The point of making a unified system for all character subtypes to engage in Downtime Activity is that all the players would be engaged in downtime activity that played off each other. Much like characters work together in combat to overcome a foe, the characters work together in Downtime to enhance each other with synergy effects. The magical trade group buys raw material for the magic cannon and the magic temple, the magic temple produces magical energy which can be used to fuel the cannon and as bribes for the spy network in local spirit courts, the magical spy network steals information which allows the trade network and army to operate with less risk and more reward, the magical army protects the trade network and temple to allow them to operate smoothly and produce better rewards and the magical cannon makes the army more efficient at its job while keeping the local spirit courts from interfering with the temple.

If you design the system right, there is no such thing as a "Decker problem" as all the players will be engaged in the system since they can all contribute to each other. If players refuse to participate... well, no game system can solve that. If only one player spends any XP on combat skills and the other players just play Pokemon on their gameboys while you run through a hour long duel with the Dawn then the Dawn is the Decker in this situation.

This would require you to mandate that everyone purchase a useful even mix of downtime/not-downtime skills so everyone has something to do in either state, which while it would work, is not what I was talking about, which was specifically Craft being a special snowflake of badness compared to almost every other build in the normal state of things when it comes to decker problems.

If we aren't working in such an assumed background framework, I'm therefore still obligated to murder Craft.

And I don't really think that Craft was very bloated. Craft had, what... ten Charms in 2e compared to how many Melee Charms? If we're cutting down on Craft bloat I also want to cut down on Melee bloat and Socialize bloat. Players should be able to invest just as deeply into Craft as into Melee and get just as much fun out of it as a result.

You're forgetting the multiple redundant abilities you had to max out because apparently it's harder to make different kinds of stuff than it is to wield every melee weapon in existence with equal skill, heh. And ten charms is far too many.

Like I said on the previous page (check the edit), severing most of this bullshit, separating design and construction stages, compacting the physical construction crafting charms to a short and concise tree and tying the design phase / magical crafting to magical spells allows me to take all this otherwise completely wasted experience and let the dude use it on buying stuff* he can actually use when playing the game with the rest of the group as well as expanding his magic widget crafting library for buffing said group.

*assumption being we aren't paying full XP for Unconquerable Self like rubes

Of course, in my ideal game players would be unable to dump everything into a single Charm tree. You'd be forced to spend resources on at least one combat tree, one social tree, one downtime tree and so on. I'm not certain how to handle it, but I wouldn't want a 10 Melee Charms vs 10 Craft Charms character.

Fair, but see above.

No, the effects could be as standardized as having a daiklave. You just balanced them around the idea that a daiklave was a daiklave and a Snake Stylist was a Snake Stylist. I had some fluff about unique traits of the user serving as exotic training methods, but that's just fluff and has no more mechanical balance then "Only a Solar may forge this three dot daiklave of Does Aggravated Damage to Zombies"

Hmm. OK, but why would you do that when you could avoid having to balance your virtual style item against Lunar, Abyssal, Infernal, Dragon-Blooded, Raksha, Ghost, Dragon King and Spirit Charmsets as well as Solar by doing it the other way?

It actually looks like less work to do one for Solaroids, one for Lunars and one for DBs. I suppose it works either way.

I could say the same thing about, say, defeating a rival. "You could just spend BP on "I defeated Chejop kejak" and move on. The point of the game is to set up entertaining challenges and goals, Jon, not to win.

Uh, the special thing about Sokka's space sword was that it was made of space metal which he got from a space rock. You need to get the space rock. If you're doing this at chargen, you're buying that with BP and telling the GM you forged it into a sword with your Craft dip, which is able to handle making swords.
 
Last edited:
I am objecting to their system as described. Since I don't read (or particularly care about) Kerisgame I'm not familiar with anything but what they said in thread.
Are you sure about that? Because the post that started this discussion initially talked about alternative ways to fuel the artifacts rather than one's motes. And maybe not leap to the worst possible interpenetration of what they post (Sorcery as artifacts? That MUST MEAN THEY'RE FREE FOREVER!!11!!!!!)? Because at the moment, I find it extremely questionable that you're actually objecting to their system as described.
 
Think about it this way - in a world where science and magic are literally the same thing, you can't be an engineer without knowing sorcery, because sorcerous laws are the laws of physics.

I don't care about the in character justification. I want to be an epic blacksmith. I don't want to have to also be an epic wizard by necessity. Those are two different character concepts.

