-
[quote user="Octopoid"] and demand proof of a contradictory position but fail to provide support for yours?[/quote] Fair enough. My post was poorly constructed, rushed, and a bit asinine. My apology. As for the foundation for my stance: Essence 10 [quote user="Holden"]Scale ends at 10.[/quote]
-
[quote user="Octopoid"] I learned from one of the best.[/quote] How to take fragments of a full statement and ignore the rest of it? Not even addressing the relevant portion? You must have been cross-training on the wow boards and /b/. Whatever, this isn't adding to the discussion at hand, well you aren't, and I'm done addressing
-
[quote user="JiveX"]But yes you do, otherwise those step 10 crippling charms are really nasty and unpleasant surprises (not in a good way)... haha you thought you only took one level of damage but instead your blind!!!![/quote] I'm in agreement with Irked on this topic. The transparency clause dictates that you announce charms when used
-
[quote user="Octopoid"][quote user="serrasin"]Erm, no[/quote] Yes. [/quote] Your argument is compelling sir.
-
[quote user="danelsan"] Not really the only one. Chejop could give her a Spell-Capturing Cord with the spell. Or made a vial with it using that (in my opinion overpowered) cauldron or something that lets you put spells in fragile vials for later use. There might be other methods I'm forgetting[/quote] ... or she might just be wearing power
-
[quote user="Shadowfang"]The Essence 10 limit is for a being's natural, unmodified Essence rating. Artifacts, charms, and other things can still increase your *effective* Essence rating beyond 10, at least in theory. [/quote] Erm, no; not unless you can come up with something more concrete than in theory . Essence 10 is the end of the
-
[quote user="Chaka"]Tattoo armour will stack with other armours. This makes sense. [/quote] I wouldn't even allow this unless the inscribed artifact specified that it stacks and does not count as armor, such as silksteel.
-
[quote user="Nobody"][quote user="Rafilar"] This is a very popular legal theory in the IP community, but I am as yet unaware of the Supreme Court having said that it is a legal fact. EDIT: U.S. only, your country's mileage may vary. [/quote] Quite the opposite, in fact. The lower courts have upheld the Copyright Act and used
-
[quote user="AjaxTorbin"]However, I will disagree with you, I would not like to see any of the features from 4th find their way into Exalted. Maybe some of the features from Scion and a general tidying up of the rules, but if the part I suspect you wish to see in Exalted shows up, I would be highly disappointed. (you do mean the 'maneuvers'
-
Been playing 4E and I'm enjoying it; this is after decades of 2E and 3E gaming. I do think that its an improvement over 3E and it has not interfered at all with character or story at all. That being said, Im glad that exalted is a unique game system, though I might like a few aspects of 4E to leak into exalted if and when there is a new edition