Posts by: Holden

Back to List

[#][F] Holden - 1/30/2013
Eternal_King wrote:
Day_Dreamer wrote:
Eternal_King wrote:
John Mørke wrote:
Eternal_King wrote:
And what if the Taliban member have a major Intimacy (hate) about your kind of people?

I'm an Eclipse. Socialize Charms 101 says I am a part of his culture.

And what if he's properly paranoid and enjoys benefits of Major Intimacy (distrust - strangers)? It's not really a culture.

I think that if it is a conditional effect - it needs to be pretty powerful and bypassing simple means to make it fail.

Not a "minor" and not "may fail if someone just hate your hair color or the way you are dressing".


It might still work. People can have contradictory feelings. Maybe if you roll well enough, you can still get them to not kill you, as long as you have a foot-in-the-door intimacy.

When I use a heavily conditional Solar Charm I expect it not just "probably work".

I expect it to crush the opposition.

I expect it to work greatly and without ant "ifs".

We discovered that a set that was full of nothing but this? It was boring, as it simply bypassed most conflict and storytelling.

To the degree that people are calibrating this against 2e social combat, I would say that your basic social combat attack in 2e is about on par with some of the stronger social magic in 3e. Your basic, meat-and-potatoes 2e social attack could make a complete stranger murder and eat his wife, then sell his children into slavery, based on a single dice roll.

Social influence actions don't really work that way.

[#][F] Holden - 1/30/2013
Mizu005 wrote:

This feels like something a skilled mortal should be able to do. If someone shows up on my doorstep unannounced and asks to be let in, I'll shut the door. If they bring up the fact that it is Passover and I'm supposed to let them in, even though I'm an Atheist I still will. My culture is a strong part of me, even though all of its traditions are not.

You don't follow all your cultural traditions, I'm willing to bet. The fact that you can point to one that you would honor even though it doesn't make sense doesn't change that.

Take me, for example. I live in the ass end of the boonies in Eastern Kentucky. It goes without saying that we have some less then savory traditions that are appalling to anyone who isn't a racist ass hole. If a random person walks up to me on the street and tried to get me to do something based on those traditions, I would probably deck them. But this charm would give me an intimacy towards those traditions that I don't normally have.

I privately think of this Charm as "the one that lets me get away with all kinds of shit anywhere I go in Halta, as long as I can relate what I want to hating the Linowan."

[#][F] Holden - 1/30/2013
Phoenix_Kensai wrote:
I'm definitely liking what I see of the way these new Charms are designed to encourage interesting play, rather than bypassing it entirely.

A minor Intimacy doesn't exactly sound like a big deal, especially for a Solar Charm, but I'm curious what it means in the new social influence system. I imagine a free Intimacy can be pretty handy, even if it's only minor.

Put it this way: When you get to the "I make a roll to make him do what I want him to do" part of the social system, if you have no Intimacies to play with, you can't do much more than bum bus money off of someone.*

*Barring threats or bribes.

[#][F] Holden - 1/30/2013

No, not Adventure Time.


Well okay, it can be Adventure Time too. BEHOLD THE ADVENTURES OF A SOLAR, ABYSSAL, AND LUNAR!

But no, rather, it's CHARM PREVIEW TIME!

Let the Charm preview commence:

Skillful Imposition Method

Cost: 6m; Mins: Socialize 3, Essence 2; Type: Supplemental
Keywords: None
Duration: Instant
Prerequisite Charms: Mastery of Small Manners

People are products of their environment. The Solar can bend an individual to his will by exploiting the mores, beliefs, and customs that color that person’s background. This Charm may supplement any social action that plays on a belief, law, custom, or social taboo held by a group to which the target belongs. The social action treats the individual as having a minor Intimacy dedicated to that social element, even if he doesn’t.

