WoD Beast: The Primordial (Good Lord Above, Why?) [Archive]

Mikemical

2017-10-24, 03:37 PM

I'm just gonna link this review and preview of the latest book for New World of Darkness, but be warned, this book is tumblr-tier cringe and self-entitlement.

http://projects.inklesspen.com/fatal-and-friends/kurieg/beast-the-primordial/

It literally is the "Coldsteel the Hedheheg" (knowyourmeme.com/memes/coldsteel-the-hedgeheg) of supplements. "Don't kinkshame me: The Game" would be a better, more honest title. They imply beasts are the sole holders of all the truth in the world, that everyone remotely related to the supernatural would be fast friends with them because "we're both totally goffik" and that anyone who would eve question them is a horrible, horrible human being who deserves no pity or any form of empathy and would be better off as Beast Chow.

There is an appeal in playing a monster, the stuff of nightmares, and dealing with adventurers who come looking for your head is a nice change of pace(A reason why Evil Campaigns in D&D remain popular). But whereas some villains have redeeming qualities, or are charismatic individuals you can't help but love to hate, the Beasts are so self-absorbed that they believe they can do no wrong, even when explicitly doing wrong. "Well, now Tyler should know better than to make fun of people who are short." says the Krakenkin after drowning Tyler and causing severe brain damage and leaving him comatose. But it's okay, because Tyler probably learned his lesson about making fun of people's insecurities.

Oh yes, the Beasts refer to themselves as "-insert magical creature here-kin", you read that right.

And the Heroes who hunt the beasts? They're all likened to Gaston, from Beauty and the Beast. They're bullies, they don't understand the Beasts' feelings, and it is why they hunt them down. They have zero redeeming qualities.

Literature idealizes these figures as square-jawed, divinely chosen champions putting themselves between depraved monsters and their innocent victims, but the Children know the truth is more complicated. Once a mythic link takes hold of a person, they are at best a ruthless stalker willing to commit any act in the name of “heroism.” At best, Heroes bear a strong resemblance to the heroes of ancient epics: deeply flawed people doomed to a terrible but glorious fate. At worst, Heroes are gibbering, gore-spattered maniacs whose obsessive quest to destroy the Beast twists their minds and makes them dangerous to everyone around them. ... The dominant narrative may be “Hero arises, kills the monster,” but the Begotten see past that and know that it doesn’t have to be that way. Heroes, on the other hand, never question their own heroism — and that is why Beasts hate them.

Also, Beasts hate Demons. We're never really given any reason why they do, just that they do and that Demons are bad too.

And if you look at the quotes of every other WoD creature, you'll see that at least one in each wants to take them to bed.

:yuk:

Lord Raziere

2017-10-25, 04:54 AM

Yup, Beast is a pretty horrible game. I pretty much said that when people were doing the whole open beta pdf thing. its like one of the WoD games I don't regret passing on. like if I want to play a good monster, a horror game THIS game is the exact wrong thing to do it with. and villainous parasitic monsters were already done better with Vampire so......yeah, it does everything wrong. like normally I'd love play something like a medusa or a dragon, but nope, this game just screws up so royally that its like, ugh, why did you even write this?

Rater202

2017-10-25, 08:16 AM

Let's see, during the Open Beta the Devs responded to complaints about Beasts and Heroes being seen as glorifying abuse(made by made by people who misunderstood the heroes, no less), whith nothing explicit in the text implying, by giving the beasts an explicit cultural impetus to be abusive asshats instead of finding ways to feed safely(which had been encouraged in the original draft.)

They also took it from "you were always a monster soul in a human body" to "another beast ate your soul and a monster soul climbed in, witch your permision or not" which turned Beast from "All Monsters are family, you're from one of the Oldests Branches, go find your family" to "You joined or were forced into a club of asshats."

Taking heroes from "anybody with the integrity of a serial killer who just happened to have a bad dream" to "specific individuals who are also the same" worked, but it was adressing a problem that didn't need to be fixed

We were promised a game where you were a monster but that didn't make you a bad person, where the main goal was learning about the World you were Born into and your new, massive, extended family.

The worst part is that the first draft was closest and the game devs changed it to something else because a loud minority bitched. And none of the people who complained about abuse in the first draft complained about it from the second draft onward, which I honestly don't get.

(Though, the reason Beasts don't like demons is becuase Demons are of the God-Machine, and none of the other splats are. It look like family but it's not family is that was supposed to be the thing, but since Beasts are no longer a family...)

Trampaige

2017-10-25, 09:09 AM

I have the collector's edition literally collecting dust on my dresser. I wish that I had unbacked the kickstarter after they re-did the entire game during the beta. The original draft was so much better, though I think I lost it when I formatted my laptop. The way they changed Souls and Homecoming is just absolutely awful. Instead of being a mythical beast of legend, who was born that way and grappling with the reality of what you are, some jerk eats your soul and now it's your job to teach people fear to protect them. Utter garbage.

Also, did they ever send out the kickstarter reward pdfs? I'm still waiting for my copy of Demon.

fishyfishyfishy

2017-10-25, 11:55 AM

I thought it was commonly understood at this point that Beast is a bad game. :smallconfused:

Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll

2017-10-25, 03:32 PM

Yeah, I'm glad I waited to back, because I was able to see their revisions and give that a hard no. I was really excited about the first draft. Do you guys know if they updated the same google doc the original draft was on? I think I still have access somewhere...

Tinkerer

2017-10-25, 04:01 PM

Haha, sounds like Wraeththu. Anyone think it might be worth an ironic look?

Anonymouswizard

2017-10-25, 04:06 PM

Yes, the first draft was amazing, it was full of flavour.

Then people said two things. 'You're glorifying abuse' and 'there's nothing to do'.

Now a big part of the first draft was finding a way to minimise the abuse you inflict, with the ideal level being 'none'. Partially because Abuse Creates Heroes, and Heroes Hunt Beasts (although I think they moved away from 'all heroes are Gaston' and are offering examples of more heroic heroes).

So they changed it to diet vampires. I already have a game about vampires, I paid £30 for it (and about that much for the other game about vampires). But apparently a game about family and finding that family gives you nothing to do and so is boring, and so we need vampires without the blood and a theme that was done better by a Covenant in Requiem. Gah, I mean there's some nWoD games where I think the execution fails, but Beast is the first time I've seen a setting go from okay to rubbish in a single redraft.

Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll

2017-10-25, 05:16 PM

Why did they end up changing the Homecoming again? I loved the idea of "the moment you realize why you always felt different", it's such a great story-telling moment, a really important defining moment for a character. Now that's just... gone.

Nerd-o-rama

2017-10-25, 05:59 PM

I think the problem with Beast is that they tried to tackle some very specific social issues that were and still are on the bleeding edge of internet consciousness - body dysmorphia, persecution, bullying and counterbullying taken to fatal extremes - and put all those hot button issues at thr forefront without much thematic substance holding them together. THEN when they inevitably got negative feedback on these issues they reversed course and jumbled stuff up in utterly nonsensical ways and just left a mess. A mess whose major themes have already been done better in Vampire, Werewolf, and Changeling: the Lost, for that matter. It's not just confused trash, it's confused trash that doesn't really need to exist.

Still better than Vampire 5e though.

Rater202

2017-10-25, 08:36 PM

For those interested, the original free preview draft is still available (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7FqViticwNuOGZvcHh3V19rSms/view)

I'm not gonna say that it's perfect, but it's better than the finished product and I still honestly can't figure out where the complainers were coming from... Or why the people complaining about "glorifying abuse" didn't keep complaining when beasts gained an inpetus to harm people "for their own good."

Beast was meant as the "Crossover" Splat. That's what you did with it, and "ancient monster with ties to most other splats reincarnated in a human body" was perfect for that.

And then they went and mucked it up.

Lord Raziere

2017-10-25, 09:25 PM

*shakes head*

I wouldn't really call the first version "better" its just a different flavor of bad. Like, the first version was bad, the second version was just like "you expect me to think this somehow fixed the problem? nope, not bothering with this anymore." the complaint I had at the time WAS that it was already bargain-bin Vampire, that was never changed. even before the second draft, what was your thing as a beast? you went around and made people suffer to feed yourself, except your not an awesome monster from myth, your just a human who thinks he has a beastly thing in his head and maybe some magical thingies that appear sometimes, so really your just this pathetic bully going around making people fear you for the sake of some identity you have and thats not ok.

Like I remember at the time,I think the complaint was, that it wasn't anything you'd actually want to play, because yes you can go around searching for your family and find a vampire or a changeling......and then what? its like ok, you found them. whatever. sure you can go around feeding yourself.....but there was nothing bigger really, because there is no bigger monster society, so the argument was, it was just a game centering around the most uncomfortable part of vampire except in instead of blood it was intentional suffering, like a vampire could theoretically take blood from willing people and such, but a Beast HAD to be a jerk, and the Heroes, they weren't much better, and I don't remember what the difference between Heroes then and now, they are just boring and stupid in general no matter which one because they are just forgettable in general.

