>Previous Thread: >>47578117
>Pastebin
http://pastebin.com/PPptBB5u
http://www.mediafire.com/download/n7htcqyqk0y0acy/%5BWtF%5DThe_Pack.PDF
>Latest News
http://theonyxpath.com/now-available-v20-ghouls-revenants/
The V20 Ghouls book is out!
>richfags
http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/184039?affiliate_id=13&src=TheOnyxPath
>poorfags
http://www.mediafire.com/download/a1kpjrm41yzozkq/V20_Ghouls_%26_Revenants.pdf
>Question
What was the worst game you played?
>>47584806
oMage con game. The objective? Save Archmage Weird Al Yankovic's ass.
>>47584751
Kevlar vests in Chronicles of Darkness are the "concealable and wearable at all times" kind. They give Armor 1/3, they have no Strength prerequisite to speak of, they impose no penalties, and they can explicitly be concealed with "a jacket or a baggy shirt."
These are not the bulky kind of kevlar vests. They are even quite cheap, at Availability 1.
Again, if the combatants lack such vests, then gunplay obviously becomes even more important than goofing about in melee and tackling Defense.
>>47584806I let her die
>>47584806
The time I tried to run Changeling. It counts as the worst because I couldn't keep the momentum going and life got busy so it fell apart in a few sessions. It's still my greatest shame and I still feel like I let the group down.
>>47584884
I mean, it's the merciful choice. Better to die a human than to live as a Ghoul.
>>47584859
Please stop. People avoid firefights in WoD because they are incredibly dangerous. I don't even know what you're arguing about at this point. Yes, guns are deadly. That is not a system flaw, that is entirely intentional.
>>47584859
>>47584859
>>47584859
>>47584859
>>47584859
Just stop, already.
>>47584902
>Those represent ones you already know and have 'paid' for.
Good. Have those starting Rotes fall under your highest Skill that your Order has a specialty for. In all likelihood, you will never purchase rotes past your starting rotes, because for the price of four rotes, you could be raising a whole Arcanum by a dot!
>But, yes, just as with everything else, the ST is well within their right to say "no, that rote was not available and may not exist".
Since there are no rules or guidelines for which Orders have which Rotes, this boils down purely to ST fiat.
>I believe there's even a line somewhere that Rotes can't be just any old skill.
Some Rote Skills are much easier to justify than others; Occult tends to be a good universal Rote Skill.
>Useful, if your ST feels you've earned the excuse to "max out" a single Skill, and only if every Rote you ever need to us as that as it's skill. But good luck finding a Rote that lets you give Exceptional Luck with Athletics.
If you are in the Adamantine Arrow or the Praetorian Ministry, why not? Athletics is a catch-all skill for physical movements, Rote Mudras are physical movements (including throwing), and you could very well visualize an imago involving physically hurling a net woven of the strands of fate.
>Not everyone is meant to be good at combat.
Which is what makes firearms so useful: blowing past Defense and having a very high Initiative with a relatively small investment (simply using a gun for the former, taking a single dot in Firefight for the latter).
>And? Are you saying that people should have a "free" action simply to act out of turn in combat? Why?
For "opportunity attack" like effects? That would actually be a good idea, since then a character could try to prevent an enemy moving away from or past themselves.
>>47584948
>not get into a firefight
It is quite likely that you *will* get into a firefight sooner or later, and it helps to have a method of attack that can blow past Defense.
>>47585027
>this boils down purely to ST fiat.
And I bet that just eats you up that an ST can tell you no.
>>47584962
Guns being deadly makes sense. Firearms being *significantly* more deadly than melee weaponry to the point wherein someone with a melee weapon who is threatening a gunman at arms reach has no recourse to the gunman backing away and shooting is a little silly.
Defense in Chronicles of Darkness is equal to the lower of Wits and Dexterity, plus Athletics on top of that. That is a non-negligible value that anyone with a melee weapon has to contend with, and it could very well push melee attacks to a chance die short of an All-Out Attack (which removes Defense) or spending Willpower (which also works with firearms).
As far as accuracy is concerned, firearms merely have to contend with full cover (if someone is using cover, they are hiding and thus not attacking) and concealment (which provides, at the very most, a -3 penalty for substantial concealment like hiding behind a car, and the one hiding takes a -2 penalty to their own attacks).
>>47585089
"The ST can say no" does not stop the mechanics from being what they are (easily abused, in this case).
What's the point of Techne? Is having an Order Tool really so important that they'd need a merit for you to use whatever tool you want? They only give a +1 to spellcasting. The 8-Again when using Teamwork is nice, but is it really worth 2 dots?
>>47585102
Do you think anyone cares? Why do you keep repeating yourself? Most people are either completely fine with things the way they are or have made small houserules to make it something they're comfortable with. You're talking to people who already know what you're saying and either don't agree or don't care. On top of that, you're saying that systems that literally tell you that the ST should prevent abuse are easily abusable.
You repeatedly deny any character any choice other than the one that you decide they must take. Any time someone points out a flaw, you try to argue that you can do something simply because the rules don't say you can't. You make arguments that any ST would reasonably tell you "No" to. You act like the book should be 400 pages of incredibly detailed descriptions that cover every possible scenario, because if they allow for any wiggle room--which they MUST do simply by virtue of the developers and writers not having infinite time or infinite wordcount--you stretch a tiny loophole until you can drive a tractor trailer through it, then argue that you've for some big flaw in the system.
Why are you even in this thread? You clearly don't like the system. You don't even seem to understand the setting.
>>47585159
When you start out, you have, at most, a base dice pool of 4.(Unless you're a shithead min-maxer who trades in all their merit dots for Gnosis 3.)
Without the Techne merit, your tool yantras are limited to the things listed under that heading and complex mechanisms/systems.
With the Techne merit, you can choose something, specific to you character, that also counts as a Yantra; cooking, hacking, writing, painting, exercising, voodoo, etc. Anything is viable, unless your ST says otherwise.
>>47585326
Why specifically do you need an Order Tool? Can't you already use anything as a Yantra as is? I mean, I only have so many Yantra slots. Why would I want to use an Order Tool over any other Yantra?
Or am I just misunderstanding how Yantras work? I thought I could basically use whatever I want. Like if I'm casting a Fate spell I could use the Tarot or dice.
>>47585159
Techne seems like a very weak Merit to me. It might be useful at one dot, but two is simply too much. Compare it to, say, Lex Magica, which gives increasingly powerful benefits as your Silver Ladder Status rises, or Prelacy which likewise confers potent advantages (alongside Seers of the Throne Status itself, which augments your Resources to a great degree).
>>47585255
>Do you think anyone cares?
Because someone in the previous tool had dredged up my arguments concerning the combat system from years ago, and I was behooved to respond.
>Any time someone points out a flaw, you try to argue that you can do something simply because the rules don't say you can't.
I am the one trying to point out flaws in the mechanics here.
Chronicles of Darkness is attempting (key word: "attempting") to be some bizarre simulationist/narrative blend with nitty-gritty rules for everything from mid-battle earthquakes to the rules for using pepper spray, so I am well within my rights to point out when the omission of a rule results in strange scenarios, such as people moving away from and past each other in combat without reprisal.
>You act like the book should be 400 pages of incredibly detailed descriptions that cover every possible scenario
You seem to think that I am a fan of overly rules-heavy games, when in fact, my preferred systems are rules-light to -medium, and think highly of the better PbtA games (Urban Shadows, Worlds in Peril, and Fellowship are what I am thinking of specifically).
The difference between such games and Chronicles of Darkness is that the former are fiction-first and based on common narrative triggers, whereas Chronicles is heavily grounded in scores of mechanics and the resolution of such mechanics.
>>47585326
Assuming you have Gnosis 2 (because you dislike the prospect of Gnosis 3), you will have two Yantra slots. Only one can be performed reflexively.
Use both Yantras on Order and Path Tool. Done.
Techne is a poor Merit at two dots.
>>47585389
You are not misunderstanding. Techne is an obviously overpriced Merit.
Nothing is stopping an Acanthus mage from using their smartphone's reflective surface as a Path Tool (Acanthus treat all reflective surfaces as valid materials) and then using an appropriate Order Tool as well.
You might even substitute one for a Dedicated Tool.
Is anyone else here hype as fuck for Scion? I know nothing about 1e, but "mythological urban fantasy" scratches an itch I didn't know I had and provides an outlet for people who don't like horror in the CofD.
>>47585390
>Chronicles of Darkness is attempting (key word: "attempting") to be some bizarre simulationist/narrative blend with nitty-gritty rules for everything from mid-battle earthquakes to the rules for using pepper spray, so I am well within my rights to point out when the omission of a rule results in strange scenarios, such as people moving away from and past each other in combat without reprisal.
And all of those are incredibly narratively handled, and their rules are not meant to be accurate simulations. More than that, you're pointing out omissions that are obvious. Again, you're arguing that you can walk through a wall because the game doesn't say you can't.
And before you say that's not what you're saying, it's called a metaphor. It's an analogy.
You should know very well that CofD is not trying to be mechanically heavy. You've played mechanically heavy games.
And once again I ask why you feel the need to be in this thread when you don't like the game.
>>47585418
>Nothing is stopping an Acanthus mage from using their smartphone's reflective surface as a Path Tool (Acanthus treat all reflective surfaces as valid materials) and then using an appropriate Order Tool as well.
I would not allow that. That does not constitute "reflective" enough for the use of a magical tool based on reflectiveness.
>>47585255
>Why are you even in this thread? You clearly don't like the system. You don't even seem to understand the setting.
Mage: The Awakening 2e had been released a few weeks ago, and I have come to take a look at it.
Mage: The Awakening contains my second most favorite RPG setting(Planescape is the first). The way it presents its wondrous magic, the Supernal Realms, and the other mystical planes of existence captures my imagination like few other settings can. As well, one of the major themes of Mage is "senses beyond the mundane," with mages perceiving the underlying energies and fabrics of reality through dazzling sensations and visions, and I find that majestic.
Mage: The Awakening inspires within me a sense of awe and wonder that makes me come back to it each time, even when I know that its rules were and always will be an incorrigibly broken mess.
>>47585478
I have strong hopes for Scion if it will be discarding the clunky mess that is the Storyteller system and attempting to build a better system.
>>47585498
>And all of those are incredibly narratively handled, and their rules are not meant to be accurate simulations.
Chronicles of Darkness manages to be more heavily rules-grounded than D&D 3.X, and that is saying something.
>Again, you're arguing that you can walk through a wall because the game doesn't say you can't.
"Walking through walls is impossible" is a hard-coded rule of nonmagical reality. "Someone taking a swipe against someone who is trying to move past them" is far more up in the air, and is something that could be addressed with a rule.
>not trying to be mechanically heavy.
It absolutely is. A CofD supernatural's character sheet rivals a 3.X sheet in terms of sheer mechanics.
>That does not constitute "reflective" enough
There is no reason not to allow a reflective surface from counting as... reflective. Besides, you can get a smartphone case with a mirror on the back, or use a tiny compact mirror.
>>47585575
>"Someone taking a swipe against someone who is trying to move past them" is far more up in the air, and is something that could be addressed with a rule.
"Human beings are solid objects" is a hard-coded rule of nonmagical reality. You can't walk through people.
Granted that CofD doesn't rely on the use of a battlemap, I'd say if 2 characters were in a hallway and one of them wanted to move past the other, but they were in combat, the one who wants to pass would be fucked unless the one standing still decided to let him pass for some reason--you generally don't let your enemy get behind you.
>>47585575
>There is no reason not to allow a reflective surface from counting as... reflective.
The monitor you're looking into right now is, technically, reflective. It wouldn't work as a yantra, imo, because you can't make out anything reflecting in it beyond vague blobs.
I'd rule that for an object to count as "reflective", you have to be able to make out what's being shown in the reflection. Otherwise, you aren't really forming an Imago with it, you're just looking at it.
Can we please talk about literally anything other than Mage?
>>47585575
Please don't reply to a million posts at once. It's an eyesore and makes you seem autistic.
