@@blacklodgegames Yep, I've always found the Anarchs to be the faction that wants to be the Camarilla in all but name and scale. I prefer to see Brujah "history" as a twisted revisionist lie. The Brujah rewrote their actual history, bit by bit over time, and it's all but lost to history, but we know now that Carthage was just an aggressive mercantile state that oppressed and subjugated the Mediterranean before the Romans came along and did it better. Their just butt hurt the Ventrue are better lords than them.
@@GldnMnkyThat was always the impression I had of them, though (i’m admittedly new to WoD). They agree the masquerade must be maintained, they agree a hierarchy of some kind is needed, they just diverge from the Camarilla about how stuff should be run. Like they probably have a softer approach to Caitiffs and Thinbloods, and they think each kindred should be allowed greater individual freedoms than they have under the Camarilla, so I imagine they’d be more relaxed on controlling how and when kindred sire or ghoul others.
I used to pull that on Anarchs back when I was a Tremere, arguing that just because they called their Princes "Barons" doesn't mean there isn't still a much older, much more powerful vampire somewhere in their home territory, who gets to decide who can sire, who can feed, who can exist... The Anarchs need the Camarilla to look better than, because almost any time they "succeed" in driving the Camarilla out of an area, sooner or later, they just become the new Camarilla.
Since the last video about Vampire as a mafia game I always envisioned the anarchs as innercity gangs of large metropolitan cities, the cammerilla as the organized international mafia, and the sabbat as superstitious/occult South american cartels. This is a new and fresh perspective i hadnt thought about. The blacklodge always has the best takes about Vapmire stuff!
That's right! Now, I actually like to run the Anarchs as written....but only on the surface level. What I mean by that is - the Anarchs *present* themselves as egalitarian, because it's great for recruiting neonates in the industrial/post-industrial era. Those neonates have grown up with those revolutionary ideas as mortals, and will carry those strong beliefs into unlife. So if an Anarch-leader wants to draw them in from the Camarilla, those are some great slogans. Of course, if any of my PCs join the Anarch ranks, they'll quickly realize that egalitarianism is impossible for a species that has superspowers powered by generation and age. That's when BLGs take comes in.
Its pretty obvious that's the nuanced take ther. the Anarchs only say they're egalitarian, just like the Camarilla only says they're Meritocracy. They're far from it. In either case.
This, 100%! I always envisioned them as being even bigger hippocrits than the Camarilla. What's described in this video, in my humble opinion, fits the bill of the largely undefined unbound and independent vampires much more, not the Anarchs.
@@GargbossOh yeah, the big difference between them and the Camarilla, at least to me, is that the Camarilla is pretty upfront with the fact that that it's a deeply hierarchial institution where your life functionally belongs to someone older and stronger, whereas the Anarchs pretend they aren't like that, but ultimately... They can call their Princes: "Barons" all they like, fundamentally they are run by the oldest and strongest, just like every other Vampiric society.
Tells you how and why the Anarchs are cringe and useless, then gives you clear examples and direction for Anarchs done right. RPG content at its FINEST.
I felt more like explaining cringe and useless mechanics that I have never seen the Anarchs as (since the late 90's) and then told _exactly_ what they have always been. Either way, good content!
Something I like about the older books vampire the masquerade and along side that a concept that is almost always lost among people who play VTM, is that Elders, especially low generation ones, have such a significant power difference that only gets stronger with time, that gap remains and only gets wider unless you have the will and cunning to topple that. A month old neonate has no place or capacity to "stick it to the man" because and this is that concept, if you are hundreds of years old, you'll be utterly alien to an actual human, especially because you'll have hundreds of years worth of experience playing the game. Your mentality will completely change, the vampire instincts desensitize and embrace what would cause a normal human trauma. You can't stay as a brujah who was a student on college campus handing out political leaflets hundred years down the line in vampire society, you'll be so insignificant that someone will stomp on you if you somehow never grew from that simply because they find you irritating. This is what makes Golconda and that kind of redemption so much more harder to achieve and why it's so rare yet an important concept. I think a good example of what an anarch is but now how you think, is likely Smiling Jack. He's not actually an anarch, he doesn't join groups, he just goes where he wants and does what he pleases. But what allows him to do that is his strength and cunning and that man can be exceptionally cruel, like just embracing a ton of people without them knowing he is their sire, not teaching them anything just to cause trouble for like a Prince. But he can do those things, just because he can.
@@Mragogo300 Jack is a great example, because if you pay attention in VTM: Bloodlines [SPOILER ALERT], you realise that for all he presents himself as friendly, the entire campaign is essentially just him playing a deadly prank on the city's Kindred to get them all fighting and killing each other. He didn't do it for the Anarchs (after all they get swept up in all this too, proving Jack didn't ask permission or even warn them what he was going to do), he did it because he could. Because he wanted to. And as far as the idea that they care more about humanity is concerned... well he killed the entire crew of the Elizabeth Dane just to sell the illusion of the Sarcophagus. If Jack has to kill people to get what he wants, then Jack is gonna do that, no questions asked.
Transcribing human politics/ideologies onto vampires always bothered me. The nature of vampires only leaves room for the Camarilla or the Sabbat. The only way to discern a human equivalent would be to imagine a world where cannibals, serial killers and death cults are the sanest among us.
I like it. Especially providing good character studies through movie clips. The kind of primal drive you describe strikes me as how the Gangrel are portrayed. Perhaps it is supposed to run through the Brujah, too. Good food for thought. I own a bunch of vampire books, but no anarch-oriented ones, so i have mostly ignored the whole thing in my games.
@@blacklodgegames thanks for the heads up, i will ignore it even harder now. I bought the core VTM5e book and that is good enough for me. Although, if i were to ST again, I'd be tempted to go with second edition because it is what i know best.
Thank you, Elders, for your insight. There's an actual play channel called World of Radish, who did a breakout video explaining Boons. They were tired of seeing players and ST's crippling their play by, as you say, not leaning INTO the aspects of Vampire. Highly recc'd.
I've always felt that Anarchs don't work in vampire but could never find a way to round that square. Thanks for giving an incredible explanation and perfect examples, can't wait to try and get an Omar or Bill Cutting in my next game. It definitely makes more sense that Anarchs are ultra ambitious individualists and not punk social anarchist revolutionaries that gen z and 40 year old man children think are cool and subversive.
I've always seen the Anarchs, that operate in cam territory, as the lesser gangs that aren't technically in the mob, but are still subject to it's rules. You don't have to show up and kiss the ring at every elysium, which allows you to lie to yourself enough to believe that you are free of the prince's yoke, and if you don't make too much noise, then you are relatively free to do as you please, but you still have to obey the code of the streets and kick up to the boss if you operate on his turf.
They don't do what the Duchess wants, they have their own little turf but they are not utter madmen like the Sabbat and aren't doing serious violations? On a good day the Duchess could squash them, but there's always someone worse in line to be hurt.
I think the point you're missing maybe is two fold. One that while Vampires are predators, they are also still partly human and the anarch mentality is a human one. To bite the hand that mistreats. The Camarilla was a rebellion against the tyranny of the elders the way the Magna carta was, the anarch revolt was not egalitarian at all, but demanding justice, law that was reasonable and acceptable and not absolute. the Vampire who will not be denied, who follow no law but Caine's law, the original Anarch you describe here is what the Sabbat were originally, the Black hand. But this is not the modern Anarch movement. And the other issue is that the thing the Anarchs are presented as in the lore, are not what they *actually* are in the game. The Anarchs convince themselves they're revolutionaries, idealogues, rebels, at least in modern nights. This is what they tell themselves and it is a comforting lie, this is what they tell the childer and neonates who would otherwise be horrified by their violence. But the truth is that the Anarchs, as they ARE in the game, in the lore are exactly what you describe. The Anarch Free State in California doesn't exist because a group of dedicated revolutionaries did a revolution. They exist because the most violent, egotistical uncompromising monsters stood up and would not abide by the law another imposed, and through natural charisma, and extreme violence turned the camarilla into ash there and declared themselves Barons. They carved the territory up so they would not step on each other. And this parallels actual gangs. What you describe as "The way to make Anarchs good" is how anarchs have been portrayed in V5 at least. They're not real revolutionaries, They're gangsters who don't want to kiss the ring of the mob and have the power, will and backing to put that to power. Victor Temple doesn't HATE his family, he's not fighting an ideological war against them. He just refuses to be made a slave to anyone. He demands respect ,and enforces it with violence, charisma, and power. Nines Rodriguez will not suffer the camarilla to impose it's will upon him, and has the support of enough of his blood to push them out. And this is even shown beautifully with the Camarilla walking away, and the Gangrel. Entire clans, organizations families who refuse to play by these old world rules and dare the Camarilla to try to stop them is alike one of the five families declaring itself against the others, and saying "Our rules our our own and will get us all killed. We will not be bowed any longer." Its the same concept.
I agree with your assessment of the Anarchs of history here entirely, but I also think that there is something to the Anarchs as an anemic political force. There's still a potent narrative to be had in a futile "raging against the dying of the light" and trying to make the world a better place. Individual vampires who do that and either succeed or fail are good characters, even if they are tragic ones. I fail to see why having a tragically idealistic faction that is basically doomed is a bad idea in a setting that is steeped in tragedy.
Always hated the hamfisted attempt at allegory that the Anarchs represent. It was like the writers felt the need preemptively to apologize for the core structure of the game. There was this implied invitation to reject the setting as it was.
Yeah, and the fact that the Anarchs just completely lost at the convention of thorns is an admission that it was a failed idea. They couldn't even keep that out of the game lol
Anarchs as the realization of what being vampire entails without the false sense of morality that Camarilla is a keen insight. Reducing them to a revolutionary vanguard for the poorly articulated political beliefs of the player behind the character is extremely goofy and limiting. The one time the intended vision of the Anarchs worked for me was when I was running a game during lockdown. The group leaned too much into being heroic and caring about things kindred tend to ignore when they have no skin in the game. They got a pyrrhic victory when the stereotypical neonate Anarch NPC took up their causes while actually having the stones to do something creating an opening for the return of the Sabbat. It propelled the group to actually engage with the themes and strengths of the game instead of playing at creating a vampire commune. Whenever a player insisted on being an Anarch it was always awful and panders to themes Vampire the Masquerade does well. People trying to turn Vampire into a game where one plays the hero is a big issue that has only gotten worse with newer players and V5.
love this take. the political aspects of VTM have always seemed a little weird to me in hindsight, but until watching this video i've never really bothered to deconstruct why. i've been reading the Anarch book for VTM 5th lately, and i couldn't help but notice how the overarching political overtones in the book itself start to feel more and more like a paper thin in-universe narrative constructed to manipulate naive fledglings and neonates the more you read between the lines - sort of like an appeal to modernity by ancient beings that want younger recruits to shape the image of their so-called "movement". the more i read these books, the clearer it is that taking what the books give at face value is a mistake - the books are all quite literally "full of lies", and the only way to tell a compelling story with them is to willfully reject certain views the books present you with, while acknowledging them as nothing more than examples of the "unreliable narrator" approach that these books are utterly drenched in.
