Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MerricB" data-source="post: 1392564" data-attributes="member: 3586">Not at all, but it just seems as if you're not quite getting all the nuances of my posts.I said that thoroughly playtesting UA is ludicrous. Certainly, there are ideas that that can be playtested in a fairly thorough manner before release (traits come to mind), but there are other ideas for which the implications are too great to allow such playtesting (gestalt classes, VP/WP systems). Consider the playtesting that 3E received, unparalleled in the history of role-playing, and it still had major issues with its balance. Not that 3.5E fixes all of those problems, for it doesn't, and of course introduces some new problems.They can do a little gaming with the variant rules in UA, but the implications of each of the changes taken alone can be huge for a campaign that lasts two years, and then there are the combinations of the changes. Oh dear!With a book like Complete Warrior, as a book where any part of it should integrate into a campaign easily, and that is built off the basic assumptions of D&D, then playtesting and the balance issues are solid and real. If it does fail on the balance issue, then that is a real problem for Wizards. However, I don't think that quite the same standard applies to Unearthed Arcana, and expecting that holds WotC to an unrealistic standard. I see UA as a real grab-bag: some ideas that are good, some ideas that have little relation to standard D&D, and some ideas that add much to the OGC community, even though their application in a 'normal' D&D is uncertain.The weird, the wacky, and the wonderful - and which is which is down to personal preferences.Cheers!</blockquote>

Verification