I have never bought the idea VAS was the major issue with TR so here's my question @Corruption.
Given your role on the game, what kept you from doing something about those? I trust you won't ask me to elaborate further since we've discussed them before, but I didn't press in private. I will do so in public since you started this thread on your own.
You say you were blindsided by VAS, alright, fair enough. But what about everything else?
Sopranos and The Shield are the only items on my great-stuff-I-must-watch-at-some-point list.
@HelloRaptor said:
@Coin @Arkandel
I mean neither of those things, since I still haven't watched Breaking Bad and didn't really get into Veronica Mars.
You are a monster. 
@Tempest said:
There are plenty of ways for those stats to come into play. You just have to actually do shit and not just go 'oh yeah, I've done almost nothing but TS with my regnant, but uhhhh yeah I have allies mobsters! and the mob needs to help us!'
How is that different from any other game where someone has brawl 4 and strength 4 but hasn't roleplayed practicing their martial arts? But when the time comes they can back their Regnant up with their fighting skills?
I don't mean to say you're wrong about the phenomenon existing, just that you're wrong it's got anything to do with RfK in particular. In fact unless staff goes into policing overtime with constant log submissions that would make it hell for players like me, there's no real way around it; people will buy things to use whether they're playing or not.
@Misadventure said:
Not sure how well sword and sorcery does as a large gaming group setting and action type.
At this point I think I want fantasy enough in a good MU* that I'd actually staff for. It's not something I can say about anything else I can think of.
@Sundown said:
However, it is a bit sad to go from a game where staffers were eager to help you figure out some grand scheme and even push you along; to games filled with limitations and 'no you can't do this', 'no you can't have that', 'no we don't allow this or support that'. It's just sad. Creative hobby, meh.
I think that's a bit unfair. Unless you can provide specific examples which we can discuss on their own merit or lack thereof, most games are already being ran a certain way; they support certain themes, too. They might not be the ways you're used to or want but that doesn't mean that they lack them.
Going into environments created for different styles of gaming and expect what you had will be an exercise in frustration. It's not staff who are the problem, it's the management of your expectations.
@Pyrephox said:
Too often, WoD games try to be everything to everyone in order to garner the most butts in chargen
That's true, and it's sad, but it's also what it is. WoD games gain the most players through familiarity - for many reasons - and so they are often made to be... generic. I've played in Vampire spheres set in Austria, in Russia, in rural and metropolitan settings in the States... and I honestly didn't see many differences. Even the political systems were often quite similar, substituting only rank names but not their functions.
RfK seems to have done an excellent job at what it was, but make no mistake, unless someone sets out to redo the exact thing you won't find it again. @Coin is right about that. For starters there are damn few if any single-sphere games being even in the works (@EmmahSue's Mage project, @Cobaltasaurus mentioned the possibility hers miiight be it I think?) since people want to play different kinds of things.
My advice to the OP: While it's still early and you guys still form a community, put it together. If you wait six months to start trying to put a game together it'll probably be harder to find the same interest.
@Lisse24 said:
I think that's a good point. One of the things that made RfK successful was that it was a highly focused game. It had a single sphere, and only allowed one alt per player. The game may have had a plot, but it was about Political Interplay, and the game was focused around making that work.
Right! A political sphere isn't necessarily a bad thing in Vampire (in fact it's great, it makes me feel perhaps I missed out not playing on RfK in its hayday) but the same paradigm simply won't work in a multisphere game for starters. At all. Offering a boon in exchange for things might work between Kindred in perfectly thematic ways but my Rahu will probably scowl at the bloodsucker who goes "hey! I screwed with your buddy - sorry! Let's say I owe you one OKAY?'. 
Fair enough. Let me put ask this, then; one of the criticisms I've heard about RfK players coming into games is that they're intent on essentially recreating the same thing to the point of expecting those games to function the same way and pushing to 'convert' them.
Although hardcoded elements could be borrowed to improve specific aspects of such games, would you say if you guys are looking for essentially a re-enactment of RfK or if you'd be satisfied with certain elements you enjoyed being incorporated in MU* you end up playing as may be appropriate for how they are already set up and ran?
@Ganymede Everything else aside, ego management is an essential skill for all levels of MU*ing. I can see taking pride in your own work (whatever that may be - staffing, RPing, plot-running) but this sounds even more than unhealthy (which of course it is), it's unsustainable.
Something had to give - and of course, it did.
Where do you perceive the game will fall on the scale between <consent-based> <-> <hardcore politics/backstabbing yo> ?
How about a MU* set in Joe Abercrombie's world? It's the definition of grimdark without reliance on any one plotline or world; characters could begin as nobodies and end up Named Men, nobility, whatever. Its magic is low level but brutal, and plenty of politics as well as conceptual possibilities for duelists, northern badasses, mercenary company leaders, you name it.
I'd play the hell out something like that.
@HelloRaptor By which you naturally mean knowing Jane from freakin' Breaking Bad is playing the part, right?
How do you make it interesting though? What sets the SoIaF apart from any other generic low-magic fantasy setting - for me, at least - is the plot, its particular setup of interesting characters, political stability being torn apart by a dynamic from internal and external forces at the same time, etc.
A GoT game placed in some other non-book related time period (and I'm including the Egg and Dunk stories in this) won't have the advantage of using tropes other book series-inspired games arguably have. For instance a Mistborn or Wheel of Time game would still have the rules of magic for characters to play with, but what would differentiate this from any other gritty/realistic world?
This could be great if done right.
The Jessica Jones TV series premiere date is announced
I'm also not sure what we're discussing now.
Can you explain what you mean by XP protections?
@Misadventure said:
Is there any way to protect the niches built into the games, or should we assume a laisez-faire design intent, and of course if you have 200 beats you should be able to buy whatever you want?
If you are Irraka, only other Irraka have access to the New Moon Gift line. So no matter how many XP someone might have they're not going to be able to buy anything from it.
Is that what you mean?
Some spheres (like Vampire) allow cross-faction but that's not the same thing of course since Auspices are closer to Clans.
Generally speaking I prefer systems where XP flow in somewhat freely - and Eldritch fits under that category, especially for players who file a lot of Breaking Point jobs - to discourage just buying all the things. It promotes homogenization especially among dinosaurs; it's kind of disappointing for a new player to create an Irraka a year after the launch and meet my Rahu who also has all the New Moon Facets too, you know?
Because otherwise 5 XP is a trivial expenditure for what Auspice Gifts can do.