BurgerBB Posted March 12, 2019 Posted March 12, 2019 Vamp rounds have a history of being shit. It's the second worst gamemode, next to ling, but no one complains about it because there is never not a peaceful vamp round and Vamp doesn't involve killing people. I suggest making it more interesting by implementing the following: If you're sucked off by a vampire, you become a vampire. Willingly, or no. I feel that this will make the rounds much more interesting and RP driven given the conflict created. I feel that this would also be a good addition considering out of like 40 players, only 2 of them have vamp enabled. It will also not make it a stealth gamemode anymore since people are now aware that they were sucked off, which will that 99% of rounds will no longer end in "Wait, it was vamp?" Yeah, embrace exists, or whatever, but it requires like 5 people worth of blood to use on one person.
Snakebittenn Posted March 12, 2019 Posted March 12, 2019 It'd be better if embrace was just a free function of sucking someone until they run out of blood. Or make it cheaper. Thralling atleast should definitely be cheaper.
BurgerBB Posted March 12, 2019 Author Posted March 12, 2019 (edited) 32 minutes ago, ParadoxSpace said: It'd be better if embrace was just a free function of sucking someone until they run out of blood. Or make it cheaper. Thralling atleast should definitely be cheaper. If not automatically, then make embrace free. Alternatively, could make it like rev or cult where you can choose to be a vampire or not when sucked off. Edited March 12, 2019 by BurgerBB
Scheveningen Posted March 12, 2019 Posted March 12, 2019 This is not very lore-friendly to start with. Vampirism isn't a viral plague, it's intended to be a magical curse.
BurgerBB Posted March 12, 2019 Author Posted March 12, 2019 2 hours ago, Scheveningen said: This is not very lore-friendly to start with. Vampirism isn't a viral plague, it's intended to be a magical curse. Most forms of media, modern and old, state that if you're bitten by a vampire you'll likely turn into one. As far as I can tell, there is 0 lore on Vampires in this universe.
Scheveningen Posted March 12, 2019 Posted March 12, 2019 Vampirism would start to be common knowledge in lore if it was extremely infectious. It makes more sense in The Elder Scrolls, it would be quite harmful to vampire antagonists if it was IC common knowledge.
DeadLantern Posted March 12, 2019 Posted March 12, 2019 4 hours ago, Scheveningen said: Vampirism would start to be common knowledge in lore if it was extremely infectious. It makes more sense in The Elder Scrolls, it would be quite harmful to vampire antagonists if it was IC common knowledge. You would have to change the vampire lore then, because literal magic and literal vampires are not something I want confirmed in the lore.
ben10083 Posted March 12, 2019 Posted March 12, 2019 @DeadLantern Technically blood cults worshiping a blood demon is in the lore, so vampires are not a big stretch, just say its because of redspace. Also, even if is magic doesn't mean it can't be infectious. I am excited just thinking of these rounds if vamp worked like this, with the crew slowly being subverted until they go critical, then they try to take over. The priest and some other crew bravely attempt to take control of the situation as their past friends reveal to be enemies. However, I feel thrall should be removed if we allow people to turn into vampire, but that is another discussion. Overall, I support this suggestion. +1
Resilynn Posted March 12, 2019 Posted March 12, 2019 What if just a basic sucking (ha) turns you into a fraction of a regular vamp. Like, it takes awhile, you get sick, you end up able to drink blood but not to spread from there and not able to do special abilities beyond, idunno, glare. And then we leave in the ability to make a full vampire with a lot of effort.
Butterrobber202 Posted March 12, 2019 Posted March 12, 2019 (edited) Actually in Vampire lore, you needed to be the opposite sex as the Vampire and a virgin to change over. If you didn’t meet that criteria you got turned into a ghoul that walked around and ate flesh. It generally either involved sucking the victim dry, the supplementing the vampires own blood as a replacement, or having them just consume the blood of the Vampire. anyways, yeah it should be a conscious choice in the vampire's part to create another Vampire. Else we'd be swimming in Elder Scroll levels of the bloodsuckers by now. quick edit: it’s also implied in game that Vampires and Cultists draw their power from the same place, just using different methods. Edited March 12, 2019 by Butterrobber202
DaTimeSmog Posted March 12, 2019 Posted March 12, 2019 Doesnt this turn Vampire into a shitty infestation style gamemode where the main objective is to kill the opposing force aka the vampires with no regard while the people inbetween the fighting have to endure hiding in a closet as nobody wants to experience the indepth RP thats compareable to cult which is more or less, Stun, suck, repeat.