[/QUOTE]
So my problems are

1. I don't want to have to learn a new charm every time I want to make a new thing.
2. I don't want a fantasy game where I'm encouraged to mass produce (see above). I want to make one off, unique artifacts because that's how fantasy usually rolls.
3. I don't want a system where I have to know and understand sorcery mechanically to make a new artifact. I don't have the skills to homebrew Charms like that.
4. I don't want to have to spend twice as much XP, if not more, for the sake of one characteristic of my character. (because I have to have Craft Charms and Sorcery stuff)
5. I don't want a system where I have to be an epic wizard if I want to be a crafter. Those are two different character concepts.
6. I want a system where I can craft things for myself without it being completely pointless.

EDIT: Just tell me if I misread anything. My reading comprehension isn't great.

EDIT: I guess 6 isn't completely accurate. You can still save motes if you find an alternate power source. But saving motes isn't really an interesting effect and I'd still have to have infrastructure in a safe place, which means I could just rest anyway.

I guess if you needed to repeatedly do one thing, it would be useful. You could hand it off to other people when you want to conserve motes. But that's still boring and I don't want other people using my artifact.

And hey, that means a wonder of the High First Age built for a Solar lord with the power of an Adamant Circle spell is what is professionally known as "fucking terrifying". Like, "I have a spear that when thrown wipes out a city, my Hindu mythology death spear brings all the boys to the yard, etc etc" [1].

Like, I'd think they'd just have a team of guys who pass the weapon on to spread out the drain, if you needed to use it multiple times.

EDIT: Also, how did they Craft things before Sorcery?
 
Last edited:
Wow, this isn't a fun conversation, and very few people in it are being pleasant.

I've no objection to fusing Sorcery and Craft to an extent, because a lot of the effects they offer are similar in practical terms. How different is commanding a sorcerous construct from owning a clay golem? How different is having Wood Dragon's Claw cast on you than wielding a bladed cestus of green jade? How different is knowing The Eye And Mouth from using a crystal lens that translates text it passes over? How different is riding a Cirrus Skiff from riding a bamboo-and-blue-jade Dragonfly Palanquin?

Even in terms of "non-magical" crafts, you can compare things like arranging a hearty meal for all your followers to Food from the Aerial Table, or preparing a brace of javelins from a grove on the eve of battle to Arboreal Arsenal, or painting a beautiful image that will capture hearts and minds to Spirit Portrait Canvas.

This applies to long-term projects, as well, the sort that would require Bureaucracy (and probably be represented through such a system). Raising the Earth's Bones is siege works or a mining project. Benediction of Archgenesis mimics the result of a farming project complete with irrigation, fertilisation, breeding for strong crops, and so on. Seed-Grown Manor is the result of a house-building project. Hell, there's literally a sorcerous spell for raising a fully-completed manse, which is as direct an analogy as I've ever seen.

That doesn't mean every artifact should essentially be a repeat-use Spell-Storing Knot. What this means to me is that you're best off writing a general Projects/Workings system, which can represent projects of different Enormity (a single small dwelling or a massive complex?), Excellence (basic shelter or a mystical haven?) and Extent (a night-long stay or a construct that will last years?).

If this can broadly represent manses and artifacts, it can presumably be used by analogy for Sorcerous workings, too – there's no reason that Elsa telling everyone to Let It Go should use a different system than a "mundane" queen commissioning a beautiful castle of ice on the same leyline. She's just using different dice pools and power source and bypassing materials (while Duc Weszelton gathers his forces to expel the dreadful anathema that has possessed the queen). You can codify Emerald, Sapphire and Adamant spells as different degrees of Project – not literally, but in terms of the effects they can be expected to produce.

Such a system also helps remove the artificial break between "magical" and "mundane" gear, which has never been hugely suited to Exalted. If you're representing a sword's ability to cut dudes and its ability to ooze abyssal venom on the same scale, then the only consideration is the materials available to you and the extent of your crafting ability. The difference between a really nice portrait, a portrait that captives onlookers with its beauty, and a portrait that causes any who look upon it to instantly fall in love, is how many successes you can generate for it and how marvellous the brushes and pigments you have access to are. Not specifically whether you have "awakened Essence".
 
@Revlid I think the key word here for your proposal is extent.

Major issue is that a lot of people are arguing around incomplete information, or interested in attaining their personal actualization of play.

I can definitely see the value in cross-compatibility and a more integrated system, the trick is that as many people have mentioned, you want to enable several character concepts and styles of play. If [Proposed houserule] does not cater to a given subset of players, it should be acknowledged that it doesn't and is not satisfactory.

Hmm... This is not directed at Revlid, and just more the thread-

Presenting anything as superior or ideal implementations of game mechanic, ruleset or fluff doesn't do anyone any favors. It only alienates people.
 
@Revlid I think the key word here for your proposal is extent.

Major issue is that a lot of people are arguing around incomplete information, or interested in attaining their personal actualization of play.
I entirely agree.

