Lost 2.0 is coming.
I’ve talked a bit about it. How Kith is defined by the role you play in Arcadia, by the place your Keeper put you. Seeming is defined by that moment where you took control, where you broke free. We’re set to have about 100 Kiths in the Lost 2.0 core rulebook. We’re set to have six Seemings, and one additional one in REDACTED. I wanted to share a Seeming with you, to show you how they look and feel.
Each will flavour and influence its Kith. You look like your Kith, but your Seeming makes it unique and yours. Certain types of people are likely to end up as a Seeming, that’s covered in Background. After all, your personality helps determine how and why you take control. The actual escape is the defining moment, that’s in the Seeming description. Blessings are anchor points you can use to freely regain Clarity, by grounding yourself in certain behaviour that’s natural to you. Curses are things that risk your Clarity, unique to your Seeming.
So here you go. Beasts. This is brought to you by the amazing Filamena Young.
Beasts
You hear that sound? Like an animal, wounded, god that gets the blood going, doesn’t it? I’m just going to go check it out…
They’ve got wild eyes and untamed hearts. They’re reckless, passionate, and dangerous. They’re a wet dream made flesh when they’re turned on, which is common, they’re walking nightmares when they’re angry, which is also common. The Beast has reached inside, found her animal self, and embraced her id. The animal inside of her kept her alive at the worst times. Humanity has failed her, failed her when she was the most in need, and so she rejected it.
Appearance: You will know a Beast by her gait, by her pose, by her appetite, but most often, you will know a Beast by her eyes. To the mundane eye, the Beast is wild and unkempt, or perfectly kept but with the presence of the animal about her. No one says of the Beast, “he’s like a shark.” They say, “he is a shark.”
To the Changeling eye, the Beast has let the wildness inside out, and remade himself from parts of the wild real and imagined. He may be simply lion on two legs, proud and golden and beautiful. Or he may be parts and pieces, a horn, a maw, dripping bird-talons and snake teeth. Chimera-like Beasts may reflect a conflict between the Kith inflicted on them and the animal soul they claimed for themselves at the time of their escape.
Background: Many Beasts lived before their Durances, already trapped and caged. Social bindings or literal incarceration can both lead to an attempt to ‘escape’. For examples, a cog in the wheel of a big corporation willing to make any deal to get out of their cubical or a three-strike looser serving life on a technicality. Even a lovely, well kept house-wife in a gilded cage dreaming of some other, wilder life, might fall into the clutches of a Keeper, anything to escape confinement. That’s not to say that free spirits who lived life in the wide open can’t become Beasts, as they do, but most often, a Beast felt trapped before they were captured.
The Escape: From one cage to another, the Beast has been pushed too far. She already knows what it feels like to be without choices, to submit, to lean on humanity and civility. After all, that way failed her as her situation went from bad to worse in the hands of her Keeper. So she makes a choice, she chooses to do something wild, something socially unacceptable, something animalistic. She bites through flesh, claws through soil, smears herself with shit and blood to escape the Huntsman on her heels. She chooses to break a taboo, destroys her civility, and in making that choice, she escapes. In making that choice, she becomes the Beast, the frail captive she once was left behind, forgotten.
Character Creation: Beasts favor the physicality of life, and test her capability at every turn. This is not to say that all Beasts are hulking brutes or thoughtless thugs. Cunning can be tied to physicality; after all, the brain is a part of the body. Instead of assuming Beasts are meaty, brainless animals, create a character who is always testing her limits. A fair scattering of Skills is likely as the character tires and bores of everything the world has to offer. At some point, the Beast will find a thing she wishes to focus on, some perceived limit in her capacity that she’ll push and push and perfect. And so, a Beast only a few years out of the Hedge may appear a jack-of-all-trades. A Beast with some time, however, will look more like a creature of passion, hyper focused on the ‘thing’ she thinks is her pinnacle. Like a cat playing to perfect her hunting skills, the Beast is relentless in improving this one aspect.
Blessing: Clarity of Abandon. Lost in the lies and oppression of society, a Beast has great difficulty making head or tales of the cultural landscape before her. She remembers, though vaguely, that there is a reason for many of the rules and laws that keep people civilized, but the importance of those reasons has faded away. Rules of society are only chains around her neck, and obedience to those old ways is suffocating. (Perhaps suffocating to everyone, but only the Beast is wise enough to notice.) Once per story, a Beast can flaunt a cultural taboo despite great personal cost, and regain a point of Clarity for free.
