Going shopping...

[mlund]

For instance, as you gain levels, your attack rolls and defense rating go up automatically. And so do your hit points and the amount of damage you do. If they'd only increased one set or the other (sort of like how D&D Next's bounded accuracy only increases HP and damage), the system would feel smoother.

In practice it still runs smoothly for a couple of reasons:

The first and most important of which is that levels 1-10 spans all the way from the start of Adventurer Tier to the end of Epic Tier. That's 30 levels worth of 4E or 20-odd levels of 3.X. Broader leveling windows are counter-balanced by the "Incremental Advancement" mechanic, but you still only get 9 bumps to your Attack and Damage stats over the broadest potential adventuring career. Compare that to the worst possible BAB progression in 3rd Edition and you still have less +1's to manage.

The second factor comes along the same lines - no Christmas Tree characters like the other editions of D&D assumed. You see equipment-based AC or Attack bonuses of only +1 per Tier. Compare that with the standard payload under 3.X/OGL: +1 to hit and damage and +1d6 elemental damage per "plus" per every 3-4 levels or so is the bog standard equipment increment for the Grogs. Add on Power Attack / Sneak Attack and multi-attack and options for increased critical threat range and you've got a bizarre, item-and-feat dependent matrix of damage algorithms that still pale in comparison to spells. In 13th Age it is way more important who is wielding a weapon than what weapon you are swinging.

And they do tend to write out abilities more like 4e powers rather than actual narrative things that just need some game mechanics to model them.

One of the awesome, recurring themes of the whole 13th Age book is just that: "Here's a specific mechanic with broad applications and an open-ended narrative. Go nuts." Seriously, just read the entry under the Swashbuckler talent for the Rogue or Cantrip Mastery under the Wizard. They aren't kidding.

What exactly does it mean that you roll even vs. odd on an attack? (A left-handed swing vs. a right-handed one, perhaps?)

"Natural Even" and "Natural Odd" die rolls refer to the number on the dice before adding any modifiers. These are basically coin-flip results without having to roll any extra dice. Flexible attacks let you roll to hit and then decide whether to activate an applicable feature to that result like.

"Naturally Even Hit" is an attack roll that (after all bonuses and penalties) scores a hit and the physical number on the D20 you rolled was 2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20.

The only exception to that is the Half-Elf. His racial power specifically let's him fudge the Natural Result of a d20 roll by -1.

- Marty Lund

 

[billd91]

I'm reading through it now. Maybe I'm sensitized because of some of the bickering that goes on here, but I'm finding little bits here and there that rub me the wrong way - like they're talking down to other d20 versions from some kind of smug, indie-name-dropping perch. On the other hand, they're pretty dismissive of some controversies like rolling vs point-buy character generation too. So there seems to be a little bit for everybody.

 

[mlund]

I'm reading through it now. Maybe I'm sensitized because of some of the bickering that goes on here, but I'm finding little bits here and there that rub me the wrong way - like they're talking down to other d20 versions from some kind of smug, indie-name-dropping perch.

Well, they have a ton of familiarity with those other versions (they built the two most influential / important ones, so they aren't sparing their own work any criticism) and specifically offer a new product that does not automatically implement parts of those games that they thing don't add value to the product as a whole.

And then they turn around and tell you they fully expect you to play your variation of this game and hope they made it easy for you to Frankenstein / cannibalize their game system as you see fit.

It's a pretty good mindset to have.

- Marty Lund

 

[Manabarbs]

And they do tend to write out abilities more like 4e powers rather than actual narrative things that just need some game mechanics to model them. What exactly does it mean that you roll even vs. odd on an attack? (A left-handed swing vs. a right-handed one, perhaps?)

I describe them as taking advantage of natural openings that occur in the heat of melee that allow a skilled fighter to pull off extra tricks. Rather than making a separate roll to see if there's an opening specifically to also shield bash somebody, the openings created by the tide of battle just piggyback off of your regular attack roll. (Bards work in a similar fashion, although they're more about exploiting openings in the emotional tide of battle, rather than the physical tide.

 

[Balesir]

And they do tend to write out abilities more like 4e powers rather than actual narrative things that just need some game mechanics to model them. What exactly does it mean that you roll even vs. odd on an attack? (A left-handed swing vs. a right-handed one, perhaps?)

I never try to link up die rolls with this kind of thing, any more, to be honest - I think that way lies madness. Ever since I realised that the whole "swinging a sword" vision/model of (pseudo-)medieval melee combat was complete balderdash, I haven't thought of a die roll to hit as "a sword (or axe, or whatever) swing".

If you want a better picture: a shield (if you have one) is your main weapon for initial offence - at least on foot - and an attack almost invariably consists of a move combination designed, first and foremost, to disable your opponent's offensive weapon(s) and, secondarily, to strike them to wound such as to open them up for a killing blow. Swinging a sword alone is likely to end up with you losing your weapon arm; that's why you aim to disable the opponent's weapon as a first priority, with striking a blow being a "nice to have" success.

