cyl
Creepy smile
Bodhisattva said:
[Background Mod] Familiar
- Thread starter cyl
- Start date
Requiem of Forgotten Lore
Junior Member
Either way it's still too cheap. I've already implemented (rating trying to achieve x 2 [-1 if favored/caste]), which I feel is way more consistent.
Hybrid rules or hybrid familiar example? The rules I like, just wish I could find a familiar character sheet or really part of a page of a current character sheetcyl said:
Bodhisattva
Junior Member
cyl:
If you're asking about your rules that you posted, one-dot familiars are more powerful than heroic mortals, so they get a huge thumbs down. You're also making this far too complex. The base animals should be designed with real world animals in mind, not by giving them a set number of attributes, abilities and bonus points to spend. A tarantula is going to make for a very cool familiar regardless of whether it was constructed with 10 dots of this, 15 dots of that and 20 dots of the other thing or it was constructed with only 3 dots of this, 9 dots of that or 12 dots of the other thing. Also, based upon your rules, a basic, garden variety non-poisonous non-constricting snake would be equivalent to a large and powerful dog. This is not true-to-life nor does it increase the epic nature of the character that your familiar is tied to. The base animals used as familiars should have a much more organic design and not be so dot-oriented in their design. When they become a Familiar (capital F), they should then get boosted stats according to their familiar rating.
Requiem: Animals don't carry weapons in their hands (except maybe primates) because they don't have opposable thumbs. Thusly, they use the natural weapons gifted to them by Mother Nature, which means they're using Martial Arts to attack with.
If you're asking about your rules that you posted, one-dot familiars are more powerful than heroic mortals, so they get a huge thumbs down. You're also making this far too complex. The base animals should be designed with real world animals in mind, not by giving them a set number of attributes, abilities and bonus points to spend. A tarantula is going to make for a very cool familiar regardless of whether it was constructed with 10 dots of this, 15 dots of that and 20 dots of the other thing or it was constructed with only 3 dots of this, 9 dots of that or 12 dots of the other thing. Also, based upon your rules, a basic, garden variety non-poisonous non-constricting snake would be equivalent to a large and powerful dog. This is not true-to-life nor does it increase the epic nature of the character that your familiar is tied to. The base animals used as familiars should have a much more organic design and not be so dot-oriented in their design. When they become a Familiar (capital F), they should then get boosted stats according to their familiar rating.
Requiem: Animals don't carry weapons in their hands (except maybe primates) because they don't have opposable thumbs. Thusly, they use the natural weapons gifted to them by Mother Nature, which means they're using Martial Arts to attack with.
Requiem of Forgotten Lore
Junior Member
Bodhisattva said:
Since animals are neither using weapons or a "style" then they would fall under hand-to-hand (or claw-to-claw), if we were in 1e still then I would say brawl; but since we're in 2e the question remains: Why MA and not Melee?
I've never seen my cat do any MA moves (even cat ones) when attacking the neighbors cat; just hissing, aggravated meowing, claws and a whole lot of fur flying when they get into it. Animal fights always look like a fist fight (or a drunken fist fight at that) then any sort of martial arts.
Red Shadow Claws
Six Thousand Club
But here's your problem, you use the dictionary definitions when the game defines these differently:
So the rules support the fact that animals and anyoen who uses unarmed or natural weapons is using Martial Arts to do so.
Requiem of Forgotten Lore
Junior Member
cyl
Creepy smile
Agreed !
I could easily use something like "you can't take Large more than your rating in familiar" to balance things out i.e. :
1 dot normz (human sized)
2 dots large
3 dots huge
4 dots giant
5 dots gargantuan
Err... that's what WW did... and what I also did when I built the creatures above mentionned with the mutations... I mean that's what they actually have in the world of reality.
Here's a quick comparative I did a while back when searching the matter, maybe this will help you understand why I do what I do:
You'll note that there is a clear disparity in the attribution of points, as mother nature has been a bitch to some of them and rather generous for others (claw striders FTW !), but you'll note that they have between 20 / 25 AP.
Which is why I transposed the rules for creating heroic mortals.
Requiem of Forgotten Lore
Junior Member
Do you mean that if someone had 3 dots in Familiar the biggest the animal will be is "huge"? Does this sort of follow the Alchemical Essence and size growth?cyl said:
cyl
Creepy smile
In short words the system I propose has various advantages:
- let the player design his companion from scratch
- represent both nature and fantasy
- allow a sets of features unreachable with the current system.
and 1 inconvenient : complexity.