Black Lodge Games dropping the kernels of wisdom of "The Anarchs are stupid, they should be the sabbath but for people that aren't idiots, as idiots should be pushing up daisies in Vampire"
I'd argue that the Anarchs can fit the VtM and can contribute things to a campaign that the Camerilla and Sabbat can't. Here are my attempts to explain what I mean: What Are The Anarchs? These are a group of people that desire better social status, positions, etc. than is currently possible within the power structure and culture of the Camerilla. When an opportunity arose to overthrow a local Camerilla Domain and have it replaced with a power structure, one that may allow them to get better social status, positions, and so on, they took it. This doesn't mean an Anarch wants everyone to have these things. It simply means they want these things for themselves. This mirrors our RL. When the US first formed it didn't end slavery and give those slaves voting rights, it didn't give women the right to vote, it didn't give non-property owners the right to vote. All that came later in future movements, which involved it fighting itself. Fighting that involved a lot of blood. What it did do was give a select group of people benefits it didn't previously, which it didn't have under the British Crown. This doesn't mean there weren't people that didn't see and oppose the hypocrisy, because there were. However, they were the minority. So what the Anarchs represent is an another expression of vampiric games for power. It's the same games that the Elders play against each other, but with different aesthetics and scale. What Do The Anarchs Contribute? There are certain things that the Camarilla's ways and culture don't allow for. Like a Nossie gaining a high position in open leadership. Something like that is almost non-existent. The same goes for the Thin Bloods and others. This limits the stories that can be told. The Anarchs allow a break from this, while still allowing for the standard vampire culture to exist for GMs that want to use that mold. If you want to create a Domain where groups that normally wouldn't have a lot of power do, just shake things up or see how that affects a game, then the Anarchs allow for this. If you want to create a Domain that is a representative democracy, to see how that might affect the power plays made by your PCs, then the Anarchs allow for this. If you want to introduce your PCs as the new leaders of a Domain and see if they care more about the ideals they endorsed or themselves (a test of Humanity), then the Anarchs allow for this. If you want to introduce a vampiric war to your PCs, that doesn't involve the Sabbat, and involves them gaining better positions at the cost of making the biggest enemy possible (the Camerilla), then the Anarchs allow for this.
I always seen them written as stupid kiddos, before 5th edition, or in some sense, Bloodlines. So I checked core books. First edition. Almost nothing: "Like rebellious teenagers, these "Anarchs", as they call themselves, demand their freedom and ignore the effects on the rest of their kind." Revised edition. Nothing. The only Anarchs are the Sabbat. 20th Anniversary Edition. First time to see them as a "Sect", The Anarch Movement, and mostly a West Coast thing: "Nominally a faction within the Camarilla, most “Anarchs” are still under the authority of the Ivory Tower."..."What needs to change? Ask twelve Anarchs, and you’ll get thirteen different answers."..."many seek to change the Camarilla or the Sabbat into some sort of new structure, usually based on mortal governmental ideas.".."variations of neo-feudalism and even fascism have been tried."
I never really had anarchs in my games because they just come off as vampire punks. It also doesn't help that I've even played in someone's anarch game once, and it was so boring.
This video was pure genius! It will help me clarify what an anarch actually is in my game. I had an instinct toward everything you talked about but could never really put it into words until now.
I don't necessarily agree that they don't fit the setting, but I see where you are coming from. The thing I personally like about the Anarchs is that they can be both impotent armchair rebels who spend more time self-loathing and pretending they are above their vampiric condition, AND loose cannons who simply want to F things up and take all for themselves. And it is not like it's a binary opposition, there is plenty of gradation in between, with room for rare, exceptional idealists who might actually have a shot at real change (or go down in a tragic blaze of glory). The same goes for Camarilla - sure, they can be a fearsome mob if run competently, but may well be presented as a bunch of pretentious, complacent elites, whimsical aristocrats who lost touch with reality, yet remain unchallanged because everyone is either afraid of their elders, blood bound to them or simply too apathetic to do anything about them. Either way, there is room for brilliant roleplaying on all sides. Also, Thin-bloods with modern ideals and standards, when thrown into this feudal, warlord-run society, are a great medium for a tragic story of a revolution that is not very likely to go well, IMHO.
About time someone finally chopped down the tree, The Anarchs as written by the authors always felt like self wank, self aggrandizing pricks who never do wrong even tho their actions had have catastrophic consequences through the history of the game. In my longest played chronicle I started Camarilla and I had at some point a chance to build an empire of my own or be just another Anarch, and the way they were written just made me pick be Autarkis instead of Anarch. Because I felt like I could actually bring some purpose to the city without being tied down to be "the good guy", ending up basing my government form in the Legacies of luminaries like Camilla The Pontifex with an Eternal Senate of sorts that bows to my will, I'm fair and I welcome everyone but at the end when being nice is not a solution, absolute acts of brutality are what have kept my Vampire alive for years. Not because I consider myself a Freedom Fighter but because It's my domain and I demand to be respected as such.
I thought I was cooking with my comment on an earlier video about a way to make the Anarchs work, but I like this at least as well. I do like the thesis statement that "your players should be afraid of Anarchs." I also liked your idea of how the Tremere should be terrifying. It's almost like this is a horror setting.
So just don't include them in your games and go back to the 90s heavier focus on Cam vs Sabbat 🤷 I feel like this is focusing too much on a singular concept of vampirism and not acknowledging how modern people being embraced would naturally react to discovering the hierarchy inherent to Kindred society. Not making sense to have been created in the middle ages notwithstanding, there would obviously be an established cohort of vampires who would want to rebel against the Camarilla.
Great video. I always interpreted the Anarch "factions" as an ironic, disparaging and self-deprecating reference to the subcultures of Gothic-Punk that were inserted as an homage to what inspired the WoD, mostly as a sort of in-joke that revolved around the hollowness of their ideology and ideals running cover for darker but more banal appetites, ie; money, sex, and drugs. (haven't played Vampire for 20 years btw)
...the entire basis for the Old World of Darkness is the goth-punk concept and aesthetic. Saying that a bunch of punk types don't fit into the worldbuilding seems like there's a bit of cognitive dissonance there. Vampire isn't a game of undead mafia, it's a game of personal horror with a broad set of themes, concepts, and stories that can be told under its umbrella.
Your videos on VtM are a breath of fresh air. It seems themes of Vampire the High School Musical and Vampire the Social Justice Warrior have taken hold of the player base of this game. It's incredibly rare to find anybody who recognises that you're meant to be playing actual Vampires - killers, and not a bunch of twenty or thirty-somethings with pent up teenage angst and parental issues. The current edition's obsession with characters as "good guy Anarchs" vs the Baddy Daddy Camarilla or the cartoon evil Sabbat is just cringe. I would very much like to play and run more games of VtM but I can't be doing with players who think a Tremere should look and act like a nerd out of a John Hughes movie or a Brujah has to be a retarded pseudo-socialist. I've never used the Anarchs in my decade of playing VtM because as you state, they're just dumb. The whole idea is ridiculous, especially the older idea of them living alongside the Camarilla, often in the same city, being separate but not really. They just reeked of controlled opposition and didn't offer anything useful to a setting. This perspective you put across makes way more sense and it puts into alignment with the Autarkis, except instead of wanting to be left alone they want to be top dog. I might actually start including them from now on.
Whenever I had anarchs in my games, I always tried to show how big their issues were. Some barons were cool, and their domains ran almost like camarilla territory. Some were god awful, where you had to pay insane protection money or some other tax/service to the baron. My players were confused by this but I explained, Anarchs have no centralization. There is no actual standard of conduct that Barons are expected to hold. They either have to be strong enough or charismatic enough to claim some turf and have no one take it. Whereas the Camarilla for all its faults, had some structure. There were numerous roles and a prince who delegated tasks according to people's skills. Such that even if the Prince was a bit of an asshole. You could still generally speaking get by without major issue.
Funny that you showed scenes from the Wire. I always ran Anarchs as the non-Cosa Nostra gangs in a city where the Cosa Nostra (the Camarilla) already divided up the turf. The political ideologies are empty threats against a system they cannot beat, but still they try to carve out crumbs from the table of the Mafia. Like, if the Camarilla are the Mafia in the Sopranos, they're also the cops in The Wire, and the Anarchs are just gangs trying to control the Towers, i.e. their turf, and sometimes, just sometimes, they can outsmart the Cam to survive another night.
Anarchs used this way sound like a great antagonist for a vampire game. a character that doesn't play by the rules, and is both smart and dangerous enough to be an absolute terror to deal with.
Also a great concept for player characters. The camarilla is powerful, but players tend to be very conservative. You can go a long way by being organized and not afraid to hurt powerful characters
I find it amusing you posted this video, as I admittedly have a bit of a side project going right now. I am trying to rewrite the general plot elements of the L.A. by Night liveplay for a campaign as I felt like they really dropped the ball in later seasons. One of the first decisions I made was that many of the Barons are becoming increasingly more like the camarilla due to the necessity of greater infrastructure to maintain the masquerade. Each one with their own unique specialty and role that contributes to the ecosystem of L.A. In addition, when the camarilla comes calling like they did in the show. The Barons are smart enough to get themselves a puppet, someone who can speak to the fledglings and neonates who are not old enough or strong enough to have carved out their own territory, but who are strong enough to fight for the Barons territory. Rally their revolutionary and rebellious tendencies against the old capes who would never give them a seat at the table. Now sure, at some time during that war, the poor puppet will die, a martyr for the dream of the anarch free states, a symbol to rally behind, and when the cam is out. The old familiar system will be back in place, where the barons are in control. Regardless, I very much agree with your point about the anarchs. Almost everyone I knew in the hobby who loved the anarchs hated the moral ambiguity of VTM. They seemed to want to play superheroes but with an edgy coat of paint. As well as being unable to understand the issues the anarchs have on a fundamental level. It was very frustrating to me, as I tried to put forth NPCs who showed what I believed were the good and bad parts of each facton.
I'm not totally willing to throw out the entirety of Anarchs as written, but this is a really stellar video. Really strong ideas being communicated all around, I'll definitely draw on this video next time I decide to make an Anarch Character. I might just be a tad-bit attached to the metaplot, but I personally I like the whole "Vampire Revolutionary" schtick as a propaganda thing. It's what Kindred on the outside look up to or down upon-while the reality of the situation is much like what you've described; with the well-meaning fledgling and neonates too naive to realize they didn't sign up for peace and love getting ground up by the truth. The idea of Equal Rights and Opportunity is corrupted into an equal opportunity to rip each other's throats out over Baronies. Either way, it'd be really interesting to see your version of things applied to the California Free State; I think there's still definitely some level of compatibility there.
The Carthian faction in Requiem 2e is the "revolutionary" sect done right imo. They are basically leninists and their domains are brutal. It works better since there is no meta plot surrounding it. Even then, I don't use the carthians all that much
@@blacklodgegames Sounds pretty cool. I've been meaning to read Requiem for a while now. And your stream a couple months ago comparing it to VTM has definitely given me some motivation to do so.
