Poll: Merge Antitribbu into base Clans?

from my perspective of being a new player, the separation into antitribute was something that took a moment to grasp. once i understood that they are their simply their own clan though it made more sense.

will the game benefit from folding antitribu? maybe

sorry for repeating the obvious, but "his is my understanding

+ it reduces some of the initial overload of details (the confusing term antitribu-xyz not same as xyz), subjective but i think is a lot cleaner

+ it reduces number of clans

+ it opens up some more flexibility, maybe, in crypt and lib selection

- revising cards adds some confusion beteeen old and new players alike

- design and test cycles required as to not cause any unintential overpowered new combos, wording to retain some restrictions


...

for me, its mostly about weighing the confusion +/-

Rowdy wrote:

VTES shouldn't even have anything to do with V5 until it has been out a few years. Jyhad didn't come around until V2 was starting. There is really no idea how well VtM V5 will do... they have already shown that they can't get their s**t together after the Chechnya screw up.

Talking these points is inevitable as post show & good to do, but changing VTES as much as talk is talking is not going to screw up the game. My opinion of course, but I am sure others feel the same as well. Those not reading the forums need say as well.

But getting rid of Sabbat because they aren't really in V5 is just outlandish in prospect. They still exist and unsure what may come eventually with the Sabbat if V5 survives. The books aren't out yet (for most part) so hold off on getting rid of a sect or combining cards. One or two voices on the forum does not speak for the many. mine, or the anti-sabbat crowd.

Played the game since '94, because of VtM. Played ever since with friends in home settings. Never did tourney play until last year, and I'm very quiet on forums, but this Poll touched a big nerve.

Rowdy

The man speaks little but is brutally to the point!

I'm so much in agreement.

Rowdy wrote:

But getting rid of Sabbat because they aren't really in V5 is just outlandish in prospect.

I'm sorry, but why did this statement even need to be said? Merging antitribu clans in VtES has nothing to do with removing Sabbat from the game, even if that were a thing.

kschaefer wrote:

Rowdy wrote:

But getting rid of Sabbat because they aren't really in V5 is just outlandish in prospect.

I'm sorry, but why did this statement even need to be said? Merging antitribu clans in VtES has nothing to do with removing Sabbat from the game, even if that were a thing.

Yes. Which is why it would have been helpful to read the "please read all of this before jumping to conclusions " part of the first post. Nothing Sect wise is in the crosshairs, just changing the clan logo on some cards and the word antitribbu. Literally all but on !gangrel have "Sabbat" in the text box.

To Ulphs point:
I started playing because of Vtm, like Rowdy. Ulphs points sum it up neatly, because as a vtm fan, I bought a Malkavian starter deck from CE. The rules were confusing as shit, and it was strange the clans thing had separate logos for sabbat versions of cam clans and salubri, but not cam versions of Lasombra and not Serpents of the Light, because I knew that they had additional weaknesses than setites and thus must be a different bloodline.

Then I started playing vtes years later and initially it was a minor thing that Dolphin couldn't recruit Muddled Vampire hunter. But it's much more annoying that Artemis couldn't act via madness network with Anatole, a problem that came up once I was more experienced. I understood why vtes wise, but vtm wise, a sizable chunk of the clan being cut off mystically from the Network when they all had was dumb.
Then seriously everything to do with antitribbu had to be just politically geared. But why the hell was Enkidu a bloodline that he predated?
But I love vtes, so it's still one of those things we joke about, like Hardestadt using a sport bike or something.

Nobody said kill off the sabbat. The whole problem is merely splitting some clans into not the Same clan because of political standings. Points of validity have been made, on both sides, but most of it comes back to it's just huge to do, and not that its out of the question, but the current variable of the future metaplot is kinda too big to dedicate to anything yet. Its obviously going somewhere, but Paradox and (maybe) Onyx Path will be the writers of it. Which is why I threw up the organically possible thing instead of changing discipline and clan names.

V5 will be part of our future. I'm not a hater, but it's a very different feeling game than Vtm2nd,rev,20. It's like parts of v20/rev, mixed with req, but less storydriven in the overview. Mechanically interesting, but if we go on merit of dice system, requiem was great, it just sucked as a game otherwise compared to masquerade AND the non-core games in Nwod(Changeling, Vigil,Promethean all kicked its ass) . Anyway,

I'm not advocating immediate change to straight V5 reflection. Just cannibalize things that fit and work. The masquerade elements I don't see "right" in the V5 3books this far are the gothic punk grit n violence blended into the horror that make it feel more personal and believable, allowing my disbelief to be suspended easier. Also the not-quite lovecraft level of part of something huge and unknowable quality of 13+gen is lost, because part of the feel was knowing someone may be pulling your strings, then realizing more than one someone was made hella good storytelling for Vtm, and it wasn't more than an outlier background plot half the time.
With Vtes, you know your a Methuselah moving your pawns. The lack of that FEEL for V5 makes vtes integration only FEEL proper in pieces; we exist in the same metaplot setting, we should make anarchs matter more, make a card about splitting from Cam for Brujah, can Assamites, Sabbat Gehenna Crusader stuff, Rudi as a card......

But the whole damn thing doesn't come to us as easy as V20, so I apologize for my RANT but Rowdy is at a viewpoint that I feel is important and I do not want the wrong idea coming off.

ReverendRevolver wrote:

Nobody said kill off the sabbat. The whole problem is merely splitting some clans into not the Same clan because of political standings. Points of validity have been made, [...] but most of it comes back to it's just huge to do

One of the things that gets touted as a strength of V:tes is the size of the card pool. But when someone says "hey, we could streamline the game to a net positive for the future," and the response is "But we'd have to errata too many cards, and that will confuse people." it makes me wonder if the set size is a positive.

The bottom line however is that Black Chantry will likely make changes to the game based on what White Wolf/Paradox wants, to make the Vtes better support V5. We've already seen it happen with Anarch becoming a sect and no longer being just a keyword whatever it was. I would not be surprised to see more of this sort of thing happening in the future.

As a long-term VTES player but NOT a VTM player, I truly don't see the benefits for a game in merging antitribu and 'parent' clans.

Furthermore, lately we've had somewhat of an resurgence of a game (VTES) locally and several new players (without any RPG background) have emerged and, so far, the existence of antitribu clans hasn't been any issue, with regards to game's complexity or densness or confusion. The same was, many years ago, when I was a new player, for me - it took two sentences of lore explanation and never was it a rule issue...