Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="schnee" data-source="post: 7314985" data-attributes="member: 16728">Well, that's why I said 'not necessarily' instead of a flat 'no'. Some of the critiques are definitely legitimate, but coming from a table that's 50% newbies, a lot of the stuff in the book that's being ragged on is actually perfect for them. RE the name charts, even if someone doesn't use the names randomly, they're inspirational and useful as a reference - and honestly, better written to me than the procedural online guides I've tried that every critical poster seems to prefer.RE the random encounter charts, they're also useful for world building just looking through them. They're also an index for monsters to consider first when building encounters in different types of terrain. RE the deeper lore and tables with the classes are doing the same thing. They're planting seeds of more ways to role play, more ways to build character and personality. The rather new-to-the-game DM at my table loves the book for those things. They're helping her to start writing her own adventures, design more interesting NPCs, and really get into a groove as a DM. So, I'm a bit less concerned with how extremely experienced, jaded gamers feel. (Even if I'm one of them.) It's making the newest people at our tables happiest.Edit: I do have my own critiques of the book. I think the Cleric was completely short-changed in spells, the Wizard got too many, and I'd have liked to see more stuff for martials outside of new subclasses. I'm also glad for the critique online, because, for example, from what a bunch of the analysis I'm seeing it seems the Hexblade is probably too strong. I like being prepared for stuff like that rather than having to nerf it at the table. So, I do agree with some of it, just not all of it.</blockquote>

Verification