>Perhaps Beasts are newer than Heroes, and took up their mantle? It's downright fun that the memory mechanics give you carte blanche to bust out of the tomb and wreck shit up in your quest for revenge, and it's a great mechanic to get the players to cause problems they'll be dealing with the rest of their Descent. Just the fact that you start out with terrifying powers but a short leash from your evil overlord, and you may eventually regain a bit of humanity even as your strength diminishes, is a really cool changeup to the whole standard RPG formula. Mummy (the Curse) was a game I was all set to laugh at, but I had the chance to play a short game of it and I was really impressed with how it carved out its own niche in the WoD lineup. I'd also be concerned that, even with the rewrite, a lot of the actual gameplay of Beast will come down to thinking of ways to creatively torture people. Put side by side, one concept looks a lot less gripping to me. Beast appears to be a game about being a monster that creates the appearance of predation, or makes humans afraid they're being preyed on, but actually is just trying to scare them to teach them a lesson. Vampire is a well-executed game about being a monster that preys on humans. Now your interaction with the other supernaturals is "Hello, have you accepted the Dark Mother as your lord and savior? Would you like to have one of these pamphlets that explains how you should strike fear in the hearts of men in order to teach them?" There isn't really the same "we came first, you're our baby brothers" tone anymore. >it also makes their claim to be the original ur-monster archetype seem like transparent bullshit, because they come across like some kind of astral parasite that uses the tropes created by other, realler monsters to get their feed on. I think the difference is that Mummy just feels like it's retreading old ground, while Beast, especially with this new version, seems to be doing it intentionally. And, I guess, technically in Summoners, since it gives a Ghost Familiar creation rules and costs.Īlso, Beast seems to crib from a lot of existing games, but in a way that i think works better than Mummy, which I feel does the same. If you really want to play a Ghost, though, there's already an awaked Ghost template in Mummy somewhere. Most Ghosts aren't really cognizant, either, and Sin-eaters would be your antagonist, and "another splat is your bad guy" really only works for Hunter. You're either bound to your Anchors or trapped in the Underworld. They have a lot in common with Mummies in that losing memory is a big thing for them, but they're kind of super limited as player characters. Why? What good does a pure ghost game serve? Ghosts are kind of bland on their own, and don't really have much to them.
No, no, bullies was the first draft of Beast. A Hero kills a Beast, but then realizes that the nightmare hasn’t ended, and his work isn’t done. Heroes leverage fear into dependency and adulation. Beasts use fear to teach (and to feed their Horrors, yes). While the Children benefit from the burst of fear and realization that comes from a hard-won lesson, Heroes benefit from a veneer of simmering dread that never goes away. They aren’t trying to kill off a Beast, they’re trying to become revered for killing Beasts. >The problem is that Heroes aren’t actually trying to solve a problem. Yes, she has her reasons, but not all Beasts exercise restraint, so perhaps Heroes are a necessary evil, weeding out the Beasts that go too far? After all, even the noblest Beast is still indisputably a monster of the darkest sort of nightmares, one who preys on human beings to satiate her Hunger. >Beasts often sympathize with Heroes, at least to a point.
OWoD: (downloading it right now to check it, but there's no newer stuff like the 20th editions and books) They don't go around acting like dicks just to get off on it, they do it to
Will this new rewrite rekindle faith in OPP?īeasts now have a purpose, even if their name is still stupid.
0 kommentar(er)
