Li Shenron
Legend
We haven't actually used any of the UA options yet in our game, but I did make some of these options available. Even if not all the stuff got me interested, but I certainly always love to read a new UA article...
Not interested in Eberron as a campaign setting at all.
I generally don't like adding more PC races by default, but I may allow any of these races in a kitchen sink game. None of them I particularly liked tho.
I didn't like the whole Artificer concept and implementation.
Always hated Action Points.
The only part I actually liked is the Dragonmark feats. Unfortunately, they are not well balanced, at least in the sense that some of them are straight better than the Magic Initiate feat.
Personal appreciation: low.
Usefulness potential: medium.
Made available in our game: none.
Loved it, possibly my favourite UA article!
I totally liked the concept and the implementation seemed fairly good. Unfortunately I haven't yet the chance to try them out in an actual game.
Personal appreciation: very high.
Usefulness potential: high.
Made available in our game: all (but this is DM's stuff).
Boring article, I have been creating new classes and subclasses for my 5e conversion of Rokugan, and I did not need these no-brainer guidelines to do so. But certainly giving them a read doesn't do any harm.
No interest in Ranger variants. On the other hand, I really welcomed the Favored Soul subclass, as I think in general the Sorcerer needed more subclasses.
Personal appreciation: low.
Usefulness potential: low.
Made available in our game: Favored Soul.
We rarely do waterborn adventures at all, but all the material here seemed very usable in all campaigns to me!
Again, I don't like adding more PC races by default, but wouldn't object to a player wanting to play this version of a Minotaur.
Didn't particularly like the Mariner fighting style, but thought it was at least balanced.
Loved the subclasses instead!
Personal appreciation: high.
Usefulness potential: high.
Made available in our game: Mariner, Swashbuckler, Storm Sorcerer.
Small and useless article to me, as I dislike the first two variants, and we already used custom alignments (but these guidelines were particularly useless).
Personal appreciation: low.
Usefulness potential: low.
Made available in our game: none.
Never been a fan of psionics, but I guess I could maybe introduce them in my game is done properly. At least this first implementation sounded interesting and with good potential.
Personal appreciation: medium.
Usefulness potential: low.
Made available in our game: none.
This was awesome to read, but sadly irrelevant for us since we are only interested in fairly traditional fantasy settings, not modern. It might be possible to adapt some spells or more, but it's not worth the effort yet.
Personal appreciation: high.
Usefulness potential: low.
Made available in our game: none.
Not going to change the default Ranger for any reason. In addition, I hated almost all these ideas.
Personal appreciation: low.
Usefulness potential: low.
Made available in our game: none.
Liked the attempt at bringing prestige classes back into the game, much better ideas than in 3e but still falling short of what would be the ideal case.
I fairly liked the example prestige class, except for the fact that it seemed it would better deliver as a series of feats than an actual class.
Personal appreciation: medium.
Usefulness potential: medium.
Made available in our game: none.
I consider the two fighting styles broken, but the three subclasses seemed awesome.
Personal appreciation: high.
Usefulness potential: high.
Made available in our game: Deep Stalker Ranger, Shadow Sorcerer, Undying Light Warlock.
Small but good.
Personal appreciation: high.
Usefulness potential: high.
Made available in our game: all.
Some concern about these implementations, but otherwise another set of immediately usable material.
Personal appreciation: high.
Usefulness potential: high.
Made available in our game: all.
More or less the same as the previous psionics round...
Personal appreciation: medium.
Usefulness potential: low.
Made available in our game: none.
Not interested in Eberron as a campaign setting at all.
I generally don't like adding more PC races by default, but I may allow any of these races in a kitchen sink game. None of them I particularly liked tho.
I didn't like the whole Artificer concept and implementation.
Always hated Action Points.
The only part I actually liked is the Dragonmark feats. Unfortunately, they are not well balanced, at least in the sense that some of them are straight better than the Magic Initiate feat.
Personal appreciation: low.
Usefulness potential: medium.
Made available in our game: none.
Loved it, possibly my favourite UA article!
I totally liked the concept and the implementation seemed fairly good. Unfortunately I haven't yet the chance to try them out in an actual game.
Personal appreciation: very high.
Usefulness potential: high.
Made available in our game: all (but this is DM's stuff).
Boring article, I have been creating new classes and subclasses for my 5e conversion of Rokugan, and I did not need these no-brainer guidelines to do so. But certainly giving them a read doesn't do any harm.
No interest in Ranger variants. On the other hand, I really welcomed the Favored Soul subclass, as I think in general the Sorcerer needed more subclasses.
Personal appreciation: low.
Usefulness potential: low.
Made available in our game: Favored Soul.
We rarely do waterborn adventures at all, but all the material here seemed very usable in all campaigns to me!
Again, I don't like adding more PC races by default, but wouldn't object to a player wanting to play this version of a Minotaur.
Didn't particularly like the Mariner fighting style, but thought it was at least balanced.
Loved the subclasses instead!
Personal appreciation: high.
Usefulness potential: high.
Made available in our game: Mariner, Swashbuckler, Storm Sorcerer.
Small and useless article to me, as I dislike the first two variants, and we already used custom alignments (but these guidelines were particularly useless).
Personal appreciation: low.
Usefulness potential: low.
Made available in our game: none.
Never been a fan of psionics, but I guess I could maybe introduce them in my game is done properly. At least this first implementation sounded interesting and with good potential.
Personal appreciation: medium.
Usefulness potential: low.
Made available in our game: none.
This was awesome to read, but sadly irrelevant for us since we are only interested in fairly traditional fantasy settings, not modern. It might be possible to adapt some spells or more, but it's not worth the effort yet.
Personal appreciation: high.
Usefulness potential: low.
Made available in our game: none.
Not going to change the default Ranger for any reason. In addition, I hated almost all these ideas.
Personal appreciation: low.
Usefulness potential: low.
Made available in our game: none.
Liked the attempt at bringing prestige classes back into the game, much better ideas than in 3e but still falling short of what would be the ideal case.
I fairly liked the example prestige class, except for the fact that it seemed it would better deliver as a series of feats than an actual class.
Personal appreciation: medium.
Usefulness potential: medium.
Made available in our game: none.
I consider the two fighting styles broken, but the three subclasses seemed awesome.
Personal appreciation: high.
Usefulness potential: high.
Made available in our game: Deep Stalker Ranger, Shadow Sorcerer, Undying Light Warlock.
Small but good.
Personal appreciation: high.
Usefulness potential: high.
Made available in our game: all.
Some concern about these implementations, but otherwise another set of immediately usable material.
Personal appreciation: high.
Usefulness potential: high.
Made available in our game: all.
More or less the same as the previous psionics round...
Personal appreciation: medium.
Usefulness potential: low.
Made available in our game: none.