Infernals/Abyssals: Allow "Redemption" or instead not be related to Solars?

[FallenEco]

As I see it, Infernals and Abyssals are Solar essence modified by "people" not really knowing what they are doing (they're not Autochthon), with a leash added. So, the ST can decide for the game at hand if repairing that is relatively easy, or clearing up the muck-up makes it extremely hard and needs the cooperation of many.

I don't see redemption to be about repairing that essence to become Solar essence again. Redemption can be about breaking that leash and use their power for good (or even working against their master while still bound to them). Considering Sol didn't have any problem with the Dragon Kings ripping out human hearts and sacrificing them to him, being good have never been a prerequisite to become a Solar. So redemption arcs are also possible for Solars.

The Deathlords/Neverborn didn't know what they were doing. Hence why Abyssal and Solars used to kind of share charms. It was frequently implied that they just reversed polority of the essence and added the leash.
The Yozis were the next most qualified to know what they were doing and the 2nd edition Infernals reflect that; they have an entirely alien charmset compared to other exalts. Nothing structural to the Solar Exaltation remained except the dicecap for charm dice, the ability to learn Solar level Sorcery and their martial arts potential. 2 of the 3 aren't even abilities strictly tied to the exaltation. It was basically a miniature incomplete mismash of Yozi spirit bits powered by/strapped to a Solor Exaltation as stability feature...even then, it was bound in a third circle demon to help keep it together. They were Solars because they kept the ability to act as peers and because they often retained their First Age memories.

3rd edition is a different beast and I can't say I've seen enough to definitively say one way or the other but I'd be annoyed if Infernals have a "revert to Solar" Redemption option.
I only use that term, because that is what it was called in MoEP: Abyssals.

[TryingToBeSlim]

Slight reminder to everyone: I am happy to see the thread active but I would like to bring the conversation back to the choice I laid out in the OP (Note : I have altered the OP a little.)-

If you had to choose between:-

Infernals / Abyssals being altered Solars BUT explicitly able to be converted back to Solars (whether by force or 'redemption' )

Or

Infernals / Abyssals being their own separate exaltation.

Note : I am basically writing/plotting my own Exalted table setting and am genuinely interested in the feedback given those two choices.

[Isator Levi]

Would you rather Abyssals/Infernals be :-

"Converted" Solars but have the option of being converted back to actual Solars (Note: Solars could be converted to Infernals/Abyssals in this scenario).

OR

Be actual Exalted of the Never-Born / Yozi's. They were never Solars in the first place.

In other words 300 Solars wondering creation currently but who knows how many Infernals/Abyssals exist....

If Abyssals and Infernals having originated among the dead and sealed away Solars absolutely needed to come with the capacity to be turned back, I would take that.

I think that connection is inextricable for reasons of "I think it harnesses interesting dimensions of the Solar backstory (leaning more deeply into the "they all died" and "they were terrifying tyrants sealed away with a prayer to never return" angles)" and I think it's important for them to all be tied together under the same umbrella of what triggers the beginning of the end of the Second Age.

Totally separate Abyssals and Infernals means that the return of the Solars becomes important for five minutes before they get swept aside to consider the new hotness.

[marin]

I think that connection is inextricable for reasons of "I think it harnesses interesting dimensions of the Solar backstory (leaning more deeply into the "they all died" and "they were terrifying tyrants sealed away with a prayer to never return" angles)" and I think it's important for them to all be tied together under the same umbrella of what triggers the beginning of the end of the Second Age.

There's something there too about how they represent both the legacy of the past (the Divine Revolution, the Usurpation) and the arrival of something new and unexpected. Hope and fear, promise and death and revolution... and reckoning.

[Eltacolibre]

In general, the whole idea of redemption to Solars seem wrong to me, as Solars are not inherently righteous or anything of the sort.

[TryingToBeSlim]

Thanks for the answer Isator Levi. Would you mind if I asked for some more details ? Really am interested in your reasoning.