I dunno, it was some time ago for me, I know I was one of the people arguing against the first draft, but I only kind of vaguely remember the arguments why, I just know that there is no meaningful difference between the two versions that really changes the problems with it. I think people just gave up trying to fix it when they saw the direction White Wolf went in response.

comicshorse

2017-10-26, 05:32 AM

I wasn't previously aware of Beast but I've been toying with the idea of a running a game based on Matt Wagner's 'Mage' comics. From the look of it the 'Heroes' of Beast would match the Avatars of 'Mage' ( the comic) and Beasts themselves would fit as the enemies. This looks worth a read for some ideas

Honest Tiefling

2017-10-26, 01:26 PM

Now a big part of the first draft was finding a way to minimise the abuse you inflict, with the ideal level being 'none'. Partially because Abuse Creates Heroes, and Heroes Hunt Beasts (although I think they moved away from 'all heroes are Gaston' and are offering examples of more heroic heroes).

I see nothing wrong with this.

Through...If these people are beasts, wouldn't that make them as dumb as a beast? Sharks aren't known for their intelligence, as they'll accidentally eat each other in a feeding frenzy. And what happens if you bop her on the nose?

Rater202

2017-10-26, 01:32 PM

I see nothing wrong with this.

Through...If these people are beasts, wouldn't that make them as dumb as a beast? Sharks aren't known for their intelligence, as they'll accidentally eat each other in a feeding frenzy. And what happens if you bop her on the nose?

No. they're the Primordial Beasts of Myth and Legend--The gorgons, dragons, Giants, tempters, tricksters, not base animals.

They're supposed to be said beings, embodiments of fear, reincarnated... but after the revisions, they're more body-jackers.

Honest Tiefling

2017-10-26, 01:34 PM

No. they're the Primordial Beasts of Myth and Legend--The gorgons, dragons, Giants, tempters, tricksters, not base animals.

That does make more sense. I read the excerpt (the first quote), and thought it was supposed to be shark. What is she supposed to be?

Anonymouswizard

2017-10-26, 01:48 PM

No. they're the Primordial Beasts of Myth and Legend--The gorgons, dragons, Giants, tempters, tricksters, not base animals.

They're supposed to be said beings, embodiments of fear, reincarnated... but after the revisions, they're more body-jackers.

Yeah, they could have made all the changes they did and kept the Homecoming (probably the best bit of the original draft), but they didn't.

They could have spun 'Beasts exist to teach people through fear' as a justification Beasts give themselves to feel better, and shown other factions of Beast society (I like the idea of formalising 'I feed on those who hurt the people under my care' as a Beast faction). But they didn't.

They could have kept Beasts as is, and given the book a negative view of them (maybe written by one of these noncrazy heroes), but they didn't.

It's like they decided to go more normal for a nWoD game instead of less, they could have rocked the boat and made something different. A society based around the question where do we come from and investigating that (without finding answers).

Plus my phone insists Beasts are Breasts apparently.

Rater202

2017-10-26, 01:56 PM

That does make more sense. I read the excerpt (the first quote), and thought it was supposed to be shark. What is she supposed to be?

I think a Kraken.

Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll

2017-10-26, 02:24 PM

For all the criticism, there must be SOMETHING to it; on the Onyx Path forum it is 7/10 in terms of number of topics and 5/10 in terms of number of posts. It has more posts than Mummy, Geist, and Promethean combined, so clearly something in it works that captures people's interests.

Nerd-o-rama

2017-10-26, 02:30 PM

I'm not gonna say that it's perfect, but it's better than the finished product and I still honestly can't figure out where the complainers were coming from... Or why the people complaining about "glorifying abuse" didn't keep complaining when beasts gained an inpetus to harm people "for their own good."

We live in an age where anyone, anywhere, who so much as comments obliquely on a social issue in a public forum is instantly mobbed by angry, angry people for either 1) not being senstive about it, 2) being too sensitive about it or 3) bringing it up in the first place you triggered virtue-signalling concern troll snowflake. This is absolutely ubiquitous in internet social media that doesn't have a blanket ban on social commentary like this forum does. If I had a twitter (and people had a reason to read it), I could tweet "I like puppies" and get thousands of angry replies and DMs shaming me for not liking kittens, for oversharing my personal preferences, and for admitting to bestiality, from thousands of people I've never met.

Naturally, the Beast pre-release got this from all three sides. There are many ways for creators to respond to incendiary reactions like this and Onyx Path chose to panic, throwing all their design docs in a shredder, letting their cats play around in the resulting ribbons for a while, then taped the results together into something that was technically a series of sentences in English, then published that.

And it still made everyone even angrier. Go figure.

golentan

2017-10-26, 02:49 PM

I was excited about Beast, then disappointed about beast. Which pretty much sums up my response to WoD in general except for the splats which just looked bad from the get go. Except more so.

Honest Tiefling

2017-10-26, 03:16 PM

I think a Kraken.

...Kraken aren't intelligent. That's a bit of a bum deal. Through that reminds me of a comic...

https://i.imgur.com/b2iJD66.jpg

Morty

2017-10-27, 10:49 AM

I've never known what to think about Beast. But when I think about it, that's just the thing. It's a game that doesn't know what it wants to be. So everything I hear about it seems to be this weird jumble of ideas.

Nerd-o-rama

2017-10-27, 05:56 PM

...Kraken aren't intelligent. That's a bit of a bum deal. Through that reminds me of a comic...

https://i.imgur.com/b2iJD66.jpg

Let's be honest. The people who wrote this probably a) didn't care or b) confused the authentic kraken myth with Clash of the Titans, wherein it's still a pretty basic sea monster but is at least implied to have some sapience by getting lumped in with the reality-creating demiurges more properly called Titans.

Rater202

2017-10-27, 09:43 PM

The idea is that a Beast is a Human whose Soul(Not Horror, screw that that's stupid) is Primordial Embodiment of some kind of fear in the form of a monster.

So The girl isn't a literal monstrous giant squid, she's a human whose soul is that of a Kraken, or rather her soul is made of the kind of fear that a Kraken represents, and she can use this to evoke abillities like that of a kraken.

Beast was pitched as the "be whatever monster you want" splat and the "built in for crossovers" splat.

What we got was a disappointment, but it makes sense for you to be a Kraken if that's what you want.

lightningcat

2017-10-29, 08:07 PM

I did not back the kickstarter for Beast, but did get the book from DriveThruRPG.com. After reading through it all I could say was that it was perfect for making opponents, but I would never run or play a game based on it. And the thought of letting someone play one in mixed or another type of game is asking for trouble.
I could at least think about running or playing a game of Prometheus, although I cannot see it working for a group very well. I think Promethetheus could be an interesting 1 on 1 game.

EDIT: clarified that.

Mikemical

2017-10-30, 07:29 AM

I think it would be a interesting 1 on 1 game.

That depends how far you are willing to thread into someone's magical realm.

Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll

2017-10-30, 07:46 AM

That depends how far you are willing to thread into someone's magical realm.

That bit was referring to Prometheus, I think.

I have similar reservations with Changeling, tbh. I do respect and love Rose Bailey's work, but David Hill had a very good direction that I was very attached to for his new edition on changeling, and there are hints so far that Rose might go in a different direction in some very important ways. It might again be a case of draft 1 being better than draft 2, though in this case I suspect more a case of difference in personal taste than anythign else.

Cluedrew

2017-11-01, 07:16 AM

Lord Raziere

2017-11-01, 12:46 PM

You know threads of like this always make me wonder: Why is World of Darkness popular? I mean I can see some good stuff in it, but less than a lot of less popular RPGs. Was the old stuff better? Did it appeal more in the dark and antsy days of old?

Maybe this should be a separate thread, but it seems pretty relevant considering some of the "dashed hopes" I'm seeing here.

well, WoD is popular because White Wolf instead of doing the usual thing of just making a world to have fun in and not care how much the PCs wreck it all.....they instead make the most beautiful setting you've ever seen and doing their darndest to make PC characters apart of that world so that anything they do is an intended story of that world, and how they fit into the settings themes and overall mood and structure. its a very different game than just rolling up a few characters for DnD, which is what some people want- roleplaying in a different way that can't be taken non-seriously. I don't see the appeal myself, but thats what some people want.

this is both WoD's greatest strength and weakness. on one hand they get to have a certain artistic integrity for staying true to the artistic/thematic point they want to make when your playing the game and providing a different experience than just being able to solve everything with violence or sill shenanigans. which is a good thing, since not everything can or should be DnD. at the same time, thats all it really does, and has no flexibility for providing anything else, so if you want play a game much like it but with some modifications its harder to get working.

and some WoD books like this, are just plain misses entirely. White Wolf writers considers themselves artists first, and art sometimes takes risks to make a point, and sometimes that doesn't work out so well, and this isn't a recent thing, there have been books that are misses in White Wolf's older days as well, White Wolf has always been a company of "great highs, great lows" they'll either produce something utterly amazing or they will screw up and it will be complete garbage, what you will never get is something boring. like in comparison, Demon: the Descent is frigging awesome.

its just the same company that produces thoughtful metaphors of horror on the nature of this and that are also the company that sometimes accidentally screws up and makes something completely mechanically unworkable or produces utterly offensive and toxic fluff that that no one wants to be canon, when the company actually cares about talking about Important Issues and such and so on.

basically? White Wolf and by extension WoD is Daring Avant-Garde Artist: The RPG Company, and that whether this is a really good thing or really bad thing depends on how the coin flip lands every time a book is released.

Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll

2017-11-01, 02:50 PM

I'd note that Onyx Path has been running all WoD stuff for the last few years, and took the brand along a slight turn, away from the edgy-punk to the intellectual-gothic. Sometimes intellectual-gothic comes off as pretentious, and its certainly more vulnerable to community pressure, as seen in the case of B:tP.

In the good games, like Demon: the Descent (the people who are still angry that it's not fire-and-brimstone demons notwithstanding) the theme is strong in and of itself as well as being well supported by the mechanics, which are fun to play in and of themselves. In the bad games, the themes and the mechanics work against each other; even if good on their own, if they don't mutually support, they go down the drain. B:tP is the first game where the theme ended up straight-up bad, imho, AND didn't jive with mechanics. Other games had bad mechanics, but strong themes and decent support saved them from ruin to merely mediocrity.

I would say that it is indeed only the old stuff that was "popular". It was very of it's moment; edgy, dark, uncertain, cynical, fight-the-man stories where power leads to power, and weakness leads to weakness, and nothing matters in the face of ancient evils. From what I've read of it, it perfectly matches that 90s nihilistic youth counterculture. it was Man Versus Society, often more specifically Man Versus Authority, which is thematically the same as Man Versus God.
The more modern CoD, by contrast, is a personal game, which makes it harder at the same time. It de-emphasizes the 'man-vs-society' in favour of 'man-vs-self', and was pretty shoddily done for the first few books introducing the world to the new direction. Additionally, it no longer matched the zeitgeist; by the mid-2000s, 'dark edgy' went mainstream. YA novels became a Thing, and the demographics shifted. The older geek community that was the core RPG market reject things that go mainstream, so who wants to play a Vampire or Werewolf game when Twilight is all people are talking about? And nobody marketed RPGs towards the YA market like they did other genre fictions, whether because the market was especially hard, or the people making decisions in the RPG world disparaged YA readers.
So when Onyx Path takes over nWoD, they rarefy it's direction; the larger market isn't there like it was, so they accept that they're making specialty products, not directly competing with D&D anymore. THIS is their drive further and further to the "Avant-Garde Artist: the RPG Maker" as Raziere eloquently put it. They've gone from the (relatively) mass-market oWoD to the (missed the zeitgeist) mid-market nWoD, to the specialty-product CoD.

Now some specialty products take off, but like Raziere said, it's a gamble. When they made Changeling: the Lost, they didn't expect it to explode like it did. When they made Mummy: the Curse, they expected it to take off a lot more than it did (despite it being one of my personal favourite games I've never actually played).

Morty

2017-11-01, 04:32 PM

Chronicles of Darkness (Beast isn't World of Darkness) are popular because people want to play games of modern horror in a variety of settings, with strong vision and tight themes. And CoD delivers, more or less. There's nothing particularly complicated about it. Of course, Beast has neither a strong vision nor any coherent theme, which is why this thread exists.

And it's really odd and somewhat exasperating that people speak about both franchises even though their knowledge about either of them has stopped a few editions of Masquerade ago.

Elderand

2017-11-03, 06:10 AM

What really bothers me is the crossover aspect, because it's absolute ****. I don't mind the idea of beast seeing everyone as family and trying to get close to them, what I mind is that the developer's way of making the crossover aspect work is by turning beast into the worst kind of mary sue that utterly **** on every theme of every other gameline to make it happen. It completely tosses out any logical reaction any other creature from the other gameline would have to make life easier for beasts.

Beasts automaticly make a good impression on other monsters and this make zero sense. The paranoid vampire with low humanity that doesn't hesitate to kill anyone to protect his secrets. As long as the beats isn't openly hostile, he'll be best bud with him quickly. The werewolves who maintain their territory by culling anything that would muck up the spirit world? Of course they'll get along just fine with a being that spawn fear and despair spirits everywhere they go. Why wouldn't they? (He says with so much sarcasm)

Mikemical

2017-11-06, 03:42 PM

Beasts automaticly make a good impression on other monsters and this make zero sense. The paranoid vampire with low humanity that doesn't hesitate to kill anyone to protect his secrets. As long as the beats isn't openly hostile, he'll be best bud with him quickly. The werewolves who maintain their territory by culling anything that would muck up the spirit world? Of course they'll get along just fine with a being that spawn fear and despair spirits everywhere they go. Why wouldn't they? (He says with so much sarcasm)

They come off as DMPC Mary Sue Races, like Sergals, or Chakats. Especially Chakats.

If a player came up to me asking to play one, I would very patiently introduce him to what a Hunter is, not a Hero like he expects he will be able to mess around with. Pretty sure Hunters don't give a damn if you're a sparkledog-otherkin who farts rainbows. You accidentally bump into someone walking down the street? The Frigging Spanish Inquisition is gonna kick down your door.

Cluedrew

2017-11-06, 06:17 PM

I forgot to come back and thank those who explained some of the good of World of Darkness. So thank you Lord Raziere, Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll and Morty.

Blackhawk748

2017-11-06, 09:26 PM

They come off as DMPC Mary Sue Races, like Sergals, or Chakats. Especially Chakats.

If a player came up to me asking to play one, I would very patiently introduce him to what a Hunter is, not a Hero like he expects he will be able to mess around with. Pretty sure Hunters don't give a damn if you're a sparkledog-otherkin who farts rainbows. You accidentally bump into someone walking down the street? The Frigging Spanish Inquisition is gonna kick down your door.

Hunters disabuse many people of their silly notions.

I forgot to come back and thank those who explained some of the good of World of Darkness. So thank you Lord Raziere, Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll and Morty.

To add to this, nWoD was....weird. oWoD had every book linked, in fairly obvious ways. There was this huge meta plot (whether that bugged you or not didnt matter) and everyone's main villain was involved. In nWoD that didnt really happen. Each splat was its own thing and the "meta plot" (the God Machine) was just sorta...there.

Now, im fine with the lack of meta plot, what bugged me was the change to Werewolves and the fact that theres basically two games designed for 1 on 1 games (Mummy and Promethean). I mean, Mummy and Promethean are great games, i'll just never get to run them.

Beast on the other hand..... its just sad. I was ok with its very basic original concept. Be an embodiment of primordial fear, and dont make a Hercules. Simple right? But then we got this mess, and the worst part is, the parts people where complaining about where already present in the other lines. Face it, WoD isn't pleasant. Its a rather ugly setting and it always has been.+

Im just hoping that other game i heard about at Gen Con still turns out ok. Its called Enigma or something? Basically you where the victim of some evil cult or science experiment and you escaped and now they're hunting you. Sounded neat.

Honest Tiefling

2017-11-06, 11:42 PM

The idea is that a Beast is a Human whose Soul(Not Horror, screw that that's stupid) is Primordial Embodiment of some kind of fear in the form of a monster.

So...You're roleplaying an aversion to slimy things? I'm really not getting sold on this system because every time I think I understand it, it just sounds stupider and stupider. I think a game where you are just a goddamn dragon would have been better at this rate.

Through a campaign where you're a group of Gastons hunting down sparkly-poo dogs that fart rainbows sounds pretty awesome.

PhantasyPen

2017-11-07, 01:47 AM

Anonymouswizard

2017-11-07, 03:12 AM

Im just hoping that other game i heard about at Gen Con still turns out ok. Its called Enigma or something? Basically you where the victim of some evil cult or science experiment and you escaped and now they're hunting you. Sounded neat.

Deviant. Out seems to be 'Showa era Kamen Rider: the game' down to having Deviants still with the evil guys.

So...You're roleplaying an aversion to slimy things? I'm really not getting sold on this system because every time I think I understand it, it just sounds stupider and stupider. I think a game where you are just a goddamn dragon would have been better at this rate.

You are a dragon, you just represent the fear of being bobbled on the head and washing up to find your stuff nicked.

Through a campaign where you're a group of Gastons hunting down sparkly-poo dogs that fart rainbows sounds pretty awesome.

Sounds too much like ungeons & ragons.

comicshorse

2017-11-07, 07:22 AM

You are a dragon, you just represent the fear of being bobbled on the head and washing up to find your stuff nicked.

Is that really what Dragons represnt the fear of in Beast ?

Anonymouswizard

2017-11-07, 07:58 AM

Is that really what Dragons represnt the fear of in Beast ?

For everybody not in the know, specific creatures do not actually represent specific fears/hungers in Beast. I was just working from a Dragon and working out what fear it might represent.

