a thought on titles

The only thing that not make sense is lack of independent city titles. Like 'have 2 votes(titled)(Berlin)'. Or something like that.

@post above: Prisci(1ballot)

Lord of Berlin?
Ruler of Berlin?

Juggernaut1981 wrote:

Lord of Berlin?
Ruler of Berlin?

Another way would be to implement new way titles are implemented.

Instead of:

Prince of <insert city> would be Prince of <insert city>(2 votes, <sect>). It's a bit longer, but allow non-standartized titles like Sultan of Warsaw (2 votes, Independent).

Of course, better way would be to introduce pictograms for sects and another for votes to save space) (on a unrelated note, i'd like to see sect indicator as icon on the green bar once vtes resume print.

Lech wrote:

The only thing that not make sense is lack of independent city titles.

Why? Titles work differently all over the place. Laibon have two different titles worth 2 votes, neither of which has a city attached. The Camarilla has clan-based titles, but no-one else does. A Ventrue deck can only have one Ventrue who is Justicar, while a Tzimisce deck could have many Cardinals. The "X has Y votes" titles can't be gained in play, while Prince, Justicar etc. can. Some titles can only be gained from card play (Liaison, some Fee Stake cities).

Translating from WoD terms, the process of voting is a somewhat abstract representation of a vampire's influence in the WoD. There's nothing that says it has to come from a city - it could come from a position of influence and prestige in a clan without necessarily having a specific geographic powerbase.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

There's nothing that says it has to come from a city - it could come from a position of influence and prestige in a clan without necessarily having a specific geographic powerbase.

His point is that independant whose power come from a city do exist in lore. I don't have actual example however of independant vampire said in lore to basiclaly be prince of their cities.

@up: If we count vtes as lore, Aziz is dammar of istanbul and should have inie city title. Don Michael Antonio Giovanni is Prince of Las Vegas.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

Why? Titles work differently all over the place. Laibon have two different titles worth 2 votes, neither of which has a city attached. The Camarilla has clan-based titles, but no-one else does. A Ventrue deck can only have one Ventrue who is Justicar, while a Tzimisce deck could have many Cardinals. The "X has Y votes" titles can't be gained in play, while Prince, Justicar etc. can. Some titles can only be gained from card play (Liaison, some Fee Stake cities).

True.

jamesatzephyr wrote:

Translating from WoD terms, the process of voting is a somewhat abstract representation of a vampire's influence in the WoD. There's nothing that says it has to come from a city - it could come from a position of influence and prestige in a clan without necessarily having a specific geographic powerbase.

To be fair, both princes and primogens are just geographical titles linked to specific powerbase in specific title. Justicar and Inner Circle are both clan prestige titles.
Bishops and Archbishops are also both geographical, Prisci, Cardinals and Regents are sect prestige related.
I don't care about laibons.
Independent ones are varied:
In Indie branch of assamites, there are both geographical titles (like said Aziz, also some super fast lord of Alamut) and clan prestige related (Jamal and Thetmes as Caliphs and i think Thucimia as some sorcerer seat, Kashan just for clan prestige i think).
Other lowly clans, well, some of those came from georaphical powerbase, some don't.

TBF i would like to see if it's clan prestige position / sect prestige position / just renown / domain related or mix of those above.

In game terms it doesn't mattern much, except for papillon.