oh, do we actually have 3e stats for Devil-Prince Sword Style? if not then the name is vague enough to sub in basically any style with swords as a form weapon.
Not yet. It feels like a pretty safe bet for Infernals, if it's anywhere.
It does actually have an Essence version as of today, in Pillars. I think it has a really different vibe from either Violet Bier or Even Blade.
Article:
The Lintha family's signature fighting art, this style uses auzhians, swords with hooked, serrated blades. Metal spikes jutting from their hilt, pommel, and handguard are all used to cut and stab. The style combines agile swordplay, showy maneuvers, and a vicious offense that humiliates and maims enemies.
As far as Exigents I'm looking forward to, the chosen of Plentimon seems pretty interesting. Playing Yami Yugi or one of the Darby brothers in an Exalted campaign seems like a fun premise for a character.
I could make the argument that that illustrates my point, because why shouldn't Abyssals be all those things and more, why shouldn't Lunars be all those things and more? Solars are certainly not obliged to be a kind of anything, and accordingly being "focused" is thus not actually something I feel that benefits them (indeed, my main issue with both Abyssals and Lunars is they were too focused in 2e as it was, albeit for wildly different reasons).
Similarly, "Abyssals are more focused and less generalist everything-to-do-with-death-and-undeath now" is an idea that can be critiqued on its own merits, regardless of how well or poorly this worked out in practice. 2e Abyssals were very problematic so I have no issues believing 3e ones might be better in almost every way. But I don't think the idea of limiting their scope was the right direction to begin with, because of fundamental ideas as to what the scope of Exalts ought to be that go deeper than "was it written well".
Well like- to use Abyssals and Sworn to the Grave as an example and a sort of case study, @akoboldskobold and @Blaque really have the right of it. The answer to "why shouldn't Abyssals be all those things and more," is that there was a creative and structural choice made to situate Abyssals in a specific playspace and orient them around a certain spectrum of experience. A certain toolkit and a particular set of aesthetics and thematic associations. And while, yeah, you can dismiss that decision out of hand I don't think it's...well it's not a very well informed critique? I'm not sure how you can say "I don't think the idea of limiting their scope was the right direction even if it was written well" if you don't actually have any idea what their scope is. Or how they're used in the setting or even how they're presented to the player. It's pretty disengenous like- I'm genuinely a little unsure how to actually discuss this? If you have no familiarity with the current material and self-professedly no real interest in it, but feel comfortable enough in your understanding to say that there was a fundamental mistake made in the splat's design.
The core of Abyssals is rooted, as people have said, in this sort of Byronic, Gothic milieu. In the idea of darkness and the things that dwell within it, things that both attract and viscerally repel, enthrall and horrify. They're rooted in the idea of death as both the one great and equalizing terror of this world but also a gateway, that there is something across that threshold, there are realms waiting to be explored, new frontiers of meaning and experience. Worlds with their own ruined grandeur and terrible majesty; nightmares and dreamscapes. The Underworld is beautiful, brutal, and ultimately broken- just as are its would be masters and their newly crowned champions. Abyssals choose and are chosen. They're murderers and victims both. They're avatars of fell power unequaled in all of recorded history and also Creation's biggest sell outs. They shouldn't exist and yet here they are.
Much of Sworn to the Grave centers around that kind of tension between what you were and what you've become. Your past, your personal history and your new loyalties. Your self conception and your new urges and instincts. And that you are now inextricably linked to this...thing, this ghostly tyrant, this monster out of deep antiquity, this Lord of Death who has saved you, damned you, who has uprooted you and made you a prince among the dead. Who cares for you (in their own deeply perverse way) and who is one of the most real and acute dangers you now face. Who is in the same boat as you because they also made a deal they didn't completely understand with consequences they didn't (couldn't?) fully appreciate and now have to navigate this future they've made for themselves.
A lot of Abyssals is rooted around that push and pull. Navigating that fraught and unstable space. Exploring that idea of being a knight, someone who is simultaneously possessed of great ability and a great capacity for violence but who is bound by oath and fealty to serve. Who controls and is controlled and accepts this, accedes to this (or doesn't).
