Okay, I am thinking of getting it: Sell me On Monte's UA book, please.

[Henry]

Moved to d20 Systems games.

The other posters have pretty much told you my points exactly; The only thing I can say is that if you are looking essentially for a VERY variant D&D game, this is a great product. The magic system alone is worth the product, in my eyes, as is a viable 20-level class for a low-armored fighter. The Unfettered class, in my opinion, can recreate anyone from Zorro, to Conan, to William Wallace (a la Mel Gibson style).

If you are looking for breath-taking full color art cover to cover, this is not present. The product actually to me hearkens back to the older days of D&D, mid-1980's, with black and white art amidst a book packed with mechanical and conceptual substance.

 

[Desdichado]

Ditto. But the art sucks.

I like the art as well as the PHB. Especially the Sam Wood pieces. Granted, there's a few real stinkers in there, but every book I own (with the exception of anything by Privateer Press) is the same in that regard.

 

[The Lemon Merchant]

I know almost NOTHING about this book and I thought I would ask you all to sell me or "don't sell" me on Monte's UA book.

I wasn't terribly impressed with it, but I seem to be in the minority when it comes to that opinion. I couldn't really put my finger on what I don't like about it, but it is an opinion I have of most of Monte's stuff.

Anyhow, if you are convinced and want to get it cheap and don't have to have it immediately I am selling mine on Ebay http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3152442988&category=2545&rd=1.

 

[FCWesel]

Interesting.

Art, while nice, isn't the "selling point" for me in anyway really. Its likely to be what makes me pick up the book on a random chance, to be honest.

hmm, I will have to take a look at the links, thanks a lot guys.

If anyone else wants to say anything please feel free to.

Is there anything, other then art, that just doesn't work about the book?

 

[Desdichado]

Is there anything, other then art, that just doesn't work about the book?

You have to buy into the races (or use some others.) A lot of people apparently don't, really. They're not D&D cliche, but they are cliche from another perspective, with lion men, dog men, giants and little faeries.

 

[MrFilthyIke]

I like Monte's work, but I'm not a AU rabid-frothing fan either.

I like AU. Art could be better, but the binding is superb. The Diamond Throne
is really what sold me. I don't like his system, but I like racial levels and
the races. The magic system is OK, but didn't stun me.

If you like to lift great ideas and make homebrew, it's great.
If you like new game worlds, it's great.
If you want standard fantasy or 3.5 compatible, I'd steer clear.

That's my middle-of-the-road opinion

 

[MrFilthyIke]

And alignment is finally gone. Alignment always was an artificial system left over from a bygone era where role playing was more about pogeon-holing you into a sterotype, rather than really role playing the character like you want them to be. And, this system lets you, and encourages it.

PS, you can achieve this by just not picking alignments in D&D.

It's not THAT amazing of a developement. I did it after becoming
a White Wolf Fan back in '95. *shrug*

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

PS, you can achieve this by just not picking alignments in D&D.

It's not THAT amazing of a developement. I did it after becoming
a White Wolf Fan back in '95. *shrug*

Though you still have to think about Paladins "Detect EVil" at will (and some spells in this direction), and in 3.5 even about alignment based Damage Reduction.

Which by the way, might in fact prove a problem if you want to incorporate D&D 3.5 Monsters in your AU game (Demons & Devils, Angels and so on especially).

A minor nitpick:
Monte didn`t like the 3.5 weapon size rules, but at the same time, AU uses a similar system for shields? Why that?
Well, who cares? It is really a minor nitpick.

I like the AU system. When I looked at the Akashic Class, I found a class/concept that I wanted to use since the begin of my roleplaying career (3-4 years ago with Shadowrun). The Magister really reminds me of a archtypical (in books and stories) wizard...

Mustrum Ridcully

 

[MrFilthyIke]

Though you still have to think about Paladins "Detect EVil" at will (and some spells in this direction), and in 3.5 even about alignment based Damage Reduction.

Easy enough though, you could just use "Holy" and "Unholy" instead of Good and Evil.

Detect Evil? Well, I like to think the Dm is intellegent enough to guess "intent" to commit "evil"...I always liked using INTENT. Are they selfish? self-serving? etc. But that's not clear-cut and exact.

A minor nitpick:
Monte didn`t like the 3.5 weapon size rules, but at the same time, AU uses a similar system for shields? Why that?
Well, who cares? It is really a minor nitpick.

Agreed, I don't like weapon sizing *shrug* but it's minor.

I like the AU system. When I looked at the Akashic Class, I found a class/concept that I wanted to use since the begin of my roleplaying career (3-4 years ago with Shadowrun). The Magister really reminds me of a archtypical (in books and stories) wizard...
Mustrum Ridcully

I LIKE the classes. I like the book.

I just don't put it on the level of Jesus in it's sacred-ness

It's a good book, but not the be-all end-all.

No game really is.

 

[Macbeth]

I ran an AU demo adventure for my campus gaming club. I Dm'ed it fairly well, not as well as I might of, but what really shone through was the rules. EVERY player, including 3 or so who are new to roleplaying, wnated to make it into a campaign. Even with pregenerated characters. I like AU. Perhaps not as rabidly as some, but it is definately worth your money.