Did you use UA in your 1E games?

[Silver Moon]

Yes, we still do. Several of the spells are very good. We haven't used very many of the character classes although our newest player is thinking of going with a Thief/Acrobat. The pages with the non-human deities have been used as reference sources.

 

[Aris Dragonborn]

We used UA quite a bit, and we never had any problems with the Cavalier or Barbarian, or any of the races.

Then again, we didn't exactly run 1E btb, so that may have had something to do with it.

Maybe after we get done playing Marvel (FASERIP), I'll talk to my friends about starting up a 1E game.

 

[Dykstrav]

My group generally allowed anything from UA, although little of it appealed to the players. I saw a small handful of barbarians and thief-acrobats, and we used some of the spells and magic items. I saw ONE cavalier in the entire time I've been playing 1E (played ably by a Frenchman who was determined to convince us that lances are really cool weapons).

 

[Hussar]

Man, I loved me my Paladin with the Cavalier abilities. We did nothing but module dungeon crawls - GDQ as I recall, so the rp restrictions never came up. Oh, you mean my paladin has to go take out the biggest guy first? Oh, ok. Was that before or after the bonuses cranked all my stats up to 18 (or 18/00) for my strength?

We blew threw the Against the Giants series with 3 PC's because of this book. No balance problems at all. )

 

[green slime]

We used it, wholeheartedly.

 

[Ant]

Overkill the Barbarian and his successor, Taybor the Barbarian would not have existed without this wondrous tome.

 

[Silver Moon]

Maybe after we get done playing Marvel (FASERIP), I'll talk to my friends about starting up a 1E game.

Or you can do like I'm doing now and blend 1E and Marvel! We conclude the five-night module next Sunday. At present the plan is for Hank McCoy (Beast) to return with the D&D adventurers to their world and continue as a Playing Character (as the aforementioned Thief-Acrobat).

 

[tx7321]

Dykstrav: "I saw ONE cavalier in the entire time I've been playing 1E (played ably by a Frenchman who was determined to convince us that lances are really cool weapons)."

 

[Vuron]

Used it extensively

Used Comeliness and still wouldn't mind using it in 3.5e to explain physical beauty and attractiveness.

Oddly enough the Cavalier and Barbarian were never really used by PCs as we were rigid in enforcing a code of conduct on the Cavalier and not letting Barbarians really work well with Magic-Users.

Weapon Specialization was used extensively

Demihuman advancement made the handful of Elf F/MU/Th characters more viable for high level play.

Drow were always NPC

Spells were great but some spells like Chromatic Orb seemed a bit more powerful than Player Handbook spells.

Alternative Creation methods based on class were used (You could actually reasonably expect to create a Paladin for a game without using some ungodly roll up 30 sets of stats and choose the best one )

Used the social class rolls pretty extensively

The demihuman dieties was useful in supplementing the core ones from Dieties and Demigods but no one ever played a cleric of Baghtru (although there were some NPCs that were)

The depictions of polearms was actually pretty damned useful in differentiating the various polearms and are arguably better than the depictions that followed.

Overall I'd say it became a pretty critical part of my 1e game.

 

[William Ronald]

My old group used it, and used the previews that ran in Dragon Magazine.

The first time we tried out a party with an elven cavalier, and two paladin cavaliers at 1st level with full plate armor. Our characters ended up killing an ogre and frustrating the DM.

Later, we saw a barbarian and a cavalier constantly arguing with each other. They did not mix well.

We used Unearthed Arcana and generally liked the book. We generally ignored the demihuman level limits, and used weapon specialization extensively.

This thread is bringing back a lot of old memories. Thanks.