>>97511876
>TQ: What was the inspiration for your first Exalted character?
The first character I made I took inspiration from some knowledge gods from Celtic mythology, stuck them in blender and poured them into a Twilight Caste. Still revisit the concept every so often.

First character I actually played I just aped Havesh the Vanisher, running hhim as a small time burglar and petty crook instead of a killer.

>>97511876
>>TQ: What was the inspiration for your first Exalted character?
An anime rip-off, than as my idealized waifu.

Looking into the old books, exalted splats are fairly self-explanatory, but what are the books like "dawn", "twilight" and the like about? Old editions have a load of stuff split into different books, it's getting kinda confusing.

File: file.png (1.64 MB, 1200x1000)

1.64 MB PNG

>>97511876
All I really had at the start was this mod skin from Library of Ruina to use as inspiration and then I tacked on a bunch of Thunderbolt Fantasy memery. Lack of systems mastery kept me from actually realizing what I was imagining in-game though.

>>97511876
>TQ
I'm not sure, actually. My first - and only so far, I'm an almost-forever ST when it comes to Exalted - was an illiterate but well-educated through oral lore Twilight shaman and sorcerer with a lesser elemental dragon mentor and a goal of freeing his homeland that was a moving island ruled by the Fair Folk who sailed the island like it was a fuckhuge pirate ship across the Western ocean while oppressing the mortal population of the island. No doubt the character was a mixture of influences from things I've read, watched, heard or played, but I can't really identify specific sources of influence there.

>>97512363
1E's Caste Books are just deeper looks into different Solar Castes, and Aspect Books into different Dragon-Blooded Aspects.

>>97512554
Thank you for clarifying.

Speaking of books, the core just arrived, and I'm crunching through the essence quickstart, I'm aiming for a test trial next tuesday.
>TQ
I'll be GMing and I will most probably never play, but the way I'm feeling now, I'd try and build some archer that shoots magic arrows to make things explode. I always liked the archetype, but few RPGs allow to make one effectively.

>>97511876
>the return of Red Panda Lunar Waifu
I-is /exg/ healing? Will Admiral, QEAnon and Sandact come back?

>counterattack always counts as an action. If a character chooses to flurry, she cannot then also counterattack unless the Charm has specific provisions otherwise
Can someone clarify this, just to be sure? I get the rule as written, but the question I have is related. A character makes a flurry, so he can't counterattack later. But if he counterattacks, does the action in the following turn count as a flurry?

>>97513028
>Can someone clarify this, just to be sure?
You get two simple actions per round. Counterattacks use simple actions, and are a way to act outside your turn but still during the round. Flurries are a way to make two simple actions that are not the same action on your turn at a penalty. Multiattacks are a way to make multiple attack actions on your turn.

As some example cases, your action orders might look like this:
>turn 1, take a simple action. You don't take the flurry penalty.
>turn 1, you're attacked and counterattack. This isn't a flurry with the associated penalty, but it is your second action for the round.
>turn 1, you're attacked again and cannot counterattack because you cannot act three times in a round.
>turn 2, you're attacked and counterattack.
>turn 2, you take a simple action. This isn't a flurry and doesn't need to be part of a flurry, but is your second action for the round. You don't take the flurry penalty.
>turn 2, you're attacked again and cannot counterattack because you cannot act three times in a round.
>turn 3, you're attacked and counterattack.
>turn 3, you're attacked again and counterattack again.
>turn 3, it is your turn but you cannot take any simple actions. You may still take your move action.
>turn 4, you flurry two simple actions, taking the penalty for doing so.
>turn 4, you are attacked and cannot counterattack because you have already taken two simple actions.

>>97513028
Basically, flurries only matter when you're acting multiple times on your turn. Counterattacks act outside your turn and don't need to be flurried. They don't roll over into the next turn or apply penalties to previous rolls in any way.

>>97513028
Your specific scenario is >>97513584 turn 4 followed by turn 2, I think.

File: 1749467166396419.jpg (1.68 MB, 2150x1464)

1.68 MB JPG

>>97512956
Nah this is more like a twitch of the corpse. I remember there used to be another >tfw no (some kind of Exalt) gf but like the lost Lunar castes, it has been abandoned to time.

>mfw in 3e Lunars just annihilated some of their castes for literally no good reason
>mfw the book tries to halfheartedly imply this was a useful adaptation to fighting the Realm, which is all Lunars are allowed to do in 3e

>>97513584
>You get two simple actions per round
This clarifies it. I mean, it can be taken from the rules, but I didn't see it plainly stated in the essence quickstart rules.
The rest of the examples make it clear. Thank you anon.

>>97514373
>This clarifies it. I mean, it can be taken from the rules, but I didn't see it plainly stated in the essence quickstart rules.
I'll be honest and say that I haven't read the quickstart. I wouldn't be surprised to find a few squiggly rules that seem open to interpretation though, there's a bit of that in the corebook too.

I'm actually going to go read the quickstart now because it might be more clear on hard bargains.

>I'm actually going to go read the quickstart now because it might be more clear on hard bargains.
I have now gone to read the Tomb of Memories version of hard bargain and it doesn't have the example showing how the mechanics are supposed to play out which directly contradict how the mechanics say the hard bargain works (the second part of picrel). So, it looks like the way it works is when an attempt at influence is made, the player being influenced presents an alternative option and the person doing the influencing chooses between their original intent and the alternative being offered? So the person refusing influence has to kind of lure/negotiate the influencer into accepting another option with sweet treats on the other side of the hard bargain, with their counterbalance being that they can always just say no and ignore the influence.

File: essence hard bargain.jpg (61 KB, 377x425)

61 KB JPG

>>97514510
>picrel

>>97514294
They didn't just drop two castes on a whim, they changed all of them into new ones

>>97514626
Yes, but since we didn't get a good explanation for why, it gave the impression that Lunars just changed them for no reason

>>97514294
>I remember there used to be another >tfw no (some kind of Exalt) gf but like the lost Lunar castes, it has been abandoned to time.
Then allow me to bring it back, for old times' sake.

>tfw no red panda Lunar waifu
>tfw no Glorious Solar Queen
>tfw no Sidereal kuudere gf
>tfw no Dragon-Blooded harem
>tfw no Abyssal yandere stalker
>tfw no Infernal drugged-out punk rock fuckbuddy
>tfw no Alchemical fully-functional sexbot

>>97514510
The way I read it from the quickstart, you lose the influence, you can oppose it with a bargain. So you can choose to lose something else in exchange for not caving in to the pressure.

File: resisting influence.jpg (155 KB, 466x564)

155 KB JPG

The text from the quickstart, for reference.

>>97515084
It's the same wording, just without the Example section from the main book. In the corebook we have three scenarios that you could read from it:

>A influences B to kill C. B sets a hard bargain (let's say that instead of killing C they kill A) then B chooses to take the hard bargain option (and kills A for the temerity of attempting influence on them)
>A influences B to kill C. The Storyteller sets the hard bargain (instead they will provide a sum of a thousand obols), then B chooses whether to kill C or hand over the money. This is the Example section from the corebook.
>A influences B to kill C. B sets the hard bargain based on how much they think A wants the original influence (let's say that instead they will provide a sum of ten billion obols), then A chooses whether they want the money or the original hit to go out on C.
In the jumpstart we don't have the second scenario. The first scenario is how I see yours breaking down. The third scenario is one I see breaking down when the influencer is very stubborn and wants what they want and won't say yes to any bargaining (especially when ignoring influence is off the table from something like Fulminating Word).

>>97515441
First scenario looks more like B ignoring the influence.
Second scenario makes sense if the ST wants to nudge the plot and the player is willing to go along with it.
Third scenario, it may be the wording, or me being retarded, but instead of B having to choose a hard bargain (so called because it should be a cost to the character), it looks like B forces A to offer an alternative from which B even benefits from. I don't think that's the intended case.

>>97515594
>First scenario looks more like B ignoring the influence.
Yes, that was rather my point. When B both sets the price of a hard bargain and chooses whether or not to take that hard bargain, hard bargain becomes a way to deflect influence at effectively no cost. B can tip the dealer, but whether they choose to do so is entirely at-will.

>Second scenario makes sense if the ST wants to nudge the plot and the player is willing to go along with it.
Second scenario is the one that's got the clearest use case, mostly because it was written as part of an example of how it's used, but it's also the one that's the least supported.

>Third scenario, it may be the wording, or me being retarded, but instead of B having to choose a hard bargain (so called because it should be a cost to the character), it looks like B forces A to offer an alternative from which B even benefits from. I don't think that's the intended case.
I think I worded it poorly.
Instead of B having to choose a hard bargain, B presents a hard bargain and A chooses. If A keeps choosing the original influence and B still doesn't want to accept that influence, B has to either ignore it or present a bargain that's more tempting to A. Maybe if I make an example it'd make more sense?

>Alderman Arrogant makes a convincing argument to Brother Bombastic that they should assassinate the vile Count Callous
>Brother Bombastic, uncomfortable with skulduggery, makes an alternative offer that they could instead see Count Callous brought before the law and make his evils clear to all before executing him
>Alderman Arrogant, knowing that Count Callous has his fingers in the court system, declines this alternative and asserts that Count Callous can only be brought down outside the law
>Brother Bombastic offers instead to beat the courts into shape and force a fair trial, even offering to abase himself before his hated uncle the Drunken Duke to get the authority needed
>Alderman Arrogant accepts this.

>>97514804
The only explanation is that they would be better for the post-Usurpation world where Lunars would be constantly fighting the Shogunate. I don't care about the changing of the castes enough to be mad about it, but if I were in charge I would just make the current castes the original ones. It just feels like an irrelevant bit of fluff.

>>97515665
The problem with this explanation is that, in 3e FA, exalted were constantly at war with each other, and Lunars aren't fighting against the shogunate anymore, meaning they would require a newer set.

>but if I were in charge I would just make the current castes the original ones. It just feels like an irrelevant bit of fluff.
This is what TAW did, but unfortunately, 3e writers went "the wyld isn't hurting me! I am hurting myself!"

>>97515655
In that case scenario 3 makes more sense then.
The chance to ignore the influence at the cost of giving the influencer more dice to try another approach (while not being able to make the same request) does seem to point to an intended scenario where there's a back and forth in negotiation. Still, the influencer can have all the dice in the world, the influenced can just keep ignoring everything. That's probably going to be settled a little out of character with both sides agreeing to have the scene go somewhere one way or another.

Is armor actually necessary? Or would just dual wielding a swod and shield suffice with charms?

>>97516676
Armour isn't necessary with enough investment in Resistance. in fact, some builds don't allow armour at all. If you're going into MA, then there'll be restrictions on how heavy your armour can be, but if not, armour is the single most cost effective way to make yourself tougher.

>>97511876
My first exalted was a night caste ninja.
My entire idea for him was a guy with thrown 5 who spammed shurikens like a DBZ character or that tower defense game with monkeys.

>>97514626
Nigga that’s even worse. That’s the equivalent of the US military deciding that fuck the total US military stockpile, all wars MUST only be fought by 3 arbitrary types of military vehicle from now on.

>>97515665
Let me stop you right there, I care about the changing of the castes because initially it was a straightforward tragedy, and trying to recontextualise it as a Smart Decision smacks of the exact same kind of shit writing that gave us Raksi eating youths (not babies! YOUTHS! She’s no Epstein island partygoer y’all, she’s a classy cannibal!) as some kind of shit test that’s ackshyually very smart and sophisticated and Lilith having an Elder Charm that lets her function as an owl.

