Mage is finally out edition
Previous Thread: >>47069397
>Mage 2e
https://mega.nz/#!B4US0aqZ!ZfMiO0LX9FP2pRWGMJKmosYd8PJiChPGx3ZJLKUJZs8
>Pastebin
http://pastebin.com/mByuG93b
>Question
How do you feel about Mage 2e so far? What's your favorite part of the new core book?
>>47083251
>How do you feel about Mage 2e so far?
They're still ridiculously overpowered, but I don't hate them as much as I used to.
>What's your favorite part of the new core book?
The pages where they didn't make the text unreadable by using needlessly pale fonts and irritating fonts
>>47083251
Personally, I've yet to find any changes I'm not overall happy with. Biggest issue I've got is that the way Legacies work now doesn't exactly quell the old issue of them implying there's a high number of high-gnosis mages, since every Gnosis 2 initiate needs a Gnosis 4+ tutor, who needs a Gnosis 6+ tutor, who needs a Gnosis 8+ tutor, unless they want to do novel attainments.
Also the lack of information about the Abyss, but I figure that'll be put out eventually/I can just work off 1e info.
My favorite part, though, is probably the Fallen Worlds section of chapter six.
>>47083359
Actually, you don't need a tutor to gain a Legacy Attainment, you just need one to join.
>>47083382
>unless they want to do novel attainments.
You need a tutor who already knows the attainment to learn an existing one, but you can make your own if you've got a Gnosis dot over the default attainment requirement.
I want to talk about Time magic some more. I appreciate the effort of the multiple Anons in the previous thread who endeavoured to make some sense of it. I think the big problem still facing us, though, is not “how it works,” but “how it plays.”
Let me try to give a hypothetical that should be fairly straightforward:
Yesterday, you and I had an argument. You pissed me off. Today, I’m still stewing over it, and I decide I’m so mad that I just want to kill you. I prepare a kill spell, and with my temporal sympathy I cast it back in time at you on the day of our argument.
Now, let’s say that in this scenario you’re a player character and I’m an NPC under your Storyteller’s control. How does this actually play out at the table?
OPTION 1.) We’re playing out the scene from yesterday, where we have our argument. You’re in the middle of going off at me when the Storyteller rolls some dice, looks up, and says, “Sorry, Anon. A spell comes from the future and kills you.”
OPTION 2.) We play out the scene from yesterday, and let it resolve normally. Then we fast forward to a new scene, today, where your character is browsing 4chan. Suddenly, the Storyteller rolls some dice, looks up, and says, “Sorry, Anon. Your character was just killed in the past, so you don’t exist anymore.”
OPTION 3.) ???
Obviously, these outcomes are somewhat hyperbolically absurd. But that just highlights the issue: is there any real way to use this sort of magic at the table that will ever feel fair, fun, and/or interesting? The magic doesn’t even have to make sense as long as it plays well at the table—but a lot of Time magic simply looks like it DOESN’T. Who cares if it violates the laws of physics or causality or whatever? It seems to violate the laws of good storytelling, and that’s a problem you can’t just hand-wave away.
>>47083350
I have never played Awakening so I have a couple of questions.
I know there is no technocracy so who do you usually run against?
How is paradox in this version?
How do player characters compare to book NPCs? Are players just better and there only disadvantage is lack of infrastructure?
What are the main changes of magic over Ascension?
>>47083426
>I know there is no technocracy so who do you usually run against?
The Seers. Mages who serve a supernal ....thing called the Exarchs that may or may not be ancient Mages who ascended and decided to buttfuck the world.
>How is paradox in this version?
Hefty, but easily fixed. You roll more and more dice the more you enhance your spells beyond the basics, and the roll can do anything from cancel your effects, to taint your soul with the abyss to summon asyssal entities to eat your dog.
>How do player characters compare to book NPCs? Are players just better and there only disadvantage is lack of infrastructure?
Haven't readNPCs yet enough to know.
>What are the main changes of magic over Ascension?
Never played Ascension.
>>47083424
>OPTION 1.) We’re playing out the scene from yesterday, where we have our argument. You’re in the middle of going off at me when the Storyteller rolls some dice, looks up, and says, “Sorry, Anon. A spell comes from the future and kills you.”
Nope. There is an objective present in the WoD, so unless your ST explicitly says that a scene is happening in the past, the future hasn't happened yet, so nothing can come "from" it Time-magic wise.
>OPTION 2.) We play out the scene from yesterday, and let it resolve normally. Then we fast forward to a new scene, today, where your character is browsing 4chan. Suddenly, the Storyteller rolls some dice, looks up, and says, “Sorry, Anon. Your character was just killed in the past, so you don’t exist anymore.”
That is how it happens, yes.
I THINK the idea is that the mage has to cast the spell on you, and then use Temporal Sympathy to affect your past self through you, but you'd still use your past self's magical defenses (or lack thereof) and stats to defend against it, and then retroactively apply it to the present self as well as possible.
Which is itself a huge ST burden. Like, say the spell doesn't kill you, it just does some lethal damage or whatever, on the same day that you went out and got into a fight. Does the ST just say "Oh, that fight would have killed you"? No, because the player would go back with "But I wouldn't have gotten into the fight if I was already that badly hurt," and then on and on and FUCKING ON until you've basically rewritten the entire timeline over one fucking spell.
Time is re-fuckin'-tarded. I wasn't expecting any magical solution, but it was clear that Dave had thought about it at least a little, so I was hoping for SOMETHING.
>>47083426
>I know there is no technocracy so who do you usually run against?
Generally, the Seers of the Throne, servants of the Exarchs, ascended Mages from Atlantis who broke the Celestial Ladder and let the Abyss in, who at this point are mostly just trying to prevent other people from Awakening as much as possible. Sometimes, Banishers, people who Awakened and went crazy, and believe all non-Banisher Mages to be evil. Also sometimes, Scelesti, Mages who straight up invite the Abyss into the world, and work with it to try and destroy everything.
Also the occasional Goetia, Spirit, Ghost, or whatever else.
>How is paradox in this version?
It only happens if you try to do something more powerful than you're naturally capable of, or obviously use magic in the presence of a Sleeper. When it happens, you can either contain it(Take damage) or release it(Allow it to fuck with your spell. Scelesti can also fuck with Paradox and use it to screw you over.
>How do player characters compare to book NPCs? Are players just better and there only disadvantage is lack of infrastructure?
I'm not quite sure what you mean; barring ST fuckery, you should be on the same level as another Mage who was built using the same XP as you.
>What are the main changes of magic over Ascension?
Entropy got split into Fate(Chance fuckery, mostly) and Death(Ghosts, undead, shadows, etc).
>>47083470
>>47083515
>>47083548
Thanks. Sounds interesting I will give it a read.
Reminder that no matter how much Dave tries to force it, gay mages will always be inferior to gay werewolves.
Hey, do you guys think an owod Mage's Avatar could get into a punmel duel with a chronicles Beast's Horror?
Cause I wamt to see that...
>>47083688
MAges are soft gay
Werewolves are HARD! gay
>>47083515
>Nope. There is an objective present in the WoD, so unless your ST explicitly says that a scene is happening in the past, the future hasn't happened yet, so nothing can come "from" it Time-magic wise.
Right, I get that. But still, it's theoretically an option the Storyteller has to play it out this way, 'cause it at least gives the player the opportunity to react to magical bullshit coming backwards in time at them. Otherwise, you're stuck with the second option, where the Storyteller effectively takes control of your character's actions.
But either way, I think we agree that it's a nightmare to try and work into a game in any meaningful way.
I feel like it's not an insignificant burden on players, either: whoever plays a Time mage has to keep in mind how any Time spell he casts affects the narrative for everyone else involved. He has the ability to undo the other players' actions, retroactively say that an entire scene the Storyteller just played out never happened, etc.—lots of stuff that could totally derail the fun of an otherwise decent chronicle.
I was already planning to be the party Acanthus in the game my group is starting soon, and I've had this on my mind ever since I read the section on Time magic.
>>47083688
but which is better at homoerotic arm wrestling?
>mfw all these people pirated mage
>>47083688
>>47083697
Meh, they both are inferior to butch vampires.
>>47083251
>Including the pirate link but not the legitimate purchase link in the OP
Come on dude.
>>47083426
I know other people answered your questions pretty well, but I wanted to chime in with some more details, since you're coming at this from an Ascension perspective.
>How is paradox in this version?
Paradox in Awakening is, metaphysically speaking, entirely different than in Ascensions. Awakening has no Consensus; Paradox has nothing to do with the "plausability" of your magic. Instead, Paradox represents a Mage trying to cast a spell more powerful than he understands how to control, which causes it to become tainted by the anti-reality (the Abyss) that stops most people from being able to use or even perceive magic at all.
>How do player characters compare to book NPCs? Are players just better and there only disadvantage is lack of infrastructure?
Awakening (and the CofD games in general) don't have "book NPCs." Other than a few example characters, the "higher-ups" in any given organization are left entirely up to your ST.
>What are the main changes of magic over Ascension?
Pretty hefty, especially in 2e, though many core ideas are the same, and it has about the same amount of effective flexibility in creating spells.
>>47083721
A lot of people who pirated the early release of mage due to the hype might still buy it, particularly when the POD is released.
Think of it as browsing the store before deciding to purchase.
