Savage Worlds Adventure Edition Kickstarter

[Ikael]

If you have not yet noticed, new version of Savage Worlds has been Kickstarted (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/545820095/savage-worlds-adventure-edition) today. Currently it is 950% Funded. The new version is definitely going to be available in Fantasy Grounds a way or another but before that, show your love for PEG and get the PDF or actual hardcover book!

[dstuffle]

it's over 1,200% (and has left the last stretch goal in the dust) less than 24 hours from the start.

[Sgain]

I ordered mine in the first hour. I've already been using the rules that they posted in my games and my players love them. It's looking like an excellent update to an already excellent game system.

[Doswelk]

I was 7th to order it seems (not that it made any difference) but did want to be able to boast I was 1st :p

[cyphus5]

Hey, do you know if the Adventure Deck module will work with the new edition? I'd also like to know if I'd be able to pull up and use stuff like Last Parsec in my adventure edition campaign?

[Ikael]

Backward compatibility is one of the most important design principal in SWADE including FG conversion I am working on

[Sgain]

Of course it's going to use the Adventure Deck!!

[Erolat]

More accurately, they are including the Adventure Deck in some of the Kickstarter products so it is safe to say it will still be usable.

[Valyar]

When this is scheduled to be released in the wild and is there any value of getting Savage Worlds products in FG now?

[esmdev]

When this is scheduled to be released in the wild and is there any value of getting Savage Worlds products in FG now?

According to the kickstarter the .PDF version will be available about 3 weeks after the kickstarter concludes.

I have no idea when the FG version might be available. If they have a preview and are already able to work on it, the FG might come out pretty quickly, if not assume it will be some acceptable development length after the .PDF is released.

I am looking forward to giving Savage Worlds a whirl but figure best to wait for the next generation to come out than buy in now. So hopefully it will be sooner than later. :)

[zarlor]

When this is scheduled to be released in the wild and is there any value of getting Savage Worlds products in FG now?


As stated above, PDF is usually ready about 3 weeks after the KS, so mid-December. Physical books will take longer, of course. As for getting them now, go for it! Per Ikael in this very thread, "Backward compatibility is one of the most important design principal in SWADE including FG conversion I am working on". So there's official word from the FG-side to help ensure backwards-compatibility. Then again it shouldn't be a big issue even for stuff that isn't changed out in prior modules as you should still be able to use them largely as-is. Either using them as they are or doing minor tweaks as you play them. Most things won't need much in the way of changes beyond maybe substituting Athletics for some of the rolls it would replace or the like.

[mac40k]

Per the FG Fri with Shane last week, the settings will get varying levels of treatment depending in part on how impacted they are. He mentioned for example that Deadlands would be getting a new edition. Some of this is tied to current stock of titles in print and stated that rather than just reprint existing editions going forward, they might take the opportunity to update them depending on how significant the changes are. Others may just get online guidance such as " if an NPC has d6 in Swimming and d10 in Throwing, just give it the average of d8 in Athletics."

Of more interest specifically to this forum is that Doug revealed that the FG plans are to make SWADE a new ruleset, although no pricing was mentioned. Once it is ready to go, the current ruleset will be frozen and it will be removed from the store, but it will continue to get maintenance releases as necessary to keep it working with updates to Core FG functionality. As for settings, the plan is to finish out any settings that may be currently in dev (although he didn't mention which ones these were), but after than all new settings would be developed for the new version of the ruleset only. The upside of this is that GMs (such as myself) that have existing campaigns ongoing, are not forced to switch to the new version of SW mid-campaign and going forward, all existing settings will continue to work as they do today. So, theoretically, you will be able to keep using the existing ruleset and settings you may already own in perpetuity and will not have to spend another dime to do so. However, you would probably need to make the switch to SWADE if and when you were interested in running any new settings released after SWADE, but that will probably be true for those buying new settings in print or pdf post-SWADE anyway. This however, also presumes that if you upgrade to SWADE and want to use it with an existing setting, conversion will not necessary be done for you by FG devs, in the same way that you currently have to manually add Guts in as a skill in Deadlands Reloaded since it was released when Guts was still part of core (SWEX). In other words, for the example given above, GMs would need to go through the NPCs in the setting and update any that have a d6 in Swimming and a d10 in Throwing to be changed to having a d8 in Athletics using whatever guidance PEG puts out, just as you would if you own the print/pdf version of a setting and want to use it with SWADE at a real table.

