General Exalted Discussion Thread IX: Errata is Combo-Ok!

[Dragnar]

Desus was a hero. Salina was a monster.

While I agree with all the rest of your post, and it's certainly true that it was those like Salina that made the usurpation necessary, not Desus... I have to disagree with this statement. Should she have done what she did? Likely not. It's foolhardy at best tampering with the laws of nature, I wouldn't dream of arguing against that. But a monster? She improved (in my opinion anyway...) the very laws of reality, giving anyone who wanted it a way to learn magic, while Desus was busy being an all-around jerk. The scale of her actions, and the possible consequences, made her dangerous... but her intentions were at least good.

Do good intentions make someone a hero? Maybe not, there are plenty of horrible people who had good intentions. But at the very least, they make them human. To be a monster, in my opinion, one must commit horrible deeds, WITHOUT any greater cause motivating them to it. Desus fits that description. Salina does not. Does having an external cause make you a good person? No, of course not. But it doesn't make you a monster either.


Or in short: Desus was a necessary evil, and creation was worse off without him. Salina was an unfortunate loss, that had to be put down for the good of everyone else. This doesn't make him a hero, nor does it make her a monster.

[Gensh]

Desus was a hero. Salina was a monster.

I daresay the greatest issue in this debate is the multiple uses of the term "hero." In particular, I spy three distinct uses for which alternate terms should be sought: the first is the classical definition, meaning one with great ambition and the will to fight for it; the second is the romantic definition, someone who fights for some vague notion of justice and bettering the world; the third is the modern definition, a super hero who fights against the plight of the common man.

Desus is certainly a classical hero, but his ambition ends with himself, and he cares not what he destroys to get his way - he fails the criteria for the latter two types. Even his status as the first type of hero is but an artifact of his Exaltation, for while he maintains that which he legitimately fought for in the War, he does nothing to expand upon what he had once risked his life for; a classical hero fails to be such the moment he decides to rest on his laurels. Even though he might manage to qualify as a hero, one could expect a shard of the god of Virtue's power to not Exalt those who are monsters on a personal level. Of course, that a Solar Mirror of Cosmic Transcendence exists implies that Virtues aren't quite what they're implied to be.

Compare Salina, who ever strove for excellence. It does not matter that she endangered the very fabric of the cosmos with her plan or that her motivation was purely selfish, merely that she did in fact enact it. She is most certainly a classical hero as a result of her grasping for something greater, and quite possibly both of the second and third types simply because of how widereaching the effects of her Working are. She simultaneously improved the life of each and every Essence-using inhabitant of Creation. Bypassing the Deliberative merely shows how unheroic the Solars has become - certainly no one actually cared enough to read the bill, but why would none of them have even constructed an AI to do the work for them?

Desus is a background character. Salina is a hero.

[Mr.Bookworm]

Salina is more of a monster (in terms of dinging Kejak's Solar Dickery Alert) because of the implications of what she did, not the act itself. Giving sorcery to anyone who wants to learn it is a relatively benign change to the world - but it doesn't change the fact that she rewrote all of reality forever. That's the slipperiest slope there is, and the Solars were not renowned for their restraint.

[aetherialDawn]

Desus is personally a monster; I think we can all agree upon that.
On a greater level, he maintained his realm, and so he did not harm the overall world.
He MAY HAVE worked to improve it; due to his custom charms it's hard to tell. It's also hard to tell if his people were happy, or if he just managed to do enough not to tip off anyone more than his charms could conceal. Still, he maintained his realm.

Salina is personally virtuous, to a fairly good degree (Compared to other First Age Solars...) with some flaws (Child-rearing) and I think we can also agree upon that, though it is MORE questionable.
On a greater level, she proved that Solars could break the world - something which meant that Solars as a whole were too dangerous to remain.
Her actions on a greater level were heroic, however - it's merely that Superman's powers, if used for evil, would be horrifying. What would Desus have chosen as his change to reality? (We don't know because Desus didn't even bother, but I expect it would have been more like what Kejak feared.)

Having power doesn't make you a supervillain, but it does make you a threat. Kejak decided that the threat was too great, given that the nature of the Age and Exaltation seemed to make it a matter of time until villainy and power came together.

Make sense?