>>47083708
Werewolves, probably
>>47083722
Objectively incorrect
Your Gangrel husbando ain't got shit on my Cahalith husbando
>>47083731
Shit
I was in a rush, sorry
http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/181754/Mage-the-Awakening-2nd-Edition?src=slider_view
>>47083752
>>47083721
Literally just bought it a minute ago, even though I pirated it to read it early. And I'm going to buy it printed when the POD is up. So I'm afraid I don't feel guilty at all.
>Wisdom status - unchanged.
>>47083721
>implying there's anything wrong with that
I'm going to buy the game the moment the hardcover goes up on DriveThruRPG. What I'm not going to do is put my group's new Mage campaign on hold for several weeks until that happens.
>>47083691
Can an Avatar manifest itself in a dream realm a la a Horror? Cause if they can, then they can probably fight.
>>47083721
Pirated, and have now bought.
>>47083752
Yeah I treat it like I always have. I go to a store Skim through the thing if I like it I buy it. I do not like the 20 page filled with fluff "previews" Supplied by drive thru.
>>47083836
>>47083691
Completely different games. It's fanfiction.
>>47083721
Who are you Kevin Siembieda pirated books do not mean people will not purchase after the fact.
>>47083869
I wish they'd allow game sellers to choose what part of the file to preview. The first 10 pages or so tell me nothing most of the time.
>>47083881
After the real person fanfiction at the tail end of the last thread, I am more than OK with regular old WoD "who would win in a fight?" fanfiction.
Reminder that you need a temporal sympathy yantra to be able to use a temporal sympathetic spell at ALL, and it doesn't give any bonus on the spell.
>>47083916
So?
>>47083916
Yes, and precisely BECAUSE it doesn't grant any bonus, there's no reason not to use a symbolic sympathy yantra, which can be literally made on the spot:
>Symbolic sympathy includes indirect representations of the subject — a person’s sympathetic name, drawings, caricatures, or posed and costumed photographs.
>>47083702
>>47083515
I haven't yet seen it in play, nor done the math to determine exactly how difficult this would be, but from reading over the rules I think you guys are SEVERELY underestimating the difficulty of the kind of thing you're positing here.
Casting the kind of "past-kill" spell you're talking about here would not only need Time and Space magic at at least 2 dots, they'd be subject to HUGE penalties thanks to Temporal and Spacial sympathy (because it seems like they stack) unless the person somehow managed to get a Strong sympathetic connection with you. In which case you're boned no matter what, because a Mage with a Strong sympathetic connection to someone they want to kill has LOADS of ways to kill them.
As a Mage ST I'm not worried at all - if anything I'm looking forward to the kinds of shenanigans my players will get up to with these new Time rules. I always hated how restricting old Time was.
>>47083251
>How do you feel about Mage 2e so far? What's your favorite part of the new core book?
Time magic is of the Devil and Fate is mighty wicked too. Being able to ignoring Withstand on an exceptional success is pure bullshit.
I actually like the magic system, how Prime was redone, how Legacies were changed, and the existence of Sleeper merits.
>>47083969
Time to start putting dots in Crafts (Drawing) then I guess.
>>47083976
>Casting the kind of "past-kill" spell you're talking about here would not only need Time and Space magic at at least 2 dots,
Only if the mage doesn't have you in front of him. Spatial Sympathy only comes into play if he's trying to kill you in the present from across the city.
>they'd be subject to HUGE penalties thanks to Temporal and Spacial sympathy (because it seems like they stack)
Withstand ratings (which Sympathy is) never stack. You just use the highest, +1 for each other one that exists.
>unless the person somehow managed to get a Strong sympathetic connection with you. In which case you're boned no matter what, because a Mage with a Strong sympathetic connection to someone they want to kill has LOADS of ways to kill them.
The difference is, you can DO MORE about those ways to kill them, whereas the Time Mage can send his spell back to any moment where you didn't have magical defenses up, like "when you were a baby" or "before you became a Mage."
And this is setting aside that you can summon someone's past self without any Temporal Sympathy at all (Temporal Summoning 3), and presumably anything you do that past self goes back to the past with them, which has similar problems in terms of gameplay.
>>47084021
Temporal summoning doesn't copy back to the past, it just copies from the past.
>>47083722
>Meh, they both are inferior to butch vampires.
>>47083770
>Your Gangrel husbando ain't got shit on my Cahalith husbando
Gentlemen please, why not just split the difference and play a Dead Wolf Cahalith Gangrel?I was the one who suggested the incredibly complicated refit for the Dead Wolves that gave them members from three different Clans quite a few threads ago.
I definitely don't dislike Mage like I did back in 1e but I still really struggle with character concepts and a lot of the mechanics. Maybe it just isn't for me?
>>47084021
>Only if the mage doesn't have you in front of him. Spatial Sympathy only comes into play if he's trying to kill you in the present from across the city.
Okay, but why would he do that, when he could just target you with a kill spell RIGHT NOW, that wouldn't have the penalties that Temporal Sympathy gives? Plus if he's in front of you you can see what he's doing and attempt to dispel.
>Withstand ratings (which Sympathy is) never stack
Fair enough, I missed that in my first read-through.
Still, I just don't get how any of the things that you're talking about a Time mage being able to do in combat amounts to more than a mage with Forces being able to light you on fire, or a mage with a gun to just, like, shoot you until you die. It's just a different, more complicated way of killing someone.
>>47084084
It's funny because I'm not lacking for character concepts, but I want to run a game. Instead, I'm lacking for actual story/game concepts.I'm also lacking for time, sort of, since I'm still running a Demon game
>>47084120
>Still, I just don't get how any of the things that you're talking about a Time mage being able to do in combat amounts to more than a mage with Forces being able to light you on fire
MY problem, at least, isn't that a Time Mage is especially dangerous compared to other Mages. That's certainly up for debate. What I'm actually worried about is how you're even supposed to use this stuff at the table. Storyteller characters casting spells backwards in time at the PCs, for instance, is never going to feel fair, is it? How would you even play that out at the table?
This is why I think it's a nightmare.
>>47084120
>Okay, but why would he do that, when he could just target you with a kill spell RIGHT NOW, that wouldn't have the penalties that Temporal Sympathy gives?
Well for one, you can't spend willpower on the behalf of your past self, and babies probably only have Stamina 1, so right off the bat there's an option that your past self has a LOWER withstand rating, even with Temporal Sympathy, than you do in the present, making the kill spell significantly easier to pull off.
>Plus if he's in front of you you can see what he's doing and attempt to dispel.
If you have Time yourself, if I'm not mistaken, but if you have Time, then killing your past self doesn't do anything anyway.
>>47084177
Shit dude, take all of my ideas. You want reincarnation Mysteries? You want a 1960s Dark Era? Take them, I'm not using them.
>>47084084
why have you not killed yourself yet
>>47083688
>>47083721
We all pirated it literally before it was available.
>>47084120
>>47084189
>>47084193
And, addendum, consider Time Assassination pointed at someone not the Mage:
Say a Time mage kills your parents before you ever Awakened.
You can't do anything about it, because (again, unless you have Time yourself) YOU DON'T KNOW. From your perspective, your parents were just always dead, oh well. There's no mystery to investigate and no possible way for you to know.
Another Time mage can't even tell you, because once the changes become Lasting (which they do immediately, because there's no time traveler in the Temporal Sympathy casting), it's your "real" timeline, there's no visible magic involved.
A Time mage doesn't have to kill you, he can just change your timeline so that you never moved to the city, or never joined the Free Council, or never made your best friend, all of which you have no way of even knowing is different or wrong.
>>47084218
Because my cats need me, and also because I'm waiting for OPP to reject my pitch first.
>>47084084
Did you not see my post last thread?
>>47075229
>>47075406
>Nah. I find it pretty easy. Just take a concept and go "and then they become a wizzard".
>For instance, that character idea I mentioned of an Ada Lovelace/Matrix inspired character.
>"Supernatural detective" is pretty much Mage in a nutshell to begin with, so all those Constantines and Dresdens and so on are good Mage fodder.
>You could even have a Mage inspired by other splats. I had a Mastigos who was afraid of Mind because he was a Ventrue's bitchboy. He was also inspired by Assassin's Creed and was an Interfector with a wrist blade.
>Look over the Paths/Orders and choose something that focuses on one aspect. I've mentioned that transgender Alchemist before. She was based on the way Moros are all about Change. One thing becomes another. Hammers break, hammers mend.
>She was also just based on taking a Moros stereotype and applying it to a pop culture subversion of the same stereotypes. i.e. the Perky Goth. That kind of thing works good for Mage when you give it a bit of depth (and then sand the depth away as you become Mad).
>You can also look at the Legacies and choose which one you want. There's only the one for now, but plenty of inspiration in 1e. You can also go another route and think "what Legacy could I build?" And Legacies are all about obsession and metaphor, like with Baseball. You can type "Zen and..." into Google and get some ideas of how to build a Legacy concept.
>Starting with their Mystery and what type of things you want to focus on is a good one, especially if you're creating a character just to get a feel for character creation. Focus on the aspect of the setting you like, whether it's the Astral or summoning or alchemy or something like that.
>Hell, you could make a Mage based on Mummy concepts, if you really wanted to be lame and put Mummy into all the other WoD splats.
>>47084240
making changes to the timeline actually does leave a traceable magickal aura.
