SolarMelee/DariusSollumanOldComments
The comments section was getting really crowded, so I'm archiving old comments here. DS
It seems clear that one would want, at one point or another, to Combo Weapon Breaking Strike, but this isn't possible, even though it's not such a Charm that Comboing it would be unacceptably frightening; I'd revise it so its listed duration were Instant and it could reflexovely augment an attack or parry, or something to that effect. One concern might be that making it Comboable should require raising its cost, though. Storm of Swords seems to be an Extra Action effect, and I would name it such; also, I'd want to explicitly discuss its interaction with other Extra Action effects. It's not as powerful as independent actions, but it's certainly a very strong effect and I wouldn't want to see it combined with, say, independent actions, allowing you to multiply the reflexive attacks you gain from it. - FourWillowsWeeping
I actually considered both of those, but deliberately decided against them. Weapon Breaking Strike is meant to be much more of a special effect than anything else. It is, functionally, a speed bump Charm. Also, as a rule, I don't like Charms that raise the cost of comboing them- the only time that should be done is with specific combinations of Charms, rather than as a broad rule, whereas an Instant Weapon Breaking Strike would be useful almost everywhere.
As for Storm of Swords, it is not, you'll notice, an Extra Actions Charm, any more than Fivefold Bulwark Stance is. It lets you make one, full dice pool Melee attack that may be enhanced normally by other Charms the same way for each time it's invoked. It interacts with Extra Action Charms the same way Persistant Defenses do- by providing even-more-specialized actions that fall outside the Extra Actions. I couldn't think of a clearer way to explain that.
I didn't consider how it would interact with multiple independent actions, though. Off-hand, I'm inclined to say you get one reflexive attack per real turn, as opposed to one per your turn- but CMotS Form kinda contradicts that, since you can use multiple Simple Charms per turn with it... - DariusSolluman
Well, FFBS, FLB, etc., don't really provide actions as much as they provide reactions, and those reactions are restricted to fairly tight conditions. I think that's a pretty important distinction; you can't instigate a situation with a persistent defence, but with a persistent attack, you gain pretty intense flexibility... I'd look at Hundred Razor Circle as an example of a "making extra not extra actions attacks" Charm. More later - FourWillowsWeeping
Mebe I'm just slow, but I don't see how this is confusing or not limited to fairly tight conditions. When you post late, would you explain your concern/illustrate it with an example? I can't help but think we've had a breakdown in communications... - DariusSolluman
My apologies... I wanted to have posted more, but I got pulled away from the box, so I couldn't complete my thought. Let me try and reconstruct it... I think my concern was especially with the possibility (that I assume you wouldn't want, but you don't rule out) of splitting the reflexive attack pool, and thus getting a great deal of high-quality attacks out of a relatively small investment. The reaction thing was this - you don't have a choice about when you get free defensive actions or how they are applied, but with these reflexive attacks, you can choose to mow down mooks, or alternatively you can bash at an Exalt's defences until they collapse. This is the scary bit - being able to make decisions.
Having tried to explain my stance as well as I can, though, and having examined the various 'extra attacks' Charms, I'm less scared of Storm of Swords... it seems to be costed within the range for its effect. The fact that you're only going to get a lot of utility out of it by using it repeately in a long battle against many opponents (and thus haemorrhaging motes) balances it nicely. It's also cool. I think I'll have to examine the properties of reflexive actions again, though; if you can never do things like split them, then the vast majority of my fears will be set to rest.\\ - FourWillowsWeeping
AH! When I wrote that, I was pretty sure you can't split reflexive actions. If I'm wrong, I'll add a note to SoS that it can't be split. (No book at the moment) Thanks for clarifying :) - DariusSolluman
The only things I'd say are that Heart Seeking Blade could do with a remark that it does not affect dodge and parry attempts as they are not difficulty increasers and Storm of Swords should be limited to your melee or your essence (or even Dex)activations active at one time - CorlanDashiva
Chnage to Heart seeking blade made. But I'm not so sure that SoS needs a limitation- at 8 motes, you can't use it much more than your Essence or your Essence +1 anyways- and that's both exhausting yourself, using nothing else, and having very little attuned. - DariusSolluman
That's a good point. I forgot that as a scene length the essence is committed to it - CorlanDashiva
Question on Adamant Wall - how would this interact with, say, Pandaemonium of Voices? If I have access to independent actions, then can I use one of them to stand around, perfectly defending myself, while my independent counterpart pops Hundred Razor Circles and Blazing Solar Bolts at anyone who looks at me funny? So long as I stand in one place, can I use Withering Dirge to shatter souls, or Heartstopping Mien to... um... cause heart attacks? Incidentally, I hadn't commented on these variations of HGD earlier, but I think they're cool (even though their brand of perfection is boring) - willows, who knows he is mixing Exalt types.
