- Location
- Denmark
- Pronouns
- She/Her
(This is their way of telling you that you need to stop. )(They do, too; Chains of Adorjan is a power of the Resplendent Destiny of the Rising Smoke, in the House of Endings)
(This is their way of telling you that you need to stop. )(They do, too; Chains of Adorjan is a power of the Resplendent Destiny of the Rising Smoke, in the House of Endings)
I second this.This reminded me of another question I had, which might have been asked before I admit. Would, or could, these kind of "internalizing" artefacts, or even a "normal" wizard's staff, be "primarily-for-sorcery-artefacts", which were made to function as Spell-Anchors first with maybe some tertiary other functions, outside being a durable beating stick in the case of staffs, etc?
These are always fun to read.
Looking forward to seeing the results of that Best Bath sorcerous working; with Gem being as dry as it is, a new source of water(because I doubt Inks as characterized will be doing anything small) is likely to make more of a splash(heh) than would first seem obvious.
Especially if it's relatively accessible to the middle and lower classes.
I don't know anything about Elric, but when Moses tried to invoke God's power (by trying to call water from a stone) without his direct permission, it backfired drastically. Using spirits as anchors makes the sorcerer subservient to the desires of the spirit in order to power their spells. If my character goes through the effort of learning sorcery, elevates his mind and essence and achieves a new plateau of power, I would not expect all that work to pay off with "now you need to kiss up to the local god of the field to grow your crops." I would expect him to form essence with his own power and cast the spell, because he just went through an incredible effort to gain that power.Elric of Melnibone couldn't just cast spells through the will and the word; he needed to contact the demons of Melnibone and invoke the power of lord Arioch to work his spells and summon mists to guard the isle. Moses couldn't just will water from stone, he invoked the divine authority of YHWH to split the ocean, call water from beneath and summon the plagues.
You say "get off your ass to use it," but what I hear is "The way to make sorcery interesting is to nerf it and toss in a ton of chains and stipulations." This is looking to turn into the same problem as Craft: You have to go through extra work to get the same result that a simple charm would provide. If I were given the option between learning this method of sorcery and learning a new charm, I'd take the charm because this is not what I want to spend my time doing. Especially not when all this work adds up to nothing more than a few extra lines of fluff at best, and repetitive side-quests at worst.Sorcery doesn't become less "awesomely powerful" if you actually need to get off your ass to use it; the Primordials needed to exploit the patterns they had woven into Creation from the beginning, the Solars used the Divine Mandate of Heaven and their supreme authority, the Sidereals use the secret designs of the Loom of Heaven and their allies among the gods to find the Lunars who draw on the power of Chaos and invoke the forbidden rogue gods and outcast spirits. The Dragon-Blooded Houses meanwhile draw on their manifold pacts with elemental courts (which are mentioned in the 1e core) in times of war, to turn the Inner Sea against their enemies and call storms and fiery mountains up.
This entire anchor system, and really a lot of the customization that's been proposed in this thread as of late, has followed the theme of "the way to make Exalted more interesting is to reduce power, add conditions and restrict freedom." I felt that the best condition for Exalted, and the one the game was sold on, was that you could do almost anything, but that you had to deal with the consequences later on.Personal mastery over the world can go fuck itself, because it makes the magic of all sorcerers fucking identical and that's boring as hell;
I also agree with a lot of this.I don't know anything about Elric, but when Moses tried to invoke God's power (by trying to call water from a stone) without his direct permission, it backfired drastically. Using spirits as anchors makes the sorcerer subservient to the desires of the spirit in order to power their spells. If my character goes through the effort of learning sorcery, elevates his mind and essence and achieves a new plateau of power, I would not expect all that work to pay off with "now you need to kiss up to the local god of the field to grow your crops." I would expect him to form essence with his own power and cast the spell, because he just went through an incredible effort to gain that power.
You say "get off your ass to use it," but what I hear is "The way to make sorcery interesting is to nerf it and toss in a ton of chains and stipulations." This is looking to turn into the same problem as Craft: You have to go through extra work to get the same result that a simple charm would provide. If I were given the option between learning this method of sorcery and learning a new charm, I'd take the charm because this is not what I want to spend my time doing. Especially not when all this work adds up to nothing more than a few extra lines of fluff at best, and repetitive side-quests at worst.
