Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What Breaks If......

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Yeah, I think that'd work. Solars would still be the best because their charms are overall stronger, then Lunars, then DBs, but the gap would be smaller.

    You could also remove the Aura mechanic from DBs so they could combo their good charms together, that'd increase their power, but they'd still be a bit behind the other two.


    Though personally, for mixed play I'd prefer to give the DB players some non-charm mechanical benefits (like more experience, more charms, more starting stats, etc; actually they do have more starting stats, but even more so; obviously this can also be done the other way by giving the Lunar and Solar players less stuff), or non-mechanical benefits (lots of jade artefacts lying around, though unfortunately that doesn't work as well as in 2nd ed since Solars are also resonant with them, or have lots of cultures that like DBs, are a bit meh on Lunars, but hate Solars).
    That way you can still use weaker DBs for NPCs.
    Ie don't make DBs better relative to the other PCs, make your DBs better relative to the other PCs.

    But that may not work as well for you, or it may just not matter if you don't mind DB NPCs being more dangerous to the PCs.


    My characters:
    Dr Soma Vaidya, viper-totem Lunar and kung-fu doctor
    Brother Alazar, Zenith occultist and last survivor of the Black Monastery of Leng
    Shadow of Kings, Twilight barbarian scholar, master of lost First Age crafting techniques. Has a lot of clones. Picture by Jen.

    Comment


    • I would say that a big, big thing in flattening the power curve is going to be either removing Supernal abilities from Solars, or giving everybody else something similar. Have access, right from Essence 1, to Essence 5 effects, makes a pretty huge difference, in my experience.

      Comment


      • Yeah, that's a very big deal.


        My characters:
        Dr Soma Vaidya, viper-totem Lunar and kung-fu doctor
        Brother Alazar, Zenith occultist and last survivor of the Black Monastery of Leng
        Shadow of Kings, Twilight barbarian scholar, master of lost First Age crafting techniques. Has a lot of clones. Picture by Jen.

        Comment


        • As other people have mentioned, DB Aura mechanics and Solar Supernal are 2 important things to look at. I'd try the following :
          -Treat every DB Charm as having the Balanced Keyword
          -Make it so Supernal only makes Charms 1 Essence higher available, not all Charms

          Comment



          • Originally posted by The Wizard of Oz View Post

            But that may not work as well for you, or it may just not matter if you don't mind DB NPCs being more dangerous to the PCs.
            A secondary goal of this would be to increase the range of challenging combat enemies for celestial exalted whether that be lower powered Exigents, local gods, or Terrestrials. I want the local magistrate and his praetorian guard to be a meaningful challenge to a new Dawn Caste and a suicidal challenge to storm into without a plan. Solars and Lunars can kill the mortal king that oppressed them as part of their backstory. If they want to unseat an E3 dragon blooded who is established in the region, that should be a story that sees a session or more of gameplay.

            I'm of the mindset that it is entirely okay to have the splats have enormous differences in what they can do, but it is not okay to have those differences ultimately result in as big of a difference as there currently is when the opposed dice pools can hit the table. Having one player that can do things which are fundamentally different from others due to the nature of their character concept is fantastic and to be encouraged. Having a character that can out shine similarly built peers by just flatly having twice as many dice to add to a pool is just... I don't know, it's boring to me.

            Originally posted by Kelly Pedersen View Post
            I would say that a big, big thing in flattening the power curve is going to be either removing Supernal abilities from Solars, or giving everybody else something similar. Have access, right from Essence 1, to Essence 5 effects, makes a pretty huge difference, in my experience.
            I agree and I think that Azure Winds was onto something with their charm rewrite when they reduced the prerequisite boost from "Treat your essence as 5" to "Add 2 to your essence."



            Exalted is an aesthetic.

            Comment


            • One minor thing to bear in mind is that DB excellencies are much more essence efficient.

              It’s no replacement for celestial dice caps and it won’t overtake a specialist, but the extra effects are not to be sneezed at, and the downside to celestial caps is that you have to judge carefully how much essence you have left.

              Once you’re tapped it doesn’t matter that you can spend 10 motes to a DBs 6 because you only have have 5-8 to spend, and the DB gets more out of their excellency than you do.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Maseiken View Post
                -snip-
                One more reason my Eclipse is so conservative with his Excellency (also that he commits to a lot of Social Charms).

                Comment


                • The one place lowering the Solar dice cap might cause a problem is crafting. The dice tricks have smaller returns on smaller pools. So I might also recommend cutting down the necessary successes for different artifacts.

                  I'm also toying with adapting the crafting rules from Scion, where questing and acquiring materials counts towards the overall goal, so maybe starting with an epic material gives you a few rolls worth of successes, or journeying to a dangerous/auspicious place to craft with your Circle also counts towards your success total.


                  Raksha are my fae-vorite.

                  Reincarnation of magnificentmomo.

