|
Mage is really drat good, actually. It's the only one I can really comment on since the Werewolf game I was in didn't last long, but my Mage chronicle was over six years and really great.
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 19:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 13:50 |
|
|
Kurieg posted:The weird tribal animosity from 1st edition werewolf was mostly excised in 2nd edition. In 2nd edition your Pack is the most important thing to you, if a decision comes down to your pack or your tribe the correct answer is "Your Pack" and your tribe will definitely understand because it's made up entirely of werewolves who should also be making that same choice. The question on my end stemmed from still probably internalizing stuff like the 1E setting books which had all cabals/packs are one <blank>, although Hunting Ground: Rockies does feel like a better example of 'here is a place with a bunch of werewolves in it' than Boston did for Mage, even if it's still heavy on mono-tribe packs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 19:45
|
|
|
Rounding out the underreported: Geist 2e is really good in ways that Geist 1e wasn't (like "having things to do") while also having the best magic item setup of all the games (they all have a very basic, universal, crucial impact on how your powers can work, with a side order of a cute incidental minor weird effect) and actual concrete rules for drat near everything it needed, including playable ghosts and sort of zombies. Hunter 2e is...not fully out yet but is a lot of Hunter 1e which was already pretty great. Deviant is new and a wild card and I love it dearly and madly and can't wait for the book to be published and in my hot little hands, because it splits the difference of point-based supers and dot-based WoD/CoD poo poo in a way that hews the closest to feeling fair of any attempt I've seen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 19:56
|
|
|
I casually pitched a Mage game to my wider gaming group and before I knew it the game has bloated into a ten player monstrosity I am not sure I can handle. Someone please give me some hot tips for not losing my entire loving mind while running this. We are doing weekly sessions via MUSH server with intermittent mid-week vignettes/writeups, if that helps.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 20:40
|
|
|
Reene posted:I casually pitched a Mage game to my wider gaming group and before I knew it the game has bloated into a ten player monstrosity I am not sure I can handle. Can you tap one or two of the group to become Narrators / mini-STs to help split the workload? By yourself - you could possibly split the party and run each one in parallel but opposite weeks. Maybe you can drop a strict reading of tone and become more light / lighthearted so it really is a more casual game to ease pressure on you. But, yeah, a 10 person Mage game sounds like RIP anyone's sanity.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 20:48
|
|
|
Yeah I'd try to split that into two cabals. Maybe have them in the same region/Consilium, with separate sessions, and have occasional big messy 10-person sessions which are just the two cabals coming together and negotiating/touching base?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 20:55
|
|
|
Let them go crazy and dig their own holes. I’m not kidding about this. For ten people I would decide that there’s some random group of unnamed number doing X crazy bad thing. Then let them fragment into smaller groups to investigate Y things that plays to player strength. Then use that to bounce off big conspiracy X and make them go at it from a half dozen angles before they can confront a couple big baddies in charge. If the bad guys can interfere in magic running smoothly, they’ll have plenty of motivation to stop it too. Play to character strengths and weaknesses, and constantly ask them what they want to be doing. With 10 people, there will be enough ideas soon enough and you can encourage them to take others with for teamwork. My method is the more they’re talking and plotting, the less I need to interfere with how their part of the story is moving, and then I only jump in to make it more complicated or give cascading consequences. I also try to keep my NPC involvement in any scene to 1-3 main NPCs that the PCs decided they needed to talk to or are there as antagonists. The bad guys can have as many redshirts as I need at any given moment then. Also, have fun, lean in and let them go crazy with the world around them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 20:57
|
|
|
Joe Slowboat posted:Yeah I'd try to split that into two cabals. Maybe have them in the same region/Consilium, with separate sessions, and have occasional big messy 10-person sessions which are just the two cabals coming together and negotiating/touching base? Yeah I just hard-refuse more than 5 players, and frankly turn away the 5th more often than not. 10 is nuts. There was a semi-legendary game at my college, well before I got there, where there were three groups of oWOD mages that were all in the same 'campaign' but rarely, if ever, had sessions with each other. Basically all like time-delay PVP shenanigans. Very silly but people who'd been around for it thought it was super cool.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 21:10
|
|
|
