|
If my understanding of Nordic larps is in any way coherent it seems like they seize on the parts of traditional Masquerade LARPs that people actually enjoyed (being a jerk, being in character, immersive elements) while limiting the parts that nobody liked (rock-paper-scissor, mass combat, other immersion breakers). It has evolved from there to include a whole lot of dramatic techniques designed to reduce the boundaries between player and character and from what I understand is supposed to be a very 'intense' experience. This is in direct contrast to America foam-sword boffing contests that are built on a wide gradient of rules-vs-character or American-style Vampire-LARPs that try to relegate anything more complicated than dialogue to a mechanical abstraction. I'm not sure which one is 'better' but I will say that social-oriented LARPs tend to run the smoothest when checks are not being made and grind to a halt when anybody wants to do anything more complicated than hide or look at something.
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2015 04:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 22:08 |
|
|
I love Apocalypse though. Anti-Masquerade nuclear option is a pretty great threat from the Covenant most likely to be allied with the Invictus, upholders of the Masquerade.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2015 05:20
|
|
|
I think fear of the 'sky' is perfectly valid. It encompasses fear of cosmic entities for one (including aliens). We have those fears because the universe is immense and we know dick all about it, so I think that checks out. The metaphorical bits work too. Mankind has developed all kinds of weird rituals and phobias related to open spaces, the continued rotation of the earth, and the coming of night. Yeah, it looks ridiculous when you think of it in the context of sunny days and birds but there's a lot there to play with. Also the sky is really big. Also metaphorical themes.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
DJ Dizzy posted:Wasnt that what litteraly happened to the WoD MMO? A day after pre-alpha images were leaked to 4chan, they shut down. No. The reason that the MMO got shut down was because it did not exist. It was, ironically, itself little more than a ghost whispered among internet denizens in hushed tones. Also I get the impression the budget and/or manpower was squandered on EVE projects and constantly subjected to changing design goals, to the point where the few guys who were allowed to work on the project from start to painful finish often felt like they were doing a different game from week to week based on whatever argument the devs had the week before. Assuming an EVE expansion wasn't coming out some time in the next 3 to 6 months and everybody wasn't poached to work on that instead.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2015 04:02
|
|
|
I like Bloodlines when they're used to create regional factions and varieties of base Clans, but not when they're used strictly to make a single unique character. I've run about three Requiem games in the last couple of years and I usually establish at the outset which Bloodlines are common in the area before game starts. I doubt I would ever forcibly stop a player from making a character into a particular Bloodline if that's what they wanted to do but I'd almost certainly try to build it into the setting rather than let them be the lone Icarian or whatever just because they thought it sounded cool. Bloodlines should come with family baggage. They are family baggage. If they are divorced from that they quickly lose all meaning.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2015 07:38
|
|
|
tatankatonk posted:Isn't part of being a Beast accepting that you're'a monster? You've had all these horrible nightmares, and one day you go, fine, whatever, I'll embrace my inner nightmare creature? But they're also squeamish about being an actual monster...? Finally, I embrace my dark heritage...of being a cabbie who takes rich people and puts them in poor neighborhoods but also makes sure no one dies as a result of what I do! Fear me!! But he doesn't need to kill them, it isn't part of his hunger. He doesn't need to do that psychologically or metaphysically. Accepting his own monstrousness means accepting whatever weird occult rules govern his hunger. "I am embrace this part of myself" doesn't mean necessarily going above and beyond the call of what you need to do in order to drive the point home. He gets no additional satisfaction out of watching them die, so why would he? It sounds a lot more complicated than just getting what you need from them.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
Well that's the real hard thing about these games and why I hope Beast gets an ST guide - what exactly are you supposed to play with these guys? What's supposed to happen with them? I don't doubt there's some cool stuff you can do out of the core (I haven't read the leak) but they're kind of disjointed, it sounds like. It's the same problem Promethean initially had. There's no clear direction for the story arc to go other than "ST's Call". I still say out of the core, only Mage and Vampire had a clear direction in 1e, and only then because other Mages and Vampires were such compelling antagonists. Vampires are all dicks, done, you just wrote an entire chronicle. Mages are chronic fuckups, done, now clean up their mess.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2015 00:25
