|
I got the playtest docs yesterday.  I am planning on running an IRC session or two.
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2012 21:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 21:04 |
|
|
GaryLeeLoveBuckets posted:Unfortunately, to do the Intercept move, you have to roll a d20 and get 11+, which is a recurring theme in the playtest. It seems like a lot of extra die rolling when 4e felt like it was eliminating as many dice as it could. Is it that you have to roll an 11+ to get it to work, or that you have to get an 11+ on your attack roll for it to work? I read it as the later.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2012 23:23
|
|
|
Well, that's less impressive then.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2012 23:54
|
|
|
Mikan posted:In general you can lift and drop, though might want to do something with the Icons and relationships. It would probably be easy to swap them out for Eberron-specific important things. I think the Icons are generic enough that you could map them to pretty much any setting and make them work without much need for rework.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2012 12:50
|
|
|
cbirdsong posted:I would be very curious to know how long the average combat takes, once someone actually plays a session. I'd imagine pretty quickly once people really learn the system. There's also the Escalation Die: in the second round of combat, the GM puts down a d6 at "1", and each new round he moves it to the next number up, up to 6 on the seventh round. The value on the Escalation Die is added to the character's attack rolls to represent them "building up momentum". Plus some character abilities add the Escalation Die to damage as well.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2012 14:45
|
|
|
nauggins posted:This sounds really neat. Does this apply to all characters or just certain classes? What about enemies? Every class gets the bonus to the attack rolls, some class features/attacks get it to damage rolls. And only PCs get the bonus, not NPCs or monsters. quote:Now I wish I had sent an email sooner
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2012 15:52
|
|
|
GaryLeeLoveBuckets posted:Coins isn't a bad fix, but there are different varieties of saving throws so it wouldn't hit them all. Some are hard saves (16+) and easy saves I assume are (6+). Some abilities trigger on an "even roll".
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2012 16:00
|
|
|
Rexides posted:Without getting into detail, is there a unified ability mechanic, like AWED Powers in 4E, that serves as a baseline for class balance? I keep hearing things like "monks have combos", "rogues have momentum" and even that thing in the OP about classes being ranked by complexity, and I am wondering if we end up with a system that's hard to balance. Yes there is. There's class features (which are the "always on" type things), and there are class abilities (the AWED attack-y stuff). You get to pick from a decent number of options for both, and you gain more as you level up.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2012 16:04
|
|
|
Megazver posted:As a laugh, have a thread for this game on TheRPGSite: That thread is magical. e: Someone buy Peregrin an account.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2012 17:51
|
|
|
Mikan posted:It's cool to learn they got an enthusiastic playtest response but I would like Pelgrane a lot more if they weren't being nice to those idiots on therpgsite I have to say this: they're being a hell of a lot more professional than most of us would be under the circumstances.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2012 18:05
|
|
|
Yeah, sorry. Got sidetracked there.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2012 18:23
|
|
|
Rexides posted:Edit: I hope that the reason the Barbarian does not have the "turn on complexity" switch is because it hasn't been designed yet, not because it's destined to be the low-effort class. Yeah, one thing people need to remember is that we're only seeing what amounts to an early draft. I'm sure stuff's gonna change all over the place as this goes along. e: Doc Hawkins posted:"You sayin' I like swine?!!" 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2012 19:38
|
|
|
Mikan posted:Unfortunately, the Barbarian has zero complexity knobs and the Ranger looks really boring compared to the Fighter. Balanced, but boring. Personally, I don't think there's anything wrong with having a simple, straightforward class or two. Sometimes you want to play the warlord and buff everyone while controlling the flow of battle, sometimes you just want to his someone in the face. As long as both options are enjoyable for the entire play progression, then I don't see that being an issue.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2012 19:46
|
|
|
Megazver posted:So do Fighters get less Skills than, say, Wizards? Fighters get 6 points in (free-form player defined) skills, wizards get 8.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2012 21:07
|
|
|
I personally don't mind it; it makes sense to me that classes like Bards or Rogues are the skillmonkeys. It helps that the skills have a pretty wide definitions. it's not like D&D where you could be good at maybe four narrowly-defined skills; you say you're a soldier and you're capable of doing everything that would fall under the umbrella of "solider". Freeform skills work pretty well in my experience, as long as the players aren't trying to get away with things like "Jack of all trades +10".
