D&D 5E Who is excited for Xanathar's Guide to Everything?
iserith
Magic Wordsmith
^ I got that email from Amazon on Friday. I wonder what the "upgrade" is. Maybe it's sufficient packaging such that my book isn't all dinged up this time.
My next session is on Dec. 1st so that will give me time to read it and see what options I can include in the campaign going forward. I'm sure my players will be excited for it!
pukunui
Legend
I am not as excited about this one as I was expecting to be. I find most of the new class options unappealing or disappointing, which I think is dragging my overall excitement levels down. There are some gems in the book that I'm looking forward to using, though, so I'm still going to get it.
L
lowkey13
Guest
*Deleted by user*
Prakriti
Hi, I'm a Mindflayer, but don't let that worry you
Almost all the subclasses fail at the conceptual level and most of the DM tools add unnecessary complications to the game. The new magic crafting system, for example, doesn't fix the existing system so much as replace it, which might be alright if the new system didn't have its own inherent problems. So now we have a choice between using Flawed System A or Flawed System B. That sort of conundrum is introduced by other sections of the book as well.
Yet for all that, I still predict that Xanathar's Guide will be one of the bestselling books of 5E.
Yet for all that, I still predict that Xanathar's Guide will be one of the bestselling books of 5E.
Mercule
Adventurer
I picked it up on DDB. It's a nice collection of new toys. Some of the DM content is much better than I anticipated (I had pretty low hopes, so YMMV).
Funny thing about the whole "new toy" part: I've been listing to Savage Worlds podcasts and digging into Fate (including running a one-shot a while back), lately. While I have no interest in doing Fantasy Hero style universal systems, I'm finding the lighter weight systems really calling to me. Dropping $30 on more crunch when there's still one PC in the group that can't be done on DDB (UA Ranger) was a bit of a trick.
I really like some of the concepts inspired by the toys in XGtE, but I couldn't help but think I could do it easier and better in Fate. Maybe not. Just odd how some things are double-edged.
Funny thing about the whole "new toy" part: I've been listing to Savage Worlds podcasts and digging into Fate (including running a one-shot a while back), lately. While I have no interest in doing Fantasy Hero style universal systems, I'm finding the lighter weight systems really calling to me. Dropping $30 on more crunch when there's still one PC in the group that can't be done on DDB (UA Ranger) was a bit of a trick.
I really like some of the concepts inspired by the toys in XGtE, but I couldn't help but think I could do it easier and better in Fate. Maybe not. Just odd how some things are double-edged.
I'm less excited than I thought I'd be. I might get it now that I've seen a friend's copy. That's more than I can say for any other 5e book and far outside of the big three.
They sure such a good job with the base game that additions seem superfluous for the most part. A few of the sub classes seem fun, but only a few. The common magic items are a real treat.
I have about $75 credit from running AL games at my local shop so I'll probably, eventually pick XGtE up along with some miniatures.
They sure such a good job with the base game that additions seem superfluous for the most part. A few of the sub classes seem fun, but only a few. The common magic items are a real treat.
I have about $75 credit from running AL games at my local shop so I'll probably, eventually pick XGtE up along with some miniatures.
I want to be but I'm really worried my DM is going to implement the sleeping in armor rule. To me this is just a terribly designed rule as it:
1) Doesn't actually make the game more fun.
2) Makes dexterity an even better stat.
If he does implement the rule I'll probably just suicide my tempest cleric and make a dex based light cleric or druid.
1) Doesn't actually make the game more fun.
2) Makes dexterity an even better stat.
If he does implement the rule I'll probably just suicide my tempest cleric and make a dex based light cleric or druid.
pukunui
Legend
I was hoping for something better myself. If I were to institute a sleeping in armor rule (and I haven't yet because it just hasn't been an issue in any of the games I run), I'd put a Con check in there first. Pass the check, and you're fine. Fail, and then you've got the consequences.
Better yet, you could just make it something simple like: if you're proficient in the armor you're sleeping in, you're fine. If you're not, then you don't gain the benefits of a long rest.
Indeed. Many of them just don't seem at all interesting. Others are quite cool conceptually but don't live up to their potential.
Agreed. I liked the look of the new downtime activities introduced in UA, but they had their own problems, and, at first glance, it doesn't look like they've done enough to address those problems here.
As time goes on, I'm becoming more disillusioned with the playtest process. I feel like often times our feedback just doesn't make a difference. The monstrous races in Volo's, for instance: they are virtually unchanged from their draft form. Despite all the talk about the slower release schedule meaning better quality, I'm really not seeing that. It's like they can't even be bothered sometimes. I'm all for "rulings not rules", but I feel like lately they've been using it as a bit of a cop-out. "We'll just chuck these half-baked ideas out there and let the DMs polish them up properly."
Last edited:
Similar Threads
