Design Challenge: "Living" Necromancers and Vampires

[Razsius]

Nothing bothers me more then how one-sided these two enemy archetypes have become. It's so bad there's probably a trope (or tropes). You see the irony is one (the necromancer) is an enemy archetype based on bringing back that which is forever lost and the second (the vampire) is based on the concept of an *unwilling* death with an almost eternal afterlife.

 

In regards to the necromancer the encounter usually involves you vs the power mad/completely evil/totally insane necromancer and the conversation usually looks something like this:

 

Necromancer: "MWAHAHAHA you will now become new recruits in my giant army of the living dead. They will cut a swathe of dest... bla bla bla bah BLAH BLAH BLA!"

 

You: "Your reign of terror ends tonight!"

 

*queue butchery of said necromancer*

 

Obviously not very compelling. But if the moment you found the necromancer and decided to have a chat with him/her resulted in you getting an eyeful of an illusion spell cast upon *showing* you the events of said necromancer's persecution and subsequent death/torture of family/children or even grandchildren you might rethink your actions. Waiting long minutes in game as the necromancer tries fruitlessly to reattach a soul to a mangled corpse and fails... over and over and over and over and over and Over and Over and OVer and OVer and OVEr and OVEr and OVER and OVER again. THAT'S compelling.

 

On the other hand, we tend to slaughter vampires by the dozens (the undead monstrosities totally deserve it because they're all evil of course). But again useful storytelling would make them once again very compelling. As I stated before vampirism in most mythos is usually a *very* unwilling event that happens to the soon to be vampire. Strangely, near all media concerning this particular variety of the living dead ends with the vampire aging many hundreds of years and losing any and all wisdom it may have gained in it's hugely extended life as well as developing an ego so massive it's almost always the downfall of our almost immortal. Yet, rarely do I see the vampire portrayed as a compelling existentialist struggle (for it certainly would be). The ever necessary hunger that needs to be sated to continue the unlife. The total change of sleeping and waking hours (Vampires don't ever get to see the sun again). The instant and massive power granted upon turning and so much more. What is "life" to a vampire? What is "fear" to a vampire? What are "friends" to a vampire? What is "death" to a vampire? What if the vampire race was the one close to extinction? What if they posed absolutely no threat level at all to the other races? What is choice in Project Eternity?

 

Compelling...

 

Do you think the developers could take this kind of design challenge?

[Giantevilhead]

You should play Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines

[Ieo]

I hope neither of those end up in the game...

 

(Divinity2:DKS had an interesting take on necromancy...)

[nikolokolus]

I hope neither of those end up in the game...

 

(Divinity2:DKS had an interesting take on necromancy...)

 

+1

 

There are so many other themes to explore.

[Razsius]

You should play Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines

 

I have played Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines so I know you're definately not refering to how awesome LaCroix was as he was this:

 

Strangely, near all media concerning this particular variety of the living dead ends with the vampire aging many hundreds of years and losing any and all wisdom it may have gained in it's hugely extended life as well as developing an ego so massive it's almost always the downfall of our almost immortal.

 

to the tee. Now Jack... was a nice change of pace (because he actually learned something in his implied long lived lifetime) but even his vampire philosophy was basically "Unlife sucks or it doesn't... your choice." Also, there's absolutely no interaction with humans that don't involve feeding on them, pseudo turning them, mercilessly slaughtering them or exploiting them (ie the usual vampire stuff). There was definately some enjoyable stuff in the game to be sure (like the "woman" in the hospital) but it didn't totally redefine vampires either.

 

There are so many other themes to explore.

 

Do tell.

 

I'd really like to know about your compelling necromancer/vampire/"normal" monster stories or fresh approaches.

 

Look, it's not like I want this stuff to be the main theme(s) of the game but if I stumble across a necromancer I want him/her to have a viable reason for being as such. Is that really too much to ask? Not to mention the fact that you might just might be able to extrapolate most of this stuff into the greater whole. Take dragons as another example. They've become more and more pansy as RPGs have gone on. Occasionally you have to gain a few more levels before you fight them but the reality is if a dragon could rend you in half with a sweep of it's claws at level 1 it should still be able to do so at level 20. When was the last time a dragon roar blew you 5 rooms back allowing the concussive force to kill your entire party because their bones turned into powder? How about when said dragon turned the forest you were fighting it in into a giant crater? Exactly...

Edited October 13, 2012 by Razsius

[eimatshya]

I liked the P. Schuyler and Sons family of necromantic jewlers in Arcanum. That was a nice twist on things.