|
|
|
Promethean is a game you can win, yes, but (IMHO) it had poorly implemented group mechanics out of the box and was best played as some kind of solo adventure game. Also it told you roughly what a milestone was but not fantastic advice on how to achieve them (as a player) or how to conceive them (as an ST). I dunno guys, your mileage may vary and all that, but there certainly wasn't a rousing cry of support for Promethean when it came out. It had some great ideas that was dragged down in places.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2015 00:31
|
|
|
What would people want to see out of Giest 2.0? I was spitballing some ideas in a notebook today. * What if Synergy was actually lost based on the disposition of your Giest as opposed to completely arbitrary rules about ghosts? Like, what if the Burned Man really hates fire and stuff like that? * What if you became more like a zombie as Synergy dropped - rotting flesh, evidence of your death, stuff like that? What if this imposed obvious social problems but made you physically more resilient? * What if you had multiple resources - say, 2? - focused on the physical and ephemeral respectively? What if Physical Resource was regained for fulfilling your own unfinished business and the Ephemeral Resource was for doing what your Giest wanted? * What if you distilled the idea krewe channels down to a handful of easily digestible ones - those granted by specific gods of death, for instance - and used those to drive the primary conflicts of the game? I think the game also lacks a central conflict. The machinations of ancient dead things in the land of the living seem obvious - but there's got to be a better way to use that which isn't just stepping all over other game lines.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2015 09:15
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:I'd make it work through en nihilo terror and make hallucinations an occasional side effect that isn't under the vampire's direct control or important to the actual working of the power. You'd probably be able to produce paranoid delusionss (i.e. the subject just can't shake the feeling that there's something lurking in those shadows or that everybody is out to get them, such that they're compelled to avoid certain places, people, or behaviors) but not conjure customized holograms. I agree with this. I'd rather have a power that made you piss your pants so hard you started to hallucinate, rather than the other way around.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2015 19:54
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:My hope is that 2E mages are genuinely weak and fragile. If I had to offer a simple concession I'd probably just have anything created by Protean 2 deal Lethal to Vampires, and have weapons created by Protean 4 deal Agg, and do away with that weird Merit entirely. Vampires are pretty good at throwing around Conditions and I would argue that they should probably be the best at it but yeah, they should have in-splat limited access to agg regardless.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
One of the things I always like about Awakening is that it didn't make arbitrary distinctions between effects due to in-world logic. Damage spells work like this was a good standard to have. As a hypothetical, would you make a distinction between a spell that directly targets a character with fire (such as, I don't know, internal combustion) versus a spell that lights their clothing on fire? If, I think you've illustrated why that's a bad idea. To put it another way the last thing I want out of a magic system is splitting hairs at the table to get the desired mechanized output. Spells shouldn't be divided along world-logic lines, they should divided based on their roughly desired mechanized output, should one exist, since the system is the only arbitrary point of reference. Having a half dozen resolution systems for "I hit him with the Arcana" is a lot of extra work on the user. Also I don't like the idea of some damaging spells getting around any kind of contest/resistance because that's pretty much always going to be better, and it's annoying to divide what does or does not have a defense applied to along the lines of in-setting logic. That leads to play in which players will literally attempt to argue around one another's defenses. This makes for great metaphorical representation of Mages in the Fallen World but I'm not sure that's actually enjoyable.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2015 14:36
|
|
|
It seems clear to me that Beast is what happens when humanity gets together and dreams up a collective concept of what constitutes a 'monster.' It's why their transgressions range from the petty to the truly monstrous; they represent human fears and frustrations of all stripes ranging from getting cut off in traffic to getting their hands cut off. The Dark Mother isn't the mother of all monsters, she's the platonic expression of what a monster is. If anything, Vampires, ,Werewolves, et al are responsible for Beasts, since real monsters have inspired humanity to dream up ideas about monsters based on legends drawn from real events. Heroes, by contrast, are what the monsters dreamed up instead.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
