Unfocused is the Focus!

If you're an RPG geek, that's one thing (and a pretty great thing, too!), but there are also hardcore RPG nerds.  Unfortunately, I fall into that category as well.  An RPG nerd doesn't just like playing roleplaying games, rolling dice, and pretending to brandish his sorcery and sword.  No, he wants to look inside RPGs to see how they work, what makes them tick.  The nerd explores all the tiny molecules of RPG design which casual gamers and regular gaming geeks probably find boring, tedious, or just a waste of time.

http://www.story-games.com/forums/discussion/17450/how-to-play-vampire-the-masquerade-first-edition/p1

The above link talks about the 1^st edition of Vampire: the Masquerade.  Here’s the crux of the argument (or first major argument worth discussing).  The game doesn't define exactly how it should be played.  Instead, it offers many different possibilities... some of them are interconnected, others quite exclusive.  That's another defining aspect of old school.  Early D&D gave DMs and players the raw tools; barest essentials.  A road map.  The vague promise of adventure... clashing steel, hurtling balls of fire, and scantily clad Elven maids.  

How to play the game is never explicitly defined.  Yes, there are examples of play included in several rulebooks, but a couple pages of "actual play" doesn't cover a fraction of the infinite possibilities.  The multitude of paths to choose from is hinted at, but never whittled down to just one.  That's the beauty of old school RPGs.  They let you wander… to triumph, flounder, or discover your own kind of weirdness.

Of course, this creates an entirely new foundation of what old school RPGs are and how to judge if a specific RPG is worthy of being part of the old school renaissance.  A term I believe should be broadened if it does not include 1^st edition Vampire: the Masquerade.  Three characteristics defined an RPG’s qualifications: non-standardization, subjective nostalgia, and date of publication.  Now, there's a fourth characteristic:  multi-focused.

With multi-focused RPGs, the game play isn’t necessarily about any one thing in particular.  It begins with a few staples, and then everything to follow is a free-form narrative created by the GM and heavily influenced by the players.

Some might say that such old school rule descriptions are "bad" or "confusing" simply because they don't spell out every little detail of how the game should be played.  I don't agree.  Ambiguous rules are not a bug - they're a feature.  But then, I like doing my own thing.  As a life-long DM, Storyteller, GM, etc., I need enough creative rope to work with.  Occasionally, I'll hang myself by accident.  Them's the breaks.  Without the chance of failure (no matter how small) there's no excitement or drama.  Player characters require it, so why not Game Masters?  Risk makes the story worth telling in the first place.

In the olden days, Dungeons & Dragons was about going into dungeons, however loosely defined, killing monsters, and looting their treasure.  Similarly, Vampire: the Masquerade is about playing a vampire who lives by night, drinks the blood of humans, and tries not to be discovered by humanity.  And yet, within either of those parameters there is a lot of play.  No two D&D or V:tM campaigns/chronicles are alike even though all of them are roughly similar.  Can the same be said of Shadowrun, Call of Cthulhu, Rifts, or later editions of D&D and V:tM?

On the other hand, isn’t every RPG capable of fluid, story-based “sand box” type play?  Yes, I think so.  However, modern games seem to favor a singular focus, one particular style of play over others.  Certain games force players and GMs into a style or way of gaming because the rule book outright states "that's the way you play this game".  Later editions of V:tM spent more time telling people how they “should” play the game, what a chronicle is supposed to look like.  Although, revised Vampire rule books still recognized all the chronicle variations that could exist for Storytellers and players alike.

So, if you're as big an RPG nerd as I am, you might get a kick out of skimming the posts on that link (some of them, at least).  You might ponder the notion of gaming focus... what's too vague, what's too concrete, and if an unfocused RPG can be the focal point?  Vampire: the Masquerade became an undeniable RPG phenomenon in the 90's, and is still discussed today.  In my opinion, it's worth trying to understand why. 

If you have an opinion, then please feel free to share it by commenting below.  I won't necessarily agree with what you say, but I'll be glad you said it.

VS

V:tM Warm-up Part 2: the Bloodbath

Even though something unexpectedly came up for half the group last night, part 2 was pretty awesome.  The Gary/Chicago rivalry escalated when Modius and his nosferatu adviser selected a target - Lodin's right hand vampire, an enforcer with organized crime connections named Lucien.

Before seeking him out in Chicago, Blago was set upon by a mysterious woman.  She was a Kindred from Chicago, sent to recruit the European gangrel away from Modius to serve the Prince of Chicago.  She used her presence to make him come to her.  He tried to resist but felt overpowered.  Blago spent a willpower point to stay where he was, standing his ground and forcing her to come to him.  At the time, I was unsure what kind of resistance roll was required to not be in awe of her, compelled to walk towards her...