There's a passage in the manuscript that I especially love and I think kind of- condenses all these things, all these facets into a coherent feeling. This sort of emotional and thematic refrain that recurs again and again.
Article:
They had taken the boy's fingernails first. They didn't stop when he told them he could get the money back with interest. By the fourth, he had told them about his secret cache of silver, set aside for finally escaping Nexus one day. By the fifth, he realized they didn't care what he told them, and that he was going to die.
He awoke in the ruined temple, hazy with burning pain and the memories of cruel laughter. As he opened bleary eyes, he saw his own corpse, streaked with blood, pocked with bruises and wounds. His killers were there, frozen in time, etched with smiles of chilling satisfaction.
He was not alone in this frozen time. A vast figure clad in black armor draped with tarnished chains, stood in the temple's entry, too large to have crossed its threshold. The figure's masked face watched him with rapt attention.
"Well then, is it the old god of the temple, come at last to deliver me? Or are you come to ferry my soul away? Well, have at it, I'm not afraid of you!"
A lie. Even outside his flesh, the presence of the spirit caused the boy to shiver. Long familiarity with danger told him that he was in the presence of one of the world's true terrors.
The figure spoke, voice reverberating in the darkness: "No god I, and no shepherd to your soul. I am here to recruit."
"Recruit for what?"
"In a place beyond the world you know, a great war of my making is brewing. I seek lieutenants of uncommon talent to further my design." The boy barked a bitter laugh.
"I think you've made a mistake, lord. I'm nobody. See here, where my talents landed me."
The boy felt the apparition's attention shift momentarily to his dying body, then to the cruel tools and ghoulish faces of his killers.
"I do not make mistakes. You came from nothing but have taken much. Your name commands fear in the dark corners of this city. You are clever. Observant. An assiduous judge of character, and not afraid to get your hands dirty. In you, I see the potential for great things. This life has given you no opportunity to realize it, but I give you that opportunity now. I give you honor as a prince among the dead. I give you the respect of your few peers and the obedience of your lessers. I give you the loyalty of a general, if you give me the loyalty of a soldier."
"Oh? And what, you're going to write my name in the clouds while you're at it?"
"No. Your name is to be forgotten with your mortal frailty and your former life, never to be remembered. That is the cost of greatness, vengeance, and survival."
The figure reached down and extended a clawed hand. The boy flinched back before he recognized the gesture as a handshake.
The boy could sense the truth in the figure's words, and the offer of true power before him. He looked down once more at his own body. He saw a dead boy and a wasted life — never living up to his ambition, thwarted by the world.
"Good." he said, taking the freezing, metal-clad hand in his own. "I want to forget it."
The terrifying figure inclined his spike-crowned head fractionally.
"Then stand in glory, my Chosen. My deathknight. Kill this chaff, then depart south, and seek me by my omens. When we meet, our work can begin in truth."
The boy breathed in his Second Breath. He opened his eyes; a heartbeat later, his erstwhile captors began screaming. Their blood was a baptismal crust upon his hands when he finally knelt before his Deathlord at the Thousand, pledging himself as The One Who Walks Behind You.
That Solars lack something like this to anchor themselves, that they are, I'd agree, in the position of having an extremely broad playspace but also not being "a kind of anything" is one of the ways they clearly suffer in 3e. It's something that's, to an extent and for all that I'm not particularly a fan of Solars per se, kind of a genuine problem. They're sort of awkwardly positioned as these dynamic agents of change, these massive disruptions to the setting's status quo, but that same sort of amorphous range works against them as they're constantly squeezed by the Dragonblooded, the Lunars, the Sidereals, the Exigents, and the Abyssals- all who have very clear touchstones and specific spaces to fall back on. While the Solars just don't.
It's sort of unfortunate on the whole but on the other hand- hey all the splats I really like are eating well, so mostly I just try not to be weird about it.
