General Exalted Thread

Hazard · Apr 12, 2016

Shyft said:
I actually don't like Styles as a mechanical solution. I agree that they work and are well implemented, but as far as what they are, they don't appeal to me. They're a very good teaching tool for a wide audience, but I actually enjoy a larger, more granular approach to things.

Like, this is firmly my opinion as Shyft, in how I run my own games or the games I would prefer to play, but I like making full 2e-style Martial Arts Styles. I've gotten good at that. I'm comfortable at it and I tend to associate with people who are comfortable with that. I do agree that MA as presented has systemic problems, but I'd rather solve them a way more preferable to my tastes.

Styles cater instead to the people who don't like that, who believe (not wrongly) in spending their creative effort elsewhere. It reduces ST and player overhead, sure, which are positive traits, and has numerous second order benefits... but it's unsatisfying to me as a player.

I can understand that point of view, but at the same time you don't end up with half a dozen martial arts trees that are different only in where they place certain types of Charm and some minor cost differences.

Sure, a Martial Art is a good way to distinguish your character, but if your campaign grows enough in experience you run into the problem that Martial Arts are closed trees, can't keep up with native Charms and that most are really similar in what they allow you to do with your magic. Styles though do allow you to expand into a new field of competence without running into a massive experience sink due to duplicate Charms.

Shyft · Apr 12, 2016

@Serafina - Legit, re Flairs/Specialties. Not my speed, but I'm glad you're getting utility out of the idea!

Hazard said:
I can understand that point of view, but at the same time you don't end up with half a dozen martial arts trees that are different only in where they place certain types of Charm and some minor cost differences.

Okay so, you're not wrong, but I think you need to remember/understand that I'm not speaking from a position of ignorance. I'm by no means the longest-time fan of Exalted, but you're retreading the same basic argument we've had happen in this very thread numerous times. You don't need to tell me the usual suspects, re: Mechanical Failings or pros/cons.

vicky_molokh said:
Umm, what exactly do you include in "taking actual concrete Actions" in this context? Players preferring a purely abstract/macro-action-scale seems to be an exception to me, not the norm, but perhaps I'm misunderstanding you.

For context, most people fall into the habit of white-boxing; of forgetting to engage with more than just their target. They also tend to act in terms of 'Fewest Possible Steps'.

Player: "I want to attack that guy. I stunt attacking that guy."
Storyteller: "Okay, you attack that guy, here's your stunt bonus."

This is a silly example, but what I'm trying to illustrate is that the ST does not take the time to check if the attack is even Valid. Like 'are they in range?' or 'does the enemy have cover', that kind of thing. There's a reason for this habit- Exalted combat is stupid granular, to the point of any sort of 'Step 1 verification' gets bogged down in favor of running through steps 2-10.

Like, here's the advantage to @EarthScorpion and @Aleph 's approach to combat: It puts all of the creative onus on Step 1. "I want to attack, I know I'll succeed if I hit, therefore what matters more is 'what do I need to do to hit'?

That's fine for their games and honestly something that could be implemented more generally sure, but the 10 step resolution is really handy for when you need intense, TCG style granularity.

Sanctaphrax · Apr 12, 2016

How exactly does the style system work?

Shyft · Apr 12, 2016

Sanctaphrax said:
How exactly does the style system work?

It was explained a few posts back. Basically it's 'Specialties +'. Search for some of @Aleph 's most recent posts in this thread and you'll find it.

Cosar · Apr 12, 2016

Sanctaphrax said:
How exactly does the style system work?

You buy styles like specialities. Each provides bonus dice(1-3), as well as one of 3 special bonuses(one unlocked at each level). You only get the bonus if your stunt is in line with the description of a style.

Shyft said:
For context, most people fall into the habit of white-boxing; of forgetting to engage with more than just their target. They also tend to act in terms of 'Fewest Possible Steps'.

Player: "I want to attack that guy. I stunt attacking that guy."
Storyteller: "Okay, you attack that guy, here's your stunt bonus."