Curse: A Beast’s Burden. Confinement is a fate worse than death to the Beast. She’s experienced it already, and her spirit is simply too big to fit comfortably into bondage. A Beast can, of her own free will, enter into a Contract or Pledge or other more intimate acts of binding, but it chuffs her more than the average Lost. Forced confinement, especially the physical kind, is too much for her. Escaping bonds requires three Glamour instead of one. Once per story, if a Beast is confined or imprisoned, she suffers a Clarity breaking point.
Concepts:
The broker’s made of teeth and cunning. He’s figured out how to land the big fish; he’s a shark and he’s always hungry.
She’s free, running like the wind at the first sign of danger, not out of cowardice, but because nothing matters more than the freedom to run.
He’s got a drumbeat in his blood and every heavy step shakes the earth under him and he will never, ever, forget the one that tried to poach him.
Timely, in the wake of all the updates for those other beasts.
Love the blessing and curse. Recently one of my changeling PCs, a fox girl, took a selfie in front of a bunch of meth. I suppose I could have awarded her a clarity.
Are all the seeming’s blessings based around Clarity?
Yes. All of them are ways to net Clarity.
Under Curse – ‘it chuffs her more than the average Lost’. Should this be ‘chafes’ or ‘cuffs’? Do these bindings hurt the Beast, it bind her harder, because I could see it working either way?
Bunyip, I can guarantee they used ‘chuff’ on purpose, but it seems they didn’t quite know the definition of it. You’re right in that it should be ‘chafe.’ But hey, this is what previews and first drafts are for.
Eh. More a legacy of quick writing, spell check things, and whatever.
Totally one of the reasons I do this and post first drafts when reasonable.
Thanks. I could see two ways the ‘typo’ could have gone, and was wondering which was intended.
Looks good. I look forward to the rest 🙂
I just finished REDACTED. Which is pretty cool.
“Escaping bonds requires three Glamour instead of one.”
Are Contracts of Separation-esque powers now innate for Changelings, or does this merely mean that Contracts always cost one glamour and a Beast using Contracts related to escape cost three times as month?
I’m terribly excited at the idea of Changelings being innately. . .free.
One of the basic advantages of the Second Edition Changeling template is that the Lost can always escape from mundane bonds. With a point of Glamour, they become unrestrained.
Does “mundane bonds” only include items like handcuffs, gags, blindfolds and chains, or does it mean that you cannot even lock them in a room or car, or successfully maintain grapple in combat?
Most of those things would be broken easily. Rooms are slightly more complicated. But any restraint that’s forcibly touching them would count as a mundane bond.
Thanks, David.
So, an actual person such as a police officer or street thug grabbing and restraining a changeling with just their bare hands would count as a “mundane bond?” If so, changelings have certainly become slippery little devils.
I really like this. It’s very different from the 1st Editio, and perhaps more inspired in the way the changeling’s escape seems to mattter more than her durance.
A thought, though:
Shouldn’t escaping be easier rather than more difficult for Beasts, since their whole thing appears to revolve about refusing to be constrained?
Same for the blessing: looks like their troubles with social mores could be the basis for an interesting weakness.
It feels a little like the themes of their Blessing and Curses were reversed somehow.
Shouldn’t escaping be easier rather than more difficult for Beasts, since their whole thing appears to revolve about refusing to be constrained?
Refusal is an inclination. They need to be unconstrained, so when someone *succeeds* in trapping them it hits harder.
Thanks for the reply! That’s terribly exciting news!
‘Escaping bonds requires three Glamour instead of one.’
Does this apply if one one is using a Contract (rather than the innate Changeling ability) such as Artifice or Separation or will they even exist in 2nd ?
It specifically applies to the inate ability. No Contracts will specifically overlap that ability.
Can I assume that when a Beast escape bonds they make the Dr. Zoidberg ‘woop woop woop’ noise?
That’s completely up to the individual character.
You really want us to think that playing these guys is awesome, uh.
Just please don’t forget that Changeling is also about trauma and it’s going to be great!
Seemings are about taking control. They’re when you break the cycle. That shouldn’t be about trauma. This is one place in the book that can’t be about trauma. It’s about agency.
But I assure you, the game touches on trauma. A lot.
Funny you should say that, because, when I first started reading this, I actually saw this as a reaction TO trauma. The idea of someone in a cage reacting by almost violently reveling is a pretty common reaction to a traumatic experience. It’s pretty much the reason the Spring Court existed in 1e.
Is that the case, or am I just misreading?
