Surprisingly people tend to think you actually have a point rather than making nitpicks on things that don't matter as if you're the 'debate police' making sure nobody is arguing in a sub-standard way (by your definition of it) even when you don't apparently disagree with their argument at all and aren't even engaging with it.
 
The thing about complexity for complexity's sake is that sure, people love that, but it really takes a lot of time and oftentimes what's happening is that the time taken in development is leeching time which could have been used to make other systems fun.

I've talked about Exalted 3E's social system before and I'll say it again-they should have used some of the time they spent making rolls this complex Las Vegas style dice game and made social influence resemble actual social influence a bit more.
I'm not sure fused abilities would actually be less complicated, though. I mean, it's all about the charmtrees; 15 abilities or 25 are equally complex other than the charms. And Melee+Brawl would have to have a significantly larger charmtree than either Melee or Brawl does on its own to cover the same ground. (Either that or you'd have to cut down on the available options - but "is there too much charm bloat" is a separate question; for any given level of bloat, Melee+Brawl is bigger than Melee.) Fewer charms total, since you could trim out some overlap - but far more charm combinations, and far more options to choose from when building/advancing your character.
 
I have a question about the Infernal Virtue-altering Charms.

For example, if an Infernal has Murder is Meat (cannot channel Compassion to aid mortals) and Puppets on Heartstrings (can always channel Compassion to aid the target fulfill their role), what happens?

Is it just up to the ST?
 
I'm not sure fused abilities would actually be less complicated, though. I mean, it's all about the charmtrees; 15 abilities or 25 are equally complex other than the charms. And Melee+Brawl would have to have a significantly larger charmtree than either Melee or Brawl does on its own to cover the same ground. (Either that or you'd have to cut down on the available options - but "is there too much charm bloat" is a separate question; for any given level of bloat, Melee+Brawl is bigger than Melee.) Fewer charms total, since you could trim out some overlap - but far more charm combinations, and far more options to choose from when building/advancing your character.

Well, this is actually pretty easy. Treat "your fist and/or foot" as "a melee weapon", dump the entire Brawl/MA ability and shrug: the real-world skill difference between fighting with your bare hands and fighting with a jian is not appreciably greater than the difference between fighting with a jian and fighting with a pair of tonfas and you can do the last two (plus battleaxes, plus nunchaku, plus bo staves, plus... etc, etc) all at once, so whatever, what's an additional weapon tacked on to the skill of wielding all weapons?

The only new, non overlapping thing that needs to be added to Melee's scope of charm effects to accomodate the new weapon is grapples/clinches, which also pull double duty for the use of stuff like fighting chains, kusari-gama and CQC knife fighting so the effort goes further than just unarmed fighters. Everything else which used to be in Brawl is overlapping, like, for example, knockback charms which should work just fine with a goremaul, conceptually.

You just need to throw in a charm which creates a "virtual weapon" for the use of your unarmed combat characters so that fighting unarmed is not retarded compared to using a weapon (which also pulls double duty with weapon-replacement effects ala Glorious Solar Sabre, and could in fact be the exact same charm), and you're basically done.

e: Peori's "martial arts style as virtual artifact" hack posted somewhere back in this thread would also work fine here: it's just another "melee weapon", to be wielded while you're using your Solar Melee Charms. Or if you're running with Styles you could do something like a Charm which requires you to have a Style at 3, which creates a permanent "virtual weapon" for you to wield while using your Style. Etc, etc.
 
Last edited:
I have a question about the Infernal Virtue-altering Charms.

For example, if an Infernal has Murder is Meat (cannot channel Compassion to aid mortals) and Puppets on Heartstrings (can always channel Compassion to aid the target fulfill their role), what happens?

You would be always able to channel compassion to aid a target to fulfill their role provided the target is not a mortal.
 
