Rant: Flavor restrictions

[Mouseferatu]

I also see no problem whatsoever with allowing cleric/paladin multiclassing. I mean, it kinda makes sense, yes?

Oh, and in response to the monk/druid concept--I must admit, that's a multiclass I never thought of. I like it. A lot.

But I have this image of a high-level character using wild shape, and I'm picturing a dire bear standing there in kung-fu stance, paws up, giving a good old-fashioned Bruce Lee "Wwhuaaaaaaahhhh!!!!"

 

[Dinkeldog]

If you allow paladin/cleric multi-classing, WotC will be forced to send the Rules Police to your game. It's ugly.

 

[Horacio]

If you allow paladin/cleric multi-classing, WotC will be forced to send the Rules Police to your game. It's ugly.

They will take your books from you, and they will beat you with a stick as if you were Hong...

 

[Agback]

Turkish, actually. The turks were islamic, but not arab.

I think. Maybe I'm wrong. IIRC, Arab is the ethnicity (to which the turks do not belong), and Islam is the religion (to which many turks to belong).

You're right, and early Arab swords were straight (like the yataghan, for example).

Regards,


Agback

 

[Dremen]

To bring this post back on track the whole point is the restrictions are only there for flavor, but they are still THERE thus official. This makes it a real pain in certain circumstances.

I simply rule 0'ed them out in MY campagin. But I'm out of luck in Living Greyhawk, and in games with weaney DM's (who might otherwise be very good DM's). That is my fustration. That it is the OFFICAL way.

It seems like any other source book that comes out from WotC also tries to get around this core flavor restriction. They keep trying to break their own rules. They only put them in there because some playtester got his super-roo's in a bunch. WotC doesn't even like it and most people just rule 0 it out of the game.

What wizards SHOULD do is make offical errata to remove the flavor restrictions out of the game. It is easy and they can pass the buck to the playtesters who insisted upon it. Say "Hey it has been a few years we came to our senses and these restrictions are OUT."

When 3e was first marketed one of the main focuses I remember hearing about was that the game was about CHOICES not RESTRICTIONS about what you CAN do not what you CAN'T do. These restrictions go against this basic premise.

I could ALMOST see the restirctions on Monk/Paladin multiclassing but I can see many reasons not to have it, fact is it should be a offical DM call not standard rules. The druid weapon stuff is plain INSANE. There are other ways to encourage single classing or the use of only class weapons.

Would you if you were a single class druid with no asspirations to multi class want to blow 1 of your limited number of feats on a weapon prof.? Elves would get their racial bonus weapon on a class that is very elvish, others would have to spend feats. Frankly I can think of alot of other feats that would be more benificial. Especially after you get wild shape. But to loose your powers for 24hrs because you used a longsword instead of a scimitar? Due to some vaugely worded spiritual oath (that they don't even attempt to detail).

Imagine this. The party is near TPK. The druid is out of spells and wild shape uses for the day down to 10 hp. She is weilding her scimitar standing by the cleric who has fallen to -8 hp. The rest of the party is dead or close to it. There is a Blackguard trying to finish off the cleric and you for that matter to complete his dark goal. The Blackgaurd sunders your scimitar, your only weapon. The fallen paladins long sword lays glowing with a holy beckoning light. Just to your right the Black gaurd see's your glance and grins. He knows his henchmen are but a days ride away and coming to assist. If you are able to get the sword he knows you will be without your powers for the next 24 hrs. But your only hope of defeating him is the long sword. So the brave druid recalling her days of weilding a long sword from her elvish youth flood her mind. She dives for the longsword dodging the AoO (she has the mobility feat) and grabs the long sword and finishes off the black gaurd. Well she can cast her 1 remaining cantrip to heal the clearic now. She lost her powers. The cleric doesn't stablize and dies. Now the rest of the party dies and is dead. As the cleric can't help them because he is dead. And she waits untill the evil henckmen come and take her out, having not resources left. TPK everyone is pissed, the encounter was supposed to be easy but due to bad rolls on the paladins part and clerics part everything went to heck. BTW they are playing in LIVING GREYHAWK, so they can't rule 0 this...... sound like fun? or fair? or rational?

