Posts by: Stephen Lea Sheppard

Back to List

[#][F] Stephen Lea Sheppard - 2/19/2013
Anyone know why I specified those five styles?

[#][F] Stephen Lea Sheppard - 2/19/2013
Tiger, Bull, Spider, Wolf, and Falcoln Styles.

(Just kidding, I don't know. And five styles in the core is probably impractical. Wouldn't it be cool, though?)

[#][F] Stephen Lea Sheppard - 2/19/2013
Tiger, Bull, Spider, Wolf, and Falcon Styles.

(Just kidding, I don't know. And five styles in the core is probably impractical. Wouldn't it be cool, though?)

[#][F] Stephen Lea Sheppard - 2/18/2013
That's actually not a difficult thing to do. With the mouth open wide, the tongue is a facial feature. It's not difficult to bite your tongue.

[#][F] Stephen Lea Sheppard - 2/18/2013
Arrakiz wrote:
The question that beggs to be asked then is: why would anyone want to learn Martial Arts and other formalized fighting styles since they're not only severely limited, but also require a lot of time to learn. The obvious answer would be that they allow stuff that is impossible to achieve by refining your native skills with Charms. Which is quite a big statement for Exalted and I can't really see how it fits with lowering the power scale in 3e.


That is a good question!

[#][F] Stephen Lea Sheppard - 2/16/2013
I find John's goals laudable, but in practical terms people play to their preferences, not what's in the book. Raise your hands if you used the 1e or 2e training time rules as written.

[#][F] Stephen Lea Sheppard - 2/16/2013
Charms in 1st and 2nd Edition were explicitly discreet techniques with verifiable in-universe existence—like, you could use All-Encompassing Sorcerer's Sight to recognize them by name, and even things like Solar Melee Charms took four times as long to learn without a teacher as with—except when it was more convenient to assume they were generic character building blocks with names only as publishing conceits... which is to say, they were the latter almost all the time.

The game was quite schizophrenic about this. However, nobody actually cared, because in practical terms it came up basically never and nobody is sufficiently concerned with the internal consistency of the universe as to actually give a shit that a Charm is a different thing depending on whether you happen to be looking at it with All-Encompassing Sorcerer's Sight right this minute or not.

3e may be slightly more consistent about it, but almost certainly only in very minor ways that can be easily ignored. In practical terms Solar Charms will still be able to exist in nebulous superposition if that's more convenient for you at the table.

[#][F] Stephen Lea Sheppard - 2/15/2013
Note that the Gossamer background is supposed to represent having a concrete source of gossamer, like other Fair Folk who tithe to you or a pool of mortals you draw it from during downtime or whatever. It's not created by the background.

[#][F] Stephen Lea Sheppard - 2/15/2013
You can harvest it from waypoints.

[#][F] Stephen Lea Sheppard - 2/15/2013
kitsune9tails wrote:
A word on this aspect of things.

Stephenls, if you have any influence over anything, I would like your opinion and hopefully your cooperation on this writing issue.

If something in the game is explicitly supposed to be 'up to your ST', please explicitly say that! Please do not just trail off and leave it mysterious or even unmentioned. This leads to arguments later when something is 'filled in' by a later product, and it can also lead to problems in planning games for STs who want to stick to canon and find themselves searching high and low for details that were never intended to be fleshed out. It can even be manipulated by unscrupulous or unwitting players, who "swear they saw that written down somewhere".

Sure, many STs will be able to just wing it or simply rule that "this is my!Creation, dammit" and move on. Maybe Exalted isn't meant for STs that are uncomfortable with doing things like that. But I think it would be a big help that would not cost you anything but a sidebar and perhaps the occasional keyword or font change.

This applies to both fluff and crunch: I would rather spend the words to have a Charm effect explicitly "Change the user's appearance cosmetically to a degree decided upon by the ST and what is appropriate to the situation" rather than "Change the user's appearance cosmetically to a degree".

...maybe it's just me who feels this way, I dunno.


We really don't like doing that. Once you define something as explicitly up-to-the-ST, you immediately accomplish two things:

1) You prevent future authors from expanding on it if they have a decent idea.
2) You prevent it from being at all relevant to any other element of the setting.

Notice, for example, how the Emissary of Nexus basically got no coverage anywhere after Compass: Scavenger Lands defined him as maybe one of five different things. All of a sudden nothing can have anything to do with the Emissary, because he's defined as an area of canon doubt and uncertainty and therefore no book can say anything about him that isn't a waste of wordcount, nor hint at anything about him without stepping on ST toes.

Notice how in Vampire: The Requiem, they basically had to invent the Strix to provide mystery in the setting after VII was defined as maybe-one-of-these-three-things.

So, uh, no, don't expect us to do the canon doubt and uncertainty thing. Not worth it.

...

Regarding Lunars gaining power from breaking taboos: That strikes me as a bad idea. Not, like, general taboos. They gain power from breaking a few specific taboos for specific reasons, but generalizing it sucks all the flavor out.

