All Posts

[#][F] John Mørke - 3/21/2013
ZexionAlmasy wrote:
If it is truly returning to 1E, then I guess Lunars need to use Fair Folk social charms while on a diet. Those were always weird.


emotion-1.gif Well, the thing is...

[#][F] John Mørke - 3/21/2013
Using scents to attract people = awesome.

Animalpalooza = silly.

There's no mythical resonance in most animals. While they can gain advantages from shapeshifting, Lunars are not going to be the animal Exalted.

I won't write a Charm called Hermit Crab Finds a Shelter that lets you wear any object you can fit inside and treat it as a house. I will write a Charm that lets you work someone with pheromones because that's resonant of more than just an animalperson and can be taken as a ground floor association rather than an apex piece of the design.


[#][F] John Mørke - 3/21/2013
Eternal_King wrote:
Quote:
It just means that some things, like the success of your adjutants, is out of your hands after a certain point, and your Charms can only get them so far.


So. I'm the Solar king.

How do my adjutants/minions/people fare?

What are the rules for that?


There aren't any.

Think about it: Exalted is about playing an Exalt. If you don't want to actually roll out what your subordinates are doing because it would detract away from playing your Exalt, I'm not going to make a system to abstract doing exactly that. No abstraction would make sense or have any bearing on your character.

Your character can influence, inspire, and unite people. He can educate them, arm them, and inspire them. We have written rules to reflect these things in the corebook. But there isn't actually a roll to decide whether they succeed or fail because no such roll would make sense and no such system would be calibrated to the actual rate of progress an Exalt should be able to push.

There are very real reasons wars are lost, projects fail or succeed, etc., and these instances can be recreated in Exalted and exploited by your Charms, and that is what I am out to reveal in EX3.

[#][F] John Mørke - 3/21/2013
Eternal_King wrote:
Quote:
It just means that some things, like the success of your adjutants, is out of your hands after a certain point, and your Charms can only get them so far.


So. I'm the Solar king.

How do my adjutants/minions/people fare?

What are the rules for that?


There aren't any.

Think about it: Exalted is about playing an Exalt. If you don't want to actually roll out what your subordinates are doing because it would detract away from playing your Exalt, I'm not going to make a system to abstract doing exactly that. No abstraction would make sense or have any bearing on your character.

Your character can influence, inspire, and unite people. He can educate them, arm them, and train them for battle. We have written rules to reflect these things in the corebook. But there isn't actually a roll to decide whether they succeed or fail because no such roll would make sense and no such system would be calibrated to the actual rate of progress an Exalt should be able to push.

There are very real reasons wars are lost, projects fail or succeed, etc., and these instances can be recreated in Exalted and exploited by your Charms, and that is what I am out to reveal in EX3.

[#][F] Eric Minton - 3/21/2013
Huh, Avoidance Kata's mechanics changed significantly between 1e and 2e.

[#][F] Eric Minton - 3/21/2013
Let's not forget the breeding process for fishmen!

[#][F] Eric Minton - 3/21/2013
No, it makes them a superliminal. bluh.

[#][F] Holden - 3/21/2013
Or, for complete candor on Dame Crimson, and with credit to Jo Fletcher:

The storm's amuck,
The lightning's struck,
The doc's in luck—
Oh, Frankenstein!

The lever's yanked,
The dials cranked,
The power's banked
By Frankenstein.

Now watch him rise
And blink his eyes—
The monster's size
Dwarfs Frankenstein.

His doubts assuaged,
The Monster's made—
Now be afraid,
Dear Frankenstein.

For what's created
Can't be sedated
And hope's outdated—
Dear Frankenstein.

[#][F] Holden - 3/21/2013
Where do the Chernozem come from? Hm.

In the first days
of the spring time
made you a prince with a thousand enemies.
Made a trail of
a thousand tears
made you prisoner inside your own frequency.

There's a ghost in me
who wants to say "I'm sorry."
Doesn't mean I'm sorry.

[#][F] Holden - 3/21/2013
Limited Reagent wrote:
Irked wrote:
Limited Reagent wrote:
CRM was pretty narratively-based. That is, a lot of the way you decide to use the system is directly based on the actions you want to take in the game world. So, if this new systems is anything like that, and bureaucratically-related Charms are easy to understand how the empower the character, then there shouldn't be problem in determining how a given Charm interacts with the CRM-like system.

