# New 13th Age 'Escalation Edition' Coming Next Year!



## Haplo781 (Aug 7, 2022)

"New edition of 13th Age"

_Perks up_

"Backwards compatible"

_Perks down_


----------



## Retreater (Aug 7, 2022)

So ... 14th Age?


----------



## GMMichael (Aug 7, 2022)

Retreater said:


> So ... 14th Age?



15th Age might be more appropriate.  Converting the 3(e) to a 5(e)?

Sadly, I haven't had the opportunity to play the first one, but the innovations (on D&D 3.5) looked great.


----------



## Mezuka (Aug 8, 2022)

Very interested.


----------



## Nightfly (Aug 8, 2022)

Never gotten the chance to play 13A, sadly, but I want to. This news makes me very happy.


----------



## Retreater (Aug 8, 2022)

13th Age had a couple of blemishes for me - though I wouldn't say I dislike it.
I don't care for the One Unique Thing - as it has the tendency to turn my games silly (i.e. "I'm the only halfling who is actually a baby goose and my name is Ryan Gosling.") 
The Icon relationships rolled every session feel chaotic, forced, and impertinent to the story the group is telling. Sometimes they make no sense at all. (I've scrapped the concept of the Icons in some games.)
And then the worst is the inflated die rolling. As you go up in level, having to keep increasing the damage dice gets tedious, throwing big fistfuls of dice around every turn.


----------



## Arilyn (Aug 8, 2022)

I love 13th Age. Excited for this!


----------



## Mezuka (Aug 8, 2022)

On Discord, user Maneval#0450 shared these notes from the Gen Con panel.

Rob opened with an anecdote about playing 13th Age during the pandemic and finding how his monk was great but the fighter sucked.
Briefly discussed Behemoths: Path of the Koru. Similar to Drakkenhall (each chapter by a different author)
Announced Escalation Edition (new edition)
"We put a lot of advice in [13th Age] that turned out not to be true."
will be backward compatible so Bestiaries can still be used
Feat progression in original 13th Age worked more like Adv: +2, Champ: +4, Epic: +6... new edition: may be condensed into a single feat that says +2, bump to +4 at champ, bump to +8 at epic.
Original team of Rob and Jonathan along with Lee Moyer and Aaron McConnell returning
new pictures of the icons?
lots of new full color art
monster stats not changing
Icon Followers will be after Escalated Edition
Prophets of the Pyre, 10 lvl [Gareth Hanrahan] campaign. 95% done. Shorter in page count than stone thief


----------



## grankless (Aug 8, 2022)

Disappointed that Jonathan Tweet is coming back after Pelgrane said they dropped him after his fun little "race science" tweets.


----------



## overgeeked (Aug 8, 2022)

grankless said:


> Disappointed that Jonathan Tweet is coming back after Pelgrane said they dropped him after his fun little "race science" tweets.



People really still parroting this lie? Come on.









						Not "Race" but Ancestry
					

Modern genetics says there are no  homogeneous, essential “races”   tl;dr  I used to think that “race” meant nothing, biologically speakin...




					jonathan-tweet.blogspot.com
				






			JoT Race Genetics


----------



## Haplo781 (Aug 8, 2022)

I'm disappointed Tweet is coming back because of his work on D&D 3rd edition quite frankly.

Can we get a Kickstarter for 14th Age by Heinsoo and Logan Bonner?


----------



## Arilyn (Aug 8, 2022)

Haplo781 said:


> I'm disappointed Tweet is coming back because of his work on D&D 3rd edition quite frankly.
> 
> Can we get a Kickstarter for 14th Age by Heinsoo and Logan Bonner?



Tweet is not working on 3rd. He is working on 13th Age. Tweet has a wide variety of game designs under his belt including Ars Magica, Everway, Talisanta and Over the Edge. These are all vastly different games. Tweet does not just redo 3rd edition over and over. He has, in fact, only worked on 3e once.


----------



## Longspeak (Aug 8, 2022)

I'm torn. I'm a big fan of the epic, a big believer that PCs should be the HEROES of the story, and lover of all the games that let this happen. 13th Age is a great example of this.

But... well... Rob Heinsoo was... awful to someone I know.... Someone who worked for him. He doesn't deserve my money.


----------



## Umbran (Aug 8, 2022)

grankless said:


> Disappointed that Jonathan Tweet is coming back after Pelgrane said they dropped him after his fun little "race science" tweets.




The information above does not say that Tweet is coming back. It says he designed the previous version.


----------



## Eric V (Aug 8, 2022)

Super excited, though in our group after years of play we found that it was the monk that was a bit weak and the fighter that shone!


----------



## Nikosandros (Aug 8, 2022)

Umbran said:


> The information above does not say that Tweet is coming back. It says he designed the previous version.



The following snippet seems to imply that Tweet will be back:



> Original team of Rob and Jonathan along with Lee Moyer and Aaron McConnell returning


----------



## Umbran (Aug 8, 2022)

Nikosandros said:


> The following snippet seems to imply that Tweet will be back:




Yeah, but who is that person?  Random, non-official folks leaving notes on Discord is not what I'd call reliable reporting. 

Folks should seek official confirmation of that before deciding what to do about it.


----------



## Nikosandros (Aug 8, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Yeah, but who is that person?  Random, non-official folks leaving notes on Discord is not what I'd call reliable reporting.
> 
> Folks should seek official confirmation of that before deciding what to do about it.



For sure. I'll add that, personally, I don't have anything against Tweet and, as one of the two original designers, I'd prefer if he was involved.


----------



## Jer (Aug 8, 2022)

The only thing surprising about this is that it's taken this long to get a revised edition of the game.  After playing it myself for nearly 10 years now there are definitely a lot of small things that could use updating.

I only hope that they keep some of the classes simple.  There's been a real tendency in the new classes that they've released over the years to keep upping the complexity and while that's fine having some classes that are just "pick a Talent at each tier" is really useful for the players who are put off by mechanical complexity getting in the way of playing the character they want to play.  Having a range of complexity in the various classes has been good for my table at least as everyone can kind of find a class they want to play.


----------



## Weiley31 (Aug 8, 2022)

So, if its backwards compatible, that means that it should be backwards compatible with all the books in the 13th Age line and 13th Age: Glorantha.


----------



## Jer (Aug 8, 2022)

Weiley31 said:


> So, if its backwards compatible, that means that it should be backwards compatible with all the books in the 13th Age line and 13th Age: Glorantha.



Right - I suspect that nobody wants to say that all of the old books are useless or require a lot of work to revise to the new edition.  Especially the bestiaries, which are probably the most mechanics heavy of the books outside of maybe 13 True Ways.

(Also I don't think the monsters in the bestiaries need to be changed much, though the ones in the core book could probably benefit from the nearly 10 years of design and development that have happened since they were published).


----------



## Nightfly (Aug 8, 2022)

Longspeak said:


> I'm torn. I'm a bid fan of the epic, a big believer that PCs should be the HEROES of the story, and lover of all the games that let this happen. 13th Age is a great example of this.
> 
> But... well... Rob Heinsoo was... awful to someone I know.... Someone who worked for him. He doesn't deserve my money.



They is really upsetting to hear. Is there more you want to share about that? I understand if not.


----------



## Doctor Futurity (Aug 8, 2022)

Haplo781 said:


> "New edition of 13th Age"
> 
> _Perks up_
> 
> ...



I feel this deserves elaboration.

