Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Set" data-source="post: 3373158" data-attributes="member: 41584">I see your point, and especially appreciate the care taken to phrase said point in such a way as to not insult the holy living crap out of anybody who thinks differently!Along those lines (and agreeing with your basic premise that the more you define a class, the more you limit it's potential), one thing I didn't like at the beginning of 3.0 was the Sorcerer = Dragon-blooded assumption that began creeping in.  By making the subtext text, with classes like the Dragon Disciple, the *options* of having Fey-touched or Fiend-touched or Angel-blooded or Far Realms-tainted Sorcerers was all-but abandoned, save for some 3rd party publishers and a lonely Dragon magazine article.I've always preferred the notion of options, and you're right, these Dead Level abilities *are* potential pigeon-holers.If *my* Bard isn't an entertainer or a musician, but a travelling scribe and scholar of the arcane and esoteric, then the Dead Level ability presented is gonna look pretty pointless to me.  [Sure, I could wank that he does some calligraphy / document illumination / storytelling / geneological research for money, but it doesn't fit the theme as well and I'd be rationalizing it.]  However, I see the Dead Levels as *options,* and it's quite possible that my DM and I might come up with a different, and equally non-game-wrecking Dead Level feature.My point here is that the idea itself is interesting and flavorful, even if the *specific examples* might not suit every single character.If my Wizard uses something other than a traditional spellbook (say he's from Nyambe and uses a Mjuju bag or something), then the animated spell-book text is particularly useless, but giving him the ability to cast Prestidigitation *only on his Mjuju bag,* allowing him to float it around or make it jingle like a heavy coin pouch or teleport from one hand to the other or something, would be a suitable variation.</blockquote>

Verification