Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pukunui" data-source="post: 6753133" data-attributes="member: 54629">I disagree.Hardly. The focus doesn't have to be on crunch in order for it to qualify as a player's guide. The focus needs to be on introducing players to the setting, which I think it does just fine. People are fixated on the crunch. How about we look at the fluff. How does the SCAG's setting info compare to that provided in the FRPG? Or the PGtF?May I ask why you want a "really well done FRCG for 5e"? Why do you feel unable to take what's in the SCAG and expand on it yourself? Would it help you at all if you stopped thinking of the SCAG as not having enough details and instead thought of it as the SCAG giving you lots of space to add your own details? I recall Chris Perkins emphasizing on more than one occasion about how they really want people to make the Realms their own. If they've crossed every "T" and dotted every "I" for you already, how are you supposed to make it your own?My sentiments exactly! The fluff is all for players too. It's all written from a player-friendly perspective. It's all there to help players ground their characters in the setting.That's assuming that this half-elf bladesinger never leaves Evereska, never encounters anyone who worships a different deity, and so on. That's also assuming that this someone never makes another character - which, admittedly, is quite likely if their first one never does anything.</blockquote>