Right- it is an abstraction. But I've rarely had any ST use it in an entertaining manner. No one has told me 'No, you can't buy something here'. When used carefully, that phrase is fun for me. I of course acknowledge that there's no real instruction on how to do this effectively.
IMHO Exalted can't decide whether it wants it to be an abstraction (and a handwave) or not. As in, it gives this detailed article about monetary systems of the setting, and then proceeds to abstract it into Resource Dots with a somewhat dubious proportions (notably, alleged out-of-pocket expenses seem like they should actually take up a significant chunk of the next dot, not something you can easily buy every day out of your pocket allotment), and lists the prices of pretty much everything in these abstract Resource Dots, also easily missing by at least an order of magnitude in terms of price estimates.

Early in the campaign, I tried to make sense of those dots and convert them into understandable numbers. I kinda gave up after hitting the brick wall of the cutoff between (Resources) and (Resources-1) purchases producing differences of outcome way out of proportion to the difference of nominal price.

I do appreciate the overall "At X you get impoverished until you earn more, at X-1 you're okay, at X-2 you can trivially purchase lots of stuff", but the actual cost differences per step need to be adjusted. At a minimum, it should be ×5 per step, otherwise it doesn't seem to make sense.
 
Last edited:
I have a question about the Infernal Virtue-altering Charms.

For example, if an Infernal has Murder is Meat (cannot channel Compassion to aid mortals) and Puppets on Heartstrings (can always channel Compassion to aid the target fulfill their role), what happens?

Is it just up to the ST?
It would probably be up to the GM.

I would decide based off of the fluff of the two charms. MiM basically means you no longer give a shit about the sanctity of human life unless they are powerful and thus interesting. PoH basically means your compassion is focused on viewing people as tools to fulfill a roll so when you help them fulfill a roll you aren't caring about them so much as you are fixing a system. When you fix your car it isn't because you love it but because you need to drive places. This charm basically makes the inability of a tool to do its job a thing you care about in the same way a normal person would care about a crying child. Except the tool is a person.

Both charms are basically shifting compassion to dehumanize people in different ways so I would make it so you cannot channel to aid mortals except in the context of making them fill a role as long as fluff wise it is the role you care about rather than the person fulfilling it. You now view mortals purely through their utility whether it is as food, or tools, not people.

So you don't give a shit that Steve's dream is to be a great swordsmen, but you do care that he is shit at his role as a bodyguard and want to fix it because people being bad at their jobs upsets you. You would feel the same way even if he hated his job and wants to be a chef, so you'll make him a better bodyguard whether he likes it or not.
 
Y'all are coming up with all of these elegant "solutions" to what is not very big problem. It is a game, and the combat system in particular is designed like a game, with a list of abstract choices and sets of mechanics that are supposed to be evocative of the names of those choices.

So, Brawl feels very punchy. Melee feels very swordsman-y although if you approach it a little differently you can totally build something that feels a bit different. Not every single combat concept is as privileged here but oh well?

(In particular Brawl feels like a combo from a fighting game: punch punch punch punch grab THROW KO type stuff)
 
Last edited:
Y'all are coming up with all of these elegant "solutions" to what is not very big problem. It is a game, and the combat system in particular is designed like a game, with a list of abstract choices and sets of mechanics that are supposed to be evocative of the names of those choices.

So, Brawl feels very punchy. Melee feels very swordsman-y although if you approach it a little differently you can totally build something that feels a bit different. Not every single combat concept is as privileged here but oh well?

(In particular Brawl feels like a combo from a fighting game: punch punch punch punch grab THROW KO type stuff)

Not particularly. The most effective Brawl attack in 2E was to spam clinch until you got one to connect, then Crashing Wave Throw the target into the nearest sharp and pointy object for 50L Piercing damage. If you didn't want to do that, you were left with a large array of underpowered supplemental charms that required you to spend more Essence to use them than the target would spend defending, effectively killing yourself slowly. In fact, the most effective way to be a Solar fist-fighter / "unarmed" combatant was to wear fighting gauntlets, which were Melee weapons as well as brawling aids, and use them with Melee Charms.

This isn't particularly interesting, so it can simply be severed and the clinch design space remanded to Melee. Melee can already punch and kick, after all, ha ha. So why not?
 
