|
Ferrinus posted:
I suspect that's the very last vestige of Grabowski's contributions gone!
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 22:53
|
|
STOP THE loving PRESSES. The ENTIRE discussion of signeurage and currency debasement from the bookmarked 3rd edition leak is COMPLETELY missing from the final pdf. This book is poo poo
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 07:46 |
|
|
Roadie posted:What's a better term for "Movement action", to differentiate it from physical movement? I was thinking "Minor action", maybe, to steal a note from D&D. Stealing a note from D&D would see you call it a "Move Action", which frankly seems fine. e: what I mean is, as long as you're consistent in your terminology, an intuitive rule phrase like Move Action is going to do more work for you in making the rules clear and memorable than it might offend or distract aesthetically for being redundant with natural language. Attorney at Funk fucked around with this message at 23:03 on Nov 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 23:01
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:How are movement actions not related to physical movement? Some things trigger off Movement Actions and some things trigger off movement, and you can combine different forms of movement in a turn but you only get one Movement Action each turn, and some things give you movement that's not a Movement Action. When you use some actions you can't also use a Movement Action in the same turn but you can use movement, and when you use some actions you can't use any movement in the same turn.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
Roadie posted:Some things trigger off Movement Actions and some things trigger off movement, and you can combine different forms of movement in a turn but you only get one Movement Action each turn, and some things give you movement that's not a Movement Action. When you use some actions you can't also use a Movement Action in the same turn but you can use movement, and when you use some actions you can't use any movement in the same turn. You have it backwards, moving a range band is called moving, while movement actions include everything from moving to rushing to disengaging to rising from prone.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 23:24
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:You have it backwards, moving a range band is called moving, while movement actions include everything from moving to rushing to disengaging to rising from prone. That's a little wacky. I'd use the Weapons-of-the-Gods/Legends-of-the-Wulin terminology, and call moving a range band 'covering ground'.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 23:43
|
|
|
RiotGearEpsilon posted:That's a little wacky. I'd use the Weapons-of-the-Gods/Legends-of-the-Wulin terminology, and call moving a range band 'covering ground'. Yeah that makes sense, and is much preferable to changing the name of movement actions to something that doesn't communicate they're about movement.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 00:12
|
|
|
I like that idea, making "move between ranges" use a specific technical wording. Not sure if I like "covering ground" specifically but since I've got nothing better I'm slotting that in for now. Along with clarifying spot-readings of mechanics, it also goes a long ways towards fixing the intuitive disconnect of "you can move without using movement (inside one range band)". Also, I've now got macros set up so I can swap technical terms in the text with a change in one spot in the preface code. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 01:22
|
|
|
"Displace self"? edit: Roadie posted:Also, I've now got macros set up so I can swap technical terms in the text with a change in one spot in the preface code. Are you a wizard? :Mørkesay: /
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 11:00
|
|
|
Here's a second draft of my combat rewrite. And for some laughs, here's the madlibs version. Hugoon Chavez posted:Are you a wizard? It's a little crazy, but it also makes it super-easy to do review passes on mechanical text (e.g. spot "{\word}" vs "{\word}ing" vs "{\word}s" vs "{\word}ed"), as well as do shorthand stuff like "You can't do this {\unlessanotherrule}." The former is useful enough that I'd seriously recommend a doing a basic text-replace version of it for anybody doing some tooling around with RPG mechanics, like "With a PRIMARYACTION you can..." style.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
'Spend three turns in Crash' - Lemme make sure I grok this. Turn 1: I get Crashed. I end the turn in Crash. Turn 2: I begin the turn in Crash, and end the turn in Crash. I've been in Crash for at least one turn. Turn 3: I begin the turn in Crash, and end the turn in Crash. I've been in Crash for at least two turns. Turn 4: I begin the turn in Crash. I've been in Crash between 2 and 3 turns. I end the turn in Crash. I've been in Crash for at least three turns. Turn 5: I begin the turn in Crash - except, no, it's been three turns, so my initiative resets to 3. My point is, 'a turn' is an imprecise way of measuring the duration of things that begin during a turn, rather than at the transition from one turn to another. Perhaps it could be rephrased to, "If you end your turn in Crash for three consecutive turns, your initiative resets to three on the fourth turn"?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
RiotGearEpsilon posted:My point is, 'a turn' is an imprecise way of measuring the duration of things that begin during a turn, rather than at the transition from one turn to another. Perhaps it could be rephrased to, "If you end your turn in Crash for three consecutive turns, your initiative resets to three on the fourth turn"? Good idea. Edit: Changed version. Roadie fucked around with this message at 20:19 on Nov 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
Why does the lowest level of crippling damage negate up to 0 health levels of damage? Should it be 1, giving it a 1-2-3 progression, or do you want losing an eye to only save your life rather than reducing damage?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 21:40
|
|
|
Kaza42 posted:Why does the lowest level of crippling damage negate up to 0 health levels of damage? Should it be 1, giving it a 1-2-3 progression, or do you want losing an eye to only save your life rather than reducing damage? I think it's the "save your life"—the primary benefit being "damage stops just before Incapacitated" more than the "negate damage" part. I should probably rewrite it to emphasize that. Changing it to just be 1-2-3 would be a better aesthetic anyway along with that, though. The original version in the book is more convoluted, where it's a bigger amount negated, but after negating that damage you take more damage (?) but then that more damage is stopped if it would reach incapacitated (???) so I tried to get a generally similar effect with less weirdness to it. Roadie fucked around with this message at 22:09 on Nov 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
Maybe this is presumptuous of me but if you're re-writing the book perhaps that should get it's own thread so those silly idiots of us who want to discuss the actual game as presented can have this thread without being confused by contradictory rule-sets.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 22:16
|
|
|
mistaya posted:Maybe this is presumptuous of me but if you're re-writing the book perhaps that should get it's own thread so those silly idiots of us who want to discuss the actual game as presented can have this thread without being confused by contradictory rule-sets. I think that's a reasonable request. I'd sub that thread.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
mistaya posted:Maybe this is presumptuous of me but if you're re-writing the book perhaps that should get it's own thread so those silly idiots of us who want to discuss the actual game as presented can have this thread without being confused by contradictory rule-sets. Thirding. Now that there's an actual game to discuss, it might warrant more than just the one megathread (or if there is a megathread, it should probably have FAQs and other important resources all collected in the OP).
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 22:26
|
|
|
a new thread now that the actual book is out seems legit
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 22:26
|
|
|
Roadie posted:Good idea. The 'crippling injury' writeup has a bug. For the 2HL and 4HL tiers, there is: 'Your [blank] are doubled for the rest of the scene.' where [blank] is just a blank space.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
This thread has needed a new OP for a while tbh, and it's probably time to give it one now that we have the game officially in hand. The only reason I hadn't suggested that before was I am not really good enough at Exalted to do it myself. Somebody step it up yo!
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 22:50
|
|
|
RiotGearEpsilon posted:The 'crippling injury' writeup has a bug. For the 2HL and 4HL tiers, there is: 'Your [blank] are doubled for the rest of the scene.' where [blank] is just a blank space. Whoops, I had {\wouldpenalties} instead of {\woundpenalties}. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 07:46 |
|
|
The people request a new thread, and lo! We have suited action to word. Mad props to Bouquet, Echo Cian, Krysmphoenix, and RPZip for their help with this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 06:00
|
|