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.

 

[pemerton]

maybe Crawford has fielded hundreds or thousands of questions about tying knots as the rule Sage, and felt a need to get something down in writing.

Maybe. Perhaps there are all these unsung nautical campaigns going on out there? Or prisoner-taking, followed by escape attempts!

I'm probably being a bit unfair - no doubt they have some reason for including it, and I think I'm the only person who has brought it up in this thread as a target of criticism. It just really stood out to me - I've GMed a lot of gritty fantasy RPGing over the years, in systems with very granular resolution and PC build systems (eg Rolemaster; Burning Wheel) and this has almost never come up. So how can a less-granular, less-gritty system need official rules for it?

But if it will make someone's day, then good luck to them!

 

[CaddoGSajwod]

Am I going to buy this book for what it adds to 5e as far as official content goes? Yes. Am I at least a little disappointed by what's not included? Yes. Honestly, when they first started talking about this book, it sounded like it was going to be 250+ pages. Less than 200 for over $40 before taxes feels like a bit of rip off. I'm happy that the book will have great art, but great art alone isn't justification for a higher price tag for a lesser page count. I'm sorry but I'm not a fan of paying more than $.25/page for my TT books.

 

[neobolts]

What I liked. I like the looks of XGtE. A lot of the UA material is being collected in one place and cleaned up. This book in going to get a lot of use. I'm hoping the DM section really gives players some direction of what to do with their big piles of gold that are gathering dust.

What I'm questioning. I was surprised that Feats for Skills didn't make it. Also, hopefully Revised Ranger or another ranger variant will make it into print someday. I will add my voice to the others saying that a dozen pages of generated names is wasted ink and paper in the internet age.

My thoughts on this thread. I've seen some forum-goers weighing in on the DM section adding a bunch of rules. I would think everything in the DM section is optional. I don't play AL, but it that what this is about?...That AL DMs will have to use the knots, downtime, crafting, etc rules?

 

[Kobold Stew]

To my eye, the most outrageous thing on that table of contents is a separate rules entry for tying knots! Seriously? Now we need rules for whistling, and maybe for getting dressed. (Oh, wait, we already have a chart for that.)

I am firmly Team Pro-Knot.

Three years ago, I posted a thread about Use Rope in 5e. Given is placement in the TOC, I am hopeful that's what this is -- a tool proficiency in rope.

But if it will make someone's day, then good luck to them!

Thank you.

 

[Guest 6801328]

My thoughts on this thread. I've seen some forum-goers weighing in on the DM section adding a bunch of rules. I would think everything in the DM section is optional. I don't play AL, but it that what this is about?...That AL DMs will have to use the knots, downtime, crafting, etc rules?

No, I don't think so.

As far as I can tell, what this is about is:
1) The (understandable) disappointment that there aren't more sub-classes, which is being blamed partly on...
2) The inclusion of reprints of sub-classes from SCAG (under the belief that if they hadn't been included, others would have), which they believe was done primarily because of...
3) The AL PHB+1 rule.

Ergo, the only reason there aren't more player options in Xan's is because of AL. It has absolutely nothing to do with WotC's desire to maintain a quality product.

Is that about right?

....

I find it hard to muster much sympathy.

 

[pemerton]

I am firmly Team Pro-Knot.

Well, then, you've cunningly aligned yourself with the winning team!

(Cunning like a kobold - although I'm not sure if you're named (sympathetically) after a stew for or by kobolds, or (antagonistically) after a stew of kobolds.)

Thank you.

You're welcome.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

They have specifically said that the subclasses that are being reprinted are in there because they are both popular and are sufficiently non-Realms enough to include in a book that is non-Realms on its own. Despite the name of a Realms NPC being in the title, this book is meant to be not specific to one world.

Have they? I hadn't heard. So they've even said that they did it for reasons other than AL, and people are still mad at AL for it. Sounds about right.

 

[jmucchiello]

I'm curious what the "This is your life" section will add to the game. It doesn't say there are new Backgrounds. But it does add "events" prior to adventuring. I wonder if it is just fluff or if there are mechanical additions there.

 

[Guest 6801328]

I'm curious what the "This is your life" section will add to the game. It doesn't say there are new Backgrounds. But it does add "events" prior to adventuring. I wonder if it is just fluff or if there are mechanical additions there.

One can only hope that it's about the player, not the character, and is brutally honest.

 

[Kobold Boots]

On the discussion about the value of names tables... some folks don’t allow tech near a game table with the game in progress.

I expect that folks on an online forum will expect to be able to google at a session and tech proliferation in the early 21st century is what it is. But low tech is only useless if you have access to better.