>>47028236
first for my waifu

>>47028236
>Infernals edition. Are infernals heroes?
By Exalted's definition, yeah.

Anyone else watching ExalTwitch here?
It's an incredibly fascinating campaign to watch, especially because I don't have a 3rd edition group of my own.
Last week they had like a dozen devs and writers in the chat with them.

File: Heroes.png (233 KB, 1812x1513) Image search: [Google]

233 KB, 1812x1513

>>47028236

Posting the screenshot of the 'Heroes' thing I have, since interest was shown last thread.

>>47028482
About half of that is true.

Should Eclipses go in for Charisma or Manipulation? A number of social charms specifically use rolls with one or the other.

>>47028518
Does your Exalt lead from the front or from the shadows?

>>47028518

Depends on your character. If you earnestly believe in what you're trying to get others to believe/do, go Charisma. If you're just interested in getting them to do what you want, and are willing to lie your arse if in order for them to do it, go Manipulation.

Also, Manipulation will give you guile, which you'll need so your marks won't see you as the sack if shit you are. If you're Charisma, you won't need it as much, because, in general, you're not hiding stuff.

Charisma is inflexible, but has few drawbacks. Manipulation is high risk/high reward - if someone cottons on, you're likely to be run out of town on a rail.

>Will decides that his Solar learned sorcery before even Exalting, serving as a cultist to the demon Glafira, the Zodiac of Blood. This is just a name and a title he made up, but he and the Storyteller work out that Glafira is a Second Circle Demon who dwells in the stars of Hell, and hungers for the end of time itself.
So, Sorcerers are common enough that it's not unusual for demon-cultists of Second Circles to be inducted into it.

>>47029401
>A PC does something exceptional
>CLEARLY THIS IS PROOF THAT EVERYONE CAN DO THIS THING

>>47029450
>serving as a cultist to the demon Glafira
We're not talking a high priest, just 'a cultist.'

And this was before they even exalted. And not the stimulus for exaltation either.

I'm not saying that anyone/everyone can pull it off. I'm just saying it doesn't sound mind-boggling in rarity either.

>>47028482

So how are Alchemicals, Abyssals, and Infernals heroes? And what about Getiminininians, Liminals, and Exigents?

I'm thinking of making a tanky as fuck sorceror. What is the best way of going about such an idea?

>>47029511
stop pulling shit out of your ass

cultist in this context doesn't meaningfully distinguish anything beyond serving glafira

>>47029870
Occult 5 Resistance 5 Stamina 5
All the Ox-Bodies or whatever

>>47029870
Invulnerable Skin of Bronze and summon an army of demons and elementals, take War.

>>47029870

Supernal resistance.

Sorcery is just too small to be the mechanical focus of a character. Initial buy-in is really small, and there's barely any room for growth, apart from a handful of spells that cost SXP.

In our group's experience, you don't so much play a Sorcerer, as you play an XYZ Sorcerer - a Demon-Summoner who uses War to command has unholy legions in battle, or Social Sorcerer, who uses Corrupted Words, or Silent Words of Dreams and Nightmares to bend people to their will, or a Crafter, who uses Workings to enhance his people/places/things.

Invulnerable Skin of Bronze is cool and all, until someone distorts it.

>>47030160
>>47030196
I really like this War idea. Any ideas on how to make it practical and make the best use of it?

>>47030253

Summon one demon or elemental every day until you have a BG whose size you're comfortable with, favour War and pick up Tiger Warrior Training when you can. Spend all of combat giving command actions.

>>47029787
Alchemicals were built to be heroes and act like it. They don't just drop their nuts on the table and demand the puny mortals suck them, their entire job is to keep mortals safe and keep their society from falling apart, and in the time that Creation has suffered four separate apocalypses, maybe more depending on how you count it, they've managed to keep a continuous society where, maybe it still sucks compared to our world, but it's among the least shitty places to live. Fucking Alchemicals dude.

Abyssals, I got nothing, unless you're playing a rogue Abyssal in which case you're telling one of Creation's ultimate evils to suck it, even as your unlife grows shittier with every great deed you perform to redeem yourself for falling when Creation needed you to stand. I was going to say that they're the champions of death and the underworld, keeping ghosts in line and holding up the rule of law in a place where you're literally being slowly sucked down into almost-nothingness, but that's all been shifted onto the Liminals. I don't know what 3e Abyssals are like.

Liminals are the champions of death and the underworld, keeping ghosts in line and holding up the rule of law in a place where you're literally being slowly sucked down into almost-nothingness. They're heroes because even when you're dead, they have your back.

GetimIcantspelliteithers are heroes because heaven is bullshit. Sidereals talk a big game about how they're helping keep Creation going but the world is on life support, and even that's starting to not be enough. Something has to change. The rule of fate and gods has done nothing to keep Creation from suffering disaster after disaster, and when a Getimwhatever is created, it's because they said "no more." No more death and destruction, only for the powers that be to nod and say, "This is good." it's not good, and the Whocameupwiththisnames are heroes because they fight for something different. Maybe it won't be better, but it'll be different.

>>47029787
>>47030343
Exigents are a different breed of Exalt entirely. They have belief. They believe so hard that a God will nearly kill themselves to invest their power into them, so that they can uphold these beliefs, whether it be in the regularity of the harvest, or the tranquility of the night, or the lost knowledge that refuses to be forgotten. They champion gods that are as essential to Creation, but are forgotten beneath the might of the other demigods running around. They could be more powerful than any Solar, they could be only slightly more powerful than a human, but they have belief, and they'll use whatever power they have to hold to it, no matter what.

Infernals aren't heroes. They're villains. Things break down here. Sorry.

>>47030343
I thought Liminals were more Alucard-ish. Hunters of their own kind and very much not champions of death and the undead.

>>47030253

It depends how crazy you want to be about it.

It could be as minimal as being a Twilight, binding a Blood Ape to your aura, and having him Defend-Other you in combat.

Or it could be as maximal as going Supernal Occult, taking All Souls Benediction, and keeping 200 demons immaterial around you at all times.

There are a couple of things to consider:

1: You'll generally want to keep your demons dematerialized, and pop them out for battle. There are charms that let you do that relatively cheaply, or you can command them to materialize themselves. If they do it themselves, they sacrifice half their mote pool.

2: It's not hard to detect dematerialized beings, especially Blood Apes, the only real combat demons stated for 3E, as they snuffle and grunt and stink, even while dematerialized. It'll be hard to hide what you are, and people will treat you like a loaded weapon.

3: Command actions and Shape Sorcery actions are mutually exclusive, so you won't be able to buff your Blood Apes hugely with War, at the same time as spewing Obsidian Butterflies at your enemies - pick one or the other.

Anyone got some Wuxia-themed music for fight scenes?

File: thots.png (319 KB, 819x2461) Image search: [Google]

319 KB, 819x2461

>>47028482
jesus christ that's disgustingly wide

>>47030940
Stop browsing on your phone.

