[RPG] How to avoid letting the players keep too many ghouls

vampire-the-dark-agesvampire-the-masqueradeworld-of-darkness

In my vampire campaign I want to limit the amount of ghouls my players keep, but without setting an arbitrary cap. Ideally I would like there to be some strategic trade-off in the question to ghoul or not to ghoul.

I would prefer if there was a noticeable but not crippling cost to keeping ghouls. You do need to feed them blood occasionally, but not nearly often enough that it becomes a burden. This is far outweighed by the blood you can drink from them when needed (even if usually saved for last resort).

One of my PC:s who is Ventrue and especially protective of his blood pool has the habit of drinking a blood point from his ghouls before feeding them one, practically sidestepping the already small cost completely. I don't like this and have thought about house-ruling it out, but as far as I understand it is fine according to RAW.

I am an experienced GM, but still learning the Vampire rules. So far I have mainly used story elements to balance ghouls. For example you can easily create a ghoul, but a good one is hard to find. A ghoul can also be a vulnerability since it knows your haven location etc.

My life as GM would become easier if there was some mechanical support for why vampires doesn't keep armies of ghouls. Did I overlook something I could use this way?

Edit: Thanks for several good answers that helped me understand I cannot solve this using game mechanics. I will instead play up the vulnerabilities of ghouls even more, for which you gave me some great ideas.

Best Answer

There is a built in limit to how many ghouls a vampire can have - their blood. Ghouls require upkeep in the form of blood, at least once a month and any time the ghoul needs to heal (if the vampire cares about helping the ghoul heal). They also need blood to power their own disciplines, should they have any, or boost their stats.

The simple fact that a vampire has to hunt much more to support more than a single ghoul is a natural limit to the number of ghouls they can have.

Now for your Ventrue feeding off his own ghoul before feeding the ghoul its monthly dose - the books even advise using that against the players. Ghouls of the Camarilla are known to the court and are quite often tampered with by other kindred. Feed the ghoul blood from another kindred, and have the Ventrue in question get blood bound to the other kindred. That behavior will end quickly... or not, the player character would be blood bound, so they might continue.

Additionally, Ventrue's weakness is well known. Kindred of the city might very well try to determine the character's herd based on what they know of the ghoul, there by cutting the Ventrue's food supply off in the city.

In the situation you are describing, the Ventrue is telegraphing to everyone how to hurt him by taking a ghoul he can feed off of, let alone actually feeding off of them. Let the natural consequences of that decision play out.

There is an additional check you can invoke if the prince of the city is not counted amongst your players - your players do not have the right of creation. The traditions explicitly restrict the right to create kindred to the prince of the city, but the creation of others of the blood is usually interpreted to include ghouls. It is the prince's prerogative to simply have excess ghouls killed off, strip status from the offending kindred, or even go so far as issue a blood hunt for a rampant ghoul creator.

Your main solutions in this situation are political; the books imply that this is one of the intended checks and balances against mass ghouling. Of course, this goes out the window in a Sabbat game, where you are supposed to create ghoul and neonate armies as a matter of course.

Related Topic