The Actual Table of Contents for Xanathar's Guide to Everything

A lot of good stuff there.

Of course, on the DM side, a lot of stuff is not there, but I like what I see.

Actually, one of the most useful things will be the appendix of sample names.

 

[Elderbrain]

While I WILL be buying the book, there is one thing that annoys me - namely, that WOTC doesn't seem to have learned anything from its Death Domain problem in 3e. If you recall, the 3e Death Domain was, like the 5e Death Domain, inappropriate for gods that weren't Undead-friendly, and they had to add a Repose Domain in later books. In 5e they are repeating the cycle with the Grave Domain - why didn't they have this in the PHB this time?

Also, am I to understand that the Kensei is NOT a weapon specialist?!?

 

[Kobold Boots]

While I WILL be buying the book, there is one thing that annoys me - namely, that WOTC doesn't seem to have learned anything from its Death Domain problem in 3e. If you recall, the 3e Death Domain was, like the 5e Death Domain, inappropriate for gods that weren't Undead-friendly, and they had to add a Repose Domain in later books. In 5e they are repeating the cycle with the Grave Domain - why didn't they have this in the PHB this time?

Because that which generated income last time will undoubtedly generate income this time. Therefore it wasn't a mistake, it was a plan.

 

[cbwjm]

While I WILL be buying the book, there is one thing that annoys me - namely, that WOTC doesn't seem to have learned anything from its Death Domain problem in 3e. If you recall, the 3e Death Domain was, like the 5e Death Domain, inappropriate for gods that weren't Undead-friendly, and they had to add a Repose Domain in later books. In 5e they are repeating the cycle with the Grave Domain - why didn't they have this in the PHB this time?

Also, am I to understand that the Kensei is NOT a weapon specialist?!?

If they had made it for gods that aren't undead friendly then what would happen to the domain for gods that are undead friendly? Remember, the death domain wasn't released as a player's option in the PHB, it was released in the DMG as an option for villainous characters, that is, a stereotypical cleric of an evil god that raises the undead to fight for them. Even then, it isn't really super undead friendly, you could easily swap out a couple of domain spells to make it more suitable for a god of the dead that doesn't automatically grant the power to create undead minions. Animate dead is the only spell I can think of on the domain list that might be problematic for an anti undead god of death.

 

[hejtmane]

While I WILL be buying the book, there is one thing that annoys me - namely, that WOTC doesn't seem to have learned anything from its Death Domain problem in 3e. If you recall, the 3e Death Domain was, like the 5e Death Domain, inappropriate for gods that weren't Undead-friendly, and they had to add a Repose Domain in later books. In 5e they are repeating the cycle with the Grave Domain - why didn't they have this in the PHB this time?

Also, am I to understand that the Kensei is NOT a weapon specialist?!?

If it is anything close to the last revision then yes they can only make by level 6 three weapons they use be counted as magical; 1 main weapon 1 ranged and a 3rd one may get another one later do not remember. They also dropped heavy weapons in the revision so 1h and versatile weapons and ranged weapons. My guess is it will be pretty close to the revision the first one was a mess and every one was like why would you make this and take away all the Monk features I can already do this now with multiclass

 

[Azzy]

SCAGs issues relate to A) being too small for it's basic purpose which was as a Setting Guide, B) the player material didn't get the public play testing that the Subclasses in XGTE got.

A) It was never intended to be a comprehensive setting guide, it—like the title says—is about the Sword Coast, with a brief overview of other areas.
B) Not everything has, or will have, a public playtest. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, it's just a thing.

But VGTMs in some ways is worse because at least the SCAG knows what setting it's supposed to be apart of, while VGTM suffers from an identity crisis.

Is it a general options book or an FR book? If general options then naming it after Volo is unethical and misleading because that name means something.

It's a non-setting-specific book, that uses the FR IP for branding purposes to make it sound more interesting than "Monster Manual 2". In the same manner that Xanathar's Guide will not be setting specific either. The naming is just a conceit, and they'll probably use characters from other setting for the same puposes whenever they introduce other setting via their APs.

