Thanks all! ... But I am still a bit confused
On Hunger StressI 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 TattoosThen 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!