The implications of the Essence Flow charm[2nd E]

[Silence In Daylight]

Safim, I'll extend the same challenge I made to Sorrow: how would you go about convincing someone, using canon (or other objective measures you can come up with), that Essence Flow with the ability to affect dice rolls w/o using a reflexive action is a better interpretation of canon than Essence Flow being applied as a reflexive action?


 This isn't about Golden Ruling or personal preferences; it's about canon interpretation.

 

[Quorlox]

Safim, I'll extend the same challenge I made to Sorrow: how would you go about convincing someone, using canon (or other objective measures you can come up with), that Essence Flow with the ability to affect dice rolls w/o using a reflexive action is a better interpretation of canon than Essence Flow being applied as a reflexive action?

As I pointed out in my previous post, canon suggests it's okay, why should anybody have to explain it more?

 

[Silence In Daylight]

I heard your supporting reasons for your POV regarding canon interpretation; I want to see if Safim has anything to add.


 Q, if you can provide a canon reference of 'innate ability' that supports your interpretation (not a reflexive action at all), I'd be more inclined to support it.

 

[wordman]

Just to be clear for the following: I'm obviously in the camp that thinks that the canon rules pretty clearly indicate Essence Flow can't pump rolls made when spell casting. However, I'm also in the camp that says "run your game any damn way you like". When looking to see if I want to house rule it to allow Essence Flow to pump sorcery, I think this is the key question...

...I can't see it unbalance anything.

I'm not sure on this one. Let's check.


Using the core book, a good candidate for pumping is Death of Obsidian Butterflies, which uses a Perception + Occult roll when cast. (As an aside... Perception? Anyway...). The #succ + Essence form number of attack successes applied to each target (reduced by DV and circumstances of each target). It also inflicts #succ + 8L base damage. This is an area attack against everyone in a 30 x 100 x 10 cubic yard area.


So given a character maxed in the relevant abilities, an Essence of 3, and using a rule of thumb that says every two dice rolled in Exalted average one success, normally they'll get 5 successes on this roll, yeilding a base damage of 13L with an 8 success attack.


Using Essence Flow, in the "average" case, 1st and 2nd Excellencies are identical, adding 5 successes for 10 motes. Essence Flow doesn't change how the excellencies stack, so this looks to be as good as we can do. That turns the spell into an 18L attack with 13 successes.


Unbalanced? Not sure. It's certainly powerful. It could certainly kill a good chunk of an army. Not sure it is powerful enough to be called "unbalanced", though.

 

[Silence In Daylight]

I agree with wordman that allowing Essence Flow to pump Sorcery is by no means game-breaking; however, the question isn't that of house rules or personal opinion.


 Q is asserting that his position is canon; that, I have a problem with--until he provides sufficient evidence to convince me otherwise.

 

[memesis]

Using Essence Flow, in the "average" case, 1st and 2nd Excellencies are identical, adding 5 successes for 10 motes. Essence Flow doesn't change how the excellencies stack, so this looks to be as good as we can do. That turns the spell into an 18L attack with 13 successes.

Just a random observation.


My starting Dawn Caste character's base damage (grand daiklave) is 18L.  He has 12 attack dice, and will be at 13 when he hits Melee 5.  He pays his attunement costs for his artifacts, and that's it.


With the defensive Charms he has, and with the Melee Excellency, he can wade through 30 guys without too much trouble.  And he will be no more or less obviously magical than obsidian butterflies cutting everyone to bits.


I'm not making an argument for or against the dice-add thing here, I'm just hoping that other people remember, when they say "unbalanced", what they are balancing the proposed effect AGAINST.

 

[Quorlox]

 Q is asserting that his position is canon; that, I have a problem with--until he provides sufficient evidence to convince me otherwise.

Using Essence to power permanent Charms is not an action.  Nonactions aren't forbidden when casting sorcery.  Essence Flow is a permanent Charm.  Since my opinion is that it should be allowed anyways, I don't require anything more.

 

[Silence In Daylight]

Depends on the charm--making arrows from Phantom Arrow Technique is most certainly a reflexive action (see charm text). Until you give me a reference in the book that innate abilities need not be actions, we'll have to agree to disagree on your interpretation.