I think the favorite aspect of Essence is the setting inspirations towards real life places being a pretty good boon for me and Pillars continues to that as well. Also I am a massive sucker for more Dream Soul and Umbral content regardless of how much is in there.
That Solars lack something like this to anchor themselves, that they are, I'd agree, in the position of having an extremely broad playspace but also not being "a kind of anything" is one of the ways they clearly suffer in 3e. It's something that's, to an extent and for all that I'm not particularly a fan of Solars per se, kind of a genuine problem. They're sort of awkwardly positioned as these dynamic agents of change, these massive disruptions to the setting's status quo, but that same sort of amorphous range works against them as they're constantly squeezed by the Dragonblooded, the Lunars, the Sidereals, the Exigents, and the Abyssals- all who have very clear touchstones and specific spaces to fall back on. While the Solars just don't.
You're right and I hate it because the Solars are my favorite splat from a purely conceptual standpoint (with only Getimians coming close on that front)
Legendary heroes and god-kings from the distant past, reborn to rule and lead again. King Arthur awoke from beneath the mountain and he now strides forth to save Britain from its final hour. Thor descends from on high and smacks Jormungandr right in his stupid ugly snake face. Insert your favorite character from Fate Stay/Night here because they probably fit. Among the Exalted, they are the specialists; the best there is at what they do, limited in scope but excellent beyond compare. All with the power and authority of the Sun itself at their backs.
AND YET THE BLOODY COREBOOK... but we're not talking about the charmset here I don't think
Part of the problem to my mind is that the Solars are supposed to be this big agent of change and disruption to the status quo but they kind of just aren't. Like yeah, they're there now and that's different, but it's treated as one pressure among a thousand and not even a terribly important one. The other splats don't seem to really notice or care because they're consumed by their own problems.
The status quo is solidified for the most part despite the Solars' return, and what changes are incoming are largely disconnected. Like, the Sidereals are noting that the Solars are coming back, but the Solars aren't actually causing them problems of note; they're anciliary to losing the Realm and Getimians attacking heaven. The Deebs are focused on the coming Realm Civil War, which the Solars don't really have a role in. The Wyld Hunt is losing control of the Threshold because of them in part but also because the Legions are gone.
This is good for 3e as a setting because it means the entirety of Creation isn't dominated by the Solars' return (from what I hear this focus on the Solars was a problem in 1e/2e) but it also means the Solars' reason to exist doesn't really apply. So you have these guys who are super powerful and may eventually be important down the line but right now everybody else gets the cool stuff to do.
The status quo is solidified for the most part despite the Solars' return, and what changes are incoming are largely disconnected. Like, the Sidereals are noting that the Solars are coming back, but the Solars aren't actually causing them problems of note; they're anciliary to losing the Realm and Getimians attacking heaven. The Deebs are focused on the coming Realm Civil War, which the Solars don't really have a role in. The Wyld Hunt is losing control of the Threshold because of them in part but also because the Legions are gone.
This is good for 3e as a setting because it means the entirety of Creation isn't dominated by the Solars' return (from what I hear this focus on the Solars was a problem in 1e/2e) but it also means the Solars' reason to exist doesn't really apply. So you have these guys who are super powerful and may eventually be important down the line but right now everybody else gets the cool stuff to do.
In all fairness, this is also to a large extent true even in 1e/2e - the two big Solar institutions that can actually disrupt anything, the Bull of the North and the Cult of the Illuminated, aren't actually meant for PC Solars to join (awkward, that) and the signature Circle disrupts, like, small kingdoms at best. The disruption is entirely what the ST and PCs are willing to do, but it's intentionally undirected except inasmuch as the Wyld Hunt makes 'stabilise the Realm' an unlikely option.
One small thing that could help: it could be made clear that Solar (and Abyssal, and infernal) NPCs gain "xp" much faster than other Exalts. So even though they're new, they're not all low-Essence. They get strong fast, in a way that the average new Sidereal simply doesn't.
