Stupid Campaign Idea: Vampout: The Iradiating.

[hyzmarca]

The basic idea is simple. You're an elder vampire. You were the lead singer in Nero's fiddle band when Rome was on fire. You were in the crowd cheering when they crucified that Jesus fellow. You told Columbus that he'd never make it to India and you were right, ha. You thought that the Victorians had terrible fashion sense, and that Radio was just a fad.

Like most elder vampires, you draduly found it more difficult to stay awake. There was less worth paying attention to, fewer things worth doing. So in the 1920s, you went into Torpor. Only your most trusted servants knew the location of your resting place, and they had instructions to revive you when the time came.

But when you woke up, you weren't surrounded by the familiar faces of your trusted ghouls. You were surrounded by strangers in blue jumpsuits, and by other vampires, formerly sealed in glass coffins, who were being awoken at the same time.

It seems that your resting place was discovered by something called Vault-Tec, who moved you into this giant underground shelter for reasons known only to it. While you slept, something happened. The Kine really, finally did it. You awake into the far-flung, strange, and frightening age of the atom. But you're not totally unprepared. If there is one thing that that the centuries have taught you, it's that war, war never changes.

[momothefiddler]

your trusted ghouls

---

I'm amused, at the least. I'd probably even play it, depending on who was running.

[Mechalich]

This sounds like a good reason to mod Fallout 4 to allow you to be a Skyrim Vampire Lord.

[JigokuBosatsu]

Probably wouldn't take much. I've already thought that they should make DLC perk trees for ghoul/robot instead of vamp/werewolf.

[Username17]

I just want to say that calling your Renfields "ghouls" is very confusing nomenclature and possibly the worst word assignment in V:tM. That is not remotely what the word "ghoul" means or implies. You need a term for Igors and Renfields, but that sure as fuck isn't it.

-Username17

[Schleiermacher]

This is a cool idea. I'd love to play it.

But since there didn't seem to be enough interest in your other VtM ideas in the Trenches, I'm guessing the chances are slim?

[DSMatticus]

I just want to say that calling your Renfields "ghouls" is very confusing nomenclature and possibly the worst word assignment in V:tM. That is not remotely what the word "ghoul" means or implies. You need a term for Igors and Renfields, but that sure as fuck isn't it.

-Username17

If I wanted to give the original writers credit, I would say it has to do with Renfield's obsession with eating living things. But more likely it's just a conveniently generic term without a lot of specific baggage that they adapted because... well, there probably isn't anything better. I've seen familiar used occasionally in modern vampire flicks, but even thatt's still a bit of a stretch. When I think familiar I think supernatural patron, not mundane servant.

[DrPraetor]

"Thrall" seems like the obvious choice.

[JigokuBosatsu]

Minion onion?

[name_here]

Thrall doesn't quite fit because that sounds like someone you've just nailed with Dominate. Bloodpet? Sanguinary?

[Omegonthesane]

"Igors" rolls off the tongue naturally enough, although you'd want a formal term for groups like the Camarilla who aren't happy using lowbrow references as technical terms.

[Username17]

If you wanted to be more pretentious and less edgy than calling your servants Igors or Renfields, you'd probably want to use Victorian servant terminology. Page seems like a good title.

-Username17

[Prak]

Would it be problematic if each clan called their Renfields something different? And the generic term could just be really generic, Bloodbound, or something.

[Schleiermacher]

It would not be "problematic", but it would be very emblematic of the sort of latter-day Vampire lore-cruft that nobody ever got anything but eye rolls out of, so I don't think you should do it.

I don't mind "ghoul" but if you put a gun to my head and told me to change it, I'd probably go with 'thrall' or 'vassal' -although 'familiar' isn't bad either.

If not for the fact that it's better used to refer to someone you feed on, 'vessel' would work too I think -as in, someone you put blood in.

[schpeelah]

Vassal sounds good, familliar is used for animals too often. Thrall is decent but also attractive as a term for someone Dominated.

[Schleiermacher]

The fact that "familiar" is often used for animals is actually neutral or arguably even a plus in my view, since plenty of vampires make use of animal ghouls. You could put in a few sentences about how early vampires used to make familiars of wolves, birds and bats for hunting and surveillance purposes, and then somebody discovered that it works on humans too.

[hyzmarca]

Vassal carries connotations beyond servitude. It's a rather specific feudal relationship, one that can just as easily apply to other vampires and unbonded mortals.

A Vassal makes better sense as someone who is semi-independent, but is granted territory and title in exchange for loyalty. In a standard setup where a city is controlled by a prince, then each vassal would be given different districts to manage with minimal oversight.

[angelfromanotherpin]

I submit Footman. It's an old-timey servant term, and it sounds old-timey because it predates concerns of gendered language, and it implies decadent displays of dominance such as human footstools or various acts of boot-worship.

[Mask_De_H]

How about Attendant? I like the generic Servant, but that can also get really confusing.

[name_here]

Would it be problematic if each clan called their Renfields something different? And the generic term could just be really generic, Bloodbound, or something.

There is basically no chance that players will actually remember all the special names, so it's only problematic if game text starts using the terms like people are expected to know what they mean. It can be a bit of unimportant flavor text that people use if they care without issue.

Anyways, I like Footman because it sounds sufficiently generic and the important vampires are old enough to not give a shit about the gendered connotations.

[hyzmarca]

Batman works, too.

[Username17]

If you're going to go with Footman for male Renfields, you have to go with Handmaids for females.

-Username17

[Judging__Eagle]

Some ideas:

Servile. Drudges. Bondservant. Pledges. Obedient. Sycophants. Peons. Serfs. Villens. Retainer. Chattel. Helots. Moil. Laborers. Varlet.

[name_here]

It should be something that connotates at least moderately high status; they'll tend to be superior to assorted bribed/mind-controlled humans who a powerful vampire might also have hanging around.

There should be a generic term for them that at most swaps gendering like Footman to Footwoman to avoid "so are Handmaidens actually different?" and such, but I also like the idea of having female Renfields also called Footmen because when it became the standard term men were distinctly preferred and the people who control the terminology are old enough they actually remember those nights. Complete with in-universe commentary to that effect by annoyed younger vamps/ancient vampire queens.

[Grek]

I'm a big fan of Thrall for minions under your mental control and Familiar for non-vampires who've gained powers by drinking vampire blood. I also think these should be separate conditions, of course.