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

Hussar said:

As far as the justifications for the 4e approach goes, I think we can safely say that that approach was received with ... less than enthusiasm.

Click to expand...

While that's true, we can't determine which fans didn't like it because they hated the loss of the lore, vs the ones who hated it because they disliked the specific changes, vs the ones who hated it just because it was 4e.

(If you'll allow me an analogy: it's somewhat like Hollywood's reluctance to do a female-led superhero film. They justify it because none of the existing ones have done at all well, which is true... but that assumes that the problem was "female-led", rather than that "Supergirl", "Catwoman", and "Elektra" are all pretty dire films.)

But, that said, WotC are doing the right thing in the current situation, IMO - faced with having made a change that didn't work, it makes a lot of sense to step 'back' to the last stable state, as it were. (Though, perhaps ironically, I also thought their "reduce the lore" was probably the right thing to do back then, too - though I didn't care for the specific changes made.)

Two main circumstances are going to surround the critiquing every book WotC allows for D&D, in-house or by freelancer-license. First, when the brand name is allowed to be associated with very few books, those books have to be much, much better because more is going to be expected. Second, when you're in the top spot in the industry, much, much more is going to be expected of you. These are both even more problematic when the business plan has a thin output schedule. With fewer books to critique, the focus is going to stay on the few being released much longer and being in the top spot goes hand and hand with having more eyes on your output. When things aren't going well, these circumstances exacerbate one another. A more robust release schedule or more sanctioned material on the market supporting the core from third party publishers helps alleviate the problem.

JohnLynch said:

As DM I find the god's info extremely useful because for once it covers worshipers and clergy, not the god's themselves. Little tidbits will be getting sprinkled throughout a lot of my adventures as a result.

Click to expand...

Here's a book from Green Ronin almost a decade and a half ago that does that in spades, and teaches how to do that for any pantheon. I'm guessing the lessons from this book may have been applied to SCAG.

http://www.amazon.com/Righteous-Dungeons-Dragons-Fantasy-Roleplaying/dp/0971438064

*edit* The truncated url looks funny to me -

JohnLynch said:

As DM I find the god's info extremely useful because for once it covers worshipers and clergy, not the god's themselves. Little tidbits will be getting sprinkled throughout a lot of my adventures as a result.

Click to expand...

If you're looking for more on that, I suggest you the 2e ''Faiths and Avatars'' and ''Demihuman Deities'' books. Lots of info on both the deities themselves and their followers, rites, prayers, role in the world and so on.

2e Demihumam Deities, Faiths and Avatars, and Powers and Pantheons were my favourite 2e books, useful for player characters, setting, DMs, for recreating villians, story hooks, and some much more.

You had info on priesthoods including specialty priests, divine avatars that felt like Gods instead just high level monsters like you see in 4e and 5e, Elder Evils like the night serpent, details on the kinds of monsters in service to gods, ect...

I'd love to see a 5e update, but I'd settle for a proper 5e FRCG.

Perkins wanting to deliver content in "a lot of ways we haven't seen before" sounds like "groundbreaking for the sake of groundbreaking".

Let me give you an example of groundbreaking for the sake of groundbreaking: The Blackberry Playbook. Remember that? It was an answer to a question nobody asked. Blackberry is nearly dead, if not dead now.

Why WotC isn't just giving the market what it's asking for with regards to digital product, I don't know.

Gnashtooth said:

Perkins wanting to deliver content in "a lot of ways we haven't seen before" sounds like "groundbreaking for the sake of groundbreaking".

Let me give you an example of groundbreaking for the sake of groundbreaking: The Blackberry Playbook. Remember that? It was an answer to a question nobody asked. Blackberry is nearly dead, if not dead now.

Why WotC isn't just giving the market what it's asking for with regards to digital product, I don't know.

Click to expand...

Yeah. It's almost like there must be more to it than what we consumers see...

pukunui said:

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.

Click to expand...

And this SCREAMS to me that Chris Perkins hasn't a clue.

I have multiple editions and other games that are sitting on my shelf. Doesn't mean I won't be going to them for a game in the future. I'm not sure how Chris Perkins sees games, but I don't see them as a one time play and they hit the shelf never to be removed again. If I feel like a product will just sit on my shelf then I just won't buy it to begin with. Also, why should Chris care what I do with my books as long as I am giving money? He needs to be worried when I stop giving money and funny enough, 5th edition is the only edition where I have purchased the least amount of product and I really like the system.

Gnashtooth said:

Perkins wanting to deliver content in "a lot of ways we haven't seen before" sounds like "groundbreaking for the sake of groundbreaking".

Let me give you an example of groundbreaking for the sake of groundbreaking: The Blackberry Playbook. Remember that? It was an answer to a question nobody asked. Blackberry is nearly dead, if not dead now.

Why WotC isn't just giving the market what it's asking for with regards to digital product, I don't know.

Click to expand...

Sounds like Dungeonscape to me, that was supposed to be groundbreaking.

Corpsetaker said:

And this SCREAMS to me that Chris Perkins hasn't a clue.

I have multiple editions and other games that are sitting on my shelf. Doesn't mean I won't be going to them for a game in the future. I'm not sure how Chris Perkins sees games, but I don't see them as a one time play and they hit the shelf never to be removed again. If I feel like a product will just sit on my shelf then I just won't buy it to begin with. Also, why should Chris care what I do with my books as long as I am giving money? He needs to be worried when I stop giving money and funny enough, 5th edition is the only edition where I have purchased the least amount of product and I really like the system.

Click to expand...

Your point is valid. But I don't think it is lack of a clue so much as it is spin.
They don't want to produce books because it is not worth the investment.

Obviously they would be pleased to know that a book they published becomes an at-table standard for many years to come. So the statement is true in the most broad sense. But if they could sell massive copies of a book at good margin, they would not care if it sat on a shelf a year later any more than Stephen King cares that I have not read my copy of Carrie in over a decade.

they don't want to produce book more than an absolute minimum for holding up the brand name. They add a vague semi-truth to that so it tastes better.