I fucking hate it because it’s a cheap and poorly thought out patch job for the setting that you have to bend over backwards to justify as a conscious AND intelligent decision that only exists to soothe the fee-fees of players, rather than actually create a coherent setting. This problem is not limited to Lunars but holy fuck, turning the annihilation of entire castes into a plus has to be one of the most blatant examples of it.

>>97516676
I actually agree with everything >>97516756 said but also for the same reasons he gave, I think armor is in fact functionally necessary if you expect your character to do any combat, ever, because being hurt past your Hardness/Soak motherfucker-sucks in a system where you’re nominally a sitting duck in crash unless you’re willing to devote a significant amount of Charm space to Resistance. There is as always one singular exception: Flesh-Scorning Flagellation lets Infernals simply dematerialise at E3, rendering them functionally invincible except to Exalts with spirit-killer Charms, artifacts with spirit-killer evocations and whatever characters the ST arbitrarily decides can hurt dematerialised spirits in a game that after years on end has shied away from systemised powersets for spirits. And at E5, Soul-Sand Devil Incarnation makes Infernals permanently dematerialised. Solving 80% of their armor problems forever.

Refluff it if you want. Assert your character wears a single ribbon and is protected by the embrace of earth spirits or something. But Hardness/Soak matters more than ever unless you can simply opt out of getting your face beaten in.

>>97516874
So a Flash build is suicide in 3e?

>>97517067
Yes and no. A Flash build is viable, but you have to think outside the box that is the conventional combat resolution system. The trick is that you can't just invest in Athletics, you have to invest in Dodge and preferably Stealth if you're really, REALLY committed to avoiding taking damage without armor regardless of your Exalt type. It's doable in theory, the main problem is frankly outside of Solars, Abyssals and Sidereals everyone's Dodge abilities aren't really up to that kind of heavy duty job. You also want to rely on Mountain-Crossing Leap and the like as well as anything that lets you disengage to just get the fuck out of dodge whenever someone is about to level their big combo at you. And also to sic an ambush attack on someone whenever possible at all.

Also as said before, Infernals get immense largesse for that kind of thing.

File: Osquio.png (1.83 MB, 2396x1350)

1.83 MB PNG

Cloud-Wreathed Colossus: The Infernal becomes a brass colossus that stretches into the sky, with a prismatic sun for a face and a crown of clouds. It has Adaptive Defense, Legendary Size, and Thousand-Armed Titan, as well as a Brawl Enhanced Attack with Area Attack. It has five-dot Unusual Hide.

>>97516842
>Let me stop you right there, I care about the changing of the castes because initially it was a straightforward tragedy, and trying to recontextualise it as a Smart Decision smacks of the exact same kind of shit writing that gave us Raksi eating youths (not babies! YOUTHS! She’s no Epstein island partygoer y’all, she’s a classy cannibal!) as some kind of shit test that’s ackshyually very smart and sophisticated and Lilith having an Elder Charm that lets her function as an owl.
She didn't eat anyone though. She served a guy a live baby and dared him to eat it if he was so willing to kill thousands of innocent children to archive what we wanted.

>>97516874
>whatever characters the ST arbitrarily decides can hurt dematerialised spirits
So most things worth fighting

>>97517440
Reread Fangs at the Gate, p. 42

>Raksi expects any Pact member passing through her Total Control Zone to visit her court at Mahalanka and greets them with....banquets of human flesh, vivisection of Dragon-Blooded prisoners of war, blood spot bectween apefolk champions and demon slaves. This isn't mere sadism on her part
>This
>isn't
>mere
>sadism
lol
lmao even
The cannibalism still happens, it's just played off as some kind of bizarre 5D chess shit test to toughen up younger lunars instead of a mad moon witch being a mad moon witch. This is what I'm sick of in 3e, the idea that everyone has to be a rational actor with a valid viewpoint even if it means flat out gaslighting you about a basic character concept.

>>97517487
The frustrating thing about 3e's NPC statblocks is that what things can or can't do basically comes down to vibes since not only is there no RoGD-style book of spirits but the statblocks are EXPLICITLY unfinished and you're supposed to just kind of imagine whatever abilities anyone or anything has.

In theory, you can just kind of declare random mountain bandits can punch ghosts because uhhhhh they have a sacred ritual where they ritually soak their brass knuckles in sacred tea, and also we're calling it a Charm because in 3e a Charm doesn't have to be an extraordinary or even explicitly supernatural miracle, it can literally just be hitting someone with a stick very hard. Not even with exceptional concussion force, skill or speed. It can just be a big bonk like one of Octavian's "Charms"

>>97517440
>>97517488
...excuse me, p. 43

>>97517501
It wouldn't even be out of place for there to be tons of ways for even regular mortals to hit spirits. Slap some paper talismans on your dagger and you're good

>>97517577
Sure, not even complaining really. I'm just bothered by 3e's terminal inability to actually make a playable game by creating NPC powerset templates the way 2e did with RoGD instead of writing cuisine descriptions and whatever the fuck Exigent Charm guidelines are supposed to be other than a loaded insult someone spent money backing that shit.

>>97516842
>Let me stop you right there, I care about the changing of the castes because initially it was a straightforward tragedy
In a meta way speaking, it only existed to justify the tattoos.
Because of this, both the caste breaking and the chimera weren't really essential for Lunars.

>>97517660
>In a meta way
If you go that far, then strictly speaking the tattoos themselves weren't necessary.

>>97517684
Yes, they are vestigial; from the time when Lunars were tribal, but once Lunars were moved from 1e!big tribe, the aesthetic became obsolete.

>>97517707
I mean, there are the IRL reasons. Tats are cool, they show you as a 'rebel' or whatever. There is a whole culture over them.

I was never into it with Lunars because you're supposed to be tatted up which takes out all the fun. It's why I prefer demon tattoos, they just seem way more flavorful instead of something that's basically a magical insulin pump. You also can't get demon tattoos as a lunar from what I remember which is just so damn boring. Everyone with tattoos gets more tattoos, so what the fuck.

>>97516636
>Still, the influencer can have all the dice in the world, the influenced can just keep ignoring everything.
I personally think that ignoring social influence is too strong, yeah. You fully defend against the influence and the downside is very small for that effect. I've found it leading to a situation where most of the players of social characters feel an anima power that says enemies can't ignore your social influence, or reaching Essence 3 for Fulminating Word which does the same, is necessary to make social influence reliable.

>>97517807
This is the real reason why Lunars are unfixable. They’re so fundamentally lame on their debut that nobody can even agree what is the correct way to make them cool. Not cool again, just cool. Or even whether they were ever cool at all.

>>97517807
Demon tattoos suck though

>>97518622
Nah, it should have always been like this. Players should have the ultimate say in how their characters think and feel, as opposed to things like physical challenges or whatever.

>>97519062
>Nah, it should have always been like this. Players should have the ultimate say in how their characters think and feel, as opposed to things like physical challenges or whatever.
Okay then play 99%+ of other games? Exalted is the one game that's actually had a robust social system (post 1e) and the expectation that player characters can and will be targeted by social influence (from day one). It's one of the things that drew me to the game and I would hate to play a version of Exalted where a meaningfully represented (mechanically) social experience isn't a core part of the experience.

Also, antagonists can ignore influence too. These rules are fully symmetrical.

>>97519103
I would get rid of it being symmetrical. That's my only edit. Works on NPCs, but players are real people and their fun and vision of who their character is matters more than what you're talking about.

>>97519103
>Exalted is the one game that's actually had a robust social system (post 1e) and the expectation that player characters can and will be targeted by social influence (from day one). It's one of the things that drew me to the game
Fate…we are forgotten…
We’re so forgotten you probably think I’m talking about the LN with the autistic sword kid, or the gacha about history-incinerating demon gods

>>97519133
…doesn’t that kind of defeat the point of mental defence Charms?

>>97519138
It does, but at my table you just don't have to buy them so you reinvest elsewhere.

>>97519147
Personally I would rather have a game where psychic attacks and the like are an actual thing that can happen in the high-flying fantasy world. I’ve never heard about this complaint in, say, DnD where the Psion class coexists happily. Like it’s your table and you can do what you want, but I think it does the entire setting a disservice to just assert that mind control in no way, shape or form exists (even among SWLIHN’s demons) because someone’s fee-fees might get hurt.

That’s Discordite talk.

>>97519163
watch out everybody, it's the same fucking schizophrenic retard who doesn't understand the problems with the social system

also known as communityfag

>>97519166
Not your bogeyman lil bro, just pointing out plenty of TTRPGs out there have mind control without it spontaneously tanking the appeal of their games.

>>97519163
Mind affecting stuff has been getting hard nerfed for decades now for the same reasons. You're out of the loop

>>97519199
his brain is literally wired wrong, he is physically incapable of understanding this

If players could be trusted with mind control mechanics without immediately resorting to using them for rape, then we could have a functioning social system. As it stands, the devs are working with what they have

>>97519163
>even among SWLIHN’s demons
Why would they get special treatment anyway. Game's better off when it's a one way street from PCs to NPCs

Mind control, and psyonics in general, is a really common thing in pulps, 4/10 of pulp magic operates in the ESP paradigm, even Howard's.

>>97519254
It is her iconic thing, it is like if Malfeas didn't have a green sun in his hierarchy.

>>97519215
>If players could be trusted with mind control mechanics without immediately resorting to using them for rape, then we could have a functioning social system.
Let them, if that's what's allowed in your game. If it's not an ERP then it's not the mind control that's the problem, it's the players.

>>97519215
By this logic shapeshifting and disguises should be removed from the game, since those were used for rape since 1e.

>>97519349
I didn't say they should be removed, I said they need to be moderated to prevent IRL harm because the players won't do it themselves

>>97198493
>>97198530
Reminder that only literal schizophrenic freaks defend the social system.

>>97519306
>in pulps
not games

>>97519370
>freaks
Freak, singular.

>>97519370
Social system is one of the most common things people actually say they like about 3E, though. Have you ever considered that you feeling that strongly about other people liking different things than you might be related to issues you have rather than to issues other people have?

>>97519357
>they need to be moderated to prevent IRL harm
Sounds like a job for... literally anybody but the developers! Who can't moderate, by design!

That's a job for the players. Yes, even if they are unable to self-moderate, it's still a job for the players. The Storyteller is a player included in this but cannot be the only one. No amount of developer coddling is going to make this problem go away.

>>97519393
It's better in comparison to 1 and 2e but that's not a high bar.

>>97519215
>the devs are working with what they have
By...giving Infernals literal mind control Charms??

I don't understand what you were cooking here, unless you're agreeing that yeah players can in fact be trusted with mind control.

>>97519403
It's better in comparison to most social systems in RPGs, but admittedly that's not a high bar, either. I think 3E's social system has plenty of good ideas, but the execution is very clunky.

>>97519415
Developers are stupid. This and more breaking news at the top of the hour.

>>97519373
The devs keep hammering home how exalted was meant to be a pulp revival.
And other sources of inspiration features mind control too.

>>97519490
nobody gives a shit you nogame troglodyte

>>97518907
Lunars are unfixable because people who don't play Lunars never let people actually make a fresh start on Lunars. It always has to be able to fit the old paradigm somehow

>>97519399
To be fair, it is white wolfism; the only way for the devs to be more intrusive, is if they sent death squads to make sure that you are playing the right way.

You are right, the moderation should be done by the tables themselves

>>97519497
Claiming that peoole who don't want a complere rewrite of Linars can't be Lunars players because...because they just can't, okay?! makes for shitty discussion and doesn't help at all with actually figuring out wats to improve Lunars. Even if you are literally autistic and understanding other people's perspectives doesn't come easily to you, you should still be able to understand the general idea of other people being able to have different likes and opinions than you without being in any way objectively wrong and while being as familiar with the subject of these differences of opinion as you are.