[Tavar]

Salina's action isn't proof that they could break the world, or, at least, it's not the first proof of that. It proves that not only can they break the world, but that they can do it easily, and without the oversight or control that up until that point everyone believed they had.

[aetherialDawn]

Salina's action isn't proof that they could break the world, or, at least, it's not the first proof of that. It proves that not only can they break the world, but that they can do it easily, and without the oversight or control that up until that point everyone believed they had.

This is a good point - whether the fact was that the oversight was too weak, or that it was simply corrupt, it still comes out to "We can't stop it if someone wants to try."

[Revlid]

Salina is more of a monster (in terms of dinging Kejak's Solar Dickery Alert) because of the implications of what she did, not the act itself. Giving sorcery to anyone who wants to learn it is a relatively benign change to the world - but it doesn't change the fact that she rewrote all of reality forever. That's the slipperiest slope there is, and the Solars were not renowned for their restraint.

On the one hand, you're correct. Imagine if Salina's Working had not been "Sorcery For Everyone", but had instead been, say, "Green Things Are Boiling Hot"? Or "Salina Is Inherently Correct"? No-one should have that kind of power, much less be able to exercise it to make a philosophical point.

That's not what made Salina a monstrous idiot, though.

Part of it is the fact that, faced with the goal of giving power to mortals, she didn't create a democracy or open Essence-enlightening-centers or anything like that. Instead, she ripped open the fusebox of reality and hammered the "give magic to mortals" button until candy fell out. This being the same fusebox of reality that contained the buttons for entropy, spatial relations, etc. So she was lazy, and prepared to screw with the base workings of the universe as an alternative to actually putting in the effort to improve things. In a world where her peers were pulling stuff like Operation Wyld-Hand, this does not bode well.

Perhaps more important than "Solars can and will break reality for the pettiest of reasons" is the political aspect of what Salina did.

See, the Deliberative was never intended to grant power, but to restrict it. The last time the Solar Host had a serious dispute (back when they realized that they could die of old age, so they wouldn't all get a turn sitting on the throne), they engaged in an eight-hundred year war that killed billions and broke reality, producing the Time of Cascading Years. This was considered undesirable.

The Deliberative was intended to prevent that. It was intended to turn the Solar Host in on itself, to turn them into creatures bound by their own power. It was intended to provide trivial luxuries and perks, and a ground for preening and boasting and networking with one's peers. It was a high-class social club, more than a governing body.

The Deliberative was a place that would allow a Solar to announce to his 299 peers (or those who bothered to turn up; have you seen the attendance ratings for Senate or Parliament?) that the kind of materials necessary to rewrite the laws of the universe are being shipped to so-and-so's island resort, and would she please account for herself? At which point a vote can be taken, and the loser will back down in the face of overwhelming (theoretical) opposition from the only people around who can match them, power-for-power.

The pre-Deliberative way of doing things would have been for that inquisitive Solar to discover the shipped materials, inform his Circle, and go off with his Exalt-buddies and private army to have a war with his opposition, which (given the power-levels involved) would probably wreck that entire Direction, killing millions upon millions.

By the time of the Usurpation, a distressing (and steadily increasing) number of Solars didn't care to be involved in the Deliberative. Which was a problem, because then they had no restraints or oversight on them, which meant that people like Gold-Shadowed Arrow felt the need to get involved, which is, hey, pretty much cause for war. Again.

At least Solars like K'tula just didn't bother with the Deliberative because they didn't care; worse were those who objected to its activities and set about changing it, because they could be considered a legitimate threat. And might well do something crazy and idealistic, like, say, rewriting reality to include "fairness" as a universal principle (to their specifications, of course). Do you understand how horribly desperate a situation is, when those who didn't bother to show up to the vote on Operation Wyld-Hand are doing less damage than those who stormed off in outrage when it passed?

What Salina did technically had the backing of the Deliberative, but essentially functioned in the same independent, I'll-do-whatever-the-hell-I-want, "heroic" fashion as the pre-Deliberative. Which pissed off a lot of people, terrified everyone who didn't want the world rewritten under their feet, and convinced most Sidereals that the Deliberative was going to fail even sooner than they'd thought.

She was a selfish, myopic, lazy monster, and the fact that she claimed to be an idealist does not redeem her in the slightest.

