Monte Cook's World of Darkness
Aberzanzorax
Hero
I haven't.
BUT:
I've played WoD and I own and have read the book.
I find it to be good, but different than WoD.
Monte seems to "get" the "essence" of a game and then can quite adequately (or better...I may be being unkind with the word "adequately") translate it to a new system.
He did the same with Call of Cthulhu.
In my opinion, it is a "reinvention" and "coordination" of both. It's World of Darkness with a D20 spin. (Or...it's D20 with a WoD mindset).
I don't think the goal was to perfectly translate WoD... I think it was to blend WoD with D20. What I mean there is like translating an adventure from one D&D edition to another. You don't say "it has 3 chimera, so I'll use three chimera". You determine the role of the chimera and then find a suitable substitution in the appropriate ruleset (which might be, but usually is not, a chimera).
Anyway, that's how I feel abut Monte's WoD. It's true to the flavor, but there are limitations to the system that are different fromt the limitations to the WoD system. Level is one. That's fairly antithetical to the WoD system. (Forgive me if I'm somewhat off in this last bit, I am going from memory of Monte's book when it first came out.)
Assuming I remember correctly, WoD "level" is not so impactful as D&D level (for good or ill). This is a significant change (and in my mind, THE significant change) that results from a fair translation. Does it capture the WoD mindset? Well....partly. But it is, by necessity, a change. Putting a number next to your power level is not the "storytelling" way, from what I remember (please, provide info that makes me eat my foot/own words if I'm off...again, it has been a while).
So, with those caveats, I'd say that Monte's version is a faithful translation as much as anyone could do it. It holds true to both, and, as such, sacrifices a bit to both. It has an excellent balance in such a sacrifice, and as an imparial reader, I find that balance to be exactly how I'd hope it would be.
In final summation: Monte did it. He did it right. BUT...it is not the same game. It can't be. It's a very evocative "vision" of the game, but with a D20 twist...and I can't imagine that D20 twist being done better.
BUT:
I've played WoD and I own and have read the book.
I find it to be good, but different than WoD.
Monte seems to "get" the "essence" of a game and then can quite adequately (or better...I may be being unkind with the word "adequately") translate it to a new system.
He did the same with Call of Cthulhu.
In my opinion, it is a "reinvention" and "coordination" of both. It's World of Darkness with a D20 spin. (Or...it's D20 with a WoD mindset).
I don't think the goal was to perfectly translate WoD... I think it was to blend WoD with D20. What I mean there is like translating an adventure from one D&D edition to another. You don't say "it has 3 chimera, so I'll use three chimera". You determine the role of the chimera and then find a suitable substitution in the appropriate ruleset (which might be, but usually is not, a chimera).
Anyway, that's how I feel abut Monte's WoD. It's true to the flavor, but there are limitations to the system that are different fromt the limitations to the WoD system. Level is one. That's fairly antithetical to the WoD system. (Forgive me if I'm somewhat off in this last bit, I am going from memory of Monte's book when it first came out.)
Assuming I remember correctly, WoD "level" is not so impactful as D&D level (for good or ill). This is a significant change (and in my mind, THE significant change) that results from a fair translation. Does it capture the WoD mindset? Well....partly. But it is, by necessity, a change. Putting a number next to your power level is not the "storytelling" way, from what I remember (please, provide info that makes me eat my foot/own words if I'm off...again, it has been a while).
So, with those caveats, I'd say that Monte's version is a faithful translation as much as anyone could do it. It holds true to both, and, as such, sacrifices a bit to both. It has an excellent balance in such a sacrifice, and as an imparial reader, I find that balance to be exactly how I'd hope it would be.
In final summation: Monte did it. He did it right. BUT...it is not the same game. It can't be. It's a very evocative "vision" of the game, but with a D20 twist...and I can't imagine that D20 twist being done better.
Aus_Snow
First Post
Very poorly.
But then, it's not trying to do that anyway. It's actually a totally different game, with a totally different setting. From the ground up, kinda thing.
Some like it, for what it is. But if you buy it, hoping for 'WoD d20', you'll be hoping for a long time to come. Or, you can have a hack at it yourself. Or, check the webs for someone else's hack.
Personally, it doesn't appeal, but on balance I'd have to say that there have been enough cheery perspectives on forums, that well, there might be something good about it. Maybe.
Lord Xtheth
First Post
I bought it thinking it would be WoD D20, and was sadly mistaken. If this were a completely new D20 game with no mention of "WoD" anywhere it may have made it into my gameplay, but having played both D20 games and WoD games, this disapointed me in both realms.
