[Werewolf] Is it really broke?

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.whitewolf (More info?)

Okay, so here and elsewhere I've seen some remarks expressing people's
wishes that either the old Werewolf or the new one would/will cleave(d)
more closely to the idea of werewolves as people afflicted with a curse,
rather than the shamanistic warriors of WtA.

And I'm wondering...why? There must be dozens of games where you can
play werewolves of the more typical stripes. WitchCraft and M&M are two
that spring to mind. I bet there's a d20 supplement on the subject, too.
Why is it so important to have yet another?

Myself, I like the WW take because, among other reasons, it's very
unique. I've never seen the basic concept of werewolves taken in that
direction before. I hope Ethan Skemp and his crew get to explore it
further.

--
Tyler

tfdion at syr dot edu
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.whitewolf (More info?)

Tyler Dion wrote:

> Why is it so important to have yet another?
>

People bitching are louder than people enjoying themselves. The amount
of bitching about WWolf not hewing closer to the 'curse' has nothing to
do with how many people actually dislike WW as it stands.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.whitewolf (More info?)

"Tyler Dion"

> Okay, so here and elsewhere I've seen some remarks expressing people's
> wishes that either the old Werewolf or the new one would/will cleave(d)
> more closely to the idea of werewolves as people afflicted with a curse,
> rather than the shamanistic warriors of WtA.

> And I'm wondering...why? There must be dozens of games where you can
> play werewolves of the more typical stripes. WitchCraft and M&M are two
> that spring to mind. I bet there's a d20 supplement on the subject, too.
> Why is it so important to have yet another?

> Myself, I like the WW take because, among other reasons, it's very
> unique. I've never seen the basic concept of werewolves taken in that
> direction before. I hope Ethan Skemp and his crew get to explore it
> further.

I disliked the eco-terrorists in fur/shamanism aspect of the game. It made
it "too big" for me in some sense, yet didn't really seem to budge. "You
kill and kill and kill all manner of spirits as you're told to do by your
spirit ancestors, but the world still falls into destruction...oh how the
spirit lands suffer!" I really felt by the end that Werewolf had nothing
else to do, much like Vampire, and unlike Mage. All the bases got covered,
we got a pretty clear picture of the world. The only thing left was to
either play the final game and move the setting on, or to invent some new
horrible thing to come out of the woodwork. Personally, I'm glad they opted
for "Final Battle" instead of "New Bad Guys".

That, and I didn't care for the amount of combat that seemed to be built
into the game.

It's just a personal preference: I think if White Wolf made a game about
the more traditional werewolf mythology (read: non-eco-guardians), they
could do something really incredible with it. If it's just a new version of
Werewolf: the Apocalypse with a clean slate, that's fine, but I probably
won't be too interested in it. That's all.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.whitewolf (More info?)

It may be unique, but if WW recycled it after the reboot, it's wouldn't be
unique anymore. Besides, it's a reboot, not a new edition.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.whitewolf (More info?)

For me all the WW games kinda got away from their "core" aspects abit.
Vampire became less about "A beast I am, lest a beast I become" and turned
into more of an exerise in political moves. And to me one of the elements at
the core of Werewolf that I liked was the fact that they know they were
doomed but they they were chose to fight on despite that. It really was a
manner of how they were going to live....on their knees or on their feet.
Another thing many of the people I gamed with and talked about over werewolf
with is the mood and back drop of the stories. Werewolf is not just about
the spirits and the fighting, it about people fighting in a war. Each Garou
character should face one simple question during their life span. "How far
will I go?" Do you sink to the level of your enemy or somewhere under him?
By doing that you have just become your own worst enemy and let the enemy
win an even bigger battle.

It also been my experence and my belief that not all Garou are "tree
hugging Hippies". The Garou I believe were created to help maintain a level
of balance. If the Wyld grow to powerful, they would work to check it power,
The same applies for the Weaver and the Wyrm.And the Garou made mistakes,
really big ones. The imperium, the War of Rage, and becoming fixated solely
on fighting the Wyrm.






