I think a lot of people were reacting to the disparity between what the setting was telling them about how powerful Solars were and then the fact that they got whacked by beings significantly less powerful than they. So they wanted to drag things down, so that it made 'more sense'.

It's not something I ever really had a problem with. And I don't really see mortals as that much better in 3E anyways. The ONLY benefit they might get is ganging up for onslaught penalties and a Solar moderately invested in combat charms will have a way around that either through a) onslaught cancelers of one sort or another or b) not being around when guys want to gang up because you're shooting them from a few hundred yards away.

Now, should a mortal be a threat to a Solar with nothing invested in any combat skill or defensive skill? Sure. But those types of characters specialize in not getting into fights because you're now their best friend.

Quote from: Simlasa;867075That does seem to go against the original appeal of the game.
Long ago I had a spark of interest in Exalted's setting but not so much in running Exalts themselves... more like running ordinary mortals struggling in a world full of roaming demigods and stuff that's vastly more powerful than even the best mortal warrior.
But then, I'm a fan of Call of Cthulhu so maybe that's plays into why I like that idea. But having PCs who could punch Cthulhu in the face... and live to tell about it... would similarly be missing the point. Yet there's always some element of folks who want to play it that way.

I must admit the Celestial tier of Exalts have never appealed to me in the slightest. All the ideas about Exalted that inspired me to want to play a game capped out at the Terrestrial tier - even then I'd prefer a game which doesn't feature any Exalts at all.

One of my favourite notions was to set the game before the current age (10-20 years will do), so that there are no Solars/Abyssals/Infernals, Lunars are off doing whatever, Sidereals are hidden and not active in the world, we can pretend Alchemicals don't exist.

Then we have a much more grounded and manageable game, where Dragonblooded are the top tier of Exalts and few and far between away from the centre of the world. Instead we have Godblooded, Enlightened Mortals (do they even exist any more in 3e?), minor gods and even the odd Heroic Mortal as the focus.

Dear gods the levels of resistance from some of the usual suspects at the idea of depowering a game of Exalted like that...

I liked three ideas in particular, one creating a God-Blooded/Dragonblooded dynasty in the Hundred Kingdoms.

The second a more focused sort of thing which could go in any direction, but it's about a scheme who's object is embarrassing a god.

And lastly, using Exalted's pre-history for a sword and sorcery game.

Quote from: Nexus;867081Sometimes I think its the same thing happened with Aberrant. Its difficult to get Storyteller to work at that power level and easier to get people to buy that's never want "the game was intended to be".

Honestly, I do think Exalts should be able to punch Cthullu in the face and live to tell about it. Not easily or casually but that was the reason they were created in the first place. And they did it. Its not easy to reconcile that outlook with the current concept of "anyone and everything must be a deadly danger or its not with having."

In a way it is; if Solars are a weapon designed to kill gods, then perhaps they have special techniques that work on gods, but not mortals?

But that means having people accept that they're not intrinsically better than every mortal they might come across, just because they're Solars.

Quote from: Kiero;867127In a way it is; if Solars are a weapon designed to kill gods, then perhaps they have special techniques that work on gods, but not mortals?

They'd also have to be stronger than mortal just do be able to use those "techniques". Any Exalt would have to be unless the Yozi and similar creatures aren't any more dangerous than mortals just "can't be killed by mundane means". Which is fine for a setting but its not how Exalted was billed on the box. Its allot more like every other fantasy game.

And it kills allot of the appeal for some of being "Exalted" if the only thing that means if you have the cheat code that lets you maybe kill some things if you don't get knifed in the back by a street thug before you get to them or something.


The Exalted, not just the Solars were created as weapons to destroy "unkillable" beings that created the Gods. So its easy to reconcile if you toss out what made the game interesting and different for many folks.

QuoteBut that means having people accept that they're not intrinsically better than every mortal they might come across, just because they're Solars.

