D&D 5E What is the point of the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide?

[Li Shenron]

I was at my local game store and looking at the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide. From what I saw, it looked like a bunch of lore for the Sword Coast. Among this lore were several things to expand the main game, such as Deurgar, 2 Rogue Archetypes (Swashbuckler and Mastermind), some cantrips, etc...

But some of what I saw seemed unfinished or not fleshed out. I saw some Bard Colleges that look like they were nothing but text, no mechanical benefit to the actual characters. Some expanded sub-races for elves and the such, but no mechanical benefits yet again.

Did it feel unfinished to everyone else? Is there a point to it other than those few game additions other than the lore? I felt like it should of been more. Needless to say, I didn't buy it.

Speaking strictly for myself, as a stand-alone product SCAG doesn't really have much point... I might be wrong because I haven't actually read the book itself, just "previews & reviews" and lots of comments on these forums.

As a DM I am not interested in a "start here" book to be honest, I like books that give a high-level bird-eye view on a complete world, and also add low-level details, but the latter are easier for me to make up if missing. Yes the books have to be massive, and yes I'm willing to spend money on a setting I like. In the 3e days, the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting book and the Rokugan Campaign Setting book were primary examples of how I want them to be, as were the Dragonlance Campaign Setting and the 3rd-party Kingdoms of Kalamar (tho I didn't own them personally).

A book that details only one region does not have a point for me personally, unless it's part of a larger collection. That brings down to the next question... is SCAG just a first book of a series? If it is, it would make a lot more sense to me.

Then alas, unfortunately (for WotC) I am already the owner of several FR books beyond the 3e FRCS, and I don't see much reasons to switch to running FR games in a different era, so even if SCAG gets companions for other regions of the Realms, the fluff of the book won't be very attractive to me.

So then there is the crunch... I do really wish to add more subclasses to the core game, as I thought the PHB was a bit too "slim" on subclasses options. The other crunch, I don't care much for. I don't feel we need more cantrips or backgrounds at all. Still, the subclasses of SCAG would be a nice addition to the game, so here's really the only point of SCAG for me. It's not a major selling point, so maybe if I find SCAG one day on a discount bin, I might pick it up.

 

[Lanliss]

Just stop it Jester, it's getting ridiculous. Are you selling WotC's merchandize for them, or what?

Let's comb through your own post and see what it says, okay?

"tiding people over" is your opinion but you don't present it as such. Lots of people aren't, but you choose to ignore this.

Why would you even write "until more content could be released". The 3E FRCS was published in 2001, just one year after the edition it serves was published. It is 320 pages long, with a font size smaller than SCAG. It won the Origins Award for Best Role-Playing Game Supplement for that year.

By any reasonable standard of comparison, we are right in being disappointed. Why do you let WotC off the hook in this case as in so many others? Why not support the very valid criticism that in roughly the same time frame, WotC has managed only to publish something "to tide us over", instead of publishing perhaps the richest and deepest campaign guide ever published, something that truly is tiding myself over even now, 14 years later?

You could have said "SCAG is a pale shadow of the FRCS'es of yesterday", yet you don't. And never do.

Moving on...

2) nothing to add here; you're right, it's an introduction. But only an introduction.
3) it does not do anything of the sort. SCAG is definitely not working as a stand-alone product - it is definitely leeching off the efforts of past editions. Introduction yes; complete campaign guide no. And as a player's guide, assuming you mean "stuff for players", meaning "crunch", it is very light. Yet none of this can be learnt from your post.
4) "It provides a small amount of crunch to satisfy that craving." Wow. You even turn the small amount into a positive. And you speak for all of us when you feel satisfied by that small amount.

You know Jester, if people still take you seriously after spewing that sales pitch...

SCAG isn't completely void of useful info. But this is a thread where the OP is asking if he has somehow missed something or if it really is that light.

A much shorter reply from you could simply have been "yes, it's much lighter than for previous editions, but I bought it anyway and recommend you do too, because it's all we're likely to get in quite some time."

Just sayin'

As a new player to D&D, I found it pretty useful. I didn't know any of the lore, and had not even thought to look up the gnome creation story, despite them being my favorite race. It might be light to some, but I found it was well worth what I paid for it. Of course, I don't even know what FRCS stands for. That being said, if it is hailed as one of their greatest accomplishments, is it really fair to expect them to duplicate its resounding success, when I hear they have had huge budget and staff cuts in the D&D department since past editions?

