log in or register to remove this ad

 

[AGE System] Creators Alliance

Marc_C

Solitary Role Playing
Green Ronin finally opened their Community Creative Program on DrivethruRPG. It's called the AGE Creators Alliance. It is similar to the D&D DMGuild. I've been waiting for this. Might even participate with a few creations of my own. This will certainly boost adventure support for AGE.

One of the reasons they have been waiting, from what was said on the Youtube channel, is the fact that they wanted to have the new version of Fantasy AGE (1.1*) core book almost done. They are now in the graphic design step.

(*it's not a new edition but rather an update and expansion. It remains compatible with older books like the Bestiary for example)

For more info on the program you can read the terms & conditions here:

 

log in or register to remove this ad


Gnosistika

Mildly Ascorbic
Green Ronin finally opened their Community Creative Program on DrivethruRPG. It's called the AGE Creators Alliance. It is similar to the D&D DMGuild. I've been waiting for this. Might even participate with a few creations of my own. This will certainly boost adventure support for AGE.

One of the reasons they have been waiting, from what was said on the Youtube channel, is the fact that they wanted to have the new version of Fantasy AGE (1.1*) core book almost done. They are now in the graphic design step.

(*it's not a new edition but rather an update and expansion. It remains compatible with older books like the Bestiary for example)

For more info on the program you can read the terms & conditions here:

I am looking forward to the community content. Adventures will be a welcome addition and some unique settings.
It's one of only three systems I run now because it is so easy to hack.

Interestingly enough, my longest running group did the playtest for the new corebook, and while they enjoyed it, they prefer the Basic Rulebook.
 

vincegetorix

Jewel of the North
Interestingly enough, my longest running group did the playtest for the new corebook, and while they enjoyed it, they prefer the Basic Rulebook.
yeah, I gave up the system after a using the new playtest for a bit. Really did not like the direction they were going with it.

But with this new storefront, I'd may be able to create a few things that gathered a little visibility in the past and release it back.

I may return to work on my AGE version of a World of Darkness/City of Mist/Unknown Armies equivalent.
 

Marc_C

Solitary Role Playing
My players prefer the new version with a specialization at level one. They said the characters feels more rounded, instead of having to wait to level 4 with the Basic Core Book. They also like the class specific stunts and the addition of the new Envoy class for Face characters.
 

Aldarc

Legend
yeah, I gave up the system after a using the new playtest for a bit. Really did not like the direction they were going with it.

But with this new storefront, I'd may be able to create a few things that gathered a little visibility in the past and release it back.

I may return to work on my AGE version of a World of Darkness/City of Mist/Unknown Armies equivalent.
What about the new direction did you like? For the record, I liked it.
 

vincegetorix

Jewel of the North
What about the new direction did you like? For the record, I liked it.
From memory, we had a problem with Stunts getting more restrictive, since (for us) they were the main selling point of the system. I seem to recall some other things becoming more restricted, while they did not change things that were restrictive in the first place (quick attacks for rogue and warrior being restricted to ranged or melee attacks, respectively).

A new class is pretty cool, so are the features that let's you generate or bank stunts for later. I'd have to look at the published results to make my mind, naturally.
 

Aldarc

Legend
From memory, we had a problem with Stunts getting more restrictive, since (for us) they were the main selling point of the system. I seem to recall some other things becoming more restricted, while they did not change things that were restrictive in the first place (quick attacks for rogue and warrior being restricted to ranged or melee attacks, respectively).

A new class is pretty cool, so are the features that let's you generate or bank stunts for later. I'd have to look at the published results to make my mind, naturally.
I get that stunts are the selling point of the game; however, I also recall players getting into decision paralysis with their stunts. I observed less of that behavior in the playtest with my players than I did prior in the basic rules. That is a good thing, IMHO, as it keeps the game running a bit quicker and smoother. But if you are used to the full gamut of stunts, then I get how greater restrictions would be a negative.