>>47084285
Only until they become Lasting (which is defined as "when the time traveler dies or returns to the present," which is immediately in this case, because the time traveler already is in the present and never left).
Lasting anything isn't magical.
>>47084189
Think of it this way - a Time Mage can cast spells back in time, yes, but they're always casting those spells in the Present. So as an ST I'd treat Time magic on the part of ST characters the same way that I treated Space magic in 1e - it's no fun to have a Master of Space telefrag a PC either. In any game, engineering situations where an NPC can destroy a PC without the PC being able to do anything about it is a bad thing, so you just have to... not do that. Don't put an Antagonistic Master of Time in a position to get that kind of Sympathy over your PCs, give the PCs ample opportunities to prepare for such encounters, and you're fine.
I mean, when you're at the tier of play where your enemies have the ability to pull out the kind of things you're describing on the fly, your PCs are going to have an equal number of tricks up their sleeves to counter them.
>>47084073
Wait, what did you suggest for the Dead Wolves?
I know I suggested Gangrel with Tells and Wolfblooded Merits. Not sure how a vampire with Wolf's Meat would work...
Actually, a clan neutral Bloodline that's more of an accident seems like it would work well. Accidentally bite a Wolfblooded? You get a Dead Wolf no matter the Clan, and they can learn Blood Tenebrous.
>>47084256
put the cat up for adoption
>>47083708
Werewolves. Mages are limp-wristed skinny-armed nerds who cry when they so much as play bloody knuckles.
>>47084227
This picture gets more surreal every time I see it. There's just so much to hate.
>>47084240
So it's like the episode of Invade Zim where he kept on trying to assassinate Dib by throwing pig toys through a time portal.
>>47084240
...So in other words, it sounds like a really good story hook to me!
Also really, what we need here is some errata from Dave. Go chime in in the FAQ thread on the OP forums if this is worrying you that much, it's entirely possible that this is a subject that he could clarify.
At any rate, my ruling would be that changes to the timeline would still be visible to Time and other Sight even after it becomes Lasting, in the sense that the object that was affected by a Temporal spell would still have the "residue" of said spell, and that sympathy could be traced back to its source. A mage who looked at your dead parents could see the residue of the spell that killed them, and note the Time magic woven in the pattern.
I have to give major props to the Mage team to making Prime actually easy to grasp this time around. I almost want to make a Guardian Obrimos who just blows poor cultists minds in the hopes of either Awakening them or forever scaring them away from magic.
>>47084340
No.
>>47084421
>...So in other words, it sounds like a really good story hook to me!
Not for the person it's happening to, because he literally doesn't even know he's in the story.
> A mage who looked at your dead parents could see the residue of the spell that killed them, and note the Time magic woven in the pattern.
That sure is good for that Mage, but totally irrelevant to me, since a Mage would see no reason to help me in that ("just randomly helping people who might have had their timelines muddied up" is not Mage MO).
>>47084421
So the outcome would be something like this:
>Evil time mage kills your parents before you're born.
>You're dead, at least temporarily.
>Good time mage sees some fishy temporal resonance and investigates.
>Good time mage decides to throw a protection spell on your parents seconds before the kill spell hits.
>Parents survive, have you, you're alive and well.
The question is now, what reason does the good time mage have, because he never knew you, and may be loathe to play around with another time masters work.
>>47084449
Yes, well, Mages are dicks, what exactly do you want? If Mages couldn't fuck with reality at levels that kind of hurt to think about, they wouldn't be real Mages, would they?
Although I don't know about
> a Mage would see no reason to help me in that ("just randomly helping people who might have had their timelines muddied up" is not Mage MO).
I think that "this random healthy couple died mysteriously leaving behind their kid, and they were definitely killed by a spell with heavy Time components marked by a Nimbus that looks a lot like one of a local Mage I know, but subtly different... LOOKS LIKE A MYSTERY TO ME!"
>>47084506
>>47084449
the Guardians of the Veil would be particularly interested in the mage going around murdering people for no good reason.
Or, that sleeper couple could have been instrumental in some harebrained Seer plot.
Or the time mage could just be curious.
>>47084506
Maybe he is a Dr. Orpheus type guy just protecting people from time injustice.
>>47084329
>Wait, what did you suggest for the Dead Wolves?
My gimmick I came up with for them was that they were based in the Mekhet, Nossies AND Gangrel, each branch got a version of their bloodline weakness altered by the whole 'was going to be a Werewolf' thing, and the entire Bloodline-Pack got a list of Devotions as long as Serpent Pangean. (seriously, I was trying to crowbar in the idea that playing with more than one Dead Wolf Was important, but I wasn't sure how best to implement it)
>>47084448
That cat is adorable.
>>47084559
Sounds way too ridiculous.
>>47084582
Most are. That's why the rule the internet.
>>47084549
>Guardians of the Veil would be particularly interested in the mage going around murdering people for no good reason.
It's not murder if nobody actually ever died. Do the Guardians devote precious resources to just wandering around graveyards around the country looking for rapidly-fading Time auras?
>Or the time mage could just be curious.
"curious" doesn't mean he'll help. He might investigate, figure out who did it, and then just move on. He has no reason to actually UNDO the change.
>>47084549
>>47084554
That sounds suspiciously like the Pax Arcana. I like it.
>>47084597
>It's not murder if nobody actually ever died. Do the Guardians devote precious resources to just wandering around graveyards around the country looking for rapidly-fading Time auras?
if time magic is as much of a fuck as the thread seems to be saying, then it is absolutely certain that there's several Guardian Legacies dedicated to ensuring that temporal fuckery is kept to a minimum.
Fucking time up but good is a really irresponsible use of magic after all.
>>47083892
Well in my case, it does. But I'm probably not going to get around to playing this anyway.
>>47084597
Well, for one, the kind of time-murder you're referring to is going to be a HUGE Wisdom sin. Fucking with time to kill some innocent sleepers just to fuck with another mage? That's Wisdom 1-2 level shit even if you carefully planned your magic, because you're fucking with causality just to be a dick. So chances are that if the Guardians don't catch you for this, they'll catch you for something eventually.
So does it say anywhere how far back Time nagic can impact? The Temporal Sympathy sidebar is a complete mystery to me.
>>47084582
Her name is Sekhmet. Our other cat is named Paarl, after the Bloodborne boss.
>>47084589
>Sounds way too ridiculous.
Yeah, also the setup I had for Disciplines was a tad daft. The layout was your three Clan Disciplines+one Physical or Mental Discipline form another Clan whose blood is present in the Dead Wolves (Say Nossie+Animalism,Celerity or Resilience). My approach would have left the blood of the Dead Wolves decidedly murky.
Maybe the best approach is Clan Disciplines+Dead Wolves unique Discipline and they have a version of their Clan weakness tweaked with Werewolf bits, also the Vampires AND Werewolves hate them.
Also any advice on how to make some working Devotions for something like this? Considering my version of the layout was...bad
>>47084732
My advice is to use the fact that Wolfblooded Tells stick around when you become a Vampire and focus on that, instead of mimicking and complicating the 1e way of doing things. 2e makes the already great Bloodline system even better by not just making every new Bloodline have some weird new Discipline that barely fits with how Vampires work (and even when it just uses Devotions, it seems like those are handled better as well). It requires a bit more homebrewing in terms of creating things, but that really works out a lot better and creates uniquer Bloodlines.
They have Tells. They can keep purchasing Wolfblooded merits. Give them Blood Tenebrous. Claire even ported it/remade it for 2e. I didn't much like the version I saw, but it *does* work well for Werewolf Vampires. So either have them be Gangrel specifically or have them be any clan, but replace their original Clan Discipline with Protean and also get Blood Tenebrous.
>>47084084
Jakki, Mage character concepts are the easiest. They're just curious people. They don't need to be overly complex, that comes from progressing as a Mage. An LAPD detective who stumbled onto something supernatural but won't let it go. A conspiracy theorist who finds out that there's things far worse than the Illuminati running the government. A bartender who begins to question the exact pattern one of his customers seems to follow like clockwork.
>>47083881
Not if you use the Mage Translation Guide~
>>47084351
You obviously don't know about the ADAMANTINE ARROW. You know what they're stereotypes for other supes were in they're book? THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY TO KILL THEM.
>>47084506
You also have to consider the fact that this good Mage has a vested interest in you staying dead do to the butterfly effect. He's only ever known the altered timeline, so even though he won't be affected by undoing the time murder his friends and family might not be so lucky.
>>47084256
Does your pitch include force feed a bunch of trannys and mentally damaged pansexual shit down everyone's throat?
all i can think is "Supernal Sentai"
>>47084649
What happens if it turns out the time murder was done to save everyone from a disaster, and BAM! you have to live under the jackboot of wizard Hitler.
>>47083721
I waited to buy it, but I don't feel at all superior to anyone who pirated it and then made sure to buy it once they could get it legitimately.
>>47084448
>took muh phantasms away
Fuck you Prime
>>47085027
That's why it seems so strange to me that he should help out of the goodness of his heart. But I guess he could do some divinations and look into how it would affect him and his loved ones.
So now that Mage 2ed is finally out and done with, can we start the count down to Promethean 2ed?
I'm far more curious about P:tC and the other non-big 3 line's 2ed revisions.
>>47084705
That's actually pretty great. What does Paarl look like? No doubt he looks better than that lightning motherfucker.