For example, a Solar attempts to convince a barbarian living in a cave high in the mountains to give him shelter from a coming storm. Knowing that the barbarian’s people have a strong custom of hospitality in the face of danger, the Solar uses this Charm while citing the custom; even if the barbarian doesn’t care about his people’s customs, he treats the Solar’s request as though it is exploiting a minor Principle of “hospitality must be offered in the face of danger.” Attempting to use the Charm in the same way on a Guild merchant from Nexus would be fruitless, however, as neither Nexus nor the Guild practices any hospitality customs.

[#][F] Holden - 1/29/2013
MissMaddy wrote:
Omicron wrote:
MissMaddy wrote:
In truth, obviously beneficial policies are fairly rare. Even in our own modern state, we argue ceaselessly about various policies that have multiple levels of complicated nuance.

Alice:"So I can ask them to do that, and after a few weeks they'll realize it's beneficial and I can leave them, right?"
Bob:"Beneficial? Seriously? Okay listen-"
Steve:"No Bob shut the fuck up we're not having a debate on welfare state at my gaming table."
Bob:"What? But-"
Steve:"Nope, not euthanasia either."
Bob:"But she can't-"
Steve:"Swords control is also out limits."
Bob:"'re taking all the fun out of this, you know."
Steve:"For once I would like to have a goddamn rpg session and not a political debate."

Entirely, deadpan serious - yes, this is the dillema I am describing. :P

Maybe it'd work well to have it based purely upon perception. IE; even a actively detrimental policy could be thought by a plurality of the group to be positive, or vice versa.

This neatly sidesteps the issue of objective appraisal by placing the merit of the policy in the eye of the beholder.

It also raises some intriguing possibilities when paired with other charms, or when considered in the context of propaganda.

A viable play strategy might literally be to tell a lie big enough, long enough, so that eventually everybody believes it.

The 'subsidies' thing of the 2e High First Age Usurpation might be taken as an example of this...

As time goes on, you'll notice that 3e trends toward two ideas: "Words mean what they say they mean" and "we believe your Storyteller not only has a brain, but also knows how to use it."

[#][F] Holden - 1/29/2013
Stephenls wrote:

Any system that requires an organization to have a codified leader is going to fly in the face of social models where actions arise spontaneously out of larger social trends[1], or where leadership arises out of difficult-to-quantify interactions between a small-to-medium-sized group.

Such as the Guild's Directorate, or the Council of Entities. Yes.

[#][F] Holden - 1/29/2013
MrInsecure wrote:
John Mørke wrote:
kitsune9tails wrote:
I think John is talking about the difference between 'High Powered' as in "Redraw the map with enough effort, luck, planning and skill" and 'High Powered' as in "Split the planet in half with a karate chop".

Fist of the North Star, not Dragon Ball Z.

I could, of course, be wrong.

I'm not throwing any qualia out there. I am asking for specific examples. If you say you want it to be high level and I say "it will be high level," you might never get what you want because our ideas are different. If you don't abandon silly words that mean nothing because they are subjective values with no consensus, I can't understand what you are talking about. Not you personally, but just posters in general.

Or, instead of complaining about people not giving specific examples- because we don't have specific examples at this point and can only talk in generalities- why not try to answer the question as though we were all reasonable individuals capable of some degree of syntactical interpretation?

For example: someone asks if the game will be high-powered. Instead of saying "I can't answer that question because the term 'high-powered' is vague," like you're a computer getting messed up by a missing bracket in the code somewhere, you can say: "well, I'm not sure if I get what you mean by 'high-powered,' but if you're asking about what sorts of things you'll be able to accomplish at Essence X, you can generally expect..."

Or you could just say "I can't really answer that question right now, sorry," and ignore us. But telling us to refine our wording just makes me feel like I'm in philosophy class again... or like I'm playing an old text adventure game and can't remember the right command to examine a rock (it's LOOK you idiot, LOOK!).

Uh, or you could just specify whether you consider "high-powered" to mean "able to whip the ass of 20 men barehanded," (any character capable of this in WoD would be very stompy indeed) or "able to single-handedly fight armies," (pretty much nobody in WoD is capable of that, or most games for that matter-- and it is certainly something you can do in Exalted!) or "able to smash mountains in half with a single punch" (which is pretty freaking out there even for Exalted... but not, notably, for Aberrant, or Nobilis).