Buzzwords and pithy summaries aren't useful in a discussion like this – they just breed misunderstanding.

My view can be boiled down quite simply:
1) You obviously want a Craft/Project/Working system.
2) This system is going to cover a lot of the same practical outcomes as Sorcery.
3) Therefore, refer to this system when designing Sorcery.

Beyond that, I've no particular hills to die on or details to provide.

I can definitely see the value in cross-compatibility and a more integrated system, the trick is that as many people have mentioned, you want to enable several character concepts and styles of play. If [Proposed houserule] does not cater to a given subset of players, it should be acknowledged that it doesn't and is not satisfactory.
To an extent (what a useful phrase this is turning out to be) that's true. At the end of the day, though, any decision made on anything is going to alienate someone – what's important is that you articulate what decision you're making, why you're making it, and the ways in which those you're alienating might be able to reconcile.

Let's take the giant oversized sword argument that people were dipping their toes into a while back.

Now, 2e places a greatsword as requiring Strength 3 to wield properly – let's assume that's something like a zweihander, which usually weighed around 8lbs. Google tells me that a replica of Ichigo's Zangetsu weighs around twice that, meaning it'd require Strength 6 – beyond anything but an abnormal human like Andre the Giant – to wield correctly. Cloud's Buster Sword – one of the most iconic Giant Anime Swords – reportedly weighs around 80lbs, ten times the weight of a basic greatsword, and so would require about Strength 30. The Dragonslayer wielded by Guts, a veritable pillar of steel, is said to weigh around 400lbs, at which point we're in Strength 150 territory. Even assuming we don't straight-up multiply Strength minimae, these weapons are clearly too heavy for normal humans to wield.

(EDIT: as @Eukie points out below, the traditional exponential scaling of WW/OP Attributes means we can assume the Buster Sword and Dragonslayer would require something more like Strength 15 and Strength 25, respectively, but the point stands – too heavy for normies)

Fortunately, we are not playing normal humans, and these are not normal swords. We are playing demigods wielding magic blades, and we specifically want to be anime as fuck. There's no reason our magic – or that of our weapons – can't compensate for this absurd weight and allow us to swing around a slab of sharp metal that weighs as much as your average sumo wrestler.

The real problem emerges when you look at the practical effects of this – because if a human being is hit by a plane wing swung by someone strong enough to lift a plane wing, they are going to turn into a greasy smear on aforesaid plane wing. This is bad for the game, because it means that either:
a) every significant opponent will explode into red mist the first time the Guts-wannabe Dawn rolls a successful attack
b) every significant opponent needs a defence that will allow them to not die when smacked by 100lbs of sharpened metal moving very very fast

In the former case, the game becomes boring rocket tag. In the latter case, you're dedicating significant system resources to ensuring that your player cannot do the thing he came here to do – namely, be a huge badass with his giant sword. Also, if you proliferate defences that can handle the Buster Sword, it's difficult to believe that a lesser attack – let's say a similarly-skilled guy with a normal-sized sword, which he's using because he thinks that looks cooler – could have any effect.

So two solutions present themselves, each catering to a different aesthetic approach – and they're largely mutually exclusive. If you pick one, you'll enjoy its benefits and suffer its downsides, and you'll alienate the people who preferred the other.

1) Giant swords are as deadly as they should be, and the magic needed to make them usable is costed appropriately. If Ichigo's Grand Daiklave is twice as heavy as a human greatsword, it will do a shit-ton of damage, and that will be costed appropriately against a damage-adding Charm. He either needs to commit motes to Strength-Increasing Exercise to wield it properly, or commit appropriate motes to make it a supernaturally light weapon in his hands, or spend motes on each attack to fuel its torso-sundering swings with bursts of Essence. This means that wielding oversized superheavy weapons is draining and/or a statement of immense strength, but is also hugely dangerous.

2) Giant swords are less deadly than you might expect, in order to keep them casually usable within the system. If Ichigo's Grand Daiklave is twice as heavy as a human greatsword, it will do maybe +2-4L damage, and will not require a huge commitment to wield. Due to its supernatural lightness, it can even be wielded by people without extreme Strength. This means that wielding oversized superheavy weapons is easy to balance and available to everyone, but is also underwhelming in practice.
 