This entire anchor system, and really a lot of the customization that's been proposed in this thread as of late, has followed the theme of "the way to make Exalted more interesting is to reduce power, add conditions and restrict freedom." I felt that the best condition for Exalted, and the one the game was sold on, was that you could do almost anything, but that you had to deal with the consequences later on.
I don't like it because 1: It takes incredible god-heroes and turns them into "traditional" spellcasters, 2: Two sorcerers need not know and/or use the same spells so identical casting styles don't matter, 3: requiring an ST to remember and enact multiple conditions per spell, per character is a ton of work, and 4: It further reduces the power of sorcery in comparison to simple charms, which was an issue that prevented 2e sorcery from really being worthwhile outside of niche conditions.
This. My ideal system for mystical stuff would be a combination of 2E Thuamaturgy and 3E Sorcery.
- Ditch 2E sorcery mechanics for 3E, and represent anchors like initiations, as conditional ways of getting extra sorcerous motes that get more oomph when used to power thematically appropriate spells.
Honestly, I'd prefer if we retained the aesthetic effects and allowed for a boost to training effects by backgrounds (like shaving off three months to learn Total Annihilation if you steal that restricted pentacle or have Mentor: Ligier) but did away with the troublesome concept of Anchors entirely. This means that Sorcery gains potent benefits from networking, but isn't dependent on Allies/Backgrounds.This entire anchor system, and really a lot of the customization that's been proposed in this thread as of late, has followed the theme of "the way to make Exalted more interesting is to reduce power, add conditions and restrict freedom." I felt that the best condition for Exalted, and the one the game was sold on, was that you could do almost anything, but that you had to deal with the consequences later on.
2: Two sorcerers need not know and/or use the same spells so identical casting styles don't matter
Replace Banishment with Emerald Countermagic and limit summons to just Demons, and I believe you have the spells that are in every copy of The White and Black Treatise, Creation's Sorcery for Dummies.(That is, infalible messenger, summon demon/elemental, banish demon. Also DOOB and invulnerable skin if you want combat magic.)
Cool! Maybe he has a staff that he uses to channel his power (Artifact), maybe he possesses supreme elevated status among the spirits as a bodhisattva (Status), perhaps he has a Cult of disciples through whom he can draw upon arcane secrets, or he has a Manse that lets him align it's sacred geomancy to his results. In some way I see your issue, because there is a finely tuned line between "DnD wizard who can do whatever he wants" which is undesirable and "boddhisattva who achieved enlightenment through supreme virtue and can dominate all worldly illusions", which should be doable with the Anchors system (but I'm unsure of how doable it is), so I'll have to page @EarthScorpion for the answer on that one.I don't know anything about Elric, but when Moses tried to invoke God's power (by trying to call water from a stone) without his direct permission, it backfired drastically. Using spirits as anchors makes the sorcerer subservient to the desires of the spirit in order to power their spells. If my character goes through the effort of learning sorcery, elevates his mind and essence and achieves a new plateau of power, I would not expect all that work to pay off with "now you need to kiss up to the local god of the field to grow your crops." I would expect him to form essence with his own power and cast the spell, because he just went through an incredible effort to gain that power.
Frankly speaking, if you're at the point of "should I take sorcery", the answer tends to be "no", because literally all your Charms are better unless you're talking about like Summon Demon of the Xth Circle or you're a Dragon-Blooded who needs large-scale effects. But like, if you don't want connections to the world, and you don't want to go through effort to do your Thing as a sorcerer then uh, I guess the Anchor system just isn't for you? Like, there's no shame in admitting it, it's designed for a specific playstyle and it's not like I and @EarthScorpion will enter through your window in the night and cut out your 2e book's sorcery system so we can replace it with Anchors.You say "get off your ass to use it," but what I hear is "The way to make sorcery interesting is to nerf it and toss in a ton of chains and stipulations." This is looking to turn into the same problem as Craft: You have to go through extra work to get the same result that a simple charm would provide. If I were given the option between learning this method of sorcery and learning a new charm, I'd take the charm because this is not what I want to spend my time doing. Especially not when all this work adds up to nothing more than a few extra lines of fluff at best, and repetitive side-quests at worst.
