Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="(Psi)SeveredHead" data-source="post: 5374433" data-attributes="member: 1165">Being a ranger is about skill, not attitude. A big game hunter who slaughters exotic creatures and just takes their heads is very different from a cold and callous bounty hunter and very different from a hunter&nbsp; warrior from an ancient tradition who teaches people not to waste animal bits... they're all very different, but they can all use the ranger class. (One of many reasons I've hated most ranger classes over the year; why the hell would nature give spells to the first guy?)I guess I'm saying, I don't know what you mean by &quot;roleplay any other ranger character&quot;. Drizzt is hardly even a ranger. If he never ran into Montolio (was that his name?) he'd just be&nbsp; a light fighter (a concept admittedly not really present in core rules of any DnD version).Can you take away the good-aligned? That's part of the RP. A big part, considered drow society's structure. I don't think anyone here has accused the drow blademaster (a monster in the 4e MM1) of being a Drizzt clone, even though he fights pretty much just like Drizzt (light fighter, dual-wielder, drow) as he's not good-aligned and is a generic vanilla monster anyway. (Also, the two blades aren't the same size. I dunno, that kind of minor detail might be relevant to some people.)Still good aligned? On the surface? Shunned? I can't say Drizzt was a deep character (as you've pointed out) but he's still not just a drow ranger with two swords.Then why do people keep bringing up the good alignment? I don't think Drizzt clones are a big deal in an evil campaign... of course, I don't think the word &quot;clone&quot; would be appropriate.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="(Psi)SeveredHead, post: 5374433, member: 1165"] Being a ranger is about skill, not attitude. A big game hunter who slaughters exotic creatures and just takes their heads is very different from a cold and callous bounty hunter and very different from a hunter warrior from an ancient tradition who teaches people not to waste animal bits... they're all very different, but they can all use the ranger class. (One of many reasons I've hated most ranger classes over the year; why the hell would nature give spells to the first guy?) I guess I'm saying, I don't know what you mean by "roleplay any other ranger character". Drizzt is hardly even a ranger. If he never ran into Montolio (was that his name?) he'd just be a light fighter (a concept admittedly not really present in core rules of any DnD version). Can you take away the good-aligned? That's part of the RP. A big part, considered drow society's structure. I don't think anyone here has accused the drow blademaster (a monster in the 4e MM1) of being a Drizzt clone, even though he fights pretty much just like Drizzt (light fighter, dual-wielder, drow) as he's not good-aligned and is a generic vanilla monster anyway. (Also, the two blades aren't the same size. I dunno, that kind of minor detail might be relevant to some people.) Still good aligned? On the surface? Shunned? I can't say Drizzt was a deep character (as you've pointed out) but he's still not just a drow ranger with two swords. Then why do people keep bringing up the good alignment? I don't think Drizzt clones are a big deal in an evil campaign... of course, I don't think the word "clone" would be appropriate. [/QUOTE]

Verification