izzy's playlists!
hello vonnie
No title available
todays bird
Product Placement
ojovivo
No title available
No title available
if i look back, i am lost
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
The Stonewall Inn
🩵 avery cochrane 🩵
Mike Driver
titsay
cherry valley forever
Noah Kahan
The Bowery Presents
Love Begins
Claire Keane
RMH
seen from Singapore
seen from South Korea
seen from China
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from Philippines
seen from Bangladesh
seen from Argentina
seen from Brazil
seen from United States
seen from Nepal
seen from Canada
seen from China
seen from France
seen from Nepal
seen from Maldives
seen from United States
seen from Canada
seen from Germany
seen from Italy
@oethyl
Vampire question. Version 6 is after version 20?
for sensible reasons, the sequence of editions of vampire the masquerade go: 1st ed 2nd ed Revised v20 v5 v6
For folks unclear, because the numbering is ridiculous: V20 was the 20th anniversary edition (and was part of a line of [letter]20 WoD anniversary editions) and was announced years before V5, resulting in the weird naming.
luckily it could be worse! such as hunter, which went straight from first edition to fifth edition!
V6 is doing the d&d thing of telling you to ignore the rules if needed, which is crazy because they could just make them good instead, yk?
That's not a D&D thing that's a sign of a good TTRPG.
Rules are abstractions. And sometimes they get in the way.
Don't even start on this nonsense train.
Good ttrpgs don't need to tell you to ignore the rules because the rules are good and actually support the type of play the game is about.
wod has a proud history of telling you to ignore the rules, don't worry
Ok that's fair enough, I only started storytelling with v5 (though I've played v20) and I don't think the v5 corebook does it
realistically the wod games have always taken a sort of simulationist toolbox approach. the aim is to accurately represent the setting so that you can get immersed in exploring it. so the game mechanics are provided as a set of tools you can apply as necessary.
it's, ironically, a similar approach to what you see in a lot of osr games. the primary activity of gameplay is the conversation loop, and when and how to invoke game mechanics is a judgement call based on what supports that fiction best.
Like at its heart, the idea is that the fiction drives the mechanics, not the mechanics driving the fiction, you know? Which is a perfectly functional way to design a game. and the older (1e-v20) editions of vampire are designed with that approach in mind.
The problem with v6 is that it simultaneously tells you to ignore the mechanics when you feel like it, while also including the sort of mechanics that are intended for a game where the mechanics drive the fiction, not the other way around. And, in the specific case of games where the mechanics drive the fiction, not applying the mechanics consistently is a problem.
I feel like "apply the mechanics as necessary" is sort of a different thing compared to "ignore the mechanics when necessary", though. Like the former assumes the mechanics are there to facilitate play, like a tool you can take out when you need it, the latter assumes that the mechanics are just there all the time and that sometimes they get in the way of play (because they're bad) and in that case you should ignore them. Maybe that's splitting hairs but it feels like a real distinction to me
V6 is doing the d&d thing of telling you to ignore the rules if needed, which is crazy because they could just make them good instead, yk?
That's not a D&D thing that's a sign of a good TTRPG.
Rules are abstractions. And sometimes they get in the way.
Don't even start on this nonsense train.
Good ttrpgs don't need to tell you to ignore the rules because the rules are good and actually support the type of play the game is about.
wod has a proud history of telling you to ignore the rules, don't worry
Ok that's fair enough, I only started storytelling with v5 (though I've played v20) and I don't think the v5 corebook does it
V6 is doing the d&d thing of telling you to ignore the rules if needed, which is crazy because they could just make them good instead, yk?
That's not a D&D thing that's a sign of a good TTRPG.
Rules are abstractions. And sometimes they get in the way.
Don't even start on this nonsense train.
Good ttrpgs don't need to tell you to ignore the rules because the rules are good and actually support the type of play the game is about.