[Ikael]

It is not decided yet if SWADE needs to be own ruleset or if changes can and should be applied to current ruleset. The project is still in planning & design phase. Points that Doug mentioned in the FGF is just one possibility what the outcome might be.

[Claybor]

I know it's all speculation at this point, but I sure hope that I don't have to re-buy everything I just bought a few months ago. Either way I am looking forward to the Savage Worlds changes.

[Sgain]

I'll buy it if required. If I was running 5e I'd be expected to buy every silly update for that game that came out every few months. SW doesn't do that so I'm not upset about paying to upgrade/update FG for it.

[alfarobl]

I think having to pay again will be a bad idea. It is already difficult to find people to play Savage this will break community in two pieces, people that keep old ruleset and play only Deluxe and people with new ruleset SWADE. If possible it will be great if it could be added to old ruleset like we had in the past Savage3.pak and Savage4.pak or something like it.
Also we have the great update to Unity someday that will make all this different and it is a big question mark.

[Trenloe]

I think having to pay again will be a bad idea. It is already difficult to find people to play Savage this will break community in two pieces, people that keep old ruleset and play only Deluxe and people with new ruleset SWADE.
This is exactly what is going to happen anyway as Pinnacle are getting you to pay for the new version of the RPG rulebook - which is standard practice throughout the RPG industry, I'm not having a go at Pinnacle.


If possible it will be great if it could be added to old ruleset like we had in the past Savage3.pak and Savage4.pak or something like it.
But then there's need to be two versions in the same code (causing additional work to implement and maintain). Because, as you say, some people will want to play the new version and some people will want to play the old version. And you can't take away the old version FG ruleset because people have paid for that and will want to continue to use it - for the old SW RPG rules. And the SW3 to SW4 upgrade you mention in the past was (mostly) a change in the underlying ruleset architecture for the same RPG system version - so that made sense to provide it as a FG ruleset upgrade at no additional cost.

I understand that people don't like paying more money on top of what they've already spent. But this is a new edition of the rules and will require a lot of coding in FG to get it slick and commercial quality, and ensure that you can still use the previous version adventures/modules. The FG developers who do that (who aren't salaried SmiteWorks employees) are supported by royalties on the product sales. Expecting developers to do a big upgrade, to a new RPG version, included with the original ruleset for free is a little bit of a stretch - in my opinion.

But, as Ikael (the main Savage Worlds developer) has stated, the design decisions are still ongoing... I'm sure Pinnacle themselves might be involved in that discussion too.

[alfarobl]

This is exactly what is going to happen anyway as Pinnacle are getting you to pay for the new version of the RPG rulebook - which is standard practice throughout the RPG industry, I'm not having a go at Pinnacle.

I just wish it could be avoided at this community. I understand how it works and why PEG is doing it. But maybe it can be spared inside FG and make things better.


But, as Ikael (the main Savage Worlds developer) has stated, the design decisions are still ongoing... I'm sure Pinnacle themselves might be involved in that discussion too.

If you can reach Ikael and as he will be talking with PEG maybe they can push a Kickstarter goal to allow him to update it without being an issue for current Savage Worlds players inside Fantasy Grounds... they did a goal to pay for a Streaming Gameplay... I guess this is more beneficial in the long term for the community that play via VTT.

[mac40k]

Thanks for the clarification Ikael. My impression was based on Shane asking Doug point blank what the plans for FG were and that was what Doug said. I don't recall him qualifying that, but that could just be faulty memory on my part. I was glad to hear it as being one of those GMs with an ongoing campaign, I had been wondering what the impact to my game will be if the updates are made to the existing ruleset, which I won't have the option to opt out of.

[Skellan]

I would be happy to pay for a SWADE ruleset. It has quite a few changes and I reckon it is worth it, particularly if it were to get a new theme :D I haven't backed the kickstarter as I only run games online so I plan on just buying the FG ruleset when it lands.

[zarlor]

This is exactly what is going to happen anyway as Pinnacle are getting you to pay for the new version of the RPG rulebook - which is standard practice throughout the RPG industry, I'm not having a go at Pinnacle.

