Nwod 2e vs owod
-
I hate basically everything about nWoD, and absolutely everything about 5th. But I seem to be in a minority.
-
I think that it’s generally a much better system than CoD 1st edition or oWoD. There are some places where I think the ideas were better than the execution, mechanically, but I enjoy the theme and the vibes way more, and even most of the mechanics are an improvement.
A couple of places where CoD 2E stumbles:
-
Investigation sub-system. I’ve seen very, very few people even try to use the Clue system, and when I’ve tried to run using it, I honestly find it badly explained and pretty finicky. I like the IDEA of it: there’s an intent of letting the players guide the investigation, of being able to use a clue you find to mechanically help you out with further inquiries, of your characters’ strengths and weaknesses affecting what they’re good at finding…and all of these are appealing. But again, execution.
-
Doors sub-system. I love the idea of Doors (you’ll read that phrase a lot), but again, the execution. In this case, it’s not necessarily the straight mechanics of it, but more the intent. Doors are intended to be used against NPCs to win favors/concessions over an extended basis. The thing is that very few of the things PCs want from NPCs actually work on that basis. Players, honestly, don’t tend to think that far ahead, so when they want someone to let them in a door, it’s usually three minutes before they have to be somewhere on the other side of that door, so “this will take a week and three attempts to influence the NPC” just doesn’t work. Ironically, it SHOULD work better in a MU*, but few games flesh out important NPCs to the extent that players think about earning favors/concessions from them for the future. I’d suggest taking the concept of Doors (favor for favor, being able to use skills other than social ones for manipulation, leveraging vices and leverage) and cutting it down to something that can be resolved in a scene.
-
Combat declarations. Honestly, this is just a failure by GMs and players to use this system or take it into account when planning things. It’s a SOLID mechanic. But yes, in CoD 2E, you’re supposed to start any combat by having both the PCs and the antagonists (or any other factions involved) declare their win conditions, what they’re trying to ACCOMPLISH with the combat, and if someone gets to it, they win whether the other side is dead/injured or not. It’s a great way to design combats that are more interesting than ‘let’s you and him fight’ and I really wish it was used more often. But the fact that it ISN’T suggests there’s a design flaw there, either in how it operates in situ or how it’s explained to people.
-
-
Really I like all three, but sort of see them as their own thing (OWoD vs NWoD vs CoD). There are things I like about them, and things I don’t. All of this is my opinion. I don’t expect anyone to agree with me.
OWoD
I like that OWoD has a very very defined setting that actually feels grand in scale and depth, and there are lots of character options (splats) in each sphere. Mechanically it’s all over the place as they never gave much consideration to people wanting to do crossovers (except the less than a handful of attempts to do it, like the one VTM Storyteller Handbook or Midnight Circus, which is the wrong kind of crossover). It definitely shows that it’s the oldest of the three from a mechanical standpoint, and in the world writing. Finally, my most controversial take: Hunter the Reckoning (while mechanically goofy as hell) is the best idea for Hunters out of all three, especially since both editions of Hunter: The Vigil feels like they took all of the ideas they couldn’t develop into full games and smushed them together in one book.
NWoD
I really really hate that the setting feels super thin in both this and CoD. The mechanics are super unified in this version, probably because they were really really pushing this hard through their official LARP club, the Mind’s Eye Society (or Camarilla, or Modern Enigma Society depending on what year it is), and wanted to ensure that they would be able to do whatever crossovers they wanted to. I think mechanically this is my favorite and gets brownie points for having the best version of Mummy between the three.
