
    So is the Whitewolf nWoD books on amazon for V:tR all from the first edition?
    I believe so.

    Is there really any reasons that make buying the 2nd edition more worth it than picking up the first edition?

    How much change occurred? Were there only minor changes? Or major ones? How much changed between editions occurred and how important are those changes?
    Better experience system, a social manuevering system has been added, use a different system instead of virtues and vices, the disciplines have all been rewritten and made more useful, it's less "V:tM but different" and more it's own thing, vampires don't frenzy just because they are meeting someone for the first time, clan weaknesses are different meaning the clans act a bit different in 2e to 1e, fluff has vampires seem less "one origin" where even each clan has multiple potential origins, humanity is based around measuring how inhuman you are rather than just being "moral code" (none of the "Morality bars" are about morals now), vampires don't have magic memory loss, you can take banes which give you folklore-vampire abilities, sunlight damage is variable depending on your humanity and blood potency, all vampires have better senses rather than needing separate powers for it, vampires are stronger when in frenzy and frenzy is no longer split into "Fear/Hunger Frenzy" instead being more general to fit with the situation that's occurring to the vampire.
    Last edited by Milo v3; 2016-12-25 at 12:44 AM.
    Spoiler: Old Avatar by Aruius
    Show
    http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q56/Zeritho/Koboldbard.png

  8. - Top - End - #68
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Anonymouswizard's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    In my library

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Quote Originally Posted by Sydonai View Post
    Sort of?
    It's vaguely true, but if you read Old-Demon you'll see that it's more of a multiple-choice past where the only correct answer is "all of the above"...regardless of the mutually contradictory nature of those answers.
    Demon is weird. I mean, I don't hate layered reality, but to keep any mystery as to what happened 6000 years ago you have to ignore it.

    I would also like to say that for Masquerade itself, the Caine story actually gets more true in some ways as the line goes on and Gehenna approaches. I mean, I love VtM, but it is extremely Christian in it's worldview (moreso than Demon).

    Quote Originally Posted by russdm View Post
    So is the Whitewolf nWoD books on amazon for V:tR all from the first edition?
    Probably, 2e is all Onyx Path and Print on Demand, so it's unlikely to have turned up on Amazon.

    [/QUOTE]Is there really any reasons that make buying the 2nd edition more worth it than picking up the first edition?

    How much change occurred? Were there only minor changes? Or major ones? How much changed between editions occurred and how important are those changes?[/QUOTE]

    The changes are deceptive. At the core all that changed its optional stuff, the core system is the same. However, at least for Requiem, pretty much all the additional stuff has changed.

    Kindred got a massive power boost in 2e, with their physical disciplines vastly increasing in strength and their psychic disciplines also getting a reworking (Nightmare now deals with illusions a lot more, for example). The fluff has also been taken even further from Masquerade, although I'm afb and so can't say exactly how.

    Oh, and there's a new experience system, a mechanic to make sure you never lose experience from Merits getting attacked (Sanctity of Merits), plus many of the core systems have been tweaked. It's highly worth getting 2e over 1e.
    Snazzy avatar (now back! ) by Honest Tiefling.

    RIP Laser-Snail, may you live on in our hearts forever.

    Spoiler: playground quotes
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Zelphas View Post
    So here I am, trapped in my laboratory, trying to create a Mechabeast that's powerful enough to take down the howling horde outside my door, but also won't join them once it realizes what I've done...twentieth time's the charm, right?
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Raziere View Post
    How about a Jovian Uplift stuck in a Case morph? it makes so little sense.

  9. - Top - End - #69
    Orc in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Mar 2010

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Quote Originally Posted by Milo v3 View Post
    Better experience system, a social manuevering system has been added, use a different system instead of virtues and vices, the disciplines have all been rewritten and made more useful, it's less "V:tM but different" and more it's own thing, vampires don't frenzy just because they are meeting someone for the first time, clan weaknesses are different meaning the clans act a bit different in 2e to 1e, fluff has vampires seem less "one origin" where even each clan has multiple potential origins, humanity is based around measuring how inhuman you are rather than just being "moral code" (none of the "Morality bars" are about morals now), vampires don't have magic memory loss, you can take banes which give you folklore-vampire abilities, sunlight damage is variable depending on your humanity and blood potency, all vampires have better senses rather than needing separate powers for it, vampires are stronger when in frenzy and frenzy is no longer split into "Fear/Hunger Frenzy" instead being more general to fit with the situation that's occurring to the vampire.
    To give an alternate viewpoint I'll just post something that someone else said;
    Spoiler: the quote in question
    Show

    Quote Originally Posted by Eukie
    God Machine Chronicles rules are bad. Not necessarily terrible, because most RPGs have shoddy rules, but certainly not good by any measure, and worse than the rules that preceded it. The Virtues and Vices have never been particularly well-written, but GMC has "Ambitious" granting full WP whenever you expose yourself to risk to accomplish a long-term goal (like "kill all Vampires"), while "Love" requires you to put yourself in danger for your paramour - a situation that is much less likely to occur in the average game about, say, Vampire-killing.

