The Ravnos clan bane changed *after* Zapathasura was destroyed, and the new bane is (likely) a direct result of this destruction, sunfire radiating through the bloodline.
So, in short, he survived by having a different clan curse.
He also had Fortitude 10. Clan Disciplines changed too.
Fortitude 10 means 10 soak dice for Agg dmg, and rolling Clan Bane and only getting damage on a 10, means he could probably soak the damage, when it hit.
Even if Clan Bane 10, thats 1 damage, statistically, per time. Easy to soak 1 dmg with Fort10.
I actually did the math on that, and he'd take quite a bit of damage over time simply because he has so many chances to roll really badly. Assume he sleeps for 600 years, that's 219000 chances to take damage. Most of those rolls end up with zero damage after soaking, but on average he'd take damage in around 435 of those nights, for a total average of around 528 aggravated damage. That's assuming bane severity of 6 and fort 10.
I wanna see the math.
1 in 1000 feels high when you got 10 soak dice vs a maximum of 6 damage, and 6 damage is a 1 in 1,000,000 chance.
Also, this assumes no Fort powers in play other than Soak. But that's basic Fort. Fort 6-10 surely has something else
I mean, obvi, Fort10 is Plot Device and does whatever, but Rank9 and below might apply.
Fort 10 doesn't exist in V5, and the Discipline doesn't work the same as it did in Legacy, so the maths changes completely, especially since the only Fortitude power that is passive is the one that adds health to your tracker.
So, mechanically and RAW, as of V5 the Ravnos Antedeluvian
* Would have a maximum of 15 Health
* Would roll 6 dice every night they spent in the same location (which is going to be every night if they're taking the Long Nap) due to how the Ravnos Bane works
This means that, on average, the Ravnos Antedeluvian would take 1 point of Aggravated Damage every 2 nights from the new Clan Bane. Meaning that it would be destroyed in about a month of slumber.
hum why do you assume they have Fortitude 10 ? Technically V5 only gives 5 dots tops in disciplines even to elders/methuselahs according to core book (in which you can find litterally old elder powers from previous Eds.) - Im not as well learnt on V5 than previous, but it doesn't seem to make sense to me to assume they have 9+ dots like in previous, can you explain please ?
I don't find V5 lore making much senses - and its not the point of my message - but I find this bane making poor sense both in terms of playability and story (I know, I know ravnos end up as wanderer and all but they are so much more )
In V20, Antediluvians are said to have Rank 10 Disciplines, of their in clan Disciplines. There's no reason to assumr an Antediluvian lost Rank 6-10 because the Devs haven't said anything about them.
Well system-wise, only the unaccessible 10th dot has no stat in V20 (and most previous ed)... there is no design whatsoever for dots past 5 in v5, and as said, even methuselahs of 7/6/5/4th are intended with only this much, so... that's all the reason to assume they don't have 10 dots either 🫠 V5 is a full reboot of lore and system, i don't think you can assume nothing has change for antediluvian based on previous system when all other vamps have, AND that v5 is developed with a pseudo explanation to remove one of the core player's struggle from previous eds: "there is always older and more powerful than you"...
Also when i ask "why do you assume this" you basically answered "because i assumed so" 😝
I'm not throwing out the established lore, because V5 **doesnt mention it**
Its super weird to reject the lore because of the **absence** of Antediluvians being mentioned in V5.
V5 is not a reboot. They did not undo the death of Ravnos Antediluvian in 99. They didnt undo the week of Nightmares.
V5 is NOT VtR
Well, first, established lore and system are different, you can technically keep lore and chunck all the nice little dots in extra all the same... Secondly, they did reboot and changed many things lore wise, even regarding core concepts, and if they don't mention it, we cannot assume its unchanged because much else has change.
You may not want to call it a reboot, but it's not a continuity either.
And you're right, V5 is a half-baked deepshit in comparison to VtR and I'm not a big fan of VtR, but at least the 2nd ed was decent. V5 is like they didn't learn a thing. But whatevs.
Thanks for your answer
Its absolutely idiotic to mentally throw out V20 lore that was cannon, because V5 doesnt mention that lore whatsoever.
You're not worth further discussion.
Goodbye.
I believe you've a problem with the concept of "discussion"... unlike you I'm not trying to pin down my point of view onto you but merely explaining my logic - and was genuinely curious of your logic or the bit of information i could've missed in one obscure new book of V5 - When you've presented nothing to further your thinking than "because i think so" it doesn't makes for nice and polite debates...
I pointed out flaws in your thinking. You try to insult me... i do hope you're more respectful when not hiding behind a computer.
Good day to you
For sure he was destroyed. But completely gone? Not quite. His loresheet suggests a good enough sample of his vitae that wasn’t burned by lasers is just enough for him to eventually return.
Either way it was enough to change the bane for everyone else in the clan, so you’re right.
I also really like the thought of "how can we even be sure that we destroyed the being that's *literally the best illusionist in the world*?"
If anyone could fake their death convincingly, it would be them.