I am definitely curious about what has changed between the playtest and publication. For example, the creation of the Envoy put the Rogue class into something of an odd place. There was also some issues that people noticed regarding the power creep between the new races put in the book alongside the old ones, some of which were quite boring in comparison (e.g., halfling, human, etc.).
 

Gnosistika

Mildly Ascorbic
I get that stunts are the selling point of the game; however, I also recall players getting into decision paralysis with their stunts. I observed less of that behavior in the playtest with my players than I did prior in the basic rules. That is a good thing, IMHO, as it keeps the game running a bit quicker and smoother. But if you are used to the full gamut of stunts, then I get how greater restrictions would be a negative.

I am definitely curious about what has changed between the playtest and publication. For example, the creation of the Envoy put the Rogue class into something of an odd place. There was also some issues that people noticed regarding the power creep between the new races put in the book alongside the old ones, some of which were quite boring in comparison (e.g., halfling, human, etc.).
We used the stunt option in the Companion to avoid the decision paralysis. Players had fun coming up with interesting names for their stunt combinations.

I am also interested in seeing what changed between the playtest and the final game.
 

Gnosistika

Mildly Ascorbic
My players prefer the new version with a specialization at level one. They said the characters feels more rounded, instead of having to wait to level 4 with the Basic Core Book. They also like the class specific stunts and the addition of the new Envoy class for Face characters.
I am a fan of the 1st level specialisations. It allows FAGE that space to let characters be really versatile. It gives the game that uniqueness, because now the characters can combine the different specialisations into interesting combinations - It is a selling point for me. I just hope that with publication they have more options for Mage characters and a few more all-classes options.
 


vincegetorix

Jewel of the North
Specs at 1st level is a houserule I implemented long ago. That and a 10 levels progression (with all the same features).

I agree that the fact that the Envoy took the non-combat features of the rogue is a big gripe for me. I would have preferred a free-form system, like someone did back in the time of the Basic Rules.

Maybe (finally) they could use the spells from DAge for a new arcane supplement?
 

Aldarc

Legend
I agree that the fact that the Envoy took the non-combat features of the rogue is a big gripe for me. I would have preferred a free-form system, like someone did back in the time of the Basic Rules.
My personal recommendation in the playtest was that if the Warrior would focus on the combat pillar, the Mage on the magic pillar, and the Envoy on the social pillar, that the Rogue should be the best at exploration and have more abilities that enhance that and not just through their stunts.
 

vincegetorix

Jewel of the North
My personal recommendation in the playtest was that if the Warrior would focus on the combat pillar, the Mage on the magic pillar, and the Envoy on the social pillar, that the Rogue should be the best at exploration and have more abilities that enhance that and not just through their stunts.
Agreed.

To be honest, and it's just me being salty, I grew tired of the playtest when every time we suggested change to the core rules for the revised rules (like the +1 fighting for humans that pigeonholes them in a certain playstyle, the HP bloat, the high armor DR + Master Armor Training, the Scholar mage being kinda useless erc ) on the Discord, the mods pushed that discussion to the Homebrew section, saying those discussions werent pertinent for the playtest.

It may be petty, but to me if you revises the rules, it may be a good opportunity to correct a few things at the same time.
 

Aldarc

Legend
Agreed.

To be honest, and it's just me being salty, I grew tired of the playtest when every time we suggested change to the core rules for the revised rules (like the +1 fighting for humans that pigeonholes them in a certain playstyle, the HP bloat, the high armor DR + Master Armor Training, the Scholar mage being kinda useless erc ) on the Discord, the mods pushed that discussion to the Homebrew section, saying those discussions werent pertinent for the playtest.

It may be petty, but to me if you revises the rules, it may be a good opportunity to correct a few things at the same time.
I get that feeling of frustration too. I was on the Discord servers too, but I also sympathize with their desire to keep this as mostly a soft revision. It's not as if this is a difficult game to hack. IMHO, it's actually much easier to hack than 5e D&D. In my own AGE games, I ignore the +1 Fighting for humans too, and I often substitute it with +1 Communication instead.
 

Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top