|
TheLovablePlutonis posted:What the hell dude I'm saying, that at a dull point in his parents story and without any warning , that his mothers body should have rejected his fetus and crushed him up into a paste. gently caress. Tim. Buckley. He is a hack writer and should have been off the Internet a while ago.
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 06:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 07:07 |
|
Excelsiortothemax posted:I'm saying, that at a dull point in his parents story and without any warning , that his mothers body should have rejected his fetus and crushed him up into a paste. drat, mang. Did Tim Buckley kill your parents or something?
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 06:21
|
|
|
In other news, they forgot to give Infallible Messenger a cost, or keywords, or a duration. Which were in the leak.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 06:23
|
|
|
Bouquet posted:I like it better than the much more flowery and poorly organized 3e text. The biggest thing I'm wondering is if my attempt at completely avoiding a glossary works. I haven't quite figured out how to finesse it more with a couple of clauses shoved in at the end (like the environmental stuff), but it's an interesting challenge to try and make it flow well as a start-to-finish read that you can still go back and reference. Edit: Plus, I despise that horrifying giant glossary that takes up multiple pages at the start of the Systems chapter in the book. Roadie fucked around with this message at 06:50 on Oct 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 06:34
|
|
Excelsiortothemax posted:I'm saying, that at a dull point in his parents story and without any warning , that his mothers body should have rejected his fetus and crushed him up into a paste. Nice, comrade. We can use that vindictiveness, though against more... appropriate targets.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 07:36
|
|
|
SunAndSpring posted:drat, mang. Did Tim Buckley kill your parents or something? He ended his comic with the main character pushing some buttons on a machine to reset the entire universe, but the buttons weren't Control+Alt+Delete.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 08:14
|
|
|
So I got to thinking about how non-magical equipment sections usually are crazy boring, so I've been looking around for ideas to slip little plot hooks into them (and welcome ideas to use with the other weapons). Juggler assassins hiding in plain sight!  Also, is there a broad consensus on the Heavy weapons category yet? It seems like it's just too blatantly worse than the other two for most people, since the Accuracy drop-off is just too much. Roadie fucked around with this message at 18:32 on Oct 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
Roadie posted:So here's my first try at rewriting the whole combat section into something at least a little sane and organized, along with some noodling with names and stuff. Plz to feedback. Just to verify, this is an attempt to replicate the rules as written? No changes to the actual rules here, just how they're presented?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 20:14
|
|
|
RiotGearEpsilon posted:Just to verify, this is an attempt to replicate the rules as written? No changes to the actual rules here, just how they're presented? Substantial bits had to be invented from whole cloth, including stuff like "what action do you use to go to ground" and "what happens when you're in stealth and attack someone" and "how are attacks and simultaneous turns actually resolved" (thanks to Nihnoz for the initial set of steps I used there) and "what happens when people multi-attack clash each other" and so on. The stuff that actually is there in the first place is identical in practice in this version* (for example, movement per turn works out the same even though Move isn't Reflexive anymore), though more changes might still be needed depending on how "Movement as its own action type" shakes out with Charms. * Except for "zones on a map" instead of "totally theater of the mind placement", because that works out basically the same in terms of range measurements, and I think it works way better for multiple combatants. Roadie fucked around with this message at 21:36 on Oct 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
Roadie posted:* Except for "zones on a map" instead of "totally theater of the mind placement", because that works out basically the same in terms of range measurements, and I think it works way better for multiple combatants. This was the bit I was curious about, because I hadn't seen any of that in the leak.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 22:02
|
|
|
RiotGearEpsilon posted:This was the bit I was curious about, because I hadn't seen any of that in the leak. In terms of function it should basically be the same (just as one 2D map instead of multiple separate 1D tracks you have to keep track of), though I think I have to do some rewriting to make the special "close" range stuff more clear with movement. Anyway, the idea is that you basically do the same as a FATE zone map:  Then count across zones for ranges. Close combat is like a sub-zone inside a zone that you have Disengage to untangle yourself from. Roadie fucked around with this message at 22:29 on Oct 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
This is garbage.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 22:19
|
|
|
TheLovablePlutonis posted:This is garbage. Why?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 22:21
|
|
|