>>47585638
>"Human beings are solid objects" is a hard-coded rule of nonmagical reality. You can't walk through people.
At no point have I ever said anything about stepping through people. I have, on the other hand, spoken of stepping *past* people.
>I'd say if 2 characters were in a hallway and one of them wanted to move past the other, but they were in combat, the one who wants to pass would be fucked unless the one standing still decided to let him pass for some reason
Some sort of combat-related rule for such a situation would help here...
>>47585638
>I'd rule that for an object to count as "reflective", you have to be able to make out what's being shown in the reflection.
The Aztecs used polished obsidian mirrors as ritual implements, and such mirrors produce awfully imprecise reflections. Additionally, in page 267 of the core Chronicles of Darkness rulebook, we have an example of a creature that can indeed use a smartphone as a "reflective surface."
Either way, however, you are disregarding the main point of it being *trivial* to have both a Path Tool and an Order Tool on hand, therefore making the Techne Merit quite overpriced.
>>47585766
When there are multiple posts directed towards me, and when a certain poster chides me for ignoring even a single post, I am under an obligation to respond to them.
>>47585832
I can assure you that nobody gives a fuck what you're saying. You've been shitting up these threads for three days now.
>>47585766
>Can we please talk about literally anything other than Mage?
Sure
I'm in a V20 game that started this last Thursday. The ST was kinda frazzled by the group make-up, because we have a Gangrel who's entire city block is his Domain, a Caitiff who has an entire hospital as her Domain, a Ventrue who works in the same hospital as that Caitiff, a Caitiff dwarf private detective, and a poncy asshole Brujah(me, my own words). I pushed for us to be Anarchs, because it made more sense for my dude than the Camarilla, but the group voted and we ended up being Cammies.
The session started with us waking up chained to wooden chairs in a small warehouse, with no windows. We couldn't remember how we got there, or anything. After taking a bit to start talking and introduce ourselves to each other, a guy in a purple suit walked in and started talking to us. He grabbed us, though we didn't learn why; I asked and he said I was just "convenient". He got a phone call and walked off, mentioning someone named Mikhael and a Tremere.
I pumped my Strength up with 3 blood(8th generation a best) and broke everybody out, then we walked out of the warehouse and saw the guy standing a few yards away. I ran at him and tried to do a knock-out punch, but missed. He grabbed me and put a gun to my head, said not to move or he'd shoot--I frenzied, and he shot me in the head, NEARLY killing me, then ran off.
I spent almost all my blood healing up(the ST said that hitting 0 blood would mean an instant frenzy, which I disagree with since there was no fresh blood around), then we walked out of the compound-thing the warehouse was in. The Gangrel spent a few minutes trying to Quell the Beast on a guy with a truck who was driving past, while the rest of us talked to some gang kids who were standing around trying to act tough. I wasn't having any of their shit, told 'em I wasn't having the kind of day where I'd just put up with their shit, then walked over to the truck.
>>47585934
The Gangrel tried one more time, then I reached in and banged the guy's head against his steering wheel and pushed him over. We all got in the truck, I nearly drained the guy in a frenzy, but then the rest of the group decided to stop the truck and pull me off him, the Gangrel using Quell the Beast to end my frenzy. We ended up dropping the guy off at a hospital, because despite my guy having no qualms about killing him, I didn't wanna have to deal with the rest of the group's bitching(both in- and out-of-character) about my morality.
>>47585575
The rules aren't an "incorrigibly broken mess". They don't cover situations that you want to do, but you only want to do those situations because they're technically allowed within the mechanics. That is not how games work.
I also do not understand why you would love Mage's setting when you repeatedly fail to understand it.
>Chronicles of Darkness manages to be more heavily rules-grounded than D&D 3.X, and that is saying something.
No.
>It absolutely is. A CofD supernatural's character sheet rivals a 3.X sheet in terms of sheer mechanics.
This is flat out wrong.
>>47585832
>I have, on the other hand, spoken of stepping *past* people.
Yes, and the Storyteller can tell you that you do not have enough room to safely manage that. Not everything is covered in the mechanics. You would not be allowed to do that in PbtA systems either.
>Additionally, in page 267 of the core Chronicles of Darkness rulebook, we have an example of a creature that can indeed use a smartphone as a "reflective surface."
Mage is a game of symbolism. A phone's symbolism is not that of a mirror.
>>47585766
Dude. Dude. DUUUUDE. It's 2hufag. We all know he's autstic as shit. It just so happens he's a helpful and polite sort of autism. Seriously, for all the shit he gets, I've never seen the guy snap at someone once.
Fuck this, I'm gonna go play Unknown Armies
>>47585832
>Additionally, in page 267 of the core Chronicles of Darkness rulebook, we have an example of a creature that can indeed use a smartphone as a "reflective surface."
I'm not the guy who said you couldn't use a smartphone as one/anything else you're arguing with in that post.
I'm just saying that something like an old door handle which, while *technically* reflective, doesn't give you a clear enough image to tell what you're looking at based solely on the reflection, doesn't make sense for a yantra to me.
Pic related is a polished obsidian mirror. That seems reflective, enough, to me; there's also pictures on google of them being used as straight-up mirrors like you would see in a hallway, with a fancy frame, and they seem pretty reflective to me.
>>47585991
Not who you're talking to, but if you turn the screen off/lock your phone it can definitely be used as a mirror.
Maybe it's just my particular model, but I wouldn't feel bad telling a player that they could use a phone as a mirror. It might end up disqualified some other way, but I don't see why you'd say that a mobile phone can't be a mirror. If it needed to be of a certain size/quality or have certain ornamentation then I can definitely see an issue, but if it just has to be a mirror at all, then a smartphone would work.
>>47586011
I have. Repeatedly.
>>47586017
They're also intentionally and specifically created to be reflective, not incidentally reflective.
>>47586012
Smart man. It's the game Mage should be.
>tfw Unknown Armies and Delta Green are slowly overtaking the CofD for you
>>47585934
>(8th generation
Lmao, all the stereotypes are true
>>47585956
>The rules aren't an "incorrigibly broken mess".
High praise for a White Wolf/Onyx Path game that still clings to its dinosaur of a system framework, which is poisoned down to its very core dice rolling mechanic and the probabilities associated with such.
>They don't cover situations that you want to do, but you only want to do those situations because they're technically allowed within the mechanics.
I do not think it is unreasonable to be able to desire some sort of way of adjudicating how character A can prevent character B from getting away from or past them. Even Fate Accelerated has that in its tiny booklet, and that is a rather light game.
>I also do not understand why you would love Mage's setting when you repeatedly fail to understand it.
The mysticism, the esoteric planes of existence, and the senses beyond the mundane all draw me in with their cosmic beauty.
>>47585991
>You would not be allowed to do that in PbtA
Yes, because such games are fiction first, and this actually *is* covered in the rules. Trying to step away from or past a melee weapon-wielder would, due to the fiction involved in such, trigger some sort of "You are trying to do something dangerous, so make a roll for it" move in any PbtA game that pays some degree of attention to physical combat.
>Mage is a game of symbolism. A phone's symbolism is not that of a mirror.
Yantras call upon the symbolism and the semiotics important to the mage themselves. As long as they can work it into their Imago, the Tool should work, and it is hardly a stretch for an Acanthus to envision themselves gazing into their own smartphone.
>>47586017
The reflection visible in such an obsidian mirror is less precise than the reflection one would receive from a convention bathroom mirror, and roughly the same quality of reflection one would receive from a black-screen smartphone in the same angle and lighting.
This is beyond the main point of "Path and Order Tools are trivial to have on hand."
>>47586011
>helpful and polite
He's done nothing but shitpost and troll these threads and deliberately try to shit all over DaveB.
>>47586107
What a villain
>>47586064
Which stereotypes? About 8th gens? Or about WoD players?
I modeled my dude after a specific character, to an extent, and said dude is in his 500s, plus a poncy asshole when he's actually drinking blood. (And it's implied he's a close in blood-relation to the oldest vampire alive, in the source show)
An example of the guy he's modeled after:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ek0GxtWSoAc
My character may fit a stereotype, but it's not at all linked to me having a history with WoD. This is my first game of it that I was actually committed too(played another game about a year ago, with the same ST, but I went through about 5 concepts for a character before I landed on one, and it only lasted one session)
>>47586087
>This is beyond the main point of "Path and Order Tools are trivial to have on hand."
I was never trying to argue against that point. It's true.
>>47586087
Please stop. You are literally making people hate this system. Please just stop. I am literally begging you to stop. I do not want to hear you. No one else wants to hear you. Please, just, create an account with Tumblr and make a blog and discuss these things. Make a post on the forums and keep your system breaking to that thread. Please, please, please stop posting in this thread about nothing but breaking the mechanics. We all know that they're fragile. We don't care. Most of us would not want more mechanical constraints. Adding more rules to the system is not helpful or conducive to what anyone wants from the system, it just makes it a more byzantine and confusing mess. Please, please refrain from posting about the mechanics unless someone asks for mechanical advice. Specifically asks you for mechanical advice. Please do not tell us how this or that is possible within the framework of the rules. Please do not browbeat the developers for failing to live up to your ridiculous standards. Please stop arguing that the game is broken because you're able to do things that were never intended to be done or will reasonably happen.
Please, just don't. Focus your attention elsewhere. Create your own system. Show us how you would make a game. Not in this thread, though. That is what blogs are for. You have upset a great deal of people, and you have stifled any conversation that isn't about you. Tell us your character. Tell us your ideas for an actual game. Tell us what you've actually played, or what your players are like if you somehow are running a game. But please. Please, for the love of the Towers, please do not tell us what you think about the mechanics. You already have turned people away. You did the same with Wulin when you discovered that system. You browbeat everyone around you into listening to you talk about all of the little problems and chased people away from the system who hadn't even tried it yet. Please, do not do that.
>>47585102
>Firearms being *significantly* more deadly than melee weaponry to the point wherein someone with a melee weapon who is threatening a gunman at arms reach has no recourse to the gunman backing away and shooting is a little silly.
/k/ here again. Well aimed gunfire can be immediately incapacitating. If someone takes a step back, fires well and then stops his opponent...
Well, that's a problem with the initiative system, isn't it.
Say your Kukri wielding turbo-chad has the initiative, attacks the gunman at arms reach and then reduces his health levels to the point that he can only move slowly and has to choose between moving or acting.
Isn't this a function of how initiative works?
And no one cares about your fucking touhou girls and it's REALLY out of place in a CofD/WoD thread.
>>47586064
You mean the stereotype that generation is always the best background to buy? That never changed.
>>47586240
>tfw a /k/ommando doesn't know the 10 feet rule
>>47586318
The one stat to rule them all...
>>47579356
>Healing Spells. Why so high Practice? People have made compelling arguments, seriously considering making Knit able to heal lethal.
As one of the people who voiced this particular complaint, I'd have no issues with slapping a Mana cost on the Lethal-healing function to make sure starting Life-specialist Thyrsus can heal Lethal without being able to heal it every turn all day long and render their group werewolf-tier invincible at the cost of blowing their turns.
It just didn't sit right with me that Mages had to wait until Adept-level to heal Lethal, even for the ones who specialize in the Life Arcanum (given that it's going to come up any time they get into a fight involving weapons, or get attacked by a monster with claws or teeth or whatever), especially when Perfecting doesn't have a four-dot improved version (based on the definitions, Patterning is improved Weaving, like Ruling is improved Compelling, but Perfecting is its own thing the way Veiling or Shielding are).
>>47586204
>We all know that they're fragile. We don't care.
Some of you would repeatedly deny various questionable mechanics, perhaps touting, "But it is fine, because the ST can always veto it."
>Most of us would not want more mechanical constraints. Adding more rules to the system is not helpful or conducive to what anyone wants from the system, it just makes it a more byzantine and confusing mess.
Please refer to my point regarding overly rules-heavy games >>47585390 here. Fate 4's Chaos Mastery being vastly superior to Forces 4's Thunderbolt, for example, is not a matter of "They did not write enough," but rather them writing *too* much into Chaos Mastery.
