Friday, March 29, 2013

Now I'm bummed about Dwimmermount

The latest Kickstarter update says Dwimmermount will come out only with ACKS rules, leaving the Labyrinth Lord version for Maliszewski to do, should he decide to. So, that's not the product I wanted. My other option is a refund.

Before this the Dwimmermount situation didn't bother me much at all. I'm weird I guess--I waited five years for 17 Lone Wolf books and would have waited another 5, but never mind that. The hook here is that I didn't blame Malszewski for any of it, but I'm unhappy with Autarch's decision here. I don't want an ACKS product, not because I dislike that system, or even know anything about it, but because I already have a system I prefer and Labyrinth Lord is pretty close to it. (I got as far as "Bladedancer" on the list of classes in the RPGnow blurb and decided it was not anything I was interested in. Dumb I know, but as dumb as the name "Bladedancer"?) I did just now notice that their system is pronounced "axe" so I like that at least.

But honestly, I would assume the ACKS version will be pretty easily usable with OD&D, I just don't want to do the work of looking into a different set of rules. Am I lazy enough that I'd rather have the money than the beautiful artwork and a book I can hold in my hands? I guess not, and that's why I'm unhappy about it--I'm going to get the book, but it's not going to be quite what I wanted. It's like a Joss Whedon story or something. At least nobody had to die.

Ripper R.I.P.
(image from


The Duke of Arkansas said...

Given that it seems it was James who didn't want to go forward with his LL version at this time would you rather that Autarch just refund everybody, even those who wanted the ACKS version?

The way I see it there were 3 realistic possible outcomes:
1. Autarch goes forward with both the LL and ACKS versions.
2. Autarch goes forward with just the ACKS version. I think refunds should be possible for those strictly interested in the LL version.
3. Autarch kills the project and refunds everybody even though art has already been bought and paid for, the rule books have already been sent out, etc.

James took option 1 off the table (unless there has been a misunderstanding), leaving only options 2 and 3. I think many of us prefer option 2 (btw, I pledged funds to receive both versions, so I am disappointed that I won't get the LL version even though the draft has been completed) as opposed to a refund and a waste of our time and enthusiasm.

I guess the other option would be for 1,000+ backers to wait for years for James to redo his version, but I think that's highly unrealistic. The backer community would fracture acrimoniously over such a delay leaving Autarch in a very bad position. I also think it's highly unrealistic that James will ever finish his redo of Dwimmermount. We now know if several projects that he has abandoned, and I think this will be the same. You can put your faith in James to finish, but I think many of the backers would be completely surprised if this ever really happens.

Aaron Nuttall said...

Sir Duke, I see your point that Maliszewski is responsible for the part of this outcome that I don't like, and that this is likely the best thing for Autarch to do from their perspective. I'm still disappointed--so I probably should have been all this last year as well.

I also don't think that anyone should have to wait any longer, which I seemed to be saying in my post. I might just have to change my mind about ACKS too, so long as I don't ever have to say "bladedancer" at the table.

Jeremy Deram said...

ACKS and LL are 99% identical. I don't foresee you having any problems running this with whatever pre-2000 D&D (or clone thereof) you feel like using. I can't fathom why there were ever going to be two versions for systems so similar in the first place.

Aaron Nuttall said...

Jeremy, I didn't know ACKS and LL were so close--I guess because I just assumed they'd be different if there were going to be two versions of Dwimmermount. I might just have to read ACKS now.