I like Pendragon a lot but have only ran a few sessions at a time. Use to be hard to find people willing to play anything besides D&D. No reason to be intimidated, it runs quite well.

Quote from: Baeraad;945396Hehe, nah, I'm not banned. It's just that in order to stay non-banned, I keep finding myself having to bite my tongue so hard that I think it's left permanent teeth marks. Spending a little less time there and a little more time somewhere where I won't have to worry about getting threadbanned for using the word "whining" might be good for my blood pressure, is my theory.

(I happen to think that my use of the word "whining" was not only justified but bipartisan, too! To be specific, I said that everyone, regardless of outlook, could stand to stop whining about not every game being perfectly adjusted to their taste. This, it turns out, was not popular with the local powers that be. )

Welcome, Baeraad!

If you enjoy chatrooms, check out the link to #rpgnet in my signature. It's unrelated to the RPGnet website these days in all but name, and even the Pundit approves of the place.

Quote from: The Butcher;945459I would actually love to read a favorable review from a relatable gamer. Pitch it!

Can do! I'll focus mostly on 1E, since that's the one I've got experience with, but I'll add some of my initial impressions of 2E at the end.

If I had to sum up my affection for BR in a single sentence, I'd say that it's a game where everything is infused with a bit of low-grade awesomeness. It's not high fantasy, where there are a few people who matter and everyone else are part of the faceless crowds. It's not low fantasy, where no one at all matters especially much (so you'd better start scrambling for survival, worm!). In BR, everyone, down to the lowliest class-less NPC, has a divine purpose to their life that they can either live up to or tragically fall short of, and the ability to do a bit of cool stuff (magical or otherwise) is, if not universal, then at least so common as to be generally accepted. To be sure, some people are more awesome than others - there is such a thing as powerful archmages, supreme warriors and mighty rulers, and you are explicitly encouraged to try to become one of them - but even to the people at the top, the ones down at the bottom never quite cease to matter. Even the greatest mage will have blind spots among his powers, and even the greatest warrior can potentially be laid low by a lucky shot from an amateur.

In relation to that, the chargen system gives you what I've found to be an incredibly quick and easy way to generate surprisingly complex characters. Basically, each character has a calling represented by a Tarot card from the Major Arcana, a Light Nature describing his best personality trait and a Shadow Nature describing his worst. It's the work of seconds to make those three choices, and what it gives you is a character with an interesting, even profound, set of aspirations and outlooks (because you can say that for Tarot, it's good at providing evocative archetypes ) which can be expressed in either positive or negative ways. Even the noblest hero is human and flawed at his core. Even the vilest villain has something admirable about him; his essential nature is never truly irredeemable, no matter how twisted and poisonous his way of adhering to it has become.

The balance between fighting, magic and skill use is another thing I particularly like. Fighting is pretty much always going to come in handy, but BR is supposed to be about peaceful solutions, and it provides that by offering a very well-defined skill system and rules for non-combat actions (to be fair, it cribbed most of it from D&D, but at least it had the sense to steal good stuff ). The magic, too, is mainly utilitarian. There are no quadratic wizards here, a powerful single-class adept facing a halfway competent guy with a sword is in serious trouble - but that adept is also going to be able to solve a lot of problems that couldn't be solved with a sword. At the same time, skills and magic can both be highly useful to augment mundane fighting skills, so combat pragmatists and magic knights both have their place on the battlefield as well. It all comes together to create very complex situations that reward creativity and provide a lot of interesting twists.

What all this amounts to is a game full of interesting characters using their own particular talents to achieve their goals. It's a world of warrior-poets pitching their unique fighting styles against each other in pursuit of goals that might be big or small, but which are always fundamentally personal and individual. It's a world of small people being more important than the grand causes they might champion. And it's a world of tragedy, where every loss is deeply felt.

Now, as for 2E... in many ways, I think it fixes a lot of the problems with 1E - said problems being mainly, the core book was absolute shit at presenting all of the above. While everything I said is present in the rules and setting, in 1E it was buried under the most uninspired prose I've ever seen in a roleplaying book. The supplements did a lot to add dash and flair and give a better idea of the setting as a place where things actually happened, but they still struggled with being weighted down by the core book's lackluster setting description. The new edition, on the other hand, starts off with the idea that there are dashing adventures to be had and a ton of mysteries to unravel, and goes from there. It spends a lot of time providing helpful advice to do... well, everything that it took me several years to figure out that I should be doing, to be honest.