You mean just because they're Exalted? Solars aren't the only types billed as beyond mortals. All of them are. That was kind of the point of making them distinct. Solars were just the most powerful. You become an Exalt, at least a Celestial Exalt in part because you're incredibly skills, heroic, driven, whatever. At the height of mortal capability. Being Exalt brings you to the next level or opens it up to you.

And even then unless you're very old you aren't better than every mortal at every possible field. Even if you're a Solar but in your field of focus? Yeah, I damn will think any Exalt should better than a equivalently focused mortal. Otherwise there's no much point to making them anything distinct.


That would mean accepting a completely different premise than the game was originally billed as. And I don't mean for Solars but of all the Exalts. Hell, Dragonblooded are in a way "better" at killing Mortals than Solars since anima flux will fatally injure most mortals that are just standing near them in a few seconds and there are a few cheap DB charms that render them totally immune to non essence based attacks in 1st.

 But Lunars can become army slaying Kaiju. Sidereal Martial Arts open up attacks that devastate miles cheaper than Solar Circle Sorcery. Exalts, particular Celestial Exalts were billed and presented as very powerful beings, beyond mortals. That was the point of being Exalted.

There's nothing wrong with more modest power levels and mortal games. I ran one one myself for awhile. But really if I wanted to play a fantasy game with mortal adventurers that was somewhat better than average among many many peers there's dozen of functional systems that have been around for decades to do that. I and most of the Exalted fans I know where drawn to Exalted by the power levels, both the glamor and the idea of the consequences and problems of having and using that much power.

There's nothing wrong with that either.

Quote from: Warboss Squee;867089At least not in massive numbers.

Then again, there seems to be a line of thought that if you don't constantly throw enemy exalts at the players they are just going to walk all over the mortals.

And that this is somehow a bad thing.

See this tells me more than just a 'line of thought'.  It's a fear, and a distrust of their own players.

I'm pretty sure everyone here has heard me say this, but I run a Mutants and Masterminds campaign (have for the past three years...  Wow...) and I currently have an Ex-Boxer turned psychically powered tank (As in as tough as), a Archer with speedster powers, a Sonic Flying Blaster and a Russian Crime Fighter.

Now, It's an Iron Age campaign, in so much as there's drugs, death and I refuse to mechanically penalize players wanting to kill the villains.  (Cops and such do look down on such activities after all.)

And the amount of PC's who've turned into mass murdering conscienceless hobos in my game?  Zero.  Yes, they've killed a few times, but they (in character) did not like it, and use it as a last and final resort, when nothing else works.

Here's the big back rub, I technically let them do whatever they want, but they don't ever 'cross the line', and I know this because I trust my players, my friends to act 'in setting'.

So my question becomes:  What is it about these fans that terrifies them into refusing to let their players be super human?

Quote from: Christopher Brady;867136See this tells me more than just a 'line of thought'.  It's a fear, and a distrust of their own players.

I'm pretty sure everyone here has heard me say this, but I run a Mutants and Masterminds campaign (have for the past three years...  Wow...) and I currently have an Ex-Boxer turned psychically powered tank (As in as tough as), a Archer with speedster powers, a Sonic Flying Blaster and a Russian Crime Fighter.

Now, It's an Iron Age campaign, in so much as there's drugs, death and I refuse to mechanically penalize players wanting to kill the villains.  (Cops and such do look down on such activities after all.)

And the amount of PC's who've turned into mass murdering conscienceless hobos in my game?  Zero.  Yes, they've killed a few times, but they (in character) did not like it, and use it as a last and final resort, when nothing else works.

Here's the big back rub, I technically let them do whatever they want, but they don't ever 'cross the line', and I know this because I trust my players, my friends to act 'in setting'.

So my question becomes:  What is it about these fans that terrifies them into refusing to let their players be super human?

Well, to be honest, most issues with power levels in games give me the impression of very antagonistic relationships between both the players themselves and the GM.

