Without going into the quality of the material, the notion that UA is a collection of optional miscellany culled from Dragon magazine is mostly not-true. Two of the appendices (the demi-human gods and the pole arms essay) are just that, and were admitted by Frank Mentzer (one of the developers of the book) as having been included as page-filler. However, for the rest of the book, it was intended as a rulebook first and the stuff that was published in Dragon magazine was supposed to serve as a preview of that book:

Gary Gygax in Dragon #58 (Feb 1982):

QuoteI am working on new monsters, magic, classes, and information for two new volumes of the system -- a supplement for players and DMs alike, and a second book of the Monster Manual -- projected for release in three to four years. Much of the supplementary material has been or will be printed in various modules or in DRAGON Magazine. For instance, many new spells are included in the upcoming modules Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth and Temple of Elemental Evil. (Yes, fans, it is again being worked on!)

Further expanded upon the next month in Dragon #59 (March 1982):

QuoteI am attempting to plug away at two new volumes for AD&D gaming. The next book of monsters will be the one to be released last (1984 possibly).With plenty of labor and even more luck there will be an ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS expansion volume next year. It will be for both players and DMs, with several new character classes, new weapons, scores of new spells, new magic items, etc. What will follow here in the next few issues is a sampling of the material slated for inclusion in the expansion.

Over the next 15 issues new rules material appeared as part of Gary's "From the Sorcerer's Scroll" column in every issue, most of it prefaced as being a preview of material from the forthcoming "AD&D Rules Expansion," as it was called at the time:

#59: Cantrips, part 1
#60: Cantrips, part 2
#61: Illusionist cantrips
#62: All about spell books
#63: The barbarian class
#64: New weapons
#65: Miscellany (the grand druid, barbarian additions, notes on more planned new classes - mystic, cavalier, savant, acrobat, mountebank, jester)
#66: New illusionist spells, weapon specialization
#67: New magic-user spells, part 1, comeliness stat, more barbarian additions
#68: New magic-user spells, part 2
#69: The thief-acrobat class
#70: Social class and birth order tables
#71: New druid spells
#72: The cavalier class
#73: All about the inner planes*
#74: All about barding (horse armor)

*For whatever reason this material wasn't included in UA (though most of it was included in the later, post-Gygax Manual of the Planes)

This was followed by an 18-month gap (while Gary was in Hollywood), but upon his return to Lake Geneva the rules articles resumed in early 1985:

#93: Hierophant druids
#94: Expanded rules for rangers
#95: Increased level limits for demi-humans
#96: Expanded classes for demi-humans

The column in issue #95 (March 1985) also announced the release of UA:

QuoteThe new material published within these pages --- character classes, information on demi-humans, spells, and so on --- should be contained in one handy volume. And that is precisely what will happen this summer, when a new hardbound AD&D game rule volume, entitled Unearthed Arcana, will appear in the stores.

What happened was this: I got so tired of trying to keep track of photocopies, notes, magazines, and whatnot, that I suggested to the Kindly Planners at TSR, Inc., that perhaps an interim volume to expand the Dungeon Masters Guide and Players Handbook would be appreciated by everyone who has suffered the same problems. Seeing as how the work on the full-scale expansion and revision of the system won''t even begin for at least another year, everyone agreed.

Material to be contained in the new book includes updated and revised versions of virtually all of the articles written by Yours Truly and published in DRAGON Magazine over the last three years or so - the Cavalier, Barbarian, and Thief-Acrobat classes, the expansions and revisions of the Druid and Ranger classes, new weapons, new spells, and the information on demi-human level maximums in this very issue, to name a few. Also in the work will be a substantial amount of previously unpublished material, including a group of no less than 150 new magic items, and some selected offerings by other Esteemed Authors whose efforts have graced these pages. Watch for more information about the contents and the release date in these pages in the months to come.

Taken together, those Gygax-authored Dragon articles make up almost the entire content of UA, everything except the magic items (which I suspect Garyt intentionally held back from magazine publication, both because they were considered "DM only" content, but also so as to leave a reason even for those who had all of the magazine content to still buy the book) and a couple other minor bits (the expanded armor table for thieves, the rules for field and full plate armor absorbing damage, and the revised unarmed combat rules) that were presumably late additions.