- let the player design his companion from scratch
- represent both nature and fantasy
- allow a sets of features unreachable with the current system.
and 1 inconvenient : complexity.
cyl
Creepy smile
Actually... sorta.
Bodhisattva
Junior Member
Let's highlight the other disadvantages:cyl said:
- The design is not true to form in that more powerful creatures like coral snakes (for example) fell through one of the "cracks" in your design.
- It also crosses the boundary between what is established player territory (their character) and Storyteller territory (the environment, which the natural animals of Creation fall into). While this is not generally a concern as all of that stuff is worked out with the Storyteller anyway, it's giving players a system by which they build their own companions (which could be translated over to Allies, Contacts, Cult, etc...) rather than having them as a Background (which is kind of the point). If you're not clear on the difference, it's like saying, "Design all of the Storyteller characters", which is what you're doing. While this isn't inherently bad, it does give the players that "I'm in control of every aspect of this game" which translates both into predictability and can create conflict when the Storyteller says, "I'm sorry, but you can't build your Familiar like that. I do not approve for the following reasons..." The inevitable response becomes, "Well, I built it according to the rules!" While Creation and nature have rules, those rules are still largely unfathomable.
----- This is a related point, so I'll put it here. With alternative systems (including the one that I've proposed as well as the one you've proposed), you have the opportunity to design what makes the Familiar "beyond the norm". Altering the norm is what the problem is here, as your system has no norm. These animals are considered mundane and like generic foes like "Mortal Hero" or "Soldier", should have a template that can be altered as needed, not built and end up with wildly varying results of what a "generic cat" is (for example), or any other generic animal.
- While you may not be privy to this concept, it goes against most of the design elements in the game from the writer's perspective. Exalted is designed very organically, which is the primary advantage it has over many other games in the genre. Having worked with several other writers on a few supplements now, I can say this with confidence.
Let's also make some of notes about your advantages:
- While this lets the player design his companion from scratch, it begs the question, "Why is this rat/dog/cat/bird/tiger/whatever different from all other rats/dogs/cats/birds/tigers/whatevers?"
- "Let the player design his companion from scratch." This point, while true, is not significantly different from letting the player design his own Familiar from the ground up using an established base. It's also not significantly different from other proposals I've seen.
- The design does not reflect reality/nature in the slightest (particularly considering that the only "normal" animals in the whole mix are Dog (War) and Horse - no cats, spiders, normal snakes, rats, etc...). This now turns one of your mislabeled advantages into a disadvantage, which I suspect you're still not seeing. This is largely due, I believe, in part to the fact that you continually compare dogs (which would qualify as a one or two dot Familiar) to great cats (which are in the solid three dot Familiar department). As for reflecting fantasy, well... Anything that doesn't reflect reality reflects fantasy.
- "Allows a sets of features unreachable with the current system." This is absolutely no different than the other proposals I've seen. So, it's not so much of an advantage as it is a feature of any reworking of the Familiar background.
cyl
Creepy smile
Actually that is exactly the point.
As if players weren't already doing this when they customize charms and artifacts... this point is absolutely irrelevant.
The point is to add a value to a Familiar so it becomes almost as enjoyable as having a mentor or an ally, not just another animal like most in the world.
Or I am saying "design your best buddy in the world !"
I'm only letting players add a more personal touch to the game and a way for them to enlarge their roleplaying by interacting with something inhuman, yet close to them. Usually that's a factor of motivation rather than discouragement.
Rules are made to be exploited to get the better out of them if the player wishes to do so, or allow him to design a cool thing. I am usually rather generous and I have never faced a case of utterly abuse I couldn't control, and if the player and I cannot come to a compromise, then it is better if we don't continue on this way.
I strongly disagree, there is a norm: formless creature, starting with 1 dots in all its attributes, and then build the beast. Note that this system could be used either by the ST OR the player if the ST wants to keep the player under control (I personnally favor trust over suspicion).
In the actual system they are... doesn't mean they should be...
I mean when you have a powerful mentor do you expect him to die ? no.
When you have Ressources 5 do you expect that something's gonna steal them ? probably
When you have an army of mortals soldiers do you expect them to live forever ? no
When you have a familiar do you sense he will follow your power curve and will be helpful all the way ? nope (at least I don't).