Roadie posted:Why? Don't add FATE's map placement system because it's absurdly vague. You might as well go theater of the mind there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
TheLovablePlutonis posted:Don't add FATE's map placement system because it's absurdly vague. You might as well go theater of the mind there. The version that's in the book is basically FATE's zones except shittier once you consider what it's used for. You have to track Close <-> Short <-> Medium <-> Long in relation to your enemies, and you have to track Close <-> Short <-> Medium <-> Long with all those enemies in relation to each other, because some effects specifically go off that in a "target another enemy who's at Medium range to the enemy you hit" sort of way. Just making it a map at least gets rid of the first layer of imitation-TotM terribleness.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
Also it ought to be "Mundane" but I imagine these are drafts. Frankly your layout looks nicer than the ones in the books, though it is less decorated.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 22:33
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Also it ought to be "Mundane" but I imagine these are drafts. I'm also thinking about combining the artifact and non-artifact weapon/armor listings, and basically listing the artifacts as secondary enhancements on top of the mundane item. I think it makes a smoother progression than putting them totally separately. Actually, I'm surprised the book doesn't have exceptional armor/weapons. It's pretty easy to get a middle step out of the stats if you squint at it enough. Artifact weapons across the board get +1 Accuracy, +3 Damage, +0 Defense (except for Heavy that gets +1?), and +1+(1/category) Overwhelming added to the non-artifact stats. Similarly, artifact armor gets +1+(1/category) Soak and +1+(3/category) Hardness added to the non-artifact stats. Take a +1 from each of those stats and give that to an Exceptional category in-between and you've got a good middle step for exquisitely crafted stuff that isn't an outright artifact. Nessus posted:Frankly your layout looks nicer than the ones in the books, though it is less decorated. Plus I've really loved the 'nicely set text against a flat layout with wide margins' thing for game books ever since Nobilis 2e, though I doubt I could ever come up with interesting-yet-ignorable thematic content in the margin as aggressively as Jenna Moran can.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 22:48
|
|
|
TheLovablePlutonis posted:Don't add FATE's map placement system because it's absurdly vague. You might as well go theater of the mind there. it works really well for the way ranges work dude. I've been doing it since my exalted campaign started, it's 100% the best way to handle battles, trust me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
Play Exalted on a really big hex grid, and each hex represents a range band, and multiple characters can occupy the same hex.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 00:30
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:Play Exalted on a really big hex grid, and each hex represents a range band, and multiple characters can occupy the same hex. That's a pretty good idea, I think I'll give that a go.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 01:17
|
|
|
Roadie posted:So I got to thinking about how non-magical equipment sections usually are crazy boring, so I've been looking around for ideas to slip little plot hooks into them (and welcome ideas to use with the other weapons). Your layout looks so much better I can't even begin to describe. Space for sidebars instead of mashing them awkwardly into the middle of the text in sometimes nonsensical places! Your combat writeup looks very clear as well, I like the idea of writing actions up like lesser charms, easier to take in information like defense penalties that way. They should just hire you, you're already fixing the book for them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 07:12
|
|
|
Yeah, I think your layout's a bit better. Don't care for some of the name changes, though. I like Withering, Decisive, and Successes more than what you have.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
Roadie, you could stick caste marks in the inner corners of each page spread. I grabbed 24 from the unofficial wiki: http://www.bouquetofflowers.net/TG/Exalted/caste_marks.zip Example:  That'd give you a six page rotating pattern. If you'd rather have SVG than PNG I could make simplified versions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 21:16
|
|
|
SunAndSpring posted:Yeah, I think your layout's a bit better. Don't care for some of the name changes, though. I like Withering, Decisive, and Successes more than what you have. Threatening and Decisive attacks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 23:37
|
|
|
SunAndSpring posted:Yeah, I think your layout's a bit better. I mean, sure, it means more page count, but that's what aggressively minimizing and deduplicating mechanics text is for. SunAndSpring posted:Successes SunAndSpring posted:Don't care for some of the name changes, though. I like Withering, Decisive, and Successes more than what you have. Bouquet posted:Roadie, you could stick caste marks in the inner corners of each page spread. As already mentioned in this thread, text is copyrighted, but mechanics can't be. Specific distinctive words not already used in a generic way in the industry (e.g. "Strength") probably fall into the former, not the latter, which makes reuse of terms like "withering" a sticky wicket.    
