Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 5432259" data-attributes="member: 18280">Whyever would you limit the system to the PHB?  Wait a sec, I know the answer to that question -- it is the only way your point can carry.If one looks at the system as a whole, not only is your non-standard kit not in the PHB, but no kit is.  All of those kits?  Not in the PHB."Spells are by and large related to combat" is perhaps true in 3e; less true of any pre-3e edition.  In fact, the 1e DMG suggests that 50% of 1st level m-u spells are combat related, half offense and half defense, with the other 50% being split between utility and misc. spells.  The two extra spells not accounted for, Tenser's Floating Disc and Nystul's Magic Aura, are utility and misc. spells respectively.With 2e, when you add in each class' Complete book, each race's Complete book, the Historical References, the DM's references, and so on, it becomes clear that the predominant theme is setting creation, including making characters appropriate to the setting.  Many kits were criticized, in fact, for failing to balance re: combat, simply because the balance sought had nothing to do with a game focused solely (or even predominantly) with combat.In 1e and earlier, XP are primarily gained by gaining treasure.  In 2e, a system was provided where XP are primarily gained by using class skills -- many of which are not combat oriented! -- or by meeting story goals.  Only when we get to 3e does combat provide the majority of XP.When one examines the number of pages devoted to spell descriptions, it should be extremely obvious that this is because each spell is an exception to the general rules, and those exceptions each need to be described.  This is no different than the reason powers take up space in 4e.Again, all you demonstrate here is your profound ignorance of earlier editions, non-standard kits notwithstanding.  Or, to paraphrase another poster, "Your increasing show of ignorance of how earlier editions work do not paint your arguments in a favorable light."RC</blockquote>

Verification