Why am I not surprised that the person who negatively reviewed the SCAG without even owning it is the one who posted a link to complement their prior vitriol.
This one line made it clear that the author willfully ignored the content of the SCAG press release.
"The book's not quite sure whether it's a campaign world sourcebook, a framework for adventures, a companion to published adventures, or a supplement for specializing player characters in the Forgotten Realms."
The book was always meant to be all of the above in a single package. Instead of releasing separate books for players and DMs, this book features both types of content. Remember that part of 5e is a reduced release schedule, and this book lines up perfectly with that design principle.
It gives enough of the overall history of the FR without reprinting many materials already found in previous edition sourcebooks. No sense wasting page space on things already found in a wiki. Putting in too much fluff would be overload for DMs who are new to FR, likely resulting in fewer sales among DMs.
People who run their own homebrew worlds knew from the get-go that a portion of the book would not apply to them at all. That's the price they pay for not playing published content, there will always be wasted space in their eyes. Therefore, those complaints should be viewed as coming from a vocal minority, and not representative of the greater D&D community.
The only thing that I agree with in the article is the treatment of maps. The inside covers should have been the maps.
Everything else in the article is ranting of someone who can't accept the new 5e release schedule and how that affects the content of non-AP releases.
Its a flawed design principle, which lead to a flawed book, they tried to make it all those things and then refuse to give it the space to do all that.
And the Authors give an example of this sort of book done right, 4e's Darksun, which should have been the model for this book.
As for it really being the equivilant of the 4e Forgotten Realms guide, as flawed as that was, no it isn't, that was focused mostly on players, and it had tons of player content, a whole new class, races, feats, Paragon Paths, plenty of powers, ect...
SCAG has a handful of player options, some of which are good, my bone isn't with the writers its with the decision makers at WotC, but its has a few subclasses and subraces, and too few of those, and 2 of the subclasses are heavily race restricted, and some backgrounds, and 4 cantrips, no feats, no classes, no new races, they lets out too many of the Gods.
As for my brain fart on reviewing the book based on internet spoilers, I've apologized for it and read the book, so you can stop hiding behind that.
I have complimented parts of the book, my problem isn't with the designers outside of a few things, its with WotC that sabotage them from the word go.
It does answer a few questions I had, such as what happened to Tymanther and the old empires region.