>>47085151
>Promethean 2ed
I don't know where you think you are, but in these parts we gargle Dave's spunk exclusively.
This is Deviant Hype territory now.
>>47085183
Eh..Deviant sounds like shit, what little we have to go by anyways. I'll pass on that shit.
>>47085211
Congrats on playing the game wrong
Deviant: The Forged is where it's at
>>47085151
Until there's more information about which parts of Promethean are getting fixed, I'm not going to get hype. There are too many ways it can end up disappointing.
>>47085238
>Deviant: The Forged
Wut? When did OP indicate the full name of Deviant?
>>47084980
See, but all of those are just Hunter characters. The Paths are very, very cool, but I have a tough time nailing down the Paths into something playable, and a lot of the Arcana go over my head.
I'm too dumb for Mage, I think.
>>47085153
Paarl is also adorable.
>>47085082
You say that like it's a bad thing.
>>47085125
It didn't, though. They're Eidolons.
>>47085521
Perfected Forms are shit Phantasms and Eidolons are shit Animated Phantasms.
They cut everything that made them fun, interesting and worthwhile, and also got rid of self-aware Tulpas in favor of literally nothing remotely similar/
>>47085513
Those who awaken are those who look for answers. And then they never stop looking for answers.
>>47085513
More pics of your house lad.
>>47085125
Then put them back in your games.
Creative Thaumaturgy is a thing.
>be either a GotV or Banisher (the difference is academic, really) Obirmos
>find some random dupe
>cast Stealing Fire to make him a temporary Sleepwalker, cast Apocalypse to tive him temporary Mage Sight
>send him out into the world with instructions to kill anyone with weird symbols around them
>profit
>>47085924
>thing I like used to be a thing
>will now have to argue with ST to get them put back in
why gimp Prime in the first place? Not like it was horrifically overpowered already, like Time.
>>47085969
>difference is NOT academic
>violating guardian ethics this badly
>>47085969
you come into my thread and you insult my favorite order! you dirty rat, atamajakki!
i'll kill ya fursona!
>>47086032
Hey, the Guardians are my favorite Order too! But there's a line in Dark Eras where the Guardian precursors are decried as basically just Banishers with an internal code and it made me laugh.
So. I'm thinking that my core Mystery for the city will be Silent Hill inspired.
The Primordial Dream bleeds through into reality in places, causing people touched by the Supernatural to experience nightmarish torments as they're punished for sins and manifestations of their guilt. In some places, people even wander bodily through the Temenos, warping it with their fears. Possibly with some sort of Abyssal taint.
Meanwhile, the city's supernatural community is torn between being really nervous about the fact that if they're alone, they might get caught up in one of these reality shifts, and the kind of freaky people who are super interested in this. You've got your usual Mages looking into it, but also Acolytes of the Crone and maybe Beasts getting all excited over the prospect.
>>47085969
>>47086267
The Guardians are not Banishers, except in the loosest sense (which would also include some Arrows), even if their precursors were seen that way. Banisher is more of an accusation than an actual designation. Though that technique might be used by them. Or anyone but Silver Ladder or Free Council, really. And as >>47085999 points out, even if Sins For A Just End Grant Wisdom, that's super against Guardian beliefs.
>>47085984
It's not "gimped". If anything, it's purview has been expanded. It's also not "putting it back" in the game to use Creative Thaumaturgy.
>>47085984
if you have to argue with your ST to get creative thaumaturgy spells put in you're making really overpowered spells or your ST is a shit.
>>47086443
So...the Los Angeles setting, but spookier, basically?
>>47086443
>a city full of Primordial Dream attracting Beasts
Turn around a leave.
Deviant: The Re-uploaded
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxiwlSshZPM
>>47086443
>tfw everyone focuses on their role as protectors of secrets and internal police
>nobody ever does anything with their messianic faith or belief in reincarnation
kill me
>>47086520
Kinda seems like it, yeah. I'll probably look over LA and take notes when I get to it. LA's thing sounded more like "possessed by the morphean of Fame", while this is more about getting trapped in the foggy world. Same concept, different execution. I was originally going to go with Shadow or something, but the Astral felt more Magey, and while that kind of mind shit is mostly a Mastigos thing, every Mage can get involved and curious.
>>47086566
I don't hate Beast, so...
>>47086672
That's because to a lot of people the Guardian splatbook schtick of "secret Messianic cult that kills people for not helping bring in a Mage Jesus they don't even know about" is the worst aspect. At least 2e makes that part less murdery.
>>47086672
That part's secret bro.
Unless you're playing an all-Guardian game, it's hard to mesh with an overarching plot without compromising the secret's integrity.
So they've done 1e books on pretty much everything there is to do books on as far as the main lines go. Are they just gonna release an updated tome of mysteries or updated abyss book or what?
I guess my problem is i cant see big enough differences between 1e and 2e to justify books on things that already had books in 1e
>>47086790
Very unlikely.
However I also doubt that many 1e things could be effective brought forwards to 2e.
>>47086724
Actually, the astral in general bleeds in. The LA setting is pretty sweet.
>>47086672
Dude, 2e specifies that only a minority of Guardians worship magic jesus.
So i notice there are alot less spells in 2e core than in 1e core. Is this most likely because they had to make room for the regular roles since the core books now hold regular rules for some reason?
>>47086984
Practices > spell examples
>>47086790
I don't care about updated splat books. All I want is updated blue book material. Give me Inferno 2e, make it happen.
>>47086790
Even if they re-cover some old content, they're doing so with the benefit of a decade's worth of writing and play. The Covenants look very different now than did at VtR's launch, for example.
There's also pleny of new stuff. I'm personally ecstatic about Thousand Years of Night, because of the rules for flashbacks, and The Pack giving us advice for troupe play is fantastic.
>>47087025
What even is troupe play? Have we not been intended to play these WoD games as a group for the last 25 years?
>>47086984
Definitely less spells, but also clearer rules, more overall material, and all with a smaller word count and inclusion of base mechanics.
No doubt within a few weeks that people will convert the multitude of 1e spells for use in 2e, as well as create new ones highlighting the revisions in the Arcana.
>>47086672
i find a lot of people have difficulty roleplaying religious faith in general, much less a fictional one.
>>47087075
>troupe play?
apparently it's people hot potatoeing the GM role around:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troupe_system
I see that sort of thing floated a lot for newer games, like Burning Wheel or FATE derivatives but it's never under that specific name.
Also no one has ever done this because nobody actually WANTS the responsibility of GMing.
So rotes
1 Add the rating of their ability as dice to the spell pool
2 Dont cost mana if inferior or common
3 Gain rote quality on roll, reroll all non successes once
4 Treat arcana as 5 for how much reach you get
Do i get that right?
>>47087075
Everyone has multiple characters, essentially.
>>47087223
>3 Gain rote quality on roll, reroll all non successes once
Only when casting from the Grimoire you learned the rote from, or if you made the Rote up yourself (which requires 5 dots in an arcanum).
But otherwise yes.
>>47087223
you only get the rote quality on the roll if you designed the rote yourself or cast it out of Grimoire, and you only get the skill dots added if you cast it from memory.
Otherwise it's correct.
>>47086672
>nobody ever does anything with their messianic faith or belief in reincarnation
This is only the case for a cult within the Order, as of 2e (which admittedly does include much of the upper echelons).
If a mage casts a spell and then is killed before the duration ends does the spell continue until the duration expires or end right then?
>>47087267
I feel like Rote Action on spellcasting isn't nearly as useful as we think, given that 2e spellcasting is all about reducing your pool as much as possible via spell factors while still leaving yourself enough dice to get 1 success.
Rote action only really starts to shine when you've got a big dicepool.
>>47087452
The idea is that even if you completely blow your roll once, you get a free reroll to try again, so the margin of error on those 3-4 dice you leave yourself is smaller.
>>47087449
>When a mage dies, all of her spells are immediately relinquished as though the player spent a Willpower point.
It's hidden in the Spell Control rules, near relinquishing, but that seems to apply to all spells.
Though there isn't going to be much chance for a spell with 4 rounds of duration to go awry, but it does mean that killing a mage won't necessarily save you from a long-lasting damage spell.
So, if I have a rote and a praxis of the same spell, do I have to choose between the two, or is the praxis benefit just stuck on top of the rote?
>>47087572
So all casting is ritual by default unless reach is spent to make it instant right?
>>47087702
Correct.
Instant-casting and Sensory range are the 2 things that gobble up Reach the most often, I'd wager.
>>47087702
with bonus rules
>>47084227
Fuck identity, intersectional politics. Hurr durr, look at me, I'm queer. NOBODY GIVES A SHIT YOU LITTLE PIECE OF CUM-CHEESE. YOU'RE AS RADICAL AND PROGRESSIVE AS THE HAIR ON GEORGE CLOONEY'S OVERSIZED CLIT.
Go out in the streets and fight the fucking system with the actual radicals. I hear they're trying to pass some fascist trade deals.
>>47087702
Unless you have Time 4, yeah.
>>47087861
It's still ritual by default, Time 4 just lets you spend a Mana instead of a Reach.
>>47087870
Yeah, I meant Time 4 gives an exception to "you must spend a reach".
So can i imbue something like a pen that lets people who dont know prime to inscribe grimores?
>>47087963
Yes
>>47083251
>How do you feel about Mage 2e so far?