"Shane Graves" <lobsterhut@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:9fXhc.5413$eZ5.3306@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> "Tyler Dion"
>
> > Okay, so here and elsewhere I've seen some remarks expressing people's
> > wishes that either the old Werewolf or the new one would/will cleave(d)
> > more closely to the idea of werewolves as people afflicted with a curse,
> > rather than the shamanistic warriors of WtA.
>
> > And I'm wondering...why? There must be dozens of games where you can
> > play werewolves of the more typical stripes. WitchCraft and M&M are two
> > that spring to mind. I bet there's a d20 supplement on the subject, too.
> > Why is it so important to have yet another?
>
> > Myself, I like the WW take because, among other reasons, it's very
> > unique. I've never seen the basic concept of werewolves taken in that
> > direction before. I hope Ethan Skemp and his crew get to explore it
> > further.
>
> I disliked the eco-terrorists in fur/shamanism aspect of the game. It
made
> it "too big" for me in some sense, yet didn't really seem to budge. "You
> kill and kill and kill all manner of spirits as you're told to do by your
> spirit ancestors, but the world still falls into destruction...oh how the
> spirit lands suffer!" I really felt by the end that Werewolf had nothing
> else to do, much like Vampire, and unlike Mage. All the bases got
covered,
> we got a pretty clear picture of the world. The only thing left was to
> either play the final game and move the setting on, or to invent some new
> horrible thing to come out of the woodwork. Personally, I'm glad they
opted
> for "Final Battle" instead of "New Bad Guys".
>
> That, and I didn't care for the amount of combat that seemed to be built
> into the game.
>
> It's just a personal preference: I think if White Wolf made a game about
> the more traditional werewolf mythology (read: non-eco-guardians), they
> could do something really incredible with it. If it's just a new version
of
> Werewolf: the Apocalypse with a clean slate, that's fine, but I probably
> won't be too interested in it. That's all.
>
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.whitewolf (More info?)

"Tyler Dion" wrote:
> Okay, so here and elsewhere I've seen some remarks expressing people's
> wishes that either the old Werewolf or the new one would/will cleave(d)
> more closely to the idea of werewolves as people afflicted with a curse,
> rather than the shamanistic warriors of WtA.
>
> And I'm wondering...why?

I suspect most of the people saying that are not WtA players. I look forward
to seeing what WW does with WtF. I certainly hope that they don't do the
Hollywood curse of the werewolf schtick, but if they do, hey, I don't need
to buy it.

Honestly? I think they will want to retain current customers and that they
have a good feel for what WtA players like.
--
--
Trashdog
---
"Trash is the eternal enigma of the dog world. It's food ...but if you eat
it you get yelled at."
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.whitewolf (More info?)

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 05:26:57 GMT, "Raymond Gunter"
<darkfated1972@hotmail.com> wrote:

>For me all the WW games kinda got away from their "core" aspects abit.
>Vampire became less about "A beast I am, lest a beast I become" and turned
>into more of an exerise in political moves.

You're kidding, right? I have a copy of the first edition of Vampire
with the sample starting storyline. And what was it? An exercise
in political moves. Political moves were a core aspect of Vampire
from the get go.

And to me one of the elements at
>the core of Werewolf that I liked was the fact that they know they were
>doomed but they they were chose to fight on despite that.

Except of course for the large and increasing proportion of their
number who chose to roll over and play dead.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.whitewolf (More info?)

"Raymond Gunter"

> For me all the WW games kinda got away from their "core" aspects abit.

They were all "twists" on an old theme. And the political thing in Vampire
isn't that far fetched. Been done before White Wolf got to it.

> And to me one of the elements at
> the core of Werewolf that I liked was the fact that they know they were
> doomed but they they were chose to fight on despite that. It really was a
> manner of how they were going to live....on their knees or on their feet.
> Another thing many of the people I gamed with and talked about over
werewolf
> with is the mood and back drop of the stories. Werewolf is not just about
> the spirits and the fighting, it about people fighting in a war. Each
Garou
> character should face one simple question during their life span. "How
far
> will I go?" Do you sink to the level of your enemy or somewhere under
him?
> By doing that you have just become your own worst enemy and let the enemy
> win an even bigger battle.