What I don't quite like about 2E - though I understand why it was probably a good idea - is the revamping of the mechanics from True20 to AGE. True20 has, I feel, a really nice mix between grittiness and excitement, and between providing distinct abilities and powers and making it possible to style your character any way you wanted to. AGE is easier to use, but it also feels more boxed in to me, and a lot flashier - they've gone full-on swashbuckler with this edition, with more quick improvisational action and less careful strategy and distinctive fighting / adventuring styles. This is, to be honest, probably the best course of action if they want more people playing the game, because it took me years and years to get a handle on True20 and it was an absolute pain in the ass until then. But now that I do have a feel for it, I'm inclined to be a grognardy grognard and complain about how everything is getting watered down and made flavourless to suit those darn, lazy, no-good kids of today.

Quote from: GameDaddy;945513P.S. Also, I happen to also like Blue Rose too. Nicole Lindroos did a great job putting together what I would best describe as a Romantic/Chivalric RPG. I even like the Magic Deer that eat magic Corn and fly. But don't get the Pundit started down that that road!

Ahem, yes, I'm familiar with the views of Mr Pundit... He's not completely wrong, and in fact I agree with a few of his points, but he really seems to see everything in black and white and it leads him to some odd conclusions. In particular, I've always been mystified by the fact that he's managed to look at a game where "get filthy stinking rich" is one of the suggested heroic callings, where the Goddess of Commerce is one of the seven fully-good deities, where the main kingdom is explicitly noted as having been brought to greatness through its commitment to free trade and hands out parliamentary seats to the richest people around for God's sake... and from that draw the conclusion that ZOMG COMMUNISM!!!!!!

Quote from: Voros;945515I like Pendragon a lot but have only ran a few sessions at a time. Use to be hard to find people willing to play anything besides D&D. No reason to be intimidated, it runs quite well.

It may be that my GM has set a dauntingly high example. I swear the man is some kind of walking encyclopedia of British history and Arthurian legend. :eek:

Quote from: Dan Davenport;945526Welcome, Baeraad!

If you enjoy chatrooms, check out the link to #rpgnet in my signature. It's unrelated to the RPGnet website these days in all but name, and even the Pundit approves of the place.

Yeah, I've heard about it. I might check it out sometime.

Welcome, Baeraad!

For God's sake, stay out of the moors.  

Quote from: noman;945554Welcome, Baeraad!

For God's sake, stay out of the moors.  

If I see any moors, I will make a point of turning around and walking the other way.

Quote from: Baeraad;945390I've seen a few of these threads around, so I'll take it as a tradition. Hi. I'm a regular at, ah, a certain other roleplaying site who shall remain nameless but has a depressingly well-earned reputation for being more than a bit uptight. Having lurked around here for a bit, I think this place might go a bit easier on my blood pressure, so... pleased to meet y'all?

Welcome to theRPGSite!

QuoteMy most commonly played game for the last half a decade has been Blue Rose...

... which is actually quite a good game in spite of and entirely aside from the constant controversy around it, and I would be happy to explain how and why if anyone is interested.

Man, we've got a MyF(a)rog player here!
Blue Rose just never appealed to me. It's not that it actively kills my interest, it's that I haven't seen anything that contributes to making it interesting!
Can you tell me why I'd want to use BR as a setting, and not a setting like, say, Exalted's Creation? (I can easily run a game of heroic mortals there with another system, and actually have done so).
Let's leave the True20 system aside for now, please.

Quote(I can't answer for its fanbase, though. Everything you've heard about that is probably true, I am very sorry to say. When I read an article by someone saying that buying the second edition about this game about tolerance and diplomacy would be a great way of sticking it to The Wrong Sort Of People I died a little on the inside, I tellz ya... though I digress)

OK, let's leave them aside, too:D!

QuoteJust generally, I think my tastes nowadays fall in some kind of uncomfortable middle ground between between old-school (limited rules all around) and bleeding-edge storygames (rules for what you're going to be doing in a narrative, thematic, fundamental sense that isn't affected by boring things like actual objective reality... or something, I can never quite figure out how that's supposed to work).