    In place of Morality (because baaaaaaaaaaaaw, I can't play a Morally good murder and thief!), there's Integrity, which is populated by "Breaking Points", allowing you to write your own Morality system. It's more of a Sanity system though. It seems, at times, like it tries to serve two masters; half of it is an attempt to solve the problem of characters being hardened to specific situations (like experienced soldiers being hardened to dispassionate killing at range in the heat of combat without also being perfectly fine with arson), like NEMESIS does with it's Trauma Gauges, and half of it being Paths from Vampire: the Masquerade. Not that you can do this, because killing someone is always a Breaking Point, perhaps in some half-hearted attempt at balance. (Rape and torture you can be fine with committing. But murder? Nuh-uh!)

    The Integrity system is, for reasons only known to that strange and elusive creature known as a White Wolf editor, split across several chapters separated by other mechanics. The actual rules, though, tell us that it does absolutely nothing. If you fail an Integrity Roll, you lose a dot of Integrity and become Guilty, Shaken or Spooked. If you succeed, you become Guilty, Shaken, or Spooked. What happens when your Integrity reaches 0? Nothing whatsoever; Integrity doesn't actually have any tangible in-game effects except to modify future Integrity rolls. The worst thing that happens is that you get -2 to future Integrity rolls, which means you fail your Integrity rolls more often. If you roll the Chance Die because of this, you end up Broken, Fugue, or Madness. (Oh, hey, it's a Sanity system. Why not just call it Sanity then? Afraid of Chaosium lawyers?)

    The Conditions system is some terrible attempt at unified FATE-like mechanics that are absolutely abysmal in implementation; for example, failing an Integrity roll makes you Guilty, Shaken, or Spooked. Guilty gives you -2 to certain rolls until you confess to your crime. Shaken requires you to voluntarily fail a roll to resolve it - but you never have to resolve it. Spooked, similarly, does nothing until you choose to resolve it by, say, staying up all night (actual example).

    It's obviously intended to work like FATE, because you can voluntarily choose to resolve your Condition in order to get 0.2 XP. This was probably meant to motivate you to make captivating stories, but what it actually does is that you're encouraged to screw up a lot. FATE has, as a premise, that you're playing a story with ups-and-downs, and gives you Fate-points so you can pull off audacious stunts and in-genre mechanics like "I was hiding behind the curtain the whole time!". Older WoD games, meanwhile, assumed you were playing as your character would, so there's a strange dissonance suddenly, where you're motivated to have your character screw up, get Conditions, and resolve them for 0.2 XP, despite this not being something your character would actually do. It's fine in a game like FATE, is built around that the GM can bribe you with disadvantages you can use to gain advantages - it's a lot weirder in the World of Darkness, which was not built around the premise that I should have my character shoot themselves in the foot for the benefit of drama and precious fifths of an XP.

    "Having a magical bond with an animal" is treated as Condition. "Someone having blackmail on you" is a Condition. "Not knowing where you are" is also a Condition. It's a form of unified mechanic for "having an effect on you" stapled to a FATE-point like system. All in all, it's not that bad, except...

    •Spirits cannot be summoned unless you've invoked a Manifestation Condition on the location. A Manifestation Condition is a different kind of Condition that doesn't work at all like the rest of the Conditions, such as by having tiers, and not being tied to characters and therefore not having any of the XP-granting resolution effects that pretty much define Conditions as separate from generic modifiers. So to summon a spirit you need to place Conditions on a scene and then follow a flow-chart of changing Conditions into other Conditions and aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh make it stop!
    •There are Tilts, which are Conditions, but in combat
    •In Demon: the Descent, each Y-splat has a Persistent Condition that doesn't do anything to you (so it's not actually a condition imposed upon your character), but can be cashed in for 0.2 XP and a bonus or effect. So we have Conditions that are not conditions, but instead powers.
    •In Blood & Smoke, the Majesty 1 power Awe imposes the "awed" condition on the target - but "awed" is not a Condition, despite being a condition with tangible effects. However, a target must be "awed" for you to impose the "Charmed" Condition, which is a Condition but otherwise indistinguishable from "awed" mechanically. So there are conditions that are not Conditions.
    •They split up rules. Want to quickly check what the Mesmerize Discipline does? Leaf through Blood & Smoke to page 131. What does it do? You roll, and then you impose the Mesmerized Condition on the target. So, what does Mesmerize actually do? Well, skip to page 305 to find what the Mesmerized Condition does. Obviously, having to skip two-hundred-and-twenty-six pages to determine the effects of one magical power is excellent design!

    Mind, then there's such fun things as "Mesmerized" and "Dominated" being separate Conditions; mechanically, they act the same - how you're allowed to use them is described by the Discipline's mechanics text, not the Condition's mechanics. Of course, the Disciplines invoke restrictions on what you can do that aren't listed in the Condition; when you've Mesmerized someone, they follow all simple three-to-four commands you give them. If you have the Mesmerized Condition, however, you follow all commands given to you by the vampire.

