New Unearthed Arcana info
- Thread starter Olive
- Start date
AFGNCAAP
First Post
Late revelation...
Wait a minute...
If bards are going to be presented as a prestige class in UA, then will that mean gnomes will have a prestige class as a favored class (for those who decide to use this option)?
Or, will this be accounted for in the book (i.e., changing the gnome's favored class to a class that can quickly gain the bard PrC)?
I'm curious if bard, paladin, and ranger are the only classes to get the PrC treatment (I'd think that at least the druid would have as well--a nifty PrC for a nature cleric w/ the Animal & Plant domains). Wasn't too sure that since only those 3 were mentioned, then those were the only ones getting the PrC treatment.
Also, I'm not familiar with CoC d20 at all--what is this class system in CoC d20 like?
Wait a minute...
If bards are going to be presented as a prestige class in UA, then will that mean gnomes will have a prestige class as a favored class (for those who decide to use this option)?
Or, will this be accounted for in the book (i.e., changing the gnome's favored class to a class that can quickly gain the bard PrC)?
I'm curious if bard, paladin, and ranger are the only classes to get the PrC treatment (I'd think that at least the druid would have as well--a nifty PrC for a nature cleric w/ the Animal & Plant domains). Wasn't too sure that since only those 3 were mentioned, then those were the only ones getting the PrC treatment.
Also, I'm not familiar with CoC d20 at all--what is this class system in CoC d20 like?
MeepoTheMighty
First Post
AFGNCAAP said:
It's been a while since I"ve looked at CoC, but basically you pick a profession, which determines your 8 (or is it 10?) class skills. You can also choose between being offensively focused (good BAB, lower saves) or defensively focused (poor BAB, higher saves). But there aren't really "classes" in the D&D sense of the word, just a bunch of example professions.
Trickstergod
First Post
I've a touch of disdain for Wizards revision of 3rd edition; I do, however, have the latest version of the SRD on hand because it wasn't completely without merit.
The Arcana Unearthed stuff looks like it has solid, interesting rules. However, I like the iconic classes - druid and cleric inspire me more than "greenbond," and the entire setting behind the rules looks like something out of a bad fantasy novel. The Scarred Lands ranks number one on my list of favorite settings, but just because they're tied into by another book doesn't make that book worthwhile. I have no plans now, or likely ever (though I wouldn't go so far as to say definitely never), of purchasing the book.
I also find undeniable fanboys are one of the worst sources for an opinion; bias is fine, and acceptable, if not too great, but there comes a point where it's just too much.
Now, with my general opinion on the conversation thus far said, my response to Unearthed Arcana:
Unearthed Arcana is really looking like it might be good, and enjoyable. It plays off of the standard Core books, near as I can tell, with alternative spins to them. In particular, I'm looking at the alternate armor class rules - it's one of those things that I think I might integrate, as it would make a low-magic setting all the more viable. Clunking around with just your Dex and a masterwork chain shirt might be fine up until level 5, possibly ten depending on how you build your character, but otherwise, the base attack bonus and strength bonus to hit soon make anyone without a magical ring, amulet, shield, or armor of some kind weapon-bait. I'd rather characters were more based on their level, class, and race, then their magic items.
Prestige class alternatives for the Core classes? I'm almost certain to use the one for the paladin. The Charisma 17 requirement they once had made them a rarity; 3rd edition took that away, and now, it seems, there's a big old glut of them in the NPC office. I much prefer them being the elite of the elite, champions of their gods, special for who they are, not just clumped together with fighters, rogues, and the like. The bard and ranger also have some promise in the prestige class field.
Vitality and wounds points? Not overly familiar with Star Wars, or Call of Cthulhu, but, this also looks promising.
A few other things I could live with, or without, but all in all, this is shaping up to be something Wizards pimps out that I might actually put as a top priority on my book list.
The Arcana Unearthed stuff looks like it has solid, interesting rules. However, I like the iconic classes - druid and cleric inspire me more than "greenbond," and the entire setting behind the rules looks like something out of a bad fantasy novel. The Scarred Lands ranks number one on my list of favorite settings, but just because they're tied into by another book doesn't make that book worthwhile. I have no plans now, or likely ever (though I wouldn't go so far as to say definitely never), of purchasing the book.
I also find undeniable fanboys are one of the worst sources for an opinion; bias is fine, and acceptable, if not too great, but there comes a point where it's just too much.
Now, with my general opinion on the conversation thus far said, my response to Unearthed Arcana:
Unearthed Arcana is really looking like it might be good, and enjoyable. It plays off of the standard Core books, near as I can tell, with alternative spins to them. In particular, I'm looking at the alternate armor class rules - it's one of those things that I think I might integrate, as it would make a low-magic setting all the more viable. Clunking around with just your Dex and a masterwork chain shirt might be fine up until level 5, possibly ten depending on how you build your character, but otherwise, the base attack bonus and strength bonus to hit soon make anyone without a magical ring, amulet, shield, or armor of some kind weapon-bait. I'd rather characters were more based on their level, class, and race, then their magic items.
Prestige class alternatives for the Core classes? I'm almost certain to use the one for the paladin. The Charisma 17 requirement they once had made them a rarity; 3rd edition took that away, and now, it seems, there's a big old glut of them in the NPC office. I much prefer them being the elite of the elite, champions of their gods, special for who they are, not just clumped together with fighters, rogues, and the like. The bard and ranger also have some promise in the prestige class field.