 

The existential horror of being a vampire can be kind of interesting, and it's basically the whole point of Vampire: the Masquerade, but it's not really an area that I'm overly concerned with. If vampires show up as evil bad dudes who we kill indiscriminately, that's fine with me. Having them as something more nuanced can be fun, but it can also get annoying (e.g. Louis' constant whining in the movie Interview With a Vampire).

 

As a bit of a tangent, the Autobiography of Benvenuto Cellini (written in the 16th century, making it almost contemporary with the time period that P:E is more-or-less based on) has kind of a bizarre segment where a necromancer purportedly summons demons in the ruins of the Coloseum. It's worth a read (actually the whole book is a pretty good read, especially if you are interested in first-hand accounts of what life was like in the Renaissance).

[Ieo]

I'd rather not see dragons in PE either.

 

SUBVERT THE DOMINANT PARADIGM.

[Giantevilhead]

You should play Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines

 

I have played Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines so I know you're definately not refering to how awesome LaCroix was as he was this:

 

Strangely, near all media concerning this particular variety of the living dead ends with the vampire aging many hundreds of years and losing any and all wisdom it may have gained in it's hugely extended life as well as developing an ego so massive it's almost always the downfall of our almost immortal.

 

to the tee. Now Jack... was a nice change of pace (because he actually learned something in his implied long lived lifetime) but even his vampire philosophy was basically "Unlife sucks or it doesn't... your choice." Also, there's absolutely no interaction with humans that don't involve feeding on them, pseudo turning them, mercilessly slaughtering them or exploiting them (ie the usual vampire stuff). There was definately some enjoyable stuff in the game to be sure (like the "woman" in the hospital) but it didn't totally redefine vampires either.

 

That game deals with most of these questions:

 

"What is "life" to a vampire? What is "fear" to a vampire? What are "friends" to a vampire? What is "death" to a vampire? What if the vampire race was the one close to extinction? What if they posed absolutely no threat level at all to the other races?"

 

Also, there are plenty of interesting vampires with different and interesting points of view like Velvet Velour, Maximilian Strauss, Isaac Abrams, Mitnick, Beckett, etc.

 

And what exactly do you mean by "redefine" vampires?

 

If you want play a game with a sympathetic necromancer, play Heroes of Might and Magic IV.

[nikolokolus]

 

There are so many other themes to explore.

 

Do tell.

 

I'd really like to know about your compelling necromancer/vampire/"normal" monster stories or fresh approaches.

 

Look, it's not like I want this stuff to be the main theme(s) of the game but if I stumble across a necromancer I want him/her to have a viable reason for being as such. Is that really too much to ask? Not to mention the fact that you might just might be able to extrapolate most of this stuff into the greater whole. Take dragons as another example. They've become more and more pansy as RPGs have gone on. Occasionally you have to gain a few more levels before you fight them but the reality is if a dragon could rend you in half with a sweep of it's claws at level 1 it should still be able to do so at level 20. When was the last time a dragon roar blew you 5 rooms back allowing the concussive force to kill your entire party because their bones turned into powder? How about when said dragon turned the forest you were fighting it in into a giant crater? Exactly...

 

Exactly what? When I said there are many other themes to explore, I meant I don't really want necromancers or vampires (or even dragons) in the game at all. There's not much left in those tropes that hasn't already been done to death in games or popular culture (especially vampires). The game doesn't have to be avant garde, but I would like an emphasis on "other" things ... chuthulu-like soul stealing horrors with underworld black markets where people literally sell their souls to unscrupulous godlike soul harvesters. a shadow society of changelings living amongst the squalor and filth of some large city, a secret society of scribes who assassinate anyone they catch wind of disseminating books without their consent ... or perhaps they've squelched several attempts by inventors to build a printing press?

 

Regardless, I think we're on the same ground. It sounds like you and I both want plausible reasons for creatures and characters to exist in the world.

[Gatt9]

Do you think the developers could take this kind of design challenge?

 

I personally thought the approach Dragonlance took in the last set of novels toward undead was great. The story went that the God of Undead was seducing people with the promise of immortality and eternal beauty, but at a very heavy price (They were essentially mindless vampires).

 

It's a direction I think could be explored to great effect, rather than portraying the God of Undeath as wanting dominion over skeletons, portray him as a seducer that strikes uneven deals.

 

The Undead have many different avenues that could be explored: Revenge, Anger, Insanity, Betrayl, results of a massacre, Curse (Like Lord Soth), etc. There's enourmous room for this theme to grow.

[Razsius]

I liked the P. Schuyler and Sons family of necromantic jewlers in Arcanum. That was a nice twist on things.

 

I really need to play that game...

 

The existential horror of being a vampire can be kind of interesting, and it's basically the whole point of Vampire: the Masquerade, but it's not really an area that I'm overly concerned with.

