Unearthed Arcana Variant Rules - Previews and Questions

[woodelf]

Scholarly bard? I'm all over that, too. Someday before I die I'm going to play a sage as a PC...

One of the coolest characters in any of my games was my brother's tortle scribe/duelist. So, not a pure sage-type, but he probably used the scribe abilities more than the duelist abilities.

 

[jarandus]

Unearthed Arcana Racial Paragon question

I was wondering if someone can help me figure out exactly what the gnome paragon Illusion aptitude works out if I am playing a 3rd level character that is a 1 gnome paragon/1 bard/1wizard (illusionist)

1 for all wizard spells but 2 for any illusion spells
1 for all bard spells but 2 for any illusion spells

is this correct or am I misunderstanding the mechanic?

Thanks

 

[woodelf]

(and anyone wonder why we might want *less* lethal falls? I'm surprised there isn't a more lethal falls variant!)

quick-n-easy more-lethal falls variant: use the AD&D1(&2?) falling rules: d6 per 10' fallen, cumulative. I.e.,
10' 1d6
20' +2d6 (=3d6 total)
30' +3d6 (=6d6 total)
40' +4d6 (=10d6 total)
etc.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

I came here to read about D&D, not SW, ... .

But you are in the General RPG Discussion forum.

The D&D forum is elsewhere.


Eric Anondson

 

[woodelf]

The Gold Dragon Bloodline as an example:
Resistance to Fire 5
Gold Dragon Affinity +2
+1 to natural armor
Resistance to Fire 10
Gold Dragon Affinity +4
+1 to natural armor
Gold Dragon Affinity +6
+1 to natural armor

[snipped out the non-relevant elements]

ok, mini-rant: is it so hard to establish a consistent convention for listing increasing benefits, especially in class/race/bloodline/whatever lists? Could they please either list them cumulatively, or individually, and stick with that method for everything. Individually would be preferable, since that's how benefits are listed in general (you don't list "+2 on Sense Motive checks, Alertness, Strength +1" as the benefits for the 3rd level of the bloodline, you just list "Strength +1", because the benefits are assumed to be cumulative, so they're listed individually). How come Gold Dragon Affinity and Resistance to Fire are listed cumulatively (i.e., the total bonus at that level is given), while the natural armor bonus is listed individually (i.e., just the bonus given at that level)? Now, in this particular case, what's intended is crystal-clear. But there are other cases where it's not: aging modifiers to abilities, frex--you have to look at the complete list before it's clear whether they're listed cumulatively or individually.
[/rant]

 

[woodelf]

From the list... it looks like there might be about 50% completely new topics, and about 50% topics that have seen print in other d20 sourcebooks at some time or another. I'm still very interested in this book... but not as much as I was before I saw this list.

From having skimmed the book, and actually read several sections (several hp/ac variants, skill variants, and some magical alternatives), i'd actually characterize the book as, roughly:

1/3 variants that are already out there in a D20 System game, though perhaps with some modifications/revisions from the original
1/3 variants that are old hat in the non-D20 System world, and are many of the reasons people have historically left D&D for other games (some of the previous category also have appeared in non-D20 System games, too)
1/3 more-or-less-new stuff--though the conceptual antecedents of these elements have often been out there for a while

So, if you have a lot of D20 System books, and/or other RPG books, it's probably not gonna be as Cool and New for you. If you're comfortable doing up your own houserules, even if they make fairly radical, low-level changes, you probably don't need this book in any case. But if you either don't have the time, or the inclination, or the ability/knowledge to come up with radical rules overhauls, and keep them fun and balanced to the degree your group requires, this is a great book. It finally brings to D&D (and, in some cases, to the D20 System in general) a lot of the rules innovations of the last 20 years--potentially slaying the rest of the sacred cows and fully modernizing D&D. At the cost of its D&D-ness, potentially.

And if you want to use a large selection of the more-radical alternatives, i would wonder why you're playing D&D, and not just picking up Ars Magica, GURPS, Earthdawn, Riddle of Steel, or some other fantasy RPG? I mean, if you were to use generic classes, recharge magic, specific injury, DR and damage conversion for armor, defense bonus, contacts, reputation, bell curve rolls, complex skill checks, craft points, and spontaneous metamagic, just how "D&D" would it still be?