>Please stop arguing that the game is broken because you're able to do things that were never intended to be done or will reasonably happen.
A game should be stress-tested to see where it cracks, such that those cracks may be repaired.
>Tell us your character. Tell us your ideas for an actual game. Tell us what you've actually played, or what your players are like if you somehow are running a game.
After having been booted out of a crossover Chronicles of Darkness game due to the GM and the group disagreeing with me, one of the players of that group had left the group as well and had offered to run a one-on-one game for me. Speaking of what my character is like would do no good, because we would have no common ground at all and could not appreciate one another. On the other hand, speaking of mechanics does give us a common frequency of the system's rules themselves.
>You browbeat everyone around you into listening to you talk about all of the little problems and chased people away from the system who hadn't even tried it yet.
I would rather have people know *exactly* what they are getting into than enter a house with a fragile floor and roof unwarned.
>>47586333
"Reactionary gap" is the technical term. It's 21 feet if you don't have your sidearm out. Now in this hypothetical situation where OHSHITFUCKTHEREHEIS! *dakka intensifies* where both the gun and the melee weapon are ready, there, just as in real life whoever gets their attack off first usually wins.
He's not considering intiative, just the case where one has the initiative and the other doesn't.
Because he's some contrarian neckbearded asshole.
>tfw mutton-chop master race.
>>47586318
>>47586334
Oh man, I remember this from back when I still played this.
That, and 10 Willpower on every player character, and a slew of nigh-irrelevant Flaws.
>>47586355
We deny those things because we have never had those problems in our games. You are going far beyond stress testing. The house is completely stable until you start taking a sledgehammer to the support beams, which is what you've been doing.
Tell us about your character. We do not care about how you feel about the mechanics. No one has the same feeling that you do in regards to them. I guarantee you that the majority of this thread would rather hear about your character.
>>47586355
>On the other hand, speaking of mechanics does give us a common frequency of the system's rules themselves.
Considering these last couple of threads? Could have fooled me.
>>47586394
>Tell us about your character. We do not care about how you feel about the mechanics. No one has the same feeling that you do in regards to them.
Speak for yourself, fuckboy.
>>47585389
Those don't fall under path or order. You'd need Techne to use them.
>>47586240
For one, a firearm-wielder is likely to have the Initiative advantage solely due to the Firefight 1 Merit, which confers a large bonus to Initiative. The melee version is Light Weapons 1, which grants the same bonus to Initiative, but reduces the weapon's damage rating to zero.
Compare the following:
Light pistol: Damage 1, initiative -0
Knife: Damage 0 (becomes 0 with Light Weapons 1), initiative -0
Heavy revolver: Damage 2, initiative -2
Machete: Damage 1 (becomes 0 with Light Weapons 1), initiative -2
The melee weapon-user is at a disadvantage here, even if they do start within arm's reach.
Furthermore, even if the melee weapon-user does start first, they will have to contend with a Defense, a value that is quite likely to be higher than the paltry +2 the melee weapon-user receives from an All-Out Attack (which also makes it impossible to charge).
The best shot the melee weapon-user has is to take a -2 penalty to try to impose the Knocked Down Tilt, which is going to be somewhat dicey given the -2 penalty on top of Defense. They can spend Willpower to improve their chances, but the gunman, who probably wishes to stay on their feet, can likewise spend Willpower to raise their Defense. Even *if* the gunman gets knocked down, they can make a Dexterity + Athletics roll (at no penalty) to kip up without using their action.
>>47586388
I remember when I dared to make a character with less than 8 willpower
>>47586447
I was specifically wondering why I'd want to use a Path or Order Tool. I swear somewhere in the book I saw something about Order Tools helping to reduce Paradox, but that doesn't seem to be in the Tool write up for them.
>>47586453
Please stop. People in actual games have played through this situation. We already know how the game works, in practice, not in theory.
>>47586355
>A game should be stress-tested to see where it cracks, such that those cracks may be repaired.
And do you think bitching about them endlessly in a general thread on 4chan is going to cause the devs to overhaul the system?
All it's likely to do is cause the unfamiliar to decide the game is shit and they shouldn't bother playing it, if anything. And pointless, multiple-thread-spanning internet arguments that ruin the threads for everyone else.
>>47586470
Those are standard Yantras. Anything else is a special case.
>>47586453
And now, look at it with the kind of stats you can expect from 0xp player characters, and mooks, who build to suit a character instead of min-maxing.
>Gunner
>Wits 3, Dex 3
>Athletics 1-2, 3 at the most
>Firearms 3
>Defense of 4-5, probably
>Melee brawler
>Str 3, Wits 3, Dex 3
>Athletics 2-3, Brawl/Weaponry 3
>Defense of 5-6
Not taking any specialties into account, at all
>Mook
>All attributes 2
>Athletics 0-2, Firearms 0-2, Brawl/Weaponry 0-2
>Defense 2-4
>>47586470
Dedicated Tool Yantras reduce Paradox. They tend to fit your Path, to some degree, because it's (as a general rule) probably the first thing you ever picked up to use in helping you cast a spell.
>>47586371
>He's not considering intiative, just the case where one has the initiative and the other doesn't.
Between weapons of equal Size, firearms have a edge in terms of comparing Initiative and damage ratings, particularly when Firefight 1 is compared to Light Weapons 1.
>>47586470
>I was specifically wondering why I'd want to use a Path or Order Tool. I swear somewhere in the book I saw something about Order Tools helping to reduce Paradox, but that doesn't seem to be in the Tool write up for them.
You are looking for Dedicated Tools in pages 122-123.
>Please stop. People in actual games have played through this situation. We already know how the game works, in practice, not in theory.
Anecdotes can return any number of outcomes, from "it works" to "it does not work" to "it can work sometimes." That is not useful data without a control, and the control in this case is the rules as they stand as written.
>>47586496
>And do you think bitching about them endlessly in a general thread on 4chan is going to cause the devs to overhaul the system?
Of course not. It can, however, help players bring up issues with their STs, and STs address those issues. Besides, the official threads for errata and FAQ on Mage 2e have been closed.
>>47586535
The gunner should Quick Draw their gun, avail of the high Initiative from Firefight 1, and directly blast the mook, possibly with Willpower spent. The melee PC has to contend with Defense (and the fact that Light Weapons 1 comes with an arbitrary downside that Firefight 1 does not have), which will certainly make them less effective at the job.
>>47586535
I'm the mook irl
>>47585389
The only tools besides order tools you can use are Coins, Cups, Mirrors, Rods, and Weapons of your path materials.
>>47586582
Most people are. Hence why they're mooks.
>>47584806
>that game.
Really well done... but I have to admit, having built-in cheat codes to make female npc's breasts bigger would have modern gamers throwing a bitchfit.
...that being said, I always played at about 1.25x size. Too big and they started looking lumpy, but of course, the models weren't probably made with that in mind.
Do you think they of we all stopped responding or acknowledging 2hu-fag, he'd go away? Because he's fucking cancer.
>>47586572
Create a blog. Write on your blog all the ways that you can stress test the system. Please, do it there. If anything, it would be much more meaningful than somewhere as ephemeral as a 4chan thread. Please, I am literally begging you to take this discussion elsewhere. You can theory craft all you like on a blog. You wouldn't even be limited to a post of only 2000 characters. If people actually have an issue with the system, they already have brought it up with their STs. They do not need your help with that. The official threads were closed because they were filled with exactly this kind of post.
>>47586624
I am laughing at your tears.
>>47586611
I feel like the "modern gamers are so offended lol" meme is childish. Most of the time, they're getting offended over honestly reasonable things. Rarely is it ever even as much of a "bitchfit" as people make out, either, with there being more complaining about the people complaining. And VtMB would not be hurt by making the designs less slutty. Although perhaps not turning everyone into a lace frilled debutante puffy shirted romance novel cover, like the early designs of the MMO.
Although Fabio vampire does seem like a neat idea...
Also, the models look shit if you increase the breast size at all. It's good for a laugh, but actually playing that way makes the ugly models uglier.
>>47586611
The person who told me to play this game is a sjw, literally everyone I know on the sjw side likes it. They think the money thing is a bit immature but that's about it.
It passes the Bechdel test a lot better than most modern games.
>>47586680
The bechdel test is a lolworthy joke and plenty of women live entire lives that wouldn't pass it (as opposed to masterpieces like Snakes on a Plane, which do).
>>47586680
Only because a female character is basically a dyke.
I agree, though. Everyone I know who likes it is also an SJW, and all my reasons for hating it have little to do with the presentation of women. It's schlocky there, but the mechanics and later half of the story are much worse.
Hell, I have a friend who hates WoD and fucking loves that game and schlicks to all the female characters because she's a thirsty lezzer who wants to be or be with Damsel.
>>47586712
What passes isn't important, it's how many things DON'T pass such a simple test.
>>47586470
>>47586624
I'd take a million 2hu posts over any of the usual CofD/WoD General fare. This is honestly the best the thread's been in weeks. People are actually taking about the game instead of derailing into political nonsense.
>>47586572
Continue man. It's a great of a read.
>>47586394
>Tell us about your character.
What is there to say? They are an Acanthus of a Proximi Dynasty and Legacy sworn to watch over the little-known Emanation Realm (new to Mage 2e) of Fate and Spirit that stretches between the Shadow and the Hedge. They are a mediator between the spirits and the fae, neither of which know precisely what the strange and alien creatures before them are, and could use someone with a calm and patient mind to help smooth over the differences.
>>47586825
Continue regarding what?
Right now, I am currently going over Fate and Time spells again, and I am simply flabbergasted over how much *stronger* than they are than their equal-dot counterparts in Death, Forces, Life, Matter, Prime, and Spirit. (Mind and Spirit, as established previously, are good runners-up.)
Take Time 2's Veil of Moments with a Rote. In any other Arcanum, rendering oneself immune to new Conditions and Tilts and forcing a Clash of Wills against virtually any supernatural effect would be nigh unthinkable, but in Time, it is just a 2-dot spell whose hindrances can be overcome by a starting Rote.
It even grants agelessness, and someone trying to dispel it will probably trigger the Clash of Wills anyway.
>>47585498
CofD is actually super mechanically heavy for what it's trying to do. While a lot of 2hu's thoughts and conclusions are sketchy when applied to social situations (which doesn't matter to his design philosophy and wherein the true disagreement in this thread lies), but CofD being a blend of narrativist and simulationist play is dead on. It's a game with theatre of the mind combat and rolls based on abstract actions that still wants you to track ammunition and range fields. It's not even a new observation, people have been writing about it when they saw the same thing in Storyteller.
Ideally it should be time to send Storytelling and Storyteller out to pasture and work out a new system from scratch, but that's never going to happen now that the games are licensed. I wonder if we'll ever end up seeing a CofD setting for the StoryPath ruleset.
>>47586807
Sure, if you like trolling, shitposting and literally making official devs cry.
>>47586926
Oh, come off it, Dave's got thicker skin than that. There's even some extra errata that's coming out of this. All of this is still better shitposting than Aspel arguing with half the thread and people complaining about whatever dumb sidebar they read this week. It's certainly better than Beast chat.
>>47586903
There's quite a lot to say about that. What was their Dynasty. What is their Legacy. What is the Emanation Realm like. What is the character's personality like. There is a ridiculous amount to talk about there that doesn't have to do with browbeating us about how terrible the game's mechanics are.
>>47586906
It doesn't really ask you to track ammunition or range. It's a game that repeatedly suggests ignoring the rules and reminds you that they exist only if you feel you need them. It's got a lot of crunch, and it's more mechanical than Fate, for instance, but it's far from a rules heavy crunch game, especially considering you never really NEED to game the system. If you think this game is crunchy, take a look at Shadowrun or Dark Heresy or D&D/Pathfinder. And that's not even touching on games like GURPS, Mutants & Masterminds, or Tri-Stat, where character creation involves several pages of scratch paper and good note taking just to keep from misplacing a few numbers and having to start over.
