Strauss headcanons thread continued, since the reply chain got too long. This is about Max and the gargoyle mostly.
@idreamtofmanderleyagain posted:
Thank you!
There’s a lot in here that ultimately I’m not too familiar with to speak on yet (LABN, Lore book references, etc.). That said, I do have a few responses:
So regarding the Gargoyle, my view is that Strauss has some unresolved, unacknowledged feelings of guilt tied to his actions and his toxic relationship with the Gargoyle. Much of the things he says about the Gargoyle read to me like someone still trying to mentally justify the bad choices he made by placing the blame on the shoulders of the being he harmed. If Strauss 100% felt like the Gargoyle needed to be gotten rid of, he would have done it himself a long time ago instead of letting his massive, potentially dangerous secret just hang about unchecked wherever it liked. I cannot imagine that he’s afraid of it, or not powerful enough to handle it. Perhaps he pushes the problem onto the Fledgeling because he can’t bring himself to harm it directly but is realizing that the issue was getting out of control. Honestly the entire situation with the Gargoyle shakes the level of integrity and strength Strauss otherwise manages to have, which is interesting to me. It’s a stain on his record that humanizes him quite a bit. I think the choices with which the Fledgeling is left with kind of left me wanting, because it wasn’t really possible to do the right thing for the Gargoyle (I’m including the possibility to give him to Isaac in that statement).
I actually forgot that you used the phrase “staunch traditionalist,” I’m sorry if you thought I was directing the statement at you! I was really speaking more broadly about the fandom, I think outside of the Strauss fans he can kind of get a little boxed-in. I think it’s clear that those in the Strauss fandom have unique takes and definitions of what his traditionalism means, which is cool.
Regarding VV, like I said, I don’t know that I truly ship them as much as I’m intrigued by the drama of their emotional dynamic. Which I want to make clear, I do NOT think they actually had a secret affair, nor do I see Max treating a woman that way. I strongly feel that he never let her take things in the direction of a relationship. However I also think that it’s not impossible that he could have harbored complex feelings about her. His response to her in the opening sequence could be less cruel than it seems at face value, especially if they are old acquaintances and are used to engaging in a little dance of her play-flirting and him scoffing in response.
That said, I don’t think he finds her sly seductiveness appealing. I’m not sure that “femme fatale” has good chemistry with him.
That’s unfortunate about LABN.
Thanks for the reply!
I like your gargoyle interpretation, and it makes a lot of sense. Max does seem a bit careless with the entire thing. Your reading could even solve one of the issues I have with this quest. That is, if you convince the gargoyle to join Isaac and lie to Strauss about it, he never learns the truth. I realize that this is so that diplomacy build characters can still get the Tremere haven and have access to the Cam ending. Yet I don’t like it, because it makes Max seem far too clueless. Ideally, I think that the next time you go to the chantry after having lied to him, Strauss should’ve wised up and throw your sorry ass to the street.
But if Strauss was feeling as bad about the gargoyle as you postulate, then maybe he could’ve learned the truth, yet decided not to act on it. (Max knowing the trust might be the case anyway, should he be interested in yet manipulating the fledgling for his own purposes, despite knowing her to be untrustworthy.) Might work. Although I’ve never even chosen this option myself. I’ve always just killed the gargoyle.
What would you consider as being the right thing to do with the gargoyle? Convince it to leave the city for somewhere safer, maybe going and buying some supplies for it first or something? Perhaps that could be implied in the Isaac option, since anarchs usually aren’t fans of keeping slaves. If the gargoyle dislikes working for Isaac, maybe he’ll just tell it to leave.
One option that I’d like would be just telling Max where the gargoyle is, but not offer to kill it for him. That way a non-combat build fledgling could still get positive disposition with Max (though a lesser amount), without having to betray him. Later you’d hear on the radio about there having been ruckus at the theater.
Personally, though, I can’t see Max having any scruples about having created this gargoyle, and I can see him going and making another one yet (I made a post on the topic some days ago). It takes dedication to learn the Gargoyle Creation Ritual, which is a very involved, long and grisly process. Even if he previously considered gargoyles to be just dull-minded servitors that are harmless to have, learning about the ritual would’ve made him reconsider that.