This is a silly example, but what I'm trying to illustrate is that the ST does not take the time to check if the attack is even Valid. Like 'are they in range?' or 'does the enemy have cover', that kind of thing. There's a reason for this habit- Exalted combat is stupid granular, to the point of any sort of 'Step 1 verification' gets bogged down in favor of running through steps 2-10.

At least for range, I think it's due to the utterly moronic movement rules in Exalted, combined with the similarly stupid ranged weapon rules. If you actually run things as written then ranged weapons become even more powerful. Yeah, rewriting the rules is possible, but for movement it's more common to just abstract it away or throw it out entirely, especially since online battle maps aren't always easy, and generally involve a lot more work for the ST.

MJ12 Commando · Apr 12, 2016

C.o.S.a.R said:
At least for range, I think it's due to the utterly moronic movement rules in Exalted, combined with the similarly stupid ranged weapon rules. If you actually run things as written then ranged weapons become even more powerful. Yeah, rewriting the rules is possible, but for movement it's more common to just abstract it away or throw it out entirely, especially since online battle maps aren't always easy, and generally involve a lot more work for the ST.

In Exalted 2e and 2.5e, ranged weapons manage lethalities and rates of fire which are generally more akin to modern rifles and accuracy rates more akin to modern guided weapons than any actual medieval weapons. Like, straight-up, a mundane longbow in Exalted has a ~200m effective range, wherein I can expect, as a competent shooter, to hit an actively evading target about 50% of the time. I can sustain, indefinitely, a fire rate of 10/minute. Whereas in real life, a guy in plate armor could literally ignore hundreds of arrows fired like that.

Shyft · Apr 12, 2016

MJ12 Commando said:
In Exalted 2e and 2.5e, ranged weapons manage lethalities and rates of fire which are generally more akin to modern rifles and accuracy rates more akin to modern guided weapons than any actual medieval weapons. Like, straight-up, a mundane longbow in Exalted has a ~200m effective range, wherein I can expect, as a competent shooter, to hit an actively evading target about 50% of the time. I can sustain, indefinitely, a fire rate of 10/minute. Whereas in real life, a guy in plate armor could literally ignore hundreds of arrows fired like that.

It's actually worse than you think- The standard roll to hit anything is Diff 1 before DV. You may, with any ranged weapon, attack up to 2 or 3 times its listed range at a -1 or -2 external penalty respectively.

So, shooting something from 600 yards away merely requires 3 successes.to land on target, plus however many successes you need to break DV.

Frakir's brother · Apr 12, 2016

MJ12 Commando said:
In Exalted 2e and 2.5e, ranged weapons manage lethalities and rates of fire which are generally more akin to modern rifles and accuracy rates more akin to modern guided weapons than any actual medieval weapons. Like, straight-up, a mundane longbow in Exalted has a ~200m effective range, wherein I can expect, as a competent shooter, to hit an actively evading target about 50% of the time. I can sustain, indefinitely, a fire rate of 10/minute. Whereas in real life, a guy in plate armor could literally ignore hundreds of arrows fired like that.

No they couldn't, cite:

NonSequtur · Apr 12, 2016

Frakir's brother said:
No they couldn't, cite:

They're hardly tenths of a kilometer away and still not getting serious penetration. At hundreds of metres things'd be worse.

FaeGlade Plural · Apr 12, 2016

Plus the fact that over such distances, accuracy would be bad against a moving target.

Edit:
This whole thing just makes me glad that 3E left ranges ambiguous. That way, I can translate "long range" into any real-world distance that is appropriate to my game, both for weapon-ranges and movement.

Hazard · Apr 12, 2016

Frakir's brother said:
No they couldn't, cite:

Below that breast plate there'd be a layer of mail followed by a thick, quilted garment called a gambeson to absorb impacts. And I'm not sure about the range but that doesn't look very far and the arrows are striking pretty much dead on on the plate.

Which is all combined a best case scenario for the bowman for maximum penetration. And the arrows don't go very far.

Would it hurt? Probably.

Would it mission kill the knight? Probably not.

100thlurker · Apr 12, 2016

MJ12 Commando said:
Whereas in real life, a guy in plate armor could literally ignore hundreds of arrows fired like that.

