|
I thought that Seers overall have slightly higher Wisdom than the Diamond Orders, per Dave Brookshaw, because they believe in a least-force philosophy when dealing with problems and have a lot of artifacts and benefits to get around using magic directly from their patrons. I would imagine though that their distribution tends to be a little more split between high and low Wisdom with less folks in the middle.
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 18:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 05:53 |
|
|
I'd assume the opposite, since on one hand Seers are likely more blase about casual use of magic for quality of life purposes (yes, it's a sacred trust strictly not meant for any human hands at all, but I'm one of the Elect!) but on the other hand are less likely to find themselves in the kind of desperate straits appropriate to two-fisted adventurers and player characters in which blowing up an entire building or unleashing a bound demon start to look like good ideas.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 18:36
|
|
|
Digital Osmosis posted:What is Wisdom like for the Seers? Mage 2E makes it clear that breaking points are somewhat subjective, but still a lot of them seem like things the Seers would be fine with. I mean, maybe taunting the abyss should be the same for them and Pentacle mages, but would a Seer really be weirded out by using magic to achieve mundane objectives, or manipulating a mortal with magic? And if the answer is "yes, because they're human, and the Seers on average have less wisdom than other mages" what do they do about all The Mad that their normal operating activities make? Tricky Dick Nixon posted:I thought that Seers overall have slightly higher Wisdom than the Diamond Orders, per Dave Brookshaw, because they believe in a least-force philosophy when dealing with problems and have a lot of artifacts and benefits to get around using magic directly from their patrons. The Mad are called Rapt now. Seers tend to not do well with Wisdom because the things their Order does tend to not be conducive to it, something the core remarks on. They regularly murder, break oaths, do weird things involving the abyss, do terrible long-lasting things to groups of people the consequences of aren't known to them because they're acting on orders Sky Daddy whispered to them in their sleep. What the Seers do have is a Wise philosophy on how to go about things, which may or may not shield you depending on how you approach it. Usually when folks lose Wisdom they settle comfortably into a rung, since all the activities they were getting dinged for are no longer things they need to worry about, and making the jump to from Wisdom 1 to Rapt is presented as requiring a truly heinous act. I imagine they'd treat any Rapt within their ranks the same as they do any other strange thing that drops into their lap: tools to make the world worse.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 20:08
|
|
|
Seers have about the same rough levels of Wisdom as the a Diamond - their tendency to do things subtly and with care offsets their tendency to do really horrid things because an Iron Seal told them to. (Note that 2e commands from the Exarchs appear as Obsessions, which makes the Wisdom hit from them *worse*) Seers also have a culture of not allowing your apprentices to question/threaten you and seeing everyone in he Order as rivals, which means they’re slightly more likely to think covering up that a Pylon member has become Enraptured is a good idea. And they have an institutional blind spot when it comes to Scelestus infiltration - a Rabashakim in the Seers has a much better chance of going undetected than in the Diamond, as obeying mysterious symbolic commands from eying is what a good Seer does - but are kill the entire Pylon just to be sure hardcore about removing it when a Tetrarchy does notice it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2019 20:23
|
|
|
The new Ascension supplement Gods and Monsters is out, and it really is grand to be reading another Mage book. As is usual for Mage: the Ascension supplements, there are tantalizing hints of forking metaplot paths, new material expanding concepts that haven't been explored since 1991, new story expansions and concepts to disagree thoroughly with, and some lovely art here and there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 02:26
|
|
|
Dave Brookshaw posted:And they have an institutional blind spot when it comes to Scelestus infiltration - a Rabashakim in the Seers has a much better chance of going undetected than in the Diamond, as obeying mysterious symbolic commands from eying is what a good Seer does - but are kill the entire Pylon just to be sure hardcore about removing it when a Tetrarchy does notice it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 02:36
|
|
|
Zereth posted:this seem like it would very much not encourage a Seer to report that they think their co-worker is a Scelestus. The Seers are explicitly organized in a way that encourages paranoia and internecine plots, so...working as intended.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 02:44
|
|
|
"It's not a bug, it's a feature!" cackles the Tetrarch serving the Conspiracy, the Exarch of control through paranoia.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 03:16
|
|
|
