I know I just posted the intro chapter. But I’m feeling really generous this afternoon.
You might be saying, gosh David, that’s a lot of text. It is. The Tzimisce clan writeup isn’t through editing. Neither is the bumper (the opening segment). I can’t make sweeping changes here, but I’m in favor of showing things up front. It worked really well for Demon: The Descent. I’ve shared a bit of this content before. But, I wanted to show you the whole thing in its glory.
This is just clans; bloodlines will come soon, but we’re doing last-minute polish on a couple of them. As with Dark Ages: Vampire, the Salubri are not addressed as a clan within. They’re three fully fleshed out bloodlines just a bloodline.
Also, this is shared via OneDrive. You should be able to just directly download from there. I didn’t do it in Google Drive this time, because it’s a huge chunk of text, and I didn’t want to bother pasting it into Drive and formatting the whole thing. It’s in our internal native Word styles. If you can’t access it, I can do a raw paste dump. But, busy, busy, busy, and every moment I spend reformatting something for public consumption is a moment I’m not spending finalizing the text.
Not to be a snob, but the Capp’ clan should be listed as having Mortis, not Necromancy. (which I’m sure you know.) The Giovanni crafted that as their own power to replace the former. Unless that is one of the game changes you are making.
We’re going more with the Revised and V20 model, where Mortis is wrapped into Necromancy as a specific Path. Giovani brought new Necromancy into the fold.
I’m with Mort, the only edition that chance Mortis from Capps is V20. The 1st DA has Mortis as normal discipline (1 power per level). The revised edición of 2002 (the best core book of Vamp in my opinión) do the change to Paths and Rituals style forma Mortis (making a lot of sense)
This Necromancy being Mortis doesn’t looks good. They are 2 differents points of views of the death.
Both then again you could just named it Mortis or not. And we as players can change the name when playing (form our snobish mind lol)
DA:V, the most current edition of Dark Ages supplements until this one gets published, turned Mortis into a form of blood magic that was absolutely identical to Necromancy, up to and including the Giovanni’s early Paths as part of itself.
Mortis and Necromancy have been the same Discipline since VtM Revised changed Necromancy into a form of blood magic. Once that happened, all the Deathy Disciplines merged together into a single form, which is WAY more elegant than having five of the things.
Except for Thanatosis, which is still dumb.
The subtle shift in the Gangrel – from people who hate or don’t need society, to those who refuse to be bound by its conventions – is a small change, but hugely helpful. It offers a lot of character concepts that aren’t traditionally associated with the Clan. Persecuted minorities who refuse to accept their “lesser” status, women who want to rule in a male-dominated world – Nicola de la Hay would have made a great Gangrel – even free-thinkers like Roger Bacon who’ve fallen out with the local Church authorities and forced to flee the Inquisition – they’d all find a place among the Gangrel.
If you’re going to make their sobriquet “outlaws”, you’ll really miss a trick if you don’t have “wolf’s-heads” there as well, though 🙂
That’s pretty much exactly our thinking in that regard. Glad you dig, and glad it came across.
Also? Wolf’s-Head is brilliant. How did that not cross our minds? Good catch.
Taking into account that numerous clans have multiple nicknames/sobriquets, would it still be possible to add “Lepers” for the Nosferatu as a derogatory one and as an homage to VtDA/DA:V? Plus, some clans have multiple nicknames/sobriquets, while some, like the Lasombra, have just one. Is there an “average” or “goal” number per clan that you are trying to achieve, or are some going to have to do with just one? P.S. The Cappadocians are missing theirs.
The Capps meet anually at Erciyes? Sounds like they would have little time for study if they are constant pilgrims. They’d spend months travelling, which seems both dangerous and extremely unlike cainites that aren’t Gangrel or Ravnos.
Every 5 or 10 years would sound more reasonable.
Not all of them meet there annually. There are some that stay there, and others come in.
Think of it like a convention. You don’t go every year; you go when it’s convenient.
Besides, right now, they’re ramping up organization, because they smell something dark in the air.