@@blacklodgegames Carthians work better in Requiem as well because vampires have the age of sleep, so the ones in charge tend to change from more than just final death.
you have convinced yourself that there's only one true better world of darkness. Many skilled writers have been writing about this world and provided many points of view, ambients and pieces of lore that just don't fit with your complaints I don't even like v5, yet i read the anarch books and felt A true spirit of vampire in its stories and opportunities for me and my players to develop and feel their characters The written anarch, the theo bell anarch, the tyler and xaviar anarch You can have the vampire the masquerade you describe in camarilla, free state anarch or sabbat domain with no issues, you just need creativity
All that punk rock edgy 90s flavor I put into thin bloods, and I make them the absolute laughing stock of the World of Darkness, allowed to exist out of pity, but if they act up are shown utterly no mercy. The entitled children of mafia bosses they're far too used to calling daddy. Great video, I always love to hear what you have to say about Vampire, do you plan on talking about the Sabbat eventually?
Power is generational in vampire, right? But the older generation isn't going away. My first guess was that anarchs have to use things the elders are not yet used to. Car bomb with a cellphone. Convincing or coercing goons to switch (as much as blood bonds allow).
I have a game of V20 I am running, and it is set in Baton Rouge. There is only one Baron in Baton Rouge. He does not allow anyone to rise to his level. He is a Lasombra, and his "throneroom" is his office in which is filled with mirrors. This does two things; 1. It allows him to be intimidating, completely showing his monstrous nature, and showing he does not care about his weaknesses; and 2. It allows him to use Dominate from any angle by using his reflectionless mirrors.
I think you miss the point of Anarchs in Vampire. It's a modern continuation of the wars that started in Enoch with the Antediluvians rose up against the Second Generation, then the Methuselahs rose against the Antediluvians. Tyler, btw, didn't just stage a "walkout" during the Convention of Thorns nor was that the start of the Anarch Movement in the World of Darkness. The FIRST Anarch Revolt happened centuries prior when the younger Cainites were able to break the Blood Bonds they were under, realized they were being enslaved by their Sires and Elders, and started killing their enslavers. This war brought the attention of the Inquisition, who was used by both Elders and Neonates/Ancillae to kill each other. The SECOND Anarch Revolt started at the Convention when Tyler SHOT Hardestadt and took off. The Second Revolt didn't really end but fizzled out, with the quelled Anarchs finding places within Camarilla territories and the more zealous forming the Sabbat. When the Antediluvians killed the Second Generation, Caine didn't just curse them with the Clan Flaws. He cursed them with the War of Ages, where the younger Cainites will always rise up and kill the Elders, which was the justification the Elders used to Blood Bond their childer. Had the Elders not done this and horde resources, there wouldn't be a War of Ages. So, the Anarchs are useful and makes sense within the context of the game when looked at it from that point of view. You can pigeon hold the Camarilla to your "mobster" view point, but it really isn't. The Camarilla is a fascist organization that wants absolute control and power for the Elders, while giving handouts to the lesser. Because you can't make sense of them, it doesn't mean they don't make sense at all.
You could even say it is a continuation of Caine's own rebellion when he first acquired his power from Lilith. Lilith wanted to keep him subjugated, but Caine wasn't having that and broke free of her with all his rage and power. From then on they've always been at constant odds with each other.
I am sooooo glad that you referenced "King of New York"! One of my favourite characters that I´ve played was a Tzimitsce lord of the ghetto who was basically Frank White if he was a Sabbat fanatic.
Oh man, I've been waiting for this one ever since you mentioned it. Every statement in this video is capital T TRUE, and your re-conception of the anarchs is a perfect crystallisation of my instincts regarding them. This kind of character archetype is a personal favourite, they're just so compelling. Got me hyped up thinking of the possibilities for whenever I get around to running Vampire (someday within the next century hahaha). Massive dub on referencing Unforgiven BTW, another favourite of mine.
Great video! I've been struggling to integrate the Anarchs into my Philly by Night chronicle. I really resonate with this vision of the movement and have wanted to avoid the whole idealistic liberal arts students vibe. The way I've been trying to do it is thus: In the wake of the SI, only the strongest and most brutal fledglings were able to survive. They've fled their old haunts and have come to Philly in hopes of a quieter place to ride out the inquisition. They largely blame the Camarilla's meddling in mortal society for the SI, and want to establish a less meddlesome, "rule by virtue" system. In practice, they organize into just as many strata as the Cammies, but they are mostly young and naive. The loudest voice wins every argument. In a way, I almost like the idealistic exterior of the Anarchs because it might attract certain players, only for them to slowly realize their rule of law is often no better than the Camarilla's. It gives them a manipulative edge that is maybe often lacking for them.
i remember my story teller made a Anarch Noss NPC that was the boogeyman of Florida using the sewers to sneak his way into anything he didn't like and burn it to the ground for the first act of the chronicle he was the quote "boss" we had to take down being up and coming camirilla
Youre not entirely right, yet you are in no way wrong. The High Middle Ages were a time of Merchants constantly worming their way into the aristocracy some conspiring for want of Italian Republicanism. Aristocratic meddling in the Kings affairs, the battle between Absolutism and Aristocracy. Along with peasants gaining access to upwards mobility post blackdeath and the laying of the foundation of Church Reform, Schism, Inquisition and Protest following the crusades. With many vampires coming onto this scene who experienced the leadup to, the events themselves and the aftermath there is no wonder they revolted. Along with Methuselah against their children, neonates against the Methuselahs children. Blood bonds only go so far under these pressures. Moving from upwards mobility and carving out a space in the power vacumns of this and whats to follow to what they are now is unfathomable to me however. I will give you that
Good comment. The problem isn't so much the revolt itself, it's that the faction is always explicitly portrayed through the lens of particular ideology that was not present at the time of the revolt. And the upward mobility you are describing is not a repudiation of the social hierarchy like the Anarchs are portrayed as seeking. The problem is this: "Sure, the revolt wasn't an explicitly egalitarian ideology like anarchism, but we are going to describe the faction as being explicitly wrapped up in that ideology for centuries, drape them in all the cosmetic accoutrements, and place them at the heart of all the anarchist/communist revolts of the last 250 years. Why would you think that they are just a thinly veiled excuse to include our own revolutionary politics!?" The idea of the revolt and formation of the sabbat is really cool. The sabbat is really cool. The sabbat adds to the game, the Anarchs really don't.
@@blacklodgegames and you sir are working towards enriching everyone's experience. You have expanded my Idea of Anarchs and Cammies. I take it you will do the same of the Sabbat... perhaps the clans perhaps the Iconnu and Ashirra
I always felt that the Anarch's pretended to be noble, but really are even more violent that the Camarilla at times. It's the constant scratch towards the top of the pile, those with power weirld it, those without get dominated in the most straight forward and brutal way. They reject the Tower because they want to do what they want, when they want, to whom they want it. This was dressed up in the rags of revolution. The Camarilla was meant to restrain kindred nature by it's laws and edicts, giving it a direct purpose. Anarchs once they rebelled, saw they were suckers, they didn't care for their peers, they wanted revenge first and foremost against the elders who sold them upriver for just a few more nights existence. The violence came first, then the philosophy to explain it. This was consistent all the way to the Anarch Free State which for all intents and purposes is absolute chaos. There were no rules, and those who could smash, did so, and often, and your precarious existence was only ensured by the sheer violence you were able to inflict to hanging on to someone who did. I feel often that this is what the Sabbat from V3 should've been, and the Real Sabbat being more clandestine, more of a cult.
@@bloodwynn i was sure they were going to realize how monstrous an SJW with vampirism would be... but no. Erika Ishi gave a good performance, it just didn't have anything to do with Vampire.
@@bloodwynn Honestly, I would have had less issues with Annabelle if the plot and all other characters didn't act like she was the kindred messiah. All she ever said is everyone deserves a home. So...what about the camarilla vampires, why don't they get a home? Also, I hated the plot point about how that true faith hunter thought she could redeem kindred since she never killed. Guess we are not counting when she used spark of rage to make one guy kill his friend. I'd count that as a kill, even more messed up actually, that guy probably didn't want to kill his friend.
The Sabbat sounds like the people who are too stupid to be subtle. Their idea of a rebellion sounds like running into a peasant village, killing or embracing everyone and telling them to storm the castle.
The only problem is what to do with the Sabbat then? Because as far as I understand, this Sect is supposed to be the brutal one and follows the principle of "rule by the strongest".
I was thinking that too. If I were doing my own thing I based on what @black lodge games has done w/ camarilla and Anarchs is i'd make them monstrous fanatic cultists. They never can hold any large territory in a developed nation because crazy violence like that is going to get you wrecked.
Nah - if you take the logic here, if the Camarilla is the mafia, and the Anarchs are the street gangs, the Sabbat are the cartels, moved by superstition and monstrous beyond belief. An example of Sabbat "behavior" is Los Zetas in Mexico, or Pablo Escobar in Colombia.
And this is why I hate V:tM. Too much setting info, and so much of it isn't actually gameable, so it just ends up with people arguing about lore, telling each other that they are having bad wrong fun.
What bothers me about the Anarks is the day have a lot of Praxis but not a lot of theory there isn’t a lot of substance to their movement and that makes it feel empty and meaningless
I came around to this while watching LA by Night, the way they slung the 'heroic underdog' theme through the whole thing. Like... You're still all bloodthirsty killers and you organize like a gang. You arent good.
Very interesting take, I don't know if I agree completely, but very interesting none the less. After reading Vampire Requiem 2nd edition, I think it's best to take a bit of its approach, where sect as we know it from masquarade- secret and worldwide societies that are after every big historical event in the world- don't exists. You can still have camarilla as an idea and a faction in a city, it's just not as interconnected and organized on a regional level (kinda like the Invictus). You can still have anarchs, even in a "traditional" VtM sense, it's just that is a small group of ideologist rebelling against the status quo in that particular city (kinda like Carthian maybe?). You can also have "omar little" anarchs, etc.. etc... Basically what I am saying is not to focus too much on the actual lore (unless maybe you're playing dark ages, where I personally thinks makes the most sense and works best) which is very exciting and compelling at first sight but very limiting in actual play, and make your own WoD with your own spin of the canon lore.
Great video, I wanna see in the future videos about Hecata, how create a city, create a story for VtM and other similar stuff. I am also curios on which clans/bloodlines you wish to eliminate from the game and which should remain. Do you have a discord or something where chat and expand this conversations?
หลายเดือนก่อน
I was thinking back to the days of when we played VTM, we just didn't have anarchs in our World of Darkness. None of us saw the point or really cared for the background lore as written. The Sabat seemed like Fertile ground for good stories to us, but they were mostly followers of Dagon or other Lovecraftian old ones. Very good video, I really enjoy Black Lodge Games Takes on VTM. I loved the World of Darkness because it was great to combine Mage, Vampire, Werewolf Changeling and wraith together into one world.