 

[The Scorp]

Actually, Q did use canon to prove his point.  What more does he need.  It wasnt his POV, it was canon that says so.  Under Essence Flow, 1st and 2nd excellency arent considered actions.  And since Essence Flow is permenant, the Exalt has the freedom (and enjoys that freedom) to do whatever with those charms outside his actions that he declared.  Thats the power and luxury of the Essence Flow charm.

 

[Silence In Daylight]

The description of Essence Flow is as follows:


 'Purchasing this Charm allows the Solar to invoke the First, Second, and Third Excellencies for the relevant Ability as innate powers rather than charms. This means that...' (The rest refers to Combo rules.)


 There. No mention of the use of Essence Flow not being an action. Only a reference to innate abilities, whatever that key phrase may mean.


 If you're arguing p. 183, referencing Permanent Charms:


 "Most permanent charms require the character to spend Essence to take full advantage of their effects, but doing so does not count as a Charm or an action."


 Note the 'most.' And for good measure, note the text to Phantom Arrow Technique, a Permanent Charm:


 "This Charm permanently enhances the Exalt's capabilities. Therefore, shaping motes into ammunition is an unrolled reflexive action and not a Charm activation."


  The fact that a charm is of Type: Permanent does not automatically make its effects non-actions.


  I reiterate: find me a definition of innate ability, supported by canon, that specifically states that all innate abilities are not actions, and need not be placed into the action queue, and I will happily concede the point.

 

[Persell]

Well lets see,


the sorcery rules clearly state that sorcery does not prohibit the use of permanent charms and that sorcerors can benefit from them. Essence flow is a permanent charm, it several times states that the effects of it do not count as charms but as innate abilites.


I actually don't see where exactly in the rules you see any way to really and blatantly state that it is not allowed so that you have to challenge me. If anything I'd say that the pro argument is more valid than yours (I really did not look at the rules when making my first post, like i said, it just sounded like fun).


After reading the rules I am also going to allow the use of essence flow to help keeping the concentration.


For combat applications this still brings sorcery not up to the level of a melee monkey with a grand daiklaive anyway so why bother?

 

[Silence In Daylight]

Essence flow is a permanent charm, it several times states that the effects of it do not count as charms but as innate abilites.

 Indeed. So, tell me, according to canon, what are innate abilities?


 They're not charms; we've established this. What are they? Give me a canonical definition that relates them to actions.

 

[wordman]

Well lets see,
the sorcery rules clearly state that sorcery does not prohibit the use of permanent charms and that sorcerors can benefit from them. Essence flow is a permanent charm

Essence Flow is certainly permanent; however, the effects of the charm are to invoke excellencies, which are not permanent.

I actually don't see where exactly in the rules you see any way to really and blatantly state that it is not allowed so that you have to challenge me.

Right here: Using Essence Flow, the "effects are the effects of a Charm used by the character in all ways, save that they can be used with other Charms from the Ability without being placed in a Combo." Emphasis, mine. There is no special rider saying "except they have different timing characteristics" or "they are not actions". Absent such a rider, you have to assume that invoking the excellency is in all ways like invoking a charm, just like the text says. Invoking an Excellency is a a reflexive charm. Reflexive charms cannot be used while casting sorcery. It could probably be made a bit more clear than that, but not by much.

 

[wordman]

My starting Dawn Caste character's base damage (grand daiklave) is 18L.  He has 12 attack dice, and will be at 13 when he hits Melee 5.  He pays his attunement costs for his artifacts, and that's it.
With the defensive Charms he has, and with the Melee Excellency, he can wade through 30 guys without too much trouble.  And he will be no more or less obviously magical than obsidian butterflies cutting everyone to bits.


I'm not making an argument for or against the dice-add thing here, I'm just hoping that other people remember, when they say "unbalanced", what they are balancing the proposed effect AGAINST.

True!


One point, though. Your example is of a Dawn caste using 13 attack dice against one target at a time. A pumped obsidian butterfly is using 13 attack successes against everyone around him at once. Your dawn would, on average, need twice as many dice to score that many successes. (At least if I'm reading the description correctly.)

 

[memesis]

My starting Dawn Caste character's base damage (grand daiklave) is 18L.  He has 12 attack dice, and will be at 13 when he hits Melee 5.  He pays his attunement costs for his artifacts, and that's it.
With the defensive Charms he has, and with the Melee Excellency, he can wade through 30 guys without too much trouble.  And he will be no more or less obviously magical than obsidian butterflies cutting everyone to bits.