[#][F] Stephen Lea Sheppard - 2/15/2013
Six hour minimum on a sacred hunt is both bullshit and easy to hit, by the way. For example, take bandits:

A serious bandit leader leading a serious bandit band is not going to be, like, camped out on the side of the road waiting for you to come by and beat him up. Those dudes get caught. He's going to have some sort of difficult-to-find headquarters, either in the wilderness or as a member of the local community. He's got to sell his plunder, so he's going to be selling to someone. That means some of the local merchants are acting as fences, and they're not dumb; they know what's going on and take a cut of the profits. Hitting everyone on the road is idiocy; he's going to have contacts in the local bureaucracy tipping him off when a big score of a caravan is coming by. Lots of people taking bribes.

The moment you set out tracing the connections, finding and interrogating the fences, tracing the bribes, etc., that six-hour countdown starts. Do you really think it's going to take less than six hours to go from nothing to "I have the location of his base of operations and am ready to go in and treat him like Batman treats a supervillain hiding in a warehouse?"

It's not. It'll take a couple of days. You're gonna qualify for that sacred hunt time minimum.

Even so, if you're so awesome that you do it in three hours, it should still count as a successful hunt.

[#][F] Stephen Lea Sheppard - 2/15/2013
You sort of have to accept that the Exaltation's memories are as meaningfully "yours" as any memories attached to your hun for things like the Solar/Lunar bond to carry the resonance it's clearly intended to carry in places like Castebook: Dawn. Certainly from an Exalt's subjective point of view they feel that way.

As for Neph's vision of it, don't get me started. That shit be creepy as fuck. Supernaturally-compelled one-sided devotion is not poignant no matter how you frame it.

[#][F] Stephen Lea Sheppard - 2/15/2013
I have no idea about any of that; I leave the Charm design to people who actually have a Goddamn clue about Charm design. Uh... talk amongst yourselves, I guess?

[#][F] Stephen Lea Sheppard - 2/15/2013
Omicron wrote:
Stephenls wrote:
The Chills and One Last Joke wrote:
Incidentally, what the blueberry fuckmuffins am I going to do with the form of a dead bandit? Start up a nutty Screwface scam?


Anything you want.

Here's something that people don't think about very often: Creation is a pre-photographic society. Famous people are famous for their deeds, and by their descriptions, as in "About yay tall, fair hair, green eyes, wide shoulders, etc.." Rulers are identified by signet rings or livery or signature dress, or sometimes by distinguishing mark, scar, or tattoo that can be described. The closest thing you have to photographs are portraits, and those have to be made by hand one at a time and are not widely distributed except in cases of woodblock prints, which are relatively low-resolution.

Most princes and queens can walk down the street and not be recognized if they dress like peasants.

If you have a form, you can do what you want with it. You have to remember that in Creation, the concept of famous faces exists in an entirely different context than it does here and now.

Note that relying too much on that can bite you in the ass, as Louis XIV discovered to his disappointment and untimely demise.

Well, yes.

[#][F] Stephen Lea Sheppard - 2/15/2013
The Chills and One Last Joke wrote:
Incidentally, what the blueberry fuckmuffins am I going to do with the form of a dead bandit? Start up a nutty Screwface scam?


Anything you want.

Here's something that people don't think about very often: Creation is a pre-photographic society. Famous people are famous for their deeds, and by their descriptions, as in "About yay tall, fair hair, green eyes, wide shoulders, etc.." Rulers are identified by signet rings or livery or signature dress, or sometimes by distinguishing mark, scar, or tattoo that can be described. The closest thing you have to photographs are portraits, and those have to be made by hand one at a time and are not widely distributed except in cases of woodblock prints, which are relatively low-resolution.

Most princes and queens can walk down the street and not be recognized if they dress like peasants.

If you have a form, you can do what you want with it. You have to remember that in Creation, the concept of famous faces exists in an entirely different context than it does here and now.

Turalisj wrote:
Romance between a Solar and Lunar should happen if there was a chance to happen in the first place. Not blind, silly, obsessive love like is described by 2e's Lunar bond.

Otherwise you get Twilight.


No, you get Twilight.

Or, rather, you get Bram Stoker's Dracula and The Mummy. Which are both actually terrible examples. The point is, you get desperate and torrid love between two people who share memories of having been in love in previous lives. That's the actual narrative role of the Solar/Lunar bond -- not a one-sided compulsion that's supernatural and mind-controlly, but the classic reincarnation love story.

You meet a new person you've never met before, and you don't even recognize their face, but somehow the moment you see them, oh, a flash of memory! In another life, you remember passionate love for someone else entirely, and somehow you know with your soul that that person and this person are one and the same! Images flood your thoughts, time spent with this person, how happy they made you!

Now what? They see you and look away too quickly, and in that moment you know that they have the same memories! They know you as you know them!

But you're different people and this is a different world and clearly you don't remember everything. What's missing? Were you happy together? Could you be happy again?

Et cetera.