Copper doesn't stop Bronze working, just blankets an area. So, I would say that the Coppercloud might hide an Allomancer within 10 paces but Bronze would still work as normal otherwise.

I approve

Very nice.

In case there are any Kiwi forumites here, I am running Thieves of the Ninth House at Kapcon this weekend, both on the Saturday and on the Sunday. If you are keen to try out the RPG and are in the area, please come along.

Find out more details here: http://kapcon.rpg.net.nz and http://kapcon.rpg.net.nz/?q=node/479.

The ever astute ZetaStriker's has raises issues with Pewter's short burn time and the longterm applications and effects of Pewter Burning.

Were there any official thoughts from Crafty on this issue?

The only part I found intrusive, for reference, was the forced structure. I feel it can interrupt the natural flow of conversation in many cases unless a PC is presenting it as an "agenda" in-game. Or an NPC, but I prefer my NPCs to follow rather than lead if they get pulled into the story like that. The only way I can see the scheme system unfolding properly is to swap between being in character and out of character.

Fair enough. It sounds like more a matter of preference rather than experience, but that's cool by me.

I'll probably end up trying it, but it just hasn't seemed necessary thus far. I'm used to incorporating player ideas into my campaigns, and never railroad them along a set path, so since it's already happening for the most part I hadn't seen a need to remove it from the roleplay. I'm tempted to try it - just once - to see how they react to adding things to the narrative. They've loved the similar options the system has, such as spending Spirit, but I think this one might be a little too intrusive in the end.

I guess one thing that is nice about Mistborn's approach is that its almost able to be roleplayed by the PCs. The process very much reminds me of the planning meetings that you see in the books. So it doesn't feel all that intrusive to me.

But yeah, if they players are giving all that to you in any case and you are responding in kind, then go with the flow.

Do you mind going more into detail on how the Plan of Action and Scheme stuff worked out? I've left it out from my group for the most part, as it seemed more of a way to get new groups started while we're all vets of other systems, but I'm curious about how your group may have reacted to it.

I think the system acts as a way for players to communicate ideas to the GM, though it is useful for new groups too. As such, I suspect it will actually appeal to experienced groups who wish to rely more heavily on player input and tailoring the gaming experience accordingly.

On saying that, I think I will probably not use it infull for the first set up, as the players wouldn't necessarily have the direction or information to complete the process. My first set up is likely to be a combination of answers from the GM and some left blank. Akishma's use of plot hooks is a good one.

I suspect the answer is no, but is there any idea when the revised PDF will be made available?

Yes 30 times rating for each metalmind.

Yeah totally.   

For the time being assume a feruchemists can tap up to 10 dice using charges, and will need to tap 5 additional charges for a nudge or 10 additional charges to increase their outcome.

Wooty.

We have a general policy to not discuss release plans until we're pencils down with a project

Fair enough, but I'm putting a game together and an unofficial-I-promise-I-won't-hold-you-to-it best guess about whether or not we'll see it in, say, the next month, would be greatly appreciated.  If not, that's fine, I just won't plan for it.

It may be worth noting that Thieves in the Ninth House is a one or two session game. It's good but I wouldn't wait to build a campaign around it.

It's not really a loop though at 10 charges per action. But yeah, it would avoid that.

Ah cool, you did. Go option 2!