ICON playtest

Hi, is there a discord or reddit community about the project?

This game looks amazing, everything I could ask for from a fantasy trpg! Hoping there'll be a physical copy run like lancer had :)

Hello, buddies! Im gonna start Open-Table Campaign with ICON, and i have a very important question for balance and immersive gameplay for a 10+ players in one big location. 

Does ICON world have economy? Yes, we have a Dust, for infusing relics and upgrading camp, and Gear have auto-refreshing. But what about city-life? What if character wanna buy some drink, or bribe a guardian, or buy some staff for Loose Gear? 

On Page 39 we have an Art with characters playing for golden coins. Soo.. Someone have ideas about it? Or ICON-style better without money? Kinda half-communism in basic need but with magic-capitalism basic on Dust for specific values.  

Cant wait for a compcon system for this

On page 81;

Tactical combat ((is)) ICON is for answering the tensions or questions that words alone can’t solve

trying to get through the update, great stuff!

Couple of things I noticed: 

On p44 it says you get 1 ability/talent each for hitting the 5/10 xp mark. On p15 (character advancement) it says one ap for hitting the 7 xp mark.

The explanation of set up on p19 mentions a boon or increased effect as a result of set up, on p35 it is referred to only give a boon (this might not be relevant as on p35 its only in a bond power explanation section)

Anyway I’m excited for the eventual full release, I think your TTRPG work is some of the most interesting & exciting out there!

Having read through the first book, i.e. the stuff on narrative play, I really like a lot of the ideas here (especially the Tempting Fate mechanic). But the way Bonds are currently implemented are kind of a dealbreaker for me, even though I like the idea of them.

As Radstarsaur said below, the Bonds themselves are really inconsistent in what they're meant to portray. Pathfinder and Seeker, are core character motivations - why they adventure. Wolf, and Brave, are more surface personality traits - how they adventure. A lot of classic JRPG heroes would be described equally well by both Pathfinder and Brave, because they're describing different aspects of a character. The rest are all over the place. Harlequin and Outsider are more broad character archetypes than actual personalities, Highborn and Elder are just very specific backgrounds, and then Mighty and Mender are so vague that I'm pretty sure they only exist so that there were mechanical classes for muscle and healer type characters.

Now, normally, I would just ignore the flavoring of stuff like this and just pick the mechanics that fit my character idea best. But that leads me into my biggest problem with Bonds, which are the Ideals. They're not only just as inconsistent, but they're also unchanging, and tied directly to progression! Even disregarding the inconsistencies, (why do some classes' third ideals involve failing or mistakes, but others are about succeeding?), the way Ideals are now coerce a player into picking very specific roleplaying choices. If I play a Mighty character, why would I ever play them as feeling overwhelmed and terrified in a bad situation when doing so screws myself out of gaining XP? If I play a Harlequin, how can I have an arc about them using dishonesty to protect themself and slowly becoming more honest when their Ideal says they will always address challenges with subterfuge and deceit? As it stands, the system makes the GM grade you on how well you play into the game's pre-written archetypes, with no room for nuance or changing characterization over time. It mechanically incentivizes one-note, static characters.

The change I really want would be some alternative roleplaying XP gain that isn't tied to Ideals at all, since I personally find ideals to be too prescriptive and overly simplistic for characterization. Not everybody will agree with me there, though, so barring that, there needs to be more flexibility in the Ideals themselves. Players should be explicitly allowed to write their own set of ideals for any Bond they pick and rewrite them as appropriate for their character's development. Something like a create-a-Bond system would also be great, though I understand that might undermine the Broker capstone.

Thanks for reading my text wall. Hope this is addressed in the future. Best of luck with development!!

I think the rules for Bonus Damage are worded a bit ambiguous. I can't quite tell if you do an additional damage roll or just adjust the regular damage roll.

The idea is probably to adjust the regular damage roll, but in that case you're not so much dealing "bonus" damage as much as you get a higher chance of dealing max damage - except when the base damage is Fray only, in which case you do get to add an entire damage die.

It is also not spelled out how multiple instances of Bonus Damage stack. RAI seems to suggest you roll more dice, but don't get to keep more.

Is there a reddit and or discord?

Do you already have a release data for the game? 

I am intrigued so far. do you have any resources for a character sheet to print off?

Is there a link to download the character sheet? The PDF mentions it but i cant find it anywhere...

will there be a planned online tool like compcon with this?

Was there any plan for character sheets

Hi, is anybody here know the discord server for playing this game? If so, can you guys show me the link? I want to try and play this game, but I don't know the right server for it.

Really looking forward to the full release of this. I've been GMing a Lancer game for over a year now and my players are already excited about playing in a Icon game.

Loved reading through the playtest. Now just have to find a group to try it out with.

Are you sold on the name ICON? Considering there's an established game named ICONS that has been around for years, it may cause confusion.