Last edited:
Someone rightly raised the point that when writing/changing rules, one first should look at what purposes they serve, as mutual misunderstandings about relevant purposes can produce unsatisfactory rules and subsequent arguments whether the rules are okay (while missing the root cause). So I'll try to list some of the things players seem to go for when envisioning crafting-oriented characters. I'm sure my list is incomplete, and I suppose some of its points may overlap. Some of these examples come from more modern sources, and need to be adapted for a more mythological feel.
  1. Being Daedalus: "I, personally, cannot fly, thus I will make wings of wax and feathers". The first reason why humans invented crafting in the first place: doing stuff that they cannot do personally, such as start fires, have sharp claws or ranged attacks. In a fantasy world, that includes producing alternatives that compensate for lacking personal magical abilities (though preferably in such a way that the two niches don't go to all-out war against each other).
  2. Being McGuyver. Whether it's the construction of the Trojan Horse, or a polarity reverse on the warp drive to teleport a planet by the power of a nearby supernova in order to enable an evacuation. Solving immediate problems with ingenuity and scrounged resources, often tailoring the solution to a specific problem.
  3. Being Thomas Edison: changing the world for fun and profit. Inventing reproducible, eagerly accepted solutions to recurring problems people have, and building a business empire out of them, while also providing progress all around oneself.
  4. Being the reverse-engineer. You just defeated the local Lich King and find trouble using his Necrotic-Essence-Powered Abyssmourne? Well, let's to reforge it into Redeemedsunmourne.
  5. Being the Super-Robinson Crusoe / UninhabitedIsland!Stark (i.e. the self-reliant one). Typically exemplified in the protagonists of computer games like Subnautica, Notrium, Minecraft. The sort of fellow who, if stranded far away from civilization, will make what s/he needed from civilization, offering the party comforts and tools in the wilderness. Usually quite over-the-top, but hey, that's what Charms are for.
  6. Being the replacement escort mission character. "So you say we need to escort this frail grandpa to the Dam of Nexus in order to fix it and prevent a city-wide flood? No way, I'm a good enough crafter that I can do it too!". Admittedly, this applies to many other skills in any campaign. Still, it's one of the things players like.
 
Last edited:
The real problem emerges when you look at the practical effects of this – because if a human being is hit by a plane wing swung by someone strong enough to lift a plane wing, they are going to turn into a greasy smear on aforesaid plane wing. This is bad for the game, because it means that either:
a) every significant opponent will explode into red mist the first time the Guts-wannabe Dawn rolls a successful attack
b) every significant opponent needs a defence that will allow them to not die when smacked by 100lbs of sharpened metal moving very very fast

I'm not worried about arguing the points- you laid everything out very logically, but I wanted to bring attention to something I noted as interesting.

You're putting a lot of emphasis on the physical characteristics of the blade- the fact that it's yea-big and so-heavy. I feel like that's skipping an intermediate step to this whole concept of weapons aesthetics and behaviors.... gathering my thoughts...

Aha! This is more harkening back to my formative experiences of Exalted- it's not actually part of an argument- in that for me, the nature of a Daiklave or other artifact weapon was not in its physical traits, but it's magic. Personally, I actually almost never even remember or notice that the blade is so-heavy. It doesn't register on my 'examining the behaviors of this weapon in-setting'.

I personally don't see Daiklaves as magically-lightened superheavy weapons, I see them as solidified magic that happens to be anchored in a 20lbs masterwork of magic gold and steel. The Daiklaiveness, for me, is separate from the physicality.
 
I'm not worried about arguing the points- you laid everything out very logically, but I wanted to bring attention to something I noted as interesting.

You're putting a lot of emphasis on the physical characteristics of the blade- the fact that it's yea-big and so-heavy. I feel like that's skipping an intermediate step to this whole concept of weapons aesthetics and behaviors.... gathering my thoughts...

Aha! This is more harkening back to my formative experiences of Exalted- it's not actually part of an argument- in that for me, the nature of a Daiklave or other artifact weapon was not in its physical traits, but it's magic. Personally, I actually almost never even remember or notice that the blade is so-heavy. It doesn't register on my 'examining the behaviors of this weapon in-setting'.

I personally don't see Daiklaves as magically-lightened superheavy weapons, I see them as solidified magic that happens to be anchored in a 20lbs masterwork of magic gold and steel. The Daiklaiveness, for me, is separate from the physicality.
I expected someone to point it out earlier. Most likely you. I mean, Exalted doesn't even list precise masses of objects and carrying capacities of characters based on their Strength. (Note: Feats of Strength are a transitional lifting capacity, which is very different from how much one can carry without feeling encumbered, without being incapable of jumping/running, or without moving at all.)
I think what this tells us is that the game line doesn't consider the masses of objects to matter outside the narrative checkbox of "really heavy, no good as a weapon unless Attuned, but has such-and-such stats if Attuned".
 
