Lawful Good Bard...

[Visigani]

The problem is - Bards weren't solely musicians. They were storytellers, acrobats, spies, personal entertainers, jugglers, scribes, both narrators and orators, scholars, even scientists among other things. Besides, I myself am musician, and I consider myself lawful - I have a strict code of conduct that I adhere to.



Crippling one class because of other one's flawed progression doesn't sound like intended thing. Besides, 2 monk levels provide loads of bennies too, and monks are as lawful as paladins, and can mix well (if not as well as bards or sorcs).

Requiring a class be neutral or chaotic and not lawful is hardly something I would describe as "crippling".


Really? Crippling? You'd use that word? It's not like the class ceases to function and no players thus far have imploded as a result of being non-lawful.

What's really bizarre in your incredibly ridiculous usage of "Crippling" is that you entirely gloss over paladins being "Lawful Good", and Monks being just as Lawful. Are they similarly "Crippled", do they require a great deal of bedrest for their convalescence?

I mean I guess you could hide in semantics on this one...

1. A person or animal that is partially disabled or unable to use a limb or limbs: cannot race a horse that is a cripple.
2. A damaged or defective object or device.
tr.v. crip·pled, crip·pling, crip·ples
1. To cause to lose the use of a limb or limbs.
2. To disable, damage, or impair the functioning of: a strike that crippled the factory.


I mean.. I SUPPOSE you could say being required to be nonlawful is crippling (and therefore the function of the class is impaired) in the same way I could describe myself as crippled from receiving a papercut and therefore my ability to type is impaired...


But really man... CRIPPLED?

 

[kitcik]

What's really bizarre in your incredibly ridiculous usage of "Crippling" is that you entirely gloss over Monks being just as Lawful. Are they "Crippled?

2. A damaged or defective object or device.

As far as monks, well...

 

[Duke Arioch]

Requiring a class be neutral or chaotic and not lawful is hardly something I would describe as "crippling".


Really? Crippling? You'd use that word? It's not like the class ceases to function and no players thus far have imploded as a result of being non-lawful.

What's really bizarre in your incredibly ridiculous usage of "Crippling" is that you entirely gloss over paladins being "Lawful Good", and Monks being just as Lawful. Are they similarly "Crippled", do they require a great deal of bedrest for their convalescence?

I mean I guess you could hide in semantics on this one...

1. A person or animal that is partially disabled or unable to use a limb or limbs: cannot race a horse that is a cripple.
2. A damaged or defective object or device.
tr.v. crip·pled, crip·pling, crip·ples
1. To cause to lose the use of a limb or limbs.
2. To disable, damage, or impair the functioning of: a strike that crippled the factory.


I mean.. I SUPPOSE you could say being required to be nonlawful is crippling (and therefore the function of the class is impaired) in the same way I could describe myself as crippled from receiving a papercut and therefore my ability to type is impaired...


But really man... CRIPPLED?

Wow, man, in all I wrote, you only cought one (probably badly chosen) word and went on flaming me? And nothing on the subject beyond that... Hmm... Okay, let me rephrase: It is very unlikely they would tailor one class in such way, only that it would be incompatible with another class. Better?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The problem is - Bards weren't solely musicians. They were storytellers, acrobats, spies, personal entertainers, jugglers, scribes, both narrators and orators, scholars, even scientists among other things. Besides, I myself am musician, and I consider myself lawful - I have a strict code of conduct that I adhere to.

Please note that I explicitly did not limit bards to being musicians.

As for being "lawful" vs "chaotic" in the D&D sense, the latter does not require not having a personal code:

SRD
Chaotic characters follow their consciences, resent being told what to do, favor new ideas over tradition, and do what they promise if they feel like it.

<snip>

"Chaos" implies freedom, adaptability, and flexibility. On the downside, chaos can include recklessness, resentment toward legitimate authority, arbitrary actions, and irresponsibility. Those who promote chaotic behavior say that only unfettered personal freedom allows people to express themselves fully and lets society benefit from the potential that its individuals have within them.

A Bardic scientist might ranckle at the thought of his innovations being used for purposes other than what he intends...and may go so far as to destroy his work rather than honor the agreement that funded his research. His willingness to challenge higher-ups or not play the organizational politics may stymie his career.

By putting his personal code before that of his society's, he gets the "chaotic" label.

 

[RedTonic]

Most of the musical types I know I would consider "lawful" in D&D terms; the theater types? Not so much. . .

 

[Soramain]

Quick, someone xp RedTonic for me.

Signed,
A theater person

 

[Elf Witch]

I had a player who wanted a lawfully good bard. The bard in question was not only a storyteller but a loyal spy to the crown.

I just house ruled that for this game he could be lawful good. It worked out just fine and I didn't see it making the bard more powerful at all.