Not an unreasonable reading at all. Responses and defense mechanisms and reactions and yeah.
I super excited about changeling. Just this post has my mind spinning in half a dozen story directions.
I started to run a mixed chronicle at one point (a mistake) and one of the players chose to play a changeling, one of the problems she had was the actual powers (pledge’s? contracts? it’s been a while since I’ve picked up changeling) seemed to be too scenario specific. Like one could only be activated if a family member (loved one?) had been killed (or something). Will it be easier to activate things in this version? (sorry about the vagueness, hopefully what I’m asking about has come through)
You made a common mistake for people playing 1st Edition Changeling; the Catch isn’t a requirement to enact a Clause, it’s a loophole for certain situations in which the Changeling won’t have to pay glamour to activate the power.
So David is developing every World of Darkness game ever?
I think you may be merging David Hill with Dave Brookshaw. 🙂
David is developing Changeling, Hurt Locker, and others, while Dave is developing Mage. They are both authors on numerous books.
Dave Brookshaw is doing Mage the Awakening.
David A Hill Jr. is doing Changeling the Lost.
Not at all I believe that is like this:
Changeling -> David Hill
Mage -> Dave Brookshaw
Beast and Promethean-> Matthew MacFarland
Vampire and WOD core-> Rose
Demon-> Matthew MacFarland and Rose
Mummy -> CAS
Ops, forgot to mention Werewolf, the developer is Stew Wilson.
Others will try to convince you that there are more than one “Dave” developing for Onyx Path. That is a Lie.
There is only One Dave, and that Dave is Dave. Observations of other Daves are either a manifestation of His Glory, or more likely a gltich soon to be corrected.
See, this is the problem with drunk mages…
I assure you, UK Dave Brookshaw is different from Japan Dave Hill.
There are multiple Daves. I promise.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JF1chLj1fro
thats what the media wants you to belive
Since the paradigm shifts on Kiths, Seemings, and Courts were talked about for 2nd Edition, I’ve been looking forward to seeing where it was all going to take Changeling The Lost.
And reading this piece of what’s to come, I am even more excited for the final product. Really like the feel of the Beast Seeming, and what you’ve done with the Curse and Blessing is actually very interesting. I think it helps focus the seeming a lot more on the symbolism of the escape and what it meant for the Changeling.
Also very curious to hear about this seventh seeming and more on the innate abilities of Changelings in second edition (especially given that mention of being able to escape out of mundane bonds just with Glamour).
I’m always extremely pleased to see Filamena’s name on an Onyx Path game. Really guarantees that the writing is gonna be off the chain. 🙂
This really makes me want to get into CtL. Thanks for sharing this preview!
I liked it a lot. I was specially worried about the Beast Seeming considering that there is a lot of Kiths that aren’t animal-like, worried that it was a concept that wouldn’t fit with others, but this write-up clears things up.
Now I’m very curious about that this REDACTED seventh Seeming is exactly…
So for clarification purposes:
My Fae Master has transformed me into something like a wooden doll (think Pinocchio). This is my Kith. But then I take control by embracing my inner Beast and escaping. That is my seeming.
Is this an accurate assessment of the new rules?
Also, does Seeming affect how your character looks in addition to your Kith, or just their personality? Would my Pinocchio character also bear a beast-like appearance, or would his beast seeming be more of a personality trait?
Going by the forum posts on this, unless there have been changes it impacts both. So you’ve got the personality stuff as implied by blessing and curse, and your kith also changes to physically reflect the seeming. You’d still be a wooden doll, but that wooden doll would have animal like features.
Which come to think of it, is pretty much Pinocchio being turned into a goat, down to the breaking of a taboo as a cause.
I think it was a donkey. But yeah, that seems like the sort of spin on it that a player could take, if so desired.
This is an accurate assessment.
Alright, you hooked me. This sounds pretty sweet!
You’d still be a wooden doll, but that wooden doll would have animal like features.
It would be interesting if Clarity influenced the weighting of Seeming and Kith in a changeling’s appearance.
So by acting like a Faerie tale archetype I learn the difference between the real and unreal represented by gaining Clarity? Instead of plunge head long down the crazy train that acting like a Faerie normally gets you?
I can see the logic, I relive the act that freed me and therefore self actualize, okay… but this is not in the context of acting like a human being, but acting like a Faerie which is where it loses the plot.
I really don’t see why you guys are so hell bent on making changes for the sake of change to Changeling the Lost, one of the most flavorful books of the 1e line. This isn’t Vampire or Werewolf who needed some refocusing on core concepts, Changeling just needed some mechanically help.