I'm looking forward to this. I ran a lot of 13th Age at one point and love it, but I also have a medley of minor grievances which ultimately added up to why I don't run the game anymore....which boil down to the following:

*Icons - *the icon influence needs a cleaner approach that doesn't overwhelm the GM with loads of encumbering improv (maybe a sliding scale of "level of influence" the icons exhibit). The current system can lead to a table full of positive and negative consequences the GM has to deal with, especially overwhelming if you have a big table and lots of lucky die rolls from players. I think almost everyone I know has had to house rule this to keep it under control. (For those who don't know, each PC has a set of favored, neutral or opposed icons who have a stake in their future; at the start of each session you roll dice and see if there's a chance of a positive or negative interaction that may take place during the night's session. This can get messy, fast.)

*Languages, Vision -* the game de-emphasizes the need for rules on vision and variable languages, leaving this to the adjudication of the game table. However, this stuff is easier to include and then let people ignore it than it is to leave it out and force people to make stuff up and add it back in. For me, knowing how well a given character can see in the dark and what languages they know have always been pretty important to my games. Providing scaled levels of rules support would be welcome.

*One Unique Thing - *more guidance on this would be helpful; although I didn't generally ever see issue with it, it was not uncommon for players to find weird ways to abuse the concept.

*Skills -* The free-form skill system is fine, but its the kind of skill system made by someone who doesn't want skills in the game and I am not that person, so a bit more structure would be welcome. I suspect it won't change, though, but that's not a deal breaker; I'd just be happy even with a sample skill list for GMs who want narrative consistency or players who lack imagination/make poor choices.

*Ability Descriptors - *In the current edition a lot of powers have zero ability descriptors. Even D&D 4E, the spiritual predecessor to 13th Age, included some sort of descriptive text. I know the idea in 13th Age is for players to make it up, but I encountered many gamers at my table for whom that was a more difficult task than it needed to be, and even some modest descriptors of what an ability or spell might look like in use would have helped them out.

In terms of backwards compatibility I take that to mean that Pelgrane Press does not likely want to monkey with the core mechanical chassis of the game, and also does not want to invalidate all their unsold back catalog of books. This is fine, totally fine. It could be a new edition in the same way AD&D 1st edition upgraded to AD&D 2nd Edition while remaining backwards compatible, and I think that would be totally cool.


----------



## polyhedral man (Aug 9, 2022)

grankless said:


> Disappointed that Jonathan Tweet is coming back after Pelgrane said they dropped him after his fun little "race science" tweets.



I'm delighted, i feel they made amends in correcting a terrible mistake.
 I read the tweet, can't see why people took exception to it. Anyone who has an inkling about Tweet knows that it's ludicrous to suggest he's racist.


----------



## grankless (Aug 9, 2022)

Not really sure how else I'm meant to read this besides "there is some merit to scientific racism but not too much of it". There's a reason there was so much backlash: because it looks insanely racist to say. 

This doesn't even necessarily mean that he hates other races or that he's a bigot. It just means he's kind of a weirdo who has very unsettling opinions that are indicative of a broader mindset.


----------



## overgeeked (Aug 9, 2022)

grankless said:


> Not really sure how else I'm meant to read this besides "there is some merit to scientific racism but not too much of it". There's a reason there was so much backlash: because it looks insanely racist to say.
> 
> This doesn't even necessarily mean that he hates other races or that he's a bigot. It just means he's kind of a weirdo who has very unsettling opinions that are indicative of a broader mindset.



Sigh. I posted the links above. You’re free to read them if you’re interested in anything more than knee-jerk hot takes of a tweet from a Tweet.

His “unsettling opinions” are literally him just reporting nuanced scientific facts.


----------



## Dire Bare (Aug 9, 2022)

grankless said:


> Not really sure how else I'm meant to read this besides "there is some merit to scientific racism but not too much of it". There's a reason there was so much backlash: because it looks insanely racist to say.
> 
> This doesn't even necessarily mean that he hates other races or that he's a bigot. It just means he's kind of a weirdo who has very unsettling opinions that are indicative of a broader mindset.



There is a difference between "race science" and "scientific racism". More importantly, the tweet you posted IS poorly worded, but not racist or supporting of racism. And, as @overgeeked points out, if you take the time to read a more detailed explanation of Tweet's views (heh, rather than his tweets), you'll find he's far from racist . . . just likes to be loud when proving how smart he is, and wording it terribly so as to gain an unfair reputation.


----------



## grankless (Aug 9, 2022)

i'm sure there's a very interesting essay you can write about the different kinds of racism


----------



## p_johnston (Aug 9, 2022)

grankless said:


> i'm sure there's a very interesting essay you can write about the different kinds of racism



Refusing to acknowledge new scientific facts and studies because they conflict with a pre existing worldview isn't how the way to make the world a better more inclusive place. 
In fact if you would even browse the essay linked you'd see Tweet making the point that doing so actually gives more credence to racists because then when they claim that people are "lieing/not reporting the facts" they are partially correct which ends up giving more weight to their arguments.


----------



## p_johnston (Aug 9, 2022)

On a happier note I am super excited for this. I super love 13th age and a lot of what it does. It manages to hit like 85-90% of what I really want out of an RPG and the few bits I don't like are easy enough to chop off.

Also especially compared to pathfinder and D&D the monsters are so much easier to run and make.


----------



## TrippyHippy (Aug 9, 2022)

Retreater said:


> So ... 14th Age?



It get’s worse when they use it for adventures in Glorantha’s 3rd Age.


----------



## Mark Craddock (Aug 9, 2022)

Retreater said:


> 13th Age had a couple of blemishes for me - though I wouldn't say I dislike it.
> I don't care for the One Unique Thing - as it has the tendency to turn my games silly (i.e. "I'm the only halfling who is actually a baby goose and my name is Ryan Gosling.")
> The Icon relationships rolled every session feel chaotic, forced, and impertinent to the story the group is telling. Sometimes they make no sense at all. (I've scrapped the concept of the Icons in some games.)
> And then the worst is the inflated die rolling. As you go up in level, having to keep increasing the damage dice gets tedious, throwing big fistfuls of dice around every turn.



I ran a 13th Age Campaign for about 6 months and never used the Relationship dice. Worked fine without it.


----------



## Reynard (Aug 9, 2022)

overgeeked said:


> Sigh. I posted the links above. You’re free to read them if you’re interested in anything more than knee-jerk hot takes of a tweet from a Tweet.
> 
> His “unsettling opinions” are literally him just reporting nuanced scientific facts.



Listen, we all know that tweets are thoughts distilled to their Platonic Ideal and should always be taken literally and at face value no matter what.


----------



## Retreater (Aug 9, 2022)

Mark Craddock said:


> I ran a 13th Age Campaign for about 6 months and never used the Relationship dice. Worked fine without it.



Yeah, I eventually learned better and dropped them myself. 
My group that had been playing 13th Age swore it off and said "never again." I do have an online group where one player specifically is interested in this system - but I've yet to find a great implementation on a VTT.


----------



## hairyscotsman2 (Aug 9, 2022)

Retreater said:


> Yeah, I eventually learned better and dropped them myself.
> My group that had been playing 13th Age swore it off and said "never again." I do have an online group where one player specifically is interested in this system - but I've yet to find a great implementation on a VTT.



Foundry VTT has a really good implementation module. It's got the content of 13th age core, 13TW and the first Bestiary. Character sheet builds easily too.


----------



## Willie the Duck (Aug 9, 2022)

Dire Bare said:


> just likes to be loud when proving how smart he is, and wording it terribly so as to gain an unfair reputation.



So, a nerd who grew up with a with an overly healthy view* of their intellect thinking everyone should revel in their brilliance, only to satisfyingly disprove the notion in an unfortunately public manner? Sounds like most everyone on every D&D forum since forever, most of us just had that life lesson in middle/high-school, probably pre-internet, and not-while-quasi-famous. We should invite him over. 
*or masked insecurity, or both.

