Tropes that need to die
- Thread starter JacktheRabbit
- Start date
re: Graveyards and D&D
now that I think about it...the reasons why graveyards existed in real life even moreso make the graveyard not make sense in D&D.
In our world, the graveayard prevented the creation of the undead and this was born out by the fact that well, there WERE no undead risings (that we know of
)..
So of course, this "proves" to the ancient people that graveyard prevent undeads...
Move this to a D&D world and you no longer have this correlation - Indeed...massive graveyards seem to have a higher chance of undead rising...thus the people of the D&D world would start to associate graveyards WITH the creation of undead.
re: Wizards and Warriors
The only genre I know where the mages are even close to the level of D&D mages would be certain manga/anime that are based on D&D. Slayers for example.
In those cases, the warriors go BEYOND human and are blatantly superhumans which is accomplished by swordsmanship training (Gourry from the aforementioned Slayers is for example, moves so fast in battles that his sorceress companion actually loses track of where he is at times)
now that I think about it...the reasons why graveyards existed in real life even moreso make the graveyard not make sense in D&D.
In our world, the graveayard prevented the creation of the undead and this was born out by the fact that well, there WERE no undead risings (that we know of
)..So of course, this "proves" to the ancient people that graveyard prevent undeads...
Move this to a D&D world and you no longer have this correlation - Indeed...massive graveyards seem to have a higher chance of undead rising...thus the people of the D&D world would start to associate graveyards WITH the creation of undead.
re: Wizards and Warriors
The only genre I know where the mages are even close to the level of D&D mages would be certain manga/anime that are based on D&D. Slayers for example.
In those cases, the warriors go BEYOND human and are blatantly superhumans which is accomplished by swordsmanship training (Gourry from the aforementioned Slayers is for example, moves so fast in battles that his sorceress companion actually loses track of where he is at times)
Conan would just take Harry Potter's wand away from him and spank him with it.
Without the wand the wizard in Harry Potter's world is helpless. Same thing in D&D; at least 3E and before. Take away a wizard's spellbook and they can't replenish their spells. Take away their spell components and they lose a vast majority of their spells. Strip a wizard naked and they are almost utterly useless. A fighter still has a big pile o' hit points and fighting ability. He could use something as simple as a club to do damage. Take away a clerics holy symbol and watch the fun. Does the player by chance have a spare written down on his character sheet?
I am sick and tired of the squealing that spell casters are over powered. Of course they are overpowered, they use MAGIC! If you cut them off from the source they can't do diddly. Put a cleric on a plane where his god doesn't exist and he's just a second-rate fighter. I like for magic to be powerful because it's... magical! Otherwise it's just currency.
I'm also willing to bet many of those complaining the loudest about spell casters play or DM in a game where casters are not required to record what spells they currently have prepared. I've played in games where the DM didn't require this and the spell casters always seem to have just the right spell for the right job. Eliminating this requirement makes spell casters even MORE powerful.
Are spell casters actually more powerful? At least at medium and upper levels, yes. But that doesn't stop me from enjoying playing fighters and rogues as well. If the spell casters just hoard their spells for their own use and don't buff up the fighters and rogues that would make them more powerful. The game assumes the the members of the party will cooperate. There are prices to be paid if the casters don't bolster the entire party. If the casters in the party don't use some of their magic to boost the fighters and rogues they could end up in the depths of the dungeon by themselves. Then they better have some Raise Deads or Teleports to get them out of the mess they're in. And they better hang on to their spell books and their holy symbols!
Without the wand the wizard in Harry Potter's world is helpless. Same thing in D&D; at least 3E and before. Take away a wizard's spellbook and they can't replenish their spells. Take away their spell components and they lose a vast majority of their spells. Strip a wizard naked and they are almost utterly useless. A fighter still has a big pile o' hit points and fighting ability. He could use something as simple as a club to do damage. Take away a clerics holy symbol and watch the fun. Does the player by chance have a spare written down on his character sheet?
I am sick and tired of the squealing that spell casters are over powered. Of course they are overpowered, they use MAGIC! If you cut them off from the source they can't do diddly. Put a cleric on a plane where his god doesn't exist and he's just a second-rate fighter. I like for magic to be powerful because it's... magical! Otherwise it's just currency.