I think that connection is inextricable for reasons of "I think it harnesses interesting dimensions of the Solar backstory (leaning more deeply into the "they all died" and "they were terrifying tyrants sealed away with a prayer to never return" angles)" and I think it's important for them to all be tied together under the same umbrella of what triggers the beginning of the end of the Second Age.

I understand the underlined reasoning, but it's the bolded part that I want to ask you about.

The problem for me in viewing the Abyssals & Infernals as parts of the Solar Back-Story is that they are so clearly modified from actual Solars. It's like saying you know a Lunar/Side/DB could be a monster if the Yozi/NB managed to alter them. ( I suppose this is why I am open to splitting them. )

I would view Moray Darktide and Fehim as better examples of the Solars potential of becoming terrifying tyrants etc...

Totally separate Abyssals and Infernals means that the return of the Solars becomes important for five minutes before they get swept aside to consider the new hotness.

In all honesty I think that's already true and happening.

[Isator Levi]

The problem for me in viewing the Abyssals & Infernals as parts of the Solar Back-Story is that they are so clearly modified from actual Solars.

I don't know what the future books will say about the nature of that modification. I hope they won't say anything at all.

In the absence of that (and partially based on propositions by the previous developers), I find myself on a perspective that the transformation of Solars into Abyssal and Infernal Exalted could not have been done in a vacuum. That the circumstances of the Usurpation are a necessary foundational mythology to build upon. The Abyssal Exalted are not merely Champions of Death, they're the great culture heroes who have been slain, passed through the realms of death, and come back changed by the experience and carrying its lessons back to the world of the living. The Infernal Exalted don't merely have demonic powers, they're the monsters of an ancient age sealed away and now unleashed to reclaim what they view as rightfully theirs.

I would view Moray Darktide and Fehim as better examples of the Solars potential of becoming terrifying tyrants etc...

Potential is about the future. I am concerned in this instance with the past.

In all honesty I think that's already true and happening.

If so, I will advocate for every inch of ground possible against it.

[JimB]

In general, the whole idea of redemption to Solars seem wrong to me, as Solars are not inherently righteous or anything of the sort.

I think it's less about Solars being inherently righteous than Abyssals and Infernals being inherently linked to forces that want to destroy humanity.

[TryingToBeSlim]

Idea just came to me that I would like to run by everyone, this is sort of me trying to have it both ways for my setting as in keeping a connection but seperating them at the same time.

What if the Solar Exaltations were unable to actually be converted by both the Neverborn or Yozi's

BUT

During the attempt of conversion, they actually created the Infernals / Abyssals based on the Exaltation they were trying to convert.

---------

Rough Outline goes like this:-

1) NB & Yozi's get Solar exaltation shards.

2) NB & Yozi begin juicing them up with their magic/essence.

3) UCS is connected to Solar Exaltations, UCS notices what's going on and intervenes.

4) Both the NB, Yozi & UCS struggle.

5) BOOM - The whole conversion process goes BOOM.

6) Solar Shards escape and are taken/released by the UCS.

7) Yozi and NB find they have somehow created the Infernals & Abyssals by accident.

8) Each Abyssal & Infernal is based on a Solar Shard. (Sort of like getting a Clay Mould of a sword and using it to cast a new one) and has memories etc. They can even trigger the Lunar Bond.

9) NB are happy. Because creating so many abyssals actually "REDUCED" the NB and made them going into Oblivion that much easier. They NEED to create more so they can enter oblivion.

9B) NB are sad. They have found they (because they are dead) cannot create new Abyssals unless they capture an existing Solar (or Infernal) Shard to use as a base.

10) Yozi's are terrified. They have been weakened but not actually reduced because they were crafting fewer Infernals AND every single Yozi was giving essence.

10B) If there had been more shards or if one Yozi tried to make on their own? They would be reduced. They are not trying to make more. (Note: Yozi's CAN make more by themselves unlike the NB).

