arcana unearthed vs revised 3e

[Olive]

3.1

AU is DnD for people bored with the standard fantasy archetype. I'm not bored with it, and if I was I'd play something else, not a different fantasy game. Monte does good work, but his tastes runa little to the wierd side of mine...

 

[Fenes 2]

Both. Since my game is already different from the "standard" D&D, I don't use many monsters, and frankly, don't care much if my NPCs have more or less skill points than they should, I see no reason not to keep my buying schedule (1+ book a month).
I am already waiting for Testament just to pilfer things from it for my Unther/Mulhorand campaign, maybe the Scarred Lands Player's Guide to arcane casters...

 

[kenjib]

Monte Cook IS a master spin-doctor!

Hello! AU is just a new Campaign Setting with some alternate rules!

Will it be cool?

Yep.

I couldn't agree more. From all that he's described so far his book isn't any more revolutionary than the Sovereign Stone Campaign Setting, Wheel of Time, Slaine, or half a dozen other books out there. His stuff is pretty good but there is a big hype engine surrounding his stuff that makes it sound like something completely new when it's really nothing new at all (Book of Vile Darkness versus Evil, the Villain Design Handbook, and various supplements on necromancy and demonology for example).

I'll probably just use the SRD for D&D revised. Monte's book isn't my kind of thing, as his descriptions of races and classes so far move further away from strong archetypes and further into a self-referential universe. I'm sure it will be a good book and people would like it, but it's not what I'm looking for, myself.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

I couldn't agree more. From all that he's described so far his book isn't any more revolutionary than the Sovereign Stone Campaign Setting, Wheel of Time, Slaine, or half a dozen other books out there. His stuff is pretty good but there is a big hype engine surrounding his stuff that makes it sound like something completely new when it's really nothing new at all (Book of Vile Darkness versus Evil, the Villain Design Handbook, and various supplements on necromancy and demonology for example).

I'll probably just use the SRD for D&D revised. Monte's book isn't my kind of thing, as his descriptions of races and classes so far move further away from strong archetypes and further into a self-referential universe. I'm sure it will be a good book and people would like it, but it's not what I'm looking for, myself.

I don't think he ever claimed it was a brand new and massively different game. He clamied a different setting with some rules changes and a somewhat different magic system, different races, and different core classes.

I just happen t like the few rules changes he has hinted at, and the changes in the magic system. Where as the rule changes I have seen for revised 3e are not exciting me in the least, and I was initially very happy about revised coming out and indifferent to AU. The meat that has ben shown so far for each has latered my opinions on both substantially. I'm still getting both, and wil probably use AU as the core and filter in revised rules/monsters/iems etc that I like.

 

[Jolly Giant]

From all that he's described so far his book isn't any more revolutionary than the Sovereign Stone Campaign Setting, Wheel of Time, Slaine, or half a dozen other books out there. His stuff is pretty good but there is a big hype engine surrounding his stuff that makes it sound like something completely new when it's really nothing new at all (Book of Vile Darkness versus Evil, the Villain Design Handbook, and various supplements on necromancy and demonology for example).

Of course there's a lot of attention around all new Monte-releases! You know his stuff's gonna be brilliant!

I'll be getting the 3.1 mostly because my old books are getting worn out, but also because I like the sound of at least some of the changes (specially the MM! Finally they're doing it right! ).
AU, on the other hand, I'll be getting because it sounds like a fun break from standard D&D. And since it's Monte doing it, it's bound to be good!

 

[kenjib]

I don't think he ever claimed it was a brand new and massively different game. He clamied a different setting with some rules changes and a somewhat different magic system, different races, and different core classes.

I guess, it's the tone of remarks like this that make me feel that way (emphasis mine):

From: http://www.montecook.com/arch_lineos72.html

But now I'm getting ahead of myself, and my crude description of these classes probably isn't doing them justice. Arcana Unearthed classes, you'll find, intentionally have a lot more specific flavor injected into them, reflected in very detailed sorts of abilities. None of the above three is just your basic sword-swinging fighter, because -- well, you already have the core rules fighter. I'm not going to try to redo what's already been done there. This is my attempt at something really new, to give you things that can't be done with the existing classes while still filling the same roleplaying needs.

Arcana Unearthed presents a completely playable set of races and classes that provide everything the existing ones present, just in a different way. Intrigued? I hope so. If you've been playing only a short while, you've probably got a lot of exploration of the existing core rules and options ahead of you. But if you've been involved with the game a long time, you might find Arcana Unearthed provides an interesting new look at what you thought you'd already seen from every possible angle. I hope you'll stick around over the next nine months and read how this product develops. It's going to be a fun trip.

I suppose it's my faulty interpretation, as now that I re-read it Monte is only talking in relation to the core books (not other d20 material) -- although WotC did put out Wheel of Time, CoC (Monte), and d20 Modern, after all...

 

[Shard O'Glase]

I suppose it's my faulty interpretation, as now that I re-read it Monte is only talking in relation to the core books (not other d20 material) -- although WotC did put out Wheel of Time, CoC (Monte), and d20 Modern, after all...

Ok that quoted less than I thought it would but hey, um. Yeah as I was saying I don't think he was claiming it was something that altered rpgs as we know them or anything, though I do think some of the specifics are things we may never have seen before at least on the d20 level.(not owning every rpg i wont make any claims about rps is total) And by specifics I am refering to the classes and races.(maybe not races)

The spell system is familiar enough for the d20 logo likely but it does have some substantial changes, not that changes to the spell system are new but the changes he gives in AU are new. And they happen to be changes that I am very eager for. Not that I don't have concearns, since the spell system seems somewhat powered up, but it's hard to say at this early date.

I'm sure some of my eagerness is in his delivery but this is my most eagerly anticipated product of this year. The only one I'm really feeling the need to get. I'm going to get other things but I spend mucho dinero on rpgs every year so that isn't a surprise, and revised 3e will certainly be one of my purchases and I'm certain I'll like some of the changes, unfortunatley for the revised book the early relases are things I'm not a fan of.(pit fiend power up I like, though not at CR16 I think, blessedsilvered DR issue I don't like)

 

[tsadkiel]

So which will be your 3.5.

BESM d20. Hopefully. I'll have to see the actual book before I decide, but it sounds much more like what I'm looking for in a new PHB than the others.

 

[Oni]

Re: Re: arcana unearthed vs revised 3e

BESM d20. Hopefully. I'll have to see the actual book before I decide, but it sounds much more like what I'm looking for in a new PHB than the others.

BESM also sounds promising, I'm hoping that I'll be able to cobble something together from the AU and BESM into some kind of homegrown monstrosity that suits my needs. But of course it remains to be seen how compatible the books will be.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

hadn't heard of BESM d20, hey yet another RPG purchase this year likely. Though considering much of the draw of BESM was the system itself I'm not sure I need a d20 version of it.