The game itself is a good read, and it might work as a game... but I just can't get into it.
The game itself is a good read, and it might work as a game... but I just can't get into it.
Doodles
First Post
WW basically gave Monte Cook the right to do whatever he wanted with the WoD IPs, and he built a completely different universe using them. It is *not* the old or new WoD with the Storyteller system. It's a post-apocalyptic world with different types of supernatural creatures creeping into our world. You're playing one of the monsters, but it's more like a dark-edged Fantastic Four kind of game, with creatures allying with each other to save/sink the world together, rather than a world of subtle politics between clans, tribes, houses and what-have-you.
Do not expect the WoD, and you'll get a blast out of McWoD.
Do not expect the WoD, and you'll get a blast out of McWoD.
fireinthedust
Explorer
Um, er, no.
I was excited until I learned that Vampires are not vampires. They're the ghosts of dead people living in the bodies of modern people. You're not 300 years old, you're a teenager who's possessed by a ghost from 300 years ago. I don't know why he would go in that direction but he did. Basically, it missed the point. Not only did he change the setting (as expected) and slap on the names of famous WoD clans/creatures, he changed the fundamental concepts of many of these creatures and slapped names on them. Vampires. How could anyone screw up vampires?!
Other than that, it's a d20 book. I could go over the finer details, but basically it's just not as good as CoCd20 was. There he took the idea and changed the mechanics. Here he's totally re-concepting very basic ideas (vampires) and it's a really confusing change.
To a stranger, the ideasbehind the setting wouldn't make sense, I dno't think. Really non-standard, sure, but I don't think he hit the nail on the head for what I would have wanted: a new book allowing me to d20 in vampires, werewolves and mages for my d20 Modern game, or even regular D&D games.
I was excited until I learned that Vampires are not vampires. They're the ghosts of dead people living in the bodies of modern people. You're not 300 years old, you're a teenager who's possessed by a ghost from 300 years ago. I don't know why he would go in that direction but he did. Basically, it missed the point. Not only did he change the setting (as expected) and slap on the names of famous WoD clans/creatures, he changed the fundamental concepts of many of these creatures and slapped names on them. Vampires. How could anyone screw up vampires?!
Other than that, it's a d20 book. I could go over the finer details, but basically it's just not as good as CoCd20 was. There he took the idea and changed the mechanics. Here he's totally re-concepting very basic ideas (vampires) and it's a really confusing change.
To a stranger, the ideasbehind the setting wouldn't make sense, I dno't think. Really non-standard, sure, but I don't think he hit the nail on the head for what I would have wanted: a new book allowing me to d20 in vampires, werewolves and mages for my d20 Modern game, or even regular D&D games.
Mustrum_Ridcully
Hero
I blame Joss Whedon. Don't Buffy Vampires basically work like this? Out goes the soul, in goes a demonic spirit. Retain the memories and personality quirks, but get a lot more violent.
I really loved Montes take. I am not so sure about the rules, seem too fiddly in gameplay. But the world and especially the "races" are interesting.
And I also like that he's basically turning the d20 system "upside" down - races work like classes, classes work like races.
fireinthedust
Explorer
Only kinda sorta. Like in Bram Stoker's dracula, or Anne Rice, you add the blood and it changes the person. Buffy has the demon, sure, but it's part of the mythos: vamp someone, they're changed into this new type of creature: the vampire. Even WoD has this, as the struggle inside the character is to retain their humanity rather than give in to "the beast".
Monte has the Vampires as simply normal humans taken over by the ghosts of other normal humans. For some reason these ghosts also like blood. The inner conflict is whether they're themselves or this new, historical identity. Dissociative identity disorder.
That's different from repressed sexual urges, represented by a lust for blood/intimate contact with people's necks. Or from, well, the collection of vampire clans from the original game; y'know, the popular one?
vampires: "Erasmus, what are you doing?" "calling to the children of the night, for I am a vampire! Bloooooood!"
Monte Cook vampires: "Rodney, why are you wearing my skirt and pumps?" "Don't call me Rodney, I'm really Lady Agatha Pettigrew, a 19th century heiress, and I demand blood... and crumpets!"
EPIC FAIL
I really loved Montes take. I am not so sure about the rules, seem too fiddly in gameplay. But the world and especially the "races" are interesting.
And I also like that he's basically turning the d20 system "upside" down - races work like classes, classes work like races.
Yeah, I think I'll have to look over the rules some more. Other than the vamps it doesn't look too bad, conceptually.
Could be fun if the vamps were reconcepted, I guess.
Similar Threads
