3.5 vs. Arcana Unearthed: Which One are You More Excited About?

[I'm A Banana]

Just curious where the sentiments lie...I'm shellin' out for AU, but I'm savin' my pennies for 3.5 until a few months have passed, myself.

Which one are you looking more forward to? And why?

 

[JeffB]

I voted for 3.5...looking forward to more clarity, some rules fixes, some simplified things, a fresh coat of paint, etc.

Honestly, though I respect the man greatly, Monte's Malhavoc products just don't do anything for me..the only one i've come close to buying (but didn't) is Nexus (I guess I'm too "old school" to appreciate his stuff, I don't know)...not to mention that I find things like "Cat-people" extremely loathesome for some reaon or another

But there are a few bits in AU that look cool..just not enough for me to want to buy it..at least from what I've seen so-far.

 

[caudor]

I voted 3.5 revised rules. That's not to say I don't like Monte's stuff...he is one of the most talented/respected contributors to the game that I know.

I'm simply looking forward to the official rules clarifications in all three core books.

 

[Jeph]

I voted UE. 3.5 will just be more of the same. UE might be, too, but *hopefully* it will be a bit of fresh air. D20 has been running around in circles, redoing what's been done 3 or 4 times already, for about a year. We need some new insights.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

Arcana Unearthed is not D20.

I have no interest in it at all.

 

[Cedric]

So...what are implications of AU not being D20? Why is the fact that it's not D20 affect your decision to buy it?

Note: I'm not challenging you on this, I'm just looking for information and some opinions.

Cedric

 

[Dark Psion]

I voted for AU not only because it is new and original, but I should be able to blend it with any existing D&D rules I wish to use.

When I look at each new bit of 3.5 news, I just see a lot of work I am going to have to do to convert psionics to 3.5 to use the 3.5 rules in my setting.

 

[Capellan]

Put me down for "Meh" on both of them.

I'm happy with the game I have now, and while I will eventually migrate to 3.5, it won't be in the near future (at least as a DM - as a player, I'll do whatever my DM does).

As far as AU is concerned ... the things I've read about it really haven't excited me that much. I'll definitely look through it at Gencon, but - like 3.5 - I doubt I'll buy it immediately, if at all.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

AU for me... In addition to the multi-layer support via MEG and FD, it's divergence from standard 3E fair has me drooling for more. 3.5, from all previews given, just seems like more of the same "ho-hum" that I've come to expect from the Core Rules. Granted, several of the changes proposed I am looking forward to, but there are also several I'm not.

 

[MerricB]

Very strongly in favour of 3.5E. I think AU will be amazing; but it isn't the style I want to play. I want my existing Greyhawk campaigns to continue fairly much as is.

However, I really want to see the tweaks in 3.5E, and also in mind of making the game easier for new players to pick up. (I'm currently teaching a 10 year old girl the game...)

Cheers!