@@blacklodgegames As I remember the way we played it back it the day, Sabat, Nephandi and Black Spiral Dancers all got along, as well as such creatures ever get along. At least that's how we played it out years ago. May not be the most lore accurate but we didn't really use Anarchs back then. Funny because back then most of us were actually Punk Rockers, in the 70's and into the 80's
In a court that justifies its support in a city, kindred that have been elevated into positions of power justify their authority in the Camarilla by actually having *less* power to make mistakes and greater accountability. Heavy is the head that wears the crown. Your version of the Anarch is an inversion of that, they hold power over others and owe accountability to no one, and if they can justify that position through raw power alone, that should be terrifying.
A core feature of the curse of vampirism in VtM has always been the children rising to strike down their elders and take their place. The Third Generation killed the Second, they suffered attrition at the hands of their descendants, and so on. Older generations are more powerful, yes, but the younger generations are more numerous, and it is often the direct childer of the Elders and Methuselahs that lead the rabble against their own vampiric kin one way or another. Not fleabites from 5 steps removed Neonates. Balanced against that, whoever replaces those Elders and Methuselahs become the new target of their own descendants, and the cycle starts all over again. Vampire society has gone through political changes before, from the Eternal Senate's initial foundation based on the Roman Republic and its evolution under the Roman Empire, the twisted demon-tainted "perfection" of Carthage, the feudal system of lords and vassals in Dark Ages, and so on. Vampires are at least part human, and their society is always a reflection or mockery of mortal institutions of the age. But those changes usually come to the realm of vampires violently, as a result of both internal and external pressure. In a way, the Anarchs as rebels against the status quo isn't a bad idea in and of itself. Rather the conflation of the Anarchs with an elevated sense of morality, and the idea that the Anarchs aren't just the new boss looking to replace the old boss, are. Moral vampires are rarely powerful, and though there are exceptions, they should never be advocates of revolution. Maintenance of Humanity essentially forbids such acts. Anarchs are better represented by bitter, violent youth, Elder Barons who believe they owe fealty to none above themselves and reject the Camarilla's oversight, and demagogue Ancilla looking to become Barons of their own domains by any means necessary, looking to take down a weak Prince by manipulating what they see as their own future subjects. Not peaceful communes where Kindred are free from "oppression" by "the Man". Because a power vacuum begs to be filled, and the strong will dominate (often literally) the weak.
This is one thing that I feel like Coteries of New York did pretty well when I played through it, the way they portray the Baron in New York is quite violent, not at all actually giving a damn about the Camarilla, and really they made him far, far less of the egalitarian sort that you'd want to side with. In fact he's mostly just a gang boss murderous jerk who literally beats the absolute crap out of you after setting up a "meeting" with you, and makes it *quite* clear that if you continue to meddle in any affairs that interfere with his plans, he will just kill you without a second thought. Plus he wears a top hat so I mean... Bill the Butcher confirmed?
The Walter White example also highlights the negatives of playing a feral Anarchz specifically how he ended. Yes a ruthless individual can rise high on ambition, intimidation, and violence but inevitably they will hit the point where the preexisting power structures simply squash them with raw numbers and systemic power. When I am not playing my usual Venture prince to be, I find playing independents who occupy speciality niches that traditional power structures usually can't or won't occupy works better. Especially if you can possess services and knowledge other find useful and dangerous enough to retain autonomy. If you're the only one that can understand antediluvian artifacts or unravel Mespotamian sorcery that you're a consultant worth having and can occasionally trap a soul in eternal agony if bothered.
Huh, food for thought. I've had some passing grievances with Anarchs and how they're presented in Vampire. But this, this gives me ideas, this seems fun
"They are very much needed, and do what we need them for. Yes, it is annoying that they draw unnecessary attention to us, but the true talents among them, who we members of the Camarilla didn't notice at first glance, will sooner or later realise, that their fight and rebellion is pointless, so they will leave the sect. Tomorrow, a year or a century from now, it matters not. They will of course have to prove themselves to us first, but after that they are welcome amongst our ranks, as any kindred capable, and strong enough to survive, especially these nights." - a Lasomra sheriff about the anarchs So yeah, my opinion about the anarchs was always like: rebelling teenagers, who think that the world is their playground, but they will grow up, and the ones we do, will be great additions to the ranks of the other sects
More forbidden knowledge from the Black Lodge! Today keeps getting better and better. Keep up the good work, gentlemen. Your videos are always insightful.
I always treated the Anarchs like a "Free city alliance" often seen in fantasy series. The Camarilla and Sabbat are like two powerful empires while the Ministry and Giovanni (Hecata now I guess) were like independent kingdoms, strong enough to maintain there independence but not directly rival the big two. The other independent bloodlines are like smaller nations stuck between the other powers and and maintain themselves through diplomacy and lip service. The Anarchs as individuals or individual groups dont have the structure or numbers of a clan or even a bloodline but through their shared beliefs/situations/goals are able to ally with and get support from the rest.
The thumbnail of the last video about the Camiralla: You had my curiosity. After watching it: You had my attention. Now, after watching this one? You have my blood oath.
This dude makes VTM actually feel scary without coming across as trying to be scary. You never know what the humans know, you never know what's lurking around the corner, you never know who's watching. As a Vampire, your harder to kill, and you have been robbed of the possibility of a peaceful death. You new life is essentially one of eternal paranoia and suffering, and you never know when your "immortality" may come to a gruesome end. You may be destroyed by an angry werewolf, you may be hunted and burnt alive. But if your lucky, you may stick around long enough to see your humanity slip between your fingers, and before you know it everyone and everything is you knew is gone, and your all alone in a new age not meant for you. Simply put, there are some fates worse than death. If I had to choose, I would take my chances as a werewolf... because then I can at least try and be a force for good and I know I can die of old age. Not gonna lie, we all romanticise Vampires way too much in modern media. But in reality, it would be a terrible experience. I can't decide which is worse. A slow and painful death, or an eternity of suffering. VTM should make you feel like your always looking over your shoulder. You should feel paranoid. Scared that if your dark secret gets out, the entire world could come undone in less than a few minutes. You should feel the pressure slowly building up... and in the end, it will break you. We need to return the horror back to the creatures of the night... Now that's a f*cking Vampire. As one of the Garou, I'm at least thankful that my condition won't torment me forever. That said, me and my pack have found a vampire hideout... you had better hope it's not one of yours. Ok dark scary stuff aside I do have an idea. Imagine a world of darkness chronicle that's like the opening sequence of underworld blood wars where people know that the supernatural's exist, and the inquisition have ordered a mass execution. You have to survive in a dystopian society that's falling apart at the seams. One wrong move and the humans will be going through the doors like armed police in a matter of seconds. Naturally this would be a very difficult chronicle to play, so the players would probably have to be older Vampires with a lot more experience to give them an edge.
Jesus that was amazing. It's impossible to talk with anyone about this who is into VtM because the whole thing as written is perfect - anything that divergent from the game is heretical Can you writeup all these ideas for a revised VtM in something I could 😊buy?
I simplified Anarchs for our game. In the original revolt they make the Sabbat, then fade away until 1944 and become the Anarchs we usually mean- expressing modern ideas in the modern era. They fade again because it doesn't work as an organization, but idealists and demagogues sometimes try to rekindle the fire. An "Anarch city" is just an anti-Camarilla city, where they'll cooperate long enough to stop someone from declaring Praxis, then go back to turf wars. I think there's a space between "Camarilla-lite" (as theyre sometines portrayed) and Sabbat-lite, where Anarchs can fit,.and theyre definitely not the good guys: they just have a better sales pitch about being true to your nature.
Love each and every one of your WoD videos. Watched each one multiple times and reccomend them all to my friends. Hoping for some introductory MtA content in the future 😸
I think your description is much more fit for the Autarkis, Kindred that ignore the sects and the clans, they serve no one, and make their own kingdoms wherever they desire.
I remember when I first started vtm, I liked the Anarchs because "here you don't have to put up with anything and you don't have to do anything a kindred who's a week older than you tells you to do". Even my first larp character was a Nosferatu Anarch. Then I discovered as a player and character the truth, the Anarchs are basicaly Elders and Neonates building a Camarilla of their own, with blackjack and hookers.
This kinda reminds of a Warhammer 40k and how they have been stripping the religiosity out of the Imperium which is a huge part of universe, and made Warhammer more unique
![ร้อยพ่อพันแม่ - WanMai [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XY2pNYASEbg/mqdefault.jpg)
Anarchs: opposes Camarilla cause they are free.
Also Anarchs: listen to local baron who has the same power as prince.
@@bloodwynn please bro, just try being anarch bro, it's totally different, the baron isn't just the prince, there are different strains
@@blacklodgegames "Barons may be lower in the social hierarchy, but they're still an aristocratic title, you choads!"
@@blacklodgegames Yep, I've always found the Anarchs to be the faction that wants to be the Camarilla in all but name and scale.
I prefer to see Brujah "history" as a twisted revisionist lie. The Brujah rewrote their actual history, bit by bit over time, and it's all but lost to history, but we know now that Carthage was just an aggressive mercantile state that oppressed and subjugated the Mediterranean before the Romans came along and did it better. Their just butt hurt the Ventrue are better lords than them.
@@GldnMnkyThat was always the impression I had of them, though (i’m admittedly new to WoD). They agree the masquerade must be maintained, they agree a hierarchy of some kind is needed, they just diverge from the Camarilla about how stuff should be run. Like they probably have a softer approach to Caitiffs and Thinbloods, and they think each kindred should be allowed greater individual freedoms than they have under the Camarilla, so I imagine they’d be more relaxed on controlling how and when kindred sire or ghoul others.
I used to pull that on Anarchs back when I was a Tremere, arguing that just because they called their Princes "Barons" doesn't mean there isn't still a much older, much more powerful vampire somewhere in their home territory, who gets to decide who can sire, who can feed, who can exist...
The Anarchs need the Camarilla to look better than, because almost any time they "succeed" in driving the Camarilla out of an area, sooner or later, they just become the new Camarilla.
Since the last video about Vampire as a mafia game I always envisioned the anarchs as innercity gangs of large metropolitan cities, the cammerilla as the organized international mafia, and the sabbat as superstitious/occult South american cartels. This is a new and fresh perspective i hadnt thought about.
The blacklodge always has the best takes about Vapmire stuff!
Same, only difference in my WOD is that "superstitious/occult South american cartels" is Hecata. Sabbath is vampiric terrorists))
That's right!
Now, I actually like to run the Anarchs as written....but only on the surface level. What I mean by that is - the Anarchs *present* themselves as egalitarian, because it's great for recruiting neonates in the industrial/post-industrial era. Those neonates have grown up with those revolutionary ideas as mortals, and will carry those strong beliefs into unlife. So if an Anarch-leader wants to draw them in from the Camarilla, those are some great slogans.
Of course, if any of my PCs join the Anarch ranks, they'll quickly realize that egalitarianism is impossible for a species that has superspowers powered by generation and age. That's when BLGs take comes in.
Its pretty obvious that's the nuanced take ther. the Anarchs only say they're egalitarian, just like the Camarilla only says they're Meritocracy. They're far from it. In either case.
This, 100%! I always envisioned them as being even bigger hippocrits than the Camarilla.