11) The UCS is upset. The UCS knows that the NB & Yozi have champions equal to his own. The world needs the Solars back.

11b) The UCS turns his face back to Creation and while still bound by his word of Exalts being in charge of creation, deciding to do whatever he can to aid behind the scenes.

[Mockery]

My main problem here is that by giving the Abyssals and Infernals imprinting from Solar Exaltations they feel even less legitimate. Those memories and the bond aren't their legacy in any real fashion, just xeroxed onto them.

To the extent they have a Lunar mate, there's still the possibility narratively that their Solar template can waltz in with greater legitimacy, and that makes the Infernal or Abyssal just look bad.

[Astralporing]

I find the tie between Solar and Abyssal/Infernal Exaltations as narratively interesting enough to not want to get rid of it. And i see no issue with having the option to change back. What i just don't want to see is the "Redemption" idea - the idea that taking this path is the only moral choice to take. Being an Abyssal or Infernal should not be a shameful and wrong option you have to "redeem" from. Neither do i want to see this path as the only sensible choice. This one was no issue for 2nd ed infernals (i mean, even if the "turning solar" option existed for them) because in general being Infernal was interesting in itself, and offered other progression paths that were for the most part interesting enough that most players would not want to give them up. In case of Abyssals however it was mostly a non-brained option for any reason except for purely aestethical ones. They were mechanically still Solars, but painted black... and then nerfed some. Anything an Abyssal might want to do, or aspire towards, Solars could do also, and they could do it either better, or the same, but at a lower cost to themselves. There were simply no alternatives to compete with "Redemption" path. I sincerely hope that 3e will change that and offer Abyssals their unique paths and playstyles, in which case turning Solar will just be one of the options, with other, equally or more interesting choices available.
Now, i'm not sure, but from what i remember 3e infernals are actually ditching the Solar link, or am i mistaken?

[Isator Levi]

Now, i'm not sure, but from what i remember 3e infernals are actually ditching the Solar link, or am i mistaken?

They're still the fifty Solar Essences bargained to the Yozis from the Deathlords, and in terms of their capabilities are probably actually making the connection more pronounced.

[TryingToBeSlim]

My main problem here is that by giving the Abyssals and Infernals imprinting from Solar Exaltations they feel even less legitimate. Those memories and the bond aren't their legacy in any real fashion, just xeroxed onto them.

To the extent they have a Lunar mate, there's still the possibility narratively that their Solar template can waltz in with greater legitimacy, and that makes the Infernal or Abyssal just look bad.

A fair point, I read Isator Levi's post and got an idea that I NEEDED to write, should probably have thought things out a bit more.

Speaking of which:-

In the absence of that (and partially based on propositions by the previous developers), I find myself on a perspective that the transformation of Solars into Abyssal and Infernal Exalted could not have been done in a vacuum. That the circumstances of the Usurpation are a necessary foundational mythology to build upon. The Abyssal Exalted are not merely Champions of Death, they're the great culture heroes who have been slain, passed through the realms of death, and come back changed by the experience and carrying its lessons back to the world of the living. The Infernal Exalted don't merely have demonic powers, they're the monsters of an ancient age sealed away and now unleashed to reclaim what they view as rightfully theirs.

Could you please elaborate on the bolded? Because unless I am missing something, Death Lords might qualify as "the great culture heroes who have been slain" but the Exalt shards have always been separate from the person they attatched too.

If so, I will advocate for every inch of ground possible against it.

Probably a separate thread (You might have seen me post my view at the Sword of Creation), but in all honesty the primary importance Solars have to the current era in 3E (at least from what I have read) is that they are "agents of change".

Not that they are Solars.

Which quite frankly I am upset with because Infernals, Abyssals and even Alchemicals all qualify under as agents of change.Heck 150 Celestial Level Exigents popping up would qualify as agents of change.

In my view, it's going to be fairly easy for Infernals/Abyssals to sweep away the Solars in terms of importance. Will stop there but that is partly why I want to home-brew my own setting a bit.

