>What is Exalted?
An epic high-flying role-playing game about reborn god-heroes in a world that turned on them.
Start here: http://theonyxpath.com/category/worlds/exalted/
>That sounds cool, how can I get into it?
Read the 3e core book (link below). For mechanics of the old edition, play this tutorial: http://jyenicolson.net/exalted/. It'll get you familiar with most of the mechanics.
>Gosh that was fun. There were a lot of lesbians though. How do I find a group?
Roll20 and the Game Finder General here on /tg/. With the new edition, though, chances are more games will crop up.
Resources for Third Edition
>Final 3E Core Release
https://mega.nz/#!ctgxyJaC!ygkrLnFsrnBJzIUZY-dJsMfyFrhFQgDsQuuo52fcW0I
http://www.mediafire.com/download/q51qw8skdw1rg15/Exalted_3e_Core.pdf
>3E Backer Core (Old)
https://mega.nz/#!E1dRBBIa!ZbQG4IasYCJRli2bhgE2MOdWeFAeV3N1rqL9kAIGbNE
>Frequently updated Character Sheet with Formulas and Autofill https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pfjmZKzcUqAX9mB58IAEUIFkZr8rq4CvdRRM4kzwwgU/edit?usp=sharing
>General Homebrew dumping folder: https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0ByD2BL6J89NiQzdCWWFaY0c5Mkk&usp=sharing
>Collection of old 3e Materials, including comics and fiction anthologies https://www.mediafire.com/folder/t2arqtqtyyt28/Exalted_3Leak
>Charm Trees:
>Solar Charms: https://imgur.com/a/q6Vbc
>Martial Arts: https://imgur.com/a/mnQDe
>Evocations: https://imgur.com/a/TYKE4
Resources for 2.5 Edition:
>All books with embedded errata notes, as well as some extras: https://www.mediafire.com/folder/253ulzik1j9s5/Exalted
>Chargen software: http://anathema.github.io/
>Anathema homebrew charm files: https://www.mediafire.com/folder/pka3nz3vqbqda/Anathema_Files
>MA form weapon guide: http://www.brilliantdisaster.net/dif/ExaltedMA.html
>http://www.mediafire.com/view/ua7tanepy2jfkdp/Exalted_2nd_Ed_-_Return_of_the_Scarlet_Empress.pdf
Resources for 1e:
>https://www.mediafire.com/folder/9vp0e9id3by6m/Exalted_1e
I guarantee that Lunars will be able to use Martial Arts in DBT.
>>47187832
Did anyone think they wouldn't?
I'm hoping each splat will have more material that can be used by the other exalt types. The charms won't be transferable, but spells and artifacts would be nice, and we can be absolutely certain that the five dragon styles will appear in the DB book. I think the devs said they'd basically be the same power level as the ones in the core book, but with no Terrestrial or Mastery keywords.
>>47187832
We know that. But they won't be able to use MA in animal form or Evocations in DBT.
In order to get this thread going, what are some stories involving Lunars? Either as a PC, an ally to the PCs, an antagonist, or whatever.
>>47187904
They'll probably be as strong as the corebook styles minus the (Mastery) keyword
>>47187904
Spells and artefacts would be nice, but they'll mostly be contained to Arm of the Chosen and a dedicated Sorcery book. We'll get a few Martial Art styles in the Dragon-Blooded and Sidereal books, but with Hero Styles being folded into Brawl, there'll be a bit less until a dedicated MA book hits.
Remember Morke and Holden are liars
>>47187904
>Did anyone think they wouldn't?
At the end of the last thread it seems.
> I think the devs said they'd basically be the same power level as the ones in the core book, but with no Terrestrial or Mastery keywords.
It'd be pretty funny if the five dragon styles did have Mastery keywords.
>>47188039
It'd be odd, but I guess it wouldn't make that much of a difference. If people didn't want to have that distinction, letting DBs gain the mastery abilities is barely even a houserule. Far worse would be if the general level of the elemental MAs wasn't comparable to the core MAs.
>>47188039
I think they talked about the Five Dragon Styles as lacking the Terrestrial and Mastery Keywords completely. So while a Solar could take them and be able to leverage their bigger motepools and dice caps of course, they wouldn't be intrinsically better at the styles than Dragonbloods were.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the lore of the Five Dragon styles is that they were made by the Sidereals specifically for the Terrestrials. I think it'd be a funny joke if the Sidereals worked in Mastery into there so they could giggle behind the backs of Immaculate Monks that they don't know what they're missing. Gameplay-wise it should be fine without Mastery.
>>47188443
Well, it was mainly made to fight Lunars. The Solars were gone; only the Siddies had Mastery. And it would be a pain for a Siddie to learn a style JUST to teach it, since it wasn't worth using. I think that would make perfect sense.
what book was this in? https://exalted-infernals-malleus-maleficarum.obsidianportal.com/wikis/chernobaalim-the-hounds-of-hell
previous thread >>47137313
>>47188914
>https://exalted-infernals-malleus-maleficarum.obsidianportal.com/wikis/chernobaalim-the-hounds-of-hell
I think that they're homebrew. The picture is cropped Guild Wars concept art.
>>47187911
>In order to get this thread going, what are some stories involving Lunars? Either as a PC, an ally to the PCs, an antagonist, or whatever.
I joined a recent game with a Lunar PC; when the original ST later dropped out, I was persuaded to take over and gradually converted it from a STPC to a sometimes-absent party ally.
She was a hiding-in-plain-sight sort of deal most of the time: pose as an alchemist-sage accompanied by a "familiar" (actually summoned) elemental of one of the least dangerous elemental types available, the sandbird that can heal wounds of up to 3L. She'd read stories to it and treat it as an equal and pretend like she wasn't even Exalted, just knowledgeable. She was initiated into sorcery, even carried an official-looking fake Realm-issue sorcery license, but rarely showed that. When she did sorcer, she only publicly used the Earth Servant spell that creates a harmless golem to carry stuff (it can't enter combat). This was all done under a false face (thanks, Courtesan's Possession) and she used her true human form for all of about 10 seconds during the campaign in 2 instances of showing it to PCs she trusted.
She did know the actual Art of Alchemy to keep a good cover up, but most of the potions she offered the party were something more.
Lunar Blood Shaping Technique
> A Lunar must feed her target a taste of the Lunar’s blood. Then, if the target is willing, he takes the shape of one human or animal from the Lunar’s library.
+ Hybrid Body Rearrangement
> A dedicated Lunar can learn to change just part of his body based on her spirit shape or a shape in her heart’s blood library
= RED BULL GIVES YOU WINGS!
(I'm not sure if it's actually rules legal to combine these two Knacks this way, but it was fucking awesome to feed someone blood-disguised-in-potion to give them a temporary mutation instead of a complete transformation.)
Other fun tricks included Life of the Hummingbird + Emerald Grasshopper Form. Fleabite, got yer form.
>>47189060
(cont)
She really wasn't a straight-up fighter with Str 2, Dex 2, and you'd laugh at her in a white room simulation, but she was an unholy terror in actual play. Fleabite, chameleon mutation and size bonus to hide, spamming unexpected attacks from stealth, stunting hiding in the other guy's hair, decent standing soak and an OBT, and of course Halting the Scarlet Flow.
When she ran into a dragon-blood who could just aura up and disrupt the fleabite strategy, she instead turned into an acid-spitting albatross and tormented him by raining acid from above, out of bow range. The accuracy was shit, but she could keep it up all fucking day at no cost.
And, of course, being able to turn into any of the animals or people accompanying an expedition. Sometimes without even killing them. As a chameleon-skinned fly, she could sneak in practically anywhere, knock out a convenient target, take their shape, cause some havoc, and bugger out. Cue unfortunate original target being found and getting accused of being a shapeshifter, only for the havoc to start up again while everyone was watching the form it seemed to have been using last.
One scene I had in mind that I unfortunately never got to play with her was a Training From Hell scenario where she'd turn into various monstrous forms such as a Marilith (or whatever pretentious name Exalted calls its local equivalent) to spar with the newbie being trained.
Yet another Iron Whirlwind Attack combination question.
Leaping Tiger Attack, can totally be combo'd with Melee normally but can it supplement each attack in Iron Whirlwind? I was thinking you could but then I reread and saw this sentence.
>This counts as the character’s movement for the round.
