[Simple Man]

Here, I'll answer in some detail

Originally Posted by basher7

My first one is concerned with the quote above that bloodlines are like organisations. In the VtR corebook the Brujah, the Japanese Necromancer types (Buggering? Bakurin? whatever), the Toreador and possibly the Morbus (although it would seem to be risky for them to organise) could be characterized as being like organisations in their structure. Malkavians no.

Well, I suppose that's close enough for him to criticise it on the basis that it goes against it's own logic.

Moving onto Bloodlines the Hidden the Maternal Bloodline and the Architects of the Monolith are organised. Some of the Khabit are, the Druggy Bloodline could conceivably be, the Hindu Demons could be, the Rustic Bloodline are. The Monks aren't (they don't leave the asylum/monastery much), the Alucinor aren't (aren't very social), the Nephalim aren't (appetites too large to share much). There are too many bloodlines in the convenants books to mention (and to be honest I'm hung over and can't be bothered too) but as far as I remember their degree of organisation between each other as fellow 'blood buddies' vary. My point is some bloodlines are organised, some aren't.

All this information, while interesting, is irrelevant as all he was reviewing was nWoD+VtR vs. VtM.

Second off, the review says that the Ordo Dracul aim to be immortal. That is not stated in the VtR book. Specifically their aim to transcend the weaknesses of the vampiric condition. They don't give it the specific spin that they want to have infinitely long unlife. That transcendence might take an entirely different form all together.

Well he did say in the review:

Originally Posted by Ezekeil Black

The Ordo Dracul wish to transcend the vampire weaknesses to achieve true power above others. They don't hold on to any particular philosophy or creation myth, they just want to become truly immortal.

Which is pretty close to what you said, besides him ad-libbing the whole "truly immortal" bit.

And in the Coils of the Dragon discipline, it states that "this covenant strives to cheat the curse levied upon it's founder, stripping away the limitations and requirements of undeath until members achieve purity."

The Coils of the Dragon (IMHO) seem to support his explanation of them trying to reach "true immortality", that being vampirism without limits, as all of it's tiers are about dropping vampire weakness, and none of them do anything to change the character from a vampire into something else (like, say, human again).

Thirdly, you state there are three convenant specific disciplines. By this I take it you mean Theban Sorcery (Lancea Sanctum), the Coils of the Dragon (the Ordo Dracul) and Cruac (The Circle of the Crone). However they aren't disciplines.

Could have fooled me. They are in the "Disciplines" section, just after all the other Disciplines, with no dividing section inbetween. As in just after they are done detailing Vigor, they detail Cruac. No seperation at all. It seems like they organized it to where the big Covenant-specific Disciplines wouldn't clutter up the section. But they still follow the "Disciplines" format, especially CotD.

Also, Devotions are defined as "Discipline techniques" and on the same page (150, right after Disciplines) they cite a Devotion for mixing Cruac and Auspex, called Arcane Sight.

Not to say I entirely agree with his review. I don't know what his hang-up on Dexterity was.