|
I think it was highest Virtue x4 for Lunars and sum of Virtues for Solars, but until 2.5e rolled around your starting WP was based on your two highest Virtues. So, naturally, you'd bring Conviction to 5 and then your favorite of the other to 5 with bonus points because starting WP read your post-BP rating. i'm so glad 3e chargen is going to resemble this in any way shape or form
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 22:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 01:39 |
|
|
Ferrinus posted:I think it was highest Virtue x4 for Lunars and sum of Virtues for Solars, but until 2.5e rolled around your starting WP was based on your two highest Virtues. So, naturally, you'd bring Conviction to 5 and then your favorite of the other to 5 with bonus points because starting WP read your post-BP rating. i'm so glad 3e chargen is going to resemble this in any way shape or form Well except Virtues were 3 BP and purchasing Willpower directly was 2 BP, and I think it's very arguable that 3 motes to your peripheral essence pool and larger/better virtue channels (on the off chance your Conviction wasn't enough) are worth the constraints having 5 points of Temperance, Valor or Compassion would place on your behavior. And that's before considering what else you could buy with those 3 extra BP. I never really felt like buying high non-Conviction virtues was a very good idea for most characters. LGD fucked around with this message at 22:22 on Jul 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
Based on my exciting field experience of "was actually in several 2E games" I can say that while high conviction was pretty common, and at one point we had a GM who said "OK, house rule, free starting Compassion 2 for everyone - you don't have to go any higher but I have had way too experiences I disliked with people using Compassion 1 as a reason", I can't recall ever seeing the "Obviously I will buy Conviction 5 and WP 10 at chargen because anything else will be suboptimal." Usually people would cheese Valor super high because it was the most readily useful in fights. Indeed it felt like you got so much of this crap slopped onto you that you had the freedom to stat more or less to concept. In our DB game we started to feel some pressure but that was because it was Lookshy based (so people couldn't all "obviously" take breeding 5 or what not) and therefore everyone's magic gear actually cut their available mote pool down to the point of hard choices. Our experience with Solars was that you just piss Essence on the problem and it solves itself. Now I'd say arguably this was a weakness because this just made everything more or less the same, and it's possible our GM was not presenting us with the proper antagonists laden with paranoia combos etc.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
I mean, I can't actually remember if the done thing was to 5 two virtues or just to make your virtues as top-heavy as possible such that you had 5/4/1/1 instead of 3/2/2/2 or whatever. You almost definitely started with maxed willpower, though, if you knew what you were doing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 23:02
|
|
|
The Virtues are all kind of dumb for a variety of reasons. As far as I can see, the primary purpose of Virtues is to push your characters into doing stupid poo poo. There are some mechanical carrots to soften the blow, but they're there to require you to act like a big dumb irrational hero in an area or two instead of just approaching every situation from a purely utilitarian standpoint. Unfortunately, 3/4 of the Virtues aren't very good at this. Conviction is pretty much the "I do what I want to do" Virtue, and is thus kind of hard to produce problems from without actively forcing the situation. Temperance is the Virtue of inaction. It stops you from doing stupid poo poo. Valor is less problematic than the other two, but I've never really seen it come up that much, and I've never seen a player take Valor 3+ who wouldn't eagerly jump into "fight everything" mode without any prompting. Plague of Hats posted:I still hosed up some Theion Charms From a few pages back, but I was just rereading this part of Shards and I'm curious as to what you thought was wrong with it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 00:00
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:I mean, I can't actually remember if the done thing was to 5 two virtues or just to make your virtues as top-heavy as possible such that you had 5/4/1/1 instead of 3/2/2/2 or whatever. You almost definitely started with maxed willpower, though, if you knew what you were doing.  That said I do think you really could pare down mote costs in half and gently caress around with it in a lot fewer ways. I can sort of understand why Virtues slightly expand your essence pool, that sort of has a philosophical undertone to it. However, glopping all this poo poo together doesn't seem like it meets any particular design goal beyond BIG MONEY BIG WHAMMIES. Like, it would be simpler if it were along the lines of "your peripheral pool is 10 + your permanent Essence + one for each virtue you have above 3. Your personal pool is half of that number," and halve costs/etc. accordingly? You could of course, if you must, gently caress with the formula for other splats (DBs might be 5+Essence+#ofvirtuesover3+Breeding, say.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 00:13
