D&D 5E Escapist article on SCAG is Brutal.

[delericho]

I know this was meant tongue in cheek, but, is there a grain of truth there? How successful were previous FR books? I have no idea. I really don't. Did the FRCS outsell this book?

I'm not sure that would be particularly meaningful anyway - the publishing landscape is very different in 2015 than it was in 2001.

 

[Parmandur]

But as a measure of quality, they're better than sales. Unless Avatar was really the best movie of all time (#2 adjusted for inflation).



In any case, it proves what I was claiming; that the reviews on Amazon are pretty bad.







Nice way to turn it into an edition war. Let me repeat a statement that I made: the SCAG has an Amazon average that is a full star less than any other 5E hardback book.







That's not at all true, if you're buying a book that is sitting at #745 in books. Several thousand books a year reach that point; do you buy all of them?



Green Ronin has put out a number of books. Given that by that standard all their recent books have been complete failures, why exactly did Hasbro tap them to do this project? Could it have something to do with the fact that Wizards of the Coast putting out an official book about the Forgotten Realms was going to sell way, way higher then about anything a non-WotC company could put out in the RPG field? Could it have something to do with the fact that brands really do matter in gaming and this book had a couple of the biggest in the industry on it?







If people are buying SCAG and being disappointed because it isn't the book they personally want, that's a problem for the buyers. They shouldn't buy it because it's "successful" (as rated by sales); they should read reviews and figure out that it's not a book that will make them happy!



I would say that it's certainly a bad book for WotC if a lot of people are complaining that it isn't the book they personally want. When they're only putting out a handful of books a year, they can't afford to put out many books that aren't what their customers want. Even if we assume, for the sake of discussion, that the problem with this book is that it's not what people wanted, that's not a dismissable problem.

the largest block of reviews are the 5 stars, and the majority are four or five star reviews. This is not quite as negative a reception as all that.

 

[prosfilaes]

the largest block of reviews are the 5 stars, and the majority are four or five star reviews. This is not quite as negative a reception as all that.

Objectively, it has fewer stars than any other 5E hardback book by a full star. If we want to broaden the comparison pool, it has fewer stars than any Pathfinder hardback book. There were a few 4E and 3E hardbacks that dropped below a 3.4, but most of them are at or above 4.0. This has received one of the most negative receptions that any D&D hardback has got at Amazon ever; it'd be eyeballing it, but it's definitely in the bottom quartile or quintile.

 

[Doctor Futurity]

I'll just say that I find it weird that people don't think there is enough content in SCAG to run a game. I'm not a FR buff (guess that works to my advantage) but I would have no problem using this book as presented to frame an entire campaign or three.

 

[pukunui]

I'll just say that I find it weird that people don't think there is enough content in SCAG to run a game. I'm not a FR buff (guess that works to my advantage) but I would have no problem using this book as presented to frame an entire campaign or three.

I think it's at least partly because people were spoiled in the past by having WotC provide them with *all* the little details, instead of just enough to whet their appetites.


Having finally read through the whole thing cover-to-cover, I'm still of the mind that the biggest problem the book has is its lack of proper editing/proofreading. The number of typos and misspelled names/words is significant. The one that is foremost in my mind, for no particular reason, is Caer Callidyrr, the Ffolk capital of the Moonshaes. Not only is it not on the map, but it's also misspelled in the text - it should be "Callidyrr", not "Callidyr". The other one that stands out is how Gyrt, the Uthgardt barbarian the elf narrator meets, is referred to a woman for most of the section but switches to being a man at the end. Whoops!

I would've liked it if the new backgrounds all had full write-ups like the Far Traveler gets, rather than essentially just being variants on the PHB ones, but meh. I can live with how they did it.

Those little things aside, I'm pretty happy with the level of detail in the fluff sections, and I like all the new class options and such. I think there's just enough in there that it adds to the game without being overwhelming. And there are definitely some things in the fluff section that have got my imagination going.

My only other complaint would be that I wish they'd included more of the character art in the gallery they posted on Facebook. There are some really neat pieces in there that I'd like to add to my collection of D&D art for use in my campaigns.

 

[Hussar]

But as a measure of quality, they're better than sales. Unless Avatar was really the best movie of all time (#2 adjusted for inflation).