Now, 2e places a greatsword as requiring Strength 3 to wield properly – let's assume that's something like a zweihander, which usually weighed around 8lbs. Google tells me that a replica of Ichigo's Zangetsu weighs around twice that, meaning it'd require Strength 6 – beyond anything but an abnormal human like Andre the Giant – to wield correctly. Cloud's Buster Sword – one of the most iconic Giant Anime Swords – reportedly weighs around 80lbs, ten times the weight of a basic greatsword, and so would require about Strength 30. The Dragonslayer wielded by Guts, a veritable pillar of steel, is said to weigh around 400lbs, at which point we're in Strength 150 territory. Even assuming we don't straight-up multiply Strength minima, these weapons are clearly too heavy for normal humans to wield.

Strength in Exalted doesn't scale linearly. Strength in the WW games has always been closer to an exponential. Assuming a proportional relationship between Feats of Strength and how heavy something you can attack with is, and putting a heavy Zweihander at STR 3, STR 5 lets you lift 15.5 lbs and STR 6 lets you lift 20 lbs, about right for the Zangetsu you mentioned. However, you should be able to lift the Buster Sword with a "mere" STR 16, and the Dragonslayer seems to be somewhere between STR 26 and STR 27.

(Most of these are, of course, far outside what a normal or even exceptional human can lift, as you point out.)
 
You're putting a lot of emphasis on the physical characteristics of the blade- the fact that it's yea-big and so-heavy.
Hm. Well, at least in the case of the examples I've used here, I'm drawing from the source material in doing so.

The whole deal with the Dragonslayer is that it's maker was almost put to death for insulting a king by creating it, since it was considered impossible for a human to wield. Guts lifting the damn thing is considered a ridiculous feat of strength, and its weight allows it to cleave through even monsters with terrible force.

The Buster Sword was originally conceived as a "giant kitchen knife", inspired by Musashi's carved oar as something crude and brutish rather than a refined weapon – which holds true in the final design right down to the name. Cloud being able to wield it is a sign of his SOLDIER abilities, and it's described as "far heavier than any sword has a right to be".

Zangetsu (and much of the other cornerstones of the series) became old hat as Bleach dragged on, but when it was initially introduced there was a great deal of emphasis put on its size – Ichigo's first shinigami opponent was shocked by the bulk of the thing, and its bulk allowed the wielder to force his way through at least one enemy's guard. It's kind of telling that its major upgrade was to make the thing smaller so its wielder could actually move worth a damn.

Contrary to the anime stereotype, I actually can't think of many series where people just have giant swords as a stylistic matter of course. Most of the time, if someone has a massive weapon, it acts like a massive weapon, and it's there to show off how strong they are – whether that's just building hype, or because they're a big dumb brute who's about to get knocked down to show off the protagonist, or because they seem really weak and the story needs to demonstrate that actually they're secretly woah strong (the whole "small child with giant club" design).

This is basically down to creative silhouetting. If you get invaded in Dark Souls by a guy with a Dragon's Tooth Club that looms over his shoulder, you can assume he's a big strong guy who's going to hit hard and swing slow. If he's wielding a whippy little Crystal Rapier or slender Chaos Katana, you can assume he's pumped his Dexterity and will strike fast and shallow.

Both in writing and visuals, a weapon is a shorthand for how you fight. If a warrior wields a tetsubo, her attacks probably won't be described as elegant and graceful poetry in motion – because if they were, why would her creator have given her a big spiky club? A weapon – at least, one as signature as an artifact weapon – is a character statement, just as much as any Charm you buy (or even more). So to me, it's strange that you can dismiss the size of a weapon as a factor in how you – and others – react to it. After all, a regular daiklave is normal-sword-sized. You don't need to go anime crazy oversized to get a magic weapon.

I think what this tells us is that the game line doesn't consider the masses of objects to matter outside the narrative checkbox of "really heavy, no good as a weapon unless Attuned, but has such-and-such stats if Attuned".
Weapons do have minimum Strength ratings needed to effectively wield them, though, and armours do come with Encumbrance penalties.

I'm not arguing that weapon impact should be measured in PSI, but big things are big, and "plus three damage" is not something that strikes me as narratively satisfying when I've swinging around a terrifyingly huge sword that every story I've read tells me should turn anything it hits into the result of gorily uniting a gerbil and a blender.
 
Last edited:
Like, I quoted all the relevant stuff here. I'm not responding to the theoretical outline you proposed but the actual outline the two people who are proposing it actually posted in the actual thread. If they meant something entirely different, they did a terrible job of actually saying so.
Yup, probably. This stuff is nothing like as formalised and set as our attribute/ability hacks, a lot of the details are still in flux, and I did a poor job of explaining what we do have because I decided to go for sass instead of being informative, which was a failing on my part. From what you've said, I think we actually agree on quite a few points, though we disagree on others - particularly your view (if I understand it correctly) that sorcery has no place in combat at all. At the very least, Invulnerable Skin of Bronze and Death of Obsidian Butterflies are iconic, and define Sorcery's combat role as "buffs beforehand like giving you weapons and armour (which you still need combat abilities to actually use)" and "WAR-LEVEL ARTILLERY YO".
 