If it's FR then a lot of the lore in it, especially the Yuan Ti origins is straight up wrong. The line is blurred and I don't like that. In FR the Sarrukh created the Yuan Ti not a decadent human snake worshipping empire.

Considering that 4e straight up rewrote the lore on lots of things, this is a quibble at best. But, again, this isn't a FR-specific book.

Does VGTM want to be a DM book or player book?

Yes. Pretty much all non-AP books they release are going to be similar in that regard (much like 1e's Unearthed Arcana, Oriental Adventures, Dungeoneer's Survival Guide, and Wilderness Survival Guide). This way it appeals to more people than just those that DM or those that don't DM.

XGTM looks like it will suffer from similar flaws, although not to the same degree.

While Xanathar's looks like it will be suffering from several flaws, these aren't any of them.

 

[guachi]

But VGTM isn't a more interesting name. It's named after some schmuck I've barely hard of. Strip out the meaningless words and your left with "Monsters". Do that with the Monster Manual, which at least has alliteration, and you have "Monster".

What's worse is that calling it "Volo's" made me think it was a FR book. It's misleading title actively discouraged me from buying the book.

The more I think about Everything the more I think it's not worth the price of admission.

 

[Li Shenron]

While I WILL be buying the book, there is one thing that annoys me - namely, that WOTC doesn't seem to have learned anything from its Death Domain problem in 3e. If you recall, the 3e Death Domain was, like the 5e Death Domain, inappropriate for gods that weren't Undead-friendly, and they had to add a Repose Domain in later books. In 5e they are repeating the cycle with the Grave Domain - why didn't they have this in the PHB this time?

Grave Clerics and Swashbuckler Rogues are IMHO the two archetypes that should have been in the PHB.

But I think the reason they were not is simply because all the character material requires design work and playtesting, and that also means a long time, if you want it to be of good quality. I just think they had to make some choices, and focus their efforts on them at the expense of others which were cut. There were other no-brainer domains which didn't make it, such as Magic and the elemental ones. In addition, while they always have to include some obvious options to the game, they also wanted to feature a few unusual ones to attract attention and generate inspiration to old players (see the GoO warlock or the paladin of the ancients). In other words, the blanket is never big enough...

 

[MasterYogurt]

I'm gonna let my players buy this. There's more in this release for them than me.

 

[MagicSN]

About the price issue - is it really intended, that it is CHEAPER for a german to buy the book from amazon.com, let it be shipped from US to Germany instead of buying it from German Amazon?

Price on amazon.com: 30 USD+International shipping = 35 EUR
Price on amazon.de as Amazon Prime Customer (Free shipping) = 40 EUR

Sounds very weird to me.

 

[Parmandur]

A) It was never intended to be a comprehensive setting guide, it—like the title says—is about the Sword Coast, with a brief overview of other areas.
B) Not everything has, or will have, a public playtest. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, it's just a thing.



It's a non-setting-specific book, that uses the FR IP for branding purposes to make it sound more interesting than "Monster Manual 2". In the same manner that Xanathar's Guide will not be setting specific either. The naming is just a conceit, and they'll probably use characters from other setting for the same puposes whenever they introduce other setting via their APs.



Considering that 4e straight up rewrote the lore on lots of things, this is a quibble at best. But, again, this isn't a FR-specific book.



Yes. Pretty much all non-AP books they release are going to be similar in that regard (much like 1e's Unearthed Arcana, Oriental Adventures, Dungeoneer's Survival Guide, and Wilderness Survival Guide). This way it appeals to more people than just those that DM or those that don't DM.



While Xanathar's looks like it will be suffering from several flaws, these aren't any of them.

Yes to all of this, and not only have they been consistent and upfront the past few years with this approach, they have doubled down on the strategy. In the past, when a strategy isn't working for WotC, they simply hit the reset button.