I don’t see why you’re not willing to read generously, and attribute “for the sake of change” to our motivations.
Lost 2e is probably changing the least of the 2e lines so far. The changes we’ve made were result of long discussions with hundreds of players, and are all to reinforce themes. Nothing, nothing was done “for the sake of change”. That would make my job harder. That would be silly.
So, I want to start by saying that there is some of this that I /really/ like! I don’t think you’re making change for the sake of change. This work is good and the brainspews on the forum have gotten me thinking a lot. But I also don’t know if this change is for the sake of Changeling.
I think I’m on board with Seeming being the way you reassert yourself. It it the way one regains agency (which is a super central theme that I’m not sure I buy into yet, but that’s not the point here). So, the Seeming is a bridge between the fae-ness of what was done to you, and the person you choose to become.
While I don’t /like/ the game being about agency as a central theme yet (I think it will grow on me), I do not believe that Seeming works with that. It’s not this writeup that bothers me, actually, but the fact that Seemings also still determine your affinity contracts. That empowring choice (to adopt your seeming) falls flat to me if it also comes with magic powers. It wrests too much control from the central conflict and puts it in the players hands. (Not saying they should have no agency, but it feels like the battle is already over in any meaningful way.)
To elaborate: If I was taken to be an elegant lover. Perhaps my Kith is some sort of Romancer, then. Yet I broke out of Arcadia by flaunting the rules and embracing something wild! I now (theoretically) have an affinity for being or communicating with some sort of animal via a contract which does that? That being said, perhaps the contract associations are more philosophical in nature, allowing minor traits of “wildness,” instead of outright association with animals.
My point is this -> if, by only the act of will that allows to to leave Arcadia, do you suddenly get magical affinities, I am concerned that this is too much like saying “I have decided to fight my abuser and have spontaneously developed fighting prowess despite their being no background for this in my Durance.”
To me, this doesn’t force players to live with what was done to them and persevere /despite/ that. I much prefer the image of the terrifying brute, who even has the magic to back it up, who became a pacifist and refused to fight (defeating his keeper with spite, perhaps like a Wizened might?) The drama there is that he still /can/ crush skulls, and he has to make sure that with his big hammer, he doesn’t treat every problem like a nail.
Thanks for reading. You all have done awesome work and I look forward to hearing more despite my concerns.
I get that. I can absolutely see it.
I’ll just put out a tiny note that affinity Contracts will be less about “getting magic powers” and instead they’re more about “how magic powers look for you”. The way a Beast uses Strength is different from how an Ogre uses Strength, and from how a Fairest uses Strength. You can learn to use Strength like a Fairest. But by default, you use it like a Beast.
That’s awesome! Ok. Seeing it through this lens, I think it is a step forward and an interesting spin.
Thanks for writing and responding. I look forward to more.
In addition to Dave’s really good point about Contracts, I’d also add that he’s expressed his intention for the mechanics behind 2e Kiths to be more useful and interesting than 1e Kiths. The guy who would prefer to solve problems without busting heads might still have something that’s really good for busting heads on his character sheet, just sitting there, tempting him to solve his problems by being what his Keeper made him to be.
That’s a huge goal with all our 2e stuff. But Kiths are a place I want to give a lot of attention, because I felt a ton of them were really lacklustre in 1e. Sometimes, their advantages were literally useless. I want them all to be functional, and bring story to the table.
I think people aren’t too inclined to be charitable about these changes because Lost 1.0 was very near perfect and didn’t need them. It didn’t need any thematic edits or additions, in any case, and that’s why I’m extremely hesitant about this. I actually like swapping Seeming and Kith’s conceptual places, but the idea of using one to inject more “agency” into the game in a way that prevents Loyalists, Privateers, or just anybody who escaped on their Keeper’s terms or was let out from ever having Seemings, taking options away from all those characters that were there and worked fine before, is frankly a significant step backwards. I don’t think *any* Changeling character should ever be CERTAIN that they weren’t allowed to leave, let alone have a giant metaphysical mark commemorating it, given what we know about the True Fae from Equinox Road and how it made them the best antagonists ever.
The game could use some mechanical updates, yeah – off the top of my head, the ones that come to mind have to do with making Contracts a bit more versatile, Pledge rules a bit less convoluted, and bringing the descriptions of Gentry in some of the earlier books into line with how Equinox Road clarified them, but its core concepts don’t need any help.
