D&D 5E Least Favorite WotC 5E Book?

[FrozenNorth]

Double post.

 

[mamba]

Gotta say, every book that has come up in this thread I have seen someone, somewhere else, sing that book's praise as something they got good use out of. SO I think it is reasonable to say that every book they have put out is at least useful to someone. No "Forest Oracle" abomination stinkers.

Not really surprising, there are 30M or so people playing. If they manage to come up with a book that no one likes or can take pieces of at least, that would be quite an accomplishment in its own right. Not desirable, but impressive nonetheless

 

[Parmandur]

Not really surprising, there are 30M or so people playing. If they manage to come up with a book that no one likes or can take pieces of at least, that would be quite an accomplishment in its own right. Not desirable, but impressive nonetheless

Hey, TSR managed to do it back in the day.

 

[mamba]

Hey, TSR managed to do it back in the day.

they had a lot fewer players then, back then it was easier

 

[Stormonu]

Strixhaven - I wanted more setting. I also would never use the student stat blocks outside of that book for another setting either.

Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft - Though I personally like the dissolution of the core back into independent domains, I was disappointed it was a reimagining instead of a carry-forward. Though, I have to say the changes to Falkovia and the addition of Cyre1313 was a positive (BTW, I ran my Cyre1313 game on Monday - everyone had a blast but they ran out of time). It's an okay book overall, but the butchering of some of the domains was very off-putting.

This is the big one -->Tasha's Cauldron of Everything - Most of the content felt like power creep and scraping the bottom of the barrel. I absolutely hate and refuse to use the "build a race rules" from it.

Out of the Abyss/Descent into Avernus - I hate the idea of "X" cards, but adventures heavily featuring demons/devils would be mine.

 

[Tonguez]

That's not really all that surprising considering that MtG is an American made card game so it makes sense that the designers would follow what was a normal college experience for them when designing the cards.

Except its an international market and theres a long history of British and Eurooean style Magic Academies in literature which should have guided the designers

 

[Vaalingrade]

Except its an international market and theres a long history of British and Eurooean style Magic Academies in literature which should have guided the designers

Because the incessant Hogwarts comparisons without actually looking at how the school operates weren't enough already.

 

[Kurotowa]

Hmm. Well, I can't say much about the adventure books, as my group rarely used them. So it's probably a coin flip between Volo's Guide and Tome of Foes. Volo's guide has some good bits, but they're sandwiched in between a lot of old school fantasy racism. Tome of Foes is a forgettable grab bag of topics without much cohesion or practical use; the lows aren't as low but the highs aren't as high. The player options in both aren't compelling, and are mostly superseded by the superior Monsters of the Multiverse.

I might have to give the dishonor to Tome of Foes. The only thing redeeming it is the githyanki chapter, and githyanki are pretty niche.

 

[Parmandur]

I absolutely hate and refuse to use the "build a race rules" from it.

To be fair, the custom Lineage is actually the weakest option in the game: or rather, it ranges from "on par" to "trap."

 

[cbwjm]

Is it intended to be college? Very different experience than any kind of secondary school, British boarding school or otherwise.

Think college/university. The USA uses college differently to other countries which often confuses me, though we did have a teachers college here in NZ which was focused on tertiary education.