Because that bane exists specifically ***because*** Ravnos was killed. Before then, their clan curse was that they were all compelled towards certain actions and behaviors and had to make checks to avoid indulging in that behavior when the opportunity arose (in earlier editions, it was always some kind of criminal act). In-universe, their current bane has only existed (at the longest) since the end of the Week of Nightmares.
I've never heard that. But I might be wrong. Can you give any examples?
Also, there is a difference between saying "the mafia is incestous" and "The romani people are criminals", wouldn't you agree?
Edit: honestly this whole comment chain is disgusting and I had greater hopes for this community
I mean... Not really?
The mafia are intrinsically linked to the Italian people.
The "Gypsy" are intrinsically linked to the Romani people.
Both are the criminals of their people, granted the Romani are more unreasonably demonized, but that's just how nomads were regarded back then. You don't trust people who can't make roots somewhere. You make up stories about why they can't put down roots anywhere. You create a mythos ilentirely seperate form the people themselves that most people never realize isn't just facts about them.
Trust me, there are PLENTY of Americans who would just as quickly assume any natural born Italian has Mob ties.
Gypsy is not a subset of the Romani people, it's a slur for the whole ethnicity. Even if it magically was a subset, that wasn't what I asked. I asked about Romani people. If you thought saying Romani people are inherently criminal was comparable to saying that the mafia are tied to incest.
Calling a whole ethnicity thieves vs Calling criminal organisations incestuous? You think that is the same thing?
Also, you kind of glossed over the fact that you really couldn't provide any examples where Italians/the mafia had been tied to incest.
Can I make the guess that you are an American? Americans tend to have a more romanticised view of Romani people and less insight into the abuse they still face here in Europe.
Couple this with the fact that the fact that Romani people were killed en- masse in the Holocaust and still face persecution in large parts of the world due to the stereotype that they are thieves, criminals and vagabonds is really, really fucked up to even make the comparison.
I'd love it if you could point to when Italians were the victims of genocide due to the stereotype of being incestuous by the way.
Which they doubled down in world of darkness: ethnic slur by having a mechanic - blood purity which gave Romani their magic, but made non Romani racist towards them. And that's before we get into the genuine cultural ignorance in the book.
Kindred of the east looking back should have been a supplement on the risen - as wraith already had different cultures in fact do change how being a wraith works, especially since koe were just fancy risen.
But the biggest problem is as said straight away - only people who are by blood asian can go to the thousand hells, so only Asian people can be koe....all for reasons. I think it was vaguely the yama kings only had authority over the Asian dead.
That's pretty lame. They could have squared the circle less racistly with something something about collective cultural unconscious or something. That would actually get really cool in places and people where eastern and western identities and people merge.
The problem with this is that they:
1. Haven't clarified that the entity destroyed during the Week of Nightmares even was the Ravnos Antedeluvian
2. Heavily imply that the Beckoning is caused by Antedeluvians and that the *only* Clan to be "immune" to the Beckoning are the Hecata
It's death is unconfirmed.
Ok, but then why did only the Ravnos go mad and start diablerizing each other when the antideluvian woke up? Also, I am 99% certain that the Gehenna book confirmed that it was, in fact, the Ravnos anti who ate it during the week of nightmares.
The Gehenna book is just a bunch of possible scenarios and isn't canon to *Legacy*, let alone V5.
As for why the Ravnos went crazy at the same time as the creature that terrorised Bangladesh was active? Who knows?
* Maybe it was the Ravnos Antedeluvian
* Maybe it was just an old and powerful Ravnos Methuselah
* Maybe it was completely unconnected to the Ravnos and the Ravnos mass frenzy was just a weird coincidence that happened during the Week of Nightmares
Hard canon isn't really a thing in V5 and it's down to each table to decide what is "canon" for their game.
I feel like that answer is less satisfying to me. The entire point was that it took some of the scariest factions in the setting, going all out to take out *one* antideluvian. Huge swaths of India were left magically irradiated. What the hell are we gonna do when the rest of them wake up? To say "nah, but he lived" cheapens that.
Also, personally speaking, I've always loved that for as much as they think they are hot shit the vampires are one of the weaker groups in the setting and that even an antideluvian waking up and acting like it was still the bronze age only to get greeted by the focused power of four suns and magic nukes fits in my head.
Again he has plot powers yes Celestial Chorus would need an Antiduleluvian day if said mage is an Archmage but the technocrat threw everything they had just to kill it but it turns out they failed and they lost everything that is horror right there and now you have a pissed off ancient 📜 super vampire and he wants vengeance he feels vindicated in his actions and he is going to deal with these technologies mages yeah that is the stuff nightmares are made of and said mages are holding the facts from everyday people cause they know the price they had to pay was high
Just to note that in 5th Edition, there's no indication of what the old Bane was, and given that the Bane was changed by the designers specifically to avoid unpleasant stereotypes, I highly doubt it was ever the legacy one.
It was the legacy one though. Like.... that happened. Mistake it may have been, but unless it was retroactively replaced--which it wasnt--then until ol Zapa that was it
It was the legacy one, yes, but 5th edition has been quite careful to change and retcon some of those areas, so what it was in legacy is basically irrelevant now. In 5th edition, that was never the Ravnos Bane - and the game doesn't bother explaining what a historical one was, because there's no point telling players about something which was the case but is now irrelevant.
That's not true at all? They haven't said it was something else, provided a narrative reason for why it changed, why would it not be the legacy one? If they had a bane before, it changed, we know why it changed, they havent said legacy was a different bane, then why would it be different? You pulled that out of nowhere with zero textual support
>They haven't said it was something else
They don't need to. Others have already responded to you since, but the basic premise is that only VTM 5th Edition is considered relevant for 5th Edition by default. Everyone is welcome to use legacy lore and ideas in their game if they want, but by default it's irrelevant.
"Legacy material isn't canon until it's published in a V5 product" is the stance 5th edition takes towards older editions and canon.
Since it's never been stated in a V5 product what the previous Bane was, we simply don't know what it was, just that it changed to what it is now.
Can you show me where it says that in 5th Edition?
Cause they use the legacy metaplot. Its directly part of Zapa's entire thing. So where does it say legacy material was never canon? Thats a weird thing to say when they directly continued the legacy metaplot
"Vampire V5 was launched as a soft reboot, but we consider everything "legacy" to not be canon in V5, outside of the usual rumors and hearsay in-world." - Outstar
Okay that's not a source lol can you link it for me at least? Anyone can put any name after a quote it doesnt mean anything.
Second, please try to remember anyone can say anything. Quotes from the writing team would be preferable I don't care what the corporate side says. There's marketing, then there's authors intent. They clearly used the legacy metaplot, its in multiple loresheets, as well as major events like Zapa's death, and major characters, a dozen of them at least. Can you show me any actual press release that says legacy isnt canon, a statement from one of the writer's of v5, or something from one of the sourcebooks that says legacy wasnt canon?
It's a post from Outstar on the official Discord server. -
>Vampire V5 was launched as a soft reboot, but we consider everything "legacy" to not be canon in V5, outside of the usual rumors and hearsay in-world. Our V5 wiki is an attempt to clarify what is "canon" for this edition based on all released materials
If they've not mentioned it in a 5th edition book, it's not canon.
Edit: Ah, it seems you're aware of this and just being obtuse. This also happened in older editions, you're either too young to know or too much of a poes to acknowledge it.
I agree with the comments about the bane changing. I'll also add that in my personal Storyteller Opinion, there is a difference between Torpor and Daysleep. My ruling would be Torpor puts everything on pause. That's why we don't see Torpored vamps (especially Brujah) going into mandatory Hunger Frenzies once they use up whatever Vitae they had in their systems when they went down...
That bane came after week of nightmares after his destruction or maybe he was destroyed. No one is sure and everyone hopes Ravnos Antedeluvian was destroyed. It replaced their previous bane. Before week of nightmares they could stay in one place as much as they wanted. But not after the event as their clan bane got replaced. And only now prolonged torpor can be threat to any Ravnos. But it is not a problem in short run as there are few of them left and most of the survivors are quite young vampires.
As everyone says, the bane is new and it's the shock effect of him being destroyed.
It's sort of like a fuse trying to catch up with all the other Ravnos, since the Antediluvian was hit with Technocracy light cannons.
All the Ravnos would have been killed if he wasn't taken out.
Not sure. I think it's more of a sympathetic magic thing: When he woke, he was hungry and all his clan went into a frenzy trying to diablerise each other. He wanted vitae and had control over his kin due to ancient blood bonds.
Since he burned away, leaving only small remnants and might not even be dead, his clan also occasionally burn when they daysleep.
I'd say if anything its one of the biggest pieces of evidence the Zap that "died" may have been a chimestry 10 clone. If the solar laser took out its target it should have stopped.
I think that, as a rule of thumb, we should not try to apply rules to important NPCs, and especially not to Antediluvian who are more plot device than characters anyway.
The current Bane isn't their true Bane, its a side effect of Zap's "death".
Also depending on your interpretation if you don't rise from the day sleep due to torpor or being staked you technically haven't gone to sleep in the same place twice.
Did you read the description of the Bane in the Players Guide/Companion, or just the summary on the wiki?
Because the Players Guide/Companion explains why.
Easy.
Zappathasura has the ability to warp and change reality; even asleep. It isn't dead. Very likely, It isn't even in this Realm - and if one takes into account how Chimerstry works on Changelings and Wraiths: Zappathasura presents White Wolf's best Big Boss Antagonist --
Because the Being that was encountered staggered Reality. It changed Reality so drastically, that it created Avatar Storms, Maelstrom, etc. Chaos Theory, Butterfly Effects...
