A Couple Questions 'Bout White Court Virgins

[Eunomiac]

Man, do I and my players really love this system (and setting, of course — been reading the books for years)!  We're a small group, with myself and two players.  Their characters are an unconventional Fellowship of St. Giles partnership investigating the sudden disappearance of the whole of House Skavis from Detroit, its traditional stronghold.

• Sabine, [Rebel Jewel Of House Skavis]: A WCv+ ("White Court Virgin-Plus" ) — I let her take the option on YW 85 to grab Feeding Dependency and upgrade her Incite Emotion with At Range, on condition that she also grabbed some aspects emphasizing herself as a juicy target for Skavis recruitment, given her unique potency for a virgin.
  
• Salem, [Sorceress On The Wagon]: A Sorcerer with the Trouble [Addicted to Pure, Arcane Release], who relies on her Skavis buddy to dampen her ecstatic addiction — ["Sabine, Keepin' Me On The Straight And Sorrow"] (n00b tip: this addiction Trouble has proven to be AWESOME—I often compelled it right before her evocation Discipline roll to have her throw more shifts into her spell than she needed to, and/or take Fallout over Backlash if she failed. And you thought Harry Dresden had a penchant for setting buildings on fire!)
  

.
Background aside (provided in case you more experienced players have insights I haven't thought to ask about): We had our first session last night, and while it took about three hours to run our first conflict, we had a blast doing it.  A few questions popped up during the course of the session, and so I come to you fine folk for the answers!

1) How does vampire hunger work?
We spent quite a while bouncing back between Emotional Vampire and Feeding Dependency, trying to figure out how they worked.  Here's what we couldn't figure out:

How effectively does Emotional Vampire let a Skavis sense, detect or gauge despair?  YW 189 describes WCVs being "drawn" to things like orgies or mobs, so does that mean they can sense these big events going down from a distance?  I tend to think yes, because it's interesting, but a more difficult question arises at the small-scale: In close proximity to a potential victim, does a Skavis WCV need to rely on Empathy to detect despair like anyone else would, or can she "smell" it in some supernatural fashion?  The latter seems to be implied by the Feeding Frenzy effect, but it's never really stated outright and it struck me as something that would be.

Am I making "feeding failure" too weak? At YW 85, the option for a WCv to take some WCV powers (to become a "WCv+" — sorry if these acronyms are confusing!) carries the disclaimer that "using them will leave you ravenous and in some pretty dire straits in short order."  But that's never going to be the case for a WCv+ who takes Discipline at any reasonable level: At the end of each scene, my intrepid Skavis only needs to defend against a Fair (+2) attack with her Great (+4) Discipline.  As long as she rolls higher than -3 (which she can guarantee with Fate), she never has to worry about hunger.  Moreover, this would appear to be the case for any WCv+, since the "+" option is intended to grant only a few powers: This makes for an end-of-scene feeding failure attack that will rarely be stronger than +2.  Even a WCv+ with Discipline at Fair or Good would succeed more often than fail — and even if she does fail, that failure will cost only a point or two of stress.  All of this does not sound like what that "ravenous"/"dire straits in short order" warning intended, to say the least!

The only thing I can think of is that maybe I'm meant to count up each use of Incite Emotion, which would indeed make for some big end-of-scene feeding failure attacks.  But this interpretation makes no sense for passive abilities like Inhuman Toughness (which is the example actually given for feeding failure): Do we add another 2 to the feeding failure attack strength every time someone with Inhuman Toughness takes a hit that's absorbed by Armor:1, or fills one of the extra two physical stress boxes?

How DOES one clear out that hunger stress? The powers section describes only two ways to clear out hunger stress — skip an equivalent number of whole scenes of play, or kill.  Am I missing the part in the rules that describes how shifts on a feeding attack clear a certain amount of hunger stress?  Skipping scenes can't be the only way to clear hunger stress without killing: This I know for a fact, because the designers are clearly too bright for that.  But I also figure it's so fundamental that it has to be included in the rules somewhere... we found it very weird that both Feeding Touch (YW 189) and Drink Blood (YW 188) describe "feeding" to deal stress to an opponent, but make no mention of how the vampire benefits from that feeding.