There are several kinds of background: those perishable and easily replacable (contacts, ressources, followers), those that helps reflect your character's status (backing, influence, cult), the utilitarians ones (artifact, manse) and the ones thay partially defines your character and his roleplay (allies mentor)... all can be exploited cleverly to build a good story, but not all of them can add some depth to the character.
According to me Familiar should be one of them, and it's not. I'm looking for a proper way to make them both unique and interesting, not mundane.
The answer is simple: it recieved a calling and bonded with an exalt...
An exalt could possess a horse... but what differentiate the excellent horse bought to the 3 dots horse ?
Actually not much, so what's the point of investing 3 BP ?
I never said it was a tool for players only ^^
I propose the system, try to perfect it, ST are free to use it the way they see fit... I'll trust my players and control their creations to avoid borderline monsters if a player gives birth to one.
Oh ? you disagree with my cat and dog representations ?
I found them rather accurate.
I mean leave the problem of the mutations cost and traits for a minute and focus on the abilities the animal has... what did I do wrong ?
err, you gotta explain how you got that feeling... I just compared a medium dog to a cat.
A war dog would probably have :
fangs 1, enhanced sense (hearing & smell) 2, thick skin 2, night vision 1, tail 1 Wolf's Pace 1, inexhaustible 2, tough 2 : 12 BP.
And a great cat would... actually have what the cat has + large 1 tough 2 and thick skin 2 (total 17).
Note that I agree that while a great cat should be superior to a war dog, there is no reason a familiar 1 couldn't be a war dog I mean besides the actual rules, the ones that suck...
Bodhisattva
Junior Member
Cyl: Rather than pick apart your quote, I'm going to respond in a more holistic fashion.
Your design is not very well put together, at all, particularly evidenced by your "that's the point" when something falls through the cracks. It's like saying, "I intended for there to be gaping holes in my system." Also, rules are not meant to be exploited. They are meant to be a guideline toward action and reaction. If you choose to exploit them or redesign them, you have the flexibility and freedom to do so. I don't agree with the mindset that any rules that any White Wolf writer gets printed are meant for you to exploit them. Of course, you can if you so choose, but you don't create guidelines for play with the expectation that they're going to be thrown out the window, even if you do make for the allowance that in reality, players will do just that. You design them with the expectation that people are going to use them.
And yes, I disagree with your cat and dog (mis)representations. Having been around cats and dogs all my life (my mother being a breeder of chow-chows, actually), I could relate any number of anecdotal examples of dogs attacking and killing cats which wouldn't really further this discussion anyway.
Now you seem to ignore the points of constructive criticism every single time I bring them up, so there's no real point in getting into it any further because you seem more interested in pushing your perspective than actually responding to the criticisms as pointed out.
Now I truly believe that you feel that your system adds value to the Familiar. If it works for you, great. It isn't something that I would use, and you were requesting feedback. I gave you feedback which you seem to be ignoring, which is your right as a designer. However, it doesn't really contribute to furthered discussion. We could go back and forth with this, "This is bad." "No it's not!" -type discussion for a long, long time and never really get anywhere. You're still not really addressing any of the flaws in your system, which is based on something that I believe to be inherently flawed - the concept that your familiar starts out as an amoeba and gains mutations (which wouldn't really even cover everything required to make any animal in nature anyway as the mutation system isn't that detailed, particularly at the lower levels where animal basic traits would be incorporated). But, as I said, if it works for you, more power to you.
Your design is not very well put together, at all, particularly evidenced by your "that's the point" when something falls through the cracks. It's like saying, "I intended for there to be gaping holes in my system." Also, rules are not meant to be exploited. They are meant to be a guideline toward action and reaction. If you choose to exploit them or redesign them, you have the flexibility and freedom to do so. I don't agree with the mindset that any rules that any White Wolf writer gets printed are meant for you to exploit them. Of course, you can if you so choose, but you don't create guidelines for play with the expectation that they're going to be thrown out the window, even if you do make for the allowance that in reality, players will do just that. You design them with the expectation that people are going to use them.
And yes, I disagree with your cat and dog (mis)representations. Having been around cats and dogs all my life (my mother being a breeder of chow-chows, actually), I could relate any number of anecdotal examples of dogs attacking and killing cats which wouldn't really further this discussion anyway.
