Legend of the Elements

Legend of the Elements is a tabletop roleplaying game, a standalone hack of Apocalypse World that emulates supernatural martial arts action.

That’s a lot of information. What does that mean?

Legend of the Elements is a tabletop roleplaying game. This means that is a game played by a small group of people interested where everyone sits down for a few hours and pretend to be characters in a fictional world, using the rules in this book to aid in telling a certain type of story. No experience with roleplaying games is necessary to play this game, though someone must read this whole book.
Tabletop roleplaying games leave a lot of the specifics up to the imaginations of the players, instead providing structure to guide the creation of those specifics. To differentiate between the structures in the game and your specific game, the former will be referred to as “the game” and the latter as changes made “at your table”.

Legend of the Elements is a standalone hack of Apocalypse World. Apocalypse World is another tabletop roleplaying game that was written by D. Vincent Baker. If you are already familiar with that game, much of this game’s structure will be familiar. If not, don’t worry, this book contains all the information you need to play the game.

Legend of the Elements emulates supernatural martial arts action. The rules of this game will help you to play a game specifically within that genre of fiction, which is characterized by a world where the supernatural is, if not common, at least heard of and where both martial arts skill and control of the supernatural are normal for heroes. This genre, known as wuxia, is associated with Chinese literature, but the setting of Legend of the Elements is not a real world place. The assumed setting for the game is a fictional world with a pan-Asian culture, but there is no reason this must be the case at your table.
The largest inspirations for this game are the Nickelodeon cartoons Avatar: The Last Airbender and The Legend of Korra. This game is not associated with those shows, but they are an excellent guideline for tone, style, and pacing in Legend of the Elements. Other inspirations include the Codex Alera novel series by Jim Butcher, wuxia films and literature, anime, and the Four Great Classical Novels of Chinese literature.

The game was formerly known as Avatar World, but no longer has any direct affiliation with the Avatar franchise.

The game's public playtest is now complete and is on the track to publishing at the end of August.

The game is now unavailable for download in anticipation of its publishing at the end of August. Look for it at Go Play NW and for the final version at PAX Prime!

If you like the game, please consider donating! I don't charge for my beta content, but some support goes a long way to making the final game a reality!

Release History:
If you're interested in the game's pre-release design history, check out the posts on this blog tagged Avatar World or Legend of the Elements, or read the [Legend of the Elements] thread on the Story Games forum.
Initial release v1.0 on September 21, 2013.
Updated to v1.1 on November 3, 2013, including a heavy rewrite of Tags, Chi, and Chakra.
Updated to v1.2 on January 20, 2014, the layout was reworked completely, Oaths and Honor were rewritten, and the MC section was heavily expanded upon.
Updated to v1.3 on February 12, 2014, visual updates, some tweaking.
Playbook file received an additional update on March 28, 2014, adding art. Overall version number unchanged.
Updated to v1.5 on August 28, 2014. Rewrite of harm, sub-playbooks added, second quickstart added, complete visual and layout overhaul.
Updated to v1.6 on October 25, 2014. Rewrite of Earthbending and some related moves, changed Armor to Fortune, tweaked sub-playbooks, full spellchecking pass.
Updated to v1.61 on December 28, 2014. Fixed typos and added two new sub-playbooks, the Lavabender and the Spirit Medium.
After v1.61, the name was changed from Avatar World to Legend of the Elements to officially distance the game from the Avatar franchise. All direct connections were severed, and steps were taken to separate the mechanics as well. The term -bending for elemental magic was also replaced.
Updated to v1.7 on March 26, 2015. Total overhaul.
On June 6, 2015, the game's public beta was completed and access to the game's files was removed.

If you have any comments or questions about the game, I can be easily contact through comments anywhere on this blog, on Twitter as @Logbook_Project, or on the Story Games forum in the Legend of the Elements thread - search for [Legend of the Elements] to join the discussion!
If you play Legend of the Elements, I would really love to know how it went! Any feedback at all provides helpful insight into making the game the best it can be.

End Recording,


  1. the game looks great so far, but there's one thing i don't understand: the tags. i can't find any explanation about them. how many tags are there and how are they called? how do they work?