CoD
While the Beats / Conditions / Experiences system is really neat, the world settings for both “Chronicles” of this version are kinda lame. The God Machine Chronicle really tries too hard to push technothriller where it doesn’t belong (and I have yet to see any MU that allows DtD to actually throw any espionage themes into their game to support it), and the Contagion Chronicle is basically just fodder for people to go “LOOK THE CREATORS OF THE GAME SUPPORT MY GOTH JUSTICE LEAGUE IDEA.” Also, I don’t understand why the sphere unique to CoD (Demon, Deviant and Beast) all have an entire section of “Please write your new mechanics with your storyteller”. It feels like a cop out. (Also Beast is atrocious for all manner of reasons including the author being an absolutely horrible person).
SPECIAL BONUS SECTION!!!
OWoD 5eSo I really really love the new mechanics. I love that the epic setting is there, and there’s now a wide variety of mechanical means to connect your PC to that story (Loresheets). I really really hate that VTM seems to be the only game in 5e worth playing. I really really hate that Hunter is a bait and switch (it says Hunter the Reckoning on the tin, but the text is really Hunters Hunted 5). I really really hate whatever that mess that Werewolf 5th Edition is supposed to be. And I really hate that Onyx Path / Paradox / White Wolf / Renegade seem to be incapable of reviewing their own work and keep making decisions to put little things in their books that are absolutely tone deaf, though they’ve mostly pulled them out of the books once the fans point it out (which is a lot more than other publishers called out for their tone deafness have done in the past). (Quick Edit: I am still cautiously looking forward to Mage 5 and potential future Changeling 5 and Wraith 5. While I would love to see Demon and Mummy 5, I’m being honest with myself that it’s not going to happen.)
*Conclusion
If you agree with me, great. If you don’t agree with me, also great. Have your opinions. I’ll have mine.
-
@Prototart Depending very much on the why you hate it…
@MisterBoring said in Nwod 2e vs owod:
I like that OWoD has a very very defined setting that actually feels grand in scale and depth, and there are lots of character options (splats) in each sphere. Mechanically it’s all over the place as they never gave much consideration to people wanting to do crossovers
@MisterBoring said in Nwod 2e vs owod:
I really really hate that the setting feels super thin in both this and CoD. The mechanics are super unified in this version
Combing the two has some legs. nWoD and/or CoD Mechanics (say what you will about beats, I love that it has a written mechanic for you to just… track short/med/long-term goals and incentivizes working towards them, even if it’s paperwork) with oWoD lore. 2e Forsaken, with it’s 5 Renown categories, is peak. Fera mechanics would need to be worked out, since Gifts are no longer 1-5 but a big mish-mash, (this is fine, I love it).
@MisterBoring said in Nwod 2e vs owod:
entire section of “Please write your new mechanics with your storyteller”
Okay so I only know about Demon here, but between Vampire Devotions/Bloodlines, Werewolf Fetishes/Lodges, Mage Rotes/Legacies… they all have ‘work with your ST for new mechanics’
Mummy Pun? MUMMY PUN!
She/her -
@Jennkryst said in Nwod 2e vs owod:
Okay so I only know about Demon here, but between Vampire Devotions/Bloodlines, Werewolf Fetishes/Lodges, Mage Rotes/Legacies… they all have ‘work with your ST for new mechanics’
I expect it in Mage, because that’s the nature of the Magick, but cramming it into all the others just seems lame.
-
Similar to MisterBoring, I also see each version as discrete and its own complete game rather than a continuous line, such as with oWoD 1st edition through oWoD 20th anniversary.
Classic World of Darkness
I think the best analogy for this, in my opinion, is this: occasionally I look for a D&D group and come across these folks who are still insisting on playing AD&D 2e. It’s comfortable, has some of the better representations of the big campaign settings (Dark Sun and Spelljammer after all), and most of the people in the group grew up on it. Similar to this, the first TTRPG I ever played was Vampire the Masquerade 2nd edition at the tender age of 12. It was likely terrible, but it ensured that I essentially lived in that world through reading and consuming the material whenever I could get my hands on it.The systems are terrible, although 20th Anniversary did a decent job at trying to adjust them (I would say especially Mage). Many of the rules vary wildly, and certain elements are just not very intuitive. Combat was mentioned above. Old/Classic World of Darkness is definitely a trad RPG and lives in that 90s design aesthetic alongside its contemporaries from the period. What I mean by that is that while definitely better than AD&D, Cyberpunk 2020, Shadowrun, Rolemaster, etc., etc., etc. the hallmarks of the “party gets together and kills shit” dynamic still does live in the entire WoD/CofD line, but in this edition particularly. Which makes sense! The storygame aesthetic would really come into its own in the early 00s.