Contrary to the anime stereotype, I actually can't think of many series where people just have giant swords as a stylistic matter of course. Most of the time, if someone has a massive weapon, it acts like a massive weapon, and it's there to show off how strong they are – whether that's just building hype, or because they're a big dumb brute who's about to get knocked down to show off the protagonist, or because they seem really weak and the story needs to demonstrate that actually they're secretly woah strong (the whole "small child with giant club" design).
Not animé, but take a look at WarCraft's weapon and armour proportions, even for classes that don't emphasize strength.

Weapons do have minimum Strength ratings needed to effectively wield them, though, and armours do come with Encumbrance penalties.

I'm not arguing that weapon impact should be measured in PSI, but big things are big, and "plus three damage" is not something that strikes me as narratively satisfying when I've swinging around a terrifyingly huge sword that every story I've read tells me should turn anything it hits into the result of gorily uniting a gerbil and a blender.
But those things (like Str 3 prereq) are purely narrative*. "Oh, it is heavy", but just how heavy? Uh, very! Compare to other game lines. For instance, in GURPS, I know the average human has a Strength of 10, which means s/her can lift 20lbs overhead with one hand with little effort to speak of, and can just barely parry an enemy strike with a 39-pound weapon (assuming two-handed grip on the parrying weapon), and can carry a 200lb load on one's back with significant effort, and that fighting in an armour of 45 lbs (and a negligible knife) would provide a -2 Dodge for this specific character (but not for Juggernaught!). In Exalted, it's not even clear how much loot a Cirrus Skiff can carry, because the mass of loot is generally only known to be 'very heavy for each artifact weapon'.


* == Nothing to do with GNS, but rather a more everyday meaning of the word.
 
Last edited:
Not animé, but take a look at WarCraft's weapon and armour proportions, even for classes that don't emphasize strength.
I would point out while that's true in Warcraft games, in most lore and cutscenes, it's the powerful warriors and mighty heroes who use the oversized weapons, whilst all their soldiers walk a around with normal sized equipment. In WoW especially, most of the Quests and Lore assume it's you and your smallish group going around fixing shit, meaning that whilst in game you see other players wielding giant weapons, the PCs are meant to be exceptional for their class.

It just falls a bit flat cause it's an MMO and that guy over there is wielding Frostmourne whilst you've only got Sulfuras.
 
I would point out while that's true in Warcraft games, in most lore and cutscenes, it's the powerful warriors and mighty heroes who use the oversized weapons, whilst all their soldiers walk a around with normal sized equipment. In WoW especially, most of the Quests and Lore assume it's you and your smallish group going around fixing shit, meaning that whilst in game you see other players wielding giant weapons, the PCs are meant to be exceptional for their class.
That's actually kinda in line with mortals walking with regular equipment and Exalts running around with overweight artifacts, as the game line tends to describe things.
 
Not animé, but take a look at WarCraft's weapon and armour proportions, even for classes that don't emphasize strength.
Yes, but this is very much a conceit of the MMO's game world. In cutscenes and story, the guy with the giant sword bleeding frost and death into the world is a huge badass who can cut lesser men in half with one mighty blow. In the game, there are seven thousand of those guys, all of whom stole it from the same fallen undead king, and most of whom spend their time fishing. That priest with the ominous burning scythe twice the size of himself does, in fact, have the grip strength of an infant – but that's not a setting statement of "nerds with wobbly noodle arms can easily swing around awesome scythes in this world", it's just a silly design for a caster drop.

This is also one of those irreconcilable differences, where I regard Warcraft's designs as cluttered garbage, but that's a secondary note.

But those things (like Str 3 prereq) are purely narrative*. "Oh, it is heavy", but just how heavy? Uh, very!
Yes, but by that definition so is the damage it inflicts. I am told over and over that the Buster Sword is a massive, awe-inspiring hulk of a weapon, so when I swing it with all my might and it responds like a similarly-sized foam cosplay item, it is not living up to its narrative promises. The abstraction of "this thing is so heavy that you need Strength 3 to wield it properly" is no more or less disconnected than "this thing is so heavy it inflicts +X damage when you hit someone with it".
 
This would require you to mandate that everyone purchase a useful even mix of downtime/not-downtime skills so everyone has something to do in either state, which while it would work, is not what I was talking about, which was specifically Craft being a special snowflake of badness compared to almost every other build in the normal state of things when it comes to decker problems.

If we aren't working in such an assumed background framework, I'm therefore still obligated to murder Craft.

I suppose, But by that logic if my game has only one player who wants to use the combat system, I'm obligated to murder Melee. I'd much rather the game have a working system that I could personally ignore in my particular game than force me to write the system from scratch myself if I want to use it.



