First VS Second

[Cthulhu_Wakes]

Indeed, I'm reading through 2nd Ed as we speak, there are many things t odo aside Charms, and all have been stated, I mean...it's not that hard a thing. Stunt, do Charms, RUN!

 

[Jakk Bey]

EM don't run from danger son.  He's a hard charging mofo who laughs at danger.


Except of course when he's Dodging like a little girl instead of parrying that shit.


:lol:

 

[Cthulhu_Wakes]

:lol:


Anyway, 2nd Ed is infinitely superior product as I'm reading it fully now.

 

[memesis]

I like turn based rules and the lack there of is not exceptable.

"Acceptable".


Why not?

 

[Ker'ion]

I guess my question is what about the mechanics "makes you sick"?  That mechanics are made clear?  That combat requires a bit more strategy?  That Abilities like Craft are much better explained?  That Integrity works?  That they've given you large scale combat rules in the BWB?  That you have good information about Yu-Shan right off the bat?  That you have better examples of antagonists and allies?

That DV exists (passive defense is unrealistic).


That Integrity exists (Willpower and Virtues cover this).


That War replaced Brawl (Brawling is NOT a Martial arts style!!!).


I don't have a problem with War as a Skill, just it's replacing Brawl.


The destruction of Turn Based Combat.


(I will think on this and return with more).


And, yes, EM does tend to roll very high on Dodge rolls.  His attacking rolls are silly though, watching him have to ping an extra to death is fun.

 

[Jakk Bey]

I was leary about the passive defense thing too.  For the same reason, but, it works.  And it simulates the feel of wuxia flicks.  Which the game is taking a lot of inspiration from.  


It also speeds things up considerably.


Integrity allows for less involved mechanics for a lot of effects.


Brawl vs Martial Arts...it's an argument that's been hashed out for a long time.  Instead of calling it Martial Arts, call it Fight then.  War adds a long needed skill set to the Dawn Caste.  It turns them from thugs, into generals.


If you like Turn based combat, then nothing is really going to change your mind, save perhaps, trying out the new system, which works a lot better.  Streamlines things, and makes things flow not only faster, but more naturally.  It's not a perfect system, by any means, and it takes a little getting used to, and it means that your players may need some time to look at their strategies, but it makes things flow, not break down into odd increments of solid time.  


The question still remains, and hasn't been answered, and I pose it once again: have you tried the system yet, or are you just kvetching based on initial reactions?

 

[wordman]

That War replaced Brawl (Brawling is NOT a Martial arts style!!!). I don't have a problem with War as a Skill' date=' just it's replacing Brawl.[/quote']
Suppose they replaced the abilities "Brawl" and "Martal Arts" with "War" and "Unarmed Combat", and then used the individual charm trees for each unarmed combat style to describe whether the style is "brawling" or "kung fu" or "stick fighting" or "boxing" or "wrestling" or "aikido".


Because that's basically what they did. That they happened to call it "Martial Arts" instead of "Unarmed Combat" is an easy change to undo if you are so inclined.

 

[Ker'ion]

The question still remains' date=' and hasn't been answered, and I pose it once again: [b']have you tried the system yet, or are you just kvetching based on initial reactions?[/[/b]quote]
Mostly the bitching on initial reactions.  I don't have anyone to try 2nd edition out with/ on, so, I can't really experiment with the problems I forsee.

 

[Ker'ion]

Suppose they replaced the abilities "Brawl" and "Martal Arts" with "War" and "Unarmed Combat", and then used the individual charm trees for each unarmed combat style to describe whether the style is "brawling" or "kung fu" or "stick fighting" or "boxing" or "wrestling" or "aikido".

My actual problem is one that is ignored in most of the WW environments as well.  Brawl, while a viable skill, is not a properly trained ability, like Martial Arts.  I think that a person with 4 dots in Brawl should do less damage than a person with 4 dots in MA, due to the training involved in learning Martial Arts, even mortal MA.  This difference would neccesitate a difference in Skills.


Personally, I believe even an experienced brawler in a bar fight should end up black and blue when facing down a martial artist who has studied properly.