Looking at the material in this order, one thing that stands out is that most of the least-liked material in the book is also the later additions. The material that people are generally okay with - the new spells, weapons, and magic items - appears to be material that Gygax had already written c. 1981-82, while the stuff that people tend to really hate - the expansions for demi-humans, comeliness, weapon specialization, damage-absorbing armor - all came later (comeliness and weapon specialization as they appeared in the magazine are both framed as sort of "hey, here's something else I thought of" afterthoughts alongside other, earlier-written, material). I have a feeling that if the "AD&D Rules Expansion" had actually been published in 1983 as Gary originally planned, and didn't include that later stuff, that it wouldn't have been nearly as divisive and would be remembered more fondly. [The one exception here is the barbarian class, which was one of the early additions but is also one of the most hated things in UA, however this class was definitely a long-term passion project for Gary (as evidence by the vehemence of his response to critiques of it in Dragon #67). He was an obsessive Conan superfan and in an earlier Dragon issue (#36, from April 1980) he had produced AD&D stats for Conan that included all kinds of bespoke special abilities that broke the AD&D rules, so it's no coincidence that when the "barbarian class" appeared 2 years later that almost all of those bespoke rules-exceptions from the Conan article were coded in as class-abilities for the barbarian class (faster move rate, extra hp and AC, saving throw bonuses, climbing and leaping, faster natural healing, abilities to detect ambushes and magic, etc.); it's also telling that he kept tweaking the class after its initial publication - adding more material for them in #65 (the ability to harm creatures only affected by magic weapons) and #67 (a whole rant-essay in defense of the class), and even more changes in UA (adding the XP for destroying magic items rule, the barbarian horde, and the table for easing the prohibitions on magic as they level up) in an attempt to hit the right balance, whereas most of the other material in UA is word-for-word the same as the Dragon magazine versions.]  

Yes, UA is Gary's attempt to exert more personal control over the content and voice of AD&D, which rubs some people the wrong way (both at the time and now). And yes, a lot of the material in it could've used more playtesting and development than it got (or perhaps BETTER playtesting and development, as some of the late additions and changes IMO made things worse instead of better). And yes it was a transparent money-grab by cash-strapped TSR and felt rushed and cheap (very little art, most of it recycled; cheap, flimsy binding) and not up to the standard of the earlier books. And yes, it seems like a random grab-bag of reprinted Dragon articles needlessly favoring Gygax over everybody else. But the last one, at least, isn't really true - the idea of a Gygax rule expansion book came first, the magazine versions were supposed to be previews of that book, until its completion and production got delayed (for 2 full years).

Quote from: Brad;1127632I do like how they had two fucking pages of errata immediately and had to devote that much space to answer rules questions. That's ludicrous. And never update the book. I've always heard UA was nothing more than a halfassed cash grab, so if that quote is accurate the theory is confirmed.

And thank Gawd no RPG book needed errata ever again.

A point about the errata never being incorporated into UA is that within a year of its publication 3/4 of the people who had worked on it (Gary Gygax, Frank Mentzer, and Kim Mohan) had left TSR under acrimonious circumstances, and the one who was still there (Jeff Grubb) had a lot of other priorities - writing the Manual of the Planes, co-writing the Forgotten Realms boxed set, writing the AD&D comic book line, etc. In addition to which, there seems to have been a general consensus at TSR (and we can speculate how much anti-Gygax sentiment from the new management may have been a factor in it) to pretty much sweep UA under the rug and forget about it. It remained in print (presumably because it was still selling), but modules in 1987-88 all stopped referring to it - comeliness scores stopped being included in character statblocks, no UA classes, spells, or items appeared, etc. UA was the passion/ego project of the old regime, so under the new regime there was at least a de-facto (if not mandated) agreement not to think about it anymore.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1127581Honestly, there's almost nothing in it that I think improves the 1e game, or that seems particularly helpful to me. Is that an unpopular view?

I liked it for the spells, the Barbarian class, the Cavalier class was OK (just not used a lot), and the modified weapon mastery made regular fighters better.

The problem for me was that all of the stuff in Unearthed Arcana was first published in Dragon magazine and I had those issues, so I felt like I was paying for the same stuff twice even when it was convenient to have it all in one book.

Quote from: Shasarak;1127660And thank Gawd no RPG book needed errata ever again.

According to TLG, this is indeed the case. 5th printing? Why not reproduce spelling errors from 1st printing?

Quote from: T. Foster;1127663A point about the errata never being incorporated into UA is that within a year of its publication 3/4 of the people who had worked on it (Gary Gygax, Frank Mentzer, and Kim Mohan) had left TSR under acrimonious circumstances, and the one who was still there (Jeff Grubb) had a lot of other priorities - writing the Manual of the Planes, co-writing the Forgotten Realms boxed set, writing the AD&D comic book line, etc. In addition to which, there seems to have been a general consensus at TSR (and we can speculate how much anti-Gygax sentiment from the new management may have been a factor in it) to pretty much sweep UA under the rug and forget about it. It remained in print (presumably because it was still selling), but modules in 1987-88 all stopped referring to it - comeliness scores stopped being included in character statblocks, no UA classes, spells, or items appeared, etc. UA was the passion/ego project of the old regime, so under the new regime there was at least a de-facto (if not mandated) agreement not to think about it anymore.

So again, cash grab. Make money off the Gygax name, but treat the product with contempt. Sounds like late 80s TSR to me.

UA was the Second Coming when it came out...and then it hit the table and we learned what a never-playtested-supplement looked like.

Fortunately, Oriental Adventures came out the same year (1985) and that dominated our play. The classes were so much better balanced in OA. The UA classes were like the nutbag classes in Dragon magazine which were also bizarrely overpowered with no sign of being playtested.

Quote from: Doc Sammy;1127585If I'm going to run AD&D 1E, I'll just use the three core books and maybe also add Deities & Demigods or Oriental Adventures depending on the campaign.

OA is a truly great all-in-one game book. Easily my favorite 1e release.

