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

[Jester David]

You keep saying that, but the truth is that it doesn't have the player content to back that up, if its a player's guide, its not successful as one, it needs more crunch for that.

Um.... no.
To be a player's guide, it needs to be aimed at players and not include DM content. Which means no monsters or secrets. That's the sole requirement. The inclusion or absence of new mechanics or crunch is irrelevant to the status of a book as a player's guide.
In fact, a player's guide to the Forgotten Realms that was all crunch would be a complete failure, despite being 100% player content, because it wouldn't introduce players to the Realms. Some measure of flavour is required. More crunch would just make it an inferior guide to the setting and a much worse book.

This book is very much aimed at players. It contains lore, but the lore is limited and focused on in-world descriptions that a DM can dismiss or contradict under the excuse of "unreliable narration". Unlike a DM campaign setting, which should be more factual and omniscient. The in-character narration makes it a poor DM resource.

 

[Jester David]

I do expect that pattern to continue, just at a much slower pace. Class splat books were good sellers. New magic books are also good sellers. I expect we'll see all of these books. I expect to see them much later on and with more testing to extend the life of this edition.

They were good sellers for a very short term. They could sell a handful of them before people reached crunch saturation.
So it stands to reason that if instead of selling one book that is 90% crunch, you can sell three books that are 30% crunch the edition will last much longer before people stop buying books. Especially if you also release books far less often.

 

[Celtavian]

Define good seller though. Again WotC has been fairly clear here that they consider 100k copies or more to be the benchmark. It's unlikely that any non core DND book has sold in those kinds of numbers since the eighties.

So, sure we're going to get new class options. But I think the days of one class per book are very much behind us.

And let's not forget that the 5e phb has a lot more classes in it than ever before. Which makes the need for new class options less.

WotC knows what numbers they are trying to reach. If they reach those numbers, it's a success. If they don't, back to the drawing board.

 

[Celtavian]

They were good sellers for a very short term. They could sell a handful of them before people reached crunch saturation.
So it stands to reason that if instead of selling one book that is 90% crunch, you can sell three books that are 30% crunch the edition will last much longer before people stop buying books. Especially if you also release books far less often.

All books sell for a very short time unless you have a sudden surge from word of mouth. That's the entertainment market in general. The initial sales has to meet the target or the project likely won't be deemed a success. Class books are popular with a much larger segment of the audience. It would be odd for them to make a the usual amount covering the different classes given the money makers they usually are in a tabletop RPG game cycle.

 

[delericho]

Sorry, that's not how 5e works. And it's not like WotC hasn't been absolutely clear on this point. They are not adding (much) crunch to the game. The game is done. People really, really need to learn to accept that or move on. We're not getting sixteen class splats. We're not getting books of new spells.

You can, of course, provides citations for them saying we're not getting class splatbooks or books of new spells?

 

[pukunui]

You can, of course, provides citations for them saying we're not getting class splatbooks or books of new spells?

I think the gist of it comes from that interview with Chris Perkins from a while back, in which he talked about not wanting to make books just for their own sake, and not wanting to make books that would just sit on someone's shelf not getting used, and not necessarily making books at all but providing content in other ways that we haven't seen before, and so on and so forth.

 

[delericho]

I think the gist of it comes from that interview with Chris Perkins from a while back, in which he talked about not wanting to make books just for their own sake, and not wanting to make books that would just sit on someone's shelf not getting used, and not necessarily making books at all but providing content in other ways that we haven't seen before, and so on and so forth.

Yep, I read that, and it's all good stuff. But IIRC he stopped short of stating that those splatbooks and/or book of spells won't be coming. (Which is wise, actually, because that way if their plans change and they do decide to do splatbooks, they won't get hit with "but you promised..." whines*.)

WotC have deliberately been quiet about their plans for upcoming books, and with good reason: they want every release to be an "event". I can't fault them for that. But it comes at a cost - since we don't know how many or what type of books will be coming, we also don't know how many or what types of books won't be coming. Which means that speculation remains fair game.

* Yeah, okay, I know they'll actually be hit with complaints whatever they do. But at least they'll have the warm glow of knowing that they didn't actually promise, for whatever that's worth.

 

[ZeshinX]

I'm not looking for splatbooks as they've been done before. While I did enjoy them, I can see the wisdom of the new(er) approach. I still would like to see expanded options typically associated with splatbooks, though far more spaced out is fine with me (every other year perhaps).

I wouldn't like to see them in the form of singular class or group of classes (like a Fighter's Handbook circa 2e, or Complete Warrior circa 3e) but take an approach where one tome adds options for ALL classes, similar to Pathfinder's Advanced Player's Guide (though with fewer outright new classes, if any, and just archetypes/specializations for the existing classes, new backgrounds, optional rules to support their stated "modular" approach which I have seen little example of, etc.

The 5e psionics introduced via Unearthed Arcana seems like a good place to start, even though I'd like to see psionics take a less "dedicated classes" approach and be more "dedicated to all classes" by making psionics be accessible to any in some form or fashion.

 

[Prism]

For me I am very happy with this as a players guide. Well written, interesting narrator views (I particularly like the non description of Evermeet), just the right amount of crunch.

I'm not sure I want a single equivalent of a campaign guide as there is too much content to ever do it justice in a single book. I'm happy working from the 1e/2e content e.g lands of intrigue and the FR wiki

What would be interesting is a kind of 'what really happened during the Sundering' but that would be best as a short story or maybe some web articles.

 

[garnuk]

Yep, I read that, and it's all good stuff. But IIRC he stopped short of stating that those splatbooks and/or book of spells won't be coming. (Which is wise, actually, because that way if their plans change and they do decide to do splatbooks, they won't get hit with "but you promised..." whines*.)

WotC have deliberately been quiet about their plans for upcoming books, and with good reason: they want every release to be an "event". I can't fault them for that. But it comes at a cost - since we don't know how many or what type of books will be coming, we also don't know how many or what types of books won't be coming. Which means that speculation remains fair game.

* Yeah, okay, I know they'll actually be hit with complaints whatever they do. But at least they'll have the warm glow of knowing that they didn't actually promise, for whatever that's worth.

There was a podcost/audio interview with Mike Mearls where he said that all future character options would come in thematic books. His classic example was a Seafaring book with all the rules for doing ship battles, and having classes such as the swashbuckler or storm sorcerer.

Obviously, his example was not how those sub classes got released, but it does fit his general comment.