                  Comment


                  • What breaks if I allow making disengage actions when not in close distance with Dexterity + Athletics opposed roll? Essentially, if I allow rush actions to allow you keep distance from someone.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Lanic View Post
                      What breaks if I allow making disengage actions when not in close distance with Dexterity + Athletics opposed roll? Essentially, if I allow rush actions to allow you keep distance from someone.
                      If I'm understanding you correctly, I'm pretty sure nothing. I'm fairly certain being able to make an uncontested Disengage action (A Disengage with no enemies in the same range band to oppose it) is RAW. It would still count as an action so taking an uncontested Disengage and throwing a knife at someone would apply the Flurry penalty to the attack but that's it.

                      Update: Just re-read the Disengage rules and it appears I might be wrong about that being how it works RAW, but it IS how I've been running it for 3+ years now and nothing has exploded, so I'm gonna stand by my "nothing breaks" until someone who understands the system way more than me says otherwise.
                      Last edited by SamuraiMujuru; 06-21-2019, 12:20 AM.


                      Exalted Behind a Screen of Jade, Savant of the Immaculate Texts, No Moon Scholar, Seeking Awakened, Cloaked Changeling, Disciple of the Antler Crown, Wraith, Good Sitting Dog, Best Lurking Cat with Bones, Pioneer Pooch, Scion with Shield of Knowledge, Director

                      Comment


                      • It has to consume the character's movement action for the turn, otherwise infinite kiting becomes possible and combat between range and melee fighters breaks completely. The reason why being far forces you to aim AND aiming forces you not to move on the same turn is so enemies get a chance to catch up. Charms that grant you a second move action on your turn tend to be high Essence and once-per-scene only.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Epitome View Post
                          It has to consume the character's movement action for the turn.
                          Actually my intent was that it works exactly like Rush au rebours: it doesn't consume your move action, but id doesn't actually make you move either. It allows you to automatically keep distance to given enemies if they move by one range band on their turn.

                          I knew that "kiting" was the primary source of concern, but as far as understand, RAW there is no option to reliably increase your distance to enemies which want to prevent it (you move, they move and rush. If they fail, yo are still at the same distance). This wouldn't still make kiting an unbeatable tactic, since you have to actually win those Athletics + Dexterity rolls.

                          What breaks if I introduce the third option "Mantain Distance" which allows you to reflexively move one range band if a given opponent does but doesn't require you to make a move action yourself? This is supposed to model tactics such as crcling a foe with mounted archers.

                          Comment


                          • To increase your distance you have the following options :
                            -make the opponent prone
                            -knock them back 1 range band
                            -use a Withdraw Action

                            Comment


                            • Epitome is right, and the main thing we’re talking about here is that last one, bc a Disengage past Close Range is mechanically the same as Withdrawing, just with a big Initiative price tag.
                              RAW, moving away from your opponent at that speed is withdrawing, and sacrificing your Initiative in doing so. It’s also not possible for anyone not using charms to actually move and aim. They would have to stop and aim, then flurry withdraw and their attack action.

                              That makes it pretty useless for an individual rider, even an Exalted one would have difficulty jumping that hurdle.
                              A Battle Group would have less difficulty with it, but that also gets into Battle Groups spending Initiative, something I prefer to avoid bc 😩 (it’s RAWcompliant and absolutely legit tho. Even quite close to how horseback archery was used historically. Just dramatically limits how much they can do it)

                              Your proposal is basically letting them keep their Initiative. I don’t think that’s game breaking, especially given the number of charms that let you move Range bands without preventing you from moving Away. As I read it, the Initiative is basically the ‘tax’ for possibly escaping the combat altogether, as evidenced by Go to Ground also enforcing a massive Initiative loss should you later rejoin combat.

                              That said, I would perhaps consider making it a Latent ability on the mount itself. Not necessarily meaning Only the Linowan-Fleeing-Lizard can do this, but rather that the capacity to carry and obey a rider who is actively looking backwards is a trick you have to Teach your mount.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Lanic View Post

                                What breaks if I introduce the third option "Mantain Distance" which allows you to reflexively move one range band if a given opponent does but doesn't require you to make a move action yourself? This is supposed to model tactics such as crcling a foe with mounted archers.
                                What are you gaining out of a "Maintain Distance" action?

                                I assume it would not be usable in the same round as a normal reflexive move or else you would gain distance. If it is just to enable your reflexive move to occur out of your turn then perhaps just let your players do that instead. If you don't change the rules they could achieve this anyway by delaying their action to act in sequence with their opponent.

                                As for the gaining distance there are options if you consider difficult terrain there are potential circumstances that you could enable a miscellaneous action to create difficult terrain behind them.

                                Also others have mentioned withdraw - withdraw is nothing like disengage. Disengage is an opposed roll. If you succeed you move a range band when they move towards you.

                                Withdraw requires reaching a target number of 10 on an extended roll with difficulty 1 and interval 1 turn to move an additional range band. Unless your burning motes and using charms you would be unlikely to manage the extra move every turn.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X