|
Axelgear posted:Does anyone have a word for that part of you that knows something is bad but you can see why some bits of it are fun, so you keep coming back to it and trying to salvage it, but you only end up frustrated when you come to the same glaring conclusion again and again that the concept is unsalvageable? I call it oLoomer.
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 03:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 18:52 |
|
|
What does Null Snyper actually do? Besides eating feelings on the internet or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 03:35
|
|
|
Well I can tell you what she doesn't do. Bathe. The book is quite explicit on that part to the point it describes her acne and smell.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 04:35
|
|
|
Desiden posted:What's interesting to me is that at a basic level, both this statement and egg pee monster convey the same notion to make you squirm (there are now weird eggs inside you), but I find the above quote a more disturbing image than what we got. I'm not 100% sure why. I think at least part of it the emphasis of difference with stuff under the skin. Like, eggs coming out your dick is gross and weird, but your junk is still basically doing what its supposed to, ejecting stuff that shouldn't be there. Whereas them under the skin really drives home the point that your own body is now doing things and changing in ways that are incomprehensible.  There's a balance that's hard to strike when it comes to horror, where you need to provide just barely enough information to make something scary so that the reader/viewer will fill in their own info, but not be so vague that it has no effect on them whatsoever or leaves them thinking "Oh great, another unfathomable cosmic lovecraftian horror... whoopie..." While Thomas Ligotti isn't my favorite author, some of his stories hit this balance perfectly. For example, "Notes on the Writing of Horror: A Story" and "The Nyctalops Trilogy" from Grimscribe strike this very well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 04:47
|
|
|
Lets take a moment to really appreciate that, in essence, this is a monster that tricks people into eating its jizz. Really savor the concept, roll it around in your mouth a bit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 04:49
|
|
|
Enola Gay-For-Pay posted:Lets take a moment to really appreciate that, in essence, this is a monster that tricks people into eating its jizz. Really savor the concept, roll it around in your mouth a bit. But I'm worried this kind of concept will snowball.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 05:02
|
|
|
So is Null Snyper just a beast that's an internet troll? If so, are there other mechanics in play that make it so that this is punishing over time? Edit: And is the old self-justification for why Beast's aren't inherently evil there still? I know they said they'd lighten up on that after people started shrieking "What the gently caress is wrong with you!" when they read the preview. Archonex fucked around with this message at 07:23 on Jan 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 07:20
|
|
|
Kurieg posted:the Progenitor, who's their ultra badass patron who's so amazing and badass that he hosed the dark mother. So he's the DM's abusive ex boyfriend? He can hang out in the pile of terrible White Wolf cosmic entities with that bad guy that was basically 'The Patriarchy'.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 07:31
|
|
|
Going through the files again. We don't know the exact population of indigenous peoples in the Northern US until quite late in their history, but there are some solid estimates for early periods. Unfortunately those estimates don't extend to the 1750s, but we can make some educated gueses - if the population of North America was 20 million before contact (which is a high number, and likely too high for the WoD since it had psychotic werewolves enforcing the impergium in the Americas on an ongoing basis until white people turned up and brought enough banes etc to make that a secondary concern) and had a 90% die-off, then two million is a good figure. Of those 2 million in the 1750s, 1 in 20,000 were Dreamspeaker mages. Not a bad ratio, eh?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 07:33
|
|
|
Archonex posted:So is Null Snyper just a beast that's an internet troll? If so, are there other mechanics in play that make it so that this is punishing over time? No their response to people going "WHAT THE gently caress IS WRONG WITH YOU!!?!" seems to have been the "Insatiable", of which Null Snyper is one. Basically they're Beasts except worse in every concievable way, and completely devoid of anything resembling human emotion, they exist only to feed and long for everything Beasts have. Also they're invisible to Hero senses so only Beasts can fight them. If i didn't know better I'd think that Insatiables are a parody of Beasts, but no they're presented right along side them with a hearty "BOY SURE AREN'T YOU GLAD BEASTS ARE AROUND TO KILL THESE ASSHOLES!?" Crasical posted:So he's the DM's abusive ex boyfriend? 1st edition White Wolf sure was one hell of a drug.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 07:55
|
|
|
Kurieg posted:Patriarchy is the name of the Wyrm Spirit of the Abrahamic faiths. Honestly, that could be sorta rad, in a 90's kinda way
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 08:16
|
|
|
Could have been, but it was Brucato's doing, and Brucato doesn't really 'get' feminism.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 08:17
|
|
|
