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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MechaPilot" data-source="post: 6828339" data-attributes="member: 82779">This also has been brought up before, but that's not an edition problem, that's a problem with the rules surrounding organized play.  5e has clearly illustrated that things can be available for use in an edition while also not being included in organized play.  WotC dropped the ball on 4e's organized play.  It's not as if it's the first time (or the last) WotC will drop the ball on something.How is it better and in what way?  Do you mean they handle it better in 5e organized play than in 4e organized play?  Or, do you mean in the edition in general?  Because saying yes to that first one will cause me to agree with you (despite their reasons for banning the flying race not passing muster with me), while saying yes to the second will cause me to disagree with you.  To me, labeling something "extra-super-mega-ulta optional" when the entire book is presenting a horde of options that the DM is free to deny as she sees fit smacks of childishness, and it seems like an attempt to say on the sly that one way of playing is more D&D than the other when it absolutely is not.Sure, TFA was entertaining.  However, I'd already seen the original trilogy for free several times on television while I was growing up.  Paying theater prices to see what was basically a remake of the original trilogy doesn't sit well with me.  I have to keep reminding myself, "hey, you were entertained while you were there."  Also, it doesn't make me terribly confident that future installments will be good.  Afterall, all they've shown us is that the franchise can repackage the original plot in an entertaining way.  They've don'e virtually nothing to make me think they have any good story ideas moving forward.</blockquote>

Verification