 

Wait, there was existential horror in Vampire: the Masquerade? Or are you refering to Redemption or something? I certainly never felt bad about being a vamp while playing (again humans amount to just above cattle in game). You had to go on a massive feeding spree in broad view just to arouse any kind of vampire hunter presence and the ones you *had* to fight were almost comical. On the other hand, what kind of world is one where the vampire is ceaselessly hunted and or enslaved to near extinction by an extremely powerful organization or nation(s). You'd really have to wonder then who the "bad guys" were when a "race" that strong lives in constant fear for it's err "life".

 

Regardless Project Eternity's world doesn't feel like one that will even include vampires but it's just a thought.

 

As a bit of a tangent, the Autobiography of Benvenuto Cellini (written in the 16th century, making it almost contemporary with the time period that P:E is more-or-less based on) has kind of a bizarre segment where a necromancer purportedly summons demons in the ruins of the Coloseum. It's worth a read (actually the whole book is a pretty good read, especially if you are interested in first-hand accounts of what life was like in the Renaissance).

 

I love history i'll have to check that out.

 

I'd rather not see dragons in PE either.

 

SUBVERT THE DOMINANT PARADIGM.

 

I knew you'd understand. All kidding aside i'd definately like some giant monsters to be able to kill me dead. I'm not exactly afraid of ants after all.

 

That game deals with most of these questions:

 

"What is "life" to a vampire? What is "fear" to a vampire? What are "friends" to a vampire? What is "death" to a vampire? What if the vampire race was the one close to extinction? What if they posed absolutely no threat level at all to the other races?"

 

The World of Darkness "life" for a vampire was basically a civilization that would go absolutely nowhere and do the same exact crap for eternity. It's enough to make you pity them.. almost. Which is also portrayed in other vampire mythos like say True Blood. You remember any scientist or philosopher vampires in Vampire the Masquerade because I certainly don't (Beckett and Grout were about the only ones doing anything meaningful). Fear was never truly explored or at least for me it wasn't. I wasn't exactly afraid of anything even including breaking the Redemption or going on a titanic killing spree for the hell of it. As for death and close to extinction those really weren't worries either as vamps in the World of Darkness lived sort of "outside" humanity they weren't being actively pursued by a *relevent* threat. Lastly, vampires were a threat in Vampire the Masquerade you even chased a vampire that used his power to exact vengence in a quest.

 

And what exactly do you mean by "redefine" vampires?

 

Vampires are known to exist. Vampires are either enslaved to humans and the other races or ceaselessly running from them to remain in existance as a whole. Vampires are *not* higher up on the food chain because they are too busy trying not to die.. again. Something like that...

 

I've never really heard of this scenario however it is probably largely irrelevent regardless.

 

If you want play a game with a sympathetic necromancer, play Heroes of Might and Magic IV.

 

I think I have that game. As I recall I played it for a half hour and then could never play it again because it bored me to tears. I can't remember why that was though.

 

Edit: Missed one.. or two.

 

Exactly what? When I said there are many other themes to explore, I meant I don't really want necromancers or vampires (or even dragons) in the game at all. There's not much left in those tropes that hasn't already been done to death in games or popular culture (especially vampires). The game doesn't have to be avant garde, but I would like an emphasis on "other" things ... chuthulu-like soul stealing horrors with underworld black markets where people literally sell their souls to unscrupulous godlike soul harvesters. a shadow society of changelings living amongst the squalor and filth of some large city, a secret society of scribes who assassinate anyone they catch wind of disseminating books without their consent ... or perhaps they've squelched several attempts by inventors to build a printing press?

 

Yea I hear ya. It's certainly hard to get some fresh takes on these things. I especially like your latter two examples as if they both exist it implies that the player himself can be fooled into thinking he understands the Project Eternity world but could actually know absolutely *nothing*. Always hated the fact you could figure out all the workings of say Baldur's Gate (the city). Life isn't even like that let alone a fantasy world you don't even know the history of.

Edited October 13, 2012 by Razsius

[Monte Carlo]

As a lich of long-standing, I can't really comment on Vampires as they are several levels below me. Aside from that they are dreadfully common: an upstart's Undeath. Lich-dom requires work and commitment, vampirism involves a night of being bitten by a Goth. *sigh*

 

Anyhow, being a lich is overrated. If I'd had my time again I'd have probably ascended to demi-godhood and adopted the body of a handsome young man and gone spreading my unholy seed *sighs again *

 

As it is I sit atop my ancient tower, occasionally terrifying the villagers, trying not to lose body parts to rot (I'm currently held together with duct-tape and epoxy resin) and seeing off pesky paladins and the like.

