This actually has a valid reason. 1d20 is a uniform probability so that a 1 is just as likely as a 20. However, 2d10 is a bell shaped distribution, which means you are more likely to roll average (11) than you are either extreme. This makes critical fumbles and critical successes more rare and also cuts down on the highs and lows.

This is one change I personally like.

John

Very interesting, I wasn't aware of that. Thank you for the clarification...but I still don't like the tier numbering

One thing I've noticed here in Cincinnati is that part of the reason that players don't want to leave 3.5, is because 3.5 is "Broken". Frankly there are a lot of players that like the feeling that they have beaten the game by combing through their stack of 50 or so ripped PDF's of 3.0, and 3.5 books to get unbeatably optimized PCs.

Case in point in a home game I was in I tried to run a standard barbarian from the 3.5 core book at level 7, with a tower shield and broad axe. The same day we had a new player show up to the group with a Thiekrine (SP?) Bug Man with extra arms, Monk who could dish out an average of 150 HP over eight attacks per round against a single target with average AC. I was chastised by my friends for not pulling my weight with my minimal 1d8+3 weapon. As a GM in the 3.5 Arcanis campaign I saw a lot of this mentality creep into game play once the typical PC started to break lvl 10, but at times as early as level 7.

I see this as a function of the 2 month publication cycle that TSR started with 2d Ed class books. To publish things that fast, feats, talents, tricks, classes, can't be game balance tested very well. Plus to encourage the continual purchase and publication of books, the crunch needs to be better than the previous books crunch.

Arcanis does not reward Min/Maxing with the addition of "crunchy" bits the core rules can't handle. Part of that comes from system design. Part of it comes from the slower publication cycle. Personally, I like the focus on heroism and story instead of crunch. But that just isn't why a lot of 3.5 players play 3.5 or Pathfinder.

I think for Arcanis to have substantial growth, we as players need to reach outside of the gaming community and bring new people and new age groups into the RPG hobby. i.e. get them before they get addicted to 10d6 fireballs, endless magic items, and limitless crunch. I see Rotted Capes as a good way to bring in new folks to the RPG hobby in general, then they can be introduced to the Arcanis story line after they have digested the rules. The reason is everybody understands superhero's and zombies these days. As such Rotted Capes isn't as intimidating to a brand spanking new RPGer.

Yeah I agree, 1.0 through 1.9 would have made a lot more sense (Which I think is how it was in the Beta)

I'm going to play "that guy" for a little bit here. We all know him, that one arse that has to beat the dead horse, wiz on the electric fence, or poke the sleeping bear. Just bear in mind that I rather enjoy the new system, LOVE Arcanis in general, and will probably support PCI in whatever hair-brained endeavors they get into in the future.

That said, let the horse beating begin:


Personally, I think the change in system was the single biggest reason our player base shrunk as much as it has. Don't get me wrong, I think we're a great group - for the most part - but there just aren't as many of us as there used to be. In switching from a 3/3.5 base to the new system, PCI obsoleted everything from their previous books, except the lore - and that's a BIG reason D&D 4th ed initially went over like a "lead balloon". Players invested hundreds of dollars in books that are now worthless, in terms of mechanics. PCI had a choice when 4th ed was released just like all of the other publishers:
1) use 4th ed's OGL, which barred further publication of 3/3.5 ed material
2) (effectively) tell WOTC to pound sand, not use 4th ed, keep using 3/3.5 ed as a base
3) license another system
4) develop their own system

I'm not going to armchair CEO their decision, as I have VERY incomplete facts, but I do know a number of people left the campaign because they didn't want to invest in a new system - financially and/or time to learn.


1 - For new players and especially new gamers, LA's character creation is immensely overwhelming. I started a group here not too long ago; with the exception of one out of six, no one had done any RPG gaming that wasn't in a video game (where all the mechanics are hidden). Mind you, every one of my players is an engineer and among the smartest people I know. They read the character creation sections over and over and the WTF look never left their faces. I ended up having to make all of their characters with vague input from them. Depth does not always mean 'better'.

2 - Mostly agreed... But as has been discussed previously, there ARE talents/spells/skills that are almost 'mandatory' for certain types of characters. At least, if you want to be as effective as possible.

3 - And given the limited number of ways to heal in combat, that's good. Mind you, none of my characters are healer-types, so as far as I'm aware 'Diminish Fatigue' is the "best" healing spell in combat (that or 'A Pound of Flesh' because of the damage it does). That being the case (or not, if I'm wrong), it can be especially hard for a healer type to keep up with some of the massive damage that can be laid down. Going from memory, DF is something like 1d8 + d(primary). That can be some pretty sad healing.

4 - Really? I disagree. If the party doesn't have at least one 'minion killer', there are battles that an otherwise effective group can get their asses handed to them. Then you start getting into the Elite level mobs and you'd better be able to do well over 5-6 points per hit to get past AR or need amazing healing. And without 2+ healers during a protracted fight in a BI, put your head between your legs and kiss your bum goodbye (or have a crapload of Fate Points...oh wait...)

5 - Maybe in the previous campaign or maybe it will be in the current arc, but I felt it was pretty pointless in the Crusade arc. Nationality can be a roadblock to some backgrounds or paths, sure, but no more than race or archetype.

6 - Granted I have only played the new arc at Origins so far, but *what* faction missions? There were side objectives at Arcanicon '13 and I know of one at Origins, but that's it. There were no secret society things in the previous arc and I don't remember any benefits in the previous campaign. Take note, however, that I do love the flavor SS's can offer and I'm already working on building one of them up (if Tony would ever reply to my email). Plus I have a vested interest in seeing BEAST grow.