It's the 2e core I like the least, but there's enough good stuff in it, both fluff and mechanincs, that despite all that I dislike in it, it's a worthy buy.
Huh. Normally making a spell lasting takes 1 reach to go to advanced duration, a -10 penalty and 1 mana. But certian spells where it just make sense for them to be lasting, like inscribe grimoire can also do the same with just 1 reach. Nice way to make that easier for spells which naturally make sense to last
>>47088017
>a -10 penalty
Only if the spell's primary factor isn't Duration already.
>>47088017
"Indefinite" is different from "Lasting"
"Indefinite" is a spell effect that doesn't end.
"Lasting" is something caused by a spell effect that is no longer part of the spell.
For example, if you create a spark next to an oil-soaked rag, the fire that causes is the Lasting effect of the spell. Setting the cloth on fire, directly, instead, is only going to last as long as the spell's duration, because it's a magical fire.
>>47088017
Wait, shit no. It takes a reach to go to advanced duration, and then another reach plus a mana to go to indefinite.
So once you houserule Time out of the game, Mage 2e is pretty good.
>>47088159
No, you're just a shitty GM.
>>47087834
>Implying people can only care about one thing
>Implying that perception and inclusion in fiction don't have impacts on reality
How about instead of bitching that there's a gay pride parade in a book by a company that chooses to show queer people they're included, you complain about something more important? Since people can only care about one thing at a time and all.
>>47088268
So once you houserule Time out of the game, Mage 2e is pretty good.
>>47088319
No, you're just a shitty GM.
>>47088393
Not removing unbalanced and poorly-implemented mechanics is not the sign of a good GM, it's the sign of a GM too bad to be comfortable tweaking the rules.
>>47088444
Nigga you fucked up the time loop
>>47088270
Don't worry about them, they're probably one of those useless anarchists.
>>47088508
I didn't want to repeat myself again, it was only amusing as a one-time joke.
>>47088444
They are balanced. In fact, by removing that Arcana, you make one Path mechanically weaker than the others, and remove much of it's narrative and thematic substance. That's not "balance". That's "I don't like a common aspect of the game, so I'll punish players that choose to focus on it".
>>47088517
I just find people going "stop complaining about things you care about unless" silly.
>>47088756
Time is anything but balanced. It's complete bullshit.
>>47088782
I'm also worried about the state of Time magic but, in all fairness, we should probably reserve judgement until some of us have actually PLAYED with the new rules. It might not be as bad in practice as it looks on paper.
>>47088756
Make Prime a Path Arcana for everyone and move Fate over to Obrimos to represent divine planning and everything having a place in the world.
>>47089276
Numbers are the same in-game or out of it. The difficulty of changing a rampaging wolf into a fetus is set in stone.
You can fix a lot of Time by removing Temporal Sympathy.
Why is there no equivalent of Condition cards for Tilts?
Especially considering how much the Mage 2e rules love Tilts and Conditions, it's something I'd pay for.
>Archmages automatically win any Clash of Wills against lesser beings.
>>47089364
Do you really expect anything different?
>>47088782
>>47089330
It's very much balanced.
If you want to use Temporal Sympathy to kill someone when they were a baby, you need to have something that represents that person as a baby(a rattle, or something else that they used when they were young). You don't get a die bonus for this yantra, but it takes up one of your yantra slots.
Unless your target is in sensory range, you're also going to need Spatial Sympathy, which likely means another bonus-less yantra. At Gnosis 1, this means you're out of yantras.
You're rolling against a minimum withstand rating of 3, because as a child they're entirely different than they are now. 4 you're using spatial sympathy. And that's just to get the spell through temporal and spatial sympathy. If you don't know their sympathetic name, that's another.
Now you add another +1 to the Withstand rating, because they've got their Resolve/Stamina/Composure.
If you're trying to kill them, the primary spell factor is probably already Potency, and since I assumed Gnosis 1 earlier, I'll assume you're using a 3-dot spell to affect them. You have a base Potency of 3, which objectively isn't enough to breach their Withstand rating. So you take a -4 for +2 Potency to hit the bare minimum of what's required to affect them with Temporal Sympathy as an infant. As a Gnosis 1 Mage, you're rolling a chance die.
To affect them at sensory range, you have to spend 1 reach. If you want to cast it instantly, so the target can't move out of sensory range during the 3-hour ritual(if it wasn't an issue, you wouldn't need time magic), that's another reach, which means you're provoking Paradox.
It also costs 1 mana to affect them with Temporal Sympathy at all, plus another for Spatial Sympathy.
It's anything BUT easy and cheap.
>>47089330
>>47089276
He doesn't mean it'll change, you fucktard, he means of course it's going to seem unbalanced in a white room situation, because everything does. White room situations never happen.
>>47089471
>If you want to use Temporal Sympathy to kill someone when they were a baby, you need to have something that represents that person as a baby(a rattle, or something else that they used when they were young). You don't get a die bonus for this yantra, but it takes up one of your yantra slots.
Symbolic Yantras are included in sympathetic ones. This includes drawings. You can sketch out a stick figure and name it Steve and you can now turn your rival, Steve, into a fetus.
This covers Spatial Sympathy, too.
At this point, the difficulty is irrelevant, as you can continue to do it indefinitely. Odds and costs do not matter because you can repeat it in safety until you win.
>>47089500
Doesn't matter.
>Ban got lifted
Awwww yeah! Fuck Proxy users
>>47089554
You can try a maximum of 10 times, assuming no spatial sympathy, before you have to get more mana. If 30 hours of trying to kill someone as an infant doesn't make you realize maybe there's another way to handle your issues, you're probably going to be killed by your target or another mage, because all those failed attempts are going to leave your Signature Nimbus on them, and if they've done something to make you angry enough to kill them in the most cowardly way possible, they probably either know your Signature Nimbus, or know somebody else who does. You also might draw the attention of any other Mages passing by on the street, when your attempts to past-kill somebody ping their peripheral mage sight. Hell, it'll probably ping the target's pms, too.
You're also definitely gonna be rolling to lose Wisdom at least once in all those 10 attempts.
Any ST who allows you to attempt it more than once without any sort of retaliation or downside deserves to have his game fucked up. Especially since your chances of success are just as good as your chances of Dramatic Failure.
>>47089554
>>47089714
Hell, I even forgot to address the fact that anybody with Space 2 could also just use the signature nimbus from your failed attempts to try and retaliate.
Can you counterspell attainments?
>>47089714
None of this actually stops you from murdering your enemies as babies. Even slightly.
"B-but someone might notice!". Sure. That's true. Other Time mages might notice or interfere. That doesn't stop you from killing people as babies.
Just remove Temporal Sympathy. Remove Spatial Sympathy, too. Problem solved.
>>47089743
Try, yes. And you could retaliate through their retaliation, but it doesn't stop the problem.
>>47088782
It's almost like the game is about playing fucking wizzards.
If you can't handle playing wizzards, maybe you should them, don't run a game focusing on them. All of the Arcana are "complete bullshit", and many of them can turn a game upside down. Investigating a murder is trivial when you can highlight all the evidence and mentally reconstruct everything CSI style in your head, then find out who the killer is. Escape is nearly impossible against someone who can bend physical distances to their will.
Nevermind that half the things you're worried about probably won't be nearly as prevalent as you think because doing them is harder than it's worth. Of course, you're less likely to run a fucking game than I am.
>>47089760
At this point your argument is legitimately just "I don't like it, therefore it's objectively bad."
Have fun being anti-fun.
>>47089781
None of the other Arcana possess Time-level nonsense.
>>47089808
My argument is "the ability to reach back in time as often as you want and cast murder spells (or anything else) against anyone just by drawing stick people and thinking about it with no defense is bad".
It's okay if you don't think that's bad. You are allowed to enjoy your games, even when they're dominated by Time nukes left and right.
>>47089819
It's not quite on the same level, but Space 5 lets you create a Pocket Dimension where you can cast spells free of Paradox, no matter how much you reach.
>>47089841
>with no defense
Do you lack reading comprehension?
>minimum withstand rating of 3
>4 if you're using spatial sympathy
>If you don't know their sympathetic name, that's another.
>Now you add another +1 to the Withstand rating, because they've got their Resolve/Stamina/Composure.
>Everything I said in >>47089714 and >>47089743
>as often as you want
>You can try a maximum of 10 times, assuming no spatial sympathy, before you have to get more mana.
After those 10 attempts are up, you have to go get more mana.
Also, as a side note, if the chapter fiction is anything to go by, killing someone or preventing them from being born doesn't kill them in the present.
>>47089841
>dominated by Time nukes
Oh yeah, I forgot that most people think all Mages should be amoral shitcunts.
>>47089964
That isn't a defense. If you're tied to a post, someone shooting at you might miss. But you're undefended if they can just keep taking shots, even if they have to pause to reload.
>>47090006
But you're not undefended. You're a fucking Mage. After their first attempt, the element of surprise is gone, and you know they're trying to kill past-you. Go kill present-them.
>>47090040
How do you know that? You don't actually know what their spell necessarily did, or even if it happened at all; signature nimbus' fade after a week. If I'm targeting baby you, well, there's not a trace of that available for the rest of your life. You'd have to specifically go and look back at that specific week you were a baby to see the traces.. and why would you? You have no idea. Nothing happened to you as a baby, so you have no reason to look.