    1. Page 23 of the rulebook (v1.3) has an explanation of "What Are Tags." To directly answer your questions, Tags aren't pulled fro a pre-defined list. When a mechanic calls for a Tag to be added (through Commit Open Violence, Move With Intention, and soon Speak Honorably), the character placing the Tag gets to dictate what that Tag is. Tags represent the narrative state of a character or environment, for example Paralyzed, Angry, On Fire, or Exhausted. These Tags are binding to the fiction, so the way enemies are taken care of is by putting a Tag on them that stops them from acting. An example of this would be Tied Up, which takes the target out of commission while leaving the opportunity for the MC to bring them back into the fight using a Hard Move. Tags can be taken advantage of using Chi as described on page 11.
      Hopefully this clears up the questions you had! Thanks for checking out the game :)

  2. A few questions.

    1) Do NPC's act only when PC's fail a roll, or do they always act and only succeed when PC's fail a roll?

    2) When taking another playbook as a Special Improvement, can you only take this once?
    2b) Do you need to take another 5 improvements to take a Special Improvement again?

    3) With the Avatar move "Spirit Within", you lose spirit of you commit bodily harm, does this mean you can't fight, or is it just when you actually inflict injury? Also, can max spirit be increased at all?

    4) Can you provide an example of play?

    1. 5) Are there any difficulty modifiers? Are peasants as easy to hit as experienced warriors?

    2. Good questions!
      1) Sort of. In a game without a turn structure, "acting" is a bit of a curious thing - NPCs can do things, move around, converse, and other things more or less at a whim, though an MC should generally be acting in reaction the what the players want to do. However, anything from the list of MC Moves are things that an MC shouldn't do unless PCs fail (or look to the MC expecting something to happen - this is a mostly undiscussed implicit role in MCing, getting the players unstuck when no one is sure what to do).
      However, I would also say that the fiction is king still. If everyone's positioning makes sense for an MC Move to happen even without a failed roll, it's still reasonable to do it. This is actually a benefit of Tags - unlike harm, where taking damage is merely a physical sign and often happens outside of move structures in other games, Tags can take that and say "yeah, you got hit, but it's not a Tag so you'll be able to shake it off."
      Hopefully that answered the question, I feel I might have diverged a bit.

      2) After switching playbooks, you do need to gain 5 more improvements before the special improvements are unlocked again. However, there's no limit on the number of playbooks a character can cycle through - or at least no technical limit. Practically, after around three it would probably be reasonable to either settle into one playbook or retire. Moves generally don't actually represent power gain so much as an increase in your number of options, so there's not a ton of harm in the gaining of moves over playbook switches, but after a bit it gets a bit unwieldly.

      3) Actual injury. As a primarily action-based game I don't want to keep a character (especially one like the Avatar) from fighting at all, but they shouldn't be out to destroy or kill. Harmony and mediation is their thing in the show, after all. As for max Spirit, I don't have any way to increase it - all the stats cap at 3, including Spirit. Given its rare usage, I may amend this once I actually get to see the Avatar in play (or hear from others about it).

      4) A full in-detail one? I don't actually have one yet. I intend to write one to include in the next draft of the game, but I haven't done so yet. Depending on your purpose I might be able to cover that a bit: if you're looking for a general sense of how the flow of a game of this style plays, the examples of play in Apocalypse World and Monsterhearts are both excellent and run on the same basic engine of conversational play interspersed by moves. If you're looking for the tone of the game, my friend Andy recently ran the game and wrote a summary of how things went down story-wise and it was pitch-perfect. You can read that summary yourself here: https://plus.google.com/u/0/110195921403384508934/posts/3jcSS9XsHTW It's a few comments down.
      If you're looking for an example of how Avatar World's specific moves flow in game, sorry, I'm still working on writing that -_-

    3. (huh, didn't realize Blogger had a character limit)
      5) There aren't, they both are and aren't. There has been a general trend of avoiding difficulty modifiers in Apocalypse World-derived games, largely stemming from a desire to preserve the very simple numbers of the game (2d6+stat, 10+, 7-9, 6-) and a note from ApW's designer in that game that some groups tried having them and it always getting dropped very quickly. Personally I'm not big on floating bonuses in general, which is why Avatar World largely dispenses with the +1 Forward idea outside of very specific circumstances.
      Hitting peasants versus experienced warriors has a complex explanation that is much simpler in play. Mechanically, the two are identical: you strike out with intent to kill or incapacitate and roll Commit Open Violence. The complicating situation is about fictional positioning: against an experienced warrior, depending on the nature of the attack a number of Tags that would have been viable against a peasant no longer make sense against a trained warrior. If the warrior had been narrated as being covered well with armor, a broad sword swing probably couldn't leave the Tag "Gashed" or the like. Instead you'd have to make do with a Tag like "Staggered." Mechanically, those two situations are identical - Tags that someone can take advantage of to increase their rolls. One of those is shaken off much more easily however, which makes the warrior, merely Staggered, better off than the Gashed peasant who will need medical attention to remove that Tag. In this way, saying exactly how you approach a target becomes a lot more relevant than merely the intent to do violence, encouraging thought about what your character is actually doing in the fiction, not just mechanically, in order to try and put down Tags of greater value.
      So that's the long answer: the experienced warrior is no harder to Tag than a peasant, but his fictional status protects him from some Tags in a way that makes him more dangerous than the peasant. That's the complicated explanation.
      The simple mechanism in play? Tagging is equally difficult, but the Tag must flow from the fiction. If it doesn't, you can't apply it.