 

So leave them out of the game, please, the fantasy (as ever) fails to live up to the reality.

[Giantevilhead]

That game deals with most of these questions:

 

"What is "life" to a vampire? What is "fear" to a vampire? What are "friends" to a vampire? What is "death" to a vampire? What if the vampire race was the one close to extinction? What if they posed absolutely no threat level at all to the other races?"

 

The World of Darkness "life" for a vampire was basically a civilization that would go absolutely nowhere and do the same exact crap for eternity. It's enough to make you pity them.. almost. Which is also portrayed in other vampire mythos like say True Blood. You remember any scientist or philosopher vampires in Vampire the Masquerade because I certainly don't (Beckett and Grout were about the only ones doing anything meaningful). Fear was never truly explored or at least for me it wasn't. I wasn't exactly afraid of anything even including breaking the Redemption or going on a titanic killing spree for the hell of it. As for death and close to extinction those really weren't worries either as vamps in the World of Darkness lived sort of "outside" humanity they weren't being actively pursued by a *relevent* threat. Lastly, vampires were a threat in Vampire the Masquerade you even chased a vampire that used his power to exact vengence in a quest.

 

The original Vampire: The Masquerade RPG was published in 1992, the first Southern Vampire Mysteries, which True Blood is based on, was published in 2001.

 

Why does it matter if you meet a scientist or philosopher? There are several characters that talk about the existential problems of being a vampire as well as how it relates to the politics of the vampire race. Does it matter if they don't call themselves philosophers? As for scientists, the Nosferatu are extremely tech savvy and the Kuei-jin conduct experiments on you to study the weakness of vampires. Also, even though it's not shown in the game, in the World of Darkness universe, the vampires, as well as Kuei-jin, are in fact much more technologically advanced than the rest of the world. They both develop technologies to combat supernatural forces. The Kuei-jin for example, have weapons satellites.

 

As for fear, coming close to extinction, and posing no threat to other races, did you play the game? Did you not notice all the talk about Gehenna and the end of days for the vampire species? Did you miss the part about the Kuei-jin gaining more power and potentially wiping out the vampire in LA? Did you not notice how there were a ton of other supernatural creatures that are way more powerful than vampires? Did you miss Jack's speech about how vampires won't stand a chance against humans now that they have weapons like napalm and nukes?

 

And what exactly do you mean by "redefine" vampires?

 

Vampires are known to exist. Vampires are either enslaved to humans and the other races or ceaselessly running from them to remain in existance as a whole. Vampires are *not* higher up on the food chain because they are too busy trying not to die.. again. Something like that...

 

I've never really heard of this scenario however it is probably largely irrelevent regardless.

 

There are plenty of fantasies where supernaturals, including vampires, are hunted or persecuted by humans. Heck, that idea even shows up in the most recent Underworld movie.

[Monte Carlo]

As an aside, lets keep Vampire fans well away from this. They are on the slippery slope to BSN romantics IMO.

[Razsius]

As a lich of long-standing, I can't really comment on Vampires as they are several levels below me. Aside from that they are dreadfully common: an upstart's Undeath. Lich-dom requires work and commitment, vampirism involves a night of being bitten by a Goth. *sigh*

 

Anyhow, being a lich is overrated. If I'd had my time again I'd have probably ascended to demi-godhood and adopted the body of a handsome young man and gone spreading my unholy seed *sighs again *

 

As it is I sit atop my ancient tower, occasionally terrifying the villagers, trying not to lose body parts to rot (I'm currently held together with duct-tape and epoxy resin) and seeing off pesky paladins and the like.

 

So leave them out of the game, please, the fantasy (as ever) fails to live up to the reality.

 

*Chuckles* Well it seems Monte also gets it. Why *do* you always find a lich or necromancer in some hole in the ground or better yet a blatently obvious tower?

 

Why does it matter if you meet a scientist or philosopher? There are several characters that talk about the existential problems of being a vampire as well as how it relates to the politics of the vampire race. Does it matter if they don't call themselves philosophers? As for scientists, the Nosferatu are extremely tech savvy and the Kuei-jin conduct experiments on you to study the weakness of vampires. Also, even though it's not shown in the game, in the World of Darkness universe, the vampires, as well as Kuei-jin, are in fact much more technologically advanced than the rest of the world. They both develop technologies to combat supernatural forces. The Kuei-jin for example, have weapons satellites.

 

The Nosferatu being tech savvy aside as I recall it was an extremely small subset of *humans* that performed an experiment upon you in game. The Kuei-jin were just backing/behind them (yes I was paying attention in class). As for the vamps being highly technologically advanced doesn't that make one of my points for me. "Ancients help us all it's the humans we might even have to fire our satellite lasers to kill them dead." I can see how nukes they totally couldn't blow out of the sky might concern them. Also that means vampires are not a threat to humans.

