Unearthed Arcana!

[Zaukrie]

Add me to the chorus saying "More of this!" I find the idea that "If it can't fit into the programs, it shouldn't be presented even as an optional rule" to be anathema to the spirit of creativity that's made every edition of this game work.

That's not how I read it. I read that some of it would fit into the CB or MB, but that it won't be playtested for balance. I'm cool with more creativity. But, I'd like playtested material. I'd also like to see Dragon not continue to shrink in size (and for Dungeon to have some full length adventures).

 

[JoeGKushner]

And you know, the other thing I'm not really gorking when reading about Unearthed Arcana, is that they need to open up the writing more. Sure, the in-house writers are great, but so great that we need to take ideas that aren't tested or themed for the campaign when there are probably freelancers out there who could do the material just as good if not better from a different angle that would fit into the DDI?"

From that persepctive, Unearthed Arcana just seems like another way to "wall off" D&D from outside influence.

 

[AngryMojo]

Add me to the chorus saying "More of this!" I find the idea that "If it can't fit into the programs, it shouldn't be presented even as an optional rule" to be anathema to the spirit of creativity that's made every edition of this game work.

Here here. I use custom monsters, there's no reason I can't use custom rules.

 

[Scribble]

And you know, the other thing I'm not really gorking when reading about Unearthed Arcana, is that they need to open up the writing more. Sure, the in-house writers are great, but so great that we need to take ideas that aren't tested or themed for the campaign when there are probably freelancers out there who could do the material just as good if not better from a different angle that would fit into the DDI?"

From that persepctive, Unearthed Arcana just seems like another way to "wall off" D&D from outside influence.

It could end up being just the opposite.

It could be that they get a lot of submissions, but can't always spare the resources to have someone comb through a freelancer's work to ensure all of it is balanced and fits with what they're doing.

UA might give them more of an opportunity to publish these ideas.

 

[WotC_Huscarl]

Either the editorial wasn't clear or its message is getting lost in the static.

Several types of articles will appear in UA. Some characteristic examples are:

• Variants that break the accepted power curve, either up or down. That doesn't mean 'broken' feats and powers but feats and powers that fall outside the game's parameters intentionally in order to achieve some effect. No matter how well developed they might be, excessively potent or weak powers can't be turned loose in the game as official content.
• Variants that create interesting play possibilities which fall outside the genre of 4E. That might be a new race of clockwork machines (we don't see a larger space for clockwork machines in the game), or rules for gunpowder weaponry (no mention of those in the game plan), or an expanded skills list or alternate uses for existing skills.
• Experimental variants such as the recent Curses which ultimately were excluded from game canon for any number of reasons, none of which were "we can't make this work."
• Variants which are assembled in such a way that they can't be adapted to the strict formatting of the CB software.

It's not limited to in-house writers at all. We're starting there because UA is a brand-new venture and we already have some cool material to work with. But we also have some promising stuff from freelancers which will see publication over the coming months.

The main thing we've been telling freelancers who are interested in contributing to UA--and there have been a lot of pitches already--is that this is a case where we're not interested in commissioning ideas. We need to see a finished article, or at least a very detailed outline, in order to judge suitability.

Steve

 

[vagabundo]

Thanks for the clarification Steve.

First off, I'm excited about the new series, but I do think that any content that can be included in the CB - and I understand that there maybe stuff that is awkward to implement - but the stuff that could be should be.

If any UA content was included it should be behind an Unearthed Arcana tab. So the clockwork race and the gunpower weapons probably could be included without any modifications to the CB and that is the content that I would love to see there.

 

[Zaran]

Something is better than nothing.

Actually it should be free if it's not supported. We are buying support for our games. If they aren't supporting it the not charge for it. That way the money we put into ddi goes to something official.

 

[JoeGKushner]

That does clear up some stuff, but not all.

For example, it doesn't expalin if these UA unofficial articles are going to be taking thep lace of supported articles.

And, to be honest, part of it sounds like horsecrap. "We don't want guns or clock work in the game offically, but we'll let you spend your money to see rules on how to use them. Even though things like items and monsters and races should be really easy to do, we have decided that's not where we want the game to go."

Uh, dudes at WoTC, let the customers decide where the game needs to go. Seriously.

 

[TarionzCousin]

Actually it should be free if it's not supported. We are buying support for our games. If they aren't supporting it the not charge for it. That way the money we put into ddi goes to something official.

And, to be honest, part of it sounds like horsecrap. "We don't want guns or clock work in the game offically, but we'll let you spend your money to see rules on how to use them. Even though things like items and monsters and races should be really easy to do, we have decided that's not where we want the game to go."

Uh, dudes at WoTC, let the customers decide where the game needs to go. Seriously.

Wait a second. You're both making a few assumptions. Let me make a different one.

What if WotC had stuff lying around that its people had worked on just for fun--things like rules for clockworks or guns, for example. What should they do with it? Ignore it?

It seems like a good business practice to add content to DDI--their ongoing monthly revenue stream. They want as many people to subscribe as possible. That is where the Corporate Masters™ want to build WotC's bottom line. That revenue is relatively reliable.

Demanding that they produce material for free is not going to win any arguments with any serious business model.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Wait a second. You're both making a few assumptions. Let me make a different one.

What if WotC had stuff lying around that its people had worked on just for fun--things like rules for clockworks or guns, for example. What should they do with it? Ignore it?

It seems like a good business practice to add content to DDI--their ongoing monthly revenue stream. They want as many people to subscribe as possible. That is where the Corporate Masters™ want to build WotC's bottom line. That revenue is relatively reliable.

Demanding that they produce material for free is not going to win any arguments with any serious business model.

Now you've got me confused. The WoTC poster just said, and I used his examples of clockwork and guns not being in the DDI but being part of Dungeon/Dragon.

"That might be a new race of clockwork machines (we don't see a larger space for clockwork machines in the game), or rules for gunpowder weaponry (no mention of those in the game plan), "

You do know, from what we've been told so far, that there are no plans to add UA articles to the DDI right? Unless I'm misunderstanding that part of the editorial it appeared in which I don't think I am, but I've been wrong before.