PHB2 vs. Arcana Evolved

[Psion]

And take Psion's class comment with a grain of salt. Remember, he has made it clear that he is predisposed against new classes. So they start out two strikes down. ( No offense, of course, Psion)

So then, why would AE be exempt from this? Hmmm?

Could it be that, perhaps, when it comes to new classes, some of better/more worthwhile than others? Your assessment of my supposed biased against new classes doesn't precisely invalidate my assessment that one set of new classes are better than another.

Of course, those who really follow what I have to say about classes find that points that I hammer on for classes isn't a tar-brush dismissal, but one based upon an assessment of the justification, flavor, and flexibility of the classes. Qualities that the AE classes have in spades and the PHBII classes lack.

 

[Crysmalon]

AE - excellent book, the aforementioned world 'baggage' is easily dropped and the magic system can originate from a far-off land in your campaign world the players don't often see.

I took one look at PHB2 and haven't looked again. Bleh

 

[ColonelHardisson]

The classes in AE are well written and well conceived. The classes in PHBII weren't.

I really dig the concept behind the knight class, and hope to use it in my campaign world. The other two new classes do nothing at all for me.

 

[Nifft]

They're quite different. PHB-II is great for a high-level D&D game. AE is great for an AE game (of any level). Obviously D&D and AE are strongly related, but they are still different games.

If you want good reading and an inspired setting: AE.

If you want more goodies for your D&D game: PHB-II.

You can't really intermingle them... well, not without a bunch of work.

-- N

 

[BryonD]

So then, why would AE be exempt from this? Hmmm?

Could it be that, perhaps, when it comes to new classes, some of better/more worthwhile than others? Your assessment of my supposed biased against new classes doesn't precisely invalidate my assessment that one set of new classes are better than another.

Of course, those who really follow what I have to say about classes find that points that I hammer on for classes isn't a tar-brush dismissal, but one based upon an assessment of the justification, flavor, and flexibility of the classes. Qualities that the AE classes have in spades and the PHBII classes lack.

First are by far foremost, you appear to be being a bit more than slightly thin skinned over a blatant joke.



That said....
For those that really read what I said in the post you quoted know that I just said they start two strikes down. Which is a long way from proclaiming tar-brush dismissals.

I agree that some of the AE classes rock.
I disagree on the PHBII classes (by and large).

But most of all I stand by my statement that you've shown a clear pattern of new classes starting out two strikes down. (And there ain't the slightest thing wrong with that by the way, I completely respect your reasoning for it.) Two strikes in no way means you can't still hit a home run.



But all that aside, SHEESH, it was A JOKE.

 

[BryonD]

I really dig the concept behind the knight class, and hope to use it in my campaign world. The other two new classes do nothing at all for me.

Must be true. Since there were THREE others.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Must be true. Since there were THREE others.

Jeez, really? That shows how little interest I had in any of them besides the knight. Let me try to remember them...umm...something about a dragon, one that was a mage/warrior crossbreed, and...you got me. I could never remember them without dragging out the book.

 

[BryonD]

Beguiler

 

[jeffh]

The AE magic system is a big hit with my group. It's a lot of work to adapt to D&D, but worth it IMO.

I use about six classes each from D&D and AE, mostly D&D races and skills, AE magic rules and a mix of spells dominated by standard AE ones, and a feat system that doesn't much resemble either game. If you're a tinkerer like me, or you're looking for an alternate take on d20 heroic fantasy to outright replace your PH, AE is well worth it.

The highlight of PHII is the feat chapter, which goes a long way toward making fighters worth sticking with at high levels, and toward making shields worth using (a big pet peeve of mine). There are many other fine ideas in that chapter as well. Most of the rest I can take or leave, though I do recommend the variant druid abilities over the standard version. But PHII is far easier to use in a reasonably standard D&D game, since that's precisely what it's designed for, and most people agree that one or two of the classes it introduces are really good (though they don't agree on which ones!).

 

[Nonlethal Force]

As others have said, if you are playing D&D, get the PHB II. If you want to play a related-but-different game, got AE.

As for the PHB II discussion going on here ...

I think the PHB II was hands down the best non-setting specific book WotC published this year. It is the book that gets more use at the table than any other 2006 publication. It did the most for expanding the game without changing the game. [I.E. it added to the game withuot making it more complex] It isn't setting specific.

But honestly, even if you don't buy the PHB II read the section on retraining. That section alone is worth picking it off the shelf and reading. It can easily become a rule for almost any RPG game out there.