I'm a little surprised this is getting a new edition. I've played 13A, although not enough to be and expert or have found all the bugs/glitches/unfortunate confluences of rules/etc. It seemed to me to very much do what the stated goals were, and those people who glommed onto it felt it really did what they wanted from a D20 D&D-esque system. Other than the quickstart edition or a new edition to improve format or clarity, I thought this was a complete project.


----------



## Asacolips (Aug 9, 2022)

hairyscotsman2 said:


> Foundry VTT has a really good implementation module. It's got the content of 13th age core, 13TW and the first Bestiary. Character sheet builds easily too.



That’s my system! We’re really proud of the system/sheet we built for Foundry VTT, and we’ll definitely be adding support for the new edition once we know more about it. The new edition being backwards compatible is a great sign for that being possible.


----------



## Eric V (Aug 9, 2022)

Asacolips said:


> That’s my system! We’re really proud of the system/sheet we built for Foundry VTT, and we’ll definitely be adding support for the new edition once we know more about it. The new edition being backwards compatible is a great sign for that being possible.



Are there plans to make Bestiary 2, Eyes of the Stone Thief, etc. available?


----------



## Jer (Aug 9, 2022)

Willie the Duck said:


> I'm a little surprised this is getting a new edition. I've played 13A, although not enough to be and expert or have found all the bugs/glitches/unfortunate confluences of rules/etc. It seemed to me to very much do what the stated goals were, and those people who glommed onto it felt it really did what they wanted from a D20 D&D-esque system. Other than the quickstart edition or a new edition to improve format or clarity, I thought this was a complete project.



After nearly 10 years of use any system can use a look and a revision, if only to incorporate new techniques and ideas into it.  I can see some places where mechanics don't quite work as intended or their original intent isn't the way people are actually playing the game, and ways to improve that experience are welcome.

My only concern is complexity creep in the character classes, which is where I suspect a large chunk of the revisions will be being made.  After a decade the folks who make the game may project their own game designer lack of interest in simplicity and need for a more complex experience onto the folks who play their game.  The new classes that have emerged for the game since the original book have been more and more complex in their mechanics with no classes that I can think of that implement a new class with a very simple, elegant design package that folks who don't like a lot of complexity in their character mechanics enjoy playing (like the 13A Barbarian, Ranger and Paladin do IME).  I'm hopeful that whatever they do keeps the game simple for the folks who like simplicity while providing complexity for the folks who enjoy complexity - the current edition does a good job of that IME.


----------



## Asacolips (Aug 9, 2022)

Eric V said:


> Are there plans to make Bestiary 2, Eyes of the Stone Thief, etc. available?



We can only include SRD content in the system itself due to licensing, but Pelgrane is working with us now on releasing more content. Specifics are still being worked out, but things are in progress.


----------



## Staffan (Aug 9, 2022)

Doctor Futurity said:


> *Icons - *the icon influence needs a cleaner approach that doesn't overwhelm the GM with loads of encumbering improv (maybe a sliding scale of "level of influence" the icons exhibit). The current system can lead to a table full of positive and negative consequences the GM has to deal with, especially overwhelming if you have a big table and lots of lucky die rolls from players. I think almost everyone I know has had to house rule this to keep it under control. (For those who don't know, each PC has a set of favored, neutral or opposed icons who have a stake in their future; at the start of each session you roll dice and see if there's a chance of a positive or negative interaction that may take place during the night's session. This can get messy, fast.)



It also has another problem: session length. I'll just take my own gaming as an example: I'm in one game that runs on Wednesday evenings, where we in theory play from 7 to 10 pm. But of course, some people are late, and there's a bunch of chatting and catching up before each game, and sometimes we end a little early when we get to something that looks like a fight and it's 9:30 already. So effective game time is something like 2 hours. I have another game that shares some of the same players on Saturdays. We usually get started at like 4 pm, then eat while chatting and stuff, and are ready to go before 5 pm and then keep going until maybe midnight: 7 hours of game.

In a 7-hour game, I could likely find nice places to have 1-3 bits of icon influence. In a 2-hour game? Doesn't sound likely.

Other "per session" mechanics in other games run into the same problem. It's one of the weaknesses of The Troubleshooters: you reset to 4 story points at the start of every session. So short sessions keep pumping in new story points at a high rate, making character weaknesses (which you get story points for triggering) less useful. Worse, most weaknesses can be triggered either for 3 points for inconvenience, or 6 points to take you out of a scene entirely... but a whole scene can sometimes be the whole session, which wastes the points. Another game with a similar mechanic is Star Wars: Force & Destiny, which is about playing Force users. As Force users, PCs are more sensitive to the Light and Dark sides of the Force, and you have a persistent stat called Morality which is about how close you are to either side. You also have a stat that resets per session, called Conflict, which increases when you do questionable stuff (including calling on the Dark Side). At the end of each session, you subtract your Conflict from 1d10, and apply the result to your Morality (so if you don't do anything bad at all you go up by the whole d10, and the more bad things you do the lower your Morality goes). Of course, shorter sessions lead to less Conflict per session, meaning you're likely to go up more.


----------



## Dire Bare (Aug 9, 2022)

grankless said:


> i'm sure there's a very interesting essay you can write about the different kinds of racism



Sigh. OK.

Race science is the scientific study of racial and ethnic differences between humans. It's not racism at all, just science. It is, however, controversial.

Scientific racism is racism within the scientific community, which leads to discrimination against scientists of color and also bad science. This is racism, and is a bad thing.

Does that help?


----------



## Drktalon (Aug 9, 2022)

Asacolips said:


> We can only include SRD content in the system itself due to licensing, but Pelgrane is working with us now on releasing more content. Specifics are still being worked out, but things are in progress.



I have to say that your 13th age foundry work is amazing.  My group is very happy playing on online.  thank you.


----------



## EzekielRaiden (Aug 9, 2022)

Dire Bare said:


> Does that help?



Extremely unlikely to do so. Tweet has said something in a foolish way, which has gotten him labelled as a racist. If the poster is unwilling to even look at a longer-than-a-tweet statement because they are convinced that nothing else Tweet will say is anything but well-heeled bigotry, explaining the actual scientific information and medical concerns that are relevant to human ethnic groups is unlikely to do anything but get you labelled as a defender of someone already seen as an enemy.

I, personally, have had to deal with some of this stuff recently in my own life. Someone I am closely related to has recently been diagnosed with cancer. That person will need a bone marrow transplant, and I am one of the primary potential donor options (as the bone marrow donor list does not have a superior match, though I need to have my blood tested to see if I am a strong enough match myself.) Having done the research on what is required of me and what will happen to my relative, I have learned a lot. One of the things I have learned is that ethnic origin is highly significant for matching someone's human leukocyte antigens (the "tags" which identify living cells as being part of you rather than foreign material.) Ethnic origin is highly correlated with increased presence of certain HLAs and decreased presence of others, meaning it is (much) less likely that you'll find a good donor match from someone whose ethnicity doesn't match your own. This is extremely important because it means you will save more lives if you get donor information from a wide variety of ethnicities. Of course, since I am a close relative of the patient in question, we necessarily share a lot of our genes and our ethnic origins, and that makes our HLAs more likely to be similar. But the donor database does collect information about ethnicity and specifically seeks out more donors of non-white ethnic groups, particularly African-Americans in this case, in order to increase the odds that a patient in need will find a match. That is not racist. It is medically necessary to try to save more lives.


----------



## Dire Bare (Aug 10, 2022)

EzekielRaiden said:


> Extremely unlikely to do so.



I know.