|
|
|
Tulul posted:The Virtues are all kind of dumb for a variety of reasons. As far as I can see, the primary purpose of Virtues is to push your characters into doing stupid poo poo. There are some mechanical carrots to soften the blow, but they're there to require you to act like a big dumb irrational hero in an area or two instead of just approaching every situation from a purely utilitarian standpoint. Unfortunately, 3/4 of the Virtues aren't very good at this. Conviction is pretty much the "I do what I want to do" Virtue, and is thus kind of hard to produce problems from without actively forcing the situation. Temperance is the Virtue of inaction. It stops you from doing stupid poo poo. Valor is less problematic than the other two, but I've never really seen it come up that much, and I've never seen a player take Valor 3+ who wouldn't eagerly jump into "fight everything" mode without any prompting. See, I'm of the opposite opinion on Valor vs. Compassion - I think Compassion is the second easiest one to work around. Temperance literally requires you to roll it to tell lies. Compassion just makes it so when you see something that's clearly wrong, you don't just turn away. Valor means you literally cannot back down from anything ever. If you have 3 valor and Malfeas himself showed up and challenged you to a fight while you were essence 2, you would not be able to turn it down unless you failed. Compassion is easy. If you see slaves being abused, it doesn't even mean you have to free them. You just have to lighten their suffering. Walk up to them, give them an inspiring speech, and use a medicine charm to heal their bruises, bam.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
Really, the bottom line is that Virtues are highly comparable to Unnatural Mental Influence if you think about it. Both are equally, amazingly, ridiculously terrible at modeling what they're supposed to cover. I've never seen a more brutal system of mindrape than UMI (seriously, you can't even call it anything else, Stepford Wives has nothing on UMI), and in the same way I've never seen a system that made you fail harder at being a properly assholish mythical hero than Virtues. It's uncanny how they do precisely the opposite of what they should be doing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 05:27
|
|
|
I'd consider a houserule for 3e where: 1. You only get Willpower for 3-die stunts, the best of the best. 2. You write two Virtues on your character sheet. I'd make a list but encourage people to work with their STs to make up their own. 3. Write a Vice on your character sheet. I'd make a list, let people make their own, and encourage them to talk with everyone to ensure the Vice is okay with everyone at the table. Then, whenever you totally exemplify your virtue or vice, gain a willpower and gain an automatic success on the action involved. You can't keep exemplifying the virtue by doing the same thing in the same scene.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 06:50
|
|
|
If we're writing down custom things on our sheets and gaining bonuses from playing along with them, I'd honestly just go for the throat and import Aspects to Exalted. No reason to go with something lesser when you can have the best possible mechanic I feel.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 07:01
|
|
|
I think Intimacies are in a pretty good place for that kind of stuff. There are actually quite a few charms that reference them directly (for instance, a basic Brawl charm lets you ignore Essence + Intimacy (2, 3, or 4) soak), and Intimacies also drive your willpower regain the way Nature and Motivation used to.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 07:22
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:I think Intimacies are in a pretty good place for that kind of stuff. There are actually quite a few charms that reference them directly (for instance, a basic Brawl charm lets you ignore Essence + Intimacy (2, 3, or 4) soak), and Intimacies also drive your willpower regain the way Nature and Motivation used to. Yeah, that's a good point, especially now that you have Principles as intimacies. It probably wouldn't be that hard to make a classical virtue of your choice work as a Principle.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 07:53
|
|
|
Huh. I rarely saw Conviction maxed out, really. Usually Valor. Me, I went with high compassion. Saw way too many people leave it at 1, which was always annoying.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 14:58
|
|
|
Kerzoro posted:Huh. I rarely saw Conviction maxed out, really. Usually Valor. Conviction was the virtue of choice due to it's flaw of invulnerability, that basically only happened when the ST really, REALLY forced you into a weird situation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 15:48
|
|
|
Conviction also directly contributes to your Willpower gain, so I had to boost it up a few times to keep my Sorceress at the highest Willpower so I could nuke everything.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 15:57
|
|
|
So, the final opinion on those leaked things is that like normal Exalted its got some good, bad, and ugly stuff? Also, virtues are totally gone right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 20:25
