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

[DEFCON 1]

Not sure how that's a problem. I just Kickstarted Primeval Thule 5e, even though I have the earlier version.

For many people, it probably won't be. But for the number of people who wish the SCAG had many more details in many more places across the map... if an Eberron player wanting a 5E Eberron campaign book wanted an amount of detail equal to that... that's an even bigger waste of time (on WotC's part) and money (on our part) to create. Because without a jump in the Eberron timeline, nothing fluff-wise will have changed. And thus, WotC could produce a basic Khorvaire Adventurer's Guide book with setting details about on the level we got in the SCAG, and then tell people "If you really want or need more detail than this... buy the twelve(?) 3rd edition Eberron books we produced, all available in PDF form from dndclassics.com, because all the info in them is still completely valid and applicable to every potential 5E Eberron game."

 

[Reinhart]

They've put out three hardbacks in 2015 because they want to put out three.

This very much depends on your definition of "they" and "want." What Hasbro needs and what the D&D team wants don't have to be in perfect sync. I think if you had Mearls or Perkins in a closed room, they would admit they want to be working on more books. There are a lot of former co-workers that they'd like to be collaborating with again. They probably enjoy designing game material more than the constant promotion and brand management that their current positions require. Heck, if they're telling the truth about their planned time-line, they have been working on more books, but this is the pace of publication that Hasbro allows them to move at. And that's because Hasbro wants to maintain the D&D brand for as low a cost as sanely possible. New books are necessary for maintaining interest and shelf-presence for the core books, but this "trickle" is all their team can manage without ballooning the budget and cutting into ROI.

 

[DEFCON 1]

This very much depends on your definition of "they" and "want." What Hasbro needs and what the D&D team wants don't have to be in perfect sync. I think if you had Mearls or Perkins in a closed room, they would admit they want to be working on more books. There are a lot of former co-workers that they'd like to be collaborating with again. They probably enjoy designing game material more than the constant promotion and brand management that their current positions require. Heck, if they're telling the truth about their planned time-line, they have been working on more books, but this is the pace of publication that Hasbro allows them to move at. And that's because Hasbro wants to maintain the D&D brand for as low a cost as sanely possible. New books are necessary for maintaining interest and shelf-presence for the core books, but this "trickle" is all their team can manage without ballooning the budget and cutting into ROI.

Let's not put this on Hasbro's doorstep. Hasbro has nothing to do with this. Wizards of the Coast? Sure. They have budgets on how much they give to the D&D department... but saying Hasbro executives are concerned about the money spent on D&D is like saying they are concerned about how much the Nerf folks are spending on nerf shooters versus nerf balls. The only people who care about that level of detail are those who run the Nerf brand.

 

[delericho]

This very much depends on your definition of "they" and "want." What Hasbro needs and what the D&D team wants don't have to be in perfect sync. I think if you had Mearls or Perkins in a closed room, they would admit they want to be working on more books.

Mearls is on record as saying that too many books, of any sort, hurts D&D. Do you think he's lying?

 

[Pauper]

It is hardly just the usual suspects though. This looks to be the lowest reviewed book of 5e so far.

It's not the people that hate it that is the problem, it's the number of people who have just gone 'meh'.

It's the lowest-reviewed book, if you don't count the hardback adventures (Hoard of the Dragon Queen is rated lower, at 52%).

More reviews give the book a 4-star rating than any other rating (and weirdly enough, the only 1-star review is the Escapist review, despite their review on their own site being between 2 and 3 stars out of five).

The only real problem with the SCAG is that is isn't what some people wanted from the first official Realms product. It's okay to be disappointed that SCAG isn't what you wanted, but my feeling is that a review should take into account what the product is, not what you wanted the product to be.

It's like giving breakfast a 'meh' review because you had to pay extra for the bacon. That's a good thing to point out, but the question isn't whether or not the bacon should be free -- it's whether or not the bacon is good enough to be worth the extra cost.

Looking at only the reviews that give substantive reasons for their review (and ignoring the ones that say things like 'too much fluff' as their entire review), the product should be trending much closer to 80%, which would put it in the neighborhood of Rise of Tiamat.

--
Pauper

 

[DEFCON 1]

The only real problem with the SCAG is that is isn't what some people wanted from the first official Realms product. It's okay to be disappointed that SCAG isn't what you wanted, but my feeling is that a review should take into account what the product is, not what you wanted the product to be.

Precisely. And it's exactly why a movie critic might give a horror movie a 5-star review. Sure... there's always going to be that one dumbass after that who then chimes in with "Oh, so you think this horror movie is on part with The Godfather, do you?"... at which point you have to remind the dumbass that-- no, reviews are not one giant scale of "Best Movie Ever" to "Worst Movie Ever", and thus this 5-star horror movie means it's an objectively better film than that 4 1/2-star period drama... but rather how well the reviewer thinks the filmmakers succeeded in doing what they set out to do.

And it's the same thing here. Knowing the kind of book WotC wanted to make, review and rate how well they did it... NOT how close they got to the kind of book YOU wanted to have.

 

[delericho]

It's okay to be disappointed that SCAG isn't what you wanted, but my feeling is that a review should take into account what the product is, not what you wanted the product to be.

People will review the product based on whatever criteria they want. The basis of review aggregation is that it takes that into account - the averaging means that the guy who gives it 1-star because his delivery was late is countered by the guy who gives 5-stars to any product with "Sword" in the title.

It's like giving breakfast a 'meh' review because you had to pay extra for the bacon. That's a good thing to point out, but the question isn't whether or not the bacon should be free -- it's whether or not the bacon is good enough to be worth the extra cost.

Not really. Being ambushed with "bacon is extra" might well be enough of a nasty surprise to sour the whole breakfast experience - and that regardless of how much extra it is, or how crispy the bacon turns out to be.

 

[Irennan]

I'm guessing they do -- I picked up "Fire in the Blood" to review the succession of Cormyr and how Foril's granddaughter Raedra ended up becoming Queen despite having a father and a brother ahead of her in the line of succession. That novel also planted some big hints about how Azuth returned to godhood while Asmodeus didn't end up losing his, which probably get resolved in a later novel.

Keep in mind, though, that the Sundering novels are six books, and the novel I mentioned above isn't technically one of them -- I'm guessing most gamers probably don't want to sift through a dozen or more novels to tease out setting details that they feel should be documented in a single massive campaign guide. I can't in good conscience say they're wrong; I can say that WotC might have a different delivery system in mind, though, for better or worse.

--
Pauper

The Sundering novels and their followups cover only a narrow slice of the full changes. In fact other novels (like Evan's and Greenwood's) include various tidbits here and there to provide updates on what the Sundering did that wasn't included in the six books. The SCAG also provides a general summary, and, from what I hear, much of what is in it hasn't been described in the various novels.

I want to know more about the Sundering and an explanation for all the changes. All we have is basically the Sundering happened and here are the changes. There are no explanations for anything. I also want more lore and detail of the current comings and goings of certain kingdoms and areas. I mean we have several RSE's in a matter of 100 years and no clear explanation as to what has taken place.

I really don't think that this is going to happen. The Sundering basically is a massive deus ex machina to reboot a lot of what happened to the Realms and was widely disliked. It is a sort of retcon, with an attempt at respecting the continuity of the setting (a rather weak one, IMO, given that it almost literally amounts to ''God fixed everything'').

 

[hawkeyefan]

Not really. Being ambushed with "bacon is extra" might well be enough of a nasty surprise to sour the whole breakfast experience - and that regardless of how much extra it is, or how crispy the bacon turns out to be.

But to run with the analogy....imagine the bacon got to the table and then said "hey, I cost extra and I'm really tasty and delicious, but also high in fat content"...if someone then decided to get the bacon, wouldn't that be their choice?

Basically, imagine you could read the back cover of the bacon, or flip through its pages, or read the online product description of bacon before buying it.

If a person could do that and then complain that the bacon is extra, then maybe it has something to do with them refusing to alter their expectations for the bacon based on available info?

 

[Edwin Suijkerbuijk]

As far as I could tell it looks like a pretty nice book for players, and maybe enough for Dungeon Masters who just intend running published adventures that are set in the sword coast.
It might not be in dept enough for dungeon Masters who intend to run their oen adventures.