 

As for fear, coming close to extinction, and posing no threat to other races, did you play the game? Did you not notice all the talk about Gehenna and the end of days for the vampire species? Did you miss the part about the Kuei-jin gaining more power and potentially wiping out the vampire in LA? Did you not notice how there were a ton of other supernatural creatures that are way more powerful than vampires? Did you miss Jack's speech about how vampires won't stand a chance against humans now that they have weapons like napalm and nukes?

 

Again, yes I was paying attention. The supposed Gehenna threat "end of days" thing was pretty hard to take seriously considering it was just a Schrodinger's cat thing with the coffin. Beckett himself basically says it's all hogwash then changes his mind telling you not to open the box that's largely because there's a bomb in there (which of course will end your unexistence). First, the vampires in LA do not I imagine constitute the entire vampire population. Second, vampire political squabbles can be bloody and may even lead into war. Third, there are things like pyrrhic victories even for vampires. The Kuei-Jin threat was not at extinction levels. As for other "stronger" supernaturals you're probably refering to say werewolves which coincidentally Nines manages to kill with his bare hands (I killed one as well by outsmarting said "stronger" enemy). As for Jack's speech about napalm and nukes overuse of either of those (ie apocalypse levels) could also kill every human and seeing as how humans (aside from the really stupid ones it seems) don't even know that vampires exist it's a pretty non-existent threat. Not to mention with the more advanced technology they apparently have couldn't they just blackmail all the human leaders into standing down? World of Darkness lore is starting to look a tad comical to me...

 

There are plenty of fantasies where supernaturals, including vampires, are hunted or persecuted by humans. Heck, that idea even shows up in the most recent Underworld movie.

 

I haven't watched an Underworld movie since the first. Though if there are vast amounts of this stuff (I really don't keep track) then maybe vampires should simply not be in Project Eternity.

 

As an aside, lets keep Vampire fans well away from this. They are on the slippery slope to BSN romantics IMO.

 

Tell me about it.

 

Wait why was I arguing with Giant again?

 

Man i'm going to bed.

[eimatshya]

The existential horror of being a vampire can be kind of interesting, and it's basically the whole point of Vampire: the Masquerade, but it's not really an area that I'm overly concerned with.

 

Wait, there was existential horror in Vampire: the Masquerade? Or are you referring to Redemption or something?

 

I was talking about the PnP game by White Wolf. The the central theme of the setting is the exploration of what it would mean to be a soulless undead monster. The introduction to the game includes the following passage:

 

"This game provides a way to experience a horror of an all too immediate nature, for you experience the terror from the other side of the mirror. The horror of Vampire is the legacy of being half a beast, trapped in a world of no absolutes, where morality is chosen, not ordained. The horror of Vampire is the evil within, and the all-consuming lust for warm blood."

 

Whether or not a V:TM campaign actually uses that as its central theme depends on the GM and the players, but it's what the creators of the setting had in mind.

 

[i recommend the Autobiography of Benvenuto Cellini]

 

I love history i'll have to check that out.

 

It's an interesting read, although it's essentially a really long speech by Cellini about how great he is (for instance, the way he paints the story, he basically single handedly repelled an invading army intent on sacking Rome). Supposedly just about every one of his claims that can be verified historically have turned out to be true, which indicates that he was a very remarkable, if not particularly humble, individual.

 

Anyway, it's set during a time when Italy was divided into a bunch of city states, and Cellini keeps getting in trouble and having to flee to a different city. It paints an enthralling picture of what life was like in such a society (at least from the perspective of a talented but rather "unrestrained" person).

Edited October 13, 2012 by eimatshya

[Nonek]

It's funny how the myth of vampires plays on this horror over drinking a little blood, especially when we humans have entire abattoirs stuffed with the corpses of fellow living creatures whose flesh we consume in massive quantities. I'm partial to a little black pudding with my fried breakfast of a sunday, that's almost entirely made of blood and yet we romanticise and demonise this timid imbibing of a little claret. It's kind of ridiculous.

 

Now if they were soul drinkers in Eternity, then we could begin to see something interesting unfolding. Great fattened beasts, gorging on the blood and souls sacrificed to them by their mindless thralls, who see only beauty and grace amidst the cancerous corruption. Who knows maybe that is what a god is in this world.

