Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Mors Rattus
Oct 25, 2007

FATAL & Friends
Walls of Text
#1 Builder
2014-2018

Works with a thrown knife or an arrow, though, both of which use Athletics. (Archery via Athletics is, IIRC, one of the major differences between normal CofD and Dark Eras.)

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Kibner
Oct 21, 2008

Acguy Supremacy

Mors Rattus posted:

Works with a thrown knife or an arrow, though, both of which use Athletics. (Archery via Athletics is, IIRC, one of the major differences between normal CofD and Dark Eras.)

I guess the RP reason would be enchanting the projectile with the spell as it's being propelled?

Doodmons
Jan 17, 2009

Kibner posted:

I guess the RP reason would be enchanting the projectile with the spell as it's being propelled?

Not necessarily. You're using the action of throwing a knife/drawing an arrow as a mystic template for the spell. Theoretically you could use a Forces spell to heat up your coffee in the morning and chokeslam your roommate through a table for the Yantra - but that would probably get you frowned at by the other Arrows.

Mors Rattus
Oct 25, 2007

FATAL & Friends
Walls of Text
#1 Builder
2014-2018

Well, the main thing is you can't do that one because heating up your coffee has no symbolic link with chokeslamming someone. A Yantra still has to have a symbolic link tot he spell you're using it for. So, what spells does the act of throwing a knife at someone have symbolic resonance with?

Kurieg
Jul 19, 2012

RIP Lutri: 5/19/20-4/2/20
:blizz::gamefreak:
If I stone cold stunner someone through the table instead could I then cool my drink?

hangedman1984
Jul 25, 2012

Mors Rattus posted:

Well, the main thing is you can't do that one because heating up your coffee has no symbolic link with chokeslamming someone. A Yantra still has to have a symbolic link tot he spell you're using it for. So, what spells does the act of throwing a knife at someone have symbolic resonance with?

So to heat up my coffee I'd have to set my roommate on fire.

Ferrinus
Jun 19, 2003

i'm finding this quite easy, i guess in part because i'm a fast type but also because i have a coherent mental model of the world
Are you folks SURE Adamant Hand lets you cast a spell as a reflexive action that isn't normally a reflexive action? Because I'm not. As far as I can tell, what Adamant Hand does is let you, on a spell on which you're going to use two yantras rather than one, do it like this:

Turn 1: Attack
Turn 2: Then perform a rote mudra, cast with a big bonus

...rather than this:

Turn 1: Chant or wave your wand around or whatever
Turn 2: Then perform a rote mudra, cast with a big bonus

It's a bit weird that it doesn't allow use of firearms. It's not like the Arrow formally disdains guns or something.

Ferrinus fucked around with this message at 19:59 on May 23, 2016

Mors Rattus
Oct 25, 2007

FATAL & Friends
Walls of Text
#1 Builder
2014-2018

Ferrinus posted:

Are you folks SURE Adamant Hand lets you cast a spell as a reflexive action that isn't normally a reflexive action? Because I'm not. As far as I can tell, what Adamant Hand does is let you, on a spell on which you're going to use two yantras rather than one, do it like this:

Turn 1: Attack
Turn 2: Then perform a rote mudra, cast with a big bonus

...rather than this:

Turn 1: Chant or wave your wand around or whatever
Turn 2: Then perform a rote mudra, cast with a big bonus

It's a bit weird that it doesn't allow use of firearms. It's not like the Arrow formally disdains guns or something.

Yantra rules - the first Yantra use is allowed to be on the same turn as casting, every additional Yantra adds one full turn. The Adamant Hand rules explicitly note this with their 'reflexive cast' bit, though they seem to imply that you don't get the Yantra bonus if you take reflexive use of Adamant Hand. This is, however, how all Yantras work, except High Speech which specifically notes that it always takes a full extra turn, even if it's your first Yantra.

