The thing is that I don't know when I'm going to be going to Canada again; I don't know if it'd be worth the publisher's while to have to wait for possibly a year or more before I can actually review what they send me.

RPGPundit

I've launched an AS&SH campaign over at Myth Weavers.  I already have 5 players for the first part, but 4 other parts are planned.  I expect there to be openings so if any one is interested in playing feel free to check in on the game.

I understand from what Benoist and other fans have said that this falls somewhere more conservative on the "gonzo" spectrum than DCC; yet is more innovative in many regards than ACKS.  The question for me would be whether it has anything that would make it more worthwhile to use in a game than Lamentations of the Flame Princess; and if so, what? And for what kind of games?

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;596658I understand from what Benoist and other fans have said that this falls somewhere more conservative on the "gonzo" spectrum than DCC; yet is more innovative in many regards than ACKS.  The question for me would be whether it has anything that would make it more worthwhile to use in a game than Lamentations of the Flame Princess; and if so, what? And for what kind of games?

RPGPundit

Well, from what I've skimmed from both, AS&SH is more of a front-loaded setting, whereas LotFP is more do-it-yourself. AS&SH has an extensive bestiary, for example, whereas LotFP asks you to wing it when it comes to monsters. They seem to be very different takes on the same general "weird fantasy" subject.

Quote from: RPGPundit;596658I understand from what Benoist and other fans have said that this falls somewhere more conservative on the "gonzo" spectrum than DCC; yet is more innovative in many regards than ACKS.  The question for me would be whether it has anything that would make it more worthwhile to use in a game than Lamentations of the Flame Princess; and if so, what? And for what kind of games?

RPGPundit

Quote from: Dan Davenport;596664Well, from what I've skimmed from both, AS&SH is more of a front-loaded setting, whereas LotFP is more do-it-yourself. AS&SH has an extensive bestiary, for example, whereas LotFP asks you to wing it when it comes to monsters. They seem to be very different takes on the same general "weird fantasy" subject.

I agree with Dan. LotFP is more about doing it yourself. It provides a basic frame of play, but expect you to fill the wide blanks. Not so much with AS&SH, which again comes with its own gazetteer-style setting in the form of Hyperborea. It's much less generic, more specific, by design.

Rules wise, it has human ethnicities that are mostly there for background color. No demi-humans. It's about the trip of playing a Viking or a Pict, it's not about getting a bonus to this or that stat and special "racial" abilities and whatnot. The classes are based on a basic/advanced idea not unlike 2nd edition AD&D, where you have the basic classes and can just run the game with that, i.e. fighter, magician, cleric and thief, and/or add the plethora of advanced classes into the mix, which I have listed earlier in this thread, and includes the usual suspects like Paladin, Ranger, Monk and the like, but also some new comers or new takes on old archetypes like the Witch, the Scout, the Priest (which is a pure divine spellcaster of sorts), and so on.

The d6 mechanic of OD&D has been extended to make sense of tests of most actions that wouldn't be covered by stats, and also tests of stats themselves. The thieves' skills work with d12 and mesh into that system. The combat system is different than AD&D with a 10 seconds round (instead of a minute in AD&D), two phases of movement, missiles and melee, that kind of thing. So if you're not looking into the actual detail it'll look like a cleaned up AD&D First Ed with a lot of little tweaks here and there, and if you look into the detail, you realize these details actually make for a different game altogether.

To put it into the simplest (and most stereotyping) terms:

LotFP is a generic variant on a "weird" OD&D (1974).
AS&SH is a setting-specific variant on a "weird," mythos-friendly, dark fantasy AD&D First Ed.

Quote from: Benoist;596690LotFP is a generic variant on a "weird" OD&D (1974).
AS&SH is a setting-specific variant on a "weird," mythos-friendly, dark fantasy AD&D First Ed.

Oh... I should also mention that LotFP is moving in more of a Renaissance direction, with the author mentioning that if he had it to do over, he'd take out the fantasy races and put in black powder firearms. AS&SH is very much swords-and-sorcery with some high tech weirdness thrown in.

Quote from: Dan Davenport;596664Well, from what I've skimmed from both, AS&SH is more of a front-loaded setting, whereas LotFP is more do-it-yourself. AS&SH has an extensive bestiary, for example, whereas LotFP asks you to wing it when it comes to monsters. They seem to be very different takes on the same general "weird fantasy" subject.

Well, that would be one point in its favor...

RPGPundit

My copy has been shipped!

Quote from: CRKrueger;597027My copy has been shipped!

When did you order?

Quote from: Dan Davenport;596811Oh... I should also mention that LotFP is moving in more of a Renaissance direction, with the author mentioning that if he had it to do over, he'd take out the fantasy races and put in black powder firearms. AS&SH is very much swords-and-sorcery with some high tech weirdness thrown in.

I didn't know about Jim Raggi's wishes, but having just read LotFP once, and knowing now AS&SH fairly well, I just want to say I agree with your take here.

Quote from: crkrueger;597027my copy has been shipped! :d

Quote from: gib;597029when did you order?

answer me!

Quote from: CRKrueger;597027My copy has been shipped!

Lucky bastard.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Gib;597034answer me!

October 5th