Stacking artifacts and hearthstones

Bonus Stacking


Bonuses from equipment (including magical material bonuses) do not stack with one another; the character enjoys only the best among his various modifiers. For example, a Dragon- Blooded character with a jade daiklave and jade hearthstone bracers would only lower his Speed by one point—the two magical material bonuses will not stack to produce Speed -2. Likewise, a character wearing lamellar armor and a magic girdle that provides armored soak enjoys only the higher of the two soak ratings—they do not stack together.


I'd say that hearthstones definitely count as magical equipment, no?
 
I disagree, good sir.


Hearthstones aren't mentioned in this section and Bonus stacking isn't mentioned in the Hearthstone section either.


I'd equate Hearthstone powers to Charm stacking rules in this case.
 
To be honest, I don't like that rule. It's feels a bit too 'MMO-ish', with people getting a mish-mash of artifacts and equipment to boost their combat stats. I've already rejected it from my games.


Captain Hesperus
 
I simply make artifacts or hearthstones with similar effects nonstackable. Exalts SHOULD be able to get ridiculously high dice pools. If various bonuses synergize with each other, but don't do exactly the same thing, I see no reason not to allow them, unless it explicitly makes things a little ridiculous. I think the latter is what happened, and they applied a blanket equipment rule, rather than figure out every unfair combo.
 
I can see not being able to stack 7LDS to get multiple +4s but I don't see why 1x 7LDS shouldn't stack with Orihalcum bonus and, say, some bs Fate magic. If they don't work the exact same way, does it matter if they work together? Not letting them work together is like saying that you can't have guided missiles because you have a targeting computer - they synergize, not exclude each other.


Now having two totally separate targeting systems or two guiding systems in the missile - that would just gum things up.
 
By the strictest interpretation of the rules (and according to several of the freelancers), nothing stacks, not even Silk Armor.


What somebody else said (that I think makes sense) is that things that add to a same pool but in different ways should stack. i.e. something adds to Dexterity and something adds to Melee.
 
They don't work together because of statistics. Literally, a +1 bonus might not sound like much, but if you've ever taken looked at the mathematics it actually matters a lot. I encourage you to look at the link I posted previously.


Seriously, the whole point of the no-equipment bonus stacking is so that a character doesn't need to have hundreds of artifacts to be effective. Once you have the basic effects (Daiklave, Armor), Artifacts should give you sideways growth, expanding your capabilities rather than enhancing them. The guy with a simple artifact sword and armor can fight just as fine as the guy in Celestial Battle armor, but he sure as hell can't fly or see and attack spirits without a similarly large investment in charms.
 
I'm aware of the "technical" interpretation, just arguing against it. I mean stacking the same item (silk armor, 7LDS, whatever) is boring and perfectly worth errata-ing out of existence, but even non-identical methods of boosting the same thing (to use the simplest example I can think of, 7LDS+orihalcum material bonus) work on totally different principles, despite mechanical overlap, so it just boggles my mind that they can't be allowed to work together.


I mean they even errata'd some of the problem issues specifically (some of the movement charms got edited to say "yeah this doesn't stack with Y," which is fine because [distance] x2 x2 x2 x5 is a lot lot bigger than just [distance] x5, and they overlap in both methodology (magic to speed you up) and function (distance), but THE GOGGLES that do something with targeting and a really well-made enchanted bow that also adds accuracy and a heartstone that makes your arrows fly straight... eh. dunno. just doesn't seem right they can't work together.


Then again I'm the person who goes into most games without any armor at all and doesn't really combat spec anything, so maybe I'm not the best source of wisdom here.
 
Incendius said:
They don't work together because of statistics. Literally, a +1 bonus might not sound like much, but if you've ever taken looked at the mathematics it actually matters a lot. I encourage you to look at the link I posted previously.
Seriously, the whole point of the no-equipment bonus stacking is so that a character doesn't need to have hundreds of artifacts to be effective. Once you have the basic effects (Daiklave, Armor), Artifacts should give you sideways growth, expanding your capabilities rather than enhancing them. The guy with a simple artifact sword and armor can fight just as fine as the guy in Celestial Battle armor, but he sure as hell can't fly or see and attack spirits without a similarly large investment in charms.
Click to expand...
My problem is I've never bought into the min-maxing paradigm of having a thousand-dice and being and utterly boring character. I'm the kind of guy who buys specialties in Encyclopedic Lore because they would make sense for a given character.