Max must have acquired two prisoners of two different clans (Nosferatu, Tzimisce, Gangrel; pick two depending what result you want) and then mutilated and tortured them in an agonizing process until their minds blanked out, giving him a blank canvas to work with conditioning. Then he would’ve dismembered and stitched them together again into an abomination and then let it cook for months in a pod, with occasional ritual chants. If his heart was too soft for this project, he probably would give up already when reading the instructions.
After doing all of this, how nice feelings could he have towards the resulting gargoyle, especially after it rebelled? I feel that to be able to preserve his sense of integrity, Strauss would have to consider the gargoyle’s existence and its role as his servitor as justified.
Furthermore, considering that Max seems very cautious and thoughtful character, I think it’s highly likely that he had already had closer interactions with gargoyles before deciding to create his own. Max starting to bond with the gargoyle after its creation, and feeling bad about the horrible things he had done, it somehow sits ill with the rest of it, in my interpretation of him. I think he really does have a high capacity for extremely unethical sorcery, and has a calm peace of mind over it, too. I think it makes him more interesting too, especially when it comes to how I envision my Tremere fledgling’s apprenticeship under him.
As for Strauss having the fledgling handle the gargoyle, that’s a cool interpretation. Even if he felt bad, his personal safety and duty to the Pyramid would eventually force his hand. I can imagine Max feeling conflicted while waiting at the chantry for the fledgling to return, maybe also feeling bad about thrusting this unjust murder unto the poor neonate?
However, I just see it as an elder using a pawn, as is their wont. (As well as a great final test for a potential new apprentice.) Max already had the anti-gargoyle amulet in his pocket, probably ready at all times to rush to action if he learned of its whereabouts. The amulet is powerful and Max trusts that its power combined with all the skill the fledgling has already shown ought to be enough to deal with the issue, so there’s no need for him to go out himself, attracting attention in Hollywood and making locals connect the dots between a rampaging gargoyle and the Tremere regent strutting about.
Maybe it’d make more sense for Max to thank the fledgling for the news, and send a 100% trusted apprentice for the kill instead, but then again there’d be no quest for us. Besides, things are already in motion, Isaac knows about the gargoyle, and the fledgling may very well go and check the theater out anyway. It makes sense for Max to ask the fledgling to do this IMO.
Still, I can see where you’re coming from with your reading though. He could’ve even just led the gargoyle slip away and claim it escaped when his Lord came asking, assuming he really started to feel bad about his deed. But considering the heavy danger he’d be placing himself in by doing so, I can’t see him doing that, even setting aside the rest.
I think the gargoyle fled only very recently. A month ago at maximum, but probably less. It would’ve been in hiding, and Max wouldn’t have yet heard about it being sighted in Hollywood. Max seems surprised to hear that the fledgling has information on it, after all. If the gargoyle decided to tell everyone about its history, Strauss would be in serious trouble. Hence, I can’t imagine him not acting immediately if he knew where it was lurking.
According to the Montmartre Pact, any Tremere caught having created gargoyles is to be stripped from any Tremere protections and given over to the Gangrel and the Nosferatu to be judged – and they are NOT fans of their clan mates being subjected to Tremere experimentation. Not a pleasant prospect, right. In practice, the Tremere of course cover and lie for anyone accused, but still it would be a serious issue, and Max’s peers and his Lord would be cross with him, at the very least. So even if Max did feel bangs of guilt, I think his self-preservation and desire to protect the clan from shame would override it, and the gargoyle would die, no matter how sad. Yet, considering how cool and stern he sounds when telling of the gargoyle, I doubt he felt a thing.
As for Max’s integrity w/r/t the gargoyle, yesterday I was discussing the gargoyle quest with a friend, and realized that Strauss references the gargoyle as being sentient. Canonically, they are of course sapient, and if Max knows the Creation Ritual, he surely knows this too. He even acknowledges that his gargoyle desired freedom and was unhappy with its lot in life.
This could just be Max downplaying the slavery aspect when talking to the fledgling. But otherwise during this convo, Max doesn’t hesitate to make it clear that gargoyles are just a servant race undeserving of freedom. So it could also be him trying to justify the entire thing to himself, making it seem less like an atrocity, with the gargoyle comparable to animals or other thaumaturgic servitors the Tremere make. On the other hand, Max seems like he’d be exact with his words, and not allow himself to cover up any truths by sticking to inaccurate terminology. So I don’t know. Hell, it can also just be the dev who wrote the line mixing up sapient and sentient, since I’ve seen it happen a ton in media.