That's not limited to Exalted mind you. Star Wars and D&D have a lot of threads on the net that boil down to "my player is awesome at something, how do I fuck them over by the rules".

Quote from: Warboss Squee;867089At least not in massive numbers.

Then again, there seems to be a line of thought that if you don't constantly throw enemy exalts at the players they are just going to walk all over the mortals.

And that this is somehow a bad thing.

There's been a few reasons put fourth and some that are my (addmitedly uncharitable) readings.

A fear that the players won't "engage" with the setting unless almost evetything in it is threatening or some sort of mechanically useful tool to exploit. Engage meaning either interact with or be interested in or in less friendly terms be afraid of and go along more with the GM's intended script because its easier to chase them back on track.

Fear that the players will run roughshod over the setting, changing it in lasting ways the gm wasn't prepared for or being general psychotic murderhobos that the gm can't control. or will derail the GM's "story".

The idea that some gamers have that high powered games are just Badwrongfun on principle. That often contains some of the previous two but not always sometimes being just a generalization of a preferences. "I don't like high powered games so they're instincially bad."

There's also been some social justice stuff thrown in for good measure, a dislike of the idea of stratification or that anyone is innately more power (read as better) than anyone else.

Quote from: Nexus;867147There's been a few reasons put fourth and some that are my (addmitedly uncharitable) readings.

A fear that the players won't "engage" with the setting unless almost evetything in it is threatening or some sort of mechanically useful tool to exploit. Engage meaning either interact with or be interested in or in less friendly terms be afraid of and go along more with the GM's intended script because its easier to chase them back on track.

Fear that the players will run roughshod over the setting, changing it in lasting ways the gm wasn't prepared for or being general psychotic murderhobos that the gm can't control. or will derail the GM's "story".

The idea that some gamers have that high powered games are just Badwrongfun on principle. That often contains some of the previous two but not always sometimes being just a generalization of a preferences. "I don't like high powered games so they're instincially bad."

There's also been some social justice stuff thrown in for good measure, a dislike of the idea of stratification or that anyone is innately more power (read as better) than anyone else.

The conflict between wanting to be better than everybody else and the position of actually being better than anyone else, not to mention the disparagement of "heroic" behavior (either in the altruist-superhero sense or the larger-than-life classical sense) while still wanting Kewl Powerz.

JG

Quote from: Christopher Brady;867136See this tells me more than just a 'line of thought'.  It's a fear, and a distrust of their own players.

I'm pretty sure everyone here has heard me say this, but I run a Mutants and Masterminds campaign (have for the past three years...  Wow...) and I currently have an Ex-Boxer turned psychically powered tank (As in as tough as), a Archer with speedster powers, a Sonic Flying Blaster and a Russian Crime Fighter.

Now, It's an Iron Age campaign, in so much as there's drugs, death and I refuse to mechanically penalize players wanting to kill the villains.  (Cops and such do look down on such activities after all.)

And the amount of PC's who've turned into mass murdering conscienceless hobos in my game?  Zero.  Yes, they've killed a few times, but they (in character) did not like it, and use it as a last and final resort, when nothing else works.

Here's the big back rub, I technically let them do whatever they want, but they don't ever 'cross the line', and I know this because I trust my players, my friends to act 'in setting'.

So my question becomes:  What is it about these fans that terrifies them into refusing to let their players be super human?

Your post is relevant to my own interests because, despite playing with a number of friends who are all self-avowed Marvel and DC fans, our sparse attempts to run four-color superhero games all have degenerated into super-murderhobos.

Granted, I was never the GM (and I'm generally considered the "tough love" one) but these aren't people who, when playing D&D, murder the innkeepers and city constabulary at the drop of a hat. When they played Traveller they weren't the "hold planet hostage with threat of near-c suicidal impact" sort. Hell, when we played frickin' Werewolf: the Apocalypse (you know, that funny old game where you play a 7-foot-tall fur-covered killing machine who drives bystanders crazy) they were more subtle and cautious.

