Xanathar's 18 Pages of What??

[delericho]

Okay, is it just me, or could Xanathar's 18 pages of names been better spent elaborating on magic item creation?

Probably not. 18 pages is almost exactly the wrong space for magic item creation - it's far too much for people who like is quite vague, and nowhere near enough for people who want it detailed.

That said, I personally would have preferred them to use those 18 pages for something else - I felt the price point and page count of the book was already pushing it, before turning over 18 pages to lists of names.

But, ultimately, it's WotC's prerogative to fill their books with whatever material they think is appropriate, and indeed to set the page counts and price points accordingly. We then get to decide whether we think the resulting product is worth it. My opinion was that I couldn't recommend "Xanathar's Guide" to others, but YMMV of course.

 

[gyor]

Probably not. 18 pages is almost exactly the wrong space for magic item creation - it's far too much for people who like is quite vague, and nowhere near enough for people who want it detailed.

That said, I personally would have preferred them to use those 18 pages for something else - I felt the price point and page count of the book was already pushing it, before turning over 18 pages to lists of names.

But, ultimately, it's WotC's prerogative to fill their books with whatever material they think is appropriate, and indeed to set the page counts and price points accordingly. We then get to decide whether we think the resulting product is worth it. My opinion was that I couldn't recommend "Xanathar's Guide" to others, but YMMV of course.

I'd recommend it, but with the caveat that a few sections are literally a waste of space.

 

[Old One Eye]

I was disappointed at first blush. But the names have proven uaeful at the table. Especially the demi-human names. Nice to have a regular naming convention for tieflings and all.

 

[jasper]

1. Okay, is it just me, or could Xanathar's 18 pages of names been better spent elaborating on magic item creation? The rules for item creation in the DM guide are vague, and basically forces a DM (especially us busy DMs) to house rule a lot of it.
2. I hope I'm not speaking out of turn, but if you don't have enough imagination to create a cool character name, then maybe RPGs are not the games for you.

2. NICE INSULT y'all.
1. I have to disagree some what on the names. Yes they could use some of 18 pages in different ways. Magic Item creation should not be a set formula. I don't want that 16 year wimpy Jerk Corp Zapp to tell me accord to page 77 right hand column 3 rd paragraph 4 sentence, that he now has all the parts for the head of Venca and the Gynax Gazebo. By putting magic item creation in the dm hands, this empowers the dm to set or change limits on magic items. If I want a quest which would take two or three levels for you create a +1 sword, that should be okay. If Morrus just wants to say spend X gp and y down time days then out comes a +1 sword, then that is okay too.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

No waste of space for me. As a DM, I get a lot of use from name tables that don't make me go to the internet or prepare a name list ahead of our session. On the other hand, I hope 5e never get official rules making magic item creation a simple and objective endeavor. That kind of rule made 3.X a much worse game, in my opinion.

 

[DEFCON 1]

And I'm think you give WotC too much leeway.

In other words, I think you focus on something entirely different than what I had in mind when I wrote my post.

I want WotC to produce official crunch. I want to pay WotC to produce quality crunch.

I want WotC not to get away with selling padding. I don't want to pay WotC for pages of filler.

Whether there is 3PP stuff and whether it is any good is entirely beside the issue.

Well, if you had something else in mind with your original post, you did a poor job of getting it across. Here's what you said:

This edition is full of what is essentially filler; weightless fluff any intern can come up with as opposed to delicious crunch only experienced game designers can create.

Your post said nothing about only wanting WotC-designed product, but rather you said only game designers with experience can create "delicious crunch". And which is what I responded to with my post.

Had you said what you just to me above, I wouldn't have commented on it... mainly because you've said this all along for the existence of 5E and I've heard and accepted it. I might not understand why you have this need to only play official WotC material when you also have a need to play with as much material as possible (since you keep saying you want to pay them to produce more and more stuff-- both entirely new things and having existing things expanded outwards)... but quite frankly I don't really care. Heck, I'm just glad you finally started designing your own material for yourself for your game, so I'll just take that as a positive and live and let live.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

The leaders were normatively warriors. The feudal systems presuppose a warrior leader.

This is a very inaccurate generalization. Even the the underlying assumption you make that there was something called a "feudal system" is increasingly questioned by historians. And in the times and places where there was a professional martial class, status was still determined by birth, connections, and command ability. Yes, William of Normandy could swing a sword and ride a horse, but he became the Conqueror because of politics and an army, not because he was the most badass swords-and-horseman.

 

[the_redbeard]

I think they haven't expanded on Magic Item Creation because they are attempting something of a "Hippocratic Oath" ('first, do no harm') in regards to crunch in this edition. (Not saying they are successful, but I think it is pretty clear that they are being cautious.)

They've left magic item creation in the hands of DM-fiat because only DMs have a clue of what is happening within their respective campaigns. What will be necessary in one game could unbalance another. What will help some DMs build an interesting challenge in one game could be a tool to wreck another. Yes, we could be disappointed in that our work is not done for us, but we could also be happy that we were not given a problem.

One size does not fit all.

 

[Shasarak]

I meant titles like Khan, Padishah, Viscount etc. 1E and 2E
had stuff like that in them. I get inspiration (advantage on D&D campaign design) from reading the AD&D DMG's.

I want my character to be so good that his name becomes a title, eh Caesar.

 

[Zardnaar]

I want my character to be so good that his name becomes a title, eh Caesar.

We had a Barbarian once named "The" does that count? He had 3 intelligence only word he knew.