Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 8194395" data-attributes="member: 7023840">That's true, but I think that's a feature, or a bug (?), that's always been with D&amp;D to a greater or lesser extent because of the very nature of how it originated.The original two classes (Fighting Man, Magic User) covered the entire spectrum of two archetypes. Then, they added a third, gish, class that also happened to be weirdly lore-heavy for bizarrely specific reasons (the Cleric as a Van Helsing type).Once you have those three (basically FIGHT, SPELL, and GISH) everything that came after it became more lore-heavy, with the possible (possible!) exception of the Thief. Halflings, Elves, and Dwarves were Tolkien. Rangers were Strider. Paladins were Three Hearts. Assassins, Bards, Illusionists- all weirdly specific &quot;subclasses.&quot; The Druid was a very specific conception of Sustare's idea of proto-Romano-Celtic ideas that were around in the 70s. And the Monk was straight-up Remo Williams. Since then, you have the same issue. You have to include the lore-light core classes (such as Fighter, Wizard) and if you want some continuity, you also have to make a place for the other classes that mostly exist because of some tie-in to traditional lore.IMO, etc.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Snarf Zagyg, post: 8194395, member: 7023840"] That's true, but I think that's a feature, or a bug (?), that's always been with D&D to a greater or lesser extent because of the very nature of how it originated. The original two classes (Fighting Man, Magic User) covered the entire spectrum of two archetypes. Then, they added a third, gish, class that also happened to be weirdly lore-heavy for bizarrely specific reasons (the Cleric as a Van Helsing type). Once you have those three (basically FIGHT, SPELL, and GISH) everything that came after it became more lore-heavy, with the possible (possible!) exception of the Thief. Halflings, Elves, and Dwarves were Tolkien. Rangers were Strider. Paladins were Three Hearts. Assassins, Bards, Illusionists- all weirdly specific "subclasses." The Druid was a very specific conception of Sustare's idea of proto-Romano-Celtic ideas that were around in the 70s. And the Monk was straight-up Remo Williams. Since then, you have the same issue. You have to include the lore-light core classes (such as Fighter, Wizard) and if you want some continuity, you also have to make a place for the other classes that mostly exist because of some tie-in to traditional lore. IMO, etc. [/QUOTE]

Verification