All in all, I think Strauss probably has at least a mild case of Tremere supremacy thing going on, despite being very polite and welcoming to the fledgling no matter their clan. Sorry to bring up the lore books again, but Libellus Sanguinis 2 had good bits about how Dark Ages era Tremere had these very disdainful attitudes to the clans they used for gargoyle materials, such as seeing the Gangrel as very animalistic. Ditto for capturing werewolves for experimentation without any compunctions. (This book also had the phrase “incorrigible tendency to experiment” which is such a perfect way to describe the Tremere lol.) The mirror side of this would be the high respect for the “high clan” Camarilla pillars, such as the Malkavians, who Max sees as seers, complimenting nicely his own mystical leanings.
Anyway, Max probably isn’t as callous as those oldest Tremere in the clan’s earliest days as described in the Dark Ages books. But he may still harbor some such sentiments. After all, he has to somehow convince himself that what he does is more or less right. I think Max’s main goal in life is “to seek forever,” i.e. keep on gaining occult and other knowledge, and next to serve his clan (and therefore serve himself and his young Tremere charges under him). So going by that, he can justify much already.
Furthermore, he can pick experiment subjects that were hostile to him to begin with. In LA, he would’ve had access to crazed Tzimisce shovelheads. Maybe a Nosferatu that got caught trying to sneak into the chantry to spy? Max would have the excuse that these kindred would have to be executed anyway, and this way they are usefully recycled at least. With their minds dying, the resulting creature isn’t really them anymore, anyway.
Also I can’t lie, I love the horrible Tremere track record. There’s always some new bit of lore that tops the previous atrocity of theirs. And then acting all innocent after. I don’t think Strauss could’ve advanced that high in the Pyramid and lived for centuries without knowing how things are in his clan’s culture, while still being a great and bouncy Pyramid advocate to fresh little fledglings.
Hm, personally I still have hard time seeing the trial scene between Strauss and VV as nothing else than her just being an intentionally irreverent tease towards the oldest (and in her view, the stodgiest) Camarilla dignitary in the building, and Strauss just making it abundantly clear that he has absolutely zero interest. Maybe it’s because I found his reaction very relatable, having had to block unwanted attentions with the hand before… I agree with you that VV very much doesn’t seem like his type, anyway.
I hope I haven’t blathered too much. It’s just mega fascinating to learn how other ppl see Strauss.
I guess I mostly see him having a soft spot for fellow Tremere, and especially for fledglings that are in need of teaching and protection. I see Max as someone who loves to educate and to encourage neonates to find their own solutions, and that attitude can also extend for fledglings of other clans, as the game shows. (With the strict limit to what he is willing to tell to non-Tremere.)
If he has any dislikes about the usual Tremere/Pyramid methods, I think it’s mostly that he prefers encouraging clan togetherness from positive examples first, and instilling a desire for knowledge seeking, as is the clan’s supposed ideal. The less nice side to him is that I don’t think he ultimately cares that much about outsiders, despite often having respect and admiration towards them. If it comes down to it, he’ll always back his own clan. So while he can be welcoming and decorous to a Gangrel fledgling that has unusual power and hope the best for their future, he however doesn’t have qualms about using another Gangrel for gargoyle parts if the situation merits.
Thanks for responding, I’m enjoying the exploration of his character with you as well.
So I think maybe it’s relevant to sort of clarify where I’m coming from, because to be honest VTM is chock full of ambiguously amoral characters, so there’s kind of a sliding scale of darkness regarding what we can potentially see each character doing. It’s very YMMV in that way.
For me, while I love to engage with dark universes and horror themes, and while I find monster and villain male characters intriguing, what makes darkness interesting to me is how we juxtapose that darkness against the humanity within them (at least for characters who engage emotionally with a protagonist in a way that isn’t meant to be toxic or based on pure hate). I’m compelled by the capacity for healing and hope and restorative justice in stories chock full of darkness. The horror and cutthroat vamp politics are fun elements, but I personally like to balance the grim with spots of light, otherwise it gets too bleak for me. I’m definitely not a GOT fan, for example.
So while Strauss’s capacity for darkness is interesting to me, I really want to explore his humanity along side of that. I like delving in the psychology of it, particularly when it comes to the dueling emotional experiences of past humanity vs. monstrous reality. Especially because he’s one of the oldest vamps in the game, and how much age must have affected his desensitization to cruelty and darkness.
