Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 6937571" data-attributes="member: 6785785">There's some course correcting, definitely. Doesn't mean I want them to add more! The level of burden it might add would depend on how much they added to the game and what it was. For instance, I really want them to be careful with feats. I mentioned earlier in the thread (or maybe it was another thread, they're blurring a bit) that I don't want the kinds of feats that remove the inherent limitations placed in a class. 3E/Pathfinder was rife with these kinds of feats, and I feel like they're looming as a possibility as soon as feats are expanded. As for closing the door on non-core material...in the past I've not always found it to be easy. Several players I gamed with during 3E/Pathfinder felt very strongly that anything &quot;official&quot;, meaning published by WotC or Paizo, should be available in the game. It was really difficult to get them to see it any other way, and regardless of the outcome, we often had undue stress at the table.Now, those players aren't still with my group, and 5E seems to have shifted things back to the DM making these kinds of judgement calls...so likely it wouldn't be an issue...but I'd just rather not find out. That's my purely selfish reason to be anti-splat.Yeah, I think we've had several iterations of the ranger to the point where there isn't even a consensus on what the class should be. I blame Strider. If Tolkien hadn't labeled him as a Ranger, I don't think the class would exist.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="hawkeyefan, post: 6937571, member: 6785785"] There's some course correcting, definitely. Doesn't mean I want them to add more! The level of burden it might add would depend on how much they added to the game and what it was. For instance, I really want them to be careful with feats. I mentioned earlier in the thread (or maybe it was another thread, they're blurring a bit) that I don't want the kinds of feats that remove the inherent limitations placed in a class. 3E/Pathfinder was rife with these kinds of feats, and I feel like they're looming as a possibility as soon as feats are expanded. As for closing the door on non-core material...in the past I've not always found it to be easy. Several players I gamed with during 3E/Pathfinder felt very strongly that anything "official", meaning published by WotC or Paizo, should be available in the game. It was really difficult to get them to see it any other way, and regardless of the outcome, we often had undue stress at the table. Now, those players aren't still with my group, and 5E seems to have shifted things back to the DM making these kinds of judgement calls...so likely it wouldn't be an issue...but I'd just rather not find out. That's my purely selfish reason to be anti-splat. Yeah, I think we've had several iterations of the ranger to the point where there isn't even a consensus on what the class should be. I blame Strider. If Tolkien hadn't labeled him as a Ranger, I don't think the class would exist. [/QUOTE]

Verification