Far in the future I plan on running a vampire the Masquerade game. But while I know a fair bit about the lore I dont know which game system/edition is the best one to use. And on top of that I know there are LOADS of source books, clan books, lore books etc. Which ones should I get for building up a well of Vampire knowledge. Even if I never run a game I'd still like a collection of the books just for the lore
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
Start with V20, and then the V2 and VR clan books. That's a great start.
V5 and gWoD is fricking garbage and need not apply.
Half 6
I basically pray the energy drinks get me along enough to not mentally collapse into a fugue before 6ish when works over.
I suggest that you give Vampire the Requiem 2e a look. It's got an extremely competent and versatile system, its modular layout allows you to include and exclude whatever aspects of the setting that you want and it allows the Storyteller and the players to use the game in whatever way they want, instead of having to adhere to a stringent and rigid metaplot at all times.
Shit meme.
When you say metaplot, what exactly is that. From what I understand metaplot is the deep lore story going on in the background of setting like Gehenna slowly getting closer but its more set dressing then an actual plot. Are you meaning it in this way?
It basically means that regardless of how you run your games, there's an objective and official storyline that defines how the world progresses and the events that occur. If you want play Vampire the Masquerade faithfully, you need to acknowledge all of the ways in which the metaplot progresses and the impact that has on the setting. Ignoring the metaplot and just using the default setting is a good way to outrage at least one of your players, as the most common assumption by Masquerade players is that the metaplot is a fundamental part of the default setting.
All of which is a very good reason to try a game that doesn't have a metaplot chained to it, like Vampire the Requiem 2e. I think you'll find that you like it quite a bit, as it covers everything that Masquerade covers and it allows for a lot more versatility.
Isnt Requiem the one that throws out alot of the charming stuff from the original? like all the clans. If I'm remembering it right there are no clans just these big orders like a group that want to make daywalkers, a group of religious vamps etc. If you wanted the clan system from the OG but the gameplay mechanics from Requiem, can they be reconciled?
>Isnt Requiem the one that throws out alot of the charming stuff from the original?
It has its own completely separate identity now that I think you will find is a lot more charming than Vampire the Masquerade ever was.
>like all the clans.
Masquerade clans force you to play rigid stereotypes. Requiem is more archetypal and allows you to play any character that you want within the archetype of the clan.
>If I'm remembering it right there are no clans just these big orders like a group that want to make daywalkers, a group of religious vamps etc.
Requiem technically has more clans than Masquerade, if you read the source books and don't just turn your nose up at the core books. As for sects, they're the equivalent of the Camarilla and Sabbat, except a lot more numerous and nowhere near as edgy or hammy. There's also fifteen covenants, so you've got loads of choice.
>If you wanted the clan system from the OG but the gameplay mechanics from Requiem, can they be reconciled?
The first edition had a translation guide for putting Masquerade stuff into the Requiem system, but that was for 1e, not 2e and that was before Requiem became as good as it is today. Since Requiem is so versatile, you could easily include the Masquerade clans in the system if you wanted to, but I strongly advise against that. Try playing Requiem without bothering with the dated Masquerade baggage.
Do you mean sects? If so then yeah, they got swapped for Covenants.
If you mean the vampire clans like Ventrue and Nosferatu, they have all those and an assload of bloodlines for further customization.
>Ignoring the metaplot and just using the default setting is a good way to outrage at least one of your players, as the most common assumption by Masquerade players is that the metaplot is a fundamental part of the default setting.
this has never been true
It has always been true. At the very least, there will always be confusion because even entirely new players will have different degrees of awareness of the metaplot and make different assumptions and start arguments over it. All of this can be avoided if you go with Vampire the Requiem 2e instead, which doesn't have such a stringent metaplot.
I've been playing VtM for six years now with various groups and never once had an argument about the metaplot when details have been changed by the storyteller
I pity your ST then, because having to reconstruct the entire Vampire the Masquerade setting whenever any little thing is changed because everything is interconnected by the metaplot sounds like a nightmare. If he didn't do that, then your ST's version of Vampire the Masquerade is a nonsensical mess that will inevitably fall apart. I really don't understand why your group chose to play such a rigid and convoluted setting if you were just going to change bits of it, anyway. It sounds like you went with the wrong game.
>having to reconstruct the entire Vampire the Masquerade setting whenever any little thing is changed
Why would anything be changed? I'm playing VtM 20th Anniversary Edition, which is a dead system.
Because the sole appeal of Vampire the Masquerade is its setting, which is convoluted and interconnected and interwoven to an absurd degree. So if someone changes any details about the setting, like
's ST did, then you need to change everything else as well otherwise the whole house of card falls apart. Any significant changes to organisations, characters or events results in other organisations, characters and events no longer making sense.
Okay? So? Why is this a bad thing?
I think you're overestimating the amount of work required. Every new edition of Vampire changes multiple fundamental details of the setting. Hell, 5e Vampires are basically a different species than 1e vampires. What a Kiasyd is has changed multiple times. If your ST does it and specifically tells you what they're changing it's not very different and is not hard to adapt to.