[Turalisj]

So Revlid, when are they making you an Ink Monkey so this stuff can become official?

[Revlid]

I daresay the greatest issue in this debate is the multiple uses of the term "hero." In particular, I spy three distinct uses for which alternate terms should be sought: the first is the classical definition, meaning one with great ambition and the will to fight for it; the second is the romantic definition, someone who fights for some vague notion of justice and bettering the world; the third is the modern definition, a super hero who fights against the plight of the common man.

The first definition is the one Exalted uses.

The second one is very similar, as very few "heroic" characters don't believe they're bettering the world through their actions. That's largely the province of the Ebon Dragon.

The third is a useless definition, as it simply means "good person".

Desus was not a good person. But he was a hero.
And he'd certainly make a better dinner host than Salina.

Desus is certainly a classical hero, but his ambition ends with himself, and he cares not what he destroys to get his way - he fails the criteria for the latter two types. Even his status as the first type of hero is but an artifact of his Exaltation, for while he maintains that which he legitimately fought for in the War, he does nothing to expand upon what he had once risked his life for; a classical hero fails to be such the moment he decides to rest on his laurels.

Desus was absolutely a classical and romantic hero. He didn't rest on his laurels; when not holding parties or social events, he was out acting as the mouth of his Circle, bringing others around to the Hierophant's point of view, causing little mischiefs in the manner of the early Loki, or simply going out and fighting monsters.

If a behemoth was attacking your city, Desus would show up and beat it down. If an apostate cult took an unExalted Terrestrial youth hostage, Desus would show up and wipe them out, talking a few of the younger members out of their madness. If Lintha pirates surfaced on the coast, Desus would commander a waveskimmer and head out to fight them back himself. The fact that he'd post for photos later on does nothing to diminish his heroism.

Desus was a hero who defended Creation itself on dozens of occasions, and protected its people on hundreds more. If the Sidereals had been able to pick-and-choose Solar Exalts they could keep around, they probably would have included him, and rightfully so.

Desus wasn't a complete monster. He loved being a hero, loved adventure, and loved his wife; none of that was an act. The problem was that he came to equate the praise with the heroism, and when everyone praises you for practically everything you do because you're a superhuman god-king... Things get out of hand.

Compare early Loki to Loki in the later myths; he goes from using trickery to get the gods in and out of trouble to using trickery to murder Baldur; now imagine if everyone laughed and praised him when he did so. How much more screwed up would he become?

The Great Curse didn't help, obviously, but Desus is less of a monster than, say, Arkadi, because Arkadi recognized that what he was doing was wrong. He still understood the line between "cutesy trickster hero excess" and "actual damaging abuse", he just routinely crossed it for his own pleasure. Desus was insane, not evil.

Even though he might manage to qualify as a hero, one could expect a shard of the god of Virtue's power to not Exalt those who are monsters on a personal level. Of course, that a Solar Mirror of Cosmic Transcendence exists implies that Virtues aren't quite what they're implied to be.

I'm not sure what you mean, here.

Virtues and "goodness" or "niceness" have nothing to do with one another. For that matter, a lack of Virtues has nothing to do with being bad.

Compare Salina, who ever strove for excellence. It does not matter that she endangered the very fabric of the cosmos with her plan or that her motivation was purely selfish, merely that she did in fact enact it. She is most certainly a classical hero as a result of her grasping for something greater, and quite possibly both of the second and third types simply because of how widereaching the effects of her Working are.

William Stryker believed, in X2, that wiping every mutant from the face of the Earth with a magical death-button was a righteous deed. This made him a hero of the first and second of your definitions. If you hand Salina the third (which I still fail to see as meaningful in any way) then he qualifies, too.

She simultaneously improved the life of each and every Essence-using inhabitant of Creation.

Except, presumably, those incinerated by some ******* who had just learned Flight of the Brilliant Raptor.

[Gensh]

Desus was a hero who defended Creation itself on dozens of occasions, and protected its people on hundreds more. If the Sidereals had been able to pick-and-choose Solar Exalts they could keep around, they probably would have included him, and rightfully so.

