/CofD/ & /wodg/ Chronicles of Darkness and World of Darkness General

Previous thread: >Pastebin:
pastebin.com/7HiVphFm

>News
theonyxpath.com/now-available-cursed-necropolis-rio/
paradoxinteractive.com/en/white-wolf-partners-with-focus-home-interactive-for-a-video-game-adaptation-of-the-world-of-darkness-storyteller-game-werewolf-the-apocalypse/

This week's Monday Meeting Notes:
theonyxpath.com/up-the-amazon-without-a-paddle-monday-meeting-notes/

>Question:
What's your favorite piece of artwork from one of the WoD splats? Post it.

Other urls found in this thread:

strawpoll.me/12812374
youtube.com/watch?v=OrVLOvJFtzM
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roman_Empire
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_I,_Holy_Roman_Emperor
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

I will only say I hate V20 art and Black-n-White is better than full colored art

Oh that one's easy. This one of the Order of Reason's Skyriggers trying to sail to God and instead encountering a patron of the Nephandi and fighting it with FUCKING CANNONS.

Anybody going to WoD Berlin?
Hook a brother up

>cardposter

This.

>No link to hunter endowment post in OP
O-oh. Okay then

Question. How would /CofD/ run a beast game? Genuinely curious with out wanting a snarky "i wouldn't" answer

...

By rewriting lots of it. The short version is that the Primordial Nightmare is alive and evil, it devours hapless souls to become Beasts for its own inscrutable purposes, and Heroes are charismatic psychopaths who naturally enthrall ordinary humans into being their mobs (Heroes are also created by the Nightmare).

Heroes as PCs
Beasts as BBEGs

Make sure the players are interested in playing a game where they are actually monsters instead of super special misunderstood dindu otherkin. Keep the obsessive aspect of Heroes but not have them be wholesale psycho narcissists and try to treat them as decent hero antagonists.

And once I have that ready I would not play it because shit mechanics.

...

>What's your favorite piece of artwork from one of the WoD splats?

Posting the classic

I do like this one

It's such a shame that 95% of the stuff concerning Blood Bathers is about being/fighting a serial killer.

I mean, I get that it's the point of them, but it still feels like a bit of a missed opportunity to have another look at that whole "what will you do for immortality" concept. They're kind of like vampires, except way worse, and you're still a human. Not the greatest or most original concept around, but there's some neat stuff about creating your own bathing ritual, and the question of how to cling to your humanity while still living off the essence of others.

The problem is that the book nearly uniformly writes them as over the top serial killers, at which point the whole ritual becomes sort of secondary unless it's super elaborate. The killing becomes the defining characteristic at that point. As antagonists they'd just a slightly odd version of a serial killer, as opposed to their own thing.
I guess the authors kind of ended up expressing what they wanted to do, Blood Bathers just don't end up feeling very interesting.

Or maybe I'm just missing something. I don't know a lot about nWoD and just started reading Immortals on a whim.

Also some of the rules for the ritual are written weirdly, to the point where I'm not sure what they're supposed to mean.

That's basically just playing Hunter: the Vigil instead.

I would say it's different. Different enough to at least warrant giving Heroes their own book that comes with ways to run a Hero campaign, but not enough to be its own splat.

Stop denying me my cathartic self-destruction ritual shitlord

My favorite part is that there is no where for her to put her feet when using that contraption.

cardposts
cardlove
cardlife

I think you use those rings on it to tie one to each of your shoes.

They seem...okay, for the most part. I'm not too hyped up yet because they're still at an extremely early stage.

Here is a piece of artwork I am quite fond of from an old VtM book called Caine's Chosen: The Black Hand

strawpoll.me/12812374

>mage tied with werewolf for best husband
>changeling closing in at third

fuck that

>Hunter having literally any votes in the 'supernatural husbando' race

It doesn't say supernatural husbando. It says husbando. And you just pin pointed why they're best, who the fuck wants a husbando that drinks blood or goes on bi weekly spirit murdering hunts?

Werewolves and mages make better husbandos. This is the consensus of the sleepers

Shut the fuck up. He's actually posting about a WoD game instead of just mageposting.

And I'm saying that as a dyed in the wool ascensionfag.

>Which supernatural being
>SUPERNATURAL

Also, who wants a husbando that goes on bi weekly psuedo-people murdering hunts???

Sheikman for the win...

If you kick a vampire in the nuts does it still hurt?

Same as it always does when your leg gets ripped off with Potence/Vigor.

Picturing that in my head was pretty funny

...But also Kaluta.

She could stand to lose a few pounds..

youtube.com/watch?v=OrVLOvJFtzM

It was the middle ages. If she could afford to eat that well, she could probably survive squeezing out an heir or five.

Don't hate.

Everything else I can understand, but why does he have the face of Charles Bronson? Why OP? Why?

thats looks pretty fuckin' cool.

>Loius the Pious
wasn't that the pope who held orgies?

Different Louis. This one was the king of Aquitaine and later Holy Roman Emperor.

I was being a jokester.