The female went up to Blago's haven, discovered he wouldn't betray Modius, wouldn't share blood with her, and then suddenly he went berserk with wolf claws thanks to his protean discipline.  Face and neck torn open, she immediately fled, using her celerity to get the fuck out of there - 3 successes of aggravated damage!  That's not going to heal right away.

This and later brawls reminded me how brutal and unforgiving combat is in V:tM.  Holy shit!  Whoever strikes first has a huge advantage.  Whoever attacks with a group has a huge advantage - especially with supernatural speed.  Whoever created their character to be a tank with plenty of strength and brawl has a huge advantage.  Whoever uses their 2 dots in protean to transform their hands into razors of goddamn fury becomes an unbelievable killing machine!

I kind of forgot how dodge worked, so I ruled that someone could try to dodge a blow but then that would take up their next attack.  Since the attack order was you go, I go, you go, I go, etc. it didn't make too much sense to dodge a blow because then you can't deal any damage next round and have 3 or 4 more attacks coming your way.  I'll have to re-think that.  Maybe dodge should be allowed (except in the case of firearms) but then your next attack (dice pool) only takes a penalty of one die per attack being dodged?

I also think it might be better to roll for initiative each round.  More surprises!  If this were D&D and each combat was expected to go 10 - 15 rounds, then that would probably be way too much rolling, but for a 3 or 4 round combat (on average), I think it'll be fine.

Soaking damage was another challenge.  Few of the opposing Kindred had fortitude, and the ones who did only had a dot or two.   So, I ruled that only fortitude alone could attempt at soaking aggravated damage, except for the very last vamp to die by the PCs' hands at the end of the night,.  I gave that dude a fighting chance, allowing him his full stamina plus fortitude dice pool to try and absorb the staggering 8 successes of wolf-claw evisceration.  I rolled well, allowing him to deal out some punishment the following turn instead of simply going down in the first six seconds of combat.  His second attempt at soaking wasn't as fruitful: 1 success out of 6 dice.  Yep, still dead - or near enough.

Instead of going either/or, just fortitude or stamina + (fortitude) for everyone, maybe I can allow just those Kindred with fortitude to roll stamina + fortitude, but those without the discipline can't attempt to soak the damage at all.  That might be a fair compromise.

I think every vampire defeated was diablerized.  Hahaha!  As soon as I mentioned drinking a fallen vamp's vitae until reaching his soul and then being able to suck that down, too... everyone wanted to try it.  Since I as using blood potency instead of generation, I allowed the soul-sucker to attain blood potency 2, instead of the 1 they started with.  Before the first session, I briefly touched on the different levels.  The greater a vampire's blood potency, the more blood he can use each turn and the less he can sustain himself on animal blood (and human blood if he reached blood potency of 5), etc.  That's why Kindred need to go into torpor after a century of stalking the night.

Another difference between the last session and this one was disciplines.  In the first, I allowed PCs to add auspex, dominate, presence, etc. to their dice pools instead of the raw attribute + ability.  So, there was less dice rolled this time and less successes, but everything seemed to go smoothly.

Back to the plot: there was a cargo shipment coming in on the docks of Gary after slaying Lucien and the scarred Evelyn.  It contained a really old dark wooden box bound in iron with Scandinavian runes on the side.  Unsurprisingly, the box contained an elder.  Modius wanted to blood-bind the elder to himself.  This, of course, is a process.  He couldn't do it in just one night.  Before his second attempt, more of Lodin's goons showed up.  These were supposed to be heavy hitters.

I finally made a decent roll for once, wounding or mauling Blago and injuring another - he had a lot of celerity.  But, in the end, the fanged NPC was toast.  The whole game was a bloody mess (in a good way).

Will have to glance at the 2nd and 3rd edition rules to see what improvements they might have made.  I vaguely remember those systems working different than 1st edition combat, but it's all pretty hazy.  For non-combat, however, I think V:tM is hard to beat.  The attribute + ability thing works really well.

The weekly home game starts tonight.  I intend on a slower pace with less emphasis on combat.  For a one-off or even two part chronicle, I think it would have been really difficult to avoid physical altercations - especially when half the troupe are noobs.  Maybe not, I'm not really sure.  At least with this new chronicle, I hope the aggravated damage doesn't go flying too quickly.

If you have any thoughts on rules, systems, mechanics, or Storytelling technique, then please feel free to comment below.  I appreciate your feedback!


VS