I was download #1421.

First of all, the art. Holy crap, this is some awesome old school art.

Second, rules.

Default character generation has the player rolling 4 0-level characters, which are expected to be "culled" in the first adventure. There's a random table for determining occupation and equipment (a sword, a goat or a cart full of dead bodies all are possible results).

Character classes are BECMI style, with races as classes.

Fighters and Dwarves get Mighty Deeds of Valor, or Deeds for short, a loose mechanic for making up Feat-like combat maneuvers (e.g. disarms, trips, pushbacks).

Clerics can "turn unholy" which includes not just undead, but other critters, depending on their choice of deity. Cthulhu is one of the sample deities.

Wizards get to choose a supernatural Patron (divine or otherwise) to call upon in dire times.

Thief ability progression varies based on alignment.

There's a spell check roll, with each spell having a unique result chart. Wizards only forget spells on failed spell checks. Clerics never forget spells, but get a cumulative -1 for the next spell check; i.e. after casting 10 spells it's a -10.

Looks pretty cool. More when I have the time to get back to it.

Holy fuck does Joe Goodman know how to put a layout together... :eek:

The artwork, especially the ones by Peter Mullen, remind me of the webcomic Clandestinauts (http://www.timsievert.com/clandestinauts)

The art is setting my brain on fire. This is really beautiful.

Funky-sided dice (d3, d7, etc.). throw away characters, endless tables to reference, horrible spell layouts. This looks more like bad school than old school...

Quote from: The Butcher;462826...
There's a spell check roll, with each spell having a unique result chart. Wizards only forget spells on failed spell checks. Clerics never forget spells, but get a cumulative -1 for the next spell check; i.e. after casting 10 spells it's a -10...

Well, the consequences for Wizards if they roll a natural '1' when casting look to be pretty dire (see pp. 97-99).  I suspect that higher level wizards frequently will have beaks, bull horns, scales, gills, etc.

Clerics also face serious problems if they roll a natural '1' when casting (pp. 100-101).

Quote from: AnthonyRoberson;462843Funky-sided dice (d3, d7, etc.). throw away characters, endless tables to reference, horrible spell layouts. This looks more like bad school than old school...

Some people's shit are other people's gold, I guess.

Quote from: AnthonyRoberson;462843Funky-sided dice (d3, d7, etc.). throw away characters, endless tables to reference, horrible spell layouts. This looks more like bad school than old school...

With the exception of funky-sided dice, some of this stuff could be the equivalent of "rpg porn" for some individuals I know in person.  :rolleyes:

My initial impressions (after a 20-minute skim):

Positive:

1. I very much like the art.  (Perhaps there is too much?  It is almost overwhelming.)

2. I like that the game is dedicated to the recently departed Jim Rosloff (a fine artist from TSR's early days, whose work influenced my earliest impressions of D&D).

3. I dig the critical and fumble charts (brings back good memories of MERP!).

4. I like that magic is unpredictable (but perhaps it is too unpredictable?).

Negative:

1. I dislike the whole 'start with 4 0-level PCs which you cull in a killer dungeon' idea.  It might be cool as an option for beginning players, but these days I prefer to let players choose what kinds of characters they want to run.

2. The 'old school machismo' tone that runs through some of the text is grating (e.g., all ability scores must be rolled randomly in order; most of your 0-level PCs will be killed; the brutal 'corruption' spell failure chart; etc.).

3. The game, overall, seems to have a very specific interpretation of what 'old school' role-playing is like, and this interpretation has been hard-wired into the rules.  Unfortunately, it's not my view of what 'old school' role-playing is like (but maybe I'm getting too soft in my old age).

Overall:

Based on this skim, I doubt that I'll ever play this game.  But I'll likely get a copy of the core rules simply for the art.

Quote from: AnthonyRoberson;462843Funky-sided dice (d3, d7, etc.). throw away characters, endless tables to reference, horrible spell layouts. This looks more like bad school than old school...

The unorthodox dice is annoying, I agree.  I find 'throw away characters' irritating these days as well (I'm no longer in high-school with infinite spare time).  

However, I'm fine with charts and tables.  Indeed, this is probably the one aspect of the game of which I'm most fond.

Quote from: Akrasia;462848...The 'old school machismo' tone that runs through some of the text is grating (e.g., all ability scores must be rolled randomly in order; most of your 0-level PCs will be killed; the brutal 'corruption' spell failure chart; etc.).

3. The game, overall, seems to have a very specific interpretation of what 'old school' role-playing is like, and this interpretation has been hard-wired into the rules.  Unfortunately, it's not my view of what 'old school' role-playing is like (but maybe I'm getting too soft in my old age)...

BINGO. My version of 'old school' roleplaying involves simple rules and freewheeling fun. It does not involve ripping away player control and beating them over the head with a blunt object.

Quote from: Akrasia;4628481. I dislike the whole 'start with 4 0-level PCs which you cull in a killer dungeon' idea.  It might be cool as an option for beginning players, but these days I prefer to let players choose what kinds of characters they want to run.

In principle one can just start at a higher level, by DM fiat?

Quote from: Akrasia;4628482. The 'old school machismo' tone that runs through some of the text is grating (e.g., all ability scores must be rolled randomly in order; most of your 0-level PCs will be killed; the brutal 'corruption' spell failure chart; etc.).

This is exactly the sort of stuff which would be "rpg porn" for some individuals I know in person offline.  :rolleyes:

Quote from: AnthonyRoberson;462850It does not involve ripping away player control and beating them over the head with a blunt object.

This was exactly my experience when I first started to play D&D.

The DMs I gamed with at the time, were very dictatorial.

Quote from: ggroy;462851In principle one can just start at a higher level, by DM fiat?

Sure.  But any rule can be changed by DM fiat.  My judgement concerns the rules that have been written down, and the play style they imply.

Quote from: Akrasia;462855Sure.  But any rule can be changed by DM fiat.  My judgement concerns the rules that have been written down, and the play style they imply.

Rules changes by DM fiat are to me a given. That's not to be dismissed: that's just a reality. So just going "oh my god stats HAVE TO be rolled in order" is kinda lame in terms of criticism, to me. Of course they don't 'have to'.

As for "old school" being rules light and free wheeling, in some corners of the hobby sure, that's very much the case, and I like these kinds of games very, very much, but since I consider games like AD&D and Role Master to be very much "old school" as well, that doesn't quite match my own definition of the term. I'm fine with a guy having a particular view of what his game ought to be - this is something I welcome, actually, because then as a GM I know what the game is and is not, and whatever purposes it'll best serve at my game table.