V6 is doing the d&d thing of telling you to ignore the rules if needed, which is crazy because they could just make them good instead, yk?
re v6: i am literally the storyteller i dont need to spend 'currency' to do things. i can do whatever i want forever as st. hello?
everybody's talking about how v6 wants to be dnd 5e, and that's obviously untrue as v6 desperately wants to be a blades in the dark style indie game.
The fuck do you mean the Hecata are gone because the Giovanni took over? Again? After just 16 years? Is every other bloodline just stupid?
I really wish I could say sike about this
cis people don't exist
being a communist is like hanging out with a bunch of normies stealthily and laughing and having a good time, then one of them out of nowhere says some bonkers fascist shit and then everybody laughs and moves on without even acknowledging it. and you have to pretend not to be stunlocked because the alternative is to be outed as the One Person In The Room Who Doesn't Have Her Head Up Her Ass at which point the social space will eat you alive for daring to not be the most milquetoast of goodvibes liberal. and it's always some shit that's like. incomprehensibly regressive like people's opinions on Kink or about an esteemed historical communist like Mao or Lenin and you have to just be like. Uh huh :) because you are outnumbered and it would not be strategically effective to decided to argue with these people. but you feel a little bit more alienated from your fellow human and start going about your day making more calculations about which parts of yourself you will withhold from these people.
the thing about piracy is that i know i deserve everything for free forever
The fuck do you mean the Hecata are gone because the Giovanni took over? Again? After just 16 years? Is every other bloodline just stupid?
Have you looked at the V6 playtest? If so, what do you think?
I have, and I am Not A Fan.
It's less about the specifics and more about the broad general approach.
Let me explain: I liked v5. Not as much as I like v20, but I think that's an unfair comparison. v20 was essentially the fourth iteration on its framework, right? where they had been able to refine the vampire 1e mechanics over three more editions to get the very fine tuned end result that is v20, because they had the benefit of a lot of hindsight after seeing it in play. And, of course, material from 1e is still basically compatible with v20, as is material from the other wod gamelines up until that point.
So. v5 came out, and v5 is very much a break from this iterative process that lead from 1e to v20, right? It creates a new game engine with new structures. It's got some really interesting ideas, but it's also got some very heavy flaws. So, I like v5 a lot, but unlike v20 there's a lot of things in it that I think are obvious fixes in a new edition. So for a long time, my stance on v5 was "I look forward to the better version of this we'll get in sixth edition."
And sixth edition comes along, and I have been really excited to see how they'll build on the foundations v5 laid down, and...
instead, no, they're starting over from scratch all over again, with a system that's even more divergent from either v20 and v5 than those are from each other.
I am upset about the v6 previews less for what they are, and more for what they are not; they are not the iteration on v5 I have wanted.
But, okay, here's the thing. People talk about the lore changes v5 made, and I think that they massively overstate how much v5 changed the setting. The changes to the setting in v5 take basically 3 forms:
moving the timeline forward from the end-point at the end of Revised, and the result of events that happened in that extra timeline. The formation of the Hecata is the result of an in-fiction event that unified the various scatted Cappadocian bloodlines (and also the Nagaraja are here). The tremere's changed clan weakness is the result of the Vienna chantry getting blown up. Et cetera.
Consolidating things together. Most notably, with disciplines. Things like Serpentis being a form of Protean, Dementation being folded into Dominate, and so on. The one that makes people most angry is folding Obtenebration and Necromancy together into Oblivion, but I actually think this makes sense; both are overtly magical disciplines drawing power entropic from the dark umbra and the spaces below it (if they had included Daimonion in v5, it would also be a variation on Oblivion, because it likewise draws power from Spiritually Below). Likewise, rolling various bloodlines back into their parent clans and so on.
Expanding on things hinted at in earlier editions of v5 but not fully explored. A good example of this is Thin Bloods; there had always been talk about the very high generations being semi-mortal and having the ability to use the blood to create new vampiric powers; the thin-bloods in v5 are simply building on that.