    Of course, since Conditions are XP-granting, Conditions imposed by Disciplines have to specifically note that sometimes you don't get XP even though the Condition is resolved, because some Conditions have time-limits and running out of time doesn't count as resolving the Condition properly. So hey. Conditions. Totally a good idea! Especially when we have four different kinds of them in the core book, and then need to add specific exceptions to how they work to use them in Demon and Vampire.

    But other than Conditions? It's still bad. Vampires no longer have Virtues and Vices. Instead, they have Masks and Dirges. Your Mask is how you act to other people, or what you might call your "demeanor", and your Dirge is how you really are, in what you might call your "nature". So you pick a "nature" and a "demeanor" for your character, including such fun ones as:
    •Child: Regain all your WP when you murder, rape, or torture people for no particular reason.
    •Deviant: Regain a point of WP for jaywalking, or regain all your WP if you murder someone in front of a cop. I recommend murdering the cop; it's less hassle.
    •Jester: Regain a point of WP for "pointing out an absurdity in the current state of affairs". I recommend pillaging the editorial comics for jokes about politics.
    •Masochist: Regain a point of WP for hurting yourself in a new way ("you know, I've never pulled out my pubic hairs one by one before" *ding*) Regain all your WP when practicing autoerotic asphyxiation.
    •Monster: 1 WP: be a ****, all WP: murder someone for no good reason (notably, this is more powerful than Deviant, because you don't need to have witnesses)
    •Nomad: Leave a city to regain all your WP. This happens very often in the city-bound vampire chronicles, I'm sure.
    •Rebel: Be different without hiding it to regain 1 WP.

    And most of GMC is like that; returning to bad VTM ideas, badly copying FATE mechanics, and generally being written badly. The Gangrel introduction wastes half a page telling you they're not going to tell you anything. There's a Merit that lets transwomen have menstrual periods from nowhere in particular. Feeding now has a chance of causing ravenous pseudo-vampires to spontaneously arise, yet vampire society has not been changed to reflect this. Being rear-ended causes Humanity-loss. Having your octogenarian, cancerous grandparents die on you causes Humanity loss. If you lose too much Humanity, you're encouraged to act more like a stereotypical vampire. Losing Humanity cannot cause you to gain an angsty Condition!

    It's a completely new edition of the new World of Darkness, with major tonal shifts, mechanical changes, and fundamentally new assumptions about how you're supposed to play the game. It's claimed that B&S and the coming GMC-updates for Werewolf and Mage are just new supplements, but they're for all intents and purposes a new edition of the new World of Darkness, completely incompatible with the old new World of Darkness. Trying to sell them as sourcebooks falls somewhere between "idiotic" and "deceptive".

  10. - Top - End - #70
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Sith_Happens's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Dromund Kaas
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Quote Originally Posted by Sydonai View Post
    To give an alternate viewpoint I'll just post something that someone else said;
    Spoiler: the quote in question
    Show

    I mean sure, if you deliberately want to describe everything in the worst possible light while ignoring that many of those changes are strictly improvements from a gameplay perspective.
    Revan avatar by kaptainkrutch.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cirrylius View Post
    That's how wizards beta test their new animals. If it survives Australia, it's a go. Which in hindsight explains a LOT about Australia.

  11. - Top - End - #71
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Das Kapital

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    To answer the other half of the question, the only books specifically written for 2e are the main Vampire the Requiem 2e book, and Secrets of the Covenants. Both are available only by Print in Demand, its incredibly unlikely you'll find any elsewhere and if you do it'll be second hand. Several first edition books are recommended. The various Clan books are about 90% fiction, most of which still is valid, and a tiny bit of crunch, which may require some tweaking. I used to sat the Covenant books too but now Secrets of the Covenants is better and more Modern, at least from what I've heard. The last two books are Sacraments and Blasphemies, which allows for more freeform blood sorcery (the example rituals in 2e are designed with this book specifically in mind), and Damnation City, for building the city.

  12. - Top - End - #72
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Milo v3's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Quote Originally Posted by Sith_Happens View Post
    I mean sure, if you deliberately want to describe everything in the worst possible light while ignoring that many of those changes are strictly improvements from a gameplay perspective.
    I find it funny that some of his complaints are "How dare they put the conditions in one spot of the book rather than all over the place!"
    Spoiler: Old Avatar by Aruius
    Show
    http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q56/Zeritho/Koboldbard.png

  13. - Top - End - #73
    Orc in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Mar 2010

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Quote Originally Posted by Milo v3 View Post
    his
    Eukie is female.
    Also her views, not mine.

  14. - Top - End - #74
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Grytorm's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2010

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Quote Originally Posted by Sith_Happens View Post
    I mean sure, if you deliberately want to describe everything in the worst possible light while ignoring that many of those changes are strictly improvements from a gameplay perspective.
    I'm not going to argue one way or the other about the criticisms. But I definitely feel that Eukie presents the reasons for my visceral dislike of the Chronicles edition (I should definitely make my stubborn alternate terminologies for the editions my signature). Having read Dresden Files RPG I know that FATE is cool, but I don't think Onyx Path should have written something which at a glance is very reminiscent of FATE.

