Arcana Unearthed: Pro's and Con's

[Voadam]

So, let me get this strait... Buying product A, which is not product B, but cheaper than product B, doesn't give you all the same information as product B?

Novel concept, that.

Tsyr, it is a novel way of doing things for Monte's Malhavok books.

This is the first malhavok press book that is not fully available as a pdf.

All pdf versions of books that I am aware of are cheaper than the print version.

This is also the most expensive pdf I have ever gotten ($18). I could have gotten it off of amazon for what? $3 more?

The smaller individual ones are comparable to other pdf prices but the magic ones are not complete on their own so you must get two of them for one useable system.

I prefer pdfs and so the decision to not provide all the material in the pdfs is my complaint.

 

[Psiblade]

I agree with Iron_chef that the layout for AU was bad. The races were too much the animal people for me. I also saw that the classes were too powerful to blend into our 3.5 campaigns without adjustment. I am disappointed with AU. I will however work with the classes to balance them to the PHB classes.


-Psiblade

 

[Kestrel]

Well, there's plenty of regurgitated material in AU. Large sections of the SRD are in there, in the combat chapter for one example.

I like the classes in AU, but the races do very little for me. Some of the feats are nice, and I like the spell system, but the setting so far leaves me cold.

There's a fine line between originality and being different just to be different. I'm not sure where AU falls. All I can say for sure, is I'll use bits and pieces but not the whole thing.

Yup, you're right. There's a lot of resued material in AU. If I had to give some cons, it would have to be the innuendo and intuit direction skills still being used. I would probably use the 3.5 skills instead.

In general however, I love the book, and am currently running one and playing in another AU game. The races take some getting used as does the setting. But, as a fan of Earthdawn and burned out on the tolkien races, I think I can handle it.

I guess I should have explained myself a little better...isnt the format and art pretty much the same in 3.5 vs 3.0? The only one of the 3.5 books I own is the Monster Manual, so I can't tell. I'll get the rest of the rules from the SRD, should a friend run a game.

 

[King_Stannis]

If AU had been more of a generic variant player's handbook, I may have bought it. But when it comes right down to it, I don't dig on cat people, dog people, etc. as characters. It seems like the book is very tied to Diamond Throne setting, which sounds interesting, but is definitely not for me. When I first heard about it I thought it might include some real innovations in combat, something along the lines of Ken Hood's Grim and Gritty system. Alas, that appears not to be the case.

Much as I might like to get it just to have something to read, I think I'll pass.

 

[Wombat]

One point that seems to be coming up over and over again in this thread is the quality of the art. I, and I know I am in a tiny minority, don't really care about art in most rpgs. I find all but a couple of the artists working for rpgs to be pretty blase and hackneyed. Eric Hotz and Tim Bradstreet come up with some interesting takes, but otherwise they get a collective **shurg** from me.

Consider a couple of rpgs, comparing art to system. The new Decipher Star Trek & LotR games have a LOT of art, movie & stills of incredibly high quality. OTOH, the games are poorly written, poorly explained, and in the end not worth the money. Does the art improve the value? Maybe a touch, but that is all.

Then there is Atlas' Over the Edge. Most of the art is pretty mediocre; the cover may or may not inspire a gamer. BUT this is one of the most innovative systems running out there.

With AU I found a couple of pieces of art that are okay, a lot that are forgettable and one or two that I actively did not like. Then again, I was not picking up an art book. If I wanted that, I would do so. In fact, I would prefer if most games had LESS art in them due to the general mediocrity seen throughout -- this is not cyberpunk, we are not going to Style Over Substance.

So, no, the art did not affect my opinion of AU. Only the actual gaming material did.

 

[Henry]

I will agree on one thing: In my opinion, I cannot see Arcana Unearthed winning any ENnies for "Best Layout" or "Best Graphic Design" next year. It left much to be desired. The black and white was not the issue: I just did not like a large amount of the art, nor the sparseness of edge designs, etc.

However, for a source of new material, I enjoyed it immensely! I will be waiting for other products to give me a sharper visual image pool with this product; while the races, classes, magic system, hero points, etc. give my mind much to chew on, the visual interpretation did not give me the fuel to vividly picture this "brave new world." Hopefully, Diamond Throne will give me what I am looking for in this category.

Iron Chef, I can understand that you did not enjoy the new races, and some of the class concepts. It takes me back to D&D in a 90 degree angle from what I am used to in the core books, however, and for that I am grateful. Just the little bit of play at Gencon I did gave me a tremendous desire to explore that world more fully.

 

[Kestrel]

Let me think back to the last two games I played of AU.

Did I have a blast? Yes.

Did the art in the book matter to the time I had playing the game? Nope.

 

[der_kluge]

Yea, Monte is so unoriginal. That whole Planescape thing was so cliche and uninspired.

 

[Ysgarran]

I have to say this has been on my mind a bit. For me it comes down to the question is how much more cost would it have added to the book to have better art?

With my monthly allotment for RPG purchases I looked at the Babylon 5 RPG and AU. I'm a huge fan of B5. I have the older RPG for B5, I've been buying the DVDs but when it came down to it I just couldn't justify plunking down 45$ for the book.

AU was just a better value for my money and I'm happy with the purchase. Agreed that some of the races were a bit uninspired but I really did like the 'racial' level mechanic.

Ysgarran.

p.s.
I've thought about posting a question to the publishers forum about the production value versus cost versus sales equation. The cost of d20 B5 really did chase me away from purchasing the book.

I have to agree with Iron Chef for a change. The art work and layout in AU was total uninspiring. The equipment section was dire (and I don't mean it had additional spikey bits).

 

[Zogg]

I will agree on one thing: In my opinion, I cannot see Arcana Unearthed winning any ENnies for "Best Layout" or "Best Graphic Design" next year.

So I take it you laughed too when you saw the drawing for "The Definitive Harness"?

Anyway, the art was sub-par. But I don't agree that the book as a whole isn't a great value. I should note, however, that I'm fairly new to gaming and haven't had a chance to read every product out there - which apparently Iron_Chef nearly has. I like what I've read in AU thus far and believe it can make for great gaming. I think part of the problem is that Iron_Chef is comparing AU to other products out there instead of looking at the book on it's own.