Now IWA lets you ignore the cost of Charms after the first activation but could you chain this together to flash step around like a madman in battle? Or since it counts as your movement could you not use it after you have previously used your movement on this Charm?
>>47189436
>Or since it counts as your movement could you not use it after you have previously used your movement on this Charm?
This one, correct.
IWA lets you ignore costs; it doesn't let you ignore usage limitations.
>>47189448
That's what brought me to question it, now, could you not use Leaping Tiger if you had already reflexively moved?
>>47189487
Correct.
>>47189448
>>47189503
Well damn, I'm trying to figure out how to murder an Essence 5 Resistance user and that was a good chunk of my damage. I still think I can manage it but that makes it a bit harder.
On a related note, Immortal Blade Triumphant. It converts damage dice to automatic successes, presumably this happens after soak for Withering or Adamant Skin Technique soak for Decisive?
Now how about it's earlier bonus, it gives Stunt bonuses to damage, what if you get a 2 point stunt? That's one auto-success to damage, if you don't get past Hardness does it do anything or does it get through anyway?
So, let me refine this question a bit.
Solar Melee has charms that let you bypass hardness. It also has charms that let you flurry decisive attacks. Everyone makes a big deal out of Solar Melee building up initiative, but they can just go for the kill right off the bat by racking up lethal health levels of damage that bypass hardness and render initiative moot.
Have you found that this is an issue?
>>47189628
Correct for both. The dice pool is reduced by soak, then rolled, which is where dice-to-success powers would happen.
>That's one auto-success to damage, if you don't get past Hardness does it do anything or does it get through anyway?
This one is trickier. By a strict reading, only damage DICE help get past hardness, not successes, and I'm inclined to think the same way, since automatic/additional successes "happen" as/after you roll, separately from the Hardness vs. Damage check.
>>47189702
Not really, because ignoring hardness makes those flurries all the more expensive, and swinging from base is much riskier for Melee than it is for Brawl, not the least of which because its best defense (Heavenly Guardian) comes out of init.
They swing back with a counterattack, immediately crash you, ending the flurry, and then swing again, killing you because you can't HGD.
>>47189799
Shit, I didn't read HGD carefully enough to realize that you can't use it while you're in crash.
>>47189818
I mean, I'm overstating the danger a little, but that's a very real risk of chilling out so close to base initiative: crash is no joke.
Can you use Immortal Blade Triumphant's Decisive attack with Iron Whirlwind? I can't tell if that final paragraph is supposed to be a Simple effect or Supplemental or what.
>>47189861
So you try to kill an opponent with your first decisive always then?
>>47189967
God no. "always" is a very rare thing in 3e's combat engine; the only things that are always good are penalty-negators to Defense, off the top of my head.
Some combatants DO want to make lots of small decisives over the course of the fight, others want a big alpha strike to start and then switch to small decisives to push you the rest of the way, or vice versa to build up a wound penalty and then capitalize on it with a big one.
>>47189961
It's a reflexive function of ending the Charm, and no you can't use it with IWA's cost-break effect.
>>47189702
>Solar Melee has charms that let you bypass hardness. It also has charms that let you flurry decisive attacks.
Yeah but what hardness-ignoring Charms actually work with Iron Whirlwind? The only one is Edge of Morning Sunlight.
>>47190032
>It's a reflexive function of ending the Charm, and no you can't use it with IWA's cost-break effect.
Okay, but can you use it with Iron Whirlwind? Immortal Blade Triumphant says terminating the Charm gives you a "single" decisive attack.
>>47190142
>Okay, but can you use it with Iron Whirlwind?
My read of it is that IBT's release function empowers an attack, it doesn't create one, so I'd let you use it on one of the attacks in IWA, sure.
>>47190142
I'd let you use it on one of the attacks, nothing too crazy about that.
>>47188992
huh. that explains the art
weird it looks like the only one on this listhttps://exalted-infernals-malleus-maleficarum.obsidianportal.com/wikis/first-circle-demons
>>47190179
If the Charm is empowering an attack, then should it not count as an attack-enhancing Charm for Iron Whirlwind? It is a Charm whose effects are enhancing an attack.
This natural language is garbage. They should have just keyworded it.
>>47190207
>If the Charm is empowering an attack, then should it not count as an attack-enhancing Charm for Iron Whirlwind?
It does, but that doesn't change the fact that ending a Charm isn't a cost.
If a Charm could only be used once/scene, IWA wouldn't help you there either.
>>47190101
Looking at Blazing Solar Bolt makes me wonder, is it impossible to block without using a charm that lets you block unblockable attacks, or does enhancing your defence with any charm at all mean you can now block it?
>>47190336
The latter.
>>47190382
How do we know that?
>>47189799
What about something like fall damage? Can you use Adamant Skin Technique to soak the damage? That's what its use was in 2E at least. But that deal automatic levels and then extra dice.
Say you can use AST, if you soak all the dice do the automatic levels go away?
>>47190394
Because if it were unblockable and undodgeable period, one of the following would be true:
1) It would be more expensive.
2) It wouldn't say "without a Charm," it would just stop at "undodgeable and unblockable."
3) It would KEEP GOING, establishing "without a Charm that can foo the unfooable."
I don't care what we "know," what's written is what's written. If they intended something else, they should have written something else.
>>47190382
>Certain attacks, particularly attacks modified by some Charms, are unblockable, undodgeable, or both. An unblockable attack bypasses Parry entirely, necessitating an application of Evasion to defend against. Likewise, an undodgeable attack bypasses Evasion. Using an attack that’s rolled but both unblockable and undodgeable is a difficulty zero action.
Unless a Charm says you can use it to block and unblockable, you're out of luck it completely bypasses the Defenses.
>>47190414
I think you misunderstood.
My point was that decisive damage with a success-booster looks like this:
Step N) "I have X damage dice." not "I have X damage dice and Y auto-successes."
Step N+1) "Is my X damage dice > Hardness? If Y, baller."
Step N+2) "I roll my dice, adding Y auto-successes, achieving Z successes in total."
That's why Hardness doesn't account for automatic successes.
Fall damage (and envirohazards in general) don't care about soak or hardness to begin with, so it's moot; even if you COULD soak the fall damage dice, that wouldn't make the levels go away, because it'd roll its pool of 0 dice and add Y successes anyway.
>>47190434
The attack is only unblockable while the condition "the Defense has not used a Charm" is true.
Once you use a Charm, ANY Charm, it ceases to be an unblockable attack, and so you don't need a perfect.
>>47190430
>I don't care what we "know,"
You misunderstand, as you just explained how we know that what you say is the case. When the writing for Charms is purposefully obtuse, we need to be able to explain why our interpretations are right. So relax, I'm not calling you a faggot or anything.
>>47190525
My bad, dawg.
>>47190483
Please quote me something that says any Charm can block an unblockable.
I just quoted text that says it bypasses Parry completely, you CAN'T apply any Charms on it, you don't get the chance.
UNLESS you have a Charm that explicitly says it allows you to block the unblockable, such as Heavenly Guardian Defense.
>>47190032
>some Do want to make lots of small decisives
And if they did, why waste time building init when it's going to reset anyway?
Granted, I alternate between "ambush, re-establish surprise" and "grapple" myself. But if you're looking at spamming melee and aren't looking for that big cut, then I'm not certain that I see the incentive for making withering attacks.
>>47190609
>Please quote me something that says any Charm can block an unblockable.
There isn't one, because that isn't what I said, you obtuse idiot.
Blazing Solar Bolt says
>Blazing Solar Bolt can strike an opponent from short range, ignores hardness, and cannot be dodged or blocked without a Charm.
The CHARM establishes that it's only unblockable/undodgeable until the defense uses a Charm. "without a Charm." Not "without a Charm that can block the unblockable," or even just "cannot be dodged or blocked," period. "without a Charm." Any Charm.
Activate your Excellency? You're using a Charm, and so BSB's own text says now it can be blocked and/or dodged.
>>47190630
>And if they did, why waste time building init when it's going to reset anyway?
>I'm not certain that I see the incentive for making withering attacks.
To have a buffer against your enemy's withering attacks, and to slow down HIS init gathering.
There's a huge difference, to the small-decisives style of combat, between being vulnerable to insta-crash 1 turn out of 3, and being vulnerable to insta-crash all the time.