>>97519582
Familiar, sure? Play them? They don't.

File: HAkU51OWQAAmLyl.jpg (154 KB, 767x1199)

154 KB JPG

>>97519605
Yes, some anon even used "the narrow path sidebar" to bash rubberman charms, the same sidebar that states that Lunars with great effort could match Dragon-Blooded social prowess.

>>97519632
What a sidestep

>>97519632
>The developers are based and correct because they agree with-OH NO NO NO THEY’RE WRONG THEY’RE ALL WRONG
Take the L, homie. Mind control options in 2e didn’t kill the line.

>>97519632
Amazing feat of damning by faint praise, the Ebon Dragon himself couldn’t come up with superior slander.

>>97519714
Did you quote the wrong post?

>>97519632
What anon, when and where? I remember seeing people here laugh at or talk much-deserved shit about that sidebar, but I don't remember anyone using it as the basis as an argument for anything expect 1E Lunars being bad.

>>97519886
Some anon used it as an argument, claiming that the fanbase had a distorted view of Lunars shapeshifting prowess.

Than people pointed out the "strong but limited charms" and the "no social" bits.

>>97519886
>I don't remember anyone using it as the basis as an argument for anything expect 1E Lunars being bad.
I know it hasn't been that long since I used it to argue that 2e and 3e Lunars were bad too, since they hadn't cleaved away from the roots it imbedded in the splat. The idea of a 'flexible Lunar' is inherently undercut so long as they still follow the same practice of a more broad potential being narrowed down to the same level in individual charms, no matter how much they claim that Lunars are flexible and able to adapt to any circumstances. The only reason they sometimes feel that way is because the Excellency is more broad, which was true for the dice adders all the way back in 1e too.

>>97519912
>The only reason they sometimes feel that way is because the Excellency is more broad, which was true for the dice adders all the way back in 1e too.
I remember finding 1e's Lunar's not-Excellencies weird, it was like if the authors didn't want them to be attribute exalted.

Strong opinion but everything should either be Ability based or Attribute based.

So this is what going to a highschool with homosexual bullies is like. Interesting.

>>97519393
I mean, it's good. Honestly the 2e system for social stuff is great as well, although for some reason people complain about that system more. I wouldn't call it uncommon for games either, tons of them have mind control or social systems. The one for exalted is just better and more detailed - more mechanical.

Speaking of mechanics it's nice to have different resources to 'attack'. It's like DnD saves, but well, good. There is just this boogyman that the ST is going to use social charms to totally mind-wash the player character and fundamentally change who they're playing which I don't even know how to argue. It's never happened to me, at least.

File: HAkU51VXIAAhUOy.jpg (297 KB, 901x1200)

297 KB JPG

>>97520696
The problem would be Alchemicals ability vs Sidereals attributes.
Sidereals could work as constellation based.

>>97519393
>Have you ever considered that you feeling that strongly about other people liking different things than you might be related to issues you have rather than to issues other people have?
In different times, this wouldn't have to be said. Now, it should be asticky. Even if people obviously don't read the sticky.

>>97521186
I'm really tired of this "It didn't happen to me so it isn't real" shit. Why do you think this keeps coming up? Is everyone a baby but you?

>>97521908
He's just unironically mentally ill.

>>97519062
I don't know how to feel about that, as I both agree and disagree.
The physical part is the main point against the players being able to dictate how their characters behave under pressure. Yes, you could say your character would never agree to do one thing, but the rules cover cases where the other part makes a compelling argument, or the character has to make a tough choice between two bad options. Rules regulate such a scenario, and you can always spin it in interesting ways.
The physical counterpart could very well be treated the same. You can say that your character is a master swordsman that can cut drops of falling rain under a storm without getting wet, but the dice may have you miss an attack all the same. The argument that in such a case the failure is due to the skills of the opponent still apply in the social encounter as well.
Same reasoning for why you could say a character in any other game is brave, but the rules for fear can have him run away.
Does it take away player agency? Yes, but that should be an accepted possibility when you start throwing dice.
That said, I can also see how some may want to make sure how character arcs develop, as basically almost all games have an established storytelling component, and some groups want to lean more into it. In the end, I think how such cases should be handled should be discussed around the table before playing, or at least with a quick chat between ST and player if the situation requires it.

>>97521969
Bro I didn't ask.

File: 1614137507973.jpg (200 KB, 1000x681)

200 KB JPG

>>97522132

The social system would have been better if it was fully asymmetrical, PCs and NPCs having the same mechanics ends up with weird interactions such a social MAD scenario.

>>97521908
We have four or so mentally ill homosexuals who've been complaining about the same thing for I think fifteen years now where this is the only place that will allow them to do so. I can promise you there are places where people actually enjoy exalted and think the social system is quite rad.

It's funny though because I don't think an ST has ever ruined your character with social attacks or whatever - but if they did I can tell you that an ST can ruin your character whenever they want, system be damned.

>>97521248
I honestly can't comprehend the level of autism is takes to be so invested in something you hate. I can, however, imagine the autism where people get hyped focused on a single aspect of the system and throw a temper tantrum when they don't get there way. You see that a lot here.

There is an anon here who constantly whine posts about lunars, the social system, the combat system for both editions, the lore of haltan, the lore ability itself and who knows what all else. They've been doing this for FIFTEEN YEARS. I'd be impressed if it didn't make me so damn sad that people just can't admit they're a faggot.

>>97522382
Bro I also didn't ask whatever question you're answering, and your ass does not remember the shitflinging that happened on RPG.net and even WW before they got hugboxed

>>97522431
Remove your comments if you don't want people to respond to them.

>>97522382
>everyone who disagrees with me is the same couple of guys
Shut up about 15 years, newfag. Some of us have been here 20+.

is anyone else permanently trapped as eternal dm because if you don't dm exalted no one will ever play it with you

>>97522382
Nigger if you're so thin skinned that you can't take shit talking the game, why are you even here?

>>97522449
There's a difference between responding and schizo ramblings.

>>97522382
what do you want him to do? Suck off ligier like that annoying infernalfag?

>>97522507
I probably am going to. But that goes for a lot of systems.
>stable group is me and 3-4 others, plus some extras
>one guy is allergic to work and can't even be bothered to read anything game related despite being the one with supposedly more free time
>another one is enthusiastic but has started out relatively recently so he's focusing on GMing other stuff for now
>other experienced GM has a nagging girlfriend and a busy schedule
>committed player is the one who can show up the least because of wife and kid
So, if we meet weekly, I end GMing twice a month, with two others doing one.

>>97522520
Don't come to a thread for discussing a game if you don't want to discuss that game.

>>97522547
I'd rather discuss the game instead of whatever gay dick measuring contests were in those replies.

>>97522554
>immediately thinks about gay dick

>>97522557
Nice deflection

File: 1626091140550.jpg (1.65 MB, 1275x1650)

1.65 MB JPG

what's wrong with thinking about dick?

File: fc662dfc8b3ab811d38405d35(...).jpg (70 KB, 700x394)

70 KB JPG

>>97522562
Bring it on fag

>>97522431
>rpg.net
>hugbox

I'm so sorry.

>>97522382
>It's funny though because I don't think an ST has ever ruined your character with social attacks or whatever - but if they did I can tell you that an ST can ruin your character whenever they want, system be damned.
You know when somebody is a newfag, when he isn't familiar with 2e's paranoia paradigm.

I'm thinking about playing Exalted with my group because I like the concept, but I pretty much would HAVE to GM it to get them to try it. I heard the game is very difficult to GM, is that true?

>>97522646
Yes.

>>97522654
What about it is considered difficult? Just having to be accurate to the lore and having to study up for it, or is it just that complex to track?

>>97522625
Silence, zoomer

>>97522665
It's both.

>>97522679
Okay, would you suggest Exalted Essence then?

>>97522685
No, but only because that one is just straight up bad. And it's not even that much less complex in exchange.

You just have to embrace it and jump in with both feet. I suggest not getting hung up on the details and minutae and just make shit up as you go along whenever you feel yourself slowing down, in both lore and mechanics.

>>97522703
What makes Essence bad compared to base Exalted?

>>97515146
if they can always just say no why even put the powers in? just don't fucking bother with social or mental powers and make the whole thing fightfag based. it's like the curseborne powers featuring possession and mental control just letting the target opt out, don't waste the fucking bytes writing the power then

>>97522809
Dont be mad at a legitimately good decision, just be mad about them not making actually taking influence *fun*

>>97522809
They want to have cake after eating it

>>97522507
No. I DM'd well enough and cycled through enough randoms that some of my players (a little over one in ten) started running Exalted and invited me to their games.

>>97522806
Anon you're talking to a hater.

Exalted is... well, it's not easy to run, but it's fine. It was fun to learn as I went, for me, but I also had a really good experienced player helping me through it. Essence is pretty easy to get into compared to the mainline editions, and is a pretty good game in and of itself, just with a different style of emergent meta than any of the mainline games that turns off some older fans. The lore is expansive and interrelated in a way that is difficult to avoid making mistakes with, but it's actually not bad to run so long as can get away with not caring that you're contradicting canon.

>>97522382
I guess I'm the anon who "whines" about the Haltan lore. Also an anon who rather likes the social system and thinks Lunars need tweaks but not a full reimagining. I wonder how many anons in total are behind the complaints you've decided to attribute to one person.

>>97523508
I am rather 100% sure you're just one of the useless cunts who cries a bunch and is no longer a part of the community. Either way, you need to stop projecting and start using your brain.

It doesn't matter if these are all one person or not - just that there are homosexuals that have been whining senselessly for way too long. Anytime they go "I have ideas" it's through a lens of bitterness and shit talking, if it wasn't then no one would be calling them out for being crying faggots. I'm glad you like the social system and think that it's good though, because it is.

It's a rather nice part of exalted mechanics desu and you're not the only one who thinks its good.

>>97523752
>and is no longer a part of the community
Oh, it's this guy again. There is no unified Exalted community, anon. Exalted communities, on the other hand, are wherever people discuss or, better yet, actually play Exalted. Everyone who posts here is part of "the community", or at least a community. I talk about Exalted on three different sites, though most regularly here, and on occasion I even manage to get my group to play an Exalted campaign, so I guess I'm not only a part of the community but a part of multiple communities.

>>97523829
>Oh, it's this guy again.
called it >>97519166

he just can't help himself kek

>>97522806
Charms are weird and weak, ventures are shit, combat is a clown show. It's a not-quite narrative system that is still heavily bogged down by obnoxious bookkeeping while also failing to evoke much of anything.

File: 1503638024320.png (12 KB, 610x161)

12 KB PNG

Is there anything an exalt could do to beat a Mage?

>>97524051
Play by Exalted's rules rather than those of Mage.

>>97523752
If you can't tolerate negativity, why be on 4chan?

>>97523752
Oh, you are the community anon? It explains the deranged shit posting.

>>97524051
>Is there anything an exalt could do to beat a Mage?
If your pic is related and you're claiming that flight is not counterable, then I have some news for you.

The news is 'attacks have unlimited range' and 'attacks always hit' and 'attacks do infinite damage' and 'attacks ignore cover'. Also the ability to counter-attack any supernatural phenomena, sending flying slashes at any range or even across realms to hit the guy cursing you and also cancel the curse if the attack hits, exists now.

>>97524051
Also, Exalted have learned to fly.

>>97517501
As fun as it was to oogle the pages long stat-blocks and charm lists for NPCs, actually using them for anything was somewhere between "impossible" and "not worth the effort".