Last edited:
Well, I obviously am not, right? 3E's solution to the problem is to layer on even more weight of combinatorial hell-cancer.

The discussion was originally about 3E and I didn't quote you. So your reply to me is pretty irrelevant. Specifically, it was a question/complaint about the ability to represent certain combat archetypes in 3E.
 
Last edited:
The discussion was originally about 3E and I didn't quote you. So your reply to me is pretty irrelevant.

The discussion was about why one would, conceptually/theoretically speaking, separate or not separate Brawl and Melee. I am pointing out that there isn't a reason to maintain the separation beyond legacy compatibility. If one ability is broad and all-encompassing enough to contain all the weapons in the world such that Zatoichi, Sephiroth, Cloud Strife, Mister I Have A Grand Goremaul Bigger Than My Entire Body Mass, Shiki Nanaya and Sun Wukong are using the same broad, multi-functional toolkit to do their "I hit the enemy" thing, it doesn't take much more to throw Zangief and Ryu in on top.

There's less of a conceptual gap between Ryu and Cloud than there is between Zatoichi and Grand Goremaul Dude, yet I can have Grand Goremaul Dude pick up a canesword and start doing badass reverse-grip sword tricks whenever I feel like it. If that's a thing, what's so special about punches?

In fact, it's more work to keep Zangief and Ryu separated from the others (as one would need to recreate all the things they have in common in a new ability tree, which is "nearly everything except for clinching") than it is to throw a few "yeah, this shit works with clinches or constrictions of any kind" charms into Melee and call it a day. There are, after all, many melee weapons that can be used as grappling aids (eg, the humble stick), and in fact have that as a natural outgrowth of their use: smoothly flowing from "brawl" to "melee" is a real-world combat thing which Exalted apparently find harder to do than changing styles from katana to giant hammer the size of a Toyota.
 
Last edited:
It gets worse, actually. Historical weapon fighting manuals, both eastern and western, included extensive sections on mixing strikes and grappling maneuvers - while still holding weapons - to hook an opponents limbs and throw him, grab on his weapon to disarm him, or use your own weapon as leverage to put him into a submission hold - aka wrestling with a crowbar.
 
What? No, that's not how it works, not in Third Edition, at least. Brawl is street fighting self-trained stuff. Jiujutsu would be Martial Arts: Jiujutsu. Same as Martial Arts: Ebon Shadow or Martial Arts: Black Claw. You can be a mortal Martial Artist with no Charms using Ebon Shadow Style. The Charms are how the fighting style expresses itself. If you are an Akido master who Exalts, you're gonna be manifest Akido Charms. Martial Art Charms are supernatural expressions of the given martial art.

Sorry to pick on you in particular, but you provided the most available quote for this.

This is incoherent nonsense.

There is a limited subset of things you can do in a fight that won't get you horribly killed. A martial art is simply a codified list of a certain number of those things, organized in a way that seemed logical to the people who came up with that list.

Self-trained street fighters either never get any good, they die horribly, or they pick up enough of the 'ways to not die horribly' to assemble a martial art out of. This is in fact how martial arts get founded.

If you have a combat skill at a half-decent level you are a martial artist. What kind of martial artist you are is the interesting matter. This elitism about where and how you learned it is incoherent and moronic - and I am an actual martial artist.

My knife fighter doesn't have the entire Solar Melee damage tree, actually. Nor any of it, actually, not at the moment. If I were to get him more dedicated Melee Charms, I would focus on the defensive and counterattack Charms, I think. Because Hungry Tiger Technique feels unfitting, to me, personally, as a damage Charm for a hesitant knife fighter. I would likely stop at Fire and Stones Strike, for damage enhancers, for exactly that reason. I mean, obviously you don't have to, you could easily fluff Hungry Tiger Technique as a perfect stab to the lungs or heart or whatever. But it's too much overwhelming damage in fluff and execution for my tastes. Melee's a big tree. Even my dedicated Meleeist with a crazy ton of Melee Charms only has half of it, and the other half would take him until E3 to get, assuming he bought nothing else, which he really wouldn't, he's got Resistance, Presence, and Socialize to invest in.