Ferrinus
Jun 19, 2003

i'm finding this quite easy, i guess in part because i'm a fast type but also because i have a coherent mental model of the world

Mors Rattus posted:

Yantra rules - the first Yantra use is allowed to be on the same turn as casting, every additional Yantra adds one full turn. The Adamant Hand rules explicitly note this with their 'reflexive cast' bit, though they seem to imply that you don't get the Yantra bonus if you take reflexive use of Adamant Hand. This is, however, how all Yantras work, except High Speech which specifically notes that it always takes a full extra turn, even if it's your first Yantra.

Yes, you can use the first Yantra reflexively. Yantras don't change the action actually required to cast a spell. Conceivably Adamant Hand is supposed to let you attack as a reflexive action, but it definitely doesn't let you cast Celestial Fire or Enervation or something as a reflexive action.

Mors Rattus
Oct 25, 2007

FATAL & Friends
Walls of Text
#1 Builder
2014-2018

Ferrinus posted:

Yes, you can use the first Yantra reflexively. Yantras don't change the action actually required to cast a spell. Conceivably Adamant Hand is supposed to let you attack as a reflexive action, but it definitely doesn't let you cast Celestial Fire or Enervation or something as a reflexive action.

It's the only way I can read the merit that makes any sense at all, so it's the reading I'm sticking with.

quote:

This Merit allows use of that
Skill in combat as a reflexive Order tool Yantra, adding dice
to a spell cast on subsequent turns, or to a spell cast reflexively
in the same turn as the combat action. You may purchase this
Merit multiple times to reflect the other styles.

Like, if this text doesn't mean 'you can attack/dodge and also cast a spell as the same action' then I don't know how to read it.

Ferrinus
Jun 19, 2003

i'm finding this quite easy, i guess in part because i'm a fast type but also because i have a coherent mental model of the world

Mors Rattus posted:

It's the only way I can read the merit that makes any sense at all, so it's the reading I'm sticking with.

The Merit makes perfect sense as written and has absolutely no language indicating that instant spells become reflexive spells. In fact, it tells you that instant spells have to be cast after the attack, while reflexive spells can be cast on the same turn.

"Reflexive yantra" is a yantra you can draw on as a reflexive action, but drawing on a yantra just means, like... thinking about it and using the inherent mnemonic device to add dice to an upcoming spellcasting roll. For instance, you could drawn on a "standing in a beam of moonlight" yantra as a reflexive action even as an unschooled apostate. If you're an Arrow, you can reflexively draw on a "just punched my enemy in the face" yantra, rather than spending your next turn aligning your Imago with the act's symbolic significance and therefore taking an effective three turns to throw a spell in combat.

plaintiff
May 15, 2015

kaynorr posted:

Getting the basics that any cabal needs/wants can fill a few sessions and can serve as an excellent tutorial into just how much mages can skip over material needs/wants and go directly to summoning unlimited numbers of shotguns. The initial checklist can look something like

  • Physical space for a sanctum
  • Mystical wards/guardian for said sanctum
  • Access to a Hallow
  • Sufficient mundane resources to pursue whatever personal agendas they have
  • Mentors, rotes, and introductions to power players in the local environment

Within a few sessions they could be financially independent, relatively secure in their surroundings (not realizing that security has a whole new meaning now that they are Awakened), and basically living the Good Life In The Lie. Take notes on how they set up all these mundane support systems - there will probably be one or two bad choices that a later antagonist can discover and exploit.

It's also worth mentioning that the default assumption of the book is that starting PCs have not just Awakened but been snapped up by an Order at least long enough to have received some sort of mentoring, training, and set of default social connections. Your folks are starting out without those things which is just fine - I did the same thing in my Mage game and it created no problems. Given the auspicious nature of their Awakening, once they show up on the radar it's natural for various cabals or independent power players to seek them out - Orders can compete fiercely for new blood, and if the new blood is even more special and shiny than average than they may be in a good bargaining position.

The most important thing for an open-ended startup like this is to let both the players and characters feel the freedom of their circumstances and pay attention to what they grab on to and given them more of it. It sounds like all of the characters have good personal agendas so that's a solid dstar.

