|
Bedlamdan posted:Someday, we will have an Exalted/WoD crossover I'm afraid not. We'll only have an Exalted/90s crossover.
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 23:02 |
|
|
Ferrinus posted:I'm afraid not. We'll only have an Exalted/90s crossover. Yeah, so Exalted/WoD!
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 18:41
|
|
|
The oWoD is bad.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
It would be infuriating, if somewhat darkly amusing, if OPP gets its licenses revoked in the transition and 3E dies without anything more than a mostly-finished corebook for backers because they couldn't be bothered to deliver anything on time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:The oWoD is bad. Counterpoint: Exalted is good and Exalts basically running into the setting with Steel Folding Chairs sounds a-okay.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
I am unsure what an Exalted/WoD crossover would give you that you couldn't already do by mashing your already-existing action figures together in your playroom.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
Bedlamdan posted:Counterpoint: Exalted is good and Exalts basically running into the setting with Steel Folding Chairs sounds a-okay. I'd rather they run into a good setting, defaulting to actually-existing Creation if there's nothing better on the table.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
Onyx Path's already been tweeting about being happy to work with Paradox, they'll be fine.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
Ketrus posted:Purchasing White Wolf in cash had to be quite the investment. I'm pretty sure CCP has been trying to offload white wolf for anything they can possibly get considering that it turned out to be basically a 100% loss I wouldn't be surprised if paradox not only picked up for a song but not even a particularly long song e: also, ck2/exalted game right now, please
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
Neopie posted:Onyx Path's already been tweeting about being happy to work with Paradox, they'll be fine. Of course they are. They're the ones with no leverage here.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
If you decrypt the cipher applied to Onyx Path's tweets you'll find that they actually read "Mario! Save meeee!"
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
Bedlamdan posted:Someday, we will have an Exalted/WoD crossover Wasn't that in Shards of the Exalted Dream or whatever that was called?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
Well, seeing as Paradox makes tons of DLC for their games and Exalted apparently plans to release tons of supplements (seriously, they have like 5 new types of Exalted planned in addition to the old ones), it's a perfect match.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
Covok posted:Wasn't that in Shards of the Exalted Dream or whatever that was called? Nope!
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
SunAndSpring posted:Well, seeing as Paradox makes tons of DLC for their games and Exalted apparently plans to release tons of supplements (seriously, they have like 5 new types of Exalted planned in addition to the old ones), it's a perfect match. They might have five new exalted planned, but Limials are just Promethean 3e in disguise.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
Covok posted:Wasn't that in Shards of the Exalted Dream or whatever that was called? The Modern Shard still takes place on a flat Creation, it's just that instead of aesthetics based on the Mayans and ancient China, it has aesthetics based on Detroit and modern Beijing. Which is kind of strange, because some of the more fantastic Shards actually do have spherical planets. Schwarzwald fucked around with this message at 19:32 on Oct 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 19:29
|
|
Covok posted:They might have five new exalted planned, but Limials are just Promethean 3e in disguise. Prometheans are cool, so I'm ok with this because in this setting they can kick the rear end of any punk motherfucker that steps to them for being a Frankenstein.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
SunAndSpring posted:Prometheans are cool, so I'm ok with this because in this setting they can kick the rear end of any punk motherfucker that steps to them for being a Frankenstein. Please do not base a splat type on Beasts, Exalted devs!!!
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 19:31
|
|
|
UberJew posted:I'm pretty sure CCP has been trying to offload white wolf for anything they can possibly get considering that it turned out to be basically a 100% loss The figure I heard was "tens of millions". 10 million converts to about 1.2 million USD, so my guess would be about 5 million USD for white wolf? Possibly less, but I doubt it's much more.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
UberJew posted:I'm pretty sure CCP has been trying to offload white wolf for anything they can possibly get considering that it turned out to be basically a 100% loss Naw CCP apparently wanted an absurd amount of money for White Wolf, from what I heard. So either Paradox shelled out the cash or CCP realized they just weren't getting anything from it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 19:42
|
|
|
Ferrinus posted:The oWoD is bad. I disagree.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 19:53
|
|
|
Covok posted:Wasn't that in Shards of the Exalted Dream or whatever that was called? Its just a lot of little things. One of the Technocracy books had Autochthonia, a machine planet. Maybe that one's not so little.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 20:48
|
|
|
Random mechanics jiggerypokery thought: What's a better term for getting a success on a die than "success"? It's kind of awkward having overlapping terminology for "success on a die" and "succeeding on a roll".