I'm nervous about a world where Mage is governed by "how lethal is this thing IRL" as opposed to, "It does X damage, done." Like as an ST I don't to get into a fight with the Moros or the Obrimos every time they want to use Forces or Matter to do literally anything. Or like if I'm supposed to know how much damage a given toxin does or arbitrate how much force titanium can absorb how far does that rabbit hole go? I always thought that one saving grace of nMage was that no, you're not really doing science at the atomic level, you're manipulating platonic ideals of how science should actually work, which means I don't have to know any physics. You can't use Forces to change different kinds of atoms into new substances, for instance, even though that ought to be possible with the level of control Forces affords you. This, to say nothing of the fact that Forces and Matter are disproportionately good compared to Spirit or Fate, since the latter don't exist and can't be Googled IRL.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2015 02:33
|
|
|
Man I didn't think people would have such a visceral reaction to those meeting notes. My read of it was: * We're revisiting the text to clear some stuff up, because you're right, it isn't clear. * Here's an image. Tell us what you think it depicts. * We're glad people had a chance to form an opinion on Beast before it was released, because you have a chance to withdraw your support. I mean yeah there's PR in there, but what were people looking for? A complete rewrite? "It died on its way back to its home planet?"
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2015 05:32
|
|
|
Vampire is also a pretty nuanced game. It floats around a single obvious transgression every vampire will, eventually, engage in -- assault, and potentially murder. Almost every vampire tries to develop a way to mitigate psychological and collateral damage on their victims, not because they care, but because it's easier to feed when you're not churning out traumatized people and/or corpses. Not every vampire feels this way and each covenant has a different opinion on the role mortals play in their crimes. The entire game is set up to deal with the damage vampires cause and ask questions about it. Even Disciplines are means to that end. I feel like when the trauma becomes that point that's where the dangerous parts seep in.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2015 20:09
|
|
|
I feel like the Sabbat's 'goal' morphed several times to take them from mustache-twirling boogyemen to something nearly playable. Like I never understood how the litany of 'gently caress all humans' was meant to be innately compatible with 'gently caress the Antediluvians.' I feel like at some point in the history of the Camarilla or the Sabbat someone would stand up and say, "You know, I oppose the apocalypse, but I also don't want to like, literally murder children." That's sort of Masqeruade in a nutshell though - absolutely zero nuance unless you're willing to look very very deep into the sourcebooks or make it up yourself. It's also kind of nice to play that sometimes, because it means no matter how big of an rear end in a top hat you are in the Cam, the Sabbat will always be worse.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2015 03:23
|
|
|
Let's be perfectly clear: I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with a splat that is abusive; it's glorifying that abuse or giving it a free pass that's a problem. Vampire is a game that's also about abuse. Almost every vampire is going to physically assault other people for food. Of those the very best will seek out willing targets. Below that, people who make their victims forget or try to convince their victims that it's what they wanted all along. Then you've got vampires who terrorize people, routinely murder, or turn their victims into willing slaves who will debase themselves at their master's feet just for the honor of doing so. What makes this different is that the vampire book keeps reminding you that this isn't really a good thing to do and that for the most part it's this kind of behavior that makes you a monster. All 5 of the covenants give you justifications for why what you're doing is okay, but OOC it's pretty obvious that all of them are wrong on a fundamental ethical level. Humans don't deserve to be treated this way, vampires are a parasitic menace that can try to rise above their nature or fall down that deep dark pit like an addict. A lot of Requiem games eventually touch on the existential crisis of justifying why it's okay to continue your own existence. I don't think that's a coincidence.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2015 03:20
|
|
|
tatankatonk posted:What if the Ordo Dracul was a secret society and not a "secret society" This is how I typically try to run the Ordo; dual-membership isn't a maybe, it's a matter of course. Members only speak in code, and meet masked, to conceal their identity. The Kogaion actively enforces rules about who can interact with who and only the Kogaion knows all the members. Career members of the Ordo typically devote their entire life to mono-focused studies or become guardians of people or sites. Most 'casual' members are ranking members of other Covenants, like the Invictus. I don't like the idea of the Ordo as a covenant the way other covenants exist; I don't like the idea of Ordo meetings (I don't really like caucuses) and I don't like the idea of the Ordo having an 'agenda'. The Ordo is an idea that supports other agendas, and saps you for whatever you can contribute to the cause.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2015 05:10
