Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Kae'Yoss" data-source="post: 3337880" data-attributes="member: 4134">Nah, the whole art loving is so not bard.One of the worst things back then. &quot;Do you want to play an elf or a fighter?&quot; That's like &quot;do you want steak or do you want to have a drink with your food?&quot; Apples and oranges. I'm glad D&amp;D moved away from calling everything fruit.No. If I want an elven bard, I don't want a MU/Th who pretends to be a bard (I play that If I want to play a MU/Th who pretends to be a bard)So why don't humans who want to be bards play just Human or MU/Th who plays musical instruments? That works even if the rules don't have arbitrary differences between races. If there's bards, they should be for everyone, so everyone can get the bard kind of magic, or there shouldn't be bards at all, and everyone should be encouraged to come up with colourful idioms to distinguish their characters. But nothing of this 6 of one, half a dozen of the other approach.Plus, you seem to have approached 3e from only one side: You pick a class and build a character around it. Nothing wrong with that, but there's another way: think of a character and take those rules choices that fit best. Now 3e, for the first time, allows you to do that and always get just what you want, without looking first whether that particular combination is allowed by your race. If you want to go straight bard (skillfull with musical magic and abilities to inspire his comrades) you can that with human, elf, halforc, whatever. If you want a rogue/wizard combo (backstabbing and agile and with magic that draws power from your intellect), you can do that, too, no matter what race you went for.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Kae'Yoss, post: 3337880, member: 4134"] Nah, the whole art loving is so not bard. One of the worst things back then. "Do you want to play an elf or a fighter?" That's like "do you want steak or do you want to have a drink with your food?" Apples and oranges. I'm glad D&D moved away from calling everything fruit. No. If I want an elven bard, I don't want a MU/Th who pretends to be a bard (I play that If I want to play a MU/Th who pretends to be a bard) So why don't humans who want to be bards play just Human or MU/Th who plays musical instruments? That works even if the rules don't have arbitrary differences between races. If there's bards, they should be for everyone, so everyone can get the bard kind of magic, or there shouldn't be bards at all, and everyone should be encouraged to come up with colourful idioms to distinguish their characters. But nothing of this 6 of one, half a dozen of the other approach. Plus, you seem to have approached 3e from only one side: You pick a class and build a character around it. Nothing wrong with that, but there's another way: think of a character and take those rules choices that fit best. Now 3e, for the first time, allows you to do that and always get just what you want, without looking first whether that particular combination is allowed by your race. If you want to go straight bard (skillfull with musical magic and abilities to inspire his comrades) you can that with human, elf, halforc, whatever. If you want a rogue/wizard combo (backstabbing and agile and with magic that draws power from your intellect), you can do that, too, no matter what race you went for. [/QUOTE]

Verification