Now you seem to ignore the points of constructive criticism every single time I bring them up, so there's no real point in getting into it any further because you seem more interested in pushing your perspective than actually responding to the criticisms as pointed out.
Now I truly believe that you feel that your system adds value to the Familiar. If it works for you, great. It isn't something that I would use, and you were requesting feedback. I gave you feedback which you seem to be ignoring, which is your right as a designer. However, it doesn't really contribute to furthered discussion. We could go back and forth with this, "This is bad." "No it's not!" -type discussion for a long, long time and never really get anywhere. You're still not really addressing any of the flaws in your system, which is based on something that I believe to be inherently flawed - the concept that your familiar starts out as an amoeba and gains mutations (which wouldn't really even cover everything required to make any animal in nature anyway as the mutation system isn't that detailed, particularly at the lower levels where animal basic traits would be incorporated). But, as I said, if it works for you, more power to you.
cyl
Creepy smile
I just didn't see the argumented and constructive critic in your previous post while I see it in the last one now you make it simple and clear. We both slipped a bit, I probably more than you, sorry
I'd like to know technically what's wrong with my cat and dog from the mutation point of view (and not on the part where cat kicks dog) though...
You might prefer to use standard model for animals (which is totally understandable, and if you give me a list of what you need I'll be happy to start stating some of them for you... with or without mutations ^^), but I don't.
I actually think that the mutation system is extremely well built for the purpose of making beasts because it contains a great (yet improvable) variety of usable features presented by animals: size, skin, morphology, senses, adaptation to their environment, natural weapons and some other stuff.
Take a good look at the list Ker'ion made. You can use it to build very quickly any beast you want to.
Now the problem of course are the attributes and classification of the familiars in the system I am working on. This is still a work in progress.
Mutations actually give you references to build a tarentula, or a warhawk, or an elephant while you need to improvise some stuff on your own otherwise. Necrotech stuff only reinforced my though on this.
Let me explain myself:
With the actual system, a horse and a great cat would be around 3 dots familiars.
What fundamentally differentiates them ?
- The horse can be a mount, the cat cannot. Primary function of the horse, it will be used for transportation
- both can fight, but the cat is much more efficient at it (claws fangs and morphology). Primary function of the great cat, it will be used in combat.
- both are good runners, but the horse is more fit to long runs.
- both are skilled "food gatherers" (horses don't hunt :lol: ) but the meat eater has to have a supplemental set of skills to hunt its prey (survival & stealth) while the prey needs to rely only on awareness for detecting the predator, and good legs to run away from him.
I feel the need to do something here about those differences, to underline them, reinforce them and make something out of it than just allowing ability points which do not really cover IMHO the interesting complexity of mother nature's work.
Let's take another example, because great cat and horse are very different beasts.
Let's say you confront a bull and a horse. They're both herbivores, roughly have the same morphology (apart for the horns), but one can be effectively ridden as a mode of transportation, the other not.
While you could represent this giving a horse 3 dots of dexterity and giving 2 or even 1 to the bull, you could also use the gazelle's pace mutation to represent the fact that the horse is an excellent runner.
(actually the text does say : "For long distance travel, the character can move over land as quickly as a horse.").
Both can transport people on their back, while other beast roughly the same size cannot (bears), and I feel this difference needs to be also represented by a mechanic (namely the Transport trait) to even things out with the other familiar that cannot be ridden.
In the end I'll be doing the same thing as you with your beast templates... but I'll probably build more accurate specimens and build them faster because I have a database I can use instead of thinking about it and doing math about how should I build it.
Your template beast solution is rather efficient, but it mostly lacks the originality and fantasy I am trying to implement.
Okay let's just say the cat and dog are wrong... meet my girl...
I'd like to know technically what's wrong with my cat and dog from the mutation point of view (and not on the part where cat kicks dog) though...
Now we're talking :twisted:
You might prefer to use standard model for animals (which is totally understandable, and if you give me a list of what you need I'll be happy to start stating some of them for you... with or without mutations ^^), but I don't.
I actually think that the mutation system is extremely well built for the purpose of making beasts because it contains a great (yet improvable) variety of usable features presented by animals: size, skin, morphology, senses, adaptation to their environment, natural weapons and some other stuff.
Take a good look at the list Ker'ion made. You can use it to build very quickly any beast you want to.
