>>43357134That is why you work with your players when they develop their characters. Allow them to run ideas from splatbooks by you so you can explicitly allow or disallow something based on how it fits into your world and its balance relative to the campaign.
>Hell, even as a player it can be frustrating to have a party full of half-genies and robots when you thought you were going to have a traditional game.Again, the DM should be working with the players to ensure that the options they select are thematically relevant and balanced relative to the setting.
>I like options, I really do, but 5E does have a lot of options for customization and I feel it is in a good spot right now.And optional content has literally no effect on that. You can just not allow it and play with people who share a compatible mindset.
>>43357089That is a criticism of the design and quality of the options, not a criticism against the availability of the options themselves. Obviously they should be balanced within the context of the game. I never implied otherwise. Further, having fewer options does not inherently increase the creativity of the player. When more options are available, there are more combinations that allow the player to combine features in unique ways. Yes, at times they can be overpowered (and the obvious solution is to disallow those combinations), but they can also be used to make specialized, unique, memorable characters that are thematically consistent and balanced within the context of the campaign. When those options do not exist, it serves to limit the expression of those creativities and combinations.
>Your childish name-calling doesn't do you many favors either.You're still a little bitch.