Specifically, to me the most important thing about dragons is the hoarding of treasure, not their power. How to extrapolate that into a fear though? Well that treasure has to come from somewhere, and before autocorrect ruined everything it was being bonked on your head and waking up to find your stuff nicked (although I love the idea of a Beast who breaks into people's houses at night, bobbles their head before using their powers to make their victims go and do the washing up, before stealing the TV while their victims are in the kitchen).

Morty

2017-11-07, 08:22 AM

To add to this, nWoD was....weird. oWoD had every book linked, in fairly obvious ways. There was this huge meta plot (whether that bugged you or not didnt matter) and everyone's main villain was involved. In nWoD that didnt really happen. Each splat was its own thing and the "meta plot" (the God Machine) was just sorta...there.

Now, im fine with the lack of meta plot, what bugged me was the change to Werewolves and the fact that theres basically two games designed for 1 on 1 games (Mummy and Promethean). I mean, Mummy and Promethean are great games, i'll just never get to run them.

Beast on the other hand..... its just sad. I was ok with its very basic original concept. Be an embodiment of primordial fear, and dont make a Hercules. Simple right? But then we got this mess, and the worst part is, the parts people where complaining about where already present in the other lines. Face it, WoD isn't pleasant. Its a rather ugly setting and it always has been.+

Im just hoping that other game i heard about at Gen Con still turns out ok. Its called Enigma or something? Basically you where the victim of some evil cult or science experiment and you escaped and now they're hunting you. Sounded neat.

Don't oWoD cosmologies frequently contradict each other and become crowded if you ever try to combine them? To say nothing of rules interactions? nWoD/CoD design games as self-contained and largely independent of one another, because trying to account for every other gameline would turn it into a huge mess. But crossover is still easier than in oWoD. I'm still not sure why Hunter: the Reckoning didn't use aggravate damage...

comicshorse

2017-11-07, 09:13 AM

For everybody not in the know, specific creatures do not actually represent specific fears/hungers in Beast. I was just working from a Dragon and working out what fear it might represent.

Specifically, to me the most important thing about dragons is the hoarding of treasure, not their power. How to extrapolate that into a fear though? Well that treasure has to come from somewhere, and before autocorrect ruined everything it was being bonked on your head and waking up to find your stuff nicked (although I love the idea of a Beast who breaks into people's houses at night, bobbles their head before using their powers to make their victims go and do the washing up, before stealing the TV while their victims are in the kitchen).

I can see that ( obsession with washing up aside :smallcool:). I was thinking more on the lines of the Dragon's connection in stories with stealing beautiful maidens. A Dragon as a parents fear that having raised their lovely innocent , little girl some 'beast' will come along and steal her from them

Blackhawk748

2017-11-07, 09:21 AM

Don't oWoD cosmologies frequently contradict each other and become crowded if you ever try to combine them? To say nothing of rules interactions? nWoD/CoD design games as self-contained and largely independent of one another, because trying to account for every other gameline would turn it into a huge mess. But crossover is still easier than in oWoD. I'm still not sure why Hunter: the Reckoning didn't use aggravate damage...

Yes and no. Each line was written from that perspective so that's how they "fixed inconsistencies. And yes, stupid power difference, but that's still that way.

And it did? Avengers had a power that made melee weapons do Agg so I have no idea where you're getting that from

Anonymouswizard

2017-11-07, 09:25 AM

I can see that ( obsession with washing up aside :smallcool:). I was thinking more on the lines of the Dragon's connection in stories with stealing beautiful maidens. A Dragon as a parents fear that having raised their lovely innocent , little girl some 'beast' will come along and steal her from them

This is one of the few great things about Beast, we can both bring our interpretations of what Dragons mean to it.

If only it wasn't linked to all the annoying bits.

Morty

2017-11-07, 09:59 AM

Yes and no. Each line was written from that perspective so that's how they "fixed inconsistencies. And yes, stupid power difference, but that's still that way.

Which perspective and what inconsistencies? You're being too vague for me to address anything.

And it did? Avengers had a power that made melee weapons do Agg so I have no idea where you're getting that from

The Avenger power made weapons lethal. You're confusing it with Sword of St. Michael, a Benediction in Vigil that works similar, except with aggravated damage.

Mikemical

2017-11-07, 04:03 PM

Every time I see a thread like this one I have to wonder: Am I just missing something? Is my copy of the book out of date? Because when I read the Beast book I loved it. IT's what got me interested in Chronicles of Darkness. The themes of Family and what defines the relationship between a monster and a hero, and even the monster and other people, just kinda called out to me. I also think it's probably one of the more interesting gamelines from a character generation perspective. There's so many ways to mix up and combine the different abilities to make something completely unique. I really just can't get why people don't like this book. :smallfrown:

I mean, maybe because to you it was your first experience with WoD. But to people like me and others who have played the old games and some of the new ones, Beast is like being promised Christmas presents, then you wind up with coal, and then get told that Santa isn't real. A disappointment, and then a slap to the face.

Like, there was a way everything is connected in WoD, both new and old. Vampires are wary of Mages(people who might suddenly throw a fireball on your face and you can't tell who is and who isn't) and afraid of Werewolves(nigh-unstoppable murder machines). Werewolves hate Vampires(undead, therefore anti-natural as well as having chronic backstabbing disorder) and view Mages with contempt(and hate the ones who bend reality against gaia's wishes, plus are always after their secrets in their temples). Mages are wary of Vampires(same as werewolves' view on vamps) and Werewolves(same as vamps). Hunters come in ranges from John Constantine to Angry Space Marine.

Beast just throws away all the social intrigue from the stablished world because getting people to trust you in WoD is HARD, so they get their "Everybody loves you" fluff, as well as the realism that every action has consequences swept under the rug, like how maybe giving someone an aneurism to fuel your horror might make a Hunter come and hunt you down. Beasts get diplomatic immunity, "because you're special". WoD is most of the time a cynical, gritty version of the real world with some staple horror-themes thrown into the mix. Beast is for people who just wanna go murderhoboing without having anything bad happen to them in retaliation for their murderhobo ways.

Blackhawk748

2017-11-07, 05:28 PM

Which perspective and what inconsistencies? You're being too vague for me to address anything.

I meant the books are written from the perspective of who the book is detailing, so any weirdness is typically bushed off as "that faction doesnt know that"

The Avenger power made weapons lethal. You're confusing it with Sword of St. Michael, a Benediction in Vigil that works similar, except with aggravated damage.

That may be whats going on. I cant find my Reckoning book, but im positive it does more that just that. Maybe its adds more Lethal damage?

Beast just throws away all the social intrigue from the stablished world because getting people to trust you in WoD is HARD, so they get their "Everybody loves you" fluff, as well as the realism that every action has consequences swept under the rug, like how maybe giving someone an aneurism to fuel your horror might make a Hunter come and hunt you down. Beasts get diplomatic immunity, "because you're special". WoD is most of the time a cynical, gritty version of the real world with some staple horror-themes thrown into the mix. Beast is for people who just wanna go murderhoboing without having anything bad happen to them in retaliation for their murderhobo ways.

And it wasnt even like they couldnt make the basic premise of "everyone trust you" work. Just instead of it being a flat effect that makes people your buddy it just makes them slightly more likely to agree with you. Hell there can even be a negative there. The like having you around. A lot. So they want you to stay around. All the time.

Kinda like one of the types of Prometheans.

PhantasyPen

2017-11-07, 07:22 PM

I mean, maybe because to you it was your first experience with WoD. But to people like me and others who have played the old games and some of the new ones, Beast is like being promised Christmas presents, then you wind up with coal, and then get told that Santa isn't real. A disappointment, and then a slap to the face.

Like, there was a way everything is connected in WoD, both new and old. Vampires are wary of Mages(people who might suddenly throw a fireball on your face and you can't tell who is and who isn't) and afraid of Werewolves(nigh-unstoppable murder machines). Werewolves hate Vampires(undead, therefore anti-natural as well as having chronic backstabbing disorder) and view Mages with contempt(and hate the ones who bend reality against gaia's wishes, plus are always after their secrets in their temples). Mages are wary of Vampires(same as werewolves' view on vamps) and Werewolves(same as vamps). Hunters come in ranges from John Constantine to Angry Space Marine.

Beast just throws away all the social intrigue from the stablished world because getting people to trust you in WoD is HARD, so they get their "Everybody loves you" fluff, as well as the realism that every action has consequences swept under the rug, like how maybe giving someone an aneurism to fuel your horror might make a Hunter come and hunt you down. Beasts get diplomatic immunity, "because you're special". WoD is most of the time a cynical, gritty version of the real world with some staple horror-themes thrown into the mix. Beast is for people who just wanna go murderhoboing without having anything bad happen to them in retaliation for their murderhobo ways.

First of all, thank you for actually answering my post and explaining the reason for why people dislike this particular gameline.