In any case, it proves what I was claiming; that the reviews on Amazon are pretty bad.

Agreed. But, I was specifically talking about success, not quality.

Nice way to turn it into an edition war. Let me repeat a statement that I made: the SCAG has an Amazon average that is a full star less than any other 5E hardback book.

But, it is important to look at the NUMBER of reviewers. That Islands book had FOUR reviewers. Looking at This page we see that outside of the first twenty products, most Pathfinder products are reviewed by less than 10 people. IOW, comparing reviews doesn't really follow all that much. The SCAG has been out for two weeks and has more reviews than most Pathfinder products. The more reviews, the more I'd expect a product to trend downward - the highs and lows smooth out.

That's not at all true, if you're buying a book that is sitting at #745 in books. Several thousand books a year reach that point; do you buy all of them?

Green Ronin has put out a number of books. Given that by that standard all their recent books have been complete failures, why exactly did Hasbro tap them to do this project? Could it have something to do with the fact that Wizards of the Coast putting out an official book about the Forgotten Realms was going to sell way, way higher then about anything a non-WotC company could put out in the RPG field? Could it have something to do with the fact that brands really do matter in gaming and this book had a couple of the biggest in the industry on it?

I can confidently say that if any WotC release sold as few copies as the best selling Green Ronin release, it would be considered a complete and utter failure. Yes, you nailed it on the head - the brand matters. People buy the book because it says Official D&D on the cover. Fair enough. Doesn't actually counter what I've said.

If people are buying SCAG and being disappointed because it isn't the book they personally want, that's a problem for the buyers. They shouldn't buy it because it's "successful" (as rated by sales); they should read reviews and figure out that it's not a book that will make them happy!

Never said they should buy it because it's successful. People should read the reviews and ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE BOOK before buying and figure out if its a book they want. Bitching that it's not this or that, when it was never presented to be this or that is a problem for the buyer. There wasn't any bait and switch here. It's a player's guide and many people are acting like WotC lied about what they produced.

I would say that it's certainly a bad book for WotC if a lot of people are complaining that it isn't the book they personally want. When they're only putting out a handful of books a year, they can't afford to put out many books that aren't what their customers want. Even if we assume, for the sake of discussion, that the problem with this book is that it's not what people wanted, that's not a dismissable problem.

Define "a lot". If the book is hitting sales goals then yes, it's a dismissible problem.

 

[prosfilaes]

Agreed. But, I was specifically talking about success, not quality.

And I wasn't and aren't.

But, it is important to look at the NUMBER of reviewers. That Islands book had FOUR reviewers.

What Islands book? If I can distract you from edition warring for a second, you'll note that almost all of the other 5E hardbacks all have more reviewers then SCAG.

Doesn't actually counter what I've said.

If what you said was the tautology that sales rates tell us more about sales then reviews, I'm not sure why anyone would argue with that. It's a little ridiculous to lead that with "star systems are a bit borked" as if we should or anyone does expect them to be a measure of sales copies sold.

Define "a lot". If the book is hitting sales goals then yes, it's a dismissible problem.

How many people preordered this? I'd say that for series work, a bad book can sell well and do a lot of damage down the line, when people think twice about buying the next books instead of preordering them.

 

[Hussar]

And I wasn't and aren't.

Well, since I was and am, why bring it up?

What Islands book? If I can distract you from edition warring for a second, you'll note that almost all of the other 5E hardbacks all have more reviewers then SCAG.

Well, that's a bit obvious since the SCAG has been out for two weeks and everything else 5e has been out for months. I was referring to the latest Pathfinder release Inner Sea Races. Sorry had the wrong name. Came out about the same time, has the same style of material as SCAG and has 4 reviews currently. Sure, it's got 4.5 stars, but, come on, it's 4 reviews.

This isn't edition warring to compare two very similar books - note the I09 review that was brought up in this thread reviews the same two books at the same time.

If what you said was the tautology that sales rates tell us more about sales then reviews, I'm not sure why anyone would argue with that. It's a little ridiculous to lead that with "star systems are a bit borked" as if we should or anyone does expect them to be a measure of sales copies sold.

Review systems are borked when you're comparing reviews by ones of people to reviews by tens of people. You're the one who has brought up the fact that every Pathfinder book has a higher review. My response is, well, of course it does when you only have half a dozen reviews, it's pretty easy to get a high rating.

How many people preordered this? I'd say that for series work, a bad book can sell well and do a lot of damage down the line, when people think twice about buying the next books instead of preordering them.

Again, how many is "a lot". How many people are actually disappointed by this book? Judging by the star reviews, everyone should love the Pathfinder book and dislike the WotC one. Yet, I09 pans both of them. How much of the poor reviews is due to unreasonable expectations.

Now, if you want to criticize the SCAG because of poor cartography, or bad writing, or bad mechanics, fine. But, that's not, generally, what's being complained about. People are complaining because this book isn't like some other book. Well, it was never claimed that it WAS going to be like the FRCS. I mean, good grief, the FRCS weighs in at TWICE the page count (or close enough). How much of the expectations of criitics is because they never bothered to actually look at the physical product before they bought it? Even on pre-order, you knew this only had 159 pages. What do you expect for something that's not a lot longer than some splat?

 

[prosfilaes]

Well, since I was and am, why bring it up?

If you go back a couple pages, you'll find that you replied to me replying to someone else

Review systems are borked when you're comparing reviews by ones of people to reviews by tens of people. You're the one who has brought up the fact that every Pathfinder book has a higher review. My response is, well, of course it does when you only have half a dozen reviews, it's pretty easy to get a high rating.

I was very careful to say that every hardback Pathfinder book has a higher review. With a goal of providing a baseline for what it means for a recent RPG book to have a bad star average on Amazon.

I said, fine, drop it, let's just look at D&D books. You're the one who wants keep dragging that out even while you're not responding to the fact that this is worse than the other 5E books in Amazon reviews. If you don't care, then fine, then we can drop it, but please stop dragging up one sentence.

How much of the poor reviews is due to unreasonable expectations.

Makers of successful products don't say things like that. If we want to talk about success, if your customers have unreasonable expectations, that's your problem, not theirs.

How much of the expectations of criitics is because they never bothered to actually look at the physical product before they bought it?

Again, really? You think businesses should look at people who bought something before reviews or anything came out and criticize them? Those Amazon preorders put it up at #754, and translated into quick money into Hasbro's pocket. The store preorders translates into sure sales for the store and one or two shelf copies instead of a lot of money locked up into speculative inventory. If Hasbro thinks the stores are key, that should be key to them.

Even on pre-order, you knew this only had 159 pages. What do you expect for something that's not a lot longer than some splat?

On something that's 16 or 32 pages longer then what GURPS authors had to sketch out a whole setting from scratch, or something the length of Forgotten Realms Adventures? Again, this does not sound like the words of success.

 

[Celtavian]

If you go back a couple pages, you'll find that you replied to me replying to someone else



I was very careful to say that every hardback Pathfinder book has a higher review. With a goal of providing a baseline for what it means for a recent RPG book to have a bad star average on Amazon.

I said, fine, drop it, let's just look at D&D books. You're the one who wants keep dragging that out even while you're not responding to the fact that this is worse than the other 5E books in Amazon reviews. If you don't care, then fine, then we can drop it, but please stop dragging up one sentence.



Makers of successful products don't say things like that. If we want to talk about success, if your customers have unreasonable expectations, that's your problem, not theirs.



Again, really? You think businesses should look at people who bought something before reviews or anything came out and criticize them? Those Amazon preorders put it up at #754, and translated into quick money into Hasbro's pocket. The store preorders translates into sure sales for the store and one or two shelf copies instead of a lot of money locked up into speculative inventory. If Hasbro thinks the stores are key, that should be key to them.



On something that's 16 or 32 pages longer then what GURPS authors had to sketch out a whole setting from scratch, or something the length of Forgotten Realms Adventures? Again, this does not sound like the words of success.

Some folks don't want to admit when a book isn't very good. You don't even need to compare it to Pathfinder books. Compare it to old 3E WotC books. Those FR books were pretty damn amazing. I loved purchasing those books. I felt I got my money's worth from each book, even rarely used books. The FRCS in 3E was an absolutely gorgeous book with a big pullout map and maps throughout it. Seems people have forgotten the kind of high quality books WotC used to put out for FR.