What's described in this video, in my humble opinion, fits the bill of the largely undefined unbound and independent vampires much more, not the Anarchs.
@@Gargboss You mean how he described the anarchs in the beginning of the video?
@@GargbossOh yeah, the big difference between them and the Camarilla, at least to me, is that the Camarilla is pretty upfront with the fact that that it's a deeply hierarchial institution where your life functionally belongs to someone older and stronger, whereas the Anarchs pretend they aren't like that, but ultimately... They can call their Princes: "Barons" all they like, fundamentally they are run by the oldest and strongest, just like every other Vampiric society.
Tells you how and why the Anarchs are cringe and useless, then gives you clear examples and direction for Anarchs done right.
RPG content at its FINEST.
@@atsumorikofuhara thanks!
I felt more like explaining cringe and useless mechanics that I have never seen the Anarchs as (since the late 90's) and then told _exactly_ what they have always been. Either way, good content!
Something I like about the older books vampire the masquerade and along side that a concept that is almost always lost among people who play VTM, is that Elders, especially low generation ones, have such a significant power difference that only gets stronger with time, that gap remains and only gets wider unless you have the will and cunning to topple that. A month old neonate has no place or capacity to "stick it to the man" because and this is that concept, if you are hundreds of years old, you'll be utterly alien to an actual human, especially because you'll have hundreds of years worth of experience playing the game. Your mentality will completely change, the vampire instincts desensitize and embrace what would cause a normal human trauma. You can't stay as a brujah who was a student on college campus handing out political leaflets hundred years down the line in vampire society, you'll be so insignificant that someone will stomp on you if you somehow never grew from that simply because they find you irritating. This is what makes Golconda and that kind of redemption so much more harder to achieve and why it's so rare yet an important concept.
I think a good example of what an anarch is but now how you think, is likely Smiling Jack. He's not actually an anarch, he doesn't join groups, he just goes where he wants and does what he pleases. But what allows him to do that is his strength and cunning and that man can be exceptionally cruel, like just embracing a ton of people without them knowing he is their sire, not teaching them anything just to cause trouble for like a Prince. But he can do those things, just because he can.
@@Mragogo300 Jack is a great example, because if you pay attention in VTM: Bloodlines [SPOILER ALERT], you realise that for all he presents himself as friendly, the entire campaign is essentially just him playing a deadly prank on the city's Kindred to get them all fighting and killing each other.
He didn't do it for the Anarchs (after all they get swept up in all this too, proving Jack didn't ask permission or even warn them what he was going to do), he did it because he could. Because he wanted to.
And as far as the idea that they care more about humanity is concerned... well he killed the entire crew of the Elizabeth Dane just to sell the illusion of the Sarcophagus. If Jack has to kill people to get what he wants, then Jack is gonna do that, no questions asked.
Transcribing human politics/ideologies onto vampires always bothered me. The nature of vampires only leaves room for the Camarilla or the Sabbat. The only way to discern a human equivalent would be to imagine a world where cannibals, serial killers and death cults are the sanest among us.
I like it. Especially providing good character studies through movie clips. The kind of primal drive you describe strikes me as how the Gangrel are portrayed. Perhaps it is supposed to run through the Brujah, too. Good food for thought. I own a bunch of vampire books, but no anarch-oriented ones, so i have mostly ignored the whole thing in my games.
@@JackMcCarthyWriter the new anarch book is especially dumb
@@blacklodgegames thanks for the heads up, i will ignore it even harder now.
I bought the core VTM5e book and that is good enough for me.
Although, if i were to ST again, I'd be tempted to go with second edition because it is what i know best.
Thank you, Elders, for your insight.
There's an actual play channel called World of Radish, who did a breakout video explaining Boons. They were tired of seeing players and ST's crippling their play by, as you say, not leaning INTO the aspects of Vampire. Highly recc'd.
Subbing now
I've always felt that Anarchs don't work in vampire but could never find a way to round that square. Thanks for giving an incredible explanation and perfect examples, can't wait to try and get an Omar or Bill Cutting in my next game. It definitely makes more sense that Anarchs are ultra ambitious individualists and not punk social anarchist revolutionaries that gen z and 40 year old man children think are cool and subversive.
Fucking love you guys. You're always on the money with the honesty and the truth of the darkness of this game. Thank you!!
Thanks for watching!
I've always seen the Anarchs, that operate in cam territory, as the lesser gangs that aren't technically in the mob, but are still subject to it's rules. You don't have to show up and kiss the ring at every elysium, which allows you to lie to yourself enough to believe that you are free of the prince's yoke, and if you don't make too much noise, then you are relatively free to do as you please, but you still have to obey the code of the streets and kick up to the boss if you operate on his turf.
Good take.
They don't do what the Duchess wants, they have their own little turf but they are not utter madmen like the Sabbat and aren't doing serious violations? On a good day the Duchess could squash them, but there's always someone worse in line to be hurt.
I think the point you're missing maybe is two fold. One that while Vampires are predators, they are also still partly human and the anarch mentality is a human one. To bite the hand that mistreats. The Camarilla was a rebellion against the tyranny of the elders the way the Magna carta was, the anarch revolt was not egalitarian at all, but demanding justice, law that was reasonable and acceptable and not absolute. the Vampire who will not be denied, who follow no law but Caine's law, the original Anarch you describe here is what the Sabbat were originally, the Black hand. But this is not the modern Anarch movement. And the other issue is that the thing the Anarchs are presented as in the lore, are not what they *actually* are in the game. The Anarchs convince themselves they're revolutionaries, idealogues, rebels, at least in modern nights. This is what they tell themselves and it is a comforting lie, this is what they tell the childer and neonates who would otherwise be horrified by their violence. But the truth is that the Anarchs, as they ARE in the game, in the lore are exactly what you describe. The Anarch Free State in California doesn't exist because a group of dedicated revolutionaries did a revolution. They exist because the most violent, egotistical uncompromising monsters stood up and would not abide by the law another imposed, and through natural charisma, and extreme violence turned the camarilla into ash there and declared themselves Barons. They carved the territory up so they would not step on each other. And this parallels actual gangs. What you describe as "The way to make Anarchs good" is how anarchs have been portrayed in V5 at least. They're not real revolutionaries, They're gangsters who don't want to kiss the ring of the mob and have the power, will and backing to put that to power. Victor Temple doesn't HATE his family, he's not fighting an ideological war against them. He just refuses to be made a slave to anyone. He demands respect ,and enforces it with violence, charisma, and power. Nines Rodriguez will not suffer the camarilla to impose it's will upon him, and has the support of enough of his blood to push them out. And this is even shown beautifully with the Camarilla walking away, and the Gangrel. Entire clans, organizations families who refuse to play by these old world rules and dare the Camarilla to try to stop them is alike one of the five families declaring itself against the others, and saying "Our rules our our own and will get us all killed. We will not be bowed any longer." Its the same concept.
No anarchs are a weak projection of some ideological idiots with nothing keeping ghem bound to reality
bingo. that's exactly what i think!
I agree with your assessment of the Anarchs of history here entirely, but I also think that there is something to the Anarchs as an anemic political force. There's still a potent narrative to be had in a futile "raging against the dying of the light" and trying to make the world a better place. Individual vampires who do that and either succeed or fail are good characters, even if they are tragic ones. I fail to see why having a tragically idealistic faction that is basically doomed is a bad idea in a setting that is steeped in tragedy.
Always hated the hamfisted attempt at allegory that the Anarchs represent. It was like the writers felt the need preemptively to apologize for the core structure of the game. There was this implied invitation to reject the setting as it was.
Yeah, and the fact that the Anarchs just completely lost at the convention of thorns is an admission that it was a failed idea. They couldn't even keep that out of the game lol
Anarchs as the realization of what being vampire entails without the false sense of morality that Camarilla is a keen insight. Reducing them to a revolutionary vanguard for the poorly articulated political beliefs of the player behind the character is extremely goofy and limiting. The one time the intended vision of the Anarchs worked for me was when I was running a game during lockdown. The group leaned too much into being heroic and caring about things kindred tend to ignore when they have no skin in the game. They got a pyrrhic victory when the stereotypical neonate Anarch NPC took up their causes while actually having the stones to do something creating an opening for the return of the Sabbat. It propelled the group to actually engage with the themes and strengths of the game instead of playing at creating a vampire commune. Whenever a player insisted on being an Anarch it was always awful and panders to themes Vampire the Masquerade does well. People trying to turn Vampire into a game where one plays the hero is a big issue that has only gotten worse with newer players and V5.
love this take. the political aspects of VTM have always seemed a little weird to me in hindsight, but until watching this video i've never really bothered to deconstruct why. i've been reading the Anarch book for VTM 5th lately, and i couldn't help but notice how the overarching political overtones in the book itself start to feel more and more like a paper thin in-universe narrative constructed to manipulate naive fledglings and neonates the more you read between the lines - sort of like an appeal to modernity by ancient beings that want younger recruits to shape the image of their so-called "movement". the more i read these books, the clearer it is that taking what the books give at face value is a mistake - the books are all quite literally "full of lies", and the only way to tell a compelling story with them is to willfully reject certain views the books present you with, while acknowledging them as nothing more than examples of the "unreliable narrator" approach that these books are utterly drenched in.
I don’t need to listen to anything more than the introduction to know how fully I agree.
…I mean, I totally will, but I don’t need to.
Anarchs were the first safety tool.
Black Lodge Games dropping the kernels of wisdom of "The Anarchs are stupid, they should be the sabbath but for people that aren't idiots, as idiots should be pushing up daisies in Vampire"
Revolution is just another word for rearrangement.
I'd argue that the Anarchs can fit the VtM and can contribute things to a campaign that the Camerilla and Sabbat can't. Here are my attempts to explain what I mean:
What Are The Anarchs?
These are a group of people that desire better social status, positions, etc. than is currently possible within the power structure and culture of the Camerilla. When an opportunity arose to overthrow a local Camerilla Domain and have it replaced with a power structure, one that may allow them to get better social status, positions, and so on, they took it.
This doesn't mean an Anarch wants everyone to have these things. It simply means they want these things for themselves. This mirrors our RL.
When the US first formed it didn't end slavery and give those slaves voting rights, it didn't give women the right to vote, it didn't give non-property owners the right to vote. All that came later in future movements, which involved it fighting itself. Fighting that involved a lot of blood.
What it did do was give a select group of people benefits it didn't previously, which it didn't have under the British Crown.
This doesn't mean there weren't people that didn't see and oppose the hypocrisy, because there were. However, they were the minority.
So what the Anarchs represent is an another expression of vampiric games for power. It's the same games that the Elders play against each other, but with different aesthetics and scale.
What Do The Anarchs Contribute?
There are certain things that the Camarilla's ways and culture don't allow for. Like a Nossie gaining a high position in open leadership. Something like that is almost non-existent. The same goes for the Thin Bloods and others.
This limits the stories that can be told. The Anarchs allow a break from this, while still allowing for the standard vampire culture to exist for GMs that want to use that mold.
If you want to create a Domain where groups that normally wouldn't have a lot of power do, just shake things up or see how that affects a game, then the Anarchs allow for this.