Maybe if the Unarmed Combat untrained (no Charms) was Brawl and trained (Charms) was Martial Arts, I could work with that.


But, then we only have 24 Abilities.

 

[Flagg]

If you insist on making a (artificial) distinction between "brawl" and "martial arts", then just say that the "experienced brawler" is actually just a low-end martial artist.


But seriously: take all the fanboy nerd-worship out of "martial arts", and it's just punching and kicking people. Someone who's good at ass-kicking will kick ass, regardless of wether they're a "martial artist" or not.


-S

 

[Ker'ion]

Werks for me, now what about Skill #25?

 

[Jakk Bey]

Ker'ion--Tell that to the 1%ers my Dad tattoos on. They aren't exactly the best trained fellas that he's ever seen--he was a trainer for US Special Forces in HTH.  He was in the 3rd class to study with Mossad in anti-terrorist techniques from the US.  He has seen, and trained a LOT of very nasty fellas.


He is scared spitless of some of the fellas that seem to like him a lot at the tattoo studio.  Very few of them have any kind of formal training, and they are dag fucking nasty.


There is NO difference.  There is a skilled fighter, and a not so skilled fighter.  If you gain skill by rote and method, for safety's sake and through repitition, you're a "martial artist".  If you just get skilled by beating the snot out of people and getting the snot beat out of you, you're a brawler.  


I've seen your example, first hand.  It usually runs the other way around.  The fella who is used to being hit generally wins over the fella who does kata and lightly spars.


But that's what I mean about a "a martial artist that has studied properly"! rises from your lips, unbidden when you read that last sentence didn't it?


There is no difference.  Only experience.  An experienced fighter, one who practices, either by getting hit and hitting, or by sparring, wins over kata and shadow boxing.  Experience is the biggest factor.  Not style.  Mean counts for a lot too--be that a series of punishing and painful cataleptics, or a fish hook and repeated shots to the jimmy.  


It's not that your "arguement" has been ignored. It's that your point is specious, at best.  


Call it Martial Arts, or Fight, or Unarmed Combat.  It's just mechanics around whipping someone's ass with your hands, feet, forehead, elbows, knees or anything else you can transfer energy or redirect it with.


Integrity simplifies a lot of things.


War replaces the artificial and redundant "Brawl" vs "Martial Arts" theme.  It is thematic for the game to put in large skill sets into small headings.  War covers a lot.  Like Larceny.  Fight/Martial Arts/Unarmed Combat does too.  


It just makes a lot more sense.  Dawn Caste gets an academic Ability. One that redefines their role as generals.  There is no artificial distincition between training styles for beating people with your hands and feet.  There is a mechanical difference between Archery and Thrown and Melee. Hence, they stayed--not in how they operate as Charms, or in attack or against DV, but how and where energy is transferred and skill sets to judge range and delivery.

 

[Persell]

*blink* That was very well said.

 

[Cthulhu_Wakes]

You learn quick that Jakk is one of them thar 'right talkin' people.  8)

 

[Guest]

OK I'll start with DV hmmm O I hate it I like rolling my dodge I tend to get more successes on my dodge rolls then I have dice' date=' don't do so well with other rolls,[/quote']Then stunt. 'nuff said

I don't do stunts so well

 

[Guest]

So' date=' your [i']luck[/i] is why you dislike the new system?  Have you actually tried it yet?
As for ticks, have you tried it?  Or is this just based on a conception of what you thiink it will be like?  Have you had bad experiences with other systems that use a mechanic like this?

I havn't tried it, but who needs to I see what it will be and I'm not interested

 

[orionstark1482]

is it just me or were their a lot of things in the 2nd ed book that a person picking it up and reading it without knowledge of the 1st source material would be totally lost?