Vitality and wounds points? Not overly familiar with Star Wars, or Call of Cthulhu, but, this also looks promising.
A few other things I could live with, or without, but all in all, this is shaping up to be something Wizards pimps out that I might actually put as a top priority on my book list.
JoeGKushner
Adventurer
Pants said:Now children, don't make me pull this thread over.
See, this is the problem with Pants. They have too much power in America! In Russia, Pants wear you!
Kesh said:
So pick up a copy of Spycraft, and use what's in there. The VP/WP system in there (which is either the same as in Star Wars D20, or just a slight tweak) is quite clearly OGC. While there is some reason to believe it wasn't supposed to be given away, it most definitely has been, and several people asked AEG at the time Spycraft came out, and they never clarified, so i'd say the chance to claim it was a typo is long past. To short-circuit complaints, i quote the relevant passages:
"AEG's intention is to open up as much of the Spycraft Espionage Handbook as possible to be used as Open Game Content (OGC), while maintaining Product Identity (PI) to all aspects of the Spycraft intellectual property.[...snip]
"Designation of Product Identity: [snip a bunch of stuff that pointedly does *not* make reference to wound point/vitality point in any way]
"Designation of Open Content: Subject to the Product Identity designation above, the following portions of the Spycraft Espionage Handbook are designated Open Game Content. Chapter One: all agent statistics and new classes. [...] Chapter Six: the entire chapter. [...snip]"
Chapter One describes figuring WP/VP for your character, which seems like an "agent statistic" to me, while Chapter Six is the combat chapter, which has the rest of the rules relating to them (such as healing). So, the PI designation does not withhold them, and the OGC declaration quite explicitly gives them away.
The only way this would not be the case is if AEG didn't have "authority to contribute" those rules to OGC. So let's take a look at that permission notice from WotC:
"Vitality points, wounds, Defense, and other rules from the Star Wars™ roleplaying game and other items not covered by the Open Gaming License used with permission from Wizards of the Coast."
Two important things to note here. First, it does *not* say that their permission does or does not extend to having authority to contribute said rules as OGC. Second, it does *not* say "this material is not OGC", "this material is PI" or anything else of that sort.
In fact, it is a bit ambiguous as to what exactly that statement means, all 'round--it seems to say that:
1: they got permission from WotC to use a bunch of stuff
2: that stuff was not released as OGC under the WotC OGL, which is why they needed to get special permission (or at least felt they did)
3: that stuff consists of two sorts of things: rules from Star Wars D20 (of which VP/WP and Defense are examples), and "other items"--whatever those might be
Now, it is quite possible that they intended it to mean the above, plus:
4: that stuff is *still* not OGC, despite appearing in this book.
But it utterly fails to say that. So we have to do our best to understand what was written, and figure out which meaning, among the possible interpretations, was intended. Given that the PI/OGC declarations appear to give away VP/WP, it makes sense to take the literal interpretation of the special permission note--which is to say, that said note has no bearing on OGC-ness, except perhaps by explaining the route by which AEG got the authority to contribute that material. Given no statement from either party, either formally (via the OGC/PI declarations) or informally (when asked online) to the contrary, i see no reason to believe that the VP/WP system, as presented in Spycraft, is not OGC. For that matter, it is quite possible that, legally, the OGC/PI statements, in conjunction with the WotC OGL, are binding, and even if the other parties *had* said something contrary, that material would still be OGC.
-----
Oh, and, in case anyone is unconvinced by the above: there is also a legal 100% OGC VP/WP system that some guy did up before Star Wars D20 hit the streets, and without having ever seen a copy of it. I'd have to dig a bit to find it, but it's probably floating around online somewhere, too.
ES2 said:
Me too. In fact, i'm elbow-deep in a project that has the tongue-in-cheek working title of "D&D Done Right"--basically, i've been playing D&D of various editions for a couple of decades, and i think that D&D3[.5]E does a fairly poor job of being "D&D". It also worships as sacred cows a few elements that i think can be improved (or even jettisoned) without in any way impinging on its "D&D-ness". So i'm setting about to work within nominally the same parameters as the D&D3E design team (it has to still make people think "D&D", and the most-basic of mechanics (d20 as the main resolution die, stats 3-18, etc.) are sacrosanct) to show that i can do something "better"--and more fun for me to play. On the one hand, i'm a bit miffed that UA is stealing my thunder--they're putting out as optional rules several things that i'm incorporating as the default element. On the other hand, i'm creating an integrated whole, not a bunch of optional rules, so someone who agrees with me (like you, it sounds) can just pick it up and use it whole-cloth. And, i'm not necessarily doing the same things as UA, nor to the same degree. So i think what i'm working on still has a place--besides, it's not like i can really compete with WotC anyway. Finally, i think some of my ideas are better than anything that is likely to be in UA, because i expect it still won't stray that far from the 3.5E core rules--some of what i'm doing involves reworking the system almost all the way down to its roots, which is very difficult to do with an optional add-on.
Finally, why wait for WotC to do this? It sounds to me like much of this (or the functional equivalent) is already available, either in a commercial product or on someone's webpage. Do you really expect WotC to do it so much better that you can't make do with whatever's already out there?
Last edited:
die_kluge said:I have a bad feeling that this book and AU are going to constantly keep getting confused. Especially for the dyslexics of the world.
I was amused to notice that my [hand-written] receipt when i bought AU said "Unearthed Arcana" on it--doubly-so since the clerk isn't old enough to have been gaming when 1st ed was on the market, and thus is likely to have never actually used the original UA.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
