Archetypes, are they useful anymore?

[charlesatan]

Again, we have to consider that we're talking about Elric pre-1970. "Elric of Melnibone" hadn't been written (I know it's the first book sequentially, but it was one of the later ones chronologically). To that audience, Elric just possessed Stormbringer; the question of where he got it hadn't been answered.

I think it's clear that Elric's powers derive from the Ring of Kings, from Stormbringer, and from Arioch, rather than from memorising spells. The Elric-as-cleric argument's defensible, although as I've said, I think the reality is that Elric doesn't really translate into 1e terms.

As you said, Elric (or a lot of other spellcasters for that matter) don't translate well into 1E terms. God forbid that Gandalf or Merlin or Ged (that's from Earthsea, for those of you who haven't read it) use the Vancian rules for spellcasting. =)

But I do think Elric does sort of qualify for a spellcaster. The way he summons the elementals is much like an invocation (with attempted rhymes and the like) even if it is derived from the Ring of Kings.

The thing about anti-stereotypes is that by now, he's a stereotype. Just like Drizzt was supposed to be a unique drow character but now you have a bunch of players wanting to play scimitar-wielding dark elf characters. =)

 

[charlesatan]

I left out 2d6 sneak attack above, but with all those abilities, I'd never play the straight fighter based on purely mechanical abilities. One fireball evaded makes up for the few extra hit points. Or a burning hands for that matter. And I rarely see heavy armor used by anyone other than a cleric, who is a secondary fighter anyway, or a paladin who wears it for style. Movement means a lot more than a couple points of ac imo. The difference can be made up by a dex item or amulet of nat armor. And medium armor just plain sucks.

I disagree on the armor part. Some prefer light, some prefer heavy (just as some prefer Two-Handed Weapons, and others sword-and-board). Of course the reverse could also be said (and probably cheaper): the heavy armor characters get an item that boosts their speed (and what Fighter doesn't carry boots of haste?).

Evasion only matters if you have a high enough Ref save to actually make it count. Sure, your Ref save is better than a straight-class Fighter, but not as good as a Ranger/Rogue hybrid for example.

Please, let's not get into the "Fighter-is-weak" argument. There are other threads about that. But suffice to say, the non-spellcasting classes have some incentive to multiclass, while it's a general no-no for spellcasters. But by no means does it replace what the classes do. I mean the Ftr/Bar/Rgr/Rog isn't really much of a tank as much as a "it's everything else". A Ftr/Bar is more of a melee combatant and probably has higher damage output. But if you want feats, go straight Ftr (a Barbarian will find it difficult to qualify for Whirlwind Attack for example, never mind that it's a relative crappy feat).

 

[charlesatan]

Nope. I haven't played that particular hybrid, but I did see a ranger/barbarian/rogue/vigilant (scarred lands). The player didn't even want the rogue levels, but he needed ranks in diplomacy to qualify. He outshined the poor fighter at every turn. The had better ac and similar hit points, but by raging, he was able to make up for the fighter's damage bonus of weapon specialization. And when the fireballs and sneak attacks started flying, the fighter's hit points shrank like ice cream on a sunny day. The multiclass guy's didn't. And this was a low magic (as far as items, not spells) game. They all had crap all for magic items. I will admit the fighter's ac helped a lot in toe to toe combat, but the multiclass guy shone in all situations, not just a slugfest.

Or maybe the Ftr simply wasn't built optimally? And the fact that if I wanted social skills, I wouldn't really pick a Ftr? (I think no one is under the illusion that the 3E Fighter will shine outside of combat.)

 

[charlesatan]

I think all the dry mechanics of 3e has stifled a lot of creativity.

First off, there is a shift in mechanics with regards to 1E and 3E. The first one was more vague, and the latter was more, uh, lawyer-ish. It's a shift, a change (and even the new L5R ed was admitting that was the case too in terms of their books--and demands of some of their market).

However, I don't think that stifles creativity. Creativity is on the part of the GM and the Players. Don't blame it on the book. If you're gonna make adjustments, just inform the players ahead of time.

And while "winging it" (and improvisation) might be seen as an asset by some GM's, it's hardly the easiest thing for newbie GMs to do. In that sense, 3E is more accessible simply because it covers a lot more ground (including the NPC statblocks that some people might chafe at, such as the case with MMIV).

Another benefit of unified rules is that it allows more players to operate on the same playing field. Playing under 1 GM with his/her own set of house rules is fine. But playing under 10 different GMs, each with their own set of long house rules, will be a nightmare (in the event you're in this scenario).

Admittedly, 3E shifted some of the power and responsibility from the GM to the player. But that's a double edged sword as the GM lost some power in rules adjucating (but yes, the GM is always right), there's also less burden on him to keep track of everything or to make up things on the fly.

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

I can see this potentially interesting and intelligible thread turning into edition wars.

 

[Storm Raven]

Nope. I haven't played that particular hybrid, but I did see a ranger/barbarian/rogue/vigilant (scarred lands).

I think the problem there isn't the hybrid, it is the Vigilant prestige class, which gives quite a lot of bonuses for little cost. Overall, the early Scarred Lands stuff seems to have some problems.

The player didn't even want the rogue levels, but he needed ranks in diplomacy to qualify. He outshined the poor fighter at every turn. The had better ac and similar hit points, but by raging, he was able to make up for the fighter's damage bonus of weapon specialization. And when the fireballs and sneak attacks started flying, the fighter's hit points shrank like ice cream on a sunny day. The multiclass guy's didn't. And this was a low magic (as far as items, not spells) game. They all had crap all for magic items. I will admit the fighter's ac helped a lot in toe to toe combat, but the multiclass guy shone in all situations, not just a slugfest.

He could rage once or twice per day, most likely for six or sevn rounds. The fighter could get the benefits of weapon specialization in just about any fight. Given that you have a low magic campaign, I'm not sure how they would have similar ACs, the fighter should be able to outshine the hybrid in that area pretty easily, since the hybrid is limited to a chain shirt or lighter to keep most of his class abilities, and when raging, that would be even worse.

Like I said, I think the problem was probably the Vigilant, not the multiclassing. Try playing something like the combination you originally posted yourself, I think you will be surprised by the result (i.e. it won't be everything you seem to think it will be).

 

[JRRNeiklot]

I think the problem there isn't the hybrid, it is the Vigilant prestige class, which gives quite a lot of bonuses for little cost. Overall, the early Scarred Lands stuff seems to have some problems.

Heh, he only had one level of vigilant before the campaign ended.