How is that not resting on his laurels? He saw the War complete and did nothing afterward to expand upon Creation. He merely maintained what was already there, no more than a trifle to an Elder Solar. He wasn't breeding tyrant lizards for use as snowboards, certainly, but he also wasn't really doing much of anything. He became reactive rather than proactive, and while such behavior is endemic in literary protagonists, it ill suits a Solar. By dint of his power, he vaguely qualifies as a hero, but he is hardly the leader that Solars were meant to be.

I'm not sure what you mean, here.

Virtues and "goodness" or "niceness" have nothing to do with one another. For that matter, a lack of Virtues has nothing to do with being bad.

Just another issue with terminology. The term implies an ideal of some sort. Sol and the Ebon Dragon provide the textbook examples as to how having too high or too low a Virtue score can hurt, but it's because of that that it doesn't really make sense that the Exalts of Virtue suffer no consequences for such extreme violations of Compassion as the First Agers made on a daily basis.

William Stryker believed, in X2, that wiping every mutant from the face of the Earth with a magical death-button was a righteous deed. This made him a hero of the first and second of your definitions. If you hand Salina the third (which I still fail to see as meaningful in any way) then he qualifies, too.

This is a matter of giving and taking. It was wildly irresponsible to give every enlightened being in Creation the ability to learn Sorcery, but it wasn't inherently a bad thing, as each of those beings possesses a free will. To permanently take something inherently part of life without UMI-free permission is perhaps the closest thing the setting has to a categorical wrong. Had Salina made it more difficult to learn Sorcery instead "for safety," then she would have been wrong. Infinitely more practical, certainly, but practicality and morality are almost always at odds. That said, I said that should could qualify for the third, not that she by definition deserved it.[/QUOTE]

[Revlid]

How is that not resting on his laurels? He saw the War complete and did nothing afterward to expand upon Creation. He merely maintained what was already there, no more than a trifle to an Elder Solar. He wasn't breeding tyrant lizards for use as snowboards, certainly, but he also wasn't really doing much of anything. He became reactive rather than proactive, and while such behavior is endemic in literary protagonists, it ill suits a Solar. By dint of his power, he vaguely qualifies as a hero, but he is hardly the leader that Solars were meant to be.

By your metric, then, Superman is not a hero? Nor Captain America, because he does not go forth and conquer Canada for the good of his country?

There comes a point where certain kinds of heroism do more harm than good. Desus reached a time when shaking the pillars of the world became unnecessary, recognized that, and allowed Creation to wallow in well-deserved peace and comfort. What would you have had him do? Invent new threats to face? Wander off into Malfeas like the quixotic Sun Dragon? Start kicking reality in the face like Salina or the Cauldronists?

Desus was the Solar ideal for gods and mortals alike; someone who would overthrow the Primordials, bring Creation into an era of peace, and then rest on his laurels, occasionally beating down the latest behemoth to crawl from the Wyld. A weapon (and make no mistake, every Exalt of the First Age was a weapon) that would sheathe itself once the fighting was done.

What more was there to do? Where else could be conquered? Heaven? Reality itself? Speculation of this kind provoked fear, not gratitude.

Just another issue with terminology. The term implies an ideal of some sort. Sol and the Ebon Dragon provide the textbook examples as to how having too high or too low a Virtue score can hurt, but it's because of that that it doesn't really make sense that the Exalts of Virtue suffer no consequences for such extreme violations of Compassion as the First Agers made on a daily basis.

All the Virtues suffered in the First Age. Temperance was thrown aside to impose the Great Geas on erstwhile allies, and to squander vast resources in orgies to shame the most dedicated hedonist of the Second Age. Conviction was suppressed to allow ambitions to gather dust for the good of humanity, to keep an army of god-kings from coming to world-slaying blows. The very existence of the Deliberative was a statement against Valor, a call to lay down arms and accept bastardized preening over true contests. And, as you say, Compassion was violated by the monstrous sufferings of the unfortunate percentage, and the perversion of the Mandala Accords.

In Exalted, Virtues do not represent something objectively "good". They are an ideal, but so are lots of things. Conviction can lead a being to stay the course in the face of hardship, whether that course is medical aid or genocide. Valor can lead a being to fight against those who decry him, whether they do so for his race or for his status as a sexual offender. Temperance can lead a being to tell the truth regardless of the pressure to lie, whether that truth would uncover great corruption or lead secret police to a den of immigrants. Compassion can lead a being to save lives, whether those lives are innocent children or murdering cannibals.

