PDA

View Full Version : Vampire; the Requiem... is it good?



Neknoh
27-01-2006, 20:39
I've been eyeing this part of the WoD series for quite some time and I'm thinking of wether or not I should get the sourcebook, just in case I might spark a few of my friends into a roleplay.
If not, I'm hoping it will give me a good read and some inspiration for my planned Vampire Counts army.

I don't have too much RPG experience since earlier, though I will probably be playing quite a bit more now that they will hold it on a weekly basis at my local store.

So, is it a good Roleplay? Is it worth getting?

Grimshawl
06-02-2006, 16:18
Honestly I am a fan of the original World of Darkness game/ edition I havent really liked much of what I've seen and read about the relaunch of the WOD. the system changed a bit for the worst and the fluff/ story definitely changed for the worst.

Hlokk
06-02-2006, 16:50
Requiem not only kicks ass, it kicks it so hard it goes into orbit. :D

ignore Grimshawl, the nWoD is far superior to the oWoD stuff in many ways. The oWoD had this whole "You are not good enough to play this game" attitude and a rediculous metaplot. The newone removes the metaplot, uncomplicates a lot of stuff and gives you far more reach and autonomy.

For example, the vampires in the Requiem are in 5 political/spiritually motivated groups:

Invictus: See themselves as the overseers of the Vampire nation, view everyone else as lower down the food chain. Think Victorian upperclass but with fangs.

Lancea Sanctum: Vampires decended from Longinus, who was turned vampiric from the blood of christ. Aiming for spiritual dominance

Ordo Dracul: Vampires decended from Dracula, who seeks enlightenment from learning and pushing the limits of the vampiric state of being.

Carthians: View the current political models of the vampires as antiquated and seek to use new, human based models. Constrasts democracy nicely with vampiric selfishness.

Circle of the Crone: Vampires who use uber sorcery to summon demons, gain more power, and worship pretty much any pagan god.

Seriously mate, spend 20 and treat yourself. Ifs a purchase you wont regret. Hell, if you don't believe me, ask Ironduke. Also, how about joining us in developing Rome for a nWoD setting?

Grimshawl
06-02-2006, 18:09
Okay each to their own I guess, but come on, one of the groups is the ordo Dracul decended from Dracula, how cheesey is that, I'd buy one of the groups being decended from Christopher Lee or Bela Lugosi just as quickly! they didnt even have the grace to use Vlad Tepish/the Tepish foundation, AKA the historical figure dracula's based off of. instead just call me Draculla blah blah, let me drink your Blaad! now thats cheesy..
also aside from that their are way too many simularitys to the old fluff, instead of an entirely reimagined world they began rehashing/ reusing names, etc, like the brujah, gangrel etc. they got lazy about it, malkavians/malkovians or some such nonsense, not inspiring really.
Having said all that I know its just my personal opinion of course, happy RPGing.

Hlokk
12-02-2006, 21:36
one of the groups is the ordo Dracul decended from Dracula, how cheesey is that,

And your point is what? Is it any cheesier than having the technocracy in Mage: The Ascention ripped off from MIB or the whole "Gaia" werewolf metaplot from oWoD ripped off from old indian legends


they didnt even have the grace to use Vlad Tepish/the Tepish foundation, AKA the historical figure dracula's based off of. instead just call me Draculla blah blah, let me drink your Blaad!

Er, no. Have you even read any of the nWoD stuff? In fact, did you even look past the "ordo Dracul" book cover? Rites of the Dragon explicitly states that its about Vlad tepish as its told from his viewpoint, It even details his wars with the Turks, his killing of his brother "Radduh the handsom", his incarceration by the Sultan at age 9 etc... Furthermore, Ordo Dracul is not about vampiric steriotypes, its about developing yourself via the coils of the dragon and exploring the limits of the vampiric state. If any are the "Drink your blood" type, then thats purely the domain of Belials brood, who are marginialied.