>>47030963
Desktop, not phon

>>47030343
>>47030510
What tremendous bullshit.

>>47030510
>Infernals aren't heroes. They're villains. Things break down here. Sorry.
Heroes of their own stories

If I posted a character sheet for an ex3 game, could /tg/ give feedback and advice on it?

>>47031154
Of course.

>>47031154
Sure, when you post it let us know what your concept or idea for the character is.

>>47031162
>>47031200

Cool. In a pasteibn because I use .txt sheets; my computer hates editable .pdfs for some reason.

http://pastebin.com/tqpcKsGP

The idea was a person used as an experiment by a mad merchant-scientist, more or less; the intent was to mass produce exigents from a captured god, but things went awry. She's meant to be a little independent; resistance charms and agile dodging instead of heavy armor, brawl instead of melee, throwing improvised weapons as a backup. There's some things on there that more represent who she was before the experiments than who she is now, but i felt it was appropriate to have some remnants of her old life there.

>>47030343
>>47030510
Abyssals are heroes because some things are mistakes that get completed before they can be prevented. To be Abyssal is to be death itself, and plenty of things need to die. If a bandit lords who roves the countryside stealing and raping whatever he pleases gets put in the ground, no one's going to care. If some sleazebag merchant empire that's devoted its entire history to making its money off the backs of the impoverished, starving and suffering gets wiped off the map, then the world can thank whoever's responsible. When a forest gets so overgrown that the wildlife grows beyond its ability to sustain itself, when a behemoth from ages ago is still rampaging around when it should've died before it was born, when someone, somewhere can only make the world a better place by not being part of it anymore, then someone has to do the dirty job. Creation's going to die sooner or later. The entire cosmos is coming to an end. The Abyssals will do their part killing what needs to be killed, shortening the world's suffering. Then, once everything's nice and dead and gone, they'll put up the chairs, turn off the lights and close up shop. Abyssals are heroes because there's always something that needs to die.

>>47031435
Infernals are heroes because there's someone who hasn't gotten theirs yet. It's called the Reclamation for a reason. Creation has its proper owners, its rightful kings, and they were denied what's theirs by a bunch of upstarts who thought they knew better than the people who put them there. And then, after the new kids on the block kicked the kings off their thrones and burned down the castle, they acted like it was the Primordials' fault for being losers, like it was anything less than theft and treason. That story is shared by every Infernal. Every Infernal knows that they didn't fuck up. They weren't too weak or too cowardly or too stupid. Their moment in the sun was right there, waiting for them to take it, like it was made for them. Their moment was stolen. Their glory was stolen. They've spent their whole lives being stolen from. The forces of Creation are wrong. The Reclamation isn't theft or conquest. It's the world's first rulers righting a case of robbery that goes back thousands of years. Infernals are heroes because they're sick of being told to shut up and take it. The world's always pushed them around, and now they've got the power to push back.

>>47031435
>>47031491
I don't think you quite get the subtleties.

>>47031555
No one said the Abyssals or Infernals were right, but that's the rhetoric they're pushing.

>>47031332

Mechanically, your attributes are sub-optimal, but this may not be much of a concern if you never plan to raise them.

Do you have a supernal? It's not indicated, and none of your charms (from memory) have higher than Essence 1 as a requirement.

Where have your bonus points gone? I count 5 on high ability dots, 2 in willpower - not sure about the rest.

>>47031961

Supernal's up at the top, it's Brawl. I spent 5 on abilities, 2 on willpower, and then eight on +1 dexterity and stamina, which started at 4 before bonus points.

The campaign is technically a one-shot which might evolve into a full campaign but we're not sure on that yet.

Nobody gonna comment on the shadowrun picture? No? Okay.

>>47032895
No, they're not. Why would they?

Why would they care?

>>47032014

You don't seem to be using it, though. That's not necessarily, as long as you don't expect your Dawn to be better at fighting than anyone else - really, it's the Supernal that actually gives you the ability to out-fight the other castes.

If you want to be fighty-er, I'd suggest taking Hammer on Iron, and Fivefold Fury Onslaught. That will really ramp up your potential for violence.

I find Iron Battle Focus an odd choice, if just because you've bought Dodge up to 5. I'd start working on Dodge charms, if you're planning on it being your primary defence - which is Brawl's main weakness. In fact, with Resistance bought up to, you really seem to be spreading yourself thin amongst the defensive abilities.

File: Exalted Third Edition Character Sheet.pdf (1 B, 486x500) Image search: [Google]

1 B, 486x500

Okay so there's a blurb in the EX3 rulebook that goes like, "Write this down for yourself because it's really important!" and it's a list of combat formulas and stuff, that's more detailed than the one on the actual EX3 character sheet.

So I replaced it with the one from the book. Don't know if anyone actually uses the PDF character sheet, but here you go.

>>47030253
I'd second being a resistance supernal. That's what I'm doing and having a blast. Last session our ST threw a Wyld hunt at myself and another party member, despite not making any attacks for 4 rounds I gained two initiative and was only down about half motes and lost two health levels (from death of obsidian butterflies), while reliably regenerating 15 motes per round before I teleported us both out. And this is a character with no offensive skills to speak of.

With invulnerable skin of bronze, unusual hide, pain tolerance and giant things get ridiculous when you add resistance charms.

>>47033171

For added shenanigans, take War Lion Stance, and never let anything attack anyone but you.

>>47033349
I actually need to take that, our Night barely made it out of that fight.
Unfortunately I've got zero dots in Melee.

>>47032989

I'll look at charm choice, then; I'll be honest, I got a little overwhelmed by Brawl's choices because there's just so many brawl charms that I wasn't sure what to go for and what not to go for; I decided to focus on striking instead of grappling at least for now, but other than that...

>>47030253
>I really like this War idea. Any ideas on how to make it practical and make the best use of it?
War charms are great. Feel free to buy them all, but even just a few can be really potent. The most important three are: War God Descendant, Ideal Battle Knowledge Prana, and Immortal Warlord's Tactic.

>>47034178

Also Tiger Warrior Training. In a month and a week you can turn rinky-dink dirt farmers into hardened shock troopers.

Is there anything that specifically says that battle groups can't be knocked prone by smashing attacks?

>>47034747

... Common sense?

Ignoring the "Raising the dead, summoning ghosts" stuff that falls under the net, what would you expect from Necromancy spells?

>>47034777
Nothing. It's going to be Sorcery but weaker and suckier and edgier all over again.

File: this.gif (243 KB, 500x281) Image search: [Google]

243 KB, 500x281

>>47034794

are quick characters and/or battle groups supposed to get stunt bonus dice?

>>47034765
Couldn't you do that Dynasty Warriors thing where you send dozen of guy flying with each swing?

>>47034826
>>47034794
What would YOU do with it then?

>>47034868

If I were GMing I'd ask for a good stunt to do it.