I think I could make a brutal axe warrior with Melee pretty easily. I'd avoid the defensive tree, dip into damage and hitting reliably, and be a Resistance berserker who can utterly shatter enemy defenses with his heavy weapon and Melee, while being nigh-invulnerable with his Resistance Charms. But I also wouldn't try to master Melee, because Melee, as a whole, doesn't fit the concept. But the damage enhancers and a couple 'hit better' Charms does it fine. Oh, and dip into Athletics, it's got some good stuff for enhancing a damage-focused melee fighter.

TL;DR: Yes, it would bother me if my axe guy felt like a knife fighter, which is why I'd spread my axe-fighter around, since not all Melee Charms would make me feel like a giant with a heavy axe cleaving enemies in two.

Right. Exactly. And in just that exact same way, your unarmed fighter can feel as different from your swordsman as you care to make 'em. The one tree's plenty big, and it's even bigger if you put the Brawl charms in there too.

So if this approach works for differentiating an axe-man and a knife fighter, why wouldn't it work for differentiating a brawler and a knife fighter?

Fists and knives are probably more similar in use than knives and axes, when you get right down to it.

They are. Knife-fighting is fist-fighting with a sharpened hand. The game changes up a bit with longer weapons like swords and axes because there's space and time to react.

It would probably work? I don't want to fuse abilities, though. It'd be less fun. I don't value simplifying things for its own sake. I enjoy complexity. It'd make the game worse, in my eyes.

It doesn't get less complex, though. It gets less fiddly because now you don't have to invest in multiple favoured abilities to do the same thing, but the full breadth of charms is still there.

As noted charm bloat is a potential issue, but that's a separate potential issue. Cramming the Brawl and Melee charmsets into one, on its own, doesn't reduce complexity at all - it just removes the stumbling block of 'I can maneuver my body perfectly to hit a target, but completely forget how the moment I don't have a stick in my hand' that makes it troublesome for an actual martial artist to engage with Exalted as-written (hiya!), while opening up more finesse-oriented unarmed combat and more 'raaaaargh for the rargh god' for a dude with an axe.

If Solar Brawl could do all of the things Solar Melee can do, and Solar Melee could do all of the things Solar Brawl can do, then why would we have two separate combat abilities and charmsets?

I think some members' answer to that question is pretty clear, but just in case: They shouldn't be.

I literally just got home from whacking people in the face with a sword, do you have any idea of how many times it turned into grappling? (You have no idea how beautiful it is to get an elbow push and send your opponent spinning so much their back is facing you) How the action to punch and the action to cut someone with a sword are borderline-identical?

Any idea how large a percentage of that above-mentioned 'ways to not die horribly' is 'clothesline your opponent with your sword'? (Swords are grappling tools, man, a good half of sword-in-armour is 'using the thing as a prybar to throw the other guy on the ground')

The human body is used all at once in violence. The only thing melee weapons do is provide leverage, reach, and sharpness.

Yes, but that's not where we are and given that Ex3 has the 25-ability spread it makes no sense to complain about the fact that they made the charm trees distinct.

Makes even less sense to use 'that's not where we are' as a defence against people complaining about 'where we are'.

We know that's not where we are. That's the problem.
 
See, @Pale Wolf, when I said you were my new hero I didn't realise it would be quite so apt. You sound like you're still in your origin story picking up heroic skills to go on an epic adventure.
 
Riffing on @Pale Wolf 's thing-

I think, at the end of the day, there are a few axioms to strive for in the design space of abilities and Charms.
  • Abilities should say things about the setting - they already do with the astrological colleges, other metaphysics and so on.
  • Abilities should be broad enough to be easily organized.
  • Each splat should have a strong identity associated with abilities or attributes as appropriate. Solar Melee is distinct from Sidereal Melee, but both inherit from Melee the Ability.
  • Charm trees, setting aside them being from codified, 2nd edition Styles or otherwise, should have clearly defined design space.
This last point I think is the important one for people who want creative play. There's a lot of extra stuff I could go on about regarding Martial Arts Culture in Exalted, but it's late so I'll save it for later.