By the same token, by not making any withering attacks at all, you've (more or less) doubled your opponent's damage potential against you. Death by a thousand cuts doesn't work if your opponent races towards "splatter you across the pavement" before you can even get to 500.
>>47190678
Depends on if you can get an early edge in, but I see that initiative can be important depending on how you fight. Particularly if an opponent can both attack well and has high hardness.
Guys! While playing Stellaris I found where Holden is! Siriusly.
>>47190876
Don't just sit there, survey that shit.
>>47190895
I am on route with both my fleet and science ship.
So, if I ant to build a Dawn Caste and not take War. What abilities (dodge/resistance/awareness are a given) should I take for the best synergy?
>>47190895
>>47190917
That's a lot of Holden...
>>47190895
Holden didn't have much to give.
>>47190980
Weirdly appropriate.
Is that big enough to put a city on?
>>47191285
Almost certainly. If it's big enough to even be visible on the map it's probably big enough to support a city-state or two.
>>47191285
Probably, it's about 130 miles tip to tip and about 18 miles at the widest.
We sure do a lot of combat theorycrafting here. We should have thread-built example characters to fight with to see how it works in practice.
>>47191341
>>47191349
Good.
Follow up, is it close enough to the border of the map that i could BS wyld influenced animals being a thing around there? My idea is for squids that have incredibly vibrant neon ink that the citizens harvest and sell
>>47191398
Definitely. Even if it weren't close to the border, there's wyld incursions all throughout Creation; leftovers from the Balorian crusade, or just random weakenings in Creation's stability.
And even if there isn't any actual Wyld LEFT, its after-effects might still persist. A bloodline of cattle that just never bred out the third eye the Wyld gave them.
>>47191398
Go ahead. Nexus has a section of Deep Wyld in it after all.
>>47190101
Armor-Eating Strike. Which incidentally happens to be the best hardness-ignoring charm
>>47191696
Getting to ignore between 1 and 7 Hardness for 1m is pretty good.
Both it and Iron Whirlwind are Essence 2 Charms though, so you can't use them both until at least ten sessions in with your group.
Question for anyone running or thinking about running. Do you (or will you) give an explanation in universe as to why the party is exceptional even among other Exalted? Or are they just exceptional because they are player characters?
>>47191831
For me, just the latter. Its not a big deal because i'll advance their closest rivals at almost the same rate
>>47191831
If you have lots of Downtime it might not even be an issue
>>47191831
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1xAOzbmSWA
>>47191831
NPC Solars are exceptional too, but only in ways that nobody sees or cares about unless they're direct and primary antagonists.
For a game set in the south, the Bull may unify the north under his rule, but it's outside the scope of the game until the players decide to challenge him.
What's race like in Creation?
I know people from the South have brown skin and there are panda people, but with the art style that's all you can really tell. Is everyone vaguely asian or are there actual ethnicities as we know them?
>>47191997
There's ethnicities, yes. You can tell where someone is from by looking, both in a broad directional sense (South vs. North) and in a more regional sense (native Gem-ites probably look different from native Delzahn).
The vast majority of Creation is some shade of brown, though; West, East, and South all noticeably so.
>>47191997
>"He can't tell a pure blooded Coral Islander from a filthy fucking mongrel Wavecrester"
>"Hey, you Easterners all look alike to me with your green hair"
>"Fucking slant-eyed, blonde Haslantians..."
>>47191997
Cultures and ethnicities generally correspond to certain directions. Asia - Centre/Realm. South - Africa. East - The Americas. North - Continental Europe. West - Pacific Islands. As you get into more specific locations, it gets shaken up, but it's a good starting point.
>>47191831
Most of the time they're not. I generally have notable NPC's grow roughly alongside the PC's
>>47191997
They explain it in the book here
>stat block for qt smith goddess removed
shame. Also miss that big statue guy who defended some town in the wyld.
How come Archery is the only combat ability that ties in combat prowess with your Intimacies? I wish Melee and the others also made more use of you fueling your strength with your Intimacies. There's a Charm or two in each ability that deals with it, and I don't think that's enough.
>>47192840
I bet that was meant to be replaced with the current animated statue statblock
>>47192840
FUCK
I JUST REALIZED MOUSE OF THE SUN ISNT THERE ANYMORE
TRAVESTY
>>47192899
>MOUSE OF THE SUN ISNT THERE
Good.
>>47192899
figuratively who
So for 3e how would you rank the following tactics so far:
>Melee spam flurries
>Ambush and re-establish surprise
>Grappling, grappling, and more grappling
>Sniping with archery/thrown plus archery/thrown
>Soak/hardness monster
>>47192996
An abstract concept denoting a question of personhood.
>>47193071
>Melee spam flurries
Rank 1 - Obliterates 98% of potential enemies with the right charm setup
>Ambush and re-establish surprise
Rank 5 - Unreliable, has many potential answers, more useful as an opening than general combat style.
>Grappling, grappling, and more grappling
Rank 3 -Solar grappling is very strong, but as a decisive gambit with several activation conditions, isn't as all-around powerful as the latter two ranks
>Sniping with archery/thrown plus archery/thrown
Rank 4 - Would be higher, but needs to be coupled with Ride for maximum cheese. Still potent as is
>Soak/hardness monster
Rank 2 - Very reliable and consistent, if unexciting
>>47192845
Archery has two charms that tie combat prowess with intimacies. Brawl has one, melee has one
>>47193320
The ambush/surprise one has been pretty solidly used in my current game by our Supernal Stealth Night with I think all the charms, now, in Ebon Shadow Style. Granted, it falls down a bit when he is fighting someone alone, but when enemies are too busy to look for him Stalking Wolf Attitude is pretty nice thing to hang around with.
>>47193320
>with the right charm setup
And what is the right Charm setup?
Can you guys give some good ideas for what kind of Wyld creatures and raksha would be on a Western Japan-like island?
>>47193803
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_legendary_creatures_from_Japan
>>47193803
What kind of fucking question is that?
Butterfly effect.
What's the most impressive chain of consequences your players have created through poorly-considered (or even well-considered) actions?
>>47193774
Invincible fury of the Dawn, increasing strength exercise, and armor-eating strike is the basic setup.
The idea is to use ISE to increase both base damage of every attack and also the number of attacks. This the only truly broken combo in the game.
>>47194080
What would you change to make it not broken?
Other than banning flurries
>>47194234
I would cap the number of attacks at 5.
>>47194234
Not him, but flurries don't need to be capped. To flurry past a flurry breaker or counterattack, and to push enough dice to crack an opponent's dv consistently burns up so many motes that I'm willing to let someone bust their wad just for the resource difference it leads to in terms of essence and willpower.
How do I add mutations to Anathema?
>>47187430
How do I get my own bondage nun?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCMNWAJiz5Y
I think Sly Marbo may be a Sidereal of Battles.
>>47194698
In 3e, artifact whips exist. It's not unlikely that when SVP style is written, whips will either replace or supplement urumis as form weapons. They're also form weapons for Laughing Wounds style, which has at least been homebrewed. Given their probable shared form weapon, and shared focus on instilling intimacies in your opponent to stop a fight in its tracks, it's very likely that one or more Joybringers has mastered both styles. And of course, all Sidereals are priests, which gives them bonuses on prayer rolls. So somewhere out there is a hot female priest with Performance as a Caste Ability who's mastered martial arts about sex and bondage. Go get 'er.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FqpiP9gkSk
Weather Gods, give em an inch and they'll take a yard.
>>47194536
It costs 8m, 1wp to Iron Whirlwind Attack with Excellent Strike. You're making 6-10 attacks (from Increasing Strength Exercise), adding an automatic success to your attack and rerolling 1s (enough to crack 7 parry consistantly, and they'll only have THAT much with some sort of onslaught negator.) add 1m for Armor-Eating Strike to ignore 1-10 hardness on each attack.
In total, Increasing Strength Exercise adds 6 extra damage at Essence 1 (6 attacks, +1 to each), 14 extra damage at Essence 2 (7 attacks, +2 to each), 24 extra damage at Essence 3 (8 attacks, +3 to each), 36 extra damage at Essence 4 (9 attacks, +4 to each), and 50 extra damage at Essence 5 (10 attacks, +5 to each). That of course, assumes that every attack hits, which they won't if your enemy has some sort of onslaught negator.