>>47034861
Anyone important enough to have a name should probably get 2 stunt dice; I'd hesitate to give an NPC two- or three-point stunts.

>>47034882
Not those dingalings, but I'd prefer it looked nothing like Sorcery at all, precisely to force people out of that comparative mindset.

Tearing secrets out of the screaming minds of dead Titans should be far more dramatic than picking up a new sorcerous widget.

If it were up to me, being a "master" Necromancer would consist of knowing like 5 Necromantic "things," and each of them would have a permanent effect on the character and the world around them, in addition to their active effects.

Like, Black-Oil Heart (Onyx-level Necromantic Scar) would turn your guts into a slurry of rot-juice that you could use to raise zombies, corrode objects, poison people or geomantic arrays, etc. and would also completely remove your ability to have Minor-level Intimacies; they just dissolve in your heart unless magically reinforced or forced up to Major.

Another question. What happens if two people roll exactly the same successes on a clash attack?

>>47035000

Same as any other opposed roll: best stunt wins.

>>47035010
And if those are equal?

>>47034777
I think necromancy might not exist as distinct from sorcery in this edition. After all, it could be represented as a set of sorcery rituals.

Generic Necromantic Ritual

You are a spooky necromancer.
When you kill a mortal, you gain a sorcerous mote that may be spent on any spell for a day, up to your Essence. If you kill an Essence-user, you gain your Essence in sorcerous motes that can be spent on any spell for a day.

Spooky Scary Skeletons ( 3 dot Merit)
Out of combat, you can grant animation to someones skeleton. The skeleton has 6 dice to spend on attacks, and can wield weapons normally. The skeleton has no essence, and has 5 dice to spend on all non-combat actions. The skeleton is too imprecise to perform any non-attacking combat actions. You can have your Essence in skeletons at a time. You can treat all your skeletons as a single artifact, and learn Evocations for them.

Puppet on a Lonely String (Merit 5 dot)
If you kill a non-extra enemy with a spell, you can reflexively spend 10m, 1 wp to animate them in your defense. They retain all their stats, essence, willpower, and attunements until the end of the scene, and then collapse back in to a corpse.

Generic Necromancy Ritual 2

Spoooky.
You are attuned to death. While in a shadowland or the Underworld, every turn you spend shaping sorcery you gain [Essence] dice of sm.

Shroud of Darkness (Merit 3 or 5 dot)
You are considered to be a creature of death for the purposes of mote regeneration, etc. The 5-dot merit lets you switch back and forth by spending ten minutes and a willpower in concentration

Glory to Stagnation/Movement (Merit 3 dot)
You can only choose one of these two merits. Glory to Stagnation allows you to force any being that dies within long range of you to stay as a ghost in the Underworld. Glory to Movement force them to Lethe. This merit does not work on Gods, Fae, Elementals, Titans, Yozi, or Neverborn.

>>47035038

Then that's it, figure out a tie-breaker yourself; it doesn't matter what.

>>47034944
That tbqh fempai.

But the devs are more like that >>47035044

File: young wizard.jpg (137 KB, 667x940) Image search: [Google]

137 KB, 667x940

>>47034882
Honestly, I know a lot of people are going to disagree with me on this, but I'd start with massively limiting the scope of what Sorcerous Working can accomplish. Sorcery, while obviously needing to be varied, can't be a 'do anything' button if it's going to have a counterpart. Monkeying around with souls, and making things static and immune to decay, are now all but impossible. Those are necromantic now.

Necromancy governs both decay, and stasis. It comes from dreams, and thus has power over dreams, even drawing them into reality to bend space and possibility. It is also despair and endless monotony, the end of new possibility. It is the remembrance of the past and the wild manipulation of organic matter. As the Underworld is a reflection of Creation, so too is reflection within Necromancy's preview. It has power to chain spirits, both dead and living.

Sorcery can still do a lot of those things. Most of them, not as well. They're what necromancy's good at.

That's what I'd do with it.

>>47035137

>>47035044, here, and I think your way has both good and bad points.

The best thing about it is that it makes necromancy very distinct from sorcery.
The worst thing about it is that it makes necromancy very distinct from sorcery.

When you split something up like that, it becomes significantly harder to balance it, and it is still very difficult to split it up properly.

Why have sorcery so much more versatile than necromancy? 2e did this, and it generally made it a better idea to go for sorcery. If you really wanted to make necromancy so distinct, it raises the question of why you don't split sorcery into many different forms. Why not have elementalism, light sorcery designed to uncover secrets and bless actions, starlight sorcery designed to twist fate and reality, infernal sorcery designed to corrupt? Why only split it into a very versatile tool, and a tool that is better only in specific circumstances?

If you manage to cause a battle group to lose multiple points of Size in one attack, do you gain the initiative break bonus each time? On page 208 I could read it either way. Either you caused them to lose a point of Size multiple times and get multiple rewards, or you fulfill the boolean condition of "group has lost Size = true" and only get the reward once.

File: f09f5e9a7c3487cc48b99d55a3b107a4.png (382 KB, 564x930) Image search: [Google]

382 KB, 564x930

>>47035244
>why you don't split sorcery into many different forms

Because in Creation, everything that is playing with the tool the Primordial gave us while creating the world is sorcery.

There is certainly a metric ton of different ways to shape sorcery, from a contract passed with the embodiment of fire to computing the last decimal of pi. But you are still using sorcery.

The Neverborn and necromantic energy are inimical to Creation in a way that is different. They weren't supposed to exist. They broke Creation in a fundamental level only by dreaming, and Necromancy is the art of manipulating those inimical, eldritch energies.

>>47035326
I meant mechanically.

>>47035356
Mechanics should reflect the setting.

>>47035356

Even if there's a reason to split it up in-setting, and there is, that doesn't mean you have to split it up mechanically. Just have it known throughout Creation that those who meddle in the affairs of life and death are those who have divorced themselves entirely from the waking world, with a paragraph detailing how necromantic rituals tend to focus on dreams, reflections, sleep, and stasis. Demand that the necromancy-focused sorcery rituals have flavor concerning how their users become pale, or look sickly, how their reflections are warped, how their dreams are twisted or non-existent. Make the stronger necro rituals remove willpower gain from sleep, instead offering the sorcerer twisted, horrific alternatives that chip away at their sanity. It's not necessary to split things up in the book itself, it just results in bloat and sorcery being a better choice than necromancy.

>>47035376
Charms don't reflect the setting. The existence of charms doesn't reflect the setting. In fact, very few mechanics reflect the setting. Battlegroups? I don't see a paragraph detailing how Realm tactics prefer splitting up battlegroups into several smaller ones to optimize their strength. Withering? It's not really common knowledge that its more difficult to kill someone with one hit if they're alone.

>>47035245
I would say it's pretty clear with RAW. Every time you cause them to drop a point size/dissolve = crash bonus, and you can cause multiple size drops per attack or size drop/dissolve.