You're forgetting the multiple redundant abilities you had to max out because apparently it's harder to make different kinds of stuff than it is to wield every melee weapon in existence with equal skill, heh. And ten charms is far too many.

For Melee as well? And I don't think I've ever played a game where we used the stupid Craft breakdown. We just omnicrafted and it worked fine.


Hmm. OK, but why would you do that when you could avoid having to balance your virtual style item against Lunar, Abyssal, Infernal, Dragon-Blooded, Raksha, Ghost, Dragon King and Spirit Charmsets as well as Solar by doing it the other way?

It actually looks like less work to do one for Solaroids, one for Lunars and one for DBs. I suppose it works either way.

The same reason its not as much work to build a separate daiklave for every PC origin. I assume that "have access to artifact level equipment/martial arts" is a default for all of them and build the Charmsets around that. For instance, if artifacts make the maximum damage without Charm 10d (ie, 5 Str + 5 equipment bonus from artifacts) then I balance the Charms around a max non-Charm damage of 10d.



Uh, the special thing about Sokka's space sword was that it was made of space metal which he got from a space rock. You need to get the space rock. If you're doing this at chargen, you're buying that with BP and telling the GM you forged it into a sword with your Craft dip, which is able to handle making swords.

No, the special thing about Sokka's space sword is he learned to forge it from a grand master while mastering the art of swordsmanship to prove to himself that he was a useful member of the team. It being made of meteor iron was flavor text. The point is that we spent an entire episode building up to this so that the space sword was memorable and iconic of the character. The player had to struggle to earn the sword and thus felt much more attached to it.

Mechanically could I (in game) have just dropped BP on it? Of course. But then its just "a daiklave I had laying around". I don't recall it or fondly remember it because the point is to have something interesting to play through and enjoy.

My view can be boiled down quite simply:
1) You obviously want a Craft/Project/Working system.
2) This system is going to cover a lot of the same practical outcomes as Sorcery.
3) Therefore, refer to this system when designing Sorcery.

My entire point was that the system presented was doing this backward. "Let's design spells, then say that you can use a Project to design a Thing that does Spell. Rather than, let's design a Project system and then allow that to make Spells.

Yup, probably. This stuff is nothing like as formalised and set as our attribute/ability hacks, a lot of the details are still in flux, and I did a poor job of explaining what we do have because I decided to go for sass instead of being informative, which was a failing on my part. From what you've said, I think we actually agree on quite a few points, though we disagree on others - particularly your view (if I understand it correctly) that sorcery has no place in combat at all. At the very least, Invulnerable Skin of Bronze and Death of Obsidian Butterflies are iconic, and define Sorcery's combat role as "buffs beforehand like giving you weapons and armour (which you still need combat abilities to actually use)" and "WAR-LEVEL ARTILLERY YO".

I did say I had no problem with Sorcery summoning equipment. I explicitly said that I think Glorious Solar Saber (and by implicit extension similar Charms) should be Sorcery effects so I have no problem with Invulnerable Skin of Bronze (just balance it as an artifact).

As for damage spells, like I said as long as it is explicitly worse than native Charms I'm fine
 
Last edited:
So you would make the character with 0 non combat charms as good at the non-combat stuff as those with combat charms? Yes or no?
In terms of non-combat stuff, no. I've never claimed that.

In terms of downtime stuff, kinda, because downtime stuff ultimately comes down to GM permission, and a lot of GMs will be pretty reasonable at letting players abstract out their characters skills. The crafter get's more control over what he wants and requires less GM permissions, but someone whose only good in combat will still probably be able to use downtime to get Background dots in things like Artifact or Resources or Fame or Backing, etc. by going on grand adventures, saving maidens, etc.
 
This is also one of those irreconcilable differences, where I regard Warcraft's designs as cluttered garbage, but that's a secondary note.
Of note, that design was still somewhat present prior to World of Warcraft; Warcraft III had Footmen, Riflemen and so on wielding weapons which were, while not as comically oversized as the heroes of that game or the PC's in World of Warcraft, still clearly oversized if compared to any realistic depiction. Just look at the Night Elf Archer model, it's absurd.

Because, of course, the art style of the Warcraft universe (even when that universe wasn't an incoherent mess, as WoW has steadily become) has always included a strong undercurrent of cartoonish absurdity. Just because it's popular doesn't mean it's the kind of setting that Exalted takes its cues from.
 
I have no problem with giant oversized weapons - as long as they act like a giant oversized weapon (perfect or die) and are priced like it. IE: Artifact five with substantial mote commitment if you don't want to have to pay motes with every single swing. Giant oversized weapons without serious costs? HAHAHAHANO, you don't get to add 8+ damage per attack cheaply.
 
