All Posts

[#][F] Chai Tea - 2/4/2013
Imrix wrote:
Holden wrote:
I should probably, for the benefit of the actual Lunar fans on the board, let you all know that the more people shove TAW in my face nonstop when we're trying to talk about 3e Lunars, the stronger the urge grows to deliberately erase any points of similarity between Lunars and TAW. I'm glad you guys put together a successful homebrew project. We're not using it as the basis for what we're doing. And there are already 500 TAW threads. Tearing down what we're doing (and what many people enjoy about Lunars) to shill your stuff is not classy.
I mention TAW only as a way to assure people that I'm not, nor will I become, angry over this subject, because I have an acceptable fallback option. I am not throwing it in your face: My posts are meant purely as a discussion of canon Lunars and the direction they seem to be taking.


The problem with this is that the gist of this post is "Well, TAW did things this way, and I like the way it does things better." You might not mean for it to sound like "You guys should use TAW because I don't like what you have planned", but that's the way it comes across whenever you bring it up. Trust me, the entire dev team is familiar with TAW, its tenets, etc; it went off in a very different direction from what they have planned. TAW is very solidly rooted in 2e, and even if making it official didn't raise ugly property issues, it wouldn't mesh well with the rest of Exalted 3e. At all.

[#][F] John Mørke - 2/4/2013
Cromage wrote:
I like the idea of "dualism" but I'm not so keen on the "human vs monster" and have actually seen that more in the province of (gasp!) other splats (don't kill me). I like the idea of Lunars being champions of two worlds--exiles, outsiders, emigrants, and wanderers--and having to either choose one world or another or somehow trying to reconcile them.

ETA: More importantly I always hated chimerism and its tendency to drag Lunars into really dumb places. Maybe 3e will make it not suck.


Human vs. monster isn't on the schedule. I'm not turning Lunars into a werewolf story.

Chimeraism is going to be way different in EX3.

[#][F] Holden - 2/4/2013
I should probably, for the benefit of the actual Lunar fans on the board, let you all know that the more people shove TAW in my face nonstop when we're trying to talk about 3e Lunars, the stronger the urge grows to deliberately erase any points of similarity between Lunars and TAW. I'm glad you guys put together a successful homebrew project. We're not using it as the basis for what we're doing. And there are already 500 TAW threads. Tearing down what we're doing (and what many people enjoy about Lunars) to shill your stuff is not classy.

[#][F] Holden - 2/4/2013
Revlid wrote:
Baba Jaga is feared, loved, respected, more the star of the stories she appears in than any of the heroes who come to her house to barter or beg or destroy. When was the last time a monster got such a spotlight?


Probably Baba Yaga, who is a monster. And also a witch.

[#][F] Holden - 2/4/2013
glamourweaver wrote:
John Mørke wrote:
BrilliantRain wrote:
And, seriously, who wants to have Lunar Bugs Bunny vs. Elmer Fudd, Wyld Hunter ruled out as options?


Hopefully everyone. lol



You can be dismissive of the cartoon humor being discussed, but Bugs Bunny comes directly from Br'er Rabbit, who in turn originates as the slightly northerly version of Anansi, brought over to the Americas by West African slaves - with a touch of influence from the Native America Coyote. So the question is are figures like Anansi, Coyote, Reynard the Fox, Kitsune in general, etc part core Lunar themes the way figures like Gilgamesh or Rama are central to Solar themes?


Goku comes from Son Wukong, Great Sage Equal to Heaven. Doesn't make them the same character.

[#][F] Chai Tea - 2/4/2013
Kirby Jerusalem wrote:
It's heartwarming to see all this enthusiasm. Really gets me pumped for the game.

Sadly, I don't think I have the experience or group makeup to make a good playtest group, and I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be able to convince the others to try it anyways, so I'll have to settle for the finished product. That said, I hope the testing proves fruitful and a lot of good gaming comes out of it!


Dude, KJ, where have you been? I've missed you.

That said, Zan is absolutely 100% correct, and you should throw your hat in the ring if at all possible.

[#][F] John Mørke - 2/3/2013
The MG wrote:
Quote:
I mean, it could be cool, but I don't really grok the idea of Lunars touching things and transforming their bodies.
I think it makes perfect sense, assuming that 1) Lunar Charms are godbody Charms, and 2) that the body of a god is more than base flesh.

So, a Lunar might transform her mount or familiar not because she has the power to transform things, but because she can transform herself, and her most beloved companion is as much part of her as her arms or heart.
Or, conversely, she might have an iconic steed that she always rides, even when she rides something else (briefly turning any random mule into Sleipnir or Kintou'n).

Think of the vāhana of Hindu deities, which are less separate entities and more attributes and symbols of the riders; Luna riding the Silver-Horned Watcher, if you will.


Oh, I understand how it works. I just don't agree with it.

[#][F] John Mørke - 2/3/2013
BrilliantRain wrote:
And, seriously, who wants to have Lunar Bugs Bunny vs. Elmer Fudd, Wyld Hunter ruled out as options?