I'm also willing to bet many of those complaining the loudest about spell casters play or DM in a game where casters are not required to record what spells they currently have prepared. I've played in games where the DM didn't require this and the spell casters always seem to have just the right spell for the right job. Eliminating this requirement makes spell casters even MORE powerful.
Are spell casters actually more powerful? At least at medium and upper levels, yes. But that doesn't stop me from enjoying playing fighters and rogues as well. If the spell casters just hoard their spells for their own use and don't buff up the fighters and rogues that would make them more powerful. The game assumes the the members of the party will cooperate. There are prices to be paid if the casters don't bolster the entire party. If the casters in the party don't use some of their magic to boost the fighters and rogues they could end up in the depths of the dungeon by themselves. Then they better have some Raise Deads or Teleports to get them out of the mess they're in. And they better hang on to their spell books and their holy symbols!
Last edited:
The Shaman
First Post
Actually it's the Grendel Grip feat (prerequisite Monkey Grip).It may also depend upon Grendel's "Glove of Holding"!
Raven Crowking
First Post
In our world, the graveayard prevented the creation of the undead and this was born out by the fact that well, there WERE no undead risings (that we know of
Excepting, of course, that people believed that there WERE undead uprisings (see upthread for a link to an example that swept Europe in relatively recent times).
Wheras
is only true if one can demonstrate that removing the graveyard results in fewer undead. This may be true in some D&D worlds; it should not be assumed to be true in all. Particularly in a world where the GM knows the purpose of graveyards, and uses that knowledge.
Well, no. Even if HP got the initial advantage, he wouldn't kill Conan, so Conan would eventually take his wand and run him through or decapitate him. HP goes from "The Boy Who Lived" to "The Boy Who Died Rather Horribly".
Actually it's the Grendel Grip feat (prerequisite Monkey Grip).
In Old Norse legends, trolls tend to carry large gloves (often made of dragonhide or things like that), with which they can pack and carry enormous loads. When Beowulf returns home, he says that Grendel had such a glove. So, it is quite possible that Grendel can carry off 30 men in his glove, still be weaker than Beowulf, while Beowulf is still within human-possible strength.
RC
Last edited:
The Shaman
First Post
Is this really the prototypical level one fighter?
A first-level fighter in 1e AD&D is called a Veteran. He has up to ten hit points (and up to fourteen if he has a top CON score), as opposed to the maximum seven hit points of the hired men-at-arms accompanying the adventurers or six points possessed by the other hirelings, and he will strike succesfully with a weapon about five percent more often than an active or laboring man, such as your average farm boy. Thought neither the PHB nor the DMG explicitly states it, in my experience the number of weapon proficiencies are significantly less for zero-level humans compared to first-level fighters.
I don't think first-level D&D fighters are just farmboys-with-swords. I think they are better trained and more skillful than most of the populace before they ever face their first goblin or skeleton in combat.
The Shaman
First Post
Uh, RC, I was making a little joke there.
Obviously not a very good one.
Raven Crowking
First Post
Nah, it was a good joke.
now that I think about it...the reasons why graveyards existed in real life even moreso make the graveyard not make sense in D&D.
In our world, the graveayard prevented the creation of the undead and this was born out by the fact that well, there WERE no undead risings (that we know of
Well, "graveyards exist to prevent undead from rising" is a vast oversimplification (perhaps even outright trivialization) of human burial rituals.
Graveyards exist because we have complicated feelings about the dead and human remains - a combination of the need to preserve the memory (and perhaps the soul) of the departed, a need to not have a corpse right next to you, and a simple fear of the unknown final frontier.
Outright destruction of corpses is often not an option, for either physical (it takes a whole lot of fuel to reduce a human body to ash) or religious (it may mean the dead don't go to the proper afterlife, f'rex) reasons.
Barastrondo
First Post
Argh. This. This is why I have fallen so out of love with the "let's keep the fighters from being too fantastic now" approach. "You can play Beowulf, as long as you accept that it's you don't have astounding endurance, it's a magic pool, Grendel wasn't really notably strong, he had a magic glove, and that swimming in the ocean thing was something you made up to sound impressive."
In a strictly non-magical setting like The 13th Warrior's, I'd actually be fine with a carefully rationalized Beowulf. But in a more mystical setting, it jars. I'd much rather see a game where you're allowed to be Beowulf-strong as presented, and then the GM makes Grendel and his mother just that much stronger in response.
Similar Threads
