#Vampire the masquerade 5th edition

[gnost-stories]

I'm gonna start unapologetically dropping my positive World of Darkness 5th Edition takes if y'all aren't careful.

[priapocalypse]

Vampire: the Masquerade Musings:

The Hecata Curse

I find it interesting that the formation of the Hecata in V5 saw the Giovanni curse spread to the other clans of death (I know it didn't do this with every member, but still). The painful bite bane is not Cappadocian - it was inflicted on Augustus Giovanni by Lamia as he diablerized her. I'm omitting lore on who these people are, but I can go into detail if anyone wants it.

So... how did the other clans of death develop this bane? The antediluvian Cappadocius was the originator of the entire bloodline, so each clan except for the Giovanni and Nagaraja (who were Euthanatos mages that created themselves without Capp's specific blood) had a variation of their founder's curse that gave them the appearance of a corpse. What changed?

Well, in lore, it's strongly implied that Cappadocius was not actually diablerized, but instead became a power wraith in the Shadowlands, where he could further his quest to diablerize God (#goals), and that during the 6th Great Maelstrom in 1999, he was finally destroyed (there's a bit in one of the wraith books about a "captain doshus" or something). That's also the time when Augustus disappeared and the Harbingers broke free of their prison in Kaymakli.

Skip forward to the V5 timeline. Augustus is supposedly dead, and Lamia *may* have been resurrected. Why did Augustus' specific curse appear in all the clans who formed the Hecata? Did Uncle Auggie really die, or did he finally succeed in diablerizing Cappi and become head of the bloodline? Or did Lamia inflict her curse anew, spreading to all clans of the Hecata, even the Nagaraja? Ooor, is Lamia the actual founder of the bloodline? So many interesting questions. I have theories, but I'd love to hear what others think!

[the-random-hamlet]

Now that Larian is Done with Baldur's Gate 3 and DnD...

Considering how well they did with Astarion and Forgotten Realms in general, I would greatly like to see them do a Vampire the Masquerade game.

[ratratart]

A Runaway Maverick (technically) Day 1 of Drawtober

This is my Ravnos lad back as a ghoul! Back before he went by Beau, on the right is his ex/sire Theo. lore under the cut :]

Maverick, Ricky, whatever you may want to call him ran away from home in the spring of his senior year of high school, having met Theodore after a college tour, and being absolutely *smitten*! He then spent several years with his new lover, performing, traveling around the west of the US and acting as a bloodbag absolutely living his best life! Eventually he was embraced in a panic when he was drained by accident. Soon after, Theo left, taking much of their earnings and their van. I love both the idea of him ending up a thinblood and the option of him being a full Ravnos kindred so both versions exist in my brain? (this is all written with the 5th edition rules in mind) If full Ravnos, he would spend his days as a traveling musician, settling into feeding off his audience (albeit with several mistakes when he was new,, and abandoned by his sire). In this version, he hopes to try to reconnect with Theo, uncertain what he did wrong, angry but optimistic in a way (when hes not writing sad country break up songs). He understands in a way why Theo did what he did, he would have panicked too in that situation! Maybe it was okay! They can talk it out!

He wishes to make back up with his mother now that he is more successful, but is unsure how to explain his awful teen behavior to her (running away, asking her for money and promising to come home,, then disappearing again), never mind his current situation (being a vampire). In this he would go by Beau, cursed with the secondary clan bane, and well known enough by his lover's old nickname for him to adopt it as a stage-name. For the version of him that's a thinblood, I think hes far more vengeful. He wants to go back to his family, but is still cursed with the clan bane, feels useless to his sire as his blood is no longer desirable, and he is ANGRY. He feels lost and abandoned and had to beg his mother for money. He quickly realizes he could not return to his old life, he can't go back home, not if he wants to actually *live*. I think he would want Theo dead, he's conflicted but he's no longer bloodbound, and would not have nearly as many benefits of kindred life as a fullblooded vampire, he's not interested. He wants his life back.

