Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nemzid" data-source="post: 7366695" data-attributes="member: 6887762">Disclaimer: I've never played ALThe way I see it, the PHB+1 AL rule serves 2 purposes:* Keep the entry price low (at most you only need to pay for 2 books, but could also play just fine with the free Basic Rules)* Keep the entry need for system mastery lowThe second point is where I feel people are misunderstanding WotC's intentions. It's not that each book is only balanced against the PHB, they also think of the overall balance of the game when designing new options and it would be ludicrous to think otherwise since their biggest audience is not playing AL. AL is designed to be accessible and a good entry point first and foremost. When adding new options, some builds will always come out ahead even so slightly due to new options complementing each other. It's not bad on its own and when you have an experienced DM/Players, but it's bad for new DM/Players. Most combos won't be gamebreaking, but they don't want people creating their first character and coming to AL just to be told by an another player "Ah that's not the way to build a X character! You should have selected Y race/sub-race from this book, Z class/sub-race from this book, these spells from this book, and these feats from this book to be more effective" or feel like they made sub-optimal choices due to their lack of system mastery when comparing their character to another one - that's just daunting and may lead them to drop D&D. They want to close the gap between experienced players with system mastery and new players who don't have it yet so both can have a good time playing together. If everything was on the table, new players might feel like they need to extensively research all the books to be good at D&D and to "meaningfully" contribute to the party, which isn't a good thing when you want to bring more newcomers to the hobby.If you consider this, the PHB+1 rule makes a lot of sense, is a good business decision, and I doubt it will change in the future (at least I hope not for the aforementioned reasons).Edit: fixing typos</blockquote>

Verification