Yes, but I was never introduced through that theme; I was introduced on the premise that I could play a demigod of Antiquity, a judge of the Bible, a Hindu avatar or a Taoist immortal. I was never introduced to the idea that you could do anything close to almost anything; I was introduced to the idea that I was blessed, given power from on high and now was given the choice of how to use it. And I think there is a fine-tuned line between those, or perhaps it is merely a result of being introduced through the Dragon-Blooded, but I think that those consequences and stipulations are healthy for the game, and healthy for the oft-neglected sorcery.This entire anchor system, and really a lot of the customization that's been proposed in this thread as of late, has followed the theme of "the way to make Exalted more interesting is to reduce power, add conditions and restrict freedom." I felt that the best condition for Exalted, and the one the game was sold on, was that you could do almost anything, but that you had to deal with the consequences later on.
Ah yes, "traditional spellcasters" as opposed to "walking swiss army knife"; I don't think there is anything particularly original with the Exalted system of sorcery, in fact I think it's a large conglomeration of cliches and attempts to be clever, desperately bundled together in the same bundle. Two sorcerers do in fact need to use the same casting styles, because you need Essence 5 if you want to change the look of your spells, and pretty much every sorcerer worth the name will have Summon Demon of the First Circle, Emerald Countermagic, Flying Gilloutine/Death of Obsidian Butterflies and so on.I don't like it because 1: It takes incredible god-heroes and turns them into "traditional" spellcasters, 2: Two sorcerers need not know and/or use the same spells so identical casting styles don't matter, 3: requiring an ST to remember and enact multiple conditions per spell, per character is a ton of work, and 4: It further reduces the power of sorcery in comparison to simple charms, which was an issue that prevented 2e sorcery from really being worthwhile outside of niche conditions.
It should be noted that this is how Theurgic Invocations in Godbound work; they're things with a bunch of training time, but don't actually cost XP. I think it's a good idea to remove the XP cost of spells if you add in Anchors, because it:Thinking about it, i honestly think that spells in the anchor system shouldn't cost xp. After all, making your players payxp for resources obtained in game is bad practice, and that is exactly what spells are in this system. If you go out of your way to learn a spell and secure a compatible anchor, why you should pay an extra cost over it?
(This has the advantage that it nullifies the competition between charms and sorcery).
This way you recalc how sorcery is a privilege, external thing yo the sorcerer.
Thinking about it, i honestly think that spells in the anchor system shouldn't cost xp. After all, making your players payxp for resources obtained in game is bad practice, and that is exactly what spells are in this system. If you go out of your way to learn a spell and secure a compatible anchor, why you should pay an extra cost over it?
(This has the advantage that it nullifies the competition between charms and sorcery).
This way you recalc how sorcery is a privilege, external thing yo the sorcerer.
For my part, my biggest peeve about the Anchors system is that it isn't Occult-y enough, at least in comparison to Sorcery as it is presented in canon. Anchors Sorcery seems like something that would be associated with Eclipses, rather than Twilights, because Eclipses are bureaucrats, diplomats, and scholars, and so creating the infrastructure and network of allies need to use Anchors Sorcery would come naturally to them, while Twilights, who are scholars and engineers, would not find Sorcery something that came naturally or easily to them under this paradigm.
I've always felt that the Absorption Charms were something Cool, But Impractical, especially since you only get to select, IIRC, two out of the four abilities, and you can't even purchase the others later like similar Charms, like you can with stuff like Essence Arrow. The Absorption effects would have been better as mutually exclusive Merits anyone could buy, instead of a limited selection provided as part of an Essence 5 Charm.Two sorcerers do in fact need to use the same casting styles, because you need Essence 5 if you want to change the look of your spells
Hmm. While I would argue that the Primordials being unable to cast spells that go against their themes, and thus outside of their ability to comprehend, and Lunars using raw intellect to understand the world instead of dedicated occult study does not exclude them from the paradigm of "Sorcery is based on the knowledge you possess," I do think I see where you're coming from, here.
I feel your pain, my friend...
