Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 6927356" data-attributes="member: 2067">If &quot;content&quot; means more races and classes and feats and spells to select from (ie, variety of character options), then wanting content definitely means wanting &quot;splat options.&quot; These things are functionally equivalent. How many options it takes to become a &quot;mountain&quot; or a &quot;ton&quot; is a matter of perspective. Someone playing the Basic Game for two years might consider the PHB to be a ton of options.I've used I think three races, three classes, three subclasses, and three adventures in the time I've played 5e. I might be an outlier, but I've already got more options and variety than I'll functionally use for many years to come.It's worth thinking about what you're asking to have happen. You're asking that WotC to cater specifically to your desire for more content/variety/splat. You could perhaps consider that maybe your desire doesn't match up with what's best for D&amp;D or what's best for most players. Maybe what you want is actually incredibly niche, difficult to do, and with questionable payoff. If that's the case, does it still make sense to ask WotC to deliver that to you?What if those things only appeal to such a small fraction of the D&amp;D audience that they cost more to produce than they'll make back in sales? Wouldn't it be better for D&amp;D overall to not do that? How many different characters do you want to play right now with the options that exist? How many of those have you played? Because I've been able to say &quot;yes please&quot; to all the options I've wanted to play, with many, many options left over that I'd like to play but just haven't for one reason or another. Taking out all the options you're not interested in, how long could the other ones last you in play? Or, perhaps an alternate question: how much should WotC spend on making options just so you can read about them in a book? Okay, but that still doesn't mean that making &quot;content&quot; for the sake of making content is a good idea. Just because you don't feel like there's a happy medium doesn't mean that MOST people don't feel like it's a happy medium.And WotC's market research is the best anyone has at determining what is a happy medium, what is a mountain of options, and what is too few. Your personal opinion of the option volume might not reflect the opinion of most D&amp;D players, and more options might not be really what they need.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 6927356, member: 2067"] If "content" means more races and classes and feats and spells to select from (ie, variety of character options), then wanting content definitely means wanting "splat options." These things are functionally equivalent. How many options it takes to become a "mountain" or a "ton" is a matter of perspective. Someone playing the Basic Game for two years might consider the PHB to be a ton of options. I've used I think three races, three classes, three subclasses, and three adventures in the time I've played 5e. I might be an outlier, but I've already got more options and variety than I'll functionally use for many years to come. It's worth thinking about what you're asking to have happen. You're asking that WotC to cater specifically to your desire for more content/variety/splat. You could perhaps consider that maybe your desire doesn't match up with what's best for D&D or what's best for most players. Maybe what you want is actually incredibly niche, difficult to do, and with questionable payoff. If that's the case, does it still make sense to ask WotC to deliver that to you? What if those things only appeal to such a small fraction of the D&D audience that they cost more to produce than they'll make back in sales? Wouldn't it be better for D&D overall to [B]not[/B] do that? How many different characters do you want to play right now with the options that exist? How many of those have you played? Because I've been able to say "yes please" to all the options I've wanted to play, with many, many options left over that I'd like to play but just haven't for one reason or another. Taking out all the options you're not interested in, how long could the other ones last you in play? Or, perhaps an alternate question: how much should WotC spend on making options just so you can read about them in a book? Okay, but that still doesn't mean that making "content" for the sake of making content is a good idea. Just because you don't feel like there's a happy medium doesn't mean that MOST people don't feel like it's a happy medium. And WotC's market research is the best anyone has at determining what is a happy medium, what is a mountain of options, and what is too few. Your personal opinion of the option volume might not reflect the opinion of most D&D players, and more options might not be really what they need. [/QUOTE]

Verification