If you want to create a Domain that is a representative democracy, to see how that might affect the power plays made by your PCs, then the Anarchs allow for this.
If you want to introduce your PCs as the new leaders of a Domain and see if they care more about the ideals they endorsed or themselves (a test of Humanity), then the Anarchs allow for this.
If you want to introduce a vampiric war to your PCs, that doesn't involve the Sabbat, and involves them gaining better positions at the cost of making the biggest enemy possible (the Camerilla), then the Anarchs allow for this.
Excellent take. You've been dropping hints building up to this one and I was wondering what direction you'd take. Top tier content as usual.
@@TrillTheDM thanks man, really enjoying your channel and watching the back catalog
I always seen them written as stupid kiddos, before 5th edition, or in some sense, Bloodlines. So I checked core books.
First edition. Almost nothing: "Like rebellious teenagers, these "Anarchs", as they call themselves, demand their freedom and ignore the effects on the rest of their kind."
Revised edition. Nothing. The only Anarchs are the Sabbat.
20th Anniversary Edition. First time to see them as a "Sect", The Anarch Movement, and mostly a West Coast thing: "Nominally a faction within the Camarilla, most “Anarchs” are still under the authority of the Ivory Tower."..."What needs to change? Ask twelve Anarchs, and you’ll get thirteen different answers."..."many seek to change the Camarilla or the Sabbat into some sort of new structure, usually based on mortal governmental ideas.".."variations of neo-feudalism and even fascism have been tried."
I never really had anarchs in my games because they just come off as vampire punks. It also doesn't help that I've even played in someone's anarch game once, and it was so boring.
This video was pure genius! It will help me clarify what an anarch actually is in my game. I had an instinct toward everything you talked about but could never really put it into words until now.
I don't necessarily agree that they don't fit the setting, but I see where you are coming from. The thing I personally like about the Anarchs is that they can be both impotent armchair rebels who spend more time self-loathing and pretending they are above their vampiric condition, AND loose cannons who simply want to F things up and take all for themselves. And it is not like it's a binary opposition, there is plenty of gradation in between, with room for rare, exceptional idealists who might actually have a shot at real change (or go down in a tragic blaze of glory). The same goes for Camarilla - sure, they can be a fearsome mob if run competently, but may well be presented as a bunch of pretentious, complacent elites, whimsical aristocrats who lost touch with reality, yet remain unchallanged because everyone is either afraid of their elders, blood bound to them or simply too apathetic to do anything about them. Either way, there is room for brilliant roleplaying on all sides.
Also, Thin-bloods with modern ideals and standards, when thrown into this feudal, warlord-run society, are a great medium for a tragic story of a revolution that is not very likely to go well, IMHO.
About time someone finally chopped down the tree, The Anarchs as written by the authors always felt like self wank, self aggrandizing pricks who never do wrong even tho their actions had have catastrophic consequences through the history of the game.
In my longest played chronicle I started Camarilla and I had at some point a chance to build an empire of my own or be just another Anarch, and the way they were written just made me pick be Autarkis instead of Anarch.
Because I felt like I could actually bring some purpose to the city without being tied down to be "the good guy", ending up basing my government form in the Legacies of luminaries like Camilla The Pontifex with an Eternal Senate of sorts that bows to my will, I'm fair and I welcome everyone but at the end when being nice is not a solution, absolute acts of brutality are what have kept my Vampire alive for years.
Not because I consider myself a Freedom Fighter but because It's my domain and I demand to be respected as such.
"I OWN THESE ENDS!" - Caesar Augustus
In the larp org I was in the anarch players just larped as antifa with vampire powers.
Many such cases!
Vamptifa
I thought I was cooking with my comment on an earlier video about a way to make the Anarchs work, but I like this at least as well. I do like the thesis statement that "your players should be afraid of Anarchs." I also liked your idea of how the Tremere should be terrifying. It's almost like this is a horror setting.
Glad I discovered this channel, I guess as an intersect of my interests in Vampirella and RPGs. Looking forward to playing my first game of VTM.
oh how my heart soars when I hear young Steve Buscemi say "it doesn't have to be this way"
How did I not see this! That's the perfect "anarch" that should be there.
Hard to see because the way it's written is just bad.
Not the fault of the reader!
@blacklodgegames you guys have some great insights sometimes and this was a really damn good one.
@@sketchasaurrex4087 thank you very much!
So just don't include them in your games and go back to the 90s heavier focus on Cam vs Sabbat 🤷
I feel like this is focusing too much on a singular concept of vampirism and not acknowledging how modern people being embraced would naturally react to discovering the hierarchy inherent to Kindred society. Not making sense to have been created in the middle ages notwithstanding, there would obviously be an established cohort of vampires who would want to rebel against the Camarilla.
Great video. I always interpreted the Anarch "factions" as an ironic, disparaging and self-deprecating reference to the subcultures of Gothic-Punk that were inserted as an homage to what inspired the WoD, mostly as a sort of in-joke that revolved around the hollowness of their ideology and ideals running cover for darker but more banal appetites, ie; money, sex, and drugs.
(haven't played Vampire for 20 years btw)
Carthage has failed everywhere it has been attempted.
Going in the same dang track is a lot like vampire.
I think part of the reason the Anarchs became somewhat sidelined by the Sabbat in later old wod was that they knew the Sabbat were a better idea
...the entire basis for the Old World of Darkness is the goth-punk concept and aesthetic. Saying that a bunch of punk types don't fit into the worldbuilding seems like there's a bit of cognitive dissonance there. Vampire isn't a game of undead mafia, it's a game of personal horror with a broad set of themes, concepts, and stories that can be told under its umbrella.
(sorry, the original was posted under the wrong account).
It's a game with some brilliant ideas and some absolutely stupid ideas. The Anarchs fall in the latter
I disagree...but I also don't approach Vampire as a mafia-style game when I run, so to each their own.
Awesome video :) I have really been enjoying this series ! I can not wait for the Sabbat video to come in the future ^^ !
Never had more fun playing Vampire than when I leaned into the fact that we are not playing the heroes, we are playing the villains.
Your videos on VtM are a breath of fresh air. It seems themes of Vampire the High School Musical and Vampire the Social Justice Warrior have taken hold of the player base of this game. It's incredibly rare to find anybody who recognises that you're meant to be playing actual Vampires - killers, and not a bunch of twenty or thirty-somethings with pent up teenage angst and parental issues. The current edition's obsession with characters as "good guy Anarchs" vs the Baddy Daddy Camarilla or the cartoon evil Sabbat is just cringe. I would very much like to play and run more games of VtM but I can't be doing with players who think a Tremere should look and act like a nerd out of a John Hughes movie or a Brujah has to be a retarded pseudo-socialist.
I've never used the Anarchs in my decade of playing VtM because as you state, they're just dumb. The whole idea is ridiculous, especially the older idea of them living alongside the Camarilla, often in the same city, being separate but not really. They just reeked of controlled opposition and didn't offer anything useful to a setting. This perspective you put across makes way more sense and it puts into alignment with the Autarkis, except instead of wanting to be left alone they want to be top dog. I might actually start including them from now on.
Whenever I had anarchs in my games, I always tried to show how big their issues were. Some barons were cool, and their domains ran almost like camarilla territory. Some were god awful, where you had to pay insane protection money or some other tax/service to the baron. My players were confused by this but I explained, Anarchs have no centralization. There is no actual standard of conduct that Barons are expected to hold. They either have to be strong enough or charismatic enough to claim some turf and have no one take it.
Whereas the Camarilla for all its faults, had some structure. There were numerous roles and a prince who delegated tasks according to people's skills. Such that even if the Prince was a bit of an asshole. You could still generally speaking get by without major issue.
Bro… I don’t even play Vampire… but your videos on it are so good, you make me want to start 😂
Funny that you showed scenes from the Wire. I always ran Anarchs as the non-Cosa Nostra gangs in a city where the Cosa Nostra (the Camarilla) already divided up the turf. The political ideologies are empty threats against a system they cannot beat, but still they try to carve out crumbs from the table of the Mafia. Like, if the Camarilla are the Mafia in the Sopranos, they're also the cops in The Wire, and the Anarchs are just gangs trying to control the Towers, i.e. their turf, and sometimes, just sometimes, they can outsmart the Cam to survive another night.
Anarchs used this way sound like a great antagonist for a vampire game. a character that doesn't play by the rules, and is both smart and dangerous enough to be an absolute terror to deal with.
Also a great concept for player characters. The camarilla is powerful, but players tend to be very conservative. You can go a long way by being organized and not afraid to hurt powerful characters
I find it amusing you posted this video, as I admittedly have a bit of a side project going right now. I am trying to rewrite the general plot elements of the L.A. by Night liveplay for a campaign as I felt like they really dropped the ball in later seasons. One of the first decisions I made was that many of the Barons are becoming increasingly more like the camarilla due to the necessity of greater infrastructure to maintain the masquerade. Each one with their own unique specialty and role that contributes to the ecosystem of L.A.
In addition, when the camarilla comes calling like they did in the show. The Barons are smart enough to get themselves a puppet, someone who can speak to the fledglings and neonates who are not old enough or strong enough to have carved out their own territory, but who are strong enough to fight for the Barons territory. Rally their revolutionary and rebellious tendencies against the old capes who would never give them a seat at the table. Now sure, at some time during that war, the poor puppet will die, a martyr for the dream of the anarch free states, a symbol to rally behind, and when the cam is out. The old familiar system will be back in place, where the barons are in control.
Regardless, I very much agree with your point about the anarchs. Almost everyone I knew in the hobby who loved the anarchs hated the moral ambiguity of VTM. They seemed to want to play superheroes but with an edgy coat of paint. As well as being unable to understand the issues the anarchs have on a fundamental level. It was very frustrating to me, as I tried to put forth NPCs who showed what I believed were the good and bad parts of each facton.
Ur-Shulgi is the ultimate Anarch. Wakes up, kicks out the Muslims, and shrugs off the curses of the Clans.
Hell yeah man, I just rewatched all the BLG Vampire vids a couple days ago. Perfect timing!
Love these videos man. Gave me some good ideas on how to increase the drama and impact of the Anarch NPCs in my own game 💪
I love your VTM videos and extremely enjoy watching them. Please make more.
(Could I also get a music name?)
@@IlyVienna it's royalty-free music from Kevin MacLeod. I don't have the title handy at the moment
I'm not totally willing to throw out the entirety of Anarchs as written, but this is a really stellar video. Really strong ideas being communicated all around, I'll definitely draw on this video next time I decide to make an Anarch Character.
I might just be a tad-bit attached to the metaplot, but I personally I like the whole "Vampire Revolutionary" schtick as a propaganda thing. It's what Kindred on the outside look up to or down upon-while the reality of the situation is much like what you've described; with the well-meaning fledgling and neonates too naive to realize they didn't sign up for peace and love getting ground up by the truth. The idea of Equal Rights and Opportunity is corrupted into an equal opportunity to rip each other's throats out over Baronies. Either way, it'd be really interesting to see your version of things applied to the California Free State; I think there's still definitely some level of compatibility there.