Regardless, it's a much better, if riskier, way to deal damage than doing things like building up initiative. Not to mention you can Peony Blossom into it if your first flurry doesn't connect or deal a satisfying amount of damage. It almost universally costs more motes to reliably defend against Iron Whirlwind Attack than to launch it, mostly because of Excellent Strike; It's very difficult to ensure that you won't get hit, and at higher levels of essence, even an IWA from low initiative can be devastating. In all, I think allowing ISE to add extra attacks to magical flurries has a distorting influence on the game. In combination with charms like Excellent Strike and Armor-Eating Strike it because incredibly difficult to counter without specific sorts of charms, and it gets incredibly out of hand at high essence levels.
>>47194234
I'd have temporary increases to strength not boost number of attacks. It's only your BASE, not any gained from Increasing Strength Exercise.
I've been curious about Exalted for a while (my friend got the core rule book a while back and I thought it was sick but we never played) and are Lunars still considered shit-tier furfags?
I haven't lurked in a while.
>>47195490
Lunars are now troll-tier furfags.
>>47195490
Lunars will never not be considered shit-tier furfags.
>>47195502
>>47195503
Good to know. I'll take that into consideration when looking for a party.
I've put together my first 3e character for an upcoming game.
http://pastebin.com/1fYQritm (Off-site so I don't take up line after line with the exact rules)
Is there anything really needed for a combat wombat with a strong secondary into social that I'm missing? Or anything in general look off?
>>47195490
>>47195520
What are your standards for tier? An entry-level Lunar, LKE, can have 20-30 soak (depending on which natural language things you read as stacking), passively heal 1lhl per action for free indefinitely, and heal more with an action, with half their starting Charms. This blows out of the water everything that didn't bring a magical flurry.
>>47195623
I'm not sure, I'm relatively new to Exalted and a lot of the numbers right now go over my head. I just remember reading about Lunars while lurking, thinking they were neat, but seeing a general negative light to them.
Seeing if that's still the case.
>>47195371
>You're making 6-10 attacks (from Increasing Strength Exercise)
Assuming you have Strength 5, and spend 3m or 3i for each extra attack you want. You can't ignore that cost. And using Increasing Strength Exercise is a Simple action, so you'll need to find the time to do it.
>(enough to crack 7 parry consistantly
This is true assuming you're using Dex 5, Melee 5, Speciality for a pool of 11. You've got about a 59% chance of getting 7 or more successes. If you're only using a pool of 10, then you've got about a 49% chance of getting 7 or more.
In either case, if the onslaught mounts as normal, your chances go up significantly. Once their defense is 4, or lower, your hit chances are over 90%.
You are correct on everything else. But remember your example character has Strength 5 and Dexterity 5. And Holden says that means you're a min-maxer and you're a bad bad person.
>In all, I think allowing ISE to add extra attacks to magical flurries has a distorting influence on the game.
I agree with this a hundred percent. It's a nice benefit at first since Strength doesn't add to Decisives, but combined with magical flurries its power grows very rapidly.
How would you recommend defending against this combo you've told us about, regardless of the mote cost?
>>47195619
>using pastebin
>not using the character sheet in the OP
>not using paste2
Resources 2 seems low.
>>47195766
>using pastebin
It was originally a google doc so the GM can quickly view it but I wasn't putting that on /tg/.
>Resources 2 seems low.
It's what the book listed for a famous courtesan. I could bump it up by playing with the points a bit.
As far as I can tell, resources really made a jump up in 3e because even resource 1 means 'You have a significant amount of money'.
Still, thanks. Anything else that seems off?
>>47195623
>passively heal 1lhl per action for free indefinitely,
How?
>>47195723
LKE, Solars are basically just "grab Melee and go" and you won't miss much. (Well, maybe you want Adamant Skin Technique or other late-step cover.) If you try "grab Dexterity and go" on a Lunar, you're going to feel the pain. Lunars require more player skill in this; they have to be built differently and more cleverly to compete.
Which they certainly can. In my last game there was a Full Moon Lunar completely and utterly beating the shit out of a Dawn Caste Solar when the Dawn had the same Essence, higher standing DV, and more experience. Mostly because any injury the Lunar took was fukkin' gone two rounds later, while any injury the Solar took was going to be wound penalty for the rest of the fight.
>>47195815
Warform, Gift effect of Halting the Scarlet Flow.
>>47195860
Are you talking about 2e?
>>47195860
Thanks for the info.
I'll do more research before I jump in roll20 And try to find a group.
>>47195878
Yes, that's why I said LKE (Last known edition). Since we don't have 3e Lunars yet.
>>47195910
>LKE (Last known edition)
I've never seen anyone use that term before. That's a dumb term, just say 2e.
>>47195928
I 100% agree. I had no idea what he was talking about with LKE. Though the 1LHL per action made me suspect something like that.
>>47195727
Different guy but since I've been trying to use this combo to kill an Essence 5 Resistance focused guy I've been thinking about it a lot.
Turn length or scene long onslaught negators works wonders, having a high Parry which is reasonable to get with some investment, especially at higher Essence where the Whirlwind combo gets deadly. If you've got Parry 7 and an onslaught negator you've got pretty even odds, they've spent 8 motes so you could burn 8 motes to stay even with them bumping 4 of the attacks up one to 8 which tilts things slightly in your favor.
If you wanna go whole hog it really depends on how much you wanna boost it by, getting each attack defense to 10 would shut down almost all of the attacks but that's 6m per attack which is a bit prohibitive.
Otherwise, have a pretty high Hardness. Resistance Aegis of Invincible Might gives you 20, but even 15 will do you well until they start cracking into higher Essence.
At Essence 1 they can ignore 6 putting you at 9, but their base damage is only 2+Initiative split which they have to split 6 ways. They would need 48 Initiative to break through your hardness with every attack, and if they shunt it all to a few just blow a good bit of motes to defend against them.
>>47187430
The 2e Infernals were cool, you know, barring the suspiciously close to Crossed nun
>>47195727
Cap the number of attacks at 5. I'm not sure its an intended interaction
>>47195910
>Since we don't have 3e Lunars yet.
Well, on the one hand, we have the quick characters.
On the other hand, the quick characters are retarded piles of nerf.
On the Extra Limbs hand, retarded piles of nerf are quite possibly what we should expect anyway.
>>47195727
>>47196029
Oh shoot. I should have set it to 13 dice. We always get 2 stunt dice.
Now your chances of getting 7 or more successes on this melee attack with Excellent Strike are much higher -- almost exactly 75%.
>>47196187
I'd set it for Parry 8 in that case, you should assume they get one as well. If it's a Solar vs Solar.
>>47196029
The issue isn't that a specialized Solar can't defend against the combo, its that it destroys 99% of possible opponents
>>47196219
That's as high as a Parry score can get without a 2- or 3-pt stunt. It assumes they have 5s, a speciality, and a medium weapon. But even then, the attacker's chances are improved:
11d10 Excellent Strike has a ~58.94% of getting 7+ successes
13d10 Excellent Strike has a ~60.01% of getting 8+ successes
Very interesting.
>>47196234
Well yes, I was still curious about the case of it being used against a suitable opponent.
It wrecking people's faces is assumed unless they have a large amount of investment because the Melee user certainly does. If someone with Dex 5, Melee 5, Specialty, Supernal Melee or High Essence, and quite a few Charm purchases walked up to someone with 3s, no Specialty and no relevant Charms of course they're fucked.
Now, if the combo was stomping the yard against an equally invested opponent and it wasn't one of the weaknesses built into the combat tree they invested in, that's where it starts to be a problem.
>>47196253
Stunts favor Offense slightly because Offense typically gets more Dice tricks making each die more valuable as opposed to Defense which just gets a bump to their static rating.
>>47191831
Two reasons.
First, the players are a Circle. There are very, very few canonical Circles, excepting the Bull and Swan's. This means they're exceptionally deadly.
Second, they're adventuring. A lot of Exalted don't. Whitewall's Eclipse Caste Solar, Rune, is tied down by his responsibilities. Bad-ass assassin and horrible person Havesh the Vanisher is deliberately trying to keep a low profile. Many others are tied up in low-risk, low-reward stuff.
The PCs are taking insane risks, even by the standards of Solars. A Circle that stays together is the Wyld Hunt's very first fear.