----------



## GrahamWills (Aug 10, 2022)

Retreater said:


> 13th Age had a couple of blemishes for me - though I wouldn't say I dislike it.
> I don't care for the One Unique Thing - as it has the tendency to turn my games silly (i.e. "I'm the only halfling who is actually a baby goose and my name is Ryan Gosling.")



my solution is simply to veto stuff that isn’t in genre.  I have as I do in every game. Do I allow my modern horror heroes to be called Investy McInvesitgatorface? No, I do not. One of the gaming contacts that our group has is that you must embrace the premise of the game. Of course, if you want to run a comic game, 13A is a pretty good choice!



Retreater said:


> The Icon relationships rolled every session feel chaotic, forced, and impertinent to the story the group is telling. Sometimes they make no sense at all. (I've scrapped the concept of the Icons in some games.)



Do you act on the rolls immediately they are rolled? That would be really hard for me. I just record them and let the players use them for re-rolls or to boost relevant skill checks as a default action, and then try to find ways to incorporate one or two specific rolls is a session. I sympathize with your problem if you were trying to make all the rolls special — way too hard For me!



Retreater said:


> And then the worst is the inflated die rolling. As you go up in level, having to keep increasing the damage dice gets tedious, throwing big fistfuls of dice around every turn.



I use the same rules I do in other editions of D&D; players can average as many of their dice as they like. Typically fast adders rolling a 10d10 spell in PF2 or a 10d10 axe attack in the very last level of a 13A game roll are rolling 4d10+33. I’d suggest that for pretty much every D&D style game as an option to players. Probably more than an adoption if the players cannot add rapidly.

I also find this much worse in other D&D systems, where quite a few spells / powers roll dice in sets, so you might have 6d8 fire + 6d8 holy + 2d6 thunder or the like. That’s where things get slow and I don’t have any good solution except fixed damage for low dice; which many players dislike. Ideas welcome


----------



## Nightfly (Aug 10, 2022)

EzekielRaiden, that was a very thoughtful post. More importantly, I'm so sorry you're going through that.


----------



## GrahamWills (Aug 10, 2022)

Asacolips said:


> We can only include SRD content in the system itself due to licensing, but Pelgrane is working with us now on releasing more content. Specifics are still being worked out, but things are in progress.



I am currently running Eyes of the Stone Thief on Foundry and the 13A support by Asacolips and his team are just fantastic. I switched from Roll20 because of them and they continue to improve and see new development monthly (thank you a ton for the default monster icons you added a few weeks ago!). Quality work, y’all, and hugely appreciated!


----------



## Arilyn (Aug 10, 2022)

Nightfly said:


> EzekielRaiden, that was a very thoughtful post. More importantly, I'm so sorry you're going through that.



I fully agree. Thoughtful and interesting information. I too am sorry about your situation.


----------



## Eric V (Aug 10, 2022)

GrahamWills said:


> I am currently running Eyes of the Stone Thief on Foundry and the 13A support by Asacolips and his team are just fantastic. I switched from Roll20 because of them and they continue to improve and see new development monthly (thank you a ton for the default monster icons you added a few weeks ago!). Quality work, y’all, and hugely appreciated!



!!!!

If you are ever looking for a player...!


----------



## EzekielRaiden (Aug 10, 2022)

Nightfly said:


> EzekielRaiden, that was a very thoughtful post. More importantly, I'm so sorry you're going through that.





Arilyn said:


> I fully agree. Thoughtful and interesting information. I too am sorry about your situation.



Thank you for your kind words--I'm glad it was useful to you, and I appreciate the well-wishes. We're keeping on keeping on, as it were, and there's good hope of brighter days ahead. There's a decent chance that the bone marrow transplant could in fact _cure_ the cancer by replacing the damaged cells, and if we're lucky it won't even require therapy to prevent rejection.



Eric V said:


> !!!!
> 
> If you are ever looking for a player...!



Big mood.


----------



## Eric V (Aug 10, 2022)

EzekielRaiden said:


> There's a decent chance that the bone marrow transplant could in fact _cure_ the cancer by replacing the damaged cells, and if we're lucky it won't even require therapy to prevent rejection.



Definitely something to hope for!  Wishing you all the luck!


----------



## Nikosandros (Aug 10, 2022)

Staffan said:


> It also has another problem: session length. I'll just take my own gaming as an example: I'm in one game that runs on Wednesday evenings, where we in theory play from 7 to 10 pm. But of course, some people are late, and there's a bunch of chatting and catching up before each game, and sometimes we end a little early when we get to something that looks like a fight and it's 9:30 already. So effective game time is something like 2 hours. I have another game that shares some of the same players on Saturdays. We usually get started at like 4 pm, then eat while chatting and stuff, and are ready to go before 5 pm and then keep going until maybe midnight: 7 hours of game.
> 
> In a 7-hour game, I could likely find nice places to have 1-3 bits of icon influence. In a 2-hour game? Doesn't sound likely.



Yes, those are precisely the reasons I strongly dislike per-session mechanics.

Even within a single campaign, I can have huge variance in effective session length. In my weekly game, sometimes we're focused and game more, sometimes there's some real word fact that we talk about for a third of the session...


----------



## Blue (Aug 10, 2022)

Retreater said:


> I don't care for the One Unique Thing - as it has the tendency to turn my games silly (i.e. "I'm the only halfling who is actually a baby goose and my name is Ryan Gosling.")



This feels more like a disconnect between the type of campaign you want to run and the type your players want to play in. That happens regardless of system.

OUT are fantastic for me - customization you can't find elsewhere that can also let the player have some authorship in the world. "I have a mechanical heart made by the dwarves" days a lot about both your character and about the dwarves in that Dragon Empire. 



Retreater said:


> The Icon relationships rolled every session feel chaotic, forced, and impertinent to the story the group is telling. Sometimes they make no sense at all. (I've scrapped the concept of the Icons in some games.)



This I agree, I had problems until I moved it to basically player-instigated meets currency. Very excited that they are revamping this. 



Retreater said:


> And then the worst is the inflated die rolling. As you go up in level, having to keep increasing the damage dice gets tedious, throwing big fistfuls of dice around every turn.



I think it is safe to say players like rolling dice. Allowing martial characters to have a chance to roll lots in one go, instead of having lots of separate attacks that take so much longer to resolve is just a bonus on top of that.


----------



## Blue (Aug 10, 2022)

Weiley31 said:


> So, if its backwards compatible, that means that it should be backwards compatible with all the books in the 13th Age line and 13th Age: Glorantha.



They said that the monster stat blocks aren't changing (which keeps the Excellent bestiaries fully compatible) , and that means combat needs to be really close to before.


----------



## Jer (Aug 10, 2022)

Blue said:


> I think it is safe to say players like rolling dice. Allowing martial characters to have a chance to roll lots in one go, instead of having lots of separate attacks that take so much longer to resolve is just a bonus on top of that.



And for the folks who don't like rolling lots of dice there's an alternate mechanic in the rules that I believe is actually the recommended approach - roll some fixed number of dice and add the average of the rest of the dice.  So if you're supposed to roll 8d6 you roll 4d6+28.  I have different players who prefer to roll all of the dice and others who prefer to take the average.

Where the numbers do get annoying is having to do subtraction in my head as the DM to keep track of hit points.  As I joke with folks I was a Math major as an undergrad and it killed my ability to do addition and subtraction in my head    The larger the numbers get, the slower I am at it. (Am I too stubborn to just get a pocket calculator to have at my side, or just too forgetful to remember to grab it before the game?  Who can say?)


----------



## orion&patchwork (Aug 11, 2022)

So instead of substracting, you can just add up hit points received. Bloodied will still be midway, no ?


----------



## Jer (Aug 11, 2022)

orion&patchwork said:


> So instead of substracting, you can just add up hit points received. Bloodied will still be midway, no ?



