That doesn't work for Autochton.

You can try, but you'll discover that the Nuclear fire simply helps give you MORE cancer.
Which is great, because MORE cancer -> MORE superpowers.

Now, it is true that having incurable robocancer sucks, which is why you follow the principles of The Enlightened Dragon so that it mostly sucks for other people. Bless their noble souls so that they are free to beautifully shine so very, very bright.
 
For Alchemicals?
Anticipatory Simulation Processor(E2, Per 3, any Perception or Wits Aug) has a submodule from CoCD Autochtonia called Syntax Modeling Subroutine which extends it's surprise negation to mental influences.
Thanks. So, judging by this being the only other example, it seems that social surprise negators and unblockable-blockers/undodgeable-dodgers are rare. So I guess the answer to my wondering is 'pretty powerful/useful'.

I have another Socialize question, if I may:

Gathering the Congregation (core 240) is not marked as UMI, but it is Obvious; it allows persuading everyone within earshot to serve the exalt as a social group, and lasts for a week.
So, the question is, just what does it look like (from an in-character/in-world PoV) to those who happen to witness the event - to those affected both immediately and a week later, as well as to those whose MDV proved too strong?

Relevant bits of RAW that are likely to influence the interpretation:
Core 183 said:
Obvious: Observers can tell that the Exalt is using a Charm,
and they have a rough idea of its effects. Obvious permanent
Charms are only obvious when actively in use.

Errata on UMI and Obviousness said:
Unnatural mental influence does not clearly announce itself
as magical mind control unless it comes from an Obvious source
and fails to affect the targeted character—characters targeted
even by Obvious unnatural mental influence only realize this
fact once they have successfully resisted it (although unaffect-
ed bystanders who witness an Obvious Charm's use can tell the
target is being subjected to mental coercion of some sort).
Note that the latter clarification is intended to clear up UMI use, not NMI use. But it seems to be the only entry clarifying the effects of Obvious social influence. I'm not sure how it should be applied (if at all) to Obvious NMI.

Any insights? Thanks in advance.
 
I'm not sure how it should be applied (if at all) to Obvious NMI.

Any insights? Thanks in advance.
The Main difference between UMI and NMI is that NMI can be repelled by the target after with a bit of effort, meanwhile UMI'S enhanced arguments must be always considered by her.

Thus an Obvious NMI wouldn't be visible by the bystanders as magical mental coercion, but simply as someone using some kind of magic to influence/empower(In this case at least) peoples with normal non magical empowered words.
 
Thanks. So, judging by this being the only other example, it seems that social surprise negators and unblockable-blockers/undodgeable-dodgers are rare. So I guess the answer to my wondering is 'pretty powerful/useful'.

I have another Socialize question, if I may:

Gathering the Congregation (core 240) is not marked as UMI, but it is Obvious; it allows persuading everyone within earshot to serve the exalt as a social group, and lasts for a week.
So, the question is, just what does it look like (from an in-character/in-world PoV) to those who happen to witness the event - to those affected both immediately and a week later, as well as to those whose MDV proved too strong?

Relevant bits of RAW that are likely to influence the interpretation:

Note that the latter clarification is intended to clear up UMI use, not NMI use. But it seems to be the only entry clarifying the effects of Obvious social influence. I'm not sure how it should be applied (if at all) to Obvious NMI.

Any insights? Thanks in advance.

Alright, so there's a bit of Borgstromancy here to deal with, as well as a core gameplay concession purely to make UMI paletable to players;

UMI is inherently Obvious so players don't get fucked over. It's not strictly intended to be permit 'NPCs constantly grudgefuck you'. This is the gameplay part. There are more than a handful of essays on the subject by Borgstrom that I sadly can't find right now, but they're out there.

Okay so- Here's partially why UMI is Obvious compared to NMI: The unliateral speed and depth of commitment UMI can instill on someone has the same effort-return as extended torture and brainwashing. They say this right in the corebook, but it's easy to conflate and confuse the issue.

What the corebook means about NMI, is that the kind of commitment someone needs to take to properly break down an intimacy over [Conviction] scenes is equivalent to several days of concerted effort that is very difficult to take as benign. It's like- to, with absolute certainty, erode someone's intimacy and prevent them from rebuilding it or making new ones, is to control their every waking moment.

Strictly speaking, you can NMI yourself to build intimacies over several scenes of work- this high intensity deprogramming is essentially saying you keep that person from having enough scenes to build himself up.

