Anybody played Hunter or Demon? How are they?

[lastelias2]

Thanks for the info, Gothmog.

This one thing is bothering me: "God is not portrayed as completely noble." This, of course, doesn't work with my personal world view. Not that I mind a good theologic discussion, but I don't want to immerse myself in an extended RP situation that is that opposed to my own view of right or wrong.

I don't even mind the idea of _playing_ a Demon who is still opposed to God. What _would_ bother me is if the foundation of the game explicitly required a God who was not entirely good. If the game allowed for the possibility that God's plan was a wise and ultimately good one, then I think I could have fun with it. If that concept is ruled out my the setting then I should probably not even bother.

I've read most of the backstory from the book, and haven't seen anything out-of-bounds, yet. Since this discussion popped up, I figured it was a good opportunity to ask a couple of questions of players of the game.

I really enjoyed Demon the few times I played at convention, and I plan on running a Demon campaign when our current D&D campaign winds down.

Mercule, I had some of the same concerns, and I can say that I am comfortable with the games portrayl of G-d. I would say that the game makes no judgements on G-d at all. In fact, it takes the approach that G-d's mind is unknowable. It is never definitively indicated if everything is not G-d's plan in the first place. The angels from the beginning are never clear if G-d intended or was aware of their betrayl of him. They are imperfect and do what they think is best.

Originally, angels could choose to know the mind of G-d, but doing so made them cease to exist. Understanding the infinite made them part of it, so the angels never really knew for sure what was going on. Like humans, they had the information given to them and acted on it. G-d stays out of it entirely. He creates the angels and humans. He then charges the angels with creating everything else. So we never know what his intentions were.

I think as with most WW games, the interpretation is entirely up to you and the kind of game you want to run.

 

[Gothmog]

Mercule,

I didn't go into a lot of detail on the God isn't completely noble statement for obvious reasons, but it makes sense in the context of the game. In Demon, God isn't good, nor is he evil, he is God. Good and evil actually aren't very important in the game- what is important is whether one acts in accord with God's will, or against it. Obviously, the demons acted against it in the past, and the divine host acts according to God's will. The demons see God as a megalomaniacial tyrant who craves worship above all else, with little to no regard for humanity or the world the angels helped create. This belief seems to be supported in the game by the world seeming to be cot off from the divine, and no sign of other angels or the heavenly host around. On the other hand, some demons see Lucifer as the savior of their kind, as well as the savior of humanity and the world (in fact, there is some evidence in the game that Lucifer may have started or guided the development of Christianity in order to fight the faith the Earthbound were gathering from human worshippers). Others chafe at the idea of following Lucifer, and are trying to locate him to exact their revenge upon him for their torment. Being a WW game, its pretty clear nobody has a clear picture of what is going on, so there are many ways to interpret it.

 

[Mercule]

Cool. It sounds like the game doesn't come of as asserting that God is flawed/not holy, which is a good thing.

It sounds more like there's a bunch of demons who, like humans, are not perfect or omniscient. A lot of them disagree with God or feel He's "not all that". If the game has no definitive answer to that opinion and doesn't require the PCs to feel that way, I doubt I'd have a problem playing it.

I will have to get a copy of the game 'ere the WoD ends.

 

[Umbran]

Hunter might turn out to be a bit disappointing for long-time WoD players. It seems to me that the game is designed as a introduction to the world. Not that the rules are any simpler, but that it is really best done when the player is ignorant of the standard WW conventions.

Hunter characters really know very little about Vampires, Werewolves, and Mages. Long time players, though, know lots about them. One can try to edit that information out of play, but it is impossible to instill that fear of that which is unknown and monstrous when the player knows lots, and has even played examples of those things, frequently in a non-monstrous manner. Rather gets in the way of suspension of disbelief.

 

[DanMcS]

This one thing is bothering me: "God is not portrayed as completely noble." This, of course, doesn't work with my personal world view. Not that I mind a good theologic discussion, but I don't want to immerse myself in an extended RP situation that is that opposed to my own view of right or wrong.

Why?

I don't even mind the idea of _playing_ a Demon who is still opposed to God. What _would_ bother me is if the foundation of the game explicitly required a God who was not entirely good. If the game allowed for the possibility that God's plan was a wise and ultimately good one, then I think I could have fun with it. If that concept is ruled out my the setting then I should probably not even bother.

The concept of the game doesn't say a whole lot about the nature of god, really. The entire setup is that god is inscrutable, even to his first creations, the angels, who could never know everything he knew, and this caused them to rebel.