> It also been my experence and my belief that not all Garou are "tree
> hugging Hippies".

But they are: just furry Cuisinart versions of it.

> The Garou I believe were created to help maintain a level
> of balance. If the Wyld grow to powerful, they would work to check it
power,
> The same applies for the Weaver and the Wyrm.And the Garou made mistakes,
> really big ones. The imperium, the War of Rage, and becoming fixated
solely
> on fighting the Wyrm.

And all in all, I don't much care for it. I'm not saying it's a bad game.
But personally, I dislike it. I know a lot of people who like it a lot.
I've even enjoyed a few games, back in the day. But it doesn't satisfy what
I would find interesting in a game in which you're a Werewolf.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.whitewolf (More info?)

"James Stein" <JamesSpamtein@si.rr.com> wrote in message
news:DLWhc.59079$WA4.51245@twister.nyc.rr.com...
> Tyler Dion wrote:
>
> > Why is it so important to have yet another?
> >
>
> People bitching are louder than people enjoying themselves. The amount
> of bitching about WWolf not hewing closer to the 'curse' has nothing to
> do with how many people actually dislike WW as it stands.

I'd like to add some bitching, and say....DO WE REALLY NEED TO DO THE WHOLE
DAMN THING AGAIN?

Ok, thats my bitchy two cents.

Jesse
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.whitewolf (More info?)

"Shane Graves" <lobsterhut@earthlink.net> wrote:
> "Raymond Gunter"

> > For me all the WW games kinda got away from their "core" aspects abit.
>
> They were all "twists" on an old theme. And the political thing in Vampire
> isn't that far fetched. Been done before White Wolf got to it.

Dracula was a count, after all. I am only half-joking here - the
real Vlad Tepes only became a candidate for literary vampirism in
light of his actions as a ruler. You can't just walk into town
and start impaling people; you've got to get yourself established
first.


I have to agree with David. The original game had a variety of
themes with politics being one of them. And aside from Elysium
politicking, there was a relatively heavy dose of mortal politics
active in character concepts (Brujah most noticeably, of course).

As you go along in the first and second editions, I think you'll
find Andrew Greenberg put less focus on horror, more on politics.
This was probably to make Vampire better as a game. It is easy,
I imagine, to run a politics-focused LARP with twenty or thirty
people compared to running one where everyone's supposed to play
off a sense of personal horror. I think that was what Raymond
perceived. However, it's a trend reversed by later developers.

I love Rob Hatch's sense of horror, especially late second and
edition material. When Justin takes over, the style and amount
of horror are similar and I feel it's a pretty transition. I
thought Justin used violent action more than disturbing being,
but that may just be me projecting my expectations on the books.

Regardless, outside of the first edition core book I think a lot
of the horror in V:tM actually came in later, via Rob and Justin.
You have them to thank for the Malkavians, Giovanni and Tzimisce
being as nasty as they eventually became. You only get Lucien
Soulban, Greg Stolze and Ethan Skemp in later editions of Vampire
and it's only with the later developers do you see horror taking
the lead in spin-offs - while the original Mummy book had horror,
I think you'll find more in Victorian Age Vampire and a fair
amount of horror amidst the action and flair found in Kindred of
the East.


As for core aspects, while I like horror in Vampire (in fact, far
more than the political aspects), I'm actually not such a big fan
of vampirism. A Malkavian's madness, a fragment of the Book of
Nod or revenge on someone who once held you in thrall via a Blood
Bond depend on the game being Vampire, but may work better if you
focus on the characters rather than the hassle and angst of where
and how you feed. Vampirism is essential, but it doesn't define
the characters or plot and gets relatively little airtime from me
compared to Vampire purists.


Vis Sierra
 

Similar threads