Ironslave posted:Hell, at this point Changeling fits the idea better, because at least one of their endpoints is outright becoming a True Fae.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 11:44
|
|
|
I'm still hype for Deviant despite my constant griping about nWoD 2.0
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 11:50
|
|
|
I hope Deviant will work well as a Hunter the Reckoning simulator. Getting powers against your will and taking revenge against the monsters you suddenly discover are all around you seems pretty effortless given what I know of Deviant.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 13:31
|
|
|
Lord_Hambrose posted:I hope Deviant will work well as a Hunter the Reckoning simulator. Getting powers against your will and taking revenge against the monsters you suddenly discover are all around you seems pretty effortless given what I know of Deviant. Man, I hope they do a fluff book of Deviants on an internet forum. I find I really liked that about Hunter's IC sections.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 15:01
|
|
|
MonsieurChoc posted:I'm still hype for Deviant despite my constant griping about nWoD 2.0 Same. I want their book and Dark Eras 2 to come out yesterday.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 15:01
|
|
|
Warthur posted:I was going to say - given that "abuse" was such a major theme of Changeling, I kind of feel like if a new CoD gameline's elevator pitch and core theme happens to also hit the core theme of an already-extant CoD gameline, mmmmmaybe it's time to consider whether your cool idea for addressing that theme would work better as a supplement for the existing gameline? Like, why introduce Beasts into the setting altogether when True Fae and a supplement about them could fit that niche perfectly well, in a game line already designed to address the core issue? Beast stole so many other elements from Changeling, why not the entire loving point (such as it was) of the game (Beast, not Changeling)?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 18:26
|
|
|
All 20th Anniversary corebooks are 75% off and every other OWOD 20th Anniversary PDF is 25% off on DTRPG.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 18:38
|
|
|
Dawgstar posted:All 20th Anniversary corebooks are 75% off and every other OWOD 20th Anniversary PDF is 25% off on DTRPG. Man, DTRPG really needs to be able to work out a way to not have Storyteller's Vault content mixed in with official stuff for every possible search.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 18:45
|
|
|
Oh I'm glad I held off on my book purchases.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 19:03
|
|
|
Rand Brittain posted:Man, DTRPG really needs to be able to work out a way to not have Storyteller's Vault content mixed in with official stuff for every possible search. I mean it's the same problem as Steam, more or less: they have no incentive to distinguish between the two if more people buy them this way.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 19:13
|
|
|
Warthur posted:I was going to say - given that "abuse" was such a major theme of Changeling, I kind of feel like if a new CoD gameline's elevator pitch and core theme happens to also hit the core theme of an already-extant CoD gameline, mmmmmaybe it's time to consider whether your cool idea for addressing that theme would work better as a supplement for the existing gameline? Like, why introduce Beasts into the setting altogether when True Fae and a supplement about them could fit that niche perfectly well, in a game line already designed to address the core issue? I'd also love it if writers stopped treating the concept of the cycle of abuse as if it's a real thing. There are a couple of longitudinal studies that show it isn't.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 19:29
|
|
|
I've argued before that Changelings should have an endgame that isn't "become True Fae or something exactly as bad" and I stand by that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 19:45
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:I've argued before that Changelings should have an endgame that isn't "become True Fae or something exactly as bad" and I stand by that. I mean, 2e doesn't have becoming True Fae be inevitable. I believe it's been said it'll be tied specifically to buying into certain kinds of Entitlement that put you at risk of becoming True Fae. Otherwise, your endgame is...being a very powerful Changeling.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 19:50
|
|
|
Mors Rattus posted:I mean, 2e doesn't have becoming True Fae be inevitable. I believe it's been said it'll be tied specifically to buying into certain kinds of Entitlement that put you at risk of becoming True Fae. Otherwise, your endgame is...being a very powerful Changeling. True, but as people have noted being a Changeling is a bit... like, it's basically an entire splat characterized by your commitment to unhealthy coping mechanisms, not just by "being a survivor of abuse." It's not so much that becoming True Fae is inevitable as it is that a Changeling's nature creates a weird dichotomy between (in some sense ongoing) victimhood and predation, and that sits uneasy with me. You are right that 2E is a big step in the right direction, though, and a lot of this is stuff that might resolve itself as more 2E material comes out as long as the line is in good hands. (And I'm pretty confident in Rose Bailey's abilities on that front, for however long she continues to work on Changeling.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 20:01