For a MUSH, I think this is likely the worst edition because of some of its strengths: each game line is distinct and has its own mechanics that apply to what kind of fiction you’re attempting to do. Each game is its own genre, with Vampire being gothic horror, Werewolf being splatterpunk/body horror, Mage being the closest to a kind of dark urban fantasy/noir technothriller depending on what you emphasize, and so on. You could theoretically have a splatterpunk gothic horror (thanks Mariana Enriquez) but it is a hard sell. So mechanically, fictionally, the games don’t work together. Finally, I think oWoD’s main strength if you’re going to play an oWoD game is its metaplot, which is a difficult thing to reconcile with the other game lines.
Also, I would say that the way oWoD is laid out prevents it from playing as a horror game at all. How can you be afraid of anything? You know what it is. There’s no chance to be caught off guard by anyone’s abilities except in the cases where you underestimate someone. You know what vampires can do. You know what werewolves can do. You expect that Mages can generally do whatever. If there’s some weird, sanity-rending monster, it’s probably a spirit or a chimera because that’s what exists in this world. And if your ST tries to invent something new, there’s a pretty strong chance that someone is going to be able to recite chapter and verse at them about why said new creation can’t or doesn’t exist in the World of Darkness. So, let’s address that particular issue:
New World of Darkness, 1st Edition
We’ve done away with our Sisters of Mercy quotes in the books and we’ve advanced through Justin Achili hiring cage dancers for DragonCon, and now we’re in the nWoD. This edition has several reasons for why it is probably the best of the three for MUSHing, but I’ll get into that.First off, mechanically it is genuinely better than its predecessor. As was mentioned above, the lack of variable difficulty is a big one, as well as standardized lists of things. You no longer have special lists of primary skills that everyone gets. If you know how to play Werewolf, you can probably pick up Changeling pretty quick, and as a bonus, without misspending your points and finding later that you didn’t buy the skill that lets you detect magic. All of your different templates have their own pretty similar elements. They might have different effects which fit the fiction/genre of what you’re getting at with what you’re playing, but they’ll have a general systemic feel that you don’t need to worry about. If you play vampire long enough you’ll probably figure out what Primal Urge 3 means by your familiarity with Blood Potency 3.
I know this is the biggest complaint about nWoD and maybe its biggest weakness, but I feel like the lack of metaplot or storyline behind everything is a better setup for a MUSH. In my view, nWoD is a toolbox versus an established setting. The ST is empowered to design the world. This is great for a MUSH because it can let the game exist without laboring under a larger canonical structure. Did you want the Free Council to rule all of North America? Sure, I guess, why not!
This is also terrible for a MUSH because a lack of unified canon means people come in with the knowledge they acquired at their local tabletops or other MUSHes that may not apply exactly that way on your game. In your history, the Lancea Sanctum and Invictus may have been ousted from Rome by the Carthian Movement in a revolt during WWI. This lack of a canonical form is a pretty common element in MUSHes, for sure, and many games will have their own “in this game we do X instead of Y,” but when you consider the semiotics of world of darkness, there’s an expectation of a larger story. At a high level, the Camarilla owns most cities in Europe and North America. The Sabbat owns most cities in Central and South America. Is your game set in Madison, Wisconsin? Probably a Cam city. Not so with nWoD.