That works 🙂
So far I’ve read up to Tremere, I’ll continue later or Wednesday. But what I have to say so far is that this grabs me right away. It’s past my bedtime! All of these clan backgrounds are so well written, this newb can imagine a wide variety of characters easily, even if some of the terminology and hints of game dynamics are currently beyond me (since I haven’t yet read into it). I’m given enough info to actually visualize characters, places and daily life to possibly startup a game with ease. This is cool!
I have a couple nitpicks but will only state one about Toreador attention spans being the shortest. If they surround themselves regularly with beauty, then wouldn’t they have long attention spans towards those things? Am I thinking about this backwards?
Under Malkavian, you have they don’t fight in battles: they start battles. I believe it would read better if you changed it to Malkavians don’t fight battles: they start wars.
Oo. I like that. Good catch.
Underneath the “Organization” section of Brujah is an incomplete sentence: “With so many causes to, Brujah…” To what? Tend to?
Also would like to see a little more on the general structure of the Brujah, as the Assamites preceding it was so darn juicy. This reads great, don’t think it’s a negative critique.
Regarding the Gangrel weakness, will the penalty be cumulative if they experience a second Frenzy before dealing with the consequences of the first one?
The Ravnos sobriquet – isn’t “Shaper” a term more traditionally associated with the Tzimisce? The weakness is a significant improvement, though. Ravnos who aren’t gypsies, tramps and thieves? That makes me want to come around and lay my money down…
“Set, not Caine, was the progenitor of all Kindred”? That’s new. In the previous versions, they acknowledged a similar origin rather than a shared one. It also implies that ALL Cainites are really Setites, something that potentially impacts their attitude to the other clans.
So yeah, about the Ravnos sobriquets – Think of Shaper as someone who shapes destiny and the truth around them, not the physical aspects of the world. That might be Molder or something else.
Gangrel: I’ll think on that, and note it.
Ravnos: It was. Thanks on that. It was one of the biggest things we wanted to address with the clans.
Set: Seriously. I think Anna did really well to fuel an entire chronicle’s foundation with just that tiny section.
Overall, magnificent work! I really liked it. I have some comments on things that caught my eye:
Assamite: Best write-up of the clan ever, really. However, their skin darkening with age is missing. Is this deliberate?
Brujah: This looks more like a history chapter entry on Troile/Carthage than a clan write-up. I miss the concept of a clan fallen from grace, which I could not perceive in the description, as well as Brujah concerns in the Dark Medieval.
Gangrel: I like the new system of the flaw a lot, however, some way for the animal trait to become permanent could be included. Thematically, i really like the new approach, but miss the connection of Gangrel with paganism, as I am used to them being very supportive of the Old Faiths.
Nosferatu: More Baba Yaga, please!!! I’d love to see the Crone’s activities in the Dark Ages. Can she become a War of Princes Monarch of Russia??? On another note, medieval Nosferatu piety was a very interesting concept, and a nice interaction of the clan with Christian doctrine, which I find missing here.
Ravnos: Brilliant interpretation of the clan weakness!!! However, I’d love to see a darker twist on it, even for those Ravnos who have a virtue as their personality trait. A comment that the compulsion is incited by the Beast would perhaps be very interesting.
Setites: I really liked how enmity to other religions was presented. However, a comment on more selfish (or rather, individual) aspiration in Setite doctrine, mentioning their personal ambition at godhood, would perhaps be interesting? What are the rewards for being a faithful of Set, after all? And the Set as anathema to chaos mention seems very odd. Isn’t the breaking of the rule of law and Maat central to Setites?
Toreador: I like the addictive quality of Toreador trance, but miss the V20 specifying that the trance can include interaction with the object of fascination.
Assamite: Best write-up of the clan ever, really. However, their skin darkening with age is missing. Is this deliberate?
Yes
Assamites: Good catch. I’ll note it.
Brujah: I understand the criticism. But I think at this juncture, we’ll have to flesh that out in supplementary material.
Gangrel: There’s going to be a lot of room for that in supplementary material. It’s something we’ve been discussing. We want to present that as a thing, without making the bias toward pagan faiths being “barbaric and savage”.