As PCs, we want Solars to play nicely with other Celestials. As NPCs, we want newborn Solars to rattle a world with many elder Lunars. Giving PC-level growth rates to every random Solar would do that very nicely.
I think 3E is boring, because they made a lot of the unique aspects kinda bland.
Example; in 1 and 2E, Solars are the Paragons, but broken by the Great Curse and the simple error of not confirming the kill. Abyssals are the Failures, the heights of what it means to succeed because of your flaws instead of despite them and why that's generally considered a bad thing. Infernals are the Traitors, the proverbial devil's bargain where greatness is achieved but always at a cost higher than anyone but them (and not even always them) ever wanted to or thought they'd pay.
In 3E, Abyssals and Infernals seem to be reflavored as "Paragons in dark clothing" and "Paragons in green clothing".
I think 3E is boring, because they made a lot of the unique aspects kinda bland.
Example; in 1 and 2E, Solars are the Paragons, but broken by the Great Curse and the simple error of not confirming the kill. Abyssals are the Failures, the heights of what it means to succeed because of your flaws instead of despite them and why that's generally considered a bad thing. Infernals are the Traitors, the proverbial devil's bargain where greatness is achieved but always at a cost higher than anyone but them (and not even always them) ever wanted to or thought they'd pay.
In 3E, Abyssals and Infernals seem to be reflavored as "Paragons in dark clothing" and "Paragons in green clothing".
Solars still have the Great Curse, though? I'm not sure what you think has changed about that.
You're also just like, completely mixing up Abyssals and Infernals as 2e depicted them? Abyssals swear an oath to dark forces to save their own lives, a bargain that gives them power but also terrible obligation, and which sets them at odds with all life. They have never been defined by failure. 2e Infernals literally did the failure thing as a condition for their Exaltations.
I think if the only thing you found interesting about these Exalt types is your perception that they are failures and traitors, though, you were never going to be happy with them, because that's just not the core pitch. Abyssals are twisted, undead mirrors of the Solar Exalted, dread princes among the dead with sinister powers, sworn to dark forces that seek to corrupt and destroy the world (in the long term). They still Exalt more or less the same way they used to, they still have to dress in trappings of death, they still forsake their names and take up flowery titles, they still work for various Deathlords as their deathknights, and they still wrestle with interesting moral quandaries as much as they're also over the top super vampires, and they're still supernaturally punished for flouting the will of the Neverborn, although the specifics are changed.
I feel compelled to ask whether you've actually like, read 3e Abyssals yet.
I did a Charm-by-Charm review of Abyssals in this thread, down to whether or not a given Charm was a mirror or not, and I assure you that if you still think they're 'Paragons in dark clothing' after reading my review you have a really broad definition that even in 2e they would fall under.
Like, this is the splat that makes people scared of you then use that fear to explode them into icy chunks.
For me, it's the transhumanism and the "You are built out of villainous parts," aspects. Failure and rising from that comes into it a bit, but as more time goes by, I think my focus shifts more towards the appeal of "You are a genre villain, straight up. Now, what will you make of that aspect of your nature?"
This is your base nature, at the core. These are the bits that make you up. They are the bits that made up your benefactors. Can you make something beautiful out of something broken?
For the record, the amount of focus people have on the cringe shit (which was very cringe and very shit) heavily outweighs how much there actually was. Like, Infernals (which is the first thing I think of when you say that) was the second-last splatbook and it was widely panned for that portion of it pretty much instantly. 2e was also understood to be a follow-up, expansion, and more organised version of 1e and had significantly less massive changes to the established setting (which isn't intrinsically a good or bad thing, but it meant the fandom of the two were for the most part identical). The fandom thus started in 2001, not 2006. Most of the books haven't aged that poorly (well, 1e Lunars sure did, but I'm not sure anyone but Grabowski liked 1e Lunars). I can't say there might not be things we'd define differently or that I might overlook due to familiarity, but I also would be sincerely surprised if you actually found yourself constantly tripping over edgy shit in most 1e/2e books, rather than the occasional gross or product of its time thing.