All of this means that someone has to read! gross! We all hate reading the wiki (or news files if you’re into that sort of thing)! In cooperation with that, nWoD is a much more ST-intensive process to get off the ground, as there’s a lot of front-loading the worldbuilding before you get started since you can’t rely on previously established plots as a basic setup.
New World of Darkness also really tried to make something for everyone. Character generation is generally simpler as you don’t have as many things to initially pick from, but each successive rulebook put out more and more character options. This is good for a bit, then it becomes a little farcical as time went on. Some of those end-of-line books had just bizarre, bonkers character options. IMO, especially the bloodlines. Eventually you did end up with some of the same problems as oWoD insofar as if you had this very specific book, or the newest book in the line, you had advanced knowledge that someone who just played with the corebook and handful of “critical” sourcebooks would not.
Chronicles of Darkness 2nd Edition
Mechanically this was even more of an improvement. To some extent, they finally cast off the trad trappings from the 90s and attempted to embrace the storygame they were attempting to do in the first place. I’m a PbtA player, so some of these will be a given for me, but failing forward as a mechanic is great, not having to track potentially hundreds of XP is great, focusing primarily on character goals and providing things like conditions as rewards is definitely story-forward. All of these things are perfect for the MUSH environment as well, since they rely on the ongoing story. Additionally you have all the standardized mechanical strengths of the previous edition. I’ll second the comments about doors, combat declarations, and investigation. The investigation system is not perfect (it’s not Brindlewood Bay after all), but it works well if you’re wanting to do true mysteries.However, IMO, they were probably too ambitious for what they had the money, talent, and time to do. I think there was an intention to address some of the complaints about nWoD having a paper thin plot but they went a little too light into providing an optional chronicle. If I had to guess, some of this might be due to how story/plot has been meted out in previous games, where you always had a new sourcebook ahead to go further into detail and provide granularity to the grand narrative. So things like Blood & Smoke/the Strix Chronicle or the Idigam Chronicle probably needed some room to breathe and get some fleshing out beyond their initial introduction. They did try to engage in a larger chronicle with Contagion, but it also was pretty flat. Having to hire a brand new team every time you want to put out a book can also bring about sudden tone shifts and changes in voice that are noticeable. The Hedge reads very differently to Kith & Kin, for example and feels more like an homage to CtL 1st edition.
There were some weird choices on adding new things. An example of this would be Entitlements. Entitlements aren’t really discussed in the core Changeling the Lost 2e book and first introduced mechanically in Oak, Ash, & Thorn. There was only one CtL sourcebook after this, which was The Hedge. This included 3 more Entitlements, and … now what? I suppose if there’s another sourcebook then we might get more, but the structure of Onyx Path Productions probably won’t lean in that direction for a good long while.
This might be recency bias since I’ve been down in the trenches with this particular edition, but I think that Chronicles has a big point of failure in standardization of templates. Prometheans, Changelings, and Mummies all purchase their powers as specific individual abilities similar to how Rites, Rituals, etc. are bought in other splats. Meanwhile, Vampire, Mage, and Werewolf use their power trees based on a continuous level increased from 1. Some splats have special rules that expand on the template which have no real comparable element in other templates. Making a Sin-Eater requires you to build the Sin-Eater’s Geist as a character with a separate sheet vs it being a largely narrative structure as in 1st edition. Sin-Eaters also have their morality trait rolled into their power trait. Speaking of power traits, Deviants have a power trait (Acclimation) that goes from 1-5 and does not have the same power point progression as other templates. Plus, Deviants have a bunch of other abilities that differ wildly from other templates. Scars are similar to Bestowments (Promethean), but not exactly as they have their own continuous levels that you raise as time goes on.