Storyteller isn't as narrativist as the name would imply, but there are FAR less moving parts than other games.
>>47586906
>that still wants you to track ammunition and range fields
To be fair, the Hurt Locker is trying to implement a system for abstracted ammunition and range: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2K8R3qXyDyoWEo5eVNMN0MtUWc/view
Still, this does not prevent the rest of the system being a confused blend of narrativist and simulationist. Every single Chronicles of Darkness game line still reprints, for example, the precise damage a character takes for overdosing on ammonia, or moderately long (really!) blocks of text on precisely how firearms suppressors and handcuffs works.
Have a look at page 226 of Mage: The Awakening 2e, for example. The *entire, text-only page* is dedicated to half of the rules for flashlights and the rules for personal computers(apparently, the dice bonus between a low-end and top-end computer is a whopping +3, the difference between a novice programmer and a hacker who can get into government and military systems, as per page 32 of Chronicles of Darkness), smartphones, survival gear, climbing gear, crowbars, firearm suppressors, and gas masks. By all accounts, this game is trying to be strangely simulationist by devoting a whole page to such relatively trivial things.
It is completely absurd that the game would go to such lengths to describe such nitty-gritty details, when that word count could be used on actually, as the name of the system implied, Storytelling-related guidelines.
>Ideally it should be time to send Storytelling and Storyteller out to pasture and work out a new system from scratch, but that's never going to happen now that the games are licensed.
Scion 2e will use a new system only vaguely patterned off Storyteller. It seems promising enough.
>>47586980
>There is a ridiculous amount to talk about
There is, and that is exactly why it is pointless to bring it up in this thread. The fine details of my character concern nobody in this thread. The game's mechanics do.
>It doesn't really ask you to track ammunition or range. It's a game that repeatedly suggests ignoring the rules and reminds you that they exist only if you feel you need them.
If that was the case, the Hurt Locker would not feel the need to rewrite the ammunition and range rules.
You claim that Chronicles of Darkness is *not* trying to be crunchy. I counter that with, once again, page 226 of Mage 2e, as I mention in >>47586994.
Building a starting supernatural Chronicles of Darkness character is, quite frankly, even *more* crunch-intensive than building a 1st-level 3.X/Pathfinder character, and that is saying something.
>>47587047
>There is, and that is exactly why it is pointless to bring it up in this thread. The fine details of my character concern nobody in this thread. The game's mechanics do.
This thread is not simply for talking about mechanics, that's why very few of the opening questions ever mention them. For instance, "what is the worst game you played" is not asking about mechanics, it's asking about the group, and the story, and what happened in the game. It concerns other people in the thread because we are much more interested in that than we are you telling us how shitty the game is.
>Building a starting supernatural Chronicles of Darkness character is, quite frankly, even *more* crunch-intensive than building a 1st-level 3.X/Pathfinder character, and that is saying something.
I have literally never had a problem with it.
A fucking Avatarfag cancerous weeb attentionwhores another thread into the ground.
I have literally zero experience with Werewolf, and right now I'm trying to figure out their entire dynamic so I don't just represent them as insane packs of murdering spirit-abominations in my upcoming game.
I've got a handle on most of their relationships with Spirits, powers and so forth, but right now I'm trying to figure out the relationship between various factions and groups of Uratha.
Most other groups seem to be farily relatable given Governance structures, however the only point of reference I can think for with regards to Werewolves is basically urban gangs.
Am I on-point? Or is there a more subtle inter-relation between various Werewolf groups which I'm missing. Also from what I'm interpreting, most packs would make sense to be of Werewolves from just one Tribe, otherwise it'd cause issues with Prey?
>>47587249
Werewolves are like gangs. Gangs or cults. Honestly, that's one of the less obvious similarities between Werewolf and Geist. Werewolves do tend to hide their packs as other mortal groups, though. A bar's regulars. A self help group. A baseball club. An indie game studio. You actually might want to check out The Pack.
Also, it's actually more beneficial if Werewolves are from different tribes. Werewolves can hunt ANY Prey, it's just that the Tribes get bonuses for specific Prey. Which means that having more variations of the Siskur Dah to draw on is better for your little circus. If a Claimed is causing you trouble, having the Storm Lord's Siskur-Dah is super useful, while the Eaters of the Dead helps take down Vampires and other undead.
That's not to say all packs are inter-tribal. Most likely aren't, and the Lodges definitely want you to be part of their rowdy band, but PC packs are expected to be.
Having come into this just now and only having the patience to read this thread and the last half of the previous one, I have no idea why the fuck everyone is mad at this 2hu poster.
The only valid counterargument beyond mindless rage and tears I've seen raised is >>47586240. What the fuck is going on.
This whole discussion has actually been tremendously enlightening, I might try and suss out some kind of attack of opportunity rule for my next game. Lets be clear, I've seen the exact scenarios this 2hu-poster is outlining take place in an actual game, not a whiteroom. You can START a melee combatant IN MELEE with some guy with a gun and he's still going to just back away and shoot them, forcing them to charge every turn (Which as 2hufag raised actually prevents a number of combat maneuvers), while the gunman maintains their defense and a higher weapon damage (For the same weight-class anyway). As a melee combatant you need to not only win initiative, but also instantly cripple (IE -2 wound penalties or more) or kill your opponent with your first strike (Something far more difficult to do mundanely in 2e than it was in 1e, where it was already ridiculously hard)
I'm thinking something like, if you all out attack you can also deal base weapon damage if your opponent leaves melee or tries to fire any 2 handed ranged weapon, until your next turn? Unless you are grappled, stunned, otherwise disabled obviously. Unfortunately EVEN THIS ridiculous measure would leave open a pistol user just Arm Wracking or stunning you.
oWoD martial arts rules from KotE if anyone wants them.
>>47587518
I have never been in any situation where it wasn't either possible to trap the gunman or just run away from him. I've also never had a fight in the middle of a field or empty street in WoD. I'm also like 90% certain that if you start your turn next to someone, you have to contend with their Defense, even if you go "I back up".
Also, if you really want an Attack of Opportunity, how about something that requires Dexterity 2 and Brawl or Weaponry 2 and if someone tries to move away from you, you deal 2B or 1L to them an stop them from moving.
Although, again, I'm pretty sure if you start your turn in melee, you have to contend with their Defense.
>>47587654
That's nice
>>47587667
Literally not how it works. Read the rules, Aspel. You don't even have to be far, you just need like 10 feet of room to go 'lol nope, no Defense for you'.
Even in a 25 foot square room, that's plenty of space.
>>47587737
Well then there's a much easier fix. Not that 25 feet of open space is just all over the place.
>>47587749
Can you seriously not read? If you're like 10 feet away, they don't get their Defense.
>>47587692
That's passive-aggressive
>>47587754
Actually, in Mage 2e's book there's no mention of Defense against Firearms EVER applying. Same with the corebook.
This actually does seem like a drastic oversight, though.
Regardless, the point I was making is that "plenty of space" is not always available.
>>47587896
Why?
Doesn't defense represent the ability to block, parry or otherwise misdirect melee attacks?
Without supernatural aid, how can one defend against a bullet?
>>47588104
Getting behind cover before the other guy can get a bead on you.
Moving erratically so someone is less likely to be aiming at you when they pull the trigger.
Providing a smaller profile to the enemy by twisting your body to the side instead of facing them head on.
Diving to the ground.
All of these will lower your chances of being hit in certain scenarios.
"You cannot apply your character’s Defense against firearms attacks without supernatural assistance, whether it’s from a spell, an Attainment, or some other power that grants Defense against gunfire."
pg. 217
Hard and fast rule.
>>47588147
>Getting behind cover before the other guy can get a bead on you.
Should have done that beforehand.
>Moving erratically so someone is less likely to be aiming at you when they pull the trigger.
Doesn't actually work that well.
>Providing a smaller profile to the enemy by twisting your body to the side instead of facing them head on.
Good way to get a lateral wound through your chest cavity which is non-survivable.
>Diving to the ground.
Now you're on the ground. The gunman drops his point of aim slightly if you have no intervening cover. This is why infantrymen avoid open fields or "linear danger areas" like the plague.
>All of these will lower your chances of being hit in certain scenarios.
>certain scenarios.
Should have used your move to get behind cover, then.
>>47588187
>Doesn't actually work that well.
Tell me how effectively using your arms allows you to "block, parry or otherwise misdirect melee attacks" against someone using a claymore, please.
>Good way to get a lateral wound through your chest cavity which is non-survivable.
Tell me how effectively using your arms allows you to "block, parry or otherwise misdirect melee attacks" against someone using a fire axe without having their ulnar arteries severed and bleeding out, please.
I don't see why people are so aggressively defensive with the 2hu anon. All the arguments against what he says can be summed up with "but the ST knows better than to follow the rules" or "there's no way that would actually happen in a game" even though if you just follow the rules, it will, and not every ST will know the system well enough to know which rule to follow and which to not.
>Magic generally doesn't reach beyond the boundaries of earth's atmosphere
Why? I mean, you can teleport to the Pocket Dimension, and Pocket Dimension isn't even part of physical reality.
>>47588187
Cover doesn't work so well in this game because you have to do nothing but hide behind it. Unless you're talking concealment, which is shitty for other reasons.
>>47588225
People get super whiny when people imply systems they like are anything less than perfect. Oh sure, they'll make some comments on minor flaws, but when it comes to actually big things, they'll bitch, moan, and whine nonstop about ST Fiat and how that wouldn't really happen.
I actually like Mage, and as someone who's interested in running it, 2hufag's commentary proves, as usual, to be enlightening.
>>47588225
This has been explained a million times in the last 2 threads
So this entire thread just ended up as an explanation of how whoever wrote nWoD 2e's combat is a retard who's never been in so much as a schoolyard brawl in his life?
We have covered a few Space spells before, such as Space 3's Ban, which DaveB has confirmed to be an irresistible instant win button against anyone who cannot cross worlds. However, one outstanding spell I have not seen anyone speaking of (save for myself in >>47567535) is Space 1's The Outward and Inward Eye. It is absolutely fantastic and solves many potential problems.
>The Outward and Inward Eye (Space •)
>Practice: Unveiling
>Primary Factor: Duration
>Suggested Rote Skills: Firearms, Investigation, Occult
>If all locations are one, it must follow that all directions areone as well. While this spell is active, the subject can see and hear in all directions and from all points within her sensory range simultaneously. She can see what’s happening behind her, on the far side of a door, or beneath her feet. She cannot perceive things farther away than her normal perceptions might allow, nor can she see through darkness. In essence, it’s as though everything happening around her were spread out on a flat plain, bereft of obstruction. This allows her to cast sensory-range spells on subjects she might not ordinarily be able to perceive.
>The subject is also nearly impossible to ambush or surprise — barring exceptional camouflage or a tremendous distraction to draw her attention, all such attempts are reduced to a chance die. Finally, the subject may reduce any penalties due to range, cover, or concealment (but not darkness or similar poor visibility) by the spell’s Potency.
>+2 Reach: The mage may use the spell to see through an existing warp or shortcut through Space; a Distortion Iris, the effects of a Scrying spell, or a magical portal created with Co-Location are all applicable. With additional Arcana based on the nature of the portal, other kinds of Iris may be seen through at the Storyteller’s discretion.
>>47588374
At ground level, the distance to the horizon is usually three miles or so, so this one spell lets you keep tabs on *everything* within that massive radius. Your senses bore straight through any and all obstructions. You can spy on an entire city with ease this way. It is not quite omniscience, but it is close.
Better still, since it is a lowly one-dot spell, it is cheap to acquire as a Rote at character creation. A starting character with Space 1 and a Rote for this can spend a free Reach for instant action casting, a free Reach for Advanced Duration, a free Reach for Advanced Scale (touching the entire cabal to buff its members with this spell), and two free Reaches and as many additional Arcana as needed for the upgraded effect.