2) Why are the Tattoos of St. Giles restricted to the Red Court?
I'm actually surprised that a search didn't turn up a previous discussion of this here on the forums.  Every effect under the tattoos is effortlessly transferable to the White Court, mechanically at least, yet the books seem uncharacteristically adamant about that Red Court restriction, mentioning it quite a few times in very strong language, while never even hinting at the possibility of sticking them on a WCV/v/v+.  It's as if Tattoos-on-a-WCV/v/v+ never even occurred to the authors.  This concerns me... have I walked into some subtle game-unbalancing trap by doing just that?

Thanks for taking the time to read, and thanks again in advance for any insight you can provide.  We're still learning the rules, and we all come from a long history of playing White Wolf World of Darkness, so it's distinctly possible we're bringing some of our WoD assumptions in without realizing it.  I do feel like I'm missing something fundamental, and hopefully the above questions will shine some light on what that might be.

[Richard_Chilton]

2) Why are the Tattoos of St. Giles restricted to the Red Court?
I'm actually surprised that a search didn't turn up a previous discussion of this here on the forums.  Every effect under the tattoos is effortlessly transferable to the White Court, mechanically at least, yet the books seem uncharacteristically adamant about that Red Court restriction, mentioning it quite a few times in very strong language, while never even hinting at the possibility of sticking them on a WCV/v/v+.  It's as if Tattoos-on-a-WCV/v/v+ never even occurred to the authors.  This concerns me... have I walked into some subtle game-unbalancing trap by doing just that?

First, they are completely different creatures.  If you remember old WoD, the differences between the courts are at least as big as the one between Kindred and KotE.

Storywise, the St. Giles faction developed over time.  I'm thinking that the tattoos were developed by someone's whose love was infected by the Red Court - someone like Harry who looked for a cure and that's the best they could come up with.

Looking at the setting there are more RC Infected than WCVs.  The Red Court infect all the time and often don't seem to care if the new vampire makes it while each member of the White Court has a parent who probably had the kid for a very special reason.  The Red Court can fool around with strangers while every WCV has family members there who want him/her to make the transition.  My view is that most WCVs don't last that long - that they either succumb to temptation or kill the demon within a decade - but that's just my view (and I'm not going to turn this into another diatribe over how rare WVC should be).

So basically with the WC there's never been a case of "they got my lover!" to spur someone into the long R&D project of finding a way to control the WCV's hunger.  In theory a member of the WC might have gone looking for something for his child, but killing the demon is better than a half measure than like those tattoos.  Maybe if Thomas' mother had lived she might have done something for her son (and maybe she did - helping him to resist his urges when he became a WCV) but that didn't happen.

The Tattoos are also a temporary measure.  If the St. Giles had a possible cure for their thirst they'd take it.  In theory any WCV could become a normal person, so why invest in finding a control when there's a cure.  The moment there's a pill to cure diabetes is the moment that insulin makers go out of business, and the tattoos are basically insulin for the Red Court Infectees.

Then there's the game element to look at.  The Tattoos are all about repressing the hunger.  In theory a WC version would be about repressing that emotion - rendering the character emotionally numb. Unable to sense or react to the emotions of others.  Suppressing the powers of the demon inside them - crippling their vampiric side.

Speaking of the demon, that's another difference.  The Red Court transform while the WC get into a symbiosis with a demon.  That's got to mean that they can't just copy the tattoos - that they would have to start from scratch if they wanted them.


That said, if you want them for your game then go for it.  Work out what they do then assign a cost for them.

