D&D 5E I just don't see why they even bothered with the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide.

Hussar · Nov 13, 2015

Isn't this book mostly for Adventurer League players? That would explain a lot if it was - a few character options and a broad over view of the setting that is the primary vehicle for AL play.

From that perspective, it sounds just about right. Could you not play AL games with the Basic rules and this book as a player?

pukunui · Nov 13, 2015

Hussar said:
Isn't this book mostly for Adventurer League players? That would explain a lot if it was - a few character options and a broad over view of the setting that is the primary vehicle for AL play.

From that perspective, it sounds just about right. Could you not play AL games with the Basic rules and this book as a player?

If it was intended primarily for AL players, you'd think they'd have put a bit more focus on the Moonsea region. Yes, you can play the first stages of each of the big adventure modules in AL, but most of the focus for organized play is around the Moonsea, not on the Sword Coast. Plus, the book makes no mention of AL at all, as far as I can tell.

Jester David · Nov 14, 2015

Hussar said:
Isn't this book mostly for Adventurer League players? That would explain a lot if it was - a few character options and a broad over view of the setting that is the primary vehicle for AL play.

From that perspective, it sounds just about right. Could you not play AL games with the Basic rules and this book as a player?

pukunui said:
If it was intended primarily for AL players, you'd think they'd have put a bit more focus on the Moonsea region. Yes, you can play the first stages of each of the big adventure modules in AL, but most of the focus for organized play is around the Moonsea, not on the Sword Coast. Plus, the book makes no mention of AL at all, as far as I can tell.

It's for making characters that fit the Adventurer's League, fit the storylines, and to synergize with Sword Coast Legends. All three feed into this book.

Jeremy E Grenemyer · Nov 14, 2015

pukunui said:
Those corrections came too late for the map in the book, unfortunately.

I suppose somebody new to the setting might have their curiosity piqued, which could lead to them hunting down maps online or in older books.

As much as we talk about wanting WotC to get things right, I have to remind myself that there's value in leaving things open ended. Little imperfections are like lures for the curious.

Alzrius · Nov 14, 2015

Hussar said:
There's a step you're missing though. Distributors. Even if I get my book published through a Kickstarter, that doesn't mean that I have the money to print enough copies to interest distributors. I mean, sure, Primeval Thule (to pick an example I like) is offered at Amazon.com, but, is it in an FLGS? How many FLGS? I have no idea to be honest. But, I'm fairly sure that there are many Kickstarter projects that never end up in a retailer.

That's not a relevant point. The assertion was that Kickstarter projects aren't retailer-friendly, presumably because they're seen as a competing venue by which to purchase products the same way that online retailers are, and that's patently false. When the book wouldn't exist if not for a Kickstarter project, it's not drawing people away from purchasing a hard copy in stores (unless you move the goalposts to say that that's money that could have gone into purchasing a different book at a retailer, but that broadens the definition of "not retailer-friendly" to include buying anything that doesn't come from a FLGS, such as going to the movies or buying ice cream).

Even if we accept your hypothetical that a Kickstarter raises the money to publish a book but not print enough of it - which sounds like a failure of the project's managers to take that into account - that doesn't rise to the level necessary to say that Kickstarter projects inherently retailer-unfriendly. Heck, you even flat-out admit that you have no idea if the one example you bring up is at an FLGS or not, and then turn right around and somehow assert that you're "fairly sure" that most Kickstarter books don't end up there.

JohnLynch · Nov 14, 2015

pukunui said:
I quite like the "less is more" approach WotC is taking with the Realms. I *like* that they're not dotting every I and crossing every T. I *like* that they're not spoonfeeding me every single little dribble of lore from the past 30 years. I *like* that they're giving me space to breathe and spread my wings and truly make the setting my own - and by that I mean, they're leaving space for me to fill in the details instead of giving me everything and then expecting me to change it if I don't like it or if it doesn't fit. It also means I'm less likely to have one of my players say, "Well, actually ..."

WotC owns the setting. They get to decide what is correct.

Ed Greenwood's philosophy has always been for every question a sourcebook answers it should raise two more questions and leave them unanswered. Now this philosophy hasn't always been followed but it's one I certainly appreciate as a DM. I don't want every question answered, I want just enough to draw inspiration for my own adventures and ideas.

Hussar said:
Because it's splitting the consumer base. 3.5 players aren't likely buying Pathfinder books and Pathfinder players aren't buying 5e books.

In other words, paizo's audience is about a third or so in size of what WotC had before 4e came along.

My gaming history:
1984-2008: No tabletop gaming
2008: D&D 4e
2009-2013: D&D 4e (Not Essentials)/Pathfinder
2013: AD&D 2e/Pathfinder
2014-Present: D&D 5e/Pathfinder

So you're wrong that Pathfinder players are segregated from D&D players (although in fairness of all the people I game with I'm the only one to cross games).

Mistwell · Nov 14, 2015

One of my players plays in a 3.5 game, a Pathfinder game, and my 5e game. He has books from all three as well.

Hussar · Nov 14, 2015

Sorry, but the plural of anecdote is not data. It's not unreasonable to assume, even from your own examples, where you have one example player and four or more counter examples, that saying that players tend to stick with one edition to the exclusion of others.

pukunui · Nov 14, 2015

sanishiver said:
As much as we talk about wanting WotC to get things right, I have to remind myself that there's value in leaving things open ended. Little imperfections are like lures for the curious.

Leaving things "open-ended" is one thing. I'm all for that. Making basic mistakes like misspelling the name of a city, or putting it in the wrong place, or accidentally leaving off the city icons for a whole slew of cities (and not noticing in time to correct it before the book it's in goes to print) is another thing entirely. I'm really not seeing how misspelling "Elversult" as "Eversult" is a "lure for the curious".

Hussar · Nov 14, 2015

Heh, I had to read that three times to actually see the difference. LOL.

D&D 5E I just don't see why they even bothered with the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide.

Hussar

Legend

pukunui

Legend

Jester David

Hero

Jeremy E Grenemyer

Feisty

Alzrius

The EN World kitten

JohnLynch

Explorer

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)

Hussar

Legend

pukunui

Legend

Hussar

Legend

Similar Threads