UMI, by contrast, can create lasting commitments in the span of minutes. Worshipful Lackey Acquisition guarantees you days of loyal service, and only the guaranteed part ends- the actual commitment endures until eroded.

So, back to Gathering the Congregation. As per corebook, it's generally assumed any Obvious Charm is going to have Solar visual effects associated with it. Think glowing sunbeams, sparks of light, etc. In the case of social charms, these effects are well, more mental/social, and they can be anything like a pronounced reverb in the Solar's voice, a shining clarity in their choice of words- how you hear them, how they comport themselves as part of the oration, etc.

Elaborating further- so you fire off GtC. I don't subscribe to that particular errata, so I won't speak to that, but you turn it on and hit a bunch of people. Since it's NMI, they don't trip the same UMI-is-Obvious Clauses. The 'Obvious' part of GtC is being able to flash-forge a semi-organized unit, instead of spending hours, days, weeks starting a club or party or whatever.

Those who weren't affected see a brilliantly charismatic demagogue rallying a bunch of people to their cause without much preparation, and as much fanfare as they like. People with crazy special effects aren't uncommon in Exalted, nor are they rare.
 
Elaborating further- so you fire off GtC. I don't subscribe to that particular errata, so I won't speak to that, but you turn it on and hit a bunch of people. Since it's NMI, they don't trip the same UMI-is-Obvious Clauses. The 'Obvious' part of GtC is being able to flash-forge a semi-organized unit, instead of spending hours, days, weeks starting a club or party or whatever.

Those who weren't affected see a brilliantly charismatic demagogue rallying a bunch of people to their cause without much preparation, and as much fanfare as they like. People with crazy special effects aren't uncommon in Exalted, nor are they rare.

I disagree there, incidentally. By my reading of the Obvious keyword, any onlooker - whether they're affected or not - will realise that the Solar is using some power that does things that no normal human can do, and that it's going to make the people who are affected follow them for a certain finite period of time (vis a vis "Observers can tell that the Exalt is using a Charm, and they have a rough idea of its effects.").

I likewise reject that bit of the errata - if you use an Obvious charm on people, your targets get to damn well know IC the rough effects of what you're doing - and thus yes, probably will spend WP to resist the lure if they really don't want to follow the Solar Pied Piper. That's why Obvious is a drawback for the Charm.
 
This is rolling back a ways, but:
That actually sounds perfectly reasonable. Any weirdness that ensues is clearly the result of how the humans of Creation are impossibly weak-willed and fickle beings that will abandoned long-held beliefs over the course of a coffee break or two.
Well, the thing is that's actually pretty true. Extremely long-held beliefs are usually long-held not because a person has any real devotion to it, but the fact the subject lives in the kind of place where they are never put in a position to question or explore the assumptions backing up that belief. That is just the natural process of Learning about oneself, your values, and becoming worldly, changing your mind over time about what things you appreciate most and the ways you interpret them compared to the presented alternatives. People who will dig in and voraciously defend Exactly what they are Certain they know, come hell or high water, are few and far between. Far rarer than the average mortal on the street, and in ways that isn't always to their own benefit either.

While on the other hand, people can hold onto specific views also because they constantly have others around them reinforcing that belief onto them if they would ever second-guess it or themselves, whether by confirmation bias or desire to have it BE true. Everyone knows someone who started hanging out with another crowd and slowly became almost an entirely different person after adopting their beliefs and attitudes, eventually split away from them and returned "to normal," and Intimacies are intended to operate no differently.

You're not supposed to hold the same Intimacies forever and ever unless you're an absolute Rock which people are forced to break themselves against, because Intimacies are naturally mutable and ultimately rooted in transitory things and not Facts. You don't love your wife because you have held an Intimacy of "My Wife (True Love)" on your sheet for 5 years ingame, but because Intimacies about your wife are Always consistantly present among those you possess, even though you may have fallen into and out of love with her for several years now as fights and reconciliations have eroded and rebuilt them over time.

Now sure, the book makes a real hash of actually Explaining any of this depth, going only so far as to say "these are easy to lose and easy to gain" but that's nothing new for Exalted or White Wolf. The underlying ideal though is that Intimacies are supposed to inherently support eachother and Evolve, and that the PCs are by no means the only ones capable of building or eroding the Intimacies of others. Sure, you may spend one whole scene utterly tearing down the entire worldview of an immaculate monk and replacing it with your own, and send her packing conflicted about the truths she was brought up in. But she also still holds Intimacies towards her fellow immaculates at the temple and her grandmaster, whom you never touched on and she deeply trusts not to lead her astray.