Like, if you just say, flat out, that Melee/Martial Arts becomes a single ability, and then suddenly every formal combat art is now a viable charm tree within that ability, you just need to figure out a way to mark the 'special' ones away from the ones inherent to the splat.

Honestly that's all that's left, after a certain point- organization. Cue 5am thoughts from Shyft. I'm out.
 
Makes even less sense to use 'that's not where we are' as a defence against people complaining about 'where we are'.

We know that's not where we are. That's the problem.

Look, here is the series of posts that really jump-started the discussion:

Tabletop - General Exalted Thread | Page 891
Tabletop - General Exalted Thread | Page 891
Tabletop - General Exalted Thread | Page 891
Tabletop - General Exalted Thread | Page 891

People started bandying ideas around up to and including redesigning the Ability system, all originating from the problem "some fighting archetypes seem hard to reflect under these rules".

This may even be correct in theory but we have an actual game right here that is not designed according to that theory and you haven't particularly offered to completely rewrite it from scratch. And people are talking about that game, and about what sort of stuff you can homebrew for that game. That discussion is fundamentally more practical and relevant than a bunch of theorizing.

So I'm perfectly happy to point out that, look, the system actually works pretty well as a game and thus one of the better solutions is to just let it do its thing, which does not perfectly reflect all archetypes but has a pretty evocative flavor for some and is also a fun game.
 
Last edited:
Like, if you just say, flat out, that Melee/Martial Arts becomes a single ability, and then suddenly every formal combat art is now a viable charm tree within that ability, you just need to figure out a way to mark the 'special' ones away from the ones inherent to the splat.

Hmm. That's the thing, a lot of formal combat arts are doing essentially the same actions. For example, there are only so many ways you can effectively swing a sword in a two-handed overhand cut, so a formal combat art that uses two-handed overhand cuts and another combat art that uses two-handed overhand cuts probably shouldn't have entirely different, separated "I can do really cool two-handed overhand cuts" mechanical widgets you buy in fenced-off progressions: that's unintuitive, unnatural. If you learned how to do two-handed overhand cuts from somewhere and you try another style which has two-handed overhand cuts, very likely, your pre-existing knowledge of how to do that is going to be useful.

Solar Charms are supposed to be extensions of your natural skill, so, if we take our mashed-together "I can use my sun-god holy nuclear fusion magic powers to mess people up at close range, with anything that I can pick up and hit someone with or even my bare hands" collection of charms, and say it has a magic power for most of the things people are going to want to do with their hands, feet and various types of weaponry... we can save truly impressive amounts of effort, wordcount and other valuable development resources.

Since we can now go "Okay! Your martial arts style uses the arming sword or hand-and-a-half sword and related wrestling moves, so buy all the magic stuff in that cloud relevant to wrestling and swording, and now you're a nuclear-powered martial artist. Your art's curriculum has all these stylish moves, and you can put holy sunfire behind every one of them."
 
Last edited:
This may even be correct in theory but we have an actual game right here that is not designed according to that theory and you haven't particularly offered to completely rewrite it from scratch. And people are talking about that game, and about what sort of stuff you can homebrew for that game. That discussion is fundamentally more practical and relevant than a bunch of theorizing.

So I'm perfectly happy to point out that, look, the system actually works pretty well as a game and thus one of the better solutions is to just let it do its thing, which does not perfectly reflect all archetypes but has a pretty evocative flavor for some and is also a fun game.
I don't see how this is at all a valid rebuttal. "You haven't offered to rewrite the game from scratch" has no bearing on whether criticism is valid, "some people enjoy it" doesn't either, and since no one is going to kick down your door and take Ex3 away from you I don't see how "just let it do its thing" is even relevant.

"But your theorizing about how to make a better game is impractical" comes across as a pretty transparent attempt to deflect criticism, as well.
 
I don't see how this is at all a valid rebuttal. "You haven't offered to rewrite the game from scratch" has no bearing on whether criticism is valid, "some people enjoy it" doesn't either, and since no one is going to kick down your door and take Ex3 away from you I don't see how "just let it do its thing" is even relevant.

