[Age Past] Up on Kickstarter LIVE!

[Locke]

My opinion from skimming your game system.... I like the dice mechanic and the morality mechanic. Good stuff. I wish the morality mechanic would appear sooner in the book. I don't like point based character creation, and I think the majority of the setting information should be pushed to the back of the book and leave only a brief summary at the beginning. The intro touts this as a great book for beginners... but it isn't. I'm not saying its a bad RPG, but from a beginners stand-point, this is complicated stuff! The art, so far, ranges from being fantastic to so-so...

Would I play it? From what I can tell, this is just another flavor a D&D. I've pretty much settled on Pathfinder/3.5 as my favorite version of D&D, so I am not too keen on trying another version right now. Sorry.

Thanks John for your glance at Age Past.  I will disagree with you about the ease.  The game is easier to play than DnD 3.5 or Pathfinder and I know this from new gamers who have learned both system roughly at the same time.  Pathfinder is extremely complex and Age Past is complex but Age Past is much easier to get into because its made up of low level simple systems.  Essentially Age Past is complex because of the number of options available to the player.  Strip this out and the core system is simple. Yes there is two-weapon fighting and crafting and xx and yy and zz.  But the players choose to use what they want so they only have to understand what they need to.  Once the character is built, leveling is very easy and since the build process is simple the player can track what they have done.

I must agree though that if you don't like archetypes build systems then this game isn't for you.  I have been able to take what DnD 3.5 needed 10+ books for and go it into one book.  This was only possible to do with an archetype based build system or using a mini-class package system (like making class packages that you choose maybe 3 to 5 and they drive your character like a typical 3.5 character).

[valador]

My opinion from skimming your game system.... I like the dice mechanic and the morality mechanic. Good stuff. I wish the morality mechanic would appear sooner in the book. I don't like point based character creation, and I think the majority of the setting information should be pushed to the back of the book and leave only a brief summary at the beginning. The intro touts this as a great book for beginners... but it isn't. I'm not saying its a bad RPG, but from a beginners stand-point, this is complicated stuff! The art, so far, ranges from being fantastic to so-so...

Would I play it? From what I can tell, this is just another flavor a D&D. I've pretty much settled on Pathfinder/3.5 as my favorite version of D&D, so I am not too keen on trying another version right now. Sorry.

I think this game system is about as easy as you can get, and still have it be a fairly fleshed out system. It's certainly not harder then 3.5. Granted it is a slightly different way of thinking when you in character development and for people that don't like point based systems then your right to look elsewhere. I for one enjoy the ability to choose any skill, or power to tailor my character to whatever my background story is.

lol and don't knock the art you know how expensive it is do fill a book with art like that?... I do.  If this was a funded project they ya I'd be with you, but its not as far as I can tell its one guy, one artist, and a handful of play testers that are relying on personal talent and whatever spare cash they can muster.

Anyway I'll get off my soapbox now, but I will say I enjoyed reading through the book and can't wait to try it out with my friends.

[Locke]

Hey All!!

There are 15 days left to still back Age Past on Kickstarter!!

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1625564009/age-past-main-role-playing-game-rulebook

Also still the beta copy of the rules is up.  Try it out for yourself!  We are adding new art to the book and content to the website everyday!  This is gonna be a great game system.

thanks!
Jeff

[Locke]

Only six days left on Kickstarter!! 

http://kck.st/jNe0rJ

Think about backing Age Past.  We have some great steampunk stuff in development coming soon!

thanks!
Jeff

[Thriff]

Hey Locke,

Some general feedback and detailed feedback on your Morality Mechanic.

Every piece of art is professional and immersive--especially the racial pictures. I like the selection of races you've provided and appreciate that they've (to some degree) deviated from tolkien-esque troll/goblin/dwarf/elf/human... Granted, you seem to be creating this game for a player that is seeking a distinct Game-master/player dynamic within a tome-sized numerically/list-intensive point-based system. And that's fine! That market exists and many enjoy such games. My personal preference is that I do not.

My general impression is that the organization of the game is confusing. Setting and System are introduced at odd intervals and in odd quantities. It feels like I have to learn about the entire world before I can properly create a character.

Morality Mechanic:

I like your approach to morality. The Core morality idea is excellent! It is simple and inclusive, I cannot think of any character concept that would not align with one of the three Core moralities--that's very impressive.

I struggle to promote the Drive concept. You've done an excellent job of choosing three routes to represent three aspects of a Core, but I feel as though Drive is ultimately unnecessary. The listed Drives are not mutually exclusive and may detract from players role-playing a dynamic and innovative character.

I consider Demeanor to be very important for defining a character. Demeanor provides a foundation for the character's interaction with their environment, without limiting the how of their actions. Demeanor suggests a character's actions, whereas Drive requires a pre-determined mode of operation. Also, why have you chosen the 9 Demeanors that you have? I can't imagine it being easy or accurate to determine 9 modes of an individual's interaction with their environment. Solution: make it open-ended, encourage players to create and state a single adjective to represent their character's Demeanor.

Core and Demeanor are natural and guiding while Drive feels contrived and invasive. I encourage you to leave Drive as a suggestive footnote somewhere and focus on Core and Demeanor. Forgive me if Drive plays a significant role somewhere else in your system, but if its sole purpose is defining the character then I see no reason for it to be pivotal to your morality mechanic.

The game is too numerical and list-based for my taste, but I can see your passion for this project. I hope you fare well with your kickstarter campaign!

T

[Locke]

Hey Locke,

Some general feedback and detailed feedback on your Morality Mechanic.

