Critical Role The New D&D Book Is 'The Explorer's Guide to [Critical Role's] Wildemount!' By Matt Mercer

It looks like Amazon has leaked the title and description of the new D&D book a day early (unless it's all a fake-out by WotC) -- and it's a new D&D setting book called The Explorer's Guide to Wildemount; it's the Critical Role campaign setting, penned by Matt Mercer!

image from Critical Role wiki​

There's no cover image yet, so we're stuck with the "Coming Soon" image.

This book appeared without a title on Amazon last week, and a 'reveal' date of January 9th, which was then later delayed until January 13th. Amazon appears to have jumped the gun a day early.

Here's some information about Wildemount, which is a continent in the same world as Critical Role's other setting, Tal'Dorei. It is described by the official wiki has having "real-world Eastern European influence.... The Dwendalian Empire takes inspiration from 15th century Russia as well as Germanic nations in Central Europe (e.g., Prussia). Xhorhas has a more 13th-century Romanian flair. Outside of Wynandir, on the edges of the Dwendalian Empire, the cultures and peoples of those regions display a distinctly 14th-century Spanish flavor."

HOW DO YOU WANT TO DO THIS?

A war brews on a continent that has withstood more than its fair share of conflict. The Dwendalian Empire and the Kryn Dynasty are carving up the lands around them, and only the greatest heroes would dare stand between them. Somewhere in the far corners of this war-torn landscape are secrets that could end this conflict and usher in a new age of peace—or burn the world to a cinder.

Create a band of heroes and embark on a journey across the continent of Wildemount, the setting for Campaign 2 of the hit Dungeons & Dragons series Critical Role. Within this book, you’ll find new character options, a heroic chronicle to help you craft your character’s backstory, four different starting adventures, and everything a Dungeon Master needs to breathe life into a Wildemount-based D&D campaign…

• Delve through the first Dungeons & Dragons book to let players experience the game as played within the world of Critical Role, the world’s most popular livestreaming D&D show.
• Uncover a trove of options usable in any D&D game, featuring subclasses, spells, magic items, monsters, and more, rooted in the adventures of Exandria—such as Vestiges of Divergence and the possibility manipulating magic of Dunamancy.
• Start a Dungeons & Dragons campaign in any of Wildemount’s regions using a variety of introductory adventures, dozens of regional plot seeds, and the heroic chronicle system—a way to create character backstories rooted in Wildemount.

Explore every corner of Wildemount and discover mysteries revealed for the first time by Critical Role Dungeon Master, Matthew Mercer.

Critical Role's other setting, Tal'Dorei, was published a couple of years ago by Green Ronin. This brings the list of settings in official D&D books to five: Forgotten Realms, Ravnica, Ravenloft, Eberron, and Wildemount.

UPDATE! Barnes & Noble has the cover (but not the title or description).

 

[Reynard]

When I explain how D&D works to people who have no knowledge, I always use the roll 1d20 explanation. Because anyone can understand it, and if you're playing with no combat (a perfectly acceptable way to play D&D) the rules don't get more complicated than "roll, add charisma, succeed or fail."

Explaining how the game works is not especially related to how complex it is.

"See, there's two sides on this grid, and each side has exactly the same pieces, and each piece has specific rules about how it can move. Easy!"

 

[Acolyte of Zothique]

No, I'm going to have to agree with Haffrung. DnD 5e is on the higher end of complexity in the current gaming market. It is a "weighty" game as I understand the terminology.

The other games you listed are on the extreme end. But, I literally just tried to teach my sister's boyfriend how to play in advance of him playing in a game with some friends. I could not explain enough material to feel like he had an adequate grasp of his options and how the math works. I skipped a lot, I glossed a lot. Sure, he can play, but understanding his choices and decision points are a lot harder.

If you are saying 5e is close to the higher end of complexity in the current Table Top RPG market then you are saying 5e is close to games like PF1E, PF2E. One of the complaints raised against 5e is that it doesn't have enough rules crunch and granularity to satisfy some people. So I'm sorry but this argument is not only nonsensical, it's also paradoxical. You cannot have a game that is both very complex and not complex enough unless you regard this as subjective opinion. Which it is.

I'm going by my 30+ years of experience, I have both run and played in dozens and dozens (and dozens) of different RPGs and in no way would I consider 5e at the high end of complexity. You want a real complex game? Try Shadowrun 4e where it took 2 hours plus to even get close to creating a character let alone begin running the thing.

What I have learnt over the years is that even with truly simple games, for example some OSR games like Basic Fantasy, it is a mistake to try to explain even the majority of rules to new players. It's cognitive overload. You just start with the essential stuff to get the character started. My experience of explaining 3.5 and 5e to new players is like day and night, 5e was designed to be easier to play and run and it appears to have worked. 5e is not complex but how you present the game to new players may be the problem. Use the drip feed, not the fire hose.

 

[Acolyte of Zothique]

Sure. But unless the player is interested in reading the rules and noting or memorizing the myriad modifiers and conditional rules, you'll be walking them through all that (not to mention class abilities, spells, combat actions, conditions, etc.) on every roll forever. Which is what a lot of DMs do. Requiring an alpha gamer to routinely monitor and manage play suggests the game is more complex than a lot of players would prefer.

5E is not difficult for hardcore gamers and longtime RPG players. But it's a massive step up in complexity for people who haven't played anything more complicated than Pandemic or Lords of Waterdeep - which is the great majority of new people who play.

Nope, you won't be walking players through this forever because most people learn as they play and become self-reliant. If people are engaged in playing the game they learn. There are people who never seem to really pick up rules despite endless explanation, Sam Riegel from Critical Role is a perfect example, but they can still enjoy the game.

Your view seems to be that people in general do not learn things. This is not true.

 

[schneeland]

If you are saying 5e is close to the higher end of complexity in the current Table Top RPG market then you are saying 5e is close to games like PF1E, PF2E. One of the complaints raised against 5e is that it doesn't have enough rules crunch and granularity to satisfy some people. So I'm sorry but this argument is not only nonsensical, it's also paradoxical. You cannot have a game that is both very complex and not complex enough unless you regard this as subjective opinion. Which it is.

I think what @Chaosmancer is saying is that if you look at the gaming market in general, so especially including board games, 5e is still scoring pretty high in complexity. That doesn't rule out that there can be even more complex systems (PF1E, Rolemaster, Shadowrun), but I don't think that matters from the perspective of someone who is typically playing board or card games.

I do agree that 5e is a bit easier to pick up than 3e, in particular because of the use of sub-classes, but it still has a lot of fiddly bits in its rules.

 

[Acolyte of Zothique]

I think what @Chaosmancer is saying is that if you look at the gaming market in general, so especially including board games, 5e is still scoring pretty high in complexity. That doesn't rule out that there can be even more complex systems (PF1E, Rolemaster, Shadowrun), but I don't think that matters from the perspective of someone who is typically playing board or card games.

I do agree that 5e is a bit easier to pick up than 3e, in particular because of the use of sub-classes, but it still has a lot of fiddly bits in its rules.

I'm not bringing board games into this discussion, it's comparing apples and oranges and is not relevant.

 

[Chaosmancer]

If you are saying 5e is close to the higher end of complexity in the current Table Top RPG market then you are saying 5e is close to games like PF1E, PF2E. One of the complaints raised against 5e is that it doesn't have enough rules crunch and granularity to satisfy some people. So I'm sorry but this argument is not only nonsensical, it's also paradoxical. You cannot have a game that is both very complex and not complex enough unless you regard this as subjective opinion. Which it is.

I'm going by my 30+ years of experience, I have both run and played in dozens and dozens (and dozens) of different RPGs and in no way would I consider 5e at the high end of complexity. You want a real complex game? Try Shadowrun 4e where it took 2 hours plus to even get close to creating a character let alone begin running the thing.

What I have learnt over the years is that even with truly simple games, for example some OSR games like Basic Fantasy, it is a mistake to try to explain even the majority of rules to new players. It's cognitive overload. You just start with the essential stuff to get the character started. My experience of explaining 3.5 and 5e to new players is like day and night, 5e was designed to be easier to play and run and it appears to have worked. 5e is not complex but how you present the game to new players may be the problem. Use the drip feed, not the fire hose.

If you read my second paragraph in the quote, I start by saying "The other games you listed". That was meant to include 3.5, Rolemaster and Shadowrun 4e. I would also include Pathfinder as it is essentially 3.5.

I also acknowledged that those games are even more complex, saying that they were on the extreme end of complexity. High < Extreme.

And, I can say with some confidence, that Shadowrun 4e is a pretty high benchmark. I had a friend who wanted to start a play by post game of that system. So, I essentially had to self teach myself to create a character with the software they gave me. It took two weeks, I still did not make a good character, and I was simply overwhelmed. And I am an experienced gamer who generally has little trouble picking up new games.


So, my post is not nonsensical, unless you think complexity is a binary state. There are games that are more complex and less complex. DnD 5e falls on the higher end. It just does, there are entire genres of games that are less complex than 5e. As someone who has had to bring in new players pretty much every year, it is a difficult transition every time. I agree with the drip method of rules teaching, but if there are mitigating circumstances, it just highlights how hard it is to teach the game.

The guy decided to play a druid, because he wanted magic and support but no religion. So I listed Hill Dwarf, Wood Elf or Human as his best choices for race. He wanted to know which was better, so I had to explain how the dwarf would increase his health and make him resistant to poison (explain what resistance is) while the elf would be harder to hit and give him more skills (what are skills, what do they do) and the human would be slightly weaker, but could give him a feat (what are feats, what do they do). What is proficiency, when do you add it, which wisdom number do you add, what do all these cantrips do, which is the best choice to take for a character who fights at range, that one sounds cool can I do this with it, what is preparing spells, how do spell slots work, what is AC how do I calculate it.

I had two hours to help him learn the game and build a character he could play at a newbie DMs table. A DM I have never and will never meet, running for a table of eight.

And, when I talked to my sister about how the session went, the first thing she asked me is that they got into an argument, mostly a player and the guy I helped, over the fact that the player declared you do not get an attack bonus when you use spells. She asked if that was true, and the honest answer is, "sort of" because you only get an attack bonus with some spells, others use saves, and still others just work without either a save or an attack bonus (magic missile) but you do not get damage bonuses to the spells, unless a specific ability says you do.


DnD 5e is by no means a "simple game". It is simple for DnD standards, just like the collected works of Jim Butcher are simple in terms of "literature" when compared to far more complex behemoths like Tolstoy, but they are not "simple books" either. These things exist in degrees.

 

[Stefano Rinaldelli]

I'm not bringing board games into this discussion, it's comparing apples and oranges and is not relevant.

Introducing Boardgames into the discussion is perfectly relevant if you are talking about people that start from scratch and are trying to decide which is the game they want to play. From their perspective DnD or Cluedo could be the same: a social game around a table. Chaosmancer argument was related to this and he is correct if he puts in the bunch even boardgames.

EDIT: so, yes, DnD (but almost all RPG) are on the High Difficult side of the spectrum.

 

[JeffB]

Introducing Boardgames into the discussion is perfectly relevant if you are talking about people that start from scratch and are trying to decide which is the game they want to play. From their perspective DnD or Cluedo could be the same: a social game around a table. Chaosmancer argument was related to this and he is correct if he puts in the bunch even boardgames.

Exactly- And since I am the one who created the tangent in this thread, I will point out It is also what I was discussing: D&D compared to other games. I specify that in my post.

For someone who has played Clue, Battleship, Monopoly and comes into D&D, it is beyond intimidating. Back in 1977 that was about my experience with games- Checkers, Battleship, Monopoly, etc. But D&D was far less intimidating then when it came to rules. My fiends had the LBBs, Holmes, and a MM (the latter two being brand new). I borrowed the Holmes book. 48 pages? It was not intimidating. It had some examples of play that described the minimal amount of rules (comparatively). Not to mention the entire game, despite the presentation not being so clear as things are today, had FAR LESS rules. Holmes could probably be summed up in about 15-20 pages if you remove the Good Dr.'s fluffy text and minimal art.

IME- 3/5E, as well as Advanced TSR D&D are a mess to teach complete newcomers who are not gamers in any real shape or form and are just trying the game out as if it was boardgame ala Monopoly or Clue, or what have you. S&W (whitebox/core) and Dungeon World/variations have been far more successful. If I had to pick a WOTC version I'd pick 4E as being the easiest because every class works in the same way and non gaming people relate easily to "you can do this anytime you want, this you can do once per battle, and this you can only do once per day). Additionally- levels match up with the powers/spells. 1st level characters get 1st level powers/spells. 5th level characters get 5th level spells,* 4E also has something cooked right into the system that is perfect for newcomers and casual players: Companion characters. Companion characters eliminates all the extraneous things that can take full blown 4E characters to a bad place with analysis paralysis. And with Companion Character builds the players can pick any class they want because they all operate at the same complexity (no need to recommend the Champion Fighter to the 8yo girl who wants to play a Wizard). EDIT- 4E also makes it easier for the players to help each other- because everybody's character works in a similar way. The newbie with that 1st level Fighter has very different rules to go by than the newbie with the 1st level Wizard or Barbarian in 3/5E (or TSR D&D)

*My god, trying to explain Vancian casting to my wife (a highly educated RN with an excellent career working for a Major Health system in the NYC metro area)---NEVAR AGAIN Spell slots, level disparity, spells per day vs. spells known, etc. It makes no sense whatsoever to normal non-gaming humans. She did not want to play another class otherwise I would never have let her do it for her first ever D&D game.

Anyhoo... D&D is a complicated game- in any form or edition for someone who is completely inexperienced with RPGs (TT or Videogame)

 

[Acolyte of Zothique]

Exactly- And since I am the one who created the tangent in this thread, I will point out It is also what I was discussing: D&D compared to other games. I specify that in my post.

For someone who has played Clue, Battleship, Monopoly and comes into D&D, it is beyond intimidating. Back in 1977 that was about my experience with games- Checkers, Battleship, Monopoly, etc. But D&D was far less intimidating then when it came to rules. My fiends had the LBBs, Holmes, and a MM (the latter two being brand new). I borrowed the Holmes book. 48 pages? It was not intimidating. It had some examples of play that described the minimal amount of rules (comparatively). Not to mention the entire game, despite the presentation not being so clear as things are today, had FAR LESS rules. Holmes could probably be summed up in about 15-20 pages if you remove the Good Dr.'s fluffy text and minimal art.

IME- 3/5E, as well as Advanced TSR D&D are a mess to teach complete newcomers who are not gamers in any real shape or form and are just trying the game out as if it was boardgame ala Monopoly or Clue, or what have you. S&W (whitebox/core) and Dungeon World/variations have been far more successful. If I had to pick a WOTC version I'd pick 4E as being the easiest because every class works in the same way and non gaming people relate easily to "you can do this anytime you want, this you can do once per battle, and this you can only do once per day). Additionally- levels match up with the powers/spells. 1st level characters get 1st level powers/spells. 5th level characters get 5th level spells,* 4E also has something cooked right into the system that is perfect for newcomers and casual players: Companion characters. Companion characters eliminates all the extraneous things that can take full blown 4E characters to a bad place with analysis paralysis. And with Companion Character builds the players can pick any class they want because they all operate at the same complexity (no need to recommend the Champion Fighter to the 8yo girl who wants to play a Wizard). EDIT- 4E also makes it easier for the players to help each other- because everybody's character works in a similar way. The newbie with that 1st level Fighter has very different rules to go by than the newbie with the 1st level Wizard or Barbarian in 3/5E (or TSR D&D)

*My god, trying to explain Vancian casting to my wife (a highly educated RN with an excellent career working for a Major Health system in the NYC metro area)---NEVAR AGAIN Spell slots, level disparity, spells per day vs. spells known, etc. It makes no sense whatsoever to normal non-gaming humans. She did not want to play another class otherwise I would never have let her do it for her first ever D&D game.

Anyhoo... D&D is a complicated game- in any form or edition for someone who is completely inexperienced with RPGs (TT or Videogame)

You created the tangent but I still stand by the view that comparing boardgames to tabletop RPGs is not relevant. RPGs have characteristics that set them apart from boardgames such as no board and no defined win state plus of course the infinite options possible through player actions. Apples and oranges.

 

[JeffB]

You created the tangent but I still stand by the view that comparing boardgames to tabletop RPGs is not relevant. RPGs have characteristics that set them apart from boardgames such as no board and no defined win state plus of course the infinite options possible through player actions. Apples and oranges.

Its completely relevant to the discussion at hand as we are talking about gaming in general-RPG rules being their own barrier to growth (specifically D&D) and bringing in complete new people to RPGs- many of which are likely to have some basic boardgaming experience as kid/family pastime, but nothing else. and looking at it from their viewpoint.