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2012 21:22
|
|
|
I think the biggest issue with having such a wide spread of points per class is coming up with things to spend them on, especially since you're not going to want any overlap between your skills. If my rouge has "member of the Dungeonville thieve's guild", taking "street urchin" will wind up being kind of redundant. Likewise, if I have "member of the thieve's guild" and "grew up on a farm", there's really not much else I feel I can effectively add to that. Maybe a narrower spread of points between the classes would help; it's hard to say without seeing people making characters. (On the subject of Fate, it kind of reminds me of when my friends and I played Spirit of the Century, where you get 10 Aspects; once you got past the obvious ones for your character it got harder and harder to come up with new ones, and by the time they got to the last two people were pretty much out of ideas.)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2012 21:42
|
|
|
Mikan posted:I noticed that even with 10 points; I'd be okay with like 8 or 10 points for every class, period. I don't mind having sorta redundant backgrounds though. The problem with redundant backgrounds is that you can only use one per roll, so you'd want them to be pretty distinct so you don't end up spending points on background A, then more on background B, then realizing that most of what background B does is covered by A. I don't know how clear I'm being here. I'm very tired.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2012 21:50
|
|
|
Mikan posted:I'm starting to get sick of explaining this, it's been covered a while bunch of times in this thread that there's no reason to make a class Boring People Only when other classes can be dialed up and down. Seriously, man, calm down. You're getting way too worked up over this.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2012 00:01
|
|
|
Can we please not turn this into a grognards.txt annex? I feel bad enough as is just saying what I've said about the system here. 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2012 02:55
|
|
|
Uh, guys?quote:Pelgrane Press Oops.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2012 12:41
|
|
|
Well, to be fair, I've done playtests before and "don't talk about the game yet publicly" tends to be a common element, because at this point a lot of stuff is still up in the air. I think the lack of an early NDA-ish comment from Pelegrane kinda threw me off. (That being said, I'm dropping out of the thread now for the three of you who care about my input.)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2012 14:40
|
|
|
I know I said I wasn't going to post in this thread anymore, but I ran my first playtest game last night and I think it went pretty well.fosborb posted:This is very cool and I am so stealing this. quote:6 Yes, And
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2012 19:36
|
|
|
Alternately, you could use some Writer's Dice.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2012 19:58
|
|
|
moths posted:What kind of stuff did you cover in a first session? Ours is tonight and I was hoping to at least generate characters, talk icons, and maybe touch on skills and fighting. Does that seem reasonable for a two hour block? We didn't do too much; it was a simple shakedown combat. We had to wait for people make (or remake) characters, but we did a 5 PCs vs. 7 monsters fight in about an hour and a half; we didn't get into Icons or backgrounds too much. If everyone's got their characters ready, then I would imagine you could get all that done in like two hours and change. Also it was an IRC game, so it was (by its very nature) moving a little slower than a live game. I'm sure if we were around a table we would have gotten more done.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2012 20:09
|
|
|
August? drat, that's a lot sooner than I was expecting.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2012 15:43
|
|
|
Also, I am
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2012 15:47
|
|
|
fosborb posted:@MonteJCook I'm honestly not sure how to react to that.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2012 18:14
|
|
|
It's more the idea that Monte (and the rest of the team) aren't paying enough attention to the rest of the industry. I know 13th Age wasn't a huge newspost back when playtesting started, but considering the people involved you'd think that Monte & crew would have at least been aware of it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2012 18:47
|
|
|
Laphroaig posted:Edit: I'm guessing they're trying to get something out for GenCon? It is worrying that we haven't seen a second playtest doc yet.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2012 14:21
|
|
|
I remember seeing somewhere that 5e's only like 20% done, so it's not like they'd have to rush.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2012 14:46
|
|
|
Looks like there's going to be a live chat Q&A thing with Johnathan Tweet on G+ Announced here quote:+Peter Adkison and 13th Age co-designer +Jonathan Tweet will have a conversation about life and games and everything in between, all from the comfort of a +Gamerati Google+ Hangout.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2012 20:16
|
|
|
I asked a question via email, and it's not there.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2012 16:08
|
|
|
Ooh, hello...Create Your Own Icon contest.quote:13th Age includes powerful icons – NPCs PCs will aid or oppose over the course of each campaign. We include a summary of the icons here so you can vote for your favourite, and The High Druid, an example icon. (Also, I'm really really sorry to my playtest group...if you guys have time next week, I should be able to run something again)
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2012 14:16
|
|
|
I love the fact that a developer is actually paying attention to us. 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2012 21:48
|
|
|
Dr Nick posted:I'm not sure I'm comfortable calling our forum that... Oh lord...Frank hasn't heard about 13th Age yet, has he?  GrandpaPants posted:That, and it's also good to know that their only point of community reference isn't the likes of rpg.net. I've said it before and I'll say it again...I'll take RPGNet over RPGSite any day. I'm still really impressed as to how professional Pelgrane's rep was over there.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2012 21:58
|
|
|
The whole thing about "not talking about it with other people" was because they wanted feedback from people that wasn't colored by the opinions of others. Which I get. Still, it'll be nice to talk about it in the open.fosborb posted:Speaking of, since we're going to be cracking this open at midnight, new OP or new thread when the gag lifts? I think new OP would be enough, unless we want to just all try and forget the stuff that happened when the NDA was announced.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2012 14:42
|
|
|
I am looking forward to doing the write-up for the FATAL and Friends thread.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2012 21:32
|
|
|
What's rude?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2012 22:01
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:Outside of the offensively stupid name the thread is just obscure RPGs. Yeah, I've reviewed like a half-dozen good RPGs in there.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2012 22:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 21:04 |
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:I can't really speak much about our playtest because my god the dice hated that game. I've never seen so many rolls below 10. I can't really judge the game based on a single combat in which nobody ever hit anything, the monsters included. Was that the one I ran over IRC? Yeah, that was ridiculous. Part of the problem too is that there aren't many options for 1st-level monsters that don't hit like dump trucks. The monster to-hit and damage numbers for goblins were a bit above the players' numbers.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2012 01:48
|
|