Thank you for your reply! I'm creating various Mentors for each Path in each Order, so that each of the neophyte PCs can see an example of what their Path decides to do in each Order, and how their Path's internal ethos manifests through their philosophies. This game is about exploration in a lot of important ways, so there will be plenty of options.

Rand Brittain
Mar 25, 2013

"Go on until you're stopped."
The way I heard it explained is that Adamant Hand doesn't let you cast more, but it does let you cast without dropping out of the fight.

plaintiff
May 15, 2015

Ferrinus posted:

Are you folks SURE Adamant Hand lets you cast a spell as a reflexive action that isn't normally a reflexive action? Because I'm not. As far as I can tell, what Adamant Hand does is let you, on a spell on which you're going to use two yantras rather than one, do it like this:

Turn 1: Attack
Turn 2: Then perform a rote mudra, cast with a big bonus

...rather than this:

Turn 1: Chant or wave your wand around or whatever
Turn 2: Then perform a rote mudra, cast with a big bonus

It's a bit weird that it doesn't allow use of firearms. It's not like the Arrow formally disdains guns or something.

That seems like it's right.

There are martial arts styles that incorporate things like rifle stocks, but that seems more like it's to be used as a weapon and falls under Weaponry. If Athletics covers bows and throwing knives, which are also ranged weapons, I don't see why Firearms would then be excluded. As far as the 1E Arrow Order book said afaik, the Order frowns upon favoritism regarding weapons of choice, and the like. Warriors are not meant to prefer one tool over another, but use them all for the purpose for which they were designed. I also specifically recall spells from 1E that were aimed through bullets, like Aim For the Dead or Sharpshooter's Eye.

Ferrinus
Jun 19, 2003

i'm finding this quite easy, i guess in part because i'm a fast type but also because i have a coherent mental model of the world
The main arguments in favor of Adamant Hand not working with firearms are probably these:

1. The Arrow's guiding fantasy archetype is basically a D&D adventurer, and those don't use guns (or if they do the guns are crappy and unreliable)
2. Firearms attacks don't read your enemy's Defense or any of their other traits, so you're not REALLY engaging with your enemy in some kind of dramatic, enlightening contest by shooting them rather than punching or stabbing them
3. Firearms are too good relative to other weapons and shouldn't be able to buff your spells when you use them

1 isn't really convincing to me, and neither is 3 since it's not like becoming able to apply your Defense to firearms attacks is that rare among monsters or other actually-challenging-for-an-Arrow combatant. 2 isn't that different from 1 when you get right down to it, especially since as far as I can tell AH doesn't require your Skill use to succeed, just be attempted. So, all in all, I'd probably just allow Firearms to trigger the Merit.

plaintiff
May 15, 2015

Ferrinus posted:

The main arguments in favor of Adamant Hand not working with firearms are probably these:

1. The Arrow's guiding fantasy archetype is basically a D&D adventurer, and those don't use guns (or if they do the guns are crappy and unreliable)
2. Firearms attacks don't read your enemy's Defense or any of their other traits, so you're not REALLY engaging with your enemy in some kind of dramatic, enlightening contest by shooting them rather than punching or stabbing them
3. Firearms are too good relative to other weapons and shouldn't be able to buff your spells when you use them

1 isn't really convincing to me, and neither is 3 since it's not like becoming able to apply your Defense to firearms attacks is that rare among monsters or other actually-challenging-for-an-Arrow combatant. 2 isn't that different from 1 when you get right down to it, especially since as far as I can tell AH doesn't require your Skill use to succeed, just be attempted. So, all in all, I'd probably just allow Firearms to trigger the Merit.

Yep. It's so much more simplified than 1E that one could easily just allow the Adamant Hand user to buy the two-dot Merit in Firearms as well as Athletics, Brawl, and Weaponry.