Richard

[Wolfwood2]

1) How does vampire hunger work?
We spent quite a while bouncing back between Emotional Vampire and Feeding Dependency, trying to figure out how they worked.  Here's what we couldn't figure out:

How effectively does Emotional Vampire let a Skavis sense, detect or gauge despair?  YW 189 describes WCVs being "drawn" to things like orgies or mobs, so does that mean they can sense these big events going down from a distance?  I tend to think yes, because it's interesting, but a more difficult question arises at the small-scale: In close proximity to a potential victim, does a Skavis WCV need to rely on Empathy to detect despair like anyone else would, or can she "smell" it in some supernatural fashion?  The latter seems to be implied by the Feeding Frenzy effect, but it's never really stated outright and it struck me as something that would be.

I handle all this "it's a supernatural sort of thing they ought to be able to do, but there's not a full power for it and it's not worth a full power" the same way.  It's either an invoke or a compel on their high concept.

If the WCV wants to detect despair and it's a useful thing, then they can pay a Fate point and sniff it out.  If this is not a useful situation for them to detect it (that is, they're hungry and it's tempting), then it's a compel.  If not either then yes, they use skills to do an Assessment or Declaration like anybody else.  Probably Empathy, but other skills might be justified.

Am I making "feeding failure" too weak?

Eh, look at it this way.  It forced her to take Discipline at a high level.  I think it's fine.  Compels are where the meat are.  The hunger track just makes for some nervous rolls once in a while.  Especially since she doesn't have all that many powers linked to the hunger.

How DOES one clear out that hunger stress? The powers section describes only two ways to clear out hunger stress — skip an equivalent number of whole scenes of play, or kill.  Am I missing the part in the rules that describes how shifts on a feeding attack clear a certain amount of hunger stress?  Skipping scenes can't be the only way to clear hunger stress without killing: This I know for a fact, because the designers are clearly too bright for that.  But I also figure it's so fundamental that it has to be included in the rules somewhere... we found it very weird that both Feeding Touch (YW 189) and Drink Blood (YW 188) describe "feeding" to deal stress to an opponent, but make no mention of how the vampire benefits from that feeding.

I would allow feeding to clear stress on a one-for-one basis, but that's just me.

2) Why are the Tattoos of St. Giles restricted to the Red Court?
I'm actually surprised that a search didn't turn up a previous discussion of this here on the forums.  Every effect under the tattoos is effortlessly transferable to the White Court, mechanically at least, yet the books seem uncharacteristically adamant about that Red Court restriction, mentioning it quite a few times in very strong language, while never even hinting at the possibility of sticking them on a WCV/v/v+.  It's as if Tattoos-on-a-WCV/v/v+ never even occurred to the authors.  This concerns me... have I walked into some subtle game-unbalancing trap by doing just that?

It's a setting thing.

[Ezra]

Hunger stress is easier to clear than lost abilities. When you win a feeding failure roll, you may clear your hunger stress track with your others. (YS190)

It's lost abilities -- the cost of overrunning your Discipline track -- that are so hard to recover. One point of lost power costs one whole scene of feeding, unless you kill. (I'd rule that feeding on camera counts too, but you can't do anything else for the scene.)


Edit: Is Discipline an apex skill for Sabine? If so, then part of her specialness is controlling her hunger much better than other feeders. She is that demon's boss, and she can shift people's minds as often as she likes without it taking control. I can certainly see why House Skavis would want her.

[Eunomiac]

Thanks all!  ...  But I am still a bit confused

On Hunger Stress

I don't mean to fixate on this unnecessarily, but hunger stress is going to be a huge part of our story (with Sabine being a prize target for Skavis recruitment, and we being one major milestone away from a playable WCV), so I really need to know and be confident in how it works.  Important caveat: I can easily house rule things once I know what the rules actually are, so I'd prefer to focus the discussion on what the rules say rather than helpful suggestions on how to change them — and they have been helpful, don't get me wrong!

So, is the following correct, at least according to the rules as-written? (The underlined words are places I'd consider making changes, if my interpretation of the rules is accurate.)