Loomer posted:Could have been, but it was Brucato's doing, and Brucato doesn't really 'get' feminism. He gets a very extreme and narrow-minded version of second wave feminism that he thinks is progressive instead of stereotypical. What he -really- doesn't get is transpeople.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 08:25
|
|
|
Kurieg posted:Patriarchy is the name of the Wyrm Spirit of the Abrahamic faiths. I love that in Awakening the Exarch of Prime, the Father, is pretty much still this concept but written well. He has a definite gender unlike the rest of them, represents religious oppression and is literally the closest thing to a standard God the Father one can meet in the Aether. He's also explicitly the Exarch that rules over misogyny in the same way as Unity rules over xenophobia and racism, as well as being in charge of blind faith, tradition overriding good sense, and censorship of true spirituality. He is absolutely the Exarch of religious patriarchy. I feel like this has to have been done on purpose.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 08:30
|
|
|
Kavak posted:He gets a very extreme and narrow-minded version of second wave feminism that he thinks is progressive instead of stereotypical. What he -really- doesn't get is transpeople. Yeah, and it's baffling. Like, even as an occultist, I can't wrap my head around him there. Yes, the hermaphrodite is an incredible magical thing defined by its dual-nature... But a transwoman and a transman aren't defined by a dual nature, nor are they incredible magical creatures in any magical tradition I know of, even if Brucato seems to think by turns they either are the long-sought hermaphrodite or a third-gender. They're just gals and guys who unfortunately had a mismatch, and while there is magic power in the subversion of gender roles and norms, transpeople as a rule aren't subverting them just by being trans. Now, if a transman wants to then dress as a woman and have sex with a spirit-husband to gain magical power like some magical traditions practice, he will be, but just 'I'm a dude, y'all' doesn't cut it as a source of ritual subversion and harnessing, and saying it is is loving insane. I genuinely do not know why he doesn't see this. Even the OTO et al agree that there is nothing uniquely magical about transpeople (any magic that might be associated comes more from personal experience of hardship or of building a new self, which is not unique to transpeople though the exact circumstances a transman or transwoman experiences them in may be, at least in the majority view of occultists I know and associate with), and they have one of the most rigidly enforced male/female magical role dynamics among esoteric societies today outside of some of the seperatist/radical feminist-Wiccan cross-over groups. It's lunacy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 08:49
|
|
|
Considering how terribly Beast handles the 'Beasts = Minorities, Heroes = MRA' allegory I'm surprised that they didn't go back to that well. What's the ULTIMATE EVIL, greater even than Beasts? Neurotypical CisHets. THE PATRIARCHY.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 09:05
|
|
|
Loomer posted:Yeah, and it's baffling. Like, even as an occultist, I can't wrap my head around him there. I sincerely love that our thread's got a resident legit IRL wizard, complete with Obsessions, and he's still of the opinion that Brucato's just nuts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 09:16
|
|
|
Terrible in some way idea a player of mine suggested in passing: Life Adept Mage thinks he's hot poo poo and puts out the word to the vampire community - he will, no fooling, give out his blood to any vampires that come to his doorstep (and just heal himself afterward), as long as that vampire can prove that over at least the last week they've done more 'good' than 'evil'. His idealistic cabal are willing to go along with this idea and protect him from attacks. "See guys, isn't this better, now you get blood through good acts instead of having to seduce people or attack them! And there's enough for everybody, no need to fight over territory!" bewilderment fucked around with this message at 10:27 on Jan 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 10:23
|
|
|
bewilderment posted:Terrible in some way idea a player of mine suggested in passing: \ 
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 10:31
|
|
|
Kurieg posted:No their response to people going "WHAT THE gently caress IS WRONG WITH YOU!!?!" seems to have been the "Insatiable", of which Null Snyper is one. Basically they're Beasts except worse in every concievable way, and completely devoid of anything resembling human emotion, they exist only to feed and long for everything Beasts have. Also they're invisible to Hero senses so only Beasts can fight them. So, if Beasts are a horribly hamfisted metaphor for marginalized groups. What does that make the Insatiable in this horrible analogy?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 14:51
|
|
|
bewilderment posted:Terrible in some way idea a player of mine suggested in passing: This is why I have vampire feeding cause resistant lethal damage.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 15:09
|
|
|
Obligatum VII posted:So, if Beasts are a horribly hamfisted metaphor for marginalized groups. What does that make the Insatiable in this horrible analogy? Furries.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 15:13
|
|
|
The members of the marginalized group that prove republicans are right?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 15:14