-D

 

[hong]

I simply rule 0'ed them out in MY campagin.

Good.

But I'm out of luck in Living Greyhawk,

I might care, if I were playing Living Greyhawk.

and in games with weaney DM's (who might otherwise be very good DM's).

Do these DMs know that you think of them as "weenie" [sic]? If certain decisions of theirs annoy you that much, you can always leave their game.

That is my fustration. That it is the OFFICAL way.

Think of it as an opportunity to be a rebel.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I understand where you are coming from. 3e must be uncomfortable for you in many ways. I mean shoot your post your character stats in 1e/2e format

Flex never made the conversion to 3e, He was my favorite old PC so I picked his name. Since his bread and butter was his biceps of infinite size and might I went and posted his stats.

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

I agree that some of the druids weapon restrictions are a bit dodgy, in light of the points raised here, but it's never bothered me that much, partly because I don't, on the whole, play druids.

But the Paladin multiclassing issue? I agree with that. Being a Paladin is to pursue a path forever. Prestige classes are there for those that want a specific style of Paladin, but most of them have the cost of 'turning from the path'.

I believe being a Paladin means saying: "A Paladin is what I am, not what I do."

That all sounds a bit serious, but it's what I think is about right. But if you were in my game and said "I want a multiclasses paladin/fighter for this reason...etc etc etc" I'd probably be fairly lenient.

 

[bwgwl]

But the Paladin multiclassing issue? I agree with that. Being a Paladin is to pursue a path forever. Prestige classes are there for those that want a specific style of Paladin, but most of them have the cost of 'turning from the path'.

but you could argue that multi-classing a paladin is also for those who want to play a specific style of paladin.

want to play a more martial-oriented paladin? why bother making up a new prestige class just for that when you could instead take a few fighter levels?

want a paladin who hunts down the enemies of his god? again, why bother making up a new prestige class when you can just take a few ranger levels?

in any case, you are still a paladin, just one with a slightly different focus.

i'd rather use the core classes for this than rely on a proliferation of prestige classes.

on a side note: thanks for the information re: origin of the scimitar wrt Turks and Arabs. learn something new every day!

 

[takyris]

I agree. The paladin as "guy in heavy armor with longsword who melees and smites evil" is a perfectly valid character choice. But a paladin/rogue, a halfling who scouts, disarms traps, and uses his diplomacy to avoid combat when possible but boldly stands his ground when his village is threatened, is also a perfectly valid character choice.

If you wanted to avoid having people take one level of paladin "just because", you could always just ditch the paladin class altogether and make it a series of feats.

Paladin(1): Requires LG, can only be taken at first level -- the person is chosen by their deity to be a defender of that deity's morals, a force of justice. They gain Detect Evil and the ability to Smite Evil once per day.

Paladin(2): Requires Paladin(1), 3rd level or higher -- the paladin's perserverence gives them divine protection. They gain Divine Grace (or whatever the Cha+ to saves is), as well as immunity to Fear.

Paladin(3): Requires Paladin(2) -- the paladin learns to channel his energy to positive ends. They gain Disease Immunity and the ability to Lay on Hands.

Paladin(4): Requires Paladin(3) -- the paladin is now a true disciple of his deity. They gain the ability to Remove Disease once per week for every four character levels, and may turn undead at one-half their character level (do not count cleric levels -- a cleric8/fighter4 turns undead as a 10th level cleric).

Paladin(5): Required Paladin(4) -- the paladin gains a mount.

There. It's rough, but a dedicated person, ie, one willing to put all of their normal feats up through 12th level in there, would reap the benefits regardless of whether they were a "fighter" paladin, a "cleric" paladin, a "ranger" paladin, or a "sorcerer" paladin.

-Tacky