Remember that as per page 111 of Mage 2e, "When casting the spell, the mage creates a dice pool based on her Gnosis and her dots in the highest Arcanum included in the spell." Not highest Practice, but highest Arcanum. Thus, a starting Acanthus mage who includes their Fate 3 to see through Arcadian Irises (e.g. to the Hedge) or Time 3 to see through Time-based Irises (e.g. to the Mists) can then use that higher Arcanum rating instead of their dots in Space.
>>47588335
And people defending it while spewing salt all over the place, yes.
>>47588272
The best part was when Dave flat out said one of the things 2hufag was talking about works, and then someone kept speging out that "NO SANE ST WOULD EVER ALLOW IT!".
>>47588387
Glad to see sticking with 1e was the right choice. There's literally nothing I've seen so far that isn't either completely retarded or something that Mirrors or Armory Reloaded didn't already do better.
>>47588386
>She cannot perceive things farther away than her normal perceptions might allow
>You can spy on an entire city with ease this way
Not really
>>47586204
If it's any consolation, I already ignore every one of his posts just like I try and ignore Aspel's.
>>47588406
The Outward and Inward Eye explicitly removes obstructions to your senses. You can use it to
>see what’s happening behind her, on the far side of a door, or beneath her feet
Exactly as the spell says.
In other words, the only thing impeding you is the curvature of the earth itself.
>>47588421
And the fact that human eyes are actually pretty shitty at detail at any real distance.
How about we make a Mage general
>>47588403
Eh, while he's pointed out some problems, overall I find 2e a fantastic upgrade.
Wifweres are worth a damn, for instance. Warform isn't 100% going to get your ass ganked anymore.
>>47588460
>Also, this spell should *probably* clarify that it does not extend sensory range for the purpose of spellcasting
Why? Is already states it doesn't improve your range of senses.
>>47588374
>>47588386
>>47588406
>>47588421
Now, here is the tricky part about The Outward and Inward Eye, or even Scrying: which supernaturally-augmented senses work through it?
Can Mage Sight work through this spell?
What of Forces 1's Nightvision?
What about Spirit 1's Coaxing the Spirits?
How about Attainments such as Death 2's Eyes of the Dead, Mind 2's Mind's Eye, or Spirit 2's Spirit Eyes?
If the Outward and Inward Eye is compatible with such mystic senses, then there is little in a city that a mage with Space 1 and a Rote for this spell that they will *not* be privy to.
>>47588426
If it is within your sensory range, it is a valid point for the Outward and Inward Eye to let you:
>see and hear in all directions and from all points within her sensory range simultaneously
from.
>>47588478
The Outward and Inward Eye:
>allows her to cast sensory-range spells on subjects she might not ordinarily be able to perceive.
In other words, you can have your sight and hearing cut through any and all obstructions as you gaze from one end of the city to another, and then cast a sensory range spell against your target who happens to be in a bathroom, no Sympathetic Range Attainment needed.
This is obviously very powerful.
Also, this spell should *probably* clarify that it does not extend sensory range for the purpose of the spell itself, lest it loop upon itself and allow a mage to see anything and everything in the world.
Is oWoD's VtM actually better than VtR or is it just nostalgia that makes a lot of people say that? I want to run a Vampire game but I don't know which one.
>>47588528
Nostalgia. VtR is better.
>>47588522
>cut through any and all obstructions as you gaze from one end of the city to another
To see a teensy tiny dot which is intistinguishable from every other teensy tiny dot.
>>47586204
I don't think you understand. He's not asking for more rules, he's asking for better rules.
Rules are incredibly important. They create the framework around which the whole game revolves. The ST can ignore, add or change rules, but if anything that just showcases how important rules are.
Especially when it comes to combat, which is one of the most mechanically driven parts of almost any game. Of course the narrative is still important, but mechanics rule the day when it comes to combat.
Now that that's out of the way, his point regarding this seems to simply be that guns outperform melee weapons even when in close range. And he's pointed out a variety of reasons why this is the case.
While I don't agree with a lot of other things he's said*, his gripes with this seem completely legitimate, and despite the frequent denials and complaining about him, I've seen no decent counter arguments so far. I think it's fairly safe to say he's probably right.
*Like saying CofD is more rules heavy than 3e is pretty silly. CofD is a rules heavy game for sure, but it's not quite THAT rules heavy. Although it isn't that far behind.
What you need to understand is, a game having flaws does not instantly mean its terrible. It just means it has flaws. Every game has flaws.
Talking about those flaws is important. At the immediate level, it brings the issue to the attention of STs, who might then decide to homebrew it away. It brings the issue to attention to players who might want to play a character with a focus on melee weapons, and prompts them to bring this issue up with their STs first. And most importantly, in the long run it might bring it to the attention of the devs, and maybe at some point down the line they'll decide to release a rules revision (optional or otherwise) that fixes this issue.
Acknowledgement and discussion is the first step to healing. Vehemently denying and trying to stop any discussion of a games' flaws only hurts it in the long run.
>>47588595
Which would be the case if not for The Outward and Inward Eye allowing the mage (and anyone the mage affects, trivial enough with a Reach for Advanced Scale) to:
>see and hear in all directions and from all points within her sensory range simultaneously
If a mage is looking out across a cityscape, *all* points in that cityscape are "camera points" from which the mage is seeing and hearing, thereby allowing the reading of a newspaper from the other side of a metropolis. Furthermore, the mage could then cast a sensory range spell to affect whoever is reading that newspaper on the other side of the city.
>>47588630
>Like saying CofD is more rules heavy than 3e is pretty silly.
I never once said that Chronicles of Darkness is more rules-heavy than 3.X/PF overall. What I *did* say was that building a starting supernatural Chronicles of Darkness character is, quite frankly, even *more* crunch-intensive than building a 1st-level 3.X/Pathfinder character.
>>47588630
>guns outperform melee weapons even when in close range
Just like in real life! Guns obsoleted melee weapons for a reason.
>>47588630
God, where have people like you been over the last half a day where the people like who you replied to just wouldn't do anything but shitpost and scream for him to just shut up? I'm glad you're here now, but damn, do I wish you were here before.
>>47588456
There were optional rules in Armory Reloaded for that too (regeneration equal to Primal Urge, 8-again to all Strength-based checks in warform including melee attacks, taking the higher of Wits/Dex for defense in more animalistic forms). Try again.
>>47588528
They're pretty much completely different, to be honest. Their feel, themes and general setup are not much alike at all, so some people like one, some like the other, and some even like both for different reasons. There's a great many reasons to like either one, it all depends on what you're looking for from them.
I was going to do a big writeup about the pros and cons, themes and differences between the two, but since I'm pretty solidly on the side of oWoD it'd probably end up pretty biased.
>>47588654
You are grossly misinterpreting The Outward and Inward eye
>>47588663
Look, there's a difference between "guns are better than melee weapons" and "guns are trivially easy to kill people with but you can stab someone for days and barely tickle them".
The lethality of melee weapons shouldn't be understated, basically. If someone shanks you, you shouldn't be able to walk it off because you have some thick clothes on - it should be possible to kill you as dead as if someone shot you.
>>47588693
>If someone shanks you, you shouldn't be able to walk it off because you have some thick clothes on
Stay mad, DIO.
>>47588155
1. The Outward and Inward Eye explicitly lets you see and hear through doors and the ground. This is stated in the spell.
2. The Outward and Inward Eye explicitly lets you see and hear things as if everything was on a flat plain bereft of obstruction. This is also stated in the spell.
3. The Outward and Inward Eye lets you cast sensory range spells on subjects you are perceiving through it. This is *also* stated in the spell.
4. The only real limitations on the Outward and Inward Eye are your sensory range and its inability to pierce darkness (and the latter can arguably be circumvented with Death 1 or Forces 1). However, considering that you can outright see through doors and the ground, this means that it is counting your sensory range through any and all obstructions.
The Outward and Inward Eye, as currently written, is ludicrously powerful.
>>47588528
VtR is just Twilight.
>I want to run a Vampire game but I don't know which one.
If you want an emo-driven game, go with V:tR, otherwise V:tM.
>>47588663
Guns made melee weapons obsolete because they're better at range. Because they're so good at range that you'll rarely ever get close in a straight up fight (unless you're a sneaky git)
Once you're close enough, a knife is a lot more practical than a pistol, let alone something like a rifle which is practically useless once someone is too close to you.
Doesnt defense apply to firearms at close range?
>>47588714
>hurr Requiem is Twilight
here's your (you)
>>47588528
Honestly? This is what the Vampire translation book is for. VtR has far better rules, but if you like the fluff for Masquerade better you can run it in that easily.
And vice-versa if you want to try and see if you can graft V20's updates to how Requiem works.
>>47588683
How the hell is it supposed to work then, genius?
That is the problem with these threads, you guys say shit like this with nothing to back it up.
>>47588678
Try again what? I like the new edition, although I know there's flaws. I even said I, personally, find it an overall fantastic upgrade for having those rules built in. I'm not trying to call your opinion bad, man.
Another issue I am currently seeing is that the book has a very poor habit of using the discrete terms of "sympathy" and "temporal sympathy."
The Space arcanum includes "sympathy" in its purview, and can manipulate "sympathy." For instance, Space 2's Ward bars off any spells that work on "sympathy," and Space 3's Web-Weaver can bolster a "sympathetic connection."
However, Time uses a different concept known as "temporal sympathy." This was perhaps a very poor choice of words, because it is very unclear whether or not the Space Arcanum can apply its purview of "sympathy" to "temporal sympathy." For instance, does Ward block off spells that use "temporal sympathy"? Can Web-Weaver strengthen "temporal sympathy"?
Even worse is that as per page 193, Space 2's Sympathetic Range Attainment and Time 2's Temporal Sympathy Attainment both use a "sympathy Yantra," as opposed to a "sympathy/temporal sympathy Yantra."
Perhaps they should have called Time's unique mechanic something like "temporal weight" instead.
>>47588745
According to page 90 of the Chronicles of Darkness core rulebook, it is *supposed* to:
>Firearms in Close Combat
>Any firearm larger than Size 1 is too big to accurately shoot someone when fists and crowbars are the order of the day. In close combat, the target’s Defense against Firearms attacks is increased by the gun’s (Size +1). If using a gun larger than a pistol to bludgeon the opponent, treat it as an improvised crowbar (see Weapon Traits, p. 268).
Again, nothing is stopping a gunman from moving away from or past a melee assailant.
>>47588630
>Especially when it comes to combat, which is one of the most mechanically driven parts of almost any game. Of course the narrative is still important, but mechanics rule the day when it comes to combat.
The problem is, the combat he's describing is balanced and only slow because he picks the most inefficient method to go around it (two people wearing bulletproof armor shooting at each other from behind cover). Many ways to make combat more interesting (and final) were offered by posters.
Even with all the shit, he's describing a perfectly balanced fight that proves that armor and cover is doing what it's supposed to do.
>>47584895
I saved her life and told her to piss off afterwardsIn my second playthrough, because in the first she got caught by the Sabbat and drained before my very eyes
>>47588759
Okay. I'm just very unhappy with the general changes 2e brought in (all weapons deal lethal damage because why? lol let's rip off Fate's aspects and make advancement suck).
My biggest beef is with the combat: it's like whoever wrote it didn't understand why 1e did what it did and doesn't understand why there was an aiming action to begin with. Fuck weapon initiative penalties with a rake.
I like oWoD combat better. Faster and deadlier.
>>47588770
The argument was that melee weapons are inexplicably far less effective than firearms even in close combat.
Two people in kevlar vests behind "substantial concealment" (not cover, because remember, actual cover is something you have to fully hide behind) shooting each other with feeble light pistols is *still* faster than them trying to slap-fight by contending with each other's Defense.
>>47588804
>faster and deadlier
>soak rolls
>damage rolls separate from the attack check
kek
nWoD 1e had best combat, accept no substitute. Perforate anything with enough lead and it goes down. Works best if you decide blasting someone in the brain is a 9/8-again
>>47588822
You get penalties at the second health box and really bad at 6 (-5 to all rolls). While in nWoD you got... -1 at 6 health box, with Stamina 3. Still faster and deadlier.