>Holy Roman Emperor.
A lot of people kind of refer to Byzantine empire as an empire in name only. France and Germany were always fighting each other.

...

>A lot of people kind of refer to Byzantine empire as an empire in name only

Unrightly so I might add

...That wasn't the Byzantine Empire. Those were two different things.

Also, why does the byzantine empire refer to both Russia and Western Europe? The papal state and russian orthodoxy were both seperate institutions.

Huh? I'm not sure what are you asking about.

Constantinople fought Russian Orthodoxy for spiritual supremacy in Eastern Christianity. This of course happened ages after western and eastern Christianity split

this shit makes me sick.

It doesn't refer to Western Europe. The Byzantine Empire and Holy Roman Empire were two different things.

...

Oh, so during antiquity they were still united?
byzantine isn't so much a regional or national moniker so much as a title we assigned to the sphere of influence brought by Christianity and the remains of the Roman Empire.

Thats a map of the Roman empire. The Byzantine empire was its successor. The holy roman empire and the Byzantine empire are the same thing.

Is this the American education system at work?

>The holy roman empire and the Byzantine empire are the same thing.
wat

> byzantine isn't so much a regional or national moniker so much as a title we assigned to the sphere of influence brought by Christianity and the remains of the Roman Empire.

No, Byzantine refers to the Eastern Roman Empire, aka the Byzantine Empire. It was centered out of Constantinople, which was originally called Byzantium. Much of the Christian world was outside of its control, instead seeing the Pope in Rome as the leader of Christendom.

Those are all arab lands. Your referring to the Islamic Empire if those maps are from 1050.

Then what the hell do you call the Western Roman empire prior to charlemange? (i.e. prior to adopting christianity?)

No, they're different things. The Holy Roman Empire was established by the Pope and Charlemagne. It was mainly what is now France, Germany, and Italy. The Byzantine Empire was the continuation of the Roman Empire in the east, mainly in what is now Greece and Turkey (then Anatolia).

The Western Roman Empire.

Im missing magefags shitting the place up..

See, this is what I'm talking about. We have two completely seperate narratives, one is secular and one is religious. You keep glorifying the crusades and denying the existence of Greece and Macedonia.

First come Greeks, then Romans, Then Byzantine. Byzantine fractures into western orthodoxy and the papal state.

We call antiquity the Dark Ages.

Rome split before it adopted Christianity.
All of Rome after that period was referred to as Byzantine. When the religious schism formed it was only then that people began refering to the remains of the western roman empire as the holy roman empire and the remains of the eastern Roman empire exclusively as Byzantine.

This is complicated. Rome and Constantinople started splinting apart after the Roman Empire split in two halfs(Western and Eastern). This process was aggravated by fall of the Western parts.

Split was a fact when Charlemagne crowned himself emperor with support of Western church. Of course Byzantine Emperor didn't really like it. Struggle between both emperors was reflected by struggle between Constantinople and Rome for supremacy and from there it went on.

Holy Roman Empire was (I'm greatly simplifying here) Germany

I swear to god its like your ripping 200 years out of the history books. How long did it take to establish a new chronology after Rome fell? How many people were still using the old Calendars?

There is this error right about when we started using anno domini instead of roman chronicles.

Wasn't there a period of book burning there as well?

>All of Rome after that period was referred to as Byzantine

Nigga what? Byzantine was a label applied to the empire *after it fucking fell*. They never called themselves anything other than "the Roman Empire" (Imperium Romanum, Basilea Rhomaion, whatever).

>Holy Roman Empire was (I'm greatly simplifying here) Germany

I can see why you might see it this way, but feifdoms within the empire would constantly war and vye with each other despite supposedly falling under the dominion of the Catholic Pope.

The pope simply supported whoever was courting his favor and played the noble houses against each other.

The name "Byzantine" doesn't come up till Victorian England.

>This is complicated. Rome and Constantinople started splinting apart after the Roman Empire split in two halfs(Western and Eastern). This process was aggravated by fall of the Western parts.

This is what I'm saying. People still called the empire prior to charlemaine Byzantine. Byzantine is more like an epitath, its like saying, "The bureo or the buerocracy"

No. The Holy Roman empire formed centuries after the formal disestablishment of the Western Roman Empire by Odoacer. The HRE dates to the seventh century. The WRE was disestablished in the fifth.

You. Fucking. Mong.

Read the key. That was the extent of Justinian and Bellisarius attempted reconquest shortly after the disestablishment of the WRE. The area shaded in pink indicates the size of the ERE/Byzantine Empire in 1050.

This is the American Educational system at work. He just didn't pay attention.

which is why it (technically) included france, parts of belgium, sweden and norway.

At different periods and different times, the HRE had varying levels of size. At a certain point, it also encompassed France. It was an unstable political union and, as such, it's borders were constantly changing.

Well I'm not saying it wasn't a mess

>This is the American Educational system at work. He just didn't pay attention.

No, i just disagree with you're interpretation. Other countries have no interest in an unbiased discussion of medieval history because they all had a stake in it.