 

[woodelf]

There're a few things in this book that i wonder why they need to write them down:

Feeling better. Now working down (page 1)
gestalt characters - effectively taking two classes at once: just use all class features and the better of all variable features (for example Base Attack, Base Saves, # of skill points...)

With the helpful warning that characters will be much more powerful than their character level indicates, and CR ratings won't be accurate. Do i really need someone to tell me i can make a character by taking the best/sum of two class levels at every character level, and that it'l radically change the balance?

Bloodlines (take 2) - Ancestors available: Celestial, Demon, Devil, Doppelganger, Black Dragon, Blue Dragon, Brass Dragon, Bronze Dragon, Copper Dragon, Gold Dragon, Green Dragon, Red Dragon, Silver Dragon, White Dragon, Air Elemental, Earth Elemental, Fire Elemental, Water Elemental, Fey, Djinni, Efreeti, Janni, Cloud Giant, Fire Giant, Frost Giant, Hill Giant, Stone Giant, Storm Giant, Githyanki, Githzerai, Hag, Lycanthrope, Minotaur, Ogre, Slaad, Titan, Troll, Vampire, Yuan-ti.
There are three bloodline strength - minor, intermediate, and major, giving 5, 10, or 20 special abilities.
All of that uses up 13 pages.

Am i reading right that these are basically like the Heroic Paths of Midnight: an additional track of abilities gained with level, independent of your race/class?

Bell Curve Rolls - 3d6 instead of 1d20 and what it entails.

I'm a little disappointed in this one. 3d6 is a really clumsy alternative to d20. It chops off the extremes of the roll, requires addition, and is very heavily centered. mid20 [3d20, drop the lowest and highest] would've been a much better option to present/explore: no math, just comparison; not quite so heavily center-weighted; full range of results; and it'd work better with the luck domain.

And, heck, if you *want* to add up a bunch of dice for every roll, you should really do it right and roll 3d6+2dF--that'd give you a range from 1 to 20, with about the steepness of 3d6.

-Injury System: No hp, just 6 conditions: hit, disabled, dying, nonlethal hit, staggered, unconscious.

This plus recharge magic pretty much completes the job of porting Ars Magica to D&D that D&D3E started. [well, short of dropping classes, that is. Though using the Expert/Warrior/Wizard base classes as presented in Unearthed Arcana would give a bit more of the companion/grog/magus feel.]

 

[woodelf]

Nope, I like class names that are something that characer or it's allies might refer to it as, in game. A character refering to its self as a Anti-Paladin would, to me, smack of Austin Powers style camp. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it's still silly.

any moreso than someone referring to themselves as "evil" (and meaning it)?

 

[woodelf]

I'm a little annoyed at the paladin prestige class. A DM who uses it is, in effect, removing a core class and forcing anyone who wants to play one to jump thorugh hoops just so they can have the special priviledge of playing...a core class.

Sort of like how D&D3[.5]E doesn't have an "acrobat" base class, instead forcing you to jump through hoops to play one? Or a "skill monkey" base class? There're any number of fantasy archetypes, and former D&D archetypes, that don't have base classes--the division between base class and prestige class is fairly arbitrary to begin with, and plenty of people think that there shouldn't be any such thing as 1st-level paladins--that it just shouldn't be a base class.

 

[woodelf]

For example, I see there is an entry for "Armor as Damage Reduction" under Chapter 4: Adventuring. Now, I would love to see a comprehensive, playtested, and balanced set of rules for armor damage reduction; especially so, with those rules being handed down from the game-designer gods of WotC (if only because those rules would reach a broader audience and be more generally accepted); but that alone would take an entire chapter if not more! Because, really, "armor as damage reduction" does not sync well with the D&D system, as is; which still, at its core -- even with the greatly improved 3.0/3.5 -- is totally built around the antiquidated and convoluted (if not nonsensical) "to hit" roll vs. AC concept.

Yeah, AC and hps are sufficiently intertwined that you really need to change both if you change one. Luckily, there are variants for both in Unearthed Arcana, and you could easily grab a pair of variants that complement one another.