      I think that covers it! Any additional or follow-up questions? Do these answers properly address your questions?
      Thanks for checking out the game!
      - Max "Ego" Hervieux

    4. That answers my questions, thanks ^_^

      Also, is it possible to put some samples tags in the manual?
      Just as an idea how they would come into play

    5. Excellent! If you get a chance to play let me know how it goes!

      I've been quite hesitant with providing specific Tags in the past, as I fear that some players will take it as a definitive list to use rather than merely samples, but I'm giving in here - such a thing will be included in the next draft :)

    6. Yeah I know what you mean
      But without examples, there will be debate about at least two things
      1) What constitutes a mild/moderate/severe tag, also how much an environment tag affects
      2) What the tags listed in abilities do. Like fatigue, how bad is fatigue?

    7. Good points. To just cover them here,
      1) This is actually a somewhat unnecessary distinction ultimately. The most significant difference between each level is the degree of "permanence," or how hard it is to get rid of. Mild Tags are rarely more than temporary, Moderate ones might last a few scenes to a session, while Severe ones either stick around for a while or impose significant limitations on what a character can do while they are affected. The same Tag could show up in all three and mean different things. If it helps, think of the category as part of the Tag's phrase: "Moderately burned, Mildly bound, Severely wounded, etc". As far as Environment Tags, just like enemy Tags the only limit on how much it affects is the fictional positioning of what it's reasonable that your character did to the environment, as mechanically it's irrelevant whether you lit a bush on fire or a whole boat or something - it's an "On Fire" Environment Tag.
      2) Related to that, any Tags mentioned in moves that apply to enemies or the environment flex completely to the fictional positioning. The few rare Tags that are applied to the player, notably Fatigued, go on the next unused spot on the Tag chart just like anything else. This means that when you get Fatigued by Spirit Within, if you were entirely healthy you're just mildly fatigued (and probably need a few minutes uninterrupted rest), if you already had a mild Tag you'd be moderately fatigued (maybe you'd need a full night's sleep in comfortable conditions), and if you already had a moderate Tag you'd be severely fatigued (and would need to go a few days without any strenuous activity to recover). In this way the Tag flexes to your current state, rather than providing an exception to the usual order.

      I'm going to try and incorporate a discussion of that sort into the book somehow. Thanks for prompting me to think about these things, it's helpful!

    8. Hey no problem
      I am a good person for bouncing ideas off ^_^

  3. Just a thought I had.
    For the Avatar's Spirit stat, what if it's maximum was changed to "The total of your highest, lowest and middle stat combined"?
    It gets high but there are two things
    1) If you don't offset the -1 it can drop
    2) If they build it up to max, it means they aren't using it otherwise

  4. I'm confused about tags regarding NPCs. If I set up a fire bending duel between the group's fire bender and a master NPC, wouldn't the fight be over the first time the PC rolls well enough to tag them?

    Shouldn't there be some sort of system of difficulty? Like mooks getting taken out with a single tag, but lieutenants getting a mild tag that must be eaten up first, major characters also having a moderate one, setting-wide villains having all three, like a PC, etc?

    1. This question has a simultaneously simple and complex answer.
      If we look at the game solely as a numerical exercise, then yes, a single Tag has the power to completely incapacitate any NPC not protected by some sort of custom move on the MC's part (something hopefully bestowed through the Plots system to keep it from being as arbitrary, but it can be done off the cuff too I suppose).