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:True, but as people have noted being a Changeling is a bit... like, it's basically an entire splat characterized by your commitment to unhealthy coping mechanisms, not just by "being a survivor of abuse." It's not so much that becoming True Fae is inevitable as it is that a Changeling's nature creates a weird dichotomy between (in some sense ongoing) victimhood and predation, and that sits uneasy with me. This is one of the ways that Changeling's image suffers from misrepresentation through overstating the metaphor, though. Yes, there are themes of abuse survival, the Courts are associated with some unhealthy coping mechanisms (I think 2e's decision to make their correspondences to the stages of grief explicit was a bad idea – the correspondences weren't originally intentional, they were a coincidence that happened to make an interesting implied extra layer), and there are thematic implications that a changeling's tendency to rely upon fae magic and evoke fae instincts mirror a survivor's response to trauma. But if you examine that fae magic and those fae instincts, the thematic mirror is weak here. This is one of the ways in which the game's themes are flexible and don't all conform to the survival metaphor. There largely aren't mechanical pressures to push changelings to respond to their hurt by hurting others. Traumatically reaping Glamour rather than harvesting it is a choice, not a necessity. Contracts aren't focused around collateral damage. You can reap Glamour for a quick fix. You can hurt people with Contracts for your own gain. But the game isn't slanted to make you do these things. What you do with your survival is up to you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 20:22
|
|
|
Thomamelas posted:I'd also love it if writers stopped treating the concept of the cycle of abuse as if it's a real thing. There are a couple of longitudinal studies that show it isn't. I know this is very sensitive territory, and I don't really want to turn this into a long discussion, but could you link those? I just ask because it's the exact opposite of what I've heard (see here). The idea that those who had a really lovely parenting environment growing up in turn repeating those behaviours jives a lot with what I understand of both behavioural modeling and with how those behaviours lead to poor social outcomes (lower school achievement, etc.) that correlate in turn with violent behaviours. It's something I'd very much like to be wrong about - the idea that abuse is cyclical is pretty horrible - but it's what I've heard. It's not exactly my field, though, so I can't say I'm up to date on this. I also want to link this, a position statement from the USDHH, which states something that needs to be heavily emphasized: That, while the statistics do seem to show that there is a greater prevalence of those who suffered abuse as children to have children who suffer abuse than non-abused parents, the vast majority do not go on to commit any sort of abuse. While this deserves exploration for understanding behavioural modeling, I absolutely do not want anything I say to be the slightest bit misconstrued as saying that the victims of violence are destined to commit violence. That is emphatically not the case. I Am Just a Box posted:This is one of the ways that Changeling's image suffers from misrepresentation through overstating the metaphor, though. Yes, there are themes of abuse survival, the Courts are associated with some unhealthy coping mechanisms (I think 2e's decision to make their correspondences to the stages of grief explicit was a bad idea – the correspondences weren't originally intentional, they were a coincidence that happened to make an interesting implied extra layer), and there are thematic implications that a changeling's tendency to rely upon fae magic and evoke fae instincts mirror a survivor's response to trauma. But if you examine that fae magic and those fae instincts, the thematic mirror is weak here. This is one of the ways in which the game's themes are flexible and don't all conform to the survival metaphor. There largely aren't mechanical pressures to push changelings to respond to their hurt by hurting others. Traumatically reaping Glamour rather than harvesting it is a choice, not a necessity. Contracts aren't focused around collateral damage. To my mind, fae magic's role is as the ultimate expression of solipsistic desire and, subtly, of authoritarian thought patterns. Fae magic is an expression of the Gentry; reliant only and solely on bargains and agreements. It doesn't require that something wants or cares for a given thing, it has no empathy, no sympathy, no pity, no compassion; fire agreed to burn things when you fed it Glamour, and so things shall burn. Oaths do not care why you failed to fulfill them or broke them; you broke them and that's all that matters. You can interpret that a lot of ways. In the abuse narrative, it can be taken either as playing into a cycle of abuse or as a way of coping with trauma by distancing yourself from others; trying to create reliant and reliable structures to mitigate or eliminate the possibility of future trauma in a chaotic world.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2019 23:45
|
|
|