I'm a straightforward person - I want a nice comprehensive setting-simulator that tell me what I can and can't do and lets me decide for myself what, within that range, I actually want to do. So GURPS, Savage Worlds... and, yes, True20, though it's more than a bit messy.

I don't have any idea how you combine those two approaches...

QuoteI'm also very fond of Pendragon at the moment, though I think trying to actually run it would give me a nervous breakdown.

Your Pendragon Will Vary.
And the sooner you realize that, the happier you shall be with the game.

QuoteMy current major project is restarting an old (and very long-running) Exalted campaign, this time with a new rulesystem that's some sort of unholy hybrid between regular Exalted 2E, True20, and a generous helping of Godbound. I am intrigued by the idea that it might actually be possible to run an Exalted campaign without feeling like the rules are fighting me every step of the way.

I've been thinking of writing guidelines for converting Exalted to Traveller (possibly the Cepheus Engine), just to see the faces some people would make...
Then I realize my time is better spent elsewhere.

Quote from: Baeraad;945396(I happen to think that my use of the word "whining" was not only justified but bipartisan, too! To be specific, I said that everyone, regardless of outlook, could stand to stop whining about not every game being perfectly adjusted to their taste. This, it turns out, was not popular with the local powers that be. )

Funny, I got threadbanned and warned about a similar comment last night;)!
Oh, and also for excessive use of smilies:). Can you believe that:p? In a forum that limits smilies to 10 per post, people still have issues with someone adding smilies within those limits:D!

Quote from: AsenRG;945559Welcome to theRPGSite!

Thank you.

Quote from: AsenRG;945559Blue Rose just never appealed to me. It's not that it actively kills my interest, it's that I haven't seen anything that contributes to making it interesting!
Can you tell me why I'd want to use BR as a setting, and not a setting like, say, Exalted's Creation? (I can easily run a game of heroic mortals there with another system, and actually have done so).
Let's leave the True20 system aside for now, please.

Well... for one thing, Aldea has a great deal less grimdark. This is by design - Creation is meant to be a brutal, visceral place full of blood and glory and mighty heroes standing tall in a world that gives no quarter to the weak. Aldea, by contrast, is a world where the soft, civilised values and basic human decency tends to manage to survive even under harsh conditions. Good will prevail in Aldea - maybe not today, and almost certainly not without a price being paid, but eventually those who build and preserve will find a way to overcome those who destroy and oppress. In Creation, you will inevitably fall in the end, and your triumph is that right now, you're still standing. In Aldea, evil will inevitably fall in the end, and the tragedy is that right now, it's still out there doing harm to innocents.

For another, the scope of Aldea is smaller. There are fewer towering empires, and more small towns with dark secrets. Individuals matter in Aldea - all individuals, not just the one-in-a-million heroic types who are capable of rising above the throng. Yes, you can create smaller stories set in Creation, but then you're on your own; the setting material for Creation doesn't spend much time on anything smaller than a city of millions or a timescale shorter than a thousand years. The most powerful kingdom in Aldea was founded 300 years ago and you can ride across it in about a month. Likewise, magic in Creation is either a world-shaking force wielded by an elite few or a bunch of barely noticeable tricks that mortal sages nonetheless have to spend a lifetime studying. In Aldea, magic is inborn in a significant portion of the population and part of everyday life - not overpowering, but eminently useful and shaping the way society works in simple, straightforward ways. It's a smaller place, with more granularity.

Thirdly, Aldea has a lot of setting elements that just wouldn't be possible in Creation, at least not without some serious tweaking. A race of sentient, psychic horses devoted to protecting the natural world and who form soulbonds with worthy riders to go on adventures with them? You could probably come up with something like that for Creation - you can get anything into Creation, if you really try - but there they would be some sort of spirits with a sinister hidden agenda or Wyld mutants with a taste for human flesh. If you just adopted Rhy-Horses straight out, they'd clash with the surrounding Heavy Metal badassery, because they're just too darn cute for Creation... and either way, they'd be fairly irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. In Aldea, Rhy-Horses are a big deal, both in practical terms and for metaphysical reasons. Same with, for example, the Sea Folk. Yes, you could have green-skinned dolphin-people in Creation - just a few basic mutations, and there you are. But they wouldn't be a race of inherently holy beings who were closer to the fluidity of the human soul's natural state than others, because that's just not the metaphysical background of Creation.