[I]also aside from that their are way too many simularitys to the old fluff,

But in your last post, didnt you say that the fluff had gone downhill? If so, how can using things from the previous eddition be a bad thing? If they'd stepped away too much, the oWoD guys would be moaning even more than they do on the WW forums. The fact is that, while they may have changed a few names and re-hashed some others, they got rid of two main things:

1: The "Holier than thou" attitude the game took to newcomers
2: The godawful metaplot which always meant, no matter what game you were playing, you were always fighting a loosing battle.

devolutionary
12-02-2006, 21:42
I prefer WoD 1.0 over 2.0 (what? That's how we wrote it amongst my buddies :p). I prefer the more global game that it had. Sure, it was plagued by a lot of crap, but it was a wide reaching, sociable game. WoD 2.0 seems, at least to me, to be more insular, locked within your little cells. Also, the struggle between Beast and Vampire seems to have wider implications beyond damnation, such as frnzying when you meet vampires. It just gives off a few more anti-social vibes. Then again, I'm incredibly sentimental about some things.

Hlokk
12-02-2006, 23:45
@Dev. WW are trying to do something similar with there Camirillia gaming group on their website. You have to pay a sign-up fee, but it absolutely kicks ass.

I know what your saying about the beast though. Personally I think its a good touch to the game, and exemplifies the whole inner beast thing. However, it is a tad overdone in the game. The whole nearly mauling someone who's got lower blood potency can be a bit of a bind, especially during elesium.

Version 1.0 had a lot of strengths, dont get me wrong. I just think the oWoD went a bit too far with the whole "you are not good enough to play this game" thing. The new one is a lot friendlier and a lot more balanced.

arxhon
13-02-2006, 00:42
I agree with everything that hlokk said, including the part where he implies that Grimshawl has no clue what he's talking about.

I find that there are three camps when it comes to nWoD and oWoD: 1) The people who wanted the new one to be exactly like the old one and get pissy because it isn't, 2) the people who either didn't like the old one, or like the new one anyway, whether or not they liked the old one and 3) people who don't like it because of the system, unrelated to the previous two.

News flash for you: They aren't the same game. They have some similar elements, but everything between the two has changed. Pissing and moaning and hating nWoD because of that fact is kind of silly. Go ahead and play your old game if you like it, that's perfectly fine. WW isn't going to kick down your door, beat you up, burn your oWoD books and spraypaint your cat because you don't buy the shiny new books, you know.;) Devoting thousands of words to it is stupid.

Grimshawl
15-02-2006, 17:37
I do in fact know a thing or two about the new version, not as much as I know about the old system, but hey I spent 6 years and 20 or so books learning things from the old system. As to the Tepish thing yes I knew they delve a bit into it but to stick the cheesy Dracula into the description of the group was what I was getting at and what disapoints me, also my point about them reusing names and being lazy is that I felt like they copped out, after all if you are going to totally redo the WOD then do so dont just halfass it like that, its like you hire a decorator to totally redo your home and when you come back to look at their work more than half your house still looks the same or so close that its hard to tell that the living room that was beige is now tan and the foyer is now called the foyee and oh yeah half your comfy pillows for the couch are missing but the other half have new pillow slips. They needed to go all the way and not rehash, clan names or change a letter here and there and creat something genuinely new, I have primarilly focused on changes with the vampires because thats what I have been reading up on, I dont know too much about the new werewolves, mages, etc, just a little from chatting with freinds, and I do still play the old system, I was just commenting here when someone asked about the new stuff.

Hlokk
15-02-2006, 20:09
also my point about them reusing names and being lazy is that I felt like they copped out, after all if you are going to totally redo the WOD then do so dont just halfass it like that,

The thing is, WW had an existing market with the oWoD players, many of whom (thank christ) have jumped ship into the nWoD. Yes, some terms (garou in werewolf now means the warform rather than the people) have been regurgitated, but that is not out of laziness, it is out of 3 things:
a: To keep familiarity with the older players
b: To keep cool concepts in there
c: Lisencing issues

The whole world of darkness system was created by one man. WW, in their lisencing, have something saying they cannot stray too far from the original design.

If that doesnt help change you mind, then just look at where you'r posting. Your on a games workshop forum. GW have shown us time and time again hopw they take one person's good idea and shoehorn it into one of their unvierses, while keeping a release schedule that is now in its 7th edition of regurgitating the same old rope with a few tweeks. If anyone is an expert at selling rehashed crap, its these guys.

At least White Wolf have made an effort to be innovative and to branch out. They may use some of the same names but most of the core concepts are totally and utterly different.

Also, I own every vampire nWoD book published to date. Please direct me to this quote about the ordo dracul. If its in the main book, i suggest you go and read the other 2 sourcebooks that have been released for them.

