Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="WotC_Huscarl" data-source="post: 5316104" data-attributes="member: 65608">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:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">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.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">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.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">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."</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Variants which are assembled in such a way that they can't be adapted to the strict formatting of the CB software. </li> </ul>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</blockquote>

Verification