>>47588758
Basically it bends perception to have a clear and unobstructed line of sight in all directions. Moving around obstacles. It doesn't move your origin point of perception, nor does it magnify your vision.
If someone's 30km away in a metropolitan sprawl, then you could potentially see him, if you knew where you were looking. However in doing so, you'd have a "clear" line of sight to someone 30km away, who would be incredibly tiny to your perception, and visually devoid of all detail, making it impossible to tell if that were your target.
It doesn't move your sight to a distant location, it brings that distant location into direct line of sight.
Say you added Life 3 to ludicrously enhance your vision, then yes, you could snipe people with spells anywhere in the city, while using Life (or Mind) spells to near perfectly determine who your target is.
If you just want to explode a dingly little house on the outskirts of town, and you know roughly where it is. You can use Outward and Inward Eye for that, but without other Arcanum to back it up, or at short range, it's not a precision tool.
>>47588804
>oWoD combat is fast
CofD is one roll for one action.
Done.
No back to front initiative and multiple-step combat actions.
>>47588817
>Two people in kevlar vests behind "substantial concealment" (not cover, because remember, actual cover is something you have to fully hide behind) shooting each other with feeble light pistols is *still* faster than them trying to slap-fight by contending with each other's Defense.
again you're choosing the most inefficient way to go about it. And the different ways of going around your artificially induced slow combat are still valid
it's also inaccurate because the armor you added to make it last longer isn't protecting you as much against melee
every time you hit you're getting at least 1 Lethal
>>47588791
Ok, yeah, the hardon for WEAPONS KILLLL is utterly retarded and I 100% agree with you there. In any games we do, we just ignore that rule(Yes, rule 0). I just enjoy a lot of the other parts of it, and the whole conditions system is super nice for my group.
The topic of Temporal Sympathy allowing mages to manipulate history with ease has already been covered in the past, but I have only seen a passing mention of Shifting Sands ( https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/47069397/#47078336 ).
>Shifting Sands (Time •••)
>Practice: Fraying
>Primary Factor: Potency
>Suggested Rote Skills: Academics, Occult, Survival
>The mage may step back through time a short distance, undoing a few precious seconds. This spell sends the subject back through time a number of turns equal to Potency. The subject retains any injuries and Conditions gained in the undone turns, and spent Mana and Willpower do not return. Spells cast on her person in the undone time remain as long as she cast them. All other spells she may have cast or had cast on her in the intervening time are canceled. Until the subject catches up to the present, the distortion caused by this spell is visible under Active Time Mage Sight. Once she does so, any changes she made to history become Lasting.
>+1 Reach: The subject travels back a full scene. This Reach effect may be applied multiple times.
My, my. A starting, 0 XP mage with Time 3, Shifting Sands, and a Rote for it has three free Reaches. They can spend those free Reaches on instant action casting, Advanced Duration, and the scene-rewind function, and then take a -4 penalty on the casting roll (heavily offset by a Mudra Yantra) to target four subjects.
Congratulations: The entire cabal has now leapt back in time by a whole scene (which seems to default to "an hour" in Mage 2e).
Need I elaborate on how story-warping it is for a 0 XP mage to be able to let the *entire party* travel back in time a scene and undo anything they disliked happening? As established in >>47554486, with a little XP under their belt for Time 4 and Space 2, the mage can take the entire cabal across the world with Temporal Stutter and then use either Present as Past or Prophecy to instantaneously, mundanely Socially outmaneuver someone.
>>47586394
>support beams
What's a support beam?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_dnYMzTcnc
>>47588894
That Temporal Stutter optional effect should really be Space 4.
No, Space spells don't do anything to temporal sympathy. When a spell affects / uses temporal sympathy it says so. That one falls squarely into a reader having to make a special effort to be confused.
Outward and Inward Eye lets you see around corners and obstructions, see what's behind you, etc, but it doesn't enhance your vision. You might see that there's a book around the corner, but if it's fifty meters away you wouldn't be able to read it.
You can, of course, combine it with Forces' "Zoom In" to achieve what you're describing. Or just make a scrying window looking upon whatever distant thing has attracted your interest.
First edition had a hard limit on what "sensory range" meant, but we decided it was so dependent on both size of the subject and the detail required. If I can see there's a person a mile away across a field, I could drop a spell on them if it did something I didn't need any details about them for like flingig them up into the air or putting a ban around them, but I couldn't (for example) heal a stab wound they had if they were so far away I couldn't see the injury. Common sense and Storyteller adjudication is necessary.
Or, if that freaks you out, just say you have to be within 200 feet of your subject like first ed did, and try to ignore the spells (like weather controlling ones) that makes not work any more.
>>47588886
>, the hardon for WEAPONS KILLLL is utterly retarded and I 100% agree with you there.
why? you want players to have more a chance for survival or don't think being beate n with large metal objects is lethal?
>>47588854
>It doesn't move your origin point of perception
For the purposes of sight and hearing, it actually does. That is precisely what "the subject can see and hear in all directions and from all points within her sensory range simultaneously" means. Every point within sensory range is a "camera point," even if it is behind a door or beneath the mage's feet.
>>47588880
You are assuming that the melee weapons can accurately hit in the first place if they have to penetrate Defense.
>>47588894
This, by the way, furthers the notion that any mage who does *not* have Time 2's Constant Presence cast upon them is a dead man walking, because otherwise, someone is going to warp history to undo the mage (literally or metaphorically).
>>47588918
>When a spell affects / uses temporal sympathy it says so. That one falls squarely into a reader having to make a special effort to be confused.
Or perhaps they could be called something other than "sympathy" and "temporal sympathy," with both of them using something called a "sympathy Yantra."
>>47588894
>Temporal Sympathy
Notto dissu shitto again.
>>47588918
>Outward and Inward Eye lets you see around corners and obstructions, see what's behind you, etc, but it doesn't enhance your vision. You might see that there's a book around the corner, but if it's fifty meters away you wouldn't be able to read it.
If this is the case, then the Outward and Inward Eye needs a clarification, because it outright says, "the subject can see and hear in all directions and from all points within her sensory range simultaneously."
Whoever had written it had done a poor job of wording the spell if it is *not* supposed to actually turn every point within sensory range into a "camera point."
>>47588957
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHlnCzalw1s
>>47588957
> "the subject can see and hear in all directions and from all points within her sensory range simultaneously."
That does sound like you can "send your eye" to place, that you see where you are standing.
>>47588949
Funnily enough, Shifting Sands, Temporal Stutter, Present as Past, and Prophecy all do *not* use "temporal sympathy." They manipulate time through other means.
Temporal Stutter with Space 2 uses "sympathy," but not "temporal sympathy."
>>47588936
>For the purposes of sight and hearing, it actually does
That you're seeing from a "point" as opposed to direct LOS makes no difference.
What DOES matter, is that the spell doesn't enhancing your senses.
Meaning you couldn't eavesdrop on a conversation on the other side of town, as that's further than your normal perception as stated when it explains "She cannot perceive things farther away than her normal perceptions might allow".
>>47588957
>Whoever had written it had done a poor job of wording the spell
You. Are TALKING. To. The. Guy. Who. Wrote. It. You. Inbred. Mong.
God, confound this 2hu fag, confound him! He drives me to drink!
Then you did a poor job, mate.
>>47588770
I'm not really sure what you're talking about. Is this in response to something that was being discussed last thread? I wasn't around then, sorry.
Either way, that's irrelevant to his point about melee weapons.
>>47588654
I guess I misunderstood your meaning by
>Chronicles of Darkness manages to be more heavily rules-grounded than D&D 3.X, and that is saying something.
I suppose I agree that creating a 1st level character in 3.x is slightly less mechanically involved.
>>47588664
Sleeping, working or preparing for their next game, probably.
Also, thank you.
>>47589011
Another sign that 2hufag is posting, he doesn't specify which person his replies are aimed at when he posts them.
>>47589032
Nah, bro, I'm a different guy. I didn't care to click on the number.
Havent seen anyone so petulant and thinks he knows more than the person who wrote the game.
>>47589032
You're getting pretty desperate.
>>47589045
If somebody writes shit, other people will try to make sense of it.
>>47588928
Being smacked around with a bat isn't as lethal as having sharp metal objects perforate your arteries and organs. It doesn't take a genius to understand this.
>>47588863
I think he meant more in the sense of the amount of rounds you play out. As in, how fast it is in universe, how deadly it is.
Especially if you use the extras rules (and you really should), oWoD combat was very deadly.
>>47588918
>>47588957
>>47588980
>>47588998
>>47589011
If the spell is not supposed to improve the subject's ability to see at a distance, then it should not explicitly say, "the subject can see and hear in all directions and from all points within her sensory range simultaneously."
Really, what *else* could that mean, if not using a point a couple of miles away as your new "camera point"?
It should be reworded slightly.
>>47589045
Game writers are not infallible. If they intended their spell to do X, but as written, it does Y, then that is a problem that should be addressed.
>>47588822
I highly disliked how firearms had bonuses to hit rather than actual damage ratings. Seems a little silly.
>>47589051
You have to be kidding me what is internal bleeding and broken bones.
>>47589058
>"the subject can see and hear in all directions within her sensory range simultaneously."
>>47588936
>You are assuming that the melee weapons can accurately hit in the first place if they have to penetrate Defense.
because they can
again, disarm, grapple, willpower, fighting styles, all out attacks
blahblahblah
>>47589061
I honestly didn't mind that, given successes directly translated to damage. Besides, in terms of firearms you'd expect something that uses rifle bullets or that's designed for high-calibre target shooting to be decently accurate.
The real offender is fighting styles and how broken they got. Never, ever allow Combat Marksmanship unless you like seeing everything die in about two turns
>>47589061
Spend WP and your weapon magically gets 3 more dice. Yeah, it's dumb.
>>47588980
I think you're missing the "from all points" bit.
That does seem to imply that you can essentially view an area "from" any area within your sensory range.
>>47589071
>what is bashing damage becoming lethal
Takes a lot of force to break bones, the human body's quite resilient
>>47589025
I just want to see actual arguments, not a bullet point list of
>Shut up you autist
>No one cares
>RAW doesn't need to match RAI
>WHITE ROOM
>No ST would let you
Because for a while, it's all there was, and I was going insane trying to argue against that. Your more then welcome, because it's nice to see sane people again.
2hufag's an autist. He's a number's autist. This is what he does. When people ignore the numbers, it just dives me insane watching because literally all the man wants is better rules for a better game.
Bashing damage is an abstraction. Having a mild cut is just bashing even be a cut. Lethal damage is something that is dangerous to your life.
>>47589098
that's a misconception, more people die from blunt force trauma than bullet wounds or sharp force injuries
because people think blunt objects don't hurt as much
>>47589129
>citation needed
>>47588949
>>47588987
Also, the important part about Shifting Stands, Temporal Stutter, Present as Past, and Prophecy *not* using "temporal sympathy" is that you need no connection to your intended target at all.
You can target them as they legitimately were in the past, so if they were in a vulnerable position a scene ago, you can exploit that. That said, if there is *any* chance at all to persuade them mundanely, you might just try to use Present as Past or Prophecy to instantly open all of their Doors because of your well-time words.
Time must be a headache for STs to adjudicate, even without "temporal sympathy," and Time 2's Constant Presence is near-mandatory on every mage of a certain renown.
>>47589074
>>47589092
The point is, if you are leisurely relaxing in your hotel room and look out the window to see the street below, you can then "shift your vantage point" to view things from street level.
Of course, you do not need to do this, because you are seeing and hearing everything from all directions and from all points *simultaneously*. If this is not what the spell is supposed to do, then that passage deserves a rewrite.
>>47589077
We have covered this in previous threads. Willpower is better spent blasting a target with a firearm, but if someone dares to spend Willpower in an attack against you, you may as well respond by spending Willpower in kind.
All-Out Attack is just a +2 (that still goes against Defense). It gives up your own Defense (meaning a melee attack against you can *then* devastate you), and you cannot use it in conjunction with a charge.