Running high powered (or hell, even mid powered) NPCs in Exalted is great though once you switch it to a system that actually understands players are making characters for a supers game and gives you the tools to do so. A good one would also give you the tools to actually make playable Exigents out of the box (that Exalted never bothered to define the limits/distinctions between different tiers of Charm/Sorcery/Martial Arts is a whole other side issue. "Sidereals can't make new Charms, but can make new Martial Arts that can do anything, including mimic the end-result of Solar Sorcery.")

>>97524903
I think the point of Mage is that willworking at one point stops being supernatural and becomes part of reality (IE, gunpowder)

>>97524051
An exalt could convince all the other mages that that one mage in particular is plotting against them.

>>97526919
Pages long characters sheets was a symptom of a problem that wasn't really solved by 3e or Essence.

The problem of NPCs needing those pages long charm lists.

In fact, people complained that characters such as Ma-Ha-Suchi didn't have enough charms to cover the basic competences.

As far as social combat goes, I am sympathetic to both sides. The big problem with Exalted though, is most forms of social combat and mind control in other systems can't permanently radically change your character into someone you don't want to play anymore. How I'd handle it is Exalts are supernaturally stubborn. You can only instill, remove, or alter minor intimacies unwillingly without using mind control. You can use mind control Charms to forcibly make big changes, but it isn't permanent. Get rid of the Great Curse, but keep Limit. Limit is an anti-mindfucking system to keep Exalts from having their minds warped/destroyed by the Primordials during the war. Your original Intimacies are just suppressed. Any action you're made to take that goes against a major Intimacy whether suppressed or not causes you to gain Limit. Once you enter Limit Break, you go crazy for a short while, but all mind control effects end.

Also, to encourage people to accept having major Intimacies messed with, bribe them with experience. On a similar note, to throw the original spirit of the Great Curse a bone, introduce Vices from CofD To draw on the classical hero inspiration for Exalted, I'd probably call them Fatal Flaws.

>>97528362
I'd rather just have players not subject to it, and then just get rid of social/mental defense abilities and charms.

>>97528362
I wouldn't mind a more DnD style of mind control like you're suggesting where it's basically just combat control but this still feels like a step backwards.

There is also the whole thing with social combat not being mind control. It's more power fantasy, where you're just too pretty for anyone to attack you or where someone talks so good you can't disagree with them. Or where you write so scary that people go crazy.

Either way the whole
> permanently radically change your character into someone you don't want to play anymore
Isn't really something you can avoid. It can be done just by taking too much damage through normal combat, or whatever else the ST throws at you.

Another issue that you'd have to solve is the whole "exalts are treated different". Some of the best combat in exalted is fighting other exalted, so making it not matter against them just removes a player arch-type. Personally, I think the systems for 2e and 3e work just fine for what they're trying to do. The only time I'd really worry about it is when it's something the storyteller is using against the players and for that I'd say just don't hit your players with a dozen plus social attacks at once if they don't have any defenses for it.

I mean if you're playing a character who doesn't have the stats to hit something really pretty I don't see how that's a problem with the system as a whole. I'm sure people could homebrew some great alternatives to the social systems but it'd be a bunch of work. I'm sure it'd been done for 2e.

>>97528473
>just tell your players your not going to use social charms against them then don't use social charms against them.

This is also a good idea if you think it's a big issue.

Studying the quickstart before trying the game tomorrow, there's several mentions of stances and a clash thing, but they're not explained at all.

>>97527879
That's consensus stuff rather than Mage stuff though. Mages can't directly alter the consensus or bake their shit into the consensus. They have to actually shift the zeitgeist and change the environment so that their stuff fits, and if an Exalt keeps up an anti-shaping field then changing the consensus won't even do anything because around the Exalt it won't have changed.

Also, if shifting the consensus would work for Mages, then it would work if Exalted did it too, because it's a trait of the environment/world, not the characters involved. And Exalted are much, much better at shifting social norms than Mages.

File: essence clash.jpg (106 KB, 359x803)

106 KB JPG

>>97529230
>Studying the quickstart before trying the game tomorrow, there's several mentions of stances and a clash thing, but they're not explained at all.
Stances aren't really a keyword. Some charms have Stance in the name but that doesn't really make them any different, and there are no generic stance mechanics. You might be thinking of Forms, which are a certain technique in every martial art that activates on Step 1 and provides a persistent bonus for the scene. In other editions you could only have one Form active at a time, but in Essence it's just a matter of how quickly you can set them up since they take up the same Step as most attack charms and each other.

Clash on the other hand is absolutely a thing, but it doesn't really come up unless you want it to come up. I'll picrel the rules. Basically you can respond to a decisive attack by attacking back and making it into an opposed roll instead of an attack roll vs Defense trait, with whoever wins the clash having their attack go through. No counterattacks allowed.

This is your simple action per round and cannot be flurried, so if you've already taken an action you cannot clash and if you've already clashed you don't have an action on your turn. You could still counterattack a different attack or use some other action-generating effect to use another action.

File: carriage ambush.png (1.58 MB, 1920x1052)

1.58 MB PNG

>A howl echoes through the night and chills cut unnaturally through your fire's warmth.
>Your caravan's guildsman shifts to check on the guard, who shrugs, unsettled and unsure.
>Another howl roars out, close this time, dangerous and angry at you interlopers.
>Your fire goes out. You're not alone.
>People start to run.

Inspire (Fear) followed by Intimidate (Flee!), exploiting the fear. Let's say both rolls beat your Resolve, but you can of course still spend Willpower as normal. Let's say your perfect combat paradigm is extremely Willpower heavy and you would be reducing your effective combat potential meaningfully if you did so.

Is this a fair and enjoyable start to an encounter (that could shortly be a combat encounter), or would you get angry at your Storyteller if they threw multiple influences at you like this?

>>97529986
Yes, reading other characters' charms and the stances are just that, I was confused in one istance but it was made clear later.
Thank you for the explanation for clash, that's good to know.

>>97530768
I wpuldn't be mad at the ST for doing that, though I'm not sure I'd enjohy that. It'd be fair but not necessarily fun. While I don't mind social influence being used against players, I think I'd prefer it if resisting it was even more about Intimacies and less about Willpower or Resolve. I mean that a dude with an Defining Intimacy of yearning for a heroic death in combat shouldn't be easy to intimidate through threats of violence even if he hasn't invested in Integrity and Integrity Charms, while a dude with a Defining Intimacy of "I really like being alive and would prefer to continue being alive, thanks" should more readily flee from violence without necessarily being any more weak-willed or easier to persuade in other contexts that the heroic death appreciator.

>>97530768
I'd tell him to get fucked and ignore it

>>97528508
I just remove the abilities so there's no XP traps. Players don't need to defend so there's no point. Although I'm going to be honest that I stopped using the exalted system a while ago and just stick with mutants and masterminds.

Which Exalted type is the sluttiest?

>>97530950
Dragonblooded. They've had to explain how unusual it is to not cheat on your wife.

>>97530866
So you're looking for something more like Essence's social influence system where it's easier to mechanically make things Unacceptable Influence rather than having to case-by-case it with the Storyteller? (In Essence anything against your Major Virtue is unacceptable influence and autoresisted as if you'd been told to suicide)

File: motivation bang all celestials.png (241 KB, 361x447)

241 KB PNG

>>97530950
Whatever type Ma-Ha-Suchi is.

>>97531090
Generally, you should be very limited on what you can influence a character on

>>97531090
I've been thinking about Pendragon's Passions being pretty cool, and previous editions' Virtue channels being kinda cool, too, and about whether something like that might form a good basis for a social influence system that works on both PCs and NPCs. I mean something like first putting in a base system to let people draw power from their Intimacies, adding bonuses scaling with the intensity of an Intimacy to actions directly related to that Intimacy, then letting social mechanics interact with saud system. Inflame or suppress passions, let persuasion work by letting people channel an Intimacy for free without costing whatever resource it'd normally cost if they go along with your influence based on that Intimacy, maybe let them suffer a malus equal to bonus if they'd go against your influence and their own Intimacy instead. Let a roll to make an idealistic hothead of a hero doubt the righteousness of his cause work by preventing him from drawing power from his devotion to said cause until those doubts are resolved. Use both carrot and stick to get people to go along with successful influence without actually compelling them to do so. It'd be more similar to Essence than base Exalted, sure. I'd be fine with.mechanics along those lines being used against my character. There's pretty much no chance of me taking the time and effort to homebrew that in, though, so it's just an idle thought.

>>97531095
I don't think FA Solars with fuckhuge harems were any less slutty than Ma-Ha-Suchi. The real answer is just that Exalts get to be as slutty as they want to be, and how slutty they want to be depends on the individual rather than the splat.

>>97530950
Solars are the only one with explicit sex charms

>>97531471
...which they stole from Sidereals.

>>97531095
Lunars' entire purpose is to be sluts, specifically to BSC (Big Solar Cock).

>>97531694
Destined monogamous relationship that persists from one life to another is about the least slutty thing possible aside from complete celibacy.

>>97531694
Not really, being a mandatory sex slave doesn't necessarily comes with being a slut.

>>97531751
>Destined
Autismode Engaged: They're not destined, they're soulmates. It's different!

>monogamous
Nothing about the Solar/Lunar Bond requires monogamy. In fact, not being monogamous is encouraged by Solar's access to extremely efficient mindrape for Lunars creating inequal relationships. Solars have less incentive to care about their Lunar's feelings since they can just change how they feel about things, while Lunars are incentivized to find anything that can help with their trauma (like a relationship) or insulate them from their Solar (like a more robust support network, which often leads to relationships) outside of their connection to their Solar.

>relationship
While there's guaranteed to be a connection it's not necessarily going to be a good one.

>persists from one life to another
Their relationship is definitely not guaranteed to persist, so much as a relationship is guaranteed to form each life. How much of a connection there is to the previous relationship depends strongly on the Past Lives and ages involved.

>least slutty thing possible aside from complete celibacy
In conclusion, while not slutty, the bond does become extremely toxic in some of the more cynical interpretations, and it's easy to go slutty from there.

Also, consider the case of two sluts bonding over sluttery by slutting it up together.

>>97531282
I don't think mental influence needs nerfs. It's already hard to pull off, regardless of edition. If people don't actively resist then it's pretty easy to get through but that goes for every field of competency in Exalted - if you don't block or dodge, fighting is going to be dangerous for you, and if you don't manage your arcane links or pay attention to workings then hostile sorcery is going to give you a bad time, and if you just let the enemy crafter craft and don't even try to harass them or stop them collecting ingredients you're going to be faced by a hard counter sooner rather than later, and so on and so forth.

If you make a Glorious Solar Saber and are disarmed, it doesn't say it dispels, and the Duration is scene-long rather than until released or anything like that. It says it has the stats of a daiklave.

Can someone else attune to your Glorious Solar Saber? Say, your Lunar Mate for instance?

>>97532585
You can't attune to GSS, it has the stats of a daiklaive but isn't one.

>>97527921
Agreed.

Honestly though, so much of Exalted's Charm system boils down to "how many different ways can we let players modify our bolted on mess of a system changes that are bolted on top of the Storyteller System's inherent messes" to the point that no edition of Exalted would ever work as well as it should.

Take Excellencies. 3ed simplifies Excellencies quite a bit over earlier versions, but even there you have them rebuilding Excellencies for each splat, which is just a way to make that die pool modifier bigger. It's a design goal to make characters interesting because of how they interact with the game mechanics, rather than using game mechanics to moderate the interesting things a character actually does.

Essence might've been an option, but by the time I'm looking at alternatives to 3ed (or 2ed), I may as well just make the jump to HERO or M&M or Cortex or some other system that can handle supers (and importing stuff from other settings) from the get go.