  15. - Top - End - #75
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Milo v3's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Thing is, the "fate-like" parts of the game are just "1) We've modified the conditions system so status effects don't reduce player agency and instead make the game function more like a horror game. 2) you can turn a failure on a roll to a dramatic failure for 1/5th of an XP. 3) You have a list of three goals that you (the player) would like to meet eventually in the game, and if they are meet you get 1/5th of an XP.". That's.... nothing to be honest.

    Whenever I see people complain about the "Fate-like" parts of the game they act as though it's some major things that's throughout the mechanics. For godsake, Mutants and Masterminds & D&D 5e are more FATE-like.
    Last edited by Milo v3; 2016-12-27 at 05:56 PM.
    Spoiler: Old Avatar by Aruius
    Show
    http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q56/Zeritho/Koboldbard.png

  16. - Top - End - #76
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Das Kapital

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    It's really not that different though, is it? All you do is instead of having the effect of the drug or power or spell or whatever mechanic listed in the mechanic itself, where you have to refer to specific mechanics scattered across the book to see what is affecting you, rather you have all the effects listed and names in a single area of the book, designed such that you can hand out cards to players to help remember what effects are what.

    Other than that, all they really do for the basic Conditions is make them a primary source for XP. But otherwise it's all information you'd have to track anyways, it just would have been more scattered and using several different systems or mechanics to remember all of it.
    Steampunk GwynSkull by DR. BATH

    "Live to the point of tears"
    - Albert Camus


    Quote Originally Posted by Wyntonian View Post
    What. Is. This. Madness.

  17. - Top - End - #77
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Kesnit's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Eastern US
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Working on an oWoD Fallen character and need some clarification.

    The book seems to say that Fallen take over a body after the mortal has died. However, I swear I read somewhere in the book that the Fallen can make a bargain with a mortal to take over the body without the mortal actually dying. (They share the body.) That kind of scenario makes more sense for the character I want to build. However, I don't want to put the effort into it if that is not actually an option.

    Spoiler: The Backstory
    Show
    The mortal is a social worker who works with kids and families in the courts. He's seen way too many bad situations and is frustrated with all the times the innocent get messed over. One night while ranting, he says "I would give anything to be able to fix what is wrong with the system." That is just the opening the Demon needs, and offers a bargain. The Demon gets a body, and the mortal gets the power to take matters into his own hands. He becomes a Dexter-like killer, "removing humans who do not deserve to live."
    Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.

    Proud member of the "I Love Anyway" Club

    Thank you, Ceika, so much for the avatar!

  18. - Top - End - #78
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Quote Originally Posted by Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll View Post
    It's really not that different though, is it? All you do is instead of having the effect of the drug or power or spell or whatever mechanic listed in the mechanic itself, where you have to refer to specific mechanics scattered across the book to see what is affecting you, rather you have all the effects listed and names in a single area of the book, designed such that you can hand out cards to players to help remember what effects are what.

    Other than that, all they really do for the basic Conditions is make them a primary source for XP. But otherwise it's all information you'd have to track anyways, it just would have been more scattered and using several different systems or mechanics to remember all of it.
    Yes it is different. They are different editions. The two are not compatible. They do tell similar types of stories with a lots of the same terminology, thus they are different editions of the same game. To say they are strictly improvements is an opinion presented as fact.
    There are the whole conditions thing, the tilt things, the viture/vice thing, the god machine, the clans, the covenants were deeply philosophically changed though they kept much of the same overall shape.



    Frankly I find the whole GMC horrid, but that's my personal opinion.
    And a bunch of people telling me to "get over it" or "it is better" doesn't help. You like that game fine but don't tell me to like something I don't. I don't find it fun, so I don't play it.


    D&D edition wars *jaw jaw jawjajawjajaw**snarl**jawjawjaw**statistics paper**jawjajwjajawjaw**snap**jawjawjaw*
    WoD edition wars *silence* *angsty starring* *silence* *silence* *explode with rage* *silence* *silence*
    Last edited by sktarq; 2016-12-31 at 03:12 AM.

  19. - Top - End - #79
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Milo v3's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Quote Originally Posted by sktarq View Post
    There are the whole conditions thing, the tilt things, the viture/vice thing, the god machine, the clans, the covenants were deeply philosophically changed though they kept much of the same overall shape.
    You say the God-Machine as if it's innately part of the edition rather than "Just another enemy type".... also not sure how "Virtue and Vice are expanded to be more than just christian ones" is negative, could you expand on that?
    Last edited by Milo v3; 2016-12-31 at 04:23 AM.
    Spoiler: Old Avatar by Aruius
    Show
    http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q56/Zeritho/Koboldbard.png

  20. - Top - End - #80
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Anonymouswizard's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    In my library

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Alright, I've been staying out of this discussion because honestly, my favourite edition of WoD is the old GURPS books (followed by CofD, but it's not close), but this has been annoying me.

