Sword Coast Adventurer’s Guide: The First Official D&D 5E Setting

Yes, it is new, I was just creating a thread for it myself.

 

[Shasarak]

But once they started being made people used them. So it's still not helping your point.

Of course some people used them? How would we have such iconic adventures as "Against the Giants" and "Tomb of Horrors" if no one used them?

 

[Henry]

Bingo, exactly! Not using pre-packed adventures. QED.

Pioneers used wash tubs and dolly sticks and clotheslines, but most i'm pretty sure would have jumped at the chance to have a modern washer and dryer if they could have. unlike AD&D, I have a lot less time in the day to write adventures and campaign settings from whole cloth, so going back to AD&D levels of support is not a desired state for me. It might be one forced by the realities of WotC's business model, but it's not an ideal state.

 

[aramis erak]

I just hope Sword Coast Legends doesn't get delayed too long. Of course, it's currently aimed at late September, so they have a couple months of wiggle room.

It's a curious idea for a product. An update on the Realms AND a campaign sourcebook (coming out to months after the campaign book (and thus too late for Encounters to use) AND a splatbook for everyone.
This makes the product sound rather... bloated actually. And the $40 price suggests it'll be in the 250-page range They can't possibly do the Realms justice in that short of space and provide enough PC content to satisfy people.


They did the same thing for the Neverwinter book and that was quality. You'd never know it was timed to coincide with the planned release.
And all their adventures seem to be set on the Sword Coast region, so it ties into the focus of most of their recent products.

The new ALPG implies season three is under the sword coast, so really, still in the region.

 

[Mistwell]

If your first Hardcover is a Monster Manual then obviously you must already have rules for creating PCs to fight the monsters.

From another game I suppose, which came out in a different year from that book so doesn't count for that year's release schedule. And it wasn't really compatible (hence two more core books would be released which changed many many rules). I mean your argument is roughly the equivalent of saying the 5e PHB isn't that important because people could try and create PCs from 2e books. I am not even sure what your point is anymore. Are you still even arguing the 1e AD&D first year had more published content than the 5e first year has? Nothing you've said in response for a while now seems to feed that argument.

 

[Shasarak]

From another game I suppose, which came out in a different year from that book so doesn't count for that year's release schedule. And it wasn't really compatible (hence two more core books would be released which changed many many rules). I mean your argument is roughly the equivalent of saying the 5e PHB isn't that important because people could try and create PCs from 2e books. I am not even sure what your point is anymore. Are you still even arguing the 1e AD&D first year had more published content than the 5e first year has? Nothing you've said in response for a while now seems to feed that argument.

I dont see the core rules as extra content, it is the base level, the minimum that you can produce. And honestly I see the UA articles and the free player booklet as better content then the two mega adventures so that leaves us at an impasse I guess.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

I dont see the core rules as extra content, it is the base level, the minimum that you can produce. And honestly I see the UA articles and the free player booklet as better content then the two mega adventures so that leaves us at an impasse I guess.

I don't understand how I single thing you said counters his points at all. The Core Rules are not extra content. It does not change the fact that it took a year for each of them to come out for 1e. Meaning by default that AD&D had a sparser 1st year then 5e.

Also I don't agree at all about the three mega adventures we are getting this year. (Rage of Demons comes out before the 1st year passes for 5e.) Rage of Demons will also include stuff like the Demon Lord stat Blocks so it will be a popular purchase for that alone.

 

[Mistwell]

I dont see the core rules as extra content, it is the base level, the minimum that you can produce. And honestly I see the UA articles and the free player booklet as better content then the two mega adventures so that leaves us at an impasse I guess.

Only if you keep insisting that content you prefer is the only content that can count towards content produced. It's apple and oranges. It's irrelevant to the question of "how much content was produced", which is what I was replying to. I mean, if I ask you how many jelly beans are in a jar, do you answer by only counting the flavors you like? What does your personal preference have anything to do with the question of quantity of content produced in the first year?

 

[Shasarak]

I don't understand how I single thing you said counters his points at all. The Core Rules are not extra content. It does not change the fact that it took a year for each of them to come out for 1e. Meaning by default that AD&D had a sparser 1st year then 5e.

If that was true then you could not actually play ADnD until at least the release of the Players Handbook or even the DMG which means that the first year of ADnD starts from the release of the DMG. The other years are just hanging out, maybe doing play testing, waiting for the release of the rules.

Also I don't agree at all about the three mega adventures we are getting this year. (Rage of Demons comes out before the 1st year passes for 5e.) Rage of Demons will also include stuff like the Demon Lord stat Blocks so it will be a popular purchase for that alone.

Obviously without seeing the Rage of Demons, I can not comment on the Demon Lord Stats and on the other hand personally the stats for Gromph and Drizzt would be more interesting. I do know that for me the inclusion of Tiamats stat blocks did not influence my decision whether to buy The Rise of Tiamat or not.

 

[Shasarak]

Only if you keep insisting that content you prefer is the only content that can count towards content produced. It's apple and oranges. It's irrelevant to the question of "how much content was produced", which is what I was replying to. I mean, if I ask you how many jelly beans are in a jar, do you answer by only counting the flavors you like? What does your personal preference have anything to do with the question of quantity of content produced in the first year?

One issue of Dragon has more potential benefit then one super adventure. It just appeals to a wider audience. It would be like comparing a big apple to a basket of fruit. And you get at least six of those in the first year - before the release of the Monster Manual.

 

[mach1.9pants]

Misunderstood sorry