|
|
|
Virtually any institution with a clear hierarchy and an interest in controlling Sleepers could easily be a Seer-controlled institution. I should think most schools (or at least universities) hold an interest for the Seers; I should think the entire business of higher education is probably quite important to the Exarchs, really, since it represents liberation from ignorance and yet manages to indoctrinate millions of people in specific ways of thinking. I don't see anybody clambering to remove college professors (or students) as valid character archetypes though.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2015 09:05
|
|
|
I don't really support unilateral, dogmatic approaches to the Orders. The game is fundamentally about philosophy, and competing philosophies. Within each order are often competing interpretations of philosophies. Hell in the Arrow book you have members who think that Sleepers should be protected at all costs and then you have Arrows who believes Sleepers are fundamentally uninvolved with the struggle for conceptually dominance with the Seers and that therefore their casualties are inconsequential. That's a pretty big divide, and yet both groups can embody the Arrow concept. What I'm saying is that there are different kinds of Arrows. Looking at two examples and noting that they are different shouldn't really cause any serious dissonance.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
Blockhouse posted:The lack of self-awareness this statement shows is staggering. Come on man, don't let Ferrinus determine what games you play. Of all people. Ferrinus.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Would people say it's better to do big-name cities as game locales that nobody's likely been to or use cities people have been to? Each's strength seems to be a reframed version of the other's weakness; with a big city, nobody will care if the geography's wrong. With a small city, everyone knows where stuff is. I've run a lot of Vampire. Anybody who knows me knows I've run a lot of Vampire. I've also run Mage (always in major cities). I've run cities I've lived in, cities I've never been to, and completely fictional cities (to say nothing of games that weren't even run in cities.) Here's the simple truth: it really doesn't matter. I used to agonize about it too! If I run city I've never been to, will one of my players correct me on the finer details? I have a favorite coffee shop, hot dog vendor and club that I visit in Boston -- so I should use that, right? For the most part you're going to boil a city down into two big piles: evocative themes, and actual locations. The themes are going to be broad and pervasive. The actual locations should serve the needs of your story. In fact, in some ways, knowing about actual places makes you feel the need to obey those things. Is Murphy's Pub in Downtown or on the North End? The answer to that question should say something about the story and if it doesn't, you don't really need to worry about it. When in doubt I say run a city you're familiar with if only because you probably have a better idea of its themes. Never worry about geography, it's really not important. Most cities have a more complex geography than you will ever need for your story.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
Werewolves are a concrete metaphor for the boundary between civilization and the wild. The fact that they are both wolves and men would probably say this loud enough but they also go on to represent the boundary between flesh and spirit. They like to keep all of those things separate while at the same time having fundamentally human needs and motivations. That right there should be enough to fill most people's chronicles.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2015 01:50
|
|
|
I think the trick is that none of those forces can get it together enough to cooperate with one another.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2015 02:23
|
|
|
Huh. I'm curious what a 4th Ed V:tM might look like. Requiem was always, "Let us apply all of our lessons from Masquerade and rebuild without those intrinsic flaws." It's kind of been allowed to spread its wings and fly, but at its core that's still sort of the idea, what if we could develop a vampire game without all of this baggage? So now that they have that, will V:tM 4th Ed embrace its original warts and just dig as far down that hole as possible, or will be develop in some different way entirely?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
I assume if they want to sustain a whole edition and retain Masquerade's identity, it'll have to be "none of the above". A post-Antediluvian world might be kind of interesting, though they're going to have a lot of splaining to do.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2015 18:41
|
|
|