So you could gain the benefit multiple times.

>>47035444
No need to be so defensive Holden. We all agree that 2E Necromancy is shit. Now, we're just waiting to see if you will be able to fuck it up even worse, or somehow get it better.

I'm going to try some Awakening Eye+Fate-Shifting Solar-Arete shenanigans, the only thing I'm not sure of is what to combine it with. I was thinking Archery for Revolving Bow Technique and Finishing Snipe, but I'm unsure if that would be the be all end all. Suggestions?

I'm looking at the book, and I'm considering running a campaign. There are a few things that I worry about before doing that though.
The first one is:
How much of a slog is combat? The Withering/Decisive thing seems like it'll drag on for ages.

>>47035131
I like that. I like that quite a lot.

>>47035520
Unless it's a one sided blowout, combat takes forever as people look up what exactly their charms do and how they interact, spend a long time describing their stunts aloud or typing a flowery sentence, and ask how rules work. It is definitely a slog.

>>47035520
1v1 combat can either been super lopsided and super quick or very even and a drag. More average numbers of players around will play generally the same time-wise as other games so long as people know the rules and aren't having to look up how to assemble their god damned withering attack pool every god damned attack their god damned dawn makes cause it's not like it's their fucking job or anything to know how to fucking hit things with their stupid ass reaver fucking daiklave Ryan you fucking piece of shit.

>>47035589
>>47035613
Ok. People don't knowing what to do will happen in all systems.
How bad is the system itself?

>>47035520
Define "a slog"?

I mean sure it isn't the fastest combat system in the universe, but fight doesn't generally take more than a few rounds to resolve.

>>47035566
Meant >>47034944


By the way, where can I read about titans and what they were/are?

>>47035692

1E Games of Divinity discusses the Yozi, and 2E's Ink Monkeys has a bit of lore about the Titans before the War.

>>47035733
Alright.

By "War" you mean the Usurpation, right?

>>47035755

No, I mean the Primordial War, which was before the First Age where the Exalts ruled.

The Usurpation ENDED the First Age, when the Solars were slain and locked up.

>>47035762
Oh, we're going way way the fuck back, yikes.

>>47035778
Well the Primordials are the most ancient beings to exist in a useful sense, so yeah, we are.

>>47035795
Are Titans related to Primordials?

>>47035806
Different name, same beings.

>>47035831
Any significant reason for a different name?

>>47035837
I don't think that they've used the word Titans since early in 2e.

>>47027343
That's a point, which place on creation would be the best place to locate Tracy Island? I know TB5 would be affixed to the Dome Of The Sky, but that is about all I can think of right now.

>>47035867
Alright. Would Old McDonald's codex help with understanding where magic comes from, or is there a better book?

>>47029787

I always thought that Infernals were meant to be the equivalent of school-shooters. So full of spite, so full of hatred, they're back to take it out on everyone.

Because the main deal of the Yozis is TREMENDOUS, FOCUSED SPITE. The Infernals are their weapons to fuck people up. Someone like Eliot Rodger or Brevik would be perfect Infernals.

>>47035998

What, magic in general? Or just Sorcery?

>>47034349

I like to imagine that they play this constantly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSS5dEeMX64

>>47036050
>magic in general or just Sorcery
Aw fuck, man...

Sorcery and Necromancy specifically

>>47036086

White and Black Treatise, or the 1E counterpart Savant and Sorcerer.

In general, 1E has more evocative but fluctuating quality lore, while 2E has more blase but consistent lore, so your call.

>>47036097
>Savant and Sorcerer.

Ah! THAT book.

>>47036097
I'll give them both a look.

>>47036140
?

>>47036185

Savant & Sorcery is (in)famous because its cover is thrusting a girl's (covered, granted) pussy at you rather aggressively.

>>47036185
Check the cover.

>>47036218
>>47036216
>That art
Holy shit, that's Exalted art

>>47036216
>>47036218
>>47036248
At least the vulva is puffy

>>47030726
>or you can command them to materialize themselves. If they do it themselves, they sacrifice half their mote pool.

Battlegroups don't use charms, they just get Might as a bonus to stats. So their mote pools are irrelevant unless you want to split one off and have it explicitly use it's charms.

>>47036317

That's not actually necessarily true. It's certainly not explicitly stated anywhere.

It's arguable that Might is only meant to abstract magic that is inapplicable to BGs, like decisive-boosting Charms, and that a BG can otherwise use Charms normally.

>>47036040
Breivik is cheap, try Orpheus for Infernal.

Doing heroic mortal things, soothed the Cerberus (hekatonkhire), negotiated with Hades (deathlord), gets to bring his wife out of the Underworld, heads back to Creation, crosses into the sunlight, finally turns to look at Eurydice-

-no dice, she still had one foot in the shadowland, now she's dragged back, no retries!

And it's in that moment of failure that the Infernal Exaltation shows up and asks: how about some UNLIMITED COSMIC POWER so you can set right this oh-so-wrong world? We understand you, we got screwed over too...

>>47035137
>Honestly, I know a lot of people are going to disagree with me on this, but I'd start with massively limiting the scope of what Sorcerous Working can accomplish

I already sort of do this. Except for Solar (who are THE sorcerers), everyone else can learn spells and cast workings relating thematically to their shaping ritual and method of becoming a sorcerer.

To make up for this they can throw out low level temporary workings without spending XP (their magic is more reactive as opposed to Solar's raw technical mastery of essence) and they get discount ritual merits.

>>47036327

The book says that battlegroupz are treated as a character with the traits of the average member. The only action it calls out as being unavailable to them, is grapple.

In the absence of any other information, Id say if the average member of a group has a specific charm, the whole group has it.

Except maybe for charms with an inititiative cost.

>>47036327
Hmm...I like this. Bu I suppose we'll have to wait for the DB book for an actual answer.

On a slight tangent - do battlegroup Orders have to be combat related? Could I order my BG to SING!! and add my successes to their performance roll?

>>47036428
>In the absence of any other information, Id say if the average member of a group has a specific charm, the whole group has it.

So by group of Blood Apes can use shattering Roar to sonic boom an enemy BG?

Sweeeet

>Carnal Spirit Rending
>Upon destroying a spirit with Ghost-Eating Technique, the Solar may activate this Charm to draw the rent and torn Essence of the spirit into her limbs and through her chakras, embodying it. For the rest of the scene, the Exalt gains (Essence) powers or traits based on the Charms and themes of the destroyed spirit, to be decided by the Storyteller.

Thought: Using sorcerous workings / summoning spells / Occult charms, bind spirits with a power I find particularly useful. Then kill them with get and use this charm to get those powers for a scene?

>>47036512

Or just use Divine Mantle from integrity, and have them forever.

>>47036534
That requires six solar charms that both match the theme of the spirit I'm taking the charm from AND one of my defining principles.

And that's six such solar charms for each spirit charm I learn.