One hardly needs plate armor to accomplish this feat. Let's look to the account of Jean de Joineville. Here we see a certain Walter of Châtillon:

...and whilst the Turks were fleeing before him, they (who shoot as well backwards as forwards) would cover him with darts. When he had driven them out of the village, he would pick out the darts that were sticking all over him; and put on his coat-of-arms again... Then, turning round, and seeing that the Turks had come in at the other end of the street, he would charge them again, sword in hand, and drive them out. And this he did about three times in the manner I have described.

Later, Joineville had been injured, preventing him from bearing the weight of maille on his body. Nevertheless...

[...] I got up, threw a quilted tunic over my back, clapped a steel cap on my head, and shouted out to our sergeants: "by Saint Nicholas, they shall not stay here!". My knights gathered round me, all wounded as they were, and we drove the Saracen sergeants away from our own machines and back toward a great body of mounted Turks who had stationed themselves quite close to the ones we had taken from them. I sent to the king for help, for neither I nor my knights could put on our hauberks because of the wounds we had received.

The mere padding that would go under Jean de Joinville's maille was sufficient armor, such that he could not only survive point-blank arrow flights from Turkic warbows, but to evidently fight ably until aid arrived. We see this corroborated by modern testing:

As for men in full plate armor?

"...they (the Spanish) were so near them (the English) that they could easily tell the fair men from the dark...the standard and he who bore it were likewise riddled with arrows, and the standard bearer had as many round his body as a bull in the ring, but he was shielded by his good armour"
-Don Pero Niño

The Laurent · Apr 12, 2016

Geeze. Though from a gameplay perspective you might not want to go that far, if only because it seems like it'd make archery completely useless, short of 'magic bow and arrow that pierce through anything' or something.

Kaiya · Apr 12, 2016

The Laurent said:
Geeze. Though from a gameplay perspective you might not want to go that far, if only because it seems like it'd make archery completely useless, short of 'magic bow and arrow that pierce through anything' or something.

I don't see the desirability of realism here, yeah.

Kaiya · Apr 12, 2016

Hazard said:
I can understand that point of view, but at the same time you don't end up with half a dozen martial arts trees that are different only in where they place certain types of Charm and some minor cost differences.

Sure, a Martial Art is a good way to distinguish your character, but if your campaign grows enough in experience you run into the problem that Martial Arts are closed trees, can't keep up with native Charms and that most are really similar in what they allow you to do with your magic. Styles though do allow you to expand into a new field of competence without running into a massive experience sink due to duplicate Charms.

I'm in an ongoing 2.5 game. Three and a half years, 850xp. Three out of four players are Martial Artists. We don't all feel the same with our powers nor have the MAs caused any of the issues people tend to complain about. I still have MAs I would genuinely buy because they'd let me do cool stuff. Currently I'm finishing Wood Dragon. I feel the issues with MAs are vastly overstated, since most games do not tend to last this long, and the issue isn't really manifesting much. I find it hard to believe that MAs are remotely the problem you're stating, because those problems are rare and aren't even becoming a thing at this late stage.

Honestly MAs are useful for us since there's new stuff to actually spend the experience on.

Omicron · Apr 12, 2016

Fenrir555 said:
I don't see the desirability of realism here, yeah.

Withering attacks. When a Size 3 (over a hundred combattants) battlegroup hits you with a withering and it only deals a couple points of initiative damage thanks to your ridiculously heavy armor, you're free to represent this as having dozens of arrows planted through your plate that haven't reached the skin and have not hurt you.

Revlid · Apr 12, 2016

Shyft said:
I actually don't like Styles as a mechanical solution. I agree that they work and are well implemented, but as far as what they are, they don't appeal to me. They're a very good teaching tool for a wide audience, but I actually enjoy a larger, more granular approach to things.

Like, this is firmly my opinion as Shyft, in how I run my own games or the games I would prefer to play, but I like making full 2e-style Martial Arts Styles. I've gotten good at that. I'm comfortable at it and I tend to associate with people who are comfortable with that. I do agree that MA as presented has systemic problems, but I'd rather solve them a way more preferable to my tastes.

Styles cater instead to the people who don't like that, who believe (not wrongly) in spending their creative effort elsewhere. It reduces ST and player overhead, sure, which are positive traits, and has numerous second order benefits... but it's unsatisfying to me as a player.