That is not true at all. Pinnacle has never worked that way. You do NOT in any way, shape or form HAVE to buy the new edition of Savage Worlds to play by the new rules. They will, and have always, provided exactly what the new changes are are in a FREE PDF you will be able to download off of the Pinnacle website so you can continue to use your current rulebook and still play by the new rules. There may be some minor wording changes to things that might not be listed in that conversion guide, but overall you should be able to fully play by the new rules while continuing to use the old rulebook without ever having to buy anything new at all from Pinnacle. This is NOT D&D and there's no real reason why this would split the SW community, just like previous rules updates have not split the community before this. Everyone moves to the new rules because everyone can whether they've bought the new books or not. Pinnacle simply has never used the D&D pricing model with new editions that are not backwards compatible and I doubt they ever will do that. It's one of the reasons I, personally, do buy the new books as a way to support a company whose business model I greatly prefer.

[Trenloe]

That is not true at all. Pinnacle has never worked that way. You do NOT in any way, shape or form HAVE to buy the new edition of Savage Worlds to play by the new rules. They will, and have always, provided exactly what the new changes are are in a FREE PDF you will be able to download off of the Pinnacle website so you can continue to use your current rulebook and still play by the new rules. There may be some minor wording changes to things that might not be listed in that conversion guide, but overall you should be able to fully play by the new rules while continuing to use the old rulebook without ever having to buy anything new at all from Pinnacle. This is NOT D&D and there's no real reason why this would split the SW community, just like previous rules updates have not split the community before this. Everyone moves to the new rules because everyone can whether they've bought the new books or not. Pinnacle simply has never used the D&D pricing model with new editions that are not backwards compatible and I doubt they ever will do that. It's one of the reasons I, personally, do buy the new books as a way to support a company whose business model I greatly prefer.
I stand corrected. Sorry for providing confusing information. Thanks for the detailed info about Pinnacle's practices. :)

[esmdev]

After I saw that the ruleset was only $10, I decided to go ahead and buy the current version. If the upgraded ruleset is only $10, you can be pretty sure I'll go ahead and buy that too.

It seems like most people's concern is having to pay to update all the other products like settings and adventures, etc., to work with the newer ruleset. I don't see how the new ruleset could work with the older modules without a whole lot of work in the ruleset designed solely to figure out if something is older and then revamp it (which seems like too much work and wasted memory to me).

Maybe an alternative would be a new standalone ruleset for $10 and an option to buy both for $15 for backwards compatibility? People who don't have Deluxe but want it can get it with the bundle, people who want the new alone or already have deluxe can get the new ruleset, etc.

When I look at the older settings and adventures and such, I'm just not really confident that they will all get updated to the newer edition, so I can see a need to retain the older.

[Trenloe]

I think, if it's possible, it would be nice to have the new ruleset (if it is a new ruleset) be able to convert library modules from the old to the new format (as is reasonably possible) or to a close approximation that is usable. The Call of Cthulhu 7e ruleset does this when a module made for the Call of Cthulhu 6e ruleset is opened, so the process is certainly viable. This would make it much easier for people to move to the new rules and still use their previous setting/adventure purchases and would also keep products made for the old ruleset a viable option for people to pick up and use.

[zarlor]

I think the big changes, from a coding perspective, would be consolidation of a few of the skills down to just being Athletics (already had to be done for the Flash Gordon setting), the new Chase Rules (which I would think could probably be just a separate option setting to choose which method you prefer to use), the allowance of the same action when doing multi-actions (but maxed at a total of 3 actions) which I don't think FG handles automatically right now anyway, and the removal of the Charisma derived trait. Modules won't touch core Edges, Hindrances or Powers so that shouldn't be much of a problem (except where a module references a core version of those things, say as a pre-requisite or something, although FG doesn't really do much character design checks like a character creation program does so that's probably not going to be an issue, either.) We know there are going to be some updates of older settings, one of them being Evernight which was created with the very first ruleset and yet is still in use now. Presumably the module authors for any updated settings will either have to update the old setting module or create a new one for the new version when released, so there could potentially be some cost for folks there if there are 2 versions of a particular setting like that (although you might still be able to run the old version with the new core rules anyway, I would think, but it just may not be supported if there are underlying changes to FG that might mess with them.)

