Demetrios1453
Legend
Ever since I got SCAG a week ago, and even before, the question for me has been - is SCAG going to be our 5e FRCS, or is it just going to be just the first of many such books for the Forgotten Realms, or even other settings? I've been going over the possibilities in my head for the last week, and when pukunui mentioned he had similar ideas, I decided to go ahead and post my (long) opinions and conjectures on the matter...
First of all, I really do like SCAG for what it does. The sections on the deities, races, and classes of the setting are top-notch, with only quibbles to complain about; a few more gods could have potentially been included, as well as races - aasimar (well more than "refer to the DMG") and genasi for example. The main part of the book, describing the geography of the region, is very nice as well, giving a good, basic overview of the Sword Coast and the North (even if the narrators may be a bit unreliable - that elf ranger seems a bit naive, possibly ignoring some of the less savory aspects of the Zhentarim or Eltugard, while you have to wonder if that gnome sailor made up that whole story about secretly travelling to Evermeet). Granted, the rest of the setting is reduced to mere paragraphs at best. So the question becomes - should we see SCAG as a campaign setting, or just a player's guide for the region?
Is SCAG a Campaign Setting? The answer there is "No". It does come close, but there is simply too many locations of the setting summarized in a paragraph or two for it to function as a full-fledged campaign setting. It's not that short summaries for entire regions aren't permissible in campaign setting books, but SCAG simply does this for far too much of the setting. Had we at lest had more detailed sections on at least the Eastern Heartlands (Cormyr, Sembia, the Dalelands, the Moonsea, etc.), it's possible that that it could have been accorded full campaign setting status. As it is, it's a just a guide to one particular region of the setting, with short peeks at other areas.
Could SCAG have been a full-fledged Campaign Setting? This is a more interesting question. Let's say, for example, that WotC had accorded SCAG not it's current 160 pages, but a larger 256 page count like Out of the Abyss. What if those extra 96 pages had been used to describe the various locales of Faerun as the Sword Coast region was described in Chapter 2? Since there isn't much else necessary to cover in the book (one can assume a few of the extra pages might have covered a few extra deities or class options, but then again the short section that was used to describe the rest of the setting would be redundant and those pages would be used for other purposes), those pages would likely have been allocated to just describing the setting. It's not hard to work out how the rest of the setting could have been pretty fully described in those extra pages: give 25 - 30 to Cormyr, Sembia, and the Dalelands to be covered in decent detail, and the give the rest of the setting 60 pages or so - definitely not unreasonable lengths to get fairly detailed coverage. The question becomes, then, would this have been enough to give it full campaign setting status? Well, yes, as it covers the setting, but it would be a bit of an odd one - the location descriptions in SCAG are very "fluffy", filled with interesting observations and the narrator's opinions, but having little in the way of actual hard facts (populations, governments, histories, detailed lists of locations, etc.), which are all things we are used to in previous campaign setting books, no matter what the campaign. It would have definitely looked little like any setting book we've seen before.
Obviously, what SCAG is is a way for WotC to publish its first "setting" book in such a way that it interests as many people as possible. For older players, it's a substantial glimpse into what a beloved (by some, not all of course!
) setting looks like in the new edition. For people new to the game and have been running the hardback adventures, it's a way to find out more detailed information about the region thy are set in and to allow players to more fully visualize their characters' backgrounds. For people who play the associated video games set in the region, it's a way to lure them into the table-top version (the moon elf on the front cover of the book is actually a character in Sword Coast Legends). It is, in the end, very much a player's guide, an accessory that both the player and DM can use to improve both sides of the game.
Time for a little speculation. Given that WotC has decided to hold their cards close to their chests concerning the release schedule, we don't know what the future holds for setting books as opposed to hardcover mega-adventures. Will we see more? Is SCAG the one and only release like this for the entire edition? All we can do is conjecture - and now that SCAG has been released, here are the four options I see in the future:
(1) SCAG is it, for either the Realms, or overall. We're not going to see another setting-type book set in the Realms. Maybe we'll see SCAG-like books for other settings (one that focuses on the Free City of Greyhawk and surrounding lands like Furyondy and Celene, but only gives brief descriptions of more distant areas of Oerth, for example), or maybe not. The rest of the Realms, for however long 5e lasts, is reduced to a few paragraphs with no more detail ever, unless we get adventures set there. This option is infuriating and disheartening, so let's hope it doesn't come to pass.