|
|
|
No virtues at all, yeah. Intimacies do all the "this is what my guy is like" work in the system.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 20:33
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:No virtues at all, yeah. Intimacies do all the "this is what my guy is like" work in the system. I always did like risking virtues Hunter: the Reckoning style but they really were pretty unnecessary and another mechanical complication. I hope they do a better job with intimacies than 2e.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
Mexcillent posted:So, the final opinion on those leaked things is that like normal Exalted its got some good, bad, and ugly stuff? It looks like it'll have better core mechanics than 1e and 2e, which is really the most I can reasonably ask for.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 22:30
|
|
|
RiotGearEpsilon posted:It looks like it'll have better core mechanics than 1e and 2e, which is really the most I can reasonably ask for.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 23:08
|
|
|
Nessus posted:The irritating thing to me is that I would have totally yielded up the same sum of KS money I did before, for "We're doing a system better than 1E and 2E, with some expanded fluff and new ideas!" I am totally OK with this being an iterative improvement rather than some kind of revolutionary thing in which John Hatewheel makes me his she-wolf-goat. I mean, did you expect something different? I'm glad to hear the momentum system seems good. I hate the crafting system but I hate crafting systems and am pissed at the fact that magitech seems to still be around. That simulacrum charm is both charming and something that I dislike.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 00:12
|
|
|
Nessus posted:The irritating thing to me is that I would have totally yielded up the same sum of KS money I did before, for "We're doing a system better than 1E and 2E, with some expanded fluff and new ideas!" I am totally OK with this being an iterative improvement rather than some kind of revolutionary thing in which John Hatewheel makes me his she-wolf-goat. To be fair, that was exactly my expectation from the get go, the low, low target to get a better system than 2nd Edition. Which certainly helps my mood to be calm and patient, while waiting for them to finish Ex3. Judging from the leaked playtest, for my group and playstyle, they are right on target. It's not that every charm is good or exciting, there are several bad/boring charms from my POV, but the combat system seems to be really interesting (sadly had no time to test it yet). For the people who have read the playtest, where do you perceive problems in the charm set? What a player of mine is concerned about is the difference between Brawl and Melee, with Melee having easy access to Counterattack and Multiattack charms, Melee being cheaper from the mote cost (cannot judge if that is true) and having such powerful charms as Hungry Tiger Technique (yes I told him it was a playtest document). What is your opinion about this? Already found some charm(trees)s to be too powerful in respect to other abilities/charms?
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 00:20
|
|
|
Mexcillent posted:I mean, did you expect something different?
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 00:52
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Not really, but I'm still irritated at all this coyness and secrecy as well as the usual and previously-discussed scandals. I mostly just am sad that Holden's awful politics are so deeply entwined with the setting. But I guess that's just how it goes, lovely dudes get to write games.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 00:53
|
|
|
LC1984 posted:To be fair, that was exactly my expectation from the get go, the low, low target to get a better system than 2nd Edition. Which certainly helps my mood to be calm and patient, while waiting for them to finish Ex3. Judging from the leaked playtest, for my group and playstyle, they are right on target. Melee and Brawl work very differently, really. Brawl is focused on canceling attacks with attacks, whereas Melee is all about playing initiative games with the opponent and making success breed success. Brawl also has more emphasis on advanced setups and huge payoffs than Melee, as seen in how Crashing Wave Throw can let you add something stupid like 14 dice to a decisive throw, turning practically any attack into a lethal one-shot, or how Falling Hammer Strike being sustained long enough means you just plain loving lose. Its defensive charms are slightly worse, but only just, because they have hilariously mean Clash Attack setups. They're pretty balanced overall.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 01:01
|
|
|