Nosferatu: We’re providing the Niktuku as a bloodline. You will see more Baba Yaga. That’s a badass idea. I’ll talk to Filamena about it.
Ravnos: I get you. That’s really a tapestry to work from. You’ll see more edges on it.
Setites: There’s totally a Road for that.
Toreador: Good catch. I’ll note it.
Toreador Addenda:
Toreador may interact with their objects of obsession, however. For deeply inhumane Toreador, this can mean terrible things for a living obsession, as the Toreador seeks to take in every aspect of nature’s art, understanding them on a visceral, fundamental level.
Perfect!
Niktuku as a bloodline? Yay!!! Can we see a preview of that next, pretty please??? Will baba yaga be one of them ? I kinda like that! And she totally deserves to be the monarch of Russia!
And still on the Gangrel flaw: will they still get permanent animal Traits somehow?
I’ll maybe allow them as a Flaw. Not sure yet.
And I may preview the Niktuku. I was waffling on that. I kind of wanted to leave them as a surprise. Let’s see how drunk I get between now and release since I can’t get to Gen Con this year.
While on the subject of Assamites.
The Alamut is in Anatolia? Really? Have my senses decieved me, or have the Assamites moved the castle to modern-day Turkey from Iran?
As far as I gathered, the Alamut is seperated from Anatolia by the Armenian Highlands and the Alborz Mtns.
The book provides an explicitly “old faith” variant of the Road of Heaven for the first time. And the great thing about it is that it moves away from the savage-barbarian, Conan schtick completely, thank God(dess). Maybe there could be a tiny mention in the write-up that adherents of the old religion are among the groups drawn to the Gangrel? It would perfectly fit the theme of people unable to fit into mainstream society. But I think this new core will probably supply a better “toolkit” for pagan character concepts than any previous version, regardless.
I can see just the first page. Is this just my problem? How can I get the remain?
That’s weird. I’m away from my computer right now, but if someone wants to dump the text in Google Docs or something, I’d be down with that.
What are you trying to view it on? System, browser?
Can try to help troubleshoot. But try to refresh the page first if you haven’t.
Win 7 and Firefox. The explorer dose show the full text.
Weird Firefox bug then. If you’re on the latest version you should file a bug report.
Glad you managed to get it working though.
I had to carefully consider my other nitpick before posting. No harshness is meant by my post, only concern.
This sentence is really bothersome: “Their beauty often reflects the ideal from the era and homeland from which they come, so they range from exotic and dark to porcelain blondes with high foreheads.”
I think it may give the wrong impression for new players and I beg for the latter half to be changed. Not only does this sentence seem to ignore male beauty, but it provides too much emphasis on DA beauty thereby implying that most all Toreador are recently embraced. Also, most blondes of the DA weren’t true blondes, like today. They ‘bleached’ and ‘highlighted’ too. Do vampires do this? High foreheads – do Toreador also pluck and burn their scalp hair off like ‘normal’ humans of that time? Also, higher class women covered their hair in the Dark Ages, so why mention color at all? Unless plenty of Toreador are peasants, but that means they couldn’t afford to contribute to the art scene.
At least: “Their features often reflect the ideal from the era and homeland from which they come, so they range from exotic to local beauties”? This right here, can help a player place their Toreador anywhere in the world. Let them figure out what’s beautiful for that geography. Thanks for any consideration into the matter.
I’ll fix it.
Ironically, where Anna wrote that, my first thought was that she was referring to Erik Northman from True Blood. It didn’t even occur to me that it could be construed as female.
Is it intentional that some of the Clans have “sobriquets” while others have “nicknames” and the Cappadocians don’t have either? I’m assuming it’s just a draft issue that’ll be corrected, but I thought I’d point it out in case it got missed, or ask if there was some nuanced reason I was missing…
Concerns:
Assamites: Like mentioned above the darkening of the skin is missing from appearance section, but that seems to have been handled by now. The other thing is that while it makes sense that the Assamites face to the other Clans are the Viziers, thanks for that btw, I would think the Warriors and Sorcerers with their weaknesses and Discipline spreads should be covered here, I trust they are now in the Bloodline section but ‘d rather prefer them in one place. Otherwise it just seems arbitrary as to which is represented in the Clans section and which are in the Bloodlines section.