So v5 is not actually that divergent in its setting from earlier editions; no more than the divergence between 1e and 2e, say. It exists in a continuity with them. Yes, the Giovanni have a new discipline spread now; this is the result of an in-setting event that shifted the nature of the Giovanni, similar to events like The Great Prank for clan malkavian or the Giovanni themselves becoming a clan and shifting away from the Cappadocian disciplines. Yes, vicissitude is part of protean now, but the vicissitude powers are still there.
Where I like v5, I like it because it's ultimately an extension of 1e-v20, just with new mechanics. The mechanics could use a new edition to tighten them up, but when I run a v20 game in the modern day, I use v5 fluff.
As much as the mechanics were new, the setting was still an iteration. Translating from 1e-v20 into v5 and visa versa took a little effort, but was doable.
Now. From what I've seen of v6, this is far less the case. From the - admittedly limited - preview materials, it seems like they're much more willing to play fast and loose with the setting and to change things for the sake of changing them.
I could list a bunch of specific changes they've made that seem incredibly stupid (eg: why do they imply that koldunism and chimerstry are the same discipline?) but that's not the point. No one change is the problem here, and some of their mechanical ideas seem good. Not all of them - doing an anti-wassail if your humanity goes too high is Fucking Stupid - but some of them could be interesting.
No, my problem is that they seem to be changing a lot of things extremely recklessly, meaning that I don't think v6 will exist as a continuiation of 1e-v5; the basic facts of the setting will be too distorted with little in character justification, meaning its setting is not compatible with the setting described in the earlier editions.
And maybe if I was more inclined to view it charitably, I'd be more open minded about the sledgehammer being taken through the setting. But on a fundamental level, I was never inclined to view it that charitably, because by being what it is, it actively shuts of the possibility of an improved v5, which is something I'd been actively looking forward to for a while. Conclusively shutting down that possibility gave it a much higher bar to clear for me to like it, and it didn't clear that bar.
Like in the vamp community, you see this talking point where because the vamp playerbase is split between v20 and v5, they had no option they could pick that would please everybody, which isn't untrue. But I like v20 AND v5, and building on either of those would have made me happy, and instead they've picked the secret third option which makes nobody happy.
and nobody IS happy, really. The only people I've seen who seem to have positive thoughts about it are people who, frankly, don't play World of Darkness and do play stuff like Daggerheart.
These are also my thoughts exactly. When I heard v6 was in the works, I was hoping it would be an iteration on v5 (which I actually prefer to v20 as a framework, but as you say needs more polish), and I was particularly looking forward to a new corebook because the v5 corebook is laid out so bad it pisses me off every time I try to use it. Instead we're getting something that I genuinely don't understand who asked for.
On the lore thing I also totally agree, I genuinely struggle to understand how the changes they're making for v6 can be reconciled with the existing setting. This feels like as much of a reboot as CoD was compared to the WoD, in that they're using some names and concepts but doing new things with them that seem unrelated to the old, or at least I can't see how they'd fit given what info we have on v6 lore as of now.
Also, why are the Giovanni back??? What did they do to my dear beloved Hecata?
"Who is this for?" is the big question I keep seeing asked.
I think the answer is that it's for people who like when things are new. Shareholders, idiots, and people not invested in the setting. The same audience they made the live-action moana film for.
I feel a bit silly saying it because I know there are obviously still good things being made, but I increasingly feel like the target audience for most new things is idiots yeah
I think we have to accept that White Wolf are firmly in the "completely lost the plot" era, alongside things like Magic The Gathering, Warhammer, Middle Earth, et cetera.
I kinda no longer want new things. When a new thing comes along, I probably won't like it, and it probably displaces something older that I did like, so I kinda just want things to Stop.
Maybe I'm just getting old.
I guess the good news is that they're not disintegrating everything that already exists. I'll probably just keep playing v5. Although I'm taking a break from the WoD for a bit, I think.
Have you looked at the V6 playtest? If so, what do you think?
I have, and I am Not A Fan.
It's less about the specifics and more about the broad general approach.