Once she returns she can go to them, express her crisis of faith and immediately begin rebuilding a replacement Intimacy once again from the influence of those around her, perhaps even Stronger this time because her environment shows her a new vantage point she never really accounted for. Perhaps it was never about the teachings of the dragons which resonated so strongly with her, and Was in fact the sense of peace and belonging that she was always relying on. Which is how you end up with Round 2 next you meet, where she recognizes that you may have spoken truthfully about the Order being a sham and a Solar Exalted being the true masters of the world, but she's now certain it will not be You to bring that message to the region, as you've already shown your willingness to step over people (including her) on your path to power, and that is the new reason why she will continue to oppose you, not because of any illusions of righteousness and overthrowing golden demons.

That is the kind of stuff you make really impressive stories out of, and its never intended to be quite so simple as shouting Dominate Person at someone until the single checkmark on their sheet preventing them from kowtowing to you becomes ticked. Though admittedly, the ability of the mechanics and tools presented to Accomplish these things are often scattershot at best.
 
I disagree there, incidentally. By my reading of the Obvious keyword, any onlooker - whether they're affected or not - will realise that the Solar is using some power that does things that no normal human can do, and that it's going to make the people who are affected follow them for a certain finite period of time (vis a vis "Observers can tell that the Exalt is using a Charm, and they have a rough idea of its effects.").
Well, that's definitely a cleaner way to build a keyword system than the current 'Obvious is obvious but Obvious UMI is not obvious to those successfully affected until it is resisted'. But the campaign I'm in is run under 2½e rules.

I likewise reject that bit of the errata - if you use an Obvious charm on people, your targets get to damn well know IC the rough effects of what you're doing - and thus yes, probably will spend WP to resist the lure if they really don't want to follow the Solar Pied Piper. That's why Obvious is a drawback for the Charm.
How is the latter paragraph different from the way that, say, a Solar can IC choose Seven Shadow Evasion over Adamant Skin against an attack because OOC the player heard the GM/other player declare a BadTouch attack Charm (that is not Obvious)? (Likewise, I thought spending WP is normally not prohibited by the rules at all.)
 
Based on the feedback of the past few pages, I've revised my Solar rewrite. The big change is to multiple attacks, which went from this:
If a magical flurry or similar effect would tell you to make multiple Decisive attacks, you typically wait until all such attacks
have resolved before determining the change to your Initiative. If all such attacks missed, you lose 2i per attack. If any attack
hit, you instead reset to base Initiative. If any effect would change your Initiative in the middle of the flurry (for instance,
if you suffer a Withering Counterattack), apply that change after resolving the changes above. (This can mean that, after
resolving an entire magical flurry, you are Crashed by an enemy attack made partway through that flurry.)
to this:
If a magical flurry or similar effect would tell you to make multiple Decisive attacks, you typically wait until all such attacks
have resolved before determining the change to your Initiative. If none of your attacks successfully hit the target, you lose 2i
per attack. If any attack hit, you instead reset to base Initiative.

If any effect would change your Initiative in the middle of a flurry (for example, if you would suffer a Withering
Counterattack), you must pay the cost for any such effects out of the Initiative assigned to any attacks in the flurry for which
damage has not yet resolved, with your choice for how to distribute the cost between the attacks. If this would reduce any
attack to zero damage dice, do not resolve that attack. No attack may be reduced below 0 Initiative, but you must pay as
much of the cost as you can.

After the flurry resolves, consider your Initiative at the time of the start of the attack, and then modify this value for any
changes in Initiative mid-flurry, even if this is a greater reduction than was actually possible during the flurry. Finally, if
none of your attacks succeeded, subtract 2i per attack, as above; if any attacks succeeded, you reset to base Initiative. (This
can mean that an attacker who was Crashed mid-flurry immediately recovers from Crash, as long as one of his attacks before
Crashing succeeded.)

If at any point in this resolution process your total Initiative drops to 0 Initiative or less, the character whose actions most
directly caused that change receives an Initiative Break bonus as normal.

