log in or register to remove this ad

 

UA Your current use of Unearthed Arcana material

How much UA/Supplements (WotC) stuff you allow in your games?

  • Core only

    Votes: 19 20.7%
  • Core + a few selected cherrypicks (<20% non-core)

    Votes: 22 23.9%
  • Core + many options (20-80% non-core)

    Votes: 12 13.0%
  • Mostly everything but with exceptions (>80% non-core)

    Votes: 21 22.8%
  • Basically everything

    Votes: 18 19.6%

  • Total voters
    92

Li Shenron

Legend
The Unearthed Arcana "sprint" is over, and the column is going to slow back down to about once a month, leaving us with quite a lot of material to try out... after adding the feats from the latest article to my tracking list of available 5e material, I did some counting and here are the numbers of various stuff. The totals include material from PHB, DMG, UA articles, SCAG, and adventure/campaign supplements.

Classes: 12 base, 3 variants, 1 prestige, 107 archetypes
Races: 29 base, 11 variants, 39 subraces
Backgrounds: 26 with 4 variants

Various features and options (only those that were expanded beyond core):
9 Fighting Styles
57 Warlock Invocations
5 Totem Warrior animals
13 Downtime activities

Feats: 95

Spells: 316 core, 74 extra

Rules modules (non-core):
Action Points
Aether-Powered Devices
BattleSystem
Custom Alignments
Encounter Building variant
Foils
Mass Combat
Modern Magic
Players Make All Rolls variant
Quick Characters variant
Traps Building variant
Vitality

...probably forgotten a few :p

Note that these are approximate totals, because of various reasons: some material was slightly (or more than slightly) revised, some is likely superseded by other stuff, and "modern" options are bundled together as a single module.

We know that UA material isn't official, but much of it is actually usable.

I am interested in knowing what is your current choice of allowed material in your campaigns. I'll add a poll for a general check, but I am interested in the detailed list as well! Naturally, you might be running more than one campaign with different stuff available, in which case for the purpose of the poll just consider all your campaigns together.

Secondarily, I am interested in which options have been actually used in your game. If you write a checklist of what is allowed, you can mark with asterisks what stuff has been eventually already chosen by the PC or used by the DM.

Edit: I am not considering homebrew or 3rd-party material here, only WotC to keep it simple, but if you modified materials from WotC then feel free to count it in.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

akr71

Adventurer
I voted Basically Everything, but since my players don't read the UA articles unless I bring it to their attention, there has been very few requests for it to date. I'm open to all of it as long as there is a discussion prior to implementation.

I may not like all of the UA articles, but without first hand playtest experience my first impression is just that - an impression, not an opinion formed from experience.
 

Tormyr

Adventurer
I don't include any UA player options, although we did play a bit with mass combat a while back. For the most part, I still keep it to PHB and setting specific stuff. I will work with my players to make special options here or there, but they do not come from UA.
 

Yunru

First Post
The stuff I allow and the stuff that actually gets used is wildly different.

I allow anything that I don't find overpowered or overly complex (or flat out broken, here's looking at you, Mass Combat) - and even then I only disallow something if I can't easily modify it to be less powerful.
My players use maybe a tenth of it? A class, subclass, or race. Maybe some combination of the above. Occasionally a feat.

But that's to be expected I guess.
 

CydKnight

Explorer
The only UA material currently being used in the campaign I DM is the Ranger Revised dated 09/12/16. This does not mean that I am not open to allowing more UA material in my games but this is the only one any of the current players have asked to use. Should any others be requested, I would review them on a case-by-case basis to see how they fit into the current campaign but more than likely I would approve most requests to use UA material with rare exceptions.
 

pdzoch

Explorer
All the spell domains are available, but none of my players have opted to use them. The only UA material my players have shown any interest in has been the Mystic.
 

thethain

First Post
I run AL stuff typically, so......

If I were running something outside of AL, then probably would allow Basically any Unearthed Arcana as long as I looked at it first, specific things like tunnel fighting style breaks action economy so would be flat out, the 2d6 HD ranger with their ambuscade ability also would be out as its got just silly things.
 

guachi

Explorer
I immediately latched onto two subclasses when they came out - spell-less ranger and the swashbuckler.

Of course, we now have an official swashbuckler. But in my Mystara campaign I added the spell-less ranger and the scout as versions of rangers for races or cultures that either weren't very magic inclined (dwarves and halflings) or might be opposed to all that druid/cleric magic on the ranger spell list (Glantri).

I think lack of use by players in my current campaign boils down to them being unaware of the material.
 

JonnyP71

Explorer
It's PHB and SCAG only for me, or AIME for that setting - basically the books I own minus Volo's Guide.. I have no intention of running a game using Monster races from Volo's, as I prefer a game where many humanoid species are irredeemably evil, and do not allow any UA/Homebrew material whatsoever - not even the revised Ranger.
 

DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
I have one player running a Mystic, and one player running a Shadow Sorcerer. I also have a goodly number of homebrew options available to take (new backgrounds, new feats etc.), of which some(?) of them might be either directly taken from UA, or adapted from UA,but I just can't remember specifically any ones in particular.
 

