Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="candidus_cogitens" data-source="post: 633953" data-attributes="member: 770">Maybe I should have said &quot;oral tradition&quot; rather than &quot;gossip,&quot; since the latter term implies that it only has to do with trivial information.&nbsp; I did not mean to imply that bard's don't have a genuinely sophisticated tradition of learning.So, I don't know if that would be a third option, or what . . . but I do agree that your way sounds good.&nbsp; It seems that the rules are so vaguely defined that one could come up with several different ways of handling it.I also think nameless' approach sounds fine--even though it is almost assuredly not what was intended by the creators of the game.&nbsp; (If bardic knowledge = all knowledge skills combined, then there would be little point in giving bards access to those knowledge skills, as I discussed above.)&nbsp; I agree that it should be a treated as a fairly powerful feature of the class.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="candidus_cogitens, post: 633953, member: 770"] Maybe I should have said "oral tradition" rather than "gossip," since the latter term implies that it only has to do with trivial information. I did not mean to imply that bard's don't have a genuinely sophisticated tradition of learning. So, I don't know if that would be a third option, or what . . . but I do agree that your way sounds good. It seems that the rules are so vaguely defined that one could come up with several different ways of handling it. I also think nameless' approach sounds fine--even though it is almost assuredly not what was intended by the creators of the game. (If bardic knowledge = all knowledge skills combined, then there would be little point in giving bards access to those knowledge skills, as I discussed above.) I agree that it should be a treated as a fairly powerful feature of the class. [/QUOTE]

Verification