Grimshawl
15-02-2006, 20:31
look I think we just arent gonna see eye to eye on this. what WW did with WOD was alot more than just bring out a new edition, like what GW has done several times, thats why their is alot of difference between 40ks fluff being 80% the same from edition to edition then WW's rewrite, they set off armageddon wrote the end of their story lines and then, didnt really bring off a totally new version its more almost mirror image like with tons of simularities down to outright copying of what they had before. The Malkavian/ Malkovian type thing is one that especially gets me,but thats just me. I will admit I'm one of the people who hasnt made the transition to the latest edition well, it just hasnt made itself cooler or improved from the old in my mind, as I said each to their own I guess.

arxhon
15-02-2006, 22:16
It boils down to this: The game developers took what worked from the old game, and threw out what didn't. They then created new stuff that worked to replace the old stuff that was dumb, broken or just plain bad (Malkavians, Sabbat, the system, a lot of the clans that started proliferating after '95). To use your "Interior decorator" analogy, rather than burning down the entire house to change the living room, they threw out some furniture, painted the walls and hung new drapes. Part of the aim was to try to ditch the "superheroes with fangs" gaming that is so prevalent in V:tM. You can still play that way, but it's more geared towards a social game.



look I think we just arent gonna see eye to eye on this. what WW did with WOD was alot more than just bring out a new edition, like what GW has done several times, thats why their is alot of difference between 40ks fluff being 80% the same from edition to edition then WW's rewrite, they set off armageddon wrote the end of their story lines and then, didnt really bring off a totally new version its more almost mirror image like with tons of simularities down to outright copying of what they had before. The Malkavian/ Malkovian type thing is one that especially gets me,but thats just me. I will admit I'm one of the people who hasnt made the transition to the latest edition well, it just hasnt made itself cooler or improved from the old in my mind, as I said each to their own I guess.

Let's see if i can make some sense out of this hysterical posting:

You're mad because it uses some old concepts.
You're also mad because it uses some new concepts.
You're mad because it has Dracula in it.
I'm betting you're choked that they ditched the Camarilla and the Sabbat as well as the Methuselah :D (three of the weakest concepts in the old game, as far as i'm concerned).

On the first two, would you have been happier if they used entirely the old setup, or an entirely new set up?

There was some really lame-ass **** in the oWoD ( Malkavians leap to mind immediately, Sabbat, Methuselah are a couple more).

On the Dracula thing, well, it's certainly a lot better than trying to shoehorn the biblical Cain into the whole thing. Shoehorning Cain had a lot of implications in terms of cosmology and where vampires stood in the world. The new setup for bloodlines is vastly superior; it takes the whole "We're all descended from this guy that god hated" to "we don't really have a clue, except for the Ordo Dracul". It also throws in the "does God really exist?" question, rather than forcing it down people's throats as an unqualified "yes", and paves the way for religious vampires such as the Lancea Sanctum.

Frankly, Dracula is way cooler than Cain anyway, in addition to it being a far more recognizable figure in terms of modern culture. It's also a lot more "religion friendly".;) It's still pretty obvious how you have no clue what you're talking about on this issue, however, whether or not you think it's cheesy. If you haven't actually sit down and read the original Dracula. It's quite fascinating. Then sit down and read Rites of the Dragon, which explains, from a narrative point of view, how the WoD Dracula got the way he did.


Here's another interesting thing about V:tR: You don't need to buy 20 books to be able to figure out what the heck is going on ( and some of those books were really bad...Dirty Secrets of hte Black Hand, anyone?). V:tM had a really bad setup in terms of information being spread out over dozens of books towards the end. You could buy the corebook and a supplelemt, and half the supplement would make no sense unless you bought three other supplements, which also made little sense unless you bought a bunch of others. The flip side of this is that as time went on, books in your collection became obselete as the information in them was superseded by the ponderous, labyrinthine metaplot.

Requiem, on the other hand, requires you buy two: The core rules, and the Vampire core. Anything else is optional. You won't run into the problem of picking up a new book next year and have it referring to stuff in something that you didn't buy 6 months ago and is out of print, and it won't suddenly be obsolete in a year and a half. As an additional bonus, they're actually compatible with other lines in the WoD metaline.