Now, there may be a bunch of other changes that will fundamentally affect how something like FG handles the new SWAdE over current SWD but we won't really know about that for sure until we get the new edition. From what we do know, though, and from the point of view of someone who is not an FG coder (although I've done a ton of SW datasets for Hero Lab) I wouldn't think we'd be looking at too massive of a software overhaul for these, especially on the module side I wouldn't think. I could be completely wrong about that, of course, so take that for what little it might be worth.

EDIT: Oh, there's also that Tricks and Tests of Will are now combined into the much simpler Tests, and Cooperative roles are now Support rolls, both of which might require the addition of coding but also probably nothing major that would disrupt the way those are done now in FG, I wouldn't think. It's really a question of what the small "tweaks" will be to some of the other stuff that FG does track, like Encumbrance, but again I'm not sure those will make much difference to a settings module. In other words might not have to worry about seeing any kind of conversion built into FG for modules. Hopefully, anyway. Also the addition of Common Knowledge as a skill rather than a Smarts roll, but also not something I think that will affect modules.

[mac40k]

That is not true at all. Pinnacle has never worked that way. You do NOT in any way, shape or form HAVE to buy the new edition of Savage Worlds to play by the new rules. They will, and have always, provided exactly what the new changes are are in a FREE PDF you will be able to download off of the Pinnacle website so you can continue to use your current rulebook and still play by the new rules. There may be some minor wording changes to things that might not be listed in that conversion guide, but overall you should be able to fully play by the new rules while continuing to use the old rulebook without ever having to buy anything new at all from Pinnacle. This is NOT D&D and there's no real reason why this would split the SW community, just like previous rules updates have not split the community before this. Everyone moves to the new rules because everyone can whether they've bought the new books or not. Pinnacle simply has never used the D&D pricing model with new editions that are not backwards compatible and I doubt they ever will do that. It's one of the reasons I, personally, do buy the new books as a way to support a company whose business model I greatly prefer.

The difference here as it applies to FG is that the ruleset updates being downloadable for free still leaves the option of whether or not to use them in the hands of individual GMs. Unless FG can make all the changes available as options that can be turned on or off in the existing ruleset, what impact will the update to remove Charisma as a derived stat and all the associated core Edges that currently modify Charisma are replaced with new versions have on existing ongoing campaigns for example? Currently, FG doesn't allow you to opt out of updates individually, so anytime you want to take updates to core or any other ruleset, you get all that you are own. You can't for example, just download updates for D&D 5e and not download updates for SW.

[zarlor]

Looks like some thoughts from the FG folks at around the 37:00 mark in this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJqkeKHL1CI

[mac40k]

Looks like some thoughts from the FG folks at around the 37:00 mark in this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJqkeKHL1CI

Yes, this is what I've been referring to and going back and rewatching that segment I now see that Doug did qualify it with a "subject to change" statement. Bottom line for me is that Savage Worlds is my system of preference, I already own more settings than I can count, and FG is currently the only means I have to play, so I will gladly pay whatever FG wants to charge to be able to continue to do so. In fact, I was tempted to just try to get by with the free pdf conversion material PEG will make available and just purchase the new rules in FG, but I backed the KS anyway just to support PEG.

[Claybor]

Good folks at both pinnacle and here. I am pretty sure they will get it all worked out in a fair and equitable manner.

[Sgain]

in terms of the Chase rules and Fantasy Grounds - you can use the existing chase tracker for the new rules. Just put some tokens on the map to represent the tokens for the chase. Then do the various rolls and draws as per the old system (with the new rules of course). I did it the other day with FG and it worked fine!

[Topdecker]

I am all in for walling off the old product and creating a new product line. And I own a great deal of it. Much of the older modules are pretty far behind anyhow.

FWIW, I jumped into the Kickstarter with a hardbound copy of the new rules. I am not GMing any SW games at the moment, but it is still my preferred system for settings from 1500AD onward. Hopefully they do a better job of spelling out how the benny system is supposed to work (yeah, you think you know...)

Top

[Sgain]

@Topdecker; there are some new rules for bennies that my players really, really like. I think you'll like them.

[Topdecker]

The current system favors a storytelling style that foreshadows or outright explains everything in immediate motion. For instance...