I do it that way now - the math degree didn't do quite a bad a number on my ability to sum as it did to my ability to subtract, but it's still there. I definitely make fewer mistakes when I'm tracking hp in a 5e battle than in a 13th age one (fortunately it seems to matter less if they go uncaught until after the battle ends in a 13A combat than in a 5e one too).


----------



## ruemere (Aug 11, 2022)

I love the news. This was probably the best version of D20 as it fixed most, if not all, problems of the game:

linear fighters, quadratic wizards,
magic rules, fighters boring, rogues are pathetic, druids come to the game with their own bestiary,
long boring fights (4E), rocket tag encounters (3.xE)
"I win" spells,
Christmas tree syndrome,
alignment.

To add some great stuff they produced (the rules already were mentioned):

fabulous, background rich bestiaries,
opportunity for the players to create parties not composed of canonical four,
the great power scaling,
daring and inventive class mechanics.

Now, it would not be fair if I failed to mention the issues it introduced:

disjoint between narrative mechanics and simulationist mechanics (icons vs. in-game everything),
big HP at the end game levels,
toolkit approach to products... this deserves a whole article since this criticizes Pelgrane Press release policy for the game line. For now however, let's just say that toolkits are not ready-to-run products. They are also structured as loose guides... So if I want to reference anything, I am on my own. And so, unless you memorized it, you end up with huge page count that is not reusable.
many, many editing or structuring issues. There is a reason I prefer to use online SRD.
the setting. It was too gonzo for me. And the tropes were so stale. Had to reinvent a lot of stuff to keep the players interested.


----------



## Joshua Randall (Aug 11, 2022)

The solution to "I'm slow at subtracting / adding" (for monster HP tracking) is not "get better at it / use a calculator", it's make the arithmetic SO EASY a caveman troglodyte could do it.

_"But Joshua, HOW?"_ I hear you cry out.

Simple:

Before combat, round all monster HP to the nearest 5 HP (lower levels) or 10 HP (mid and up).
At low levels, round all incoming damage to the nearest 5 HP.
At mid-to-high levels, to the nearest 10 HP.
At very high levels, you can round to the nearest 20 HP, although typically rounding to the nearest 10 HP still works fine.
What this does is mean you are only ever adding/subtracting by 5s or 10s, which, when the monster HP are already a multiple of 5s or 10s, is super easy and fast.

_"But Joshua, doesn't this punish piddly amounts of miss damage and splash damage?"_ Yes it does, and I am entirely fine with that "drawback".


----------



## SteveC (Aug 11, 2022)

This is very exciting news. I was fortunate enough to play sessions with both Jonathan and Rob (back to back!) and they were some of the best GMs I've ever had. They really helped my with the Icon mechanics by having them have real, tangible effects in play.

Two of the best game sessions I've been in at a Con, and I've been in some exceptionally good ones. Really excited for this as an option!


----------



## Joshua Randall (Aug 11, 2022)

SteveC said:


> I was fortunate enough to play sessions with both Jonathan and Rob [...] They really helped my with the Icon mechanics by having them have real, tangible effects in play.




How did they handle the icon mechanics?


----------



## EzekielRaiden (Aug 12, 2022)

Joshua Randall said:


> The solution to "I'm slow at subtracting / adding" (for monster HP tracking) is not "get better at it / use a calculator", it's make the arithmetic SO EASY a caveman troglodyte could do it.
> 
> _"But Joshua, HOW?"_ I hear you cry out.
> 
> ...



Personally, I'd fix that last problem by just saying the minimum damage is 5 (or whatever.) That way, miss and splash damage still matter, but not a ton. If rounding to the nearest 10 is already fine, then a floor of 5 can't be THAT much of a pain, and it's easy math at that point.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 12, 2022)

Joshua Randall said:


> How did they handle the icon mechanics?



They did it on a scene basis and you rolled it like Blades in the Dark, so 6 = total success, big impact, 4-5= more modest effect. There was a dragon battle and my character had a relationship with the three. I rolled a 6 and ended up stopping the dragon's breath weapon and initiating a parley with them. It turned the combat encounter into a social one that was really memorable.


----------



## EllisEthel (Aug 12, 2022)

I like 13th Age. Might grab this.


----------



## Jer (Aug 12, 2022)

SteveC said:


> They did it on a scene basis and you rolled it like Blades in the Dark, so 6 = total success, big impact, 4-5= more modest effect. There was a dragon battle and my character had a relationship with the three. I rolled a 6 and ended up stopping the dragon's breath weapon and initiating a parley with them. It turned the combat encounter into a social one that was really memorable.



That's a really interesting idea actually - turning it from a resource you get at the beginning of a scenario and have to keep track of until you use it (or forget you have it) into something that you just check when it's relevant.  Less to track, less to juggle, more immediate impact when it hits.  I'm going to have to think about trying that out.  (I sometimes just use the existence of a relationship as a way to further the story, but I hadn't thought of moving the rolls to be scene-by-scene instead of tracking them through the scenario).

Was it player initiated to roll the icon relationship ("Can I see if my icon relationship with the Three can help me here?") or was it something the GM called for (at the start of the scene asking everyone to make icon rolls to see if they have some kind of advantage)?  I could see either being used, though I'd be more inclined to try the former.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 12, 2022)

Jer said:


> Was it player initiated to roll the icon relationship ("Can I see if my icon relationship with the Three can help me here?") or was it something the GM called for (at the start of the scene asking everyone to make icon rolls to see if they have some kind of advantage)? I could see either being used, though I'd be more inclined to try the former.



Different styles for different people. I am a very social person so I said, "I need to call upon my relationship with the three here since I'm out in the open and about to be roasted. The three has plans for me that being a charred husk won't let them do."

Another player was quiet and they asked them "you have a relationship with the Emperor, do you think that could affect how those soldiers are treating the group?"


----------



## GreyLord (Aug 12, 2022)

grankless said:


> i'm sure there's a very interesting essay you can write about the different kinds of racism




I don't know about him, but I have read about some interesting items that have occurred in the medical field.  It isn't so much about race, but about genetics and geneology (Which some could interpret as racial).  There are many various genetic diseases or other things that seem to affect people of certain heritages far more than others.  For example, sickle cell may affect those with a background from certain areas of the world far more than those from other parts of the world.  It is caused by a genetic connection, not some random chance.

In many instances, being able to identify individuals by a quick method that lets the doctor know WHERE that person's geneology lies can help understand some of the medical things that may be occurring or that they should probably double check to see if they are occurring or not.

This tends to reference things such as race at times, and as such medical scientists are identifying times when looking at a genetic component that is a general item to a broad swath of people can be useful.

This type of medical science MIGHT be looked at as racist by others today I suppose, as many times they DO reference things such as race (and sometimes it is quite specific in how it references that in relation to a certain tribe or group of people in a specific part of the world, far more specific at times than what is generally used to describe race).

It is an interesting dilemma, because calling those who are performing the research as well as doctors who use that research to save lives as racist because they are using that medical knowledge puts one at a quandry of how to talk or reference such items among everyone else.

Verifiable government and medical sources on the topic

Medicineplus gov on the subject

PBS Genetic research has a white bias and it may be hurting everyone else


----------



## Morrus (Aug 12, 2022)

GreyLord said:


> I don't know about him, but I have read about some interesting items that have occurred in the medical field.  It isn't so much about race, but about genetics and geneology (Which some could interpret as racial).  There are many various genetic diseases or other things that seem to affect people of certain heritages far more than others.  For example, sickle cell may affect those with a background from certain areas of the world far more than those from other parts of the world.  It is caused by a genetic connection, not some random chance.
> 
> In many instances, being able to identify individuals by a quick method that lets the doctor know WHERE that person's geneology lies can help understand some of the medical things that may be occurring or that they should probably double check to see if they are occurring or not.
> 
> ...