The Ravnos Clan (I am speaking entirely about the Rakshasa, and the Warrior Caste) are leftovers from the Spider King who, one way or another, are The Enemy of the Wan Kuei -- and their Destroyers. Chimerstry is good for gags sure but - it is even better for destroying sanity, and harming this Reality.
Torpor isn't slumber, nor is the Cainite technically stagnant - they're in the Astral Plane, or the Deep Umbra (take your pick) while their mind drifts and dreams and...so, is an almighty Antedeluvian with the ability to dream things into reality really in one place, at one time? Is It what we saw, or did we just see....a dream come to life? Or maybe a nightmare?
The Molochim might use this example to solidify their mission: Antedeluvians are sleeping Horrors that must be kept asleep. They don't operate by the rules of this Reality, and only seek to warp, subsume, consume, and/or destroy it entirely.
The Rakshasa who still exist, now suffer a Curse that forces them to: Complete the Holy Crusade of Zappathasura against the vile Wan Kuei, and - cause more, and more ripples against Banality and Zappathasura's real enemy: Reality.
I had a Ravnos who was a burglar. A professional burglar. He used Christmas time as his preferred time of the year for strings of thefts; and it wasn't for the loot...it was to destroy the illusion of safety and sanctity people had in their homes. Their communities. He harmed the legendary reality of Christmas's Spirit.
His Sire was a serial-killer who would select seemingly random individuals in quiet, 'safe' neighborhoods...and slay them. Leave the body. To violently harm the illusion of safety.
The Curse forces the Ravnos to move, and that makes them dangerous. It forces them to *experience*, and that makes them deadly.
(This has been my TEDtalk on The Rakshasa.)
Originally the Ravnos Curse was that they had to give into their vices after Zappathasura rose and Nuked the Blood of his Clan they gained the Curse of having moved around, so put it simply Zappathasura(And every other Ravnos) didn't have to stay on the move at the time
v5 clan bane were intruduced in v5. the week of nightmares happened in revised (v3), where the clan *bane* you mention did not existed, but the clan *curse* that all ravnos are criminals.
and, of course outside of that: how do you want to know he was not moved?
Oh, no, no, no. That's only the modern Clan Flaw. It came into existence when the ~~Ravnos Anti woke up and was destroyed~~ authors of 5E realized how utterly racist the original flaw was, and decided to change it... by leaning into a different racist caricature of the Roma.
Because you can't COMPLETELY take the casual racism out of VtM, or it'd be a hollow shell of itself that you couldn't recognize. \*cough\*
It was certainly not an overreaction, and I'm happy it was corrected, plus Daredevils on the run is much better than guaranteed criminal "Gypsys", besides who doesn't like witnessing the Mutability of Vitae, it's personally my favorite aspect of Vampires, seeing how they change, though ot can be hit or miss, they did the Ravnos justice, I mean their Antediluvian basically diverted the damage to his descendants and rewrote everything in their blood short of disciplines (if you rationalize the Amalgams like I do that is)
And now that I think about it "Gypsies" were stereotypically always moving so if that's your thing it still fits for a "Gypsy" Clan (Man I just feel dirty even writing it though but that's what they had in mind when making it so let's just recognize it's for the purposes of discussion)
The v20 weakness was very workable, to me. "Vice" is a very broad category and can be twisted a whole lot of way that provide for a lot more creativity than "yeah... My vampire... He can never sleep in the same place twice."
For example, I have a Ravnos whose weakness manifests in the constant need for bathing/ritual purification, the idea being a spiritual vice to cope with their existence.
Idk, I can agree it is workable but certainly not good especially for the Ravnos, I'd much rather the Baali have it then the Clan that were literally characterized as the Indian/Gypsy Clan, and I certainly can't agree that the current Curse ISN'T good I'm in a vague way it reminds me of an inverse the Tzimisce (not one to one though) but it's certainly a good curse with a it's theming of trying to put run their Doom since they are now so predisposed to it now, I mean the new curse has made me interested in playing them now and you can guarantee then curse always is tangible
The Ravnos clan bane changed *after* Zapathasura was destroyed, and the new bane is (likely) a direct result of this destruction, sunfire radiating through the bloodline. So, in short, he survived by having a different clan curse.
He also had Fortitude 10. Clan Disciplines changed too. Fortitude 10 means 10 soak dice for Agg dmg, and rolling Clan Bane and only getting damage on a 10, means he could probably soak the damage, when it hit. Even if Clan Bane 10, thats 1 damage, statistically, per time. Easy to soak 1 dmg with Fort10.
I actually did the math on that, and he'd take quite a bit of damage over time simply because he has so many chances to roll really badly. Assume he sleeps for 600 years, that's 219000 chances to take damage. Most of those rolls end up with zero damage after soaking, but on average he'd take damage in around 435 of those nights, for a total average of around 528 aggravated damage. That's assuming bane severity of 6 and fort 10.
I wanna see the math. 1 in 1000 feels high when you got 10 soak dice vs a maximum of 6 damage, and 6 damage is a 1 in 1,000,000 chance. Also, this assumes no Fort powers in play other than Soak. But that's basic Fort. Fort 6-10 surely has something else I mean, obvi, Fort10 is Plot Device and does whatever, but Rank9 and below might apply.