"Your team walks out into the plaza looking for the spy. Give me a notice roll. <Roll fails.> Would you like to use a benny?"

vs

"The sniper sets up with a good overwatch of the plaza, his scope dancing from potential target to potential target. He sees the traitor enter the plaza and take a seat at the cafe and begins to calm his breathing. Out of the corner of his eye he notices a team of 4 operatives enter from the walk platz and realizes that he needs to shoot and shoot soon.

Your team walks out into the plaza looking for the spy. Give me a notice roll. <Roll fails.> Would you like to use a benny?"

Players need to know how important it is to be successful before they spend a limited resource, which makes a foreshadowed storytelling style very friendly for bennies. Otherwise, you need to add something like 'It is critical to the mission that you succeed with a raise." (And adjust the level of importance to match the importance of success.)

And we haven't even touched upon adventure cards...

EDIT: The problem is that none of this is really spelled out in the rules very clearly. And then you get someone like me that doesn't appreciate the rules dictating my storytelling style who will argue with the rules experts over their interpretation of their rules. Obviously, I've conceded to the notion of giving players enough information so they can spend their bennies intelligently, but overall I find the entire system to break the fourth wall too frequently and it is a constant aggravation and source of annoyance for me both as a player and a GM.

Top

[Skellan]

It is up to the player whether they want to spend a benny based on the information that they have.

[Topdecker]

The GM is supposed to qualify it well enough so players can make an informed choice. It isn't a guessing-game in which the GM attempts to draw bennies out of a player's hand.

They are supposed to be to the benefit of the player and obscuring the importance of success prevents the player from using them effectively. If a GM were doing this, I as a player should be able to ask directly how important is success on a scale of 1-10 and expect to get an accurate response.

This is why I made the earlier comment that bennies don't work how most people think they do. And that the rules did such a poor job of explaining such a critical system is why I was hoping they could find a way to be clearer in the next edition. (BTW, I got beat-up pretty badly for arguing that foreshadowing and otherwise explaining the value of re-rolling damaged the storytelling aspects. I suspect that some of the more rabid rules guys in the PEG forums would say that the 1-10 importance scale was not sufficient - but I am not willing to give it much more than that in many cases.)

Go ask on the PEG forums if you want to hear it from the source.

Top

[Skellan]

There are quite a 'few rabid rules guys' who don't work for pinnacle that like to tell people how to play. This is an old chestnut, I won't derail the thread any more with it. I am pretty sure no one will come and take my dice away :D

[Topdecker]

Yeah, and "rabid" is a restrained description IMO.

Top

[esmdev]

I think that the rules vs. creative flow war has been waged since the dawn of gaming. It really makes sense considering deep down the original tabletop RPG was built on a wargaming kernel. Wargamers can be quite rabid about rules and distance.

[Sgain]

In my games I have a couple of simple rules for bennie use; no bennies for fear or notice rolls. Cuts down on the wasting time having them play 20 questions with me.

[mac40k]

A lot of it has to do with the benny economy of the game. Where "bennies flow like water" players are more willing to spend a benny on a failed Notice roll, whereas in games where the GM is more stingy, they tend to horde them for soak rolls or important "offensive" combat usage. Another factor is the point in the session where the opportunity arises. With bennies refreshing at the beginning of each session, players are much more willing to "burn" a benny on a failed notice roll late in the session due to "use it or lose it" mentality, whereas they may be more hesitant to spend that benny on a reroll in the exact same situation if it occurs very early in the session. It's may be metagaming, but it's also just common/natural human behavior.

With respect to Notice rolls in particular, I don't tell players ahead of time what modifiers are in effect and do the math in my head. So the situation where the players must succeed with a raise to progress is just a -4 modifier they are unaware of. OTOH, I have adopted the spirit of Gumshoe with respect to giving out clues/info for my games. If the PCs need it, they get it, with or even without a roll. If they succeed with a raise, they just get better or additional info that may add value. Under no circumstances would I as a GM make it impossible to progress in the story without a player realizing that they should probably be spending a benny on a failed Notice roll. Going back to your sniper example, I would decide ahead of time how important to the story is it that the PCs have the opportunity to foil the assassination attempt. If it is critical that they be able to do so, they are going to have a glint or reflection of some sort catch their eye without calling for a Notice roll. If the shot has to happen, then it does, also without a Notice roll as just assigning a really high penalty to stack the odds against them still allows for the possibility that they can get lucky or be willing to spend a benny (especially if they have Elan) that then gives them an opportunity to derail the story in a manner I may not be prepared for. If I'm asking for a Notice roll, I've already accounted for all possible outcomes (failure/success/raise), or the outcome has no significant impact on overall story progression and I'm just planning to improvise and riff off of the players' actions.