(2) SCAG is the model for campaign settings for the edition. Instead of one overarching book per setting, we get several instead, each covering a distinct, but large, region. For the Realms, we see SCAG-like books for the two areas mentioned in Chapter 1: the Lands to the East (basically the nations around the Sea of Fallen Stars and further north) and the Lands to the South (The Lands of Intrigue and the southern tier of states on the continent). Perhaps, later, there would even be similar books for Kara-Tur and Zakhara. The question here is, what would be in those books? Detailed coverage of the places in those regions, but done like the travelers' reports in SCAG, so with little in the way of hard data. Beyond that, there isn't much to cover. There could be smaller section on deities not fully covered in SCAG - various demigods in either case, the Mulhorandi and Untheric deities (if any besides Gilgeam exist) and draconic deities (important for Unther and Damara, and, to a point, the dragonborn) for the "East" book; the gods of the scaly folk could appear in the "South" book. A few more races could be fleshed out (aasimar in "East" and genasi in "South"), and, of course there can always be new class options and backgrounds. But all this would seem a bit... supplemental... to the solid, basic info of the setting in SCAG.
(3) SCAG is the "players guide", while we get a full-fledged, DM-centric FRCS in the future. Obviously, this would be nice. But the problem is, there is a lot of information in SCAG that would also seem to be necessary for any potential FRCS. How to finesse things so that you don't end up with basically repeated information in both books? The meat and potatoes of a potential setting book, the description of the geography of the setting, would be the simplest part. The descriptions in SCAG, as said before, don't have hard data or detailed city descriptions, so, instead of paragraphs talking about just how wondrous Silverymoon and its amazing sights are, we'd actually get hard facts on where the Vault of the Sages is in relation to the Moonbridge (granted, those of us with previous edition material already know this, but this would be important to those who don't have access to those sources, as well as for cities/locations that have changed drastically since last we visited them). Also, once we're outside the area covered in SCAG, a putative setting book wouldn't have to worry about repeating information on areas already detailed, since, well, those areas haven't been properly detailed yet! Beyond the geography, however, we run into a bit of a conundrum, the same as the "other campaign guides" before: SCAG did a very good job of fully describing the races, gods, and classes of the setting. Obviously, this is information that should also be in a campaign setting book, but, if (a) you just repeat it, you annoy people who have both books and feel they've "wasted" money on repeated information, or (b) you say "refer to SCAG for this information" and you annoy people don't have it and who don't want to buy a second book. What to do? The Gods section, at least, can also focus on details not in SCAG - church organization and history, relationships between the deities and their churches, and so on. Races, on the other hand, would be much harder to keep from just repeating everything - SCAG did a very nice job in that section (other than aasimar; "refer to the DMG" indeed
), and classes as well will just fall into either "split between different books and annoying people" or "all the info is in both books and annoying people". Finally, if SCAG is to be the "players guide" and this FRCS is the "DM's guide", players who want to make characters outside the Sword Coast region will need to reference a book that's (supposedly) DM-only, which will blur the distinction between the two.
(If you need an example of a flat-out no-nonsense data-filled campaign setting, the 3e Living Greyhawk Gazetteer would be, in my opinion, the best example to use. It's a pretty no-frills description of the setting and packs an amazing amount of hard information in just 192 pages).
(4)We get both SCAG-like player books for the rest of the Realms and a full-fledged FRCS. This is obviously the best of both worlds (well, not in price, but I'm sure we'll manage somehow). This would give us full coverage of the setting, one set of books for players and one for the DM. Of course, with several SCAG-like books, the "repeat info" issue is merely exacerbated, although with SCAG having the majority of the basic setting info, this would probably be fairly minimal in other books.