You'll notice, Adamant Wall specifically prohibits moving or attacking while it's up- not taking actions. Which means that, in order for you to make an attack or move, you have to drop Adamant Wall.
Now, that does leave the question of 'what constitutes an attack' for what you can still do and not do, and the question of counter-attack charms. My gut instinct is that basically no charm which is intended to cause harm to another may be used while the Adamanat Wall is up, nor can an Exalt use counter-attack Charms or use reflexively granted attacks. The nature of the AW is the most pure defense- it's used for keeping the army from advancing, not for keeping your own hide safe. - DS
You might simplify and clarify Adamant Wall by specifying that the Exalt "may do nothing but defend." This should avoid having to spell out every single thing you can't do (counterattacks, Reflexive Charms, etc). - Quendalon
Done and done, although I still leave a little bit of explicit spelling out. DS
You may wish to expand "using any other Charms" to something roughly along the lines of "invoking other Charms or utilizing the effects of already-invoked Charms." I've phrased it badly, but your current phrasing leaves gaps for stuff like Ready In Eight Directions Stance: not movement, not an attack, and not using a Charm, because it's already active. Or at least a disclaimer of the "for example, but not limited to:" variety. - Quendalon
nod Changes made. Thankye :) DS
Hi there! I like many of these charms. Can I steal some of them and insert them on my MeleePaths page? Furthermore, I notice that there are some similarities between the charms that I've developed and the above. Now, some comments. In Tornado Strike, isn't there a smarter mechanic? It's good as is, but I dislike the extra rolling. Furthermore, what happens if the parry is enhanced with charms? Does the defender have to pay the cost twice, as per re-rolling charms in combos? -Clebo
Feel free to use at will :). And you're right about the Tornado Strike being a bit cludgy- I've redone the mechanic. It's more powerful now (upped the cost to compensate), but much easier. DS
Very interesting apps of Heavenly Guardian...
I'm feeling quasi-creative... if you need help with flavor text, just let me know... Damarus
Dude, totally :) Place flavor text for pure mechanical charms as you will :) DS
Hope you like it... Damarus
Haven't finished reading them all yet, but so far I like them a lot.\\ Suggestions: Make the cap of Tornado Strike the user's Melee. I know that's a much higher cap, but it'd just make more sense to me. I'd also add a WP cost to Storm of Swords. It's already expensive, but that's quite an effect.\\ Those're just my ideas. Thought I'd throw them out there.\\ ~*~Braydz~*~
Re: Making the cap on Tornado Strike the user's Melee. That was my inital thought, but I worried that I was stepping on Abyssal toes there- since making people do worse at stuff (as opposed to making yourself do better) is a typically Abyssal thing. I made the cap Essence specifically because it was worse than Melee, and so less toe steppage. But I can see the arguement the other way, too.
Re: Willpower cost on Storm of Swords. I stand by my inital statement on that- it'd be excessive :) Few melee fights, in my experience, last more than 4 turns, and that's what's needed for Storm of Swords to have become more efficent than Iron Whirlwind Attack. I think the only way to actually settle this would be to build a pair of similiar Solar meleeists, one with Storm of Swords and one with Iron Whirlwind, and see which one does better. DS
DS and I had a discussion on Storm; I agree with him that it's much less scary than it looks. Significant, yes, but broken, probably not. - willows
Okay. A friend of mine and I just ran highly similiar Solar Swordsmen (equal in all ways, save one had Iron Whirlwind and one had Storm of Swords). SoS won, but it took /forever/- both had Fivefold Bulwark Technique up.
I need to run the test again, with slightly different tactics (only used SoS once) variations on interpretation of 'reflexive melee attack' (just Dex + Melee, or a full pool Melee attack; are the reflexive attacks Charm enhanceable) and without a persistant Defense to get a better feel for it.
As was, the SoS guy won by sheer luck. Until the very end, not a single SoS attack even came close to breaking the Persistant Parry. DS