That being said, I think part of this might also come down to us interpreting the fluff differently. I didn't read the fluff as "everybody loves you." I read it as "everyone is your family" and perhaps this has more to do with the culture and environment I was raised in but that has a lot of baggage to it, but most of it comes from the Beast's perspective, not the other monsters. It's the Beast who looks at the others and sees a long-lost children of the Mother of Monsters, and that colors their reactions. If a particular vampire or werewolf is friendly towards a Beast, it's because the Beast's own instincts gives them a predisposition to be helpful towards the vampire and the werewolf.

As for the "no consequences" thing, I don't remember there being any fluff or crunch in the books that would imply your actions have no consequences, but there was a lot of suggestion to minimize actions that would cause you to have to deal with said fallout. Murderhobo'ing in Beast just gets you on a blacklist: Heroes come after you, and they might recruit everyone else to take you out. Heck, even your own Family might turn on you if you disrupt the Dream too much.

raygun goth

2017-11-08, 02:37 AM

I swear, some days it's like nobody's ever read the section where Beasts can feed just by hanging out with Changelings at a club soaking up Glamour.

Like, if you make contact with a non-Beast and go do their thing with them, you don't have to dream-hunt. At all. You don't even have to do the thing. You just have to be there.

Anonymouswizard

2017-11-08, 02:53 AM

Morty

2017-11-08, 05:15 AM

I meant the books are written from the perspective of who the book is detailing, so any weirdness is typically bushed off as "that faction doesnt know that"

So how is it appreciably different from CoD does it?

That may be whats going on. I cant find my Reckoning book, but im positive it does more that just that. Maybe its adds more Lethal damage?

It adds lethal damage and makes any blunt improvised weapon deal it. The illustration for the Avenger creed has a wrench.

Mind you, H:tR Edges range from overpowered (preventing supernaturals from spending their power source) to so weak you might as well not bother (miscellaneous improvements to Second Sight), with a few being actually useful and balanced for their costs.

Anonymouswizard

2017-11-08, 06:50 AM

So how is it appreciably different from CoD does it?

CoD is modular, but IIRC generally has the different splats concentrate on different planes. So of the big three Vampires concentrate on the physical world exclusively, the Werewolves focus on the Shadow, and the Mages focus on the Astral Realms. Of the others the Prometheans and Hunters are entirely physical world, Changelings are Arcadia (which might be an Astral Realm), Sin-Eaters the Underworld, and I'm not sure about Mummies and Demons (but I think they're another physical world focus). Depending on which game lines you use you might or might not have contratictions, the big one being the very different Arcadias in Mage and Changeling. But each gameline infringes on the cosmologies of the others and none answer the big questions of 'how did everything get created' (as Werewolf: the Apocalypse did) or 'how does everything work' (as Mage: the Ascension did). Beast is obviously the Dream Realm.

Now oWoD did have separation as well, Mages got the High Umbra, Ghosts got the Low Umbra, and the Werewolves got the 'can't remember the name so let's call it the middle Umbra', but even then the descriptions of the other Umbras never matched the ones from the gameline that focused on it. Plus Mage's Consensus, which works in it's own game, causes havoc with the metaphysics of every other gameline (vampires only work like that because people believe they do, or Consensus doesn't work).

oWoD was a brilliant setting if you knew which version you wanted to use. My personal favourite is Demon/Hunter, playing biblical fallen angels/demons interests me and Hunter slots neatly into any other gameline's cosmology by not answering the big questions (Vampire is more variable).

Oh, this is how I like to line up the cosmologies:
-Vampire/Demon seem to draw from the same cosmology and mythology.
-Werewolf and Changeling actually seem to be relatively compatible if you assume the focus on the opposite ends of the spirit world.
-Mage runs over everybody with their Consensus.
-Wraith exists alongside everybody fairly neatly.
-Hunter just doesn't care, it doesn't answer it's big questions.

Conversely nWoD's biggest problem is two Arcadias and the fact that the cosmology was different at some point in the setting (which is what makes Mummies weird IIRC). Everything else adds another section to the Cosmology, and arguably that applies to Changeling.

So to answer the question, oWoD says 'this is what Splat X thinks', CoD says 'this is what splat X knows'.

Mikemical

2017-11-08, 08:45 AM

As for the "no consequences" thing, I don't remember there being any fluff or crunch in the books that would imply your actions have no consequences, but there was a lot of suggestion to minimize actions that would cause you to have to deal with said fallout. Murderhobo'ing in Beast just gets you on a blacklist: Heroes come after you, and they might recruit everyone else to take you out. Heck, even your own Family might turn on you if you disrupt the Dream too much.

It's not that you get outed for screwing up by the other magical beings, because that happens to everyone on a regular basis. It's that in general, when others do their thing far too regularly, there is a consequence that follows accordingly. Vampires lose humanity and grow frenzied, might even turn feral. Mages gain paradox and might accidentally erase themselves from reality or become Nephandi. Werewolves risk being corrupted by the Wyrm, and might even be turned into Black Spiral Dancers. Beasts on the other hand, get a slap on the wrist and justification on the things they do because "it's in your nature, you can't help it." It sounds like tragic characters in paper, but in practice you only get bad DeviantArt OCs. When Heroes(or anyone rational, for that matter) show up to kill you dead because you're the source of the bad things happening, it's them who are in the wrong, regardless if you're a completely unapologetic sadist who revels in watching his victims squirm.

Also the fact that most of the stories read like bad high-school revenge fantasy porn written by that goth kid who thought he was a badass because he watched Elfen Lied and Hellsing doesn't really help it's case.

raygun goth

2017-11-08, 04:23 PM

Because honestly? That's less interesting than trying to minimise the harm your feeding does.

Essentially, you can be the monster everyone thinks you are and risk endangering the dream and triggering Heroes, or, you can go play politics with other supernaturals, which is very sticky and can get dangerous, as well, but for different reasons.

golentan

2017-11-08, 06:21 PM

Essentially, you can be the monster everyone thinks you are and risk endangering the dream and triggering Heroes, or, you can go play politics with other supernaturals, which is very sticky and can get dangerous, as well, but for different reasons.

I feel like it'd be more interesting if there were downsides for those supernaturals with hanging out with a Beast playing politics.

Like, the beast shows up and is "We're family, we're best friends now, and I don't need to feed because I can sponge off of you!"

And the vampires look at them and go "Yeah, no, we don't need heroes coming after us instead of you, and also hanging out with you triggers morality checks which is not great for Crazy Jim. Get lost."

Edit: And you can keep the Mary Sue effect, and thus force the supernaturals to plot behind their back to ditch the beast!

"Every time I go near tha @#$%ing thing I wind up smiling like a stupid puppy! How do we get rid of it without talking to it?!"

Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll

2017-11-08, 07:09 PM

So...You're roleplaying an aversion to slimy things? I'm really not getting sold on this system because every time I think I understand it, it just sounds stupider and stupider. I think a game where you are just a goddamn dragon would have been better at this rate..

The idea isn't that you represent AVERSIONS. It's the really deep-seated ones, and those are your X-Splat. Some are typically linked with some fearsome creatures of legend more than others. So in the book, it links Dragons with the Ugallu family, which represent the fear of "exposure"; a wide-open plain with nowhere to hide, a giant dragon swoops from above, perhaps even a roving eye that can see past any hiding spot you have. In your nightmares, you cower behind your sofa, make yourself as small as possible, try to hide, but it doesn't matter, because you can never hide, an Ugallu sees you, always.

I think that dragons also fit really well into the Anakim family; Fear of Helplessness. Their traditional link is giants, and their power is they remove barriers at a breeze, a kind of "you can run, but I'll catch you eventually thing", but I find the theme really fits a Dragon; you look up into this ancient beast, and what can you do against it's glory? You are helpless before it.

The other large fears represented are Darkness (you know something is out there, and for the love of god you can't see it, and it could get you at any second!), Depths / the Unknowable (think the classic Lovecraftian horror for this one, unknowable things that lurk beyond the seas, or far above in space. The idea that things on land are safe, but there are places where The Same Rules Do Not Apply.). The last one is Revulsion, which is a kind of fear-of-disability I think. It's the nightmare when you look in the mirror and scream because your eyeballs are slowly turning into large black orbs that are also mouths eating your own face.

... Man I have some messed up dreams. But you get the general idea. Don't think "I'm afraid of slimy things", think "I'm afraid of what slimy things REPRESENT", which could be "slimy things represent the revulsion, in that once you touch slime you can't get it off and it spreads across your entire body until all you can feel is slime", or it could be "slimy things represent fear of Depths/the Unknowable, because slimy things are terrible creatures from below that should not exist, and as you look at one you are paralyzed with fear, as your mouth slowly fills and you drown in your own mucus."

PhantasyPen

2017-11-08, 09:39 PM

The idea isn't that you represent AVERSIONS. It's the really deep-seated ones, and those are your X-Splat. Some are typically linked with some fearsome creatures of legend more than others. So in the book, it links Dragons with the Ugallu family, which represent the fear of "exposure"; a wide-open plain with nowhere to hide, a giant dragon swoops from above, perhaps even a roving eye that can see past any hiding spot you have. In your nightmares, you cower behind your sofa, make yourself as small as possible, try to hide, but it doesn't matter, because you can never hide, an Ugallu sees you, always.