Hm. I had kind of the opposite takeaway from 2e's implementation of the CRM - it was a neat system, and you could see where one could write Charms to make tasks easier, but most of the existing Bureaucracy Charms didn't obviously interact with it in any meaningful way.
Yeah, but I think that was a problem with the way the 2e Bureaucracy Charms were written. They were basically "things happens because." They didn't obviously interact with anything. You need that second point of mine --- bureaucratically-related Charms being easy to understand how the Exalted is accomplishing them --- for the scale-up to work.


Here's the basic problem we realized exists within the CRM, after TDO did an amazing job of streamlining the system:

It's not an RPG. We looked at all the rest of the rules and realized that it was dissonant, it was doing something different. When the CRM came out, you basically stopped RPing and played a sim game for a while, then went back to RPing.

That seems really obvious in hindsight but yeah.

That's not a condemnation of the CRM-- as bureaucratic warfare sims go I think it's extremely robust and neat-- but it required as much mental effort to grasp and use the system as it did our entire core rules engine + combat engine + associated paraphernalia. And this was because it was basically a separate game inside our game.

John decided, and I agree, that that's not an appropriate corebook feature, and that Exalted should focus on roleplaying and probably try to avoid any big complex non-roleplaying minigames as part of its fundamental structure.

This is not to say that for some (many?) groups, stopping mid-RP to play a sim game that impacts on the RP wouldn't be fun, and I wouldn't be surprised to see the CRM pop up later as an optional add-in. But we felt it was a mistake to force all groups to have to approach and master the CRM just because Bob took some dots of Bureaucracy.

In 2e, it was a lot easier to see the CRM as a coherent part of the whole design, because the game zoomed out to that macro view a lot more often, with the Mass Combat system and the Mass Social Combat system. But in 3e there is no Mass Social system, and no "Mass Combat system" either-- mass combat is the camera affixed to your character's shoulder as his might shapes the course of huge battles, rather than a dedicated sim-warfare engine. In 3e, the rest of the game never leaves that micro, RP-centric view for more than a brief dice roll or so.

With two macro systems already established, it seemed natural for 2e to have a third. With no other macro systems in place, it became clear that CRM wasn't core material for EX3. Thus its removal for now.

[#][F] John Mørke - 3/21/2013
Whitewall? I like the sound of that.

I am poking around the chat now. It seems nice. (waves to the java mods.) :D

[#][F] John Mørke - 3/20/2013
gattsuru wrote:
But I don't think you get be going for a kid-in-candy-store feel and cut down everything else down to that degree.


Your point is unclear.

Are you worried that we're going to cut Charm sets down?

[#][F] Stephen Lea Sheppard - 3/20/2013
I would say "A competent intelligence network, presumably including contacts in the sorcerous community of the Realm, who collectively fed information to her about things summoned demons have been saying recently, which she successfully pieced together into an accurate picture which would not have been obvious based on any one demon's commentary."

But I like things that occur out-of-play to behave according to sensible cause-and-effect, even if this results in events being kind of less dramatically interesting than stuff you'd read about in an adventure story. No prophetic dream, no Yozi mind control, just the result of a successful politician's sensible political preparation measures.

[#][F] Holden - 3/20/2013
gattsuru wrote:
John Mørke wrote:
1: Mechanics are not separate from design.

Absolutely true. But they are separate from presentation, even if player viewpoints on mechanics are influenced by presentation.


They're absolutely not, not even the tiniest bit. For a good example of rules and presentation crashing into eachother head-first resulting in a double KO, see 1e Fair Folk. That set actually works fine for what it was intended to do, but good luck untangling it to see how it does so.

Quote:
If you're saying that the Lunars have had a great design, including mechanics, I'm saying that Lunars have a number of issues with their designs, including mechanics.

Quote:
But the 2e core established that nothing could exist without the rules and then proceeded to overfunction, so that nothing natural or original could ever occur.

Agreed, and I've sparred with Chung a couple times on that (Deathlord immortality, I think).

Quote:
This is not a statement about what Lunars can or can't do in EX3, but rather that rejection of a premise based on the idea of tiers is faulty, whether it be "Lunars should be able to do X as well or better than a Solar" from a Lunar fan, or "Lunars (or anyone else) should not be able to do X as well or better than a Solar."