If a Charm would create a series of separate reflexive attacks, such as those provided by the Solar Charm Swarm-Culling
Instinct, those attacks are not a flurry and do not use these rules.
plus some supporting examples. I also tweaked the rules for attacks beyond maximum range and fixed a typo in Swarm-Cullling Instinct.

General houserules note, new keywords, etc.

Solar Charm Rewrite
 
Last edited:
Based on the feedback of the past few pages, I've revised my Solar rewrite. The big change is to multiple attacks, which went from this:

to this:

plus some supporting examples. I also tweaked the rules for attacks beyond maximum range and fixed a typo in Swarm-Cullling Instinct.

General houserules note, new keywords, etc.

Solar Charm Rewrite
So before 3rd edition has been released we have a full charm set rewrite for the core splat?

I don't think that's a good thing.
 
So before 3rd edition has been released we have a full charm set rewrite for the core splat?

I don't think that's a good thing.
It isn't. This isn't say like an adjustment to craft or making it so that you get extra health-levels with each dot of essence; this one of the core mechanics that defines how the game will play in every area, and people are taking a cleaver to it already.
 
It isn't. This isn't say like an adjustment to craft or making it so that you get extra health-levels with each dot of essence; this one of the core mechanics that defines how the game will play in every area, and people are taking a cleaver to it already.
Did 1e or 2e see any rewrites of the charms? I can't think of any.
 
Did 1e or 2e see any rewrites of the charms? I can't think of any.
2e had The Ten Thousand Dragons, which was a partial rewrite of the Dragon-Blood Charm set, Revlid did a rewrite of SWLIHN becuase he felt the canon charmset was boring, and Earthscorpion, Revlid and a couple other guys rewrote Lunars cause they felt the Canon Lunar Charmset was no good.

Other than those? I don't think so.
 
Technically, the Scroll of Errata probably counts.

I thought he meant Homebrew rewrites, but including all sources, then yeah, errata changed a lot of stuff, but only completely rewrote the Fair Folk Charm Set.

It's not a full rewrite. The vast majority of it is basically a pared-down mechanics-only description of each charm. A lot of the rest is just the deletion of some problematic charms.
Thank you for clearing that up.
 
There were a couple other attempts at Lunars, as well as a Sidereal rewrite or two. I think I saw something for Abyssals at some point, but that was on the old forums, so who knows.
 
Did 1e or 2e see any rewrites of the charms? I can't think of any.
Replying to this again, but I think the key difference is that the rewrites generally took significantly longer to come about. Not entirely sure why, but I think it has to due with second edition having a much more favorable reception and the fact that the problems were more baked in. To fix paranoia combat you basically need to rewrite the entire combat system and everything it touches, which is most of the game. That's a tall order. Also, most of the rewrites/fixes in second edition had to deal with creating something new, rather than building off what was there.

For third edition, many of these things seem less true. The issue is more with small bits that are attached to the core system, but not intrinsic to it.
 
It's not a full rewrite. The vast majority of it is basically a pared-down mechanics-only description of each charm. A lot of the rest is just the deletion of some problematic charms.
Right.

2e's problem was that there were systemic lethality issues baked into it at basically every level: weapon stats, surprise, poison, hundreds of Charms, several basic resolution engines, and so on. Its virtue was that these systemically bad components were run through a system that could unambiguously handle almost all of the game's information packets. To make 2e work, you could have used the information-packet-handling system that it already had, but you would have had to rebalance basically every aspect of the game.

3e's virtue is that it has - or at least appears to have, so far - a relatively-balance set of powers that don't have crazy built-in sources of lethality at basically every level. You don't have to rewrite and rebalance and replaytest every single aspect of the game. 3e's problem is that it doesn't have a robust information-packet-handling system; its basic system is full of ambiguities and missing rules. So to fix 3e, you have to patch the holes in the packet-handling, and you have to rewrite the (already largely balanced!) Charms to use that patched packet-handling system. That's still an extended job, but it's nowhere near what would be required to make even the 2e core workable.
 
Last edited:
Thanks. So, judging by this being the only other example, it seems that social surprise negators and unblockable-blockers/undodgeable-dodgers are rare. So I guess the answer to my wondering is 'pretty powerful/usef
Ok, so, I'm looking at the Infernal Charms in MoEP and BWC, as they're the exalts I know best, and even ignoring their unusual charms that give perfect defenses against subcategories of social attacks, three of the Yozis have Perfect social defenses. The Ebon Dragon's specifies that it can't be used against unexpected social attacks, but the others don't. So, that's Broken Silence Laughter Defense and Counter Pronouncement of Enthymic Law to consider as well.
Also, I didn't bother responding earlier because I figured others would, but since you may have drawn an incorrect conclusion from their silence, I felt compelled to try at least once on this particular issue.
 
