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.

​

 

[Morrus]

I guess as what Morrus said, I'm one of the dissenters here and anything I said will go out as a rude snob or a douchbag...

I did not say that. Please don't misquote me.

 

[Morrus]

OMG! guess what? so is your's!
Phew, that was shorter than what I thought it would be, point is mate, you got your opinion and it's a fine and good opinion, but other folks got their own opinions and going all passive-aggressive implying that your opinion is more valid than other folks opinion just make you look like a rude snob at best, a douchbag at worse...

[MENTION=6688285]Blackwarder[/MENTION], that is entirely inappropriate. Please do not call other members names.

 

[Blackwarder]

Problem is, my opinion differs from the general populace. How should it stand out then? Stating it and ending it like, "Oh, but of course, the DMG 5e is a 5/5 if everyone else thinks so..." That isn't stating my opinion.

I guess as what Morrus said, I'm one of the dissenters here and anything I said will go out as a rude snob or a douchbag...

You're right - I should keep my peace.

Thanx.

So what? Say your opinion and move on, no need to try and convince everyone else that your opinion is right, what's the point?

Warder

 

[mouselim]

I did not say that. Please don't misquote me.

I came back (to this thread) as I think I need to offer my apology to Morrus. I meant it another way but I guess the sentence came out differently. My bad buddy

 

[Eric V]

Oh good, I wondered if I was the only one who felt underwhelmed by the hacking and options.

You most certainly are not.

 

[Pauper]

I'm not sure the solution to the question of aggregating ratings is weighting by timeline -- I think a more significant factor in the DMG's rating is that many folks are rating the DMG highly who don't normally rate RPG books. GeekDad rated the DMG, but as far as I can tell the only reference he's made to 13th Age is to mention it in passing in discussing Jonathan Tweet's Kickstarter for Grandmother Fish, his childrens' book of evolution. Likewise, BoingBoing makes a passing comment on the Kickstarter to create Glorantha as a setting for 13th Age, but doesn't seem to have an 'official' review. Only io9 has an actual (glowing) review of 13th Age.

If you want to improve ratings by weighting the reviews that comprise the ratings, it would seem that the better way to do it is to place less weight on reviews from people who don't review many books -- it's a legitimate point to say that GeekDad's and BoingBoing's reviews are intended as much to drive traffic to their sites than they are to accurately reflect an opinion on the 5th Edition DMG. Folks like the io9 reviewers that take time to review more books would, you'd think, be innately more trustworthy, since they have more of a history and thus a reader has a chance to get to know that reviewer's taste when deciding if they agree or disagree with the review. And of course, local users that review books for the sheer joy of it should probably get more weight, since the review is the whole point; these folks aren't using the review to drive traffic or raise awareness of their own websites.

Just my $0.02US.

 

[S_Dalsgaard]

I haven't read a DMG in 15 years, so to me, most of the content of the new DMG seemed very new and helpful. Yes, there's stuff I will never use, but that is true for any rulebook with as diverse an audience as D&D.

Maybe I should check out the 13th Age books if they are so highly regarded. You can never have enough inspiration.

 

[Iosue]

Speaking as an experienced DM, I absolutely will be using the world and adventure creation sections. They are chock-a-block with random tables and suggestions that stoke my imagination, plus do a lot of the heavy work I no longer have time for.

 

[guachi]

I haven't read a DMG in 15 years, so to me, most of the content of the new DMG seemed very new and helpful. Yes, there's stuff I will never use, but that is true for any rulebook with as diverse an audience as D&D.

This is absolutely true for me, as well. Right down to the "haven't read a DMG in 15 years". Last time I gamed was 1999 and I rate 5e so highly (except for poorly bound PHB) because I'm excited to play again. 15 years on (1984-1999) and then 15 years off (1999-2014). Neither 3e or 4e piqued my interest enough to do more than read the book a little in the gaming store.

 

[Umbran]

Without referring to the book...

If your answer is yes, then you'll realise that chapter 3 in the DMG covers it too. Designer thoughts? Nothing specific maybe only a snippet of example to FR. Anything revolutionary? Nope.

I think you may miss the point of an old hand reading such a section.

The point of reading is to refocus yourself on things that you may already technically know, but may also have gotten out of the habit of applying. An old hand is at risk of falling into ruts, repeated behaviors and design choices that limit the creative space they work with regularly - the occasional re-education keeps your own design acumen on point. And, the designer's intent will be threaded throughout - it doesn't have to be "revolutionary" to tell me what they think the game is best at doing.

So, the chapter could be *full* of things I already know. That's fine. Refreshers are useful.