7 - At least for the Crusade, I again have to strongly disagree. I really felt we were on rails the entire time. Sure we pissed and moaned and got Henry to retcon Lil Max, but the overall outcome was never in question. There was no real threat that the Crusade could possibly fail. As evidence, I point to the Codex of Heroes - on sale and containing a summary of the Crusade's end before the Crusade actually ended. Now, clearly, that's because Henry has a story to tell; of course we aren't going to be able to jack with it THAT much. The previous campaign DID feel like we had a lot of play in the story, at least for me, the Crusade didn't, at all. Another example is more recent: the 'delve' at the upcoming Arcanicon. My memory may be faulty, but I could have sworn the outcome of the auction was most of the money was 'ear marked' for location A - except now we'll be going to location B. Please, correct me if I'm wrong. As for the LARPs being the shining example of how we the players can affect the world...I just don't see it. We're told 'this happened and this happened and this happened', and maybe this is incredibly cynical of me, but how do we know that we actually changed anything? In my rarely humble opinion, what I think I'd like to see is a 'before and after' treatment of the story. Obviously I'm not asking for spoilers, more "this is what we thought you'd accomplish and here's a taste of the consequences...but here's what you did and how it effed with our story in-the-VERY-immediate-future". In the last LARP, I worked hard to get Melinda's NPC to give me the secret ways in and out of the city with the express purpose of giving that information to Milandir to shut down the slave trading (or at least slow it down). As far as I know, nothing at all came of that. If we can't get a "player's oriented critical event changes summary", at least tag things in future mods / Story Times With Uncle Henry with a 'hey, this is direct fallout from the BS you people pulled in the LARP' so we can look back and say "awesome, I was a part of that" or "damnit, I TRIED to stop that".

***
What I'd like to see developed, and what I've talked to a few people about already, is an official crafting option within the campaign. I don't expect we'll be able to churn out magic items like we did under 3/3.5 or get rich off of making exceptional arms/armor but right now, other than for flavor, crafting skills / talents / backgrounds / paths are pretty much useless; there's little to no incentive to take them. Why take Artisan: Bowyer in order to get the path Bowman (easy way to get an exceptional bow), when after 1 BI I could buy it? What's the point of having the herbs and what not in Codex of Heroes, if I can't actually make any of the potions? I understand that the books have to service both home games and campaign and that somethings will work for one and not the other, but given that (right now) the campaign is what's likely driving most of PCI's sales on all things Arcanis - shouldn't we try to have as much as possible in the campaign?

As was mentioned during the round table at Origins '13... LAND! I want to buy land! Granted, one of my characters already has a house in the First City, but he's all about expansion. And come on... My Ghost Scale BEAST member is going to need *somewhere* that he can go off and worship the rock...err.. Herka without the Black Talons preaching Fire Dragon this and Fire Dragon that and Hillboy... *cough* Jaggel Sag rules...

Just to be a voice on the other side, my group of Arcanis players probably would not still be playing if the game was a d20 or a D&D 3.5 system. Then again, we *enjoy* and *seek out* new game systems to try because they all offer something different. In general we have played

7th Sea
Call of Cthulhu (d100)
Savage Worlds
Fate
Star Wars (Funky Dice / d6)
Rogue Trader
D&D 4e
D&D Next
Arcanis

John

I agree with John. I did not try Arcanis until it was its own system and, if it was a d20 setting, I would not have looked at it. I know some of the local players have been playing for a long time while I'm pretty sure others are like me and did not try it until relatively recently (though I don't know if they would have tried it if it was d20 or not).

The other issue would be it's another system - period. d20 'worked' because everybody used it. I can play Forgotten Realms, Star Wars, Dragonstar, Arcanis -- all with the same basic ruleset. There were only a few notable outliers, like Shadowrun and Rokugan. After the break-up, every campaign had it's own rule-set.

Not only is it a vast increase in buy rulebooks and such, it's also a huge barrier to simple portability of books in convention. There is rule confusion; in my gaming group we're constantly mixing up mechanics.

This isn't a complaint; I'm just identifying areas that may have players opt out. I've already done that elsewhere, with other campaigns, with the idea that I simply don't want to invest in a new system, in both time (to understand the rules and mechanics) and money. This will get magnified once edition updates start hitting the streets (every 5-7 years, it seems).

Also, the Arcanis system IS pretty complex. That alone bothers some people (not me). But it also causes problems for simple ease of use. For instance, one of my most maddening issues is when I'm flipping through the Talents section. If it has a "Limited" designator, why can't it have an entry saying what it's limited to in the description? That leaves one flipping through a 400 page book to guess the areas it might impact. Is it Path, Background, racial, Archetype? Sometimes it seems intuitive (like a Val power or Elorii bloodline), but others its not.

Again, I'm not venting; just one of the by-products of a complex campaign. I tried writing up a character creation cheat-sheet to simplify the process...and broke down after four pages.

Those are just my thoughts. Y'all know I'm still an arcaniac.
Michael

I have a pretty decent character creation cheatsheet (basically an Excel spreadsheet with the steps of chargen and tabs for each "thing" compiled from all sources (unredistributable due to quantity of copyright material)). In that same spreadsheet, I also added the Limited information you noted (I found the same issue when I was working on characters - it would be really nice to have that info included in the book).

I tried working on a character generation spreadsheet (as did a friend) but Arcanis is quite complicated to create such a thing. I do think Arcanis would greatly benefit from an official character creation program (either standalone or Hero Lab or similar).

Great post all around. I would also like to see crafting gain value. My wife, for instance, built her character around herbalism/apothecary, but there really isn't enough there to make it fully viable. I ended up submitting a path and additional herbs to flesh it out a little, but never heard back from PCI (even after several follow-up emails to Pedro which were ignored).

I know that in the old campaign it was said that PCs could never craft legendary weapons due to the amount of time required...wouldn't have had time to adventure.