D&D 5E I have the DMG!

[Dire Bare]

i'm tired of waiting on promises from WotC.

Groan. It's hyperbole time again. WotC has not "promised" anyone anything. They have been very sparse with info, but have shared some of the things they planned for the DMG. Some of those things have made it in, some have not.

i bet if you tabulated every comment they made about whether something would be in the DMG or not, the majority of those claims would turn out to be false.

And I bet you'd be wrong. I bet if you actually went back and re-read everything they've said they planned on putting in the DMG, most of it will be in the DMG. Not all of it, but most of it.

Less kvetching and more spoilers please!

 

[Dire Bare]

Go do something else, I guess? It does seem that the book is less focused on the "hacker's guide" stuff than was previously described. This is a little disappointing, but they've obviously had to make hard choices about what's gone in, and it seems they've chosen to focus more on the basics. This makes a lot of sense when you think about it, so as long as more modular stuff comes out later, I'm happy.

Don't remember anyone from WotC promising a "hacker's guide" to D&D. I remember lots of folks reading (poorly) inbetween the lines and thinking that's what WotC said, when it actually wasn't. WotC told us there would be rules modules in the DMG to change-up your game . . . and they're in there! Most of the specific rules modules they mentioned seem to be in there, although some are not (Warforged, sigh). There is not an "alternate rules" section, which has confused some folks, but rather the rules modules are spread out throughout the book. Some are small tweaks, others are more substantive.

 

[The Hitcher]

Don't remember anyone from WotC promising a "hacker's guide" to D&D. I remember lots of folks reading (poorly) inbetween the lines and thinking that's what WotC said, when it actually wasn't.

Mearls specifically used that term on at least one occasion. But like I said - I'm sure they've made the best decisions about what to include and what not to. They've been on the money so far.

 

[transtemporal]

Thanks for answering our questions man!

1. What's the maximum magical bonus for armor and weapons listed?
2. Can you get a plain old magic shield+X?
3. If so, does the magic bonus add to straight to AC as in pre-4th edition?
4. If so, whats the maximum magical shield bonus?

 

[MerricB]

So does either the Monster Creation or NPC Creation section provide a mathematical basis for assessing CR??

I'm going to expect this is the case. Mike said on Reddit a week ago:

"The DMG breaks down CR into an offensive and defensive rating, with a range of values for each (attack bonus and damage for offense, AC and hit points for defense). Special abilities can also modify those CRs, and this is where a fair amount of design sense and playtesting comes in to make sure that something is weighed correctly.

"Once you're done, you simply average out offensive CR and defensive CR to come to your final rating. Again, you might adjust a little in either direction for monsters with weird abilities, but the process is easy if you're making typical monsters."

Cheers!

 

[casterblaster]

Time for some rage quitting I guess. Their aim is for new DMs who will more than likely run the game RAW and less on experienced DMs who mostly homebrew. You will get your modules, for free even, just give them time to get the core rules out. If not having certain guidelines in the DMG will zap all entertainment from your experience then play something more suited to what you want.

 

[Jester David]

it's starting to seem more and more like all the stuff they said would be in the DMG isn't going to be in there. nice to know we were just getting jerked around for two solid years.

So much for the promised modularity. An empty promise to keep people hoping during development.

Heh.
The book's not even out yet and we've gotten all of four or five posts of content reviews. A full two or three paragraphs describing the book. And already people are claiming it's a disappointment and full of broken promises.

Yeah... there might be a bias.

 

[Zaukrie]

Admittedly, it would be frustrating to those people that want some of what was cut.... because we could be looking at months or even 2016 before getting some of this, given the pace they are posting anything right now. I look forward to the book, but less so than I was.

 

[rjfTrebor]

it's not like this is speculation. if something's not in the book, it's not in the book.

 

[rjfTrebor]

Heh.
The book's not even out yet and we've gotten all of four or five posts of content reviews. A full two or three paragraphs describing the book. And already people are claiming it's a disappointment and full of broken promises.

Yeah... there might be a bias.

sure, a bias against dishonesty and unfulfilled promises.

and pardon me for not wanting to wait on some dumb article after already spending two years with the playtest in hopes of getting all that stuff in the DMG.