As someone who has NEVER played any "- of Darkness" ever, where's a good starting point? I've always been interested in either Vampire or Werewolf.
What's the difference between Chronicle and World?
>>47090199
Chronicles of Darkness is the 2e of New World of Darkness.
And Vampire or Werewolf are both pretty good starting points; their CofD versions include all the core rules in their books, so you can just grab one or the other PDF.
>>47090129
The nimbus is probably gonna tag you in the present, too, and it'll definitely ping your Peripheral Mage Sight. Then you can use Active Mage Sight, and if you've got any Time, see that someone tried to do something to you; if you don't can just get a Cabal-mate to check. Then you know someone tried to do something to you in the past, and you can start trying to find out who(if you don't recognize the nimbus) and deal with them.
>>47090199
World is full of 90s-isms, rage against the man, black trenchcoats, and world-wide conspiracies.
Chronicle is full of modern trends, personal horror, and a lower power cap.
There's also the minor matter of all the World games having different mechanics for the splat-specific stuff, and Chronicles being built with crossover in mind, but that won't be a big deal if you're just playing Werewolf or Vampire.
Personally, I'd recommend Werewolf the Forsaken 2e.
>>47090199
World of Darkness is the old Vampire the Masquerade stuff. Old 90's "latex and angst" with lots of biblical stuff and a world a short way from some form of appocalypse.
Chronricles of Darkness is the new name for the new World of Darkness. No metaplot to learn, it's basically a toolbox for which you can create you own setting and game with whatever materials you like. A lot more "the world is shitty, but it's not ending" and more of a struggle to maintain humanity rather than the oWoD option to simply discard it.
>>47090260
>The nimbus is probably gonna tag you in the present, too, and it'll definitely ping your Peripheral Mage Sight.
I see no justification for these claims in the rules as written. Signature Nimbus says very clearly:
"When she uses a spell, Praxis, Rote, or Attainment, she leaves little wisps of her identity on that magic. A Mage utilizing Focused Mage Sight can recognize those signatures she's seen before."
Unless you cast a spell on yourself, your signature nimbus will not be anywhere near you. If you're casting magic on a baby in the past, the nimbus will be on the baby, and thus unseen by any sort of sight.
But no one will notice because there's nothing to actually investigate until the time-nuke has already succeeded, at which point there's still nothing to investigate because none of your cabal-mates met you or cared about you.
>>47089364
Id expect the same out of elder vampires and whatever the hell you call primal urge 6+ werewolves
>>47090332
Temporal Sympathy says
>The mage must be casting a spell on the subject as it exists now
You aren't casting a spell on the baby. You're casting a spell on the target, in the present, and it's affecting their past.
It's like you didn't even read the information on how Time magic works before the spell lists.
>>47090199
Everyone else has the right idea here. CWoD is more global and large scale ("The fate of reality/gaia/dreams is in the balance!"), while CofD is more local and personal ("Your friend went into that haunted house and hasn't come back out yet. Grab the shotgun."). I would suggest you start with Chronicles of Darkness core and work your way up from there.
>>47090376
>You aren't casting a spell on the baby. You're casting a spell on the target, in the present, and it's affecting their past.
You're casting it on the past through the present. You're not actually doing anything to them in the present.
>It's like you didn't even read the information on how Time magic works before the spell lists.
Nah, I read it. Them in the present is just a vector. The target is the past. That's why it says this:
"Temporal Sympathy allows a mage to cast a spell through time at the past of a subject. "
>>47089751
No, they aren't spells.
>>47090222
>>47090260
>>47090272
>>47090378
Thanks all for the info, any good link to download the pdfs?
>>47090399
You are casting a spell *ON THE SUBJECT AS THEY EXIST NOW*.
You are explicitly casting the spell on them as they are in the present. The spell is affecting their past, just like a Mind spell cast on someone would affect their mind, but it's still being cast on the subject.
Thus, there is still a Signature Nimbus being left on the target in the present.
>>47090427
Look at the Pastebin in the OP.
>>47090441
>You are casting a spell *ON THE SUBJECT AS THEY EXIST NOW*.
".. cast a spell through time at the past of a subject."
Perhaps I don't understand what the word "at" means. To me, it very clearly indicates you are casting through time. You're doing nothing whatsoever to the target in the present, you're using them as a vector to their past.
>>47090497
Casting a spell one someone's mind is technically using them as a vector. It's still going to leave a signature nimbus.
You're affecting the target, you're going to leave a signature nimbus. It makes infinitely more sense for that nimbus to be in the present, instead of in the Fallen World's past, and thus, as far as any ST who doesn't want to massively gimp one of the Paths just because they don't like one of the thousands of things they could potentially do if they're a massively amoral cuntbag is concerned, it will be in the present.
>>47090575
>Casting a spell one someone's mind is technically using them as a vector. It's still going to leave a signature nimbus.
Yes, a signature nimbus on their mind, which, given it is right there part of them, will be on them.
But if you're throwing fireballs at babies for whatever reason, the nimbus is gonna be on the babies.
>>47090497
That's not how Time works in Mage, metaphysically speaking.
Remember that everything Time magic does is done in relation to the constant, objective Present.
Think of the example in the book, where time is a string being woven on a loom - a person's Past is the thread that's already been formed, their Present is the point where the thread is being woven together, and their Future is the unspun thread ahead. When you use Temporal Sympathy to affect a person back in time, what you're doing is analogous to messing with the thread that extends backwards from a person's present. You're messing with things in the Past, but the target is the source of the string you're modifying - the Present person.
>>47090637
>You're messing with things in the Past, but the target is the source of the string you're modifying - the Present person.
How then do you explain Temporal Sympathy, which says "cast a spell through time at the past of a subject"?
You're not actually doing that with what you said. "at the past" is unambiguous; either it's wrong, or I'm right and the nimbus would linger on the little baby.
>>47090619
A person's past is a part of them.
Since you ignored the entire rest of that post, I'll explain in more detail.
The section on how Time works says that someone who travels to the past and uses magic to look at the 'future'/present won't see any of their changes having an effect, because it's still in the Fallen World's past. If you cast a spell at the past, you're casting a spell at the past, and your Signature Nimbus is going to appear--why would it appear in the Fallen World's past, when the spell is being cast in the present, and is by your own logic going to the target in order to affect their past?
>>47090666
>trips of the beast
If you want to cut a string on the loom, you have to know which string you're cutting; you're not going to dig through all the strings that are there until you find it, you're going to grab the string at the present point and follow it back. That point where you grab it is where the signature is left: in the present.
>>47090703
>when the spell is being cast in the present,
The nimbus doesn't care when the spell is being cast. The nimbus lingers on the effect itself, which is in the past.
>Since you ignored the entire rest of that post, I'll explain in more detail.
I ignore irrelevant details to condense post length.
> That point where you grab it is where the signature is left: in the present.
The signature nimbus clings to the spell itself, which isn't the hand holding the thread but the cut in it.
>>47090763
Technically, it would cling to both. If you think of the Nimbus like paint, and the spell's path to the target as a brush stroke, it's going to touch the target in the present, AND the baby in the past.
Or, to continue the loom metaphor, the spell to cut the string is disturbing the weave at two points: In the present, where you grab the string to follow it back to where it began, and in the past, where you cut it.
And, again, odds of the spell succeeding are low, at best, until you get to higher Gnosis ratings, at which point odds are your target has probably either shielded their past against time effects, or removed the temporal sympathy to themselves as a child.
>>47090876
>Technically, it would cling to both. If you think of the Nimbus like paint, and the spell's path to the target as a brush stroke, it's going to touch the target in the present, AND the baby in the past.
What magic is being done to the target in the present for the nimbus to cling to? Temporal Sympathy says it repeatedly:
"cast a spell through time *at the past of a subject*",
"... to cast on a subject both in the past and at a distance..."
It's clear that the target is an entity in the past, not the present.
>>47090619
Where does it say that in the book? It looked to me like whatever you use your magic on will have the nimbus, so the fire would bear te nimbus but burned victims wouldnt because those burns are natural for what happens when skin comes into contact with fire
>>47090199
>where's a good starting point?
Right here, fampire
https://my.mixtape.moe/qsavpb.pdf
>>47090975
>Where does it say that in the book?
Okay yeah the fireballs were a bad idea, since they're the actual magic bit. I should have used a different example, like snuffing the baby's life force out directly.
p. 89 & 90 are what discuss the signature nimbus.
I dont think the example listed is possible given how time works in mage.
If you killed someone in the past then you would never have actually fought them so you never could have cast the spell. Isnt that a paradox? Like what if a mad scientest made a portal into the past then shot himself through it before he made the portal
>>47091037
The Time section talks about this. Magic prevents Paradox on the Time-wielder's behalf; if you stop an event in the past, your personal timeline continues as if the event had happened and then you fixed it, whereas it's everyone else who is treated as if it had never happened.
A mad scientist who killed himself in the past would find himself in a world where everyone believed he'd been shot and killed, but he's still there.
>>47091078
So what you're saying is that killing yourself in the past is the best way to cover your tracks?
>>47091105
If a horrendous breach of Wisdom, yes.
>>47091037
The book is pretty explicit that time paradoxes aren't a thing; Magic adjusts things as necessary so that you going into the past to kill Hitler doesn't eliminate your reason for killing Hitler. Or at least, if it would, it gives you a new one.