That's fucking impossible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9rbsrd1sWE
Would you play an Ocean Hunter style game /exg/?

>>47036556
>That's fucking impossible.
When you are playing Exalted there is no such word...unless you are trying to repair a Warstrider.

>>47036556

"If a spirit recognizes the Lawgiver as king, high priest, or most high prophet in the region of Creation where it dwells, OR IF THE LAWGIVER DEFEATS THE SPIRIT IN QUESTION IN COMBAT, then the Solar may use this Charm to gain the powers of that spirit’s station. The Solar learns the powers in question instantly and as a matter of instinct, but may only learn Charms she has the trait minimums for. She can ignore the prerequisite of any Charm, however, and can even embody Charms which do not have the Eclipse keyword."

>>47036882

That doesn't obviate the other restrictions, it's just a way of getting the Charms in the first place.

You still need a shitload of other Solar Charms that fit both the spirit and the Principle.

>>47036995

If it doesn't obviate the need for the other set of requirements, then why is it necessary? I mean, if you can take the charms of spirits *without* them acknowledging you as king, or defeating them in combat (which is what the rest of the charm implies), then what's the reason of having a paragraph that says you can take the charms of spirits who acknowledge you, or who you defeat in combat?

>>47037093

Here's what Divine Mantle requires, in full, before you get the spirit Charms:

1) That the spirit's Charms embody one of your Defining Principles. (explicit text of the Charm, nothing about the sidebar says ignore it)
2) That you have six other Solar Charms that ALSO embody one of your Defining Principles and the spirit's nature. (explicit text of the Charm, nothing about the sidebar says ignore it)
3) AND for the spirit to acknowledge the Solar as high king, defeating them in combat, etc., because that IS how you don the Divine Mantle (extra, expounding text in the sidebar, like how Fivefold Bulwark Stance as extra, expounding text in ITS sidebar)

>>47030726
>It could be as minimal as being a Twilight, binding a Blood Ape to your aura, and having him Defend-Other you in combat.

Wait I don't remember reading any explicit thing that let you do this. Is this a working thing? I just want to see if I can sneak being a jojo into exalted

>>47037156
Twilight Anima Power

File: Omae+wa+mo+dora+if+you+swipe+from+dora+then_1e5985_4885523.png (820 KB, 600x1283) Image search: [Google]

820 KB, 600x1283

>>47037156
Never thought about Jojoing the Twilight Anima Power, but goddam, it is.

>>47037153

If that's how it's supposed to be read, then its incredibly poorly written (which isn't exactly a shocker).

It should state the EFFECT of a charm first, and then go on to list the ways that effect is limited, rather than the invoice. This isn't even a natural language problen, its just bad language.

Guys there are somewhere guidelines for crafting artefacts and making evocations? The book say that I can do it but I have no idea of what an Artifact 4 weapon is supposed to be more than an artifact 3.

>>47037325
Works much better with a spirit custom-made with Ephemeral Exegesis Prana.

>>47037414
I don't disagree.

>>47037472
Arms of the Chosen will go more in-depth on the matter, or at least have more examples to go by.

My rule of thumb for the time-being has just been to compare to native Charms power-wise, and say that artifacts can't have Evocations of Essence greater than (rating).

>>47037472
You want help designing artifacts?

What sort of shitty player can't homebrew stuff wholecloth without guidlines and examples? git good scrub.

t. Holden

File: glorious_solar_copypasta_methodology.png (191 KB, 645x382) Image search: [Google]

191 KB, 645x382

What the fuck is this shit.

>>47037504
Look, our corebook was already nine billion pages and people are bitching about it like they have Malfeas Rage Prana, it would have been ten billion if we had to include artifact creation and if you think about it you'll realize that nobody would actually want that, not even you.

t. Morke

>>47037525
>Look, our corebook was already nine billion pages

Maybe if you hadn't done shit like this >>47037509 it wouldn't have been

What tag is better? Chopping or Balanced?

>>47037575
Balanced

File: hold_copypasta.png (51 KB, 265x549) Image search: [Google]

51 KB, 265x549

>>47037509

Now, I think Performance is a single Ability and the charms for Performance should therefore *reflect* a single ability, with things like double 9s being a single Charm, and music-only Performance charms should be limited to those that do specifically musical things like summon an instrument.

But I know that's just my opinion.

On the other hand, I don't think it's just my opinion that D&D 3.5e managed to spend _less_ space on _more_ complicated powers, because they knew that when you write similar effects, you don't copypasta the entire bloody thing.

I realize the RPG industry innovates slowly, but this is from ten years before Exalted 3e was even announced, let alone published. Do we have to beat White Wolf about the head and shoulders with the wheel until they stop reinventing it? Learn some fucking refactoring, and turn "double X" into a keyword so that you can use that "Keywords: None" line to alleviate your oh-so-dire space shortage.

>>47037603
>Thunderbolt Attack Prana
>charm's effect is 5 words
>charm text is a paragraph of fluff and minutiae
I don't see why every solar charm needs to begin by saying "Solars are so fucking cool guys look at how cool they are"

>>47037603
>>47038701
Wasn't someone on the OPP forums doing a 'natural language'-free rewrite of the charm chapter?

>>47038782
I'd be curious to see exactly how much free space would be gained that way.

>>47038782

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwZiXCIz14oCUldna29zZXNpaU0/view

What's the Eastern war god?

>>47038908
168 pages of space saved just by removing the useless fluff.

Good job dev team.

>>47039219

Hard to say, actually. That document has a lot of white space, and is in a larger font than the core book, but doesn't have any art. Good be more than that, could be less - but I'm pretty sure it's significant.

>>47039200
Sunipa, Goddess of Dutiful Soldiers and the Rules of War is the head one. She's supported by a staff including Leopard Tooth Scholar, God of Reconnaissance-in-Force Operations; Wandering Star, Goddess of Guerilla Warfare; Ivory Shadow Smith, God of Secret Arsenals; and countless smaller gods.

Tahn Jo, God of Righteous Revolts and Uprisings also hangs out there, but is more a god of starting wars than a proper war god.

>>47039437
In 3e, how many people can be attuned to a manse/demesne at one time?

>>47039543

I don't remember any upper bound being given? If there are, it'll be in a splatbook, since I know for a fact there weren't any such fine-grain mechanics in 2e's core.

Were there limits in Old McDonald's?

>>47039219
I wouldn't like all of the Charm fluff being removed. For some Charms fluff helps me visualize its effects or get what kind of capabilities it represents in the setting. It's okay to have some fluff in the Charm descriptions, it's just this weird compulsion to give every Charm at least a sentence of fluff that needs to go.

>>47038908
Cutting the 'flavour text' out of Element Resisting Prana makes it look pretty heavily nerfed.

>>47037477
Ephemeral Exegesis Prana just materializes guys you've already created/summoned/bound.

Are you talking about the Ephemeral Induction Technique?

>>47039840
Yes, that.

>>47039840
Man, that has a shitload of pre-reqs

The Solar may use the prerequisite to enter the psyche
of another, examining his dreams and memories, no matter
how distant or forgotten, for traces of spiritual taint,
demonic possession, or other signs of haunting. While
entranced, the Solar experiences the dream or memory
of her subject in first person, and may interact with the
world of her subject’s mind using Awareness, Investigation and Occult Charms to look for signs of spiritual predation. Though she cannot use her presence in her subject’s mind to change his memory’s outcome, she can use
what she discovers as a basis for further action. Furthermore, if she is able to confirm the presence of a spirit
actor in her subject’s past, she may also commit seven
motes to create a doorway which opens in her mind the
moment her subject is approached by the spirit. The
moment she steps through it, the Exalt falls into a trance
and experiences a dematerialized state that allows her
to enter the scene through the dreamscape of her subject,
where she may confront the spirit with all of the force
that is hers to wield. While the Solar may not interact
with any other physical beings in this state, if the spirit
attempts to escape her by materializing, the Solar may
still perceive and attack it by using Charms such as Spirit-Detecting Glance.


What exactly is this charm supposed to do?

>>47039885
The bigger issue is that the spirit will begin with your essence and only basic shit.

I'd rather just summon an elemental with hefty stats/bonuses and bind it with the twilight caste power..

>>47039900
>What exactly is this charm supposed to do?
let you deal with spooky spirit possession

>>47039922
> Furthermore, if she is able to confirm the presence of a spirit
actor in her subject’s past, she may also commit seven
motes to create a doorway which opens in her mind the
moment her subject is approached by the spirit. The
moment she steps through it, the Exalt falls into a trance
and experiences a dematerialized state that allows her
to enter the scene through the dreamscape of her subject,
where she may confront the spirit with all of the force
that is hers to wield.


Does it retroactively undo the possession from 10 years ago? Do people the demon made her kill come back to life because thanks to you she was never possessed?

>>47039900
Spooky possession, but more importantly information gathering.

If you're a Solar you can probably force the spirit out of that guy, but if you want to know more, you'll need to enter the psyche of the possessed. It also works without possession: if you want to know, say, what happened to that guy yesterday, you can.

Is there no way to summon an elemental of higher than 3 essence besides being essence 4+ and using Ephemeral Induction Technique? Because having a garda bird familiar would be awesome.

>>47039900

In my game last session, a character used this to pop into Swan Dragon's head, see the torture the Fair Folk put him through and began unravelling his madness.

>>47040060
>Celestial 2: Invite an unbound Second Circle demon into Creation in a ritual that culminates on the night of the new moon.

If you want a Garda Bird you're going to have to call it from elsewhere n Creation and either charm it to serve you or break it's will and enslave it. No summoning spell shortcuts.

>>47040060
>>47040096
Also you'd need another Celestial 2 working to increase the essence capacity of your twilight anima to accept E4 spirits as familiars

>>47040115
Oh that is true, forgot about that restriction.

A little sad though having to do so many work around. Elementals interest me so much more than demons, that I expect that's because Exigents are coming 'soon' and they're gonna be much more fleshed out there.

I'd honestly say Solar to change the nature of you Exaltation like that.

>>47041532
Celestial Ambition 2 includes giving someone or yourself supernatural powers or to alter supernatural beings nature.

Amping up a solar's caste ability by a hair sounds like it's within that realm to me.

If anyone's interested, Mage 2e just dropped in the WoD thread. Makes a decent sorcery inspiration supplement

>>47041532
It's Celestial 2 to give yourself a magical power. You're not changing the nature of your exaltation - your next incarnation won't get the effects of that Working. It's just a Permanent new effect which builds off of your existing Anima Power.

>>47038908

And they fall at the very first hurdle by not pointing out that whether the target has cover or not, Wise Arrow is "reduce the target's defense by 1". I'm not saying they're not doing good work, but seriously, it's the first charm.

That comment applies to the core book as well.

>>47039675
In 3e, any number of people can be invited to attune by the owner, but only one person can own a manse/demesne.

>>47041532
>>47041606
Giving yourself a superpower is Celestial 2. Turning a God into a Demon is Solar 2. Making permanent changes to a exaltation is somewhere in that range. Personally I'm leaning towards Solar 1 the possibility of going higher for more significant changes.

Which chapter comic is the most comfy?

File: 1402856566783.png (980 KB, 616x882) Image search: [Google]

980 KB, 616x882

>>47043588
Comics aren't comfy

>>47043682
Why do the clothes look like they've been photoshopped to the pic afterwards?

>>47038908
Jeez. Never knew I wanted this. Thanks Anon!

>>47043950
Magnificent Pose Prana
>30m, 1WP - Reflexive
>Incarnae engage in debauched incestuous acts as readily and often as mortals break wind. But the ancient laws of the Primordials which bind them still demand they be perceived as chaste and detached when shown upon parchment.
>This charm may be used whenever someone (usually a spirit of journalism or a horny Eclipse caste) attempts to document or record these carnal acts of cosmic decadence. Their record or image is replaced with one of the Incarnae posing dramatically, their overwhelming naked forms covered in standard garb for thir station (though Awareness 6, Ocult 6 allows observers to notice that the clothing appears out of place and added by magic)

Does anyone know how charms like Wind and Stones Defense and Ferocious Jab interact with charms like Bulwark Stance?

Will 3e Lunars still be able to grow to kaiju size? Or is that yet another fun thing that Holden and Morke have deemed "not appropriate" for them, and parceled out to another Exalt type?

>>47044140
Lunars are barbarians, not pokemon

>>47044140
Holy shit. The bitching about Holden and Morke now demands a goddamn TIME MACHINE to set up? Just burn them in effigy and get it out of your system. Fuck.

>>47044120
Natural language means there is no ruling, so your GM will have to supply one and not be encouraged to stop play to read through an 800 page book. Opinion is divided on whether this is a good thing or not.

This GM makes it a policy never to personally look up anything during play. This GM also thinks that the onslaught value for a character using Bulwark Stance remains in tact, but the character ignores it as a penalty; the value can still be used by an attacking character, or by a Shining Point practitioner using Solar parry and Gathering Light Concentration. Your GM may differ from this GM.

>>47044120
Onslaught Penalty is still there, you are merely ignoring its effect to your Parry or Evasion. There is one Charm that prevents onslaught from building up, but all others that say you ignore the penalty still work with Wind and Stones etc.

>>47044202
INCORRECT

>>47044198
It is true that Morkden deems inappropriate what the 15 years old of the forum deems inappropriate, that is, the circlejerking of the moment. Should the 15 years old of the forum decide that the UCS is inappropriate to the setting (and those morons can be persuaded of almost anything), Morkden will probably remove it entirely, and then explain his move in a 3500 word passive aggressive post that doesn't really explain anything but prove that anybody who think that the UCS has any worth in Exalted is a moron.