Let me explain: I liked v5. Not as much as I like v20, but I think that's an unfair comparison. v20 was essentially the fourth iteration on its framework, right? where they had been able to refine the vampire 1e mechanics over three more editions to get the very fine tuned end result that is v20, because they had the benefit of a lot of hindsight after seeing it in play. And, of course, material from 1e is still basically compatible with v20, as is material from the other wod gamelines up until that point.
So. v5 came out, and v5 is very much a break from this iterative process that lead from 1e to v20, right? It creates a new game engine with new structures. It's got some really interesting ideas, but it's also got some very heavy flaws. So, I like v5 a lot, but unlike v20 there's a lot of things in it that I think are obvious fixes in a new edition. So for a long time, my stance on v5 was "I look forward to the better version of this we'll get in sixth edition."
And sixth edition comes along, and I have been really excited to see how they'll build on the foundations v5 laid down, and...
instead, no, they're starting over from scratch all over again, with a system that's even more divergent from either v20 and v5 than those are from each other.
I am upset about the v6 previews less for what they are, and more for what they are not; they are not the iteration on v5 I have wanted.
But, okay, here's the thing. People talk about the lore changes v5 made, and I think that they massively overstate how much v5 changed the setting. The changes to the setting in v5 take basically 3 forms:
moving the timeline forward from the end-point at the end of Revised, and the result of events that happened in that extra timeline. The formation of the Hecata is the result of an in-fiction event that unified the various scatted Cappadocian bloodlines (and also the Nagaraja are here). The tremere's changed clan weakness is the result of the Vienna chantry getting blown up. Et cetera.
Consolidating things together. Most notably, with disciplines. Things like Serpentis being a form of Protean, Dementation being folded into Dominate, and so on. The one that makes people most angry is folding Obtenebration and Necromancy together into Oblivion, but I actually think this makes sense; both are overtly magical disciplines drawing power entropic from the dark umbra and the spaces below it (if they had included Daimonion in v5, it would also be a variation on Oblivion, because it likewise draws power from Spiritually Below). Likewise, rolling various bloodlines back into their parent clans and so on.
Expanding on things hinted at in earlier editions of v5 but not fully explored. A good example of this is Thin Bloods; there had always been talk about the very high generations being semi-mortal and having the ability to use the blood to create new vampiric powers; the thin-bloods in v5 are simply building on that.
So v5 is not actually that divergent in its setting from earlier editions; no more than the divergence between 1e and 2e, say. It exists in a continuity with them. Yes, the Giovanni have a new discipline spread now; this is the result of an in-setting event that shifted the nature of the Giovanni, similar to events like The Great Prank for clan malkavian or the Giovanni themselves becoming a clan and shifting away from the Cappadocian disciplines. Yes, vicissitude is part of protean now, but the vicissitude powers are still there.
Where I like v5, I like it because it's ultimately an extension of 1e-v20, just with new mechanics. The mechanics could use a new edition to tighten them up, but when I run a v20 game in the modern day, I use v5 fluff.
As much as the mechanics were new, the setting was still an iteration. Translating from 1e-v20 into v5 and visa versa took a little effort, but was doable.
Now. From what I've seen of v6, this is far less the case. From the - admittedly limited - preview materials, it seems like they're much more willing to play fast and loose with the setting and to change things for the sake of changing them.
I could list a bunch of specific changes they've made that seem incredibly stupid (eg: why do they imply that koldunism and chimerstry are the same discipline?) but that's not the point. No one change is the problem here, and some of their mechanical ideas seem good. Not all of them - doing an anti-wassail if your humanity goes too high is Fucking Stupid - but some of them could be interesting.
No, my problem is that they seem to be changing a lot of things extremely recklessly, meaning that I don't think v6 will exist as a continuiation of 1e-v5; the basic facts of the setting will be too distorted with little in character justification, meaning its setting is not compatible with the setting described in the earlier editions.
And maybe if I was more inclined to view it charitably, I'd be more open minded about the sledgehammer being taken through the setting. But on a fundamental level, I was never inclined to view it that charitably, because by being what it is, it actively shuts of the possibility of an improved v5, which is something I'd been actively looking forward to for a while. Conclusively shutting down that possibility gave it a much higher bar to clear for me to like it, and it didn't clear that bar.