I find the tie between Solar and Abyssal/Infernal Exaltations as narratively interesting enough to not want to get rid of it. And i see no issue with having the option to change back. What i just don't want to see is the "Redemption" idea - the idea that taking this path is the only moral choice to take. Being an Abyssal or Infernal should not be a shameful and wrong option you have to "redeem" from. Neither do i want to see this path as the only sensible choice. This one was no issue for 2nd ed infernals (i mean, even if the "turning solar" option existed for them) because in general being Infernal was interesting in itself, and offered other progression paths that were for the most part interesting enough that most players would not want to give them up. In case of Abyssals however it was mostly a non-brained option for any reason except for purely aestethical ones. They were mechanically still Solars, but painted black... and then nerfed some. Anything an Abyssal might want to do, or aspire towards, Solars could do also, and they could do it either better, or the same, but at a lower cost to themselves. There were simply no alternatives to compete with "Redemption" path. I sincerely hope that 3e will change that and offer Abyssals their unique paths and playstyles, in which case turning Solar will just be one of the options, with other, equally or more interesting choices available.
Now, i'm not sure, but from what i remember 3e infernals are actually ditching the Solar link, or am i mistaken?

I agree with most of what you said with a few caveats.

1) Abyssals (at least in previous editions) were those who accepted a bargain from the NB or Death Lords. While I might not say being an Abyssal is something shameful and wrong, bargaining with the NB would and should be in my view.

2) I agree that "redeeming" into becoming a Solar should NOT be the only moral choice (for either Infernals or Abyssals).

3) That being said, it should not be that easy to create/find/follow more moral paths.

Because otherwise the NB and Yozi's come across as morons. Both factions had a purpose as to why they created their exalts and want to see that purpose fulfilled. Neither are that concerned what the Exalt/Mortal might think/want.

I am not against Abyssal or Infernals having "moral" options. I just don't want it to come across as if those moral options are the DEFAULT. "Moral" Abyssals / Infernals should be the exception (or PC) and no where near the majority or even a large minority. Problem is with their initial numbers? Even a few examples can become too many. (Note: In all honesty this is partly why I plan on increasing the number of exalts in my setting, 10 Moral Abyssals out of 50 is too many. 10 out a hundred or even two hundred? That's better. Similar things for other splats. )

[Xerxes]

If you had to choose between:-

Infernals / Abyssals being altered Solars BUT explicitly able to be converted back to Solars (whether by force or 'redemption' )

Or

Infernals / Abyssals being their own separate exaltation.

Note : I am basically writing/plotting my own Exalted table setting and am genuinely interested in the feedback given those two choices.

The comments you make in your other thread now makes a heap more sense. I think the question you need to ask is what level you want it to make sense on. You were generally given a bunch of thematic answers as to why Solars are relevant, and couched your question in thematic terms ("what makes the Solars unique", "what's their niche" and so on). What you're actually after seems to be a plot-level answer for why the Solars are relevant.

For my two-penn'orth, they aren't directly relevant at the plot level because the metaplot doesn't advance beyond their return much. They are released as a consequence of the Yozis and the Neverborn wanting to make Infernals and Abyssals. If you make Infernals and Abyssals their entirely separate thing, there's no reason to break into the Jade Prison, and therefore no reason for the Solar Exaltations to leak out.

Isator Levi The thread where TryingtobeSlim is arguing that the Solars aren't relevant to Exalted any more is in the paragraph above, in case you wanted to put some more reasoning into that debate specifically. I also could have sworn there was a version of it in this forum as well (same title and all), but I can't seem to find it.

Rough Outline goes like this:-

I really like the reasoning you give for the Neverborn wanting to make "pure" Abyssals, it makes a lot of sense given their main motivation.