Even in the fiction, most of the Exalts don't stay together; they go off on their own little missions, because usually one Solar is enough.
>>47196283
It does stomp the yard against equally invested opponents. You need to have an essence 5 resistance charm or a decisive counterattack to disarm them to not die.
>>47196296
What's funny is the game design somewhat encourages this. At least for many of the groups I've been in.
The system incentivizes hyper-specialization which means often times in session is completely split doing their own things and basically just cluing each other into what they're doing every so often and sometimes not even then.
>>47196322
This is my least favorite part about Exalted. The PCs are a party, and should go on their adventures together. But since everyone is so good at their own thing, it's hard to keep the party cohesion going. This would work out okay if this were a novel, or perhaps a video game, but I don't think it's desirable for an RPG.
What sort of Evocations would you expect from a staff designed to be the ultimate healer's aid?
>>47196373
I don't like the concept, any more than "a sword designed to be the ultimate sword-fighter's aid".
That said, if someone wants to post the Yin-Yang Staff from Weapons of Legacy, maybe we can get some use out of that book.
>>47196318
Flurrybreakers apply as well.
>>47196340
>The PCs are a party, and should go on their adventures together.
>But since everyone is so good at their own thing, it's hard to keep the party cohesion going.
I tend to solve this by keeping Circles small: no more than 4 players, usually 3. PCs are encouraged to generalize because otherwise there will be Abilities no one has; they tend to cooperate because they need each other more; if the Circle splits up they still get a lot of attention because I'm only dividing the session 3 ways instead of 5.
>>47196406
Flurrybreakers against IFoD? It allows you to move 1 rangeband between attacks
>>47196406
What flurrybreakers exist in 3e?
>>47196373
Like >>47196385 said, it's kinda unpleasantly cliche.
However, you could probably get a good start by looking at Crane Style - defensive bonuses, Defend Other bonuses, encourages you to do bashing, inflicts Intimacies that you can then use to make the conflict end peacefully, etc.
Perhaps it also lets the wielder remove flaws like Sterile, Hideous, some Derangements. Lean on other themes of green jade / Wood element and use it to bless crops or purify water. Perhaps you can plant it in the ground and it turns into a tree that gives wondrous fruit.
Healing has often had a mythological component; perhaps it wards against creatures of darkness or strikes out possessing spirits like an exorcist.
>>47196450
If I'm being perfectly honest, I worded that like complete ass and didn't mean "Healing+!" type shenanigans, was more in line with what you've posted. Prevention, purifying food and water, so on and so forth.
>>47196415
Mournful Crane's Cry (Crane Style) lets you chuck an opponent two range bands with a counterattack. Sunlight Bleeding Away can work too, if you win Initiative against the IFoD user.
>>47196428
Leaping Dodge Method still the gold standard against anything other than IFoD.
>>47196340
It's like the 2E opening comic. Think about it; what's the whole Circle doing there? You don't need all of 'em to fight a River God. Swan and Dace would've been enough.
If they had just all opened up on the River God at once, he'd have been atomized. Instead, Panther does the fighting for some reason.
The only vaguely convincing fight was Kidale's Circle in the comic, and it works on the assumption that Demethus was the only real fighter.
>>47196527
>all the events of Kidale's comic happened because Faka Kun didn't kill the Dragon-Blooded when she had the chance
The lesson to take away from that story is to always confirm your kills
>>47196514
Okay, so...a Crane Stylist. Sunlight Bleeding Away isn't a flurry breaker, its a disengage charm that can't be used mid flurry because it occurs after a disengage action
Is Flurry-Breaking really a...thing? When I first learned about them in 2e, I thought it was a weird technicality. Like a loophole in the rules. The idea that you move away in the middle of their attacks didn't seem like it was intentional. But in retrospect, there is almost no other use for Leaping Dodge Method. It's rubbed me the wrong way since its inception.
Have the devs commented on this at all for 3e?
>>47196583
Yes, in the sense that are actions a defending player can take that will end a flurry of attacks against them. Leaping Dodge is one way.
More commonly, a Decisive Counterattack could be used to perform a disarm gambit, which would end the opponent's attack.
>>47196593
>More commonly, a Decisive Counterattack could be used to perform a disarm gambit, which would end the opponent's attack.
Oh wow, I never considered that before. And here I was just looking at Solar Counterattack and thinking "this would be really risky against a withering attack".
If you counterattack and disarm them, though, do they still roll damage for that attack against you?
>>47196583
> Have the devs commented on this at all for 3e?
Mostly the devs have talked a lot about how flurries would be gone in 3e. (Again, holden and môrke are liars.)
For example, see the first exchange here: http://avatarcomic.net/exalted-wiki/Combat
>>47196634
...I don't know! Ask your GM
I would say no.
>>47196636
I really do think that Flurries would have really have been better being just gone in 3e. 'Has a flurry' vs 'Doesn't have a flurry' are kinda staggering. They'd have been better off with area attacks/multi-target than flurries you can all throw at a single dude.
That and Grappling are my major issues. Mostly how Grappling basically has zero defenses once the guy has touched. There is few ways to reverse a grapple or ninja out of it, which feels rather wrong.
>>47196636
They're right. Most flurries are gone. Everyone attacked multiple times per turn in previous edition without magic at all.
>>47196661
>So mundane flurry and Iron Whirlwind style multiattacks are gone in EX3. (Holden)
>>47196653
The counterattack keywork only says the charm can't be used in response to a clash charm or other counterattack charm.
Are you sure you can perform a Gambit here? Page 199 does say Gambits are a special kind of Decisive attack. I guess it'd work, but it's a really weird interaction.
Let's look at it this way. If you Solar Counterattack and kill your enemy, do they still damage you? If the answer to that is yes, then they should still damage you even on a Disarm. But if not, then I guess it's up to individuals to decide.
>>47196659
Uh, its actually really easy to get out of a grapple. Every time the grappler is attacked OR takes damage, he loses 1 round of control.
If you attack the guy grappling you, he immediately loses 1 round. If your attack does damage, he loses another.
In a teamfight, just hit the guy doing the grappling! Each attack has the potential to cost him 2 rounds of control - thats huge.
>>47196693
I'm not 100% sure, but I would say you can use a charm like Solar Counterattack to perform a gambit, because - as you say - they are simply another kind of decisive attack.
Now, there are counterattack charms that specify they may only be used to Disarm, but they also tend to cost less and have other benefits to the disarm action.
>>47196659
>Mostly how Grappling basically has zero defenses once the guy has touched. There is few ways to reverse a grapple or ninja out of it, which feels rather wrong.
What feels wrong to me is that the grappled target can still fight with just a few penalties to their pools. You can still attack with your grand goremaul and do Iron Whirlwind Attacks and what have you.
>>47196661
They're liars.
> Iron Whirlwind style multiattacks are gone
Iron Whirlwind is still right there being a multiattack, still with upgrades that hand out even more attacks and more bonuses based on how many attacks it has.
> That doesn't happen in EX3. (Unless you have 16 players, I guess.)
Yeah, now we've moved to a single player being able to go nova and throw out 16 individually rolled attacks in a turn.
> Outside of rare and limited Charms, multi-attack rolls are gone from the system.
There are Charms for it at Essence 1 Archery, Essence 2 Brawl, Essence 2 Melee, Essence 2 Thrown in the corebook.
> I have taken precautions to stop them from being force multipliers
When Iron Whirlwind lets you pay attack-enhancing charms a single time to enhance every attack in a flurry, what the fuck is that if not a force multiplier?
>>47196593
>Yes, in the sense that are actions a defending player can take that will end a flurry of attacks against them. Leaping Dodge is one way.
My favourite in 2E is currently Valor Style counterattacks + Heaven Thunder Hammer.
"What's that? You just spent a pile of Essence on 8 attacks? Gonna spend the other 7 on that pile of rubble, are ya?"
>>47196803
Those require you to be
A) A Solar
B) Used for Decisive attacks only, with 1 exception
If you look at MA, they tend to just have charms that increase raw decisive damage, and not many flurries. In fact, only White Reaper has a true magical flurry charm.
>>47196848
They claimed they removed these types of flurries. They demonstrably did not. I'm not sure what you're trying to argue.