Well, that's my long-winded conjecture/wall of ideas on SCAG and the future of campaign settings. I'm curious what others may think on the matter...
First of all, I really do like SCAG for what it does. The sections on the deities, races, and classes of the setting are top-notch, with only quibbles to complain about; a few more gods could have potentially been included, as well as races - aasimar (well more than "refer to the DMG") and genasi for example. The main part of the book, describing the geography of the region, is very nice as well, giving a good, basic overview of the Sword Coast and the North (even if the narrators may be a bit unreliable - that elf ranger seems a bit naive, possibly ignoring some of the less savory aspects of the Zhentarim or Eltugard, while you have to wonder if that gnome sailor made up that whole story about secretly travelling to Evermeet). Granted, the rest of the setting is reduced to mere paragraphs at best. So the question becomes - should we see SCAG as a campaign setting, or just a player's guide for the region?
Is SCAG a Campaign Setting? The answer there is "No". It does come close, but there is simply too many locations of the setting summarized in a paragraph or two for it to function as a full-fledged campaign setting. It's not that short summaries for entire regions aren't permissible in campaign setting books, but SCAG simply does this for far too much of the setting. Had we at lest had more detailed sections on at least the Eastern Heartlands (Cormyr, Sembia, the Dalelands, the Moonsea, etc.), it's possible that that it could have been accorded full campaign setting status. As it is, it's a just a guide to one particular region of the setting, with short peeks at other areas.
Could SCAG have been a full-fledged Campaign Setting? This is a more interesting question. Let's say, for example, that WotC had accorded SCAG not it's current 160 pages, but a larger 256 page count like Out of the Abyss. What if those extra 96 pages had been used to describe the various locales of Faerun as the Sword Coast region was described in Chapter 2? Since there isn't much else necessary to cover in the book (one can assume a few of the extra pages might have covered a few extra deities or class options, but then again the short section that was used to describe the rest of the setting would be redundant and those pages would be used for other purposes), those pages would likely have been allocated to just describing the setting. It's not hard to work out how the rest of the setting could have been pretty fully described in those extra pages: give 25 - 30 to Cormyr, Sembia, and the Dalelands to be covered in decent detail, and the give the rest of the setting 60 pages or so - definitely not unreasonable lengths to get fairly detailed coverage. The question becomes, then, would this have been enough to give it full campaign setting status? Well, yes, as it covers the setting, but it would be a bit of an odd one - the location descriptions in SCAG are very "fluffy", filled with interesting observations and the narrator's opinions, but having little in the way of actual hard facts (populations, governments, histories, detailed lists of locations, etc.), which are all things we are used to in previous campaign setting books, no matter what the campaign. It would have definitely looked little like any setting book we've seen before.
Obviously, what SCAG is is a way for WotC to publish its first "setting" book in such a way that it interests as many people as possible. For older players, it's a substantial glimpse into what a beloved (by some, not all of course!
) setting looks like in the new edition. For people new to the game and have been running the hardback adventures, it's a way to find out more detailed information about the region thy are set in and to allow players to more fully visualize their characters' backgrounds. For people who play the associated video games set in the region, it's a way to lure them into the table-top version (the moon elf on the front cover of the book is actually a character in Sword Coast Legends). It is, in the end, very much a player's guide, an accessory that both the player and DM can use to improve both sides of the game.Time for a little speculation. Given that WotC has decided to hold their cards close to their chests concerning the release schedule, we don't know what the future holds for setting books as opposed to hardcover mega-adventures. Will we see more? Is SCAG the one and only release like this for the entire edition? All we can do is conjecture - and now that SCAG has been released, here are the four options I see in the future:
(1) SCAG is it, for either the Realms, or overall. We're not going to see another setting-type book set in the Realms. Maybe we'll see SCAG-like books for other settings (one that focuses on the Free City of Greyhawk and surrounding lands like Furyondy and Celene, but only gives brief descriptions of more distant areas of Oerth, for example), or maybe not. The rest of the Realms, for however long 5e lasts, is reduced to a few paragraphs with no more detail ever, unless we get adventures set there. This option is infuriating and disheartening, so let's hope it doesn't come to pass.