I think a lot of people are very charitable about them. I’ve got a couple of skeptical notes, but a ton of very, very positive ones.
This in no way prevents Loyalists, Privateers, or other escapees. Not even remotely. Maybe you’re assuming that’s the case because you’ve read two pages out of 300. I hope the other 298 can help to clarify for you.
Okay. We’ll see as more pages come out. Until then, though, that’s not actually what I said. Can Loyalists and Privateers have Seemings?
So, Beasts! Curiouser and curiouser, I must say.
One thing that I am absolutely adoring is the shift from Beast = dumb of the first game. I actually feel more inclined to play a Beast now than I did ever before. The breaking-of-social-taboos does seem more animalistic; animals aren’t human, don’t think like them. Humans have to think like them.
The rest, however, I really feel like its either a repeat of the themes from 1e (which, while good to see, I can’t get excited about), or we’re missing pieces. The escape thing feels odd to me as it is – is the extra glamour to reflect freaking out more? I feel like something’s missing, but I can’t tell without the other rule set.
Um, no? Did you read the entire thing?
You don’t get Clarity for acting out an archetype, you get it for reenacting the circumstances of your escape, reminding yourself it did actually happen and you’re a free changeling, now.
Beasts got that way by deciding to screw taboos and confinement, and they screw taboos and confinement to help cement the first and most glorious time they did so.
I’m interested in seeing how this system plays out for Loyalists or Privateers whose “escape” may not have taken the form of “seizing control.”
I think the last mention it got on the forums was that Changelings who didn’t take (or haven’t taken) control of their own lives back just may not have a Seeming. Things may well have changed since then, of course; the mention of a seventh Seeming is a possibility, much as I’d welcome it being something else.
I don’t know that being a Loyalist/Privateer from the beginning is mutually exclusive with getting a Seeming. I can see ways of a Changeling taking agency and then using that agency to keep up an association with his Keeper.
They don’t always get a Seeming.
I was skeptical of the change to Seemings, but I really like what y’all have done with it.
So… Beasts are the Tyler Durdens of the Changeling world, now?
I have a question, David. I can see how a Beast could be attracted to Spring, Summer, and Winter: those are all Courts that have very bestial mentalities: eat, drink, and make love; go down fighting if the Fae come back; run and hide, and pray your Keeper doesn’t find you. Autumn seems more cerebral than Beasts are being portrayed. Are Autumn Beasts supposed to invoke intelligent, calculating animals, like ravens, octopi, etc.?
Er, I don’t see the difficulty. Beasts aren’t thugs, they’re simply irritated by taboos.
An Autumn Beast would be a canny trickster who shows the stupidity of laws as they break them, and knows what the ravens whisper among themselves.
As a sidebar, from mentions in the outline and on the forums, the seasonal courts aren’t ubiquitous as they were in 1e. Every city has its own unique court system in 2e.
I wasn’t aware that the Courts had been changed that much. I suppose it makes sense, but I’m curious to see how Changeling 2e presents Courts. I need to take a look at the outline.
We’re not assuming a default. The way the “court structure” in Requiem is no longer considered a default. We’ll be featuring the seasonal courts as an example, but one of many.
What kind of steps are the developers of 2E going to make to ensure that Beasts are distinct, and don’t overlap too much with other Splats, say, Werewolf?
Mostly, Beasts will not be werewolves.
Also, I’m not sure there’s much concern. If you read that Seeming writeup and thought, “Man, that’s a lot like Werewolf,” that’s not our intention. I think they’re apples and oranges. That’s not a savagely furious animist shapeshifter that sometimes wakes up in the carcasses of his victims and has a millennia old role in the spiritual cycle of the universe, struggling to keep the physical and the spiritual worlds separate. These are Changelings that were abducted by alien monsters, and who escaped by breaking expectations and social decorum, who now value freedom over all.
I don’t see similarity outside maybe some superficial trappings.
I do like this, but know that I am not totally pleased with the open development of this game. That is, until now it’s been done on the forum pages, and I cannot stand that forum anymore because I don’t feel like many of the participants there are playing the same game I am. I’m NOT saying that any of them should be playing the way my troupe plays, no, no, no. The possibilities of the games is what makes all of the World of Darkness so wonderful. However, the forum seems to have become THE ‘voice’ of Changeling players, and that’s just not the case…
I dunno that there’s a better way of doing this, but the threads on that forum for the Second Edition just make my head hurt. I’m still excited about the game, but I’d hate to have anyone think that those who post on those boards express the sum total of Changeling fans’ thoughts, hopes, and needs.
