Tuesday, 16 August 2011

How mysterious do you want your mysterious groups?

V20 (that's the 20th Anniversary edition of Vampire: The Masquerade) has spurred (a) new supplements and (b) a lot of chatter. Some nostalgia, a lot of edition wars, but also people picking the games up and looking at running them. I just commented on a couple threads at the WW forum about Sabbat packs and the like. Which reminded me of this...


Overheard in a Camarilla classroom:

"Why were the Anarchs even fighting us? Why wouldn't they look to be more civilized?"
"I hear they're diablerists!"
"That's only Sabbat."
"Sabbat aren't real!"
"Full well they are!"


This links on to a current RPGnet thread on use of cutscenes and presenting completely OOC information to the players.

How in the dark do you want to be?

Obviously this varies from genre to genre, but also group to group and player to player. During The Watch House I got so into cutscenes, "next time" trailers and discussing plot possibilities with the players that one of them became a regular co-plotter while another asked specifically not to be spoiled on future events.

Are the on-stage Sabbat more interesting than the original unknown threat? Well, I have some issues with what they were like, but they have their own fans.

Would you play a mystery game like Columbo where you know who the murderer is and have to work out how to prove it? Maybe occasionally, but not regularly for the years Columbo ran.

Would you be more likely to play a Doctor Who one-shot called - Of The Daleks than one with a less on-the-nose title? My one-shot games tend to have attention-drawing titles these days, so I suspect that one's a "yes"...

No comments:

Post a Comment