Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana probably coming to D&D website (Reddit AMA)

[Warunsun]

Wow, no Kender/warforged and mass combat isn't in the DMG. That's.... really dissapointing to me. Wow.

While I would have preferred it to be in the DMG it really isn't a big deal. It would take about 10 minutes to make a Kender sub-race of Halfling myself for my own campaigns. Plus Keith posted a good enough version of warforged for use for an Eberron game.

 

[Wrathamon]

so instead of getting crappy mass combat rules we have to pay for, we are going to get them for free and with a playtest to make sure they dont blow ...

here come the /ragequitters

Wotc cant win

 

[SithlordRPGA]

I'm not opposed to stuff that was cut from the DMG being released online for free how is that a bad thing?

I could really care less about mass combat myself but I agree it's better to be delayed and playtested the rushed out and not be any good.

I like hearing that 5e will not become book of the month club, which I hope translates into fewer books but with better quality control.

 

[Evenglare]

I guess WOTC can do no wrong apparently.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Wow, no Kender/warforged and mass combat isn't in the DMG. That's.... really dissapointing to me. Wow.

did you say no Kender in the DMG?

I think they said no Kender..

NOW I AM SO HAPPY, I DO THE DANCE OF JOY...

DA DA DA DA de de DAD he he he he HAY!!!!



NO KENDER PARTY!!!!!

 

[The_Gneech]

Things like Kender and Warforged should be in world supplements anyway, not the overall DMG, unless they were doing an appendix that had all the playable races for Dragonlance, Dark Sun, Spelljammer, Eberron, Ravenloft, OA, etc.

It's certainly not the case that WotC can do no wrong, but it sure gets tiring to hear a never-ending chorus that everything they do is wrong, too.

Stop being so easily disappointed, people, sheesh! It's a game.

-The Gneech

 

[casterblaster]

Yeah I mean youre getting it for free.

 

[AverageCitizen]

This is something that has been asked, and explained, and asked, and explained, but I thought this explanation was a good one:

"I'll give you an example of a theoretical expansion.

Let's say we wanted to do psionics. We'd tie that to a campaign you can play, maybe one centered on mind flayers or a similar foe.
The psionic sourcebook would be the player's companion to the DM's mind flayer campaign. The sourcebook would have all the info for creating psionic characters, along with world material for players who are creating characters for the mind flayer campaign. The player's book might also have a chapter written from an in-world perspective on psionics and psionic monsters, the kind of information that a character might have access to or have heard.

You can expect us to do one or two such products a year, to give people enough time to play through a campaign without overwhelming them with new options."

I have run two published adventures in my career as a DM, and they were among the worst games I have played. I really don't like the fact that they are packaging the things I want with the things I really, really don't.

 

[Nellisir]

I have run two published adventures in my career as a DM, and they were among the worst games I have played. I really don't like the fact that they are packaging the things I want with the things I really, really don't.

Gotta agree. A good way to make me not buy something is to package it as an adventure or worse, an adventure campaign.

 

[jsepeta]

>You can expect us to do one or two such products a year, to give people enough time to play through a campaign without overwhelming them with new options."

I don't buy that for a second. There was so much content being cooked up for 4e that I couldn't keep up with my players for all the new stuff they wanted to do with their characters. Reversing course might be a good thing for the game and for the DM, but how does that square with the profits that Hasbro is expecting from this division?