Tulip posted:Yeah I just hard-refuse more than 5 players, and frankly turn away the 5th more often than not. 10 is nuts. I'm afraid I have to second this. If it were me I'd apologize, maybe look into compromises where players could be folded into a different, more managable game, but actually running a Mage game for ten people, even split up by cabal or with co-STs, would be a giant headache, complete dealbreaker. It might be different with another game. Maybe Vampire, where you could set up player-vs-player rivalries. Maybe Hunter, which is free and open for improvised encounter design. But Mage? Imagine wrangling ten characters, all with their own Obsessions, with enough mysteries for characters to pursue locally, the normal NPCs to populate the Consilium, and answering for their Mage Sight and supernal vision alone, even before you get into spellcraft. Mage is too in-depth to run for so many people without a lot of work and support.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 21:39
|
|
|
While running two different games concurrently does not appeal, two groups of five feels way more doable than a group of ten. I'd just be afraid somebody's going to get lost in the shuffle, maybe a couple someones.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 22:01
|
|
|
Reene posted:I casually pitched a Mage game to my wider gaming group and before I knew it the game has bloated into a ten player monstrosity I am not sure I can handle.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 22:03
|
|
|
Reene posted:I casually pitched a Mage game to my wider gaming group and before I knew it the game has bloated into a ten player monstrosity I am not sure I can handle. Two games of 5?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 22:24
|
|
|
Reene posted:I casually pitched a Mage game to my wider gaming group and before I knew it the game has bloated into a ten player monstrosity I am not sure I can handle. Yikes, I'm doing seven players with play by post and it's super rough to make sure everyone has something to do. With ten players, like everyone else posted, you're going to have to split the party. That's easy for me since there's the built in time delay of play by post, but doing it real time is going to be a nightmare. I'd encourage players to team up with linked characters, especially obsessions and aspirations that compliment each other. Heavy use of down and dirty combat. Good luck!
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 22:27
|
|
|
Tulip posted:It's entirely probable that LWW and I have different priorities/experiences. Nearly all the games I've played have been with the same people, over a decade and a half, and we tend to play pretty loose, lots of improvisation, and a lot of escalation followed by introspection. In retrospect, my list was more about which games are the best at being what they're trying to be and less about which has the best player experience or anything like that. Still, I can't disagree with your list either, and I did do a lot of games I love dirty by just not wanting to talk about them in a longer list. For example, the game I disagree with you hardest there is Promethean 2e, and even if I could yell about how Roles feel oddly pidgeonhole-y and the Alembic system feels like you'd need at minimum a board game style peg board to make managing your pyros feel good, it's still a great game and a marked improvement on the first edition. If someone said any nWoD/CofD 2e line besides Beast or Mummy was their favorite, they would make perfect sense. Also, Mage is great, fight me. (Do not actually fight me, your criticisms are probably entirely fair.) Also, to Reene, what everyone else said. I've only been in games with ten people that use systems far easier to run than Mage, and even then we split into subgroups naturally just for the sake of scheduling and giving everyone the proper spotlight time. Maybe even go for two groups of three and a group of four, just don't try to run ten mages at one time. Lurks With Wolves fucked around with this message at 22:49 on Jun 4, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 22:46
|
|
|
I guess sort of a general question from me then to everyone advocating for that’s too many people. Not because I’m raging or anything, but just curiosity. And because this is the internet and tone can be hard to convey, I’m not judging anyone for play style here, just want to expand my own toolbox for game running. When you sit down for a session of awakening, how do you plan? Do you have very in depth scenes planned for your groups? Do they like guided story a lot? How do you plan scenes and get mages to interact with it without just planning their way around half of it with magic? I just mean actual logistics of a game session, metaplot isn’t really probably a lot different as that’s all set up by me too and that’s mostly static. ———- I think my experience with running the game is definitely different than a lot of peoples’ experience doing the same thing. When we started I went with a small story where they were rookie mages getting tossed at a problem from two directions at once. This snowballed and ran them into the central mystery of the whole thing, but after about 4-5 sessions the beginning transitioned quickly from me setting a complicated scene and just letting them decide how they wanted to bounce off the world. I kept a list of stuff happening to explore, and they’d start with something new, or