Short answer? In Aldea, you are a beautiful unique snowflake of a soul trying to find your way back to the peace and freedom of your true, natural state. In Creation, you are a crappy disposable prayer-generator who got ideas above your station and somehow managed to take over a world that was never meant to be yours, and now it's up to you what you make of it. Both scenarios have their appeal, depending on your taste and your current mood.

Quote from: AsenRG;945559OK, let's leave them aside, too:D!

Yes, let's. Thinking about them depresses me.

Quote from: AsenRG;945559I don't have any idea how you combine those two approaches...

Hmm? Which two approaches?

Quote from: AsenRG;945559Funny, I got threadbanned and warned about a similar comment last night;)!

So I see. Well, I hear ya, for what it's worth. I personally feel that if they don't want to be told that they're whining, they should maybe stop whining so goddamn much. Too much negativity is toxic both for the ones spreading it and for the ones who have to listen to it, no matter how justified it supposedly is.

Quote from: AsenRG;945559Oh, and also for excessive use of smilies:). Can you believe that:p? In a forum that limits smilies to 10 per post, people still have issues with someone adding smilies within those limits:D!

Flat what.

*reads ticket*

... yep, that's what it says, all right. Too many smileys. Jesus Christ, you can't make this shit up. I... it... that... HOW DO THEY NOT REALISE HOW FUCKED UP THIS IS?

Quote from: Baeraad;945553Can do! I'll focus mostly on 1E, since that's the one I've got experience with, but I'll add some of my initial impressions of 2E at the end.

That's a good pitch. I'd play this.

Oh yeah, and I'd still Shadow of the Demon Lord-ize it, 'cuz I suck.

Welcome! Savor Discordance!
(Nah, we're not all that bad. Just watch for the tar pits. Ooh, and the moors, those too!)

Hello!

Quote from: Baeraad;945390My current major project is restarting an old (and very long-running) Exalted campaign, this time with a new rulesystem that's some sort of unholy hybrid between regular Exalted 2E, True20, and a generous helping of Godbound. I am intrigued by the idea that it might actually be possible to run an Exalted campaign without feeling like the rules are fighting me every step of the way.

Sounds cool. Keep us updated!

Quote from: The Butcher;945570That's a good pitch. I'd play this.

Oh yeah, and I'd still Shadow of the Demon Lord-ize it, 'cuz I suck.

I must admit that I once ran what was essentially a Call of Cthulhu scenario with BR. Complete with blasphemous tomes and extra tentacles. Oh, and the sorcerous villain was impersonating one of the backward [strike]New England Puritans[/strike] Jarzoni villagers by means of a Flesh Shaping ritual that involved flaying the skin off of the person he was going to turn into and stitching it onto himself. There is room for grimdark if you want it, is what I'm saying - and the overall cutesiness of the setting tends to make it stand out all the more.

Quote from: Cave Bear;945634Sounds cool. Keep us updated!

Will do. The first session is set for this Saturday, so I'll let you know how it goes.

Quote from: Baeraad;945564Thank you.

You're welcome:)!

QuoteGood will prevail in Aldea - maybe not today, and almost certainly not without a price being paid, but eventually those who build and preserve will find a way to overcome those who destroy and oppress.

That's the thing. The certainty bores me.

QuoteIn Creation, you will inevitably fall in the end, and your triumph is that right now, you're still standing.

Luckily, I've never played Exalted with a GM that adopted that stance.

QuoteYes, you can create smaller stories set in Creation, but then you're on your own; the setting material for Creation doesn't spend much time on anything smaller than a city of millions or a timescale shorter than a thousand years.

I'm pretty sure that the Haslanti League and pretty much all of the West disagrees with that assertion...
Are you sure you're not listening to Exalted fans? Because the fans can be, at times, similar to those of Blue Rose in your description;).

QuoteThe most powerful kingdom in Aldea was founded 300 years ago and you can ride across it in about a month.

That's about 1500 km across? Not small at all, I'd say.

