Search results

By that argument wizards would not be able to cast magic. In this this context the "real world" includes folklore, myths, legends, etc.

But where did the tropes that make up those setting come from? They weren't invented out of whole cloth. No, they were created by the developers drawing upon they're experiences and knowledge of the real world. By you're logic you could have a rogue be a completely law abiding gentleman with no...

If you're referring to me than you're wrong. There's no basis for misunderstanding him. He wants paladins to be alignments other than lawful good. I don't. There's not really any room to misinterpret anything.

It's not arbitrary just because you disagree with it. The word paladin has a meaning and in the context of pre-4e D&D that meaning precludes the paladin being any alignment other than lawful good.

If the paladin is just a generic holy warrior that's fine (though that also overlaps with the cleric, which in 2e and 3e was pretty much exactly that, in 1e in earlier it was less generic, but still a holy warrior). However, that's not what the paladin was up until 4th edition. The paladin was...

Thus paladins should rarely, if ever, worship a chaotic good deity.

I think the paladin, as it is in 4e, should be subsumed by the cleric. In it's place should be a version of the paladin more true to the class' roots. That being the ultimate ideal of knighthood and chivalry rather than a martially inclined servant of a deity. This class should indeed be...

This was a bad thing?

Yes, and that's exactly I want. Innovation with regards to games is subjective anyway.

"You must spread some Experience Points around before giving it to Shemeska again."

Yeah, that does sound right actually. Maybe even have the core wizard fulfill a limited set of archetypes and let all the others be different classes.

I think specialist wizards should be different classes than the base wizard. Like the 1e Illusionist.

That's not what I'm saying. For one thing, combat means many things. A wizard throwing a fireball is a form of combat. For another thing, there are other classes that should in fact, have just as much training and practice as the fighter, the ranger and paladin being the most noteworthy, maybe...

The fighter should not necessarily be any better at fighting than any other class. The fighter is a fighting man, a person whose primary occupation is fighting, a warrior, a professional soldier, man-at-arms, etc. Thus, while the primary skill of the fighter is fighting, there's no reason for...

I'd like for the rogue to get special abilities related to his forte rather than any great advantage in terms of the skill system. Every character should have to role to play outside of combat as well as within it.

I personally think the core cleric should focus on one, or a few related archetypes. Then other divine classes should be based other archetypes, like the invoker being a "blasty cleric". Then there should be ways to customize each of these classes further for specific deities.

I just really don't want to have to virtually rewrite parts (mostly the races chapter) of the PHB to play Greyhawk.

Personally, I'd like to see guidelines for training time and other forms of down time, so that the campaign will actually take some time, and thus things like age might actually come into play. Obviously this should be optional, since some people have play styles that don't jive with this...

I'm sorry, but that's wrong. The first version of clerics did not have any spells at first level, and didn't have enough spells overall to be a healbot. they did, however have fighting abilities nearly on par with the fighter. In many ways the cleric was the first "Gish". hence the desire to see...

Yeah, I'll check out you're blog, but I'd appreciate it if you checked out mine as well. ;) It's not really an OSR blog, but touches on old school topics.