D&D 5E (2014) Future format of books that mimic SCAG: Will you buy them?

[Parmandur]

I like the format and the fluff/crunch ratio, would like to see a longer book in the same format: but, yes, absolutely, I would go for a repeat of the SCAF form.

 

[CapnZapp]

My players are power gamers in general. From a mathematical standpoint, most of the mechanics were inferior to what is offered elsewhere. If you have players that either aren't concerned about the math behind the mechanics or are unable to determine superior options, then you'll probably be ok. In my case, if I can't create a character concept that equals or exceeds an available option for the majority of material with this early a release, it's on my no buy list. I found the mechanics in the SCAG to be inferior to what I could create using the PHB for the majority of options. The Bladesinger being one of the worst offenders. You could make a better Bladesinger with an Eldritch Knight or a wizard/fighter hybrid.

And having played a monk before, I find the Death Monk problematic because the monk will not land many killing blows due to inferior damage and the requirement he be in melee. Sun Soul monk could be fun and interesting providing some ranged attacking. But if you an archer in the group, the monk is sort of a third wheel waste of time.

Storm Sorcerer is somewhere between Dragon and Wild Mage, closer to Dragon Sorcerer with a nice high level ability. The Shadow Sorcerer's mechanics were much more powerful within a group.

Provable in play and on paper mechanical viability is extremely important to me. The monk archetypes would probably be ok in my book if I had not played one in a group with an archer and a warlock/fighter. My damage and defenses were inferior in nearly every way. I rarely landed death blows because of it. I was useless with ranged attacks. My group liked to take advantage of their superior ranged capabilities to take things down as often as possible. It was pretty rare that ranged wasn't a vastly superior option to melee. Close-Quarters Combat fighting style pretty much made ranged better than melee in any way very early on. I'm allowing its use right now, but I do hope maybe they look at that Fighting Style again and modify it some. Way too good.

Okay, so you just admitted to only purchasing power creep.

Right.

As for the ranged > melee, you really need to lay off the hate. The multiple places you've brought this up should have told you your experiences are... atypical.

Perhaps try playing an all-melee party next time? [emoji4]

I mean, setting aside your probably Justified notion ranged rules just once, if only to experience the game the way it's obviously meant to play?

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[neobolts]

While I would have preferred a bigger and more robust full campaign book, I would still buy books like SCAG in the future.

 

[Pauper]

Bought the SCAG the day it was released, haven't regretted it.

Am looking forward to the Heartlands AG, the Moonsea AG, the Unapproachable East AG, and more.

--
Pauper

 

[Mistwell]

Remember, WotC is far from going all-in on Dungeons & Dragons this time. To me, it's apparant Hasbro has instructed WotC to maintain a holding pattern, investing the minimal effort needed to keep the gamers reasonably happy to keep the brand afloat.

Hasbro doesn't tell WOTC anything with regard to D&D. WOTC is a subsidiary of Hasbro, and D&D is a small department within WOTC. It seems like a really important product line to us because this is a fan board for it, but Hasbro is a multi billion dollar company and D&D is a nothing to them. It's not, in any way, directly supervised by Hasbro aside from very large brand franchise stuff like movies. If D&D has a smaller budget, it's because WOTC gave them a smaller budget based on WOTC's judgement. It is, after all, WOTCs budget that money comes from.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Yes.

I like D&D.

I like D&D books.

I like putting a dollar in my piggy bank each week.

I like having $40 after 40 weeks.

I like using those $40 to buy a D&D book.

I like D&D.

 

[CapnZapp]

Hasbro doesn't tell WOTC anything with regard to D&D.

Feel free to switch out the single word "Hasbro" for "WotC" in my post if you must.

My point still stands.

 

[Corpsetaker]

well, not much else is coming out.

I would say this is the main reason lots of people will still buy the product.

It's a bit sad that D&D has gotten this low.

 

[Bluenose]

I fully expect the next "adventurer's guide" to cover another region of Forgotten Realms, and to include a new smattering of crunch. Leaving the Realms for another campaign setting simply draws a smaller audience. If anything, it wouldn't surprise me if WotC were to add stuff previously exclusive to other campaign settings (such as Eberron) into that FR book.

This would be more convincing if Forgotten Realms was enormously popular as opposed to being a setting that only interests a small minority of D&D players (a larger minority than other D&D settings, but still only a minority).