Given that your response was cut off, I'm not sure what else you were going to write, but that set-up as it stands would mean that there's a much more aggressive and co-ordinated Cult of the Illuminated and Gold Faction - with the Unconquered Sun not just back and focused on Creation but with an explicit goal in mind for being so, having the Solars explicitly tasked with hunting down and wiping out or cleansing the corrupted Exaltations would be much more likely. Your setup feels like it forces the idea of redemption (or even just purgation) as a thing that must be done to the Abyssals and Infernals in order to set things right again. Not necessarily that that's the end goal from an Infernal/Abyssal point of view, but it's the right thing to do according to the UCS. I think it actually gives more moral weight (insofar as UCS is the arbiter of morality, so ymmv) to the creation of all three types of Exalted than the current setup.

[Isator Levi]

Could you please elaborate on the bolded? Because unless I am missing something, Death Lords might qualify as "the great culture heroes who have been slain" but the Exalt shards have always been separate from the person they attatched too.

That's such a literal way to engage with the subject matter, devoid of its mythic connotations, that I can hardly see the appeal even before the fact that the current trend in the writing is shifting away from it.

While a Celestial Exalt is not literally the last incarnation of their Essence, nor are they totally detached from the previous member of the chain. There's a link and a lineage which are among the many ways in which the Second Breath entails such a profound sense of transformation that it's given a term that quite directly describes being born again.

This is something baked into the game's DNA. When Geoff Grabowski, the developer who came up with most of the foundational ideas that made Exalted what it is, described some of the underpinnings of the game, he talked about ideas such as the Founding Fathers of America being born again to lead the nation. The Solars carry ideas such as the mythology referring to how great kings of legend such as Arthur are not dead, merely sleeping until the time of their land's greatest need when they will rise again in glory. That bit at the start of God-King's Shrike talking about beards grown so heavy that they shatter stone tables? That's a reference to genuine folklore, centuries old.

The Usurpation murdered the Solars of old, and in the Time of Tumult they live again; no modern Solar is totally their predecessor, and how much they are will vary with circumstance and their own wills, but the underlying concept is still there.

Even if the Abyssals and Infernals don't arise from a literal use of magic to emphasize alternative parts of that backstory to give rise to a different kind of hero, the narrative beats are still liable to inform their presentation.

Probably a separate thread (You might have seen me post my view at the Sword of Creation), but in all honesty the primary importance Solars have to the current era in 3E (at least from what I have read) is that they are "agents of change".

Not that they are Solars.

I wonder which has more significance, being a novelty or having the power to force the Wyld back into the shape of arable farmland.

Which quite frankly I am upset with because Infernals, Abyssals and even Alchemicals all qualify under as agents of change.Heck 150 Celestial Level Exigents popping up would qualify as agents of change.

What kind of change?!

Does nothing seem significant in the distinct Solar powers of artifice, of healing, of swaying hearts and minds, of wrestling gigantic monsters to the ground?

The Strawmaiden is compelling, but her narrative of being a grand heroic farm girl is far more limited in scope even assuming a Solar who only purchases Charms in the same range as her Strawmaiden Abilities.

In my view, it's going to be fairly easy for Infernals/Abyssals to sweep away the Solars in terms of importance.

See, that's the other thing. Like, even within the boundaries of thinking that the only relevance any of these things have is in being a novelty, the Abyssals are hardly new. Being a harbinger of death just means helping the world stay the course on its downward spiral into ruin. The return of the Solars constitutes a last ditch effort to reverse that, to revive a vitality in a world whose divisions have brought it to the brink of ruin.

Infernals I view as intended by their patrons to be somewhere between hastening the end and clawing the world back from the brink and making it beg for an end which will never come. The personalities of individual Infernals might vary effectively within that, but there can be a question of how much range they can express through the nature of their power.

And sure, the future of Creation is not merely a competition between the three philosophies of Solars, Lunars and Sidereals and Dragon-Blooded have their say as well. But those Exalted who have been present throughout the Second Age have all lived to some extent under the shadow of the Usurpation, and the return of Solars and Abyssals and Infernals is not merely something to shake up the status quo but a mythos of the Usurpation coming back to haunt them.