The Carthian faction in Requiem 2e is the "revolutionary" sect done right imo. They are basically leninists and their domains are brutal. It works better since there is no meta plot surrounding it. Even then, I don't use the carthians all that much
@@blacklodgegames Sounds pretty cool. I've been meaning to read Requiem for a while now. And your stream a couple months ago comparing it to VTM has definitely given me some motivation to do so.
@@blacklodgegames Carthians work better in Requiem as well because vampires have the age of sleep, so the ones in charge tend to change from more than just final death.
@@blacklodgegamesThe best thing I can recall in Requiem was the return to the local level instead of giant conspiracies one-upping eachother.
you have convinced yourself that there's only one true better world of darkness. Many skilled writers have been writing about this world and provided many points of view, ambients and pieces of lore that just don't fit with your complaints
I don't even like v5, yet i read the anarch books and felt A true spirit of vampire in its stories and opportunities for me and my players to develop and feel their characters
The written anarch, the theo bell anarch, the tyler and xaviar anarch
You can have the vampire the masquerade you describe in camarilla, free state anarch or sabbat domain with no issues, you just need creativity
Wrong.
@@blacklodgegames doubt it, I think you just have a skill issue
All that punk rock edgy 90s flavor I put into thin bloods, and I make them the absolute laughing stock of the World of Darkness, allowed to exist out of pity, but if they act up are shown utterly no mercy. The entitled children of mafia bosses they're far too used to calling daddy.
Great video, I always love to hear what you have to say about Vampire, do you plan on talking about the Sabbat eventually?
We will, but we have other stuff coming out first.
Power is generational in vampire, right? But the older generation isn't going away.
My first guess was that anarchs have to use things the elders are not yet used to. Car bomb with a cellphone. Convincing or coercing goons to switch (as much as blood bonds allow).
The quality of your vampire series is insane! I cant wait for the Sabbat video. Subbed. You clearly know what your doing with roleplay
I have a game of V20 I am running, and it is set in Baton Rouge. There is only one Baron in Baton Rouge. He does not allow anyone to rise to his level. He is a Lasombra, and his "throneroom" is his office in which is filled with mirrors. This does two things; 1. It allows him to be intimidating, completely showing his monstrous nature, and showing he does not care about his weaknesses; and 2. It allows him to use Dominate from any angle by using his reflectionless mirrors.
Everyone likes a big mirror room now and then.
I just keep thinking "Has anyone tried to reflect sunlight?
I think you miss the point of Anarchs in Vampire. It's a modern continuation of the wars that started in Enoch with the Antediluvians rose up against the Second Generation, then the Methuselahs rose against the Antediluvians. Tyler, btw, didn't just stage a "walkout" during the Convention of Thorns nor was that the start of the Anarch Movement in the World of Darkness. The FIRST Anarch Revolt happened centuries prior when the younger Cainites were able to break the Blood Bonds they were under, realized they were being enslaved by their Sires and Elders, and started killing their enslavers. This war brought the attention of the Inquisition, who was used by both Elders and Neonates/Ancillae to kill each other. The SECOND Anarch Revolt started at the Convention when Tyler SHOT Hardestadt and took off. The Second Revolt didn't really end but fizzled out, with the quelled Anarchs finding places within Camarilla territories and the more zealous forming the Sabbat. When the Antediluvians killed the Second Generation, Caine didn't just curse them with the Clan Flaws. He cursed them with the War of Ages, where the younger Cainites will always rise up and kill the Elders, which was the justification the Elders used to Blood Bond their childer. Had the Elders not done this and horde resources, there wouldn't be a War of Ages. So, the Anarchs are useful and makes sense within the context of the game when looked at it from that point of view. You can pigeon hold the Camarilla to your "mobster" view point, but it really isn't. The Camarilla is a fascist organization that wants absolute control and power for the Elders, while giving handouts to the lesser. Because you can't make sense of them, it doesn't mean they don't make sense at all.
This video is about you in particular.
You could even say it is a continuation of Caine's own rebellion when he first acquired his power from Lilith. Lilith wanted to keep him subjugated, but Caine wasn't having that and broke free of her with all his rage and power. From then on they've always been at constant odds with each other.
I am sooooo glad that you referenced "King of New York"! One of my favourite characters that I´ve played was a Tzimitsce lord of the ghetto who was basically Frank White if he was a Sabbat fanatic.
Oh man, I've been waiting for this one ever since you mentioned it.
Every statement in this video is capital T TRUE, and your re-conception of the anarchs is a perfect crystallisation of my instincts regarding them. This kind of character archetype is a personal favourite, they're just so compelling. Got me hyped up thinking of the possibilities for whenever I get around to running Vampire (someday within the next century hahaha).
Massive dub on referencing Unforgiven BTW, another favourite of mine.
@@armata_strigoi_0 greatest Western of all time
@@blacklodgegames Absolutely
Great video! I've been struggling to integrate the Anarchs into my Philly by Night chronicle. I really resonate with this vision of the movement and have wanted to avoid the whole idealistic liberal arts students vibe. The way I've been trying to do it is thus:
In the wake of the SI, only the strongest and most brutal fledglings were able to survive. They've fled their old haunts and have come to Philly in hopes of a quieter place to ride out the inquisition. They largely blame the Camarilla's meddling in mortal society for the SI, and want to establish a less meddlesome, "rule by virtue" system. In practice, they organize into just as many strata as the Cammies, but they are mostly young and naive. The loudest voice wins every argument.
In a way, I almost like the idealistic exterior of the Anarchs because it might attract certain players, only for them to slowly realize their rule of law is often no better than the Camarilla's. It gives them a manipulative edge that is maybe often lacking for them.
This channel has become more favorite rpg content channel. 100000000% agree with this.
i remember my story teller made a Anarch Noss NPC that was the boogeyman of Florida using the sewers to sneak his way into anything he didn't like and burn it to the ground for the first act of the chronicle he was the quote "boss" we had to take down being up and coming camirilla
Youre not entirely right, yet you are in no way wrong.
The High Middle Ages were a time of Merchants constantly worming their way into the aristocracy some conspiring for want of Italian Republicanism.
Aristocratic meddling in the Kings affairs, the battle between Absolutism and Aristocracy.
Along with peasants gaining access to upwards mobility post blackdeath and the laying of the foundation of Church Reform, Schism, Inquisition and Protest following the crusades.
With many vampires coming onto this scene who experienced the leadup to, the events themselves and the aftermath there is no wonder they revolted.
Along with Methuselah against their children, neonates against the Methuselahs children.
Blood bonds only go so far under these pressures.
Moving from upwards mobility and carving out a space in the power vacumns of this and whats to follow to what they are now is unfathomable to me however. I will give you that
Good comment. The problem isn't so much the revolt itself, it's that the faction is always explicitly portrayed through the lens of particular ideology that was not present at the time of the revolt. And the upward mobility you are describing is not a repudiation of the social hierarchy like the Anarchs are portrayed as seeking. The problem is this:
"Sure, the revolt wasn't an explicitly egalitarian ideology like anarchism, but we are going to describe the faction as being explicitly wrapped up in that ideology for centuries, drape them in all the cosmetic accoutrements, and place them at the heart of all the anarchist/communist revolts of the last 250 years. Why would you think that they are just a thinly veiled excuse to include our own revolutionary politics!?"
The idea of the revolt and formation of the sabbat is really cool. The sabbat is really cool. The sabbat adds to the game, the Anarchs really don't.
@@blacklodgegames and you sir are working towards enriching everyone's experience. You have expanded my Idea of Anarchs and Cammies. I take it you will do the same of the Sabbat... perhaps the clans perhaps the Iconnu and Ashirra
Another banger of a video, now: *Sabbat video waiting room*
I always felt that the Anarch's pretended to be noble, but really are even more violent that the Camarilla at times. It's the constant scratch towards the top of the pile, those with power weirld it, those without get dominated in the most straight forward and brutal way. They reject the Tower because they want to do what they want, when they want, to whom they want it. This was dressed up in the rags of revolution. The Camarilla was meant to restrain kindred nature by it's laws and edicts, giving it a direct purpose. Anarchs once they rebelled, saw they were suckers, they didn't care for their peers, they wanted revenge first and foremost against the elders who sold them upriver for just a few more nights existence. The violence came first, then the philosophy to explain it. This was consistent all the way to the Anarch Free State which for all intents and purposes is absolute chaos. There were no rules, and those who could smash, did so, and often, and your precarious existence was only ensured by the sheer violence you were able to inflict to hanging on to someone who did.
I feel often that this is what the Sabbat from V3 should've been, and the Real Sabbat being more clandestine, more of a cult.
the only intresting anarch were in LA by Night but thats its own micro universe that no one else will reproduce.
Yes, except Annabelle... Who went 200% SJW mode.
@@bloodwynn i was sure they were going to realize how monstrous an SJW with vampirism would be... but no.
Erika Ishi gave a good performance, it just didn't have anything to do with Vampire.
@@bloodwynn Honestly, I would have had less issues with Annabelle if the plot and all other characters didn't act like she was the kindred messiah. All she ever said is everyone deserves a home. So...what about the camarilla vampires, why don't they get a home? Also, I hated the plot point about how that true faith hunter thought she could redeem kindred since she never killed. Guess we are not counting when she used spark of rage to make one guy kill his friend. I'd count that as a kill, even more messed up actually, that guy probably didn't want to kill his friend.
@Sarcastic_Sophist Because when SJWs say "everyone deserves a home" what they mean is "I deserve YOUR home".
Anarchs only approach cool when they are Cam lite. That's all they are. Total shit hypocrites.
Your videos make me long for a real TTRPG experience
Sabbat should be the real anarchs.
They essentially are.
Tell that to Paradox
The Sabbat sounds like the people who are too stupid to be subtle. Their idea of a rebellion sounds like running into a peasant village, killing or embracing everyone and telling them to storm the castle.
@@SusCalvin yea they’re idiots but they’re idiot that are believing in their stupidity and in doing so fit the world
We pretty much ignored the anarchs when we played back in the day.
The only problem is what to do with the Sabbat then? Because as far as I understand, this Sect is supposed to be the brutal one and follows the principle of "rule by the strongest".
I was thinking that too. If I were doing my own thing I based on what @black lodge games has done w/ camarilla and Anarchs is i'd make them monstrous fanatic cultists. They never can hold any large territory in a developed nation because crazy violence like that is going to get you wrecked.
Nah - if you take the logic here, if the Camarilla is the mafia, and the Anarchs are the street gangs, the Sabbat are the cartels, moved by superstition and monstrous beyond belief.
An example of Sabbat "behavior" is Los Zetas in Mexico, or Pablo Escobar in Colombia.
I love your Vampire content. Please keep it up.
🫡
I'm binging on your whole channel since I hope to be running a Vampire game soon.
And this is why I hate V:tM. Too much setting info, and so much of it isn't actually gameable, so it just ends up with people arguing about lore, telling each other that they are having bad wrong fun.