      However, the game is not a numerical exercise. Unlike some games (particularly the trad powerhouses like D&D), where the numerical game has to be balanced independently of any sort of play, Avatar World and the games that helped spawn it are intrinsically linked to the fiction - balancing the game solely based on the numbers denies the potential in the system.
      What does this mean for your question? It means that sometimes, yes, a single Tag will be sufficient to take down pretty much anyone. The main factor that limits this is fictional positioning: is it plausible that the player in question could actually apply such a Tag to the foe? Would the enemy's supposed level of skill make it less likely that such a Tag could be inflicted against them so easily? If the players used several other moves setting up the opportunity to land that Tag, then yes, I'd let them take down tough things with just a Tag. If not, they probably wold need several. Additionally, if the Tag isn't instantly lethal (and it usually shouldn't be, that's pretty boring for a Tag) then the MC can use their MC Moves to reverse the Tag later and bring the NPC back up.

      There's a few reasons I do it this way.
      ~ Simplicity. Keeping track of separate little Tag charts for everyone gets to be quite a handful, and making it universal keeps from complex distinctions like "what defines the different levels of NPCs."
      ~ Focus. A core principle of several other ApW-derived games (and one that is slightly reworded in AvW) is the idea that NPCs shouldn't be precious to the NPC. They exist solely to provide outlets through which the MC can express their MC Moves in a fictional way. Don't hold on to them tightly and risk the story becoming about an NPC instead of the PCs. They are always the spotlight.
      ~ Plots. The structure of Plots allow an outlet to do pretty much anything you please with an NPC, with the caveat that you should prepare it ahead of time. It makes the game a little fairer than the MC just deciding that the fight shouldn't be over yet and so will need more Tags first, instead having things set up already (and thus less arbitrary). If you can see that the players will be coming up against a master NPC, write him up as a Threat ahead of time and you can do what you will. Other major characters follow this same idea. Mooks and minor leader characters (episode villains, etc) just rely on fictional positioning to differentiate them.

      The most important one, ultimately, is Simplicity. The MC has a LOT to do already, and a lot to remember, so keeping it simple is just easier. That said, if you play it as written and your group finds it unsatisfactory, the fix you've suggested is a perfectly valid house rule. I find it unnecessary for all of my playing, but if you've actually experienced otherwise (as opposed to just theory-talking, which, while valid conceptually, doesn't follow my own experiences with the game) I'd love to hear about it.

      Hope that clears some things up!

    2. So, in that situation vs. the master, if a PC rolls really well early on, I can suggest that they have done nothing yet to secure a position of advantage of break his defensive posture, so they can't take him out, but they can create that position of advantage with this tag?

      At which point does the player announce the tag to be created, before or after the MC reaction description?

  5. Here's an idea: what if the MC had a pool of fortune, equal to the number of players in the game, that he can spend to ignore tags that make sense (pointing to thematic elements, like an NPC's armor or incredible skill). They refresh at the beginning of a session, but it allows him to spend them to make certain villains, like the session's BBG, tougher, but it doesn't mess with the complicated mechanics.

    1. That's not a bad idea. I think that, based on my own experience, the core rules will continue to operate as-is (both as an element of my own personal preference and as a simplicity thing) but I'm considering including something like that as an optional rule.
      Ultimately, I find that just directly dealing with the fiction is often easier and more rewarding to me than using intermediary elements like Fortune. The existence of Fortune and even the Player Tag system is an element of necessity to me, protecting the players from being rapidly written out by bad luck or a rash decision. MC characters don't need that kind of coddling; if the players can set themselves up to be the victor, good for them. Heck, I'm not even positive PCs need that protection - I'm experimenting with a more or less healthless variant of the ApW framework in my other game The Shining Void. MC characters aren't the victim of bad luck, and if they make rash decisions it's okay for them to bear the brunt of the consequences. There exists a framework to bring in more resilient NPCs (even if just with a custom move of "they have 1 Fortune") for when it's really necessary, but for the standard game I believe in just trusting the fiction and discarding NPCs easily.

      As for when the player announces what the Tag is? I'd say they should give an intention when the move succeeds, but it would just be nitpicking for an MC to not let them make one that's actually appropriate after hearing the reaction. Fan of the PCs after all, not trying to dick them over.

      I definitely understand where you're coming from with mechanizing NPC difficulty. It's quite a staple to most games, after all. It's one of the more rules-lite elements of the Apocalypse World framework, and one that just appeals to me. I've seen Dungeon World play around with variable MC character (ie monster) difficulty, and I find myself much more satisfied by Dungeon World when the focus is on the fictional status of the characters rather than their numerical states. The 16 HP Dragon is a big part of what excited me about DW and is the sort of thing I want to concentrate on. It's the primary reason I've continuously resisted suggestions to introduce minimum numbers of Tags before a character can be taken out, which I receive pretty regularly but just dislike for its conversion of the system to a quantitative thing rather than a narrative one.