Libertad!
Oct 30, 2013

You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

Alien Rope Burn posted:

Beastchat will probably be running hot until the F&F is over, I wouldn't fight the flow.

After that we can hopefully ship it out to the island of misfit games along with Mummy, Geist, and Changing Breeds.

What's so bad about Mummy?

Mors Rattus
Oct 25, 2007

FATAL & Friends
Walls of Text
#1 Builder
2014-2018

Mummy is not offensive, it just has some lovely TN-shifting mechanics and fluffwise would feel more at home alongside Werewolf: the Apocalypse or other oWoD lines.

Cabbit
Jul 19, 2001

Is that everything you have?

Kurieg posted:

If I stone cold stunner someone through the table instead could I then cool my drink?

Only if it's beer.

Rand Brittain
Mar 25, 2013

"Go on until you're stopped."
The problem with Mummy is basically that a) it is really hostile to the standard "3-5 people each playing a monster" style of White Wolf game, and is actively deceptive about this fact, and b) Mummy society makes no sense because mummies are corpses 90% of the time and amnesiac most of the rest, and this fact is not taken into account. Oh, and the ST section is sealed away from player eyes even though it includes a bunch of things players need.

It does have some really strong writing, though, and a powerful central metaphor. I actually dislike it more than Beast, because I wanted to like it.

Dave Brookshaw
Jun 27, 2012

No Regrets

Ferrinus posted:

Are you folks SURE Adamant Hand lets you cast a spell as a reflexive action that isn't normally a reflexive action? Because I'm not. As far as I can tell, what Adamant Hand does is let you, on a spell on which you're going to use two yantras rather than one, do it like this:

Turn 1: Attack
Turn 2: Then perform a rote mudra, cast with a big bonus

...rather than this:

Turn 1: Chant or wave your wand around or whatever
Turn 2: Then perform a rote mudra, cast with a big bonus

It's a bit weird that it doesn't allow use of firearms. It's not like the Arrow formally disdains guns or something.

Much as it pains me to admit it (hi Ferrinus!) he's right. It doesn't allow you to cast a spell reflexively if you couldn't already.

What it does let you do is fight or use a full dodge in the run up to a spell, while your colleagues from other Orders are stood there like muppets chanting in High Speech or waving wands around

Mors Rattus
Oct 25, 2007

FATAL & Friends
Walls of Text
#1 Builder
2014-2018

Dave Brookshaw posted:

Much as it pains me to admit it (hi Ferrinus!) he's right. It doesn't allow you to cast a spell reflexively if you couldn't already.

What it does let you do is fight or use a full dodge in the run up to a spell, while your colleagues from other Orders are stood there like muppets chanting in High Speech or waving wands around

...ah.

Welp! I should probably tell this to my Arrow players.

Daeren
Aug 18, 2009

YER MUSTACHE IS CROOKED

Dave Brookshaw posted:

Much as it pains me to admit it (hi Ferrinus!) he's right.

THE END IS COMING

(That's still fairly useful though)

Dave Brookshaw
Jun 27, 2012

No Regrets

Mors Rattus posted:

All I have on that is the rumor mill that Rose Bailey intensely dislikes Beast and is very unhappy with how it turned out.

As for Deviant: we don't know a lot. We know that Jekyll/Hyde is an inspiration for it. And... :shrug:

Rose wrote more of Beast than I did. She wrote the splats.

Mors Rattus
Oct 25, 2007

FATAL & Friends
Walls of Text
#1 Builder
2014-2018

Yeah, I know.

That doesn't change what I've heard. But again, rumor mill.

Dave Brookshaw
Jun 27, 2012

No Regrets

Chernobyl Peace Prize posted:

Yaaay that sounds nifty. It's a little thing, but I especially like that it explicitly calls out that it's street-level because the antagonists are normal-and-organized. I feel like that could lend itself pretty well to running a good "evading a conspiracy" game without either playing mortals in turn, or running into the "and this plot armor/constant escalation of power dice pools is why you can't just power your way out of this situation" that I feel like you'd get into running it with another line.