[#][F] Holden - 1/28/2013
Gayo wrote:
Holden is on the record (well, the web forum record) as saying that they had the freedom to choose any sort of system they wanted or build a new one from scratch, and stuck with ST because it's familiar and intuitive and has some probabilistic traits they liked. Honestly, I think keeping the Ability/Attribute spread was more perverse than keeping ST; I'm cool with ST if you distill it down to the most basic level.

Keeping Attribute/Ability spreads was a recognition that we can make the core engine work fine almost no matter what we do there; the Attribute/Ability spreads are primarily useful as channels for Charm design, and the EX2 spread was pretty good for that.

[#][F] Holden - 1/28/2013
Count Dorku wrote:
Limited Reagent wrote:
The difference between an RPG and a novel is that a novel gives you the answers to your questions by the end of the book, whereas you play and RPG and create the answers to the questions yourself (or the ST does. Whatever).

The trick, you see, the trick to writing good RPG mystery is providing enough clues to not only leave the mystery open enough to create different answers to the proposed questions, but also lead the game players into creating interesting answers.

I hope you can see why your silly Plutonian Exalted example fails in this regard.

The Plutonian-Style Mystery Novel:

"Once upon a time, there were some people in a place. Then one of them was murdered!"

Actually, it would be: "Once upon a time, there were some people in a place. Something happened!"

[#][F] Holden - 1/27/2013
marin wrote:
Holden wrote:
Corolinth wrote:
Oh, Liminals have something to do with death or undeath? So that Alchemicals sidebar about the secret history of soulsteel was really just a cheap, thinly-veiled ploy to seed the product line for another hardcover Manual of Exalted Power. I am so surprised by this turn of events.

It's a shame, really. I want to give third edition a chance, but people just keep reminding me why I'm not impressed with the current writers.

Nope, the two have nothing to do with one another.

Also that sidebar dates back to the first edition Alchemicals book.

Corolinth's claimed this before, and got shot down by John.

Ah. So he's trolling, then.

[#][F] Holden - 1/27/2013
Corolinth wrote:
Oh, Liminals have something to do with death or undeath? So that Alchemicals sidebar about the secret history of soulsteel was really just a cheap, thinly-veiled ploy to seed the product line for another hardcover Manual of Exalted Power. I am so surprised by this turn of events.

It's a shame, really. I want to give third edition a chance, but people just keep reminding me why I'm not impressed with the current writers.

Nope, the two have nothing to do with one another.

Also that sidebar dates back to the first edition Alchemicals book.

[#][F] Holden - 1/26/2013
Thief-of-Faces wrote:
I have not read or played Wraith, but this really intrigues me.
Could try to make them more distinct from the Dual Monarchy, but yes.

How are the Wrath Deathlords portrayed moralwise, might I ask?

As Roman senators.

Which is to say, mostly a bunch of self-interested jerks, but not entirely.

[#][F] Holden - 1/26/2013
If people are really interested in a living vs dead / Creation vs Underworld debate, it'd be nice if they spun that out to another thread so it doesn't drown out the Abyssal discussion going on here.

[#][F] Holden - 1/26/2013
Lafing Cat wrote:
Arrakiz wrote:
And from what I recall, its about people wanting to be able to play Abyssals who can actually make death and the Underworld an alternative to life. Nobody objects it should be pretty bad at a starting point, but it would be neat to see abyssals have some way of making it better for the dead to the point of making the living jealous of what ghosts can have. And of course not only making it possible, but also one of relevant play-styles.

At such a time as being a ghost becomes objectively better than being alive, it becomes a moral imperative for *everyone*, not just Abyssals, to murder the world.

Which, I mean, is a thing. I'm not exactly sure it's a thing I want Exalted to be about.

I am so tired of binary arguments.

[#][F] Holden - 1/26/2013
John Mørke wrote:
Eldagusto was lurking for a second and I got excited.

Then he left emotion-9.gif

You got Eldagustowned.