pick up where they left off with something completely different. About a year ago I had to stop planning complicated scenes almost entirely because they have a tendency to just break things and skip any planning I did. So we transitioned into what I’ve seen referred to as a West Marches style game. They have all the hooks in the world, and they can decide who/what/where with a ton of agency. Last night we ended up in a random spot to start, with a random NPC chosen by a player, and we had an absolute blast with what transpired. It was all because the NPC has a short list of goals and I picked one for it to complain about. They took it and a little unexplained magic on my part, they’re doing something political, messing with time magic, and destroying a vampire in the same scene (a scene that we had played 3 years ago and was a point of consternation for the NPC). There was so much back and forth and description from the players in a scene that I didn’t have any thing to interject a lot. If you’re going to actually run 10 players (I do think it’s possible this way), I’d pitch it as requiring this sort of player agency. The more that they can do themselves within a reasonable framework, the more a ST can impact the game in great and unexpected ways.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2020 22:52
|
|
|
I plan a lot and not at all. These are my game binders, purple is for werewolf, which is on hiatus while we do mage. Green in Mage.  I've got tabs in here for quick reference of my player's sheets, npcs, places, the current plot, upcoming plots, things the players have done that were left unresolved that might come and bite them in the rear end later, stuff like that.  Then, for each story I have a basic flow chart of how things *could* progress. This comes back to the "not at all" part of planning, because it's impossible to anticipate all the ways the players will gently caress up your plot. But having it there to look at will help you improvise ways to make things keep making sense.  Then I start getting a little more granular. Just quick notes on the major beats and players in the plot, but still pretty light.  Finally I think of a few ways that the players can progress from step to step. Sometimes they actually do what you anticipate, sometimes they get stuck because you didn't make something as clear as you thought so these are good for giving hints. I wrote these notes before I really started to get a handle on mage, but my players were learning too, so it didn't matter.  Basically, have a general roadmap ready, write down everything you improvise, because you never know what your players will fixate on, which is how an unplanned encounter with a true fae in a reststop has now evolved into my mage players helping a changeling freehold fight off an invasion of hedgebeasts and goblins as the minions of the abyssal entity masquerading as a celtic god tries to take out the only remaining threat to it's breaching of our reality. Fake edit: sorry for my handwriting and for images being upside down wtf why is imgur mobile so much harder to use than the browser version? Real edit: I forgot to actually address you experiences. Mage is very focused because this evolved from a mortals game where the characters were teens who had to kill a god making killer snowmen eat their small town. They awakened and all had visions of all these abyssal entities trying to get into our reality under the guise of ancient gods. So they take their wizard van and travel to where these visions direct them. They always have that time sensitive goal urging them on. Werewolf is city based and I did similar to what you ended up doing at the end. The city lives it's own life and the players cannot control everything. So there are multiple plots going on and they need to choose where to direct their energies and efforts. In werewolf, they stopped an outbreak of suicide spirits and helped a pack of Pure destroy a lab owned by even worse Pure that were making vampire/werewolf hybrids. But because of pursuing those goals, the azlu infestation in the neighborhood bordering their territory has gotten worse. The alliance between the Ivory Claws mafia family that owned that facility and the Invictus vampires in the city center has strengthened. Same players in each game, but because the drives behind the chronicles are different, their approaches are different. Soonmot fucked around with this message at 02:30 on Jun 5, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 02:20
|
|
|
My basic Mage storytelling strategy looked like: Have a bunch of somewhat detailed NPCs, including the cabal of Tremere central to the main problem in the Consilium that I expected them to specifically focus on. I spent a decent amount of time beforehand thinking of wizards with their various magical approaches, alliances, and so on - in particular, ways in which the Tremere situation influenced everyone else. Making sure that things in Mage are interconnected is important to create that sense of following breadcrumbs and clues to Mysteries, even if the breadcrumb trail wasn't specifically thought up by the ST: The players naturally run into hints of connected things no matter what they do. This means that, eventually, the PCs will have circulated through a ton of the local Mage politics and Mysteries. Mysteries! Not talking about the mechanics of them, just some big weird things and