>>97533502
I believe that the dice adders keep being reinvented because of the "solars aren't outright supernatural, just superhuman" soft rule.

>Solars are the super human splat!!
>how do we represent it without breaking the game?
>Oh, dice adders!!
>There are too many dice adders in 1e, let's simplify them in the form of Excellencies.
>But how do we represent solars being the superhuman and strongest splat?
>Oh, with more dice and cap breakers!!
>2e ended up a mess, let's streamline the Excellencies further.
>But how should we represent the Solar superhuman prowess??
>Oh, with dice tricks and non-charm dices!!!

Than other splats have to keep up with the dice bucket meta.

>>97531694
You have it backwards, Lunars are the Bad Dragons for Solars. No one wants fish or wolf pussy but women want the crazy cocks.

>>97532253
It's not a mechanics debate or issue. It's a game design thing for them. "A system should not have these things" sort of thing. No amount of balancing can change that unless you make the system effect combat only.

>>97534509
>No one wants fish or wolf pussy but women want the crazy cocks.
Anon... there's an entire board dedicated to a forbidden show demonstrating this to be untrue.

>>97534843
I apologize for my ignorance because I know mermaids are a thing but I wasn't really thinking of them. I don't think furry girls count because they have human female vaginas.

>>97534509
>A system should not have these things" sort of thing. No amount of balancing can change that unless you make the system effect combat only.
2e!NWoD kind of solved it through the conditions system.

>>97534982
During the heyday of the forbidden show, the bad dragon company, sold main 6 flavored horse pussy/anus fleshlights.

>>97535063
>2e!NWoD kind of solved it through the conditions system.
Not really. I'm one of the guys against it and this is still not acceptable.

>>97532617
daiklaves have attunement in their stats, 5m usually.

File: 1637785184530.png (155 KB, 300x299)

155 KB PNG

>the test session I've been preparing for the past two weeks got cancelled because the third player was sick
>we just had a chat and something to drink
I mean, it was still a nice evening, but...

>>97535153
>the test session I've been preparing for the past two weeks got cancelled because the third player was sick
Fucking typical.

>>97535165
I want to stay positive and get the chance to finally start reading the fluff. I focused on the crunch to have something playable, now that that's out of the way I can start really digging into it. Starting with 1e core I guess.

>>97535153
GMing a wargame is so much more convenient than RPGs. All but 1 person can drop out I can still play, but just 1 person calls out of an RPG and the session may go to shit or other players get deflated and back out as well

>>97535153
That's why you should keep a one shot on the back of your book.

>>97534509
>It's not a mechanics debate or issue. It's a game design thing for them. "A system should not have these things" sort of thing. No amount of balancing can change that unless you make the system effect combat only.
Basically yeah. I don't agree with any sort of control over player characters.

>>97535538
>Basically yeah. I don't agree with any sort of control over player characters.
Why the hell are you in the Exalted fandom then? This isn't new, it's a huge part of every edition, and I refuse to believe anyone could have been attracted by the combat system. I mean for fucks sake I hate to call it out because it's going to draw in spam posters hating on the idea, but it's not like you could have gone into Exalted without knowing about the Great Curse, which is already way over your hard line in the sand from the get go.

>>97535621
>>97535621
I think it's stylish; the grandiosity and aesthetic are really cool. I like a martial arts heavy setting, and there are just a ton of individual pieces of the lore and Exalt types that I really enjoy. It's not like I didn't know about the Great Curse and all that, I just get rid of them when I play because I don't like those parts of the game and I am not beholden to use everything or nothing. I don't know why this is setting you off, man, I feel like my opinion is triggering some deep-seated resentment in you that has nothing to do with me and picking and choosing what I like about the game.

>>97535621
Not that anon, but I thought it was going to be a non-wod game, a breath of fresh air away from elderwank and dominate.

>>97535621
If you like the Great Curse, you have no right to talk shit about anyone's opinion

>>97535621
Players being subject to mental influence is not a critical part of the game or setting. Get off your high horse.

>>97535621
Liking some parts of a game but not all isn't unusual, anon. The beauty of tabletop RPG is that it's easy to tweak things to fit your and your table's tastes. I don't mind social influence being able to affect player characters, myself, but there are definitely things I change for my table. For instance, since you brought it up, I tend to remove or at least ignore the Great Curse.

Finally decided to ditch the Exalted Discussion Thread over on Sufficient Velocity. No I will not elaborate, fuck them and their treehouse club bullshit.

>>97535471
That was what we were supposed to play

>>97536371
Eh, I rather like that thread. It's often slow as fuck and some of the frequent pisters annoy me, but it's far from the worst place for discussing Exalted.

>>97528487
First of all, it isn't just combat control. Presuming you aren't trying to repeatedly force someone into doing something that goes against a strong Intimacy, it could last a rather long time. I'm not against stuff that hinders people either. Not being able to hit a character because they're too pretty is fine. The problem is when the character is rendered unfun to play in the long run by changing their fundamental character. It's worse than a character dying, because a dead character is unplayable instead of having the expectation to keep on playing them.

>>97536512
At least with 3E social rules it'd take a whole lot of influence rolls over the course of a longer period of time for a character to fundamentally change. What kind of a scenario are you thinking of where a player would have to let a long-term multi-phase project of changing his character into sometjing unfun to play go on?

>>97536512
>The problem is when the character is rendered unfun to play in the long run by changing their fundamental character.
Is your problem that 3e/Essence's instill actions are too easy? Because if that's the essence of the problem I'd agree. If it's that instill is an action at all I'd want to disagree.

I really dislike that it seems the standard way to go about social interaction is to fundamentally change core beliefs on account of that being easy and a prerequisite for doing what you usually actually want, which is to use the persuade action to get them to do something for you. The actions 'convince a character to do something for you, requiring that they have some reason to care' and 'level up a character's beliefs from trivial -> would risk my life on it -> would throw my life away for it' should not be equivalent in terms of difficulty, and definitely should not be equal difficulty at all stages. Trivial tasks should not be the same difficulty to persuade people into as life-changing tasks.

I do like that changing people's core beliefs is actually possible. I think that's a good way to go about things in Exalted. I think it's an okay thing to levy on a player character when it's given appropriate build-up and difficulty associated and is coming from an appropriate character, and where the player has appropriate say in what goes through - it should not be as easy as it is, it should not be something that can be done in casual conversation, forcing it precisely shouldn't be possible, but it should be possible.

>>97536518
>At least with 3E social rules it'd take a whole lot of influence rolls over the course of a longer period of time for a character to fundamentally change
No... It takes one conversation. It does take a whole lot of influence rolls, but that's only slow out of character, and you need a whole lot of influence rolls to push through basically anything in 3e's social system.

>>97536533
>No... It takes one conversation. It does take a whole lot of influence rolls, but that's only slow out of character, and you need a whole lot of influence rolls to push through basically anything in 3e's social system.
One conversation where you have the supporting Intimacies and the other guy the supporting evidence to rewrite your personality, where the other guy succeeds on all his rolls because I guess he just does, and where you just stand around and let it happen? Even as a response to successful influence roll it's perfectly valid to have your character get upset about his pre-existing convictions being shaken and just storm off, with new doubts in his heart but unwilling to continue the discussion any further. I'm not saying that there aren't things I'd do differently about the social system, but this particular scenario doesn't seem very likely to me.

>>97536542
>One conversation where you have the supporting Intimacies and the other guy the supporting evidence to rewrite your personality
No, the aim is to push it through without any supporting intimacies.

>where the other guy succeeds on all his rolls because I guess he just does
Frankly, if a character has gone pretty much all-in on social, and you're not going hard on Integrity (most of which is shit), then yeah they're going to succeed on all their rolls. If you both go all-in then the offense is still advantaged, just less so. Social influence is way more mote efficient than social defense too, so if you actually try to defend yourself you end up being lamed in the combat you probably intend to go into.

>where you just stand around
This is another one of those cases of people underestimating how fast social combat is. Social can happen in combat rounds. If you've seen the Fulminating Word Thousand Courtesan Ways flurry then please understand that dropping someone by eight Willpower in one combat round is not even cheese so much as it's just pointing out that social charms are both fast and strong.

One of the best feelings ever is hitting an enemy with a flurry of social attacks to fuck their willpower and apply debuffs so that your allies can absolutely fuck them over.

I need to be real, all these negatives really just sound like positives if you actually enjoy social systems in a game. Not everything needs to be resolved with combat and having ways to facilitate changes with mechanics instead of just free writing is nice.

>>97536542
I think the guy between my posts >>97536596 is baiting.

Anyway, just wanted to mention that everything I was talking about before about how fast social combat is gets significantly worse when there is more than one person talking. When you hit people with the Fred and George special each of the characters who're doing social influence have separate retries on all the social influence actions. Fred can try to instill Loyalty to the Weasley Family and if he's resisted with willpower George can happily slam a second influence that's exactly the same in to do it too.

Unironically might get back into five guys with sledgehammers territory, except sledgehammer is the name of a drink and they're chatting you up at a bar.

>>97536625
Social characters are pretty powerful especially when you have multiple of them in the same circle. Another benefit for it really. This isn't typical mind you, most games only have one or two max because not everyone wants to play the social character.

>>97536650
>>97536596
Really feels like instead of listening, these posts are just about people understanding that it's broken and not wanting a game without the bullshit system.

>>97536665
>not wanting a game without the bullshit system.
I don't want a game without a social system. I'd much prefer the social system was less ass than 3e, which has a system I have a lot of problems with, some of which I've described above, the only other major problem being that it doesn't reward exceptional skill/success from the character, only exceptional skill / patience from the player, which is an utterly awful way to have a roleplaying game work. For me, right now, the best social system is Essence.

>>97536596
These are incredible negatives for everybody who isn't you. It's essentially paranoia combat all over again except now you have to be running two different kinds of defensive suites every time you are in combat because you could potentially have your brain exploded. Can't you see how stupid that is?

Longshoreman Of The Apocalypse would be a pretty goated Alchemical Name for a Soulsteel not gonna lie.

>>97536669
To be clear I think social characters still have a place. But as pcs trying to impose their will on other people, and even then I do not think that once you have committed yourself to violence that you should be allowed to start a completely different resolution system during said combat.

>>97536665
To me it feels more like people complaining about a system for the sake of complaining. It's not going anywhere and it has always been allowed to just not use it if you don't like it.

For other people it's great because for one it's pretty strong. You can actually solve things through social mechanics instead of having to fight like in DnD. You can be so pretty that everyone falls in love with you just by seeing you. It gives you something to do to help out before combat starts, lowering the enemy willpower or adding various penalties in combat. Social charms also have a lot of quality of life stuff, like being able to share information loudly with only certain people being able to understand you. It depends on your build of course but there are a lot of options.

This is true for all Exalted. If they're craft focused, they're gonna dominate with crafting. Fighting focused exalted dominate with combat. Social focused ones can end fights effectively with words, even against the mightiest of gods. Assuming you built right, ectectect. These have all been selling points for Exalted since 1e I'm pretty sure.

For player side it gives another resource to attack them on and gives them more things to interact with. For example this post here is a great example of good social against players.

>>97530768
The players here need to make a choice of spending willpower that they want to use later or taking an intimacy, assuming they don't resistance to influence rolls. This isn't BG3 where you can have a six-pack with strength 8 - if you have no integrity or willpower you really shouldn't expect yourself to be fearless and even god things can feel fear. For normal people this isn't really a problem desu.