Wow, THIS isn't a debate which belongs on EN World. Drop it, please.


----------



## ruemere (Aug 12, 2022)

So, to sum it up, since there is no official announcement at Pelgrane Press site:
1. There will be a kickstarter for the next edition of 13th Age in the next year.
2. The playtest program will commence soon.
3. If you want to participate in the playtest, drop an email at 13thageplaytest...{@}gmail...com (minus the . and { and } to avoid the scrubbers).


----------



## Deekin (Aug 13, 2022)

One thing I really hope they take  a  good long look at I'd the Recharge X mechanism.  I was never really sold on a "roll to see if you get to have fun" mechanic, and after having to spend a combat doing nothing but spamming my basic attack after fluffing a bunch of recharge rolls really solidified my hatred of it as a mechanic


----------



## Dragonblade (Aug 13, 2022)

Played a decent amount of 13th age back when it came out.

Here is what we found that it needed:

More detailed ritual casting rules, and a catalog of 4e style rituals, that include mundane things as well as more exotic rituals (e.g. create food and water, detect magic, water breathing, etc.). There should be martial "rituals" too. Basically the game needed a way to flesh out the feeling of the world, and provide more utility and non-combat abilities. The class abilities were cool, but too structured around combat scenes. The game has a wing it mentality but this is one area where more explicit mechanical framework along with a catalog of say 50 sample rituals would have been good.

Icon rules didn't work. They should be more of a narrative luck point style system. Each player rolls for each icon relationship they have. For every 6 they roll, per session they get something similar to 5e advantage, or a Savage World bennie if they can work it into the narrative of a scene, including combat scenes. That's basically what we did.

Magic items were too limited and not epic enough at higher levels. Most of them had a single power with a recharge. I'd rather have magic items with one or two always-on passive abilities, and then maybe a big bang daily or encounter power.

Also while I appreciated the unique feel of them, they were almost too unqiue and quirky. I would keep those items, but I'd also prefer a Diablo style random magical item generator so you could randomly create more standard items, and then sprinkle in some of the more specialized items.

Also class abilities were too limited. I liked the 1 Feat per level, but I hated having to waste higher level feat slots taking more feats in the chain. The Champion and Epic tier abilities of the Feat should just come automatically for free as soon as you hit that tier. So every time you get a feat it should be buying you into a whole new feat chain that just grows automatically. Sounds like this may be closer to the new approach.

Also the Paladin class was boring. I know it was intended to be a "simple" tank class, but it was boring. Needed something more. Thankfully, the 13th Age Glorantha book had that undead slaying class that could be reskinned as an awesome striker paladin, but not so many people saw that book. That class should move into the new core rulebook.

Also, there was a really good conversion of Tome of Battle done by Martin Killman on one of the fan sites. I know some people didn't like Tome of Battle, but my group loved it and we added those classes to our 13th age game to much excitement. I would love to see some version of those added to the new core rulebook. Also, add an anime style monster tamer/summoner class would be fun too. I know people cry about the action economy being broken, but those kinds of classes are still fun, and if any system can make them work it would be 13th Age.


----------



## ruemere (Aug 13, 2022)

Monster tamer is easily doable.

1. Archmage Engine cares mostly about attack economy, that is you are limited to one attack per round, with damage die being dependent on your stance.

2. Treat summoned/tamed creatures attacks as your character attacks. Subject them to all rules of your class chassis.

3. Add special abilities. If they break rule #1 or #2, make them dailies. If they grant special utility effects, make them dailies. If they grant short temporary bonuses, make them once/scene with recharge 10.

Done.


----------



## waderockett (Aug 16, 2022)

Dragonblade said:


> Icon rules didn't work. They should be more of a narrative luck point style system. Each player rolls for each icon relationship they have. For every 6 they roll, per session they get something similar to 5e advantage, or a Savage World bennie if they can work it into the narrative of a scene, including combat scenes. That's basically what we did.



I started using the icon mechanics Rob Heinsoo said he was experimenting with in his home game, and which seem to have inspired the 13th Age Glorantha rune mechanics:

Players roll their characters' icon relationships at the beginning of each session.
On a result of a 5 or a 6 they get an icon advantage and I give them a token for that icon. I use the beautiful icon tokens from Campaign Coins because having something shiny in front of them reminds the players that they have a valuable resource they can spend.
They can spend that icon advantage at any time during the session to automatically succeed at something that would be difficult or impossible for them to do using their normal powers and abilities. It has to be within reason and the player has to tell us how it connects to their experience with, or the power/influence of, that icon.
When they use that advantage they roll 1d20. On a 1-5 there's a consequence or complication attached.
Making the icon advantage a resource controlled by players has worked incredibly well for me and my players. They enjoy using them, I enjoy seeing the creative ways they come up with to overcome challenges, it's super simple, and it gets the players invested in the icons—which lays the groundwork for Epic tier when they start to spend time with the icons in person and take on the campaign's villainous icons directly.


----------



## adamantyr (Aug 16, 2022)

My only surprise with the announcement is why Pelgrane Press hasn't done some PR work to prepare the ground first if they intend to bring Jonathan Tweet back.

His tweet comes off as adversarial and political, which makes any point he was trying to make valueless as he's angered the audience reading it. It reminds me of when Chris Crawford published something about video games only being enjoyed by men because the three game types (logic puzzles, manual dexterity, resource management) all derive from hunting and gathering skills. WOW did he get roasted. And deservedly so.


----------



## ruemere (Aug 16, 2022)

adamantyr said:


> My only surprise with the announcement is why Pelgrane Press hasn't done some PR work to prepare the ground first if they intend to bring Jonathan Tweet back.
> 
> His tweet comes off as adversarial and political, which makes any point he was trying to make valueless as he's angered the audience reading it. It reminds me of when Chris Crawford published something about video games only being enjoyed by men because the three game types (logic puzzles, manual dexterity, resource management) all derive from hunting and gathering skills. WOW did he get roasted. And deservedly so.



Because not all people have PR skills.
Because sometimes you can be tolerant and understanding.

This topic was done over many times, even in this thread. Please, do let it go, ok?


----------



## Umbran (Aug 16, 2022)

ruemere said:


> Because sometimes you can be tolerant and understanding.




Sometimes, you can be tolerant of racist ideas, sure.  But... why would you want to?


----------



## Umbran (Aug 16, 2022)

For folks who didn't see it, upon being asked about this, Pelgrane Press tweeted:

"Jonathan is working with Rob on 13th Age 2nd Ed. He's just working on the core book, and only because he co-wrote it originally, and Rob felt he couldn't re-write it by himself. We haven't worked with him on anything since 2014, and will not be working with him on anything else."


----------



## overgeeked (Aug 16, 2022)

Umbran said:


> Sometimes, you can be tolerant of racist ideas, sure. But... why would you want to?



There’s no reason to be tolerant of racism. No one’s suggested otherwise. As stated up thread there are real genetic differences between ethnicities that can doom lives when medical treatment does not take these differences into account. Accepting the findings of modern science isn’t racist.

ETA: To be perfectly clear. Acknowledging genetic differences between populations is not racist. It literally saves lives. Thinking those genetic differences makes one group superior to another is racist. And should be fought.


----------



## Cadence (Aug 16, 2022)

Joshua Randall said:


> The solution to "I'm slow at subtracting / adding" (for monster HP tracking) is not "get better at it / use a calculator", it's make the arithmetic SO EASY a caveman troglodyte could do it.
> 
> _"But Joshua, HOW?"_ I hear you cry out.
> 
> ...



If the goal is minimal math, why not just use all kinds of smaller values and dice instead of doing variable rounding?

