How likely are the recent UA to become an AL core rulebook?

[stewstew5]

With the recent Unearthed Arcanas (the recent class changes ones especially, the others I'm less concerned about) how likely are they to become a part of the "core" adventurer's league rulebooks alongside the phb for having choices any player can choose from regardless of their companion book?

[Kane0]

Given the reception and timing i'd say they will see an official release, it's just a matter of when.

[stewstew5]

Given the reception and timing i'd say they will see an official release, it's just a matter of when.

that's not really my question. My question is, when they DO release, how likely is it that the rulebook be usable no matter what in adventurers league or will it just be a companion book for those who chose it

[HolyDraconus]

Probably will be a seasonal freebie.

[Willie the Duck]

The rulebook will probably* be AL usable, and will undoubtedly become the +1 people get to choose alongside core (again, probably).
*But we are in uncharted territory. So who knows?

[Kane0]

that's not really my question. My question is, when they DO release, how likely is it that the rulebook be usable no matter what in adventurers league or will it just be a companion book for those who chose it

Oh right. We won't know for sure but my bet is it will be a +1 book.

[diplomancer]

The rulebook will probably* be AL usable, and will undoubtedly become the +1 people get to choose alongside core (again, probably).
*But we are in uncharted territory. So who knows?

Whether it will be the +1 people choose depends a lot on your class (and, even more, which subclass you want to play). A wizard or rogue? Probably not. A sorcerer? Probably yes.

[Willie the Duck]

Whether it will be the +1 people choose depends a lot on your class (and, even more, which subclass you want to play). A wizard or rogue? Probably not. A sorcerer? Probably yes.

Whether they choose it will be up to the individual (remember it is competing with XGtE), I simply mean that I think it will 'count' as a +1. But that too depends on if it is some kind of light supplement or a full rulebook or the like. Since we don't really know what they are going to do with the thing, it's all up in the air.

[Rfkannen]

Since they are presented as optional rules, my instinct is too say they just won't be al leagal. (As al tends to go for a baseline, any rules that would be turned in and off like that I think would be left off.) I know feats and multiclassung are allowed, but those are in the ohb. None in the dmg are on

[Yunru]

Somewhere between "definite" and "no way" (inclusive).

[EvilTwinSkippy]

I doubt it will be AL legal any time soon. I certainly hope it shows up, there's a lot to like in there, esp. the updated Ranger and the new fighting styles and metamagic options.

It was suggested before (and seems somewhat likely) that this material might show up in a reprint of the PHB (5.5 Edition). I would be in favour of that, mostly cuz I need to replace mine. My current Players Handbook has all of the pages falling out. lol

[Dork_Forge]

I'd guess they'd see publication in the next player supplement (likely with the subclass UAs we've seen recently) and that would be the +1 book. Time wise I'd guess in time for Season 10.

[paladinn]

I think it would be a fight between those who like the new UA (like me) and those who like XGtE. The hexblade has been Really popular, as has the divine soul.

Honestly I see a 5.5e coming out. Some of the stuff in the new UA is too good Not to fold into the core.

[strangebloke]

It will be free the season it comes out and in subsequent seasons who knows.

Personally I suspect that these rules will be all or nothing at a given table. If it was an option why wouldn't you take it? Every class is strongly buffed here and these ACF's are going to come alongside subclasses like Heroism Paladin and Eloquence bard. I suppose you could argue that certain subclasses are powerful enough (like hexblade) that you'd still take XGTE over this, but I don't see it.

Then too, what a pain for a DM to have to deal with half people who can reassign spells known and half who can't. What a pain to have an ACF ranger and a normal ranger in the same party.

So if anything I'd expect every table to be either

PHB +1

or

PHB2 +1

The only reason that you wouldn't use the latter version is because you're concerned about XGTE subclasses combined with the ACFs. But I don't see any issue there.

[jaappleton]

Most of the stuff should become official.

However, a question I have is how will it be implemented?

Many tables, and AL, play PHB+1. Will this count as the PHB? Will it be printed in future PHBs and provided as an insert for free for ones we all own?

No idea. None.

[Dork_Forge]

Most of the stuff should become official.

However, a question I have is how will it be implemented?

Many tables, and AL, play PHB+1. Will this count as the PHB? Will it be printed in future PHBs and provided as an insert for free for ones we all own?

No idea. None.

I'd guess in the next player supplement (hopefully very early next year, we are looong overdue) we will see one new subclass per class, the variant rules from the UA, some new spells and magic items.

[Arkhios]

I'd say the chances are, hands down, 50:50.

[stoutstien]

I think a lot of it will be worked back but in some form most of it will get printed I some form. I'm waiting to see what they do with subclasses variants before I make a final decision on how it impacts the game.

[Monster Manuel]

Since they are presented as optional rules, my instinct is too say they just won't be al leagal. (As al tends to go for a baseline, any rules that would be turned in and off like that I think would be left off.) I know feats and multiclassung are allowed, but those are in the ohb. None in the dmg are on

Seconding this, since they are optional rules, I don't think they will necessarily be AL Legal, and will be hard to put into a +1 book, but I think there is a caveat. I think the reason that these were presented as optional "revisions" and "additions" to existing rules, is so they could be implemented WITHOUT appearing in a sourcebook. Technically, these could all be errata-ed into the PHB.

If they had a massive PHB errata that incorporated final versions of the UA, that would make them AL-legal, wouldn't it? As part of the PHB, not a +1, either.

It would also probably drive a whole new batch of PHB purchases, to get the errata-ed version, and make a lot of people annoyed at feeling the need to do so, but it's not like that's unprecedented...

[Garresh]

Most of the stuff should become official.

However, a question I have is how will it be implemented?

Many tables, and AL, play PHB+1. Will this count as the PHB? Will it be printed in future PHBs and provided as an insert for free for ones we all own?

No idea. None.

I've never heard of a home game using the +1 rule. Is that actually common? It seems like a needless restriction. You don't need anything other than Xanathar's to cheese a build. I don't like the idea of blocking fun races from players due to AL rules. Personally, I'd be pissed if I couldn't play my Shadar Kai Druid of the Shepherd circle.

The reason for that rule is to prevent players with high level characters from being outclassed since they can't respec as new books come out. AL is more longstanding than most home games, so long term balance between characters is more important. In the context of AL, the rule makes sense. But for home games it's a needlessly restrictive rule. There's nothing in the various non-PHB races which would break anything in Xanathar's.

The "don't be a dbag" rule is far more all encompassing in home games.