[Submission] Bully

ReverendRevolver wrote:

Celerity and potence are dangerous, but Rotschreck is just the red fear, not related to what can "kill you deader" than a lit cigaretre or a candle, just the intristic fear of fire vamps have.

There is exactly two possible interpretation of the red fear :

* it's litteraly only fire and sun, which is very strange given that the beast is a bit smarter than that, and certainly not in line with the rotschrek card. I do remember obtenetration being able to do rotschreck in some manual too.

* it's everything that can actually kill definitely a vampire. Ripping the head or heart of a vampire is such a threat, one that can be done with potence and helped with celerity, and which is about impossible to do without at least potence.

If you stick to #1, yes it's not rotschreck. If you believe it's #2, it's plausible to induce rotschreck simply by being an angry brujah.

I dont own a physical copy od any vtm core rulebook. I recall revised and second having Rotschreck listed in like a page spread, with difficulty to resist various levels of "lit the f#@%k on fire" basically.
Other types of frenzy were listed seperately.
Now, Id be more useful with a book in my hands (this lasagna in front of me doesnt have vtm fluff content...) but I CAN say that frenzy from fear generated differing results than Rotshreck, but had more in common with that than hunger frenzy.

Rotschreck, fail or botch the roll to resist and you run like hell away from the source. So, run from a Bic lighter being held up during a bar band covering Purple Rain, and escaping the structure the trigger was seen it overrides all reason. So, if you run from the flame and into a waiting sabbat coterie and six warghouls you KNEW were there, your still reeling from rotschreck.

Intimidartion tactics are typically, in fluff, more like a subterfuge thing than frenzy from envirnment, powers, humger, whatever. So, animalism and presence are great for being able to enduce frenzy.

In vtes, Rotsxhreck triggers on all agg, so the only super fair thing to do is compare to other cards. Frenzy in pre is weak, great in Ani and one of several masters.

Cel Pot arent what Id call good candidates for frenzy cards. Intimidation isnt frenzy, but the fluff argument can be made.
Id argue Potence and celerity BOTH should be able to tap and inflict damage without question, possibly both with no blood cost for free. Feeling no on frenzy and such though.

ReverendRevolver wrote:

I dont own a physical copy od any vtm core rulebook. I recall revised and second having Rotschreck listed in like a page spread, with difficulty to resist various levels of "lit the f#@%k on fire" basically.

The books basically describe Rotschrek as the vampire's beast reaction to something that can destroy a vampire, citing fire and light as sole example, but never explicitely saying it's only thoses two that work, as I said two time already.

ReverendRevolver wrote:

Other types of frenzy were listed seperately.

Regular frenzy => aggressive pulsion
Rotschrek => defensive pulsion.

In fact, books explicitely say that rotschrek is the frenzy born of fear, and the "regular one" the frenzy born of anger.

ReverendRevolver wrote:

Now, Id be more useful with a book in my hands (this lasagna in front of me doesnt have vtm fluff content...) but I CAN say that frenzy from fear generated differing results than Rotshreck, but had more in common with that than hunger frenzy.

I have the book on my hand, and you're wrong. Fear don't provoke non-rotschreck frenzy.

ReverendRevolver wrote:

Rotschreck, fail or botch the roll to resist and you run like hell away from the source. So, run from a Bic lighter being held up during a bar band covering Purple Rain, and escaping the structure the trigger was seen it overrides all reason. So, if you run from the flame and into a waiting sabbat coterie and six warghouls you KNEW were there, your still reeling from rotschreck.

Your example is good because what you describe, while objectively worse, isn't a direct threat to the vampire being. So, yes, the beast will command to try to kill that packs and thoses six warghoul if they don't move out of the way, because you cannot kill a bonfire but you can kill a warghoul ; and a warghoul send you in torpor, not definitely dead.

(the fact that people may want to diablerize you is lost to the beast)

It's like humans being less fearful of a car than a plane, despite the car being objectively more dangerous. Rotschreck is a primitive fear reaction, not a risk calculation thing.