some ideas about what's going on there to generate more stuff off of. In my case, the city of Cheston was built on top of a giant Time Before ruin/prison with a Bound god at the bottom, and then I made sure each cool magical thing I wanted to add beyond that was at least a little influenced by that Bound, or could interact with it in an interesting way. What did that do to the Shadow? What did it do to local dreams? These sorts of things will slowly generate a web of connections - you don't need them all to start with, just some things that are naturally going to interact, and then go out of your way as ST to think 'ok, how does this other thing intersect with this side plot or minor Mystery? How can I make the one touch on the other?' so that the players are drawn forward by their curiosity and desire to understand the whole situation. So a lot of cabals and Mysteries in Cheston touched on the labyrinth under the city, there were vampires being drawn by the Bound towards the ruins, the Seers wanted access to the Bound. So the players bounced around the setting, getting in fights and doing smaller plots with other cabals, until they slowly built up a sense of what was going on in Cheston overall. Have a starting situation to throw them into, and a final scene/situation I want them to be in waaaay down the line. That final situation in this case was 'confront the Tremere leader trying to release the Bound through manipulating the Mysterium Hierarch Superior, so that the spiritual backlash is felt by the Hierophant and the Tremere can create a bridge for their patron from the Abyss to the Supernal via the Bound.' The details changed over time as the game played out, which is good! You have the goal you want the players to reach, the final image or setpiece, but you can add more and develop it and remove bits based on their actions, so that their work shapes it - in this case, the conditions of that final showdown were wildly different than I expected. The starting situation was arriving for an advisory meeting/dinner with a Mystagogue to find him shot dead by a sniper, and his basement full of soul jars... and then someone else used magic with Time from a now-changed future to wipe the evidence clean, so the players know there's a conspiracy. Session to session, however, you need to be very flexible, find out their goals, and give them options. I planned most sessions maybe a week in advance, fleshing out the part of the sandbox the players said they wanted to go to next, and making sure to think about player Aspirations and Obsessions, so that the setting and characters around them provided the raw material for player-focused session writing. They did a lot I didn't expect! With Mage, you don't really need to worry too much about 'I don't know what players can do about X or Y' because, like, as long as you give them some clues and they're using their magic, they'll find a way through whatever you point them at. Less so for combat or immediate dangers, but if they have time to try out some terrible ideas, they'll do great and/or terribly on their own. I think that this sandbox style doesn't need a central plot thread, but benefits from it for keeping a coherent theme and giving it a coherent endpoint to aim for. This isn't, like, everything, but I think that that kind of built-out sandbox with details sketched in ahead of specific sessions based on expressed player interests is a pretty flexible framework.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 02:38
|
|
|
Both of those answers were very useful for me. I did most of the work for fleshing out the mage world well enough before we started with NPCs and NPC antagonists, so I've been able to just slowly modify that the entire time. Adding one new NPC here and there is a lot less work, and because we play with Chicago as the setting location (but not from the Chicago book), we have never run out of room in the sandbox. Although we do sometimes take day trips to other places. Soonmot's werewolf game is about how I run with mage, with the city doing what it's going to do, and there only being so many hours in a day.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 06:33
|
|
|
Reene posted:I casually pitched a Mage game to my wider gaming group and before I knew it the game has bloated into a ten player monstrosity I am not sure I can handle. bully one of your players into GMing and run two groups
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 06:56
|
|
|
Arivia posted:I'm not saying you're wrong as the line has developed until now, but I was discussing the very beginning of the nWoD, where Guardians of the Veil was the first order book and like the fourth MtAw book period. To me as a new reader, it seemed very obvious that Guardians wouldn't mix well with other Pentacle mages in a cabal, same as I was finding reading the Vampire covenant books around the same time. I think the real answer to this problem is that Guardians canonically revere the institution of the cabal and would A. never ask a Guardian to turn on their own cabal and B. wouldn't let a Guardian do it, short of accidentally discovering they are baby-eating Nephandi (which is not to say another Guardian couldn't do it--but no one rats on their cabal, because if they did, no one would let Guardians in their cabal in the first place). Maybe this was just Brookshaw canon in Broken Diamond etc, but it certainly feels important to their lore. thegoatgod_pan fucked around with this message at 07:39 on Jun 5, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 07:29