This is why the Ebon Dragon is so frustrated; he wants to be the Ultimate Evil, but the only way he can portray anything is by becoming its dark reflection, and there is no Ultimate Good (or metric for such) in the Exalted universe. It's a meaningless, entirely subjective term. So the most he can do is permanently lower all his Virtues to one and stick his fingers in his ears.

"FIGHT YOUR ENEMIES" says Nirupadhika, the Sword, who defines Valor.
"PISS OFF" says the Ebon Dragon. "I DON'T CARE ABOUT YOU!"
"FIGHT YOUR ENEMIES" says Nirupadhika, mindless shinma, god of the Wyld.
And the cycle continues.

Calling someone an exemplar of Valor is similar to calling someone an exemplar of Gravity, or an exemplar of Thermodynamics. It's an objective law, not an indicator of morality. Those with greater Valor find it easier to act as Valor dictates, and have to work to act against it. Those with lesser Valor can ignore Valor, but don't get as much Valor-boost when they act as it leads them to.

Someone with Valor 1 doesn't need to be a sniveling coward. They're just the sort of person who, when faced with someone calling them a douchebag, doesn't need to grit their teeth and spend Willpower to just brush it off and ignore them. Similarly, someone with Compassion 1 doesn't need to be a sociopath.

[Lord Raziere]

So Revlid, when are they making you an Ink Monkey so this stuff can become official?

I hope not. I wouldn't want him rewriting the Underworld. Again.

and I dislike his take on virtue. I prefer that Virtues just be a psychology model.

though I do find that he is right regarding the Solars thing and Desus and Salina…..priorities. a person playing with reality, no matter how idealistic, is still a person playing with reality like toy, and reality obviously….is not a toy. simple as that.
granted, beating your wife is also bad, but thats like comparing a grain of sand, to an entire desert or something…….

[Tavar]

I'm not sure that it's really playing with reality like a toy: even in the First age I feel Solars didn't treat reality that frivolously.

As for the virtue thing, they're both (at least in terms of what the game line says).

Finally, regarding the underworld, it would be helpful if you expressed why you didn't like it.

[tonberrian]

I refuse to read Revlid's Underworld rewrite on the grounds that I have no basis to judge its merits as compared to the canon Underworld, since I have not read CoCD: Underworld yet.

[Xefas]

So, Asura's Wrath came out today.

I would suggest, if you like Infernals, you go watch at least the first 5-6 episodes on Youtube. The main character is, at one point, the One-Handed Maiden (from everyone's favorite martial art sutra) in every possible way and meaning. And it is awesome.

[Revlid]

The writers have plans for making the Underworld an interesting place to be.

Raziere's cainophobia aside, I have no doubt they'll succeed.

[Gensh]

By your metric, then, Superman is not a hero? Nor Captain America, because he does not go forth and conquer Canada for the good of his country?

Superman cannot magically increase the intelligence of the human populace around him, for starters. Apart from the fundamental "impossibles" of the setting like time travel, there is absolutely nothing that they cannot do. The shards were created as weapons, but their wielders are still men. When the war is over, the axe is better used cutting wood than being put on display. Say the selection process didn't get ruthless megalomaniacs half the time - what if the Solars broke reality in such ways as to create glory our minds can't fathom. There was much the First Agers could have done rather than playing hide-and-seek with the Lintha.

Calling someone an exemplar of Valor is similar to calling someone an exemplar of Gravity, or an exemplar of Thermodynamics. It's an objective law, not an indicator of morality. Those with greater Valor find it easier to act as Valor dictates, and have to work to act against it. Those with lesser Valor can ignore Valor, but don't get as much Valor-boost when they act as it leads them to.

My issue with that interpretation of Virtues is that it doesn't quite make sense with the setting at large - it makes characters seem too much like Primordials struggling against their Excellencies. It's almost like everyone is Marty McFly, except instead of being a joke, it's supposed to be taken seriously. In the group I ran, all the players groaned whenever I mentioned them, so I threw them out altogether. I'm working on a bit of material that's relevant and might merit their return, but otherwise, I've found it works better when Virtues as the objective concept are just as irrelevant as kingship the objective concept - only important when you're staring Sol/Malfeas in the face.