Now, again, I’m not strong on my understanding of VTM lore, so I don’t know my timelines well enough to fully understand where Strauss might have been for major events and laws put into place and how that factors into all this. I really couldn’t speculate on where in time the Gargoyle comes into play. That said, I think it’s fair to say that Bloodlines may be trying to stuff quite a lot of lore into it as a primer for the WOD, and someone decided it would be interesting to pop a Tremere Gargoyle into the plot without fully thinking through the plot holes the whole thing might create. They may not have expected some fans to explore this quest that deeply. I think this is especially true considering the fact that he would be so harshly punished for it. It seems…rather foolish to create something so hulking and big and loud and extremely visible if it’s this much of a crime, and to let it live after it started rebelling on top of that? It sounds like something that that wasn’t entirely well thought out on the writer’s part. It makes much more sense as a retroactive justification to have a Gargoyle battle in a video game.
I also want to ask if the way the Gargoyle looks in Bloodlines is accurate to what they are supposed to look like as frankenstien’ed vamps in VTM? Does the monster presumably through magic start looking like a stone carving? Because if not, it might be worth examining whether Bloodlines’ concept of a Gargoyle is the same as the grisly VTM lore process.
All that said, if the game is 100% true to VTM lore, then it’s unavoidable that cruel, destructive process is what Strauss perpetrated to create a Gargoyle. But I would argue that for a 700+ year old vamp, who’s seen multitudes of cruelties and learned to have the capacity for it himself, it may have been relatively emotionally easy to torture and brutalize Sabbat enemies, whom are far crueler monsters in their own right, than it would be to harm an innocent the same way.
The thing about the Gargoyle in VTMB is that it comes across very much like an innocent in the game. It’s angry and violent, but it’s heartbroken. It’s been betrayed. It may be brutal, but it approaches everything with an absolute sense of justice, which presumably must have been to at least some degree instilled in it by Strauss. It was when he found Strauss (and presumably others) acting in a way that belied it’s own ethics that it decided vampires as a whole were untrustworthy monsters.
Imagine for a moment you bring yourself to torment and enemy and craft it into a what is supposed to be a mindless monster guardian, enslaved to your magic. You justify this for yourself because you used true monsters to create this thing, and it’s not supposed to be a person anyway. Suddenly, the being you created has lost so much of it’s former self that it has been rendered an innocent - one that has thoughts and feelings and a growing sense of justice that is moving beyond your teachings. Where then do you place it in your own personal ethics? What does it become to you? Maybe you even start to feel affection for it, like it’s a good guard dog.
And if it wants it’s freedom, and you decide you must refuse, how do you justify this to yourself?
In my mind, it would be easier, but also incredibly selfish and cruel, to compartmentalize the whole thing. “Gargoyles are sentient but not sapient. Gargoyles are too brutish and need to be controlled, or they will wreak havoc. I might as well have it put down to solve this problem.” I would also say this especially because the whole thing in canon evokes the emotional themes of Frankenstein so much.
So while I too think Strauss is capable of behaving unethically (because all vamps in VTM are like that on a sliding scale), my view of this situation is that it became far murkier for him than he initially expected, and it’s one of his greater shames, one that he is still failing to acknowledge properly within himself.
And while it’s possible he could take Ghouls, in my mind maybe Ghouling comes pretty close to home re: the Gargoyle. Maybe his distaste for the Heather situation is subconsciously rooted in his own shame regarding the Gargoyle.
The tragic thing is that again, the Gargoyle’s hate for Strauss clearly seemed to be based in a sense of betrayal. It’s in a great deal of pain. Which suggests it felt a bond with Strauss.
I would have liked a way to address that pain in a way that would not have resulted in putting it under the thumb of another vampire, whether he enslaves it or not.
(Also, to be honest at the end of the day I have to take personal preference with fiction into account. Fantasy creature enslavement as a trope just makes me uncomfortable, and it just doesn’t personally sit right for me to like the guy without examining this through a lens of remorse and restorative justice. I can’t comfortably ship a Fledgeling or OC or whatever with him if he’s just super 100% fine with enslavement, let alone a supremacy mindset, unless that is being addressed. Ghouls are a slippery slope for me as well, but I can handle it as a concept as long as we’re examining the moral boundaries of it and the personal ethical limits (or lack-thereof) of different vamps.)