DeadLantern Posted March 12, 2019 Posted March 12, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, ben10083 said: @DeadLantern Technically blood cults worshiping a blood demon is in the lore, so vampires are not a big stretch, just say its because of redspace. Also, even if is magic doesn't mean it can't be infectious. I am excited just thinking of these rounds if vamp worked like this, with the crew slowly being subverted until they go critical, then they try to take over. The priest and some other crew bravely attempt to take control of the situation as their past friends reveal to be enemies. However, I feel thrall should be removed if we allow people to turn into vampire, but that is another discussion. Overall, I support this suggestion. +1 No, that's not what I mean. In the app burger implied that knowledge of the vampire disease would be somewhat common knowledge among the crew. It doesn't feel right that the crew non chalantly knows that a magical infectious disease exists. Edit: Sorry, Scheve said that, but Schev's point still stands along with mine. Edited March 12, 2019 by DeadLantern
Scheveningen Posted March 12, 2019 Posted March 12, 2019 4 hours ago, DeadLantern said: You would have to change the vampire lore then, because literal magic and literal vampires are not something I want confirmed in the lore. All antagonists are canon within the game's overarching story. The issue, however, is completely changing how an antagonist works by flipping its mechanics onto its head. Blood point management is a major part of being a vampire right now since it is the only thing preventing a frenzy. The idea is that you have to feed, or else when you do use your powers you become a liability to yourself due to the nature of the vampire's curse. Our vampires are more inspired from VTM:B at the moment. We don't have a proper way to measure Humanity, sadly, due to the nature of how context killings work. (Killing a person in self-defense in VTM:B is fine, killing an innocent while feeding on them is not).
Scheveningen Posted March 12, 2019 Posted March 12, 2019 too lazy to edit this into my post but; I prefer VTM:B vampires over TES-style vampires because there's enough plausible deniability to overall protect our vampires from any sense of metagaming. The only time it would come up in usual discussion would be mythological discussion in which people deliberately only discuss hearsay. This generally benefits vampire antags more than it hurts since it protects them from soft-meta.
Garnascus Posted March 12, 2019 Posted March 12, 2019 Vampire is easily the most well designed and interesting mode we currently have. You have the tools and incentives to create conflict and RP without killing people. Right now it is definitely very difficult and time consuming to create another vampire. You need at least two people. One person to become the vampire and then another person to have their blood sucked by the new vampire. I do not know if i fully understand your suggestion. If you want people to become a vampire just from being bitten and regardless of the volume of blood sucked i think that will ruin the mode. You're not slaved or allied to whoever turns you into a vampire. You're creating a potential enemy for.... what gain exactly? Why would i do this?
Hendricks Posted March 12, 2019 Posted March 12, 2019 yeesh, well. It would at least make the round surely interesting. But I don't it would be my cup of american sweet tea.
BurgerBB Posted March 12, 2019 Author Posted March 12, 2019 1 hour ago, Garnascus said: Vampire is easily the most well designed and interesting mode we currently have. You have the tools and incentives to create conflict and RP without killing people. Right now it is definitely very difficult and time consuming to create another vampire. You need at least two people. One person to become the vampire and then another person to have their blood sucked by the new vampire. I do not know if i fully understand your suggestion. If you want people to become a vampire just from being bitten and regardless of the volume of blood sucked i think that will ruin the mode. You're not slaved or allied to whoever turns you into a vampire. You're creating a potential enemy for.... what gain exactly? Why would i do this? It is not well designed. No one plays it. Not many people like it as a gamemode, but many people are fine with it because it's just another extended gamemode. On most rounds, there are only 2 vampires in a manifest of 25. Out of those 2, one of them usually chairrp's with security or medical, and the other one is a new players who has no clue what to do. I'm pretty sure that vampire was a disliked gamemode in that 2018 survey regarding gamemodes, but in general the results of the survey has been largely ignored so I don't know if it's even relevant anymore. If you're concerned about rivalry, ake it a choice by both the person giving the suck and the person receiving the suck if a concern of rivalry is a thing.
Scheveningen Posted March 12, 2019 Posted March 12, 2019 14 minutes ago, BurgerBB said: It is not well designed. No one plays it. Not many people like it as a gamemode, but many people are fine with it because it's just another extended gamemode. On most rounds, there are only 2 vampires in a manifest of 25. Out of those 2, one of them usually chairrp's with security or medical, and the other one is a new players who has no clue what to do. I'm pretty sure that vampire was a disliked gamemode in that 2018 survey regarding gamemodes, but in general the results of the survey has been largely ignored so I don't know if it's even relevant anymore. If you're concerned about rivalry, ake it a choice by both the person giving the suck and the person receiving the suck if a concern of rivalry is a thing. Lol. You are not "everyone", Burger, because there are plenty of people who like vampire as it is. So stop saying no one plays it or likes it.
DeadLantern Posted March 12, 2019 Posted March 12, 2019 3 hours ago, Scheveningen said: All antagonists are canon within the game's overarching story. The issue, however, is completely changing how an antagonist works by flipping its mechanics onto its head. Blood point management is a major part of being a vampire right now since it is the only thing preventing a frenzy. The idea is that you have to feed, or else when you do use your powers you become a liability to yourself due to the nature of the vampire's curse. Our vampires are more inspired from VTM:B at the moment. We don't have a proper way to measure Humanity, sadly, due to the nature of how context killings work. (Killing a person in self-defense in VTM:B is fine, killing an innocent while feeding on them is not). Yes, I know they are Canon, but things like changelings are not common knowledge. As you said, vampires would become common knowledge.
