Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Burticusb" data-source="post: 6753949" data-attributes="member: 6791242">Again, I'm not upset about the ruling, it actually doesn't affect any my current character builds at all. And I can appreciate the ruling given in the haste and pressure that was given to Adventurer's League. However, the grounds of that this book was not play tested with this other book as the reason for the exclusion of them being able to be paired is silly to say the least. Trust me, there are for more colorful words I could use instead...It actually shows a level of no confidence, in the staff or the dm's that this organization promotes. I mean, your telling me that a DM shouldn't be capable of seeing these broken characters and be able to take the player to the side and explain that the players character is taking the fun away from other players. Yes, pun pun was broken, so much so that he was a bore to play as and play with. I think we are going the wrong way here, why not let the player explore the options. And then offer some outside role play solutions to some of the encounters. Allow the DM to take charge of his adventure and give the other characters a chance to rp out of a situation. If a player based his character solely on mechanical advantages he will quickly find that this may not be the best medium to use for that venture.</blockquote>