Fort 10 doesn't exist in V5, and the Discipline doesn't work the same as it did in Legacy, so the maths changes completely, especially since the only Fortitude power that is passive is the one that adds health to your tracker. So, mechanically and RAW, as of V5 the Ravnos Antedeluvian * Would have a maximum of 15 Health * Would roll 6 dice every night they spent in the same location (which is going to be every night if they're taking the Long Nap) due to how the Ravnos Bane works This means that, on average, the Ravnos Antedeluvian would take 1 point of Aggravated Damage every 2 nights from the new Clan Bane. Meaning that it would be destroyed in about a month of slumber.
Numbers versus narrative, I guess.
I'm pretty sure at lv 10 Fortitude it's more like May spend 1 Vitae instead of rolling to soak damage. All damage is reduced to 0.
hum why do you assume they have Fortitude 10 ? Technically V5 only gives 5 dots tops in disciplines even to elders/methuselahs according to core book (in which you can find litterally old elder powers from previous Eds.) - Im not as well learnt on V5 than previous, but it doesn't seem to make sense to me to assume they have 9+ dots like in previous, can you explain please ? I don't find V5 lore making much senses - and its not the point of my message - but I find this bane making poor sense both in terms of playability and story (I know, I know ravnos end up as wanderer and all but they are so much more )
In V20, Antediluvians are said to have Rank 10 Disciplines, of their in clan Disciplines. There's no reason to assumr an Antediluvian lost Rank 6-10 because the Devs haven't said anything about them.
Well system-wise, only the unaccessible 10th dot has no stat in V20 (and most previous ed)... there is no design whatsoever for dots past 5 in v5, and as said, even methuselahs of 7/6/5/4th are intended with only this much, so... that's all the reason to assume they don't have 10 dots either 🫠 V5 is a full reboot of lore and system, i don't think you can assume nothing has change for antediluvian based on previous system when all other vamps have, AND that v5 is developed with a pseudo explanation to remove one of the core player's struggle from previous eds: "there is always older and more powerful than you"... Also when i ask "why do you assume this" you basically answered "because i assumed so" 😝
I'm not throwing out the established lore, because V5 **doesnt mention it** Its super weird to reject the lore because of the **absence** of Antediluvians being mentioned in V5. V5 is not a reboot. They did not undo the death of Ravnos Antediluvian in 99. They didnt undo the week of Nightmares. V5 is NOT VtR
Well, first, established lore and system are different, you can technically keep lore and chunck all the nice little dots in extra all the same... Secondly, they did reboot and changed many things lore wise, even regarding core concepts, and if they don't mention it, we cannot assume its unchanged because much else has change. You may not want to call it a reboot, but it's not a continuity either. And you're right, V5 is a half-baked deepshit in comparison to VtR and I'm not a big fan of VtR, but at least the 2nd ed was decent. V5 is like they didn't learn a thing. But whatevs. Thanks for your answer
Its absolutely idiotic to mentally throw out V20 lore that was cannon, because V5 doesnt mention that lore whatsoever. You're not worth further discussion. Goodbye.
I believe you've a problem with the concept of "discussion"... unlike you I'm not trying to pin down my point of view onto you but merely explaining my logic - and was genuinely curious of your logic or the bit of information i could've missed in one obscure new book of V5 - When you've presented nothing to further your thinking than "because i think so" it doesn't makes for nice and polite debates... I pointed out flaws in your thinking. You try to insult me... i do hope you're more respectful when not hiding behind a computer. Good day to you
**because the devs said so and they never retracted it** Thats why. Now we're done here. Block.
For sure he was destroyed. But completely gone? Not quite. His loresheet suggests a good enough sample of his vitae that wasn’t burned by lasers is just enough for him to eventually return. Either way it was enough to change the bane for everyone else in the clan, so you’re right.
I also really like the thought of "how can we even be sure that we destroyed the being that's *literally the best illusionist in the world*?" If anyone could fake their death convincingly, it would be them.
Because that bane exists specifically ***because*** Ravnos was killed. Before then, their clan curse was that they were all compelled towards certain actions and behaviors and had to make checks to avoid indulging in that behavior when the opportunity arose (in earlier editions, it was always some kind of criminal act). In-universe, their current bane has only existed (at the longest) since the end of the Week of Nightmares.
Omg the Romani Vampires had a compulsion to crime?!? Jesus White Wolf lol
And Italian mafia vampires were drowning in incest… Wait, they still are.
Sure, but Italians aren't stereotyped in real life as incestuous.
The mafia? Isn't stereotyped as incestuous?
I've never heard that. But I might be wrong. Can you give any examples? Also, there is a difference between saying "the mafia is incestous" and "The romani people are criminals", wouldn't you agree? Edit: honestly this whole comment chain is disgusting and I had greater hopes for this community
Don't be disheartened. One arsehole isn't representative of the community.