To this day, I do think it might be more worthwhile than you think to peek into the more highly regarded 1e/2e books. The stuff Jenna Moran wrote (Games of Divinity, 1e Sidereals and Fair Folk come to mind) is, for instance, responsible for a lot of the most beloved aspects of the setting and there are, bluntly, very few RPG writers of her caliber. I'm also a fan of the better Aspect and especially Caste books from 1e, which offered a unique viewpoint on the setting via personal stories of various NPCs (and which I think are still the only time the line ever gave any material focusing on what the Shogunate was like, unless a more recent 3e book did).
I'd definitely second the recommendation to read some of the better books of the previous editions. I first found out and got interested in Exalted in 2E times but only started playing when 3E core came out, so I don't have nostalgia or anything like that going for 1E, but there's sone extremely good material there. Aspect Books, in particular, are some of my favorite RPG books ever, and I'd love it if more games put that kind of effort into really giving people in the setting a "voice".
The Aspect Books are like, a blend of genuinely interesting setting and character work, and like... elements and writing decisions that have just aged like a fine milk. The vision of the Realm is sometimes compellingly awful, but often falls into early 00s grimdark. There are some wild choices that went into Aspect Book Earth and Aspect Book Wood in particular, but I love some of the things in those books.
It's probably the most condensed 1e experience you can find. High highs, very low lows.
You can, I'm sure, imagine that their being more thematically coherent in their design and setting elements are not something that benefits them, but I, having the advantage of actually having read and played both 3e Lunars and Abyssals, feel very confident in disagreeing. Like, we can sit here all day with you speculating about how you assume certain changes in books you haven't read are bad, and reacting second or third hand to people trying to describe those changes -- god knows, we have some people in this thread who seemingly have that as literally their only engagement with Exalted material at all and yet still feel entitled to people respecting their opinions -- but I'm not sure it's a productive use of your time.
I would, personally, and having read the relevant books both for 3E and the previous editions, argue that 3E Lunars, at least, don't benefit much from that added coherence. 3E does have the best take on Lunars to date, or at least the best canon take, but I think the improvements over 1E and 2E are more in details and in the style of writing than anything else. There's less pointless edge and more focus on a varied cast of Lunars doing cool things, which is great. I don't see how 3E Lunars would be in any way worse off if their shapeshifting and overall Charmset encompassed everything it did in 2E.
It waters down what an Exalted is to add more types, in my view. It does not matter whether there are a few hundred or a few million of them in actual numbers. I illustrated fairly clearly what Exalted were conceptualised as in 1e and 2e, and said "adding more weakens this core concept". You can disagree, and that's fine, but it's not an invalid viewpoint simply because I haven't seen whether or not 3e did the new Exalt types well because the viewpoint is agnostic as to how well they end up being done.
While I rather like Exigents, I can definitely understand that view. I don't particularly care for the other new Exalts, myself, but Exigents in specific are so flexible that I'd consider them a very useful addition to the setting. Themes and concepts aside, my own personal, subjective, not-demanding-anyone-but-me-to-care-about-it enjoyment of the game would benefit immensely from the writing team not spending their time and effort on writing new Exalts and instead spending that time and effort writing something I can utilize when running or playing the Exalts that already exist. More locations, more Artifacts, more Martial Arts, more sorcery, more non-Exalted antagonist, thematically focused books that give details on warfare or trade or sailing or occult pursuits in Creation and also include related Charms for all the existing Exalted types, that's the kind of stuff I'd like to see more of. That's worth considering when discussing the merits and downsides of new Exalted types, I think - do they benefit the game as a whole more than spending the same amount of wordcount on something that benefits the Exalts that are already there? That's obviously not a question with an obvious correct answer, but my personal answer would be "probably not".
I imagine most of the Realm's really big accomplishments were made by groups of DBs. And maybe something analogous to an ancient Roman triumph would be fitting in those cases. A huge parade celebrating the accomplishment, with the people who made it possible in the place of pride.