    Quote Originally Posted by sktarq View Post
    Yes it is different. They are different editions. The two are not compatible. They do tell similar types of stories with a lots of the same terminology, thus they are different editions of the same game. To say they are strictly improvements is an opinion presented as fact.
    Actually, the only big difference is the Conditions, and even then it's mainly a streamlining of a concept from most games. Now, when it comes to the setting side I can see the disagreement, I didn't feel for Requiem 1e while I love Requiem 2e (conversely I don't care for Forsaken 2e but Forsaken 1e is tied with Apocalypse as my favourite WoD game). The core system is all the same, and mortals work almost exactly the same (the only changes being one character creation tweak, Sanctity of Merits, and a better XP system*), so I don't know why you see this massive difference between nWoD1e and CofD (now the individual games I do understand, they've all had massive reworkings).

    * Remember the old one that made realistic starting characters hilariously suboptimal? I'm not sad that it's gone.

    There are the whole conditions thing, the tilt things, the viture/vice thing, the god machine, the clans, the covenants were deeply philosophically changed though they kept much of the same overall shape.
    To go through these in order:
    Conditions: yeah, these could have been handled better. Half of them don't even tell you what they do, and a bunch of things that should be conditions aren't. I also don't like XP being given for them, it pushes them front and centre in character development where I'd rather have Aspirations. I like them as a concept, but they turn almost everything into 'roleplay this once and get XP', when them just being an easy way of tracking bonuses/penalties would have been fine.
    Tilts: In all honesty I've never been bothered by them, but that's because I always forget they're a thing. Really, I should not be able to forget about a key part of the combat system (really because the first thing that springs to my mind is 'condition').
    Virtues/Vices: There has literally been no change for mortals since 1e. The rules in 1e didn't limit you to seven Virtues and Vices, although it might as well have as far as I know. I do agree that some personality archetypes for Supernaturals need work, but really why are we still doing this when we have less subjective vectors for regaining Willpower.
    Clans: eh, personally I prefer the 2e Clans to the 1e ones, except maybe for the Ventrue's weakness (seriously? At least the Nosferatu one costs 4XP to overcome), but I agree that it's subjective.
    Covenants: really, this is where we get into the fact that 2e fluff is really more of a reboot than a continuation. There's a lot of common themes, and the covenants still follow the same core archetypes, but there have been significant enough changes that it's really a case of new covenants (this is definitely not the old CoC).

    Frankly I find the whole GMC horrid, but that's my personal opinion.
    That's fine, you're entitled to it.

    And a bunch of people telling me to "get over it" or "it is better" doesn't help. You like that game fine but don't tell me to like something I don't. I don't find it fun, so I don't play it.
    The thing is, from a rules stand point it's the best WoD has been (which is not saying a lot). But if you don't want to play it, that's fine, better doesn't always mean more fun (heck, I'm certain there are still people out there playing oWoD 1e, even with some of the really strange ideas [specific focuses for each Tradition!?]).
    Snazzy avatar (now back! ) by Honest Tiefling.

    RIP Laser-Snail, may you live on in our hearts forever.

    Spoiler: playground quotes
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Zelphas View Post
    So here I am, trapped in my laboratory, trying to create a Mechabeast that's powerful enough to take down the howling horde outside my door, but also won't join them once it realizes what I've done...twentieth time's the charm, right?
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Raziere View Post
    How about a Jovian Uplift stuck in a Case morph? it makes so little sense.

  21. - Top - End - #81
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Das Kapital

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Oh I didn't mean the editions were the same, I meant conditions were tracking things that you were supposed to be tracking anyways, but in a more consistent manner that encouraged greater player buy-in. There are a few other changes that I would consider net positives, and strongly so.

    You missed, for Vampire, the removal of the Predators Taint (every time you met another vampire you had a chance to flip out and either run, cower, or attack) and the replacement with Predatory Aura, an active effect that allows you to seduce, scare, or challenge others supernaturally. I consider this a fairly objective improvement. It takes an annoying social impediment out of a primarily social game, and replaces it with a social TOOL. That rule was one I often saw house ruled out.

    Additionally, changing how weapons work so shotguns aren't better long range weapons than sniper rifles anymore, by separating the damage bonus from the dice roll. Another common house rule I saw.

    Also removed the archaic, problematic, and insulting link between morality and mental illness. Used to be you could gain a mental illness if you shop lifted. Sure, it fit a theme, but at the cost of implying that the mentally ill deserve their illness because they're bad people. That was a major issue hard to simply house rule away but I can objectively say it was a right choice. Unless you think that there's nothing wrong with insulting the mentally ill at your table. This is responsible for screwing up the Ventrue curse, which they never did come up with a suitable replacement for.

    As for curses, I would argue that the Gangrel also have a disappointing curse. Mekhet, Nosferatu, and Daeva all reinforce their stereotypes whether they accept the curse or go out of the way to avoid it arising. The other two go against stereotype if they try to avoid the curse. Daeva are the best example: either accept that you have a tight knit herd that you are obsessed with, or become promiscuous to avoid the curse. Either fits the stereotype. Gangrel on the other hand are merely punished for having low self control so are incentivized to have... Overly high self control? Not exactly fitting their stereotype.