      At the end of it all, it's really pretty simple at the table. When you choose to Tag a character, say how you want to change the dynamic between that character and their surroundings and other characters. If it's reasonable that that change could come out of whatever you did to trigger the move, you did it. If not, think of something more reasonable and do it. No reason to get numbers involved, and that's what I love about it.

    2. Oh, I will note: a pool of Fortune equal to the number of players, depending on the players' attitudes, can often be way more than necessary. I think people overestimate how often Tags really leave giant impacts in the fiction. 2 Fortune per session would be plenty to make things a little more resilient when it counts.

  6. Speaking of Fortune, I noticed the Firebender has Armor listed instead of Fortune. Also, it seems that the more armoured playbooks start with Fortune, while the others don't. Is that a hold-over from a prior rules version that had armour instead of Fortune?

    1. Whoops, my bad on the Firebender, I'll get that cleared up.
      It's true that some of the playbooks start with more than others. Unlike Armor it's not really easy to pin down one archetype as "luckier" than others in a Fortune context, but unfortunately it was a part of balancing some of the playbooks in the previous versions. As it currently stands, the Earthbender, Monk, and Warrior have Fortune to start with (and I recently decided to give the Airbender starting Fortune as well), which sort of lines up with armored classes but sort of doesn't.
      The reasoning? Without Armor, it's my only real mechanical refuge to make defensive characters more resilient. It's also a way to shore up the resilience of very exposed characters, which is why the Airbender and Monk start with a bit. If, in playtesting, it feels like something that should be fully distributed I'm willing to change it to give everyone some, but I want to see it in action first.
      Thanks for the question!

    2. I'm actually running a game for Ryan (the inquisitive man above) so we'll be sure to pester you with questions and feedback!

  7. Max, do you think you could make a sample plot or two? I think I have the gist of it but I want to make sure I'm using it the way it's designed to be used.

    1. There's actually two of them already in the book, one at the end of each of the quickstart scenarios. Or do you mean in addition to those?

    2. I was looking more for walking through making a plot with examples at each step, preferably with at least one custom move thrown in for good measure.

    3. Absolutely, I just didn't want to take the time to write one if you'd just been looking for a sampe ;)

      Ok, so plots. It's a little weird to come up with a plot before having an established world to build it within (which is why MCs usually don't write Plots before the first session), but let's do just that.

      Step One: Concept.
      Okay, so first step is to come up with the overall concept for the Plot. Hmm... ghosts haunting a firebender village. That would be pretty fun.

      Step Two: Plot Track.
      This isn't a particularly complicated Plot, so I'd call it two or three events long. If I was actually going to play this, I'd probably call it 2, but for the purpose of illustration let's extend it to 3 frames. I see no reason to increase the Chi cost for any of them, so the track will be:
      [1] [1] [1]
      So I need three significant events that can occur as the haunting progresses, and they need to not determine anything for the players. Let's make the first one, the kick-off point for the story, the sudden disappearance of Shaman Alma, the spiritual leader of the community. The second can be Damien, a hotshot young firebender, running down into the catacombs under the town to try and confront the ghosts. The third can be a possessed Alma returning to deliver the ghosts' demands, which I haven't decided on but I don't think it matters.
      So we have:
      [1] Shaman Alma is kidnapped by ghosts.
      [1] Damien hastily attempts a rescue.
      [1] Possessed Alma returns with the ghosts' demands.

      Step Three: Threats
      Three Threats sounds right: Damien, Possessed Alma, Ghosts.
      Each one goes into a threat category and subcategory. I usually just look through the list of threat types and pick one that seems to have the right instinct and MC moves for what I want. Alternatively, sometimes I look through and pick threat types first and then build characters from them.
      Damien: Damien's an odd threat because he's supposedly on your side. I'd call him a Predator - Rat. While his instinct to backstab needs to be interpreted a little loosely, making actively bad decisions makes him hard to deal with.
      Possessed Alma: Silver Tongue - Eagle. She's here on behalf of the Ghosts, and is still capable of Making A Costly Offer as a move, which is what she was sent to do in the third act.
      Let's write a custom move for Alma, that'll be fun. What's the most interesting interaction the players could have with Possessed Alma that could be special with this particular threat? I have two ideas. I'd be interested in Alma's demands, or I'd be interested in designing a move about if the players attacked her even though it's Alma's body.
      I could go through the process of writing a move, but I don't think the entire thing is what you're looking for, though I could be wrong. Let me know if you'd like that process too, though it's not really a science. There's a lot of intuition.
      Here's what I got for her: When you do something that could endanger Alma's body, choose one:
      * One of the villager's sees your recklessness,
      * Alma's body comes to some harm,
      * Stand Fast to do it safely.
      Yeah, that's an alright one. To Stand Fast is another risk on top of whatever move you were already gonna make, harming her is obviously bad, and the villagers seeing it could easily cause interesting other drama.
      (hit the character limit, see next post)