If somebody else wants to accumulate dice like nobody's business then more power to him. I don't mind being sup-optimal as long as I'm having fun.
 
Urk. My last post isn't ignoring you Incendius, you just posted while I was writing mine up with all the speed and grace of a crippled walrus crawling about on the surface of the moon.


But yeah, honestly, lord kamina pretty much said in three sentences what I was struggling to express in three thousand. I don't min/max at all, but if someone wants to... that's fine? I just pick stuff based on the character concept, and it bothers me that that is actively harmful now, rather than just suboptimal. Also, the idea of magical material bonuses being made null and void effortlessly despite being an INTRINSIC PROPERTY OF THE DAMN WEAPON just confuses and enrages me on an intellectual level.
 
[QUOTE="Lord Kamina]If somebody else wants to accumulate dice like nobody's business then more power to him. I don't mind being sup-optimal as long as I'm having fun.

[/QUOTE]
This.


There are players who get this concept, and rock, like Kamina. There are also players who find joy in rolling ludicrous amounts of dice and squashing the baddies. This is not a bad thing either. Exalted, from 1st ed, has supported this type of character. To do a blanket nerf to, what in my honest opinion I believe it was for, stop a few bad combos was a bit sloppy. Yes, a few extra dice makes a huge difference. But, the TNs aren't going to remain static in a good game. Enemies will progress as well.
 
Im typing from my phone so I can't do overly long responses, so I'll try to put this as succinctly as possible.


First, I have no idea where this "artifacts are now actively harmful" comes from. Yes, if you choose two artifacts that do the exact same thing, you're not getting much benefit, but seriously, how often does that happen enough to be a problem if you are making characters to a concept? Just taking the example of the thread, if you have both the 7LDS and Orichalcum weapons you are still better off than someone who only has one of those.


The min maxed can still exist with the rule. I am a min-maxer myself some of the time (though I always have a character idea I am working towards that I find interesting) and I am very glad about this rule, because min maxing doesn't exist in a vacuum. The point of min maxing is to make yourself supreme in your element, and personally, I do it because the story I want to tell with the character needs him/her to be astonishing at what they do. If all artifacts stack, that becomes exponentially harder. No one wants to have boring one dimensional characters, and forcing an essentially unlimited number of possible upgrades means that those with min maxing tendencies have no ceiling to approach. Thus they constantly need to upgrade to compete. It makes it an arms race, which is really not fun for all the people that aren't min maxer who now can't compete at all.


In addition, one of the core ideas of the game is that it is the character that matters, not the artifacts. They are part of the legend, not the legend itself. Allowing equipment bonuses to stack makes equipment a supreme part of the character.
 
Also one of the core conceits of Exalted is that the PCs can and will challenge the Elders of the setting, unlike in the OWOD. This rule facilitates that, because otherwise the elders would be impossible to touch due to their massive panapoly. Such a panapoly still gives them a huge advantage (Getting through The Legion Sanguinary and all of its necrotech monstrosities in order to even approach FAFL is a lot harder than simply dueling him), but it doesn't make them invincible.
 
What you're saying makes virtually no sense.


We're here advocating for a judicious use of the ruling and you're trying to sway us with hyperbolic arguments.
 
Okay, maybe I'm misunderstanding, I am advocating that equipment bonuses should NOT stack. Are you saying that that is what everyone else is wanting as well?


Also, please don't be so insulting. I don't mind people refuting my points, but if you are going to just dismiss them out of hand please get out of the thread, because you aren't contributing.
 
It's a horse apiece. I usually settle the argument simply by making my players pay xp for their artifacts, and work for them. Anything above a rank 2, and even sometimes not even those, won't just show up in some scavenger lord's display for sale. Gotta find those things. That way, I think that getting massive dice bonuses doesn't feel cheap. It also encourages my players to find more unique artifacts, because they know it'll be a hassle to get their artifact of +10 Asswhupping. They'd rather get a +4 in Asswhupping and the power to breath firey tuna fish from their nostrils. Far more unique. However, I see no problem with "Ya know what? I need +4 to dodge. I get hit too easily, despite my maxed out dex and dodge. Let's make myself like the wind."


