|
|
|
|
|
#1 |
|
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Sydney, Australia
|
If we have actual errors we're supposed to tell the authorities, this thread is just for miscellaneous thoughts about them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Join Date: Jun 2017
|
Looks pretty good. Never played or read TFT before, so i have no other version to compare it to. I don't like the niche protection that is giving wizards penalties to non-staff weapons, but there's a reason steve is a game designer and I'm not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Join Date: Dec 2017
|
I'm sure a lot of people like the 'class' specific penalties and limitations, but a relax them at my table.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Join Date: May 2015
|
In the full rules in In The Labyrinth, that "class protection" becomes a general requirement for everyone to have an appropriate weapon talent or attack at -4.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Join Date: May 2015
|
Overall, I really like the new previews we're seeing!
I love the adjustments to the effects of fallen bodies, especially the explicit -2 footing penalty, and the option to slowly enter or leap over bodies to avoid having to make a 3/DX roll or fall (which in the original rules was IMO too brutal for low/mid-DX figures). I think I miss the 3/DX roll not to fall when a Forced Retreat happens to someone with nowhere to retreat, though. Of course it's the easiest thing in the world to re-add as a house rule. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Join Date: May 2015
|
I'm really not sure why there is a change of 1 point for death and unconsciousness. It doesn't increase the margin where people might be alive if they collapse from wounds at all. And as is being pointed out in errata, it makes the existing examples explaining it wrong.
Having unconscious be 0 OR 1, and death at -1, would help in both ways, though a 2-point unconsciousness zone is not much different from 1. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|