Does Unearthed Arcana make a DM's life harder?

[Altalazar]

The DM can just say "no." Simple.

 

[Calico_Jack73]

didn't allow the first UA so why should i allow this one?

Ouch! You've got my vote for "DM from Hell".

I loved the first UA but then again I didn't DM much back then. I loved the Cavalier class and the Barbarian as well though I never saw how a Barbarian could really work in a party with a bunch of magic users. We all kind of cringed when the Barbarian would take his pick of the treasure. He'd undoubtably take the most powerful magic item in the lot and destroy it for the extra XP it would give him.

 

[Grazzt]

Unearthed Arcana is just any other product that is put out by any company, not just WotC. The DM has the final say as to what can be included and what can't. Also, I'm a big believer in trying something out and if it doesn't work out well, then getting rid of it. <snip>

I think if you approach any of the changes as provisional and that they can be dropped by your say, you should be all right.
P.S. Ignore the whining by the players no matter how much they do...

Agreed. The DM has final say in what is allowed and isnt allowed. Try a rule out if the players or you are interested. If it doesnt work (or even if it does work, but doesnt gel with the feel of the campaign), get rid of it.

 

[Umbran]

...toned back the spell power special ability of prestige classes...

And, in order to support Henry's position, I'll contradict him. Look at the Mystic Theurge, a PrC with massively enhanced spell power. WotC isn't even consistent!

Mind you, I don't think WotC should be consistent. In order to satisfy the most people, the final details of balance must be handled by the DMs. WotC can and should be producing rules and classes and such in a range, so that the DMs have solid bases from which to choose.

So, in the end, I don't think Unearthed Arcana makes the job of a DM any more difficult, in that a good DM needs to learn how to pick and choose and how to say "No".

Plus, it isn't as if there was a lack of variants for players to whine for before UA was published. :\

 

[D+1]

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.

 

[Henry]

And, in order to support Henry's position, I'll contradict him. Look at the Mystic Theurge, a PrC with massively enhanced spell power. WotC isn't even consistent!

To be clearer, I was referring to the spell power special ability of Archmages, Red Wizards, et. al. - the one that increased the save DC by +X amount, and was responsible combined with GSF and high ability scores for getting save DC's into the 30's and 40's. The Mystic Theurge I claim the jury's still out on him; by himself with 3.5 rules, he's not bad at all, and in fact suffers compared to straight clerics and mages outside the sheer spells per day; however, who's to say WotC won't soon come up with a new feat, spell, PrC, or whatnot to make him DEFINITIVELY overpowered?

So, in the end, I don't think Unearthed Arcana makes the job of a DM any more difficult, in that a good DM needs to learn how to pick and choose and how to say "No".

One mind, two DM tables.

 

[Aries_Omega]

My 2 Cents on UA and how to deal with players.

I have mixed feeling on UA. One hand I love some of the ideas in there. Such as the Paladin prestige class. I mean Blackguards are a PrCl why not Paladins. I also like the Totem Barbarian option. Others things I did not like. I say just use what is usefull to your world and leave the rest alone. If you have a player that bellyaches about not being able to use one optional rule from UA that you do not want to use tell them "too bad". The book is "optional"....that means it is not required to be used and you are going to use only the rules that you see fit.

If they still gripe....well do what I do to my players in my Cyberpunk d20 game (in house system based of RTG games).....I give them the big bad weapon....and make up a big bad guy to fight against it. Remember.....for every bad ass player....there is a more bad ass monster. They want a cool magic item...do it. Try this one sometime.

It's a gauntlet with one finger....no not that one! Anyhow it is a sentient item. Once it is on it doesn't come off. It can talk to the wearer and help them figure out things. It has some kind of cool power....TK....magic missile X times a day or what have you. Nothing to big right?

Well it informs the player that it can gain more power if you add more fingers and can help find the next one. Okay....after fighting baddies, killing whatever and crawling through something they find the next finger. More power....cool. This repeats until they get to the last finger. By then they are smiting dragons with impunity. They add that last finger.....well...the glove gives the wearer the "finger" and now is in control. You don't do it....it hurts you. Do this once to a player....they learn to not trust an item smarter then themselves and that power corrupts.

A good variant is a gauntlet and it's cohorts....other items that are found too that have the same qualities. A ring for the wizard that as you add stones it gets stronger too for example. That way the who party goes on quests for parts for the items they found.

 

[Cevalic]

It's always been my opinion that it's the players that make the DM's life harder. Then again, maybe it's my players...

 

[RFisher]

I've long had a simple answer to players who complain too much about my choice of which options to allow:

"OK. You DM."

Seriously. I'm always pretty open to allowing the players to play the game they want to the way they want to. I'll allow the players to argue the case & try to change my mind about something. Once I make a decision, though, if players don't like the choices I make as DM, I'm more than happy to step aside and roll up a PC.

 

[Qualir]

I've long had a simple answer to players who complain too much about my choice of which options to allow:

"OK. You DM."

Seriously. I'm always pretty open to allowing the players to play the game they want to the way they want to. I'll allow the players to argue the case & try to change my mind about something. Once I make a decision, though, if players don't like the choices I make as DM, I'm more than happy to step aside and roll up a PC.

3 of the 5 people in my group also DM. I happen to dislike the "Golden Rule of DMing" (my say is absolute and final), so I make the players debate optional rules that I do not particularly care for among themselves. Most of my fellow gamers (just my particular group) tend to agree with my impression on the matter usually antyway. Anything the group believes should be allowable is ok by me on a play test basis. This means that any such rule that I find to be unbalanced/unmanagable can be thrown out. I rarely actually do so (except for things like void and the iaujutsu skill). As a whole the group responds well to this method. I find that this helps keep me from dominating the players while letting them feel they have more control (Of course I usually do get my way in the end, but that's all part of the charm.)