Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dykstrav" data-source="post: 3399992" data-attributes="member: 40522">Yeah... There's no denying that reinventing your entire flagship product line requires some brass balls. Sometimes, that's exactly what a product needs to stay fresh and viable (especially such artsy games as the World of Darkness).I always tried to play off the contradicitions between game lines as being the party line for the particular supernatural faction. Usually worked rather well, but it was still frustrating to deal with those players who whined when you mentioned Lilith or Kuei-jin when the core rulebook &quot;stated explicitly&quot; that all vampires were descended from Caine. But you always get a certain amount of goobers playing any game... It became almost a requirement to change some of the supernatural history for your own chronicle just to deal with those people that wanted to play neonates with an intimate knowledge of the Camarilla's inner circle and the like.I think one of the things that turned me off to the new setting are the people that claim that they love the new World of Darkness because it's somehow impossible to play a stereotype in the new setting. In the old World of Darkness, I've played a Brujah archaeologist, a Ventrue bodyguard, a Tremere that was an olympic athelete, a Giovanni lounge singer, and a Gangrel day trader (those are just some of my weird Vampire characters, my wraiths and mages were usually more out there than that). So the argument that the old World of Darkness somehow shoehorned you into playing clans a certain way really never held water with me. I do kind of dig the idea of blood potency, but nothing else in the new setting has caught my eye enough to convince me to shell out money for a game that I don't see as broken. I may end up playing the new World of Darkness one of these days. But the old one still has plenty of interesting things for me to play with.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dykstrav, post: 3399992, member: 40522"] Yeah... There's no denying that reinventing your entire flagship product line requires some brass balls. Sometimes, that's exactly what a product needs to stay fresh and viable (especially such artsy games as the World of Darkness). I always tried to play off the contradicitions between game lines as being the party line for the particular supernatural faction. Usually worked rather well, but it was still frustrating to deal with those players who whined when you mentioned Lilith or Kuei-jin when the core rulebook "stated explicitly" that all vampires were descended from Caine. But you always get a certain amount of goobers playing any game... It became almost a requirement to change some of the supernatural history for your own chronicle just to deal with those people that wanted to play neonates with an intimate knowledge of the Camarilla's inner circle and the like. I think one of the things that turned me off to the new setting are the people that claim that they love the new World of Darkness because it's somehow impossible to play a stereotype in the new setting. In the old World of Darkness, I've played a Brujah archaeologist, a Ventrue bodyguard, a Tremere that was an olympic athelete, a Giovanni lounge singer, and a Gangrel day trader (those are just some of my weird [I]Vampire[/I] characters, my wraiths and mages were usually more out there than that). So the argument that the old World of Darkness somehow shoehorned you into playing clans a certain way really never held water with me. I do kind of dig the idea of blood potency, but nothing else in the new setting has caught my eye enough to convince me to shell out money for a game that I don't see as broken. I may end up playing the new World of Darkness one of these days. But the old one still has plenty of interesting things for me to play with. [/QUOTE]

Verification