QuoteLikewise, magic in Creation is either a world-shaking force wielded by an elite few or a bunch of barely noticeable tricks that mortal sages nonetheless have to spend a lifetime studying. In Aldea, magic is inborn in a significant portion of the population and part of everyday life - not overpowering, but eminently useful and shaping the way society works in simple, straightforward ways. It's a smaller place, with more granularity.

Yeah, but since I generally prefer less magic for the PCs, that's another thing that bores me;).

QuoteThirdly, Aldea has a lot of setting elements that just wouldn't be possible in Creation, at least not without some serious tweaking. A race of sentient, psychic horses devoted to protecting the natural world and who form soulbonds with worthy riders to go on adventures with them? You could probably come up with something like that for Creation - you can get anything into Creation, if you really try - but there they would be some sort of spirits with a sinister hidden agenda or Wyld mutants with a taste for human flesh.

Or I'd simply make them elementals, or Lunarspawn.

QuoteSame with, for example, the Sea Folk. Yes, you could have green-skinned dolphin-people in Creation - just a few basic mutations, and there you are. But they wouldn't be a race of inherently holy beings who were closer to the fluidity of the human soul's natural state than others, because that's just not the metaphysical background of Creation.

Yeah, but again, inherently holy beings are another thing I consider boring (and raises a whole host of hard to resolve questions, for me).

QuoteShort answer? In Aldea, you are a beautiful unique snowflake of a soul trying to find your way back to the peace and freedom of your true, natural state. In Creation, you are a crappy disposable prayer-generator who got ideas above your station and somehow managed to take over a world that was never meant to be yours, and now it's up to you what you make of it. Both scenarios have their appeal, depending on your taste and your current mood.

Thanks, that was...an evocative description, although again, it doesn't jive with my experience of Creation;)!

QuoteYes, let's. Thinking about them depresses me.

Yeah, that's the description I mean.

QuoteHmm? Which two approaches?

Those I quoted.
"Just generally, I think my tastes nowadays fall in some kind of uncomfortable middle ground between between old-school (limited rules all around) and bleeding-edge storygames (rules for what you're going to be doing in a narrative, thematic, fundamental sense that isn't affected by boring things like actual objective reality... or something, I can never quite figure out how that's supposed to work)."

"I'm a straightforward person - I want a nice comprehensive setting-simulator that tell me what I can and can't do and lets me decide for myself what, within that range, I actually want to do. So GURPS, Savage Worlds... and, yes, True20, though it's more than a bit messy."

Unless you consider GURPS to be old-school, I don't know how you combine "limited rules", "bleeding edge storyhames" and "comprehensive setting-simulator".

QuoteSo I see. Well, I hear ya, for what it's worth. I personally feel that if they don't want to be told that they're whining, they should maybe stop whining so goddamn much. Too much negativity is toxic both for the ones spreading it and for the ones who have to listen to it, no matter how justified it supposedly is.

Agreed, but let's not make it a thread about TBP!

QuoteFlat what.

*reads ticket*

... yep, that's what it says, all right. Too many smileys. Jesus Christ, you can't make this shit up. I... it... that... HOW DO THEY NOT REALISE HOW FUCKED UP THIS IS?

Sometimes I suspect that some of them are trolling the site.
But again, let's not make it about TBP.

Quote from: Baeraad;945737I must admit that I once ran what was essentially a Call of Cthulhu scenario with BR. Complete with blasphemous tomes and extra tentacles. Oh, and the sorcerous villain was impersonating one of the backward [strike]New England Puritans[/strike] Jarzoni villagers by means of a Flesh Shaping ritual that involved flaying the skin off of the person he was going to turn into and stitching it onto himself. There is room for grimdark if you want it, is what I'm saying - and the overall cutesiness of the setting tends to make it stand out all the more.

I've been known to play such games, too;)!

Quote from: AsenRG;945855That's the thing. The certainty bores me.

I see. That's a matter of taste, then... but I should point out that being certain of the ultimate victory of the Light is a very academic comfort right here and now when a monster is chewing on your leg. The Empire of Thorns fell in the end, but not until after several generations had lived and died knowing nothing but hardship and oppression. Yes, they were reborn into better times, but that doesn't make the suffering they had to endure any less real.