[thecupsmith]

I found the best use for the dominate discipline

[gmortschaotica]

"Daniel has answered a mysterious summoning to Hallowbrook, where a kindred with a link to his past has an offer to make. An offer that will be difficult to refuse without dire consequences."

http://gmortschaotica.blogspot.com/2023/04/vampire-masquerade-v5-solo-session.html

[reikiajakoiranruohoja]

WOD 5th ed rant: Decided morality

This is simply my own take on this and I respect if you the reader have a completely different one. Regardless, there is something about WoD 5th ed that truly bothers me on both a storyteller and a writer level.

It is the fact that we cannot play any antagonist factions and that some factions are deemed antagonists for extremely strange reasons.

To explain, in the 5th edition of Vampire the Masquerade the Second Inquisition has managed some massive victories over the kindred, destroying a Tremere Chantry and putting the vampires on the defensive. This is a huge victory for humanity.

Yet, we cannot play a character from the Second Inquisition. Even in their own book, we are not given any character creation rules for them. This is extremely strange, as the vampires in VtM are not good guys. They have never been good guys as a whole, with few individuals being the exception.

The humans in the Second Inquisition, regardless of their morality, are still taking out creatures that manipulate and feed on humans. Yet they are treated as an antagonist-only faction like the Sabbat.

This is extremely bad writing, because we are not given the chance to decide ourselves who is right and who is wrong. We are told the Second Inquisition is bad and we should not play them. Yet we can play a fleshcrafting inhuman vampire landlord.

It isn't even that V5 is the only one that has this problem. Hunter 5th ed makes it very clear the player hunters cannot join larger hunter organizations because those are bad. The examples we are given are written cartoonishly incompetent and evil, in an effort to discourage the players from even trying.

Like with the vampires, however, the freelance hunters aren't exactly the paragons of morality. After all, an angry mob is an angry mob regardless of WHAT it targets.

What makes this very interesting, is that even in the most strict times of WoD 1 to Revised editions we were still always given the chance to try to play the other side. Even if there was a culture of looking down upon snowflakes (characters who were special), the books still kept the avenues open for exploration.

As I said at the start, the Second Inquisition has done a lot of good by taking out vampires. That we are told they have not and that they are all zealots and fanatics, and yet the PCs can be zealots and fanatics too, is treating your playerbase like idiots.

[vixensdungeon]

You've probably asked yourself

What are psychology mechanics in tabletop roleplaying games?

Or maybe you haven't, because that's a term used by like two people because it was made up by me. But others have come up with it before me! Warhammer, for example, uses "psychology" to mean effects like Hatred and Stupidity that modify the behavior of units on the battlefield. And that's thesame basic concept we're talking about.

Psychology is a game mechanic that represents a character's inner life and modifies their behavior. Some would call such a thing a "roleplaying mechanic," but those people are silly with a limited idea of what roleplaying is.

Psychology mechanics fall broadly into three categories, or three C’s. They are:

enCourage: if you do X I’ll give you a little treat Coerce: do X or suffer the consequences Compel: you do X

Encouraging mechanics seem the most in vogue in modern design, though I think the other two have their place. (I briefly considered naming the first one Consent but that wouldn't reflect how the mechanic acts upon the character, and in truth the player consents to all three by playing a game with such mechanics in it)

One game I think is particularly famous for its psychology rules, that being Call of Cthulhu with its Sanity mechanic, and I think King Arthur Pendragon deserves a nod for its passions and such, but we’re going to talk about a different one. Paradigm shifting in its time, seen as traditional these days, it’s Vampire: The Masquerade, the cool game for sexy goths!

To help us delve into the World of Darkness, we’ll employ the guidance of Malcolm Fisher, a Lick currently operating somewhere in England. Say hi, Malcolm!

I knew the vixen was trouble the moment she walked into my life, with an air of mystery and danger, and thighs that-

Ahem, yes, thank you. I think we don’t need to hear from Malcolm anymore, wouldn’t you agree? Instead we’ll use his character sheet to explore the various psychology mechanics in Vampire.

Vampire 5th Edition doesn't actually have an example of encouraging mechanics that I can remember (correct me if I'm wrong), so we'll briefly dip into its predecessors for that. Malcolm has two archetypes, a Demeanor and a Nature. In his case both match: Enigma. Whenever Malcolm acts in accordance to his Nature, in this case by perplexing other characters through actions that turn out to make sense in hindsight, he regains spent Willpower. This encourages Malcolm to act a certain way.