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:The members of the marginalized group that prove republicans are right? Enola Gay-For-Pay posted:Furries. But Beasts were so horribly mishandled that both of these already apply to them. Which means the Insatiable have to be the next step up (down?) from that and I'm having a hard time fathoming what that could be.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 15:20
|
|
|
Loomer posted:Yeah, and it's baffling. Like, even as an occultist, I can't wrap my head around him there. Yes, the hermaphrodite is an incredible magical thing defined by its dual-nature... But a transwoman and a transman aren't defined by a dual nature, nor are they incredible magical creatures in any magical tradition I know of, even if Brucato seems to think by turns they either are the long-sought hermaphrodite or a third-gender. They're just gals and guys who unfortunately had a mismatch, and while there is magic power in the subversion of gender roles and norms, transpeople as a rule aren't subverting them just by being trans. Now, if a transman wants to then dress as a woman and have sex with a spirit-husband to gain magical power like some magical traditions practice, he will be, but just 'I'm a dude, y'all' doesn't cut it as a source of ritual subversion and harnessing, and saying it is is loving insane. You seem to be crediting Brucato with have at least attempted to delve into occult philosophy more than "read some Silver Ravenwolf 20 years ago, and maybe some wiki articles since then". I am not sure that is wise. The guy has always had a very shallow understanding of most of the philosophy and ideology he writes about. His perspective on trans people is basically just an extension of the same sort of fawning adoration he heaped on the feminine. Which is usually the sort of trait you see in newcomers to an ideology who go overboard in their attempt to prove their allegiance, but ends up being really sad when its someone who has been doing this for decades. Like, the other 20th lines are your circle of friends who grew up, got real jobs and families, and who still believed in the causes of their youth, but realized how they went about it was kind of silly and now have a bit more nuance. When I read Mage 20th, it kept making me think of that One Friend most people have, who still in his 40s thinks wearing Rage Against the Machine t-shirts and signing e-petitions is totally gonna transform society, man.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 15:23
|
|
|
Obligatum VII posted:So, if Beasts are a horribly hamfisted metaphor for marginalized groups. What does that make the Insatiable in this horrible analogy? http://i.imgur.com/wkD4VRS.mp4
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 15:23
|
|
|
bewilderment posted:Terrible in some way idea a player of mine suggested in passing: Absolutely nothing can go wrong with this plan and it won't have any unfortunate side-effects.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 15:49
|
|
|
Doodmons posted:Absolutely nothing can go wrong with this plan and it won't have any unfortunate side-effects. there certainly isn't an entire clan that gets addicted to the blood of anyone they feed on more than once, nope nope nope
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 15:53
|
|
|
Desiden posted:You seem to be crediting Brucato with have at least attempted to delve into occult philosophy more than "read some Silver Ravenwolf 20 years ago, and maybe some wiki articles since then". I am not sure that is wise. Brucato is a weird guy. I'm in a Facebook group with him, and... Well, he's trying. Maybe not succeeding, but trying. He doesn't quite get that being put on a pedestal can be just as alienating as being oppressed, and some of his friends really like being worshiped. One of his main problems is that he doesn't quite "get" his own school of magickal thinking, Chaos Magic. One of the big things he was worried about during the production of Mage was that people would "accidentally" cast spells and hurt themselves. Yeah. See, according to the basic tenets of chaos magic, spells require a great deal of focused intent, meditation/trance-entering, etc. It by definition isn't something you can do accidentally. You won't stumble onto a sigil, because they are created out of cloth by their caster, and needs to be created with a purpose, charged, then discarded. You can't do that without focused intent. It's like worrying that by reading a history of the atomic bomb, and then helping your kid build a papier-mâché vinegar/baking soda volcano for school, you're really going to blow the whole place up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 16:11
|
|
|
Obligatum VII posted:But Beasts were so horribly mishandled that both of these already apply to them. Which means the Insatiable have to be the next step up (down?) from that and I'm having a hard time fathoming what that could be. I'd say the guy that tries to patiently explain he's an ephebophile, but I feel like Beasts are that guy too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 16:20
|
|
|
Toph Bei Fong posted:Brucato is a weird guy. I'm in a Facebook group with him, and... Well, he's trying. Maybe not succeeding, but trying. He doesn't quite get that being put on a pedestal can be just as alienating as being oppressed, and some of his friends really like being worshiped. I haven't run in occult or pagan circles for quite a while, but back when I did I remember the "accidentally casting spells" thing seemed to be a popular hobby among the loonier and/or more dysfuctional parts of the social group. It usually seemed to boil down to either: 1. "I am so powerful that I must carefully control my actions lest I accidentally change reality" 2. "No one is paying attention to me, so I'm going to claim someone is magickally attacking me and/or is a psychic vampire" Admittedly, this was mostly among goofy drug addled college kids during the 90s, so I don't really assume its a universal to practitioners, but drat was it absurd.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 16:51
