New iron lore add

[A'koss]

On the product description page of Iron Lore, it says the PDF is 240 pages, and the print version is 256. What's up with that?

It was originally supposed to be 240 but after playtesting it grew another 16 pages according to Monte.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

It was originally supposed to be 240 but after playtesting it grew another 16 pages according to Monte.

It could also be a more economical signature size for printing.

At least, that would have been my guess if you hadn't already explained it.

 

[EricNoah]

Very nice.

Did anyone else initially read "fury tokens" as "furry tokens"?? That scared me for a sec!

 

[Benben]

Very nice.

Did anyone else initially read "fury tokens" as "furry tokens"?? That scared me for a sec!

You're not the only one. Terrible things popped into my head after reading that.

 

[TerraDave]

The add looks great, as has the other preview material.

BUT, speaking as an early booster, while am sure I will get it, I am starting to wonder about the level of tactical complexity it seems to involve.

I may just read through the book, and convert some of the more interesting stuff over to more standard D20. In any case there are still a few months left for that decision.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

The add looks great, as has the other preview material.

BUT, speaking as an early booster, while am sure I will get it, I am starting to wonder about the level of tactical complexity it seems to involve.

I may just read through the book, and convert some of the more interesting stuff over to more standard D20. In any case there are still a few months left for that decision.

Well, at this point I don't see very much that will increase the complexity for the DM, at least not without decreasing it elsewhere, and as a player I see a lot that excites me about the tactical complexity, oh so very very very much!, I must admit that I intend to prep my fellow players and gradually and carefully and might very well be selective in the players I allow.

But even for the conversion and adaptation process you mention above it seems more than worthwhile.

 

[Wild Gazebo]

I think I'm going to buy this book and run a Dark Sun campaign with it.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

I think I'm going to buy this book and run a Dark Sun campaign with it.

A couple of people have been talking about that on Monte's board.

You'd have to develop a number of psionic traits, but I think it's very doable.

Me, I'm happy to see more stone-age settings anywhere, right now I'm working on one in a pre-Columbian American Southwest style setting with Arcana Evolved as the rules set.

 

[TerraDave]

Well, at this point I don't see very much that will increase the complexity for the DM, at least not without decreasing it elsewhere, and as a player I see a lot that excites me about the tactical complexity, oh so very very very much!, I must admit that I intend to prep my fellow players and gradually and carefully and might very well be selective in the players I allow.

But even for the conversion and adaptation process you mention above it seems more than worthwhile.

After witnessing some very involved (convuluted) buffing at our saturday session...who knows, complexity could go down in an absolute sense...but old dogs, new tricks...still, what is done with Iron Lore is a decision that can wait a while.

 

[DungeonmasterCal]

This one's now definitely on my list.

Too bad the market isn't large enough to support it but I'd love to see variant Player's Handbooks from a number of different designers. I'd especially like to see what Bruce Cordell would come up with if left to create his own PHB.

I'm with ya on this one, Phil!