>>47090936
In your own words, the target is a vector to the past. If somebody covered in paint has to use a window as a vector to get outside, it's going to leave some paint on the frame of the window.
And again, it says
>The mage must be casting a spell on the subject as it exists now, ...
You are casting a spell ON THE SUBJECT AS IT EXISTS NOW, to affect the PAST OF THE SUBJECT.
>>47091105
Again, I reference the chapter fiction, spoiler alert;That's basically what Outis, the narrator, did. He got sent to the past, and accidentally caused his parents to never meet, then when he returned to the present, nobody knew who he was."Outis means 'Nobody'."
>>47091188
>If somebody covered in paint has to use a window as a vector to get outside, it's going to leave some paint on the frame of the window.
No it isn't. Just go through the window without touching the frame.
>You are casting a spell ON THE SUBJECT AS IT EXISTS NOW, to affect the PAST OF THE SUBJECT.
It also says "cast on a subject in the past", not "cast on a subject in the present to manipulate the past", which wouldn't make sense anyway.
Again, though, all of this is fixed by removing Temporal Sympathy.
>>47091235
Again, to quote your own posts
>"cast a spell through time *at the past of a subject*"
You are casting it at the past, not at the baby. The past is directly connected to the subject, and thus you are affecting the subject.
It makes perfect sense with the way Time magic is said to work before the list of Time spells, in which the only spell that directly changes the past, Rewrite History, is also probably going to leave your Nimbus on the target, because you're casting a spell on them to rewrite their past by directly affecting their pattern.
>All of this, the EXTREMELY slim possibility to kill someone in the past that's only going to work in theory 1 out of 10 times, and will objectively cause more trouble for you than it's worth anyways(Paradox from Reach, Paradox from using magic that will hurt a sleeper, Wisdom loss, etc), can be fixed by gimping one of the Arcanum by removing one of the Attainments for it entirely.
Like I said earlier, have fun being anti-fun.
Honestly, it sounds to me like you're just dead set on not allowing anybody who wants to play an Acanthus to have any fun.
>>47091121
Boo fucking hoo, "I'm dead" is the perfect alibi.
>>47091396
They aren't going to run a game in the first place, so it's not like it matters.
Anyone wanna make 100 Mages to fill up a Consilium, based on Dave's guideline?
>>47091396
>You are casting it at the past, not at the baby.
Temporal Sympathy explicitly says "cast on a subject in the past".
Not "at the past", but a subject in the past (the baby).
>Honestly, it sounds to me like you're just dead set on not allowing anybody who wants to play an Acanthus to have any fun.
I don't care what you think. I'm against unbalanced bullshit mechanics.
>>47091417
Do you really think that shit didn't come up? It literally shows up in the chapter fiction. It's clearly not the major problem you think it is.
>>47091417
Hold on, let me just scour your posts
>>47090936
>"cast a spell through time *at the past of a subject*"
>>47090666
>"at the past" is unambiguous
>>47090497
>Perhaps I don't understand what the word "at" means.
>>47090399
>The target is the past.
etc
You're casting the spell at the past of the target, to affect the target as an infant. Temporal Sympathy doesn't let your spell time-travel to the past, it lets you target the past of a given subject, which has to be what you're casting the spell at.
>>47091506
Yes, at the past *of the subject*. As in, the subject-in-the-past. Your spell travels back in time and hits the person you used as a vector in the present.
There's no other way to interpret Temporal Sympathy saying "a subject in the past".
>>47091498
I think it assuredly came up, and OPP didn't give it any thought. That defines most of the problems in all of their releases. They're horrible at playtesting.
For fuck's sake, Requiem still has Obfuscate at full power, even when a forum as shitty as rpg.net realized it deformed the game and complained about it.
Trusting in OPP's mechanics is a fool's game.
>>47091552
>I can't handle running a game about wizards, so I'll complain about the things wizards can do
It came up and they decided it didn't matter. Except that I'm pretty sure you're also just full of shit and can't understand the mechanics. I haven't actually gotten to them myself yet, but other people seem to be clarifying that yes, you are full of shit and don't understand the way the game works, but you're doubling down and continuing on with bitching about how the game does this thing that is so terrible that it doesn't actually do.
>>47091649
> I haven't actually gotten to them myself yet
You really should have stopped there. There's nothing admirable about having no idea what you're talking about but assuming something is true because an unknown number of complete strangers said so.
Jesus Christ, dude, at least diss me based on your own thoughts, and not the parroted thoughts of an amorphous blob.
You're fucking pathetic.
>>47091552
Time travel doesn't show up in Time until the third dot. Why would Time 2 allow you to send something to the past, especially by more than a few seconds, when even the Time 3 spell only brings you back a scene at a time, with Reach?
The best example of how the Attainment actually works would be a combination of Knowing the past and Ruling it, thereby altering it so that the spell you're casting in the present happens.
Either way, you're affecting the target, and thus they're going to have your Signature Nimbus in the Present, because your Nimbus only ever appears in your Present(even if you travel to the past, it's *your* present, then fades from there).
What's more, if you're targetting them at Sensory range, they're going to get a ping from Peripheral Mage Sight, telling them where you are.
Plus, at Gnosis 1, the best you could do before hitting a chance die is 1 bashing damage, which isn't even going to knock an infant out. You'd have to cast the spell multiple times, and by the time you've killed them with it, even ignoring whether or not your Nimbus shows up, you're suffering a breaking point, and warning the subject that someone's messing with their timeline.
You can *maybe* knock an infant out at Gnosis 2, but that's still going to alert the subject in the present, because his past is being affected by a spell cast in the present.
>>47091682
It doesn't really matter. Someone is literally pointing out the flaws in your argument using your own posts. They already brought up the example from the actual book where the situation you're complaining about happened.
>>47091749
>Time travel doesn't show up in Time until the third dot. Why would Time 2 allow you to send something to the past, especially by more than a few seconds, when even the Time 3 spell only brings you back a scene at a time, with Reach?
Because that's how Temporal Sympathy says it works. My suggestion: excise Temporal Sympathy.
>Either way, you're affecting the target, and thus they're going to have your Signature Nimbus in the Present, because your Nimbus only ever appears in your Present
Your Signature Nimbus will appear on the magic, which is in the past.
>What's more, if you're targetting them at Sensory range, they're going to get a ping from Peripheral Mage Sight, telling them where you are.
That's not how Peripheral Mage Sight works. They don't get alerted to any specifics like that unless it's 1. not hidden at all, and 2. they have the appropriate Arcanum to use Active Sight with.
p. 90. "Nor does Peripheral Mage Sight give any clues as to what just happened — only that magic is afoot."
>Plus, at Gnosis 1, the best you could do before hitting a chance die is 1 bashing damage, which isn't even going to knock an infant out. You'd have to cast the spell multiple times, and by the time you've killed them with it, even ignoring whether or not your Nimbus shows up, you're suffering a breaking point, and warning the subject that someone's messing with their timeline.
The moment you deal damage, since you're in the present, that change to the timeline becomes a normal part of it. To the person who was harmed, that always happened to them. They might be curious about that time in their childhood they inexplicably got hurt and investigate it, they might not.
Really, though, you should be able to kill them before anything like that happens.
>>47091797
Fluff and mechanics frequently fail to match up. The mechanics are on my side.
>>47091850
>The mechanics are on my side.
I don't know man, it seems like casting a spell back through time does have to at least go through the target in the present. Seems like that ought to leave the residue of their nimbus.
See Temporal Sympathy:
>The mage must be casting a spell on the subject as it exists now
>>47091850
>Your Signature Nimbus will appear on the magic, which is in the past.
Your magic has to travel to the target, whether through Sensory or Sympathetic range, and then it affects their past by making the damage effect of your spell happen to them in the past.
>The mage sees — rather, perceives — magical occurrences through the lens of her Path and Nimbus. Many mages experience the Periphery through senses other than sight. A sensual Mastigos might feel brushing, light touches on his skin, while an Acanthus might hear mercurial laughter. Many Moros sense the supernatural through their sense of smell, tasting decay and chemicals on the air.
Logically, those senses aren't telling you the magic is EVERYWHERE. They'll at least give you a general direction.
>>47091850
>Fluff and mechanics frequently fail to match up. The mechanics are on my side.
They REALLY aren't, you're just so blinded by your own stupidity and hatred of the incredibly slim chance that a player could fuck with the story by killing someone, despite the handful of balancing factors I've handed to you, that you'd rather straight up gimp one of the Arcanum and make it outright underpowered compared to the others.
>>47091924
>>The mage must be casting a spell on the subject as it exists now
Yes, you're using the target in the now as the vector. Continue reading Temporal Sympathy:
"It is possible to combine this Attainment with
Sympathetic Range to cast on a subject both in the past..."
Using what you know of the English language, how is "cast on a subject (both) in the past.." interpreted? Does that not indicate the subject is in the past? That you're casting your spell on someone in the past?
I consider myself reasonably adept with language. If you have a more compelling interpretation of those words, by all means educate me.
>>47091958
>Logically, those senses aren't telling you the magic is EVERYWHERE. They'll at least give you a general direction.
They're telling you magic occurred in the area. There's no indication they give you even a vague direction. Indeed, the fact it then proceeds to say Active Sight is necessary for information would suggest it doesn't give you a direction.
>They REALLY aren't,
They are.
>you're just so blinded by your own stupidity and hatred..