While that sounds fun I don' t think that would really survive as anything like Vampire; it would be something else that, while really cool, would probably be very different. I foresee two possibilities. One, they use a very watered down version of Gehenna that allows Masquerade's core conceits to continue more or less undeterred without the nagging sword of Damacles hanging over it the whole time. Or two, they set it after some kind of second Burning Times in the wake of Gehenna that means they really, really need to be serious about the Masquerade this time no seriously would you guys cut it out.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2015 00:41
|
|
|
It's obvious (to me) that the correct answer is to therefore use none of those options from the Gehenna book. After all that book was written to help people wrap up long term Chronicles and in-line fiction. It wasn't designed to be playable beyond the end.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2015 01:58
|
|
|
I think a post-Gehenna world where the Sabbat was instrumental in preventing or mitigating the end-times might be more compelling. Like sure, the Sabbat is still fundamentally a suicide cult whose very existence is unhealthy for Kindred as a whole. But hey, they killed the Antediluvians, so shut the gently caress up.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2015 04:37
|
|
|
I think nWoD part 2 tracking fiddly bits is in keeping with horror themes of consequence and scarcity, but yeah there are probably non-interger ways of tracking that stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
DJ Dizzy posted:Okay, so second question: How do I make a hunter story that isnt just monster-of-the-week? To turn the question around what you're asking is how do I tell a long-arc story with Hunter? Hunters are soldiers, mostly. Sure some of them are volunteer, and some of them are secret-FBI, and some of them are religious nuts, but they are fighting a war, and a secret war at that. Things that afflict soldiers afflict them. What happens when a commanding officer dies? What happens when close companions die or are injured? What happens when they receive conflicting orders, or when they think there's a leak in their midst? What happens when Hunters form attachments? What happens when they have difficulty integrating into normal society again? Hunters are also criminals. What happens when the police some calling? Or a different Hunter faction? What happens when innocent people get in the way? What lines won't they cross? In other words: stories that aren't monster-of-the-week are going to focus on relationships. The traditional way of handling this is to focus your sights on your relationship with a primary antagonist (such as, I don't know, a really huggge werewolf) but you can also shift the lens to other hunters. Hunter does lend itself very well to MotW stories but you have other options. Human stories are often the most engaging. If you want to go more Hollywood with it, you could turn it more into a long-term Investigation ala Penny Dreadful and similar shows. In a lot of media characters spend a relatively small portion of their time interacting with the main antagonist and most of their them preparing or following leads to be occasionally interrupted by minions of the main antagonist. Considering running Hunter in seasons consisting of between 10 and 20 sessions. Each season can focus on one antagonist. This allows you to run a longer game with more focus without the worry of running out of steam.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2015 19:20
|
|
|
Playing "spot the tonal dissonance" in either WoD is like spotting sand at the beach. I prefer to read it as tonal diversity.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2015 20:33
|
|
|
I would think yeah, the role of the Guardians becomes secret police and informers. They're the ones that tattle to the Arrow that a particular Mage is left-handed, performing abominable sins against wisdom, or engaging in wanton Paradox. Likewise, they can report to the Silver Ladder Sleepers who are dangerous to the mage political cause, identify Mages who are not good for PR, and quietly eliminate any of the above rather than going in guns blazing.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2015 20:27
|
|
|
I know you're joking but this is at once what I like and what I hate about the God Machine. It generates conspiracy as an afterthought and more often than not the short term reason why it engages in incredibly convoluted plots is "because magic", which feels unsatisfying as a player. How do people avoid that in their games?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
See, I don't think one should 'fight' the God-Machine at all; that finding out this guy who works at the grocery store or this cat who keeps hanging out around your place 'works' for It should be a major reveal or nagging paranoia. People who work for the God Machine don't have a full picture of what they're doing and should have human motivations for what they do, with angels pulling the strings at the edges of the story. Even then, angels should ultimately have human-recognizable motivations for doing what they do, and angels don't really have the whole picture either. What I want from my Demon game is a world where 'The God Machine' is just short hand for 'The Conspiracy' or 'The Syndicate' or whatever, except no matter how hard you try you can never look behind the curtain and see what's going on. It's a the X-Files perpetually stuck in the 1st/2nd seasons