D&D General Is the SCAG Still Useful?

[Horwath]

It's the perfect example of the community getting what they wish for when the monkey paw finger curls.

well, I don't think that we wished for a waste of ink in a book.
no one will play this subclass and that is sad,

same can be said about the feats in this book, but that is another topic.

 

[Remathilis]

well, I don't think that we wished for a waste of ink in a book.
no one will play this subclass and that is sad,

same can be said about the feats in this book, but that is another topic.

It was a total rejection of the subclass. People didn't want name, the lore and/or the features. So they took what already existed, gave it the generic name and tweaked a few things.

 

[Zardnaar]

It was a total rejection of the subclass. People didn't want name, the lore and/or the features. So they took what already existed, gave it the generic name and tweaked a few things.

Some clueless designer being cute.

PDKs are something else.

 

[Horwath]

It was a total rejection of the subclass. People didn't want name, the lore and/or the features. So they took what already existed, gave it the generic name and tweaked a few things.

we already have dragonrider subclass.
no need for two of them
also PDK were not dragonriders.

they had the chance to make universal subclasses for 5E last year, they chickened out.
if they hadn't we could have dragonrider subclass for any character class.

 

[DrJawaPhD]

It was a total rejection of the subclass. People didn't want name, the lore and/or the features. So they took what already existed, gave it the generic name and tweaked a few things.

All of that was totally fine, and I think the correct move. Where they flubbed was not playtesting the tweaks and getting feedback that this version of Banneret has a great theme going but is just way too weak to ever be useful.

Taking what already existed and tweaking a few things was the correct move but they just needed to turn the Power knob higher

 

[Azzy]

...was it ever useful?

For running adventures in the Sword Coast, yeah. It just failed as a introduction to the Forgotten Realms outside of the SC.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The lore sections were just the right amount information for somebody like me who in interested in FR and wants a capsule amount of general knowledge/regional highlights but doesn't really care much about "canon" or all the novels, etc.

This bit was too wall of text for a dyslexic like me. I prefer information presented in tables and diagrams.

Or at least, short paragraphs.

 

[Bae'zel]

Outside of game mechanics, the new book has far better info on the same topics. You can still mine a bit of detail about other cities that aren’t covered in the new books (eg Neverwinter, Waterdeep) but I found the SCaG’s details dull and uninspiring.

Like how the hell do you write a couple of pages about Neverwinter and not mention the floating islands attached to it via giant chains?! Naw better talk about sterile politics; that will be an adventure hook for generations.

I’m gonna ditch the SCAG.

 

[Parmandur]

Like how the hell do you write a couple of pages about Neverwinter and not mention the floating islands attached to it via giant chains?! Naw better talk about sterile politics; that will be an adventure hook for generations.

Because they were trying to negotiate representation for people from across multiple edutions: most FR players had not embraced the Spellplague, so no floating islands.

 

[Azzy]

Like how the hell do you write a couple of pages about Neverwinter and not mention the floating islands attached to it via giant chains?!

Because SCAG presented a post-Sundering (which was supposed to erase 4e-isms like that and "fix" the setting), version of the Sword Coast and so SCAG presented a Neverwinter that didn't have those elements. Sad, as it thew out the baby with the bathwater, but I believe that it was a deliberate choice.