this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2026
605 points (98.4% liked)

RPGMemes

15395 readers
1007 users here now

Humor, jokes, memes about TTRPGs

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Iunnrais@piefed.social 42 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (3 children)

On the one hand, good on them for trying a “nazi punks fuck off” type move.

On the other hand, a blood sucking aristocracy that feeds off the “lesser people” beneath them as the protagonists… that’s nearly the definition of fascism?

[–] Sir_Gkar@lemmy.world 71 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

From what I recall (and this may vary between editions), the game tends to assume that most people are playing younger vampires who aren't anything like an aristocracy. By default, you play as the bottom rung of vampire society, the youngest generation in a system where the older generations will never grow old and die. The aristocrats aren't the protagonists, they are the ever present boot stomping you down.

More importantly, the core concept of the game is supposed to be about the "personal horror" of being a monster. You were a (presumably) ordinary person who has been violated, killed, and brought back as an abomination. Your existence is defined by the struggle against the beast within. You are desperately clinging to your humanity, and every time you slip up or compromise you risk losing a piece of yourself that you can't get back. You suffer mechanical penalties for becoming more evil, and if you ever lose your humanity completely you lose your character.

In short, the game isn't supposed to be the kind of thing that would appeal to a fascist. If anything, it has more in common with the experience of waking up to find yourself surrounded by fascists and trying to survive without becoming one of them.

[–] Barbarian@sh.itjust.works 24 points 13 hours ago

Yup, this is pretty much it. I played a campaign of it. Essentially, you're so far down the hierarchy you're basically almost human, with older vampires being a far far greater threat than humans, struggling to understand and survive vampire society before it destroys you. As you said, there's also a fair chunk of trying to hold on to what humanity you still have left.

[–] Iunnrais@piefed.social 6 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

That is entirely fair. I only know V:tM from people I knew who played it… but they were, as individuals, definitely more on the fascist side, leaning more into the glamour of being a monster rather than the horror of being a monster.

I hope more groups and players lean into the horror of it more than the glamour. Maybe this note is trying to encourage that.

[–] PugJesus@piefed.social 47 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I mean, that's more the definition of... well, aristocracy.

Fascism is largely a creation of the modern age and mass politics.

[–] SmackemWittadic@lemmy.world 6 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Aristocracy has shown a tendancy to lead to fascism, as can be seen in what is currently happening in the US

[–] PugJesus@piefed.social 1 points 2 hours ago

Yes and no. Aristocracy can exist independent from fascism, and should be considered entirely separately. However, if they can't maintain power with a purely conservative/reactionary coalition, aristocrats will almost always side with fascists over liberals, much less socialists. As such, in the modern day, aristocracies are aligned with fascists, despite fascism erasing aristocracy as it 'succeeds' and aristocrats being generally aware that fascists do not have their aristocratic interests in mind.

[–] GreenBeard@lemmy.ca 3 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

Fascism is what you get when Aristocracy gets a business degree. The difference between a feudal lord and a CEO is non-farm income.

[–] PugJesus@piefed.social 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Fascism is what you get when Aristocracy gets a business degree. The difference between a feudal lord and a CEO is non-farm income.

Far, far from it. Despite the casual use (including by me!) of aristocracy for any entrenched elite, there is a non-negligible difference between actual aristocrats and plutocrats. Long story short, aristocrats are dependent on social capital and extraordinary legal privileges; plutocrats are dependent on financial capital. The tension between these competing sources of elite power has fueled many pre-modern conflicts. The two can blend, and there's rarely a 'pure' example of either, but they're aren't quite equivalent either. A majority-owner of a modern farming conglomerate does not base his power on the same foundation as a feudal lord, and vice-versa.

[–] GreenBeard@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 hour ago

In principle you are correct, in practice the functional difference is very much negligible. As anyone who has ever tried to hold a plutocrat accountable in court can tell you, their equality under the law is more theoretical than how the world really works. The cults of personality, the careful reputational management, the nepotism and cronyism, dynastic rule and insularity, it's all there, it's just got a different window dressing.

On paper their power is different. In practice, not so much.

[–] SmackemWittadic@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

I can't imagine the apathy these people have for human* rights, despite seeing the actions this apathy leads to every day

[–] stray@pawb.social 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

What does it mean that you've put an asterisk next to human? Is it just because of the context of vampires or is there like a broader meaning I'm not familiar with?

[–] SmackemWittadic@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Oh no, I had a feeling that wasn't the best terminology. I've offended the bees, haven't I?

[–] stray@pawb.social 1 points 2 hours ago

I'm not offended, if that's what you mean. I'm just curious what it means because I haven't seen it before and can only guess.

[–] Solumbran@lemmy.world 19 points 15 hours ago

I'd rather have anti-fascists play as fascists, than the opposite.