>>97536684
Plus I think you can use being a Social Solar to be sneaky.
>Deeb 1: "My wife said I need to be more attentive."
>Deeb 2: "What? You're very attentive-"*Gets grabbed by a Zenith while Deeb 1 isn't looking*
>Deeb 1: "I know, that's what I told her...*Sees 'Deeb 2' (Zenith whose stolen Deeb 2's clothes).*...Hela, did you get a haircut?"
>Zenith, rolling a kpthjillion dice: "I did!, thank you for noticing."
>Deeb 1, alreadt urning away: "It looks nice on you."

>>97536698
What an entirely unproductive post. If you can't tell, we already know all those perspectives and we disagree with them. If you are in combat, you need to use combat to win.

>>97536669
Yeah social combat in exalted is great. My personal favorite I suppose to 2e because it feels like it has extra "oomph" to it but it works pretty dang well in 3e as well. Not having that just means we're free styling everything and I don't find that nearly as fun. I also have more memories of playing 2e and messing with it. Blasting willpower is just fun.

>>97536671
Other people like the social system and your opinion doesn't matter in regards to the social system seeing as how any changes you'd want would just stop it from existing. For whatever nonsense about paranoia combat all I can say is that Exalted are powerful. If your ST wanted to they could one shot you with basically anything. Or just, you know, telling you that your character is afraid with you having no choice in the matter and not even being able to roll.

Point is it's a great system and the game devs are 100% allowing you to not use it if you don't want to. If you can't find tables that also don't use the social system then I really don't know what to say. It's pretty popular so I can see why that'd be hard. It'd be like finding a table where crafting or sorcery is banned.

>>97536715
I don't really care what other people like, because that has no bearing on my opinion. Why do you keep bringing up this appeal to popularity that you can't even prove what I'm talking about how the system is flawed?

>>97536712
This level of projection is insane and funny. You shouldn't make posts that apply to your very own posts like this. It's just so dumb and faggy.

Again - you are more then welcome to not use the social system in your games if you don't like it. I'm allowing it, the devs are allowing it, it's always been allowed. However your opinion with the rules for it have literally no value. You don't want the rules for it to be better or funner, you want the system and what it can do to be gone.

>>97536715
>For whatever nonsense about paranoia combat
Yes, it's paranoia combat. Being able to delete vast swaths of their important combat resources by utilizing an entirely different system that operates on a different time scale is absolutely the definition of busted and something you need to protect yourself against or else you just lose.

>>97536724
No amount of whining can change that it's a fun system to use, that people enjoy using and that's effective at what it's supposed to do. I know social characters can be powerful, it's exalted, all player characters can be powerful. It's sort of one of the draws. You should see what a combat character can do in a single turn.

I am very confident that whatever changes you'd suggest would just make the social system... not fun to use, ineffective, or worse just reduce it to combat actions. Remember - you not wanting to use it doesn't mean it's flawed. It just means you want it gone. It's as retarded as people wanting crafting gone. Or wanting sorcery gone. Or wanting combat gone.

>communityfag is still at it

>>97536743
Brother the issue is you're not talking. You're just being defensive and throwing insults instead of discussing the merits and flaws of the system itself. To wit: The problem with it is that it bypasses combat even when combat is already active, the amount of the resources that it is able to chew through is staggering. This adds another layer of preparedness anybody who wants to fight with realistically need to have. This is before you get into how much more effective the options to socially attack are than to socially defend.

>>97536743
Hey, as someone who rather likes the 3E social system, though not without reservations, could you please shut the fuck up? I'd take any amount of peoole telling me that my opinion is shit over someone like you basically agreeing with me but in such an obnoxious way that any association with your post makes me feel dirty. Also please try to contemplate and comprehend the fact that people can, will and are allowed to have different likes and dislikes.

>save or sucks are fair and based if my social character does it

>>97536698
>The players here need to make a choice of spending willpower that they want to use later or taking an intimacy, assuming they don't resistance to influence rolls.
They aren't taking an intimacy. The scenario was intended as a kind of best case for the social system, where it's used to add flair and tension to combat rather than to win the encounter on it's own, force people to make choices that would have impact on both the mechanical and narrative levels, and where there are no effectively-permanent-wounds being dealt to characters (i.e. instill actions). It's just inspire for the emotion and persuade for the action.

>>97535538
The risk of control over the PCs is kind of hard baked into the setting and systems though.

Pretty much every splat has mind control Charms somewhere, there's the whole Virtue/Great Curse thing (and variations for different splats).

Then you get to all the setting elements, like opium addiction, Fair Folk soul eating, Lunar enslavement, Wyld transformations, and so forth.

I'd argue that the core theme of the Solars is "be true to who you are, even when everything is trying to change you". And that 'everything' includes the growing power Solars can attain, what with absolute power corrupting and all.

Can you ignore all of that? Sure. But then you're just playing a hollow wuxia game, and a bad one at that.

File: HA3-hOqbYAAwVLT.jpg (140 KB, 1080x1325)

140 KB JPG

What do you think about the introduce facts mechanics? How did it play out in your tables? Would you change it?

>>97539016
No one ever uses them. They're clunky and shit.

>>97511876
Weekly Update
very short
>Art Direction
Essence PG – Just gonna get Navela to do half and Gong to do half
>Layout
Alchemicals
>Press
Exigents – Awaiting mine. But should be here Monday… and the rest are getting shipped to the States as we speak
today is the day exigent hardcovers get charged to people that order. specifically the quote
FEBRUARY 11 - PAYMENT PROCESSING - Now that orders have been reviewed and confirmed, the BackerKit Pledge Manager will begin PROCESSING PAYMENTS for any ADD ON OPTIONS SELECTED IN THE PLEDGE MANAGER as well as deluxe edition PRE-ORDERS
so sort that out while you have time. in 2 weeks addresses get confirmed

>>97539016
I like them but whenever I try using them I feel like I'm just weaseling out of a problem by immediately creating a solution

>>97537379
Nah, I've been running without it for years and none of that is anywhere near the core game experience. Its absence genuinely does not adversely affect the game feel whatsoever. It might affect idle conversations like this where you get really idealistic about what game elements mean philosophically, but not practical gameplay

>>97539787
The same could be said if you cut out crafting, combat or sorcery. It's nice to know that you haven't played real exalted in years though.

>>97539016
It's great. Not really much to say about it, good system good rules that's about it. Makes me wish it was in 2e. It does have some of the most flavorful charms in 3e from what I recall and it really helps with making me feel like a part of the setting.

I've noticed people have "Go to" introduce facts, stuff they like to introduce to every table.

>>97537379
They don't actually play exalted and don't care. They don't understand that free-play roleplay has always been a thing that's allowed for them. Again, it's not a logic issue with them or a mechanics thing. They would cry if they lost in combat they cry and whine about social mechanics.

For all the talk of social stuff you just know these closeted faggots would have the biggest temper tantrum if they took a debilitating wound or were actually killed off. You might as well be trying to get tax information from a dog with how useless these 'people' are.

>>97539854
>The same could be said if you cut out crafting, combat or sorcery.
Not really. In 99% of cases it's exactly the game continues on as if you had successfully defended against the theoretical influence, which is already a situation case that exists and a much more common outcome than flawlessly winning all combat (for example). You're trying to run some kind of smear without data or understanding what you're fighting against and it's obvious.

>>97539916
Nah, your example is shit and it's the exact same thing as just free RP combat or crafting. You don't like the system itself for what it can do, other people think it's great and are happy it's in. You have nothing of value to add because anything you try to add will just result in it no longer existing.

Also I just know you'd crash out the moment your PC was killed so you don't even take combat seriously.

>You're trying to run some kind of smear

Quit barking dog boy. I don't even know how the fuck someone would go about doing that. What kind of smear campaign is "The social system is good and you shouldn't listen to 'people' who only want it gone because it messes with their power fantasy and homebrew."

File: Handsome Yes.jpg (8 KB, 220x229)

8 KB JPG

>>97536768

>>97540173
Debuffing is a great archtype and is very fun to play. DnD has an 'issue' where this stuff can stop a player from taking actions, which Exalted doesn't really share.

Social stuff in general, in every edition, pretty much is mechanics to facilitate RP. Your intimacy of love towards something doesn't REALLY do anything. I mean, you can call on it for rolls and stuff but it doesn't demand anything from you. It just wants you to roleplay stuff. There are exceptions but still - plus the exceptions tend to have a shaping tag in 2e.

Another fun use of social is countering enemy social stuff in case your party doesn't have great resists to it. That and hitting willpower to weaken people before a fight is also fun.

I think it might be possible to do a buff build with social stuff but I never got heavy into how buffs work in Exalted. I want to say it's not very in depth compared to the damage you can deal.

>>97540153
I'm trying to have a real conversation with you here but you're talking like a 12 year old, constantly hurling insults and not bringing anything to the table to support your opinions other than repeatedly insisting you're right. You haven't substantiated anything you've said here nor have you built a counter case against me. What are you even doing here?

>>97540153
>Nah, your example is shit and it's the exact same thing as just free RP combat or crafting
Not remotely. Like it was mentioned, if you successfully socially defend it's like nothing happened. If players are not targetable by the social system, it's just as if they're ignoring influence and this is a situation the game accounts for. This is unlike combat which has no end state like denying influence, and is meant to be a long series of exchanges with elaborate counterplay and steps. The real flaw of the system is being able to ram things through and burn a huge amount of resources on something that was already effectively denied, and being able to do that outside of the context of a dedicated social encounter.

>>97540201
>DnD has an 'issue' where this stuff can stop a player from taking actions,
You're misinformed. Save or sucks let you act, but without all your best abilities and at significantly reduced efficacy. This is exactly like losing a ton of WP/motes to a social attack out of nowhere

>>97540201
>>97540153
>>97539854
>>97537379
This guy doesn't know a single thing about actually playing the game. Or any game, it seems.

>>97540339
>The best way to weaken your enemies isn't with an ancient profane curse, but by nagging them down.
This explains why 3e grandmas are so powerful

>>97540417
People in DnD don't whine nearly as much about debuffs. That's saying a lot. I'm glad we've reached the part where you lost so hard that you have to accuse people of not playing games.
>>97540339
So do combat charms. Or sorcery. Or crafting.
>>97540267
That is literally combat. You are describing combat.

Just remember - the devs have always allowed you to not use social rules. The same way combat, sorcery or crafting might not be involved in your games. They encourage you to homebrew parts you don't like to fit your game better. They are okay with this, they accept you. Well, not you probably but people who don't have that stuff at their table.

For people who do like social rules it does what it says it does and does it in a fun and engaging way. No amount of crying about the system existing is going to change that. It might not be perfect but this is exalted, literally nothing is.

>>97540545
>People in DnD don't whine nearly as much about debuffs.
Yes they do, you clown. I play D&D regularly and have since the mid 90s and debuffs are frequently bemoaned by the fanbase. You're actually just making stuff up to try and sound like you're experienced.

He's mentally ill, and I mean this completely unironically. There's no use arguing with him.

>>97540527
The epic quest to find the Infernal's beloved grandmother so she can scold him

>>97540545
That isn't like combat at all unless you're boiling everything down to "spend motes/wp".

>>97540709
>pot calls kettle black.

Aren't you one of those mentally ill freaks who've been whining about this game for twenty years? Either way people like to play debuffers and psions in DnD. This has been a thing for ages, even if the only people you spend time with are faggots who constantly complain about the system they're obsessed with.

Ahhh, the memories of Glibness. Good times.

>>97540701
GiTP is pretty good. I want to be careful here though because I don't want to enter a retarded conversation with people pretending that casters aren't the best classes to play in it. Imagine playing a fighter or a barbarian. You'd have to be such a loser.

