D&D 5E Wanting more content doesn't always equate to wanting tons of splat options so please stop.

[Corpsetaker]

Not at all. It's a an ernest desire. And I think a fair bit of good advice.

Yeah. Real maturity here.

 

[Azzy]

Ahhhh. I see they mentioned two class variants. The monsters don't really count because it's not adding any new mechanics to the game. Still not impressed and my main point still stands. Now if they did a big write up on that Gunslinger class that has sat at the top for ages then I may change my view a bit, but other than that no.

And this is exactly why you've earned the reputation that you have.

 

[Corpsetaker]

And this is exactly why you've earned the reputation that you have.

Well like I said before. I must be saying something right because I've been racking up on XP on these boards. I'm too old to be playing " for tat" with some of you. There is a real sense of immaturity with a few people on these boards and I don't have to put up with it. I'm just fine with my reputation and it seems there are a lot of like minded people on these boards and that's fine with me.

Oh what, you thought your words hurt me feelings or something? Trying to "get one over on me" kind of thing?

Sad.

 

[darjr]

Yeah. Real maturity here.

In your umpteenth thread on the same darn topic, asking all the rest of us to stop.

 

[Corwin]

Well like I said before. I must be saying something right because I've been racking up on XP on these boards.

That's cool. Me too! And I haven't been agreeing with you at all. How weird is that?

 

[cmad1977]

Well like I said before. I must be saying something right because I've been racking up on XP on these boards. I'm too old to be playing " for tat" with some of you. There is a real sense of immaturity with a few people on these boards and I don't have to put up with it. I'm just fine with my reputation and it seems there are a lot of like minded people on these boards and that's fine with me.

Oh what, you thought your words hurt me feelings or something? Trying to "get one over on me" kind of thing?

Sad.

Whoa! Racking up teh XPz!!

Seriously though. Why are you crying so often. If you spent the time to create what you wanted, you wouldn't be posting these threads. And you spend enough time posting and responding to these threads(and thinking about them) that clearly time isn't scarce for you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MoonSong]

*Still* not what you said. Did you really go back and check? Because it doesn't seem like it.


Exactly. So why are you not giving me the same courtesy?


Irrelevant to my point. It's not about *you*. You've made more than one inference that my Helkboyrine was inappropriately "monstrous" (your word). I cited multiple existing races that are also "monstrous". Frankly, I don't care if you like them or not. They exist in the game and plenty of people do.

If I told you I think sorcerers were lame and we don't use them in our games, I guess that means your example character is invalid AFAIC, right? Same deal. Tables turned.


Exactly. So why are you not giving me the same courtesy?

Also, compiling every small inconvenience into a single pile just to highlight how terrible 5e is could be construed by many as being unrealistic. I'm sure I could do something similar, I suppose. Wouldn't be all that helpful. Nor would it describe how much I enjoy 5e.


"Locked away"? Geez. Really? All the interesting ones? If you love being creative with spell use, as much as you claim, do so with the spells you *do* have access to. Or do you only want to be creative with things you don't have? Because you suffer from an acute case of grass-is-greener? Possible a terminal one.


Unfortunately, given that and what I'm seeing in this current response, its starting to feel like you aren't having a conversation with *me* at all. Just belaboring the same tired bullet points and rehashing your favorite criticisms. Irregardless of what I'm saying on my end.


If you weren't so rigidly finical, I'd say all of it is easily within your grasp. Unfortunately, you are so busy railing against the system, you are missing that the system is there to help you get what you want.

Well, the thread is going down the drain so I'll do it quickly. Sorry for assuming ill faith. I didn't have enough context to talk and I guessed wrong.

(But I said "Hey look how awesomely monstrous I am" Copy-pasted pinkie swear. I said monstrous but in a cool way, it isn't my way to pile on other people's preferences and I try not to make things personal. It was @pemerton who said "overpowered monstrosity" not me)

 

[cmad1977]

That's cool. Me too! And I haven't been agreeing with you at all. How weird is that?

Rigged.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Shasarak]

Did you accidentally quote me? If intentional, I apologize for not seeing the relevance to my question.

Also, are you implying that D&D, at *any* point, permitted the players to force the DM to use material they didn't want to use? If so, I'd like evidence to support that as well, while we are at it.

There was at least one edition where everything was considered to be core. You may not remember it.

 

[Corwin]

Well, the thread is going down the drain so I'll do it quickly. Sorry for assuming ill faith. I didn't have enough context to talk and I guessed wrong.

The true irony, of course, is that the conglomerate example character you described is as equally irrelevant as my Helkboyrine. It is, in its own way, just as "awesomely monstrous."

(But I said "Hey look how awesomely monstrous I am" Copy-pasted pinkie swear.

Exactly correct. And all I've ever been saying. You didn't say "awesomely inhuman" or "cool monster" as your two previous posts claimed you did. If you say you said something, I expect accuracy. For someone who professes to put a lot of wait on words and meanings, I think we can agree "awesomely monstrous" has a different connotation than the two variants you tried to push off as having been said.