It already has happened, several times.

>>47044338
>It already has happened, several times.
No it hasn't, you're just making things up again.

>>47044426
It's not as though making things up can make the Exalted development process appear any more dysfunctional, though.

>>47044338
>It already has happened, several times.
Name one

>>47044468
It clearly can though.

>>47044258
Didn't you just agree with me?

>>47044581
No, you said there's no ruling, when there unambiguously is one.

>>47044603
My ST claims that Hatewheel/Holden ruled the other way on the Onyx Path forums.

>>47044630
No, they ruled that way on the forums and it's fairly clear if you actually bother reading the charms.

>>47044630
Your ST is wrong.

>>47044630

He's lying or misinformed, then.

>Most Charms just let you ignore your onslaught penalty, either for an instant or to one aspect of your Defense. Very few Charms prevent onslaught from accumulating in the first place, but those that do would indeed mess up Ferocious Jab.

Straight from the Hamster: http://forum.theonyxpath.com/forum/main-category/exalted/861762-ferocious-jab-vs-various-defensive-charms

>>47044603
Where's that then? Doesn't seem to be in the combat or charms sections.

>>47028236
Would sunglasses be allowed in Creation or would that make John and Morke have a goddamn hissy fit, like technology levels above The Dung Ages?

>>47044704
Why are you so mad?

>>47044700
I guess I should refresh before I post. Still, not in the book, which I think is part of a deliberate decision to discourage people from looking stuff up mid game.

File: 20160502_154114.jpg (4 MB, 5312x2988) Image search: [Google]

4 MB, 5312x2988

>>47044737

File: 20160502_154231.jpg (4 MB, 5312x2988) Image search: [Google]

4 MB, 5312x2988

>>47044737
>>47044759

>>47044737
>>47044759
You sure you in the right thread bra

>>47044140
I don't think Holden or Morke have stated anything specific about size boosting charms, but given Holden's specific, and often aired, views on what is fitting for lunar shapeshifting, I'm almost positive that the answer is 'no'.

If they do include 'kaiju charms', they'll probably end up as a Shintai thing, since Infernals seems to be gobling up the majority of the non-animorphism shapeshifting.

>>47044685
>to one aspect of your Defense
This is a good point. Even if you're parrying and you have Bulwark up, you still have an onslaught penalty to Evasion.

I guess the Essence 3 version of Gathering Light Concentration definitively cancels your onslaught. Turns out fighting a guy using a sword with your bare hands might get you injured. Who knew?

>>47044778
What a needlessly fat fuck of a book

>>47044700
>>47044727
In the actual text of the book
>Until her next turn, the Lawgiver ignores all penalties to her Parry Defense.
Is Ferocious Jab lowering your Parry Defense? No? Then Bulwark Stance does nothing. This isn't even natural language, this is drooling retards can't read levels of stupid.

If you have a charm negating wound penalties, do you expect it to mean you're actually no longer wounded? If you have a charm to see in darkness, do you expect the darkness to go away because you can see through it? If a charm lets you make attacks as if you were in close range, do you think it teleports you to close range? Charms do what they say they do, this shouldn't be a hard concept to grasp.

>>47044713
Three years and $30 for a mediocre PDF release of a system I'll never use.

>>47044828
Then why are you in this thread?

>>47044841
A fair point, but I like the setting still and also I now unironically wanna know if sunglasses are a thing in Creation.

>>47044821
You know I agreed with you about this part, right? Or you agreed with me, since I posted first.

The fact that people keep asking the question shows it's not as obvious a ruling as all that. None of the devs posted to point out you can't spend motes you don't have, for instance, because that's actually obvious. The fact that we have consensus on this doesn't mean people who disagree or don't see it are stupid.

>>47044662
>>47044674
>>47044685
>>47044821

My ST has admitted they must have misrembered but wants to pass on their opinion that you're a "shower of cunts". Which I think might be higher praise than they'd give Onyx Path or RPGnet.

>>47044963
>but wants to pass on their opinion that you're a "shower of cunts"
Tell him to fuck himself, too.

I have a question about Gloaming Eye Understanding. It allows me to be taught spirit charms, but how I learn them in the first place? I just acquire them magically every time I use tha charm or I need to spend the training time? I need an examplar of the spirit to teach them to me?

>>47045107
>Type: Reflexive

You learn them instantly as a reflexive action. No training time required.

>>47045107
>>47045151
Also it says "she may be taught" so you need either a spirit or an Eclipse who knows the charm to show you how to do it.

>>47045195
So does that mean you need to keep the 3m committed or you lose the charm and need to relearn it? Or should you be able to just spend the 3m whenever you want to have access to that charm? Both options seem extreme.

>>47045328
If you release the mote, the charm goes back to being in a language you can't speak and you need to be taught it again.

If I don't want to really focus on Sorcery or even mess with it a whole lot, is it worth the merit buy-in just to pick up a single spells to screw around with?

>>47045328

The former. You lose the Charm completely if Gloaming lapses.
>Releasing these motes causes knowledge of the Charm to fade.

>>47045351
I guess that's fair. If you're not an Eclipse you shouldn't just be able to get their power but cheaper.

>>47045357
Sorcery is always worth it, even usut for one spell you want. Or hell, just for a merit you like from the shaping ritual.

There is literally no downside

>>47045357
>merit

Charm.

And yes, even grabbing Demon of the First Circle or Summon Elemental as your control (which does nothing) is a decent deal; grabbing two spells (one that deals with what you want to do primarily, and then a Summon spell) is a great one.

>>47045357
YES.

Especially if you pick a spell that is versatile (Demon summoning. Always a laugh at parties. Don't fail your binding roll.) or complements what you're already doing (Wood Dragon Claw is easier to turn on and off than Invulnerable Skin of Bronze).

>tfw they hard-nerfed Mists of Eventide

My sorcery boner is at minimum

>>47039969
No, it just lets you know if a spirit's been fucking with your subject before you got to them, and lets you plant a trap for the next time said spirit tries anything.

>>47045357
Yes, though fluff-wise sorcery's a big deal in 3E, so a sorcerous dabbler would feel pretty inappropriate for me.

>>47045474
They say that, but it's like when they say that 5+5+1 is rare even by exalt standards. It really doesn't match the actual game that they released.

>>47045387
>Charm

Right, sorry. Haven't played anything except DnD in like a year, still adjusting to the terminology.

I think I'm gonna take Corrupted Words as my control spell, and then pick up Summon Elemental just to have it.

>>47045498
Sure it does. Or rather it matches the setting they released: if players are going to 'play it wrong', then nobody can stop them. For the record, I've only seen one sorcerer character in 3E, and sorcery was a pretty defining part of his character, so it's not like nobody cares about the fluff of sorcery.