Example: imagine an attack versus a dragon as follows -

- swing a sword at his flank while he bites off your sword arm, OR

- thrust your shield into his snout, deflecting his breath away from you and cutting his line of sight for a claw strike, while simultaneously stabbing with your sword under cover of your shield into his throat behind the jaw.

Which seems more like a trained fighter's move, to you?

Basically, you try to anticipate your opponent's next attack and block it while making your own stab inside the protection of your shield/block/parry.

 

[Dungeoneer]

And they do tend to write out abilities more like 4e powers rather than actual narrative things that just need some game mechanics to model them. What exactly does it mean that you roll even vs. odd on an attack? (A left-handed swing vs. a right-handed one, perhaps?)

This confuses me too. An attack roll is an abstraction, even in the most literal interpretations of the game. Just think about any time a player has been asked to narrate their big hit. "I jump over the orc's fallen comrade's body, spin around, and decapitate him with my scythe!" All that wrapped up in a single number on a die! That's to say nothing of things like the creature being attack's defenses, dodging, etc. Which are implicitly factored into the attack roll.

You can roleplay it anyway you want, but presumably a natural even roll is just saying that the attacker has found a rare opening to perform a more advanced maneuver or attack. We're already simulating a very complex narrative event with a single roll of the dice so this hardly seems like a stretch.

 

[Rel]

I've become a huge fan of this system for a whole variety of reasons, most of which have been discussed here. But one thing I haven't seen mentioned much is how the game emphasizes cultivation of a really positive relationship between players and GM. It is something that many of us have picked up on in different places along the way but 13th age pulls a great deal of that wisdom into one package.

Things like finding ways to say "yes" whenever possible. The fact that Backgrounds are a great way for players to tell a small story to get a small bonus to a roll. The game urges both players and GM to broadcast their intentions with the intent of empowering others to take your idea and run with it rather than play your cards close to the vest and then say, "gotcha!" It promotes the "fail forward" concept of a bad roll not stopping the story but instead making it more complicated (hopefully in ways that are really fun). The players get to describe how and why they related to the Icons. Then characters become tied deeper into the setting through the use of Icon Rolls. And of course the One Unique Thing is a way for player and GM to agree on a powerful hook for plot lines specific to that character.

This is a game where I not only find the mechanics appealing for the most part, but also one that puts a smile on my face and that of my players. We know we're going to have fun cooperatively because the game makes that cooperation a big part of the design.

I dig it. A lot.

 

[Dungeoneer]

I've become a huge fan of this system for a whole variety of reasons, most of which have been discussed here. But one thing I haven't seen mentioned much is how the game emphasizes cultivation of a really positive relationship between players and GM. It is something that many of us have picked up on in different places along the way but 13th age pulls a great deal of that wisdom into one package.

Things like finding ways to say "yes" whenever possible. The fact that Backgrounds are a great way for players to tell a small story to get a small bonus to a roll. The game urges both players and GM to broadcast their intentions with the intent of empowering others to take your idea and run with it rather than play your cards close to the vest and then say, "gotcha!" It promotes the "fail forward" concept of a bad roll not stopping the story but instead making it more complicated (hopefully in ways that are really fun). The players get to describe how and why they related to the Icons. Then characters become tied deeper into the setting through the use of Icon Rolls. And of course the One Unique Thing is a way for player and GM to agree on a powerful hook for plot lines specific to that character.

This is a game where I not only find the mechanics appealing for the most part, but also one that puts a smile on my face and that of my players. We know we're going to have fun cooperatively because the game makes that cooperation a big part of the design.

I dig it. A lot.

This is a very good point.

To add to it: I've noticed the core book often encourages loose rulings on rule disputes. Just make a 50-50 roll. In many cases it even seems to encourage DMs just to rule in favor of the players. This is quite unusual in a world where rules are often designed to 'protect' DMs from power-hungry players.

But one of the things I've picked up on, moreso from listening to podcasts with Rob Heinsoo than from the book, is that as a DM I shouldn't be afraid of my players. I'm the Dungeon Master, b*tch! If I want to drop a rock on your head and make you roll up a new character I can. So go ahead and take that +2 to-hit on your next roll, Mr. Player. We'll see who comes out ahead in the end.

*evil laughter*

But seriously, aside from tournament play there is no reason that DMs should be afraid to let players have input into the game or gain 'unfair' advantages. At the end of the day it's still the DM's game. A DM who is experienced and confident doesn't need any advantage over their players except one: a nice, simple system that gets out of the way of the story they want to tell and lets them improvise as needed.

 

[Agamon]

For what it's worth, our group's last session was the most fun I've had roleplaying in at least 10 years. The openness of it, the narrative back-and-forth, the backgrounds instead of skills, the more abstract movement, the way the icons tie the PCs to the ongoing story, it's all good.