I think that dragons also fit really well into the Anakim family; Fear of Helplessness. Their traditional link is giants, and their power is they remove barriers at a breeze, a kind of "you can run, but I'll catch you eventually thing", but I find the theme really fits a Dragon; you look up into this ancient beast, and what can you do against it's glory? You are helpless before it.

The other large fears represented are Darkness (you know something is out there, and for the love of god you can't see it, and it could get you at any second!), Depths / the Unknowable (think the classic Lovecraftian horror for this one, unknowable things that lurk beyond the seas, or far above in space. The idea that things on land are safe, but there are places where The Same Rules Do Not Apply.). The last one is Revulsion, which is a kind of fear-of-disability I think. It's the nightmare when you look in the mirror and scream because your eyeballs are slowly turning into large black orbs that are also mouths eating your own face.

... Man I have some messed up dreams. But you get the general idea. Don't think "I'm afraid of slimy things", think "I'm afraid of what slimy things REPRESENT", which could be "slimy things represent the revulsion, in that once you touch slime you can't get it off and it spreads across your entire body until all you can feel is slime", or it could be "slimy things represent fear of Depths/the Unknowable, because slimy things are terrible creatures from below that should not exist, and as you look at one you are paralyzed with fear, as your mouth slowly fills and you drown in your own mucus."

In general, Dragons could be any of the main families, but I think other than that this is mostly right. There are thematic links to other elements of the more "iconic" monsters but you've pretty much covered it all.

I feel like it'd be more interesting if there were downsides for those supernaturals with hanging out with a Beast playing politics.

Like, the beast shows up and is "We're family, we're best friends now, and I don't need to feed because I can sponge off of you!"

And the vampires look at them and go "Yeah, no, we don't need heroes coming after us instead of you, and also hanging out with you triggers morality checks which is not great for Crazy Jim. Get lost."

Edit: And you can keep the Mary Sue effect, and thus force the supernaturals to plot behind their back to ditch the beast!

"Every time I go near tha @#$%ing thing I wind up smiling like a stupid puppy! How do we get rid of it without talking to it?!"

Thank you for this, that last line's gonna leave me grinning for days. ^_^

Althought again, the "best friends" line doesn't really ring true to me, but it seems pretty clear I'm getting different implications from the lore than everyone else.

Anonymouswizard

2017-11-09, 04:53 AM

I feel like it'd be more interesting if there were downsides for those supernaturals with hanging out with a Beast playing politics.

Like, the beast shows up and is "We're family, we're best friends now, and I don't need to feed because I can sponge off of you!"

And the vampires look at them and go "Yeah, no, we don't need heroes coming after us instead of you, and also hanging out with you triggers morality checks which is not great for Crazy Jim. Get lost."

Edit: And you can keep the Mary Sue effect, and thus force the supernaturals to plot behind their back to ditch the beast!

"Every time I go near tha @#$%ing thing I wind up smiling like a stupid puppy! How do we get rid of it without talking to it?!"

This is awesome and I am stealing it for a campaign, thank you sir.

Mikemical

2017-11-09, 08:40 AM

"Every time I go near tha @#$%ing thing I wind up smiling like a stupid puppy! How do we get rid of it without talking to it?!"

Apparently demons are immune to that. There's a story in the book about a hitman(implied to be a demon) that killed a beast in it's own lair.

I would also think that Hunters are immune to it, then again, the book says that Slayers and Hunters get along well.

Because nothing says edgy-antihero like associating with the Inquisition that hunts down magical beings like yourself.

PhantasyPen

2017-11-09, 09:32 AM

Apparently demons are immune to that. There's a story in the book about a hitman(implied to be a demon) that killed a beast in it's own lair.

I would also think that Hunters are immune to it, then again, the book says that Slayers and Hunters get along well.

Because nothing says edgy-antihero like associating with the Inquisition that hunts down magical beings like yourself.

No, no, no. That doesn't sound right at all. What book are you reading??? Hunters hunt Beasts just like they do any other monster, what it says is that Slayers can get buffs from Beasts like the other monsters do. (Which has some worrying implications about the souls of Slashers)

Honest Tiefling

2017-11-09, 03:49 PM

Because nothing says edgy-antihero like associating with the Inquisition that hunts down magical beings like yourself.

Hey, maybe they give out good dental. Through I'm getting a little confused as to what is what, can anyone give me a run down?

Zale

2017-11-09, 05:16 PM

Someone was asking why people said Beast glorified abuse:

Basically, most splats in the various Wod/Chronicles games are supposed to be.. not very good people. This varies, from splat to splat, but the baseline assumption is that most characters will probably do- or be tempted to do- morally questionable or reprehensible things.

However, lot of the time those are presented in a way that's dramatic, or at least in a way that doesn't feel like something close and personal.

Vampires drink blood, and can kill people, but most people don't deal with blood-drinking murders so it feels removed. Something fantastic- it can be a vehicle for exploring themes that can hit closer to home, but it doesn't ring of it from the depths.

But Beast..

Beast always makes me think of the banality of evil.

Beasts frequently do bad things in very personal, familiar ways. They're, in many ways, people who thrive off of the suffering of others. They need people to be afraid, uncomfortable, or violated. They feed off of removing the blanket of comfort people wrap around themselves, on exposing them to the world and their primal fears.

But all to often, they do so in banal, familiar ways. They're the boss who crushes you under the thumb, just because they can. They're a stalker who breaks into your home just to take away the feeling of safety you get from it.

For me, personally, it breaks my ability to make characters I feel like I can play. The best option I have is, basically, a Batman-like figure- with all the attendant problems that has, while most characters are going to passively or actively act like abusive *******s just to feed themselves.

I've dealt with emotional abuse in my time, and I can't -won't- take the part, even imaginary, of something that feels like that. Something that feels like this banal, crushing evil. The darkness of humanity not as a grand or dramatic, but as small and gross and pathetic.

But my reading is tilted by my world-view and perspective, so maybe someone else can get some enjoyment out of it. I won't tell other people it's axiomatically bad, just I feel like it has a lot of unfortunate implications and negative themes that I don't wish to play.

(Also because of my viewpoint, it makes me super uncomfortable to think of Changelings getting along with Beasts, as the Changelings are a much better composed metaphor for abuse and trauma victims. You can imagine why that might make me wince a little.)

PhantasyPen

2017-11-10, 09:56 AM

Someone was asking why people said Beast glorified abuse:

<snip>

(Also because of my viewpoint, it makes me super uncomfortable to think of Changelings getting along with Beasts, as the Changelings are a much better composed metaphor for abuse and trauma victims. You can imagine why that might make me wince a little.)

Thank you for answering that in a coherent way, it makes your viewpoint understandable, and actually quite relateable, although I worry you might be correct that it's colored by your personal history (but that applies to all of us now doesn't it?).

As for your last point in parenthesis, I read the interactions between Beasts and Changelings (and this also applies to Prometheans) as Beasts are extremely protective of the well-being of Changelings they befriend, which in my experience is generally something that endears you to someone. The relationships between Changelings and Beasts, (or between Prometheans and Beasts) isn't one between an abuse-victim and an abuser abusing another person (in general), it's a relationship between someone heavily-scarred and a very large guard animal. At least, that's how I've come to interpret the interactions between the two.

Nerd-o-rama

2017-11-10, 10:28 AM

Although this explanation brings up a key problem I have with both Beast and my previously-mentioned bête noire, New Old Vampire: they both heavily railroad how your character acts either with rules or "we're assuming your character acts this way or else the setting makes no sense". I'm fine with some assumptions about the condition of WoD supernaturals - Vampires lack natural empathy, Changelings have been abused so thoroughly they have trouble distinguishing reality and fantasy - but not so much on strict definitions of how characters act on these conditions, at least for player characters.

I can accept that most Vampires become exploitative monsters prolonging their unlives at the expense of everyone around them, but if I want to play something other than that, don't tell me what to do when previous versions of the game have given me a plethora of interesting philosophies and goals to choose from. I can accept that Changelings tend to fall into a certain finite set of coping mechanisms, but don't tell me I can't come up with something else. I can't accept Beasts automatically always doing the thing that "should" make another supernatural feel comfortable with them. What if the Beast wants to do something else? What if the other supernatural doesn't want to respond positively to that? What then?

Blackhawk748

2017-11-10, 10:59 AM

Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll

2017-11-10, 11:09 AM

PhantasyPen

2017-11-10, 11:35 AM

I think the reason that Vampires abusiveness doesn't insult in the same way is that that's the major question the splat asks: "now you're a bloodsucking monster who regularly assaults people just to survive, caught up in your own little world of cliques as if that's all that matters; are you really all that different then you were before?"

What does Beast ask that's equivalent? I can't think of it. Every other splat has a "big question" that's on a similar level of depth, except for Beast afaik.

