I have no idea who Bilbo Bagshot and Tim are supposed to be, but the Ewoks were already as bad as Jar-Jar back in 1983. Actually, I think they are even worse. There is nothing in "Return of the Jedi" that can redeem their presence.Alas, to live a life without having watched spaced. *Hugs* Its alright, we will do what we can to ensure that you see it eventually.
Fixed that for you - in case someone thinks there's a typo in the name :-)
Excellent sitcom:
Bilbo Bagshot: I was like you once. Blonde hair. Scraggly little beard. Childlike ears. Full of beans, and spunk. I let my principles get in the way of things. I once punched a bloke out once for saying Hawk the Slayer was rubbish.
Tim: Good for you.
Alas, to live a life without having watched spaced. *Hugs* Its alright, we will do what we can to ensure that you see it eventually.
I've googled it now and I think it is not something I would enjoy. I am not really a fan of sitcoms or, for that matter, other comedy shows, especially wacky ones, so I tend to ignore them.
I have no idea who Bilbo Bagshot and Tim are supposed to be, but the Ewoks were already as bad as Jar-Jar back in 1983. Actually, I think they are even worse. There is nothing in "Return of the Jedi" that can redeem their presence.Alas, to live a life without having watched spaced. *Hugs* Its alright, we will do what we can to ensure that you see it eventually.Fixed that for you - in case someone thinks there's a typo in the name :-)
Excellent sitcom:
Bilbo Bagshot: I was like you once. Blonde hair. Scraggly little beard. Childlike ears. Full of beans, and spunk. I let my principles get in the way of things. I once punched a bloke out once for saying Hawk the Slayer was rubbish.
Tim: Good for you.
Bilbo Bagshot: Yeah, thanks. But that's not the point, Tim. The point is I was defending the fantasy genre with terminal intensity, when what I should have said was "Dad, you're right - but let's give Krull a try, and we'll discuss it later."
|
I wouldn't ever consider Elric a bladesinger...Arcane warrior are always interesting to players. It's why everyone loved Bladesingers in the Realms.And let's not forget ol' Elric of Melnibone! Has anyone mentioned him yet?
Wouldn't even consider him a "gish" or whatever. Take away Stormbringer, give him a normal sword and he can't even lift the thing. He was a wizard with a demon who took the form of a sword guiding his arm in combat.
is it too late in the thread to request that folks wrap there character class ideas in spoiler tags if it requires more than a paragraph or two or a full, PHB style write up?
|
|
For my part I hadn't seen this usage before the lead up to 4e. Of course, I never spent much time in the WotC forums. Now it is everywhere.
As for the character type, it doesn't bother me overly much. My current crop of players don't seem interested in the type. I do enjoy playing bards but it appears to have been made clear that the bard is not an arcane warrior class.
Mostly I am just confused by the whole thing. For me, being a fighter/mage has always required multiclassing. Or, if playing BECMI D&D, playing an elf. It was costly and limited during 1e and that idea has stuck with me over the last 25 years. This has been the D&D paradigm for me and I was never motivated to see a change.
I guess I can understand some of the points that are being made but it isn't something I have ever thought of pursuing. I have only ever skimmed such classes in 3e. It isn't that I think such a class shouldn't exist. On the contrary, if Paizo developed an arcane warrior I would likely just ignore it unless a player really wanted to play it. I make most base classes open for selection in my group so that is a possibility. It just doesn't fit my paradigm for D&D, but that is such an ephemeral thing that some people may not agree with. Ultimately, it wouldn't impact me if they published it and it would make the fans happy.
When it comes to the sudden surge of interest in such a class, I have no idea where that came from. It blindsided me during the lead up to 4e and I never saw it coming here. I must have the world's best blinders on. But there seems to be a vocal group who really like the idea, so it must have traction.
|
|
Like I said, the concept doesn't bother me, we had elven fighter / magic users out the yin yang in 1e, the use of "gish" to describe it bugs me.
I don't care if it became popular because Dragon and Dungeon did a githyanki feature, and some loser on the WotC boards decided it would be "cool" to use it for any melee/arcane magic class (base, prc or multi), and a bunch of lemmings followed suit.
It's the gamer world version of having to listen to tools say "rad" all the time back in the day...
For me, the concept makes sense. In this fantasy world, dominating the battleground IS important. Most people will attempt to do this with a sword (or an axe, or a spear etc). Some gifted individual will develop talents at magic. Making a weapon out of it in the form of magic missiles and fireballs is bound to happen because for wizards too, winning battles IS important.
A one point, someone is going to figure out that if a sword cuts well and a fireball burns well, doing both makes you even better at killing stuff. Regardless of whether it happens to be viable or not, the concept is too attractive for people not to attempt it 'in-game'. So yeah, regardless of how the fighter/mage is mechanically translated, I can see how the concept is interesting to both real players and fictional characters.
'findel
I was completely bemused by the thread title. I mean, Gish isn't even the best Smashing Pumpkins album (I had automatically assumed it wasn't a reference to the Scottish slang term for male lovejuice).
So when did "GISH!" become a viable term for the githyanki? Couldn't something less annoying have been picked?
|
|
I was completely bemused by the thread title. I mean, Gish isn't even the best Smashing Pumpkins album (I had automatically assumed it wasn't a reference to the Scottish slang term for male lovejuice).
So when did "GISH!" become a viable term for the githyanki? Couldn't something less annoying have been picked?
Gish was the term for a Githyanki Fighter Magic user of levels 4/4 ever since they were first published in White Dwarf in 1979. That is, the first time they ever appeared in a gaming product. It became the "official" term for the Gityanki 4/4 f-mu in 1981, when the Fiend Folio was published for 1e AD&D.
"Gish" meaning any arcane/warrior hybrid came from some bit of idiocy on the WotC CharOp boards a few years ago.
Interesting. Must have come across it in the meantime (I used githyanki once in a 2E campaign), but guess I just blocked it out on account of it being weird.
I wonder if Charles Stross knew about the Scottish slang term before he applied it to the githyanki? That would be pretty funny.