In what ways have vampires changed over the editions? and was it slow and cumulative or was it radical changes
Yes, and each edition is the product of an entire company putting years into remaking the setting and rewriting everything. Does your ST have that much time on their hands to rewrite everything? If the answer is no, why not play a game that is actually intended to be an easily edited setting instead, like Vampire the Requiem 2e? If it doesn't have what you like about Vampire the Masquerade, you can just add that, with far less work than it would take to rewrite Vampire the Masquerade into something that isn't a monstrous mess.
>you can just add that, with far less work than it would take to rewrite Vampire the Masquerade into something that isn't
This, anon.
Many groups work specifically due to the presence and rationale of others; the setting is not plug and play by any means.
Congratulations for highlighting the problem with Vampire the Maquerade that I've been talking about for the past several posts.
I am agreeing on something many fans have problems admitting.
>Does your ST have that much time on their hands to rewrite everything?
What kind of changes are you envisioning that requires rewriting the setting? I've never seen an ST want to change things THAT much.
Frankly, VtM works just fine if you ignore the metaplot, or if you change it. It's not some bureaucratic red tape nightmare. If you've ever played it you'd know, but it's pretty clear you were scared off by the metaplot and never got into it.
Besides, last time I checked VtR had like 5 clans. It's very different and very much not what I'd like to play.
Vampires nowadays have a very unpredictable amount of hunger. Sometimes they are forced by randomness to go on binges. Older vampires are more predictable, you manage blood like a currency.
The details of disciplines change all the time. They often do very different things at similar levels.
Blood resonance didn't exist for older vampires, and they were more flexible in their feeding.
>Frankly, VtM works just fine if you ignore the metaplot, or if you change it. It's not some bureaucratic red tape nightmare. If you've ever played it you'd know, but it's pretty clear you were scared off by the metaplot and never got into it.
That's a cute assumption. I know from experience that the existence of the metaplot and different levels of exposure to it mean that everyone tends to be confused and argue over the canon. It is absolutely a red tape nightmare that people struggle to deal with, in my experience.
>Besides, last time I checked VtR had like 5 clans. It's very different and very much not what I'd like to play.
Thanks for showing your ignorance. Even excluding bloodlines, Vampire the Requiem 2e has more clans than Vampire the Masquerade. 14 > 13.
Well, that's a nice anecdote but I can't say I've ever seen it in play myself.
On top of that, doesn't NWoD have the God-Machine/Strix metaplots going on? How is it less confusing?
On top of that, "lost clans/bloodlines" don't count. If you include those VtM has 14 main clans and 15+ foreign clans and bloodlines.
>On top of that, doesn't NWoD have the God-Machine/Strix metaplots going on? How is it less confusing?
Chronicles of Darkness 2e is designed from the ground up to be modular and optional. Nothing is interwoven and interconnected in a way that requires the existence of something else. You can remove and add whatever you like without harming the integrity of the setting, unlike Vampire the Masquerade where trying that just leads to confusion and a nonsensical setting that stops making sense.
>On top of that, "lost clans/bloodlines" don't count. If you include those VtM has 14 main clans and 15+ foreign clans and bloodlines.
If you're going to include bloodlines then so can I and it turns out that Vampire the Requiem 2e dramatically outdoes Vampire the Masquerade when it comes to the quantity and quality of bloodlines and provides you with all of the tools that you need in order to construct a bloodline of your own.
You can stop trying to start edition wars now.
I'm not "starting edition wars". I'm saying VtM offers a different experience, and while I recognize it has problems clan variety and having a metaplot are not among them. If you talk to your players about any changes you want to make there are no problems, and the level of connection has never gotten in the way of things to me. If you can identify the kind of change that would cause problems I'd appreciate it.
Frankly, VtR and VtM are very different games, and I don't think they're in competition with each other. If you want a system with a defined world you pick VtM, and if you want to make it up as you go along VtR is far superior. That doesn't mean VtR is bad, I (qnd many others) will just never want to play it over VtM.
pretty based take. I would try Requiem at some point but I prefer to run VtM and my group is fine playing it, I just like the general world/setting
>If you want a system with a defined world you pick VtM
Do you admit that wanting a pre-defined world to play is a sign of laziness, especially one as convoluted and dated as Vampire the Masquerade? If the only merit that Vampire the Masquerade has is "at least I don't need to put in the work to make my own setting," then it's not very good, is it?
>Do you admit that wanting a pre-defined world to play is a sign of laziness
What? In what way? Why is building your own setting better when you're almost certainly just aping some other piece of fiction anyways?
Having an existing world that your players can work with to create resonant characters is great. When you make your own setting, players can't conform to expectations of behaviour as well. But when I use VtM, I can mention Setites and players will know what I'm talking about and respond appropriately. If I introduce Clan Ghandahar and write a couple blurbs about them for my players, they'll have far less to work with.
The main draw of VtM is "I have this sweet setting with a lot of history to play in that feels like a real place". It's the difference between writing scifi and writing historical fiction.
