Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Khaalis" data-source="post: 6387522" data-attributes="member: 2167">The problem is then you are playing a rogue with a small selection of &quot;nature&quot; oriented abilities, not a Spell-less Ranger. There are a lot of people who want everything about the Ranger, as it exists, minus spells. They should have that option especially for campaigns where Rangers simple aren't spellcasters. This is nothing new and there have always been 2 camps on rangers when it comes to spells.------------------------------------------------------------------------------/rant on - To all who simply say &quot;dont write bloat, bend your concept to what's in the book&quot;:I'm only going to say this once. I am not going to get into an argument over character concepts and how to meet them or the creative field that is D&amp;D. People have always written additional materials for D&amp;D and always will.IMHO, no one should be telling others how to play their concepts. If you don't like additional classes, sublcasses, feats, etc. and consider any such material that broadens the choices for players to make the characters they want the way they want them, then simply don't pay attention to the &quot;bloat&quot;. Yes the existing material can make many concepts, but not all. The PHB is not the &quot;one mechanic to bind all concepts&quot;. Sorry, not even close.As to the Duelist in particular, a bunch of people have stated (here and other boards) that they want this concept and it IS going to be created one way or another by someone at some point. You can choose to add constructive conversation on how to best to do it or you should simply ignore the topic, not tell people its simply a stupid idea and shouldn't exist because you can find a way that works for You and anything else is &quot;bloat&quot;. Keep in mind &quot;To Each His Own&quot;.&nbsp; If bloat doesn't work for you, great for you, but don't go cr@pping in other people's sandboxes./rant off</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Khaalis, post: 6387522, member: 2167"] The problem is then you are playing a rogue with a small selection of "nature" oriented abilities, not a Spell-less Ranger. There are a lot of people who want everything about the Ranger, as it exists, minus spells. They should have that option especially for campaigns where Rangers simple aren't spellcasters. This is nothing new and there have always been 2 camps on rangers when it comes to spells. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ [B]/rant on[/B] - To all who simply say "dont write bloat, bend your concept to what's in the book": I'm only going to say this once. I am not going to get into an argument over character concepts and how to meet them or the creative field that is D&D. People have always written additional materials for D&D and always will. IMHO, no one should be telling others how to play their concepts. If you don't like additional classes, sublcasses, feats, etc. and consider any such material that broadens the choices for players to make the characters they want the way they want them, then simply don't pay attention to the "bloat". Yes the existing material can make many concepts, but not all. The PHB is not the "one mechanic to bind all concepts". Sorry, not even close. As to the Duelist in particular, a bunch of people have stated (here and other boards) that they want this concept and it IS going to be created one way or another by someone at some point. You can choose to add constructive conversation on how to best to do it or you should simply ignore the topic, not tell people its simply a stupid idea and shouldn't exist because you can find a way that works for You and anything else is "bloat". Keep in mind "To Each His Own". If bloat doesn't work for you, great for you, but don't go cr@pping in other people's sandboxes. [B]/rant off[/B] [/QUOTE]

Verification