Quote from: AsenRG;945855Luckily, I've never played Exalted with a GM that adopted that stance.

Well, the same thing applies there in reverse. Eventually you will fall and all your have wrought will come to ruin. But it won't necessarily be next Tuesday. It might be after you have ruled gloriously for a thousand years as the God-King of the greatest empire the world has ever seen.

Quote from: AsenRG;945855Are you sure you're not listening to Exalted fans? Because the fans can be, at times, similar to those of Blue Rose in your description;).

I'm listening mostly to the second edition fluff. I'm aware that the first edition allowed (maybe intended?) for a smaller-scale narrative, though - being a (mortal) wandering monster-hunter in Exalted 1E isn't much different from being a wandering monster-hunter in BR. Except that Creation has more monsters running around that would eat a mortal monster-hunter in a single gulp, I guess, whereas a BR monster-hunter can usually expect to have at least a fighting chance against just about anything he might come across.

Quote from: AsenRG;945855Yeah, but since I generally prefer less magic for the PCs, that's another thing that bores me;).

Well, again, you asked why the setting is different. If the difference is not one that appeals to you, then I'm perfectly willing to accept that.

Quote from: AsenRG;945855Yeah, but again, inherently holy beings are another thing I consider boring (and raises a whole host of hard to resolve questions, for me).

To be sure, Exalted has a much more humanistic setting - we are here, this is now, and nothing has any inherent significance but what we choose to ascribe to it. In BR, some things are simply holy. That doesn't mean that your PC will necessarily care, only that it is possible for things to have value beyond and aside from what human beings ascribe to it.

Again, you might like that or not - it's a matter of taste. But to me BR does scratch an itch that Exalted just doesn't, the one of interacting with a world that's more important than I am - not just bigger and badder, but more important, possessing an inherent significance of its own.

ETA: In fact, sometimes I wonder if a lot of the problem with BR is that it pushes explicitly liberal values (feminism, environmentalism, diversity, etc, etc) but gives implicitly conservative in-setting reasons for them (authority, sanctity, tradition). The result is that it manages to rub everyone the wrong way.

Well, almost everyone. It's a very good game for people who see progress as being the ongoing evolution of tradition, not a rebellion against it - people of a liberal Christian bent, for instance, or those who hold to Aaron-Sorkin-style old-fashioned liberalism. Consider it a specialised taste, I guess. Kind of like marmite.

Quote from: AsenRG;945855Thanks, that was...an evocative description, although again, it doesn't jive with my experience of Creation;)!

Er... that description, on the other hand, is the literal truth, unless they've changed the canon again. The primordials created humans to be small and scared and pray a lot, so that their prayers could empower the primordials' divine minions. Then the humans (along with said divine minions) rebelled and took over a world that was originally created as a primordial playground. That doesn't have any direct effects in play, I'll grant you, but it's part of the underlying assumptions of the setting.

Quote from: AsenRG;945855Those I quoted.
"Just generally, I think my tastes nowadays fall in some kind of uncomfortable middle ground between between old-school (limited rules all around) and bleeding-edge storygames (rules for what you're going to be doing in a narrative, thematic, fundamental sense that isn't affected by boring things like actual objective reality... or something, I can never quite figure out how that's supposed to work)."

"I'm a straightforward person - I want a nice comprehensive setting-simulator that tell me what I can and can't do and lets me decide for myself what, within that range, I actually want to do. So GURPS, Savage Worlds... and, yes, True20, though it's more than a bit messy."

Unless you consider GURPS to be old-school, I don't know how you combine "limited rules", "bleeding edge storyhames" and "comprehensive setting-simulator".

Oh, I think I see the problem. I might have expressed myself badly - I didn't mean that I favoured a combination of all of the above. I just meant, y'know, I don't fall into either the old school camp or the new school camp, I fall into the very lonely camp that still likes 90s-style elaborate rule systems and attempts at realism. Not OD&D and not D&D 4E - I'm fundamentally a D&D 3.5 person.

Quote from: Baeraad;945962I see. That's a matter of taste, then... but I should point out that being certain of the ultimate victory of the Light is a very academic comfort right here and now when a monster is chewing on your leg. The Empire of Thorns fell in the end, but not until after several generations had lived and died knowing nothing but hardship and oppression. Yes, they were reborn into better times, but that doesn't make the suffering they had to endure any less real.