 

[Persell]

Ok, I finished my last first edition campaign two weeks ago and fooled around with the 2nd ed. system this weekend with some of my players (we did this before but we thought another go of playtesting might be a good idea).


it is awesome, here my thoughts.


static defense. best thing since sliced bread. the modifiers based on your actions make strategy important and people stop stacking defenses until it gets silly. and the "oh you used an offensive charm this round without comboing now you are dead meat" effect is gone, too. which is a good thing in my book, 'cause only being able to go on offense when comboing is stupid. you sure are bound to recieve some damage without defensive charms but it is not nearly as worse as in the 1st ed. oh and last but not least it makes combat faster which is a good thing.


tick system. in simple words, way more realistic, strategic and faster than 1st edition ever was or could be. you can give a new player a sheet with some actions listed and he is never going to ask again, while in first edition what you could do was spread over half the book... and not very logical often enough.


lethality. man, you can die fast now. coordinated attacks can make a fang of elite troops a threat to exalts, admittedly only young ones or careless ones but it is a huge plus for overall dramaturgy. even combat exalt vs. exalt is a lot more deadly now, general damage seems to be higher.


solars. finally they took their place. cheap perfect defenses and an array of powerful charmtrees without too many speedbumps.


social combat. i feared the worst but white wolf did a splendid job, with a bit of practice it is like the old freeform system, just better as you have better ideas of how to cover things mechanically without instant houseruling it all the time like in the 1st edition.


and the list goes on: mass combat, rules far better explained and the rest of the line. let's face it, wonders of the lost age is one of the very best sourcebooks ever created. it gives a glimpse at the first age from its own special purview but is deeply rooted in the age of sorrows. in other lines it would have been a book full of goodies but here it nicely portrays the knowledge lost by comparison, the feel of the first age and a good deal of second age feel. hopefully the other books will be on par with this.


overall I'd take the 2nd edition over the first in any way, there is nothing which I miss. I realize that I sound like a fanboi, usually I am fairly weary (right word?) of new things but the 2nd edition convinced me.


So, now excuse me, I only got like a month to prepare my next campaign

 

[Flagg]

There is a mechanical difference between Archery and Thrown and Melee.

Now, if someone could only please tell me why it's called "Thrown" and not "Throwing"? None of the other Abiltites are in the past tense.


-S

 

[Jakk Bey]

Because the Developers touch themselves at night...

 

[Guest]

I admit the new charms are cool and all artifact armor having a hardness rating is a good thing but as for the rest of the changes well I'll just play 1st with a few minor ajustments

 

[Cthulhu_Wakes]

O.o ...ooooooooook.

 

[Thorn Darkblade]

Just curious....why do you think turn based is better than the tick system???

 

[lowguppy]

I'mm going with 1st ed until 2nd proves itself otherwise to me. I do like the improved art, and I am inclined to like it for that factor alone (I failed a save vs. shiny check and bought the new Mage book afterall) but I need to play it more to be convinced. Also, after its release, I was able to finally pick up a 1st ed core book for like $7.

 

[memesis]

That DV exists (passive defense is unrealistic).

Defense Values are not "passive".  You do not just stand there and people somehow miss you.  If this is what you think is going on, you are mistaken.

That Integrity exists (Willpower and Virtues cover this).

Willpower and Virtues have a very definite place in social combat.  What do you suggest using to resist suggestions like "let's go fight the bad guys" to a Valor 5 character?  His Valor?  He's going to take a penalty to resisting such a thing because of it.


"Oh, but he can spend Willpower to resist".  Yes he can.  How fast will he run out of Willpower that way?  Integrity is there to keep him from NEEDING to.


Integrity is the professional skill of avoiding emotional involvement in a topic of conversation, no matter how you personally feel about it.  In addition, Integrity is NOT the only "defensive" social-combat ability.

That War replaced Brawl (Brawling is NOT a Martial arts style!!!).

Sword fighting is NOT staff fighting!!!  But I don't hear you complaining about how Melee is bundling too many dissimilar techniques together.


Wrestling, sumo, and boxing are "martial arts" in the sense that they're organized bodies of unarmed combat instruction.  They aren't "martial arts" in the sense that Chinese kung-fu movies commonly feature them, but Exalted is more than Chinese kung-fu.  The Roman gladiators used a complex system of combat techniques (see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pankration) and Exalted is just as much about that culture as about the East.


And if you want to say "but Brawlers aren't skilled, so they should use their own ability", I would say:  if they aren't skilled, why do you support having an Ability for them to get better in?  I would ALSO like to hear you tell a skilled wrestler that he is worse off than a judoka, to his face.