Ghul wrote:

Well, I put it on my list of things to consider. While I'm very open to adding new things to the game (new spells, new subclasses, new monsters, new magic items, weather tables, etc.), I'm much more hesitant when it comes to changing an existing thing, and to me we are flirting with that very thing; it is, however, more of a slight enhancement and not a change, which is why it's made my list of "things to consider." Thanks!

While the rule itself is fine*, I sympathize with your concerns.  I'm not sure having two slightly incompatible versions of the game is a positive at this stage (although I guess it didn't hurt TSR in the late 70's and early 80's) and I don't know that you should be making actual rules changes unless the reasons are truly exigent.

* - Although personally I'm opposed on principle to bribing players with bonuses or goodies in order to get them to play a certain class, use a certain weapon, or memorize a certain spell.  As far as I'm concerned, let them just play another class, use another weapon, or memorize another spell.  And let them eat cake too**!

** - The cake is a lie.  Some restrictions may apply.  All rites reversed in Chaotic temples.

Chainsaw wrote:

Anything new you can share, Jeff?

It's on! I've been working on it, and others have, too.

ART! 

• Charles Lang is working on the cover. He has sent me several conceptual sketches. Things are coming together nicely on that front!
• Val Semeiks will be doing six full-page frontispiece illustrations that will mark each of the six "volumes" or chapters of the game. He starts in December.
• Johnathan Bingham is working on interiors. He is doing a series of full-page class illustrations -- of which there will be 26 in total! After that he might be taking on some larger scene pictures.
• Del Teigeler will be doing several monster illustrations.
• Glynn Seal is going to tackle the world map. 

WRITING!

I've got contributions from Ben Ball, Michael Haskell, and Colin Chapman (has anyone seen or heard from him?). Some of these contributions will be worked into the hardback alongside the three new subclasses (cryomancer, huntsman, purloiner), as well as a fourth subclass that I'm still fiddling with. It was going to be a seer, but I've been experimenting with another subclass, and I'm liking it more -- a Viking-style runecaster. 

EDITING!

David Prata will edit the whole, tidying up the new material and combing through the original material. 


It's a work in progress, I'm happy to say, but I'm also working on something else, too. Never a dull moment in the hoary wastes of Hyperborea! ;)

Cheers,
Jeff T.

Last edited by Ghul (11/17/2015 9:32 pm)

All the additions sound great.....but working on something else as well?  Very mysterious.

Oh yeah can't wait. Please keep us updated Jeff!

I should have also mentioned David Prata, who's also submitted some great additions to the game, especially the weather tables, which have seen some great use in my game.

Last edited by DMPrata (12/07/2015 11:40 am)

Handy Haversack wrote:

Weather or not your players want it?

Your sad puns are coming on like a hurricane.

Just a small observation for the new ed....

This is essentailly to suggest extending the non-standard actions resolution system.  Curently, DMs can use the characteristic based system for physical feats (STR, DEX, CON) but there is no equivalent for the other characteristics.  It seems to me that a handy extension would be to have equivalent tests for INT, WIS and CHA.  This would be useful for lots of situations for groups who like to roll dice.

Anyway, just a thought...

Cheers,
Rob

I like the idea, since I pretty much do this now: based on background, I have the players roll a d6 for any number of things (healing for the cleric of Apollo, earning a night's lodging and food by the musician, etc.).

I already do this in some situations, but it's rare. For INT, maybe if, say, there's a pertinent fact of history or culture that the PC might possibly know, I might give the player a chance to roll for it. Never for riddles or puzzles though, as I see those as a challenge for the player, not the stats. For WIS, I might have them roll to avoid an effect that causes insanity or something. You could also do this with a save though.

I'm aware that some players prefer not to do any thinking, but I don't see any reason to cater to them.