My interpretation of Oblivion hinges into my handling of the Neverborn as a whole - that without souls to define their inner lives or joutens to express their outer facets, the slaughtered titans exist in a state where their unbound ex-Mythoi can, in theory, create or express anything they think of[1]. The issue is that their minds are broken as well, the ordered chaos of a psyche managed by its own self-aware opinions perverted into a discordant ruin where individual clumps of memory, subconscious babble, and delusional introspection[2] all fight to be heard inside the echo chamber of the dead Primordial's tomb.I don't think the Neverborn created Oblivion, I think they just ripped open a passage to it.
"boddhisattva who achieved enlightenment through supreme virtue and can dominate all worldly illusions", which should be doable with the Anchors system (but I'm unsure of how doable it is), so I'll have to page @EarthScorpion for the answer on that one.
It should be noted that this is how Theurgic Invocations in Godbound work; they're things with a bunch of training time, but don't actually cost XP. I think it's a good idea to remove the XP cost of spells if you add in Anchors, because it:
- Serves to reduce the competition between Charms and sorcery.
- Furthers that they are external to Charms.
- Means that I don't have to spend five sessions for the privilege to spend my 8 XP.
NPCs don't normally use XP anyway, so...Mm, that seems like it would result in Elders being able to pull pretty much any spell they'd want straight out of their ass, given their centuries long lifespans and all. Not sure if that's a positive or negative in your book.
Yes, but.Isn't it kinda the entire point of Anchors to be engaged with temporal concerns and the material world?
Assuming you're killing Elder Essence raising caps, then you need something for Elder Exalted to actually do on a meaningful level, which player characters can interact with. Sure, the Elder himself is using the best possible set of buffs, what with his collection of spirit allies, wicked tattoos, and artifact daisy chains; you can still cut away at his support base by murdering all his allies and attacking him in the bath.Mm, that seems like it would result in Elders being able to pull pretty much any spell they'd want straight out of their ass, given their centuries long lifespans and all. Not sure if that's a positive or negative in your book.
I mean, a slayer probably can do it. The spells is for people who don't have access to those charms, or who don't want to pay the associated costs with getting those charms.Yes, but.
On a Doylist level, Anchors serve to make you go out and get to adventuring. On a Watsonian level, if invoking Ligier's name to get a fraction of his power can burn an city to radioactive ash, then he needs to be able to.
And if he can, then why is an Anchor required for your Enlightenment 10 Slayer to burn a city into radioactive dust? He's on the same level of enlightenment, he's got a hell of a lot of power himself. Why can't he?
Yes, but.
On a Doylist level, Anchors serve to make you go out and get to adventuring. On a Watsonian level, if invoking Ligier's name to get a fraction of his power can burn an city to radioactive ash, then he needs to be able to.
And if he can, then why is an Anchor required for your Enlightenment 10 Slayer to burn a city into radioactive dust? He's on the same level of enlightenment, he's got a hell of a lot of power himself. Why can't he?
Assuming you're killing Elder Essence raising caps, then you need something for Elder Exalted to actually do on a meaningful level, which player characters can interact with. Sure, the Elder himself is using the best possible set of buffs, what with his collection of spirit allies, wicked tattoos, and artifact daisy chains; you can still cut away at his support base by murdering all his allies and attacking him in the bath.
The thing is, most backgrounds require maintenance and you can only fit so many artifact tattoos onto one body. It's actually possible to resist an elder if you do it right and get lucky. That sure isn't true with canon.
I mean, Elder NPCs would have whatever spells the ST sees fit to give them, whether those spells would cost XP for a PC to buy or not. There is no change in that regard. If you take issue with the idea, then... congratulations? Get your ST to stat up every Elder with XP from the Elder table I guess.Sure, but it's an understood thing that the PCs are the 99th percentile of the 99th percentile of Solars so they have tons of XP relative to NPCs. That's not really true of time though so it doesn't work.
I mean, Elder NPCs would have whatever spells the ST sees fit to give them, whether those spells would cost XP for a PC to buy or not. There is no change in that regard. If you take issue with the idea, then... congratulations? Get your ST to stat up every Elder with XP from the Elder table I guess.