Then quickly mentioning some of the weirder moves with CofD-specific games. I personally think Demon is great, and I sort of like Deviant – though I struggle to see what it actually adds to the Chronicles of Darkness that other games do not already have – but Beast is awful, both as a game and as a record of its creator’s interests. The way you construct a Beast makes no sense, the lair system is a big departure from the rest of the lines where other characters absolutely have lairs but have to buy them separately as merits, and the powers. Well. It reminds me of that WKUK Grape commercial in how it tells on the author. Demon attempts to hardball the God Machine Chronicle storyline, which MisterBoring discusses above as being maybe tonally different from what people were going for with CofD. I kind of like the idea of GMC, only because I tend to put a gnostic spin on it. Demon does tend to feel like “what if The Matrix, but horror” through a lot of its fiction.
This went on longer than I anticipated. I get more into it, but the tl;dr is:
-
oWoD is a bit of a mess and is a difficult game to run in a multi-sphere MUSH (even just two of them) format because the themes, genres, and mechanical structures are specific to each game. It is easier to rely on a larger metanarrative without having to make up your own entire world.
-
nWoD is mechanically much better than the other editions due to more complete standardization of the systems across the board. It is very easy to run templates alongside one another if that’s the sort of game you want to do The lack of metanarrative requires STs and leads to frontload their world-building in order to get the plot started. nWoD generally had something for everyone, eventually to its own detriment as time went on. Honestly I think this is the best one for MUSHing if you’re going the multi-sphere route.
-
Chronicles of Darkness fulfills the “story” aspect of “storytelling system” better than its predecessors by having more subsystems focused on engaging the players in collaborative worldbuildng and storytelling, as well as experience and character development. It suffers from a lot of toneshifts and the model of OPP’s publishing (largely relying on freelancers, focusing more on crowd sourcing, etc.) that is required now that they’re not under a larger corporate entity makes it difficult to have ongoing narrative beats as oWoD had. Beast is bad. Deviants ??? Demon is good.
"And the Fool says, pointing to the invertebrate fauna feeding in the graves: 'Here a monarchy reigns, mightier than you: His Majesty the Worm.'"
Italo Calvino, The Castle of Crossed Destines -
-
@somasatori said in Nwod 2e vs owod:
I’m a PbtA player
I had a sneaking suspicion you were down with the Apocalypse.
-
@MisterBoring said in Nwod 2e vs owod:
@somasatori said in Nwod 2e vs owod:
I’m a PbtA player
I had a sneaking suspicion you were down with the Apocalypse.
Yes! I’m a big fan. My favorite PbtA game is one that I have struggled thinking of how to make into a MUSH, being Life Among the Ruins (and Generation Ship as a close second). I mean, it probably shows since I use terms like “in the fiction” and “genre emulation” constantly these days.
Requisite meme:
-
Now do Curseborne.
-
-
@Jenn said in Nwod 2e vs owod:
@Redbird said in Nwod 2e vs owod:
Now do Curseborne.
We may be working on that.
I and several folks on CoH may be prepared to pounce on that. Fear.
-
I want to play Curseborne, but having seen the final book, I’m not sure if I want to MU it.
-
@somasatori said in Nwod 2e vs owod:
Meanwhile, Vampire, Mage, and Werewolf
Also real quick about Werewolf, it is a mix of the two. Your Auspice Gifts do indeed level up 1-5, but the rest of your gifts are pick and choose ignoring the progression. There is no Mother Luna 4… you have Mother Luna (Cunning) or Mother Luna (Honor).
Which would be Hella cool to somehow get mage or vampire to do. But I am lazy. RIP.
-
@MisterBoring Any deets you can spill on why not? I admit I’m super intrigued by the system, but wasn’t a backer and haven’t done any real dives into the mechanics or theme.
-
@Pyrephox said in Nwod 2e vs owod:
@MisterBoring Any deets you can spill on why not? I admit I’m super intrigued by the system, but wasn’t a backer and haven’t done any real dives into the mechanics or theme.
The bonds mechanic rewards clique building and momentum is a currency shared by all players in the game.
-
What do you mean by clique building? So often I see people complaining about what they consider to be cliques, but which I would just consider to be “groups of friends playing together”.
