Unearthed Arcana Variant Rules - Previews and Questions

[Silveras]

Beats me... I've been using opposed rolls over static 10+ for nearly 3 years now (Defense, Spell DCs, and most anything with a value 10 or higher).

But that's not quite what this is.

"Players Roll All the Dice". The DM does not make an attack roll. Instead of the monster rolling 1d20+bonus+adjustments and checking against the character's AC (10+bonses+adjustments)... instead the monster is assumed to roll 12+bonuses+adjustments and the PLAYER rolls "AC": 1d20+AC Bonuses+Adjustments.

 

[Derulbaskul]

Yes I know all of this from reading my copy of UA, but what is the XP cost paid? Is it treated like a regular level?

Of course. You're taking a level in a "virtual" class therefore you pay the normal XP costs.

 

[Derulbaskul]

I picked my book up yesterday at my FLGS as they were unboxing it. So far I really like alot it. Some of the material seems like it will work VERY well with my Dawnforge Campaign

Ren

I've posted my thoughts on this topic over at the Paths of Legends boards. I hope you'll check it out and add your own comments.

 

[buzz]

OK, color me confused: Omega Minus posts pretty much the entirety of a very simple rules variation (one that doesn't need much more than that to work out)--one that is found in the DMG, not Unearthed Arcana--and it makes you want to buy Unearthed Arcana? What's the connection?

Because it's *not* the same rule variant that you're citing from the DMG? (UA: "Players roll all the dice" != DMG: "Defense roll".) Because it was yet another idea I thought was cool, not the *only* idea?

Is my being enthusiastic not okay with you?

 

[buzz]

Yeah, i still don't understand the switch to squares. Has an actual rationale/reason been put forth at any point, and i just missed it?

When did D&D ever use hexes before? All I remember was the little flanking diagram from 1e, but maps were always in squares.

 

[woodelf]

Beats me... I've been using opposed rolls over static 10+ for nearly 3 years now (Defense, Spell DCs, and most anything with a value 10 or higher).

But that's not quite what this is.

"Players Roll All the Dice". The DM does not make an attack roll. Instead of the monster rolling 1d20+bonus+adjustments and checking against the character's AC (10+bonses+adjustments)... instead the monster is assumed to roll 12+bonuses+adjustments and the PLAYER rolls "AC": 1d20+AC Bonuses+Adjustments.

Yeah, i didn't catch that at first--Bendris is describing something that increases the die rolling, and symetricalizes the system (both sides always roll). I'm talking about, and the poster raving about Unearthed Arcana was responding to, something that eliminates GM die-rolling, and makes the system deliberately asymetrical.

 

[woodelf]

well, speaking from personal opinion, i'd still rather play a heavily Unearthed Arcana-ed version of D&D 3.5 than Ars Magica, GURPS, or Earthdawn. (i don't have any prior experience with RoS, but from what i've heard i probably wouldn't like that system either.)

Even if you've altered it sufficiently that it's closer to one of the latter than to D&D? Seriously, using a significant portion of the rules in Unearthed Arcana could actually end up with a game that is closer to "Earthdawn with a d20" or "GURPS with classes" than to D&D3[.5]E. I mean, does it really matter any more that it's nominally the same system at that point, if you've changed [almost] everything?

 

[woodelf]

Ironically, with UA there essentially is an acrobat and skill-monkey base class. A very simple Rogue variant, in which the sneak attack progression is replaced with the Fighter's bonus feat progression, fulfills both of these roles.

Cool! 'course, i've already got the Akashic, as well as some homebrew stuff, and i'm not likely to be playing a D20 System game any time soon, so it's mostly a moot point for me personally. But i gotta say i've been pleasantly surprised by Unearthed Arcana. It's got some really great stuff in it, even if i think it's also got some pretty silly/obvious stuff in it. If i were running a D20 System fantasy game, it'd be the only WotC book i've seen so far that i'd buy.

 

[woodelf]

Because it's *not* the same rule variant that you're citing from the DMG? (UA: "Players roll all the dice" != DMG: "Defense roll".) Because it was yet another idea I thought was cool, not the *only* idea?

Is my being enthusiastic not okay with you?

It's perfectly ok--i said i was confused, not upset, disbelieving, incredulous, offended, or anything else negative. I see now that i misread you--and misremembered the DMG (i could've sworn that in the same section that talked about defense rolls, it also talked about simply having the players do all the die rolling).

And i hoped that that one idea wasn't *the* reason you were interested--but it *was* the only one you quoted and enthused about, so i was questioning. Sorry; didn't mean to upset you.

 

[woodelf]

When did D&D ever use hexes before? All I remember was the little flanking diagram from 1e, but maps were always in squares.

Officially, AD&D1 used squares (and 10s of feet) indoors, and hexes (and 10s of yards) outdoors. Outdoor maps were usually, but not always, overlaid with a hex grid, while dungeon maps were always with a square grid. Most people i know used all squares for the home stuff, but only because hex graph paper was hard to find, and all of us that had battle mats (homemade or commercial) used hexes.

AD&D2 was on the fence, and the combat rules, at least, did everything in both hexes and squares (flanking/facing diagrams for both, missile scatter diagrams for both, etc.). I don't think i bought any commercial adventures for AD&D2, and i don't remember seeing a grid of any sort on the campaign maps from boxed sets.