Vampire The Masquerade 5th Edition Playtest

[fishyfishyfishy]

The "pre-alpha" playtest material used at the recent convention in Berlin has been released. White Wolf is looking for feedback. Nothing really solid on Humanity or Generation. This seems to be specifically to test out the new hunger mechanics.

https://blog.white-wolf.com/2017/06/...curtain-rises/

[ShikomeKidoMi]

Thanks, I'll try to take a look at this and fill out the survey.

[fishyfishyfishy]

No problem. Keep in mind the survey assumes you've played the game and has an open ended portion at the end to insert whatever feedback you want to give. I typed out 7 pages of notes in a word document as I read through it and pasted them in that box in the survey.

[Friv]

I read the playtest.

Discussing most of the problems with it will run up against Inappropriate Topics in about six different ways, so to summarize:

The rules are a mess and the scenario is a nightmare garbage fire that is bad decisions all the way down. This is, like, nearly a FATAL-level bad scenario.

[BayardSPSR]

Anyone who is interested in reading the scenario should be warned that it's both very bad as far as being a game is concerned, and has some stomach-turning behavior forced upon one of the players. Not in a "horror game" way.

Honestly, I would be surprised if anyone has actually tested it using that scenario. No one I game with would choose to play that if they knew what was in it, and I have no intention of being the one to expose them to it.

[fishyfishyfishy]

I highly encourage you to submit your feedback to them in the survey. The best way to get things done is to be involved.

[CharonsHelper]

I highly encourage you to submit your feedback to them in the survey. The best way to get things done is to be involved.

Or just vote with your wallets and not buy their stuff. That is the #1 way to affect a business.

[Friv]

I highly encourage you to submit your feedback to them in the survey. The best way to get things done is to be involved.

Oh, believe me, I did. Politely and at length. But if there's any response to that beyond "But it's mature", I will be frankly shocked.

[Anonymouswizard]

Oh, believe me, I did. Politely and at length. But if there's any response to that beyond "But it's mature", I will be frankly shocked.

What is mature? Does it grapple with hard themes or simply go 'look at me, I'm so edgy'.

Yes, I already know it's the latter, with the p-ventrue as the number one culprit. Being mature and having wacky cool fun stuff aren't exclusive, Unknown Armies managed to do that with Adepts (who are cool, but have the same variance in functionality that most insane people do). Not that it manages it everywhere, and it's not always trying to be mature, but Adepts were handled very well (heck, ours was the second sanest member of the group for various reasons, our shrink failed every stuff check we came across and my characters are unstable at the best of times).

I'm generally not liking what I'm hearing about the playtest, I'll have a look myself once I have a working computer.

[comicshorse]

So is that scenario consistent with the new background for 5th Edition ? 'Cause if the Masquerade is that screwed I'm not seeing any Vampires surviving beyond the year. Which would kinda impact on any campaign lasting longer than...........say, three sessions

[fishyfishyfishy]

Or just vote with your wallets and not buy their stuff. That is the #1 way to affect a business.

Well considering they don't have a product to sell yet, and you still have the opportunity to be involved with shaping the product before it is released, I think a better course of action is to submit your feedback in every variation of their Playtests. Complaining and saying "I just won't buy it if they don't do it the way I like", while simultaneously not telling them what exactly you dislike is not going to get you anywhere. Clearly they are oblivious that a line was crossed so say something to them.

[CharonsHelper]

Complaining and saying "I just won't buy it if they don't do it the way I like", while simultaneously not telling them what exactly you dislike is not going to get you anywhere.

It won't affect this product in particular - but the #1 way to affect an industry is with your wallet.

There are plenty of TTRPGs out there that I do like. Why do I need to put in effort to fix try to help them fix this bad one?

[fishyfishyfishy]

It won't affect this product in particular - but the #1 way to affect an industry is with your wallet.

There are plenty of TTRPGs out there that I do like. Why do I need to put in effort to fix try to help them fix this bad one?

If you aren't interested in the play test of VtM, why are you even here commenting on it? This thread is intended for those who want to discuss this new version being made. In general I would agree with your position that if you don't like a product simply don't purchase it. However, this product is in a "pre-alpha playtest" phase, which one can assume means it's not even close to a final version. Additionally the company making it is completely new to this industry and has no previous products to draw comparisons from. -No, old white wolf doesn't count. They have the same name but it's a whole new company.- They're asking for feedback from fans of the old system to help guide the production of their product through feedback. If it turns out they ignored that feedback then by all means, vote with your wallet and don't support them by purchasing it.

[CharonsHelper]

If you aren't interested in the play test of VtM, why are you even here commenting on it?

I was mildly interested before I heard how horrible it is.

[Anonymouswizard]

It won't affect this product in particular - but the #1 way to affect an industry is with your wallet.

There are plenty of TTRPGs out there that I do like. Why do I need to put in effort to fix try to help them fix this bad one?

This is something I agree with 100%, at the end of the day, when the final product has come out, vote with your wallet. I've supported games I like even when I don't have to (PWYW and similar), so if I don't like VV I won't give nWW any money (just like how I'm not overly fond of what I've seen for Forsaken 2e, so I haven't bought it yet, maybe I'll change).