(2) SCAG is the model for campaign settings for the edition. Instead of one overarching book per setting, we get several instead, each covering a distinct, but large, region. For the Realms, we see SCAG-like books for the two areas mentioned in Chapter 1: the Lands to the East (basically the nations around the Sea of Fallen Stars and further north) and the Lands to the South (The Lands of Intrigue and the southern tier of states on the continent). Perhaps, later, there would even be similar books for Kara-Tur and Zakhara. The question here is, what would be in those books? Detailed coverage of the places in those regions, but done like the travelers' reports in SCAG, so with little in the way of hard data. Beyond that, there isn't much to cover. There could be smaller section on deities not fully covered in SCAG - various demigods in either case, the Mulhorandi and Untheric deities (if any besides Gilgeam exist) and draconic deities (important for Unther and Damara, and, to a point, the dragonborn) for the "East" book; the gods of the scaly folk could appear in the "South" book. A few more races could be fleshed out (aasimar in "East" and genasi in "South"), and, of course there can always be new class options and backgrounds. But all this would seem a bit... supplemental... to the solid, basic info of the setting in SCAG.
(3) SCAG is the "players guide", while we get a full-fledged, DM-centric FRCS in the future. Obviously, this would be nice. But the problem is, there is a lot of information in SCAG that would also seem to be necessary for any potential FRCS. How to finesse things so that you don't end up with basically repeated information in both books? The meat and potatoes of a potential setting book, the description of the geography of the setting, would be the simplest part. The descriptions in SCAG, as said before, don't have hard data or detailed city descriptions, so, instead of paragraphs talking about just how wondrous Silverymoon and its amazing sights are, we'd actually get hard facts on where the Vault of the Sages is in relation to the Moonbridge (granted, those of us with previous edition material already know this, but this would be important to those who don't have access to those sources, as well as for cities/locations that have changed drastically since last we visited them). Also, once we're outside the area covered in SCAG, a putative setting book wouldn't have to worry about repeating information on areas already detailed, since, well, those areas haven't been properly detailed yet! Beyond the geography, however, we run into a bit of a conundrum, the same as the "other campaign guides" before: SCAG did a very good job of fully describing the races, gods, and classes of the setting. Obviously, this is information that should also be in a campaign setting book, but, if (a) you just repeat it, you annoy people who have both books and feel they've "wasted" money on repeated information, or (b) you say "refer to SCAG for this information" and you annoy people don't have it and who don't want to buy a second book. What to do? The Gods section, at least, can also focus on details not in SCAG - church organization and history, relationships between the deities and their churches, and so on. Races, on the other hand, would be much harder to keep from just repeating everything - SCAG did a very nice job in that section (other than aasimar; "refer to the DMG" indeed
), and classes as well will just fall into either "split between different books and annoying people" or "all the info is in both books and annoying people". Finally, if SCAG is to be the "players guide" and this FRCS is the "DM's guide", players who want to make characters outside the Sword Coast region will need to reference a book that's (supposedly) DM-only, which will blur the distinction between the two.(If you need an example of a flat-out no-nonsense data-filled campaign setting, the 3e Living Greyhawk Gazetteer would be, in my opinion, the best example to use. It's a pretty no-frills description of the setting and packs an amazing amount of hard information in just 192 pages).
(4)We get both SCAG-like player books for the rest of the Realms and a full-fledged FRCS. This is obviously the best of both worlds (well, not in price, but I'm sure we'll manage somehow). This would give us full coverage of the setting, one set of books for players and one for the DM. Of course, with several SCAG-like books, the "repeat info" issue is merely exacerbated, although with SCAG having the majority of the basic setting info, this would probably be fairly minimal in other books.
Well, that's my long-winded conjecture/wall of ideas on SCAG and the future of campaign settings. I'm curious what others may think on the matter...