If you've got the Requiem core, why don't you take a look at pages 253-258? There's your tools for making the game the way you want. Toss the Ordo Dracul if you don't like it. It won't break the game at all. It's part of the "toolkit" approach the developers have taken to the new Vampire, as opposed to the old one where Mary Sue author NPCs did all the cool stuff and the players got to watch if they were lucky.

Oh, and jumping up and down saying "6 years and 20 books" doesn't prove anything other than you've got some books for V:tM. It doesn't prove that you've read them, it doesn't prove that you know what you're talking about. But hey, if you want to compare "credentials", i first encountered Vampire in 1991.;)

Finally, yes, to each their own. But railing against something you really don't seem to understand because you want it to be something else is kind of silly. Go ahead and enjoy your games. I'll enjoy mine.

Hlokk
15-02-2006, 23:34
Requiem, on the other hand, requires you buy two: The core rules, and the Vampire core. Anything else is optional. You won't run into the problem of picking up a new book next year and have it referring to stuff in something that you didn't buy 6 months ago and is out of print, and it won't suddenly be obsolete in a year and a half. As an additional bonus, they're actually compatible with other lines in the WoD metaline.

This is definitely a plus of Requiem. I got hold of the VII book a few weeks ago and it basically says "here's three interpetations of what VII can be, in future publications we'll say we don't know what VII are in case you want to develop your own concept of them or modify one of these or not use them at all" Also, the Predators book makes a great source of antagonists for VtR. I have all the vampire books, and there are some which are very useful (the ghouls, VII) and some that are less so (Nomads, bloodlines: the legendary) but none are essential. Indeed, to try and integrate them all into one chronical at the same time is asking for trouble. The only problem I have with this system is deciding what to buy next: Armoury or Blasphemies?

The whole thing with dracula that suprised me is that he ISNT the uber-vampire you'd expect. He makes it quite obvious in Rites of the Dragon that Mara could absolutely wipe the floor with him, and its up to deception and backstabbing to win the day, as with normal vampires within the game.

By removing Cain, you get several different vampiric creationist myths (Lancea Sanctum: Vamps existed before Christ, but wern't doing much. Circle of the crone: Vampires are natural evolution. Ordo Dracul: Vampires were created by God, but Dracula was created to lead them/be the worst) which, if nothing else, adds to the whole confusing effect that torpor has and gives a greater depth of mystery to the game. Indeed, one could say that they give rise to this idea of Science versus mystisisum. Vampires are supernatural creatures, therefore there must be some greater power out there than science, but no-one knows what it is.

Again with the "use what you want" bits, there are rules in some of the books for gaming using PCs as members of VII, or a ghoul bloodline, or a nomad coatiarie. None of these fit into the prescribed remit of VtR in terms of being in the core book, but the beauty of the system is that you are actively encouraged to throw away what doesnt work and insert what does.

Again, each to their own, but you'r arguements dont make sence Grimshawl. I think you seriously need to read a couple of the books cover to cover to get a feel for it. And if we're comparing credentials, 2 years and 27 books.

Arxhon: this is going to sound incredibly n00bish, but could you please explain what the sabbat and the Methusilah are? I get the impression the sabbat are similar to the invictus, is this right? Also, if you havn't read the Ghouls book, you really should, its a great read.

devolutionary
15-02-2006, 23:35
Arxhon, the fact you bad-mouthed the Malkavians, Sabbat, and Caine in the same post makes me think that you are very very wrong :D

Saying that, I started reading WoD (core) and am looking at VtR just for the knowledge base.

Grimshawl
16-02-2006, 13:18
I admit that the WOD had become complex and that some books were based on knowledge from other books but each one was pretty clear about what was in it or if it was in a series so their really was very little you had to know or have to run a game of Vampire even towards the end, also as far as I can think of their were probably less than 6 books that were ever rendered obsolete in the line, even the old hunters hunted and early edition Mummy books still had relivent material you could use in your games right up to the end. I really dont get what your beef was with the Camirillia and the Sabbot, and the Methusilahs, and Caine, if you really hated all that I'm surprised you played the game at all, but even then WOD offered alternate origens for their Vampires if thats what you wanted, like Lillith for example, anyway thats about it for me on this subject as we just seem to be coming to an impass here.
lastly someone did ask a pertinate question, would I prefer all new or all old background/fluff, I had thought my previous post made this clear, if your gonna remake the WOD then actually do it, all new all original stuff would have been my preference.

ironduke
16-02-2006, 14:10
if your gonna remake the WOD then actually do it, all new all original stuff would have been my preference.

