Arcana Evolved, any good?

[Evil DM Mark3]

How does it differ from DnD? Is it any good? Is it better balanced? Is getting rid of the pre-established setting easy (I always do this, my world or no world). My recent d20 experience has been Iron Heroes and I want to go high fantasy again but want to avoid DnD because the 3.0/3.5/4 factions in the local gamers are still pretty nasty.

[JaxGaret]

It's just a 3e variant. It's still D&D.

[Evil DM Mark3]

The cover art alone leads me to suspect that you are in error. A quick glance through in the shop lets me know you are mistaken.

[Starsinger]

It's d20 system, but it's better balanced than D&D, I like it more.

[JaxGaret]

The cover art alone leads me to suspect that you are in error. A quick glance through in the shop lets me know you are mistaken.

How so? Seems pretty much like a 3e remake to me, similar to what Paizo did with Pathfinder.

[Evil DM Mark3]

OK I understand that it used the d20 system but from what I have heard it is as different as Iron Heroes (but in a different direction). Admittedly I have limited knowlage (hence why I asked those very specific questions at the start that have yet to be addressed) but any game that strips out the original classes and races in their entirety cannot be basically the same game.

[Skjaldbakka]

I really like it. Here is a sample of some of the things I really like.

The spellcasting system.

All spellcasters kind of blend the sorceror and the wizard. You have a certain number of spells that you can cast per day, and you have a certain number of spells that you can have memorized at one time. You cast spontaneously from your memorized spells.

Spells are broken down into simple, complex, and exotic spells. All classes have the same list, but most classes only have access to the simple spells. The 'wizard' class (magister), gets all simple and complex spells. The healer class (greenbond) gets all healing descriptor spells.

You can expand your spell list by taking feats. Like Fire Mage, which gives you improved access to spells with the fire descriptor. Which means a magister knows all fire spells if he has fire mage. A witch or mage blade, which only get simple spells, would know all complex fire spells with that feat.

Metamagic works differently in AE as well. Instead of increasing the level of the spell, you increase the cost of the spell. Quicken in AE uses up two spell slots instead of one (a mechanic called ladening), and is also limited in times per day. Fire mage adds extra dice of damage to a spell if you expend a 20gp gem. (No, you can't use multiple gems on the same spell for mega damage.)

[JaxGaret]

OK I understand that it used the d20 system but from what I have heard it is as different as Iron Heroes (but in a different direction). Admittedly I have limited knowlage (hence why I asked those very specific questions at the start that have yet to be addressed) but any game that strips out the original classes and races in their entirety cannot be basically the same game.

What do you mean by "D&D" exactly in the following:

[I] want to avoid DnD because the 3.0/3.5/4 factions in the local gamers are still pretty nasty.

AE is still 3e, just like Pathfinder is still 3e. It may be altered a bit but fundamentally, mechanics-wise, it's still D&D 3e.

Your players may think likewise, and since you claim that you're attempting to avoid those 3e/4e squabbles, I would recommend that you take that into account.

[Evil DM Mark3]

Your players may think likewise, and since you claim that you're attempting to avoid those 3e/4e squabbles, I would recommend that you take that into account.

I will but we (as a group) agree at least that DnD =/= d20 system.

[Raum]

AE is still 3e, just like Pathfinder is still 3e. It may be altered a bit but fundamentally, mechanics-wise, it's still D&D 3e.

It certainly used d20 mechanics but I'm not sure that's enough to call it D&D 3e. After all, it has different races, classes, feats, magic system, and some changes to the combat mechanics. But yes, the general mechanics of hit rolls, skill rolls, classes, and feats will feel similar to D&D 3.x.

[JaxGaret]

I will but we (as a group) agree at least that DnD =/= d20 system.

I see, perhaps you thought you were being clear about that in the OP, but you weren't - I took the last bit of it as part of the larger question on whether or not you should run AE. I.e., "will my players think this is D&D?" rather than an affirmation that your players do indeed see it as non-D&D and thus are happy with it as a substitute for either 3e or 4e.

If your players are fine with it and like it as an alternative to core D&D, go right ahead! Enjoy

And come back and let us know how it turns out, of course.

[Toliudar]

I find the AE spell system fabulous. It definitely finds a better balance in power between spellcasters and other classes (although I haven't played above about level 15, so YMMV).

The races and setting are flavourful and fun - so, even if you ditch them, there may be elements to retain in your own setting. Because you start with one feat more than usual, the low-level characters are a bit more distinctive.

The lack of obvious good guy and bad guy races was fun, if a bit difficult for my players (raised on 1E "it's an orc, I kill it" methodology) at first.

I highly recommend it.

[Skjaldbakka]

How about its compatability with D&D? You can run most PHB classes in AE with little alteration.

Most being defined as 'doesn't use spells' and 'isn't fighter*'

*fighter is pretty much covered by unfettered, warmain, and ritual warrior

I suppose monk is covered by oathsworn, but oathsworn has some issues as well. You might have a good class if you combined the two, though.

I have actually seen the spellcasting classes used as well, but it takes some conversion to make them work with the new system.

[JaxGaret]

I have to agree with Skjaldbakka. I really don't see how it's anything but a rehash of 3e. Sure, they changed some things, but at its root it's the same.

Note that I'm not saying that it's bad.