It's my intent that the antagonist Conspiracy will scale somewhat to an individual Deviant.

Play Sarah Manning, get Neolution. Play Bruce Banner, get the US Army.

Soonmot
Dec 19, 2002

Entrapta fucking loves robots




Grimey Drawer

Ferrinus posted:

The main arguments in favor of Adamant Hand not working with firearms are probably these:

1. The Arrow's guiding fantasy archetype is basically a D&D adventurer, and those don't use guns (or if they do the guns are crappy and unreliable)
2. Firearms attacks don't read your enemy's Defense or any of their other traits, so you're not REALLY engaging with your enemy in some kind of dramatic, enlightening contest by shooting them rather than punching or stabbing them
3. Firearms are too good relative to other weapons and shouldn't be able to buff your spells when you use them

1 isn't really convincing to me, and neither is 3 since it's not like becoming able to apply your Defense to firearms attacks is that rare among monsters or other actually-challenging-for-an-Arrow combatant. 2 isn't that different from 1 when you get right down to it, especially since as far as I can tell AH doesn't require your Skill use to succeed, just be attempted. So, all in all, I'd probably just allow Firearms to trigger the Merit.

:adjusts trench coat: haven't any of you heard of...


Gun kata!!!

Yawgmoth
Sep 10, 2003

This post is cursed!

Mors Rattus posted:

Well, the main thing is you can't do that one because heating up your coffee has no symbolic link with chokeslamming someone.
I don't think you've seen people who are heavily caffeine-addicted without their coffee.

Dave Brookshaw
Jun 27, 2012

No Regrets
It's more like "it's supposed to be a Martial Art that is in some ways an Order Tool" and Gun-Kata being... Well...

If you want Gun-Kata, roll up an Acanthus with Forces and become the Unstoppable Gunman. You don't need Adamant Hand to do that.

MalcolmSheppard
Jun 24, 2012
MATTHEW 7:20

Rand Brittain posted:

The problem with Mummy is basically that a) it is really hostile to the standard "3-5 people each playing a monster" style of White Wolf game, and is actively deceptive about this fact

The game literally provides the most detailed instructions out of all 1e games on how to structure chronicles, and the line includes a canonical chronicle, and the line provides an entire book of historical chronicle frameworks during periods when virtually all protagonists are active.

Soonmot
Dec 19, 2002

Entrapta fucking loves robots




Grimey Drawer
Despite my post, no one wants gun kata.

Now, if this was oWoD...

Rand Brittain
Mar 25, 2013

"Go on until you're stopped."

MalcolmSheppard posted:

The game literally provides the most detailed instructions out of all 1e games on how to structure chronicles, and the line includes a canonical chronicle, and the line provides an entire book of historical chronicle frameworks during periods when virtually all protagonists are active.

I think that's a little deceptive? Let's please not do this.

Mummy has information on how to structure chronicles, but all of that information is basically working around the fact that for most purposes "everybody makes a mummy and you play in the modern era" doesn't actually work. (Not that Mummy tells players this, though, which is why the character creation section is all about building your own Arisen and cult.) The game does include a canonical chronicle, but it largely ignores all the elements that make running a bunch of mummies together problematic.

The bit about having a book full of historical periods where everybody is active is true, though.

Dave Brookshaw
Jun 27, 2012

No Regrets

Rand Brittain posted:

I think that's a little deceptive? Let's please not do this.

Mummy has information on how to structure chronicles, but all of that information is basically working around the fact that for most purposes "everybody makes a mummy and you play in the modern era" doesn't actually work. (Not that Mummy tells players this, though, which is why the character creation section is all about building your own Arisen and cult.) The game does include a canonical chronicle, but it largely ignores all the elements that make running a bunch of mummies together problematic.

The bit about having a book full of historical periods where everybody is active is true, though.

One of the periods where everyone is active is the present day.

I Am Just a Box
Jul 20, 2011
I belong here. I contain only inanimate objects. Nothing is amiss.

