Eladrin, warlords, and unnecessary D&Disms

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Pelor though should be changed to "Pol Pot"

Wouldn't Louis le Grand (Louis XIV) be more fitting, thematically?

*(It's been said that the english language borrows from other languages. This isn't true. English follows other languages into dark alleys, mugs them, and rifles through their pockets looking for words to steal. Used in this way, english-language is a verb, meaning "to blatantly steal with no apologies".)

I disagree. It's not stealing. We still say "Kindergarten" or "Angst" in German. But it wasn't borrowing either. I guess "Copying" is the correct expression. ...Copycat...

 

[Clavis]

We are dealing with the company that came up with the name 'Gleemax'.

Which still reminds me of the name of the anti-depressant from the "Kids In The Hall" movie!

 

[Aloïsius]

That's not to say don't have double weapons, classes with names like "hexblade", robot PCs, psionics, magic trains and such...just please put them somewhere optional, where they belong.

Guess what : they are all not in the PHB. Thus, I guess that by "optional" you mean "non-existent".

I wan't to play D&D, not "generic fantasy". I want my illithids, my psionic characters and my spells per day. D&Dism ? Maybe, I don't care, and most people don't.

As for elves having a stronger basis than eladrin... Maybe. But Eladrin has two advantage : you don't think about tiny creatures working for Santa Klaus and you don't think about Harry Potter elves. Plus, Eladrin sounds like Eldar, elder or what you want. Creating names has always been parts of creating worlds. It's a difficult art, because everybody can't be Jack Vance, but I would hate if my fantasy world were limited to the Oxford dictionnary.

 

[rounser]

I wan't to play D&D, not "generic fantasy". I want my illithids, my psionic characters and my spells per day. D&Dism ? Maybe, I don't care, and most people don't.

Yes, and I agree. Illithids, Vecna and Sigil belong in D&D and it's mythology. Psions make an excellent optional ruleset. Go sick.

This is a different argument from whether a class named Debt Collector and a new race of quasi-gnomish frog people called Gsnorky belong in the PHB, alongside Wizards and Elves. You get me?

Vecna can be in the books, and you can ignore him if you don't like him. Put a class called Knight of Vecna and a race called Vecnaspawn in the PHB, and you can no longer ignore him. Too bad if you don't like him, or think that Vecnaspawn is a stupid name.

 

[hong]

This is a different argument from whether a class named Debt Collector and a new race of quasi-gnomish frog people called Gsnorky belong in the PHB, alongside Wizards and Elves. You get me?

Nope.

 

[rounser]

Nope.

You just want to roll up a gsnorky debt collector...see, I know....

 

[Betote]

I like eladrin. Sounds like the elvish name for "elf" to me.

In fact, it almost is: Eldarin -> Eladrin

 

[Gargoyle]

In fact, it almost is: Eldarin -> Eladrin

So I've been told earlier in the thread.

 

[hopeless]

Hmm...

Warlord as in some form of leader which in itself sounds as though this should be a prestige class rather than core character class, oh hold on isn't it just that in the Kingdoms of Kalamar setting?

Eladrin or was it Eldarin?

Why don't they just go back and say the elves originated from the feyrwild or whatever its called, is there actually a need for another elvish sub species even if it could be said the Eladrin or whatever is what the elvish species should be called?

They got rid of gnomes or whatever to add Tieflings when there is no substantiated reason for them to be added outside of say a new campaign setting...

I wouldn't mind but it sounds as thought they're trying to get around the improving bit with adding stuff that isn't core at all.

At least core if it had a definition that involved the earlier versions of dungeons and dragons.

What's wrong with just identifying the current classes under the heading of "leader", "arcanist", "spiritualist" or "divinist" and so on?

Is there any real reason for these changes so far?

I happen to like that bit J.Wyatt did about starting a campaign small especially the fact he's added Silverymoon to the area but has there actually been any attempt to explain why they had to make so and so changes without avoiding the point of the question?

Please feel free to comment on this, I'd actually like to know for example the case in point why use the name "Warlord" or more importantly why add a new class at all?

In any case all the best!

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Please feel free to comment on this, I'd actually like to know for example the case in point why use the name "Warlord" or more importantly why add a new class at all?

Why add new classes at all? My guess:
To highlight options the new system has to offer that didn't exist before (or weren't utilized), and therefore allowing to express certain character concepts mechanically in a new way.