itch.io

Thanks for the reply as these are all really great points. I'm going to take your advice on the Sharpshooter and Double Attack feats. 

I must note, as of right now, there is a limit to the levels. However, if a campaign wanted to have PCs continue to play at level 12, I wanted to build in a rule allowing them to continue to grow. So they can still accrue XP to develop their skills they just won't continue to gain HP, ability increases, or RS (if that is kept).

I see what you mean about the spells. I'm sure some are much worse than others. This might clear up some of the language as well.  Although in some instances it may be difficult to separate the varied cost with the description text. I'll take a look at the spells and see what I can do.

I am definitely open to more input, I'll send you an email. 

Thank you for the praises and suggestions! I truly appreciate them. 

During playtest, the pips has been a confusing concept for some folks to wrap their heads around. I've wondered if the name pips was the problem and called them dots, which sort of helped. I have looked at PF2e's proficiency system. A friend recommended it when I was first working on the pips system. While at first I felt like it was a long winded way of saying +2/+4/+6/+8, I'm now realizing that it may also be beneficial to have a more relatable naming system. I'll probably keep the bonuses the same 0/+1/+2/+3/+4 since they're added with the ability modifiers. Was this what you had in mind?

You're totally right about Sharpshooter. A quick thought is to either have it cost FP or change it so that you must aim for an active action first, then the effects last as many rounds as your Awareness. I'm definitely going to have to comb through the feats again, there are probably a few others that shouldn't be permanent (Parry comes to mind).

For the extra/double attack feats, do you think it would be less OP if it was still at a lower level of pips but with a higher cost, then decreasing the cost as the pips increase? Say start at 3 FP at •, 2 FP at ••, and 1 FP at •••.

Would you mind telling me more about what is bothering you about the spell system formatting? Does it feel too cluttered? Too much information at the top? Any suggestions for how to improve this, I'm all ears.

I actually started with Fortitude, Reflexes, and Will before simplifying it to Resilience. I still go back and forth in my head about which is better. I like FRW for PCs but don't really like it for NPCs/monsters as I think it adds more bookkeeping for the GM. But it does add more mechanical depth/variation for opponents. I'm very much on the fence with this, so it wouldn't take much for others to push me to changing it back.

Thanks again for your feedback. If there is anything else you come across please let me know. When I get an online playtest game going, I'll definitely reach out.

Awesome! I'm glad to hear. I've been polishing up the rules a bunch and will have an update soon. Let me know if you come across anything clunky or confusing during your play.