Transient People posted:Melee and Brawl work very differently, really. Brawl is focused on canceling attacks with attacks, whereas Melee is all about playing initiative games with the opponent and making success breed success. Brawl also has more emphasis on advanced setups and huge payoffs than Melee, as seen in how Crashing Wave Throw can let you add something stupid like 14 dice to a decisive throw, turning practically any attack into a lethal one-shot, or how Falling Hammer Strike being sustained long enough means you just plain loving lose. Its defensive charms are slightly worse, but only just, because they have hilariously mean Clash Attack setups. They're pretty balanced overall. Thanks for the explanation. That is helpful to know, my char idea is looking quite good now (Brawl, Resistance, Survival, Athletics, maybe Stealth and/or Occult, mean familiar tagteam), on the other side, won't try to convince my player, for him the grass is always greener on the other side, in this case abilities he does not like. drat, I really want them to finish the game now. Haven't played Exalted for two years, really looking forward to it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 01:40
|
|
|
I wouldn't recommend Resistance as something to focus on as a Brawler, if at all possible. It's kind of pretty lovely at the moment because literally every charm except like three has some sort of stupid catch or another. If there's a charm tree that is truly underpowered while also not being heavily incomplete, Resistance is it, because it really wants you to make it Supernal or start at Essence 3 for Ruin-Abasing Shrug (AKA, the only straight up good charm in a large portion of the tree). Dodge has a lot of 'tanky man' effects, so I'd go for that as a stopgap until it's fixed. Melee doesn't have a problem going without a secondary defensive ability but Brawl really appreciates the extra help from Dodge.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 01:58
|
|
|
I wanted to get Resistance mainly for the Ox-Body charms in combination with the Stealth charm "Shadow Replacement Technique". Or if it is only one enemy, grapple attack and then let the familiars pound on him. But what you say is true, I'm not so sure about the defensive abilities of this character, maybe will look into Dodge (or hope that Resistance gets better)  .
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 13:10
|
|
|
Mexcillent posted:I mostly just am sad that Holden's awful politics are so deeply entwined with the setting. But I guess that's just how it goes, lovely dudes get to write games. How so? I'm not even sure what Holden's politics are.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
Silver2195 posted:How so? I'm not even sure what Holden's politics are. I think WW has had some wacko paleo-libertarians in their writing, some may even have been in Exalted - or be in Exalted now. I just don't think Holden is one.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 17:55
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Honestly from what I know it seems like he is a well meaning left of center guy and I am willing to ascribe White-Wolf-writer screeds such as his "on barbarism" article as being clumsily aimed at the literary portrayal of such concepts rather than "the celebration of the Noble Sauvage." I can certainly understand why others may be less charitable. But he doesn't seem to be calling for the abolition of fiat money and taxing all foreigners living abroad, either. Holden pretty much wants to portray fantasy societies inspired by e.g. the Triple Alliance, the Gauls, or sub-Saharan Africa circa the Belgian Congo as vital and complex (if often under threat from central Imperial powers), but wants to be able to call them barbarians because that's the bin gamers are used to thinking of them occupying, largely due to years of D&D books writing up societies inspired by the Triple Alliance, the Gauls, or sub-Saharan Africa circa etc. as "Good places for your character to be from if you want to play a member of the barbarian character class." This isn't new to Holden -- the 1e Making of Exalted book opened its section on Lunars with "You just can't beat belligerent shapeshifting barbarians." 3e intends to make those areas of the map much more interesting in their own right this time around, and less just good recruiting grounds for when your Lunar wants to raise a horde to toss at the local Realm garrison. I'm never sure whether Mexcillent has a problem with the word barbarian in particular, or whether he takes issue with taking inspiration from the Triple Alliance (still a living people, albeit with much changed circumstance) in the same manner as one might take inspiration from the Gauls circa Julius Caesar or the Mongols circa Ghengis Khan. (EDIT: Or maybe it's a sort of intersectional thing where it's okay to have a fantasy society inspired by the Gauls and call it a barbarian society because a. there are no more Gauls and b. the Gauls were the historical group called "barbarians" by the Romans, but it's not okay to have a fantasy society inspired by the Inka and call it a barbarian society because IRL there are people descended from the Inka who are being spit on and denied jobs on the basis that the people doing the spitting and job-denying see them as "barbarians.") I can't really fault this topic coming up, though, because the last time it did, it resulted in me reading 1491 and then me forcing Minton to read 1491, and Minton's the dude writing our setting chapter. I'm not sure what awfulness Mexcillent expects to see show up in there, but I doubt it will. Stephenls fucked around with this message at 18:59 on Jul 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 18:05
|
|
|
