Do people use Arcana Unearthed stuff with 3.5?

[Ozreth]

So I just found out about Monte Cooks Arcana Unearthed and am wondering if people incorporate this stuff into their 3.5 games and if it is fully compatible?

[LordBlades]

There is a lot of good stuff in UA. The stuff my group mainly uses are: Alternate Class Features, Racial Paragon Classes, variant races and flaws

[Sir Swindle89]

There is a lot of good stuff in UA. The stuff my group mainly uses are: Alternate Class Features, Racial Paragon Classes, variant races and flaws

Wrong book bro.

To answer your question, no, but thats becasue no one in my group has bothered to ask. It looked like there was some decent stuff in there to me.

[McSmack]

There is a lot of good stuff in UA. The stuff my group mainly uses are: Alternate Class Features, Racial Paragon Classes, variant races and flaws

Yeap I've also used the weapon group proficiencies, the Item Familiar feat, and a few other random tidbits here and there.

[LordBlades]

Wrong book bro.

To answer your question, no, but thats becasue no one in my group has bothered to ask. It looked like there was some decent stuff in there to me.

Lol I was completely unaware that there is something called Arcana Unearthed :smallredface: I assumed the OP was referring to UA.

[Eldan]

Note, people:
"Arcana Unearthed", not "Unearthed Arcana". They are different books, with annoyingly similar names. The first is a pretty obscure one, in my experience, by Monte Cook.

Anyway: I've only seen it used once, in a PbP game, and I barely remember it, sorry.

[Amphetryon]

Technically, Arcana Unearthed is 3.0 compatible, while Arcana Evolved is supposed to be the 3.5 version, if memory serves.

[potatocubed]

I love Arcana Unearthed (and its update, Arcana Evolved) but I've never had a chance to do anything with it.

EDIT: Amphetyron is correct, also.

I don't think it's directly 3.5 compatible, though; the core assumptions of each game are different. You might be able to knock something together by swapping all the classes in one for the other, or all the spells in one for the other, but I don't think you could get away with using a mixture.

[Gametime]

As with most of Monte Cook's independent stuff, I really like what he tried to do with Arcana Unearthed/Evolved, but I don't think he achieved the desired result all that well.

I've never actually played a game of Arcana Evolved, though, so I could be wrong. The Combat Rites were exciting in concept and disappointing in execution; you think "Oh, here's an option for martial classes to do stuff other than attack," and then the majority of them are just very small bonuses to attacks. There are a few good ones, like one that gives you an extra move action, but they come online way too late.

On the other hand, a glance at the high level spells doesn't reveal anything on the level of gate or shapechange. I haven't looked at all the spells, but maybe the Arcana Evolved list is much more subdued than the craziness of 3.5. If that's the case, mixing them would probably be a bad idea.

[Vizzerdrix]

I've looked it over. I'd love to play a Faen tricklock sometime. :smallbiggrin:

[Rhothaerill]

I've used the ceremonial feats and talents in my homebrew campaign, combining them with regional feats from Forgotten Realms (every 1st level character in my campaign gets one extra feat that they can take as ceremony, talent or regional), as well as picking and choosing a couple of supernatural abilities from his races for some of my homebrew races.

[BobVosh]

Never heard of it, so no. However I'm a bit weary of most of Monte Cook's stuff. Just like GameTime.

[Yora]

Certainly interesting, but it's all kinda weird in some unexplainable way. It just feels odd. It has mechanics and quite a bit of fluff, but still seems completely bland.