Now the problem of course are the attributes and classification of the familiars in the system I am working on. This is still a work in progress.
Mutations actually give you references to build a tarentula, or a warhawk, or an elephant while you need to improvise some stuff on your own otherwise. Necrotech stuff only reinforced my though on this.
Let me explain myself:
With the actual system, a horse and a great cat would be around 3 dots familiars.
What fundamentally differentiates them ?
- The horse can be a mount, the cat cannot. Primary function of the horse, it will be used for transportation
- both can fight, but the cat is much more efficient at it (claws fangs and morphology). Primary function of the great cat, it will be used in combat.
- both are good runners, but the horse is more fit to long runs.
- both are skilled "food gatherers" (horses don't hunt :lol: ) but the meat eater has to have a supplemental set of skills to hunt its prey (survival & stealth) while the prey needs to rely only on awareness for detecting the predator, and good legs to run away from him.
I feel the need to do something here about those differences, to underline them, reinforce them and make something out of it than just allowing ability points which do not really cover IMHO the interesting complexity of mother nature's work.
Let's take another example, because great cat and horse are very different beasts.
Let's say you confront a bull and a horse. They're both herbivores, roughly have the same morphology (apart for the horns), but one can be effectively ridden as a mode of transportation, the other not.
While you could represent this giving a horse 3 dots of dexterity and giving 2 or even 1 to the bull, you could also use the gazelle's pace mutation to represent the fact that the horse is an excellent runner.
(actually the text does say : "For long distance travel, the character can move over land as quickly as a horse.").
Both can transport people on their back, while other beast roughly the same size cannot (bears), and I feel this difference needs to be also represented by a mechanic (namely the Transport trait) to even things out with the other familiar that cannot be ridden.
In the end I'll be doing the same thing as you with your beast templates... but I'll probably build more accurate specimens and build them faster because I have a database I can use instead of thinking about it and doing math about how should I build it.
Your template beast solution is rather efficient, but it mostly lacks the originality and fantasy I am trying to implement.
Okay let's just say the cat and dog are wrong... meet my girl...
cyl
Creepy smile
The Tarentula !
fangs 1, Enhanced sense (touch) 1, Night Vision 1, Toxin 2, Thick Skin 2, minuscule 6, spider legs 6.
total: 19.
fangs 1, Enhanced sense (touch) 1, Night Vision 1, Toxin 2, Thick Skin 2, minuscule 6, spider legs 6.
total: 19.
cyl
Creepy smile
Now let's just say I want to put on some serious face and have a spider mount !
I just need to switch minuscule to large (1) or huge (2), and add 2 multiple limbs (12) to get my combat movement, probably a tougher armor (Armored Hide 4 sounds good) and buy the transport trait (2).
Total: 32/33.
I just need to switch minuscule to large (1) or huge (2), and add 2 multiple limbs (12) to get my combat movement, probably a tougher armor (Armored Hide 4 sounds good) and buy the transport trait (2).
Total: 32/33.
cyl
Creepy smile
Drum Roll... and the latest version of it !
Familiars are kin spirit to the exalt created and sent or chosen to protect their exalt master.
At times it can also be that a person has a tied relationship with an animal and that when he exalts, the creature is blessed as well.
They might start as regular animals or be formed and sent to the exalt by the Incarnae, but they are loyal and benevolent towards their rightful master.
The creature usually take natural animal shapes but as time goes by their power usually grows, and they will more and more develop extraordinary features that will reveal their divine heritage.
They do not age and do not die. They heal as mortals, can be killed but rise like the phenix from their ashes and cannot be permanently destroyed unless someone uses a spiritual dissolution charm (like ghost eating technique) while slaying the beast.
Familiars are kin spirit to the exalt created and sent or chosen to protect their exalt master.
At times it can also be that a person has a tied relationship with an animal and that when he exalts, the creature is blessed as well.
They might start as regular animals or be formed and sent to the exalt by the Incarnae, but they are loyal and benevolent towards their rightful master.
The creature usually take natural animal shapes but as time goes by their power usually grows, and they will more and more develop extraordinary features that will reveal their divine heritage.
They do not age and do not die. They heal as mortals, can be killed but rise like the phenix from their ashes and cannot be permanently destroyed unless someone uses a spiritual dissolution charm (like ghost eating technique) while slaying the beast.
Comments are more than welcome as always.