Thanks for replying. :) I like your idea of a conflicted Strauss struggling with remorse. It sounds very forlorn.
I hope I haven’t given the impression that I don’t think Strauss has a humane side or that he can’t have complex feelings about the unwholesome aspects of what it means to be a kindred. On that, I wholly agree with you, and I think we have similar approach in exploring Strauss as a character. We just have different focus points on it, I suppose. And yeah, I see him as already having come to terms with most of the moral issues that vampires face.
As for bleakness and lighter moments, to me Max’s positive sides are very much on the forefront. The fact that he enslaved a gargoyle and how he sees them as inferior beings is disturbing and a contrasting point to all the good things about Strauss, and that’s why I don’t want to make excuses for him.
It’s also why I emphasized the atrocious nature of the gargoyle making process at the expense of Strauss’ potential doubts that he might have harbored later on. (I hope it wasn’t upsetting or anything. I just love digging into lore.) I find your ideas about those very interesting, and agree on some of your points.
Since I consider Max mainly from my fledgling’s POV, there’s mostly nothing but kind behavior from him. He’s polite and calm, he can be trusted to help a new and lost Tremere neonate find her footing, he teaches her and helps her cope with sage advice and guidance, and offers an absolutely safe haven where she can rest snug and secure. Yet, he is a Tremere elder, and can’t have made it this far just by being all nice. And honestly, to me it just suits his character that he has created a gargoyle. He’s very old and has an access to powerful sorceries. It helps to stress how he can afford to bide his time, while the younger Prince bumbles about.
The way I interpret Max relates heavily to my fledgling’s sense of morality, too. In the game, she stuck to the high humanity and moral options just about every time. She refused to let Pisha have the Haunted LA guy, and ate the masquerade violation by telling him to flee. She was horrified to meet Heather in Downtown and told her to go away, feeling disgusted about what she just witnessed. However, she is very insecure and is desperate for a safety net, and hence has it as her n:o 1 goal to secure herself a place within the Pyramid. So when it came down to having to kill the gargoyle, she didn’t think twice of it. It’s not a good moment for her moral development, for sure.
She has a massive blind spot when it comes to Strauss, in fact. In contrast to just about everyone else she’s met, Max is very pleasant, offering support and soothing words. I think he’s genuine about it too, objectively speaking. He wants the best for her, and his apprentices, and his clan, and probably the city itself. He’s also wise and considerate, and proceeds cautiously in his dealings. And he has the most attractive voice ever, too. There aren’t many apparent flaws, really, so the gargoyle fits well there to balance things. It tells us that Max is entrenched in this strange society that kindred in general have, and has his own, and to us alien, views about things.
During her apprenticeship, my fledgling will gradually become more desensitized and jaded, as she is taught Thaumaturgy and other Tremere secrets, adjusting to that culture. That would happen even without the Pyramid tutelage, of course, as it does to all kindred. But in this particular case, it’s tied to her and Strauss’ mentoring of her.
For me, it’s less “shipping” and more just a narrative emerging from the roleplay. I have mostly explored the slavery issue w/r/t ghouls, since the gargoyle is already basically gone by the time the fledgling gets to meet it. The way my fledgling ends up getting her first ghoul, under a different regent than Max, is particularly upsetting for her.
The devs in were certainly coming from ‘fun first, canon minutiae second’ angle, and that’s how it’s supposed to be. The lore is there to be utilized as one likes, and therefore I also see it perfectly legit for you or anyone else to interpret the gargoyle as something else than what the canon says they are. No reason to stick to something that doesn’t sit well with you, after all. :) Do you already have some idea about what kind of creature the gargoyle is in your narrative?
I see no plot holes in the gargoyle quest though. The reason why Strauss is mortified about the idea of Isaac (or anyone else) learning his secret about the gargoyle is exactly because they’re illegal. He having made it is there to illustrate that despite being a strong Camarilla supporter, he’s still a Tremere blood sorcerer who puts his occult occupations and his clan first. It works perfectly for his character IMO.
