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

[Geoffrey]

I for one am relieved that AU is going to get away from dwarves, elves, and hobbits. Those three races belong in Middle-earth and nowhere else. They don't feel right elsewhere. (And I challenge anyone to show that the dwarves and elves in Norse mythology bear more than a slight resemblance to those described by Prof. Tolkien.)

Monte's AU, however, is getting away from the old (and lazy) idea that a fantasy world's PC races should be poor copies of the peoples of Middle-earth.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

I for one am relieved that AU is going to get away from dwarves, elves, and hobbits.

And I think this is a big key factor in the appeal of the setting. It's not that AU offers new races; Considering the number of monster books out there, there are litterally hundreds of optional races to play instead of the standard races. It's that AU has different races as the standard races. And these races aren't just "elves with fur" or "dwarves with snouts and tails", but are entirely different in society, religion, customs, outlook and every other aspect that defines a race beyond its numbers.

 

[Fiery James]

not cats... LIONS!!

Everyone keeps saying "yech, cat-men".

C'mon, you people. They're LION-MEN!!

LIONS!

And, to be honest, I was mildly interested in the new races, but assumed I'd be playing humans in AU.

Then I saw Claudio's PC counters. Ummm.. the Litorians kick butt!


Mostly I love AU for it's classes. Every single one of them appeals to me, whereas in D&D I find that I have certain favourites that I stick with. I don't really ever play bards, barbarians, paladins. Love rangers. Love rogues. Take or leave the others.

In AU, I *want* to play all the classes. Today, my favourite is the Runethane. He's just the coolest.

And, if you want to mix-n-match, I imagine a Dwarven Runethane would be just about my perfect character!

PS: The Blue Knight is an Engine of Destruction!

- James

 

[Frilf]

I voted for 3.5 because I'm just curious enough about what's been changed, added, deleted, clarified, or otherwise tinkered with. In addition, as a publisher, most folks will probably head the way of 3.5 sooner or later (since all the "official" products will be 3.5 from the date of release), it just makes good sense for me to get a handle on the new stuff in preparation for that fateful day.

I am not completely taken with AU yet. I dunno. It just doesn't have enough creative "spark" to pique my interest (or I could just be sniffing the glue again). There are some aspects I find very nice, like the removal of alignment and the distinction between divine and arcane magic. That stuff just makes sense. No elves, either. That's a good thing

Another minor quibble (and it's admittedly a quibble) is that the title is about as unimaginitive as I can, well... imagine. Of course, 3.5e isn't quite a sparkplug for the ol' creativity engine, either...

However - having said that, I still trust Monte to put out rock-solid product and will end up buying a copy along with my 3.5e rules set come Gen Con. Would you autograph mine, please, Mr. Cook?

Cheerios!
Ian

 

[drquestion]

I voted for AU. When I first heard about it, I wasn't too excited, but after reading some of the design diaries, I'm now looking forward to it.

I'll probably buy at least the 3.5e PHB, cause the one I have now is getting torn up, but I can't really say that I'm excited about it. 3e has been working ok for me so far.

Originally posted by Oni:
I've noticed a few people here are interested in AU, but are concerned about finding a group to play it with. This too is a concern of mine. Any interest amoung those of you worried about find a local group in trying to put together some kind of online game, perhaps via IRC or the like?

I've been kicking around ideas for a campaign to start sometime over the summer. I had been planning on using a weird amalgamation of various d20 sources, but AU looks like it might have what I'm looking for. I'd definitely love to have you if I do decide to start it, Oni! I've enjoyed gaming with you in Nightfall's Tuesday night campaign.

drquestion

 

[Dark Jezter]

I'm looking forward to 3.5e more. In fact, I'll be pre-ordering the 3.5e core rulebooks from amazon.com very soon. I agree with virtually all of the 3.5e changes I've heard of thus far, and plan on updating my current FR campaign to 3.5e this July.

AU sounds neat based on what I've heard, but I have no desire at the moment to start playing another system; I'm DMing a Forgotten Realms campaign and playing a PC in a Scarred Lands campaign at the moment, so D&D is keeping me plenty busy for now.

 

[Greatwyrm]

Pesonally I do not much like Monte's products. The BOEM stuff seems merely average and RTTTOEE is a steaming pile of offal as far as I am concerned.

With that in mind the fact that it is not D20 means he is writing this with basically complete freedom to do whatever he wants.

The two of those together do not sit well with me in expecting this to be a product I will like or want.

Everybody likes different stuff. That's cool. The thing I don't get is the "freedom to do whatever he wants" angle.

As far as I know, the only things in the book that you can't put in a d20 product are character creation and advancement. Everything else in there could be put in one big d20 book if he just left those 2 small things out. Doesn't sound like a lot of freedom.

 

[Black Omega]

as long as it has a good, long, non-rules-specific chapter on "how to design and run a fantasy campaign," i'll be picking that one up too.

(same reason i've been waiting for GURPS Fantasy Campaigns all these years...)

Assuming Fantasy Hero will be along similar lines to the Champions book, it should have a non-rules specific chapter on how to design and run various types of fantasy campaigns as well.

I can certainly use some good ideas on magic for a more human level game as well.

 

[Merlion]

Been done before. Everquest RPG PH is OGL as well. WotC did it themselves with the Wheel of time d20 game.

Both have alternative magics and use core d20 mechanics to build setting specific classes and whatnot.

Not knocking AU, just saying it's not the first "alternative d20 mechanics PH for fantasy gaming".

Hrmmm...I dont really consider that the same thing at all. The books you mention are D20 tabletop RPG versions of an online "rpg" and a series of novels respectively. Arcana Unearthed is in fact alternate DnD...an RPG made to be an RPG and its own thing, not an RPG version of something else.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Hrmmm...I dont really consider that the same thing at all. The books you mention are D20 tabletop RPG versions of an online "rpg" and a series of novels respectively. Arcana Unearthed is in fact alternate DnD...an RPG made to be an RPG and its own thing, not an RPG version of something else.

On top, one is undeniably driven by its battle-centric/non-RP origins (and the nickname "Evercrack" cannot be a good thing), while the other (though extremely good) has minimum support and a fan-base that's barely able to agree on how certan elements not included in the rules are best represented (i.e., non-cohesive fan community).

AU, on the other hand, has no less than three companies producing product for it.

As someone that's extremely critical of RPGs (I considered doing reviews at another site but decided against it when I gave the Player's Handbook 2-out-of-5), I'm exceedingly hopeful for AU's potential and success.