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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dremen" data-source="post: 391329" data-attributes="member: 6773">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</blockquote>

Verification