>>47589025
>>Chronicles of Darkness manages to be more heavily rules-grounded than D&D 3.X, and that is saying something.
Certainly poor wording on my part, and I apologize for that. By "rules-grounded," I meant "deferring to rules frequently," not necessarily "sheer volume of rules."
>>47589080
More deadly is not at all equal to more accurate.
For example, a high caliber handgun is not necessarily more accurate, often times the opposite at that. But when they hit, they'll still tear you up more. Or just overpenetrate but that's a whole other issue.
>>47589115
there were several lists of other things to do in the last thread, just like there were when the rules came out
they're coupled with his faulty white room because his faulty white room literally isn't something that comes up in games and will never involve players (it's two npcs fighting each other with no assistance/deviation of attack)
and it's still balanced
>>47589147
Then why are so many .44 Magnum and .50 AE weapons praised for their shot accuracy?
>>47589134
http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1680107-overview
>>>47589144
>We have covered this in previous threads. Willpower is better spent blasting a target with a firearm, but if someone dares to spend Willpower in an attack against you, you may as well respond by spending Willpower in kind.
yeah hah that was your justification for not doing anything than attacking, because anything else involves risk, despite having your strawmen sit there plinking at each other endlessly knowing one is going to die
>All-Out Attack is just a +2 (that still goes against Defense). It gives up your own Defense (meaning a melee attack against you can *then* devastate you), and you cannot use it in conjunction with a charge.
you can save your all out attack for when they're on the ground and you have a +2 against them, or when you disarmed them and they don't have a weapon they can take advantage of your lack of defens with
>>47589144
>We have covered this in previous threads. Willpower is better spent blasting a target with a firearm, but if someone dares to spend Willpower in an attack against you, you may as well respond by spending Willpower in kind.
The characters you chose only have 1 Willpower.
Statistically the one who dominates with a Willpower-enhanced attack first is going to have the edge, even if the other character uses their WP.
>>47589150
This still fails to address the ultimate point of contending against Defense (which is *higher* in Chronicles of Darkness than the older combat system, due to adding Athletics to Defense) being the downfall of melee attacks compared to firearms, which can simply ignore that potentially daunting value.
>>47589166
>yeah hah that was your justification for not doing anything than attacking, because anything else involves risk, despite having your strawmen sit there plinking at each other endlessly knowing one is going to die
If you use All-Out Attack, you have just lost your Defense. It is quite possible that you are losing more than you are gaining; after all, if melee is so viable as you say, then the other person could surely exploit that major opening.
>you can save your all out attack for when they're on the ground
The Knocked Down Tilt allows a Dexterity + Athletics roll (with no penalties) as a reflexive action to kip up and ignore it.
>or when you disarmed them and they don't have a weapon
We have already covered this as well. This just delays them by a turn, because as per page 88 of the Chronicles of Darkness core rulebook, all it takes is an instant action to pick up a dropped weapon. The disarm action does nothing but make the weapon drop, short of an exceptional success.
>>47589166
>absolutely nothing supporting his claim
>just a blanket treatment of all forms of blunt force trauma, including car crashes which deal lethal damage by nWoD rules
http://theonyxpath.com/changeling-20thanthology-all-call/
Greetings, aspiring writers of Changeling-related fiction. I want your words.
Here’s what you need to know:
The anthology is going to include 10 stories, about 5000 words each. I haven’t hired anyone to write for it yet. I haven’t even decided if I’m going to write one (hint: I probably will, which would mean there are nine slots up for grabs).
I am accepting submissions. Indeed, if you want to contribute a story, I am requiring submissions. Yes, this includes freelancers who are working on other OPP books.
Submissions are open from the time this post goes live until August 1st. At that time, I will close submissions and pick ten (maybe nine) folks from the submitters. Submissions will not be accepted after August 1st.
Submissions for this work a little differently than our normal submission process. See below.
>>47589115
You're welcome.
I just think that good discussion is healthy for a game, you can't deal with a flaw if you don't know it's there in the first place.
And besides that, it makes for a much more interesting read than whatever this shit is. Damn it's a chore to read through.
>>47589162
Same reason so many lower caliber guns are. They're well made.
Do you guys just play the game for the fluff?
Would explain why you go REEEEEEEEEEE when someone calls out shit rules.
>>47589304
>Do you guys just play the game for the fluff?
If I wanted to play a game for the rules, I wouldn't play one with a system as simple as CofD.
>>47589304
I'm sure a lot of people do, White Wolf (and Onyx Path) has never been known for their stellar systems, moreso for their interesting settings, characters and stories.
But even then the majority still use the rules, and it's an important part of the game. It is, and has been ever since they were founded, one of the major things White Wolf (and now Onyx Path) need to try and improve their abilities with.
>>47589304
>Do you guys just play the game for the fluff?
I just come here to discuss homebrew ideas, I'm only getting pissed off with 2hu because he's eating up the post count and making it so we can't discuss ANYTHING.
>>47589304
Shit rules, shit system.
>>47589333
You don't discuss anything, senpai.
>>47589346
Don't call me senpai, baka
>>47589333
I don't see why you can't have another discussion at the same time.
>>47589362
Cuz he gets triggered easily.
2hu anon, what's some cool shit that can be done with Prime, Forces, Death and Matter?
>>47589395
Since the topic has moved on, let us take a few steps away from the "golden children" that are Fate, Time, and to a lesser extend, Mind and Space. Let us have a look at a couple of Matter and Prime spells.
>Hidden Hoard (Matter ••)
>Practice: Veiling
>Primary Factor: Duration
>Suggested Rote Skills: Larceny, Occult, Subterfuge
>This spell renders Matter difficult to detect. It isn’t invisibility, precisely; rather, the spell veils the subject’s connection to the Supernal truths, making it seem insignificant and beneath notice. Mundane attempts to detect the subject fail automatically. Spells and powers that would detect the veiled object are subject to a Clash of Wills.
How does Hidden Hoard work if the object is, itself, concealing someone? Suppose someone has thrown a blanket over themselves (presumably, they are also using Space 1's The Outward and Inward Eye to see right past it), such that it drapes and drags across the floor, and then casts Hidden Hoard upon the blanket. What happens, exactly?
>>47589438
>Pierce Deception (Prime •)
>Practice: Unveiling
>Primary Factor: Duration
>Suggested Rote Skills: Investigation, Medicine, Occult
>Prime is the Arcanum of pure Truth, and no falsehood may stand before it. By means of this spell, the subject sees illusions, phantasms, and lies for what they are. The spell sees through mundane falsehoods the subject perceives automatically; magical illusion or deception automatically provokes a Clash of Wills.
>This spell only reveals “active” untruths: the subject would see that someone with dyed hair isn’t really a blonde, or recognize a lie when she heard it, but she wouldn’t know that a Wall Street executive has been committing tax fraud for years just by looking at him. If she got a look at his tax return, however, she would see that it was a falsehood.
>+1 Reach: In addition to sensing falsehoods, the subject gets some symbolic sense of what the actual truth is, veiled in Supernal symbolism and metaphor.
I have seen this mentioned before, but it bears repeating. For a one-dot spell, this is astoundingly good for anyone who intends on getting into any kind of social situations. Not even the highest Manipulation + Subterfuge can stand against Pierce Deception, and magical deception is likewise pitted against a Clash of Wills.
Pierce Deception arguably automatically trumps even Time 4's dreaded Present as Past or Prophecy for instantaneously opening up all Doors, provided that the Social maneuvering could be construed as deceptive in some way.
>>47589193
>The Knocked Down Tilt allows a Dexterity + Athletics roll (with no penalties) as a reflexive action to kip up and ignore it.
You can Dex+Ath roll only if you haven't acted yet in the turn, otherwise you are prone and have to spend next action standing up (if you want to stand up)
>>47589362
Here is one thing I came up with and that is Hosted Vampires, Hosted Vampires are kind of obvious, they are members of the Kindred who have become fused to one of the Shartha, the upside of this is that the Kindred in question gets devotions that let them replicate the abilities of the Shartha inhabiting their bodies, only downside is they basically suffer same fate as other Shartha possession victims, with the added bonus of being trapped in their own bodies while the Shartha does it's own thing. Also the Shartha has access to their Disciplines, which sucks.
I will have to sleep very soon.
>>47589453
Force 3's Turn Momentum is a rather useful spell, but only if you also have Time 1. That way, you can constantly cast it as a reflexive action with one Reach (it has no Mana cost), thereby using it to deflect bullet after bullet. As long as you can keep on succeeding on your spellcasting rolls, you should be safe. You probably do not want to have allies in the same area, however.
This could perhaps compensate for Forces' Mage Armor being slightly inferior to Fate and Time's Mage Armors. (Forces will still have you take 1 bashing damage each time, and it might not completely mitigate the damage from larger weapons or high numbers of successes, whereas Fate and Time increase your Defense and then allow it to apply against firearms, potentially forcing enemies to make chance die rolls against you, which can turn into dramatic failures).
>>47589470
That is quite interesting. I will certainly concede that. If the melee attacker goes first, trying to impose the Knocked Down Tilt *is* a fairly feasible method of evening the odds, though going up against Defense and a -2 penalty for the called shot is not guaranteed even with Willpower and an All-Out Attack.
>>47589438
I don't see why it wouldn't hide someone/something it was concealing, provided that person or thing remained concealed beneath the thing and remained stationary. If they moved around I'd probably require a Stealth roll - the blanket is acting as concealment but they still have to avoid obstacles, not make sounds, and remain fully covered.
Prime 2's Supernal Veil currently a bit poorly written.
>Supernal Veil (Prime ••)
>Practice: Veiling
>Primary Factor: Duration
>Suggested Rote Skills: Occult, Subterfuge, Survival
>Sometimes even the greatest magician must hide her light under a bushel. This spell wards its subject, which can be a spell, object, mage, supernatural creature, or any other active magical phenomenon, from detection. Passive abilities (such as Peripheral Mage Sight) automatically fail to detect the veiled phenomenon, while active attempts provoke a Clash of Wills.
As it currently stands, Supernal Veil applies to *all* forms of detection, be they mundane or magical, which could very well result in a strange case of actively looking for the subject with mundane sight could trigger a Clash of Wills.
For those who wish for an example of an *awful* spell, look no further than Prime 2's As Above, So Below.
>As Above, So Below (Prime ••)
>Practice: Ruling
>Primary Factor: Duration
>Suggested Rote Skills: Academics, Occult, Politics
>A mage’s tools are sacred, her every word and deed a reflection of the Realms Above. By means of this spell, the mage imbues the tools of her Art with holy meaning, allowing her to draw down power with greater facility. For every level of Potency, she chooses a single Yantra (and it must be a specific example of a Yantra, not just a category: “the Crypt of the Mariner,” not just “Environment”). Any spell cast that incorporates that Yantra gains the 9-Again effect on the spellcasting roll.
>+1 Reach: The Yantra instead grants the 8-Again effect on spellcasting rolls.
Due to the way spells work (a single success is enough for it to take place at full Potency), a mage probably wants to use spell factors to nudge themselves down to about five or six dice.
http://nwod.org/wiki/index.php/Probability_Math
9-again on five dice produces an average of +0.208333 successes on average, and it gets even worse with four or less dice. This is a bad spell.
>>47589661
Please get a trip so I can filter you.
>>47589661
I think you're reading Supernal Veil a little too broadly - it's pretty obviously stating that the spell prevents detection by passive abilities specifically, not all forms of detection.
>>47589717
Active attempts at detection explicitly provoke a Clash of Wills from Supernal Veil.
As written, Supernal Veil applies to *all* forms of detection. This means that a mundane, active search could very well trigger a Clash of Wills.
Are there any other cases of mundane actions potentially triggering a Clash of Wills? That is not rhetorical; I am genuinely curious.
So, question: I was reading through the Changeling playtest rules, and I'm sort of wondering how Fate magic interacts with them.
I'm guessing that a Mage's Peripheral Mage Sight would be set off by a Changeling trying to Seal a statement that they made, and the Fate 4 Attainment would let them reflexively spend Mana to enter a Clash of Wills to dispel it.
