Things about how true it is to being what your used to at your table, is not how it is at another table, or another table. Because rules in D&D are simply guidelines, it's stated in the handbooks, that if something isn't working for you toss it out, or change it.
Oh I get that. Like with any pen'n'paper or any game that you are playing with friends. You can play chess like Warhammer if that's what your table wants
Still any change that you make will make it harder to convince the next table to join you. Its like changing words in your language for your own style - after a while you will have a hard time communicating with others and thus reaching them.
I wasn't going into detail why their changes are problematic as I have done it myself in other threads and you will find it also by many others. I didn't see the point to go through all the details again arguing them in detail and just summarized it as '95% D&D' because I was oversimplifying it. A lot of the issues could be solved by rolling the changes back and Larians has tons of threads on the individual issues already
Still like you said, changes from proven rules have to earn their place. And sadly so far few of the changes implemented by Larian have turned out to have convinced players that they are improvemnets.There are no complaints for them changing the ranger class. I have also no real issues with the weapon specific abilities, no matter if they are 5e or whatever. But again, if you change something that is already working, it better be an improvement - especially if you advertised me that you are selling me the original.