"But your theorizing about how to make a better game is impractical" comes across as a pretty transparent attempt to deflect criticism, as well.

I don't have any particular disagreement with the abstract idea of reducing the abilities down. I think that in the context of the origin of the discussion, which involved a concrete question of "what can I homebrew in order to represent the concept I want", it's reasonable to say that the solution "rewrite the Ability system from scratch" is perhaps excessive compared to the scale of the problem.
 
I don't have any particular disagreement with the abstract idea of reducing the abilities down. I think that in the context of the origin of the discussion, which involved a concrete question of "what can I homebrew in order to represent the concept I want", it's reasonable to say that the solution "rewrite the Ability system from scratch" is perhaps excessive compared to the scale of the problem.
Yes, but the discussion is not superglued to its origin, and moved on. Unless I missed someone seriously suggesting rewriting the system from scratch for someone's 3E game, they're just talking about how to make a system without those faults. Is that practical for the immediate my-next-game stuff? No, but that doesn't mean it's somehow unreasonable to talk about.
 
Yes, but the discussion is not superglued to its origin, and moved on. Unless I missed someone seriously suggesting rewriting the system from scratch for someone's 3E game, they're just talking about how to make a system without those faults. Is that practical for the immediate my-next-game stuff? No, but that doesn't mean it's somehow unreasonable to talk about.

Discussions are not superglued to their origins but it's also perfectly reasonable to try to bring them back around. And it is helpful for a sense of proportion to do so.
 

Can you not do that 'so obviously you haven't read what's been written' thing? It's condescending jackhattery.

Especially when you're wrong.

This is a far more useful post to understand what jumpstarted the discussion.

It initiated as a discussion of house rules and how martial arts should be in the system. It didn't touch on the topic of homebrew for more than two posts as an aside. If you believed the discussion was about homebrew then you would be well-served to catch up on your reading, and do it for comprehension instead of speed this time.

People started bandying ideas around up to and including redesigning the Ability system, all originating from the problem "some fighting archetypes seem hard to reflect under these rules".

This may even be correct in theory but we have an actual game right here that is not designed according to that theory and you haven't particularly offered to completely rewrite it from scratch. And people are talking about that game, and about what sort of stuff you can homebrew for that game. That discussion is fundamentally more practical and relevant than a bunch of theorizing.

So I'm perfectly happy to point out that, look, the system actually works pretty well as a game and thus one of the better solutions is to just let it do its thing, which does not perfectly reflect all archetypes but has a pretty evocative flavor for some and is also a fun game.

I reject your argument in its entirety. I do not need to rewrite it from scratch to yield what I view as substantial improvements.

Ever heard of 'house rules'? You ought to have, a discussion on house rules was the start of this little jaunt, with which you have, of course, declared your perfect intimate familiarity by deigning to inform me of the patently obvious.

These are called 'alterations to the existing ruleset, because I believe this alteration will produce a game that I find more satisfying and better accomplishes my desired ends'.

I need not rewrite from scratch when I could simply alter. I need not satisfy myself with what I have been given, when I can analyze why it failed to provide me with what I wanted, and think on how to obtain it.

We are not mere peons, fit only to stand before the game that has been given unto us, to admire and to adore. We are capable of thinking. Sometimes that thought is 'there is a thing I want from this game that I'm not getting, and there's some shit that makes zero sense, how easy is it to tweak to turn this game into something a little closer to what I actually want out of it?'

What I actually want out of it includes what the game straight-up promised me and failed to deliver - wuxia action and the ability to fight and feel like an epic hero. Goddamn D&D 3.5e does that better in some sectors, and that is literally Exalted's reason for existing.

Your opinion on the utility of theorycraft is noted, and dismissed. What is even less useful than you think theorizing is? Trying to shut down discussion because 'it's just a game guys'.



The discussion has never doubted where we are. It has from the beginning been 'where should we be?'
 
Last edited:
Back
Top