Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="haakon1" data-source="post: 5946862" data-attributes="member: 25619">"Some people" here, reporting for duty.I think customization of individualized characters is what skills and feats are for, not classes.  I've had diplomatic paladins in both 3e (Viking) and 4e (quasi-Roman), and in both cases it was about good Charisma and choosing to emphasize my Diplomacy skill.  Why would I need a kit or theme or special class to do that?A paladin diplomat who doesn't have any skill at Diplomacy (in an edition that uses such) is just a poorly written character . . .  not a second rate character, just a character who apparently "wasted" skills/feats on stuff the player wasn't really interested in and "forgot" to put them where intended.How would that be different with kits?  "Ooh, I took the crusader paladin kit.  But I want a paladin who is great at singing.  Oppps, guess I should have taken the Singing Paladin kit or the Choir Boy theme or the Avenging Singer-songwriter class."And with a feats and skill approach, you could split the difference, if you want to a little good at both diplomacy and singing . . . without the rules bloat of endless splatbooks.As for the approach in AD&D (pre-UA), there were no skills, feats, kits, themes, alternative classes, prestige classes, etc.  And we got along fine without them.  Want a singing paladin in AD&D?  Announce at the table, "My character was raised at a monastery and trained as classical singer.  He's a fine tenor and was the usual soloist for feast day services back home."  DM says, "Cool" and most likely it never comes up again unless the player wants to do something with it.If the player says, "I'll ask the local cleric if I can sing at the church service", most likely the DM will say, "Sure.  Your reputation preceeds, and the cleric is very happy to tell everyone your singing.  The Church is just packed on the big day.  Everyone is impressed by Sir Elvis's crooning, and after the service, several damsels would like to seek his personal theological advice . . . "If somehow there was a situation requiring a "skill check" (singing contest?), in DMing AD&D I'd use a super complicated rule to resolve whether Sir Elvis or Cedric the Bard won (the latter being an actual character name in a party I was in -- Cedrid the Entertainer, get it):  roll a d20 + Cha bonus + true Bard level (if you've  got one).  Fair and simple.For what it's worth, I love paladins and bards.  I'd do everything in the AD&D PHB and the 3e PHB as core clasess for 5e, which means:-- Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, Barbarian-- Thief/Rogue, Assassin-- Magic User/Wizard, Sorcerer, and Illusionist-- Cleric, Druid-- Monk-- Bard (both preferably multi-class and single class versions)Why not the stuff from 2e or 4e?  I didn't enjoy either even edition, but if there's something from their PHB class lists that everybody likes and isn't on my list (Cavalier?  Warlock?  Warlord?), OK, no sweat.  I agree it makes more sense to talk about what to include than what to exclude.  Some stuff, like Rogue/Thief, they would need to decide what to call as its for all intents and purposes the same thing (ditto on Wizard/Magic User).</blockquote>

Verification