    4. (continuation of previous post)
      Ghosts: Great Spirit - Dragon. The ghosts assume they're in control, and make demands from their position of power.
      The ghosts can have a custom move I suppose. Maybe like this?
      When you are possessed by a ghost, roll +Natural. On a 10 or greater you feel fine and the ghost is rejected. On a 7, 8, or 9, the ghost passes through you, leaving you with the Tag "death-touched."
      I like Natural for this to avoid using Solid for everything, plus being connected to the natural living world seems like a good defense against the undead. Death-touched is similar to how I was explaining to Ryan above about Fatigued - it's always just the next Tag on the track, meaning it's really dangerous for those already tagged a couple times or could be as mild as a subtle creeping uneasiness for healthy characters. It's also the sort of Tag that they'd have to be creative to figure out how to get rid of it. Paying one's respects to the dead or some such seems like an appropriate way if everyone gets stumped, but I'm open to whatever they try.

      You might instead (or additionally) choose to write up the catacombs in the second stage of the Plot as a landscape, probably a Mist or a Darkness depending on whether you're more interested in their attempts to stop Damien's hastiness or in their descent into a dangerous place in its own right.

      And that's it! To summarize:
      The Haunted Fire Village
      [1] Shaman Alma is kidnapped into the catacombs by ghosts.
      [1] Damien the firebender hastily attempts a rescue. (New threat: Damien)
      [1] Possessed Alma returns with the ghosts' demands. (New threats: Possessed Alma, Ghosts)
      Damien (Predator - Rat).
      Possessed Alma (Silver Tongue - Eagle). When you do something that could endanger Alma's body, choose one: * One of the villager's sees your recklessness, * Alma's body comes to some harm, * Stand Fast to do it safely.
      Ghosts (Great Spirit - Dragon). When you are possessed by a ghost, roll +Natural. On a 10 or greater you feel fine and the ghost is rejected. On a 7, 8, or 9, the ghost passes through you, leaving you with the Tag "death-touched."

      All done! Does that process demonstrate how I build plots and how they can then tie into play? Also remember that when players spend their Chi you can hold it for a bit if you don't think the next event is quite appropraite to start yet.

    5. No problem, let me know if there's anything else tripping you up :3

  8. Hello. I'm a rpg gamer in south korea. I'm interested in this game and want to play this game. Can i translate avatar world 1.6 to play with my friend? We are oriental. I think that we can give you good commet. :)

    1. I would be honored! As long as my name stays on it, I would love for you to translate it. When you finish would you mind sharing it with me so I can put it up here for any other Korean gamers who want to play?

  9. I don't really know a lot about websites nor do I know if this matter, but the url still says "avatar world." Just felt like pointing that out since you're trying to separate Legend of the Elements from the The Last Airbender franchise. Just trying to help out.

    1. Thanks! I am aware, but it is an unfortunate necessity right now - changing the URL would invalidate a lot of the existing links to this page, and that's slightly more important at this stage of the game. I intend to change it over to a new URL shortly before the release at the end of August. Thank you for caring, it's helpful to see that other people notice it!

  10. I don't suppose there's a way to buy the book sooner than August? Some of my friends were lucky enough to get copies, and I'd love to dive into my own. PDF or hardcopy, I'd take either.

  11. Hi Max, I've run a few games of LotE at this point - a few one offs as well as a three parter.

    I was wondering if you would be happy with fans creating more quick-starts or even full pre-made adventures (including pre-made characters)and making them available online. I thought I should ask as the pre-made adventure includes six filled in/altered character sheets which you may not be happy with.

    I've only seen Korra so my games would be a touch more urban than yours currently available.

  12. Hey Max. Not sure where to contact for typos, so here goes:

    In the present book from drivethrurpg the Spiritshaping move is replaced with Minwdwarp in the playbook(but is still listed as spiritshaping in pg 166 and as requirement for some subplaybooks).

    Just baught the book, loving it and excited to play asap.