Hopefully everyone. lol

[#][F] Holden - 2/3/2013
babyseal wrote:
A few questions which would impact my playgroup:

Will storytellers receive adequate tools to simulate non-Solar characters within the calendar year? (I run a game which spans all exalt types, currently.)
Will there be a conversion guide for bringing a 2.0/2.5 game up to 3.0 mechanics? (assuming Evocation brings a new vision to the previous artifact/sorcery/thaumaturgy systems)
Will SMA be a reasonable mechanical tool for a PC to use, without being relegated to storyteller handwaving?
Will lethality of the system be toned down beyond the need for surprise negator+2/7 filter?
Will there be any system changes which would make it easier for me to challenge my players in combat with non-exalt NPCs?
Will the real-life time it takes to run through a combat be reduced to any extent?
Are you planning to make any significant changes to the 2.0 stat-block for NPCS?
Are problematic Spirit charms due to be revised in form or function? Some seem entirely too useless for the spirit to use (Benefaction), while others are overwhelmingly powerful when activated (Sheating the Material Form, Ride), making it difficult to find an appropriate grade of difficulty for antagonists.
Will ghosts receive any increase of power or influence which would cause Exalts to pay more attention to them?
Will Lunar Bond/Lunar-Solar dynamics be revised in any way?

Thank you(?)


To the point that you can run them as PCs? Not all Exalt types, no.

No. I suggest just re-rolling the characters from scratch and then applying the same amount of XP they already earned in play-- it's what my group did when we went 1e->2e.

Yes.

This question assumes 3e is a modified version of 2e. It is not. A "2/7 filter" is not even a coherent concept in 3e.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Spirits aren't going to get a universal Charm set in 3e, beyond a very few super-common basics like Measure the Wind.

Answer is too complicated to compress down here.

Yes.

[#][F] Holden - 2/3/2013
Asura wrote:
Holden wrote:
Ersatz wrote:

As a long time GW fan I feel I have to butt in here, and say that while they may be somewhat ruthless they are not malevolent as the internet likes to think. The edition changes, while regular, are not usually major and only the most extreme army builds would be need major purchases to bring up to date.
In my experiance, those players who do have very unusual army builds are typically power gamers who abuse rules loopholes and I have no sympathy for them or their wallet.


You gotta admit tho, the whole "note who our best vendors are and put them out of business" thing is pretty nasty. Brilliant, but nasty.


Cursed GW. The only things they talked in 4chan is Spess Mahreen and Whatever Dark gods that is in right now.

Nobody talked about 3rd Edition in 4chan!!
This makes me....grit my teeth.


Given 4chan, that is probably for the best.

[#][F] Holden - 2/3/2013
MorkaisChosen wrote:
Will I be able to play a wizard in the style of Gandalf or Odin out of 3e Core?

That is, not throwing fireballs and chanting mantras - but a mysterious wanderer who solves problems through knowledge exoteric and esoteric, with hidden powers that aren't flashy and incredible, but more quietly amazing?

(Thinking of the Gandalf of the books, who doesn't do a great deal of obvious magic.)

If yes, will later 3e releases make me gleeface more?


Did you have trouble doing that in the past?

Why do you feel like you need the mantle of "sorcerer" if you never really do anything that could be construed as sorcery? Why not just play a guy with tons of Lore and Occult and maybe Investigation?

[#][F] Holden - 2/3/2013
DShomshak wrote:
The Invisible Voice wrote:
Will it be possible to play a god/ghost/demon/fae-blooded exalt?
If so, will it be purely a cosmetic detail?

Appended and related question: Will beastmen, Wyld mutants and engineered races still be capable of Exaltation? (Celestial, Terrestrial, or other!)

Dean Shomshak


Across the two sets of questions: Yes, no, yes.

[#][F] Holden - 2/3/2013
Eldagusto wrote:
Okay I just witnessed another example of someone saying if they change one specific thing about a Gameline then I will never buy their books again.

It doesn't seem like it would work to me. I mean to claim to love a product so much, but to try to tie so much of your consumer leverage to one point seems like it makes your argument shallow. Especially if that change isn't so much a removal but a change of priorities.


Generally, given the kind of person who would toss down an ultimatum like "If you don't do exactly what I want, I am LEAVING FOREVER," when it happens it tends to provoke a reaction of "Dear God, I hope they're serious and will stick to that."

[#][F] Holden - 2/3/2013
Thoth wrote:
Hippokrene wrote:
Um... I think that all the White Wolf (crunch) books I've read have followed that logic.

Not one has been without mechanics for combat or social interaction.


I didn't say they wouldn't have mechanics for combat and social interaction.

I said WW books didn't use a simple core set and that the expansions were not optional.


*glances at the entire nWoD* errrrrrrrrrr

[#][F] Holden - 2/3/2013
Locutus of Autochthon wrote:
Asura wrote:
Isator Levi wrote:
Hippokrene wrote:

I wonder if that 'monster within' is related to Chimeraism.


Holden has said before that chimerism carries the interesting conceit of Lunars being potentially devoured by their own power.


This is just a wild guessing from my part...
but I think chimeraism in 3E is probably already a problem in the first age, instead of the lunar exaltation broke because they are exiled into the wyld...
Because EX3 have Lunar dominion (ergo, they never exiled in the first place anyway)..

Just a guessing though...



Oh man! What if all that Solar mind control that went down in the first age was simply "for the Lunar's own good"? That'll be sick...in a good way.


What Solar mind control?