Gangrel: While I have nothing against the mechanics of the new Weakness, I do dislike it’s fluff somewhat. Why do you choose to downplay the animal part of the Gangrel so? I’d prefer them getting solely animalistic features, whether physical or not is irrelevant, instead of features affected by local vampiric myths. Also the system for permanent, or just long lasting, features would be nice to have. Whether from botching a self-control/instinct roll or from something else.
As for the writeup itself I find it odd that a Clan of survivals is described to often actively either ignore or mock the local habits of dress. Part of survival is blending in, this is exactly what both predators and prey animals alike hold in common. Why then do the Gangrel flaunt their differences openly inviting mortal retribution? I understand that they are the often the outsiders, except when they are not like in the north, but to openly invite trouble does not seem logical to them as a Clan, some few member perhaps but not enough certainly to warrant it as a descriptive element for the whole Clan.
Ravnos: Thank you for sticking with the Revised CB Ravnos. While I do kinda understand why you would widen their Weakness to include Virtue as well as Vice in it’s options it still leaves you to wonder why the Beast would support a Virtue? Also as per the Revised CB the Ravnos are supposed to resist these cunning whispers of their more aware Beast this would mean that some would seek to avoid acting Virtuously. Just food for thought. I’d just like a little something to explain why their Beast would urge them towards Virtue instead of seeking to purely degrade them towards wassail.
Setites: I like this except for the two mentions of Horus. Horus is a Sky God, and a Warrior/Protector/Rulership God, not a sun God, though as a sky God sun is part of him being his right eye while the moon is his left, that distinction belongs to Ra. And yes Egyptian religion is complicated and the Gods purview’s often have at least some overlap but still calling Horus as the Sun God just causes me cringe each time I read it. There is a difference between being associated with the sun and being the Sun God.
Other than that it’s all good. Nice work, mate.
I like this a lot.
For now I’ll comment on the new Ravnos weakness.
I’m totally not against it – I think it can be refreshing looking at something with new eyes. And besides, with multiple weaknesses through the editions we can all go for one most suitable for our own tables.
Myself I prefer the weakness as presented in the old LS4: Thieves in the Night, where they go with crime not being the actual weakness, but rather sin is. That way they could pull of the Chivalry adhering Ravnos of (mostly) France to a better degree, without falling to the kleptomania stereotype, and still keeping the darker aspect of the Ravnos Beast. The Founder of the line had wrath as her sin, as example.
If you go on with “the crime of Virtue”, I echo some of the good posters above and ask for a slightly more dark and sinister angle for it.
Keep up the good work folks 🙂
I think an extra small segment should be added to all clans: A short discussion of how the clan fits in the high/low hierarchy in different regions.
Either that, or a more detailed explanation at the beginning of the chapter with a short summary for the most important regions. Especially newer players will find the current explanation very confusing when it comes to exactly what clans are considered high respectively low in different regions. Not even the “default” position (most of Europe) of the clans are included now.
A session with the Monarchies, explaining the Monarch, the Lords, the description and Poblemas as did the previous edition and the rival clans and Hight added that the monarchy would be something interesting. We would only consider how many monarchies. I believe 21-32.
“Ventrue characters need a keen balance between Physical and Mental Attributes, between social graces and knowledge.” Should that be “Social and Mental Attributes”?
I can appreciate the need to get away from stereotypes with the Assamites, but while the RL Assassins have been subjected to sensationalist propaganda, they weren’t nature’s noblemen either. The Assamites should fall short of their ideals as much as the Ravnos and Ventrue do.
Might be months late to the party, but isn’t Brujah the elder supposed to be the calm, logical one and Troille supposed to be the passionate one that diablerized him? Here it’s the opposite to what I recall it being in Masquerade V20 (and the earlier ones too, of course, but it’s V20 that matters). It’d be annoying to have a contradiction about the nature/origin of the True Brujah.