Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ryltar" data-source="post: 1708527" data-attributes="member: 19393">Hi Merric,Aren't we being a little too harsh here? Yes, I was talking about my game, but as you can tell, I'm not alone with this opinion. My statement even holds true from a player's standpoint. You can't tell me that players are happy with the way Wizards are handling their publications. What makes an original character concept is not the umpteenth feat or yet another spell, but rather his background, origins, mannerisms etc - and there has been decidedly too little of that in WotC books for a long time now. Yes, I know that starting the old fluff vs. crunch argument again is a can o' worms, but that's how I see it. The current system advocates to think more about your character's feat and spell selection than to think about his background, which I think is a mistake per se. The FR books were useful in a certain kind of way: to derive ideas from. I don't expect each and every book to come out to be exactly what I am looking for - but I expect every book to come out to at least hold partial use for my campaign, if it is advertised as a "general", not setting-specific book.The last thing I'd want to do is deny WotC their success. But your statement does correspond with mine in a certain way: books need to be profitable enough so that the d&d line may be continued. I honestly don't think that books which do nothing but annoy the DM fall under these criteria - as someone else stated already in this thread, it also has been my experience that DMs buy 90% of the books used in any given campaign.I wouldn't have anything against the "Player's Guide ..." concept, if it would only prove more of a resource for ideas. Example: Don't just include a prestige class, give me three to four pages of ideas in which context this class might be used (not saying I'd definitely use that background, then, but it would give me a place to start my own ideas). Don't just do the same old feats which only seem to serve PG players these days, but make them original and more flavor-y (the tactical feats in CW were quite good in that regard).That's why BCD is on my "must have" list <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=":)" />.You've got a point there. Perhaps the fact that few companies have done so yet only has to do with the players not clearly stating what they're looking for. But this calls for a new thread <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> ...Bye,Ryltar</blockquote>

Verification