What is Arcana Evolved/Unearthed Arcana like?

[Nifft]

Some time in the next few days I should have an interview with Monte up on this subject!

That's hot.

-- N

 

[Krypter]

Well I was looking for both new rules and setting material, so AE should be perfect. With the changes to the magic system it sounds better than vanilla D&D while still being compatible. Just my cup o' tea. Too bad it doesn't change the combat system. If anyone could improve/streamline the D&D combat mechanics, it would be Monte.

Piratecat, ask him if there will be additional setting books for the Diamond Throne.

So where can I get it for $40 instead of $50? I couldn't see any special offers on Monte's site.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

Malhavoc put out the Book of Iron Might which has combat rules. Though I think they may complicate things as much as simplify them.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

Quick ?

Is Arcana Unearthed: A Variant Player's Handbook all in 3E?

And is Arcana Evolved in 3.5E or still in 3E?

Thanks

- Woas

As I understand the differences are enough that it doesn't really matter. The only really noticeable thing is that the Oathsworn uses the old iterative attacks.

DR used to be 3.0 where it was used, and the monsters had the old face/reach system. They may have changed those points.

 

[Felon]

That's 'cause it's not a setting book, it's a rule book. It's analogous to the D&D3E PH, not to Nyambe.

But as Crothian mentioned, the character classes, races, and other content are specific to the setting, and that's where the PHB analogy stops.

 

[Staffan]

But as Crothian mentioned, the character classes, races, and other content are specific to the setting, and that's where the PHB analogy stops.

Arcana Unearthed is about as specific to the Diamond Throne setting as the PHB is specific to the Greyhawk setting. It's just that pretty much every other D&D setting uses Greyhawk as a starting point and changes the geography and stuff, but keeps the same races and similar things.

 

[HiLiphNY]

I want to play in an AE setting. Even an AU setting, but really really really in an AE setting.

-- N

In life, they say timing is evereything. . .see the link below my sig:

 

[woodelf]

But as Crothian mentioned, the character classes, races, and other content are specific to the setting, and that's where the PHB analogy stops.

Says you. According to the author, and according to me, the races/classes/spells are no more Diamond Throne-specific than those in the D&D3E PH are Greyhawk-specific. His goal was to have no more assumed setting than the D&D3E PH, just different assumed setting. I think he succeeded.

Look, open a random, not-TSR-published fantasy novel. Is it more likely to have animal-people, or D&D-style gnomes? Halflings, or faeries? Militaristic spell-slinging undead-turning priests, or animists? Bards who use magic independent of their musical abilities, or wizards who use staves? And so on. IME, the tropes he chose for AU are more typical of high fantasy fiction than those of D&D3E which (1) are very Tolkien-specific in inspiration and (2) have evolved into their own thing, significantly differentiated from their sources.

Unless your conception of fantasy automatically includes the elements of the D&D3E PH, regardless of anything else, one is no more "generic" than the other. Heck, i took a setting designed for D&D tropes, and still found AU to be a better fit. Al Qadim has built-in roles for most of the AU races; gnomes and halflings and dwarves are such a lousy fit in the original that they basically don't appear once you get past the passage where it says they're present. The original rules had to ditch about half the standard classes and provide a whole slew of new kits (with new abilities) to match the setting; with AU, i had to dump one flavor of witch and add a few more totem animals and a feat chain, and i had everything covered. AU has mechanics built in to handle several things important to a pseudo-Arabian setting (like Fate) that had to be tacked on in D&D.

AU would be a better fit for Narnia and Earthsea, too. I may not have read every bit of fantasy fiction out there, but, IME, AU is *more* generic, not less, than D&D3E. YMMV

 

[woodelf]

Quick ?

Is Arcana Unearthed: A Variant Player's Handbook all in 3E?

And is Arcana Evolved in 3.5E or still in 3E?

Thanks

- Woas

Neither, and neither. Most of the things that are changed between the two revisions are different still in AU/AE. In several places, AU used the 3.5E version before 3.5E did. In other cases, it uses the 3E version. In a few, it never says one way or the other--i believe which flavor of DR is never actually addressed in the AU rules, frex.

 

[Krypter]

AU would be a better fit for Narnia and Earthsea, too. I may not have read every bit of fantasy fiction out there, but, IME, AU is *more* generic, not less, than D&D3E. YMMV

Really? I'd love to play a Narnia game with talking animals. Do the AE rules really support that, or did you mean just better than plain-old D&D?