I'm not making an argument for or against the dice-add thing here, I'm just hoping that other people remember, when they say "unbalanced", what they are balancing the proposed effect AGAINST.

True!


One point, though. Your example is of a Dawn caste using 13 attack dice against one target at a time. A pumped obsidian butterfly is using 13 attack successes against everyone around him at once. Your dawn would, on average, need twice as many dice to score that many successes. (At least if I'm reading the description correctly.)

That's true.  However, this is something he can do indefinitely, without a per-attack Essence cost.  So while it is not apples-to-apples, the end result is the same: "30 guys are dead following the use of X motes of Essence".  The end result is what I look at when questioning balance.

 

[Quorlox]

 If you're arguing p. 183, referencing Permanent Charms:


 "Most permanent charms require the character to spend Essence to take full advantage of their effects, but doing so does not count as a Charm or an action."


 Note the 'most.'

 
The most refers to the permanent charms needing Essence, not that only most have the advantage of not counting as a Charm or an action.  

And for good measure, note the text to Phantom Arrow Technique, a Permanent Charm:


 "This Charm permanently enhances the Exalt's capabilities. Therefore, shaping motes into ammunition is an unrolled reflexive action and not a Charm activation.

I'd interpret to support my position, not yours.  As a general rule, permanent Charms do not count as actions or Charms.  This is trumped when the permanent Charm's description explicitly states otherwise, as is the case for Phantom Arrow.  Since no such restriction is present for Essence Flow, it's not an action.  

   Â  I reiterate: find me a definition of innate ability, supported by canon, that specifically states that all innate abilities are not actions, and need not be placed into the action queue, and I will happily concede the point.

If they wanted them to remain reflexive actions, they could have listed it in the description as they did with Phantom Arrow.  Since they didn't, I assume it's a nonaction.  


And my goal isn't to convert you or anybody else.  It was to state my opinion, read yours, and then move on.  I've stated my opinion and have read yours, so I think it's time to move on.

 

[Persell]

Well lets see,
the sorcery rules clearly state that sorcery does not prohibit the use of permanent charms and that sorcerors can benefit from them. Essence flow is a permanent charm

Essence Flow is certainly permanent; however, the effects of the charm are to invoke excellencies, which are not permanent.

I actually don't see where exactly in the rules you see any way to really and blatantly state that it is not allowed so that you have to challenge me.

Right here: Using Essence Flow, the "effects are the effects of a Charm used by the character in all ways, save that they can be used with other Charms from the Ability without being placed in a Combo." Emphasis, mine. There is no special rider saying "except they have different timing characteristics" or "they are not actions". Absent such a rider, you have to assume that invoking the excellency is in all ways like invoking a charm, just like the text says. Invoking an Excellency is a a reflexive charm. Reflexive charms cannot be used while casting sorcery. It could probably be made a bit more clear than that, but not by much.

Ok, forgive me if it sounds harsh now but discussing is kinda hard that way. Your emphasis is wrong.


Innate abilities are never really defined but the only other example of them are animas which work with sorcery just fine. what you quoted should prevent people from using the same charm multiple times for an action. the activation of permanent charms even if they use charmlike effects which cost essence does NOT count as charm (exalted page 183. permanent).


people really need to stop interpreting what they were used to from the first edition into their view of the second edition. everyone of you was assuming it would work that way, coming from the 1st ed. and therefore you have been searching for anything that remotely proves the point. but the rules do not.

 

[Silence In Daylight]

Innate abilities are never really defined but the only other example of them are animas which work with sorcery just fine.

 But anima powers are specifically listed as an exception for shaping sorcery, in regards to taking actions. Wouldn't that imply that in general, innate abilities are actions?


 You say we have preconceptions from 1st Ed. All right, then; show us how 2nd Ed works things--with supporting evidence, not on your say-so.

 

[wordman]

Your emphasis is wrong. Innate abilities are never really defined

Yes, they are. The exact bit I quoted is intended to tell you exactly what they mean in this case: that these abilities work just like charms, except for how they interact with the combo rules.

what you quoted should prevent people from using the same charm multiple times for an action.