>What? In what way? Why is building your own setting better when you're almost certainly just aping some other piece of fiction anyways?
Because you're making something perfectly tailored to your personal enjoyment and that of your group. It's going to be objectively superior to anything pre-packaged unless you're inept and don't understand your own desires or those of your group. For this reason, a well-designed tool kit system like Vampire the Requiem is undeniably a better choice than anything preset and pre-made.
>But when I use VtM, I can mention Setites and players will know what I'm talking about and respond appropriately. If I introduce Clan Ghandahar and write a couple blurbs about them for my players, they'll have far less to work with.
That would be your fault for failing to create a compelling clan and communicate what that clan is about. The failure lies with you, not the system.
>The main draw of VtM is "I have this sweet setting with a lot of history to play in that feels like a real place". It's the difference between writing scifi and writing historical fiction.
You can create a setting with a lot of history to play in that feels like a real place, if you put in the effort and don't frick it up. Every positive that Vampire the Masquerade slowly has can be replicated with Vampire the Requiem 2e provided that you put in the effort and aren't inept. If you fail to create a world more compelling than that of Vampire the Masquerade using the tools that Vampire the Requiem 2e provides, then I'm afraid that the only thing to blame is your skill as a world-builder.
>unless you're inept and don't understand your own desires or those of your group
How am I supposed to make a custom setting to appeal to random people I haven't met? What if I want to run for a new group, or for conventions?
>That would be your fault for failing to create a compelling clan
So you expect the GM to write 50+ pages on their new clans? It's an unfair expectation.
>You can create a setting with a lot of history to play in that feels like a real place, if you put in the effort and don't frick it up.
But you shouldn't have to. Playing in an established setting is fine and acceptable. Is Wuthering Heights not an excellent piece of literature because Emily Bronte didn't want to invent a new country?
Worldbuilding doesn't have any value in and of itself. It's only useful when it enhances your play. With VtM all the information is there, and my players can use setting information freely to enhance their characters. If you want a custom setting they don't have that.
>How am I supposed to make a custom setting to appeal to random people I haven't met? What if I want to run for a new group, or for conventions?
Gauge what your group wants and communicate with them until you have a good idea of what sort of world they'd like a game to be set in. For one-shots at conventions, a simple setting like baseline Vampire the Requiem 2e is a far better choice than something as contrived and complicated as Vampire the Masquerade.
>So you expect the GM to write 50+ pages on their new clans? It's an unfair expectation.
No, I expect STs to create something compelling for their groups. You can create something intriguing with plenty of depth to explore with just one page or two. Why do you associate quantity of pages with quality?
>But you shouldn't have to. Playing in an established setting is fine and acceptable. Is Wuthering Heights not an excellent piece of literature because Emily Bronte didn't want to invent a new country?
Literature isn't a tabletop game. For tabletop games, your experience is enhanced when the setting best suits the tastes of everyone at the table and creating your own setting is the best way of doing that. With Vampire the Masquerade, it's not going to perfectly fit the tastes of absolutely everyone and it's so interconnected that changing anything about it at all turns it into a nonsensical mess.
You're just going out of your way to make yourself sound like an inept ST (saying GM just makes it evident that you're a tourist) and that both you and your group are lazy and want to be spoon-fed.
Sorry, but I use GM because I play other games. It's a great generic term, though I prefer MC. If you only play WoD that's fine, but swapping a title is quite minor.
All of this is just GURPS justification. You're arguing that making your own setting is vital and enhances play, but the same applies to the system. Why use VtR when you can homebrew a system to perfectly fit the taste of you and your players? Because it's easier on you and your players, and you'd need a team of writers to accomplish something of similar depth.
Does putting in the time to make a setting enhance your game? Sure, but it's totally unnecessary and is unlikely to enhance your player's enjoyment of the game. It's usually for you, the person running things.
I'd contest your point about being unable to modify VtM, but you refuse to illuminate us with the kind of change that would cause serious disruption.
Finally, do you really think your one page write-up provides as much depth as any of the established clans have? That's barely enough pages to set up a culture, and conflict of culture is one of the primary conflicts of VtM.
>It's usually for you, the person running things.
That's always the only person it's for the guy you're arguing with is very autistic and incapable of understanding anyone else's perceptions
anon You not only have autism you're a piece of shit
>You can remove and add whatever you like without harming the integrity of the setting,
yeah the game just starts to not function at all because you stripped out all the rules that are interconnected
You don't even seem aware the books are written in character.
So your complaint is that you're autistic?
>Because the sole appeal of Vampire the Masquerade is its setting,
Not really no. Its one of them. Get checked for autism.
the system is bad and i say this as someone that has done WoD for a long time
there's more to a game than just one detail anon, stop being autistic
I think the core resolution is fine, the only issue is the janky combat systems. Easy enough to fix.
I'm not reading all of that, and I don't need to to know you're a fricking idiot
when people talk about THE metaplot they refer to the plot that is outside your game but still affects it: the plot of the setting
it was pretty normal in oWoD to have THE metaplot follow whatever was published at the time so it was common between games and provided a greater foundation of knowledge about the world
you could of course have a different world background that affects your chronicles and your players dont know about because you think its better your way, that would be your own metaplot
Run it with Nights Black Agents. The "Storyteller" system is trash.
