D&D 3E/3.5 The DMG: A CRITICAL HIT at 93.5%!

The 5th Edition Dungeon Master's Guide is still pulling in rave reviews, and is trending at 93.5%. io9 says its "like a Hacker's Manual for D&D", and Geekdad reports that "this 5e ruleset has completely won me back!" There are dissenters, of course - 5 Minute Workday feels its "a whole lot of appetizers but no real main course" - but these are outweighed by reviews from the likes of boingboing who called it "gorgeous, evocative, hefty, organized, and readable".

So, clearly the Dungeon Master's Guide has garnered critical praise. You can look at the list of critical reviews from outlets around the web. The critics have given it an aggregate score of 85%; but fans have shown more support and weigh in with a whopping 93.5%!

Fun with stats: D&D 5th Edition Dungeon Master's Guide is ranked #3 out of 24 products with 10 or more reviews, placing it in the 92% percentile. It is rated 15.1 points higher than the overall average product rating of 78.4%. With 43 reviews, this is the #3 most reviewed product.

​

 

[delericho]

I'm going to read it entirely before I provide any official review...

I would be very interested to know how many of the existing reviewers had actually read the entirety of the book before they posted. I would be even more interested to know how many of them had actually used the book before they reviewed it.

Because the DMG isn't like a film, which you can get a feel for via consumption, or even an Adventure Path where a read-through can give a good feel for how it will play out. It's a toolbox, and the quality of a toolbox really only becomes apparent when you try to use it.

 

[Imaro]

I think there is a lot of desperation involved of wanting 5E to be good.

Desperation from who exactly?? I think most gamers that liked 4e were ready to stay with it, and most gamers who didn't had found alternatives so I'm not sure where this supposed desperation comes from...

Also historically Enworld has always been "very enthusiastic" about new D&D editions.

Yes, but then again Enworld didn't write the reviews, posters/consumers did... so what bearing does this have on the ratings?

And, marketing from WotC went into overdrive and convinced their customers that vague and incomplete rules are a good thing.

This line of thinking is slightly insulting and, much moreso than wanting 5e to succeed, reeks of desperation... It's the same line many detractors of Pathfinder tried to use... Oh noes, marketing brainwashed gamers into buying and accepting (and playing for years) something they never really wanted and don't really think is good... Uhm, yeah... ok.

So the requirements for a book to be perceived as good are now a lot lower.

So not only did they brainwash us into buying a game we really don't want... marketing changed our perceptions when it comes to rating all gaming products as well... if that's true all I can say is hats off to their marketing department because they are amazing...

 

[Reynard]

ROTFLMAO. Anyone who thinks the 5e DMG is apparently incapable of being discerning in their judgement. Nice. The above basically means that anyone who agrees with you is right thinking and showing good taste and anyone who disagrees with you is a mindless fanboy. It couldn't possibly be that people actually like the book and think it's well written. That's just not possible.

Or worse, think that reintroducing the foundational ideas of "rulings not rules" and "Dm judgment calls" is a good things and not "incomplete rules." Heaven forbid we take the thing that makes tabletop RPGs unique and interesting -- the interplay between GM and players -- and apply it officially to D&D, instead of treating the DM like a computer to process the rules.

 

[fantasmamore]

Unless you consider DMG on par with Dungeon World core book (or Fiasco or Hillfolk).

Friend, those are different products. None of them is actually a DM Guide. By the way, I am a big fan of Fiasco, I just bought Hillfolk and I really like it. I could give both of them 6/5. But if someone asks me which DM / GM / Storyteller's Guide I prefer, I would say the 5e DM's Guide...

 

[Queer Venger]

It is, quite literally, the DMG of our age. I was reading this last evening and was having all kinds of imaginative ideas on how Im using these hacks. Bravo Wizards, pure and simple, BRAVO!!

 

[Jester David]

Having just read your review JC, I'm not sure I would consider it negative at all. It seems pretty even handed. Nothing stands out as particularly strongly worded. Did I miss something?

It feels odd as I'm the one of the few saying it's got a fair number of flaws.
Still, when the worst review of a book is one that feels it was an average product, that still says good things about the DMG.

 

[Nebulous]

The only thing i found wrong with the book is that it needed more crunch and optional rules in the last section. I wish they'd added another 20 pages, then it would be darn near perfect.

 

[Jester David]

I would be very interested to know how many of the existing reviewers had actually read the entirety of the book before they posted. I would be even more interested to know how many of them had actually used the book before they reviewed it.

Because the DMG isn't like a film, which you can get a feel for via consumption, or even an Adventure Path where a read-through can give a good feel for how it will play out. It's a toolbox, and the quality of a toolbox really only becomes apparent when you try to use it.

Read most, skimmed a few small bits. Skipped most of the magic items for time (but went back after the review). Reread a few sections.
I've used it less, not having started my 5e campaign yet. But I made a few attempts to use the index, built a monster, and rolled some magic items.

But how well it uses wouldn't much change my opinion, as it's mostly omissions not bad execution that brings down the book.

 

[mouselim]

[MENTION=1]Morrus[/MENTION] and fjw70: Don't think that I had suckered you on a word that you used. Just google for merriam-Webster, free dictionary or just google "dissenter meaning". Remember, I didn't use that word, you did. As I had given earlier, it is to deviate or go against the norm, thinking, ideas or beliefs of the public that deemed it as official (many definitions used that word and not something that I cooked up). By using that word, you are claiming that it is official (DMG is that good!) since the public or majority said it and we the minority are thus dissenters.

Anyway, like it had said here and in my review, DMG is good but not that good. Then in comparison, to say that it is better than books like 13th Age core and the likes is ludicrous. Yet if some is to say that they are different categories, well its not me that didn't categorize the books. Anyone who comes to this website and see this rating will make (or it'll influence) that conclusion that DMG is THAT good.

 

[mouselim]

[MENTION=29314]Del[/MENTION]erico: Exactly! I had my book on Dec 04 and spent days reading and reviewing it progressively. I pondered and considered how much of the materials I'll use, how much will influence my games, how relevant and if its any sort of ground breaking materials. In conclusion, i found the overall content lacking and felt like a foundation or platform for future expansions. For example, the section on magical items are good but 99 pages of it in the DMG?! And WoTC claimed that much other materials (eg. Mass combat) had to be taken out after weighting the importance and they included 99 pages of content on magical items?! Read through this section and tell me if not more than 50% of the material can be found in 4e, 3e and 2e...this is merely a rehash. Not just this section but many others.