 

[shoak1]

I was at my local game store and looking at the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide. From what I saw, it looked like a bunch of lore for the Sword Coast. Among this lore were several things to expand the main game, such as Deurgar, 2 Rogue Archetypes (Swashbuckler and Mastermind), some cantrips, etc...

But some of what I saw seemed unfinished or not fleshed out. I saw some Bard Colleges that look like they were nothing but text, no mechanical benefit to the actual characters. Some expanded sub-races for elves and the such, but no mechanical benefits yet again.

Did it feel unfinished to everyone else? Is there a point to it other than those few game additions other than the lore? I felt like it should of been more. Needless to say, I didn't buy it.

I imagine Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide is designed for hard-core lore-junkies ("OMG! That's why Northumberland and Southumberland hate each other so much!! I TOTALLY get it now!!" ). For those of us that like to move figures around on a 1"=5' grid and kill stuff, its useless. I remember they used to pump out tons of that fluffy filler stuff back in 1e/2e days.....

Its kind of like being REALLY hungry and someone giving you one of those tiny mints they put in a little cellophane package wrapped with tassels. Eating it does nothing to appease your appetite, it just gives you a tummy ache.

meh [I shrug and return to the work of min-maxing this NPC I just made].

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

What he did was to echo the very common sentiment that SCAG is very light on crunch, very light on new fluff; yet somehow not very light on price.

No, he did not. You said those words.

I was responding to the question actually asked and pointing out that the "besides A and B" portion of the question used values for A (the mechanical bits) and B (the lore) that make up the totality of the content in the book.

...and I don't think the sentiment you mention is as common as you are framing it as by calling it common.

 

[jadrax]

I think its clear that SCAG had a very mixed reception. On Amazon it averages 3 stars where as most other 5e products are 4 or 5. On ENWorld its currently rating 63%, which is again around the average mark - I think the only hardback that rates worse here is Hoard of the Dragon Queen.

Basically the book did ok, but was not a big hit.

 

[Umbran]

Just stop it Jester, it's getting ridiculous. Are you selling WotC's merchandize for them, or what?

Arguments of the form, "You must be ignorant, stupid, mentally unstable, or a corporate shill to hold this position," are effectively a form of ad hominem, and kind of rude and insulting.

Please refrain from such in the future. Whether or not you share the same opinion about a book (and it is just a book, a book about pretending to be elves, even) we expect you to show a modicum of respect for the people on the boards. If you cannot do that, you are placing your opinion of a book over people. Do you want people wondering why you think a book is more important than a living, breathing person? Probably not.

 

[Ezequielramone]

For me is an excellent player companion. It even says "adventurer's guide" on the title.

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

I've read it, though haven't bought it, and it is an interesting read.

Some of the subclasses and pretty much all the backgrounds are cool.

My question is this: if WOTC follow this pattern and release a similar guidebook to other areas in the Realms - Cormyr, the Dalelands, Thay and so on - that would be cool. Sort of a BECMI Gazzetteer approach.

The only issue is one of expectations in crunch.

With what was it 11 subclasses based on this one region, by the time another three large geographical regions are done there could either be the dreaded bloat or as each new one comes out it comes with less crunch. Neither of which would be ideal for different parties (publisher/players) for different reasons.

In some ways they almost could have had LESS crunch to make it more of a long term project for other regions.

I'm not convinced each regional paladin needs its own subclass, just suitable flavour; ditto warlocks, rogues, etc.

Most people who like crunchy things or min maxy things would bless scag for Green Flame Blade alone!

 

[robus]

I bought it and was disappointed by it at the time. I thought it was going to be more map heavy (nice maps of the major cities and a nice regional map of the Sword Coast and one of the continent that put the Sword Coast in a greater context). Some pull-out maps at the back would have been a lovely feature.

It's more of a resource for players than DMs, my mistake.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

I own it and don't regret making the purchase. I wish future WotC books are light in crunch like this one, because I want the rules to be expanded, but I want it to happen in a slower pace that's easier to include in new campaigns.

I just wish they had considered which classes were in need of new mechanical options before developing it, though; it's kind of weird that clerics get a new subclass option while rangers get nothing.