|
|
|
thegoatgod_pan posted:I think the real answer to this problem is that Guardians canonically revere the institution of the cabal and would A. never ask a Guardian to turn on their own cabal and B. wouldn't let a Guardian do it, short of accidentally discovering they are baby-eating Nephandi (which is not to say another Guardian couldn't do it--but no one rats on their cabal, because if they did, no one would let Guardians in their cabal in the first place). Oh yeah that's a good point, it's outlined in both the 2e Core and the Guardians book from 1e iirc: The Diamond made it clear that the Guardians needed to have 'no Guardian will ever be asked to work against their own cabal' as a requirement for the Guardians to be involved, and the Guardians have wholeheartedly adopted that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 08:07
|
|
|
thegoatgod_pan posted:I think the real answer to this problem is that Guardians canonically revere the institution of the cabal and would A. never ask a Guardian to turn on their own cabal and B. wouldn't let a Guardian do it, short of accidentally discovering they are baby-eating Nephandi (which is not to say another Guardian couldn't do it--but no one rats on their cabal, because if they did, no one would let Guardians in their cabal in the first place). No, that's from the Guardian book. Which as noted was, like, the fourth book ever released for M:tAw. "Obviously, a neophyte cannot form any sort of positive relationship with a mage he has spent time intimidating on the order's behalf. Telling someone that you know where he was last night is not a good way to begin a friendship. If a neophyte seeks guidance on the matter, she is told to earn some friends first and spread the Guardians' bad name second. Once she has companions whom she can trust and who can trust her, a neophyte can begin the work of making other mages nervous. Most importantly, a neophyte is <i>never</i> asked to betray her cabalmates. The cabal is a source of stability for the neophyte, and of safety. Even a magister, inscrutable and imperious in his ways, will find another way to learn what he needs to know, rather than requesting an action that will potentially shatter a neophyte's cabal. This rule, detailed in several parables and koans hailing from ancient time, extends all the way up through the ranks: one does not betray one's cabal or allow another to do so." And in the 2e core, put more simply: "No Guardian will ever be asked to investigate or act against members of their own cabal" So, in 2e, where we're emphasising that single-order cabals are a rarity in the Diamond (though not the Free Council) it's phrased as a concession the Guardians make to other orders. In their 1e Order book, which is all about their internal view, it's about safeguarding the mental health of their members. Both justifications are valid, I think. Dave Brookshaw fucked around with this message at 08:16 on Jun 5, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 08:13
|
|
|
thegoatgod_pan posted:I think the real answer to this problem is that Guardians canonically revere the institution of the cabal and would A. never ask a Guardian to turn on their own cabal and B. wouldn't let a Guardian do it, short of accidentally discovering they are baby-eating Nephandi (which is not to say another Guardian couldn't do it--but no one rats on their cabal, because if they did, no one would let Guardians in their cabal in the first place). I could see that being a really interesting and terrible arc for a Guardian character. Do I preserve my cabal by keeping it intact, or do I do the thing that everyone else would do and remove that baby-eating Nephandi to really keep the cabal together... you know... for the greater good. I'm not sure I've run across any reformed Nephandi, but I guess maybe (seems unlikely). It really is important for the Guardians, because it shows that they're still independent actors. It also humanizes the entire order at the same time. Less mage boogyman, and more someone that works in the shadows. Sure, they do the dirty work that no one else really wants to do, but a mage is really only as good as their word. It reminds me of that sect of the Arrow who are very interested in oaths, so much that they devote a ton of time and energy making sure they never break one, and get bent out of shape when someone else does. What happens when those oaths and promises come into opposition to each other? How do you rationalize it and deal with it? By punching it in the face?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 08:16
|
|
|
thegoatgod_pan posted:I think the real answer to this problem is that Guardians canonically revere the institution of the cabal and would A. never ask a Guardian to turn on their own cabal and B. wouldn't let a Guardian do it, short of accidentally discovering they are baby-eating Nephandi (which is not to say another Guardian couldn't do it--but no one rats on their cabal, because if they did, no one would let Guardians in their cabal in the first place). In the last mage game I played in, the Guardian player and I ended up discussing it out of character to see how our characters felt about it. It came down to my character assuming the Guardian knew all of the internal political gossip for the Arrow but he wasn't going to discuss it anyway because it wasn't the Guardian's business. And the Guardian player acknowledged his character did know all of the gossip in fact but strongly approved of Cabal mates who could keep their drat mouths shut. The trust level wasn't 100%, both compartmentalized but there was enough common ground for them to be friendly with each other.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 08:49