Every piece of art is professional and immersive--especially the racial pictures. I like the selection of races you've provided and appreciate that they've (to some degree) deviated from tolkien-esque troll/goblin/dwarf/elf/human... Granted, you seem to be creating this game for a player that is seeking a distinct Game-master/player dynamic within a tome-sized numerically/list-intensive point-based system. And that's fine! That market exists and many enjoy such games. My personal preference is that I do not.

My general impression is that the organization of the game is confusing. Setting and System are introduced at odd intervals and in odd quantities. It feels like I have to learn about the entire world before I can properly create a character.

Morality Mechanic:

I like your approach to morality. The Core morality idea is excellent! It is simple and inclusive, I cannot think of any character concept that would not align with one of the three Core moralities--that's very impressive.

I struggle to promote the Drive concept. You've done an excellent job of choosing three routes to represent three aspects of a Core, but I feel as though Drive is ultimately unnecessary. The listed Drives are not mutually exclusive and may detract from players role-playing a dynamic and innovative character.

I consider Demeanor to be very important for defining a character. Demeanor provides a foundation for the character's interaction with their environment, without limiting the how of their actions. Demeanor suggests a character's actions, whereas Drive requires a pre-determined mode of operation. Also, why have you chosen the 9 Demeanors that you have? I can't imagine it being easy or accurate to determine 9 modes of an individual's interaction with their environment. Solution: make it open-ended, encourage players to create and state a single adjective to represent their character's Demeanor.

Core and Demeanor are natural and guiding while Drive feels contrived and invasive. I encourage you to leave Drive as a suggestive footnote somewhere and focus on Core and Demeanor. Forgive me if Drive plays a significant role somewhere else in your system, but if its sole purpose is defining the character then I see no reason for it to be pivotal to your morality mechanic.

The game is too numerical and list-based for my taste, but I can see your passion for this project. I hope you fare well with your kickstarter campaign!

T

Thanks for the note I appreciate that you took the time to write.  Its funny when I started the project I wanted it to be a mechanical system and the players and GM could make their world.  But people asked for the world, they wanted to see what the races were like and what the world looked like.  So I then started developing a world.  The world primarily exists to support the mechanical rule set as a frame and I generally feel, that the world could become more generic, like a pathfinder or DnD setting, if the GM and players want.  So I would not focus too much on having to learn the world.  The point of the game is for people to make the exact type of character they want and for the GM to run a good game.  The players shouldn't need to know a lot about the world.

I would gander that the World of Darkness games, Exalted, Eclipse Phase (SERIOUSLY) and Shadowrun need far more background info than Age Past and people don't seem to have an issue following and learning the fluff and background in those settings.

I have gotten several criticisms regarding the order that the information is displayed in the game.  Unfortunately without a better understanding of what the problem is I can't fix it, other then sorta arbitrarily move things around.  I have no problem making the document better if I know how.  Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.  I like hearing how you felt wile looking at the book so that I have a better psychological understanding of what people are thinking.

Regarding morality, its meant to be more flavor based than anything.  I agree you probably don't need it, but it gives the GM some teeth if he chooses to use it.

I understand the game looks crunchy.  It plays very smooth since the system is very easy to identify the pools needed and mods are kept to a minimum.  I do agree that being a beastmaster, shifter, two weapon fighter is more complex than just being a guy with a sword.  I also believe that it is up to the players to understand what they are doing and read the rules, it only take a few extra minutes to understand these more difficult classes.

Thanks for the good thoughts!!  We are really close and more great art is to come!

Jeff Mechlinski

[John Michael Crovis]

My opinion from skimming your game system.... I like the dice mechanic and the morality mechanic. Good stuff. I wish the morality mechanic would appear sooner in the book. I don't like point based character creation, and I think the majority of the setting information should be pushed to the back of the book and leave only a brief summary at the beginning. The intro touts this as a great book for beginners... but it isn't. I'm not saying its a bad RPG, but from a beginners stand-point, this is complicated stuff! The art, so far, ranges from being fantastic to so-so...

Would I play it? From what I can tell, this is just another flavor a D&D. I've pretty much settled on Pathfinder/3.5 as my favorite version of D&D, so I am not too keen on trying another version right now. Sorry.

I think this game system is about as easy as you can get, and still have it be a fairly fleshed out system. It's certainly not harder then 3.5. Granted it is a slightly different way of thinking when you in character development and for people that don't like point based systems then your right to look elsewhere. I for one enjoy the ability to choose any skill, or power to tailor my character to whatever my background story is.

lol and don't knock the art you know how expensive it is do fill a book with art like that?... I do.  If this was a funded project they ya I'd be with you, but its not as far as I can tell its one guy, one artist, and a handful of play testers that are relying on personal talent and whatever spare cash they can muster.

Anyway I'll get off my soapbox now, but I will say I enjoyed reading through the book and can't wait to try it out with my friends.

Well, I don't think Pathfinder or D&D 3.5 is really for beginners, either. I prefer much simpler games to introduce RPGs with, eventually graduating to more options and choices. This game, like the before mentioned Pathfinder and D&D 3.5, is front loaded with options and choices. Regarding the art work, I'm comparing it with other glossy color printed RPGs on shelves today, which I assume is what this game aspires to be eventually. At this level of professionalism, the game has some really great artwork.... and some artwork that isn't so great. If the author intends this to be just a PDF download, then I agree that the art is damn good for a PDF download... but it should be in Black & White, so it can be printed from a home computer. If the game was going to be a free-for-all download, I would see any original artwork at all as a big bonus.

I hope this clarifies where I'm coming from... I'm not trying to knock the guy for what he is doing - I really think he's doing a pretty spiffy job. But I also think that I would do him a disservice by not giving him honest feedback, pointing out the good and bad.