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
Roadie posted:Random mechanics jiggerypokery thought: What's a better term for getting a success on a die than "success"? It's kind of awkward having overlapping terminology for "success on a die" and "succeeding on a roll". If you want to change one it should probably be the latter because the former is a technical term.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:If you want to change one it should probably be the latter because the former is a technical term. Honestly, I'd rather have "success" for success on the roll as a whole, with some alternative term for the individual die results from pips. It's more intuitive that way in context with "failing" a roll.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
A 'hit'. An 'ace'. A 'scoring die'. A 'point'. Edit: A 'pip'.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
My inclination is something like 'hits', but that has the downside of being potentially similarly confusing in combat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
TheLovablePlutonis posted:I disagree. The oWoD is good, but the nWoD is Better.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
Doc Aquatic posted:My inclination is something like 'hits', but that has the downside of being potentially similarly confusing in combat. Yeah those are all even worse, if it's really confusing to you (it's not confusing) just use pass/fail for rolls.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 21:31
|
|
|
MonsieurChoc posted:The oWoD is good, but the nWoD is Playable. This is a bit more like it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 21:41
|
|
|
If you're looking for playable, White Wolf hasn't been the best place to be. How's that 3E splat looking? I didn't back it, but I'm curious.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 21:45
|
|
|
Orabilis posted:If you're looking for playable, White Wolf hasn't been the best place to be.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
Orabilis posted:If you're looking for playable, White Wolf hasn't been the best place to be. It's an unambiguous improvement over 2E that's marred by a couple of bad decisions. The base system is genuinely good, the Craft subsystem is bad but stuff like War and Sailing work well now, and the rest depends upon your feelings on large lists of charms, spells, and techniques. Oh and BP/XP Bedlamdan fucked around with this message at 22:00 on Oct 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 21:56
|
|
|
Orabilis posted:If you're looking for playable, White Wolf hasn't been the best place to be. For crunch: The core combat system (initiative, withering, and decisive attacks) is actually fun to play for once. The social influence system... well, exists, for real, for the first time, and it's pretty drat good. Both the social system and the combat system have enough ability spread / possible approaches that you get a lot of leverage out of teamwork. This has counter-intuitive results for those of us raised on first or second edition. It makes sense to take dots in Socialize. They really aren't kidding and Ox-Body really is useful for once. There are no combos, thank god, and weapon choice does directly influence turn order or turn frequency. They put a leash on stunts so you're not getting +2's and willpower regen every round, but it's still a core component of the game. There are a lot of decisions that are definitely love it or hate it (the crafting system), but I think it's a huge improvement over second edition. You're looking at the result of someone trying very hard to make second edition playable, for years, giving up, and starting from scratch. (Then giving up, and starting from scratch AGAIN, and getting it almost right). (Edit: Oh, I forgot. There are so many charms. This introduces some choice paralysis, but a lot of them are very interesting charms, like the Survival tree that lets you turn your Familiars into murder machines and cooperate with them more effectively in combat. On a Caste by Caste basis, you get to choose one of eight abilities as your Supernal ability, which allows you to purchase charms all the way up to Essence 5 from the start. This is a huge part of character creation, picking a single specialization to eat up about half of your 15 starting charms, and giving your character a gimmick where they're simply unmatched. In that way it's a very different 0xp feel from 1e/2e) For fluff: It's a lot more similar to first edition core than anything else. The book isn't interested in telling you precisely how everything works, only how your character's stuff works. There's a page dedicated to describing charms as narrative abstraction, and absolutely nothing describing how a character might enter Malfeas, if they were so inclined. There's lots of blank room right now, partially a result of the reboot, partially a result of their "let's not demystify absolutely everything" philosophy. The Dreaming Sea, the new region in the southeast, is pretty drat cool. The North has reasons to care about it other than Whitewall. The art is about 2/5 awesome, 2/5 acceptable, 1/5 poser screenshots poorly painted over. They're working on that. It has the single best piece of opening fiction I've ever read in a tabletop RPG. Ketrus fucked around with this message at 22:28 on Oct 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 22:12
|
|
|
Roadie posted:Random mechanics jiggerypokery thought: What's a better term for getting a success on a die than "success"? It's kind of awkward having overlapping terminology for "success on a die" and "succeeding on a roll". I see sux used a lot so why not enshrine it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 22:21
|
|
|
SunAndSpring posted:Well, seeing as Paradox makes tons of DLC for their games and Exalted apparently plans to release tons of supplements (seriously, they have like 5 new types of Exalted planned in addition to the old ones), it's a perfect match. Hopefully Onyx can speed the release a bit up, if they're releasing everything two years late like the corebook, we'll see the last of those 5 new types in loving 2025 at the earliest.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 22:30
|
|
|
RiotGearEpsilon posted:A 'hit'. An 'ace'. A 'scoring die'. A 'point'. I like "pip". It sounds vaguely die related and most people won't actually know the real meaning. Thug Lessons posted:Yeah those are all even worse, if it's really confusing to you (it's not confusing) just use pass/fail for rolls. It isn't confusing to me personally, but the use of "success" to mean two different things in short order is one of those things that stood out to me when trying to make the start of the Ex3 Systems chapter more coherent (re: pages of glossary at the start of the chapter, talking about rolls before explaining how to make them, etc). Since difficulty isn't a penalty any more, it can't use the "at least one success on the roll" terminology from WoD that made it sorta-kinda work in a unified way before. I suspect the writers made that change to difficulty and then never thought again about the language involved.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
Personally, I'm not fond of the "Charms aren't real in setting" thing. I understand they pretty much have to go that far to kill the 2e assumption of rules as physics, but it does take away some of the kung-fu charm of it. (But then again, I liked motes as real things in setting, too, so I'm biased.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 22:39
|
|
|
Kenlon posted:Personally, I'm not fond of the "Charms aren't real in setting" thing. I understand they pretty much have to go that far to kill the 2e assumption of rules as physics, but it does take away some of the kung-fu charm of it. The approach I like is basically "magical techniques and motes are more or less a real thing but don't literally map one to one to discrete points or specific items the character sheet". It's like how you can measure about how many calories somebody burns while exercising, but that doesn't mean they're literally spending Calorie Points from their Calorie Pool.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 22:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 23:02 |
|
|
Kenlon posted:Personally, I'm not fond of the "Charms aren't real in setting" thing. I understand they pretty much have to go that far to kill the 2e assumption of rules as physics, but it does take away some of the kung-fu charm of it. It goes hand in hand with killing combos. Your character no longer has to exercise strategy and effort trying to get his charms to work together nicely, they just do. That said, I don't think their new setting snaps in half if you tweak that part of it, especially for Martial Arts charms. They still don't come naturally to any Exalt type, still require a tutor or dedicated effort to develop from scratch, and they still have picky rules for inter-style compatibility. There, the conceit still makes a lot of sense.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 22:59
|
|