NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 7487810" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Normally that answer would be no. However, WoTC admitted there was a problem, there data said there were enough dissatisfied people to warrant a fix. Then they dragged their feet until the player base changed enough it was no longer enough people. This completely changes the dynamic you are talking about. There has been a small subset talking about getting a Warlord fighter since 5e came out. If WoTC suddenly agreed to work on it, saying a signifigant portion of the fanbase wanted it, then two years later said “Our player base has changed, Warlords are no longer popular enough, we’re stopping work on the Warlord class” people would be furious and it would be a black eye for the company because they said they would do something, then took too long and backed out. And that is kind of what has happened here. They heard the community saying the Ranger needed work. No one so far has said the Ranger is as good as it could be. And the people who were calling for that change didn’t go away, we didn’t get what WoTC indicated they would give us. Instead we are now being told it was just a vocal minority who was never really right, and with the new swell of players we aren’t important enough to finish the work they started. We’ve been talking about the Beastmaster a lot, actually. Crawford in his tweet said “There is only one Ranger, the one in the Player’s Handbook”. Half of the Player’s Handbook Ranger is the Beastmaster. Are you wanting to claim that half of the core Ranger is irrelevant to a discussion about the Ranger? Do we get to just ignore things that don’t work because we can just make more things that do work?What if they release the Eberron setting and it is as bad a setting as the Beastmaster is a subclass, should we be satisfied with the argument “Well, they can just make more settings, or a different setting with the same themes, or you could just play a different setting.” Do those excuse poor quality work? And, we can expand the discussion to other ranger features. I gave a quick list and we all know the debates that have been had over them. Heck, I recognize that the Revised Ranger doesn’t even fix a lot of the complaints that are the worse for the Ranger as a skill class about tracking, but it is better at least.</blockquote>

Verification