Do you care for the metaplot? Because there's a metric ton of it, but easy way to circumvent it is to avoid hotspots that received attention in book.
I'm a fan of Old world of darkness. Really like the older lore. So yeah, I like the OG metaplot of these ancient immortal beings who have nothing left to fear but the passage of time, and they're running out of time as the day of reckoning gets closer and closer
>mfw someone is actually trying to sell people on Requiem
Fight the good fight, anon.
It's just that hatred for Requiem has at this point become full-on irrational. You'd think V5 flopping would've directed at least some people to give V:tR a second chance, but no.
Requiem is very good, more people should understand this.
Requiem second edition, and for Masquerade you can make arguments for different editions, but I honestly think V20 is fine.
I honestly believe that there is no tabletop roleplaying game in existence that was not done best in its first edition. Followups are always full of useless bloat. You can steal good ideas from later games but the core should always be the first edition.
NO MATTER WHAT GAME.
Vampire the Requiem 2e is absolutely better than 1e. It got rid of the last Masquerade vestiges and it strengthened the connection between mechanics and roleplay.
only problem I have with R2E is them tightening the screws on some fixed elements. I don't like the strix and their existence should've been left as more of an optional mystery like everything else in requiem rather than being the designated antagonist for vampires.
Everything in Vampire the Requiem 2e is optional. If you don't like Striges, you can just exclude them. I don't know why haters always obsess over something that you can just not include in the game. If you don't like them, don't have them in your game and the problem goes away. Nothing is fixed and your criticism is completely baseless.
>roleplaying "mechanics"
take your beats and put them up your arse
Can you explain why beats are bad from an objective point of view, or are you just sharing your uneducated opinion?
Because you don't need to codify roleplaying to that degree. It's something players and ST should be working out among themselves.
But the players and ST do work it out among themselves. If beats are used inappropriately, that's entirely the fault of the ST for mismanaging the system. It encourages RP, instead of codifying it. Besides, if you hate it that much, like all aspects of Vampire the Requiem 2e, you can just remove it. You don't really have a leg to stand on.
>you can just remove it
You keep saying this, if that's you in the thread, but that's not a valid answer. I didn't buy a book to drop most of it. It should not be a go-to answer.
The system's designed to be modular so that you can drop any part of it that you don't like. It's literally a part of the game's design and a large part of its appeal, you can tailor Vampire the Requiem 2e to be whatever you like. I don't understand how you can't see that as a positive.
I like it when editions actually advance the timeline. That was Dark Ages' thing.
So, you exclusively play white box od&d, then?
I'm a few games into my first ever campaign as an ST, using V20 since I liked the familiarity with bloodlines. I would just say use whatever system works better for you and just pull whatever lore you need, was there anything you were aiming for in particular?
Mostly just a prime system to run the game on like V20 for example. And then just lots of suppliment books like the old clan books and source material books. I'm curious about which ones are the best to just learn about the little details about the setting, clans characters etc. Not just for the game but because I do just enjoy Vampire's lore
I mostly stuck to V20's core book and Lore of the Clans/Bloodlines at least when trying to help my players pitch their characters, they should all be in the same folder on the mega. For myself I kinda dug into some of the clan books or Dark Ages ones on some particular details I've been asked but mostly those 3 I mentioned above for V20 at least. As for V5 or Requiem I'm sure another anon here who plays them could explain better than I
I suppose I'll ask a more specific question, which Vampire/Requiem edition is best? I personally really like the old world of darkness lore and focus more so on the RP story and characters of a game with some combat sprinkled in here and there to spice things up. I dont really like crunch and really complex systems though I do like having alot of customization options
Vampire the Requiem 2e. Vampire the Masquerade has all of the crunch and really complex systems that you hate, while Vampire the Requiem 2e has versatility that allows it to have lore as good as Vampire the Masquerade's, if not better. You just need to put in the work, read the source books and make a good chronicle. The only reason to favour any edition of Vampire the Masquerade over Vampire the Requiem 2e is if you're extremely lazy and absolutely must be spoon-fed a setting, even if it's extremely aged and convoluted.
No world of darkness system is crunchy. Pick whichever you like, they'll always be fairly simple. It's just d10 dice pools.
>Which ones should I get for building up a well of Vampire knowledge.
Anne Rice and the Sookie Stackhouse series.
Bram Stoker's Dracula.
>game system/edition is the best one to use.
V20
>source books, clan books, lore books etc.
Lore of the Clans, Lore of the Bloodlines, Anarchs Unbound, those are V20 splats. Guide to the Sabbat, Guide to the Camarilla and the Clanbooks from the revised edition are more than enough to turn into a savant.
As far as running the game though, the V20 corebook is all you need, surprisingly it's also excellent for total newbies as long as they actually read the parts that they must.
I'm not screeching you're acting autistic you're pretending like in an autistic approach to anything has anything to do with other people.
