Adventurer Conqueror King Available NOW

P257, Cleaving, Theives should be Thieves.
(As a native speaker of a language in which the “ei” sound very different from the “ie”, I might have the advantage in spotting this :slight_smile: ).

Just got the chance to download the PDF and read through it, it looks fantastic. When do you guys expect it to be purchasable? We’ve been using the play test campaign rules for a few months, so I’m looking forward to going over them closely to see how they’ve changed. I think we’ll be setting up a wiki for the players to track their own ACKS stuff online (domain revenue, church investments, hijinks, that kind of stuff).
Is ACKS fair game now for reviews and discussion? I’d probably hold a review until it’s at least purchasable as a PDF, though.

Beedo - I’m glad you like it!
The PDF is going to be purchasable on GameSalute, DriveThruRPG and Lulu in February and in stores as a book in March. Each PDF will come with a coupon to drive an in-store purchase.
ACKS is definitely fair game for reviews and discussion!

1 week to go for PDFs!

Caught another two:
P114 Left Block 2: Example: "…HD 9 with 3 special abilities, so her bonus XP is (3 x 700 = 2,100). A group of adventurers receives 3,100XP…
should be (according to the table: 700 (base XP for HD9) + 3 x 600 (bonus for HD9) = 2.500 XP
P149 Left Block Last: Example: “…A lair of orcs is defined as 1 warband. 1 warband is defined as 2d6 gangs. The Judge rolls 1d4 for the number of gangs…”
should read "…“The Judge rolls 2d6…”

Too late! We went to print. :expressionless:
But we’ll correct it in the PDF.

A few updates:

  1. If you’ve already downloaded the PDF, you might want to download the version we uploaded yesterday. It’s got high-resolution graphics that are much cleaner than those we had in the drafts, and many niggling errors have been fixed.
  2. As you may have seen from the blog, we went to print!

“That said, if anyone has placed an order but does not have access, please let us know!
Thanks,
Greg”
I pre-ordered (just yesterday) and don’t have access.
Thanks,
Rick

@rick:
You’re all set as a Contributor. Thanks for your preorder!
Greg

I just pre-ordered when I saw the game is available. I’ve got the receipt, but the link here in this thread is giving me an error as well.
I expect there to be a delay, to be honest, but I thought I’d check just in case I can get it in time to read on my commute home. (don’t worry, I take the bus).
-R

We just uploaded a new and corrected version. It has a few interesting teasers at the end, too…

Oh wow. Nice teasers!

I’m in the same position as Frederick.

@JustinW, @frederick, you’ve both been marked for access!
Thanks,
Greg L.

And there it is! Thanks very much.

My own comment from a quick look through. Giving the GP cost of a listed magic item would be convenient for GMs. Sure you can go through the whole book, cross reference the appropriate spell and deduce the costs, but it would save a GM some time.

While the math is the same, the description of combat and the combat example (p. 102) don’t match up with the quick hand out on page 257.
From page 102, Armor class: " … The target’s Armor Class is added to the attack throw value necessary to hit it."
From page 102, EXAMPLE: Marcus “… a 10th level fighter (attack throw 4+) attacks
a plate-armored target (AC7). He needs a modified roll of 11 (4+7) or more to hit. He rolls a 12, and lands a blow!”
From page 257, Attacking: “… Subtract the target’s armor class from the roll. If the modified roll is greater than or equal to the character or monster’s attack throw value, they hit …”
The same example would be changed as follows: “… a 10th level fighter (attack throw 4+) attacks a plate-armored target (AC7). He needs a roll of 11 or more to hit.(a -7 to an Attack Throw of 4) He rolls a 12 and lands a blow! (12-7=5).”
Personally, I prefer the addition style.

I purchased the PDF about a month ago from gamesalute and now it finally says it shipped, but I can’t find a download link anywhere on their site or the e-mail confirmation they sent me.
What do I do now?

Anglefish, that was a deliberate, albeit quirky, decision.
My initial idea was that AC should be a penalty on the attack throw. However, we found aesthetically hat people seemed to prefer addition rather than subtraction. So we went with an additive presentation of the rule, where AC increased your target value.
Then, in actual practice, we found about 33% of the players would add AC to their target value; about 33% would apply AC as a penalty on the die roll; and about 33% would roll, subtract their attack throw from the result, and announce what AC they’d hit. So different people used a different system for the same result.
I decided to create a quick start hand-out to clarify things. I wrote up the rule all three ways and handed it to playtesters, and then asked them to explain how AC worked to me, and for whatever reason subtraction was conceptually easiest to grasp when presented in the quick start format. So we ended up including two methods of explaining the same system - one aesthetically more pleasant, one conceptually easier to grasp.
I think I may be guilty of vastly over-thinking how I write rules, and just making them more confusing.

I’m in the same boat with Azuki and haven’t heard a response back from GameSalute.