• The only way to gain hunger stress is to fail an end-of-scene feeding frenzy roll.
  
• A feeding frenzy roll is an attack with an effort (i.e. GM doesn't roll for the attack) equal to the total refresh of different powers you used in the scene (i.e. you don't count each use of a power)
  
• You defend against this attack with a Discipline roll, where hunger stress taken = Attack Effort — Discipline Roll.  You can absorb this stress as normal with physical or mental consequences.
  
• Any hunger stress that is not absorbed by physical or mental consequences remains on your sheet into the next scene, AND you must lose access to powers with refresh equal to the hunger stress you have taken.

.
So... say a WCV fails to defend against a +4 feeding failure roll, absorbs with a mild consequence, takes 2 hunger stress, and loses 2 refresh in powers.  Then, he drives across town to another scene, entering that scene with 2 hunger stress on his sheet (and 2 refresh of lost powers).  In this scene, he uses a 2-point power.  At the end of the scene, he succeeds against the (easier) +2 feeding failure roll — clearing out his whole hunger stress track, including the hunger stress he took in the previous scene?  I understand that this doesn't mean he regains those lost powers, and that stress isn't meant to represent "hunger" but "transient stress from being hungry", so it's not completely nonsensical... yet. 

But here's where it gets to that point, at least for me: What if, instead, the WCV elects not to use any powers in that later scene?  He wouldn't get a feeding failure roll, and would not get the chance to clear out his hunger stress.  This creates a paradox:  You need to use your powers in order to clear your hunger stress, when it's those powers that are supposed to make you hungry in the first place.  And, the less powers you use, the easier it will be to clear all that lasting hunger stress... unless you use no powers, in which case, you clear no stress.  Can-I-getta-huh?

I'm not so much worried about munchkins using token 1-pt powers to get easy chances to clear their hunger stress, because I'm lucky enough to have really mature players (thought it was worth mentioning, though).  I'm more concerned with the fact that this makes no sense whatsoever.  And, since I'm new to a system that strikes me as meticulously well-thought-out on all other counts, I suspect it's because I have something wrong here. 

On Tattoos

Then there's the game element to look at.  The Tattoos are all about repressing the hunger.

 In theory a WC version would be about repressing that emotion - rendering the character emotionally numb. Unable to sense or react to the emotions of others.  Suppressing the powers of the demon inside them - crippling their vampiric side.

Thanks a ton for your insights into the story/setting reasons for the RCI restriction; I think I'm confident enough in this area to be happy with my decision to mod the tattoos over to the WCV, at least in Sabine's case.  I find this discussion interesting though, as I interpreted the tattoos a bit differently than you did and I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts:

Are the tattoos really about repressing the hunger?  My interpretation was that they were like an adrenaline shot to your human side, or maybe an "aura of protection" for your soul, as opposed to dampening the hunger.  This way, they are focused on the human and not the hunger, which I figured was an "off-limits" zone to magic (for the same reason that curing vampirism is).  This would also explain why the tattoos stop working entirely when the RCI completes the change: Their human side is gone, leaving nothing for the tattoos to do.  Otherwise, the tattoos would arguably continue to have some effect on the hunger, perhaps weakening the RCV until s/he found a way to remove them.

Interpreted this way, they would work equally well on anyone with a human side for the tattoos to affect, and an inhuman/"dark" hunger inside them that their soul needs to resist: Addiction (like Salem's) wouldn't qualify, because that's all too human.  But they could work on a WCV/v/v+, or maybe even someone like Harry hosting Laciel's shadow (a full-blown Denarian would just be too powerful, though, I'd say).  This would jive nicely with the Fellowship accepting more than just RCIs, and would make the tattoos more of a symbol of the Fellowship than of the RCIs themselves (but this bit is more my personal tastes towards the setting, not canonical inference, so it's not an argument per se).