Weakness wise social characters have a bunch of them too. Same with combat characters or sorcerors or crafters. Being invested in something leaves you more open to other forms of attack because you only have so much xp. It gives things a nice mechanical complexity when you bring it all together.

What's really funny is that the strongest "Change your character" charms aren't even social in nature. They're shaping or combat charms. But again, this isn't a mechanics debate or an issue with changes being forced on a character. It's literally just people not liking the social system and wanting it gone. There are no changes you can make that would satisfy them while allowing it to do what it does.

>>97540709
What discord did he crawl out of?

>>97540934
>whining about discord now

I do not understand how you people can be so fucking autistic. How do you feed yourselves. God damn. I bet this fucker uses discord too so it makes even less sense.

Why must everything you say be pure projection I just don't get it.

>>97540715
How many psycho Karens did the armies of the gods need to wither down the ancient creators of the world?

>>97541013
300.

>>97540929
bro you're not even 30, why are you pretending you have this library of experience

>>97541116
Oh don't be silly. I'm sure you have more experience in this game and table top games in general. I also bet if you posted some homebrew that wasn't just whining disguised as an idea I'd really like reading it.

Exalted is fun, if there is a system you don't like then don't use it. I might not be the most experience gamer but even I know that you can't fix something that you're trying to make disappear.

>>97541428
You think everything is whining, including how people have modified the game and are happier for it. I'm pretty sure you don't actually play the game because the things you say don't line up with any sort of real play experience and instead remind me of people who just read the books and theorize.

>>97541468
Anon, retard. You and other people are whiners. This isn't up for debate. For what little it matters I've never played at a table where the social system was banned but apparently an anon here has been doing it that way for a decade.

Using Mutants and Masterminds to run Exalted is fine too. Literally no one is bothered by that, even if they find it a bit odd.

Also I'm pretty sure these people literally could not post an idea without complaining about the game itself at the same time. It's sad because all the fun ideas you can talk about doing with the social system are going to be bombarded by people who have no interest in said system to begin with.

Anyways, I've been thinking about what the strongest archtype for Exalted is and I'm torn between sorcerer or crafter. Bang for your buck, capable of having the most impact on the setting without being easy to kill and having a bunch of tools to solve their problems. This might not be true for all the splats...

>>97541587
What isn't whining to you, is the better question? Because it seems like you only tolerate positive comments like a braindead redditor. What negative critique is acceptable?

>>97541587
>For what little it matters I've never played at a table where the social system was banned
This is easy to say when you've never played at a table at all.

>>97541610
kek

>>97541587
What discord or forum or something do you participate in where you get these ideas about how people feel? I'm in the trannycord AND churdcord AND SV's thread and nobody thinks like you

>>97541654
>What discord or forum or something do you participate in where you get these ideas about how people feel?
The loony bin I imagine.

For the people who use Mutants and Masterminds, do you guys template castes or what?

>>97541610
It says a lot that I know you honestly believe this and can't imagine tables where people enjoy the social rules or use them. No one cares if you don't use them, that was always allowed.

>>97541654
I'm so sorry for you. People here think less of you for using discord, so I would avoid bragging about it.

Anyways, the social system is good. In both 2e and 3e and you shouldn't worry too much about it. It's going to be easier to ruin characters in other ways if you're an inexperienced ST. If you're in a game with social rules and don't plan on removing them then I would just not play with the people who really hate it. There are other tables for them and it's fine.

>Anon only plays exalted though mutants and masterminds.
>Anon has banned all social rolls for ten years now.
>Anon has removed the great curse.
>Anon thinks no one wants to play a shapeshifter.

We should have a list of all the terrible terrible takes that come up in this thread. All of which are allowed and okay with the devs if that's how you want your table to play, mind you.

>>97541797
I guess you don't have another discussion area you use.

>>97541812
I don't really use those things. I just like reading the books and homebrew that come out and playing the occasional game. It's so not the drama.

I've been around though and believe it or not people actually have fun with all the various mechanics in this game. You should see 3e crafting if you want to see an actually healthy form of autism. For it and 2e I'm pretty sure they're the strongest type of Exalted you can play. I don't know enough about the various splats to say it's true for all of them though.

>>97541840
So you don't have an impression of what the general player base feels. Who's your group? Where do you play?

>>97541840
Okay, that's partly a lie. I do like posting here when it's not all fucking miserable. I'm still trying to figure out what the best exalted type is for raping people. That sort of thing.

>>97541844
You should quit projecting yourself into these things. When someone says they've been around it's to imply they have a impression of what the general player base feels like.

I don't think your brain is capable of understanding that people actually think this game and its mechanics are good. If you can comprehend that, which again I don't think you can, then I'm not really sure what you're going on about.

>>97541857
You often try to speak with authority on how players feel, how well a mechanic is received and functions in typical play, what the usual hiccups are. To be able to do this you need to reach beyond any casual group you may have played with, because at best it means you can speak for about 3 to 5 guys, including yourself. Perhaps up to 10 if you've had multiple groups. This is your only point of contact if you aren't involved in the wider communities

>>97541857
>My group is in canada, you wouldn't have met them

>>97541857
>>97541840
Basically you don't have enough experience, even if you're telling the truth about having a group, to talk about how well the game works or what people do or don't enjoy because you've barely played it and you barely know anybody as compared to bigger discussion forums.

>>97541868
Oh more then that and it's not like any of these places are special clubs. Reading isn't exactly hard. I want to be clear here, I'm not going into an argument about how experienced I am with whatever. I know you and other people are no doubt more experienced and know more about the game then I do. You've made more homebrew as well I'm sure, seeing as how you've been around longer and more active.

None of that really changes the social system being fun in 2e and 3e and that people have fun playing those arch-types? Or how little an opinion means when it boils down to "I don't like this and won't have it in my game." People like that can't offer any improvements to something they want gone. Plus, apparently, there are tables that flat out ban the social rules although I sure as heck have never seen it.

desu I'm surprised that reading threads and posting and joining various discords is a bragging point.

Honest question, have you ever had game of exalted that didn't involve a ton of your homebrew that you actually enjoyed? Because I have and I know other people have as well. As much as I enjoy other systems like dnd or m&m exalted just hits a spot that they don't, for either edition. Maybe even 1e as well but I am probably never going to try to learn that one.

>>97541902
This is pretty sad. Why is so hard for you to just say that people have fun with the mechanics of exalted. What form of autism is this.

The social system is fun, you see? It's easy. Same with plenty of other mechanics in the game.

>>97541904
>>97541912
You're being asked to qualify your opinion, because you've done nothing but look down your nose on everybody. It sounds like you don't have the credibility and experience to do that.

>>97541923
I've asked you not to project like that. Also I have mentioned some of the reasons why I like it and think it's fun. It doesn't matter if the system is good or fun or not when the person just wants it gone.

Which was always allowed.

If we started posting social charms we like or the social combos we've been thinking about it'll cause an even bigger autistic fit. It would be nice though. Or just, you know, some homebrew that doesn't boil down to basically taking out the system all together.

Anyways, the social system is good. If you've ever hesitated using it then find yourself a table that is okay with it (most of them) and play one. It'll be okay, so long as no one is a spaz.

>>97539916
nta but I did run weekly sessions for almost a year, twice, without combat, and I didn't feel like the game was missing anything meaningful. The same for sorcery (but at different times). The social system has never felt like something I could do without.

>>97541951
Nobody is projecting, the only thing that's happening is you're trying to slide the conversation away from us questioning your qualification to be such a judgmental douche. Frankly, it sounds like your experience is extremely limited and you don't have enough experience to back up your constant shit talking.

>>97541983
Of course nobody is suggesting to get rid of it. What people have suggested is that players aren't targeted by it. How I run it in my games is that only NPCs can be affected by social abilities, players always get to make up their own mind. This is exactly the same in play as if I'd made them defend

I have an idea for the Eye trying to corrupt a family of Dragon-bloods to be death-aspected the way he helped to corrupt Solars; any ideas for abilities?

What do people think of the Lunar Bond being downplayed and no longer having every Solar and Lunar having one?

>>97542050
Another bad decision regarding Lunars done to a piece some of the crazier elements on the forums. Instead of embracing it as a core feature, and one that makes for incredible stories, everything got tainted by the idea of an abuser and it got safe spaced

>>97541587
>Using Mutants and Masterminds to run Exalted is fine too.
Interesting idea. How did you do it?

How many dots for an Artifact that has the effects of Destiny-Manifesting Method?

>>97542112
Not that guy but what I did was power level 10 for the easy math, then everybody got a template according to their caste in order to represent a blend of anima powers + their default abilities (Night got ranks in stealth and a custom power to make them unrecognizable). The template and any abilities did not count towards power level limits.

>>97542003
>Of course nobody is suggesting to get rid of it. What people have suggested is that players aren't targeted by it
Players can only win is a boring-ass way to play. Players can't even be hindered by enemy action is even worse.

>>97542161
But that's not the case. Players can still fail to influence people they just can't be targeted by others themselves, and they can still be hindered in combat in ways other than social interaction which feels like something they didn't test very well to tell you the truth. I feel like you're being very hyperbolic.

>>97542172
>Players can still fail to influence people
That's not being hindered by enemy action or failing to win, that's failing an action.

>they can still be hindered in combat
But not socially? Look, I know Exalted draws power fantasy players, but there should be a limit... surely it can't be fun? I guess freeform doesn't suck, but it's not gaming.

>>97542182
Players can be hindered in a ton of ways, simply not socially because they can make up their own mind. However that does not protect a
Their organizations or whatever, you simply cannot change their own mind. Besides, all of 1st and 2nd edition didn't have social hindrance in combat and social perfect defenses were trivial to obtain. You're complaining about nothing.

>>97542182
What kind of games are you running where the only way to bother your players is with social charms?

>>97542213
Seriously.
>Can't use social influence on them
>"Might as well give up and die"

>>97542050
I think it's one of the half-assed compromises 3E too frequently makes. I think Solar-Lunar bond as a general feature of Solars and Lunars is fine, and can lead to good stories. IMO if it's a thing it should be important and impactful for both Solars and Lunars, affect both of them equally and get as much wordcount in both their books, though. On the other hand, I think that completely removing the Bond and all its baggage would be an understandable decision, and it wouldn't ruin either Lunars or Solars. I'm not a fan of 3E just sort of doing both and making the Bond a thing but not a universal one. It dilutes the significance of the Bond, and if the Bond's not that important, I don't see much reason for it to be a thing at all. It's a half-measure. My primary general complaint about 3E - which I like as a whole, while acknowledging its flaws - isn't it changing things too much from the past editions, but exactly such half-measures where devs don't seem to dare or want to remove some controversial aspect of the previous editions but don't quite want to keep it either and end up tonung it down and softening it until it's just kind of there but has neither edge nor point. Outright removing things and writing in something new would often be better.

>>97542276
The problem is that third edition really needed the setting to be scrubbed of bugaboos, WoDisms, and unfinished ideas that went nowhere. But the developers are fags and like that stuff.

>>97542342
Some WoDisms, sure. Drawing inspiration from WoD isn't inherently different from drawing inspiration from anything else, but it's true that some things don't really fit Exalted that well. I think the biggest problem caused by WoD brain was the elder problem. That, at least, is sometjing 3E did sonething about, though of course the way elders are handled in 3E is another one of those half-measures I just complained about.

>>97542358
When I say WoDism, I don't mean something like "hey, recognize this kindred of the East reference?". I do mean stuff like the Elder problem, over-reliance on hierarchical societies, and an obsession with tiers of power

>>97542383
Oh, sure, that's fair.

>>97542213
>>97542223
Pretty obvious that the statements were made in the context of social only.