Instead of the 53hp (round to 50) monster that does d6+1 damage (round the 1-2 to 0, and the 3-7 to5) with one attack and d12+1 damage (round 1-2 to 0, 3-7 to 1, 8-12 to 2, and 13 to 3) with the other, make it a 10 hp monster that does 1 and d2?


----------



## Joshua Randall (Aug 17, 2022)

Cadence said:


> If the goal is minimal math, why not just use all kinds of smaller values and dice instead of doing variable rounding?
> 
> Instead of the 53hp (round to 50) monster that does d6+1 damage (round the 1-2 to 0, and the 3-7 to5) with one attack and d12+1 damage (round 1-2 to 0, 3-7 to 1, 8-12 to 2, and 13 to 3) with the other, make it a 10 hp monster that does 1 and d2?



Because that’s a lot more work and the goal is to reduce work.


----------



## Cadence (Aug 17, 2022)

Joshua Randall said:


> Because that’s a lot more work and the goal is to reduce work.



Ah.  I thought you were talking about a possible thing the new 13age books could have as a rule or set-up.


----------



## ruemere (Aug 17, 2022)

overgeeked said:


> There’s no reason to be tolerant of racism. No one’s suggested otherwise. As stated up thread there are real genetic differences between ethnicities that can doom lives when medical treatment does not take these differences into account. Accepting the findings of modern science isn’t racist.
> 
> ETA: To be perfectly clear. Acknowledging genetic differences between populations is not racist. It literally saves lives. Thinking those genetic differences makes one group superior to another is racist. And should be fought.



Thank you. I promised myself I would not comment on this topic myself, as there are simply too many instinctive reactions to r-word.

@Umbran , I would like to specifically distance myself from your interpretation of my words: I am not proposing to be tolerant of r-expletive-ist ideas. I referred to people, specifically one Jonathan Tweet.

We are multinational, multilanguage community here - with a bit of understanding, we can talk things out, right?

Disclaimer: A few days ago, 15 km east of my homeland border there has landed a proof that one cannot reason with _some_.


----------



## ruemere (Aug 17, 2022)

Cadence said:


> Ah.  I thought you were talking about a possible thing the new 13age books could have as a rule or set-up.



The big issue with 13A rules was that due to certain cadence of growth of damage/HP, characters in the end game fought similar number of creatures, but the numbers crunched reached three digits, or in some cases, four (Tarrasque, HP 2k+). Also, the number of dice rolled reached two digits.

While unlikely to be a big issue, this definitely contributed to the length of a character's turn.

In my game I have tried several approaches, probably most successful being fixed damage with many sided die at a top, and number of hits being close second (one hit is worth N minions, takes three hits to down a trooper, 1 for archer or caster, 5 hits for a boss; crits upgrade the number of hits scored).


----------



## Joshua Randall (Aug 17, 2022)

Length of combat is like length of lovemaking: it’s the right length as long as you are still enjoying it. Which differs person to person and mood to mood. Game rules can give you levers to pull to adjust (perceived) duration, but rules cannot dictate one true answer.


----------



## Umbran (Aug 17, 2022)

overgeeked said:


> As stated up thread there are real genetic differences between ethnicities that can doom lives when medical treatment does not take these differences into account. Accepting the findings of modern science isn’t racist.




As was stated upthread by the man who owns the site:  Debate of the science involved is not a subject for EN World.


----------



## EllisEthel (Aug 17, 2022)

Joshua Randall said:


> Length of combat is like length of lovemaking: it’s the right length as long as you are still enjoying it. Which differs person to person and mood to mood. Game rules can give you levers to pull to adjust (perceived) duration, but rules cannot dictate one true answer.



Joshua Randall…the Swiss Tony of RPG’s lol


----------



## ruemere (Aug 17, 2022)

A


Joshua Randall said:


> Length of combat is like length of lovemaking: it’s the right length as long as you are still enjoying it. Which differs person to person and mood to mood. Game rules can give you levers to pull to adjust (perceived) duration, but rules cannot dictate one true answer.



While I agree with you, here are the observations for default 13A combat encounter (based on simulations and in-game tests):

the fight, the significant portion of it when the outcome is changeable, lasts 3 rounds. These rounds need not be consecutive (a chase, a fight distributed over a large area, or a temporary barrier may introduce a delay)
the players tend to use dailies on the first or third round.
mopping up phase (when the fight is already decided) is best resolved in a short manner with minimum rolls.
minions are crucial to player's fun - these guys can bite if left alone, and they make very satisfying splat - while troops are least enjoyable - no risk, no pain
high level minions are incredibly dangerous - and if they are ranged, even more so - I had a TPK almost on my hands

That said, default encounters are sometimes a bit bland. I have a ton of notes on how to spice 13A combat... for example, running no holds barred fight among big tents - scared war elephant, sudden fire or just a few cunning rogues with saws...


----------



## waderockett (Aug 18, 2022)

Rob Heinsoo has started posting details about the new edition on his personal blog, expanding on the items in that Gen Con flyer list.


----------



## Joshua Randall (Aug 18, 2022)

Rob Heinsoo's blog said:
			
		

> *Each class gets +2 additional pages: *Classes like the ranger and paladin that were always quite simple now have talent options that can make them more interesting for experienced players. Classes like the sorcerer get more spells with a greater range of effect. Most of the classes are getting quite a bit more than 2 pages; so far it’s only the rogue that hasn’t grown beyond that.




Well that does suggest the dead-simple Paladin or Ranger is now a 2nd class citizen.


----------



## ruemere (Aug 18, 2022)

Joshua Randall said:


> Well that does suggest the dead-simple Paladin or Ranger is now a 2nd class citizen.



I think that Rob implied more options, not that old defaults are gone - that would go against backward compatibility. Hopefully, there will be more to come.

Let's not expect too much for now. Playtest phase is about finding out if the new ideas are sound.

By the way, since we're at the wishful laundry list stage, here are my favorites:

Eastwood's Man with a Gun: I want to be a monster hunter who shoots first.
Cloud's Ridiculously Heavy Sword and Wuxia mobility in 3D.
an Immortal Paragon with Flying Swords chasing dragons (Wuxia style).
Garret the Thief setting.
support for more levels. 10 ain't enough.
retraining, so that people can rediscover their characters.

And a few others.


----------



## EzekielRaiden (Aug 19, 2022)

Joshua Randall said:


> Well that does suggest the dead-simple Paladin or Ranger is now a 2nd class citizen.



The quote implies that it's opt-in, not opt-out. So presumably there will be some nice, clean, super-simple options for people who want those, and some complicated, intricate options for those who want that too.

Which I see as being pretty much purely a win. Especially if there's a "quick-build" guide for each class that gives a solid, functional character with minimal bells and whistles, and says, "This is the streamlined basis. If you find yourself hungry for more options, consider changing out some of your talents for other, more-complex options."

Plus? The _inherently_ dead-simple Paladin was honestly underpowered compared to other classes. It needed a rework either way. Why not simultaneously make the simple option stronger _and_ offer alternatives for those who want them?


----------



## Chromie (Aug 20, 2022)

overgeeked said:


> People really still parroting this lie? Come on.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



How the hell does this help? This is a naughty word take


----------



## ruemere (Aug 20, 2022)

Two new entries:

13th Age 2e: More Info: 13th Age 2e: More Info
13th Age 2e: The Same Core Team: 13th Age 2e: The Same Core Team


----------



## Nikosandros (Aug 31, 2022)

I've sent an email for the playtest, but I've got no answer. Has anyone else here applied for the playtest?


----------



## waderockett (Aug 31, 2022)

Nikosandros said:


> I've sent an email for the playtest, but I've got no answer. Has anyone else here applied for the playtest?