*looks at requiem book then looks at the Masquerade book*

This one can be answered very easily...it is!

I haven't bothered to read most of this thread because i hate getting into arguments involving old versus new but ive garnered from the few previous posts that you haven't read the requiem book. If indeed im right then i believe you should reserve your judgement until you have.

The new system is exactly that, not masquerade revised but a entirely new game and the world of darkness is new not adapted. There is no clear cut this is how it is, World of Darkness is a game of horror coupled with story, and this is exactly what white wolf has achieved in the new game.

Nothing is clear cut nothing is for definite, can you be so sure? If theres Vampires in the world couldn't there be anything else that is mentioned in tales and stories from the past. This is what the world of darkness bases itself on. There is none of this we are the Camarilla our enemies are werewolves, The Sabbat, People who are not of the 13 clans and anyone else is fair game.

Theres no more silly disciplines like potence that could get abused and similiar stuff. Keep it simple and this is what they have resorted back to, keep it vague.

Sorry for the ramblings but i dont think people should "judgea book by its cover" or its prequel.

cheers ironduke

Grimshawl
16-02-2006, 14:35
I have read the book, I'm sorry but if you dont see the connections between using gangrel, brujah and a host of other words in nearly to identicly the same context in some cases as the old game doesnt seem like copying to you. Now I am not saying it is identical verbatum thruout but it isnt entirely new or original either.
something else that bothers me is everyones b*tch about how everything was laid out and clearcut in the WOD before, if you have it pull out the original copy of the old vampire book, you will find that before everything was fleshed out with the dozens of books that the WODs long life span brought about that things started out fairly simple at first just like they are now, originally their was no mention of the Sabbot , wherewolves were somewhat mysterious and alot of the other creatures of the world where mere question marks left to the storytellers imagination. If this incarnation of the WOD runs as long books will continue to be published and eventually it too will be as complex interconnected world as the old.
I swear the way some of you are jumping on me I'd swear I just told you all their was no Santa Claus or something. Chill a bit and we'll all just go our own cyber ways,,,, good gaming

ironduke
16-02-2006, 15:50
The difference is your after something different than the majority, this is an assumption not a insult but are you a roll-player rather than a role-player. The reason why I ask is because ive met quite a few people who have complained about the transition and what it boiled down to was they preferred the old version because (apoligise for extreme example) you could life cars and throw them or change into werewolves or reverse time (silly True Brujah *shakes head*)

Also i hate to pick apart examples people have made but yes the names are the same and yes they have been applied to some things in the same context but fundementally they are different, Brujah in the new game are a bloodline.
These guys are so close to bordering on being Brood its unbelievable rather than being a worldwide they are located on the east coast of america.

Masquerade got out of hand and White Wolf were wise to acknowledge this. Originally it started off pure but then donw the line it just went wrong, it became a joke so they revamped it now.

So why complain if you enjoyed the original, here is something based upon these original princeps?

Oh and by the way Santa Claus is real okay! ;)

Grimshawl
16-02-2006, 16:38
Truth is I've done both types of RPGing as the game and situation dictated, I've had strong character driven stories where peoples emotions and quirks were the driving force and I've had powergaming car lifting one dimensional campaigns were " me hulk smash " was the order of the day, I find neither type of play excludes the other and that people often like variety or a change of pace. As to why complain, why I already have the original, I dont need a simular copy, Just like if I owned an original masterpeice I wouldnt need a copy of same artwork.
In my mind the Brujah example still stands as a good example of why I dont like the copying in the new game, why even call them Brujah, Brujah wasnt even one of their better Clan names in the original WOD, if they had used an original name it would have been better, in my opinion.

lastly I just dont get the shock and outrage people seem to feel when mentioning supernatural creatures having well, supernatural powers, its almost like " I'm so offended Vampires can be stronger than Humans in this game, now if they had the abillity to turn green instead of truely shapechanging that would be okay, but man if its effective I'm bummed." thats mostly what I get out of these types of complaints, It just seems like alot of people got on the wrong side of one of those powers at some point during a gaming session and got mad and decided THAT power is so wrong, I hate IT! whatever IT happens to be, thats really more of a personal decision amongst your play group, Mine fixated on Cellerity as the Overpowered, Cheese dicipline, but I've travelled to many other groups and never heard a peep about it, simularly I've heard groans about Dominate, Presense, Obfuscate,etc, etc, depending on the group or story, Ballance of such perceived problems needs to be in the hands of the storyteller for His own campaign, but really I dont see it as a problem with the system itself.

finally if I told you I was discontinuing the Mustang and you like that type of car and then I brought out the Mustange and instead of being a V6 255horsepower car, it was a v6 250 horsepower car, etc etc, I think you can see where I'm going with this, a near duplicate of anything can be anoying especially if its something you liked alot.

Hlokk
16-02-2006, 17:07
finally if I told you I was discontinuing the Mustang and you like that type of car and then I brought out the Mustange and instead of being a V6 255horsepower car, it was a v6 250 horsepower car, etc etc, I think you can see where I'm going with this, a near duplicate of anything can be anoying especially if its something you liked alot.
But its not a near duplicate though is it :rolleyes:

The core concepts and background are completely different. Look at Werewolf The apocalypse versus the forsaken. I challenge you to find a single reference to they wyrm, bunyip, fianna, blackshadow dancers, pentex, gaia etc...

Your arguing over the recycling of names and thats it. So what if they used a similar name? The concept behind it is completely different.

Grimshawl
16-02-2006, 17:27
I'm not arguing the werewolf backgrounds, indeed if you actually read my previous posts you would see I've said I know just a little about the new werewolf stuff and not once have I said I have any problem with the werewolf changes. And if what you say is true that they didnt lazilly slap on old names and half familiar backgrounds to come up with them then I'll probably enjoy it.

Hlokk
17-02-2006, 00:25
And if what you say is true that they didnt lazilly slap on old names and half familiar backgrounds to come up with them then I'll probably enjoy it.
But thats the case with the new vampire stuff. Although they used some names, everything else is fundamentally different.

arxhon
17-02-2006, 01:26
Arxhon: this is going to sound incredibly n00bish, but could you please explain what the sabbat and the Methusilah are? I get the impression the sabbat are similar to the invictus, is this right? Also, if you havn't read the Ghouls book, you really should, its a great read.

It's been a while, so my memory is kind of fuzzy.

Basically, the Sabbat were "bad vampires" who ran around doing whatever they wanted without concern for the Masquerade. There were, iirc, several clans that were Sabbat, as well. The Camarilla and the Sabbat were at odds, quite violently.

The Methuselah were really, really old, very powerful vampires (4th generation and earlier, iirc). Basically the "big scary bogeymen" of the Vampire society. A methuselah showing up was supposedly bad news, and they were frequently used as the "evil mastermind behind everything" in games.

Ghouls is one of the books i'd like to snag, actually. I really like the concept of Ghouls. I was going to run a game set in Vancouver at one point (motorcycles, Asian gangsters and rain-slicked neon streets, baby!), and it's big enough to support a decently sized vampire population), and rather than have a zillion vampires running around (which seemed to be the default style of play with the old game), Ghouls can be used. They're pretty tough (especially after you apply the "mook" rules in the nWoD core to regular joes), have some of the powers of vampires, and make great bad guys.

It also has the side effect of mctually meeting a Vampire being a momentous thing.

devolutionary
17-02-2006, 02:06
Sabbat were a militant wing that believed, theoretically, in the equality of all vampires within a military structure. They were Blessed, not Cursed, byt Caine, and the Antediluvians were controlling the elders, bringing about the destruction of all vampiric kind except for the chosen few. They were staunchly independant to start, springing from the failed Anarch revolt. The two clans that went purely to the Sabbat (again, in theory) are the Lasombra, who were the leaders and kings of old (obviously the elder's control bred severe malcontent in the neonates) and the Tzimisce, who have an agenda so messed up it hurts. Human's are cattle, teh Camarilla are pawns, and the Sword of Caine will defy the Antediluvians who are the cursed and fated destroyers of all.Very quasi-catholic in their style, including their rituals and traditions.

What did this mean to most players? That they could be biker gangs that raped, pillaged, and slaughtered their way across town without repercussion. I liked the Sabbat, hated most of it's players.

Neknoh
17-02-2006, 14:50
ok, this is NOT answering my initial question, nor is it going to, all I got was a flamewar with long posts instead of something helpful, the first two posts were good, the first TWO out of 24.

So, I am now locking this topic and sincerely hope that you guys will NOT flame any more.