Unearthed Arcana = D&D Viagra!

[Psion]

[Edit] It didn't even make me want to look into the Diamond Throne more as a Campaign Setting. I know it was sold as a dual-use book (Variant PHB + Diamond Throne PHB), but its failed on both those counts for me ... so I guess it *is* a bad book in my opinion - so no flames - if you are enjoying it, keep doing so !

So, does not necessarily wanting to use something make it bad? That's not the definition I would use (and if I did, the reviews page would look a bit different.. ;p )

Just because I don't want to drive a mustang doesn't make it a bad car.

 

[ddougan]

So, does not necessarily wanting to use something make it bad? That's not the definition I would use (and if I did, the reviews page would look a bit different.. ;p )

Just because I don't want to drive a mustang doesn't make it a bad car.

It means its bad for me I bought the book, had no interest in using it as an alternative campaign setting, no interest in using it as a variant player handbook, no interest in lifting stuff out of it as variant rules in my campaign.

Basically I've not used the book. In my opinion it was a bad buy!

If you are using it and enjoying it, like I said in my previous message - don't stop

 

[Piratecat]

I generally dislike house rules, but I'll eventually be using (or would be open to using):

Elemental racial variants
Reducing level adjustments
Bloodlines
Racial paragon classes
Variant character classes
Class feature variants
Complex skill checks
Massive damage threshhold variants
Legendary weapons
Item familiars
Taint

And there are another half-dozen ideas that wouldn't be appropriate for my current game, but which I could use in future campaigns. Yup; definitely worth it for me.

 

[nikolai]

Psion, could you talk about your dislike of the traits and flaws system a little more?

I'm not fond of them. As a disclaimer, I am not fond of most disad systems, but this system is in no way exemplary. Some of the flaws are okay; in most D&D games, a -6 initiative is going to hurt regardless of character types. That said, some strike me as having the same sorts of problems that many disad systems face. "Feeble" - why do we need this disad? Isn't having a low Stength and Constitution sufficient to describe this condition? "Inattentive" - this strikes me as having the same problem that most of the "traits" earlier in the same section have... penalties to skills in a party situation usually aren't penalties. You merely take penalties to skills that you are never going to be strong in anyways, and it's really a non-penalty, since the rest of the party will carry those skills.

From what I've seen and heard of the system they seem to have designed it so that the disadvantage will count, and that their effect is worse than the advantages. Things like these for the down-side of traits:

• -1 penalty on Spot checks (or Spot and Listen checks),
• -2 penalty on Dexterity-based skills,
• -1 penalty to your Armor Class,

Or these for flaws:

• -6 to Initative,
• -3 to Will Saves

Don't seem that broken. I don't yet have the book, so I may well be missing something. But it seems to me things like spot, listen, and balance checks have specific effects on individual characters, and are hard to opt out of. Character can minimise their impact, but can't choose not to use them.

Oh, and what proportion of non-broken flaw/traits are there? This sort of system is very vulnerable to the weakest link in the chain, so could you fix it by crossing out those that don't work on a case-by-case basis?

Sorry for the long post, traits/flaws are one of the big draws of UA for me.

 

[Piratecat]

I rather like the traits system. Psion's point is that a penalty to spot or search (or any "shared" skill that the whole party rolls) won't matter, because someone else can compensate for you. I don't see that as much of a problem in UA's traits system, though.

Flaws are trickier. It's difficult to balance two bonus feats with two penalties, and incorporating the flaws system could allow entrance into some prestige classes relatively early.

 

[Psion]

Psion, could you talk about your dislike of the traits and flaws system a little more?



From what I've seen and heard of the system they seem to have designed it so that the disadvantage will count, and that their effect is worse than the advantages. Things like these for the down-side of traits:

Erm... I thought I explained it pretty well in the linked post you quoted. I'm not sure exactly what to add. Let me try again.

Some of the penalties AREN'T very abusable. As stated, an initiative penalty is pretty telling for most characters the way the game is played.

That said, many of the penalties are weak and are not really a balancing detriment despite the fact that they are larger in magnitude than the associated bonus.

Why is minmaxing. You are not going to take a penalty in a skill you are expecting your character to use a lot. Rather, you are going to take a penalty in a skill you will never use. That being the case, disadvantages become point-mines vice adding character flavor.

This approach has struck me as wonky ever since I first saw it in ars magica "anti-skills" or whatever they were, for this reason.

As also stated in the quoted link, I think the only way to really handle disadvantages viably that don't have direct and telling impacts on the game (like the initiative penalty flaw, or the way flaws work in Kult) is to reward the character on a per-incident basis, so the character is only rewarded if the flaw actually comes into play.

Or, another alternative is to simply allow the player to take whatever disads they want to actually play and not give any kickbacks (or, at best, roleplaying XP bonus). IME, making disads point mine only invites wonky characters that the player really isn't that keen on roleplaying.

 

[Umbran]

...but when it came right down to it, the changes I'm looking at were already available in d20 format...

...and would cost you how much to collect on your own, when each hardcover book is in the $30+ range these days?

 

[Desdichado]

I rather like the traits system. Psion's point is that a penalty to spot or search (or any "shared" skill that the whole party rolls) won't matter, because someone else can compensate for you. I don't see that as much of a problem in UA's traits system, though.

Flaws are trickier. It's difficult to balance two bonus feats with two penalties, and incorporating the flaws system could allow entrance into some prestige classes relatively early.

I agree; I'm fine with the traits (there's another rule add-on that I like that I forgot) but I'm not real pleased with the flaws for the reasons cited above.

 

[Desdichado]

...and would cost you how much to collect on your own, when each hardcover book is in the $30+ range these days?

That's only an issue if I hadn't already had those books for several years, in some cases. Sure, starting from scratch, UA is a better deal than picking up Star Wars so you can see how WP/VP works, and class based defense bonus, and CoC to see how Sanity works (to use two examples.) But I've had both of those books since they were new.

Besides, my comment isn't that UA isn't a good book and worth owning, merely that I don't think it lives up to the hype. Most of the better rules in it are not original to d20, and in many cases, they weren't exactly spelled out exactly how they should be used, especially in combination with other house rules. To me, that seems like it should have been a pretty crucial step, and would have been worth it to pick up even if I literally had every rule already in the book in print from somewhere else.

As it is, I still have to do the same amount of work to kitbash in many of the optional rules.

 

[Breakdaddy]

Wow, I see that the usual naysayers are panning the new material. Count me in as one who gives it an overall thumbs up! I turned a fairly critical eye to the book when I picked it up, thinking I MIGHT find some decent material in there but was pleasantly surprised. I dont think everything in it is great but most of it is worth the time to read through. I got some really good ideas from this and particularly like the new death's door system (sans the -10 hp rule) which will be implemented in my game asap.