1
\$\begingroup\$

In Vampire: The Masquerade: 20th Anniversary the first three powers of Valeren's Warrior path (page 474 of the Corebook) are rather useless. One would only learn them if one wanted to learn the •••• and ••••• powers, which are probably the most overpowered things accessible to neonates in the whole book. I am especially glad to see "Ending the watch" gone and replaced by a useful power.

However, in V20: Dark Ages (on page 262) the situation is reversed: • needs no touching and gives away info that may help in offence, •• is pure offence/buff, ••• is buffed, •••• is the same armour which is even more important in Dark Ages...

... and then we come to •••••, which is the useless Ending The Watch. Yes, it is buffed and may theoretically allow regaining Willpower at enormous rates if you have plenty of souls to eat, but would one really swap autosuccesses on all attack dice for this?

Vengeance of Samiel is ••••• • now.

Why did the designers move Vengeance of Samiel to advanced powers?

To generally nerf the Discipline after buffing the first 3 powers? Because available to generated characters? Some other reason?

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ If you disagree with the change (as I do), simply allow Ending the Watch to be another lower level technique and keep Vengeance of Samiel as a level 5 technique. \$\endgroup\$ – FluxIX May 28 '17 at 2:29
5
\$\begingroup\$

To maintain the goal of bringing everything in line with the latest rule set, and rectifying the canon, Ending the Watch had to be added to the discipline track for the Warrior caste. It could not be added as an advanced discipline, as it only affects mortals, and there cannot be two discipline powers at the same level below advanced. Vengeance of Samiel had to be bumped a level to accommodate it.

This is mitigated by the fact that Dark Ages characters are generally of a low enough generation to still be able to get Vengeance of Samiel as the top of their discipline progression.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Why is the usual technique progression linear? Why not allow prerequisites on techniques so the technique progression is more organic? \$\endgroup\$ – FluxIX May 28 '17 at 2:30
  • \$\begingroup\$ @FluxIX ask the developers. Typoed. \$\endgroup\$ – Tritium21 Jun 5 '17 at 20:52

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.