>>47196848
>Those require you to be
>A) A Solar
>B) Used for Decisive attacks only, with 1 exception
Not to mention the number of them can be counted on the fingers of one hand, and they are appropriately costed.
Fuck people for complaining about this.
>>47196865
It may be that those types of flurries are less commons among the other Exalted. But yes, they demonstrably did not. They clearly changed their mind between the time they said that and release.
But mundane flurries are gone and there is only a single Withering-attack flurry, so I don't really mind
>>47196872
Fuck people for complaining about IWA? Seriously? So you think it being the one true way to play melee this edition is fine and good.
>>47196865
No they claimed to have removed the "flurries all the time" paradigm, you thick fuck.
Quoting out of context doesn't work on people who witnessed the original discussion. Flurries were one of those things that just coimpletely dominated Ex2's combat and people wanted that gone.
Now it's gone.
>>47196888
Calm yourself down. It's not out of context. Holden said "Iron Whirlwind style multiattacks are gone in EX3." Doesn't look like it's gone from Solars.
As for whether it dominates combat - look for yourself at the thread and previous threads.
>>47196913
>As for whether it dominates combat - look for yourself at the thread and previous threads.
Or,you know, actually play the game and see if it dominates combat or not.
So, last night's 2E session. Nearly ended up in a fight with an Elder Lunar, then wound up having a philosophical debate with him instead, then went off and got nearly acidized to death by a Kimberry akuma DB, climbed out of the water, said "fuck it" and sounded the charge against said akuma's Lintha mates.
Oh, and his ship is dead in the water because my Eclipse bud has a magitech plasma cannon.
I love 3E to bits, but I can't help but notice the missing parts...
>>47196913
>>47196887
I'm actually reading the IWA discussion right now. Probably shoulda done that first, but I'd just woken up when I posted >>47196872 and fuck reading full threads before breakfast.
I'll get back to this when I'm done with the reading, but it certainly is interesting. Still not convinced about the whole "one true way to play Melee" stuff, though.
In any case, to restate my point in a calmer way, if IWA is a problem in itself, then complain about IWA. Calling Holden a liar is all well and good when he does lie, but bitching about flurries of attacks in general because of IWA alone when the promess had always been "We'll get rid of multiple attacks per turn every turn all the time because it's a fucking pain in the arse to resolve and they just fuck balance when they can be spammed" makes no sense.
I mean, unless all of Ex3's multiattack charms present the same problems as IWA does.
In that case you're free to bitch away!
>>47197188
The interaction of ISE and IWA is a problem, not IWA by itself
>>47197210
AES letting you ignore oodles of Hardness for just 1m for all of IWA is a problem too. Other magical flurries don't get that benefit that cheap, only IWA.
>>47197658
I don't view that as an issue because you could say the same thing about IWA and any supplemental charm. Without ISE, IWA doesn't do enough damage at low initiative that AES really matters
>>47197748
The ISE and AES combination is what allows IWA to override the game's built-in mechanic to defend against this sort of flurry of tiny decisive attacks. Without ISE adding to your base damage, AES still lets you roll a lot of damage dice. Without AES, you risk your flurry being completely stopped by artifact armor or low-level Charms.
There's no question that ISE giving you more attacks is outrageous.
>>47197817
>>47197748
And there's no other way for IWA to ignore Hardness than AES. >>47190101
>>47197817
AES doesn't let you roll enough damage dice with ISE at low init to be worth the cost. 2/2/2/1/1 At base initiative for 6m 1wp is pretty shitty for a decisive attack and not all those will even hit.
>>47197849
IWA not ISE*
>>47197817
The outrageous combo is being able to 120 decisive damage from base initiative at high essence with ISE and IWA. +5 strength, 10 attacks, 60 base damage, then peony into another IWA for 120 total.
Spending 6m 1wp to MAYBE do 8 decisive dice at base init is not an issue
>>47196030
>suspiciously close to Crossed nun
wha?
>>47190591
3rd's outfit with 2nd's flamestyle under the hood <3
>>47190876
>>47190917
>>47190941
>>47190980
Game?
Did they remove sage at some point?
>>47187430
that pic
>>47199007
>A Ninja
>A Pirate
>A mummy with a crab claw
>Big barbarian with an axe
>A bondage nun
So the term "Edge" has just lost any and all meaning, huh?
>>47199054
I dunno. That ax has quite the edge. Lots of points too.
Do exalted sorcerers cast spells exactly the same way as mortals, but with the option of an excellency on the shape sorcery action?
Shaping rituals hardly do anything, especially compared to dumping 10m on an excellency.
I see Ancient Tongue Understanding but it's less effective than an excellency below Ess 6... I would have expected some solar along the way to make a charm to mass-convert motes into sorcery motes.
>>47199007
It's 2e infernals. Poorly conceptualized all around.
>>47199081
>Do exalted sorcerers cast spells exactly the same way as mortals, but with the option of an excellency on the shape sorcery action?
Yes.
>>47197112
Let me guess, the West and Leviathan? Because in our campaign, my Eclipse Caste had Admiral Arkady's Exaltation. So it was actually really touching when he met Leviathan, who had been waiting for years to finally be relieved from his post.
What wasn't as touching was the revelation that he'd been torturing the descendants of the Usurpation for generations.
>>47199081
>Do exalted sorcerers cast spells exactly the same way as mortals, but with the option of an excellency on the shape sorcery action?
Pretty much. There are other charms (Spirit-Drawing Occulus, the Lunar one from the quick characters) that interact as well, but basically that.
>Shaping rituals hardly do anything, especially compared to dumping 10m on an excellency
For the average mortal, whose Shape Sorcery pool is going to be 4-6 at best, getting 5 free motes from upholding an intimacy representing a passionate value, and another 3 from tapping it...yeah, that's pretty good. Even for a maxed Solar, it beats out the value of a full excellency.
So, yeah, "hardly do anything". Maybe read them first.
>>47199225
WOW 8 whole motes!!!
Now you need 7 more to cast DoOB, which used to be as simple as paying them from your essence pool
>>47199284
Generally you don't want to pay from your Essence pool, because that's where all your cool shit comes from.
The new system lets you cast anything if you stand there long enough.
>>47199284
You do realize multiple quotations marks and a "WOW" don't *actually* constitute an intelligent argument - or an intelligent anything, really - right?
Just because you can't do maths, or just skimmed over the rituals section and didn't realise that they can potentially provide 50% of the cost of the expensive Terrestrial Circle spells, doesn't mean the rest of us did.
>>47199309
>if you stand there long enough.
Which is generally considered a bad idea when some chaps are waving pointy things at you
>>47199343
>he can't subtract 8 from 15
Here's your (You)
>>47199379
Isn't that more than 50%?
>>47199379
53%, stop being pedantic on a board for probability charts dude.
>>47199473
7.5 is 50% of 15. 8 is a reasonable approximation of 50% of 15. Anon is just pissy because he got caught out spouting bullshit, and is trying to deflect.
>>47199166
The West, but no Leviathan yet, though there's been some suggestions dropped. I'm playing a Tengese Zenith with a hate-on for the Lintha.
>>47199511
>deflect
Nice projection!
You're the one who thinks that saving 8 motes is a big deal. And that's once a day. And since you're still too retarded to notice-- 8 is less than 15, so you still need a shape sorcery action for more sorcery motes. It's not reflexive, you have to put all this extra shit in to get back to a standard action.
I'll take 2e sorcery instead, thanks, where you don't need to pretend to be a mortal.
>>47199588
This isn't d&d battlemages, Sorcery isn't primarily meant for attacking every round in combat. You hide in the back and charge it up, or have something summoned or prepared before the battle starts. You could even have a fallback combat option too.
But if you're not taking turns to command your pack of blood apes, you're not even trying.
>>47199588
>You're the one who thinks that saving 8 motes is a big deal
You're the one who apparently thinks that getting half your spell cost for free is "hardly anything". Anything other than just letting you cast them instantly, for free is apparently worthless. Just another stupid munchkin, then.
And while the extra 3 is only once per day, the 5 you get from upholding an intimacy work as many times as you can trigger it. It's almost like playing a fiery, passionate character is rewarded by taking the fiery, passion-themed ritual, isn't it?
>I'll take 2e sorcery instead, thanks, where you don't need to pretend to be a mortal.