[Giantevilhead]

Why does it matter if you meet a scientist or philosopher? There are several characters that talk about the existential problems of being a vampire as well as how it relates to the politics of the vampire race. Does it matter if they don't call themselves philosophers? As for scientists, the Nosferatu are extremely tech savvy and the Kuei-jin conduct experiments on you to study the weakness of vampires. Also, even though it's not shown in the game, in the World of Darkness universe, the vampires, as well as Kuei-jin, are in fact much more technologically advanced than the rest of the world. They both develop technologies to combat supernatural forces. The Kuei-jin for example, have weapons satellites.

 

The Nosferatu being tech savvy aside as I recall it was an extremely small subset of *humans* that performed an experiment upon you in game. The Kuei-jin were just backing/behind them (yes I was paying attention in class). As for the vamps being highly technologically advanced doesn't that make one of my points for me. "Ancients help us all it's the humans we might even have to fire our satellite lasers to kill them dead." I can see how nukes they totally couldn't blow out of the sky might concern them. Also that means vampires are not a threat to humans.

 

So what if the Kuei-jin uses humans? The point is that they know the value of science and technology. It also shows that they're smart enough not to risk their own lives or time when they can have their underlings do the work for them.

 

As for vampires having advanced tech, they don't have Star Trek level tech. Humans are still a threat. The Kuei-jin weapons satellites cannot shoot down missiles, they're designed to be used against other supernaturals.

 

As for fear, coming close to extinction, and posing no threat to other races, did you play the game? Did you not notice all the talk about Gehenna and the end of days for the vampire species? Did you miss the part about the Kuei-jin gaining more power and potentially wiping out the vampire in LA? Did you not notice how there were a ton of other supernatural creatures that are way more powerful than vampires? Did you miss Jack's speech about how vampires won't stand a chance against humans now that they have weapons like napalm and nukes?

 

Again, yes I was paying attention. The supposed Gehenna threat "end of days" thing was pretty hard to take seriously considering it was just a Schrodinger's cat thing with the coffin. Beckett himself basically says it's all hogwash then changes his mind telling you not to open the box that's largely because there's a bomb in there (which of course will end your unexistence). First, the vampires in LA do not I imagine constitute the entire vampire population. Second, vampire political squabbles can be bloody and may even lead into war. Third, there are things like pyrrhic victories even for vampires. The Kuei-Jin threat was not at extinction levels. As for other "stronger" supernaturals you're probably refering to say werewolves which coincidentally Nines manages to kill with his bare hands (I killed one as well by outsmarting said "stronger" enemy). As for Jack's speech about napalm and nukes overuse of either of those (ie apocalypse levels) could also kill every human and seeing as how humans (aside from the really stupid ones it seems) don't even know that vampires exist it's a pretty non-existent threat. Not to mention with the more advanced technology they apparently have couldn't they just blackmail all the human leaders into standing down? World of Darkness lore is starting to look a tad comical to me...

 

You're doing a meta-analysis of the game, which makes your questions impossible to answer because you are not a vampire yourself.

 

The game answers all your questions through the characters.

 

"What does 'fear' mean to vampires" - there are plenty of vampires in the game crapping their pants over the prospects of Gehenna and take over by the Kuei-jin. You may not be personally afraid because it's a game, that you've completed, but the characters in the game are believably afraid.

 

"What if they posed absolutely no threat level at all to the other races?" - The vampires pose no real threat to the humans. They have superior tech but it's not so advanced that they have an unbeatable advantage. As for overuse of napalm and nukes, why would the humans overuse them? Humans outnumber the vampires by 100,000 to 1 in most places and 50,000 to 1 in major metropolitan areas. Why would humans nuke the entire world just to kill a few hundred thousand (at most) vampires? As for stronger supernaturals (not just the werewolf but the Kuei-jin and Tzmisce constructs too), just because vampires can kill them doesn't mean they're not afraid. Humans can kill bears and lions but if you were being chased by a lion, wouldn't you be afraid?

Edited October 13, 2012 by Giantevilhead

[AGX-17]

R: "DIE, MONSTER! YOU DON'T BELONG IN THIS WORLD!"

 

D: "IT WAS NOT BY MY HAND THAT I AM ONCE AGAIN GIVEN FLESH. I WAS CALLED HERE, BY HUMANS WHO WISH TO PAY ME TRIBUTE."

 

R: "TRIBUTE?! YOU STEAL MEN'S SOULS, AND MAKE THEM YOUR SLAVES!"

 

D: "PERHAPS THE SAME COULD BE SAID OF ALL RELIGIONS."

 

R: "YOUR WORDS ARE AS EMPTY AS YOUR SOUL! MANKIND ILL NEEDS A SAVIOR SUCH AS YOU!"

 

D: "BAH! WHAT IS A MAN? A MISERABLE LITTLE PILE OF SECRETS! BUT ENOUGH TALK, HAVE AT YOU!"

 

It's funny how the myth of vampires plays on this horror over drinking a little blood, especially when we humans have entire abattoirs stuffed with the corpses of fellow living creatures whose flesh we consume in massive quantities. I'm partial to a little black pudding with my fried breakfast of a sunday, that's almost entirely made of blood and yet we romanticise and demonise this timid imbibing of a little claret. It's kind of ridiculous.

 

Now if they were soul drinkers in Eternity, then we could begin to see something interesting unfolding. Great fattened beasts, gorging on the blood and souls sacrificed to them by their mindless thralls, who see only beauty and grace amidst the cancerous corruption. Who knows maybe that is what a god is in this world.

 

The difference being that humans are the same species as humans, which, like all animals, have a genetic imperative to spread and diversify and multiply their genetic code. Cannibalism is resorted to only in emergencies by the sane, and only the insane derive pleasure from it. To engage in it would be detrimental to the species as a whole. It's not odd that predators would prey on other animals but not their own species. There are stupid, base animals like Bears (specifically the males,) that do cannibalize other bears, but like I said, they're base and stupid. Male bears will even eat their OWN cubs, they're so stupid and aggressive.

 

 

At any rate, the concept of Necromancy is always depicted as evil madmen bent on enslaving the souls of victims they personally murdered or paved on a path of good intentions gone wrong (my beloved Julia, I cannot live without you! There must be some way...)

Edited October 13, 2012 by AGX-17

[HeedlessHorseman]

I would like to go back to vampires as monsters, rather then the romantic idea of them that has been dominant lately.

 

As for necromancy, I want to see the unmentioned sect of the necro-romancer.

[AGX-17]

How about Necromancers as a legitimate profession? For a significant fee, those who are not thrilled by the prospect of death can pay a necromancer to prolong their life or bring them back for a few decades more. Some upstart necromancer starts raising milk cows on the farms outside of town? The Necromancers' guild will crack down on 'em! The player could use these services to avoid losing progress despite failing in a given task rather than saving and reloading. An honest trade, respected just as the smith and the butcher!

Edited October 13, 2012 by AGX-17

[Nonek]

One of my old campaigns I had an order of Necromantic historians, who gathered history from the most authentic of primary witnesses and were revered as some of the most benign individuals in my entire campaign setting. There were quite a few liches and such amongst them, but these were just older members of the fraternity who'd decided to dedicate their "retirement" to the job. My players were always creeped out when a lore puzzle drove them to conduct research in the halls, but they were never once given reason to distrust or fear the brotherhood.

 

I've got to say Mr 17 i'd like to see your idea of Vampires as stupid overly aggressive cannibals implemented somewhere, that's quite original.

Edited October 13, 2012 by Nonek

[AGX-17]

I've got to say Mr 17 i'd like to see your idea of Vampires as stupid overly aggressive cannibals implemented somewhere, that's quite original.

 

Bethesda did that in Fallout 3 with one of their quests. They had a bunch of cannibals holed up in a metro station who were whiny emos (stupid,) whose leader wanted to straighten out his flock and make them good by murdering an entire town JUST to drink their blood, but not eat the rest, because that would be evil. Bethesda's writers are terrible, by the way. Not that it wasn't self-evident.

[Razsius]

I was talking about the PnP game by White Wolf. The the central theme of the setting is the exploration of what it would mean to be a soulless undead monster. The introduction to the game includes the following passage:

 

"This game provides a way to experience a horror of an all too immediate nature, for you experience the terror from the other side of the mirror. The horror of Vampire is the legacy of being half a beast, trapped in a world of no absolutes, where morality is chosen, not ordained. The horror of Vampire is the evil within, and the all-consuming lust for warm blood."

 

Whether or not a V:TM campaign actually uses that as its central theme depends on the GM and the players, but it's what the creators of the setting had in mind.

 

Ah makes sense now. I do finally remember there was a single existential encounter in Bloodlines. That was when Isaac turned Ashe against his will. That truly was a very human moment portrayed by a vampire and the consequences were pretty far reaching for the both of them.

 

It's funny how the myth of vampires plays on this horror over drinking a little blood, especially when we humans have entire abattoirs stuffed with the corpses of fellow living creatures whose flesh we consume in massive quantities. I'm partial to a little black pudding with my fried breakfast of a sunday, that's almost entirely made of blood and yet we romanticise and demonise this timid imbibing of a little claret. It's kind of ridiculous.

 

Not really. If you know anything about how your body works with a lack of blood it's no laughing matter. If I recall correctly you have something like ~8 liters of blood in your body (hmm google says ~6 quarts I think i'm close... maybe). If you lose over half of it you're basically dead or will be in the rather immediate future. The vampire would have to suck something like 3-4 coffee mugs worth of your blood before you're toast. That's not exactly a very big "meal". Even if it drank 1-2 mugs worth you'd basically suffer from anemia (due to blood loss obviously). 3 mugs worth and you're basically not getting out of bed... starting to see the problem?

 

As for vampires having advanced tech, they don't have Star Trek level tech. Humans are still a threat. The Kuei-jin weapons satellites cannot shoot down missiles, they're designed to be used against other supernaturals.

 

I don't see how satelite weapons which would need a massively advanced targeting system would not be useful against humans as well (just how the hell do those things work in that universe?). You know what I don't even care anymore.

 

"What does 'fear' mean to vampires" - there are plenty of vampires in the game crapping their pants over the prospects of Gehenna and take over by the Kuei-jin. You may not be personally afraid because it's a game, that you've completed, but the characters in the game are believably afraid.

 

I'd be a little more "in game scared" if the threat didn't have a blatantly simple solution to it. Even if the doom of the vampire race *was* actually contained in that box all you had to do was not open the thing (apocalypse averted). I'd kind of expect the vampires that did live more then a couple of decades or centuries to be able to figure that one out.

 

"What if they posed absolutely no threat level at all to the other races?" - The vampires pose no real threat to the humans. They have superior tech but it's not so advanced that they have an unbeatable advantage. As for overuse of napalm and nukes, why would the humans overuse them? Humans outnumber the vampires by 100,000 to 1 in most places and 50,000 to 1 in major metropolitan areas. Why would humans nuke the entire world just to kill a few hundred thousand (at most) vampires? As for stronger supernaturals (not just the werewolf but the Kuei-jin and Tzmisce constructs too), just because vampires can kill them doesn't mean they're not afraid.

 

A vampire can kill a single human quite easily.. they can also kill a great many humans again very easily. This constitutes "absolutely no threat level" how again? You may have forgotten but nuclear explosions tend to have long lasting effects after a bomb is dropped. Napalm sets *everything* on fire then continues to burn the hell out of everything around it. Not exactly precise weapons. Tack on the fact that vampires as I recall congregated in cities amongst humans. How do the citizens, who hypothetically are supposed to be protected by their respective governments, remain unmolested in such a scenario? Why does this even matter seeing as how humans don't even know vampires exist? I'm very afraid of the murderer who doesn't know I exist after all... err wait.

 

While I don't know about lions (I think if I was dumb enough to run i'd have a very good reason to be afraid) I do know one thing:

 

Humans can kill vampires but if you were being chased by a vampire, wouldn't you be afraid?

 

Yes, very much so especially ones that are barely phased by guns, regenerate and wish to eat me. Bonus points go to vampires that can turn invisible or turn my mind into mush. Pretty sure I don't have much of a chance then...

 

...And with that I will wish you a very good day sir. These conversations are far too tiring by the time I actually type them to debate whether World of Darkness mechanics/lore/or whatever will have an influence on the general idea of what i'm getting at. Keeping my yap shut about it from now on.

 

 

I'll tell you one thing I did rather enjoy the whole Necromancer's Guild approach our latest forumites posted. Keep it up guys.

[Jojobobo]

I'd like to see a new take on vampires, werewolves and whatever other monstrosities the devs think are worthy to put in their game. In fact, I don't even want to vampires to be called vampires (like how we have the orlan which seem quite goblinoid and yet they aren't goblins) - they should be only linked to vampires thematically (being parasitic, and gaining power because of it). By not naming vampires "vampires" and only have them losely based on vampires you effectively side-step all the modern incarnations of vampires and you are free to get more creative (also people won't moan as much saying "Well that's not what I thought vampires should be like").

 

With werewolves, I would like to see them drop the wolf part. It'd be nice if people transformed into something bestial yet also not even related to anything else known to man (thereby making it even more primeval and rudimentary - something that is animalistic ferocity distilled). Again it should have the themes of a werewolf (loss of control - transforming into something violent and terrible against your will) but maybe lack some of the stereotypical tidbits (weakness to silver, full moon forces the change, etc.). However, loss of control is bound to annoy players and is also difficult to mechanically implement well so it would probably only work in an npc capacity.

 

As for necromancers, the different cultures should have different opinions on how appropriate it is to raise the dead - but I don't think any necromancer should be out and out evil. Maybe one culture holds them in high esteem and it's natural to raise recently dead relatives back to life as zombies, but in another they are frowned upon as they consider their actions as defiling the dead and so they are mostly around in a criminal capacity (selling the secrets of the dead to the unscrupulous).

 

In a nutshell, if these things are in the game I want them to be atypical - a new take on somewhat tired material.