 

[Nifelhein]

Hunter might turn out to be a bit disappointing for long-time WoD players. It seems to me that the game is designed as a introduction to the world. Not that the rules are any simpler, but that it is really best done when the player is ignorant of the standard WW conventions.

Hunter characters really know very little about Vampires, Werewolves, and Mages. Long time players, though, know lots about them. One can try to edit that information out of play, but it is impossible to instill that fear of that which is unknown and monstrous when the player knows lots, and has even played examples of those things, frequently in a non-monstrous manner. Rather gets in the way of suspension of disbelief.

I agree with this for the most part, but having played it I can say that the fun was all about not letting your knowledge change what you would do, and also that fear IS present, sicne knowing what they can do and that you are ONLY HUMAN is something that makes you afraind, knowing who and what they can do just adds to it, since you know more than hunrdreds of ways to kill your character using that npc...

 

[Mercule]

Why?

Hmmm.... How to explain to someone to whom it's not immediately apparent?

The nature of the game would seem to involve some fairly strong theologic issues. The very nature of playing a demon involves God. It is inescapable, really. Either that, or the fact that you're a demon is meaningless. Or so it would seem to me.

I've played atheist characters, evil characters, pagan characters, female characters. Hey, I've even played a half-devil. It isn't the idea of playing a character (significantly) different from myself that bothers me, it's the level of... "steeping" in it that I perceive as being a very real probability in Demon.

Try this: I don't mind the concept of playing a rapist (probably not my first choice, but bear with me). I don't want the game to be entirely focused on raping, though. I especially don't want it to turn into a steady stream of graphic rape scenes. Why? Because I think rape is wrong and really doubt that I would enjoy such a game.

Put into a different situation, I'm very much a capitalist. I've read Marx and talked with many socialists. I really don't see any redeeming qualities in socialism (not saying someone who does is bad, just giving a foundation for where I'm at). I could easily play a socialist and enjoy it. I'd have a hard time playing as one of a group of socialists out to take down a capitalist government.

I guess it boils down to fundamentals about good and evil. I don't mind a character, or even several, who qualify for "not a nice guy". I don't like a game where the entire objective or mood promotes what I consider "wrong". And religion is, of course, the strongest right/wrong there is.

If someone doesn't believe God is all good, that's fine. I'll even discuss it with them. I'm a reasonable guy and it's not like I'm afraid to challenge my beliefs. I just don't think that playing a game founded around objectionable premises is 1) fun and 2) the right way to go about exploring new ideas.

Note: to stave off any devolution of the thread, I'll refrain from commenting again on the "Why" part. I have my tastes and I'm trying to determine if Demon would fit well with them. That's about all that matters.

 

[Vocenoctum]

Hunter might turn out to be a bit disappointing for long-time WoD players. It seems to me that the game is designed as a introduction to the world. Not that the rules are any simpler, but that it is really best done when the player is ignorant of the standard WW conventions.

Hunter characters really know very little about Vampires, Werewolves, and Mages. Long time players, though, know lots about them. One can try to edit that information out of play, but it is impossible to instill that fear of that which is unknown and monstrous when the player knows lots, and has even played examples of those things, frequently in a non-monstrous manner. Rather gets in the way of suspension of disbelief.

It's one of the nice parts of Hunter, that they're always adding wierd stuff. There's plenty of bad guys that can't be slotted into one of the other ST games, and that's good.

The perceptual problem with Hunter is that the core book was filled with violent imagery and the system seemed to support that idea.

There's no reason Hunter has to turn into a Monster of the Week type of game though.

All in all, I like Hunter. I've played several games, and tinkered with a Hunterd20 game that everyone liked but took too much effort to make it worthwhile.

 

[Nifelhein]

I liked hunter too, and i must say that we were true hunters, not many fights, the ones that happened were epic for normal humans but easily considered a fight for supernaturals...

Hunter is nie, but hard to use properly and make the game interesting in more than one campaign...

 

[Mercule]

There's no reason Hunter has to turn into a Monster of the Week type of game though.

I haven't run a Hunter game, yet, but it seems to me that the book is slanted toward the idea that every Imbued becomes a fanatical social pariah, either voluntarily removing themselves from "the monsters" sphere of influence or doing something stupid that costs them their job, family, pet skunk, etc.

Seems that the game would get old real fast if that was the case. I think there are other ways to run the game, but the book certainly doesn't give that impression.