I agree though that it’s almost foolishly risky of Strauss to create a gargoyle. However, I don’t think that means that the gargoyle doesn’t fit or that the devs were clueless or bad at writing to include it. The Anarch Free States aren’t very happy about Camarilla presence, so Max would have needed the protection for his chantry. The gargoyle downright saved Max’s life on multiple occasions, so his gamble seems to have paid off. The Tremere are arrogant, as a theme, and engage in a slew of unethical experiments expecting to get away with it. And they have gotten away with a lot.
For the game design, there’s the big library building opposite the Venture Tower that has the fence around it with the gargoyle statues. This is very close to the chantry, and I imagine that works as visual world building to hint that the gargoyle might have blended in here, while hunting/watching out for enemies. Maybe it’s something that Max made a mental note when choosing where to base his chantry. (In fact, when I first walked past the statues, I thought that I won’t be surprised if one of them swoops down to grab me yet in some later game sequence. :p And that was before I knew anything about VTM gargoyles.)
Gargoyles have a variety of appearances, since they always come out different from the Creation Ritual. Like traditional gargoyle statues, more or less. The gorilla look of the vtmb gargoyle is a bit odd to me, but they’re generally not pretty. Maybe Max used a particularly ugly Nossie for this one. They also have wings for flying, which I don’t think the game gargoyle had. That I guess could be used to envision this gargoyle as some different kind of creature if you wanted. The wings could also just be small and under the armor, though. Max probably wouldn’t have wanted it flying except if absolutely necessary cuz masquerade.
Gargoyles have a discipline called Visceratika that allows them to harden their skin to stone. The gargoyle is either using this discipline (skill called Armor of Terra) or some similar skill powered by Strauss’ rituals, ready for a fight when it crashes down to meet the fledgling. In the concept art, the gargoyle looks much like the game version, but it’s not stony. Its armor, afaik, should not turn to stone with its flesh, but maybe they tested different versions and wanted to make clear to the player that this was a stone monster.
The biggest problem I see is that Strauss tells the fledgling the entire truth about the gargoyle so freely. True, there’s a speech check, and we need quests, so it just has to be chalked down to the fledgling being really persuasive. (It’s the power of “𝑪𝒐𝒎𝒆 𝒐𝒏, 𝑴𝒂𝒙… ” and can’t be resisted.) And if you’re a Tremere, he tells about it without you even asking, so there’s the clan trust too.
I agree that Strauss surely had a positive attitude towards the gargoyle originally. I didn’t want to imply that he was extraordinarily cruel towards it while it yet served him. Max definitely is a person who wants to treat others fairly, including his ghouls and the gargoyle. Of course, “fairly” is very questionable concept when it comes to enslaved beings… I think Max did view it as a reliable guard, like you say, and wasn’t abusive in his language or commands with it.
You make a good point that the gargoyle’s sense of justice must have come somewhere. Max must also have taught it to hunt and to stay unseen, and so on. Its hatred for Strauss and the Tremere is so immense that sense of betrayal probably does figure into it, yeah. Especially with how viscerally it reacts to the concept of “talk,” which we know Max is good at.
I imagine he gave the gargoyle some decent lair in the chantry, too, not just some closet. Seeing them like guard dogs seems a common approach for Tremere back when gargoyles were still commonly used, but I like to think Strauss might have been kinder than that yet. However, that is still a low bar when talking about keeping a slave. It always remains the dynamic of a master’s attitude to their slave.
During the final nights before it escaped, Max probably became increasingly annoyed about its rebellious tendencies, and grew harsher with his language and disciplinary actions. In my headcanon, this coincides with an apprentice (the fledgling’s sire) also being increasingly unruly and difficult to reason with at this time. Max had raw nerves due to all this, as well as the Prince being garbage, which also explains why the gargoyle managed to escape.
I was imprecise when I wrote that Strauss didn’t “feel a thing” about the gargoyle facing death. I clarify: I think he felt no remorse about wanting it dead. He notably exhibited anger when he said that he had hoped that the gargoyle was already dead, raising a clenched fist. I think Strauss felt betrayed too, and that gels with your thoughts about him having been fond of it back when it was still under his thumb. I think his positive feelings for the gargoyle were all eroded at that point, though, and that he was past caring.
In my personal narrative, any potential mourning about having lost a once loyal servant is also overridden by relief of a problem solved and the exciting prospect of gaining a new apprentice. With the fledgling sent off to do the deed, I imagine Max already rummaging around to find a suitable welcome present for the neonate, picking the seriously great Daimonori, and preparing his ghouls to be ready to help her move in. (I headcanon that Max actually hasn’t yet had her possessions brought in, although it’s sort of fun idea that he was THAT confident about her accepting the Pyramid invitation.) He’s very happy to hear the gargoyle is dead, after all, and I doubt he is just putting on a brave face.
