RA Salavatore Books vs 4.0 E

Aris Dragonborn said:
True, he uses Faerie Fire and Darkness, but these are innate racial abilities - not granted spells.

The FRCS also gives him Dancing Lights, but I can't recall him ever using these in the novels.



The current FR year is, what, 1374 DR? He was born in 1297 DR, so he's 77 or thereabouts.


Once he healed himself but that is all I remember.... except for his racial abilities which he uses regularly.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Rechan

Adventurer
I have the feeling Salvatore wouldn't up his books 100 years in the future for the next one. He's still going to milk all his current characters for a while.

Speculation re: Non-spellcasting Drizzt:
He's not a high enough level ranger to qualify for spellcasting. Fighter/Barb/Ranger/Dervish or Tempest/whatever else.
 

Aris Dragonborn

First Post
megamania said:
Once he healed himself but that is all I remember.... except for his racial abilities which he uses regularly.

Huh. I guess I need to re-read the books again, because I don't remember that at all.

Rechan said:
Speculation re: Non-spellcasting Drizzt:
He's not a high enough level ranger to qualify for spellcasting. Fighter/Barb/Ranger/Dervish or Tempest/whatever else.

Fighter10/Barbarian1/Ranger5 (according to wizards.com).
A Ranger5 has access to 1st level spells, though there's a '0' in the spells-per-day chart. By virtue of a 17 Wis, he gets 1 bonus 1st, 2nd, and 3rd level spell.

I don't get the 1 level of Barbarian, though. IMHO, he wasn't in the wilds of the Underdark long enough to rate gaining that class. Just call him a Fighter11/Ranger5 or Fighter 10/Ranger6 and be done with it.

Although, considering that he served as the advanced scout for the drow patrols, I think you could make an argument that he's more of a Ranger than a Fighter - Ranger10/Fighter5 maybe?
 

Kabol

First Post
Well - the persona of the "Hunter" < it is the hunter right?, haven't read them in a while > states that he gives himself over to the Fury of battle - thus the Barbarian Rage tie in, Total abandon - just raw brutality.
 


Aris Dragonborn said:
Huh. I guess I need to re-read the books again, because I don't remember that at all.

In Hunter's Blades Trilogy he did it after getting his buttocks handed to him by Obould and his Orcs.

Aris Dragonborn said:
Fighter10/Barbarian1/Ranger5 (according to wizards.com).
A Ranger5 has access to 1st level spells, though there's a '0' in the spells-per-day chart. By virtue of a 17 Wis, he gets 1 bonus 1st, 2nd, and 3rd level spell.

I don't get the 1 level of Barbarian, though. IMHO, he wasn't in the wilds of the Underdark long enough to rate gaining that class. Just call him a Fighter11/Ranger5 or Fighter 10/Ranger6 and be done with it.

Although, considering that he served as the advanced scout for the drow patrols, I think you could make an argument that he's more of a Ranger than a Fighter - Ranger10/Fighter5 maybe?
 


hamishspence

Adventurer
Salvatore's books vs the Rules in FRCS

Sometimes they differ a lot, sometimes a little, almost any conversion will have odd things.

Personal objections: Guen as a slightly advanced normal sized panther, and a pure figurine of wondrous power.

These things animate! Guen is more of a summonable. and a big one at that!

MY Guen would be a Celestial Dire Puma (panther) with some decent feats so she can do some decent damage to outsiders. Repeatedly stated that she is an outsider and can damage demons, bargests and the like with her claws: Sanctify Natural Weapon, or simply the Good subtype, would fix it, (Celestial animals do not technically get the Good subtype)

Elder Brain: CR26 in present rules, went down WAY too easy to Guen on her own: it has DR20/adamantine!

Apart from that, there aren't many major complaints.
 

hamishspence

Adventurer
The Conversion Process: 3.5 to 4th

YES, WOTC said it is too much like hard work for players to convert 3.5 ed characters to new edition.

I disagree. If they wish to use ANY old favorites in the new ed Players Guide to Faerun, or new FRCS if there is one, they will need to do some of it.

Obviously some characters have no precise equivalent, but the training feats, paragon paths, and epic destinies should allow some matching up.

Elminster: 1 fighter training feat, 1 Rogue training feat, 1 cleric training feat, 27th level Wizard, Epic Destiny: Chosen of Deity. Some epic paths strongly suggest you can become an agent of deity with immortality. This is EXACTLY like the old Chosen of Mystra template.

Yes, doing it this way will mean less cool powers for the Sage of Shadowdale, but it will also mean no annoying template, and make it so players with the right choices can do the same sort of thing. No more "The NPC's are Different" I chose 27th level because it has traction: he was that level in 2nd ed.