|
|
|
Toph Bei Fong posted:See, according to the basic tenets of chaos magic, spells require a great deal of focused intent, meditation/trance-entering, etc. It by definition isn't something you can do accidentally. You won't stumble onto a sigil, because they are created out of cloth by their caster, and needs to be created with a purpose, charged, then discarded. You can't do that without focused intent. Well, ish. Sometimes chaos magic supposes that magic is a thing that exists in a myriad of forms, and the art of chaos magic is simply the art of convincing yourself really hard that you can draw on a specific style. Under that, heh, "paradigm", it's entirely possible that someone might cast a spell by accident if they're really precise about following the rituals of chaos magic. Alternatively, based on how he thinks playing a Nephandi will turn you into a serial killer, Brucato may just think that people will genuinely believe they can cast magic if he tells them how to, and then "accidentally" cast magic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 18:06
|
|
|
Imagine if Gary Gygax had been worried about people using his spell descriptions to accidentally cast Fireball for real.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
It's a shame Beast is such a waste of paper, but I love the horrified discussions of it in here so I'm torn. Also Insatiables represent the fever dreams of what a privileged liberal thinks a rich Rethuglikkan thinks the worst example of a minority is and it's way, way more telling about the privileged liberal's secret lovely beliefs than anything else.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 19:13
|
|
|
ZeroCount posted:Imagine if Gary Gygax had been worried about people using his spell descriptions to accidentally cast Fireball for real. You'd need a whole lot more bat guano for that to happen. Also, as someone peripherally following this thread, I never quite understood--are Beasts supposed to be protagonists or antagonists? Because so far from these descriptions, there doesn't seem to be much reason for a player to want to be a Beast. They all sound awful, and not in an exciting way. A vampire is a tragic figure in the Romantic style--cursed to be a monster with heroism found in the struggle for humanity against their new nature. A werewolf is the classic underdog (heh) in a semi-cliched 90's punk fight against The Man. A Mage is the Faustian desire for knowledge leading to the Hero's corruption, or alternatively the Hero's Journey through magic to enlightenment and the immanentizing of the eschaton. A Promethian is the flawed human searching for redemption? meaning? purpose? A Changeling is the runaway slave or abuse victim coming to terms with their suffering. A Demon is the Individual struggling to maintain their identity against The Collective. But what is the core struggle / redeeming, humanizing factor for Beasts? In all this discussion I haven't heard one yet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
Cantorsdust posted:But what is the core struggle / redeeming, humanizing factor for Beasts? In all this discussion I haven't heard one yet. They don't have one. Their humanizing factor is that the book insists over and over again they're good and you should love them and that every other supernatural does.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
Tiny Deer posted:It's a shame Beast is such a waste of paper, but I love the horrified discussions of it in here so I'm torn. Last I checked privileged liberals don't poo poo infectious eggs out of their dicks with every thrust of their hips. Or, well, maybe i've been missing out on some of the subtler aspects of liberalism. Archonex fucked around with this message at 19:48 on Jan 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:They don't have one. Their humanizing factor is that the book insists over and over again they're good and you should love them and that every other supernatural does. Do they have a Morality slider akin to Humanity for the Vampire, Wisdom for the Mage, etc? That could at least point to whatever you're supposed to manage as a player. edit: Like, I guess what do Beasts do? Vampires drink blood on the day to day and scheme for power long term. Mages study/investigate on the day to day and learn more magic for the long term. Werewolves defend their territory on the day to day and seek balance for the long term. What are Beasts doing on a day to day, regular play session basis, and what is their supposed character arc? Cantorsdust fucked around with this message at 19:47 on Jan 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
Archonex posted:Last I checked privileged liberals don't poo poo infectious eggs out of their dicks with every thrust of their hips. Oh god I need to get to a doctor right away.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 18:52 |
|
|
Cantorsdust posted:Do they have a Morality slider akin to Humanity for the Vampire, Wisdom for the Mage, etc? That could at least point to whatever you're supposed to manage as a player. Nothing, really. They go around and act out their dumb revenge fantasies and the game calls them heroes for it. But not Heroes, those are all disposable villains with no mechanical power to threaten the Beast. This is the actual core of why Beast is poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 19:48
|
|