I understand where you're coming from, and one potential idea would be to allow for Evocations stemming from mastered Styles rather than Artifacts.

One of the core goals of Styles is to make customizing your own as quick and easy as possible, incidentally allowing a huge variety in terms of flavour without opening up a can of combination-worms. Normally, therefore, I wouldn't suggest Evocations, which come with an exact opposite set of upsides - great mechanical depth and breadth, as well as the ability to invest deeply in a single cohesive tree of powers - complete with the exact opposite set of downsides. If you're playing 3e, however, you're already expected to homebrew big Charm trees for magic weapons and fighting styles, so why not?

So just allow Exalts (or other beings capable of using Evocations) to homebrew Charms appropriate to Styles they've mastered, in the same way as Evocations extend from artifacts they've bonded with. Mortals get all the benefits of regular Styles, but Exalts get to take them to new heights - functionally the same thing as Martial Arts Charms, but with no need for Mastery/Terrestrial keywords, and available in wuxia areas other than punching-people-fu. Sorcerous Initiations and their associated Merits could probably end up being lumped into these, too, as Occult Styles.

Aleph · Apr 12, 2016

The Laurent said:
Geeze. Though from a gameplay perspective you might not want to go that far, if only because it seems like it'd make archery completely useless, short of 'magic bow and arrow that pierce through anything' or something.

Well, the alternative is that ranged combat does hit on-par with melee combat, and then archers are Just Better, because with equal investment Glorious Solar Railgun can do equal damage to Invincible Sword Princess from three hundred times her engagement range and run away as fast as she can catch up.

Historically, the advantage of melee combat was rather that you could do a lot more damage a lot faster and be a lot more certain about doing it than plugging away at someone from four hundred yards away. So I'm cool with Ranged taking an Accuracy and Damage nerf vs Melee in exchange for, you know, being able to attack them while they can't attack you.

How much of a nerf is up for debate, but that's basically a matter of haggling.

Imrix · Apr 12, 2016

NonSequtur said:
They're hardly tenths of a kilometer away and still not getting serious penetration. At hundreds of metres things'd be worse.

Hazard said:
Below that breast plate there'd be a layer of mail followed by a thick, quilted garment called a gambeson to absorb impacts. And I'm not sure about the range but that doesn't look very far and the arrows are striking pretty much dead on on the plate.

The listed range is 20-25 metres. I feel I should point out, however, that the draw weight of the bows they're using is pathetic. An 85 lb warbow? Pfuagh. The 110 lb yew is at least in the right ballpark, but there's a reason we can identify the skeletons of Welsh and English longbowmen by the deformities of their shoulder and arm bones. They were seriously heavy bows - estimates range up to 185 lbs.

That said, MJ12 commando is essentially correct. I don't know about Turkic archers, but a longbowman would be expected to shoot with reasonable accuracy (hit a stationary, man-sized target) out to 200 yards; anything up to 400 was possible, but that's shooting just to see how far you can put the arrow. The wind decides where a shot like that lands, not you. Longbowmen were also fairly professional, even elite soldiers in their day, so realistically 200 yards was long range shooting. To put it in Exalted terms, a real longbow probably has an extreme range of 400, a long range of 200, and a regular range of 100 yards or a little more. This is all talking about stationary targets, mind you; on the battlefield longbows were mass shooting weapons meant to target formations instead of individuals.

Kaiya · Apr 12, 2016

Omicron said:
Withering attacks. When a Size 3 (over a hundred combattants) battlegroup hits you with a withering and it only deals a couple points of initiative damage thanks to your ridiculously heavy armor, you're free to represent this as having dozens of arrows planted through your plate that haven't reached the skin and have not hurt you.

Ah! I was actually thinking in terms of changing the weapon stats to reflect being unable to pierce armor. You make a good point, though!

SerbobIV · Apr 12, 2016

@Aleph usung the Kerisgame hacks would an infernal at chargen (being enlightenment 6) have all essence 6 or less charms available? Or would that use the enlightenment-5 rule?

