Friday, February 18, 2011

NERO 9th Edition: Recap

Now that we've gone through most of the changes in 9th edition, I figured I'd put a summary post with links to all the rest of the posts. Alternatively, you can simply check the label Change Log.

Spell Changes
Skill Changes
Gameplay Changes
Race Changes
Cantrip Changes
Formal Changes
Production Changes

Keep checking back for updates to the changes!


  1. Is there a national list of chapters tracking who has converted?

    I'm interested in reading the feedback of chapters trying it out.

  2. I am going to try to get to the first ARGO event that uses 9th and do a write up.

  3. Cool, Tim - I'd can't wait to hear how it goes!

    By the way, one question I never saw addressed - how come the spell "Curse" did not have its name changed in this version? It has long been a design flaw that I have tried to overcome...I know it's not much of an issue in the reality of the gameplay, but I think it has stuck with me because it would be so simple to just rename the spell "Destruction/Remove Destruction" and change the incant to "I rid you of your Destruction"...Mickey?

  4. Mike, that's something that I pushed for as well but was ultimately denied. Personally, I think it should be called "Vulnerability" and have the incantation changed to match (ie, "I curse you with vulnerability.") Destruction is too similar to "destroy," a discrete game effect with its own definition, which is why I disagreed with changing the damage type for Death Elementals to that. As many effects as possible should be intuitive and self-descriptive. To me, "vulnerability" is perfect. Someone that's never played before could guess that's what it does. Destruction has no implicit meaning like that.

  5. Basically, since we didn't change how it worked and nothing else in the system changed that affected it, we left it alone for ease of transition. Or at least I think that's why, it's been a long time.

  6. Another extremely major change that I haven't seen mentioned much is the core change to the Effect Type for all Carrier Attacks. In 8th edition, the effect type for a carrier was defined by the chapter of the book that the effect's primary entry is listed in, with ambiguous effects (such as Drain) defaulting to Arcane. In 9th edition, according to table 6-1, the effect type for ALL carrier attacks is Physical.

    The main difference here is that Dispel Magic cures very few status effects delivered by carrier attack any more, whereas Remove Physical Affliction removes ANY carrier attack regardless of its effect or delivery. Other than Remove Physical, the only other way to remove Carrier Attacks is by the effect's specific counter (ie Awaken for Fear/Sleep/etc, Release for Pin/Bind, Unparalyze for Paralyze, Remove Curse for Curse, etc.)

    This gives earth casters a near-monopoly on curing carrier attacks, which is fine by me as they should be the ones curing mostly everything anyway.

  7. I don't think realized it Noah.

  8. I'm not sure I agree with your logic with regard to "vulnerability" vs. "destruction", but at least we can agree that it shouldn't be curse.

    Another issue that I just came accross is the allowance of dropping your shield to avoid affects vis "Shield Grounding"...unless this is a mistake and I missed a clarification (entirely possible), this is a horrible change.

    The rule has been that for the purpose of non-weapon packet combat an item is considered to still be in your possession until it comes to rest on the ground, thus disallowing the dropping of shields to avoid spells. This is the ultimate cheese, and hopefully it will be removed before the final book is put out.

  9. As for the change to the removal of Carriers, I like it because it simplifies things, and makes them removable by less than a Dispel Magic.

    I didn't catch it in my initial look through, but like it a lot - bravo!

  10. Thanks for this guys

    ~ PJ (from PRO)