D&D 5E SCAG - Campaign Setting or Players' Guide?

[hawkeyefan]

I think that it's certainly more aimed at players rather than at DM's. Or at least that it's for both and not exclusively for the DM. The dearth of player oriented material combined with the "in character" bits about the regions really seems designed with the players in mind.

A DM is perfectly capable of dismissing anything setting related in this book as hearsay, allowing him to alter it however he sees fit.

 

[pukunui]

I think that it's certainly more aimed at players rather than at DM's. Or at least that it's for both and not exclusively for the DM. The dearth of player oriented material combined with the "in character" bits about the regions really seems designed with the players in mind.

As it says on the actual product page: "While the Sword Coast Adventurer’s Guide is a valuable resource for Dungeon Masters, it was crafted with players and their characters foremost in mind. There is a plethora of new character options to intrigue and inspire every member of the adventuring party."

 

[BMaC]

The upcoming release schedule lists two adventures. These obviously will be in 2016 and will probably be large, campaign style books similar to what we've seen thus far. However, that still leaves the window open for one or two hardcover releases that are not adventures. Hmm....could be interesting!

 

[hawkeyefan]

As it says on the actual product page: "While the Sword Coast Adventurer’s Guide is a valuable resource for Dungeon Masters, it was crafted with players and their characters foremost in mind. There is a plethora of new character options to intrigue and inspire every member of the adventuring party."

Exactly. I thought it was pretty clear all along what we should expect out of this.

There's actually more setting based material than I had thought there would be. But as I said above, the way most of it is presented leaves it up to interpretation. And I think that was done deliberately to give players reading the book a sense of what their characters would likely know about the countries/cities, rather than some kind of objective view.

 

[pukunui]

Exactly!

 

[Marandahir]

So the question becomes: are these basic knowledge stuff, the kind you wouldn't need to roll History, Nature, Religion, Arcana, etc for? Or should characters need to roll for this stuff? Or is it a mix – are they stuff the characters might know due to a background and not a need a roll, but other characters might not know and need to roll?

 

[hawkeyefan]

So the question becomes: are these basic knowledge stuff, the kind you wouldn't need to roll History, Nature, Religion, Arcana, etc for? Or should characters need to roll for this stuff? Or is it a mix – are they stuff the characters might know due to a background and not a need a roll, but other characters might not know and need to roll?

I think you have to go with a mix. I mean, folks will have a general knowledge of Faerun, to verging degrees. I think you tailor it to the education level of the character and/or their background. So a bard or a loremaster type Mage would know at least a little about most locations/organizations, but a character who was a soldier might be limited to geography or perhaps the military strength of a nation or its elite warriors.

Anything outside such an area of expertise would need a check or a higher check.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

I agree, the SCAG is trying to cover as many bases as possible, blending the line between a player and DM book. As a DM, I’m happy with it, as, when combined with the vast amount of Realmslore out there, it’s enough to get a feel for the 5e era of Faerun. Heck, some of the entries in the old 1e Gray Box were more scant than the details in the SCAG (not that I’m knocking that hallowed product).