I have read through AW: Dark Ages but have not played, nor even gone through the exercise of creating characters. I've also looked through the forum - there is some good discussion and commentary there! - but I want to post my thoughts anyway, since Vincent was kind enough to provide the draft in return for feedback!
First, I really like the set of basic moves. The results seem less dire than most AWE games, in that even on a failure something good often happens, and the partial successes seem like watered down versions of the full successes. That gives me the impression that the PCs are more "heroic" - in the "get things done" sense, not the "good guy" sense. This surprised me, given the tone of the game, but I think it makes sense: it's a dark world, but the PCs are those empowered to do something about it. In AW, you are fighting to survive; in this, it seems like you are fighting to change the world.
I didn't notice how ranged combat worked. Is the "harm as established" the key here? That is, if you have longbows, do you get to inflict harm at range, without suffering any from a group with swords. Or is that all part of the same engagement, so it's just a normal Go Into Battle roll? I think I just need more guidance how to use the moves with this situation.
One move I missed, though this may be personal taste, is something like Dungeon World's "Spout Lore" move, expanding the mythology of the world on an as-needed basis. The Sharp moves here are much more focused on the details of the situation and don't give that "exploration" sense to me.
Helping seems very powerful, which I infer is there to force PC interaction.
Can you send your followers or war band to battle? I assume the answer should be "yes" but I don't see how it is resolved (do you use the leader's stats?). This may have already been noted and be incorporated under Vincent's promise to give us rules to go to war in a later version.
I think the Fates are super-cool! I really like the cues they provide to the player. I would like to see some more guidance on how healing works (especially whether "I will survive this" means that you are really stuck).
I am not sure what motivation players have to choose low ranks, other than story. That's not a bad thing, but it seems like higher ranks have mechanical advantages without corresponding disadvantages.
The idea of holdings and supporters seems great. But it also may require a little more micro-managing than I prefer (keeping track of how PCs lose followers, etc.) I guess I'd rather see something like an abstract Fate track for the followers, rather than keeping track of actual numbers.
I'm also not really sure what to do with bounties and wants - I mean, I understand the idea (I think), but implementing them in play would be challenging, so I look forward to more guidance. Looks like Vincent has already promised that!
Does the Dragon-Herald know what a dragon is? (Since that is in the GM section.)
The Outlaw Heir has a couple of moves that require judging by the player. Much like the rank thing, it seems like these require heavy buy-in by the player to be used correctly. Or, in other words, subject to munchkinism. Maybe it's my "trad" background showing through to worry about such a thing, but one of my favorite aspects of AWE is that it uses in-game incentives to drive the fiction. It's not obvious to me how that is working in this case.
I think I like the XP system but am not entirely sure, largely because I'm not sure how it feeds the fiction. That is, why does the game engine encourage PCs to do lots of different things? I mean, I do find that fun, but is there something deeper? And I'm especially not sure why Armor has an XP box.
I like how the setting has three different competing power structures.