V5's compulsions are, despite the name, a coercive mechanic according to the terminology I made up. When Malcolm suffers a bestial failure on a roll, he might suffer from a compulsion. We'll assume that in this case it's not the one specific to his Clan, Malkavian, but rather one of the generic ones: Paranoia (still appropriate for him). Any action not taken to disengage from any perceived threat suffers a penalty. This coerces Malcolm to act a certain way by punishing him for doing otherwise.

Finally we have the big one, Frenzy. This prevents a player from saying something to the effect of "I would simply not flee in terror from fire." I'm terribly sorry but that's not for you to decide. Unless one decides to ride the wave and not resist the frenzy, the Storyteller takes control of the character. Seeing a large bonfire after a particularly draining investigation, Malcolm fails his Willpower roll and falls into a terror frenzy. He will flee from the fire in the most expedient manner, whether the player wanted to or not. This compels Malcolm to act in a certain way, because he has no other choice.

And there you have it. That's the general gist of psychology mechanics.

[derinthescarletpescatarian]

O Derin, author of cool works, producer of red herrings, master of games: how do you run a tabletop game while making it fun for the players without getting overwhelmed? I've considered trying to be a GM for my friends, but I had a bad time trying to follow a DND 5th e module (especially the combat), so now I'm worried about being able to keep on top of things and narrate well. And also combat with more than like three types of enemies to keep track of makes me feel like I'm taking way too long to remember what they all do.

I ask you specifically because you write good and create cool settings and characters, and run at least one game that people seemed to like. I like to think I'm decent at coming up with stuff, but not having the ability to go back in a tabletop game and edit to make it better is daunting, and tabletop roleplay is different from writing anyway, so how applicable are those skills, really?

I give Diesel a parasocial hello, and also the chickens, and hope you're having a good [time of day] 👍

Don't run DnD then. If the system is too crunchy, use a different system.

I like FATE, personally, as a flexible and fairly light system. If that's too crunchy, you could go lighter with Kids on Bikes, or even something very bare like Lasers & Feelings. If you want something in the crunch range of DnD but more focused so you don't get overwhelmed with extras and edge cases, something like Vampire: The Masquerade (or Requiem, whichever you prefer) might work. If it's the concept of combat that's overwhelming you, run something that's not focused on combat. If you're lucky and have a party that likes roleplaying, they'll roleplay with each other and do a lot of the work for you.

If this is your first time, the concept of shopping around for an rpg itself is probably overwhelming (since you won't have the context to know what's good or bad for you yet), so my recommendation would be starting with FATE or with Lasers & Feelings and running a very short game, between 1 and 5 sessions long. This game does not have to be an epic masterpiece of art. It is for you and your players to feel out how you play and what you like. Once you're done, run a longer one; same system, new system, short or long, whatever you're feeling. There's no need to be overwhelmed because there's no need to go big or complicated.

[thydungeongal]

Do you have any thoughts on Chronicles of Darkness?

I'm quite fond of Chronicles of Darkness and its predecessor World of Darkness and I think both have their respective strengths and weaknesses. The one I am most familiar is Vampire (Requiem and Masquerade respectively) and I feel those two games act almost as a metonym for differences between the two game lines:

I ultimately prefer CofD's approach to lore, with there being no grand supernatural conspiracy, and a lot of the world and its supernatural history being shrouded in myth. Having said that, the lore sometimes feels a bit too bland and like it's playing it a bit too safe, something which I would never accuse Masquerade of.

CofD is, undoubtedly, better mechanically. To be fair, my point of reference for Masquerade is the 20th anniversary edition and it's possible 5th edition has improved on it a lot. But idk, on a general level I appreciate CofD's approach to character-building and mechanics more. Vices and Virtues are great.

Having said all of that, based purely on vibes, I prefer Masquerade: it's a whole 90s goth ass game and Requiem doesn't quite match that.