Stephenls posted:I'm never sure whether Mexcillent has a problem with the word barbarian in particular, I think that using the word barbarian when referring to cultures that didn't have the same values and institutions that anglo/roman cultures did is offensive and racist, and it makes me a little upset, yeah. It's on par with Tony Abbot talking about how Australia was "completely uncivilized or settled" before white people showed up. Edit: I also think there's a difference between pointing out that a SOCIETY views people are babarians (say, Rome seeing the Gauls as such) but saying that in the setting overall, they are 'the barbarians' is really bad. Because yeah, you can portray prejudices in the setting, make the Realm think threshold states are lowly barbarian kingdoms, but don't make it the 'trait' for the whole society. KittyEmpress fucked around with this message at 19:17 on Jul 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 19:07
|
|
|
Minton and I are talking about this via AIM right now, BTW. There's a conflict here between stuff we want to do because it's nigh-omnipresent in the source material and stuff we don't want to do because we don't want to be culturally insensitive dicks. I think the solution we are enacting, which is the solution we had already settled on, is the acknowledgement that the word "barbarian" is really not accurate, and is largely used by the Realm and urban Threshold civilization as a catch-all term for a variety of Creation's cultures and civilizations that are easily as diverse among themselves as they are different from Realm-influenced society, but which Realm-influenced society finds it easiest to engage with via caricature and dismissal. (And attempts at economic exploitation which are not always successful.) This is not the only intractable problem we have found ourselves with in this arena. Take beastfolk -- we've got a setting with beastfolk, and it's established that a) Realm and central Threshold society doesn't treat them as fully human and b) this is a failure of ethics and empathy on the part of Realm and central Threshold society because they are fully human. The solution was "Write at least one cool, complex beastfolk society that shows rather than tells that they're not the mindless half-animal degenerates central Creation prejudice likes to paint them as." But you can't have a generic interesting society, because the interesting comes from the specific, so we've got to take actual inspiration -- "What about the Empire of the Feathered Serpent, a society of snakefolk and raitonfolk who've formed an alliance out in the far Threshold and are busy expanding and conquering neighboring states to support the heights of their own civilization and art and architecture?" Sure, sounds cool! But then it's written and it's, first, a cool bit of setting, and second... still a bunch of white people telling a parable of racial oppression using animal-people as stand-ins for marginalized ethnicities. Facepalm. So... what then? Cut it? It's on the map and the fans are already excited to read about it and everything! Just remove the bits where they're snakefolk and raitonfolk and make them baseline humans? That would actually require a substantial rewrite, and would then leave us with the still-extant problem that we need to do something with the beastfolk. Maybe remove beastfolk entirely because the concept is fun on the surface but becomes intrinsically offensive if you dig into it to any substantial depth? Past a certain point, you hit "The noblest fiction is a fetish, the loftiest fictitious sentiment is depraved." So we're going to try muddling forward and continuing to be as un-hurtful as we can while trying to make stuff we like. Stephenls fucked around with this message at 19:41 on Jul 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 19:35
|
|
|
I think the, honestly, easiest way to make that nation less horrible is to make it not be racially oppressive - conquered humans are forced into a new society where a lot of beastmen are not only there, but their equals, and that causes the tension that the setting needs. Put in stuff about how recently conquered areas have a lot of human vs. beastmen violence, and vice versa, but point out that in general, human, snakeman, or rationperson, all of them can do poo poo like hold office, all of them can do poo poo like run stores. They're 'equal'. You can easily have a society that isn't purely positive, without making the government itself horribly oppressive. Or maybe you do. Maybe one of the plothooks is that a minor town in the country has two mayors (or whatever) who are competing for an office after a Totally Legit Death of a mayor who was pro-equality, with one being a beastman who believes humans are weaker and thus lesser, and another who runs on a humans first campaign. Note that it's not the first thing of that kind to happen, note that it has inspired some violence inside the country. Talk about how there's secret societies of XRACEFIRST members, who make public declarations just within the laws about their racist views. Go on marches through the largest city spouting about how scales make... fails... okay yeah come up with better rhymes than that. I think a large issue I have with exalted on a whole and the settings within it, is that the various nations all have problems. That's okay. That's fine, even good. However, all of the problems should not be due to the government. I'm not sure if that's how it will be in 3e, but in 2e I can't think of a single society where the issue wasn't at the top of the totem pole. edit: basically, make it a society of racial tensions, but not outright oppression, if you want to give people the impression that no, beastmen aren't all horrible, and they can totally be fine with normal humans if given the chance, without making it idyllic. KittyEmpress fucked around with this message at 20:08 on Jul 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 20:00