I absolutely respect David and his team enough to believe that we’re going to get a great game, so maybe I’m just being a crank. If so, please feel free to disregard my comments. I’m not trying to start a row here.
If you have been shut down or attacked, as opposed to having a lot of people who disagree with you and post accordingly, then please contact the mods. If a large number of posters are all of the same opinion as to how a game should be played and so post similarly, then that’s just how the game is perceived by that group and if you perceive it differently you are in fact in the minority there. BUT, if they don’t allow discourse about different ways to play, then that is not acceptable and something our mods will look into.
What Rich said.
But additionally, I am taking a pretty light-handed approach with open development here. I don’t think Changeling needs a lot of big shifts from its roots. So, instead of doing a lot of open development, I’m just showcasing some of the knobs and dials we’ve twisted.
I’m sorry the forum has given the impression that it has. I mostly just use it to collect comments. But I assure you, I don’t believe it represents some holistic hive-mind of Changeling players. I also discuss on RPG.net, and I have a really wide base of highly-active Changeling players that don’t touch the forums, who which I draw notes from.
After having seen David’s attitude come more fully out in social media, I’m fairly confident that David’s not the guy who’s going to let the masses absolutely decide the direction of the game. Inform his decisions, yes, but let’s not pretend that anyone other than David (and his crew when he passes it off) has their hands on the wheel.
That is a very kind understatement.
Thank you.
🙂
(Also, most of my team doesn’t read the forums. So there’s just only so much that can influence their style and opinions.)
I think this was beautifully done. I’m pleased to see the first content changes from the developers, even more so that we’ve received this level of quality.
Well done! I’m patiently awaiting more.
Thank you so much!
This feels a bit off. Not all beasts are wild, or even against order. What about ants? Or domesticated animals? Doesn’t seem right to limit everything to “escape society”. :/
My guess is that the Beast Seeming really is about capturing that wildness. However, not all Changelings with animal traits need be Beasts. The line, “Chimera-like Beasts may reflect a conflict between the Kith inflicted on them and the animal soul they claimed for themselves,” makes me think that a Changeling’s Kith still factors in heavily to the character. A character with a strong animal influence who wouldn’t fit as a Beast can probably still work as a different Seeming.
Just my speculation.
Fair enough.
Yeah. Kith is a huge thing here. You could be an animalistic Kith, yet be a Wizened Owl or whatever.
Human society. Ants do not belong in human society.
Domesticated animals still poop in the park.
Kith is a huge thing here. You could be an animalistic Kith, yet be a Wizened Owl or whatever. Beasts don’t inherently mean “ALL THE ANIMALS”. They mean specific behaviour patterns. Specific ways of thinkings.
You could have an entire crew of one animalistic Kith, represented by each of the six Seemings.
Huh, this doesn’t sound like a sad fairytale at all. In fact, rather than reading in as flavorful a way as the original game, Lost 2e’s Beast Seeming reads like B&S and the BTP previews… Giving it the benefit of the doubt, it is the Beast Seeming, but the original game didn’t really have this problem. Eh, 2e is beginning to feel pretty samey in general. Maybe a totally unified thematic direction wasn’t actually such a good idea? I could understand the refocusing of Vamp and Werewolf, but other than mechanics, everyone was satisfied with Changeling. There were no changes to this degree necessary. Seriously, what’s with all this enforced focus on agency? Shouldn’t that be the player’s choice? It just feels like we’re being shoehorned more than ever.
Changeling 2e’s thematic direction has nothing to do with Vampire or Werewolf’s thematic direction. Agency’s just a tool to tell a certain kind of story, one that Changeling is very well-known for telling. It’s more of what Changeling already was.
It’s strange to my eyes that you come away with a feeling of being shoehorned because a hundred Kiths to mix and match with 6 Seemings seems incredibly open ended. That’s more options than the next game with lots of choices: Mummy’s dozens upon dozens of judges.
The favor of the writing is more visceral and gritty than 1e which works for Vampire and Werewolf although you’d be fair in arguing whether it’s as appropriate for Changeling (in this case I think it was already noted that the “vulgar” quality was because it was the Beast Seeming. I’m assuming that the style will change depending on Seeming.)
I disagree that this feels more limited than before.
Affirming Agency = Being Shoehorned.
Seemings as Reactions to Permanent Mental Scars = Not Sad.
All Kiths Being Open To All Character Archetypes = Losing Player Uniqueness.
LOGIC!