Also, how does this look as a style?
Bleeding Edge Technologist Style
(Tony Stark/Reed Richards-esque Science!)
Practitioners of BET create technology at the bleeding edge of human capability and test it themselves.
+1 to design & build tech using state of the art equipment
+1 to prototype brand new technology
-1 difficulty to repair/troubleshoot self-built tech in stressful conditions

Kaiya · Apr 12, 2016

Revlid said:
I understand where you're coming from, and one potential idea would be to allow for Evocations stemming from mastered Styles rather than Artifacts.

One of the core goals of Styles is to make customizing your own as quick and easy as possible, incidentally allowing a huge variety in terms of flavour without opening up a can of combination-worms. Normally, therefore, I wouldn't suggest Evocations, which come with an exact opposite set of upsides - great mechanical depth and breadth, as well as the ability to invest deeply in a single cohesive tree of powers - complete with the exact opposite set of downsides. If you're playing 3e, however, you're already expected to homebrew big Charm trees for magic weapons and fighting styles, so why not?

So just allow Exalts (or other beings capable of using Evocations) to homebrew Charms appropriate to Styles they've mastered, in the same way as Evocations extend from artifacts they've bonded with. Mortals get all the benefits of regular Styles, but Exalts get to take them to new heights - functionally the same thing as Martial Arts Charms, but with no need for Mastery/Terrestrial keywords, and available in wuxia areas other than punching-people-fu. Sorcerous Initiations and their associated Merits could probably end up being lumped into these, too, as Occult Styles.

This actually changed, by the way. Weapons get like...5, 6 Evocations, tops, now. My Night's weapon is Artifact 4 because it has 5 Evocations (and also I guess because I gave it esoteric bullshit instead of normal stuff). The three dot artifacts tend to have three or four Evocations.

Broken25 · Apr 12, 2016

andres said:
@Aleph usung the Kerisgame hacks would an infernal at chargen (being enlightenment 6) have all essence 6 or less charms available? Or would that use the enlightenment-5 rule?

Enlightment 6 is equivalent to a infernal with E1, for charm prerequisites.

Aleph · Apr 12, 2016

andres said:
@Aleph usung the Kerisgame hacks would an infernal at chargen (being enlightenment 6) have all essence 6 or less charms available? Or would that use the enlightenment-5 rule?

Also, how does this look as a style?
Bleeding Edge Technologist Style
(Tony Stark/Reed Richards-esque Science!)
Practitioners of BET create technology at the bleeding edge of human capability and test it themselves.
+1 to design & build tech using state of the art equipment
+1 to prototype brand new technology
-1 difficulty to repair/troubleshoot self-built tech in stressful conditions

Flat no to the first question; Enlightenment 6 is equivalent to Essence 1 for Solaroids and Essence 6+ Charms are just flat-out gone because they're basically all terrible.

As to the Style, hmm. No. The first two bonuses essentially always apply, and it's not really thematic enough. And honestly I'm inclined to say... hmm. What sort of game is this Style for? Because if it's an Age of Sorrows game, it's just not suitable at all. High First Age, maybe, but in the Age of Sorrows it shouldn't exist.

EarthScorpion · Apr 12, 2016

Aleph said:
As to the Style, hmm. No. The first two bonuses essentially always apply, and it's not really thematic enough. And honestly I'm inclined to say... hmm. What sort of game is this Style for? Because if it's an Age of Sorrows game, it's just not suitable at all. High First Age, maybe, but in the Age of Sorrows it shouldn't exist.

Yes. To be Tony Stark, you need to pick up a fuck-tonne of different Styles. You need AI Styles, Power Armour Styles, High Energy Physics Styles [1], etc etc.

That's because being an amazing polyglot super-mega scientist who has no limits to what they dabble in is meant to be very expensive.

[1] Assholish Remark Style, Alcoholic Consumption Style, Annoying (Other Avenger) Style...

General Exalted Thread

Shadow Cabal Barristerminator

Goodbye.

a body

Semper Legens

atheshtarih and Enemy of the Lie

"I already have dragons, I do not want men."

blob of bugs

Princess of Stabbity

Periodically Malevolent QM

Princess of Stabbity

╯‵Д′)╯彡┻━┻