I think CofD is much better than WoD when it comes to offering the Storyteller a toolkit for crafting their own unique experience, whereas WoD is much more a package deal where the game comes with its own weird idiosyncracies and strange metaphysics. Also I keep hearing cool shit about Changeling: the Lost (not that I don't like the Dreaming either; it's just that Dreaming I feel, of all the WoD games, would best be served by not being a part of the broader WoD).

[lunegrimm]

Part II the work I did for the " Book of Nod Deluxe Artifact Edition" for Vampire: The Masquerade 5th Edition by Renegade Game Studios!

[humantea]

Handing out copies of the 2018 Vampire The Masquerade 5th Edition Core Rulebook for Halloween and cackling with glee at the dawning horror on the faces of trick or treaters as they try to actually make sense of it

[thecupsmith]

In universe VtM memes:

[gmortschaotica]

Vampire the Masquerade - V5 - Five Chronicles, Thirty Stories and More...

As time constraints have prevented me writing up our groups last few sessions, now would seem to be a good time for everyone to catch up on the previous one hundred and fifty or so...

https://gmortschaotica.blogspot.com/p/infiltrate-la-chronicle-welcome-to-l.html

[reikiajakoiranruohoja]

W5 critical: Absence is not inclusivity

Critical of Werewolf the Apocalypse 5th edition, please don't read if you like the edition.

Few weeks ago, I saw a post stating that the removal of the cultural ties from (almost) all of the tribes is a good thing, because it means anyone can now be a member of any tribe.

What this mentality misses, however, is that the absence of culture is not the same as being inclusive. Sure, everyone can be anything, but from my experience, that freedom does not result in actual diverse depiction. After all, we have data that you can be as diverse as you want in your character creation options, most players will still make a white brown-haired cismale character.

In the same vein, all of the released adventures for W5 have been set in the US. Even though anyone can be anything, we have fallen back to treating the US as the default setting. Paradox is a Swedish company and Sweden has plenty of stories that fit WtA. This is no longer the case of a US company writing for a US audience.

What is worse, now that there are no specific tribes from Turtle Island, they don't have to be included in the stories set on their own lands. Instead, all characters can be white and the ST doesn't have to consider how the native people of the land see the white characters.

Even though the Legacy books often fell on their face when it came to depicting anything not a WASP American, the presence of cultural ties had a purpose.

Garou are creatures of community, they are people who band together not out of desperation or survival but because they like to have people around them. Unlike Vampire the Masquerade, Werewolf the Apocalypse is about honesty. Garou want friends, they want allies and a family without ulterior motives.

What this means is that each tribe was not just a group selected by a specific patron. They were communities of shifter and kin who all shared a culture and had for generations. A tribe is a garou's support network, their source of history and so on.

Of course, Werewolf the Forsaken's tribes aren't culturally tied. But the difference between the W5 tribes and those of The Moon is that there are only 8 or so base tribes and even then three of those are the 'bad guys'. The tribes in Forsaken are archetypes, werewolves of similar goals. But the game has always made a point that there are cultural differences depending on the country and there are plenty of lodges that are local to a specific area.

In W5, you have 11 tribes that were originally built to have ties to certain culture or broad concepts. Now, with most of the context removed, there are multiple tribes in W5 that could be cut and the setting would not change.

More than that, the tribes of W5 (aside from Cult of Fenris for some reason) are alone. Even the Uratha in Forsaken need to have contact with their potential tribe to join one, but in W5 the tribe patrons simply choose a fitting garou with no input from others of the tribe. This loneliness is further shown in how little thought is dedicated to a pack having a patron. Unlike every other WtA book, W5 does not come with a list of patrons. Instead the book, in a sidebar, recommends picking a tribal patron among the tribes of the pack. With an added mention to do contrition to other patrons who did not get picked. Even then, each PC is still expected to follow their tribal patron's ban on top of their pack patron's.

Meanwhile, in Legacy, the ties to various real life cultures give direction and community to the garou. When the pack chooses a patron, that patron is often not from any tribal brood. The pack, in Legacy, is important.

In W5, community, pack, family and all that are not only gone but also treated as the source of the garou's evils. Better be alone, better be without roots, it says.

No person is an island, yet that is what W5 wants things to be.