Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 7759083" data-attributes="member: 6704184">IMO, honestly, PF isn’t a particularly good game. If you’re going to make an option heavy, mechanically complex and clearly defined, game, it needs to also be fairly well balanced. PF is only balanced in comparison to late 3.5 with all the official supplements available. indeed. Heck, I use CharOp mastery to make interesting rileplaying characters that don’t suck in any given pillar, while satisfyingly representing a specific concept in a way where my mechanical options show, so I don’t have to tell. Honestly, for most classes, different builds/power sets within a class play more differently than is he case for most 5e classes (or any other edition). Its ok, having bad opinions doesn’t make you a bad person. This is a weird argument, IMO. I won’t ever play every option, sure. But my group will eventually play most of them, and all the groups I know will probably play all of them. More importantly, there is nothing in 4e that is like the Assassin, or the Gloom Pact Hexblade, or a Cunning Bard who incongruously focused on fighting in melee, or a multi-target focused mixed range rogue (dagger thrower or hand crossbow build), or a Beast Master Ranger, or I could go on and on. PHB only 5e is fun, but very limited, and most players I have ever known just aren’t going to make certain types of characters if there isn’t a relatively clear option for it. There isn’t a combination of options in the PHB that makes a “Spirit Talker”/Shaman type character that mechanically plays like the concept, so the player just opts to play a different concept. Then Xanathar’s comes out, and that player is thrilled that she can play that earlier concept now. It doesn’t matter that she won’t ever even read through the Sorcerer options in the book, she doesn’t care about sorcerer stuff. Yep book has increased her ability to play her “1st choice” character concept when a campaign is starting, instead of settling for something else. I mostly agree with this, but I’d like to point out that replayability isn’t determined by total options, but by total options within the scope of what broad types of characters a given player likes to play. A dozen classes doesn’t mean much if your group are all players that each have maybe 3 classes they’re likely to ever play.</blockquote>

Verification