I do think your (and Wolfwood2's) point about the setting being the reason ring true:  There's simply far fewer WCV/v candidates for tattooing than there are RCIs.  And, I agree that wading into the "how many WCVs are there?" debate is an issue for another thread. (It's quite an issue, too, IMHO.)

Again, thank you all for your help!

[Becq]

You have the rules correct, to my understanding.  And I agree, they don't make a lot of sense.  Especially the bit about using powers in a scene in order to have the chance of becoming *less* hungry.

For what it's worth, you can find some of my thoughts on the matter here: http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,20726.msg907666.html#msg907666  The last post in the topic was my attempt to 'fix' the hunger rules.

[Ezra]

Any hunger stress that is not absorbed by physical or mental consequences remains on your sheet into the next scene, AND you must lose access to powers with refresh equal to the hunger stress you have taken.

That AND is the part I hadn't understood previously. Rereading with it in mind, though, I agree that's what it says. It does sort of seem to match Thomas's observed behaviors in the books I've read.

[Richard_Chilton]

Are the tattoos really about repressing the hunger?  My interpretation was that they were like an adrenaline shot to your human side, or maybe an "aura of protection" for your soul, as opposed to dampening the hunger.  This way, they are focused on the human and not the hunger, which I figured was an "off-limits" zone to magic (for the same reason that curing vampirism is).  This would also explain why the tattoos stop working entirely when the RCI completes the change: Their human side is gone, leaving nothing for the tattoos to do.  Otherwise, the tattoos would arguably continue to have some effect on the hunger, perhaps weakening the RCV until s/he found a way to remove them.

Have you read the entire series? There are a few things in later books that touch on this.
Below is a Spoiler for Changes.

(click to show/hide)

Infected Red Court people have a preda­tor spir­it inside them that can be affected - it's that no mortal knows how to work that magic.  Red Court Infected draw strength from that spirit - it gives them all of their powers.

Basically - the Red Court Infected draw strength from the proto vampire bit inside them.  And that bit hungers.  When that bit takes control then they have to feed.  The only emotion it knows is hunger, so any major emotion makes it stronger.

So the tattoos aren't strengthening the human side as much as it is weakening the inhuman side.

And, I agree that wading into the "how many WCVs are there?" debate is an issue for another thread. (It's quite an issue, too, IMHO.)

In a nutshell, my view is that they should be very rare.  It seems to take a conscious effort produce one, it takes about 18 years to do it, and the WC are great schemers.  I think that their WC relatives will make sure that the most recent tool makes itself useful by arranging the transition from WCV to WC.

But that's just my opinion.

Richard

[charlesperez]

The text in YS190 about the Feeding Failure check could be written better, but is nonetheless not ambiguous. Taking stress from a feeding failure on the hunger track is one option; taking a mild (-2 stress), moderate (-4 stress), severe (-6 stress) or even extreme (-8 stress) consequence is another option; losing powers (-refresh cost in stress) is the third option. These options may be combined in any way desired; the last sentence in the second bullet point of that section is explicit about it. Losing powers is presented as the alternative to taking consequences; it is reading too much into the text to say that checking a box on the hunger track also means losing that much refresh of vampiric powers. Also, taking stress on a stress track and then having the same stress hurt in other ways is very much against the spirit of the game.

Too lenient? Feeding Dependency is only worth +1 refresh, at most canceling the cost of Blood Drinker or Emotional Vampire. It's not much of a rebate, and not worth losing powers just because you looked at them funny.

[Wolfwood2]

Too lenient? Feeding Dependency is only worth +1 refresh, at most canceling the cost of Blood Drinker or Emotional Vampire. It's not much of a rebate, and not worth losing powers just because you looked at them funny.

Absolutely.  How often does +1 Feeding Dependency actually hurt you?  Well, how often do characters tend to lose +1 Items of Power?  My experience suggests maybe once in between every Major milestone.

You don't want players afraid to use their powers, or losing access to their powers every other scene.  That would be insane.