Libertad! posted:

What's so bad about Mummy?

Nothing on the scale of the wrongness of Beast, but:
  • Mummies have an unusual template defined by their death cycle and its ties to their power stat, Sekhem. Sekhem doesn't increase with experience; instead, it begins each awakening briefly at ten dots and then descends like a quadratic arc, slowing down as it approaches a single dot. (And they have powers, of course, specifically designed to scale in effect with Sekhem, so that you don't start out slinging weak powers that just have a big dice pool.) Then you fall from the living world into the Duat and you don't come back until either cultists summon you with a ritual, your tomb is disturbed, or once approximately every 1500 years. Based on circumstances and whether you've inculcated a loyal cult, that could take anywhere from days to... uh, up to approximately 1500 years. Even assuming everybody has a cult they can depend on to summon them back quickly, it can get pretty lopsided even within a party of mummies, let alone a mixed group, if their death cycles fall out of step. The whole Sekhem thing is a pretty cool idea but it's not conducive to the typical Chronicles of Darkness play. This wouldn't be as big a deal if the game were designed to better incline towards troupe play, Ars Magica style, but it really isn't. The Storytelling chapter suggests "frameworks" that include troupe styles alongside the traditional party style, so at least there's trying there, but I felt it didn't give strong guidelines to make that kind of play intuitive and appealing.
  • Mummy rules are super unnecessarily finicky. You know how the classic World of Darkness and Exalted have two separate chargen resources, your starting dots and your bonus points, and they aren't equivalent in value or efficiency, so if you build two different characters and then climb them towards picking up whatever the other character has that they don't with XP, one can often get there before the other? Mummy gives you your standard CofD chargen dots and then adds 20 XP, and instructs you that you have to exit chargen having spent both your resources in such a way that you meet certain minimums (rather than just giving them to you). This isn't presented like the usual sidebar about if you want to create advanced characters, why not add N XP, but is the standard. You start with nine dots to allocate among your five Pillar traits, but no Pillar can exceed your rating in your splat's primary Pillar, you can leave one Pillar at zero dots but you can only do this for one Pillar at most, and the fifth dot in a Pillar costs two dots instead of one, and you can't buy it even then if you have a Pillar at zero dots. These are not onerous requirements but they reflect a general design that doesn't concern itself with clarity or simplicity that continues through the book. The prevalence of effects that modify the target number of dice is just one manifestation of this trend, albeit glaring in its opacity. (Quick: what's more useful, four dice at target number eight, three dice at target number seven, or six dice at target number nine?) It also shows up in basic powers that are frequently packages of loosely related bullet points, big-bang powers that have three separate keyworded tiers of prerequisites each, and antagonist monsters who downgrade non-magical attacks to bashing damage, including those made by supernatural attackers but not if the supernatural attacker is a Mummy, and also specifically excluding nuclear weapons, which still don't kill the monster but do send it into Twilight.
  • Mummy will not play straight with you. It introduces a conceit where the gameline divides its book content into player-facing and Storyteller-facing sections, so that relevant setting information can be discovered by the player alongside their amnesiac mummy character in play. That would be fair enough, it's not my style but I understand the conceit. In practice, though, it has another divide: supplement-facing material that is withheld from the Storyteller and drip-fed in successive releases. (This is why people sometimes confuse Mummy for having a metaplot. It doesn't, but it does have a series of successive reveals meant to recontextualize the setting significantly.) This is done differently from other Chronicles of Darkness games. I have nothing against the appeal of supplement books. I've bought my share. You buy the Mage corebook and there's an overview of who the Seers of the Throne are, what they do and why, and then you can buy the Seers of the Throne book if you want more details, like what are the individual Iron Seals, or what special magic and servitors are they afforded by their service to the Exarchs. But you knew the broad strokes before buying the supplement. Other books introduce new elements, and that's fine too. The Demon core has the material that's relevant to a typical game of Demon. Supplements don't contradict the basic pitch in the core, but there's a book about demon-blooded who are only vaguely mentioned in the core that can really flesh them out, and the Storyteller's Guide has stuff like imperatives that are angel-like but not quite angels. They don't transform the game, though. Mummy feels like this is what it sets out to do from the beginning. Major concepts, like the realm of the Duat that you go to every death cycle, the Judges of Death whose purposes and commands you carry out, and the nature of the ancient Nameless Empire where you once lived before becoming a mummy and which has since vanished from the world mysteriously, are intentionally obfuscated in the corebook, dropping only enough details to communicate that a plan is in place for supplements, but not enough to really know how to play out those elements' roles in the game without those supplements. Again, this could be made vague if the point of the game was that they didn't really matter, what are you going to do with your life now as a mummy in these changing times, but the writing and focus of the book really don't communicate that. Individual Mummy games can be about finding yourself and growing as a person and a leader of your own, but Mummy itself is about the titular Curse that set this eternal tragedy into motion – a Curse whose nature and motivation the book never explicitly tells you, even in the Storyteller's section.