For the medal itself...maybe one big medal, broken into pieces, with each person wearing a piece. But what would it do? Giving it abilities to help the wearers work together would make sense, but why would DBs need a medal for that when they have Terrestrial Charms?
It could be specifically linked to a place, I suppose. A nation that you conquered or saved, generally. But what might that look like, specifically?
The medal itself could be made out of a specific trophy of that victory - shards of a defeated king's broken crown, or a would-be-conqueror's shattered sword, or something of the sort, used as a centerpiece in a medal otherwise made of some magical material. As for the effects of the medal, well, it'd almost have to be something enhancing teamwork, but it's true that Terrestrials have a lot of that already going on in their own Charmset. Maybe it could just boringly but usefully give a mote discount to any teamwork-enhancing Charms when cooperating with other Dragon-Blooded bearers of that medal.
The Aspect Books are like, a blend of genuinely interesting setting and character work, and like... elements and writing decisions that have just aged like a fine milk. The vision of the Realm is sometimes compellingly awful, but often falls into early 00s grimdark. There are some wild choices that went into Aspect Book Earth and Aspect Book Wood in particular, but I love some of the things in those books.
It's probably the most condensed 1e experience you can find. High highs, very low lows.
It's true that Aspect books aren't all solid gold, but those highs really are high. At their best those books did a good job showing how a not-that-awful person might be fully on board with with the Realm's horrible imperialism and how their worldview might be, sort of, not justifiable but coherent. I'll admit that a big part of why I like Aspect Books is Aspect Book: Air, and a big part of why I like Aspect Book: Air is just that I find Tepet Arada really cool.
One small thing that could help: it could be made clear that Solar (and Abyssal, and infernal) NPCs gain "xp" much faster than other Exalts. So even though they're new, they're not all low-Essence. They get strong fast, in a way that the average new Sidereal simply doesn't.
As PCs, we want Solars to play nicely with other Celestials. As NPCs, we want newborn Solars to rattle a world with many elder Lunars. Giving PC-level growth rates to every random Solar would do that very nicely.
The problem with that as a universal rule is that there's some Solars who've been around longer than the PCs. This was specifically a source of tension with the Bull of the North last edition, the idea that he'll always have a decade of experience on you.
I think it certainly can be compelling for some characters! I'll probably use it for some Infernal character I make at some point.
It does mean it's not a universal for the Infernal condition, now, but overall I think this is a positive development for the splat while still letting me bring in a bit I liked.
While I rather like Exigents, I can definitely understand that view. I don't particularly care for the other new Exalts, myself, but Exigents in specific are so flexible that I'd consider them a very useful addition to the setting. Themes and concepts aside, my own personal, subjective, not-demanding-anyone-but-me-to-care-about-it enjoyment of the game would benefit immensely from the writing team not spending their time and effort on writing new Exalts and instead spending that time and effort writing something I can utilize when running or playing the Exalts that already exist. More locations, more Artifacts, more Martial Arts, more sorcery, more non-Exalted antagonist, thematically focused books that give details on warfare or trade or sailing or occult pursuits in Creation and also include related Charms for all the existing Exalted types, that's the kind of stuff I'd like to see more of. That's worth considering when discussing the merits and downsides of new Exalted types, I think - do they benefit the game as a whole more than spending the same amount of wordcount on something that benefits the Exalts that are already there? That's obviously not a question with an obvious correct answer, but my personal answer would be "probably not".
Given the huge amount of effort the fanbase spent on turning Devil-Tigers into Exigents, I sometimes feel like they're not even a new type at all. More like a formalization and tidying-up of some clunky fanon.
It's funny because Devil-Tigers and Exigents could hardly be more different, in every way other than the build-your-own-Exalt theme. But it turns out that bit's more important than everything else together.
The medal itself could be made out of a specific trophy of that victory - shards of a defeated king's broken crown, or a would-be-conqueror's shattered sword, or something of the sort, used as a centerpiece in a medal otherwise made of some magical material. As for the effects of the medal, well, it'd almost have to be something enhancing teamwork, but it's true that Terrestrials have a lot of that already going on in their own Charmset. Maybe it could just boringly but usefully give a mote discount to any teamwork-enhancing Charms when cooperating with other Dragon-Blooded bearers of that medal.