|
|
|
as an aside: "These Savage Shores" didn't get an Eisner nomination, which is good, because I only noticed it that way, and you should too. It's a WoD as gently caress comic about WoD things in the 1700s in India.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 13:26
|
|
|
Are there any good Mage: The Awakening streaming shows out there?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 16:17
|
|
|
Dave Brookshaw posted:No, that's from the Guardian book. Which as noted was, like, the fourth book ever released for M:tAw. This is pretty cool, thank you! I wasn’t trying to diminish or dismiss what you’ve done with the line since, just discuss how I felt back when Awakening was much younger.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 17:49
|
|
|
Dawgstar posted:Are there any good Mage: The Awakening streaming shows out there? Occultists Anonymous has one. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6NroG9vRe4 It's up to 101 videos.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 19:32
|
|
|
Speaking of Awakening, I have been making quite decent money by putting bestiaries for Exalted on the Storyteller's Vault — enough to turn RPGs into something I make money on, rather than spend money on. (In fact I make more money than the people who write for Exalted officially — I checked.) It's also good fun! Part of the reason that I can do this is that Onyx Path has for some reason neglected to make a proper monster manual for Exalted even though the game desperately needs one and always has. Mage: the Awakening is in a similar position in that the game really needs a set of properly-written-up Legacies, and I feel like the person who starts doing a really nice set of those on the Vault could also make pretty good money. Food for thought, if you know Awakening's rules well enough to have a go at it!
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 20:23
|
|
|
I'd buy a setting book for Awakening. Heck, pretty much any CotD line. Just give me a Consilium to drop into a city. Occultists Anonymous is pretty good, although I'm kinda spoiled by Saving Throw Show and the like when it comes to my streaming games. One dude doesn't seem to have made the buy-in the other players have which kind of drags it down a bit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2020 03:58
|
|
|
Arivia posted:This is pretty cool, thank you! I wasn’t trying to diminish or dismiss what you’ve done with the line since, just discuss how I felt back when Awakening was much younger. Hey, s'cool. I wish more people kept the difference in mind - I sometimes come across people arguing points of dubious canon with "but in Soul Cage..." None of my games used the setting - or system - exactly RAW. I don't think I've ever run a game without adjusting it for the group.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2020 09:37
|
|
|
https://www.gematsu.com/2020/06/world-of-darkness-game-wrath-the-oblivion-afterlife-announced-for-all-major-vr-platforms Unfortunately it's VR. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 16:45
|
|
|
They appear to be a fairly competent VR-only developer so it might be worth watching a Let's Play of.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 18:09
|
|
|
Are they changing all the WoD gameline logos to look more like Vampire's? Old Wraith logo could use a touchup for modern sensibilities, sure, but it had a lot more character than this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 18:44
|
|
|
I Am Just a Box posted:Are they changing all the WoD gameline logos to look more like Vampire's? Old Wraith logo could use a touchup for modern sensibilities, sure, but it had a lot more character than this. so the only other logo they have besides Vampire and Wraith is Werewolf, which I'm putting here for comparison:  and yeah, the unified font on the subtitles is to be expected, and it looks okay, but the treatment on "Wraith" is really just kinda boring, but it's not like we're getting a Wraith V4 any time soon, right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 19:36
|
|
|
As a VR player I'll probably give it a go
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 23:37
|
|
|
It looked like a generic haunted house game that scored a good license. I don't expect to regret not having a virtual occulus glass boy or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 00:01
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/worldofdarkness/status/1270730313765924864 For the interested.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 16:51
|
|
|
Have they shown any gameplay info for that yet? The first trailer looked about average, for an early era PS3 game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 17:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 13:50 |
|
|
Personally hoping it is just a reskin of the Hunter the Reckoning game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 20:47
|
|