It quite literally is an argument because you are acting like an autistic moron.
Damn I guess I should we should just kill our games and play Requiem bros. I guess we can never enjoy Masquerade again now that our eyes have been opened, how has it taken this long to see the light.
There's no need to act like a child. I'm simply explaining why having the ability to craft your own setting to your preferences is superior to using a pre-existing setting, especially one full of so many interwoven elements that make it almost impossible to edit without rendering it incoherent and full of holes.
You're the sort of guy who think's star wars is ruined because there are bad canon movies. Vampire, as much as something with as stupid a scale, only matters in local terms. What is going on in your city, with your local sabbat, Cam, and Anarchs. All this shit of "if you alter one thing, duh whole game falls apart!!!" reeks of undiagnosed autism, late weeknights glued to the white wolf wiki, and ~~~~~~~~~~~~~nogaems~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's the worst part about people these days is that they read the wiki and never hit an actual book.
Which leads them to believe the information in the wiki is objective fourth wall out of character objective in world fact and not the personal statements of the characters in the setting who don't have perfect knowledge.
And that's assuming what's in the wiki even is from a book and not just made up wholesale.
Let's go with a simple example. The ST doesn't like Malkavians and chooses to exclude Malkavians from the chronicle. He is forced to do one of the following options:
>Go out of his way to rewrite the setting to not include Malkavians, putting in an undue amount of effort since he has to change everything that ever involved a Malkavian vampire. This might not seem like much, but this would drastically change the formation of entire sects and all sorts of things could have happened differently if it wasn't from the Malkavians.
>Go out of his way to explain why Malkavians will never set foot in his part of the setting or get involved, specifically writing lore and putting in effort to justify why they will never be seen in this particular city no matter.
>Leave it as a blatant, gaping plot hole that can easily be picked apart by a player who blunders into it, intentionally or accidentally.
Meanwhile, let's say the ST wants to remove the Mekhet clan from Vampire the Requiem 2e:
>No rewriting necessary. No other aspect of the setting is inherently tied to the Mekhet clan so nothing needs to be changed to make up for their absence because nothing is connected to them, or any other clan or covenant or aspect of the setting.
Vampire the Requiem 2e is a network of modules that can be tailored precisely to the ST's liking, unlike Vampire the Masquerade. Throw around childish insults all you like, but you won't be able to change this simple fact.
would you say you recommend Requiem 2e?
Your dumb meme is not an argument.
No anon, You just tell your players no. None of these things are problems with the game, they are a problem with your communication skills.
You are an autistic moron who literally can't play games because of it.
All of that other stuff is literally just you having an autistic fit about some Jawa getting swung around in Star wars
I think you might be the one who is mentally ill if you consider the ST screeching "NO!" every time the players try to mention something he wants to exclude from the setting a solution. That's like plugging your ears and trying to prepare that the hole isn't there and carefully tip-toe your way around it.
"screeching"
Thanks for giving away what you think STing is anon
Normal human beings are capable of communicating without yelling like morons like you.
As usual the problem is your inability to talk to the players as human beings.
I've been advocating communicating with players to collectively create the ideal setting for the group from the start. You're the one who is in favour of the ST using a pre-made setting and screaming at players to ignore any holes in the setting.
I'm not sure that I'm the one incapable of communication here.
No you've been advocating that it's impossible to do so with an existing setting You never actually told anyone anything helpful or how your gay ass love for Requiem actually fixes it You just claimed it did and then screech further when anyone pointed out problems with requiem literally saying to solve them by just screeching "no" and to just get rid of it. You're literally incapable of seeing fault with your own ideas apparently.
>You never actually told anyone anything helpful or how your gay ass love for Requiem actually fixes it
It solves it by being designed from the ground up for being customisable. Nothing is interlocked into a convoluted tapestry like Vampire the Masquerade. Instead, in Vampire the Requiem 2e, everything is stand alone by design, which allows for the easy removal or addition of everything without impairing the integrity of the setting.
In the case of Vampire the Masquerade, everything is so connected, even cities and locations, that it's very difficult to exclude something or introduce something without damaging the integrity of the setting and having to introduce fixes or, as you advocate, scream at your players whenever they comment on the gaping holes left in the setting.
That's why you can easily tailor Vampire the Requiem 2e to your liking while Vampire the Masquerade is almost impossible to houserule or change in any regard.
like every game ever run in any setting typically has a list of things that are allowed or not. You don't need a 17-page backstory on why you're not letting any of the players take true faith. a common rule is that generation is set or capped. None of this needs explanation in world. Player character creation at no point resembles the average person in the world of darkness and isn't intended to.
this is been the case with every 90s developed game line due to the sheer amount of books published
It's not uncommon for d&d games to ban silly books they don't like from 3.5, hell there are people that ban everything outside of the core book. The adventure league used to be literally core book plus one other book lol
not every town has sabbat
not every town has Malkavians
besides nothing you're doing is from books you just read the wiki and have never actually played
>hey guys, I don't really like Malkavians. Can we exclude them from this game.