As it is I'm following the playtest at least vaguely, finding some bits I like (simplified dice mechanics, although I'd have gone for successes at 7+) and some bits I dislike (I'm not sold on hunger compared to Blood Pool), so I've come to the following conclusion:
-I will follow the playtest iterations as they are and join in stone discussions, but I won't provide feedback unless I come across a major dealbreaker.
-When VV comes out I'll take the money for the corebook and say it to one side. If I like what I'm seeing and hearing I will order the core book, otherwise I'll take the money and spend it on Requiem 2e supplements (and I need to fix the convey on my copy of Blood and Smoke when it gets out of storage).

Because I like vampire roleplaying and like Requiem 2e (although I majorly disliked 1e), as well as liking Masquerade 2e (not got any of the later editions). I'll see if VV convinces me it's worth investing in, but at the moment I don't feel strongly either way and so won't reply to the playtest survey.

[BayardSPSR]

Guess they didn't really want feedback after all? Link to WW's response to the playtest.

[Braininthejar2]

What about the game mechanics? Is it any good?

[BayardSPSR]

What about the game mechanics? Is it any good?

That depends. As a player, do you like having your character's actions decided by a random table?

[Ignimortis]

I've gone through those with my ST, and we're both quite disappointed. The rules are overly simplified in places they shouldn't be (let's be honest, even oWoD is not rules-heavy), the scenario is just bad, and it doesn't feel like Vampire I like at all. Then again, I've been told time and time again by some people from outside my group that I play Vampire wrong. V5 looks like those people had been listened too, really.

[Anonymouswizard]

Guess they didn't really want feedback after all? Link to WW's response to the playtest.

Please tell me I'm wrong, but as far as I can tell it begins off with them basically saying 'it's my game and I can do what I want'.

Which I mean, is true. But it's my money and of I decide I don't like how VV deals with the Middle East or whatever I don't have to buy it. So the feelings of their fan base should at least be considered.

Also, ouch. 'This is how you're​supposed to vote these characters' is one of the worst things to say. If nothing has changed from 2e and Revised than the Camarilla's main problem is being too restrictive and conservative, it's an organisation that needs reform from within rather than being turn down. That's my view, and I'd really like to not be told 'you're wrong, this is how you're supposed to look at the Camarilla.

Also, did they just explain Humanity to me? This seems like a very narrow view of a game. Also it doesn't feel very mature for all of this explaining what the game is supposed to be like and how I'm meant to view certain factions (I tend I've been glad to see dying down and relaxed with 'these guys can be heroes or villains*), it feels more mature to say 'the Camarilla is bad but might be with saving' than 'the Camarilla is evil and filled with evil vampires'.

This is making me less and less optimistic for the game of undead politics (not political horror) that I enjoy.

* Yes, my favourite oWoD have is Mage. Both sides being right to an extent Nantes for a much more interesting conflict.

[fishyfishyfishy]

I was also disappointed with their response. It was dismissive of the concerns levied towards them and the direction they're taking this edition. Hopefully the future content they provide for the playtest materials is less focused on edgy grimdark storytelling and more focused on the mechanics, as a playtest should.

[Max_Killjoy]

Guess they didn't really want feedback after all? Link to WW's response to the playtest.

Sounds like the same self-important edgelord love-their-own-fragrance garbage we've seen from WW since the 90s -- is this the same team they had back then, come back to turn their noses up at the gaming "unsophisticates" again, or just a new bunch of guys who want to capture that same arrogant hauntiness?

That depends. As a player, do you like having your character's actions decided by a random table?

No, and I don't see why anyone would like any mechanic that seizes control of the PC away from the player.

Please tell me I'm wrong, but as far as I can tell it begins off with them basically saying 'it's my game and I can do what I want'.

Which I mean, is true. But it's my money and of I decide I don't like how VV deals with the Middle East or whatever I don't have to buy it. So the feelings of their fan base should at least be considered.

Also, ouch. 'This is how you're​supposed to vote these characters' is one of the worst things to say. If nothing has changed from 2e and Revised than the Camarilla's main problem is being too restrictive and conservative, it's an organisation that needs reform from within rather than being turn down. That's my view, and I'd really like to not be told 'you're wrong, this is how you're supposed to look at the Camarilla.

Also, did they just explain Humanity to me? This seems like a very narrow view of a game. Also it doesn't feel very mature for all of this explaining what the game is supposed to be like and how I'm meant to view certain factions (I tend I've been glad to see dying down and relaxed with 'these guys can be heroes or villains*), it feels more mature to say 'the Camarilla is bad but might be with saving' than 'the Camarilla is evil and filled with evil vampires'.

This is making me less and less optimistic for the game of undead politics (not political horror) that I enjoy.

* Yes, my favourite oWoD have is Mage. Both sides being right to an extent Nantes for a much more interesting conflict.

Sounds like they really have inherited the old WW's "you're having badwrongfun" and "you're not doing it right" attitude.