Have fun getting your not-mortal self decapitated when you deplete your mote-lifepool to cast your spell, instead of using them for perfect defences. Enjoy 2E, you deserve each other.
>>47199715
>Enjoy 2E, you deserve each other.
Woah now, that's pretty fucking harsh, I wouldn't wish that on anyone.
>>47199715
>5 you get from upholding an intimacy work as many times as you can trigger it.
Then considering all the others are at most 10 sm/day, that one is vastly overpowered. Who's the munchkin? Hint: it's you.
>deplete your mote-lifepool to cast your spell
Yeah, it's almost like choosing to spend a resource has drawbacks when you need that resource for something else. In 3e you don't get the choice.
Since you apparently need things repeated 3 times before they penetrate your thick skull, just read this post 3 times.
>>47199641
Yeah, 3e sorcery pulls everybody down to the mortal level, where you need allies/resources, preparation, and bodyguards, instead of just 1 shape sorcery action per circle. Meh.
>>47199904
Because Sorcery is fundamentally and massively different to having an essence pool.
Mortals can fuck around with sorcery trying to manipulate ambient essence and gathering those motes together to use.
Exalts learn to channel the essence within themselves, and within their aura, this is what makes Exalted so much better than Mortals, this is why they can kick people's asses at most things, it has no reason to make them extra special with Sorcery. Their Occult excellency is what shows their unsurpassed skill and knowledge over the occult arts, channeling inner energy into making them better at gathering external energy. If you want to give them a bunch of dicetricks on top of that, make custom Occult charms.
>>47199904
>Then considering all the others are at most 10 sm/day, that one is vastly overpowered. Who's the munchkin? Hint: it's you.
Beeeeeep. Wrong again. Reading. It's useful. You should try it.
Two of Mara's rituals have a per scene limitation, so a potentially limitless number of smotes per day. The drawing-from-fire Ifrit one can be done with every shape sorcery action, as long as there's something burning. The Fey one that lets you grab smotes from limit gain can be used as often as you can prod your circlemates into gaining limit, which is hilarious as well as powerful. The majority of rituals don't have any per-day limitation.
>In 3e you don't get the choice.
Hurr durr, how I use excellency again? Does I use motes or not? I guess when I is retarded I has no choice. Not like excellency any good with negative int anyway.
>>47199904
>In 3e you don't get the choice.
2E: Pay motes to cast the spell
> more choice
3E: Roll your Int+Occ OR use an excellency OR use a shaping ritual OR any combination of the above
> less choice
>>47200170
>>47200115
Troll.
Feeding.
Stop.
Should I just get rid of that rule that makes people have to buy multiple Abilities of Craft if they wanna do both weapon-making and engineering and etc.? It doesn't seem like it brings anything to the game at all.
So I'm making a list of hard and soft counters to Solar Melee flurry spam
>High static DV
>Onslaught penalty reduction
>Threatening counterattacks
>Flurry breaker (Can be countered by solar charms from athletics)
>High hardness/Soak (Can be counted by melee charms increasing minimum damage, so probably a poor strategy)
>Maintaining Range Bands
>Ambush/surprise (Can be countered by sizeable investment in Awareness charms)
>Grappling (As if anyone will let you land that particular gambit)
Even Fair Folk have access to most of the above by the core, and Solars can get most of it. Why is everyone so stuck on Solar melee as being gamebreaking? Most of the counters to it aren't even all that deep into their respective charm trees.
So can a Quoll-Lion use Falling Fang strike to supplement a withering or decisive attack? It seems like it's written to work with any of the above. Not sure if it could apply to grapples too...
>>47201214
The part where you move and attack can supplement either form of attack. And yes, anything that boosts a decisive attack (except for damage) would also boost a grapple gambit's to-hit roll.
The part where you use falling damage in lieu of normal damage, I'd require a decisive attack for sure.
>>47201260
Makes sense.
>>47199904
Anon, 3E is the edition where being a lot of people consider being a sorcerer a no-brainer, because it's just really really good. 3E's sorcery doesn't pull anyone down in any meaningful way. What it does is raise those few mortals who learn it above normal mortals.
>>47198903
Stellaris.
>>47200223
Ok Holden
>>47200286
did you even read the thread? It's because its damage scales quadratically when used in combination with ISE, and allows massive decisive attacks from base initiative that is very hard to defend against even high static DV.
Having one combo scale in damage at each essence level from 6, to 14, to 24, to 36, to 50 is bad for the game when every else scales linearly.
Can a Sidereal of Battles use his warcry as a weapon?
>>47202250
With an appropriate martial art or Charm? Sure.
>>47202279
Excellent...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCMNWAJiz5Y
where are the rules for counterattacks how do they work
How long does a Shape Sorcery action take? I imagine that, since you can do it in combat, it can't take more than a couple of seconds, but is there any official word on how long it takes outside of combat?
>>47202372
There aren't general rules; each Charm is in theory supposed to define its own counterattack.
>>47202393
A combat action is a nebulous period of time, so no, you may as well ask how long "an attack" takes. (Accounting for the fact that "an attack" has considerably more going into it than physically swinging your sword one time while standing in an open field.)
>>47202393
It's a combat action, so it takes combat time. Which is like 2-6 seconds or whatever. So if you wanna cast Stormwind Rider, it's gonna happen pretty quickly if you aren't under any stress or time crunch, if you are you roll into Initiative and take it from there.
>>47202186
It goes like this:
>ISE: 15m
>Base attack: xm (X being whattever supplemental charms/excellencies/reflexives are needed to make it hit)
>OW2B: 3m + Xm
>PBS: 1m+1wp+xm
>IWA: 5m+1wp+xm per supplement, probably +6m for ES and HTT
>Possibly another PBS, starting the loop again if they spent a minimum of 15 essence, so 4 more during the IWA combo
At minimum, this means they're blowing 24 motes and 2 willpower, with the opportunity to regain 2-6 motes that round before the main decisive flurry if they're maximizing onslaught. More realistically to land that first attack they're going to have to blow maybe five or six motes, and they're going to try to put down some supplemental charms on PBS and IWA if they're going for the kill with their decisives per ISE, so they're investing another 6 motes minimum for , plus they're knocking themselves down to initiative 1 thanks to HTT.
So the solar is out a minimum of 30 essence and 2wp minimum at this point before the first IWA attack is even thrown. Maybe they don't HAVE 30 essence to blow through if they've had to fight for a little while first, or perhaps after they've committed to the IWA you activate a flurry breaker and/or counterattack and make those motes into a wasted expenditure.
At which point you have an opponent who just blew through about 2/3 to 1/2 of their mote pool. If you broke their flurry at the first IWA then you have an easy shot at an opponent who is now sans a stupid amount of their resources. They pop even one max excellency during that exchange and they're sans almost of their most pool.
Hey all, character sheet guy here. Would like your input on something before I go and do it. When I asked my friend what else I could do with the sheet he wanted autosorting Charm Lists so all the Brawl Charms and what not stuck together and what not. This would be possible but would probably necessitate creating another tab where you input the Charm names and Abilities and then another tab that actually display the relevant information.
Would that be too cumbersome to use? I would need a separate area for the data input then another to display and I'm not sure how easy that would be to interact with. Thoughts?
>>47202640
It does not "go like this"
First, in your example, if they are able to spend 15m on ISE, then they are essence 5 and can afford that. After which there is no reason to launch a basic attack - a 6m 1wp Armor-Eating IWA has a potential damage of 60 over 10 attacks.
For the opponent to not die they have to:
A) Have the right charms to answer
B) Spend disproportionate resources to do so
Secondly, you seem to be talking from the perspective of Solar vs Solar combat, which is pretty rare.
As has been stated before, the problem with this combo is that it is both easy to use bypasses the initiative system entirely to do massive damage. It has an unwelcome warping influence on combat if you are aware of it.
>>47202909
Nah, if you have a column for Ability, it should be easy enough for players to sort it manually as they add more, dragging around rows if there's changes.
Different pages for input and output would be clunky and a hassle.
>>47202909
Sounds annoying. Couldn't you just have an 'add' area with a big drop-down menu and some sort of button? Speaking of annoying, last I checked, the math was wrong. It counts your dots for MA twice, once from the 'Abilities' area in the first tab, and once from the 'Martial Arts Styles' area in the same tab.
I remember hearing about the backer pdf having a chart for buying items with money in the game. Anyone know what happened to that?
