Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FitzTheRuke" data-source="post: 9086658" data-attributes="member: 59816">Maybe, but you dig pretty deep. You're so far down that someone like me probably looks super-positive to you, when what I am is neutral.Not that I think WotC designers are incapable of making mistakes (even vast ones) but I think that if they are showing their plan on a slide-show, it probably will work the way they expect it to. Or in other words, they will have time to show us what they want to show us, and collect feedback on that. Would we LIKE them to show us more? Will there be something in the DMG that doesn't work the way it should? Probably. (Of course, that will happen whether we playtest it or not!)They're clear every time that they test IDEAS, not BALANCE. I'm pretty sure that even if everyone LOVES the new Rogue abilities (and I expect that they do!) It'll almost certainly get nerfed before publication. I'm not following this last paragraph, but I find that I often can't quite grok what you're getting at. Personally, I love (and employ) snark, so that's not quite the problem. I think it's that you flit from one negative comment to another like a hummingbird, without always giving us context for us to follow you with.I mean, how is the DM an "enemy to be defeated"? Are you speaking of 5e specifically? Because for all its faults, I don't see 5e as promoting DM-player adversarialness. Certainly not MORE than earlier editions.</blockquote>