Ferrinus
Jun 19, 2003

i'm finding this quite easy, i guess in part because i'm a fast type but also because i have a coherent mental model of the world

Dave Brookshaw posted:

It's more like "it's supposed to be a Martial Art that is in some ways an Order Tool" and Gun-Kata being... Well...

If you want Gun-Kata, roll up an Acanthus with Forces and become the Unstoppable Gunman. You don't need Adamant Hand to do that.

You don't need Adamant Hand to become the unstoppable boxer or whatever either, and yet it's good that it's there to help. I don't think there's really a good argument for Arrows not taking guns as seriously as they take knives.

Daeren
Aug 18, 2009

YER MUSTACHE IS CROOKED
Mummy can work, but you need to be really, really willing to wrestle with it, you're almost required to read the later books where the line starts hitting a stride, and most groups I know would probably end up discarding more than a bit of its mechanical/fluff oddities.

However, if you get it to click, you can basically play the pulp adventures of The Nameless One, on a quest of self-discovery that involves bitch-slapping ancient devourer-gods so hard all their minions go "the gently caress was that!?" at the same time, which is something you can't really say about any of the other games.

Ferrinus
Jun 19, 2003

i'm finding this quite easy, i guess in part because i'm a fast type but also because i have a coherent mental model of the world
Frankly, the way the 2E Arrow is written up, Adamant Hand should really let you make a Yantra out of your use of any 3+ rated Skill on your character sheet in any context.

I Am Just a Box
Jul 20, 2011
I belong here. I contain only inanimate objects. Nothing is amiss.

Daeren posted:

However, if you get it to click, you can basically play the pulp adventures of The Nameless One, on a quest of self-discovery that involves bitch-slapping ancient devourer-gods so hard all their minions go "the gently caress was that!?" at the same time, which is something you can't really say about any of the other games.

I'unno, that could be a particularly rocky, especially metal Promethean journey.

You're right that there is cool material there in Mummy, and while I couldn't see myself running it and don't expect to end up playing in a game of it, the Arisen and the history of their Nameless Empire have a lot of crossover value. There's a certain kind of frustration you can find in a flawed game that you can't muster for a failed one.

bewilderment
Nov 22, 2007
man what



Ferrinus posted:

Frankly, the way the 2E Arrow is written up, Adamant Hand should really let you make a Yantra out of your use of any 3+ rated Skill on your character sheet in any context.

I thought (based on vague remembering) that Adamant Hand is literally a supernally infused martial art. Like, it's the actual motions and forms and mindset that make it a tool and significant.

Can 2e Mages still share Mage Sight when it's no longer a spell? "Hey guys, we're heading into ghostville, here's your ghostvision"?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Ferrinus
Jun 19, 2003

i'm finding this quite easy, i guess in part because i'm a fast type but also because i have a coherent mental model of the world
You can Pattern Prime to reconfigure someone else's soul such that they have the same mage sight you do.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply