Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 5900360" data-attributes="member: 1465">There is a difference between allowing/supporting any conceivable character and providing a nearly-ready implementation of it.Personally I think that D&D already allows any conceivable character since the start of an edition (core). Your fantasy is the limit... but then apparently many gamers don't have as much fantasy as they think, or (in the case of DMs) have too much a rigid mind to allow players roam free, probably because they're obsessed with balance and thus scared of tinkering with character creation rules. And here come the publishers with a flood of supplements which could have been written by the gamers themselves, but carry that spark of being "official" that makes the obsessed/scare DM allow them more easily, even if the day before they forbid the same thing when proposed by a player.But my bottom line is that as long as the more original stuff ends up in supplements rather than core, then I am not worried, because it always defaults to optional. Of course if you allow everything, you end up with a kitchen-sink/diluted game, but this is only your fault <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />And here comes the problem IMHO... some of those new archetypes end up in core, and that's what causes the most damage to the fan base, because (whether they make it explicit or not) core defines the "default" of the game.</blockquote>

Verification