D&D General Iconic characters that have changed in later editions

[DarkCrisis]

Take for example Drizzt of Faerun. 2E he was a Ranger. A good quick way to gain duel wielding and sneakiness. Did he ever cast a Ranger Spell?

Via current D&D and current novels. He's probably more of a Fighter/Barbarian/Monk. 9/1/10. Any "Rangerness" is duplicated by simple background and skill choice. Also, seeing as how he never uses his Rage anymore one could also say he's just a 10/10 Fighter/Monk. AND if you wanted Classic Drizzt under 5E rules, he'd probably still just be a pure Fighter (Or Fighter/Barb) with Nature and Sneak skills etc.


Raistlin of Krynn. In Krynn you have to have a "spark" to be able to cast magic. AD&D only had Wizards. So Raistlin is a Wizard. He studies spell books etc. Now while he (and other Wizards) have "The Spark", I don't think that's enough to say "Sorcerer". A Krynn Sorcerer may just have better access/use of "The Spark".

Now of course comes in Fistandantilus. The spirt of a dead Wizard who empowers Raistlin for a time. So? Warlock? Wizard/Warlock? What Patron fits an undead wizard who plans to take over the body of his ward? Raistlin wasn't really granted magic by Fist, he was granted boosted power and knowledge. He still had to seek out spellbooks to learn new spells (or create his own new spells via research). Fist was more of an ever present mentor than a being granting spells to Raist. So eh, I could see some Warlock levels but Raist is still just a Wizard. He just has a spirit helping him figure things out. The Bob to his Dresden.

Who else? How's Elminster fair? Wizard/Cleric/Sorcerer/Warlock?

 

[Charlaquin]

Drizt is a ranger, and the fact that he doesn’t cast spells simply goes to show that spellcasting really isn’t a crucial part of the ranger archetype’s identity. There are a lot of characters that fit the Ranger archetype conceptually and few to none of them ever cast spells.

 

[DarkCrisis]

Drizt is a ranger, and the fact that he doesn’t cast spells simply goes to show that spellcasting really isn’t a crucial part of the ranger archetype’s identity. There are a lot of characters that fit the Ranger archetype conceptually and few to none of them ever cast spells.

Which is why AD&D Rangers didn’t get spells until late in their career.

Via newer rules a lot of those “classic rangers” are Fighters with nature skills.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Waylander with thieves' tools, maybe?

 

[Charlaquin]

Which is why AD&D Rangers didn’t get spells until late in their career.

Via newer rules a lot of those “classic rangers” are Fighters with nature skills.

No, they’re still rangers. The ranger class’ mechanics have just fallen out of step with the archetype the class is supposed to represent.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Raistlin of Krynn. In Krynn you have to have a "spark" to be able to cast magic. AD&D only had Wizards. So Raistlin is a Wizard. He studies spell books etc. Now while he (and other Wizards) have "The Spark", I don't think that's enough to say "Sorcerer". A Krynn Sorcerer may just have better access/use of "The Spark".

Planeswalker. Clearly.

 

[DarkCrisis]

No, they’re still rangers. The ranger class’ mechanics have just fallen out of step with the archetype the class is supposed to represent.

I can agree that the Ranger Class as presented in modern D&D has "lost the way" but that's what Im saying, via "modern game mechanics", they aren't Rangers. They aren't 5E Ranger. They are 5E Fighters with certian skills

 

[the Jester]

Take for example Drizzt of Faerun. 2E he was a Ranger. A good quick way to gain duel wielding and sneakiness.

Interestingly, the whole reason rangers got dual wielding in 2e (IMHO) is that Drow got it as a racial feature in 1e.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

No, they’re still rangers. The ranger class’ mechanics have just fallen out of step with the archetype the class is supposed to represent.

I mean difference between "that isn't a 5e ranger" and "the 5e ranger has moved away from that" seems to be -

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Take for example Drizzt of Faerun. 2E he was a Ranger. A good quick way to gain duel wielding and sneakiness. Did he ever cast a Ranger Spell?

Via current D&D and current novels. He's probably more of a Fighter/Barbarian/Monk. 9/1/10. Any "Rangerness" is duplicated by simple background and skill choice. Also, seeing as how he never uses his Rage anymore one could also say he's just a 10/10 Fighter/Monk. AND if you wanted Classic Drizzt under 5E rules, he'd probably still just be a pure Fighter (Or Fighter/Barb) with Nature and Sneak skills etc.

I really like Drizzt as a fighter/kensi monk... I had not thought of it but it works

Raistlin of Krynn. In Krynn you have to have a "spark" to be able to cast magic. AD&D only had Wizards. So Raistlin is a Wizard. He studies spell books etc. Now while he (and other Wizards) have "The Spark", I don't think that's enough to say "Sorcerer". A Krynn Sorcerer may just have better access/use of "The Spark".

I go back and forth... I think I would keep him a wizard

Now of course comes in Fistandantilus. The spirt of a dead Wizard who empowers Raistlin for a time. So? Warlock? Wizard/Warlock? What Patron fits an undead wizard who plans to take over the body of his ward? Raistlin wasn't really granted magic by Fist, he was granted boosted power and knowledge. He still had to seek out spellbooks to learn new spells (or create his own new spells via research). Fist was more of an ever present mentor than a being granting spells to Raist. So eh, I could see some Warlock levels but Raist is still just a Wizard. He just has a spirit helping him figure things out. The Bob to his Dresden.

very much I LOVE that idea...

Who else? How's Elminster fair? Wizard/Cleric/Sorcerer/Warlock?

TBH I always thought that elminster would be a great bard... and in 5e (pre1D&D) with magic secretes the college of lore would fit well... especially with home brew named spells