Some weird forum software thing happened that made it appear as if I'd double-posted, so I deleted one post, but it turned out I had not so it deleted my only post. Annoying.

3e's virtue is that it has - or at least appears to have, so far - a relatively-balance set of powers that don't have crazy built-in sources of lethality at basically every level.
I run a weekly game on Fridays, and so had the latest session tonight.

I set up an ambush for my Solar circle made up on one mortwight and two 'wax-children' based on hungry ghost stats (but slightly beefed up). All of them rocked their Stealth rolls and so managed to secure surprise. Both wax-children were using poisoned weapons. All of them had light (ie highest-accuracy) weapons.

One Solar got massively wounded in the opening strike - and survived only thanks to Ox-Body Technique. The other Solars suffered light to no wounds, and the one who got hit by a poison attack managed to fully resist the poison.

I consider this a win on three fronts: one, I managed to use several stealth + poison attacks and it didn't insta-kill everyone. Two, poison + stealth still actually mattered, by making otherwise weak opponents able to force Solars to spend a lot of Essence resisting them, exhausting their power, rather than having cheap Charms that instantly shut it down.

Three: Ox-Body Technique actually matters, holy shit.

This is the kind of experience I keep having that makes me like Ex3 so much. I realize not everyone agrees and I appreciate their reasons, but this was a cool session.
 
Last edited:
I run a weekly game on Fridays, and so had the latest session tonight.

I set up an ambush for my Solar circle made up on one mortwight and two 'wax-children' based on hungry ghost stats (but slightly beefed up). All of them rocked their Stealth rolls and so managed to secure surprise. Both wax-children were using poisoned weapons. All of them had light (ie highest-accuracy) weapons.

One Solar got massively wounded in the opening strike - and survived only thanks to Ox-Body Technique. The other Solars suffered light to no wounds, and the one who got hit by a poison attack managed to fully resist the poison.

I consider this a win on three fronts: one, I managed to use several stealth + poison attacks and it didn't insta-kill everyone. Two, poison + stealth still actually mattered, by making otherwise weak opponents able to force Solars to spend a lot of Essence resisting them, exhausting their power, rather than having cheap Charms that instantly shut it down.

Three: Ox-Body Technique actually matters, holy shit.

This is the kind of experience I keep having that makes me like Ex3 so much. I realize not everyone agrees and I appreciate their reasons, but this was a cool session.
I've had similar experiences, and I agree with the assessment on all points. One of my favorite moments so far was when the players were fighting a Solar ghost with a spectral version of Spring Razor. One of the players turned to the Dawn, who at that point was poisoned and down 6L. "Do you want to start spending your peripheral motes?" the player asked.

"Nah," said the Dawn. "It's not that serious yet."

I could never have had that conversation in 2e, and I love that I can in 3.
 
Yeah. As far as criticisms go, I've yet to see anyone say that 3E didn't solve the lethality landmine issues that 2E had. That is telling in itself, given that people have been criticizing the shit out of literally everything else.

Thematic criticisms? Been there.
Base system criticisms? Done that.
Charm bloat criticisms? Seen so much of that.
Lethality problems? Not a word.
 
Last edited:
Ok, so, I'm looking at the Infernal Charms in MoEP and BWC, as they're the exalts I know best, and even ignoring their unusual charms that give perfect defenses against subcategories of social attacks, three of the Yozis have Perfect social defenses. The Ebon Dragon's specifies that it can't be used against unexpected social attacks, but the others don't. So, that's Broken Silence Laughter Defense and Counter Pronouncement of Enthymic Law to consider as well.
Also, I didn't bother responding earlier because I figured others would, but since you may have drawn an incorrect conclusion from their silence, I felt compelled to try at least once on this particular issue.
Thanks. Hmm. That makes me unsure of some things
  1. Do special defences in general get permission for usage against surprises? Only those with the word 'perfectly'? None? (It seems ambiguous given TED's precedent.)
  2. Ditto about being able to defend against Unblockable/Undodgeable? (I'm assuming no unless it's spelled out very explicitly in the Charm text, but maybe I'm wrong.)
 
Back
Top