America is neutral because we are mutts, we don't care to argue our breeding or pedigree. You are trying to back up claims of your ancestry with maps and charts instead of stories and legends.

Up until 285 AD, there was just the Roman Empire.

After 286 AD it was divided into two administrative areas. One was ruled from Rome (the capital was later moved to Ravenna), the other from Byzantium (which was later renamed Constantinople). At the time, they were both simply referred to as the Roman Empire, since people didn't see it as a national split so much as an administrative one.

Eventually, the western half collapsed under a combination of invasions, incompetence, corruption, and natural disasters. The eastern half endured and continued to carry on the name of the Roman Empire. It is referred to as the Byzantine Empire by historians, but the name was not generally used by the Byzantines themselves, who just called themselves Romans.

In 800, Charlemagne, the king of the Franks, had conquered much of France, Germany, and Italy. The Pope then crowned him "Holy Roman Emperor," and established the "Holy Roman Empire." They did this to claim that they were the legitimate successors to the Roman Empire, in defiance of the Byzantines in the east who claimed that as well.

The two empires did not get along, in part due to their conflicting claims, but also due to religious divides. The Holy Roman Empire was generally Catholic, while the Byzantines were Eastern Orthodox. The Holy Roman Empire said that the Pope in Rome was the highest religious authority in Christendom (when they weren't backing an Anti-Pope anyway). The Byzantine Empire said the Pope was merely the bishop of Rome and that as a bishop he should be subordinate to his secular lord, as was the case with the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople. The Pope obviously did not want to be merely a bishop, nor did he want to be subordinate to a secular lord.

"Byzantine Empire" is the modern name for the Eastern Roman Empire. The western division of the Roman Empire has never been called "Byzantine." "Byzantine" comes from Byzantium, the old name for Constantinople.

I am an American.

I think, to put it more aptly, the holy roman empire was the amount of territory claimed by the pope to be part of his dominion.

This included France, Spain, Italy, Germany, and many Norwegian territories, but it didn't preclude them from fighting one another.

desu it was more of a loose confederation to defend against barbarians outside their territories than it was an empire.

There is a reason they call it a fuedal state. Feudal states aren't forbidden from warring with one another even if two vassals serve the same king.

Everybody was vying to be crowned, "Emporer" over an imaginary empire. They had simply balkanized into microfactions and were in a constant state of civil war.

and all this matters why?

Me too user. Me too.

> I think, to put it more aptly, the holy roman empire was the amount of territory claimed by the pope to be part of his dominion.
No it didn't. That's the Catholic world. The Holy Roman Empire is a subset of that, ruled over by an Emperor chosen by the German princes. Originally, it covered France, Germany, and Italy. Later (and for most of its existence) it was primarily Germany and sometimes also Italy.

>which is why it (technically) included ... sweden and norway
What the fuck are you even talking about?

You are aware that the HRE isn't synonymous with Catholicism, right?

so then for 285 years after the fall of Rome people were still calling it the Roman Empire?

When did it split?

> I think, to put it more aptly, the holy roman empire was the amount of territory claimed by the pope to be part of his dominion.

No.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roman_Empire

This is the Holy Roman Empire.

>You are aware that the HRE isn't synonymous with Catholicism, right?

Well then thats ridiculous. I'm not going to trace a line back to every village in every country in every country just to conform with your native understanding of geography.

Drawing a line on a map isn't as important as establishing context. We are talking about a state of perpetual warfare and dogmatic ignorance that spanned hundred of years.

Do you want the trees or the forest?

Are you absolutely sure you can actually read?

dude, what??

The Holy Roman Empire didn't persist into the Enlightenment Era. That's absurd, you have the empire persisting into the Victorian era.

Protestans were also subjects of Holy Roman Emperors

an archmaster can go back and just edit out the HRE.

#mage supremacy!

The HRE was dissolved by Francis II in 1806.

As a formality.
In practice the HRE didn't persist past Charlemagne. It immediately fragmented and balkanized and fell on its own sword.

Up until 285 AD there was just the one Roman Empire that ruled over the Mediterranean Basin. In 286 AD it was split into a Western Roman Empire and an Eastern Roman Empire. The Western Roman Empire crumbled over the next few centuries, and by the 470s it was dead. However the Eastern Roman Empire endured until 1453 AD, when it finally fell to the Ottoman Turks.

The Eastern Roman Empire is often referred to as the Byzantine Empire, because its capital was in Byzantium, which was later renamed Constantinople. They themselves just called it the Roman Empire.

Later, in 800 AD, the Pope gave Charlemagne the title of Roman Emperor, and his lands were the Holy Roman Empire. The title would eventually end up becoming an elected position, chosen by the most powerful of the German princes. It ruled (in name only) over most of central Europe. Territories like Spain were not part of the Holy Roman Empire, even though they were Catholic.

>Francis II the archmaster?

FFS then why German Emperors ruled over it

Otto reestablished the Holy Roman Empire in 962 AD.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_I,_Holy_Roman_Emperor

>elected position
top kek

>tfw the only good WoD games are Dark Ages: Inquisitor, Wraith, and Demon