I'd also like to see those studies as it runs contrary to pretty much everything I've personally observed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2019 04:04
|
|
|
I Am Just a Box posted:This is one of the ways that Changeling's image suffers from misrepresentation through overstating the metaphor, though. Yes, there are themes of abuse survival, the Courts are associated with some unhealthy coping mechanisms (I think 2e's decision to make their correspondences to the stages of grief explicit was a bad idea – the correspondences weren't originally intentional, they were a coincidence that happened to make an interesting implied extra layer), and there are thematic implications that a changeling's tendency to rely upon fae magic and evoke fae instincts mirror a survivor's response to trauma. But if you examine that fae magic and those fae instincts, the thematic mirror is weak here. This is one of the ways in which the game's themes are flexible and don't all conform to the survival metaphor. There largely aren't mechanical pressures to push changelings to respond to their hurt by hurting others. Traumatically reaping Glamour rather than harvesting it is a choice, not a necessity. Contracts aren't focused around collateral damage. I'm still annoyed about the change in 2e to make harvesting glamour have any negative effects upon the other party at all. It's unneeded, un-thematic, and just plain a bad design decision. The entire point was that changelings can do so both covertly and without worrying about harming people at all in their so doing (aside from potentially being a dick to inspire negative emotions). There are a host of situations that just make so little sense if the other party in a harvesting suddenly starts feeling kind of hollow and depressed for a while afterward, and I could keep typing all day, but that would just be an even bigger waste of time than this post already has been.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2019 04:33
|
|
|
It only happens if you literally, forcefully extract the emotions out of them in an incredibly invasive and destructive way. I don't think its inclusion is a problem; if anything it stands as a contrast to how it normally works.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2019 04:36
|
|
|
I'm talking about basic harvesting, the loss of a wp, the 'subtle loss of emotional intensity', etc. I'm not saying it ruined the whole game, but I'm still annoyed that they felt it necessary to have any negative effects whatsoever.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2019 04:41
|
|
|
EimiYoshikawa posted:I'm talking about basic harvesting, the loss of a wp, the 'subtle loss of emotional intensity', etc. Oh, sorry; you're right, I should have reviewed the section first. I'm still not sure I dislike it, though. It makes Changelings into something a little bit more sinister, true, but it also resonates with the idea that nothing in terms of Fae magic comes for free.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2019 04:44
|
|
|
Solution: Feel less guilt by being a provider of people's Vices, then harvest off the good feels they get from that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2019 04:54
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:I've argued before that Changelings should have an endgame that isn't "become True Fae or something exactly as bad" and I stand by that. This, plus the talk a weekish back about Changeling not having a good "gameplay loop" gave me pause, personally. Even if you killed your Keeper for good, all you have left is to gain power; but the metaphor is being stated that power- fae power, coercive "do as I say" power- is a moral dead end even if you did pursue it for the correct reasons. Frailties add up over time, pledges and their consequences mount, the seasons continue to turn. Like as with CoD Vampire, your destiny is to die in one way or another. Even in a game without a strict level structure, there is always some value to having a "30th level, you become a god in the new pantheon" caper to a campaign, just as there is a value to a gameplay loot with a distinctive reward structure like clearing a dungeon and going back to town. But I don't know if that is the kind of game I play? Very few games ever get to the point where XP isn't a reward but a threat, and very few games I run are as strictly delineated as a strict personal plot cycle versus a wider thematic year-long Freehold cycle. At least in 2E, there is the Huntsman to serve as a very clear Buffy Episode loop- a warning, a threat, a consequence, and a victory, only to set the game back to zero. But unlike with Mage, there is no mystery: you know where it comes from, why it wants you, and how to kill it. And unlike other games, there is no promise you will ever "finally" finish the job. But even back in 1E, you can get a cycle going by selling tasks to the Goblin Market to buy more items to be able to do the tasks without ever worrying about the freehold; but, in my opinion, it is the interests of the "real world", and the cycles of the monarchs, that the game does shine.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2019 05:14
|
|
|