Boring-but-useful has an irritating tendency to become simply correct, optimization-wise.
Medals exist to memorialize things, so...maybe the medals could share memories? Wearers can put parts of their own pasts into the medals, and thereafter all the wearers can "remember" those parts as though it happened to them. That's probably out of theme for the Charmset, which makes it fitting for an Artifact.
The problem with that as a universal rule is that there's some Solars who've been around longer than the PCs. This was specifically a source of tension with the Bull of the North last edition, the idea that he'll always have a decade of experience on you.
Chejop will always have experience on your Sidereal PC; he's still not the main character. I think it's fine.
I'm not saying we should be super rigid about it, and say that all Solars grow at exactly the same rate. But generally speaking, I think a random NPC Solar who Exalted last year should have significantly better numbers than a comparable Lunar.
Boring-but-useful has an irritating tendency to become simply correct, optimization-wise.
Medals exist to memorialize things, so...maybe the medals could share memories? Wearers can put parts of their own pasts into the medals, and thereafter all the wearers can "remember" those parts as though it happened to them. That's probably out of theme for the Charmset, which makes it fitting for an Artifact.
As a two-dot Artifact, I think it narratively could have the power to impose the facts of the achievement onto a person, so that if anyone asks 'what did you get this medal for' you can just beam it into their head.
Mechanically, you could use it like a Major Principle, or a Defining Principle if you already have it as a Major Principle for social interactions with someone you beamed into, since they know it is Really True that you carried an injured comrade halfway across a battlefield to save them. Presumably, such Artifac medals should only work for their true bearers, but who knows!
I was thinking that something along those lines would be a default ability for all the medals. But I didn't think about using it as an Intimacy; that gives it rather more mechanical weight.
As for false bearers, I imagine that the magical message isn't so much "the wearer of the medal did X" as "this specific person did X". So stealing the magic would require you to convince people that you are that specific person.
God-bloods also have the element of the god granting that power doesn't get diminished, and there's some things they're not narratively obligated to that Exalts get. It's helped that being Exalts ahve resulted in folks writing them as their own thing, which 1e and 2e conditioned a lot of folks as to seeing god-bloods as looting their parents for spare change and often kind of underwelming mechanics.
Yeah, my main consideration is that Afondha in Adversaries is a somewhat logical take on what a spirit trying to wield power through their lineage of god-blooded children is going to look like and a narcissistic family matriarch who'll disown you if you don't shape up is probably fairly middle of the road all things considered.
Boring-but-useful has an irritating tendency to become simply correct, optimization-wise.
Medals exist to memorialize things, so...maybe the medals could share memories? Wearers can put parts of their own pasts into the medals, and thereafter all the wearers can "remember" those parts as though it happened to them. That's probably out of theme for the Charmset, which makes it fitting for an Artifact.
Since it's a medal given for teamwork, and meant to celebrate what you can achieve through teamwork, how about enhancing one's ability to sacrifice self for the Kinship and letting other wearers of the medallion to take on themselves the injuries suffered by one, regardless of the distance? That could have potential for interesting situations especially when it comes to an accomplished Sworn Kinship whose members have since drifted apart. Like, if one wearer of the medallion feels that one of the others is about to suffer a fatal blow, they might take that blow instead. If the other wearers choose to do the same, the damage would be shared and no one would be in immediate mortal dangers, but what if the others choose to not take that damage on themselves? Then the one who does so might end up dying in their Sworn Kin's stead, without any assurance of the beneficiary's situation being such that they might then survive instead of just suffering a new, equally lethal attack. And how would the Dynastic society view the other wearers of such a medallion surviving unscathed when one dies? Granted, that specific situation's not really something that'd come up in-game, or at least it'd be more likely to happen to NPCs than the PCs, but it could be thematically neat.