It is a matter of taste, like most things RPG-related. That's why I asked you for recommendations - I was wondering whether there's anything I've been missing:).
Seems like there isn't, but that's not your fault:).

QuoteWell, the same thing applies there in reverse.

Of course! That's why I said "luckily". The certainty of an eventual downfall would be equally boring (and meaningless to boot, but it's "boring" I have a greater problem with).

QuoteEventually you will fall and all your have wrought will come to ruin. But it won't necessarily be next Tuesday. It might be after you have ruled gloriously for a thousand years as the God-King of the greatest empire the world has ever seen.

Oh, wait. If you're thinking of that kind of "certainty", I'm willing to take it, actually:D!
Because it's also the one we've got IRL, and I'm willing to run with that one:p.

QuoteI'm listening mostly to the second edition fluff.

...page references?

QuoteI'm aware that the first edition allowed (maybe intended?) for a smaller-scale narrative, though - being a (mortal) wandering monster-hunter in Exalted 1E isn't much different from being a wandering monster-hunter in BR. Except that Creation has more monsters running around that would eat a mortal monster-hunter in a single gulp, I guess, whereas a BR monster-hunter can usually expect to have at least a fighting chance against just about anything he might come across.

I don't believe in challenge levels, either.
So I prepare ways to kill things way above my challenge level. My friends (and relatives) play the same way, and last time a Wyld Hunt went after them, they decimated the hunt... before havign become Exalted:D!

QuoteWell, again, you asked why the setting is different. If the difference is not one that appeals to you, then I'm perfectly willing to accept that.

I'm also willing to accept it. I was just asking because there might be something I was missing.

QuoteTo be sure, Exalted has a much more humanistic setting - we are here, this is now, and nothing has any inherent significance but what we choose to ascribe to it.

Well, some things have intrinsic value, as much as they do in the real world. But let's not go there.

QuoteIn BR, some things are simply holy. That doesn't mean that your PC will necessarily care, only that it is possible for things to have value beyond and aside from what human beings ascribe to it.

According to which one of the gods;)?
And that's just the first of a long list of such questions I have to resolve on order to have "intrinsically holy" stuff. (BTW, you have those in Exalted, too, just in reverse - people that are intrinsically unholy are "creatures of darkness").

QuoteAgain, you might like that or not - it's a matter of taste. But to me BR does scratch an itch that Exalted just doesn't, the one of interacting with a world that's more important than I am - not just bigger and badder, but more important, possessing an inherent significance of its own.

Yeah, got that. It's just an itch I don't have - I decide what is more important than my character, I don't need things to have inherent significance. In fact, it's often an obstacle.

QuoteETA: In fact, sometimes I wonder if a lot of the problem with BR is that it pushes explicitly liberal values (feminism, environmentalism, diversity, etc, etc) but gives implicitly conservative in-setting reasons for them (authority, sanctity, tradition). The result is that it manages to rub everyone the wrong way.

Well, almost everyone. It's a very good game for people who see progress as being the ongoing evolution of tradition, not a rebellion against it - people of a liberal Christian bent, for instance, or those who hold to Aaron-Sorkin-style old-fashioned liberalism. Consider it a specialised taste, I guess. Kind of like marmite.

Unlikely. I see progress as an ongoing revolution of tradition, except where tradition has become too ossified and you need to rebel against it (much less often than some people would like to, though).
BR still bores me.

QuoteEr... that description, on the other hand, is the literal truth, unless they've changed the canon again. The primordials created humans to be small and scared and pray a lot, so that their prayers could empower the primordials' divine minions. Then the humans (along with said divine minions) rebelled and took over a world that was originally created as a primordial playground. That doesn't have any direct effects in play, I'll grant you, but it's part of the underlying assumptions of the setting.

Yeah, but accepting it is like saying "things only have the meaning they were created with".
While I subscribe to the Cyberpunk approach "the street finds its own uses for things". It explains so much about the setting of Exalted;)!
Humans were created as prayer-machines, right. But the gods found their own use for them.

