Anybody played this?
Does it do anything cool? What does it have to make it special? Does it play fun? Better than 3.x? Better than FC? The more recent d20 reimaginings?
>>48186803
I've never played it, but it sounds good from what I'm reading now.
>>48186803
Its GOAT. Needs some fixes here and there, but in general is fucking solid.
>>48186999
That's what I hear about FC (in terms of D&D-likes, anyways). How does it compare to FC?
>>48186922
https://mega.nz/#F!7IZlDDiB!VjNHDZ0Vwrqtnh_vEcApFQ
>>48187142
I was literally just coming back to 4chan to see if the fileshare thread would have a link.
You're awesome.
>>48187359
You're welcome.
I'd like to try this some time. Also Fantasy Craft. I've heard good things about both.
>>48187142
>>48187359
Sadly, no True Sorcery in this Trove.
Yes yes, picture for ants.
>>48187480
I've just found a download for it, actually.
4shared (requires a 4shared account):
http://www.4shared.com/get/s93nxsxP/True_Sorcery.html
If you prefer I can throw it to my Mega when it's finished.
>>48187142
>dungeon shit on a trove for True20
That's some low-level bait, anon. And a shitty one, per se.
Why do people keep bringing up all these old dead d20 games?
>>48190195
>dead
I think you mean undead.
>>48187037
Its more rule medium, and plays more loose. You have only 3 classes (Warrior, Expert and Adept), but the Companion have rules for you making your own class.
Everything is Feats, and Magic use Fatigue checks. And its uses the same rules of M&M for Toughness, instead of HPs.
Adepts are kinda above the others classes, but no so much like in D&D, its more because Expert and Warrior feats are kinda limited. The Warrior's and Expert's handbooks give them lots of new options and better Feats.
>>48186803
It's okay. A bit better balanced than 3.5, the Toughness saves are a bit more intuitive than HP. If you're already familiar with D20, you don't have much new stuff to learn.
On the other hand, the class and level nature of character creation and advancement strikes me as weird and possibly counterproductive for a universal system. I believe it's possible you can come to a point where representing your character concept in a meaningful, mechanical sense is going to be hard, and that you can reach that point in True20 well before you'd reach it in a more granular, point-build universal system.
Also, T20 still carries much of 3.5's power curve, where PCs start out weak enough that sewer rats are a viable threat to them but eventually advance to the point where they're basically demigods. That can work for a lot of campaigns, but it's inappropriate for quite a lot of campaigns I'd consider running.
>Better than FC?
That's a hard comparison, the two games evolved along completely different lines. FC took core D&D and added new shit, giving everybody a bunch of cool abilities. T20 stripped D&D down and standardized the class mechanics. Their approaches are almost opposites of each other. Which you'd prefer really depends on your priorities and personal tastes.
