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="Mercule" data-source="post: 7136754" data-attributes="member: 5100">I could take this a few different ways. WotC is definitely more capable of running a sustainable business. I'm not always in agreement with the creative decisions, though.Heck, as excited as I was about 3E, at the time, I look back on it, now, as a stepping stone to 5E, at best, and something that I can't imagine ever playing again -- I'd definitely rather go back to AD&D. But... I do like 5E and, two or three years in, still think it's the best version of D&D so far.The fluff is something else, entirely, though. Since the moment WotC stepped in, they've seemed largely unable to inspire without proscribing. Any time a fluff explanation is given in a rule book, it's done at far too concrete of a level. Mearls, in particular, seems to suffer from this. I love the rules he creates, but Psionics is a great example of him not being able to say, "who knows, but here are some theories." It was like there had to be an official explanation of the psionic origin with anything else being a call out to a house rule.If you're talking about settings, I'd say that Eberron is probably the best they've done. I don't necessarily mean the subjective bits around whether you like warforged or not, but around how much support to give. Actually, even Eberron was over-supported, in some ways, and suffered from the "here's an answer to the question you didn't know you didn't care if it was answered". Greyhawk may have had the right amount of information for what it is, but it was never really the default setting. And the Realms is being pushed with all the finesse of an argument between Sam Kinneson and Gilbert Gottfried. Everything else has just kind of bet dropped on its head.</blockquote>

Verification