Roadie fucked around with this message at 23:47 on Nov 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 23:44
|
|
|
Roadie posted:Thinking about it, I suspect there's a substantial benefit possible in actual readability from ditching the two-column, text-dense layout that so many RPGs seem to have just because they're copying previous books that are copying previous books that are copying all the way back to AD&D or whatever. I think you might be liable for some level of moral hazard if you just re-sell it. While it is true mechanics can't be copyrighted so you can take all of the mechanics and make your own game, there is likely some legal issues. The fact that game isn't even officially out yet and has only been released in preview material to those who prepurchased that right may also apply some pressure on you. Perhaps more so if you are a backer as Kickstarter may have some legal text on backers not abusing their insider knowledge, though I some how doubt this contingency,
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 23:47
|
|
|
Covok posted:I think you might be liable for some level of moral hazard Covok posted:likely some legal issues quote:Copyright does not protect the idea for a game, its name or title, or the method or methods for playing it. Nor does copyright protect any idea, system, method, device, or trademark material involved in developing, merchandising, or playing a game. Once a game has been made public, nothing in the copyright law prevents others from developing another game based on similar principles. Copyright protects only the particular manner of an author’s expression in literary, artistic, or musical form. "Take this number of dice and add them together following this set of steps" is not protected. The actual specific expression of that text in the book, including stuff like distinctive words used to describe things, is protected. This is why there can be a billion Flappy Bird clones and why there are a billion fantasy heartbreakers out there that badly copy the AD&D rules. Covok posted:some legal text on backers not abusing their insider knowledge Also, it's not like this is something that I'd spit out complete within the next month or two anyway. Nihnoz posted:Threatening and Decisive attacks. I do like "threatening" more than "withering". I don't really see the connection between "withering" and "trying to stab people". Roadie fucked around with this message at 00:03 on Nov 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 23:59
|
|
|
Again, if it's necessary to distinguish between dice successes and "succeeding" at a roll, I would use the language of pass/fail for rolls rather than introducing an arbitrary technical term for dice successes. The former is completely intuitive and actually has precedent, so it'll be immediately understood by anyone picking up the game, whereas the latter sounds weird and honestly grating.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 02:20
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:an arbitrary technical term for dice successes I understand what you mean... but, just saying here, "success" for "got this number on a die" is an arbitrary technical term in the first place.  Shadowrun uses "hits", other games use different terms.Plus, if we're talking about how arbitrary terms are, everything from Dark Heresy to good ol' Ghostbuster International to the 600-pound gorilla that is D&D/Pathfinder use "success" and "failure" as the overall terms for a roll. Roadie fucked around with this message at 02:37 on Nov 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 02:33
|
|
|
Roadie posted:I understand what you mean... but, just saying here, "success" for "got this number on a die" is an arbitrary technical term in the first place. "Success" makes sense because you succeeded in rolling at or above your target number. "Hit" makes sense because you hit your target number, though it has some overlap with hitting an opponent in combat which makes it a no-go if "success" was a problem in the first place. "Pip", "point" and so on are just completely arbitrary and come off as weird and unnecessary technical terms. Mainly my point is that whatever term you're using here should have some relation to what's happening, rather than just calling them chazwozzers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 02:40
|
|
|
Roadie posted:Plus, if we're talking about how arbitrary terms are, everything from Dark Heresy to good ol' Ghostbuster International to the 600-pound gorilla that is D&D/Pathfinder use "success" and "failure" as the overall terms for a roll. Symmetry with other TTRPGS isn't a problem unless it's actually going to confuse people, which it won't in this case because everyone will pick up on the pass/fail language in the first 5 minutes. Beyond that the only value in it is some sort of meta-aesthetic that's not really that compelling in the first place. But if you must, absolutely must, make sure Exalted lines up with D&D and Pathfinder in terms of language I would suggest using "hits" rather than "pips" or "points" because then at least it makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 02:48
|
|
|
Using pass/fail to refer to overall roll/task resolution is a good way to avoid having find-replace the better part of the book.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 03:05
|
|
|
Honestly if you used a pass/fail system and didn't mention it, probably nobody would notice. It's really intuitive and thus mostly invisible. If you replace "success" with another term it sticks out like a sore thumb because it was a technical term to begin with and, like Ferrinus says, it's everywhere, so in this case I would definitely favor symmetry with your source material over symmetry with other games.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 03:09
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:find-replace the better part of the book What I've done so far has been 99% rewrites from scratch because the original either completely avoids actually using the right mechanical terms or labors fiercely to fit the contents of one sentence into three, so that's not exactly a huge burden by comparison.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 03:10
|
|
|
What's a better term for "Movement action", to differentiate it from physical movement? I was thinking "Minor action", maybe, to steal a note from D&D.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
Roadie posted:What's a better term for "Movement action", to differentiate it from physical movement? I was thinking "Minor action", maybe, to steal a note from D&D. Secondary action? Complementary?
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
A Movement. As in bowel movement.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
 STOP THE loving PRESSES. The ENTIRE discussion of signeurage and currency debasement from the bookmarked 3rd edition leak is COMPLETELY missing from the final pdf. This book is poo poo
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 22:43
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:
I hope Paradox turns these loving people out of their homes. I'm as serious as a heart attack
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 22:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 07:07 |
|
|
Roadie posted:What's a better term for "Movement action", to differentiate it from physical movement? I was thinking "Minor action", maybe, to steal a note from D&D. How are movement actions not related to physical movement?
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 22:49
|
|