Give an example of a game breaking plot hole pcs are going to "stumble into" because I don't include malks in my chronicle.
Why did Carthage fall without the Malkavians?
Why is Jerusalem a hub of religious mania if Malkav doesn't exist?
Who replaces the Malkavians who serve as Princes of different cities and how do these new Princes change the development of these cities?
How do you handle the absence of influential Malkavians such as Vasantasena, one of the founders of the Sabbat, just an example?
If Malkavians do exist, why have none of them come to the area where your chronicle takes place?
What prevents any Malkavians from coming to the place where your chronicle takes place in the future?
None of those thinge are going to affect my theoretical chronicle. My theoretical chronicle is about vampires in Portland. I just don't want to have Malkavians in it, and my theoretical players are fine with that.
How will any of that stuff ever effect my theoretical chronicle, autismanon?
Your theoretical players (thank you for admitting you're a nogames, by the way) are forced to engage in doublethink and not mention an integral part of the setting woven into many other aspects of the setting, even if their absence causes the entire setting to fall apart. For example, what's the deal with the Brujah and the Ventrue if Carthage never fell? How does Carthage never falling impact the development of the rest of the world? What happens when Rome stops being a superpower that the rest of Europe aspires to be like for the following two millennia? How does a Europe where there is no Renaissance or any Romanticism develop? By removing the Malkavians, you've spawned an AU but you refuse to acknowledge the consequences of that. You're just plugging your ears and screaming that Malkavians don't exist and pretending that the setting would be completely the same, when it would fall apart without them.
You literally can't even figure out that Portland not having Malkavians does not impact Carthage in any way. Its the same as saying that they're aren't Balli in the city.
You are too autistic for these games anon, besides what you're describing is a history told by a character in the setting who isn't right and doesn't have perfect knowledge.
Plenty of the books explain the lore from an objective perspective. That is not an argument. Also, you did not explain why there are no Malkavians in Portland, therefore I went with the explanation that there are no Malkavians there because Malkavians do not exist. If Malkavians do exist but don't exist in Portland, why is that? You tell me and then I will tell you the obvious ramifications of that decision and the consequences of changing any single part of an interconnected setting.
>If Malkavians do exist but don't exist in Portland, why is that?
Because I don't want Malkavians in my game, and my players have agreed to this concession.
By refusing to elaborate, you're going with the "everyone plug your ears and don't you dare think about Malkavians or the implications of an entire clan missing from the city, or an entire clan having never existed at all" route. In short, you're asking your players to engage in doublethink.
No you're just having an autistic screeching fit because no one happened to wander into a city that there was no incentive for them to be in.
You are moronic
You are autistic
And on top of all that you're a belligerent piece of human trash about it.
That assumption you just make is the kind of assumption that someone who's either never played a game or intentionally ruins everything they touch makes.
The problems you have are entirely in your head because you are deranged from your autism.
Slinging insults isn't an argument. You're pretty audacious to call someone else belligerent when you're one wailing about autism and moronation with literally every post you make.
The reality of the matter is what Vampire the Requiem 2e is designed from the ground up to allow for players to exclude and include whatever they want - without plugging their fingers in their ears like you suggest.
See, this has GOT TO be a false flag! Seriously?!
No anon you might as well run it in Requiem, it is truly the best system of Vampire to exist. Your players will be able to think properly and your setting will be completely intact, there is no escape from it.
Your assumption displayed clear and present autism. You have autism. Your experience is atypical because you have autism. because you've used this as an excuse your entire life you are a piece of shit.
You can't argue with a mental derangement which is all you've put on the table.
So, you cannot come up with a way that it will come up in game? You concede defeat? Because you still haven't given an example. Don't carp on about the history of the setting, or npcs that my players will never interact with. Don't assume that one of my players is going to throw a fit because man is are excluded. This situation is: I do not like Malkavians. I have asked my players to not play them, and they agreed, and I am not using any Malkavian npcs. How is this going to ruin the game, or make it suddenly unplayable?
>V:tm is impossible to play, because the ST and also every player must have read every single splat book, tie in novel, and played both videogames, and remember and internalize all of that lore, and take that into account every time they make characters or write scenarios.
I want you to come join my star wars game, the non-canonicty would make your heart fricking explode.
Vampire the Masquerade is built around the assumption that everyone is following and obeying the metaplot. So yes, the game does expect and encourage everyone to keep up with the metaplot and all of the details of the setting, unlike Vampire the Requiem 2e. That's why I've spent the past fifty posts explaining how that's a bad thing.
Man, this is some good old fashioned Ganker autism. This is the good shit, this is why i still frequent this dumpster fire. Every once in awhile you still get an utter car wreck of a human being, so completely incapable of being a person or arguing a point. So completely without the ability to look inward. It's lovely.
How long have you been living with autism, anon? Do you have a big boy job, or are you are ward of the state? Do you run a game for your minder?
>Every once in awhile you still get an utter car wreck of a human being, so completely incapable of being a person or arguing a point. So completely without the ability to look inward. It's lovely.
he just constantly shit posts about wanting to wiener suck Requiem It's very boring. pretty sure he was shitting up the actual wod thread the other day too
Ah, see, I don't frequent that general.
