D&D 5E I have the DMG!

[casterblaster]

Just go skateboard until the articles come out

 

[surfarcher]

I'm going to expect this is the case. Mike said on Reddit a week ago:

"The DMG breaks down CR into an offensive and defensive rating, with a range of values for each (attack bonus and damage for offense, AC and hit points for defense). Special abilities can also modify those CRs, and this is where a fair amount of design sense and playtesting comes in to make sure that something is weighed correctly.

"Once you're done, you simply average out offensive CR and defensive CR to come to your final rating. Again, you might adjust a little in either direction for monsters with weird abilities, but the process is easy if you're making typical monsters."

Cheers!

Huh. I missed that one. It's not too different from the method I am using.

Still interested to see or read about what's in the actual DMG, of course

 

[thalmin]

it's hard to tell what isn't in the book. The original poster hasn't had the book long enough to read it all yet. He's tried to answer a few questions, but just because he hasn't found something yet doesn't mean it's not in the book.

edit: And thank you Nikosandros for taking the time to post.

 

[Jester David]

sure, a bias against dishonesty and unfulfilled promises.

and pardon me for not wanting to wait on some dumb article after already spending two years with the playtest in hopes of getting all that stuff in the DMG.

Such as?

What promises are unfulfilled?
Were mass combat and kender the make-or-break content?

 

[Sword of Spirit]

No gestalt rules or further options for multiclassing.

Holy cut options, Batman! It was only a little while ago that Mike said this one was in the DMG (I provided the link on another topic recently) along with some other stuff. We also know Battlesystem was cut (for a good reason--more playtesting and development), when they had the rules already developed. It sounds like a lot of stuff they were actively working on or had even completed just straight up got cut due to space.

If they are cutting out that much stuff that they had already been slaving away on, they must have had a lot of content they had to decide between. I'm getting the impression that at some point the focus moved away from the "hacker's guide" and back to the more traditional "guide for the new DM."

Hopefully most of the cut content will appear in the web articles, and/or be added to Basic D&D.

Admittedly, it would be frustrating to those people that want some of what was cut.... because we could be looking at months or even 2016 before getting some of this, given the pace they are posting anything right now. I look forward to the book, but less so than I was.

Yeah, that's the problem I'm having here. If they start spitting out articles of cut content weekly starting in January, I expect I'll get most of what I need in a few months.

On the other hand, if they casually roll out content online at a rate of one article every month, half of which talk about philosophy* rather than giving crunchy articles@, it could be another year before I have what I need to enable me to decide whether I need to make my own houserules, which is not going to make me happy.


*"Why we didn't put everything in the DMG (no spoilers!)"
"Why it was hard to decide what to leave out of the DMG"
"Why are you still reading this, we aren't giving you anything you want"

@"Gestalt-style (AD&D) Multiclassing: How things came together,"
"So you want slower natural healing? Get it right now!"
or even:
"Future releases, and which ones we're sticking all the crap you still want in"

 

[surfarcher]

I'm going to expect this is the case. Mike said on Reddit a week ago:

"The DMG breaks down CR into an offensive and defensive rating, with a range of values for each (attack bonus and damage for offense, AC and hit points for defense). Special abilities can also modify those CRs, and this is where a fair amount of design sense and playtesting comes in to make sure that something is weighed correctly.

"Once you're done, you simply average out offensive CR and defensive CR to come to your final rating. Again, you might adjust a little in either direction for monsters with weird abilities, but the process is easy if you're making typical monsters."

Cheers!

Ah! Reddit, not Twitter. I see how I missed it :-D

TY!

 

[president16us]

It just occurred to me that the "missing" DMG content is just the sort of thing that Dragon magazine used to produce. Perhaps this is the basis of a potential relaunch of that forum online. Not sure what that would mean for Dungeon, but I'd also love to see Dungeon type adventures start to get published soon for 5e alongside the adventure paths and Adventurer's League adventures.

Exciting times nonetheless!

 

[juboke]

Has Elven Chain changed from the play test?

 

[rjfTrebor]

Such as?

What promises are unfulfilled?
Were mass combat and kender the make-or-break content?

not just them, but the idea of concise, purposefully-designed modules, the rules for managing a Domain, dual-classing (aka gestalt characters). it looks like there's plenty missing.

and it's not as if i'm saying i'm completely disenchanted with the game, i'm merely frustrated that a company with the resources and time that WotC had couldn't manage to squeeze a bit more into the most hyped book of their core line.

 

[Joe Liker]

and pardon me for not wanting to wait on some dumb article after already spending two years with the playtest in hopes of getting all that stuff in the DMG.

If you thought everything that was ever mentioned during the playtest counted as a promise, you obviously have a very selective memory. They told you like a gazillion times that nothing -- NOTHING -- that they wrote during playtest was set in stone, and none of it constituted a "promise." Especially not lists of things they thought might be appropriate for a hypothetical DMG that they hadn't even started writing yet.