and you never really figure out what the motivation for any of it is, but you still meet characters who think they get it and keep getting very upset when you put pressure on them to tell you the truth. That's what I think fighting the God Machine should be like; it's like being Mulder in the(early) X-Files; you think you get but no, you really don't. Yet you still manage to create setbacks and hardships for the enemy, and you do save human lives in the pursuit of justice against this omnipresent conspiratorial power. A machine cultist who works for a music company wants to keep his job and his fame and his power, and the person (or angel) who put him there fabricates a close-enough story about the big picture that the he's terrified of breaking his established rules. Demons should be uncovering that kind of poo poo all the time, with actual assaults on locational Infrastructure being a pretty big deal. At least, I guess that's my vision of it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2015 01:37
|
|
|
I like to think of the Masquerade as partially self-enforcing. I know this isn't an entirely logical view of the situation but my reasoning goes like this: How many murders are there in your greater metro area? How many aggravated assaults? Drive bys? Why are there not more videos of those in the public eye? There are some, of course; and a very disturbed kind of person trades in gross stuff too for sure. Is it because people wouldn't consume it? Is it because you can't post it on YouTube? Is it because people aren't taking those kinds of videos? I think there probably are more people with an awareness of the supernatural, but they're all people with the faith and weirdness to go to the right places online and talk to the right people. You can't post a video of some guy ripping somebody's throat out of youtube. I see a smart, informed hunter class developing in response to modern civilian surveillance but I don't see any kind of big outing of the supernatural to the general public.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
I mean, when you run Vampire (either one, really) it's up to you if the masquerade is realistic or not. If you think it's interesting for players to enjoy their private dramas and deal with Kindred issues than it's usually a good idea to keep the masquerade in place, and justify it however you want. It ain't too hard in oWoD since you can just rub a couple of really ancient and powerful vampires on the problem and they make YouTube and Verizon just sort of go away. If you think the idea of vampires interacting with humans more often and potentially getting into a conflict with them, go nuts, but I have a hard time imagining that story going any way except one -- humans try to kill vampires. You could True Blood it up, I guess, and that might be cool. We think the masquerade is unrealistic because we can't imagine people seeing a supernatural event and not recording it and sharing it. Fair enough; but I still maintain most of those videos that slip through the cracks of immediate response, fiscal channels and Dominate are still going to get relegated to the weird parts of the internet. As a vampire it isn't hard to just sit back and wait to see what kind of people believe in this stuff and deal with it that way, rather than trying to clamp down on every individual infraction. I don't think a video of someone drinking blood or flipping over a car or even chucking a fireball around is going to shatter the masquerade in one fell blow. The fact of the matter is that random human NPCs in the World of Darkness just don't give a poo poo. Most of them are too busy with their soul-crushing jobs and their various addictions to notice that stuff. They aren't going to infiltrate secret vampire meetings and they certainty aren't going to interpose themselves in the middle of a murder. I think real, smoking-gun style masquerade breaches are probably pretty rare -- maybe once every year or two in major metro areas, and the mainstream media isn't going to cover that stuff even if it's public.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2015 09:34
|
|
|
Kavak posted:I think to cause the public to sit up and take notice you'd need a TFV version of Manning or Snowden- someone who leaks a poo poo ton of reports and evidence of the supernatural from a very obviously official source. You literally just described Interview With the Vampire. We've come full circle. To be less blithe: I think an Interview scenario with just normal Jane or Joe vampire backed up with evidence sounds like an awesome hook for a game.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2015 02:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 22:08 |
|
|
Kavak posted:I haven't read the book in like a decade and I don't recall if Louis talked about that in the movie- was breaking the masquerade-equivalent one of the things he was trying to do? I always thought so, yeah. It seemed clear at the time of the interview Louis had gotten pretty sick of being a vampire and was trying to create drama in a subtler way than Lestat would later attempt. I don't think he'd made up his mind to attack Daniel (the interviewer) until pretty late in the story and ended up letting him live anyway. The vampire community pretty much hated him for it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2015 08:11
|
|