Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
What Do You Like About 3.5
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mercule" data-source="post: 833019" data-attributes="member: 5100"><p>Actually, I see as much reason to get rid of Bardic verbal components as somatic components. Don't any friggin' Bards play an instrument or dance a jig anymore? Doing so is _definitely_ a somatic component, unless you've got some sort of cyber-flute.</p><p></p><p>To say that _every_ Bardic spell has a verbal component of singing or poetry makes no more (or less) sense than saying that every Bardic spell requires a somatic component in the form of dancing or miming (only evil Bards may use mime). What makes the most sense is that spells which require a verbal component require singing, etc. and spells that require a verbal component require dance, etc.</p><p></p><p>From a mechanics point of view, Bards use arcane magic. One feature of arcane magic is that restricted movement may cause a spell to fail. This is a property of the type of magic, not of the caster. If Bards don't have a chance of failure, then they are not using arcane magic.</p><p></p><p>I don't really have a problem with Bards casting divine magic. They did in 1E. Historically, Bards have often been linked with the gods (anyway, bards who wrought magic, like Vainamoinen, were). They cast healing spells, which have always been a reserved divine ability. Maybe Bards tap into the "inherent power of music" the same way Rangers/Druids tap into the "inherent power of nature" without gods.</p><p></p><p>Anyway, I really didn't mean to get into a 3.5 bashing mode, which is why I didn't elaborate much. I do tend to think, though, that letting Bards get away without having an arcane failure is a narrow-sighted and internally inconsistant fix. Minor issue? Heck, yes, which I indicated. Still, I look at this, Weapon Familiarity, and the Mystic Theurge. None of them are too bad by themselves, but if you through enough "one offs" into the mix, the game becomes significantly less attractive.</p><p></p><p>I really am excited, overall, about 3.5. I've never liked all the rules in any game I've ever played and I'll always have house rules. 3E involved the fewest major house rules to date for any RPG I've played. I'm hoping that 3.5 makes things even better and "takes it to the next level". I'm just cautious about my hope, and some of what I'm hearing makes me more cautious.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mercule, post: 833019, member: 5100"] Actually, I see as much reason to get rid of Bardic verbal components as somatic components. Don't any friggin' Bards play an instrument or dance a jig anymore? Doing so is _definitely_ a somatic component, unless you've got some sort of cyber-flute. To say that _every_ Bardic spell has a verbal component of singing or poetry makes no more (or less) sense than saying that every Bardic spell requires a somatic component in the form of dancing or miming (only evil Bards may use mime). What makes the most sense is that spells which require a verbal component require singing, etc. and spells that require a verbal component require dance, etc. From a mechanics point of view, Bards use arcane magic. One feature of arcane magic is that restricted movement may cause a spell to fail. This is a property of the type of magic, not of the caster. If Bards don't have a chance of failure, then they are not using arcane magic. I don't really have a problem with Bards casting divine magic. They did in 1E. Historically, Bards have often been linked with the gods (anyway, bards who wrought magic, like Vainamoinen, were). They cast healing spells, which have always been a reserved divine ability. Maybe Bards tap into the "inherent power of music" the same way Rangers/Druids tap into the "inherent power of nature" without gods. Anyway, I really didn't mean to get into a 3.5 bashing mode, which is why I didn't elaborate much. I do tend to think, though, that letting Bards get away without having an arcane failure is a narrow-sighted and internally inconsistant fix. Minor issue? Heck, yes, which I indicated. Still, I look at this, Weapon Familiarity, and the Mystic Theurge. None of them are too bad by themselves, but if you through enough "one offs" into the mix, the game becomes significantly less attractive. I really am excited, overall, about 3.5. I've never liked all the rules in any game I've ever played and I'll always have house rules. 3E involved the fewest major house rules to date for any RPG I've played. I'm hoping that 3.5 makes things even better and "takes it to the next level". I'm just cautious about my hope, and some of what I'm hearing makes me more cautious. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
What Do You Like About 3.5
Top