It's a shame, really... I was kinda hoping we'd get a grown-up version of the game instead of a "Mature" (warning sticker) version of the game, made by people who aren't smug angry bitter absolutists, and understand the difference between "difficult" and "hopeless", and between "morally grey" and "shades of poop"... with mechanics that cleaned up some of the bizarre imbalances and unstoppable / no-defense Disciplines.

[Anonymouswizard]

It's a shame, really... I was kinda hoping we'd get a grown-up version of the game instead of a "Mature" (warning sticker) version of the game, made by people who aren't smug angry bitter absolutists, and understand the difference between "difficult" and "hopeless", and between "morally grey" and "shades of poop"... with mechanics that cleaned up some of the bizarre imbalances and unstoppable / no-defense Disciplines.

The thing is, I own actually mature games. Requiem at least tries to give everyone multiple interpretations, so if you don't like the Invictus being good guys you can pay then as power hungry villains. I don't think Requiem was 100% mature, but there was a lot of effort put into making sure that the player factions we're all morally grey.

It's like, you can have a mature game that is bright and hopeful as long as you admit everything's not perfect. Sure, I did once associate maturity with grimdark and angst, but then I realised that a focus on that can stop you from actually talking about issues. It's like how sex and violence is significantly less mature than 'during the Holocaust people did horrible things, because that is something humans can do, and the ghosts that exist because of that have likely been psychologically affected'. Sure, that's dark, but it's a very different kind of darkness.

FWIW I was hoping the same thing as you, and if the WW treehouse has to be painted black and launch water balloons at passing conservatives then maybe I don't want to be in it. There's plenty of games companies out there, and sure have much superior treehouses for me to hang out in. Plus those treehouses aren't made out of this held together by twine.

Maybe I shouldn't have continued the treehouse analogy.

[Friv]

Sounds like the same self-important edgelord love-their-own-fragrance garbage we've seen from WW since the 90s -- is this the same team they had back then, come back to turn their noses up at the gaming "unsophisticates" again, or just a new bunch of guys who want to capture that same arrogant hauntiness?

It's the latter, and I think they're really painfully aware that they aren't the originals and thus feel the need to be even more arrogant and edgy than the old crew at their worst.

This is, almost word-for-word, what I expected the response to the playtest would be, but it really sucks to be right.

[Max_Killjoy]

It's the latter, and I think they're really painfully aware that they aren't the originals and thus feel the need to be even more arrogant and edgy than the old crew at their worst.

This is, almost word-for-word, what I expected the response to the playtest would be, but it really sucks to be right.

Yeah, their response to any criticism or suggestion is going to be "Well you just don't understand what we're trying to do here, the depth and sophistication that we're trying for, that no other game has ever ever had."

[Anonymouswizard]

Yeah, their response to any criticism or suggestion is going to be "Well you just don't understand what we're trying to do here, the depth and sophistication that we're trying for, that no other game has ever ever had."

And while it's good to have depth, I don't always want complex flavours. Sometimes is just prefer a beef stew with Pearl Barley (I should make that more often).

[BayardSPSR]

And while it's good to have depth, I don't always want complex flavours. Sometimes is just prefer a beef stew with Pearl Barley (I should make that more often).

It's not even deep, though... The scenario name-drops some serious business, but how do you engage with that when it's offset by a sex club full of Spartan cosplayers and a SWAT team in a helicopter that shows up whenever you try to do anything? It's not exactly a critique of the European response to the refugee crisis; it's just another joke in the background for seeing how long you last until a TPK.

It's hard to set aside all the tone problems and bothersome background details, but even if we did, the way it sets up "horror" as "GM inflicting arbitrary inescapable punishment because you deserve it" is just... bad. Isn't that one of the classic examples of what not to do while GMing? And it seems like they're building the whole game around it...

[Anonymouswizard]

Oh, I want saying it's deep, just that in my mind if it was it wouldn't automatically make it good.

[Max_Killjoy]

And while it's good to have depth, I don't always want complex flavours. Sometimes is just prefer a beef stew with Pearl Barley (I should make that more often).

To be clear, my assertion wasn't that they're actually doing anything like depth -- it's that they're claiming "you don't understand how deep we are" when faced with criticism or unglowing feedback.

In fact, the more I read, the more it sounds like they're making the typical teenager's mistake of confusing shallow edginess and shock with "depth".

And if they're claiming to be engaged in allegory, then they need depth. Shallow "allegory" is usually just juvenile caricature.

[Anonymouswizard]

To be clear, my assertion wasn't that they're actually doing anything like depth -- it's that they're claiming "you don't understand how deep we are" when faced with criticism or unglowing feedback.

In fact, the more I read, the more it sounds like they're making the typical teenager's mistake of confusing shallow edginess and shock with "depth".

And if they're claiming to be engaged in allegory, then they need depth. Shallow "allegory" is usually just juvenile caricature.

Yep, and my point was 'they can wine about trying for depth ask they want, but they should realise it's not the primary measure of a good game'. I've played games with zero depth that were much more mature and engaging that what nWW is showing, and they expect me to believe this attempt at maturity and depth that uses only the bad methods of American comic story writing and none of the good ones is worthwhile? I have with depth at '60 meters below sea level' as well as ones which are effectively hills, this is looking like the latter. Which isn't bad if it's handled well.