>Oaths can only be sworn by, and to, changelings. Human beings and Huntsmen can make bargains with the Lost, but these are defined by what the bargaining parties will do, not what they feel.
What about Mages with three or more dots of the Fate Arcanum? I mean, they can cast their own Oath-binding magics, so could they swear Oaths with Changelings, using their Supernal magic to bolster the Changeling's Wyrd magic? I mean, a Mage certainly *can* swear a magically-binding oath determined by what they feel.
>>47589753
This is just my personal guess, but perhaps they should have capitalized "oaths" as "Oaths" so as to make it refer specifically to changeling-style pledges, rather than any kind of magical contract in general.
>>47589753
I'd say that a Changeling Oath and an oath sworn with Fate would be similar (and detected as such by both Mages and Changelings) but not identical.
Good Mystery fodder for an Acanthus, really.
>>47588528
these:
>>47588680
>They're pretty much completely different, to be honest.
>>47588745
I'm a huge cWoD fan, but people are (probably) right: nWoD has better rules.
... while the lore / fluff of cWoD is far superior.
cWoD has '80s - '90s gothic punk vibe.
Older fa/tg/uys like it better.
nWoD is for the "modern" kids.
Thin-blooded fledgelings like it better.
So basically: it's up to you.
Try both of them and you'll find out.
>>47589835
>I'm a huge cWoD fan, so it's fluff is obviously superior to nWoDs and people who like it are dumb kids who don't appreciate black leather trenchcoats.
C'mon dude. cWoD and CofD being different tonally and stylistically is a feature, not a bug. You can like one without being a sarcastic douche about the other. You can even like both! Because both have good points. Not everyone likes 80's and 90's gothic punk, and not everyone likes CofD's "dark urban fantasy/horror".
>>47588528
which icecream flavor is better? dude just check the setting/mood/atmosphere for both and choose. whatever you choose your STing will make it or break it anyways
>>47589959
>>47589835
>>47588558
>>47588680
But what are some of the main differences in the setting and rules?
Is there any reason why purchasing Arcana is even *cheaper* in Mage 2e than in 1e?
In the previous edition, raising Arcana took (new dots) × 6/7/8 XP. Attributes costed (new dots) × 5 XP, and were still inferior due to the benefits of high Arcana.
In Mage 2e, raising an Arcana to your limit (which is not much of a limit) costs 4 Experiences, the same as raising an Attribute. Given the way free Reaches work, I can see incredibly few circumstances wherein raising an Attribute will be anywhere as effective as improving an Arcanum.
If a mage has four Experiences to spare, why would they ever spend it on anything *but* raising Arcana, with raising Gnosis as a second priority to allow for higher Arcana caps? I could see a few Merits being of great use, such as the exceptionally powerful Mystery Cult Initiation (ten Merit dots and Status 5 for the price of five Merit dots!) and Consilium/Order Status (raise your other Merits in a somewhat roundabout way through requisitioning), but raising Attributes and/or Skills is virtually never going to stand up to raising Arcana. Yes, even if you would gain a higher Mudra bonus.
>>47588528
VtM is (generally speaking) a slightly higher powered, political focused game. Your character concept is very strongly tied to your Clan and Sect and navigating their related social landscape, which is inevitably filled with backstabbing and betrayal. World-spanning conspiracies and powerful NPCs abound. It's also very 90's goth-punk in tone and aesthetic.
VtR is a little more generalist - your Clan and Covenant choices give you a lot of initial variety in terms of character, and as ST you have a lot more leeway in terms of designing the local Kindred political landscape. It's less focused specifically around vampire politics (though you can still run a game focused around it) and is smaller scale/power level - there aren't world-spanning conspiracies operating behind the scenes left and right, but plentiful smaller conspiracies, monsters, and mysteries to explore. Plain survival is more of a struggle for Kindred. It's aesthetic is more dark urban fantasy than specifically gothic or punk.
>>47589932
That's exactly what I said.
It's up to you.
Try both.
>>47590031
Can you stop now?
You've passed beyond the limits of "these are things that could have been better worded/clarified" and into the territory of "if I was a douchebag powergaming rules lawyer with a spineless ST I could do this thing." You can't give 100% non-exploitable rules in a game where all the spell rules you're referencing ARE JUST GUIDELINES BECAUSE YOU CAN MAKE YOUR OWN SPELLS FROM SCRATCH WHENEVER YOU WANT. Mage is literally a game of ST Fiat.
CofD/nWoD has always had rules like this and the solution has always been "this is a storytelling game, if you're powergaming instead of spending XP as it would make sense for your character to you're doing it wrong and your ST should slap you." This is a non-problem.
Plus ffs, of course Mages are going to prioritize raising their Arcana over mundane skills. Wouldn't you, if you were a fucking wizard?
>>47590015
See:
>>47588745
>This is what the Vampire translation book is for.
>>47590015
Setting:
Masquerade has the origin of vampires mostly known, Requiem keeps it a mystery
Masquerade has a coming apocalypse on the horizon tied to the origin of vampires (they're cursed by God right down from Caine himself, soon He'll pronounce final judgement upon them or the eldest of them will rise to eat their brethren), Requiem doesn't unless the GM wants one
There are two major factions of vampire in Masquerade locked in a shadow war with one another, in Requiem there are six factions all squabbling for control of cities, forming alliances, or in the case of Seven trying to exterminate all other vampires
In Masquerade nobody, and I mean nobody, out of other supernatural creatures likes vampires at all, while in Requiem that can be a lot more open-ended and down to the individuals involved
System:
Both are similar, but Masquerade uses a shifting target number you have to roll on your d10s while Requiem has it standardised
Requiem is tied to nWoD's modular design which requires a book for each supernatural creature as well as the base rules for humans: while this can be physically clumsy if you're using print books it makes crossovers and preludes where players begin as mortals and end up vampires extremely easy to run. Masquerade has all the basic rules in one tome, but playing humans is trickier if you don't know what you're doing
>>47590100
>you're not playing the game right unless you're gimping yourself on purpose how can you be so stupid
>VtM is good
I love this meme!
>>47589362
>I don't see why you can't have another discussion at the same time.
Because anything else gets drowned out.
>>47590054
Also, in VtM, the strongest Elder Vampires are some of the most powerful beings in the setting, to the point where the globe-spanning, world-ruling wizard conspiracy known as the Technocracy had to use magic-enhanced nukes to kill one when he went on a rampage through India.
In VtR, vampires are basically very small, parasitical fish living on the fringes of the very deep supernatural pond. They have a fair bit of social influence, but as far as raw supernatural power goes, even Vampire Elders can be trivially crushed by Archmages, the God Machine's potency is nearly omnipresent and entirely capable of grinding any Vampires who cross it between its gears, and the less is said about how badly they get crushed by the most potent members of the various forms of Ephemeral Entities (ghosts, animist spirits, angels, goetia, etc.) the better - they're so strong, they don't even have game stats!
I mean, even a Mage right out of chargen is capable of trivially murdering dozens of Vampires in a straight-up fight; with Forces 2, they can turn any light present into sunlight, and with Mind 3, they could summon a goetia representing the human understanding of the concept of "the Sun" out of the Collective Unconscious.
>>47590283
To be fair, Archmages trivially crush almost anything that gets in their way
>>47590210
>VtR is good
I love this meme!
>>47590158
Very good explanation.
If all the mechanics breaking is over, can I get some feedback on my Legacy write up?
https://vindae.tumblr.com/post/145298175000/the-whipping-boys
How much Celerity do you need to pull off Quicksilver shit from XMen movies?
>>47590283
None of those other Supernatural things necessarily exist (or at least, will ever come in contact with the PCs) in VtR, though. You're never going to see an Archmage, the GM is most certainly NOT omnipresent, stop giving new people that idea, it's not and has never been fucking true, and the only role Spirits are likely to play in a Vampire game are mysterious antagonists, since they have few ways (or reasons) to interact. Rank 5+ Ephemeral Entities are so rare that the average character will never encounter one unless they go looking for one.
>I mean, even a Mage right out of chargen is capable of trivially murdering dozens of Vampires in a straight-up fight; with Forces 2, they can turn any light present into sunlight, and with Mind 3, they could summon a goetia representing the human understanding of the concept of "the Sun" out of the Collective Unconscious.
Oh fuck right off. A starting mage against 12 vampires will be fucked in the ass 12 times with Celerity before he could kill a Vampire with summoned sunlight. Even if he finished the spell sunlight won't insta-kill any vamp who's not, like, BP 8+ and low humanity. And you don't even have to include any Mages in a VtR game so it's fucking moot anyway.
Stop misleading new people.
>>47590396
Never enough, at least in nWoD. Vampires can run about as fast as a car with high ranks of it, if I remember rightly.
It is one of the few defenses against being shot at, though.
>>47590159
>you're not playing the game right unless you're treating your character as a collection of numbers that need to be as high as possible, only power fantasies are fun
I've been reading a lot of Worm lately, and the Space arcana has given me an interesting idea. If I were to use creative thaumaturgy to stretch out the blade of a knife to attack with it, how would that be done mechanically?
>>47590497
Shrink and Grow(Matter 3)
Probably also do-able with Space 3, Weaving
>>47586665
Most gamers don't give a shit, it's a small and vocal minority. For those of us who grew up playing games, if some shit offends our sensibilities we just don't play it.
>>47590426
So nothing on the level of this then?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXASS7aYIVM
>>47590524
I mean, what kind of damage would that kind of thing do? Would it's properties change at all? What happens?
>>47590550
Oh, I figured you meant just using it to attack from a longer range.
Could probably use it to turn your Knife into a Sword, too, though, stat-wise
>>47588222
We're not talking about melee attacks. Now go fuck yourself.
>>47590262
>2hu anon stopped posting
>all activity in the thread ceased immediately
>m-muh drowning out
Fuck off.
Is spending a point of reach and a point of mana for aggravated damage considered a spell factor or spell modification? Would someone be able to combine the castings of Thunderbolt and Celestial Fire so that they both deal Aggravated damage with 1 reach and 1 mana?
>>47590543
Definitely not. Although nWoD Celerity is sufficiently bullet-timey enough for you to be able to evade gunshots with it.
Now oWoD's Celerity came close to that in how fucking broken it was. Each dot gave you an extra action although I think people ruled each action required a blood point to stop things from getting too bullshit. It's still hilariously overpowered, mind you.
>>47590791
It'd only cost 1 mana/reach to do Agg with that, yes.
Why would you combine the two, though? It wouldn't double your damage, you'd still only do damage equal to the (combined) spell's Potency.
>>47590782
I'd rather have no activity than listen to his autistic smugness anymore.
>Look at how smart I am, finding ways to abuse narrative semi-free-form mechanics! I'm going to talk down to the game's lead dev because I obviously know better than he does.
>>47590830
Why wouldn't it double the damage? It causes both spells to go off at the same time, unless by combining them it somehow no longer has separate effects.
>>47590862
But the devs have been shit since GMC anon
>>47589162
/k/ guy here again! Accuracy is a mechanical measure. ie how many inches at what range will the group be? This is typically expressed in the term "Minute of Angle"
Minute of Angle is a measure of arc that translates to a difference of 1.09" at a range of 100 yards. If I put a given firearm in sandbags/a ransom rest, how wide will that group be?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Fr5ccyriJI
Something like this to hold the weapon on a consistent target. That's accuracy. Guns are accurate. The -shooter- is precise. That being said, large caliber firearms buck and roar and it takes skill to properly use them. They might be mechanically accurate but the muzzle flip or recoil can throw shots off for someone without experience.
>>47590862
Not only that, but he isn't even using the mechanics as they should be
>>47590929
That's nice, but each check is typically a single shot so recoil and muzzle-flip don't apply (if you have the Strength necessary to wield the firearm, it's assumed you can compensate for the recoil kick).
Also no edition of WoD is really good for /k/ommandoing over, although Armory has lots of nice details you might like.