Scheveningen Posted March 12, 2019 Posted March 12, 2019 (edited) Yeah, I was just adding to the subject, not trying to "GOTCHA" you, sorry if it came off that way Edited March 12, 2019 by Scheveningen
Carver Posted March 12, 2019 Posted March 12, 2019 I'd be down for embrace being immediately available. Not every sucking of blood turning someone into a vampire, but if sucking someone dry always did, then sure. At the very least, as said, make embrace available from the get-go.
Skull132 Posted March 12, 2019 Posted March 12, 2019 2 hours ago, BurgerBB said: If you're concerned about rivalry, ake it a choice by both the person giving the suck and the person receiving the suck if a concern of rivalry is a thing. Rivarly between the newborn and old vampire is partly the point. Or rather, the chance for it. This is also partly why a new vampire begins frenzied, to make the old vampire actually consider fucking off after creating his spawn. Further, vampires are designed to be lone hunters, not team players. They literally have no abilities which allow for direct synergy, and this is by design. I would rather not make this into another generic team based conversion game mode. 14 hours ago, BurgerBB said: Most forms of media, modern and old, state that if you're bitten by a vampire you'll likely turn into one. As far as I can tell, there is 0 lore on Vampires in this universe. To provide context, since the first claim is off. A lot of this is based off of the World of Darkness PnP game series. At least ability content, the general look and feel of the vampires. Primarily because I consider said series a very good modern re-contextualization of the myth of vampirism. In our interpretation of this, vampirism is a slow poisoning of the Veil. When the Cult are direct subjects and slaves of Nar'Sie, vampires are a side-effect. Thus, free agents. There were/are expansion plans based off of this, like making the cult able to create vampire agents by subjecting randos to the Veil's presence. But unless someone wants to pick this up, it's on my "Do later" list. With that context said. Making embracing actually a thing off the bat isn't necessarily a bad idea. And it would expand the things a vampire could do. However, at that point it would also be nice to implement more vampire-on-vampire interactive powers. Diablier is a completely unexplored area, and the idea of generation stealing; and otherwise, if you have more vamps, you want them to be able to do stuff to one another. I say, "To one another," because again, I would rather this not become a team based conversion game mode: if you observe /tg/, then a prolifilation of those is not a positive thing!
BurgerBB Posted March 12, 2019 Author Posted March 12, 2019 2 hours ago, Scheveningen said: Lol. You are not "everyone", Burger, because there are plenty of people who like vampire as it is. So stop saying no one plays it or likes it. Why are you quoting a word that I never said. If you are referring to me saying "No one plays it." that's an over exaggeration. Very few people play vampire because it's very difficult to come up with some sort of gimmick if you're an HRP player, and it's very difficult to really do anything if you're not. As a player, I can only think of one solid antag gimmick as a vampire player without the feature. I can think of 4 if this feature was added and let me establish my harem of vampires.
BurgerBB Posted March 12, 2019 Author Posted March 12, 2019 41 minutes ago, Skull132 said: Rivarly between the newborn and old vampire is partly the point. Or rather, the chance for it. This is also partly why a new vampire begins frenzied, to make the old vampire actually consider fucking off after creating his spawn. Further, vampires are designed to be lone hunters, not team players. They literally have no abilities which allow for direct synergy, and this is by design. I would rather not make this into another generic team based conversion game mode. To provide context, since the first claim is off. A lot of this is based off of the World of Darkness PnP game series. At least ability content, the general look and feel of the vampires. Primarily because I consider said series a very good modern re-contextualization of the myth of vampirism. In our interpretation of this, vampirism is a slow poisoning of the Veil. When the Cult are direct subjects and slaves of Nar'Sie, vampires are a side-effect. Thus, free agents. There were/are expansion plans based off of this, like making the cult able to create vampire agents by subjecting randos to the Veil's presence. But unless someone wants to pick this up, it's on my "Do later" list. With that context said. Making embracing actually a thing off the bat isn't necessarily a bad idea. And it would expand the things a vampire could do. However, at that point it would also be nice to implement more vampire-on-vampire interactive powers. Diablier is a completely unexplored area, and the idea of generation stealing; and otherwise, if you have more vamps, you want them to be able to do stuff to one another. I say, "To one another," because again, I would rather this not become a team based conversion game mode: if you observe /tg/, then a prolifilation of those is not a positive thing! Could always limit the amount of vampires that could be converted by one person to something reasonable like 2. On top that, you could also limit conversions to round-start vampires. "Solo hunters" doesn't really have good gimmicks because it usually translates into "solo interaction".
Garnascus Posted March 12, 2019 Posted March 12, 2019 Solo interaction is not a bad thing. Neither is "chairrp". Its just role play you personally do not like. Embracing off the bat could probably work. I do not see too many players willing to roll with suddenly becoming a vampire. A lot of you nerds purposefully resist cult conversions to death as it is. Make thralling a cheaper power and unlocked earlier imo.
Recommended Posts