Edit- Also, arguing on the internet is like running in the special olympics. Win or lose, you're still retarded, so, keep it to debate level, not arguing. :D
 
Incendius said:
Okay, maybe I'm misunderstanding, I am advocating that equipment bonuses should NOT stack. Are you saying that that is what everyone else is wanting as well?
Also, please don't be so insulting. I don't mind people refuting my points, but if you are going to just dismiss them out of hand please get out of the thread, because you aren't contributing.
Click to expand...
First; I have not been the least bit insulting in any of my posts so please cut the drama.


Second; No. I'm saying we (or at the very least I) are for _some measure_ of stacking. This means I like stacking, presupposing common sense. You, on the other hand, are throwing around the most extreme and exaggerated examples.
 
Saying 'Your arguments are hyperbolic and make no sense'' sithout even attempting to explain why is pretty damn insulting. If you can't see why that is, I just have nothing to say.


I'll make another post she I get back to my computer, typing on the phone is a bit tiresome.
 
Yes, if you choose two artifacts that do the exact same thing, you're not getting much benefit, but seriously, how often does that happen enough to be a problem if you are making characters to a concept?
Click to expand...
...Which is not what anyone said. Orihalcum material bonuses being totally negated by any of the 1-3 dot stuff that adds an accuracy dot or two, or if you want to get to minmaxing stuff more like perfected kata bracers/7LDS, is a/the problem depending on how you define it. If there was maybe a cap of [essence] accuracy from equipment and it could be hit however, that would be fine, but having orihalcum's biggest bonus be totally negated just because you have one similar-but-not-identical bit of equipment seems dumb. Again, I'm not suggesting that multiple 7LDS should stack.


I'm not... really interested in touching on your admission of min/maxing and having all your character concepts revolving around being superperfect at something, so I'm just going to end this shortly. I don't think we're going to see eye to eye there, which isn't necessarily a bad thing because it takes all kinds to make a world, but I just don't think we're going to be able to convince each other than our extremely-subjective opinions are "wrong."


@Thorn: oh I definitely think that ALL artifacts should have a story behind them. Finding any artifact should be a bit of an adventure, otherwise you just devalue them all.
 
[QUOTE="Lord Kamina]... do you even know what the word "hyperbole" means?

[/QUOTE]
Are you aware that a debate actually involves proving your statements, and not just making blanket statements about someone else's points?
 
Incendius said:
Are you aware that a debate actually involves proving your statements, and not just making blanket statements about someone else's points?
Click to expand...
Bringing "characters" the size of FaFL to any discussion about mechanics is automatically a hyperbole. In 99% of games, those characters are the endgame (if even that.)


And you're basically argumenting that if you have a masterfully-crafted blade and then through an enchantment; become an impossibly competent swordsman, your blade is now not as good.


That makes no thematic sense whatsoever.


But then again, what do I know? I'm the kind of guy who never even considered having a "Paranoia combo.", back when that was still a thing.
 
Okay. I think there is some misunderstanding going on here. The point is not that any particular combination is broken in of itself, it's that this rule is an easy way to prevent any problems from occurring in the first place. It's so you don't have to apply ST rulings to every situations, to make it easier to design things that are balanced. Balance is an important consideration in any mechanics based game. If you don't care about mechanics though... I can't really convince you of anything.


Again, more detailed/coherent posts when I get back to a computer.
 
Incendius said:
Okay. I think there is some misunderstanding going on here. The point is not that any particular combination is broken in of itself, it's that this rule is an easy way to prevent any problems from occurring in the first place. It's so you don't have to apply ST rulings to every situations, to make it easier to design things that are balanced. Balance is an important consideration in any mechanics based game. If you don't care about mechanics though... I can't really convince you of anything.
Again, more detailed/coherent posts when I get back to a computer.
Click to expand...
My point is that it's more thematically appropriate to allow the kind of stacking I describe because things don't really start to break until way further up in the game; a point that most people never reach in the first place. I've never been in a chronicle where a character was above Essence 4, for example.
 
Didn't FafL have some scene-length charm where he just straight up murders everything without perfect defenses? I remember seeing him in, umm.... first edition alchemicals or something, and ALL OF MY NOPE.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top