    Not a fan of the way experience is presented, but that's fixed by saying a beat is an experience and multiplying all costs by five. Simpler.

    Even though it's a different game, I must point out how Mages spell casting improved imho with "reach". Before Mages only had to avoid casting certain "vulgar" spells jn front of Muggles, or the Abyss twould leakthrough. Now, it's rather that they are encouraged to "reach" for more power in their spells at the cost of the Abyss possibly leading through. Fits the theme of "hubris" so much more strongly

    Edit: also re the god-machine, that's no different than saying I really hate ghosts in the first edition. They're the featured antagonist in the mortal line and a major role in one other line, and have references here and there in other lines, but little more. You can play a game without ghosts very easily. In fact, you can play a game without the God machine much easier than you can without ghosts.
    Last edited by Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll; 2016-12-31 at 09:37 AM.

  22. - Top - End - #82
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    On the god-machine thing. I dislike it because of the same reasons I dislike the Cain/Jyhad parts of oWoD. It took a fundamental mystery and put something there. I thought what nWoD did best was often in what it chose to leave blank or missing.

    And I liked predator's taint. It was a powerful ST tool. How groups of vampires delt with it could deeply shape their actions...So getting rid of it wasn't a positive for me. And while I was hopeful for Aura on paper

    Remeber that 1e DnD thief who was always stealing everything that wasn't nailed down because it gave him XP? Well conditions seem to turn people into that in the storytelling arena. No if you had hypermechanically focused players who avoided and minimized any flaws their characters may have had I could see this being a plus. But frankly it turned many of the parts of playing a complex character in a point reward system instead of a fun reward system (doing something because it brings enjoyment). This more than anything is why I loath this edition.

    As for the link between falling humanity and mental illness I agree with you. I just don't find the replacement functional.

    It isn't like all the changes were bad, (Obfuscate, weapon issues, the idea of breaking points etc) but the bad ones outweighed the good to a large degree for me. The behaviors that the changes incentivise at the table are different enough to make it a different evening. It has felt more like a combo of legal contract negotiations mixed with 1990's style Kings Quest games (with conditions being inventory objects) than cooperative storytelling (what it says on the tin). Both the games I've run and the games I've played in have been comparatively joyless affairs because of it. Much less laughter for example.

    Realistic starting characters been deeply suboptimal? I actually thought of that as a feature not a bug. It had to be taken into account for as an ST but it drove lots of fun stories.

    Having never enjoyed any of the mage games I don't follow them and I'll take your word on the improvement there was enough room for it.

    Final thought-I could hand the blue and red book to someone who had never played when they sat in on a session and they all could follow along (I put labeled bookmarks in to help but not much else). I considered this a huge improvement to oWoD. I don't find the game on ramps well. I could teach VtR after only a couple sessions (and it made bigger changes from VtM than VBS does from VtR) the poor presentation has practical consequences which have been replicated by those of my friend who did make the switch-they have found it hard to get interested parties to become new players.

  23. - Top - End - #83
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Anonymouswizard's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    In my library

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    I'd say that, for someone who hasn't played, it's probably better to go with Blood and Smoke/2nd edition. It's only one book rather than two, and the text feels much more evocative. There's also the fact that 2e Kindred have been massively buffed, mainly due to the boosted physical disciplines and stronger Frenzy (although not entirely, most psychic Disciplines were already buffed). I also think that 2e sets out the book a lot better for someone like me, who may have skimmed Requiem 1e but never read it deeply (it was just sort of dull for me), as well as potentially completely new people, but YMMV and I don't think it's brilliant for old players.

    To be honest, I get entirely why some people might not want to play 2e. Although I love the 2e changes, I've recently realised that I don't need them, especially as I don't like all the changes to the splats. I'm actually planning to grab a copy of 1e Forsaken (the only copy I've read belongs to a friend) because a lot of major changes aren't as I hoped. I loved how Forsaken 1e suggested having the hunt as a constant theme, but not as the focus of every session, and not as the only key theme. I actually like the level 1-5 gifts where you can buy them out of order. I hate how each Tribe has a preferred enemy. The only change to Forsaken I do like is increasing the power and role of Wolf-Blooded.
    Snazzy avatar (now back! ) by Honest Tiefling.

    RIP Laser-Snail, may you live on in our hearts forever.

    Spoiler: playground quotes
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Zelphas View Post
    So here I am, trapped in my laboratory, trying to create a Mechabeast that's powerful enough to take down the howling horde outside my door, but also won't join them once it realizes what I've done...twentieth time's the charm, right?
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Raziere View Post
    How about a Jovian Uplift stuck in a Case morph? it makes so little sense.