Drizzt: 18th level Ranger, Barbarian Training (if possible) maybe a Fighter training feat or two. Now we can have a Drizzt that is same level as Artemis, without a Level adjustment, and all ranger levels, like he was in last edition!

If multiclassing is gone, but you can do similar tricks by taking feats, without having a perfectly balanced character with equal powers in both, it could be interesting. No more mystic theurge equality: now they are mages with cleric training, or clerics with mage training, and the Mystic Theurge paragon path.

Be aware I do not KNOW they are abolishing multiclassing, but the theme in Races and Classes book seemed a lot like that. It said Tank Mages are Mages with Armour Proficiency, maybe a Fighter Training feat or two. That sounds awfully like much less multiclassing to me, maybe no multiclassing.

Oh, and Swordmage sounds rather better than Gish to me. It gives a category for the Magic Wielding Fighter Type that avoids making him too good at a distance: his armour is magical energy, his sword glows with fire or other power, his job is to defend, and slay things in melee.

All things considered, only a few of the most exotic new 3.5 ed classes will be impossible to convert, in my opinion. Might have to change a few names: Warmage=Wizard with a few Fighter Training things, Knight is fighter specialising in defence of others, Beguiler is rather harder though.

Binders WOULD have fitted Warlock with Vestige pacts, a little bit, but apparently these pacts are now gone. Drat.

Factotum could be Rogue with a lot of training feats and skills

Incarnum classes have no close fit, though Soulblades might squeeze into Paladin niche.

Most core players, ever some multiclass players, will be able to reconstuct a approxiate equivalent of their old characters, I think.

Those who cannot, are stuck with old edition.
 


hamishspence

Adventurer
rules vs narrative

Do not castigate writers for the occasional mess up rules wise. It is entirely probable that rules were somewhat different when they wrote the novel, and anyway most fiction or movie or series has Things Happening that might be a bit out of place in D&D.

Vice versa (D&D non magic guys doing things that cannot feasibly be done) is even more common. call it cinema physics, "the Bullet Hurls people back effect"

Best not to moan too much either way.

I prefer to look at 3.5 novel character rules as guidelines, especially if novel character does not fit rules. I would, for example, homebrew Guen to make her a formidable sidekick.

Question is: will 4th ed allow viable versions of old favorite NPCs? Should DM use PC type rules for any main character from a novel? And will it fix some issues?

Elminster in 3rd ed was pretty behing magically, cos of his +4 LA Chosen template and muticlassing. In 4th ed you can now have a Sage of Shadowdale with as much magical power as PCs of same CR. And if you can get a Epic Destiny that fits the Chosen concept well, even better.

So, is that likely? Will 4th ed help to fix oddities of 3.5? Will famous NPCs fit the novels better, be quicker and easier for DM to manage, and have better power levels?
 

Sitara

Explorer
Well, i am pretty sure 4e will fix the 'oddities' of 3.5e (by oddities we ofcourse, mean the broken and retarded stuff that was slapped on becuase of system limitations).

Sadly 4e will also introduce many 'oddities' of its own. :)

And so the cycle continues...
 

Sitara

Explorer
Oh and drizzt is a fighter10/ranger 4/barb1 in the frcs as far as I know.

They didi not give him higer than 4 ranger levels because he never casts spells. (the time he befriended the seal was the use of animal empathy, not a spell.)

Its for this reason I hope ranger spellcasting is either OUT (preferable) or at the very least purely optional in 4e. (i.e. if you want the ranger to cast spells, choose certain talents).

Intruigingly, since the druid is rumored to not be in the phb, it will be interesting to see what spells the ranger gets, if any.
 

Green Knight

First Post
Sitara said:
Oh and drizzt is a fighter10/ranger 4/barb1 in the frcs as far as I know.

They didi not give him higer than 4 ranger levels because he never casts spells. (the time he befriended the seal was the use of animal empathy, not a spell.)

He's a Level 5 Ranger in the FRCS. It's immaterial, though, as Level 4 Rangers also cast spells. He'd have to be a Level 3 Ranger to not have spellcasting ability.
 

Sitara

Explorer
Hmm, i could have sworn he was level 4 ranger. Oh well, the point is moot as they say. :)

if you have the book handy, what spells does he have memorized?
 


ZombieRoboNinja

First Post
megamania said:
I suppose this means he will hook up with the female elf he was flirting with in Hunter's Blades then.

That's pretty much cleared up in The Orc King.

Another note: it's strongly hinted in the prologue to Orc King that Bruenor is dead. (Obviously the rest of Drizzt's non-elven friends have kicked the bucket too, unless there was some magic interference.)
 

Dungeon Delver's Guide

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top