Does Unearthed Arcana make a DM's life harder?

[Olive]

Harder? No. More interesting? Eh. Maybe. I am actually quite UNimpressed with Unearthed Arcana. Very little in it actually interests me much. Now ARCANA Unearthed - THAT has a LOT that interests me to the point where if I didn't know that my players would kill me I'd institute it lock, stock, and barrel from this time forth forevermore.

I have no use for UA. I will have endless use for AU, in whole or just pieces.

[RANT]This sort of thing is getting so boring!!!

If Monte had called AU Monte's Big Book of Spontaneous Magic Fun or if WotC had called UA I Love House Rules And So Should You! then people wouldn't feel the need to come in to these threads and talk endlessly about how one book isn't like another book with a similar name.

So why do they feel the need to do it now?

for what it's worth, I can see the problem, but hopefully it will help them over come a problem. cos UA isn't the problem, the 'WotC stuff rocks without exception' attitude and the player/DM bickering is!

 

[Aristotle]

I've always hated the whole "everything published by WotC is law" mindset. As others have said, other than ownership of the brand, what makes their staff any more talented than the 3rd party guys? Especially when some of those 3rd party guys used to be members of the staff!

If you have that mindset, then yes... This book throws a wrench into the works as it provides multiple fixes for similar mechanics that will not work well together in some instances.

The book is pretty open about the fact that it is a collection of "optional rules". Just like the various optional, or variant, rules in the DMG. You may be able to use all of those, but they were not included for that purpose. You are supposed to pick and choose which fit your game and which do not. The same is true for UA. The way you or your group decide is really up to your group dynamic. Some DMs make all the decisions, while others hold discussions or votes within the group.

 

[Umbran]

As others have said, other than ownership of the brand, what makes their staff any more talented than the 3rd party guys?

In a word, money.

WotC has more money than any other RPG publisher, and larger sales. That means they can pay higher salaries for more people than any other gaming publisher. Yes, many of the designers they used to work with now work elsewhere, but they each tend to work in isolation now, instead of in a think tank like they used to.

In addition, WotC has more resources to put into playtesting, and probably gets more feedback than any other publisher. Put it all together, and there's good reason to expect that WotC should be able to produce more good products than anyone else.

I don't advocate the "anything that WotC publishes is gospel, and all others are junk" mindset. However, most gamers have only so many dollars to spend on gaming books. Sticking to the publisher that should (and does) tend to put out more solid products is a practical "first cut" that many will make.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Can't say I'm anywhere near the same boat as you. I disagree with my players all the time about what's official and what's not but the bottom line is it's all optional and none of it is mandatory.

I'm pretty sure that UA has a statement like that as well.

 

[dren]

Yes, it does.

 

[Alzrius]

As I consider using some stuff from this book in future campaigns, I begin to wonder, what if I get players pestering me to use rules from it that I don't like?

Now we have a whole 'official' book of 'unofficial' rules.

I can understand your point of view. I, myself, am quite concerned with issues of what is official/canon and what is not (though for me, it's more story/plot line than rules material, since rules naturally change and evolve over time).

The thing to remember here is the Unearthed Arcana says right in it that the rules it presents are 100% optional - more than that, that it's quite impossible to use them all in a game. It is NOT a book of "official unofficial rules": It is "official optional" material (despite what some people think, being official does not mean something can't also be optional...the two are not mutually exclusive).

If you feel the (understandable) desire to run your game by limiting yourself and the players to just material by WotC, you're still within your rights as a DM to discount Unearthed Arcana completely by the clause of "optional" built in to its officialness.

 

[hong]

Now, I now many experienced DMs on this board regard look at all rules from books critically and play with thier own particular mixture of WotC rules and house rules. But for many of the less experienced DMs, I wonder how much the existance of UA will lead to some stress as players beg or demand the inclusion of certain rules.

Think of it as a character-building experience.

 

[Tessarael]

As I consider using some stuff from this book in future campaigns, I begin to wonder, what if I get players pestering me to use rules from it that I don't like?

This shouldn't happen too often hopefully. I recommend you do the following ... Go through Unearthed Arcana, and make a list of alternatives that you will allow or are adopting. Make a list of those you won't allow. Make a list of those you might allow - subject to playtesting and discussion. Make those lists available to your players. That should cut down on discussion. Wizards of the Coast released a checklist somewhere for Unearthed Arcana precisely for this purpose.

I did something similar when I was DM for an Arcana Unearthed (yes, the other one!) mini-campaign. I went through the spell list, and listed spells that I disallowed or changed. The list of changes and disallowed spells wasn't that long, but it did help set the flavor a little: I wasn't allowing spells to modify skills or replace skills, so the Akashic wouldn't be trodden on by spellcasters.

Just my thoughts ...