  24. - Top - End - #84
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Sith_Happens's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Dromund Kaas
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Quote Originally Posted by Anonymouswizard View Post
    Virtues/Vices: There has literally been no change for mortals since 1e. The rules in 1e didn't limit you to seven Virtues and Vices, although it might as well have as far as I know.
    It definitely said "Choose from the following," so that is in fact different. 2e also made them both moderately easier to fulfill.
    Revan avatar by kaptainkrutch.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cirrylius View Post
    That's how wizards beta test their new animals. If it survives Australia, it's a go. Which in hindsight explains a LOT about Australia.

  25. - Top - End - #85
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Morty's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Poland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    In my personal experience, 2e/CoD is the same kind of experience as 1e, but better. It produces the same kind of stories, but is much better equipped to do it. It's not so apparent in a mortal game, but Vampire works much, much better. Everything runs smoother - the Disciplines have much more of a bite to them, especially. The two things that gave me trouble when running Vampire 2e were conditions and aspirations. The former were hard to remember about and keep track of; the latter just didn't come up in play.
    My FFRP characters. Avatar by Ashen Lilies. Sigatars by Ashen Lilies, Gulaghar and Purple Eagle.

  26. - Top - End - #86
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Ignimortis's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Eh. My ST decided he wants to nerf Celerity (I have my suspicions that I shouldn't have just willy-nilly murdered six elite dregs with AK-74s last session, but he says it's mostly to protect the players from being oneshot by a Sabbat Celerity user with 3+ dots, which also makes sense, since I'd be about the only one who'd be able to even fight such a guy), and at first looked at the DA20 version, but it still wasn't good enough for him. It seems like he wants to abolish multiple actions altogether for the first 5 dots. After a while he came up with the following version:
    Celerity adds its' rating to all DEX dicepools, including initiative, grants the ability to ignore multiple opponents up to its' rating, allows to burn 1 BP for an x2 burst of movement speed for a scene, and also to burn 1 BP for Celerity rating in dodge/parry/block dice for the rest of the turn to all incoming attacks.
    He's still unsure whether it should disable the dicepool boni while in active use, though.
    I'm pretty sure this is balanced, but does it really hold up to the old one? I love all the physical disciplines (hell, Fortitude allowed me to tank like 20 headshots that day, the dregs were uncannily lucky with their split rolls), but celerity is what makes my character a one-man army.
    Last edited by Ignimortis; 2016-12-31 at 10:22 PM.
    Elezen Dark Knight avatar by Linklele
    Favourite classes: Beguiler, Scout, Warblade, 3.5 Warlock, Harbinger (PF:PoW).
    78% of DM's started their first campaign in a tavern. If you're one of the 22% that didn't, copy and paste this into your signature.

  27. - Top - End - #87
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Milo v3's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Quote Originally Posted by sktarq View Post
    On the god-machine thing. I dislike it because of the same reasons I dislike the Cain/Jyhad parts of oWoD. It took a fundamental mystery and put something there. I thought what nWoD did best was often in what it chose to leave blank or missing.
    Single piece of fiction even mentioning it in the entire game (which isn't very mysterious) doesn't make it a "Fundamental Mystery".

    And I liked predator's taint. It was a powerful ST tool. How groups of vampires delt with it could deeply shape their actions...So getting rid of it wasn't a positive for me. And while I was hopeful for Aura on paper
    Except the best way for vampires to deal with it is to not be social creatures at all.... which is rather stupid in a game about social intrigue. Imagine if everytime an Adventurer meet another adventurer in D&D their is a chance they go psycho, there wouldn't exactly be many adventuring parties and trying to create organizations like adventuring guilds is just asking for everyone to murder everyone.

    Remeber that 1e DnD thief who was always stealing everything that wasn't nailed down because it gave him XP? Well conditions seem to turn people into that in the storytelling arena. No if you had hypermechanically focused players who avoided and minimized any flaws their characters may have had I could see this being a plus. But frankly it turned many of the parts of playing a complex character in a point reward system instead of a fun reward system (doing something because it brings enjoyment). This more than anything is why I loath this edition.
    Have you actually seen it used in play, because that doesn't describe what I've seen at all.

    As for the link between falling humanity and mental illness I agree with you. I just don't find the replacement functional.
    As a person who has mental illness, I have to say I am rather hostile to the idea I have my illnesses because I did evil actions.

    Realistic starting characters been deeply suboptimal? I actually thought of that as a feature not a bug. It had to be taken into account for as an ST but it drove lots of fun stories.
    How could someone think "not being able to make non-ridiculous character" is a feature of a game that is trying to focus on making stories and is a system specifically called Storyteller....

    Final thought-I could hand the blue and red book to someone who had never played when they sat in on a session and they all could follow along (I put labeled bookmarks in to help but not much else). I considered this a huge improvement to oWoD. I don't find the game on ramps well. I could teach VtR after only a couple sessions (and it made bigger changes from VtM than VBS does from VtR) the poor presentation has practical consequences which have been replicated by those of my friend who did make the switch-they have found it hard to get interested parties to become new players.
    How is handing 1 generally organised book harder than handing 2 disorganised books that you have to repeatedly cross reference?
    Spoiler: Old Avatar by Aruius
    Show
    http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q56/Zeritho/Koboldbard.png

  28. - Top - End - #88
    Orc in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Mar 2010

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Quote Originally Posted by Milo v3 View Post
    Single piece of fiction even mentioning it in the entire game (which isn't very mysterious) doesn't make it a "Fundamental Mystery".
    Probably has more to do with the 2nd Ed Core Book than a bit of fiction in the 1st Ed Core Book.

