Vampire The Masquerade 5th Edition Playtest

[BayardSPSR]

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

Sorry, I didn't mean to direct my rant at you. I got a bit frustrated.

[Anonymouswizard]

Sorry, I didn't mean to direct my rant at you. I got a bit frustrated.

That's fine, a mixture of university and my phone's autocorrect taking a dive in quality were causing me to operate stressed for months, I've been unusually confrontational and bad grammared.

[Cluedrew]

Sounds like this one has exactly enough depth to be 6 ft. under.

[Ovakalla]

I found the characters very lack luster, and the forced roles were a bit twisted. The rule set was not as robust as I would have liked, but a pre-alpha is a first attempt essentially... Hopefully the next incarnation has a much more robust rule set!

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 should note that there has been another version of the play test (Alpha version) available for a while now. This one seems to have cleaned up a bit and many are saying is an improvement over the pre-Alpha. I highly recommend checking it out.

[Anonymouswizard]

Just read through the latest playtest.

This system is a worse version of nWoD. The bits that are different, such as Hunger and You Are What You Eat are just bad. Although I do like spending Willpower to reroll dice, the rest is just bad.

I see no reason to use d10s on anything bar Frenzy rolls, and Hunger just feels broken and clunky. In previous editions of Masquerade and Requiem it was simple, you used up blood/Vitae to use powers, and you started being hungry when you got low (about 3, although I like vampires feeling peckish at 5) in-fiction vampires only had a rough knowledge of their Vitae, and in Requiem 2e many low level discipline powers didn't cost Vitae, which tempted your characters into using them.

Plus continually checking my Hunger dice, rolling a die whenever I do anything vampiric, just to see if I gain a point of hunger, just seems like a lot of work compared to crossing off a Vitae box. It feels like the writers wanted to move away from tracking blood, but didn't want to lose the 'being vampiry makes you need blood angle', leading to a system that's clunky and ends up with the same result as Blood Pool did, just less predictable.

[Max_Killjoy]

Just read through the latest playtest.

This system is a worse version of nWoD. The bits that are different, such as Hunger and You Are What You Eat are just bad. Although I do like spending Willpower to reroll dice, the rest is just bad.

I see no reason to use d10s on anything bar Frenzy rolls, and Hunger just feels broken and clunky. In previous editions of Masquerade and Requiem it was simple, you used up blood/Vitae to use powers, and you started being hungry when you got low (about 3, although I like vampires feeling peckish at 5) in-fiction vampires only had a rough knowledge of their Vitae, and in Requiem 2e many low level discipline powers didn't cost Vitae, which tempted your characters into using them.

Plus continually checking my Hunger dice, rolling a die whenever I do anything vampiric, just to see if I gain a point of hunger, just seems like a lot of work compared to crossing off a Vitae box. It feels like the writers wanted to move away from tracking blood, but didn't want to lose the 'being vampiry makes you need blood angle', leading to a system that's clunky and ends up with the same result as Blood Pool did, just less predictable.

I'd bet the randomness is more intentional, "because personal horror", and they're pushing back against the way many players rationally managed the blood pool to avoid PC loss of control.

[Anonymouswizard]

I'd bet the randomness is more intentional, "because personal horror", and they're pushing back against the way many players rationally managed the blood pool to avoid PC loss of control.

Oh, I get that they're incompetent designers, they've made that clear.

But pushing back against player rationally managing blood pool... wouldn't a Vampire semi-rationally manage their blood pool? Player: I only have five blood points left, better swing buy a bar to top up. Vampire: I'm feeling a bit peckish, better swing by a bar and get a drink.

[CharonsHelper]

Oh, I get that they're incompetent designers, they've made that clear.

But pushing back against player rationally managing blood pool... wouldn't a Vampire semi-rationally manage their blood pool? Player: I only have five blood points left, better swing buy a bar to top up. Vampire: I'm feeling a bit peckish, better swing by a bar and get a drink.

You and your logic! We're too busy being dramatic over here for that nonsense!

[Max_Killjoy]

Oh, I get that they're incompetent designers, they've made that clear.

But pushing back against player rationally managing blood pool... wouldn't a Vampire semi-rationally manage their blood pool? Player: I only have five blood points left, better swing buy a bar to top up. Vampire: I'm feeling a bit peckish, better swing by a bar and get a drink.

I agree.

They want horror uber alles, and rational characters are anathema to horror. So they're introducing randomness to ham-handedly shove the hunger down players' throats.

[Anonymouswizard]

I agree.

They want horror uber alles, and rational characters are anathema to horror. So they're introducing randomness to ham-handedly shove the hunger down players' throats.

Lets be honest, real life gaming groups are anathema to horror. The one time I tried to run a horror game the players reacted by having a higher joke content. No amount of 'you have to act this way' will stop players from putting chicken in toasters or peeing in the toilet. Or in one case holing up in a church and just ignoring the horror all together.

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

I mean, I kinda get the concept of the randomized possibility of gaining hunger over the planned spending of BP; it's to introduce an element of risk and unpredictability. It's similar in a way to M:tAw 2e's paradox rolls, but I'm not sure whether it strengthens their themes in the same way.

Awakening 2e is all about hubris and overreaching your power, so the mechanics encourage you to overreach in casting spells, with added risk of bringing down a paradox on you and your surroundings. That makes sense. VtM 5e seems to be trying to introduce a similar mechanic, which makes sense in one sense (the vampire losing control is a common meme) but it doesn't really strengthen the greater themes. Plus, you already have other tools to strengthen the vampire-losing-control stuff.

[Max_Killjoy]

My personal experience is that most players will treat the blood pool like a medical condition or portable battery charge to be rationally managed... not as an element of horror.

There's no way to force horror, and trying to do so with added randomness will just encourage greater caution and more elaborate preparation on the part of the sort of player I'm most familiar with.

[CharonsHelper]

There's no way to force horror, and trying to do so with added randomness will just encourage greater caution and more elaborate preparation by the sort of player I'm more familiar with.

I will say - it is possible to have a mechanic add tension. Dread does a pretty good job of adding tension to a game session, though I still wouldn't call it horror.

But - the tower is its only real rule, and while unpredictable, it's not random.

Plus - I wouldn't want to play Dread for anything but the occasional one-shot.

[Anonymouswizard]

I will say - it is possible to have a mechanic add tension. Dread does a pretty good job of adding tension to a game session, though I still wouldn't call it horror.

That's the thing, you can add tension, not horror. While tension can cause horror, it isn't certain.

I personally am planning to experiment with 'skill pools' for my next horror game. It'll be based on 2d6, on each roll you add your relevant Attribute (which never go down), and can spend points from a relevant Skill Pool to get a bonus on the roll. These skill pools also act as your health (damage will force you to spend skill points to negate it), leading to skills ticking down as the session goes on. There's no penalty to a skill hitting zero, but a character who takes any damage when all their skills are at zero are out. Less certain than Dread, but still a movement towards failure.