>>97542050
I think they fucked up. Literally all they had to do was make it even on both sides and they didn't even manage that. Making it occur less often and giving players the opportunity to opt out does very little to help. The bond is less fucked than it when Lords of Creation came out and is more fucked than it was at any time before that.

>>97542867
While I'm pretty indifferent towards the Bond in general, making Sun-Moon-symbolism more of a central thing for Solars as well as Lunars could be cool. Not just for Lunars, it could also give Solars a bit more character.

>>97543052
>While I'm pretty indifferent towards the Bond in general, making Sun-Moon-symbolism more of a central thing for Solars as well as Lunars could be cool. Not just for Lunars, it could also give Solars a bit more character.
It's not even making it central, it's purely making it equal. Even just mechanically would be fine. Lunars in 3e are the only ones to feel any effect from the Bond. In 2e you had that ass one-sided mindrape charm paradigm built on the exact same argument that's been shitting up this thread (>>97542003) with Solars (because they're more protagonist than anyone else) instead of PCs. 1e's Eternal Vow - on which nothing was written in either the Solar books nor Lunars - being entirely even and not immediately placing one side over the other (and having a lot of play in how you could frame it with flaws, too) was a large contributing factor in it being the best version of the bond in any edition. 2e tainted it for 3e.

>>97541797
>We should have a list of all the terrible terrible takes that come up in this thread.
Does anyone remember years ago when an ST came in here saying that he managed to create a mortal that could challenge his circles Dawn Caste due to having 13 parry, and when we all grilled him on it to see how this build was accomplished he finally admit that there was no bulid, he just fiated the mortal to have that absurdly high stat.

>>97542050
>What do people think of the Lunar Bond being downplayed
I like how it makes Lunars less of the Solars' bitches
>and no longer having every Solar and Lunar having one?
Dislike it. I prefer having the same number of Solars and Lunars.

Real talk.

Should Mnemon have bigger tits because she is older and more MILF-coded, or should V'neef have bigger tits because it's another thing that would make Mnemon seethe?

>>97543370
DBs don't breastfeed their own kids, so its irrelevant.

>>97543336
>13 parry
Melee 9 (5 base +3 thaumaturgy +1 Prodigy) + Dexterity 9 (5 base +3 thaumaturgy +1 Legendary Attribute) + specialty 3 + Stunt 2 + hook sword defense 3 = 26 dice.

The equivalent to that number actually checks out in 1e. And attacks are at +1 difficulty if they've got a shield too.

File: defeat anathema.jpg (233 KB, 780x944)

233 KB JPG

>>97543461
>26 dice
Prime No Key rocking Octavian's shit kinda vibes.

>>97543461
This was in Ex3? any idea if you could get it that high there? All I can think of is Dex 5 + Melee 5 + medium weapon + speciality + mounted (only grants defence against non-mounted melee dudes that lak a weapon with reaching) + full defence action (needs to be taken every turn and costs initiative) + heavy cover = 12 parry that needs constant initiative spent on it.

>>97543507
>This was in Ex3? any idea if you could get it that high there?
You could also add exceptional equipment? Exceptional equipment arms and armor don't add rolls, but there is nothing said about other kinds of exceptional equipment adding to those rolls, which is a bit of an oversight/cheese but whatever. Your dojo's ninja scroll of hidden techniques can give you +1 MA according to RAW. An exceptionally broad reading of Danger Sense could also apply.

Beyond that quick characters can have actually anything, sorcerous workings can buff mortals into whatever the hell you like, if you let them for some reason then artifacts might do something for them, thaumaturgy is potentially stronger than sorcerous workings and casts at instant speed, etc etc. All those special effects are much more freeform in 3e, and numinous buffs are more of an expectation than in any other edition. On the most reasonable end of that scale would be a hearthstone giving bonus Defense to people around it, since hearthstones are the most useable and obtainable source of magical effects for mortals (in that anybody strong enough to register on these kinds of scales should be strong enough to go bully a hearthstone off someone).

>>97543507
Stunt.

>>97543112
That argument is not shitty (players have more agency than not players) and totally unrelated to that issue. The problem was that they wanted to spin everything into the abuser relationship angle because they are fucking hacks

>>97543338
I'm of the opinion that it shouldn't be downplayed at all, but it shouldn't be an equal influence thing either. Instead they should both be powered up by it

>>97540847
nta but that's basically how everything in Exalted works: use your Attribute+Ability, modify it by spending motes/wp to power Charms (even if that Charm costs 0 to use).

And since It's a supers game in fantasy post-post-apocalyptic magitech wuxia costuming. Mind control effects are part of the genre, but social combat systems are as integral to TTRPGs as any other system. Any decent GM doesn't expect players to be knowledgeable about how to actually fight, how to repair a collapsing stone tower, or how to properly clean and preserve an animal (and if you feel the need to tell us you know all this, I hope your parents find you as precious as you think you are). And yet people seem to think you have to actually roleplay your super social character's skills or else it doesn't count. Bullshit. Make the same effort describing your talk to the mayor as you'd put into describing your sword swinging or your masonry repair and let the numbers carry the rest.

If the dice say your character is compelled to betray their word it's no different than the dice saying your character got stabbed in the kidneys. Accept it and move on.

holy fuck this schizoid freak is STILL at it

>>97542112
NTA, but M&M3

Solaroids are PL 10 (no cap, but needs story reason to raise)
Lunars are PL 9 (cap 11, but needs story reason to raise)
DBs are PL 8 (cap 10, but needs story reason to raise) PLs aren't fair, but I don't see anybody whining about Heroic Mortals at PL 6.

Exalts gets 150 points to build with. This means Solars can be better than DBs at a few things, but DBs tend to be broader generalists and have more abilities.

Animas are triggered a couple of different ways, depending on how you want to build an Effect. Spending a Hero Point for Extra Effort on an Effect triggers the Anima effect. But I'd also require abilities with ranks to have half of their ranks have the Limitation: Quirk (triggers Anima). Any powers that cost 15 or more points (for example, Insubstantial at 4 Ranks) also have to have that Quirk. So I can take an Enhanced Trait of Close Combat (Swords) 5, and then an additional Close Combat (Swords) 5 with the Limitation: Anima Triggered. This is in addition to any other skill ranks the character has!

Perfects are replicated with something like the Immunity to Toughness Checks (i.e. Impervious Protection 40), which breaks PL limits, but is also loaded down with Limitations (including the Anima Quirk above, limited duration, and only usable in certain situations like in Exalted).

And while the Anima is a power in it's own right, it also works as a Complication too! Often, simply triggering it pays for it.

M&M3 also gives players tools to make their own "Charms" with some semblance of balance. It's not great balance, but it does make Exigents much more viable. The thing is, Exalted tells people they can make their own Charms, but never really gives any meaningful limits on them.

The other thing is, M&M3's great in a lot of ways, but is designed to tell comic book stories in a comic book way. So long term healing, disease, and other effects that last longer than a scene are handled with fiat, and fiat is not impartial.

>>97542383
>and an obsession with tiers of power
The real problem is that they want the players at the bottom.

>>97543412
Big tits are always relevant

>>97544342
The writers and fans underestimate the female brain.

>>97543920
What a sad individual

Once again proving that only the genuinely mentally deranged enjoy the social system.

>>97545990
I enjoy all of Exalted, except maybe 3e crafting. That's mostly because I never took the time to understand it but the token system it uses isn't really my thing.

>>97520057
They were written by the same people who wrote the Dragon-Blooded Charms and also kneecapped because of how over the top powerful some Deadly Beastman Transformation Gifts were. This is in addition to being written in the days where soaking lethal with bashing soak was a big deal, as was having it last for more than a turn (writing for Lunars would have started about the time that the first two caste books were coming out). The only thing new that they got was what would later be called Hardness... and it needed a lot of work before it became viable sometime in 2e, at which point everyone had it and it stopped being a Lunar thing.

Lunars have been perennial canaries in the coal mine, and it's really sucked that they end up with broken, prototype setups so that whatever comes out later and implements lessons in game design can be glazed to hell and back (literally in the case of Infernals). At least in 1e there were Caste books to patch the holes for the Solars and Dragon-Blooded (the latter of whom were owning the former with Immaculate styles until a Solar hopping dodge made its way into CB: Night).

>>97545920
Holy shit the crash out is real

>>97546177
I am aware of 1e Lunars DBS focused design, I also saw Grabowski comments, nearly all of their power budget went to it.

>>97543595
>That argument is not shitty (players have more agency than not players) and totally unrelated to that issue
>solars have more agency than not solars
Toooootally different argument yep sure.

File: exalted___issue_1_powerfo(...).jpg (162 KB, 745x1072)

162 KB JPG

I have a question for 2e players. Roughly 20 years ago, at launch, the Corebook was the only thing you had to play. I've read it now, and in my experience, the layout and order the rules were presented is less than ideal, not to mention the contradictions (like in the combat section) That pattern repeated with the books released afterwards, and without the errata, in the long term, it seems like a very daunting experience (That is, if nobody took interest in the material from the books of sorcery or, the sun forbid, martial arts). I ask this mainly because I've read many threads on forums of the 2k6-12 era that look like groups, in spite of the low quality of the crunch presentation, were having lots of fun doing crazy shit all over the place.
How did you all fill in the gaps? What rules did you alter or outright not use from the books before official corrections happened?

TL; DR The need to have open the 2e corebook, the Errata, Ink Monkeys pdfs and two entries of the unofficial wiki just to simulate a combat and reference all the changes "clearly" is insane. How did you all do this regularly and enjoy it back when you had less clarifications?

>>97546784
Players are real human beings you dingus. What kind of crazy false equivalency are you trying to push?

>>97547030
Rule of Cool.

>>97547030
Exalted was seen as a jank over the top action game, people enjoyed it despite the flaws.
The "ragdoll" physics were kind of part of the appeal.

>>97547030
No one fucking played it.

>>97547341
Yes, we did.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=HD0dMr3kAQs
Hey, a new beastman solar game just dropped.

>>97545990
Enjoying the social system isn't rare, and arbitrarily deciding that one deranged anon liking it is a representative sample of people liking it in general is about as faulty as logic can get.

>>97547202
If you are a Solar player, which was what the developers at the time cared about, then your Solars are real human beings too. So again... yes. It's the same argument.

If you're about to say 'but some of the players aren't Solars' then I'm sorry bud but some of the players are Storytellers too. Shouldn't we care about them?

>>97548244
Brother this is absolutely alien backwards logic. This is about player to player dynamics at a real life table, not this stupid philosophical question your positing

>>97548244
Insane

>>97548576
>stupid philosophical question your positing
Pointing out direct parallels, you mean?

>>97548890
They aren't, though. This is literally a schizophrenic jump. I'm saying the real people at your table, the actual players that you have assembled in order to have a fun game with, have a greater right to determine their character than the fictional entities you create in order to facilitate the game. There is no splat parallel unless you're actually crazy, bitter, or both

>>97548922
The parallel exists between you talking about players now and the developers talking about Solars then. Literally replace the word 'players' in your argument with 'Solars' and your argument would be word for word.

>>97549115
That's absolutely nonsense. Not only would the intent and purpose of such statements be different if it did occur (and I doubt it did as you seem to frame it), it's still a false equivalency where you're trying to hold up the interplay between splats as if it's the same as the priority of the fun and agency of factual human beings. It's the same as comparing the cultivation of cucumbers to the Indian caste system.

>>97549154
>still a false equivalency where you're trying to hold up the interplay between splats as if it's the same as the priority of the fun and agency of factual human beings
These are 2e devs I'm talking about here. In their minds Solars are the PCs. Prioritizing their agency is the same as prioritizing the agency of players.