Yeah, okay, this I can agree with. :/ I think Onyx Path/White Wolf focused too hard on making Beast a crossover-compatible system and didn't look at it as a singular entity enough.

EDIT: Wait, I think there was a mention somewhere of "what's the difference between the hero and the monster?" But it definitely didn't feel like a focus.

Elderand

2017-11-10, 03:10 PM

Yeah, okay, this I can agree with. :/ I think Onyx Path/White Wolf focused too hard on making Beast a crossover-compatible system and didn't look at it as a singular entity enough.

EDIT: Wait, I think there was a mention somewhere of "what's the difference between the hero and the monster?" But it definitely didn't feel like a focus.

heh, focusing on making it crossover compatible, good joke.

Mechanically all games in chronicles of darkness are crossover compatible since they all use the same basic mechanics. You don't need special rules to make things crossover compatible.

And the rules that beasts get to make crossover easier completely crap on every gameline involved, beast included.
As I said before, beast 'family' stuff forces other supernatural to completely act contrary to what make sense given the setting of each gameline. And for beast ? The crossover rules actually remove the one thing that create any challenge for beasts. They don't have to hurt people to feed in a crossover, without that not only do you remove the central theme of beast, but you also remove the built in antagonist.

The crossover section of beast ****s up everything and everyone without exceptions.

Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll

2017-11-11, 01:37 PM

Yeah, as far as I can tell the way crossover developed was "What if Beasts see all other monsters as descendents from their own Mother of Monsters!"
"Yeah! Let's make it crossover!"
"Should we consider any of the themes of the other splats?"
"Nah! And hell, let's not even consider our own themes! Crossover fun!"

Mikemical

2017-11-15, 08:35 AM

Blackhawk748

2017-11-15, 06:26 PM

Heroes only got like three pages of basically saying "These guys are jerks, all jerks are heroes, and if a hero isn't a jerk, then we're not gonna bother explaining how they work because that would contradict everything we've said about them so far."

Their Nemesis gets 3 pages of description? My god, Each monster gets nearly that much in the Hunter book

Anonymouswizard

2017-11-15, 06:41 PM

Their Nemesis gets 3 pages of description? My god, Each monster gets nearly that much in the Hunter book

Faulty assumption, you're acting as if Beast is as good a game as Hunter.

Mikemical

2017-11-16, 09:49 AM

Their Nemesis gets 3 pages of description? My god, Each monster gets nearly that much in the Hunter book

It gets worse. There is a Hero that turns out to be an US Marine who returned home from service. I was expecting him to really be some kind of bloodthirsty killer as the demographic that this book appeals to often paint them as. Turns out the guy is a super chill dude, with Integrity 5, so I was wondering "okay, so how does he go about his hunt?"

He doesn't. The one sympathetic hero in the section doesn't really hunt beasts because he's too much of a nice guy. Like, he experienced a beast feeding off someone, and he just looked the other way. Because according to the book, that's what nice people do.

Blackhawk748

2017-11-16, 10:14 PM

Faulty assumption, you're acting as if Beast is as good a game as Hunter.

I never assumed it was as good as Hunter, i just figured the Nemesis, the ting you will spend most of your time dealing with, would get more than a cursory snapshot.

It gets worse. There is a Hero that turns out to be an US Marine who returned home from service. I was expecting him to really be some kind of bloodthirsty killer as the demographic that this book appeals to often paint them as. Turns out the guy is a super chill dude, with Integrity 5, so I was wondering "okay, so how does he go about his hunt?"

He doesn't. The one sympathetic hero in the section doesn't really hunt beasts because he's too much of a nice guy. Like, he experienced a beast feeding off someone, and he just looked the other way. Because according to the book, that's what nice people do.

......that makes so little sense its painful.

Thats it, making a Hunter Conspiracy called Heroes. Gonna show these pansies how its done.

strider1276

2017-11-24, 06:44 PM

Hey, maybe they give out good dental. Through I'm getting a little confused as to what is what, can anyone give me a run down?

I know that it has been some time since you asked this question, but I just came across this thread today, so I will attempt to answer it. Long story short, several things are muddling the discussion - I have no idea, for instance, why WoD got brought into it, as Beast is a CofD game.

(WoD = World of Darkness - anything between 1991 and 2004; CofD = Chronicles of Darkness - anything after that, although from 2004 until the past year or so, it was called the "new" World of Darkness or nWoD for short)

The original World of Darkness games are Vampire: the Masquerade, Werewolf: the Apocalypse, Mage: the Ascension,
Wraith: the Oblivion, Changeling: the Dreaming, Mummy: the Resurrection, Hunter: the Reckoning, and Demon:
the Fallen. The first five have 20th Anniversary Editions, put out by Onyx Path Publishing, a bunch of folks who used to work for White Wolf. The first, Vampire, also has a 5th Edition coming out, from the new White Wolf, owned by Paradox Interactive. (All of that is a long story that isn't in and of itself important right now.)

The "new" World of Darkness, or Chronicles of Darkness as it's all known now (even retroactively, although obviously any books printed before the change don't say it) consists of: Vampire: the Requiem, Werewolf: the Forsaken, Mage: the Awakening, Promethean: the Created, Changeling: the Lost, Hunter: the Vigil, Geist: the Sin-Eaters, Mummy: the Curse, Demon: the Descent, Beast: the Primordial (which is the topic of this thread), and the upcoming Deviant: the Renegade.

The two groups share a lot of DNA - d10 dice pools, accumulating successes, supernatural creatures hidden from humanity and so forth. They also have quite a few differences, especially now with the CofD lines moving to their Second Edition (for the most part - Demon and Beast already use those rules, as will Deviant).

So, with all of that said, those talking about those CofD games are talking about games that Beast potentially crosses over with, should a table decide to do so. The WoD games...again, I'm not sure why those were brought up, as it just muddies the already confusing waters.

Does that help?

Morty

2017-11-26, 01:20 PM

It really does help to keep our titles straight in World of Darkness and Chronicles of Darkness discussions.

Anonymouswizard

2017-11-26, 01:31 PM

It really does help to keep our titles straight in World of Darkness and Chronicles of Darkness discussions.

I mean, at least now the titles are properly seperated, I remember back when Chronicles of Darkness was just World of Darkness, if the offical name was used you had to work out if they were talking about nWoD or oWoD (later cWoD). Now with CoD/CofD it's at least clear what people mean, but it's hard to get people to change their acronyms.

I mean, I still refer to the old world of darkness, and I think I'm going to continue using it for the pre-nWW WoD games, because I just do not like the new Vampire.

Morty

2017-11-27, 11:47 AM

Sure, but this is a thread about Beast the Primordial, so the old World of Darkness is by default less relevant than Chronicles.

Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll

2017-11-28, 09:16 AM

Iirc, it was brought up originally in the thread to compare the over-arching themes and design philosophies behind the games, to show how Beast starts to veer away from them.

Grytorm

2017-11-28, 02:24 PM

Then you get people like me who have decided to just use the acronyms in my own way and repeatedly explain it...

I use oWoD or cWoD for Masquerade, Ascension etc. nWoD for Requiem, Forsaken, Awakening etc 1e. CoD I would use for the updated/2nd edition rules for those games and new gamelines which came out after the rule changes. So I think for me Mummy the Curse is the last nWoD and Demon the Descent is the first brand new CoD line.

Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll

2017-11-29, 10:38 AM

MtC I consider borderline as well; it was the first game to really deviate from a lot of the nWoD 'rules'; power stat goes from 1 to 10, morality stat starts at 7. It was the first experiment to opening up those rules to more interesting gameplay, which later CofD games ran with. But on the other hand, it also tied itself VERY closely to the Virtue/Vice system, so...

The Random NPC

2017-11-29, 02:22 PM

Anonymouswizard

2017-11-29, 02:53 PM

I thought all of the power stats went from 1 to 10 and morality stats started at 7. How does it deviate?

IIRC in MtC your power stat goes from 10 to 1 (and is not under your control), and your morality stat (Memory) begins at 3. Then if you achieve certain conditions your power stat is locked at one but Memory takes over some of it's functions (but not all of them, you're weaker than when you were on a timer).

Lord Raziere

2017-11-29, 03:06 PM

I thought all of the power stats went from 1 to 10 and morality stats started at 7. How does it deviate?

I think hes talking about Mummy The Curse, I think there was a typo. basically it doesn't go from 1-10.....it goes from 10-to-1, and I think your morality starts out low. your Mummy starts incredibly powerful but not very human, and as time goes on they gradually lose power while gaining coherence and humanity, and the less powerful they are, the slower they lose their power, until your like this power 1 guy with a lot of humanity and such but your power is at its minimum until you decide to sleep again then wake up like few millennia from now to do the whole thing over again. complicating the process is that you don't have full memories of who you are from who you were back in Egypt and might value getting those back but you have limited time to actually do that, as well as having to fulfill a purpose of someone who commands you.

so the whole game is supposed to be a dwindling resources thing where you have only a limited time to be super-powerful at the start before you have to do things the smart and sneaky way, as well as balance getting back memories and fulfilling the purpose some jerk is controlling you for.

you can see why it didn't really take off. its an interesting game, its just that most gamers like them level ups and being badasses and determining their own backstory, when Mummy requires you to basically leave your backstory in the hands of the GM. It doesn't really appeal to me as an a thing to actually play either, I just find it fascinating to talk about in theory.