No, what prevents that are the Excellencies rules, which specifically prohibit it, as well as the line in the Essence Flow rules that does as well: "However, she cannot use them out of place on the order of combat actions (see p. 145), nor may she apply the same Charm repeatedly to a single roll."

the activation of permanent charms even if they use charmlike effects which cost essence does NOT count as charm (exalted page 183. permanent).

This isn't a "charmlike effect". It is a charm. Just like the rule I've quoted explicitly says it is. The permanent effect of Essence Flow is not that it lets you produce excellency-like bonuses. It is that it lets you cast Excellency charms outside the normal combo rules. That's all.


In other words, I have no trouble believing that if there was some permanent charm that lets you spend X essence to, say, see a spirit, the rule you mention on 183 would imply that this abillity could be used during sorcery; however, Essence Flow is not that kind of charm. It is a permanent effect that allows the invocation of effects that are explicitly stated as working like charms in all ways except for combos. This trumps the rule on page 183 and, because it does, the rules on sorcery that apply to reflexive charms hold.

people really need to stop interpreting what they were used to from the first edition into their view of the second edition.

No argument there. If you'll recall, I first said that you could pump sorcery with Essence Flow. Reading the rules convinced me otherwise. Since neither Essence Flow nor the Excellencies even existed in the First Edition, I'm not sure why you are assuming my opinion is based on First Edition.

 

[Persell]

Activating the effects of permanent charms does not count as a charm in any way. it is in the rulebook under permanent. essence flows invokes the EFFECTS of the other excellencies, not the excellencies themselves. I really don't see any way to interpret it differently.

 

[Sorrow]

Safim, I'll extend the same challenge I made to Sorrow: how would you go about convincing someone, using canon (or other objective measures you can come up with), that Essence Flow with the ability to affect dice rolls w/o using a reflexive action is a better interpretation of canon than Essence Flow being applied as a reflexive action?
 This isn't about Golden Ruling or personal preferences; it's about canon interpretation.

Wow you challenged  :lol:  me to prove this and I didn't even notice it? When? How? Where?


I didn't claim anything (apart that you could use any excellency after the spell is cast)  I just made a question.


Anyway I don't know how I will play it, I may avoid allowing essence flow to be used with sorcery if I see it can be used in a broken way. But otherwise gamingwise it don't see a reason not to allow it. I will see how it turns out and act accordingly.

 

[wordman]

Activating the effects of permanent charms does not count as a charm in any way. it is in the rulebook under permanent. essence flows invokes the EFFECTS of the other excellencies, not the excellencies themselves.

But, the Essence Flow charm speficially overrides the standard permancy rule, flat out telling you that these effects "are the effects of a charm in all ways" except that they violate combo rules. This is a charm-specific exception to the standard permanent rule. This line has no other purpose.

 

[Persell]

Activating the effects of permanent charms does not count as a charm in any way. it is in the rulebook under permanent. essence flows invokes the EFFECTS of the other excellencies, not the excellencies themselves.

But, the Essence Flow charm speficially overrides the standard permancy rule, flat out telling you that these effects "are the effects of a charm in all ways" except that they violate combo rules. This is a charm-specific exception to the standard permanent rule. This line has no other purpose.

Wrong. It nowhere in the charm text says flat out that what you think it does. nowhere.

 

[Solfi]

Look, this issue is unclear enough to be interpreted either way. So just go with whatever the hell you like, and just drop it already. You guys have beaten this one to death. There'll probably be an official ruling on this in the errata in the near future anyway.


To me, the deciding factor can be found in this sentence:

[QUOTE="Exalted Core 2nd]

He *can* benefit from the established effects of ongoing or permanent Charms and he *can* - as a special exception to the rule on reflexive actions - activate his anima.

[/QUOTE]
... keyword being 'established'. Which the Excellencies are clearly not.

 

[Persell]

Look, this issue is unclear enough to be interpreted either way. So just go with whatever the hell you like, and just drop it already. You guys have beaten this one to death. There'll probably be an official ruling on this in the errata in the near future anyway.
To me, the deciding factor can be found in this sentence:

[QUOTE="Exalted Core 2nd]

He *can* benefit from the established effects of ongoing or permanent Charms and he *can* - as a special exception to the rule on reflexive actions - activate his anima.

... keyword being 'established'. Which the Excellencies are clearly not.

[/QUOTE]
They keyword here is OR, established OR permanent. essence flow is permanent.