I'm currently preparing a more combat-oriented session than what I usually do, and I wanted to place a Vozhd at the end of it. (I know how uncommon this should be, but I'm turning down the rarity of a lot of things in our current chronicle.)

The problem is that one of my players has Path of Blood •••••, Cauldron of Blood. I'm okay with my players planning ahead and trivializing an otherwise hard battle, but I fear this discipline can one-shot the Vozhd even if they just go for a direct attack.

In my head the monstrous nature of the Vozhd should be enough to deny the one-level of damage = kill to non-supernaturals, but the monster is listed as a war ghoul, so I'm doubting it. The same would apply to Szlachta.

Please answer assuming V20.


1 Answer 1


There's plenty of in-fiction reasons why Cauldron of Blood wouldn't one-shot a Vozhd.

  • This isn't just a normal human—it's over a dozen humans forged together with foul fleshcrafting. Would it just boil one human's worth of blood? How much would that matter?
  • Ghouls are perverse mix of human and vampire. Vozhd are special even for ghouls, and the wording is some ghouls with access to Fortitude are said to have survived. That gives you room to work with. Nobody knows for sure.
  • Vozhd are also forged with Thaumaturgy. Would the Tzimisce allow one of their masterworks to be put down by a single (albeit five dot) power?
  • They would also have to run up and touch it to use Cauldron of Blood. How easy is that going to be?

Generally, Vampire is more about being a cool horror game than a strict rules game. Personally, I would make it hard for your Tremere witch to both get close enough to touch it and keep their cool to attempt the ritual. I could also imagine an unexpected mouth, row of teeth, stomach, etc., removing the limb in question, but hey, that's what they get for touching it. Cauldron of Blood would work, though, but I'd go for half the expected aggravated damage, treating it as if it were a vampire rather than a mortal, unless they make this the conclusion of the fight after beating it up, in which case let them kill it, sure. Basically, don't make it a boring fight.

  • \$\begingroup\$ Thanks! I had thought about the need to touch it but not about the extra risk in it (not counting being in melee range of it) \$\endgroup\$
    – user28910
    Dec 12, 2017 at 14:11
  • \$\begingroup\$ "unless they make this the conclusion of the fight after beating it up, in which case let them kill it, sure." Eh, that sets a precedent; and there is no harm in saying "it screams in agony, but still continues to writhe on the floor after the effects subside"... and them making them dismember it. :) \$\endgroup\$
    – Uueerdo
    Dec 14, 2017 at 22:56

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .