Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6750744" data-attributes="member: 996">What makes you think those play styles must be intentionally excluded?  They were well-supported by 4e, and 5e is meant to support /more/ playstyles than 4e did.  Whatever the reasons, be it inclination/reluctance, catering to a specific segment of the fan-base, design efficiency, IP integrity, or lack of resources & pragmatic expediency, 5e has a slow pace of releases and has yet to add a new official, published class, while it's added several sub-classes.  Even though the Mystic appeared in UA, empirically, the evidence still weighs against it ever seeing print.  It's that much worse for any other additional classes the game needs that haven't even entered the pipeline yet.  Sure, there's reason to hope.  I find more reason in the professed goals for 5e than in their actions of the last year or so, which, is not, I guess, very convincing.  But hope doesn't need solid proof.</blockquote>