Is the “Explorer’s Guide to Wildemount” considered Official Dungeons&Dragons material?

2 thoughts on “Is the “Explorer’s Guide to Wildemount” considered Official Dungeons&Dragons material?

    • tideoftime says:

      There are, as occurred with some earlier editions (3.0/3.5), some open-license books published by private persons when/where there can be some question of how well the context was playtested or not. (Ex: Mercer’s first campaign book, Tal’Dorei, is pretty solid as a book *but* does have a couple or few instances of contextually “under-tested” material that he later retconned — a couple aspects of The Cobalt Monk sub-class, for example — and that’s an example of a “hardbound 5E book” that was perhaps under-tested. The official-by-WotC books, however, are generally well-tested; parts that later turn out to not work quite so well or need revision are errata’d and corrected in later reprintings and available for free at their website. Those corrections, though, are relatively few compared to the overall size of the material in question.) So it boils down to: if it’s official from WotC, then it should be reasonably dependable; if it’s open-license material, then buyer should beware/ask around for opinions from others first.

Leave a Reply to William Hunter McBatman Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.