Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="squibbles" data-source="post: 8425815" data-attributes="member: 6937590">I voted based on thematics rather than implementation--Bard and Cleric.I agree with the thread's other critics of bards, so no need to elaborate.Cleric, though, is really weird and really specific, but built into D&D's traditions deeply enough that its indiosyncratic jank gets overlooked. From <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleric_(Dungeons_%26_Dragons)#Dungeons_&_Dragons" target="_blank">Wikipedia</a>:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"In the original edition, the class is described as gaining "some of the advantages from both of the other two classes (Fighting-Men and Magic-Users) in that they have the use of magic, armor, and all non-edged magic weapons"</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"The cleric character class began as a simulation of vampire hunting clergy, such as seen in B grade "Hammer Horror" films, specifically created to oppose a vampire player character called "Sir Fang". The cleric's power to repel the undead had its roots in Dracula, which coined the popular term 'undead' and established a vampire hunter's ability to turn away vampires by the presentation of a crucifix"</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"Gary Gygax added the restriction on weapon types, influenced by a popular interpretation of the Bayeux Tapestry where Odo of Bayeux is depicted with a mace in hand"</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"When the paladin character class was introduced in Supplement I – Greyhawk (1975), the potential for confusion between the roles of the two classes arose."</li> </ul>So, the Cleric--conceived as a gish class, a Victorian vampire hunter (implied to use a crucifix), but also the analog of a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odo_of_Bayeux#Trial,_imprisonment_and_rebellion" target="_blank">deeply shady</a> bishop who (maybe) fought at Hastings, and (despite the obvious similarity) definitely NOT a paladin--has come down to contemporary D&D as THE PRIMARY REPRESENTATIVE OF ALL ORGANIZED RELIGION. What?So, for example, why would the earthly agents of a trickster god use turn undead as a core feature? No reason but path dependency.A reasonable counterargument can be made to this point, but I generally agree with you (and I normally hate mixing steampunk aesthetics with vanilla fantasy).But, for whatever reason, I don't have any difficulty compartmentalizing them from the other setting elements. I guess they don't feel like they're an integral part of 5e's implied setting to me, just extra bits that are bolted on, and that makes them inoffensive....mind blown. That's a really good idea. Maybe a bit strong, but that'd be a great chassis for a whole bunch of non-magic-using adventurer archetypes--provided some of the loudly rogue-y things were modified.</blockquote>

Verification