Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana:Are they revealing limitations in the 5th edition system?

[Parmandur]

You have to love when people start threads claiming X and then never reply to anyone who makes a point about how X may not be the case.

Why would they do that when all right-thinking people must agree with X, as inherently obvious?

 

[hawkeyefan]

Why would they do that when all right-thinking people must agree with X, as inherently obvious?

Clearly.

I don't know what I was thinking.

 

[CapnZapp]

If it's "innovation", the UA have it.

Not sure why you're debating taste with me.

Most of the UA I've seen have very far from what I'd call innovation and imagination. Sure there are exceptions. The Arcane Archer got some new arrow feature, but IIRC it was relatively minor in the end, and not a whole new approach.

Doesn't change my take.

I can't even name one new UA item on par with the PHB subclasses. By that I mean: imagine if the Battlemaster or the Assassin or the Shadow Monk (or, heck, the Beastmaster) didn't already exist, and was introduced by UA.

That level of new stuff is far and few between.

I can't remember if the Bladesinger was in UA before it appeared in SCAG. If so, I stand corrected. That would have been a UA worth the attention. (That would arguably be the only new SCAG subclass that truly is worth getting excited about)

 

[Corpsetaker]

You have to love when people start threads claiming X and then never reply to anyone who makes a point about how X may not be the case.

Because you are one of those people I don't really bother responding to because all you are going to do is give some snarky response and never admit that you might be wrong.

 

[Corpsetaker]

I don't think he did. You do realize that they could put out a VGtM or SCAG every other year instead of every year, right? Heck they could even release one every three years.

They could but I bet a lot of people wouldn't be happy about that.

Not sure who mentioned it but someone gave a vague reference to the playtest survey about the release schedule and people asking for a specific amount of release. This never happened because they survey never gave a specific number. You saying you want less can mean many different things. If people were satisfied with the releases then DMsGuild and UA wouldn't really exist because people would be happy with the amount Wizards gives them.

I'm afraid Jester's comment isn't valid because 1 book a year is an extreme, just on the other side of the scale. Moderation usually runs in the middle of the spectrum.

 

[pkt77242]

They could but I bet a lot of people wouldn't be happy about that.

Not sure who mentioned it but someone gave a vague reference to the playtest survey about the release schedule and people asking for a specific amount of release. This never happened because they survey never gave a specific number. You saying you want less can mean many different things. If people were satisfied with the releases then DMsGuild and UA wouldn't really exist because people would be happy with the amount Wizards gives them.

I'm afraid Jester's comment isn't valid because 1 book a year is an extreme, just on the other side of the scale. Moderation usually runs in the middle of the spectrum.

Huh? UA would still exist because they need to test stuff for future releases.

Also DMs Guild would still exist because some people would want more. What I think that you are missing is that there has to be a critical mass of people who would buy the next product (without can canabalising sells of other products). The question isn't would some people buy a 4th product but would enough people buy a 4th product (without canabalising sells of other products) to be worth it. No one knows the answer for sure but WoTC who has the most information of all of us feels that the 3 releases a year is the best option. Of course that probably takes into account other issues such as keeping the edition evergreen, ROI, etc.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

This never happened because they survey never gave a specific number.

I distinctly remember being surveyed about how much I budget for gaming materials, or how often I prefer to buy them, if not both those questions.

They don't have to ask "How many D&D products do you want to be released each year?" with specific number answers to obtain appropriate information with which to devise a release schedule that the majority of the fan base will be satisfied with.

 

[Willie the Duck]

Because you are one of those people I don't really bother responding to because all you are going to do is give some snarky response and never admit that you might be wrong.

Then how about my question about what kind of UA output you would consider innovative and bold?

 

[Parmandur]

They could but I bet a lot of people wouldn't be happy about that.

Not sure who mentioned it but someone gave a vague reference to the playtest survey about the release schedule and people asking for a specific amount of release. This never happened because they survey never gave a specific number. You saying you want less can mean many different things. If people were satisfied with the releases then DMsGuild and UA wouldn't really exist because people would be happy with the amount Wizards gives them.

I'm afraid Jester's comment isn't valid because 1 book a year is an extreme, just on the other side of the scale. Moderation usually runs in the middle of the spectrum.

[MENTION=697]mearls[/MENTION] was quite specific in one of the recent interviews that the data came out "three a year;" all signs point to this set-up working for them just fine.

 

[Willie the Duck]

And why the heck are we back to talking the release schedule? This thread is theoretically about UA!