GlassJaw

Hero
I voted mostly everything because I allow my players to bring anything they might be interested in to the table. But it's all subject to review. That said, I've read through everything and there's only a few things I flat-out wouldn't allow. Most of it is fine with minor tweaking (not sure I would allow the Mystic though).

Most of the players in my group are fairly new to the game and they've started to take interest in the UA articles.

Only 1 player has used anything yet: the Minotaur race from Waterborne Adventures. Another player was considering the Swashbuckler path for his Rogue but doesn't look like he's going that route.

They are also really interested in the Downtime article. Go figure.
 

Mercule

Adventurer
Here's what I allowed for my Curse of Strahd game. Note that this was right after the Warlock/Wizard "issue" had been released. Anything after that hasn't been reviewed as much. Also, SCAG is not used, but Elemental Player's Guide is permitted but no one has picked anything more than a spell from it. The Ravenloft options didn't wow anyone, either.

Few racial variants (kinda). Based on the "humans are preferred" text in the adventure, I actually encouraged more human-looking characters. Human, half-elf, aasimar, and tieflings. Tieflings were reskinned back to the 3E almost-human appearance. All the PHB races (except drow) were actually available. I just made a point of there being in-game consequences for selecting those races. I did allow (Eberron) changelings, as well, but pointed out that, while they could pass for human easily enough, it would be extremely bad if they were discovered.

Classes/kits (assume PHB options, only listing UA extras):

Barbarian: Ancestral Guardian, Storm Herald
Bard: Glamour, Whispers
Cleric: Forge, Grave. Note: these were presented as granting martial weapon proficiency, instead of heavy armor because personal preference.
Druid: Twilight
Fighter: Arcane Archer (contender, but ultimately went with Ranger)
Monk: None offered. Probably would have looked harder, had I realized we were going to end up with a "China/Japan comes to Eastern Europe" instead of the more traditional setting.
Mystic: As written except no Far Realms.
Ranger: PHB version permitted, but latest UA rewrite promoted. Beast, Hunter, Deep Stalker, Horizon Walker.
Rogue: Scout.
Sorcerer: Favored Soul, Phoenix, Sea, Stone
Warlock: Hexblade, Raven Queen.
Wizard: None permitted.

Spells: Various. Starter Spells article all looks good and will probably see use as characters gain spells.

Feats: Would selectively allow racial feats. Would not use skill feats.

Downtime activities look nice, but haven't had any downtime since it was released.

Current party:
Aasimar Devotion Paladin
Aasimar Favored Soul Sorcerer
Half-elf Moon Druid
Human Open Hand Monk
Human Hunter Ranger (UA variant)

Previously used:

Prior UA Ranger (with 2d6 hit dice and Ambuscade). The 2d6 hit dice played well. Ambuscade was way overpowered and annoying. The character started as a Rogue and multiclassed into Ranger, so that may have been a factor in the Ambuscade being annoying. The player was not a true power-gamer (competent, not aggressive), so it was done for RP, not to game the numbers.

We also used action points for Eberron, but allowed PCs to swap for a Dragonmark, if they wanted (basically, limited selection free feat at 1st level; count AP as a feat). Used the races from the UA Eberron, but did custom Dragonmarks.
 

Redthistle

Explorer
I'm big on letting my players play-test UA material, and also some 3PP options upon my approval.

The problem a lot of us have is that there just isn't enough available time to play as often as our respective Inner-Gamers would like.

I'm not religious, so this is strictly wishful thinking: I like to imagine that there is an afterlife where all gamers go when they die (let's call the world "Gamerstory") where we could each live lifetime-after-lifetime, including ones where we are the NPCs in other gamers' stories.

The Shakespearean quote (from the play "Julius Caesar") "A coward dies a thousand times before his death, a hero dies but once" is often misquoted as "A coward dies a thousand times, a hero dies but once."

The misquote is the way I first heard it, and it immediately seemed to me to favor the coward. After all, to die a thousand times, you've got to live a thousand times.

That's a thousand times more pizza, along with every other thing you enjoy in life - like role-playing games! Well, girls and boys, it's the coward's lives for me!

<If only.> <Oh, sigh.>
 


S'mon

Legend
I think I've allowed everything a player has requested. Ask and ye shall receive.
I wouldn't be happy if a player used UA stuff without asking though.
 


Sacrosanct

Legend
I had to change my answer, because I initially responded with what we actually use. But what I allow is almost everything.

No reasonable request should ever be unreasonably denied.
 

Flexor the Mighty!

18/100 Strength!
I'm not opposed to it but none of my players look at that stuff and I can't say I do either. Heck nobody has even bothered to look at SCAG for character options. So they are pretty much just PH for characters.
 

MiraMels

Explorer
Currently I'm using the "players roll everything" rule in one of my games, and we're trying out the new downtime rules soon. Oh and my girlfriend is adding the Arcane Archer subclass and the new barbarian subclasses to the character options pool for a Zelda-themed game she's starting.

That's the extent of the UA material that's in use currently in any game I'm running or playing in.
 

I did not vote, but basically have the same approach as [MENTION=6801213]akr71[/MENTION].

I don't use any of it, but my players have never asked so what I would allow I don't know. Probably most of it.
 

Halloween Horror For 5E

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top