>>47045544
They got rid of marble circle magic and replaced it with sorcery. It's a lot more common than in 2e by my reading

>>47045474
>>47045544

On the other hand, 3e Sorcery now replaces 2e Thaumaturgy as the tool for minor workings and enchanted bridges and cursed roads and suchlike. Sorcery is reasonably common, thaumaturgy is now "one bread maker in a century".

>>47045498
Yeah, it's quickly becoming my headcanon that a person exalts as a Solar for having a five in something, but the excellence that bleeds into them from their exaltation (which is what I imagine Solar XP is, and which you get for being passionate and acting in your role) supplies the rest of the 5s they actually start play with. Other Exalts exalt for different reasons, and might not start at Peak Mortal but they can all reach Peak Mortal and beyond; different degrees of ease, but it's there for the taking.

>>47045566
How common it is debatable, but please lets not have that debate, we've already had it quite a few times in these threads. My point isn't really about the rarity of sorcery, though, but about how important it should be to characters who take it. I think that the section on sorcery makes it very clear that sorcery isn't something you just learn on a whim or for a few useful tricks. It's something that takes real dedication and a right kind of mindset, and should be character-defining rather than just something you dabble in.

>>47045647
Except that you can't Supernal sorcery, so it must by definition be a secondary aspect of your character

So, thaumaturges are like capes in Worm while sorcerers are like, um, Batman?
In that thaumaturges can do only their thing but they do it well, but Batman does everything?


Anyway; Sorcerers, what thaumaturgy did you choose when you got your Sorcerires?

>>47045662
If you insist on only playing characters who are defined by one thing, I guess.

>>47045705
Supernal is your "thing". Sorcery is just one charm you took.

>>47045701
Prestidigitation - as the D&D spell

New ST here. One of my players want to play a character that before exalting was a mortal that lived in the first era and got petrified/caged into jade until now. I don't know much about the first era, how feasible is that?

File: Hahaha_No_Owl.jpg (67 KB, 780x477) Image search: [Google]

67 KB, 780x477

>>47045743

>>47045662
If you supernal Occult and start with Spirit-Drawing Oculus (and Ancient Tongue Understanding and Supernal Control Method, although those are Essence 1), Sorcery is pretty clearly your character's primary focus.

>>47045647
Could you recommend an explanation for why I might have just learned a little sorcery? I was looking at the higher levels of sorcery and I like the look of quite a few spells in there, but I don't want to invest in a bunch of spells in terrestrial circle spells, because I don't really have a need for most of them.

>>47045726
Supernal being your "thing" in no way implies it should be your only "thing". Characters generally shouldn't be defined by a single thing, and the fluff of the sorcery certainly makes it seem like it should be character-defining. Sorcery being just one Charm you took is true on a strictly mechanical level, but it's complete nonsense from a fluff perspective.

>>47045743

Perfectly feasible. The first age had recurring breakouts of Solars Epically Fucking Shit Up on their "off days" until eventually everyone got pissed and started the Usurpation, and one of those things might have been petrifying a mortal in jade as an experiment to see how the mortal is doing a thousand years later. For science!

>>47045743
I feel like this can only end badly. Especially given the only person that in canon was in such a state was the last solar as far as I recall, and even then that's only if you want him there and to be relevant to the story.

The first age was extremely different from the second. It was an age of wonders where the Solars weren't known as Anathema and were the rightful rulers of Creation. Having a mortal with that knowledge could be extremely detrimental in the long run.

BUT. Is it feasible? Yes. Lots of crazy stuff happened in the first age. Someone waking up from something like cryo-stasis wouldn't be the most crazy thing to happen.

>>47045769
Your character comes from a wealthy background and had an expensive education (in 2e this might have been in Thaumaturgy), although it was never your character's great enthusiasm.

>>47045848
That's easy enough to work in, thanks!

>>47045848
Why would someone who isn't all that enthusiastic about sorcery display the "effort, dedication, and the willingness to abandon old views and deeply-held beliefs" that learning sorcery requires?

>>47045810
>>47045824

My problem is not so much the cryo stasis itself but the fact that I don't really know how much it will impact the game the fact that it's walking around with first age knowledge.

>>47045948
Money

>>47045824
>>47045743
You could also dilute the concept a bit to bring it into line with the established setting. Maybe the character comes from an area that still has working First Age tech. They could be an Air Child (fallen race, wings, created by Solar fuckery, live in the very far North where only tech can sustain life). Let the guy play a Vault Dweller if you want, just pick Fallout 1 instead of 4.

>>47045566
The problem is that the devs want conflicting things out of sorcery. They want to present it as something rare and mysterious and remarkable...but they don't want it to be a "and thus, you generally can't have this very cool thing, I'm afraid" thing as a result, so what happens is the clusterfuck you see before you where ostensibly rare sorcery has rather lax learning requirements.

>>47045965
More than that because I don't know what "first age knowledge" includes except for the solars being rulers of creation (which sincerely I figured that in game is not gonna be really influent, as being a solar exalted he could perfectly be going around claiming to be the rightful ruler of creation even without being from the first age).

>>47045965

So don't have first age knowledge. I mean, how much "first age knowledge" do _you_ have of, say, building a computer from our age? Now imagine building a computer sans infrastructure and having to reinvent the components. "Um, there are chips that use silicon" might save you a few years on the reinvention, but it's not going to get you to computers any time soon.

Mortals from the first age are going to have no clue how the infrastructure worked on a deep level, only that it was there, and their personal knowledge of who's who is going to be a thousand years out of date. You could sell it to some researcher, maybe, if you convince them of your story.

>>47045948
>"effort, dedication, and the willingness to abandon old views and deeply-held beliefs"
The Five Stations is now only one way to initiate into Sorcery. 3e doesn't even mention Brigid. I like to imagine the Salinan Working is still a thing, though, even in a version of Creation where you can learn Sorcery in between fucking a succubus and eating pieces of her victims' souls.

>>47045965
>>47046015
Well depending on where he's from, he could claim to have intimate knowledge of things now long lost to time. For example, if you're in the south he could easily claim (with a good occult score) that the old man in the Lap is the last supplicant of endless power, that'd be the biggest problem.

>>47045976
Money is an answer to this how, exactly?

>>47046075
No, but what I quoted was from the 3E Core's section on sorcery. The things mentioned are something each and every path to learning sorcery explicitly requires.

>>47046113
So it does; I thought that was a reference to 2e Sorcery, and that sacrifice that every player I ever met managed to cheese their way past without giving up anything they'd miss.

Maybe there's room for a dabbler sorcer, though. Especially with a decent bit of privilege and money.

>>47046000
They just chose that the requirements should be mostly narrative. That also means you can ignore them but don't pretend there are none.

>>47046507
They could have just made sorcery a merit like martial arts. That would stop anyone from just dabbling in it.

>>47046609
Not really. You could still have the fluff that your character is a dabbler, just like you can fluff that your character took decades to master sorcery with it "only" requiring a single Solar charm.