How much of Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed do you use?

[Orryn Emrys]

My wife, who's playing the akashic, has also complained a little that while it seems like a good class at first blush some of the abilities in the first 3 levels seem fairly unimpressive. It's turned her off further advancement, since other characters who have bardic knowledge-type abilities seem just as capable as she and yet hers is supposed to be tapping into the collective knowledge etc etc.

True, the akashic's abilities seem a little more poignant in a setting where other classes don't possess similar abilities. I do take some liberties with the general feel of the akashic in my campaign, adding an additional air of mystery to the character... sometimes she even has prophetic dreams and such....

 

[diaglo]

Other. i bought it as a collector's item. so i don't intend to use any of it. mostly, cuz i play something else.

OD&D(1974) is the only true game. All the other editions are just poor imitations of the real thing.

 

[Nisarg]

Read it, haven't used it at all.

Too much gratuitous wierdness and non-standard-fantasy-for-non-standard-fantasy's-sake.

Call me silly but I actually like my campaigns to touch on Archetypal symbols and themes that connect with people instinctively because they've been part of our common culture for decades or centuries. I consider that a good thing. Its psychology; people will connect more deeply to themes that they are unconsciously familiar with.

Nisarg

 

[Psion]

So far, I have only considered adapting the Unfettered to my game as a superior version of the Swashbuckler, and considered adapting some spell conventions.

 

[John Q. Mayhem]

Nisarg, it's really not so much "non-standard-fantasy-for-non-standard-fantasy's-sake" as drawing from non-standard fantasy authors. Have you read the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant? A good deal of AU is taken from that, what comes to mind are the giants and oathsworn. Truenames are a staple of fantasy and mythology, appearing prominently in Ursula K. LeGuin's Earthsea novels. Unfettered and warmains are both archtypes, totem warriors are combat druids, rune magic is another fantasy staple, magisters are if anything more standard fantasy than D&D wizards, fey creatures are common, warrior-mages are an archtype. The only really non-standard things seem to be akashics, witches, and anthropomorphic animals.

EDIT: I'm currently running 2 games, both of which use the Unfettered and Warmain in addition to the fighter. We also use a couple of variant rules and feats. I have a game that's been stalled for a few months due to job and school considerations, but that was with almost-pure AU in a homebrew setting.

 

[teitan]

I'm using the akashic in my Dragonlance campaign, but there isn't much else from the book that sees use. My wife, who's playing the akashic, has also complained a little that while it seems like a good class at first blush some of the abilities in the first 3 levels seem fairly unimpressive. It's turned her off further advancement, since other characters who have bardic knowledge-type abilities seem just as capable as she and yet hers is supposed to be tapping into the collective knowledge etc etc.

I've been using racial levels, although it's not something unique to AU, and action points, which are a very common feature in gaming these days. Mine work more like Buffy: the Vampire Slayer's drama points than AU's hero points, as well, so in reality the various house rules or included OGL/d20 rules in my game aren't so much AU rules as they resemble them through parallel development.

Cheers,
Cam

I think you are experiencing some of the differences in AU as compared to straight D&D. In D&D power increases exponentially while AU it is a steady creep of power, subtle layering that only becomes relevant in a few levels. AU isn't so much like a video game as D&D.

Jason

 

[teitan]

nothing to see here

 

[Jaws]

Spelling Mistakes

I first want to point out that it is Monte Cook. No e at the end. This is from someone who made a point when someone put Legends instead of Lands (of the Jade Oath).

And while I am at it, Malhavoc ends with a c not a k like some people like to put it.

I think the spell system is better than regular D&D. Be it OD&D (1974) or what came afterwards. After playing a wizard just recently, I now refuse to play a spellcaster if it isn't using AU's spell system.

I will point out that I use Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed whenever I can. I run two campaigns set in the Lands of the Diamond Throne and I play a spryte in a regular D&D game.


Peace and smiles

j.

 

[Cam Banks]

I think you are experiencing some of the differences in AU as compared to straight D&D. In D&D power increases exponentially while AU it is a steady creep of power, subtle layering that only becomes relevant in a few levels. AU isn't so much like a video game as D&D.

That may be true. I don't know that I like the "D&D is a video game" stereotype, since that's as much a feature of certain play styles as it is the rules themselves, but I agree that the balance between the AU classes doesn't necessarily translate between AU & D&D classes.

I think what's really at the core of this is that somebody once told me the akashic was the best AU class for using in a D&D campaign, with the least amount of problems. I'm probably going to have to "ramp up" the class somewhat, at least in terms of the return of investment.

Cheers,
Cam

 

[Nisarg]

That may be true. I don't know that I like the "D&D is a video game" stereotype, ç

The real irony of that stereotype being that D&D was there first, and many modern videogames look and feel the way they do BECAUSE of D&D, not the other way around.

Nisarg