In fact, these people have played Exalted (a campaign I missed) and it was by all accounts a pretty chill game with plenty of slave-freeing and tyrant-toppling and evil-stomping and kingdom-building. No one went on peasant-gutting rampages, not even the Lunar on Limit Break.

I don't generally distrust my players because I'm the frickin' GM. I get to break out the big guns if they get too cocky. I don't fudge to save a callous player's character. Nevertheless, watching two or three attempts and supers games sink, even as a player, was frustrating enough that I sort of wrote off the whole genre. For now, anyway.

So if there are any tips, tricks, techniques or experiences on building and mantaining player buy-in, I'm all ears.

Tangent Start:

Quote from: The Butcher;867214So if there are any tips, tricks, techniques or experiences on building and mantaining player buy-in, I'm all ears.

The issue is that my players played superhero games before I came along, namely the FASERIP system which penalizes players for going on murder sprees.  They are also huge supers fans, so they get in setting long before they make a character.

Honestly, man, I dunno what to tell ya.  Wish I could help, cuz I loves me some supers, either Fantasy or Modern.

Tangent End.

The last estimate I saw for the actual full blown release for the third edition was "Several months" a few weeks ago. Has anyone heard anything different?

Quote from: Nexus;868647The last estimate I saw for the actual full blown release for the third edition was "Several months" a few weeks ago. Has anyone heard anything different?

IDK. This is a low bar shot, but at least they're farther along than Sarka.

Quote from: Warboss Squee;868670IDK. This is a low bar shot, but at least they're farther along than Sarka.

Zing!

(...but so true...)

Oh, that post that earned a permaban should be everyone's new sig there. Wow! Such utter fucking tools! I hate that damn site...

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;868734Zing!

(...but so true...)

Oh, that post that earned a permaban should be everyone's new sig there. Wow! Such utter fucking tools! I hate that damn site...

OK, this is somewhat of a tangent, but I think in a way relevant to Exalted.

Funny thing. Daddy Warpig, a poster I haven't seen here for a while, recently did a podcast with the Honey Badgers, they of the anti-feminist anti-censorship and men's rights in general, and had a talk about the intrusion of the authoritarian left into table top games.

Which, Warpig if you happen to read this, good on you man, I didn't know you were that involved with the adult section of the net like that.  That said, I wish he'd have mentioned the blow up with OBS or rpg.net in general, since it would be nice to see that sort of thing get attention outside of our hobby, and I'm sure people would love to see the "Game devs write game, members of site criticize game both for it's faults and the bullshit behavior of it's writers, whom mod both major sites this is promoted on, and ban or bully the critics".

Because when it get's down to it, I think the reason I really haven't gotten into this new Exalted, is bias. And it's on my part, because I truly loath the people involved.  I know I said I'd try to put that aside and try to look at the game on it's own merits, or lack thereof, but I really don't think I did/can.

Hey morons. Fucking morons. HOW HARD IS IT TO BOOKMARK A GODDAMN PDF?

I'll give you a hint, not fucking very, which is why bookmarked versions of the file were circulating 4chan within a day of the backers getting their copies.

Assholes.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;867219Honestly, man, I dunno what to tell ya.  Wish I could help, cuz I loves me some supers, either Fantasy or Modern.

I'm at a loss too. I've seen the issue come up before but the usual causes (players aren't familiar with genre, don't like or don't really want to play it) don't appear to apply so I'm not really sure what to say or any advice to offer. Especially since they're not running into similar issues in other genres (so its not a matter of having too much 'freedom" outside of more structured settings).

Well, I appreciate the commiseration if nothing else. Thanks gents.

I've considered a more Hellboy/BPRD-esque "secret supers vs. weird menaces" campaign. Maybe the shades of nWoD would keep them grounded. Problem is, I'm not much in the mood for mission-based games these days.