Compartmentalization as a coping mechanism for Strauss is a good theory. The way you put it sounds highly fitting for the Tremere. Maybe I idealize Strauss too much as being so very scholarly and smart that he’d refuse to lie to himself about extremely basic facts like sentience and sapience. I guess it’s because I tend to think of Strauss’ existence being strongly tied to the kindred culture and being accustomed to using sapient beings for his provenance. He’s been drinking blood from humans for centuries; his morality has to be skewed as hell by now. And I think he probably rates kine higher than gargoyles, considering that the Camarilla tends to value sticking to one’s humane side, at least on paper (and compared to the Sabbat).
Like I said, I do think he justifies the gargoyle creation and keeping it enslaved to him, e.g. by using hostile Sabbat members for ingredients. We think about the justification in similar lines, but I probably view him as more callous about the entire thing. And the way I see it, the gargoyle rebelling unfortunately didn’t cause Max to reconsider, but instead made him angry and determined to kill it.
While I do think the fledgling and Max definitely have a capacity to feel regret and try to do things better in the future, and that they act on it on occasion, I don’t see big redemption arcs in their future. Strauss is not the type to start a search for Golconda. He seems content in his life and I think he doesn’t harbor great conflicts about his existence, having had centuries to work out his initial fears. The major doubts I envision him having relate to the Pyramid and especially to it fracturing.
About ghouls, in lore the Tremere don’t usually keep many, because they can have all sorts of thaumaturgic servant creatures. (As an aside, sometimes the Tremere take ghouls that they figure are good potential embraces. So after faithful service for some decades, the ghoul can hope to “advance” and becomes an initiated apprentice of the Pyramid. So if you struggle with Strauss keeping ghouls, you could consider if it’d make it easier to swallow if Max was evaluating a potential childe for himself or an apprentice.)
I’ve headcanoned a homunculus for Strauss, and my own fledgling I see as a fan of sanguine assistants. There’s also a blood imp later on. I don’t think Max could have managed the chantry without any ghouls though. It’s just something the kindred eventually end up accepting if they want to thrive. Living among these kinds of creatures as well as ghouls, and maybe managing kine herds too, might have made Max feel like a gargoyle wouldn’t be such a big step, in a culture where these things, as well as the use of Dominate for mind control, are heavily normalized.
Still, the Camarilla has prohibited them for a good reason, so it wouldn’t just be another servant among many. Hence I still think it means Max had especial interest in forbidden rites, and to me that’s another sign about why he has prospered within the Pyramid where the main virtue is to keep on pushing the boundaries without getting caught.
I hope I haven’t rambled too much about my fledgling in conjunction with Max, btw. I like to stick to her viewpoint in my narration, so that colors how I explore my ideas on various characters. Although with Max I also have scenarios from before her time, too.
Edit: I’ll have to add yet that I don’t think that the gargoyle stuff is the only questionable thing about Strauss either. He is up to all sorts of elder fuckery for sure. Just in case it came across as me presenting him spotlessly innocent about everything else than the gargoyle.
Agreed with @sadnessofthings here. Max is an elder, and a Tremere, and a loyal one at that. He couldn't have gotten far without seeing and performing his share of at least questionable (by non-Tremere standards) deeds. Whatever his real ages is, he very likely wasn't born in 20th century and a lot of our current issues would most likely fly right past his head, plus elders do get more detached as they go. I can’t realistically see him seeing a single issue with a gargoyle, or a ghoul, or any servant creature used for the advancement and safety of the chantry, clan Tremere or just Max himself. That however doesn’t have to mean he can’t at the same time be a great mentor to his apprentices, or show some other humane traits not tied to guilt over something that might not concern and elder Tremere one bit. Strauss, in the relatively short time he gets, comes off as an interesting character, and part of the fun in those is that they are never one thing, and one can guess they’ve got good and bad going together. If Max’s bad is to be a callous old blood sorcerer, I say let him have it, that only makes him more fun to consider. But on the other hand I admit I am a fan of bleakness and barely find something enjoyable in a character if I don’t see how they’re bad, aside from how they’re great.