What bothers me about the Anarks is the day have a lot of Praxis but not a lot of theory there isn’t a lot of substance to their movement and that makes it feel empty and meaningless
I came around to this while watching LA by Night, the way they slung the 'heroic underdog' theme through the whole thing. Like... You're still all bloodthirsty killers and you organize like a gang. You arent good.
Yo. Thanks for patching up Anarchs. It is so hard to even explain what Anarchs are without saying: just like Camarilla with different names.
Very interesting take, I don't know if I agree completely, but very interesting none the less.
After reading Vampire Requiem 2nd edition, I think it's best to take a bit of its approach, where sect as we know it from masquarade- secret and worldwide societies that are after every big historical event in the world- don't exists.
You can still have camarilla as an idea and a faction in a city, it's just not as interconnected and organized on a regional level (kinda like the Invictus). You can still have anarchs, even in a "traditional" VtM sense, it's just that is a small group of ideologist rebelling against the status quo in that particular city (kinda like Carthian maybe?). You can also have "omar little" anarchs, etc.. etc...
Basically what I am saying is not to focus too much on the actual lore (unless maybe you're playing dark ages, where I personally thinks makes the most sense and works best) which is very exciting and compelling at first sight but very limiting in actual play, and make your own WoD with your own spin of the canon lore.
can't wait to see your video on the sabbath btw
Great video, I wanna see in the future videos about Hecata, how create a city, create a story for VtM and other similar stuff.
I am also curios on which clans/bloodlines you wish to eliminate from the game and which should remain.
Do you have a discord or something where chat and expand this conversations?
I was thinking back to the days of when we played VTM, we just didn't have anarchs in our World of Darkness. None of us saw the point or really cared for the background lore as written. The Sabat seemed like Fertile ground for good stories to us, but they were mostly followers of Dagon or other Lovecraftian old ones. Very good video, I really enjoy Black Lodge Games Takes on VTM. I loved the World of Darkness because it was great to combine Mage, Vampire, Werewolf Changeling and wraith together into one world.
It should just be "The Sabbat Revolt"
@@blacklodgegames As I remember the way we played it back it the day, Sabat, Nephandi and Black Spiral Dancers all got along, as well as such creatures ever get along. At least that's how we played it out years ago. May not be the most lore accurate but we didn't really use Anarchs back then. Funny because back then most of us were actually Punk Rockers, in the 70's and into the 80's
Dude that clip from Les Mis killed me. No better way to make this argument than that.
Loving the commentary and ideas. Thank you.
@@michaelaguilar7332 thanks for watching. We really appreciate it.
In a court that justifies its support in a city, kindred that have been elevated into positions of power justify their authority in the Camarilla by actually having *less* power to make mistakes and greater accountability. Heavy is the head that wears the crown. Your version of the Anarch is an inversion of that, they hold power over others and owe accountability to no one, and if they can justify that position through raw power alone, that should be terrifying.
Damn! makes a lot more sense AND sounds more fun
A core feature of the curse of vampirism in VtM has always been the children rising to strike down their elders and take their place. The Third Generation killed the Second, they suffered attrition at the hands of their descendants, and so on. Older generations are more powerful, yes, but the younger generations are more numerous, and it is often the direct childer of the Elders and Methuselahs that lead the rabble against their own vampiric kin one way or another. Not fleabites from 5 steps removed Neonates. Balanced against that, whoever replaces those Elders and Methuselahs become the new target of their own descendants, and the cycle starts all over again.
Vampire society has gone through political changes before, from the Eternal Senate's initial foundation based on the Roman Republic and its evolution under the Roman Empire, the twisted demon-tainted "perfection" of Carthage, the feudal system of lords and vassals in Dark Ages, and so on. Vampires are at least part human, and their society is always a reflection or mockery of mortal institutions of the age. But those changes usually come to the realm of vampires violently, as a result of both internal and external pressure.
In a way, the Anarchs as rebels against the status quo isn't a bad idea in and of itself. Rather the conflation of the Anarchs with an elevated sense of morality, and the idea that the Anarchs aren't just the new boss looking to replace the old boss, are. Moral vampires are rarely powerful, and though there are exceptions, they should never be advocates of revolution. Maintenance of Humanity essentially forbids such acts. Anarchs are better represented by bitter, violent youth, Elder Barons who believe they owe fealty to none above themselves and reject the Camarilla's oversight, and demagogue Ancilla looking to become Barons of their own domains by any means necessary, looking to take down a weak Prince by manipulating what they see as their own future subjects. Not peaceful communes where Kindred are free from "oppression" by "the Man". Because a power vacuum begs to be filled, and the strong will dominate (often literally) the weak.
This is one thing that I feel like Coteries of New York did pretty well when I played through it, the way they portray the Baron in New York is quite violent, not at all actually giving a damn about the Camarilla, and really they made him far, far less of the egalitarian sort that you'd want to side with. In fact he's mostly just a gang boss murderous jerk who literally beats the absolute crap out of you after setting up a "meeting" with you, and makes it *quite* clear that if you continue to meddle in any affairs that interfere with his plans, he will just kill you without a second thought. Plus he wears a top hat so I mean... Bill the Butcher confirmed?
The Walter White example also highlights the negatives of playing a feral Anarchz specifically how he ended. Yes a ruthless individual can rise high on ambition, intimidation, and violence but inevitably they will hit the point where the preexisting power structures simply squash them with raw numbers and systemic power. When I am not playing my usual Venture prince to be, I find playing independents who occupy speciality niches that traditional power structures usually can't or won't occupy works better. Especially if you can possess services and knowledge other find useful and dangerous enough to retain autonomy. If you're the only one that can understand antediluvian artifacts or unravel Mespotamian sorcery that you're a consultant worth having and can occasionally trap a soul in eternal agony if bothered.
Love the use of Sopranos references. Seeing Pauli with that hair most definitely took something away from my humanity but it was worth seeing lol
Huh, food for thought. I've had some passing grievances with Anarchs and how they're presented in Vampire. But this, this gives me ideas, this seems fun
"They are very much needed, and do what we need them for. Yes, it is annoying that they draw unnecessary attention to us, but the true talents among them, who we members of the Camarilla didn't notice at first glance, will sooner or later realise, that their fight and rebellion is pointless, so they will leave the sect. Tomorrow, a year or a century from now, it matters not. They will of course have to prove themselves to us first, but after that they are welcome amongst our ranks, as any kindred capable, and strong enough to survive, especially these nights." - a Lasomra sheriff about the anarchs
So yeah, my opinion about the anarchs was always like: rebelling teenagers, who think that the world is their playground, but they will grow up, and the ones we do, will be great additions to the ranks of the other sects
More forbidden knowledge from the Black Lodge! Today keeps getting better and better. Keep up the good work, gentlemen. Your videos are always insightful.
I always treated the Anarchs like a "Free city alliance" often seen in fantasy series.
The Camarilla and Sabbat are like two powerful empires while the Ministry and Giovanni (Hecata now I guess) were like independent kingdoms, strong enough to maintain there independence but not directly rival the big two. The other independent bloodlines are like smaller nations stuck between the other powers and and maintain themselves through diplomacy and lip service.
The Anarchs as individuals or individual groups dont have the structure or numbers of a clan or even a bloodline but through their shared beliefs/situations/goals are able to ally with and get support from the rest.
The thumbnail of the last video about the Camiralla: You had my curiosity.
After watching it: You had my attention.
Now, after watching this one? You have my blood oath.
This dude makes VTM actually feel scary without coming across as trying to be scary.
You never know what the humans know, you never know what's lurking around the corner, you never know who's watching. As a Vampire, your harder to kill, and you have been robbed of the possibility of a peaceful death. You new life is essentially one of eternal paranoia and suffering, and you never know when your "immortality" may come to a gruesome end. You may be destroyed by an angry werewolf, you may be hunted and burnt alive. But if your lucky, you may stick around long enough to see your humanity slip between your fingers, and before you know it everyone and everything is you knew is gone, and your all alone in a new age not meant for you. Simply put, there are some fates worse than death. If I had to choose, I would take my chances as a werewolf... because then I can at least try and be a force for good and I know I can die of old age. Not gonna lie, we all romanticise Vampires way too much in modern media. But in reality, it would be a terrible experience. I can't decide which is worse. A slow and painful death, or an eternity of suffering. VTM should make you feel like your always looking over your shoulder. You should feel paranoid. Scared that if your dark secret gets out, the entire world could come undone in less than a few minutes. You should feel the pressure slowly building up... and in the end, it will break you. We need to return the horror back to the creatures of the night... Now that's a f*cking Vampire. As one of the Garou, I'm at least thankful that my condition won't torment me forever. That said, me and my pack have found a vampire hideout... you had better hope it's not one of yours.
Ok dark scary stuff aside I do have an idea. Imagine a world of darkness chronicle that's like the opening sequence of underworld blood wars where people know that the supernatural's exist, and the inquisition have ordered a mass execution. You have to survive in a dystopian society that's falling apart at the seams. One wrong move and the humans will be going through the doors like armed police in a matter of seconds. Naturally this would be a very difficult chronicle to play, so the players would probably have to be older Vampires with a lot more experience to give them an edge.
Anarch Leader: "I believe in equality, that is that y'all are equally weak before me, do what you will."
Jesus that was amazing.
It's impossible to talk with anyone about this who is into VtM because the whole thing as written is perfect - anything that divergent from the game is heretical
Can you writeup all these ideas for a revised VtM in something I could 😊buy?
I simplified Anarchs for our game. In the original revolt they make the Sabbat, then fade away until 1944 and become the Anarchs we usually mean- expressing modern ideas in the modern era. They fade again because it doesn't work as an organization, but idealists and demagogues sometimes try to rekindle the fire. An "Anarch city" is just an anti-Camarilla city, where they'll cooperate long enough to stop someone from declaring Praxis, then go back to turf wars.
I think there's a space between "Camarilla-lite" (as theyre sometines portrayed) and Sabbat-lite, where Anarchs can fit,.and theyre definitely not the good guys: they just have a better sales pitch about being true to your nature.
Love each and every one of your WoD videos. Watched each one multiple times and reccomend them all to my friends.
Hoping for some introductory MtA content in the future 😸
Neither of us is really into mage so we don't have any strong opinions about it to share.
I think your description is much more fit for the Autarkis, Kindred that ignore the sects and the clans, they serve no one, and make their own kingdoms wherever they desire.
I remember when I first started vtm, I liked the Anarchs because "here you don't have to put up with anything and you don't have to do anything a kindred who's a week older than you tells you to do". Even my first larp character was a Nosferatu Anarch. Then I discovered as a player and character the truth, the Anarchs are basicaly Elders and Neonates building a Camarilla of their own, with blackjack and hookers.
Just play the Sabbat.
Big agree.
Tell that to Paradox
I'm forming a band named "Lore Accurate Peasant Trad Wife" (LAPTW or "Lapped Eww").🤘
now we need a video about the Sabbat
I've been in agreement with this concept since I've heard about the Anarchs. I've always thought they made no since
This kinda reminds of a Warhammer 40k and how they have been stripping the religiosity out of the Imperium which is a huge part of universe, and made Warhammer more unique