Like in the vamp community, you see this talking point where because the vamp playerbase is split between v20 and v5, they had no option they could pick that would please everybody, which isn't untrue. But I like v20 AND v5, and building on either of those would have made me happy, and instead they've picked the secret third option which makes nobody happy.
and nobody IS happy, really. The only people I've seen who seem to have positive thoughts about it are people who, frankly, don't play World of Darkness and do play stuff like Daggerheart.
These are also my thoughts exactly. When I heard v6 was in the works, I was hoping it would be an iteration on v5 (which I actually prefer to v20 as a framework, but as you say needs more polish), and I was particularly looking forward to a new corebook because the v5 corebook is laid out so bad it pisses me off every time I try to use it. Instead we're getting something that I genuinely don't understand who asked for.
On the lore thing I also totally agree, I genuinely struggle to understand how the changes they're making for v6 can be reconciled with the existing setting. This feels like as much of a reboot as CoD was compared to the WoD, in that they're using some names and concepts but doing new things with them that seem unrelated to the old, or at least I can't see how they'd fit given what info we have on v6 lore as of now.
Also, why are the Giovanni back??? What did they do to my dear beloved Hecata?
"Who is this for?" is the big question I keep seeing asked.
I think the answer is that it's for people who like when things are new. Shareholders, idiots, and people not invested in the setting. The same audience they made the live-action moana film for.
I feel a bit silly saying it because I know there are obviously still good things being made, but I increasingly feel like the target audience for most new things is idiots yeah
Have you looked at the V6 playtest? If so, what do you think?
I have, and I am Not A Fan.
It's less about the specifics and more about the broad general approach.
Let me explain: I liked v5. Not as much as I like v20, but I think that's an unfair comparison. v20 was essentially the fourth iteration on its framework, right? where they had been able to refine the vampire 1e mechanics over three more editions to get the very fine tuned end result that is v20, because they had the benefit of a lot of hindsight after seeing it in play. And, of course, material from 1e is still basically compatible with v20, as is material from the other wod gamelines up until that point.
So. v5 came out, and v5 is very much a break from this iterative process that lead from 1e to v20, right? It creates a new game engine with new structures. It's got some really interesting ideas, but it's also got some very heavy flaws. So, I like v5 a lot, but unlike v20 there's a lot of things in it that I think are obvious fixes in a new edition. So for a long time, my stance on v5 was "I look forward to the better version of this we'll get in sixth edition."
And sixth edition comes along, and I have been really excited to see how they'll build on the foundations v5 laid down, and...
instead, no, they're starting over from scratch all over again, with a system that's even more divergent from either v20 and v5 than those are from each other.
I am upset about the v6 previews less for what they are, and more for what they are not; they are not the iteration on v5 I have wanted.
But, okay, here's the thing. People talk about the lore changes v5 made, and I think that they massively overstate how much v5 changed the setting. The changes to the setting in v5 take basically 3 forms:
moving the timeline forward from the end-point at the end of Revised, and the result of events that happened in that extra timeline. The formation of the Hecata is the result of an in-fiction event that unified the various scatted Cappadocian bloodlines (and also the Nagaraja are here). The tremere's changed clan weakness is the result of the Vienna chantry getting blown up. Et cetera.
Consolidating things together. Most notably, with disciplines. Things like Serpentis being a form of Protean, Dementation being folded into Dominate, and so on. The one that makes people most angry is folding Obtenebration and Necromancy together into Oblivion, but I actually think this makes sense; both are overtly magical disciplines drawing power entropic from the dark umbra and the spaces below it (if they had included Daimonion in v5, it would also be a variation on Oblivion, because it likewise draws power from Spiritually Below). Likewise, rolling various bloodlines back into their parent clans and so on.
Expanding on things hinted at in earlier editions of v5 but not fully explored. A good example of this is Thin Bloods; there had always been talk about the very high generations being semi-mortal and having the ability to use the blood to create new vampiric powers; the thin-bloods in v5 are simply building on that.
