Let's say half of those vampires don't bother to develop it to level 3 and half of the rest choose another power and noone else chooses to learn one of the most practical and common disciplines out of clan.

And in 5e there are probably not a lot of vampires with Auspex 3 in any given city.Why wouldn't there be? Of the six Camarilla clans, three have Auspex in-clan. Auspex isn't exactly precise science, and you can't show it to anyone, so all anyone has is a word of an Auspex user that he really does see a black streak. There is no way to 'credibly accuse' someone of Diablerie.

But compared to many other crimes like domain violations or non-Diablerie destructions, the social mechanics of Diablerie work a little differently.īut that's the issue. Of course, the Prince can do that if they've got a good reason like pushing a valuable asset deeper into their pocket. A Prince who does not punish someone credibly accused burns a lot of social capital with people who are the most obvious Diablerie targets - the elders of the city. Also, everyone (in the Camarilla) at least publicly agrees that it's a horrible crime. So sometimes 'no u' is a sufficient response to 'hey, this guy has black streaks in his aura!' and other times you need to leave town immediately because you are being accused by Tremere Primogen even though you've done nothing at all.While that is somewhat correct in general, Diablerie in particular seems a little different from most crimes - if the accusation is known, everyone with Auspex can check it. Always remember that Camarilla and Anarchs are not lawful societies.

Just like always in vampire, who are your backers and who are your enemies is much more important than whether you actually did anything. Just because someone accuses you of diablerie doesn't mean you get imprisoned and executed.

Vampire the masquerade diablerie