Unbondable is a crime because bloodbond is allowed. Tzimisce rely on bloodbond just like everyone else, if not more. So I see no contradiction.

Lesser problem that I see, is that Oathbreaker, the vicissitude power, is different from unbondable in canon. The latter is a permanent condition that makes one immune to all kind of bloodbond. The former allows to shed it's effect temporarily and is not guaranteed to work against higher power bloodbond, Antediluvian's for example.

The real problem is CK3 code limitation, where laws are part of the "faith", making ruler a subject to his own laws. What you want to be rarely equals to what you wish your subjects to be, but CK3 has a different opinion.

On the bright side you can decide to not punish yourself, if you are a ruler. Your subjects notice that you break your own laws. They can´t imprison you for it, though.

Eh. I would not call unbondable a criminal in the first place. Diablerie is a crime, when everyone might want you to die again out of self-preservation, because you are dangerous. Quite the contrary, unbondable is socially vulnerable and that's why he is likely a target.

Nobody gives a damn if you break the bond you don't want, other than your regnant of course. There are other ways besides the Oathbreaker. Abandon the Fetters and Brother's gift, something and something. Investiture and Vaulderie, blah and blah. Them are kinda obscure ways, but you can try and suppress the bond just through the sheer force of will. And then kill the regnant, so nobody is left to give a damn for sure.

Problem of unbondable is that he can't even willingly accept the bond and that's the only way to earn a trust of another vampire. He can't enter murual bond, he can't swear fealty to the Prince, he can't repay for services rendered, he can't beg to be kept alive when captured. He can't enter any contract of any importance. That's the problem.

Social pariah, useless and disposable freak. Killing such a creature is an act of pure mercy. I mean, moreso than any other killing.

Among the Tremere unbondable recruits would be seen as liabilities. They would probably get send on suicide missions. The Sabbat might give them a pass. Officially they only use vaulderie to counter elder influence. So an unbondable soldier is reliable, just in a different way. Plus, you can send them on infiltration missions against the Camarilla. Okay, so very similar procedures and outcomes, I guess.
This game mixes up crimes and socially undesirable features. It is a little inaccurate, but not that much. People get locked up for things that are not directly illegal but pose problems for the authorities.

Unbondable Tremere being denied is an out-of-character concept. It's assumed that the only reason why player would chose to play them is to counter clan weakness. But if beautiful Nosferatu exist, then unbondable Tremere could exist too. I mean every unbondable childe faces a risk of being sent on suicide mission on account of them being unruly and untrustworthy. But I am not sure why Tremere should be singled out, in theory.

Interesting idea about unbondable vs Vaulderie. Without giving it much thought, I would disagree with you. Ideology aside, Vaulderie creates real palpable unity and connection within the pack. And then you look like a dog among wolves. You'd be thorn apart long before they think of a use for you on the outside.

Code or rulebook will always be imperfect, it's a duty of intellegent beings to fill the gaps. Result for the victim might be the same, but it's important to remember why you killed them.

my issue is just that unbondable is a crime for many religions and if im playing a vassal its not just an opinion malus but serves as a reason for imprisonment or a strong hook if blackmailed. Most vampire religion have unbondable as a crime, at the very least you'd think other kolduns wouldnt care as maxing out the abilities of vicissitude would be their whole shtick..

I would say that unbondable being a crime or a social stigma is in line with the WoD lore for the dark age. Most lords in Europe follow some version of the Via Regalis/Road of Kings. The Tzimisce are a regular high clan in medieval Europe and behave like classical if somewhat brutal rulers.
In modern times most Tzimisce are completely different and behave like rebels and freaks. Modern Anarchs strongly dislike bloodbonds, don´t like using ghouls and settle their disagreements with brawls. To the self-declared unbound the unbondable perk would be virtuous.

In the setting of this mod it is mainly the Via Regalis, Via Tyrannus and other classic paths of high clans that have a problem with unbondable subjects. Gangrel on feral faiths, rebel Brujah, Assamites etc. don´t have a problem with it.
You can be as unbondable as you like, just not in polite society.

Originally posted by DatDoomDud3:

my issue is just that unbondable is a crime for many religions and if im playing a vassal its not just an opinion malus but serves as a reason for imprisonment or a strong hook if blackmailed. Most vampire religion have unbondable as a crime, at the very least you'd think other kolduns wouldnt care as maxing out the abilities of vicissitude would be their whole shtick..

Oh no. Access to any elder power is a statement of independence. Anything 6+ is legendary, the Oathbreaker is Vicissitude 8. You are demi-god in your own right, you simply can't be seen as a loyal vassal anymore. If NPC sire had any wits about them they should have either thwarted or hooked you long time ago.

Really, the situation you are in is wrong far beyond the inconvenience of unbondable. I know, gaining power in the mod is too easy and you might not feel like that, but in you case confrontation is unavoidable and you should really plan it from the start.

I would agree that you can gain too much power too quickly in this mod. Also, the AI is too passive. However, in pen and paper the NPCs would not automatically see your character sheet and know that you are unbondable. You could pretend to be bloodbound or part of the vinculum and only act independently in critical moments. In this regard this mod is more brutal.

Being unbondable is especially powerful for traitor Tremere. It not only counters their clan bane, it also neutralizes the mark of the betrayer, one of the most vicious security measures of the clan.

Normally, when a Tremere turns rogue, a visible mark appears on his forehead and all of his colleagues know that he is a traitor. Being onbondable messes up the ritual, so you can be a secret traitor. Even worse, nobody suspects this to happen because it is very rare.

In "Berlin by Night" one of the antagonists is a rogue Tremere with this perk. You can be born with it, but some Tremere get it from their "sponsors".

Originally posted by I haz grapes:

Originally posted by DatDoomDud3:

my issue is just that unbondable is a crime for many religions and if im playing a vassal its not just an opinion malus but serves as a reason for imprisonment or a strong hook if blackmailed. Most vampire religion have unbondable as a crime, at the very least you'd think other kolduns wouldnt care as maxing out the abilities of vicissitude would be their whole shtick..

Oh no. Access to any elder power is a statement of independence. Anything 6+ is legendary, the Oathbreaker is Vicissitude 8. You are demi-god in your own right, you simply can't be seen as a loyal vassal anymore. If NPC sire had any wits about them they should have either thwarted or hooked you long time ago.

Really, the situation you are in is wrong far beyond the inconvenience of unbondable. I know, gaining power in the mod is too easy and you might not feel like that, but in you case confrontation is unavoidable and you should really plan it from the start.

I don't mind having unbondable as a crime for other religions but what i do have a problem with is that other kolduns believe unbondable to be a crime. Koldun is a tzimice relgion about fleshcrafting and using vicissitude to transcend vampirisim. Unbondable as an elder perk for a koldun makes sense because they are transcending the traditional vampire weakness of being able to be blodbonded by others. For kolduns this is epitome of their faith and something of an apotheisis for the beliefs. I don't mind that other vampires see it as a crime to be unbondable but what i do mind is other kolduns seeing it as a crime despite the fact that this is what their trying to achieve.

Let me use the tremere as an example. The tremere are all about the use of blood sorcery, now imagine you are an elder vampire that has mastered a path of blood sorcery, something they all strive to do. Now imagine that you suddenly find your self a criminal because of this, because somehow the code of tremere has a clause where if you maxed out a blood sorcery path you are now a criminal.

Originally posted by DatDoomDud3:

The koldun religion has being unbondable as a crime despite the fact that the vicissitude discipline has being unbondable as one of its elder perks. Is this intended? you'd think that getting all the perks of vicissitude would be encouraged by the faith thats literally about using vicissitude and transcending vampirism.

Kolduns traditionally rejected Vicissitude.

Old Clan Tzimisce consider it to be an abomination, and a parasitic infection that has corrupted their clan.

------------

What I'm more curious about, is why the Path of Metamorphosis doesn't allow you to pursue the Ahzi Dahaka, despite the in game description saying they consider it to be the next step in their evolution.

The signature character for koldun characters is yorak and he is the creator of the flesh cathedral which required high levels of vicissitude to create. Playing as him and being immediately blackmailed for being unbondable by all my neighbors is also the reason i started this thread in the first place.

Anyway it doesn't matter anymore the last patch has removed unbondable from being a crime for kolduns. Seems like the mod creator agrees with my original point at least.