Interesting, but I'm not sold on it yet.
While it's hard to tell from the small amount of information given, I think the author is failing to question some of the core assumptions of the d20 system. Chief among these is the power curve. d20 is based on D&D, and D&D has a very steep power curve by RPG standards. Even in 4E, which did a lot to flatten the curve, a really high-level character can take on a hundred or more low-level foes.
This is appropriate to D&D's particular brand of fantasy, and there are other genres such as heroic pulp action where it might fit. But there are plenty of genres, even other types of fantasy, to which it is not at all appropriate. A Call of Cthulhu investigator, no matter how experienced and skilled, should not be able to take down a dozen shoggoths or even a dozen crazed cultists in hand-to-hand combat.
One can of course simply slow down advancement or apply a level cap, but then the players get frustrated because they have no sense of progress. A game built from the start with the intention of a shallow power curve offers rewards designed not to upset that curve, allowing PCs to grow and develop in a mechanical sense without overturning the setting assumptions.
This is one of the reasons I've long felt d20 was not a good fit for many types of RPG, and I don't see anything to suggest e20 will be any different. Which then leads me to ask: Is there really a niche for this product? Or will it just end up competing with Pathfinder and Trailblazer for the "heroic-fantasy 4E alternative" market? If the latter, what will make it better?
Going to think about it some more and send the author some questions. Any answers I get, I'll post here.