Axelgear posted:I know this is very sensitive territory, and I don't really want to turn this into a long discussion, but could you link those? I just ask because it's the exact opposite of what I've heard (see here). The idea that those who had a really lovely parenting environment growing up in turn repeating those behaviours jives a lot with what I understand of both behavioural modeling and with how those behaviours lead to poor social outcomes (lower school achievement, etc.) that correlate in turn with violent behaviours. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/article-abstract/2086458 This is Cathy Widom's big longitudinal study on it. 900 victims of sexual/physical abuse and neglect studied along with 900 others who don't have a reported history of sexual/physical abuse and neglect but match for socio-economic situations. Watched for over 50 years. She's done some other studies on physical abuse and neglect that show similar outcomes. Sheri Madigan has done some metastudies that support Widom's work. And you're right about having a parent who was abused is more likely to produce a child who is abused. The why's for this tend to be really hotly debated at the moment. From the survivor perspective, I suspect that the answer will be that some survivors develop coping mechanisms that are self-destructive in nature that make them less than ideal but not abusive parents. I also suspect you'll find those parents have issues maintaining relationships. And that idea of the cycle of abuse is kind of a thing although limited since the majority of kids of abusive surviving parents don't get abused. However, I'd point out that variation of the cycle of abuse is never what ends up being used by writers. It's almost always exclusively abuse victims becoming abusers. It creates this idea that every abuse survivor is a ticking time bomb. If a child is molested they will become a molester. If you grow up in a house with domestic violence, you'll engage in domestic violence. That in particular is what annoys the poo poo out of me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2019 05:26
|
|
|
Octavo posted:If we might deviate from Beast-chat, has there been any word from Modiphius about the WoD properties they're managing? I heard rumors that they might be revising V5, but that's it. Since I didn't see anyone answer you... * Modiphius has stated in an email that they have no plans to rewrite the Cam and Anarch books. And nothing has been mentioned about doing any revising anything (which is highly unlikely). * They are working on four pieces of material: Fall of London Chronicle, Second Inquisition, Player's Guide and V5 Starter set. * They are working with their upper management to get the ability to actually sell the PDFs of Cam/Anarch since WW/Paradox mandated that they wouldn't be sold and all physical copies would be on sale until out of stock. But the V5 haters will continue to think what they want and spread direct misinformation, so whatevs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 02:46
|
|
|
"the V5 haters"
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 02:58
|
|
|
I mean, if the correction is that they're doing their level best to convince their bosses that some of the most important books for the line shouldn't be sent down the memory hole, maybe the truth is still pretty bad?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 03:49
|
|
|
Mors Rattus posted:"the V5 haters" whatevs, I say, because it's not really a shot across the bow if you act all, like, nonchalant about it. EDIT: To add some actual meat to the post, most of what I've seen in this thread re: V5 is 'I like the changes but why are ~teehee~ nazi refs in here, and why is the company writing it starting international incidents??' The ~*~haters~*~ have generally had favorable things to say about the crunch, but that the edgelord fluff took it a few steps beyond even the standard White Wolf bullshit that we all became accustomed to in the 90s. And, I mean, they weren't wrong about that, unless you really need what people were 'hating' on spelled out for you in fine detail. Old Boot fucked around with this message at 03:57 on Apr 13, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 03:50
|
|
|
Rand Brittain posted:I mean, if the correction is that they're doing their level best to convince their bosses that some of the most important books for the line shouldn't be sent down the memory hole, maybe the truth is still pretty bad? Eh. The books are fine, particularly now that the Chechnya section of Cam was removed and replaced with other cities and material. Paradox's mandate of 'don't sell these' is pretty weird in all honesty.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 03:52
|
|
|
Yeah who'd think selling books that started an international incident and contained something that was literally offensive to everyone involved would actually be something that they maybe don't want to sell, psh. Fukken WEIRD man
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 03:54
|
|
|
Wait, the books are fine but only particularly once they removed the thing that got their distributors arrested and talk of a sovereign state arranging for extradition of the principles?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 04:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 05:53 |
|
|
Gerund posted:Wait, the books are fine but only particularly once they removed the thing that got their distributors arrested and talk of a sovereign state arranging for extradition of the principles? don't be a hater
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2019 04:33
|
|