So v5 is not actually that divergent in its setting from earlier editions; no more than the divergence between 1e and 2e, say. It exists in a continuity with them. Yes, the Giovanni have a new discipline spread now; this is the result of an in-setting event that shifted the nature of the Giovanni, similar to events like The Great Prank for clan malkavian or the Giovanni themselves becoming a clan and shifting away from the Cappadocian disciplines. Yes, vicissitude is part of protean now, but the vicissitude powers are still there.
Where I like v5, I like it because it's ultimately an extension of 1e-v20, just with new mechanics. The mechanics could use a new edition to tighten them up, but when I run a v20 game in the modern day, I use v5 fluff.
As much as the mechanics were new, the setting was still an iteration. Translating from 1e-v20 into v5 and visa versa took a little effort, but was doable.
Now. From what I've seen of v6, this is far less the case. From the - admittedly limited - preview materials, it seems like they're much more willing to play fast and loose with the setting and to change things for the sake of changing them.
I could list a bunch of specific changes they've made that seem incredibly stupid (eg: why do they imply that koldunism and chimerstry are the same discipline?) but that's not the point. No one change is the problem here, and some of their mechanical ideas seem good. Not all of them - doing an anti-wassail if your humanity goes too high is Fucking Stupid - but some of them could be interesting.
No, my problem is that they seem to be changing a lot of things extremely recklessly, meaning that I don't think v6 will exist as a continuiation of 1e-v5; the basic facts of the setting will be too distorted with little in character justification, meaning its setting is not compatible with the setting described in the earlier editions.
And maybe if I was more inclined to view it charitably, I'd be more open minded about the sledgehammer being taken through the setting. But on a fundamental level, I was never inclined to view it that charitably, because by being what it is, it actively shuts of the possibility of an improved v5, which is something I'd been actively looking forward to for a while. Conclusively shutting down that possibility gave it a much higher bar to clear for me to like it, and it didn't clear that bar.
Like in the vamp community, you see this talking point where because the vamp playerbase is split between v20 and v5, they had no option they could pick that would please everybody, which isn't untrue. But I like v20 AND v5, and building on either of those would have made me happy, and instead they've picked the secret third option which makes nobody happy.
and nobody IS happy, really. The only people I've seen who seem to have positive thoughts about it are people who, frankly, don't play World of Darkness and do play stuff like Daggerheart.
These are also my thoughts exactly. When I heard v6 was in the works, I was hoping it would be an iteration on v5 (which I actually prefer to v20 as a framework, but as you say needs more polish), and I was particularly looking forward to a new corebook because the v5 corebook is laid out so bad it pisses me off every time I try to use it. Instead we're getting something that I genuinely don't understand who asked for.
On the lore thing I also totally agree, I genuinely struggle to understand how the changes they're making for v6 can be reconciled with the existing setting. This feels like as much of a reboot as CoD was compared to the WoD, in that they're using some names and concepts but doing new things with them that seem unrelated to the old, or at least I can't see how they'd fit given what info we have on v6 lore as of now.
Also, why are the Giovanni back??? What did they do to my dear beloved Hecata?
First Post!
I deleted my old tumblr because... man idk why it was covid-times and the prefrontal cortex was not in the room with us!! Anyways, I was reminded by my lovely friend @repecca that tumblr exists, and that some of my work has been going around on here, so I decided to post some of my work up officially! Starting off with my most notable (?) work to date, here's my LOTR: The Middle Kingdom Project. Now, it's been over a year since I posted this, and at the time I was... really searchingfor myself artistically, and I decided to go all in on something that I'd been ruminating on for a long time.
So, hello, again. I'm Leia. I do visual development/BG design, and I'm also a writer of things. I love fantasy and transformative work. It's nice to meet you.
legalize copyright infringement
to be clear this is a fully sincere political belief that I have. I am pro copyright infringement and in fact anti "asking for permission to make derivative art"
Does this mean I can finally profit off of reproducing another artist's work?
Finally!
yes