[Topdecker]

Yeah, I too adopted the Gumshoe method as soon as I became aware of the concept. Unfortunately, not every adventure is especially well focused on what the players do with the information, so it isn't as well implemented on the fly compared to when it is planned for and used as part of the adventure.

Top

[Skellan]

Yeah, not calling for unnecessary rolls is good practice. Sometimes easier said than done though

[Razortide]

One question: I am highly interested to transfer my VTT from Roll20 over to Fantasy Grounds. Right now FG only has the Deluxe rules and as we all know here, the Adventure Edition is just looming around the corner and is even announced for FG. Does it make sense to purchase the Deluxe Edition at this point or will I need to pay for the Adventure Edition fully anyway (so it would make sense to postpone my purchase after the Adventure Edition is released on FG)?

[alfarobl]

Wait as they said SWADE rules will probably be paid and if you own Deluxe there is no discount AFAIK.

[Razortide]

Thank you! Makes sense :-)

[Trenloe]

One question: I am highly interested to transfer my VTT from Roll20 over to Fantasy Grounds. Right now FG only has the Deluxe rules and as we all know here, the Adventure Edition is just looming around the corner and is even announced for FG. Does it make sense to purchase the Deluxe Edition at this point or will I need to pay for the Adventure Edition fully anyway (so it would make sense to postpone my purchase after the Adventure Edition is released on FG)?
You will get a free upgrade for the ruleset structure, but not the new library data. See here for full details: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?46445-Savage-Worlds-Adventure-Edition-Development-Plan-and-Update&p=413209#post413209

[Razortide]

You will get a free upgrade for the ruleset structure, but not the new library data. See here for full details: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?46445-Savage-Worlds-Adventure-Edition-Development-Plan-and-Update&p=413209#post413209

Thank you so much! My forum-fu is weak lately, because I am not using many forums anymore. Thank you for digging it up for me!

[llothos]

One question: I am highly interested to transfer my VTT from Roll20 over to Fantasy Grounds. Right now FG only has the Deluxe rules and as we all know here, the Adventure Edition is just looming around the corner and is even announced for FG. Does it make sense to purchase the Deluxe Edition at this point or will I need to pay for the Adventure Edition fully anyway (so it would make sense to postpone my purchase after the Adventure Edition is released on FG)?

I know others have suggested waiting but do you want to start playing now? If your using Roll20 your only using the Deluxe rules there? While they have said its coming I don't think they've exactly indicated when but if I were to guess it would likely coincide with the official release sometime next year or possibly a little earlier then June release. The deluxe ruleset is only $10 and with the steam sale coming up this week it will likely be discounted 20-25% (no guarantees of course). As others have said you will get upgraded for free but if you want the SWADE book in FG form then you would have to shell out another $10 which isn't bad.

If you're looking to start converting over now then I would buy it now and when it comes out next year, it's not a lot of money and it supports the devs in a small way (if the modules were $40 or $50+ then I would definitely suggest just waiting).

[Razortide]

I know others have suggested waiting but do you want to start playing now? If your using Roll20 your only using the Deluxe rules there? While they have said its coming I don't think they've exactly indicated when but if I were to guess it would likely coincide with the official release sometime next year or possibly a little earlier then June release. The deluxe ruleset is only $10 and with the steam sale coming up this week it will likely be discounted 20-25% (no guarantees of course). As others have said you will get upgraded for free but if you want the SWADE book in FG form then you would have to shell out another $10 which isn't bad.

If you're looking to start converting over now then I would buy it now and when it comes out next year, it's not a lot of money and it supports the devs in a small way (if the modules were $40 or $50+ then I would definitely suggest just waiting).

Hey llothos,
I've already purchased SWDL and DL: Noir. As you said: 10 USD is a steal. I am just annoyed that DL Noir is not completely implemented and the chance of an update are slim. I said it in other threads and won't stop mentioning this until it's upgraded :-)

In Roll20 I've already implemented all known SWADE Rules (New Skills, Free Core Skills, Chase Rules, etc.) I will also continue to use Roll20 for Music.