>>47203181
>>47203126
Your input is noted, I have told him his idea was repudiated by the members of /exg/ and my laziness is now condoned.
As for the math, I'm not sure why Martial Arts is even on the Ability section, just a holdover from the original sheet I based it off of, I could remove it but then we have a blank space, maybe just fill it in with something else or move everything up a bit. I recently made it so Martial Arts is considered favored if Brawl is Sup/Cas/Fav so it should be fine if I remove it.
>>47200251
I would say yes. Performance lets you do any performance equally - singing, playing any instrument, dancing, and so on. Melee lets you use any melee weapon equally, whether it's a short curved dagger, a long two-handed spear, or dual-wielding a sword and a mace. There's no reason why Craft shouldn't also let you Craft basically anything.
>>47202909
I like it the way it is now. Don't add in that other column.
I have a few other concerns.
1) When I select Brawl or MA as a Caste or Favored ability, the other is not automatically Brawl or MAed.
2) A lot of Charms do not have descriptions when you select them in the sheet.
3) Most importantly, can you make it so when you select Equipment type, it automatically loads in the basic stats for that type? If I select L. Artifact Melee, I want the grids to automatically load in the values for Light Artifact Melee weapons. Then I can manually input the tags. Can you do that? It'd be a big help.
>>47202640
>ISE: 15m
If you're Essence 5 and have Strength 5, and pay it all from motes and not initiative, sure.
>OW2B: 3m + Xm
>PBS: 1m+1wp+xm
>So the solar is out a minimum of 30 essence and 2wp minimum at this point before the first IWA attack is even thrown.
Nah. Why would they bother doing that? The only purpose that serves is to trade willpower and motes for onslaught penalty. Just go right into IWA, skip the One Weapon, Two Blows setup.
>IWA: 5m+1wp+xm per supplement, probably +6m for ES and HTT
Excellent Strike is 3m and Armor-Eating Strike is 1m, so that's just +4m. I don't know why you're assuming they'd use Hungry Tiger Technique.
>>47203395
1.) I have set it up so if Brawl is favored or anything like that Martial Arts is as well, it doesn't automatically select it because I couldn't put formulas in a cell that allows input, but in the calculations it does. I'm gonna tinker around with moving the Martial Arts ability Fav/Cas/Sup around, currently have it sitting on top of the style selection area, see how that looks.
2.) I removed the Charm descriptions as a whole because I ended up posting it on the official forums and I wished to play it a bit safe in regards to copyright. It'd be relatively easy to copy them over from a previous version for your own personal use but as the guy who's making it just want to play it safe. I might add them back in since the one huge rewrite that makes everything super simplified had all the mechanics in them and that's pretty popular on the forums.
3.) I could probably do this, the only problem is if I make those cells with formulas you couldn't adjust them without deleting the formulas, so I'd have to account for weird effects that might add Accuracy or Damage, such as from the tags or potential Evocations. Very doable but might take a bit of time.
>>47202640
>or perhaps after they've committed to the IWA you activate a flurry breaker and/or counterattack and make those motes into a wasted expenditure.
Since you're assuming they have Essence 5, you should assume they have Invincible Fury of the Dawn. Tell me some flurry-breakers that work against that Charm.
>or counterattack
That'll work only if you happen to have a counterattack charm and happen to do something with it that stops their flurry.
>>47203073
>Secondly, you seem to be talking from the perspective of Solar vs Solar combat, which is pretty rare.
Also this.
>>47203558
Add the Charm descriptions back in. After once having them, not having them is horrible. You have nothing to fear from copyright; be bold.
In Google Docs, is there no way to change the contents of a cell without sticking a formula in that cell?
>>47203607
Might be able to mess around with a hidden array directly above it, with allowance for that cell being overwritten by someone and still functioning.
Would you let a player apply his unarmored specialty when he's wearing silken armor?
>>47203898
No. But then I also probably wouldn't let a player get away with an unarmored specialty in general; they're literally fill in the blank, put something cool or fun in there.
>>47203898
>unarmored specialty
>when he's wearing armor?
No?
Another day, another GM flakes. I wish I wasn't the only semi-reliable Exalted GM.
>>47203898
>Would you let a player apply his unarmored specialty when he's wearing armor
On what grounds could a Dragon Blooded serve a lunar?
>>47203987
Because they like the Lunar and agree with their policies. Because they swore an oath and feel obligated to follow through. Because they think the Lunar is pretty.
Exalts are individuals, not robots, jesus fucking christ.
>>47203987
On the grounds that a Terrestrial managed to gain agency and intelligence, somehow rising above his station as an extra.
>>47203227
anyone?
>>47203297
>I would say yes. Performance lets you do any performance equally - singing, playing any instrument, dancing, and so on. Melee lets you use any melee weapon equally, whether it's a short curved dagger, a long two-handed spear, or dual-wielding a sword and a mace. There's no reason why Craft shouldn't also let you Craft basically anything.
It actually doesn't, at least not without penalty. See p.227.
>>47204484
It was in the leak.
>>47204537
I look at that penalty and i'm like, the only thing I could consider appropriate for that would be an instrument one has never seen before such as an electric guitar or something. Otherwise we're devolving into the craft conundrum again.
>>47204720
>craft conundrum
It's not like they have to spend XP, dude.
An hour to get acquainted with an instrument you haven't played before is perfectly reasonable.
(Which should also be how Craft works. -3 if you've never worked silver or wood before, absolved by a quick day of tutoring and practice)
>>47204774
That's a more reasonable solution. I guess I was more thinking the Lore thing where you have to have a specialty on something to do anything with it. My bad using craft as an example.
>>47204647
so I found the leak and holy fuck, there's like 300 extra pages of shit here.
I know a lot was cut for space, but like, are all the npcs good? Because having all these extras seems dope for more samples to pull from
>>47199081
>It's 2e infernals. Poorly conceptualized all around.
As much flak as they get, they were a hell of a lot more playable than any other non-Solar splat at the time.
I mean, your options were:
Sidereals: literally unplayable, fluff took a shit with 2e and "lol oversight"
Abyssals: literally black Solars with a Limit Break that consists of kicking players in the balls over and over, set-up is almost as bad as Infernals
Lunars: literally Silver Solars, get worse in parties, fluff is just as bad as Infernals
Dragon-blooded: janky mechanics in an edition that hated them - still the second-best written splat for most of the game
Sure, you had to basically abandon the first two chapters of Infernals and just run off the Storytelling chapter for "how do I use these guys", but... y'know, they /worked/. And they did so in interesting ways. If it weren't Charm chapters of Infernals, the game would look really different today.
>>47204926
>so I found the leak and holy fuck, there's like 300 extra pages of shit here.
>I know a lot was cut for space, but like, are all the npcs good? Because having all these extras seems dope for more samples to pull from
They're all good. They were only cut for space, after all - if it weren't for the leak, I'd lay money on the devs shuffling all that material into a whole new book, the equivalent of on-disc DLC.
>>47204537
Regardless of that penalty, Performance still lets you equally dance, play, act, and sing. Certainly Craft should be the same.
>>47205091
Yeah, a lot of hate is given to Infernals with how prominent they made the Yozis but damn it the mechanics behind them were incredibly interesting, effective, and just really fun to play.
Many people don't like the Charms as Yozi-DNA mechanics but I loved how it gave us deeper insight into they worked and thought. Some did it lead it too far and made them into one dimensional psycho cases but I feel that was a flanderization of what was presented, now what was presented itself.
So I think the Liminal and Getimian Exalted are kind of... not interesting and unique enough? I mean, the presentation isn't as good as it could be.
E.g. So the universe used to have laws like "immortal is immortal," "dead is dead," and "time cannot be rewritten." The Exalted said "fuck that" and totally broke those laws, creating the Neverborn, Liminal Exalted and Gentimian Exalted.
Even so, they kind of strike me as abyssal mockeries of the Lunar and Sidereal Exalted, which themselves are interesting ideas IMO that have gone neglected. E.g. The Liminal castes represent the cycle of decay, Liminal have a bond to their creator, Getimian are stillborn destinies that rage against the heavens, etc.
What do you think?
>>47205617
Liminals are literally just "b-but I want Promethans"
Getimians are "well Solars have mirror antagonists, why shouldn't my pet splat have them too?"
