Anyone picked up True Sorcery?

[iwatt]

Assuming that I'm typical for GMs, probably not valid but I'll assume it for this arguement's sake, it's mostly a matter of not having the time in or out of game to come up with cool descriptors for failed actions.

It's hard coming up with enough descriptions when someone fails to hit in combat:

"You're sword strikes his shield, deflecting the hit"

and

"you barely miss his head"

etc..


Coming up with on the fly descriptions isn't one of my DM-ing abilities.

 

[Nebulous]

The first option is the one I'd like to see more of but most GMs lack either the time or the imagination to do it properly. Assuming that I'm typical for GMs, probably not valid but I'll assume it for this arguement's sake, it's mostly a matter of not having the time in or out of game to come up with cool descriptors for failed actions.

Hence, why it might be neat to see a blurb under the spell description: WHEN A CASTING FAILS; blah blah blah. And rattle off a few options. It would help GM's anyway add some descriptive text. But actually influencing someone with a failed die roll should be a no-no, unless you somehow have rules for activating critical failures.

 

[Antendren]

So I just got an email claiming that the pdf had been updated, but when I downloaded it as instructed, as far as I can tell there's no difference. Anyone else experiencing this?

 

[Michael Tree]

How is rolling a 1 on a casting check any different from rolling ones on attack rolls? The combat class that rolls a bunch of ones 'wastes' its action just as surely as the caster who's spell fails to cast. I've heard many complaints about the caster but I've never heard complaints about the combat class (away from the game table); I wonder why that is?

Normally the 'chance of failing' comes from the spell's saving throw. If a spell requires a spellcasting roll <i>and</i> still has a saving throw, then there's twice the chance of failing.

 

[ValhallaGH]

I'm curious about using True Sorcery for True20 as well.

Does anyone who has the True Sorcery pdf thought about using it with True20?

Now that I have True20 and have had a chance to familiarize myself with it and True Sorcery, yes.

Does it replace the power/magic system in True20, or is it meant to be used in addition to that system?

Either or. Replacement, supplement, it will work with either role.

Does it introduce a new role to be used in place of (or in addition to) the Adept?

No. Conintue using the Adept role.

How complex/easy is the True20 True Sorcery system in comparison to the default system in True20?

More complex but also more flexible. More importantly, it feels like a magic system instead of a semi-psionic system.

Any overall impressions on the appropriateness of True Sorcery for True20 games?

Very appropriate. The only difficulty is figuring out a good method for integrating a limiting factor of some sort. I think a Fatigue save with a DC of 5 + one fifth of the Spellcraft DC (Spellcraft DC/5 + 5) would be the best implementation of the flavor and balance intended from True Sorcery without changing any fundamental aspects of True20 (such as reintroducing points to track).

Apologies for taking so long to provide a meaningful reply, but I've been trying to learn two new systems and not fall behind in life. I've succeeded though.

 

[Nebulous]

So I just got an email claiming that the pdf had been updated, but when I downloaded it as instructed, as far as I can tell there's no difference. Anyone else experiencing this?

Yup. I experienced the same thing. Not sure what's going on.

 

[hong]

How is rolling a 1 on a casting check any different from rolling ones on attack rolls?

Saving throw.

 

[JohnSnow]

Same problem here. No idea what's going on. Near as I can tell, the revised version isn't revised.

They certainly haven't fixed the errors in the Iron Heroes section.

 

[dalfen]

Yup, maybe they really have the update version, but they didn't update the link

 

[JohnSnow]

I just dropped Rob Schwalb a note. Maybe he knows. If I get a response, I'll let you guys know.