[RPG]: Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed, reviewed by George Jackson (4/5)

http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/9/9581.phtml

George Jackson's Summary:

An excellent direction for d20 fantasy games full of coherent, well thought-out rules and much less hanging on papa Tolkien's apron strings than most.

Go to the full review for more information.

Post originally by Jeff Rients at 2003-08-01 09:48:51
Converted from Phorums BB System

Thanks for such a timely review! I'm enthused about this product as well. It's nice to know that at least one person thinks it's not all hype.

Post originally by Wombat at 2003-08-01 13:35:25
Converted from Phorums BB System

That's my impression of the book, and I LIKE shiny things!

I know some people have been put off by the notion of gaining levels in a race or species, but I think this has been handled very well; certainly if I were a Giant, my first three levels would be in Giant, just so I could get BIG! And the Faen are just a fantastic concept!

The character classes are truly eye-opening. I understand that Monte believes the classes to be marginally more powerful than the D&D3e base classes, thus the slightly higher XP cost to go up levels. This is probably true, looking at the charts, but I have yet to see how it works in play.

One thing is for certain -- prior to picking up this book I had no interest in picking up the soon-to-be-published worldbook ("The Diamond Throne"). After my first (admittedly quick) read through, I am now DETERMINED to pick it up.

This is the single most imaginative product I have seen for D&D in many a moon.

Well done, Monte Cook!

Post originally by Dog Breath at 2003-08-01 15:02:26
Converted from Phorums BB System

Might buy this if it is 3.0 compatible. Since I dont plan on ever buying 3.5, then wouldn't buy this if it's 3.5 compatible.

So which is it? 3e or 3.5e?

Post originally by Tenchi at 2003-08-01 15:04:23
Converted from Phorums BB System

I really did not like the combat "Revisions" in 3.5, is combat improved with the AU? I dont like playing with Minis is why I ask. And so I was hopeful that AU combat would be a little less rules heavy and more clear from a "roleplaying" perspective.

Post originally by Mike at 2003-08-01 15:04:48
Converted from Phorums BB System

To me, a very appealing aspect of the game is that there are no restrictions on which spellcasters can learn what healing spells. There are also no exact analogs to the standard Dungeons and Dragons cleric.

What an amazing change it makes! First, tou can have a religion whose hierarchy is actually an ancient school of Magisters just attempting to help the populace, while another religion's priests are all Mind Witches with nefarious purposes, and a third is Greenbonds teaching respect for nature.

Second, all magical healers aren't cut from the same cloth. For instance, it's possible to have the beloved high priest be corrupted without losing any of his awesome magical abilities.

Third, there is less of the 'required to have at least one in the party' syndrome. Arguably, the group should have an Akashic to handle traps if your party does a lot of dungeon crawling. Other than that, the classes are pretty versatile with their roles.

So far, I like what I've read.

Post originally by Wombat at 2003-08-01 17:20:08
Converted from Phorums BB System

Well, this is a /variant/.

It's not really 3.0, but it is not 3.5 either.

The magic system works entirely different than the version put forward in the PHB of D&D3e. Many spells are different or simply don't appear and the way magic is cast (and the options available) are quite different -- there is no Arcane v. Divine, there is only Magic. There are enough variations in other matters (weapons, armour, XP to go up levels, lack of alignment, etc.) that it cannot really count as 3.0. OTOH it does not conform to the new SRD either.

In the end, I think it is best to label it as 3.Monte.

In the end AU could squeegeed into either system, but in either case it would take work.

Post originally by Robert at 2003-08-01 19:52:28
Converted from Phorums BB System

The biggest joke is that Tunnels & Trolls and RuneQuest allowed any spellcaster to learn healing spells and they were published 25 years ago. Now that D&D finally has that option, players are going to think that it's revolutionary!

Post originally by Mike at 2003-08-01 20:02:20
Converted from Phorums BB System

Robert,

For Dungeons and Dragons, it IS revolutionary. I do appreciate that it's been part and parcel of many other RPGs for years. I'm glad to see someone finally brought it into DnD, and did a fine job at it too.

Post originally by Fute at 2003-08-01 20:03:08
Converted from Phorums BB System

How much, and what kind, of new OGL material is in the game?

Thanks!