Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9741883" data-attributes="member: 18">People react based on the relative history of companies and do so in a dynamic way.WotC has a recent-ish history of stepping on rakes and making weird choices with settings. It's not a terrible awful history but it is a patchy and concern-inducing one.That could change. Two good setting books in a row (say, Forgotten Realms and Dark Sun) would probably reset people to similar assumptions to with Paizo. It's not because WotC are big or something, it's because of their actual behaviour.They're not the only company with question marks either - plenty of others cause people to have some skepticism re specific things.WotC causes far less skepticism re balance than most 3PPs I'd suggest. Like, I wouldn't trust Matt Mercer and crew to write balanced classes/subclasses/spells for 5E based on CRs history there, whereas WotC? I'm surprised when one isn't balanced reasonably ok. So let's not have a pity party for WotC. Some things they have a history of doing well, some they don't, either could change in future.</blockquote>