What? No! Shut up? You keep talking about Ex3 and every time you do you throw these kinds of jabs at how it's an objectively terrible system that constantly fucks you over while using the same ideas as other games you like? Except in Ex3 they're arbitrarily bad? You keep making posts in which you present specific arguments and then you end with these broad, sweeping "and that's why Ex3 is objectively awful and deliberately unfun" and like, no? This isn't my experience and the experience of the people I've played with?
You keep making these arguments about "game engine tools" as opposed to "other stuff" and how it's terrible and you haven't proven your premise - either that they exist only as "game engine tools" or that this is bad.
I have fun playing 2e, you have fun playing 3e, that doesn't make
either system well designed. Putting that out there up front.
When you design a 'game engine', it exists as a set of rules and mechanics to resolve something. DnD is my big example of a well-designed system that is primarily focused on being a combat engine. It resolves player inputs and generates outputs all focused on the core gameplay mechanic of 'You are in a dungeon, fighting things including but not limited to Dragons'.
To elaborate on why a lot of 3e design is bad, and why I invoked Transistor, is that Transistor is a video game, and Exalted 3e is not. Exalted 3e attempted to capture with
numerous systems, the same level of 'automatic' tracking that video games can attain, especially MMOs. Like, refresh mechanics and powers on cooldowns?
Wonderful mechanics, when something other than you is watching the clock. This is why 'Until your DV refreshes once-twice' is
extremely elegant, because it gives you a very clear statement of 'Oh, so that's when this can come back.'
Additionally, baring a handful of exceptions, most modern video games are in fact designed to be completed - that sounds obvious I know, but it's important to recognize. A 'wargame' like wh40k is designed to be
won or lost, and an RPG like DnD or Exalted is intended to among other things, evoke Drama.
In Transistor, you are by design intended
not to die even as you lose your powers, and are given a clear timer on when your stuff will regenerate.
In Exalted 3e, when SSE or other conditional charms trigger, it's telling you 'Hey, you should either run, or game the reset condition so you can use this safety net again'. The core criticism of this design is, why do you
buy your safety nets? Why are defensive options purchased with character advancement?
Let's see...
Okay, so game engine tools.
Heavenly Guardian Defense in 3e exists to defend against a specific 'slice' of possible threads. SSE exists to defined against another slice, and AST exists to defend against a third slice.
This is a deliberate simplification for the purposes of being clear, I am
aware that I'm not quoting the charm text directly: If HGD is designed to suck away 'initiative', and as discussed upthread, essentially turn a decisive attack into a withering attack, that is an engine tool. It's an engine tool because
all it does is manipulate the combat mechanics within a very narrow space for the purpose of creating gameplay variance.
So you end up with this tool that lets you turn Decisive attacks into effectively withering attacks.
SSE exists by contrast to defend against things with a more flat 'I just don't want to get hit' mechanic. Taken together, both of these functions create what I consider illusory gameplay. I don't need to do
anything other than consider Charms and Initiative to engage with these mechanics.
It's like getting excited about being able to block medium attacks with a medium defense, and save your large defense for that
really important thing. It creates an illusion of tactics and strategy, because yes, if you happen to have more defensive Charms and options, you force your opponents to do different things, but those actions are so abstracted as to be inconsequential.
All initiative gain and loss is effectively sourced from Attacks. You
have to attack, even if your actual stunt is 'I push a wall over'. It still focuses wholly on Initiative. All these Charms basically create artificial tactics and strategies. Mind you, this happened in 2nd edition too, what with perfect-or-die.
At the core, 3e
feels better, because you don't feel like everthing's
useless. If you attack, you can be fairly asured that your time/motes won't be wasted, which is a good thing. That doesn't change the fact that 3e is not well designed.