No.
Remember how the platonic forms and symbols that define reality exist outside of time? Like as far as maguc is concerned there is no seperation between some dude and that dude five hours ago, theyre the sqme thing
>>47091990
>Using what you know of the English language
Holy shit, are you this stupid? Don't be such an ass. The part I quoted says, in plain English, that you're also casting the spell on the target in the present. No qualifications. You can't interpret that phrase liberally and then insist that a later phrase in the same passage has to be interpreted literally.
Guys stop biting the bait
>>47092064
What do the words "cast on a subject in the past" mean, anon? You're a smart fellow and I believe answering this is within your capabilities.
>>47092081
You're right, Anon. I'm sorry. I was just taking a break from playing Mario Party to check on /wodg/ and figured I'd helpfully point out where another anon was mistaken. I didn't even stop to think that it was bait.
>>47091990
You keep quoting the exact same line.
>Temporal Sympathy allows a mage to cast a spell through time at the past of a subject. The mage must be casting a spell on the subject as it exists now
>Page 193, Temporal Sympathy
These are two sentences that say you're targeting the subject and their past. You have one, which you're interpreting to fit your argument and ignoring these, that implies you're completely ignoring the subject in the present, which is objectively false.
>>47092034
Excellent point.
>>47092092
It means you're casting the spell on the subject, and then Temporal Sympathy is flinging the effect back along their timeline to a point in their past, at which point it affects them. Again, look at the previous post I quoted; your nimbus is going to be on both the infant in the past, and the subject in the present, because as far as the Supernal is concerned, they're the same being, just with a different time stamp.
>>47092081
Honestly, I'm done after this. If he wants to keep arguing that Temporal Sympathy is imbalanced despite all the evidence against it vs his singular misinterpreted sentence supporting it, I've run out of fucks to give.
>>47092154
>You keep quoting the exact same line.
There is no need for another line.
>These are two sentences that say you're targeting the subject and their past.
It says you cast the spell through time at the subject in their past.
>It means you're casting the spell on the subject, and then Temporal Sympathy is flinging the effect back along their timeline to a point in their past, at which point it affects them. Again, look at the previous post I quoted; your nimbus is going to be on both the infant in the past, and the subject in the present, because as far as the Supernal is concerned, they're the same being, just with a different time stamp.
So "cast on a subject in the past", to you, means you're not casting it on a subject in the past.
>>47092174
No one is making you post, and no one cares enough about you to need a status update when you decide not to post. Just don't post.
This thread? This is why Mage 1e didn't let non-Archmasters use Time to fuck with the past.
>>47092557
Just looked at the Iconic art for Mage 2e.
GOOD GOD IS IT ASS!
>>47092592
Acanthus: Female Leftist punk.
Magistos: Female Sandnigger.
Moros: Professor, a profession dominated by leftists.
Obrimos: A nigger.
Thyrsus: A white hobo.
Diversity, ho! The only non-leftist white person is a fucking hobo!
>>47092705
>A liberal Muslim homosexual ACLU lawyer professor and abortion doctor was teaching a class on Karl Marx, known atheist
>“Before the class begins, you must get on your knees and worship Marx and accept that he was the most highly-evolved being the world has ever known, even greater than Jesus Christ!”
>At this moment, a brave, patriotic, pro-life Navy SEAL champion who had served 1500 tours of duty and understood the necessity of war and fully supported all military decision made by the United States stood up and held up a rock.
>“How old is this rock?”
>The arrogant professor smirked quite Jewishly and smugly replied “4.6 billion years, you stupid Christian”
>“Wrong. It’s been 5,000 years since God created it. If it was 4.6 billion years old and evolution, as you say, is real… then it should be an animal now”
>The professor was visibly shaken, and dropped his chalk and copy of Origin of the Species. He stormed out of the room crying those liberal crocodile tears.
>The students applauded and all registered Republican that day and accepted Jesus as their lord and savior. An eagle named “Small Government” flew into the room and perched atop the American Flag and shed a tear on the chalk. The pledge of allegiance was read several times, and God himself showed up and enacted a flat tax rate across the country.
>The professor lost his tenure and was fired the next day. He died of the gay plague AIDS and was tossed into the lake of fire for all eternity.
>Semper Fi
/pol/, please go
>>47092557
Because someone is wrong about how that works?
>>47092833
>Because someone is wrong about how that works?
I'm completely right about how it works. The reason you shouldn't let non-Archmasters fuck with the past is that fucking with the past is awful.
>>47090666
I'm sorry, your retarded! Read the damn attainment before making your argument.
Here I even highlighted it for you.
"The mage must be casting a spell on the subject as it exists now, cast at sensory range, use a sympathy Yantra, and spend one Mana."
All of this MUST done to cast on baby them. Sense its cast on the subject as it exists now not only do you have to feal with their normal withstand raiting but the mage can and may find out what your trying to do.
>>47092842
Why?
I honestly don't understand the argument. This is a game about playing superpowered wizards who's entire schtick is that with enough knowledge and patience, you can do anything.
>>47092923
Here I'll help you too. You're welcome.
>>47092958
Because Time shenanigans outperform any other sort of shenanigans. They're narratively messy and mechanically obnoxious- the introduction of time alterations creates vastly more shit you have to worry about than anything else and makes the play experience un-fun. Even the book acknowledges this with sidebars and text blurbs, and other posters have acknowledged it with dismissive shrugs and saying "well just don't let (N)PCs do that" even though doing it is perfectly sensible.
>>47092923
>>47092958
No, guys, no! You're taking the bait again! Don't do it!
>>47093035
It says a lot about /tg/ that pointing to the book's rules is bait.
>>47093035
Yay just got completely caught up. I apologize, but I just can't stand stupid.
>>47092705
Nigga, that hobo is the fucking NEMEAN. Scelesti archmage, ruled Boston with an iron fist, hangs out with the old man of the abyss for fun, escaped being banished to astral plane, and one of the baddest motherfuckers in Chronicles of Darkness.
>>47093074
When it says "both in the past and at a distance beyond the sensory", It means you can target the past version of something that is not within sensory range.
That's all. Nothing more. The wording of the attainment is clear, you have to be casting the spell on the present version of the target.
>>47093074
Continuing to cite the same source that you've intentionally interpreted wrong and refused to back down on repeatedly is bait.
>>47093124
>The wording of the attainment is clear, you have to be casting the spell on the present version of the target.
Just to be clear, your claim is that "cast on a subject in the past" does not, in fact, mean casting on a subject in the past.
>Continuing to cite the same source that you've intentionally interpreted wrong and refused to back down on repeatedly is bait.
I've interpreted it correctly; you are wrong about it. I am not going to stop citing it just because you're retarded (and that goes for anyone else being retarded, too).
>>47092986
That highlighting doesn't mean anything. It just means that you don't need to be in the same room as the person you're casting on. You're still reaching out to the past. Not that you're casting only on the person in the past and not the one in the future.
This is also a game about people who reshape reality to their will. Complaining that Mages can do ridiculous shit is like complaining about Nobilis. And it's a shitload more complicated to do the things people are saying can be done in the first place.
>>47093168
>Just to be clear, your claim is that "cast on a subject in the past" does not, in fact, mean casting on a subject in the past.
It immediately follows that up by explaining that to cast something on a subject in the past, you are casting on their current self.
>I've interpreted it correctly; you are wrong about it.
If Dave doesn't plan on answering questions about this shit here, I'm completely 100% certain he'll answer things on the OPP forums. I also sincerely doubt that you're right, since it makes no sense and is unreasonable.
>>47093198
>That highlighting doesn't mean anything. It just means that you don't need to be in the same room as the person you're casting on. You're still reaching out to the past. Not that you're casting only on the person in the past and not the one in the future.
To be clear, "cast on a subject in the past" does not, in fact, mean casting on a subject that is in the past?
>This is also a game about people who reshape reality to their will. Complaining that Mages can do ridiculous shit is like complaining about Nobilis. And it's a shitload more complicated to do the things people are saying can be done in the first place.
I am complaining about one specific sort of ridiculous shit. Don't be a disingenuous little cunt.
>It immediately follows that up by explaining that to cast something on a subject in the past, you are casting on their current self.
Yes, you're using their current self as the vector. Your spell follows their history and whacks whatever you selected.
>If Dave doesn't plan on answering questions about this shit here, I'm completely 100% certain he'll answer things on the OPP forums. I also sincerely doubt that you're right, since it makes no sense and is unreasonable.
It makes perfect sense and is quite reasonable; it's just overpowered, which is a frequent problem with OPP because they don't actually playtest, they use them to generate hype and ignore feedback.
See: Obfuscate, Behold, My True Form! and most of Beast in general..
>>47093118
>Nigga, that hobo is the fucking NEMEAN. Scelesti archmage, ruled Boston with an iron fist, hangs out with the old man of the abyss for fun, escaped being banished to astral plane, and one of the baddest motherfuckers in Chronicles of Darkness.
LOLwut. I remember his writeup in the Mage 1e book, but when did any of that happen?
>>47093260
>I am complaining about one specific sort of ridiculous shit. Don't be a disingenuous little cunt.
It's pretty fucking arbitrary.
And no, it doesn't make sense. You're whining because you don't understand the rules. At least two people are telling you otherwise. You have read the fucking thing and still don't understand.
>>47093281
Boston Unveiled.
