Dmg II

[Razz0putin]

Perhaps, but then most gamers may not like WotC's take on them. So you do have a variety to choose from.

Yes you have variety plenty of it in fact which is why what I want instead of Wotc spoonfeeding me what classes they deign to. I'd like a book that lets me the Dm create core classes whole cloth and them not be completely wonky in terms of balance. I'd pay good money for that product instead I get the umpteenth book on how to do x monster or setting or what have you. People keep being amazed that they created variation x of class of choice and I'm going tell me how you do it I'll make my own

 

[Razz0putin]

Kapture said

<How about this: No one would ever confuse the Wizard of Oz with Lord of the Rings, or the Chronicles of Narnia, or Harry Potter, or Chine Mieville, or Clive Barker.>

again that's what I'm talking about

 

[Ranger REG]

Yes you have variety plenty of it in fact which is why what I want instead of Wotc spoonfeeding me what classes they deign to. I'd like a book that lets me the Dm create core classes whole cloth and them not be completely wonky in terms of balance. I'd pay good money for that product instead I get the umpteenth book on how to do x monster or setting or what have you. People keep being amazed that they created variation x of class of choice and I'm going tell me how you do it I'll make my own

Here's an idea: Send the book back.

 

[Gez]

*rolls*

After rolling on the random tavern generator three times, I got:

"The Drunken Priest"
"The Dripping Wench"
"The Dancing Bucket"

Heh.

Why roll? Just take one line, they're all good!
The Black Dog
The Green Horse
The Red Rat
The Golden Fish
The White Giant
The Blue Dragon
The Dripping Vampire
The Wet Elf
The Drunken Gnome
The Tipsy Dwarf
The Welcome Orc
The Scurvy Halfling
The Rusty Fool
The Dizzy Wench
The Hungry Thug
The Thirsty Pirate
The Sleeping Priest
The Twisted Boot
The Spinning Bucket
The Dancing Tankard

I like the Welcome Orc, the Dripping Vampire, the Wet Elf, the Scurvy Halfling and the Dizzy Wench. But any name with "Wench" in it is good anyway.

 

[S'mon]

...and wet t-shirt contests are born in D&D.

I don't think that's what he was thinking of... *geez I play too many NC-17 PBEMs...*

 

[woodelf]

I hardly consider support for common fantasy archetypes like swashbuckler, shaman, totem warrior, con artist, or barbarian (not berserker) to be "thinking outside the box" in fantasy game design.

Perhaps, but then most gamers may not like WotC's take on them. So you do have a variety to choose from.

You missed my point: WotC doesn't have a take on those archetypes (at least in the core rulebooks). My point is that they're so common and central to fantasy that it is appalling that you have to kludge or turn to other sources to fulfill them. And, therefore, describing them as superfluous or unusual, or a game that uses them as the same, is silly.

 

[The Shaman]

My point is that they're so common and central to fantasy that it is appalling that you have to kludge or turn to other sources to fulfill them.

I understand your point, woodelf, but I think you may be overstating the need a bit. For example, our threepointoh game didn't really have a place for a 'swashbuckler' or 'duelist' type finesse fighter - the feel was more Dark Ages, broadswords and shields, not 'men in tights'. Had the swashbuckler been a core class at the time I ran the game, I'd've houseruled it out.

Every fantasy archetype doesn't necessarily belong in every fantasy game. It's an issue of flavor and personal choice.

 

[VirgilCaine]

The 1e DMG is just one of those books you have to admire... if not really use. I've been able to glean a lot of good advice and flavor from it, but only once did I go into it with a certain goal in mind and came up with it.

But more 1e DMG style flavor in the DMGII is great. At first I wasn't looking forward to this book, but I think I'm probably going to pick it up now.

Demiurge out.

More 1e DMG style useful tables and appedices would be nice. The properties of herbs, the reputed magical powers of gems, costs for pelts and tapestries, potion descriptions, the gambling appendix. These are useful.

 

[Ranger REG]

You missed my point: WotC doesn't have a take on those archetypes (at least in the core rulebooks).

You're right, they're not in the core rulebooks. They're in the other WotC D&D supplements (e.g., Complete Warrior).

My point is that they're so common and central to fantasy that it is appalling that you have to kludge or turn to other sources to fulfill them. And, therefore, describing them as superfluous or unusual, or a game that uses them as the same, is silly.

So, basically you want "one game fits all fantasies." The one singular product that have absolutely everything that you don't want add-on supplements because everything is in one neat little package.

I will admit, they don't give a wide range of combat-oriented feats to specialize a fighter, whether he is swordsman or a spearman or an archer or a pugilist. They don't offer more for the monks in the wide varieties of martial arts styles (not necessarily unarmed) in said core rulebooks.

Despite that, 3e did more to offer options than previous editions. A savvy gamer would take advantage of that, and fine-tune to whatever flavor they like for their own D&D game.

 

[MerricB]

You missed my point: WotC doesn't have a take on those archetypes (at least in the core rulebooks). My point is that they're so common and central to fantasy that it is appalling that you have to kludge or turn to other sources to fulfill them. And, therefore, describing them as superfluous or unusual, or a game that uses them as the same, is silly.

How often do you see those archetypes in the same setting as knights in heavy armour?

That's right: you don't. Or, at least, they aren't expected to be on the same level as the knights.