Rob doesn't have an auto-reply confirmation set up, so you'll most likely get an email when the first playtest packet is close to ready.


----------



## Nikosandros (Aug 31, 2022)

waderockett said:


> Rob doesn't have an auto-reply confirmation set up, so you'll most likely get an email when the first playtest packet is close to ready.



Thanks for the info. I thought that this might be the case, but it's nice to have confirmation.


----------



## Eric V (Aug 31, 2022)

Nikosandros said:


> I've sent an email for the playtest, but I've got no answer. Has anyone else here applied for the playtest?



Yes.  Looks like my group will get to playtest.  Very excited about it.


----------



## ruemere (Nov 11, 2022)

13th Age playtest package is up. It's pretty much a full book, so digesting it will take time regardless of helpful highlights.

Loving it so far, though admittedly I am biased in favor of 13th Age.


----------



## Nikosandros (Nov 11, 2022)

I also received it and I will start a playtest game next week


----------



## Jer (Nov 11, 2022)

Yeah I've barely scratched the surface on my initial read - I'm going to have to spend some time this weekend to digest the changes.


----------



## Deekin (Nov 11, 2022)

Have they fixed the recharge mechanic?


----------



## Weiley31 (Nov 11, 2022)

Is it too late to get in on the playtest for 13th age Eschalation Edition?


----------



## Weiley31 (Nov 11, 2022)

Joshua Randall said:


> Well that does suggest the dead-simple Paladin or Ranger is now a 2nd class citizen.






EzekielRaiden said:


> Plus? The _inherently_ dead-simple Paladin was honestly underpowered compared to other classes. It needed a rework either way. Why not simultaneously make the simple option stronger _and_ offer alternatives for those who want them?



Supposedly, _Dark Alleys and Twisted Pathways_ has options/tried to rework the Paladin a bit to make it less dead simple/underpowered.









						Dark Alleys & Twisted Paths (13th Age Compatible) - Kinoko Games | DriveThruRPG.com
					

Dark Alleys & Twisted Paths (13th Age Compatible) - Dark Alleys & Twisted Paths (13th Age Compatible) is a massive expansion book for all classes of the Core Book and




					www.drivethrurpg.com


----------



## EzekielRaiden (Nov 11, 2022)

Weiley31 said:


> Supposedly, _Dark Alleys and Twisted Pathways_ has options/tried to rework the Paladin a bit to make it less dead simple/underpowered.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Interesting. I'd need to see more details, the blurb makes it sound like it's perhaps too cautious, only providing more options rather than altering the existing structure. That is, IMO the Paladin needs something like 3-4 more talents spread out across its levels, based on some very thorough analysis I've read. So while giving alternative options is cool, getting more _chances_ to pick them would be better.


----------



## ruemere (Nov 11, 2022)

Deekin said:


> Have they fixed the recharge mechanic?



There is a lovely Designer sidebar on this, where Rob and Jonathan spar on the very subject (p. 157). There is Rob's alternative proposal on p. 298.
Since I do not know what exactly was your issue with recharge mechanic, and since I am unsure what I am allowed to share (Rob is very open about the playtest, however since this is very much a work in progress, I would hate to share something that is not ready), and since people could use another fan's input, use playtest email address (posted somewhere in this thread) and submit your playtest request.

I have posted some feedback, however I was just addressing something that is really a carry-over from a previous edition, and - in my opinion - there are games on a market that already tackled these items in a way that can be imported.


----------



## SteveC (Nov 14, 2022)

So I emailed and got the first playtest document. I like what I see so far. I looked at the fighter, since that was something that was discussed the most. I like the changes I've seen. 
Fighters have a set of maneuvers that are either offensive or defensive. You have a "combat rhythm" that switches so if you're on offense and use and offensive maneuver, you switch to defense. When you use a maneuver of the same type you're in rhythm with, you roll two dice and take whichever you prefer. I would play this version of the fighter (I didn't like the earlier version and thought it was too fiddly and based too much on what you rolled).
There are a a lot of smallish changes, and things (like "elven grace") are adjusted to be more balanced. I will have the time to answer some questions if you'd like to see how things work now.


----------



## ruemere (Nov 24, 2022)

(no spoilers)

As per my reading of the Playtest Package, here's a minimalist character sheet template made in Google Docs:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1L5gWO2AWi0wGM01yO-ws9nW0nMQ2VNAlnChOrHK4gRI/edit?usp=sharing

It works in any modern browser (just make sure to make a copy - access is restricted to Read-Only), and best of all, it works on any mobile phone. 

Important advantages over a paper sheet:
1. Almost anyone with a mobile phone should be able to read, and with permission, edit a copy of a sheet.
2. It can be printed out, turned into an immutable PDF or edited by multiple people.
3. While minimalist, it is very legible and should support all classes.

Next stop:
1. Need to create a new adventure (I have adapted almost all material that was out there). Needed to test creature and encounter design. And mostly to remind myself how it works. 
2. The adventure premise requires availability of almost any kind of monster. My players requested to have an Arcanum experience. So we're looking at a steampunk frontier, with magic vs. technology dissonance, where zeppelins are flying ships, Elves are a mix of degenerate Menilboeans (Chaos god pacts included), Conan Picts (super conservative nearly immortal barbarians) and Wandering Jews, Dwarves are progressives, capitalists, marxists and are definitely NOT DYING OUT (actually, dwarves breeding like crazy thanks to their quite modern medicine is going to be a great angle - so it's going to be Calcutta all the way in their cities), while humans are going to be a new type of blight - initially a refugees from another world, they stole/adapted tech from dwarves, made several questionable pacts with Menilboean Elves, and now they are pushing frontiers for their settlers.


----------



## Blue (Nov 24, 2022)

I've been running playtest with two groups - had 11 people wanted to take part in it (plus myself).  Goes from 13th Age vets to someone who has never played a TTRPG before.


----------



## Nikosandros (Nov 30, 2022)

The rules for relationships with Icons have been changed, but I'm not sure about how do they work when you have multiple points with a single icon. Do you roll one die for each point at the start of the day to establish the connections?


----------



## ruemere (Nov 30, 2022)

Nikosandros said:


> The rules for relationships with Icons have been changed, but I'm not sure about how do they work when you have multiple points with a single icon. Do you roll one die for each point at the start of the day to establish the connections?



Icon mechanics start at page 187.

When you create your character, you gain select three icons you're connected to.
At the beginning of each day, you roll for your icons to find out which icon you can call upon on that day. Unused calls disappear at the end of the day.
When you call upon an icon, you roll d6. On 3-6 you can narrate something advantageous to you in line with your relation and the icon. On 1-2 GM gets to add their complication to the narration (the GM has an option to poll other players for complication ideas).

There is a rule variant on page 193.


----------



## Nikosandros (Nov 30, 2022)

Yes, all of this is clear to me. My question is about having more than one point with a single icon. Do you roll more dice at the start of the day? Do you roll more dice (and pick the highest one) when using the connection? Something else? I think it's the first one, but I'm not sure.


----------



## ruemere (Nov 30, 2022)

Nikosandros said:


> Yes, all of this is clear to me. My question is about having more than one point with a single icon. Do you roll more dice at the start of the day? Do you roll more dice (and pick the highest one) when using the connection? Something else? I think it's the first one, but I'm not sure.



Page 35: "relationship mechanic lets you roll one d6 per point invested in a relationship when you’re trying to leverage your connection to the icon"

So, I assume that the leveraging one's connection means trying to roll d6s trying to get the story to work in your direction.


----------



## Nikosandros (Dec 2, 2022)

That seems reasonable. I wonder if the player rolls two dice and picks the best when leveraging the connection if they can leverage twice per adventuring day.


----------