Incidentally, what was the question everyone is supposed to be debating? I thought the topic was whether or not Solars are entitled to being huge pricks by virtue of winning the War, but it kind of went off in some other direction.

[Lord Raziere]

The writers have plans for making the Underworld an interesting place to be.

Raziere's cainophobia aside, I have no doubt they'll succeed.

*narrows eyes*

*looks up definition*

I'm shutting up now.

[Turalisj]

The writers have plans for making the Underworld an interesting place to be.

Raziere's cainophobia aside, I have no doubt they'll succeed.

Now be fair Revlid. Cainophobes make up about a quarter of the Exalted fanbase.

[Tavar]

To be fair to Revlid, Lord Raziere, most of your complaints seem to be "I don't like it because", at least with regards to the Underworld. That's not a good way to start a discussion, or make others view your position favorably.

[DeadManSleeping]

Now be fair Revlid. Cainophobes make up about a quarter of the Exalted RPG fanbase.

Fixed that for you

[Turalisj]

Fixed that for you

If we're going to change it to the RPG fanbase, it needs to be at least half of the fans.

[DeadManSleeping]

All the meatspace RPG players I know are totally cool with new stuff. It can't be THAT big a percent.

You might be conflating us too much with comic book people, who hate every new thing until a new new thing comes out.

[Turalisj]

There is a good deal of overlap.

[Lord Raziere]

well how about I list the things I like first about the rewrite?

I like:

-some of the plot hooks in said underworld rewrite
-giving Ghosts better charms and Necromancy
-actual details on the Neverborn

Dislike:

-where he put Oblivion. it shouldn't be the sun. it should be underground
-where he put the Neverborn. they should still be underground, like Oblivion.
-ghost-artifacts shouldn't be lesser than the real artifacts. I like them as is. I don't want to wield a ghostly normal sword, I want to a wield a ghostly daiklave.

but really, I'm pretty much trying to get over Abyssals and the Underworld. its pretty clear that for some reason, everyone prefers Abyssals the way they are, being doomed, and therefore why should I care about the Underworld either.

Its just rapidly becoming clear I really want to play a Fiend Caste or a Raksha with Assumption of Cerements and Bone. Solars don't have the "making a deal with the devil then rebelling against them using their dark powers" thing I'm looking for, while Abyssals don't have enough rebellion. Infernals have right amount of rebellion, right amount of deal with the devil….but I'll probably be sticking to Fiend Castes to get the darkness.
Raksha of course, being from the Wyld can tell any story I want with it...

[Hiro Protagonest]

So, Asura's Wrath came out today.

I would suggest, if you like Infernals, you go watch at least the first 5-6 episodes on Youtube. The main character is, at one point, the One-Handed Maiden (from everyone's favorite martial art sutra) in every possible way and meaning. And it is awesome.

I can't find the ones in English, except for the gameplay demo, and that's not the episodes. T.T

I saw a video of the game before though (starting from when Asura started fighting the fat guy and going to the point where he beats back the guy's comet of a fist and someone who you only see the feet of appears behind Asura and says "you should not have come back").

[horngeek]

Where is Revlid's underworld rewrite, anyway?

[Tavar]

A link to something of a compilation thread.

[Xefas]

I can't find the ones in English, except for the gameplay demo, and that's not the episodes. T.T

Apparently, only minutes ago, while I was in the middle of watching a video, Capcom threw a tantrum and had all recent Asura's Wrath gameplay videos taken down (in at least one case, including an officially Capcom-sanctioned review).

I'm sure they'll be back up somewhere on the internet by tomorrow. But, as a summation to those folks who haven't seen it, the main character, Asura, is fighting a god the size of a small planet, who attempts to squish him with a big golden mountain-range-esque finger. Asura activates Devil-Tyrant Avatar Shintai (for some bonus limbs) and punches this dude's hand until his own arms crack and shatter into little bits. With his single remaining arm, he Green Sun Nimbus Flares the god into oblivion. This tears Asura's last arm off.

And then he fights another god using only his head, torso, and feet while I shout Monty Python references.

[Tavar]

I've seen most of that video(up until right after he defeats the god the size of a planet), and I completely agree with you. It's either a Slayer with a heavy Malfeas focus, or it's a Solar Akuma of Malfeas going by his combat style.