In terms of non-combat stuff, no. I've never claimed that.

In terms of downtime stuff, kinda, because downtime stuff ultimately comes down to GM permission, and a lot of GMs will be pretty reasonable at letting players abstract out their characters skills. The crafter get's more control over what he wants and requires less GM permissions, but someone whose only good in combat will still probably be able to use downtime to get Background dots in things like Artifact or Resources or Fame or Backing, etc. by going on grand adventures, saving maidens, etc.
The issue is that significant amounts of non-combat stuff is relegated to downtime activities. So you're saying that these abilities are largely worthless, and that this is a good thing. Fine for your games, but I think that's a kinda terrible design principle.
 
Of note, that design was still somewhat present prior to World of Warcraft; Warcraft III had Footmen, Riflemen and so on wielding weapons which were, while not as comically oversized as the heroes of that game or the PC's in World of Warcraft, still clearly oversized if compared to any realistic depiction. Just look at the Night Elf Archer model, it's absurd.

Because, of course, the art style of the Warcraft universe (even when that universe wasn't an incoherent mess, as WoW has steadily become) has always included a strong undercurrent of cartoonish absurdity. Just because it's popular doesn't mean it's the kind of setting that Exalted takes its cues from.
Well, note that those are models for a top-down zoomed out wargame. The exaggerated and cartoonish proportions serve a purpose – they allow small and distant models to nevertheless communicate the elements that the designers feel we need to be aware of. In this case, the weapon, the head, the ears, the terminus of the limbs, and the boobs. Warhammer Fantasy/40k does the same thing with the "heroic" scale of its models – just look at the proportions implied by a Space Marine model.

They did strip out a fair bit of this exaggeration when the time came for World of Warcraft, because it was simply no longer necessary – our point of view was much closer, and graphical capabilities much higher.
 
The issue is that significant amounts of non-combat stuff is relegated to downtime activities. So you're saying that these abilities are largely worthless, and that this is a good thing. Fine for your games, but I think that's a kinda terrible design principle.
The only real downtime activities that have mechanical support are Craft and Sorcery. Social, rather notably, has pretty extensive rules for running it during a session but nothing for downtime. Everything else exists in the same state I just described for Melee-guy: talk to your GM, explain what you want to do and why you can do it, and then possibly roll dice or something.

The solution is to make Craft more desirable in-session the same way Sorcery is, not to declare that melee guy can't go on crazy solo-adventures, stealth-guy can't go stealing, or social guy can't gain a ton of contacts a region. Like, having a character need to pick between relevance in a session or in downtime is a terrible design principle, and completely out of theme with the game.
 
Last edited:
Because, of course, the art style of the Warcraft universe (even when that universe wasn't an incoherent mess, as WoW has steadily become) has always included a strong undercurrent of cartoonish absurdity. Just because it's popular doesn't mean it's the kind of setting that Exalted takes its cues from.
Judging by the descriptions of artifacts and their picture, it does seem to be taking at least some cue from this style:

Daiklave said:
Elaborately decorated and with double-edge blades over four feet long and six or more inches
wide, daiklaves are the traditional weapons of the Exalted. Daiklaves are forged from steel alloyed
with one of the fi ve magical materials and are far too large to be wielded by mere mortals. However,
in the hands of an Exalt, the material of the sword resonates with the character's anima, making the
blade light and easy to wield, despite its impressive size.
Grand Daiklave said:
Sometimes called a battleblade or foecutter, the grand daiklave is the ultimate expression of the
philosophy behind the daiklave—one needs no defense against a dead opponent. Two-handed weapons
with blades six-feet long and over a foot wide, it is only the lightening effects of Essence that allow
these weapons to be wielded at all.
Reaver Daiklave said:
The weapons favored by these Exalted are cleaver-like single-edged blades, four-feet long and, in some
cases, a foot wide, with square or angled tips.
Grand Grimscythe said:
These huge two-handed great scythes are easily a yard across and represent the epitome of cleaving power.

Oh, and the Dire Chain is five yards long and quite thick on the picture.

Pictures:
Gyazo - c26b76c69d14952490b5225d5dcba595.png
Gyazo - 8d3c90dde74c42c93746258b660ad6e4.png
Gyazo - d25abfa54fabd8d577f3a106b38d8ca7.png
Gyazo - a18bc1eda050aeaeea372b9bb1553996.png
Gyazo - 1c4222ee2916d9e5cb12be6565c63e29.png
 
Vicky, people have already talked about plenty of works like FF7, Berserk, etc that provide ample inspiration for oversized weapons. You're going to have to work a lot harder to show Exalted's oversized weapons draw specifically from Warcraft as well.
 
Back
Top