Quote from: Anselyn;1127656Oh, that it were so ...

By 85 I has played AD&D, Gamma World then Traveller - in my hometown. At university, D&D was the club you joined but we had moved to Call of Cthulhu as someone had bought it.  Later we played DragonQuest in a long campaign.

To be honest, if you asked the 21 year-old me then I'm sure I'd have said that I'd moved on from D&D to more sophisticated new-generation games. But - I bought Monster Manual 2 and Unearthed Arcana when they came out as you never really want to lose your first love. I think that epithet was also the disappointment speaking that UA hadn't pulled me back to D&D.

Whilst the Fiend Folio was and is awesome, I remembered MMII as being a pointless waste of money: devils, dinosaurs and modrons. Having just looked at it again I see that some of its content has become core( derro, yuan-ti). But the MMII tarrasque will never have the same resonance for me as the purple worm - as that was the most dangerous thing in Holmes Basic (GW printing for us).

For me MMII was worth buying for the Demon and Devil lords alone as in later editions seeing them in print was harder then pulling a healthy tooth with pliers.

Fun in my neck of the woods COC never took off in the 1980s only later.

I realized I was an ass in my op so no hard feelings.

I liked it, especially weapon specialization and additional spells.

I was already done with D&D and RPG's when it arrived. It was actually a whim purchase I made while shopping for a gift at Toys R Us. I picked it up along with Adventures in Blackmoor. (Seeing Gary & Dave's names were the enticement). I glanced through them, put them on a shelf  I was then out of the hobby until about 1994.

So later when I got back into gaming- I never got back into playing much 1E. I ended up selling my original. I've since bought a used copy I found at a bookstore.  But if I did use it I'd pretty much just use some spells, items and Fighter Weapon specialization (I personally feel Fighters get the shaft in most editions of D&D, so I don't have a prob with it).

Quote from: sureshot;1127750I realized I was an ass in my op so no hard feelings.

Ditto

When it came out, my group treated it like getting five flavors of sauce for the ice cream. None of the DMs blanket accepted all of it, but most accepted 'blocks' of it. I think most accepted the Barbarian class but everyone felt it was overpowered.

The cavalier was a fun class, if the DM knew how to manage them.  I liked the way its ability scores could progress.  Given that Greyhawk supplement ruined everything changed ability scores into something far more important than the were originally, it was nice to see a system that would allow characters to raise those scores, even if it was for just one class.

The book itself was a cash grab, since TSR was in dire financial straits.  It could have been titled "The Best of the Dragon*, Selections from Tsojcanth, and some stuff about pole-arms".  The Original books had school textbook binding, IIRC a comment Gygax made in one of his threads ( Dragonsfoot?) but the Blumes cheaped out on the binding for UA, and well, pretty much everyone's copy fell apart quickly.  Mine certainly did.

It was convenient to have the material in one place.

*previews or no, the material, large amounts of it, appeared in Dragon magazine before it saw print in the UA.  Whatever TSR intended, the book was in the main, a collection of Dragon Magazine articles.

I happen to have my copy in the bookshelf right next to my chair, so I dusted it off and took a look.  New classes, gear, spells, magic items ... what's not to like?  I suppose you could say the table of contents was pretty weird.  A lot of this stuff ended up in 2E and later games, so it couldn't have been that bad.  And the binding on mine is fine 35 years later, after lots of use.  I recall I did think that the cavalier was a bit overpowered after my brother used it in play for a long time, but he enjoyed it and it didn't break the game, so so what?

I have a strange urge to go through UA, extract some of the rules, and generalize them by reading way too much into them.

For instance, method V? It's 3d6 in order, except you get +1d to +6d (or +0d to +5d, depending on how you elide comeliness) to each stat depending on your class selection. So start by rolling 3d6 in order. That's your natural talent, before you started training for your class. Then roll the extra dice, say +6d for your fighter's Strength, and swap out any better rolls. The new score show how much stronger you got, from all that harsh physical training you endured.

And if you look at it as extra dice, like the +6d above for a fighter, then multiclassing is trivial. Halve for two classes, third for three classes, and add up the bonuses from all your different classes together. Round down, or multiclass characters will get more dice than single class characters. Handle the comeliness problem by human supremacy -- the default is +5d to +0d, but humans get +1d to every ability on top of that. Optionally, give demihumans +1d to specific abilities. Instead of linking it to stats where demihumans get a bonus already, link it to stats where they have a high minimum (then ignore the minimum rules).

That kind of thing. Mostly useless, but entertaining as a thought experiment.

Quote from: Shasarak;1127660And thank Gawd no RPG book needed errata ever again.

Most RPGs don't need errata because they'll never be run as games! They're just very pretty reading material.

Quote from: Brad;1127668According to TLG, this is indeed the case. 5th printing? Why not reproduce spelling errors from 1st printing?

Those are VINTAGE spelling errors now!

At this point, Troll Lords should identify the spelling errors that have made it through 5 printings and make sure they stay in every printing forever as a bizarre homage.

Quote from: Pat;1127909I have a strange urge to go through UA, extract some of the rules, and generalize them by reading way too much into them.

Do it! That would be a fun thread.