-
Curseborne has built-in bonds (can be positive or negative). But characters are limited in the bonds they can have, as far as mechanical ones go. Like any game, families, friends, enemy lists can be as large and varied as desired.
And, bonds can be with NPC’s, such as your job’s boss, or your little sister, too.
It’s like any game with factions. Coteries and mystery cults are also able to be cliques. Ships or businesses can be cliques if they exclude non-members.
Bonds are no more/less a clique than any other reasons players have for their characters to know and/or exclude others. It will come down to game culture, and depend on if the community encourages and supports inclusivity or not - same as any other system.
-
Man, Curseborne. Or really, the entire Storypath line. I think Storypath is my favorite incarnation of the overall Storyteller mechanics. While I love the system itself, I dislike almost every single attempt to execute it.
I’ve completely lost faith in Onyx Path at this point. Their insistence on building games around a “You’re a <THIS> who is a member of <THAT>” structure is old and tired, IMO. That’s the first issue. Second, they take what should be a simple and elegant system and muddy it with needlessly complex, ambiguously explained, and confusing abilities.
I find Scion 2E entirely unplayable just from reading the books. Aberrant has great moments but falls apart when you get to Nova tech. The “It Came From…” line is good but a little too cheesy and tongue-in-cheek for me. I hate the implementation of Curse Dice to power mechanics in Curseborne. Again, destroying an elegant system with kitschy mechanics. Aegis should be my absolute favorite game given the setting and its use of Storypath, but I read it and it all just falls flat.
All that said, I think the Storypath system is fantastic, and I’ve put significant work into creating a “New-New World of Darkness” type system with it. I’ve even come up with guidelines for creating Drawbacks to help flesh out characters. The system is very flexible and easy to hack.
For instance, in my custom hack, I’ve done away with Momentum and replaced it with personal pools of power. Willpower for mortals, Blood for vampires, etc. Mechanically, they all function the same (they power abilities and allow you to do things you might otherwise do with Momentum), but they shift the focus to the character rather than the group.
-
@Raistlin said in Nwod 2e vs owod:
“You’re a <THIS> who is a member of <THAT>”
This is a core conceit of basically all of RP. Characters are described in terms nearly identical to those even if there’s not a spot for it on the character sheet.
@Raistlin said in Nwod 2e vs owod:
While I love the system itself, I dislike almost every single attempt to execute it.
From reading your post, it looks like you dislike every attempt to execute Storypath, which makes me question whether you love the system or the intent of the system more. You don’t mention Dystopia Rising: Evolution at all, which makes me think that either you do like it, or you have been in the horror show that is the DR LARP, and don’t want to give them any mention at all.
Proud Member of the Pro-Mummy Alliance
-
@MisterBoring I’m not entirely sure what your post is trying to get across. If you want to have a back-and-forth about Storypath, I’m game, but your reply mostly feels like it’s questioning my motives rather than the points I raised.
On the “You’re a <THIS> who is a member of <THAT>” comment:
- What I was pointing out is that Onyx Path doesn’t just use that as a descriptive shorthand (which, sure, all RPGs do in some way). They make it the mechanical spine of their games; your role and affiliation aren’t just flavor, they dictate what your character can do, how they progress, and even how you interact with the world. For me, that overreliance makes the designs feel narrow and repetitive.
On Dystopia Rising:
- The only reason I didn’t mention it is that I haven’t read it. No hidden motive there.
On Storypath in the context of this thread:
- Since the discussion is about which version of World of Darkness works best, I’ll clarify: I think Storypath’s core mechanics and dice resolution are fantastic. It’s a really solid system, and I love that part of it. What I don’t care for is how Onyx Path tends to implement those mechanics in their published games. That’s why I’m actually looking forward to Storypath Ultra, it seems like a cleaner, more generic take on the system that could really shine outside of those heavy-handed frameworks.