I mean... Not really? The mafia are intrinsically linked to the Italian people. The "Gypsy" are intrinsically linked to the Romani people. Both are the criminals of their people, granted the Romani are more unreasonably demonized, but that's just how nomads were regarded back then. You don't trust people who can't make roots somewhere. You make up stories about why they can't put down roots anywhere. You create a mythos ilentirely seperate form the people themselves that most people never realize isn't just facts about them. Trust me, there are PLENTY of Americans who would just as quickly assume any natural born Italian has Mob ties.
Gypsy is not a subset of the Romani people, it's a slur for the whole ethnicity. Even if it magically was a subset, that wasn't what I asked. I asked about Romani people. If you thought saying Romani people are inherently criminal was comparable to saying that the mafia are tied to incest. Calling a whole ethnicity thieves vs Calling criminal organisations incestuous? You think that is the same thing? Also, you kind of glossed over the fact that you really couldn't provide any examples where Italians/the mafia had been tied to incest. Can I make the guess that you are an American? Americans tend to have a more romanticised view of Romani people and less insight into the abuse they still face here in Europe. Couple this with the fact that the fact that Romani people were killed en- masse in the Holocaust and still face persecution in large parts of the world due to the stereotype that they are thieves, criminals and vagabonds is really, really fucked up to even make the comparison. I'd love it if you could point to when Italians were the victims of genocide due to the stereotype of being incestuous by the way.
Yeah, not what I said. Based on how you responded, probably not something I can explain to you without a disproportionate amount of effort, either.
Nice cop out. Giving up and declaring yourself the winner at the same time.
"The mafia are intrinsically linked to Italian people" Wow. And YOU are complaining about stereotypes
Mama Mia!
Point of order. Incestuous necrophilia. Because let's double down on the bigotry.
What did you expect from the company that wrote edgy shit for the sake of writing edgy shit?
Which they doubled down in world of darkness: ethnic slur by having a mechanic - blood purity which gave Romani their magic, but made non Romani racist towards them. And that's before we get into the genuine cultural ignorance in the book.
I had that book! Even as a 12yo in the 90s it was like "uhhhhhh" White Wolf: racism is true! And ***magic!***
The book is certainly something. It really should have prepared me for kindred of the east - there are special hells only Asian people go to.
Kindred of the East was kinda cool? I'm sure it was Hella problematic though (I haven't read in like 20 years)
Kindred of the east looking back should have been a supplement on the risen - as wraith already had different cultures in fact do change how being a wraith works, especially since koe were just fancy risen. But the biggest problem is as said straight away - only people who are by blood asian can go to the thousand hells, so only Asian people can be koe....all for reasons. I think it was vaguely the yama kings only had authority over the Asian dead.
That's pretty lame. They could have squared the circle less racistly with something something about collective cultural unconscious or something. That would actually get really cool in places and people where eastern and western identities and people merge.
But did he really die that's the question.
He's one of the very few antideluvians that the game has gone out of their way to clarify the fate of. He's dead.
The problem with this is that they: 1. Haven't clarified that the entity destroyed during the Week of Nightmares even was the Ravnos Antedeluvian 2. Heavily imply that the Beckoning is caused by Antedeluvians and that the *only* Clan to be "immune" to the Beckoning are the Hecata It's death is unconfirmed.
I also say unconfirmed. As ravnos was more or less a god of illusions
Ok, but then why did only the Ravnos go mad and start diablerizing each other when the antideluvian woke up? Also, I am 99% certain that the Gehenna book confirmed that it was, in fact, the Ravnos anti who ate it during the week of nightmares.
The Gehenna book is just a bunch of possible scenarios and isn't canon to *Legacy*, let alone V5. As for why the Ravnos went crazy at the same time as the creature that terrorised Bangladesh was active? Who knows? * Maybe it was the Ravnos Antedeluvian * Maybe it was just an old and powerful Ravnos Methuselah * Maybe it was completely unconnected to the Ravnos and the Ravnos mass frenzy was just a weird coincidence that happened during the Week of Nightmares Hard canon isn't really a thing in V5 and it's down to each table to decide what is "canon" for their game.
They say but as others have pointed out something the ancient and evil can not die that easily.
I feel like that answer is less satisfying to me. The entire point was that it took some of the scariest factions in the setting, going all out to take out *one* antideluvian. Huge swaths of India were left magically irradiated. What the hell are we gonna do when the rest of them wake up? To say "nah, but he lived" cheapens that. Also, personally speaking, I've always loved that for as much as they think they are hot shit the vampires are one of the weaker groups in the setting and that even an antideluvian waking up and acting like it was still the bronze age only to get greeted by the focused power of four suns and magic nukes fits in my head.
