Our sci-fi adventure path

[Morrus]

How will playtesting be handled?

Probably in-house or via subscribers. Still too early to say anything; we've literally had the license for under two weeks!

 

[raptor112]

Just out of curiousity why does your psion have an encounter attack power rather then an augmentable at will? I mean of all the 4E classes Psion needs the least fluff changes and no really power changes. Unless there is something I've missed....

 

[malcolm_n]

I wouldn't think it was the same psion.

 

[raptor112]

I wouldn't think it was the same psion.

I was pretty sure of that, I was mainly wondering why make up your own psion when they already have one to use right out of the box? I mean what, aside from the powers structure, makes it different?

 

[malcolm_n]

From what Morrus said before, those are just place holders anyway. It may not even be a psion when they release it.

 

[raptor112]

From what Morrus said before, those are just place holders anyway. It may not even be a psion when they release it.

Ok, I was just curious as why not use the WOTC psion or if it had to do with the novel series.

 

[Nork]

I've not bought any of the EN world products before (not saying anything negative about the products, simply saying that none of them piqued my interest for whatever reasons).

Now this Santiago stuff though... Well the first thing I did when I saw that preview page was send an email to a friend about it. We both thought it looked really interesting. I'm planning on buying it when it comes out.

Personally, I'd say the closer to 4E mechanics the better. They work, people know em (well most of them), so unless you just can not tell the story without a new mechanic, just leave the game rules well enough alone and focus on the classes, story, and encounter design.

 

[rangerjohn]

Actually, I don't know if duels fit with a party. This would be especially troublesome in a pbp.

 

[raptor112]

I've not bought any of the EN world products before (not saying anything negative about the products, simply saying that none of them piqued my interest for whatever reasons).

Now this Santiago stuff though... Well the first thing I did when I saw that preview page was send an email to a friend about it. We both thought it looked really interesting. I'm planning on buying it when it comes out.

Personally, I'd say the closer to 4E mechanics the better. They work, people know em (well most of them), so unless you just can not tell the story without a new mechanic, just leave the game rules well enough alone and focus on the classes, story, and encounter design.

I third this, it was my big problem with 3rd party supliments in 3.0/3.5. Too many changes that didn't work will with the structure of the 3rd edition. So please stick with the 4E framework and don't make changes or additions just for the sake of changes because I will buy the product...and steal its content to run my D&D in SPACE campaign...

 

[Morrus]

I third this, it was my big problem with 3rd party supliments in 3.0/3.5. Too many changes that didn't work will with the structure of the 3rd edition. So please stick with the 4E framework and don't make changes or additions just for the sake of changes because I will buy the product...and steal its content to run my D&D in SPACE campaign...

We do hope that the end result will be robust enough to handle any D&D space campaign. We'll have a lot of our AP's fluff text/flavour in it, but the classes and items etc. are the core of the crunchy stuff.

We're not creating any rules at all. It's 4E rules all the way. We're just creating new classes and items - all plug-in type stuff, no fundamental alterations.