Why does WoD attract the worst autists? You guys get this dude, touhou, and that prick who recommends deviant for literally any game. It's an embarrassment of autistic riches.
It's because there's lots of poorly organized information about it.
The autist starts seeing patterns and needs them to be real lol
>Ah, see, I don't frequent that general.
false
again that's not the game, that's just your autism
stop reading the wiki
So you still don't have a single instance of game ruination arising from the example you, yourself came up with?
It's a common problem for anyone who has played Vampire the Masquerade, not just me. Feel free to ask /CofDg/ for their experiences, the rigid and stringent nature of Vampire the Masquerade and its metaplot isn't a problem unique to me.
no it's pretty unique to you and other autistic morons.
You're the ones who are freaks anon. A disproportionate amount of you worthless pieces of shit existing here also checks out
I accept your concession of defeat, anon.
I'm giving you a source that you can access right now if you want to. You don't get to call that a concession of defeat.
You cannot actually come up with an instance for the example you used. That's a concession, bud.
I gave six, you said they didn't count. I asked you to be more specific about how you were excluding Malkavians so I could come up with instances that do count, you refused. I pointed out how that refusal fell under the "kick and scream whenever anyone even thinks about the plot holes" category and you say that this somehow means that you win.
I'll even give you a link.
. Go and ask them which setting is easier to work with, Vampire the Requiem 2e or Vampire the Masquerade. It's not an opinion unique to me.
no you didn't ask him to be more specific You specifically went out of your way to be the most moronic you possibly could because you're an autistic piece of shit
>moronic
>autistic
You forgot to call me a false-flagger as well. This is not an argument and you haven't done anything to explain what advantages Vampire the Masquerade has over Vampire the Requiem 2e.
But you didn't do any of that You're just a moronic autistic person.
Why would I make something up when you're obviously autistic and moronic.
we know the source of your autism anon
your brain is moronic
Therefore you decided they never existed anywhere at all
The whole rainbow of character options does not exist in every city
You've literally never played a game It's amazing stop reading the wiki.
How does any of those facts effect any of my vampire pcs doing vampire politics in vampire portland? When is it ever gonna come up?
You don't need to samegay. I read your post the first time.
Also, if you can't imagine how the world could be a massively different place if Carthage never fell, then you're a special sort of moron.
Imagine being this stupid and trying to call someone else a moron.
Yeah this guy is just too moronic to live. really wish all these wikiwodgays would kill themselves. They're almost as bad as the official WoD communication channels.
You're frickin with me, right? This has GOT to be false flagging.
>If Malkavians do exist, why have none of them come to the area where your chronicle takes place?
>What prevents any Malkavians from coming to the place where your chronicle takes place in the future?
They have a prophesy about the city that makes them leery about it.
Wow, was that so hard? Instant fix. Oh, let me do it for other clans:
>Ventrue Prince distrusts Brujah, leading to none sticking around
>Rumors of a group of Niktuku in the city keep Nosferatu out
>Setites are banned by the prince after he fell into debt with one
>a large tremere presence wards off the Salubri
><insert sabbat clan> won't show up in a camarilla city, or vice versa
You can easily exclude most clans from your city with something similar. What's the problem with any of these approaches?
No anon, You are simply being an artistic piece of shit just like all morons are. People made excuses for you your whole life so you'll never change.
Play it in V20, read the Revised edition splats for your edification. Stay away from VtR it's a bloated mess that completely changed the game's tone and atmosphere to 'dnd but with vampires'.
Have you actually read Vampire the Requiem 2e?
would you recommend it?
Yes it's a bloated mess even the writers have no advice how to run.
>ask lead dev how you implement Humanity
>They say not to use it rather than answer the question
This is the power of Requiem 2e
The rules are rather straight-forward and I don't see why you would need to ask anyone for elaboration. But yes, if you don't like certain rules, simply don't use them. Vampire the Requiem 2e is designed to support that.
No, it wasn't about not liking them you autistic morons.
It was about how they work in game and how to use them.
But thanks for proving your gay system is as shit as you are.
Please point out what parts of the system you are incapable of understanding and I shall gladly educate you.
Anon, You already denied they exist and said that it couldn't possibly be an actual issue.
You've been engaging in denialism anytime anyone brings up anything about Requiem lol
You're a fricking autistic moronic piece of human trash who ruins everything they touch
You're allowed to not like something about Vampire the Requiem 2e and if you do, you can easily remove that aspect of the game.
Not understanding it when it's designed to be clearer than Vampire the Masquerade from the start is what bemuses me. That is why I am asking you to tell me what rules you do not understand and what rules you consider a "bloated mess," so I can educate you and show you why those rules are not bloated and why the error lies with you instead.
anon the developers and writers can't even answer questions about it. You didn't magically solve it.
Nor should they need to, because the rules are self-explanatory. But since you're having such trouble with them, I'll take this opportunity to explain them to you.