You know the internals of the 3E work better than I do or can, obviously, but even if we completely negate the whole tier concept, I assume Charms and such are going to exist. If you took 1E or 2E's design, equalized XP and mote and ability and essence costs for every similar Charm, you'd still get a very funny game design. There are things that Solars -- and Sidereals, and Alchemicals, and Raksha, and Infernals -- have charms to do, that don't have equivalents in other splats. For Lunars, the charm writer tried to build Knacks to do that, and he did as good a job possible given the source material, but transforming into a monster and then hitting someone with a daiklaive really doesn't look that different in the way that StSL does, or that Shaping Combat or removing 'un' from 'unfooable' does, or that switching up charm loadouts from social-fu to combat monster does, or that buying your way through the Cecelyne tree does. Raksha aren't more powerful than Solars at a thing -- IPP is still a "screw you" to Shaping Combat, and getting hit with CocT shows the difference between a true perfect and a mere "remove un from unfooable" -- but at both a mechanical and flavor level it's distinct.

((The snippets of Social Charms suggest some spaces for horizontal differentiation, which is encouraging.))


This isn't really a discussion about mechanics and so I am not sure why you keep bringing things back there. All a Charmset (and associated proprietary splat mechanics) has to do to function is to be interesting, subject-appropriate, and fun. It's one of the harder design elements to execute well, but not actually a subject of great philosophical depth in terms of objectives.

[#][F] John Mørke - 3/20/2013
gattsuru wrote:
John Mørke wrote:
1: Mechanics are not separate from design.

Absolutely true. But they are separate from presentation, even if player viewpoints on mechanics are influenced by presentation. If you're saying that the Lunars have had a great design, including mechanics, I'm saying that Lunars have a number of issues with their designs, including mechanics.
Quote:
But the 2e core established that nothing could exist without the rules and then proceeded to overfunction, so that nothing natural or original could ever occur.

Agreed, and I've sparred with Chung a couple times on that (Deathlord immortality, I think).

Quote:
This is not a statement about what Lunars can or can't do in EX3, but rather that rejection of a premise based on the idea of tiers is faulty, whether it be "Lunars should be able to do X as well or better than a Solar" from a Lunar fan, or "Lunars (or anyone else) should not be able to do X as well or better than a Solar."

You know the internals of the 3E work better than I do or can, obviously, but even if we completely negate the whole tier concept, I assume Charms and such are going to exist. If you took 1E or 2E's design, equalized XP and mote and ability and essence costs for every similar Charm, you'd still get a very funny game design. There are things that Solars -- and Sidereals, and Alchemicals, and Raksha, and Infernals -- have charms to do, that don't have equivalents in other splats. For Lunars, the charm writer tried to build Knacks to do that, and he did as good a job possible given the source material, but transforming into a monster and then hitting someone with a daiklaive really doesn't look that different in the way that StSL does, or that Shaping Combat or removing 'un' from 'unfooable' does, or that switching up charm loadouts from social-fu to combat monster does, or that buying your way through the Cecelyne tree does. Raksha aren't more powerful than Solars at a thing -- IPP is still a "screw you" to Shaping Combat, and getting hit with CocT shows the difference between a true perfect and a mere "remove un from unfooable" -- but at both a mechanical and flavor level it's distinct.

((The snippets of Social Charms suggest some spaces for horizontal differentiation, which is encouraging.))



World of Warcraft made it a lot easier to sit down and play a game where you could lose yourself in fantasy, and set a bar, especially for us in the text hobby industry.

If our game requires more struggling through the rules than it provides an enjoyable gameplay experience, we will lose customers based purely on the fact that there are easier outlets for a good time if you have money.

So why god why would I make a game's rules balance to the function of a fucking mechanical system's boundaries? The idea is not to compete with that bar by making the game more like an MMORPG, complete with catering to the attitudes of people who want it to be more and more like that, but making it a game that is different from an MMORPG, in that it makes you want to get out of the house, meet up with friends, sit around a table with drinks and dice and music and have a genuinely good time, a fantasy time that is away from the droning haze of a PC monitor, away from the problems of life. A game where the rules don't choke the fucking life out of the game and consulting the corebook isn't fully half the game. A game where the system bits don't take obnoxiously long to resolve. This is what overmechanization gets us; a game that cannot resolve as quickly as an MMORPG but caters to the same desires and thought-space from a gaming crowd that really ought to stick with MMORPGs, because playing parallel to a bunch of other players and also demanding balance against them because you will only ever interact with them in PVP is not what Exalted is about.