1E Unearthed Arcana: Yea or Nay?
- Thread starter Delta
- Start date
Nay. There's some good stuff in there, but the cavalier... oy.
It also had some heavy errata, unusual back then when you never saw more than a single sheet of corrections included with later printings. I recall that Dragon published the errata such that you could cut it out and tape it over the relevant sections in the book, and my brother's copy was filled with those cutouts.
The binding was also terrible, IIRC.
It also had some heavy errata, unusual back then when you never saw more than a single sheet of corrections included with later printings. I recall that Dragon published the errata such that you could cut it out and tape it over the relevant sections in the book, and my brother's copy was filled with those cutouts.
The binding was also terrible, IIRC.
Serendipity
Explorer
Then, yes.
Now, in the theoretical but possible, probably not - or at least, I probably wouldn't use everything from it.
Now, in the theoretical but possible, probably not - or at least, I probably wouldn't use everything from it.
Philotomy Jurament
First Post
Overall: no. There are a few things I'd cherry-pick and include: some spells, the unarmed combat system, some magic items.
Plane Sailing
Astral Admin - Mwahahaha!
I voted no. We looked at it when it came out and considered it to be rubbish compared to the things we had already integrated into our game from early issues of White Dwarf (e.g. the Brian Asbury version of the Barbarian character class, for instance).
Vancian Magic
First Post
If you're asking whether you should buy it and read it, then yeah sure. There's some good stuff.
If you're asking if you should play-as-written, then gods no!
If you're asking if you should play-as-written, then gods no!
Psion
Adventurer
Cavalier and the Barbarian came to represent everything I came to loath about trading roleplaying weaknesses for combat power.
But other than that, there's some great stuff in there... cantrips, spells, demihuman deities, throwing the doors wide on race/class combos, cool magic items, etc.
I didn't vote. "Split opinion".
But other than that, there's some great stuff in there... cantrips, spells, demihuman deities, throwing the doors wide on race/class combos, cool magic items, etc.
I didn't vote. "Split opinion".
Grimstaff
Explorer
I would have preferred the option "Charry Pick", but if its all or nothing, I have to say "nay".
Back in the days, I was all for it, but I had no clue about "balance" or "power creep", or even "nonsense", so its hard to go back.
Barbarian and Cavalier - ok, but were better off as "Fighter" with RP drawing the distinction.
The new ability roll system is horrid, basically "this class gets an 18 in strength, even if you have to roll 11d6 to get it".
Weapon specialization is a somewhat necessary fighter-enhancement, depending on the overall power-level of your 1E campaign.
The Demi-human deities are nice enough.
Pole-arm fetishism...not sure what to say here, ok if you're into that sort of thing I guess...
Some decent enough spells.
YMMV
Back in the days, I was all for it, but I had no clue about "balance" or "power creep", or even "nonsense", so its hard to go back.
Barbarian and Cavalier - ok, but were better off as "Fighter" with RP drawing the distinction.
The new ability roll system is horrid, basically "this class gets an 18 in strength, even if you have to roll 11d6 to get it".
Weapon specialization is a somewhat necessary fighter-enhancement, depending on the overall power-level of your 1E campaign.
The Demi-human deities are nice enough.
Pole-arm fetishism...not sure what to say here, ok if you're into that sort of thing I guess...
Some decent enough spells.
YMMV
Similar Threads