  29. - Top - End - #89
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Milo v3's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Quote Originally Posted by Sydonai View Post
    Probably has more to do with the 2nd Ed Core Book than a bit of fiction in the 1st Ed Core Book.
    The complaint of 2e giving an answer to a fundamental mystery of the God-Machine requires it to have been a fundamental mystery. Which it wasn't (and the God-Machine is still 99% mystery so it's an odd complaint anyway).

    If they are saying 2e says God-Machine is a fundamental mystery, and then answers it by giving info on how to run God-Machine games as a storyteller, then I sort of want to know how they want the game to discuss anything. 2e gives basically no answers on the God-Machine because anything close to an answer we get is always presented with contradictory answers, and just gives plot fodder.

    How is any mystery meant to treated as fundamental if apparently writing information on it is a bad thing now?
    Last edited by Milo v3; 2016-12-31 at 11:53 PM.
    Spoiler: Old Avatar by Aruius
    Show
    http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q56/Zeritho/Koboldbard.png

  30. - Top - End - #90
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: General WoD Discussion #5: Chronicles of Duty: Modern Darkness

    Quote Originally Posted by Milo v3 View Post
    Single piece of fiction even mentioning it in the entire game (which isn't very mysterious) doesn't make it a "Fundamental Mystery".
    It is fundamental because it hangs in the background of the whole setting. Bloodlines that interact with it (which yeah you can skip but)...any other mystery an ST wants to create has to take it into account. And just like the Abrahamic God was 99% mystery in oWoD it still deeply slanted and effected the nature of the stories told in that game.
    And I don't want it explained .... that wouldn't help either. I find it an unnecessary limiting agent on storytelling or at least strong disincentive to the breadth of ideas involved.


    Quote Originally Posted by Milo v3 View Post
    Except the best way for vampires to deal with it is to not be social creatures at all.... which is rather stupid in a game about social intrigue. Imagine if everytime an Adventurer meet another adventurer in D&D their is a chance they go psycho, there wouldn't exactly be many adventuring parties and trying to create organizations like adventuring guilds is just asking for everyone to murder everyone.
    In part yes. And again I considered that a good thing-actually one of the high points of the system IMO. When I built cities how they dealt with that issue was part of what defined the society of that city vs other cities. It drove people to REALLY want obfuscate 2 or ghouls to use a messengers. I drove the use of proxies in general-which opened up lots more characters especially if population recommendations where followed at all . . allowed expendability of such characters and because the PC's were less physically dominant could still be a threat. And putting the inherently conflicted nature of vampire as social animals who feel regularly that they want to flee or claw the eyes out of their neighbors was a regular driver of highlight moments and logically poor decisions that made for a more fun game. And I did and do play up the fact that just because a character can't fail a frenzy check of meeting a character a second or a hundredth time they still get a reaction. Watching new (either to PCs or just the players) vampires react to their own fealing of the predator 's taint was a great way of giving first impressions. The concept also covered why there was a vampiric hermit wherever who would seem to cause an effect on nearby social scenes but didn't really seam to..... It really added to the game for me as a powerful tool.

    Quote Originally Posted by Milo v3 View Post
    Have you actually seen it used in play, because that doesn't describe what I've seen at all.
    Yeah about 20-ish games. ran 8-ish. Say ish because due to low engagment they (both mine and others) had a far higher rate of breaking up into a general social night than normal.

    Quote Originally Posted by Milo v3 View Post
    As a person who has mental illness, I have to say I am rather hostile to the idea I have my illnesses because I did evil actions.
    I agree it is a weak point. I can't say I minded with humanity (didn't like it but insanity as a vampiric punishment as one became less human was plausible) but had huge issues with it as the baseline for mortal morality. Then again I thought I would really like the Breaking point system but it worked better on paper than in play for me.


    Quote Originally Posted by Milo v3 View Post
    How could someone think "not being able to make non-ridiculous character" is a feature of a game that is trying to focus on making stories and is a system specifically called Storyteller....
    So it made them more humans than vampires. . . which since I usually played starting characters as only a few years dead that is what I wanted. They had hobbies and stuff. And people who didn't sink a point into things like academics or drive were a great source of fun for the whole table. It was generally they people who did focus on optimization that brought the least to game in terms of how much fun we all had. I think what we would call a ridiculous character is probably very different.

    Quote Originally Posted by Milo v3 View Post
    How is handing 1 generally organised book harder than handing 2 disorganised books that you have to repeatedly cross reference?
    By apparently having different experiences and definitions of organized, clear, and well actually giving an idea of what things actually do. I will say that VBS was a more entertaining read....less useful as a reference.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •