D&D General Dmg previews up

[Parmandur]

I know, we have discussed this before. However, these books (2024 core books) are not for you for a number of reasons. You are not the market.

Nobody posting here is the market, even. We are the oddball outliers.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I

I strongly disagree. DMs are not professional game designers.

Give me some official variants, please. It doesn't have to be exhaustive and cover every little situation, but at least something to tweak pacing and difficulty.

Dont need anything to be official, but having something to work with is always good.

 

[dave2008]

They sure aren't! Amazing what a difference a few years and being financially successful can do to what used to be an exciting must-buy for me.

I'm not the one who changed.

I bet you have actually.* The only constant is change after all.

*Not suggesting any change in you is the reason you are not interested in the books though.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Fortunately they are still an incredible value all things considered. And if you really need to save, you have the SRD and free basic rules.

What things? There are plenty of other, similar (even 5e) rule sets out there for a similar price point. What makes WotC's version an "incredible value"?

 

[Micah Sweet]

I bet you have actually.* The only constant is change after all.

*Not suggesting any change in you is the reason you are not interested in the books though.

I meant change in regards to what I want out of gaming, of course.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

That would be weird. Moving the monster lore out of the MM and into the DMG? That doesn’t seem right. It would be a waste of space to print it in both. But then there’s a lot of redundancy in the new PHB.

I think it makes sense if they are breaking up the Monster sections like they seem to be planning. If they are being spread around alphabetically like how they mentioned Gelatinous Cube is now under G instead of O in the Ooze section, that means the overviews for things like Dragons, Demons, Devils, and Giants would be leaving the Monster Manual. Putting the overviews in the lore glossary would make sense in that case.

 

[Parmandur]

I think it makes sense if they are breaking up the Monster sections like they seem to be planning. If they are being spread around alphabetically like how they mentioned Gelatinous Cube is now under G instead of O in the Ooze section, that means the overviews for things like Dragons, Demons, Devils, and Giants would be leaving the Monster Manual. Putting the overviews in the lore glossary would make sense in that case.

I could see some rules stuff that was in the 2014 DMG exchanged with the MM, for that matter: take some high level lore and put it in the DMG, take some Monster math stuff and put it in the MM...

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think it makes sense if they are breaking up the Monster sections like they seem to be planning. If they are being spread around alphabetically like how they mentioned Gelatinous Cube is now under G instead of O in the Ooze section, that means the overviews for things like Dragons, Demons, Devils, and Giants would be leaving the Monster Manual. Putting the overviews in the lore glossary would make sense in that case.

That just seems weird too. I really don't understand a lot of the larger scope changes in 5.5. They don't make sense to me.

 

[dave2008]

What things? There are plenty of other, similar (even 5e) rule sets out there for a similar price point. What makes WotC's version an "incredible value"?

First, I am not comparing it other RPGs, but to entertainment value per dollar. If I get 2 hrs entrainment out of a movie it cost me roughly $5 per hour. D&D cost me about $0.10 per hour or less. That is really just counting playing time, not the extra hours of enjoyment that I get from DMing and just reading the books.

 

[dave2008]

That just seems weird too. I really don't understand a lot of the larger scope changes in 5.5. They don't make sense to me.

I understand most of them, but I do not like the organization changes proposed for the monster manual.