Edit: BELEH, listen to the guy above me, not me, I don't have a good memory of this game.

Anonymouswizard

2017-11-29, 04:24 PM

you can see why it didn't really take off. its an interesting game, its just that most gamers like them level ups and being badasses and determining their own backstory, when Mummy requires you to basically leave your backstory in the hands of the GM. It doesn't really appeal to me as an a thing to actually play either, I just find it fascinating to talk about in theory.

Yeah, a sad thing with some CoD games is that they can be good for only one kind of story.

I think that a lot of the more interesting ideas with MtC is how it played around with the mechanics though. I like how it does resources compare to other games and am a bit sad they didn't shake up resources in one of the core three.

The Random NPC

2017-11-29, 07:48 PM

I get it now, it isn't 'here's how it broke the rules', it's 'here's the rules it broke'.

Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll

2017-11-30, 10:33 AM

Anonymouswizard

2017-11-30, 12:52 PM

Ah yes, that's what I meant. Super evocative of the themes, but Mummy's big issue is that it hews far too closely to its themes, restricting the types of stories that you can tell; I guess the opposite issue of Beast, which is that it ignores its themes to facilitate crossover, making the game seem like a weak soppy mess.

I'd honestly say that Mummy is the better game, because even though it limits the kind of stories it simulates, it simulates them really well. It also wouldn't be too hard to change the power and morality stats to support a more standard game, so I don't have too much of a problem with them doing it this way round.

Mummy's probably my favourite of the nWoD games because it did at least try a new vision and stick to it. Sure, it's not what everybody wanted, but it works for exactly what it sells itself as, while Beast doesn't even work for it's core concept. Sure, I also adore Requiem 2e, but I consider post-Changeling to really be different better games (I mean Requiem 1e still used a lot of unneeded Masquerade terminology).

Arbane

2017-12-05, 01:40 AM

It doesn't make much sense that Prometheans would get along with Beasts - Beasts' 'charm' ability is supposed to be because all monsters are 'naturally' related to each other, but Prometheans' whole schtick is that they are so inherently unnatural that nature itself revolts against their existence.

But Beast..

Beast always makes me think of the banality of evil.

Beasts frequently do bad things in very personal, familiar ways. They're, in many ways, people who thrive off of the suffering of others. They need people to be afraid, uncomfortable, or violated. They feed off of removing the blanket of comfort people wrap around themselves, on exposing them to the world and their primal fears.

But all to often, they do so in banal, familiar ways. They're the boss who crushes you under the thumb, just because they can. They're a stalker who breaks into your home just to take away the feeling of safety you get from it.

As some wiseguy said, "Sorry, Beast. You're not Grendel or Smaug, you're Catbert."

Tinkerer

2017-12-05, 04:15 PM

Well... *cough* that was certainly a read. Of the many, many, many, MANY problems in the book I think that the one which really got me was the Hungers. Not necessarily in what they are but the samples within that section directly contradicting the established rules regarding feeding. Just... wow.

And did anyone else feel weird about the disparaging depictions of Demons, which the designer also worked on and which was almost as critically acclaimed as this book was derided?

EDIT: Could make for an interesting villain with a little reworking though.

Mikemical

2017-12-13, 09:46 AM

Beasts frequently do bad things in very personal, familiar ways. They're, in many ways, people who thrive off of the suffering of others. They need people to be afraid, uncomfortable, or violated. They feed off of removing the blanket of comfort people wrap around themselves, on exposing them to the world and their primal fears.

But all to often, they do so in banal, familiar ways. They're the boss who crushes you under the thumb, just because they can. They're a stalker who breaks into your home just to take away the feeling of safety you get from it.

Funny that the game that supposedly portrays their nemesis as bullies has the Beasts perform the bullying themselves. Their morality is orange and blue, and they think they're completely justified in their actions, because in their heads, they're the victims and it's their nature to do horrible things, so why try to act against their natural impulses?

In slightly-related news, one of the main writers was apparently outed as a rapist. (sarcasm)Imagine my shock(/sarcasm)

Anonymouswizard

2017-12-13, 10:10 AM

In slightly-related news, one of the main writers was apparently outed as icky icky icky, why are people like that

Source? I mean, I'll be searching for myself later, but I'd still be interested to know where you heard this.

No offence meant to the various paedophiles who have gone out of their way not to hurt children even indirectly. I know they exist, and I believe that they're doing the right thing.

Mikemical

2017-12-13, 10:33 AM

Source? I mean, I'll be searching for myself later, but I'd still be interested to know where you heard this.

Got my charges wrong, edited original post accordingly... he's a rapist.

https://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?817741-RPG-Industry-sexual-harassment-Mentzer-abuse-and-what-do-we-do-about-it
https://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?817932-BlackHat-Matt-Is-No-Longer-a-Moderator-at-RPGnet&
https://boards.fireden.net/tg/thread/56069938/#56078825

Anonymouswizard

2017-12-13, 11:06 AM

Got my charges wrong, edited original post accordingly... he's a rapist.

https://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?817741-RPG-Industry-sexual-harassment-Mentzer-abuse-and-what-do-we-do-about-it
https://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?817932-BlackHat-Matt-Is-No-Longer-a-Moderator-at-RPGnet&
https://boards.fireden.net/tg/thread/56069938/#56078825

Cool will read in a bit. Spent a while trying to work out if the new charges are any better, but I really shouldn't be trying to grade horribleness.

He's at least at Vampire levels though, if he hasn't managed to reach the apex of Beast level horribleness.

Mikemical

2017-12-13, 11:11 AM

Cool will read in a bit. Spent a while trying to work out if the new charges are any better, but I really shouldn't be trying to grade horribleness.

He's at least at Vampire levels though, if he hasn't managed to reach the apex of Beast level horribleness.

It does explain why Beast came out the way it did. No matter how much you write, your actions and behaviour will inevitably bleed into your works. With how the book is structured, it's not really much of a surprise to me. The ones more busily virtue signaling are the ones with more skeletons in their closets.

Anonymouswizard

2017-12-13, 12:44 PM

It does explain why Beast came out the way it did. No matter how much you write, your actions and behaviour will inevitably bleed into your works. With how the book is structured, it's not really much of a surprise to me. The ones more busily virtue signaling are the ones with more skeletons in their closets.

Sure. I will admit that I gave up on Beast before the book came out, because I didn't like the direction the redrafts were taking. I've got no idea how much the book actually shoves 'Beasts are misunderstood' in our faces (heck, from what I remember of the initial pitch to internetters there was no 'Beasts are misunderstood', which seemed to appear in the first draft).

Heck, if Beast had been able to admit that Beasts are jerks and bullies, but managed to carve a narrative around that (and made it so that Heroes were the universe's response to Beasts going too far) then it would have been a good game.

Heck, let me have a go at a short synopsis version.
We have always been there, hidden among humanity. The primordial fears lurking within hearts, of violence, of avarice, of powerlessness. monsters of Myth and Legend, existing to teach a lesson.

Unfortunately, as I was told when I experienced my Homecoming, the lessons we exist to teach have been forgotten. Each of us exists to pass along a single lesson, and it is said that originally our Mother would help each Beast to find their lesson. But our mother isn't here, and many Beasts die with their lessons unfound, much less taught. Only those who can divine their purpose are able to attempt to pass that lesson along, to take the first step of the long road of ascending from Beast to Myth.

Until then we have to make do. We have been given tools to help us in our attempts to teach, the power of fear, the forms of beasts, the sanctuary of our Lairs. Useful tools, but ones that must be used carefully. If a Beast goes too far, if they become a Monster, then the universe shifts. It reacts, and it sends out a calling for Heroes who will slay the Monster and return the light they have taken.

A few ideas here, one of which is that a Beast that manages to pass along their Lesson is actually changed by the experience. The second is that there is no actually need to be abusive, instead the spreading of fear is as much a tool as the powers it gives you, at least from the point of view of Beasts, and that Heroes are a safeguard against this (in game terms a Hero would be created at Satiety 10 rather than 0). A Beast could go through life without spreading any fear, but they'd be limited to the lowest tiers of power. Still problematic, if I was actually trying to remake this I'd seperate spreading fear and refueling your powers completely, but I'm trying to work with what's there and that means Satiety fuels powers.

I also wanted to expand on the idea of teaching humanity. Here it's not enlightening through fear (although that option is still open), but it's the first step on the path to greatness. The only problem is that there's no instinctual knowledge of what lesson you're supposed to teach, leading for some 'quest for knowledge' stuff as potentially session ideas.