Anyone picked up True Sorcery?

[Nikchick]

I get the feeling that the final PDF version, assuming it is finalized by the end of next week, is the version that will hit the printers. That's why GR is trying so hard to catch all those last minute errors that they've missed, or not had, previously.

Of course, I don't actually know and am probably talking out of my behind.

You've got the gist of it. We release the PDF a little early so we can catch any of those last creeping errors before the final print job. People who buy our PDFs always get free updates to the document whenever we correct or revise the material; whenever possible we also correct the print version as long as we hear about errata before we approve the proofs with the printer.

 

[Fenris]

You've got the gist of it. We release the PDF a little early so we can catch any of those last creeping errors before the final print job. People who buy our PDFs always get free updates to the document whenever we correct or revise the material; whenever possible we also correct the print version as long as we hear about errata before we approve the proofs with the printer.

Well that is very good news to hear. I can't wait for the print edition to hit.

 

[2WS-Steve]

You've got the gist of it. We release the PDF a little early so we can catch any of those last creeping errors before the final print job. People who buy our PDFs always get free updates to the document whenever we correct or revise the material; whenever possible we also correct the print version as long as we hear about errata before we approve the proofs with the printer.

Yah, that seems like a very good strategy. A hundred eyes from overly-anal gamers can catch a lot more glitches than two eyes from even the best editor.

 

[nerfherder]

You've got the gist of it. We release the PDF a little early so we can catch any of those last creeping errors before the final print job. People who buy our PDFs always get free updates to the document whenever we correct or revise the material; whenever possible we also correct the print version as long as we hear about errata before we approve the proofs with the printer.

You know, that's a really smart idea for publishers producing PDF & print versions of their products. Kudos.

Cheers,
Liam

 

[Akrasia]

I'm curious about the True20 conversion, but am trying to hold off until the print book comes out.

Does it have a new role for True Sorcery spellcasters, or the adept role from the core book?

How does damage work? Is it +5 spell DC / +1 damage DC, or something like that?

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?

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

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

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

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

Thanks!

 

[catsclaw227]

I am gonna check it out tonight.

 

[Nebulous]

Yah, that seems like a very good strategy. A hundred eyes from overly-anal gamers can catch a lot more glitches than two eyes from even the best editor.

That is such a tremendous advantage to this market. Can you imagine how well edited WoTC books would be if they released a .pdf version first to 100 DM's on Enworld? No one would complain about errors again because there wouldn't BE any!

 

[Henry]

No one would complain about errors again because there wouldn't BE any!

I don't know about NO errors, but a heck of a lot less of them, anyway. Editing on a lot of WotC products seem to be hit-and-miss, IMO: Some do pretty darned good, others get raked over the coals for the sheer volume (a la Monster Manual 3).

As for True Sorcery, glad to hear all these things. Question: Does the die-scaling also cost +5 still? In BCCS, you get more bang for the buck by adding extra dice up until about 10 dice or so; then, you're better off scaling the die size up. I know that this would mean that damaging spells would become about 2 to 3 die less in on-the-fly combat casting.

 

[Nebulous]

I don't know about NO errors, but a heck of a lot less of them, anyway. Editing on a lot of WotC products seem to be hit-and-miss, IMO: Some do pretty darned good, others get raked over the coals for the sheer volume (a la Monster Manual 3).

As for True Sorcery, glad to hear all these things. Question: Does the die-scaling also cost +5 still? In BCCS, you get more bang for the buck by adding extra dice up until about 10 dice or so; then, you're better off scaling the die size up. I know that this would mean that damaging spells would become about 2 to 3 die less in on-the-fly combat casting.

Well, yeah, i'm sure some would sneak through. You're right.

Henry, you seem pretty familiar with the system. Is there a way to, for example (i'm trying to think outside the D&D box) if you enter a burning building, to use your magic to either
A) suffocate the flames by removing Air B) Douse them with sufficient water C) Smother them with Earth D) or other...

in a spontaneous fashion? This is the kind of magic i've always wanted for D&D, where you can apply it for completely non-combat situations. Just a general control over the elements.

 

[ValhallaGH]

Question: Does the die-scaling also cost +5 still? In BCCS, you get more bang for the buck by adding extra dice up until about 10 dice or so; then, you're better off scaling the die size up. I know that this would mean that damaging spells would become about 2 to 3 die less in on-the-fly combat casting.

Yes, in the current version it is +5 per extra die and +5 to increase the die type one step. Extra damage is some of the least efficient use I've noticed so far, and they may be reducing some of these costs in the editting, but I do like that it encourages casters to take on a role besides "artillery platform."