|
|
|
Fun fact, barbarian is a term that came from Greek's view that they are the best and anyone who is not Greek is a Barbarian. The fun part of this fact is that the word came from a mocking impression of non-Greek languages all sounding like "Bar-bar bar-bar-ba-bar bar bar-bar?" to the Greeks and while it is cool to have the Realm be much the same I think having them view a few cultures as barbarian rather than a vast number of them will make a bigger impact and more sense (you don't bad talk major trade partners, only the people you exploit with force). Sharkrace is the master race however.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 20:17
|
|
|
The Empire of the Feathered Serpent has proscribed social roles based on race -- snakefolk are expected to be military while raitonfolk are expected to be scholastic. To the extent there's racial violence, it's directed at individuals who don't want to fit into that mold. (Also, god help you if you've got both snake and raiton traits, because that means your parents engaged in a forbidden tryst and now you're ritually unclean. At least you weren't strangled at birth to cover up your parents' crime, though.) You don't generally see snake-on-raiton or raiton-on-snake violence so much as you see everyone-on-anyone-who-wants-to-escape-categorization violence. The thing I am actually worried about is the prospect of a person of color who wants to play a member of a Nahuatl-inspired civilization and who reads the book and goes "Wait, these guys are animal-people? I've been called an animal all my life by white folk, now a fantasy RPG by white folk says if I want to play a badass Aztek warrior I have to be an actual animal-person? gently caress this poo poo!" But, uh... as I said a moment ago, the solutions to this problem are themselves problems.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 20:18
|
|
|
You could make the Feathered Serpent empire populated chiefly by humans, and instead put beastmen into one of the more typically generic "civilized" cultures. Lookshy, fortress of the hedgehog-men.Transient People posted:I wouldn't recommend Resistance as something to focus on as a Brawler, if at all possible. It's kind of pretty lovely at the moment because literally every charm except like three has some sort of stupid catch or another. If there's a charm tree that is truly underpowered while also not being heavily incomplete, Resistance is it, because it really wants you to make it Supernal or start at Essence 3 for Ruin-Abasing Shrug (AKA, the only straight up good charm in a large portion of the tree). Dodge has a lot of 'tanky man' effects, so I'd go for that as a stopgap until it's fixed. Melee doesn't have a problem going without a secondary defensive ability but Brawl really appreciates the extra help from Dodge. What does making something a Supernal ability require/entail? I missed that part.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:What does making something a Supernal ability require/entail? I missed that part. AFAIK, it's "pick one Ability, ignore Essence requirements for its charms". You can buy all the way up to its Ess5 stuff at Ess1 if you feel like investing that heavily, so long as you meet the Ability requirements. All Solars get to pick one of their Caste/Favored Abilities as Supernal.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
Thesaurasaurus posted:AFAIK, it's "pick one Ability, ignore Essence requirements for its charms". You can buy all the way up to its Ess5 stuff at Ess1 if you feel like investing that heavily, so long as you meet the Ability requirements. All Solars get to pick one of their Caste/Favored Abilities as Supernal.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 21:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 01:39 |
|
|
quote:The thing I am actually worried about is the prospect of a person of color who wants to play a member of a Nahuatl-inspired civilization and who reads the book and goes "Wait, these guys are animal-people? I've been called an animal all my life by white folk, now a fantasy RPG by white folk says if I want to play a badass Aztek warrior I have to be an actual animal-person? gently caress this poo poo!" But, uh... as I said a moment ago, the solutions to this problem are themselves problems. This is a large part of the problem, yeah. You're defining The Realm as the 'normal'/human area, which is to say inspired by civilizations that called other people savage barbarians, and then defining the other as people who are actually not fully human. And also inspired by civilizations and cultures that have historically been denigrated for not being fully human. You could flip it around - Ferrinus's suggestion was a pretty good one - but you won't, so you may as well just own it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 22:04
|
|