ReverendRevolver wrote:

Intimidartion tactics are typically, in fluff, more like a subterfuge thing than frenzy from envirnment, powers, humger, whatever. So, animalism and presence are great for being able to enduce frenzy.

Oh, yes, thoses two disciplines work to mess with someone's head. In the same idea, you can intimidate with presence, or with potence. The potence one is more likely to break the masquerade and have other problem, but a lot less likely to be blocked by a random power.

In the same idea, you completely can drive someone mad with Chimestry or Obtenetration, even if dominate and dementation are the more classic options. Same thing here, potence+cel can be used to provoke the beast to react by making a credible and real threat, while Animalism and Presence is here to make the beast go off regardless of whether there is a threat or not.

Ohlmann wrote:

In fact, books explicitely say that rotschrek is the frenzy born of fear, and the "regular one" the frenzy born of anger.
...
I have the book on my hand, and you're wrong. Fear don't provoke non-rotschreck frenzy.

It's not quite that simple. If you're referring to "the book", there's more than one, and it changes.

By the time you get to the 1998 edition (p.228):
Now, you might say "But that's for a vampire who's in frenzy who becomes afraid." (Though becoming afraid when roleplaying death from above with no self-control isn't easy.)

But on the list of provocations:

Provocation	Difficulty
Life-threatening situation	4

Then going back to:

Ohlmann wrote:

The books basically describe Rotschrek as the vampire's beast reaction to something that can destroy a vampire, citing fire and light as sole example, but never explicitely saying it's only thoses two that work, as I said two time already.

It's pretty explicit that it's not just anything that can destroy a vampire. By the time 1998 rolls around:
Fire and sunlight are the obvious ones in a V:tM chronicle. If you had a protagonist who had easy access to other sources of aggravated damage - say, a Celestial Chorister who's smacking you about with power channeled directly from god him/herself - that could easily be recognised, you'd probably expect characters to develop a similarly Pavlovian reaction to it, perhaps shortly after they see a redshirt get vapourised by it in a manner similar to a vampire on a bonfire. My personal interpretation for Rotschreck is usually something along the lines of something that can indiscriminately cause Final Death, especially where it's something that can get out of control (e.g. a fire). Obviously, in V:TES we've simplified that a bit - so claws that wouldn't typically provoke Rotschreck in the WoD can provoke it in V:TES, but them's the breaks.






All that aside, I don't like this card, however you tweak the theme.
The inferior is fine. The superior... urgh.

First, play this, go to close range, throw down IG and.... Ow. Note that although you can only play one at superior, you could use the inferior to get to close range if necessary - and in the sort of deck you're likely to play this, inferior cel/pot should be easily available. You've now caused some extra trouble for any sort of hitback strategy, and hitback strategies are one of the few things a vampire under IG can use to annoy you. Currently, say you rush an empty vampire (or get blocked by an empty vampire), you can potentially still get hit for one, hit for more than that with a Weighted Walking Stick or Target card, and similar. Enter combat against a fairly typical Protean vampire with one blood and they can either get aggravated damage or strike you, but not both. I don't really like this. It's just moving another step towards "You will die. There is nothing you can do about it." (Yes, I realise we're not quite there yet, but...)

Then, the opponent you're facing manages to slip your grasp and goes to range. Great! Now they want to shoot you with their .44 Magnum and Blur for, say, 1 additional. Okay, that's going to cost them 2 extra blood, even though they're at range. One of the few escape routes for an IG deck is the gun player who can slip to range, causing the IG player stress with having enough maneuvers available etc. You don't want lots of Flash type cards around when you can't play them (and you might not want to cycle Flash with the Press as a second round isn't necessarily awesome for you, and if an opponent is already dead, it's tricky to press to cycle it - Nimble Feet is useful here). This card does two things, though. It gives you a maneuver, and it gives you a way to screw up the gun using vampire even if they get to range. Seems like something of a double whammy.