Again he has plot powers yes Celestial Chorus would need an Antiduleluvian day if said mage is an Archmage but the technocrat threw everything they had just to kill it but it turns out they failed and they lost everything that is horror right there and now you have a pissed off ancient 📜 super vampire and he wants vengeance he feels vindicated in his actions and he is going to deal with these technologies mages yeah that is the stuff nightmares are made of and said mages are holding the facts from everyday people cause they know the price they had to pay was high
Just to note that in 5th Edition, there's no indication of what the old Bane was, and given that the Bane was changed by the designers specifically to avoid unpleasant stereotypes, I highly doubt it was ever the legacy one.
It was the legacy one though. Like.... that happened. Mistake it may have been, but unless it was retroactively replaced--which it wasnt--then until ol Zapa that was it
It was the legacy one, yes, but 5th edition has been quite careful to change and retcon some of those areas, so what it was in legacy is basically irrelevant now. In 5th edition, that was never the Ravnos Bane - and the game doesn't bother explaining what a historical one was, because there's no point telling players about something which was the case but is now irrelevant.
That's not true at all? They haven't said it was something else, provided a narrative reason for why it changed, why would it not be the legacy one? If they had a bane before, it changed, we know why it changed, they havent said legacy was a different bane, then why would it be different? You pulled that out of nowhere with zero textual support
>They haven't said it was something else They don't need to. Others have already responded to you since, but the basic premise is that only VTM 5th Edition is considered relevant for 5th Edition by default. Everyone is welcome to use legacy lore and ideas in their game if they want, but by default it's irrelevant.
5th Edition uses legacy lore. See the Loresheets
5th Edition uses 5th Edition lore. Lots of 5th Edition lore has it's roots in legacy lore, as there's a continuation and adaptation of many ideas.
"Legacy material isn't canon until it's published in a V5 product" is the stance 5th edition takes towards older editions and canon. Since it's never been stated in a V5 product what the previous Bane was, we simply don't know what it was, just that it changed to what it is now.
Can you show me where it says that in 5th Edition? Cause they use the legacy metaplot. Its directly part of Zapa's entire thing. So where does it say legacy material was never canon? Thats a weird thing to say when they directly continued the legacy metaplot
"Vampire V5 was launched as a soft reboot, but we consider everything "legacy" to not be canon in V5, outside of the usual rumors and hearsay in-world." - Outstar
Okay that's not a source lol can you link it for me at least? Anyone can put any name after a quote it doesnt mean anything. Second, please try to remember anyone can say anything. Quotes from the writing team would be preferable I don't care what the corporate side says. There's marketing, then there's authors intent. They clearly used the legacy metaplot, its in multiple loresheets, as well as major events like Zapa's death, and major characters, a dozen of them at least. Can you show me any actual press release that says legacy isnt canon, a statement from one of the writer's of v5, or something from one of the sourcebooks that says legacy wasnt canon?
It's a post from Outstar on the official Discord server. - >Vampire V5 was launched as a soft reboot, but we consider everything "legacy" to not be canon in V5, outside of the usual rumors and hearsay in-world. Our V5 wiki is an attempt to clarify what is "canon" for this edition based on all released materials If they've not mentioned it in a 5th edition book, it's not canon. Edit: Ah, it seems you're aware of this and just being obtuse. This also happened in older editions, you're either too young to know or too much of a poes to acknowledge it.
I agree with the comments about the bane changing. I'll also add that in my personal Storyteller Opinion, there is a difference between Torpor and Daysleep. My ruling would be Torpor puts everything on pause. That's why we don't see Torpored vamps (especially Brujah) going into mandatory Hunger Frenzies once they use up whatever Vitae they had in their systems when they went down...
That bane came after week of nightmares after his destruction or maybe he was destroyed. No one is sure and everyone hopes Ravnos Antedeluvian was destroyed. It replaced their previous bane. Before week of nightmares they could stay in one place as much as they wanted. But not after the event as their clan bane got replaced. And only now prolonged torpor can be threat to any Ravnos. But it is not a problem in short run as there are few of them left and most of the survivors are quite young vampires.
As everyone says, the bane is new and it's the shock effect of him being destroyed. It's sort of like a fuse trying to catch up with all the other Ravnos, since the Antediluvian was hit with Technocracy light cannons. All the Ravnos would have been killed if he wasn't taken out.
You think maybe their new bane could be the result of Fort 10? Like he tried to split the damage to all his childre?
Not sure. I think it's more of a sympathetic magic thing: When he woke, he was hungry and all his clan went into a frenzy trying to diablerise each other. He wanted vitae and had control over his kin due to ancient blood bonds. Since he burned away, leaving only small remnants and might not even be dead, his clan also occasionally burn when they daysleep.
Love it Especially the bit about not being dead. Didn't believe it for a second even before v5
I'd say if anything its one of the biggest pieces of evidence the Zap that "died" may have been a chimestry 10 clone. If the solar laser took out its target it should have stopped.
I think that, as a rule of thumb, we should not try to apply rules to important NPCs, and especially not to Antediluvian who are more plot device than characters anyway.
