Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="gizmo33" data-source="post: 2133528" data-attributes="member: 30001">True. true.&nbsp; Your bard-fu is indeed strong.&nbsp; But now enlightened, my point still stands.&nbsp; Calling someone elses statements &quot;indirect or evasive&quot; is a judgement that can say more about the background of the reader than anything else.&nbsp; I might call some lawyer's contracted &quot;oblique&quot; if I didn't have a background in his specialized knowledge.&nbsp; In spite of how &quot;sure&quot; scholars are that the oral tradition of these cultures was indeed broken at times, and changed over time, my opinion is that the cultures themselves did not believe this.&nbsp; And since these cultures are the ones that have informed us about dragons, and since we believed them with that, why are we such sticklers about realism in this area?&nbsp; The consequence is a bard class at times that is barely playable.&nbsp;&nbsp;I hope so!&nbsp; The bias _against_ poetic sagas has been so strong in most FRP gaming literature that the bard has been relegated to some sort of &quot;trash collector of gossip&quot; in 3E.&nbsp; I really think that this stems from the fact that the bulk of our modern knowledge comes from written sources, and the culture that valued oral sources is foreign to us.&nbsp;&nbsp;And killing a lion with a club is a pretty insane but stories such as those are the inspiration for the fighters of DnD (ok, not the first level fighters).&nbsp; Remember, I'm only using realism when it serves my purpose and that seems fair considering that the design of the fighter class only uses realism when it serves it's purpose as well.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="gizmo33, post: 2133528, member: 30001"] True. true. Your bard-fu is indeed strong. But now enlightened, my point still stands. Calling someone elses statements "indirect or evasive" is a judgement that can say more about the background of the reader than anything else. I might call some lawyer's contracted "oblique" if I didn't have a background in his specialized knowledge. In spite of how "sure" scholars are that the oral tradition of these cultures was indeed broken at times, and changed over time, my opinion is that the cultures themselves did not believe this. And since these cultures are the ones that have informed us about dragons, and since we believed them with that, why are we such sticklers about realism in this area? The consequence is a bard class at times that is barely playable. I hope so! The bias _against_ poetic sagas has been so strong in most FRP gaming literature that the bard has been relegated to some sort of "trash collector of gossip" in 3E. I really think that this stems from the fact that the bulk of our modern knowledge comes from written sources, and the culture that valued oral sources is foreign to us. And killing a lion with a club is a pretty insane but stories such as those are the inspiration for the fighters of DnD (ok, not the first level fighters). Remember, I'm only using realism when it serves my purpose and that seems fair considering that the design of the fighter class only uses realism when it serves it's purpose as well. [/QUOTE]

Verification