Cite the rules that you're having trouble with.
Anon, You can't even answer basic questions about it when asked you just say to remove it which is not what was asked in any way shape or form.
You literally have nothing to say about Requiem and haven't commented on it once this entire time. The only thing you've done is throw an autistic fit.
Yes, if you don't like any particular rules, you should remove them, something that Vampire the Requiem 2e is designed to facilitate. Yet this isn't about that. This is about you saying that you do not understand clearly written rules. So tell me, what rules do you not understand? What rules are a "bloated mess," so I can help you understand them?
Screaming at me without answering the question just makes it all the more obvious that you have lost the argument.
great advice just change the entire game on the fly mid session including all the bad rules and themes present and requiem that you thought would work but don't thanks
classic requiem lover
Forgive me for assuming that like anyone sane, you read the rules before you play the game and decide which rules you want to use and which you want to throw away.
By the way, what are the rules that you are having trouble understanding?
yep no one ever runs into problems mid-game that they didn't foresee You're right. your system is perfect in every way.
What are the rules that you're having trouble understanding?
Anon you only have one solution and we know it It's the same as the developers.
What are the rules that you're having trouble understanding?
I'm sorry that you consider screaming "autistic" and "moronic" over and over again and more acceptable way of communication than calmly explaining that Vampire the Requiem 2e allows groups to shape the setting and the rules to their liking, a feature that Vampire the Masquerade doesn't have. The way I see, they're claiming that I cannot defend Vampire the Requiem 2e's rules so I am offering to defend them, if they can only explain what problems they have with the rules. The issue is that they are not willing to mention any rules at all, which makes me believe that they have never read them in the first place and are simply trolling.
Anon you're literally being an autistic moron.
I feel myself getting sucked into this so this will be my last post on the subject.
Read
And its that your explanations are of no interest and your efforts to keep pushing it just makes you and as you are the face of your community in this thread the playerbase look bad.
If the game is good or not does not matter at this point its that you go on these long tangents about arbitrary issues that only you seem to care about. Your point about the lore is particularly egregious because it was stated multiple times that they don't care about that aspect.
And yet you kept bringing it up like it was a debate when its not.
We are on a Peruvian basket weaving forum for fricks sake you will not win you can state your position and then there can be some back and forth but this wasn't happening here just you making yourself look bad.
You showed yourself as trying to hard and so your continued protest is that of a failure who just brings annoyance.
For an example from another game, your like those DnD 4e players who fly into a rage when somebody badmouths their game on a misconception. Their corrections don't make you look smart or in the better light they make you look like someone who is a sore loser and can't take that people don't like the thing they like.
Again, I'm sorry that you consider shrieking insults a more acceptable way of communicating than actually trying to get people to talk about the problems that they have with a game. I suggest you move to the jungle if you enjoy the company of shit-slinging monkeys so much.
> than actually trying to get people to talk about the problems that they have with a game..
Anon you failed at what you're trying to do that's why it's worse than accurately labeling your behavior.
You are worse at communication than someone calling you autistic. Probably because of your autism.
Wasn't the previous post your last post on the subject?
Nope, another incorrect assumption from a moron.
Are you going to add anything productive to the discussion or are you just going to continue spamming "autistic" and "moronic" as though they're meaningful?
If you're that other anon, I'm still waiting on you to tell me what rules you're having trouble with, by the way. I'd love to help you with your issues.
Anon, you keep being wrong. The reason you're wrong is that you are mentally ill. Why would anything else come up when you continue to engage in the same behavior cyclically? You're a moron anon. I'm sorry I don't have a meme to post so that you might have a chance of understanding this message.
That's nice, but what are the rules of Vampire the Requiem 2e that you are having trouble understanding?
>Screaming at me without answering the question just makes it all the more obvious that you have lost the argument.
The irony is thicc.
You already stated multiple times that if something comes up as a problem in the middle of a Requiem game you're just supposed to delete it entirely and then engage in double think and pretend like it was never there. No need to press you further. You already gave your opinion
>completely changed the game's tone
It's a different game.
thats the complaint
VtR Anon please shut up for your own sake more than anyone else.
I want you to understand that any points you have had this thread have been buried under a sea of belligerence that makes you come across as more than anything else as annoying and for me personally as a new Anon to this thread can attest that I will stay away from VtR precisely because you are now the face of the player base for me.
Your argument is not receptive to the people you are responding to and your need to keep pressing it has fricked the thread so in the future please post your opinion and then shut the frick up.
And for the guy calling him autistic your just the lesser of two annoyances here and all of you make WoD fans look worse than they already do.
>And for the guy calling him autistic your just the lesser of two annoyances here and all of you make WoD fans look worse than they already do.
I'm not calling him autistic.
At first I was trying to help because he was falling into an autistic loop and the only way I've ever seen those end is having it pointed out. Doesn't always work though.
Then I started insulting him and he just started spouting books of insanity. Very amusing but ultimately of no use or practical value.
sorry I left off the part where I was going to reiterate that he is in fact autistic I'm not calling him that it happens to be a factual label.