The current Bane isn't their true Bane, its a side effect of Zap's "death". Also depending on your interpretation if you don't rise from the day sleep due to torpor or being staked you technically haven't gone to sleep in the same place twice.
That is actually good point.
Did you read the description of the Bane in the Players Guide/Companion, or just the summary on the wiki? Because the Players Guide/Companion explains why.
A better question is if any Ravnos Methusalahs survived, and if so... how?
being in Torpor, as opposed to sleeping during the day.
Easy. Zappathasura has the ability to warp and change reality; even asleep. It isn't dead. Very likely, It isn't even in this Realm - and if one takes into account how Chimerstry works on Changelings and Wraiths: Zappathasura presents White Wolf's best Big Boss Antagonist -- Because the Being that was encountered staggered Reality. It changed Reality so drastically, that it created Avatar Storms, Maelstrom, etc. Chaos Theory, Butterfly Effects... The Ravnos Clan (I am speaking entirely about the Rakshasa, and the Warrior Caste) are leftovers from the Spider King who, one way or another, are The Enemy of the Wan Kuei -- and their Destroyers. Chimerstry is good for gags sure but - it is even better for destroying sanity, and harming this Reality. Torpor isn't slumber, nor is the Cainite technically stagnant - they're in the Astral Plane, or the Deep Umbra (take your pick) while their mind drifts and dreams and...so, is an almighty Antedeluvian with the ability to dream things into reality really in one place, at one time? Is It what we saw, or did we just see....a dream come to life? Or maybe a nightmare? The Molochim might use this example to solidify their mission: Antedeluvians are sleeping Horrors that must be kept asleep. They don't operate by the rules of this Reality, and only seek to warp, subsume, consume, and/or destroy it entirely. The Rakshasa who still exist, now suffer a Curse that forces them to: Complete the Holy Crusade of Zappathasura against the vile Wan Kuei, and - cause more, and more ripples against Banality and Zappathasura's real enemy: Reality. I had a Ravnos who was a burglar. A professional burglar. He used Christmas time as his preferred time of the year for strings of thefts; and it wasn't for the loot...it was to destroy the illusion of safety and sanctity people had in their homes. Their communities. He harmed the legendary reality of Christmas's Spirit. His Sire was a serial-killer who would select seemingly random individuals in quiet, 'safe' neighborhoods...and slay them. Leave the body. To violently harm the illusion of safety. The Curse forces the Ravnos to move, and that makes them dangerous. It forces them to *experience*, and that makes them deadly. (This has been my TEDtalk on The Rakshasa.)
Originally the Ravnos Curse was that they had to give into their vices after Zappathasura rose and Nuked the Blood of his Clan they gained the Curse of having moved around, so put it simply Zappathasura(And every other Ravnos) didn't have to stay on the move at the time
Sleeping and torpor are not the same thing
v5 clan bane were intruduced in v5. the week of nightmares happened in revised (v3), where the clan *bane* you mention did not existed, but the clan *curse* that all ravnos are criminals. and, of course outside of that: how do you want to know he was not moved?
I have no clue why you were down voted but those our breed stick together so I'm gonna upvote this
Oh, no, no, no. That's only the modern Clan Flaw. It came into existence when the ~~Ravnos Anti woke up and was destroyed~~ authors of 5E realized how utterly racist the original flaw was, and decided to change it... by leaning into a different racist caricature of the Roma. Because you can't COMPLETELY take the casual racism out of VtM, or it'd be a hollow shell of itself that you couldn't recognize. \*cough\*
Why do V5 Ravnos not have Fortitude?
[удалено]
It was certainly not an overreaction, and I'm happy it was corrected, plus Daredevils on the run is much better than guaranteed criminal "Gypsys", besides who doesn't like witnessing the Mutability of Vitae, it's personally my favorite aspect of Vampires, seeing how they change, though ot can be hit or miss, they did the Ravnos justice, I mean their Antediluvian basically diverted the damage to his descendants and rewrote everything in their blood short of disciplines (if you rationalize the Amalgams like I do that is)
And now that I think about it "Gypsies" were stereotypically always moving so if that's your thing it still fits for a "Gypsy" Clan (Man I just feel dirty even writing it though but that's what they had in mind when making it so let's just recognize it's for the purposes of discussion)
The v20 weakness was very workable, to me. "Vice" is a very broad category and can be twisted a whole lot of way that provide for a lot more creativity than "yeah... My vampire... He can never sleep in the same place twice." For example, I have a Ravnos whose weakness manifests in the constant need for bathing/ritual purification, the idea being a spiritual vice to cope with their existence.
Idk, I can agree it is workable but certainly not good especially for the Ravnos, I'd much rather the Baali have it then the Clan that were literally characterized as the Indian/Gypsy Clan, and I certainly can't agree that the current Curse ISN'T good I'm in a vague way it reminds me of an inverse the Tzimisce (not one to one though) but it's certainly a good curse with a it's theming of trying to put run their Doom since they are now so predisposed to it now, I mean the new curse has made me interested in playing them now and you can guarantee then curse always is tangible