QuoteOh, I think I see the problem. I might have expressed myself badly - I didn't mean that I favoured a combination of all of the above. I just meant, y'know, I don't fall into either the old school camp or the new school camp, I fall into the very lonely camp that still likes 90s-style elaborate rule systems and attempts at realism. Not OD&D and not D&D 4E - I'm fundamentally a D&D 3.5 person.

Well, I can play pretty much everything, but I admit that most of the systems are like have a small core, which carries an elaborate system (that you can decide not to use). And well, you can see my opinion on the value of realism in the realism thread;)! (I wouldn't peg 3.5 as really realistic, mind. Of the games based on it, Spycraft 2.0 achieves much more in that department, despite being cinematic).

Quote from: AsenRG;946002It is a matter of taste, like most things RPG-related. That's why I asked you for recommendations - I was wondering whether there's anything I've been missing:).
Seems like there isn't, but that's not your fault:).

Yeah, I think you understand it well enough and it's just not for you. No worries.

Quote from: AsenRG;946002Of course! That's why I said "luckily". The certainty of an eventual downfall would be equally boring (and meaningless to boot, but it's "boring" I have a greater problem with).

Oh, wait. If you're thinking of that kind of "certainty", I'm willing to take it, actually!
Because it's also the one we've got IRL, and I'm willing to run with that one.

Just so! All things end. We manage to know that, and still care about them here and now.

And that works for both good stuff and bad stuff. Like, if I'm going through a rough time personally, then I will usually know that unless it's actually life-threatening, then this too shall pass... but that rarely does much to cheer me up, because it doesn't change the fact that right here and now I still have to deal with whatever crap it is I'm dealing with. And it also doesn't mean I can just lean back and wait for it to be over, because in many cases it will last much longer and be much more painful if I do nothing to work through it than if I actively try to fix the situation.

Quote from: AsenRG;946002...page references?

I'm not sure how to provide a page reference for an overall impression. :confused: I think it's reasonably common criticism of Exalted 2E that it forces more EPIC!!!!-ness into everything, though, to the point of strongly implying that if the PCs weren't trying to conquer a major nation you were playing the game wrong.

Quote from: AsenRG;946002So I prepare ways to kill things way above my challenge level. My friends (and relatives) play the same way, and last time a Wyld Hunt went after them, they decimated the hunt... before havign become Exalted!

That's impressive. :eek: How did they manage it? Did it involve poisoned food or avalanches? Or, ooooh, sending in assassins while they were bathing?

Quote from: AsenRG;946002According to which one of the gods;)?
And that's just the first of a long list of such questions I have to resolve on order to have "intrinsically holy" stuff. (BTW, you have those in Exalted, too, just in reverse - people that are intrinsically unholy are "creatures of darkness").

That's just it - in a setting with intrinsic value, it's not a matter of anyone's opinion or decree. It's intrinsic. You could theoretically develop some sort of device for measuring truth, beauty and goodness. (indeed, the setting actually has one of those...) The exact intricacies of what is and is not valuable may be beyond the ability of regular people to fully understand, and the gods aren't telling (they may not even be capable of explaining it in a way that humans would understand), but it is nonetheless a thing that exists and which would continue to exist even if no sentient beings were there to observe it.

In Exalted, holiness is very much a matter of opinion - the Unconquered Sun's opinion, in this case. And ol' Four-Arms does have some pretty good reasons for settings things up the way he did, but it's still just something one person decided, and that either he or someone of greater power can potentially countermand at any time.

In many ways, the second version is a lot more realistic. Value, inasmuch as it even exists, is an emergent property of the sentient mind, and while there are certain common denominators in what people think is and is not valuable, anything but the broadest strokes are subjective and negotiable. But that's just not very, well, romantic. And BR is after all the storytelling game of romantic fantasy, not the storytelling game of naturalistic fantasy.

Quote from: AsenRG;946002Yeah, but accepting it is like saying "things only have the meaning they were created with".
While I subscribe to the Cyberpunk approach "the street finds its own uses for things". It explains so much about the setting of Exalted;)!
Humans were created as prayer-machines, right. But the gods found their own use for them.

Well, yes. Like I said, that's the appeal of Exalted - for me as well, even if I have other tastes too. It's all about making your own decisions about how things should be. It's about having the world tell you, "stop! You can't do that!" and going "oh yeah? Fucking watch me!"