| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The only wrongbadfun is stopping other people having fun.
and rogues.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The only wrongbadfun is stopping other people having fun.and rogues.
That's for another thread!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's for another thread!The only wrongbadfun is stopping other people having fun.and rogues.
But I used my OP psionics to fuse it with this thread.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But I used my OP psionics to fuse it with this thread.That's for another thread!The only wrongbadfun is stopping other people having fun.and rogues.
The thread made its saving throw against the power and the merger failed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The thread made its saving throw against the power and the merger failed.But I used my OP psionics to fuse it with this thread.That's for another thread!The only wrongbadfun is stopping other people having fun.and rogues.
Nah we use "psionics are different".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nah we use "psionics are different".The thread made its saving throw against the power and the merger failed.But I used my OP psionics to fuse it with this thread.That's for another thread!The only wrongbadfun is stopping other people having fun.and rogues.
That doesn't prevent saving throws from working :P
Indeed. I think to any non-scholar, non-adventurer "Woman with supernatural powers" = witch, by default.
See, I disagree.
Here, in the real world, we differ between professions. A dentist, a veterinarian and a MD are all "medical professionals" but we have different terms for them, and you need to know when your cat is sick to take her to the vet, not the dentist.
Lawrence Watt-Evans does it right. Magical professionals are known by their subtypes- wizards, witches, warlocks, etc. Sure, some naifs from the hicks may not know one from the other, but in general both the laity and the magical professionals know the difference between a Witch and a Wizard, and both are clear as to "which" they are when hanging out their shingle. Of course, some are con artists and fakers, but...
Yes, here IRL, magic doesn't really work, thus our definitions of "witch" vs 'wizard" are hazy and imprecise.
So, in a world where magic is commonplace, pretty much everyone with any smarts at all would know the difference. Sure, in some very small country villages- the vet, dentist & doctor may be all the same person, but that's another issue.
Thus, it's not "metagaming" for your sorcerer to call herself that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Knowing there are different spellcasting techniques and knowing that each one has its own title and name on a sheet or in a book are two completely different things, especially when you can refluff things easily.
(For example, I will never play a bard (class) that is a bard (concept) ... no singing, no dancing, none of that. Obviously, he's not going to call himself a bard, and nobody in-character is going to call him a bard either.)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Indeed. I think to any non-scholar, non-adventurer "Woman with supernatural powers" = witch, by default.
See, I disagree.
Here, in the real world, we differ between professions. A dentist, a veterinarian and a MD are all "medical professionals" but we have different terms for them, and you need to know when your cat is sick to take her to the vet, not the dentist.
Lawrence Watt-Evans does it right. Magical professionals are known by their subtypes- wizards, witches, warlocks, etc. Sure, some naifs from the hicks may not know one from the other, but in general both the laity and the magical professionals know the difference between a Witch and a Wizard, and both are clear as to "which" they are when hanging out their shingle. Of course, some are con artists and fakers, but...
Yes, here IRL, magic doesn't really work, thus our definitions of "witch" vs 'wizard" are hazy and imprecise.
So, in a world where magic is commonplace, pretty much everyone with any smarts at all would know the difference. Sure, in some very small country villages- the vet, dentist & doctor may be all the same person, but that's another issue.
Thus, it's not "metagaming" for your sorcerer to call herself that.
...
Yes, but they're all called doctors.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It also doesn't help that every spellcasting list in the game overlaps significantly. You're injured, so you can go to ... the holy man, the nature shaman ... or the musician.
...
Yes, but they're all called doctors.
Yes, and they're all called 'spellcasters'.
Bottom line seems to be that neither psionics nor Vancian casting is particularly complex to work out, or particularly superior or inferior as a game mechanic, it's just a question of what people are used to and what they prefer.
The only wrongbadfun is stopping other people having fun.
Well said!
Also, it shouldn't require the average gamer a four-page thread to grasp why someone might want a class write-up for their favorite character concept.
It also doesn't help that every spellcasting list in the game overlaps significantly. You're injured, so you can go to ... the holy man, the nature shaman ... or the musician.
The D&D bard is the Celtic bard, not just a entertainer, which is a minstrel. In the Celtic world, being a Bard is like being a Druid, a very important profession.
Indeed. I think to any non-scholar, non-adventurer "Woman with supernatural powers" = witch, by default.
See, I disagree.
Here, in the real world, we differ between professions. A dentist, a veterinarian and a MD are all "medical professionals" but we have different terms for them, and you need to know when your cat is sick to take her to the vet, not the dentist.
Lawrence Watt-Evans does it right. Magical professionals are known by their subtypes- wizards, witches, warlocks, etc. Sure, some naifs from the hicks may not know one from the other, but in general both the laity and the magical professionals know the difference between a Witch and a Wizard, and both are clear as to "which" they are when hanging out their shingle. Of course, some are con artists and fakers, but...
Yes, here IRL, magic doesn't really work, thus our definitions of "witch" vs 'wizard" are hazy and imprecise.
So, in a world where magic is commonplace, pretty much everyone with any smarts at all would know the difference. Sure, in some very small country villages- the vet, dentist & doctor may be all the same person, but that's another issue.
Thus, it's not "metagaming" for your sorcerer to call herself that.
This all seems very campaign-specific, though. The common person may or may not recognize the difference.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Good afternoon everyone. I figure that while I'm waiting on a few responses to sate my hungry curiosity, I'll bring up a few other things that are a bit related to the whole magic vs psionics vs arcane vs divine vs magi vs monks vs clerics vs oracles vs druids vs wizards vs sorcerers vs witches vs paladins vs rangers vs inquisitors vs bards vs summoners vs alchemists vs ninjas etc.
All of these characters perform magical things in different ways. In my opinion this is a good thing for a few different reasons.
1. It adds variety, which is good. Just as we've noticed in this thread, there are people who enjoy some mechanics over others. In D&D/PF, you can have someone who enjoys the psionics system, preparation system, and spontaneous system, and someone who enjoys qi-gong monk magic all in the same party and everyone gets to play and be happy.
2. It allows you to easily create slightly different disciplines that demonstrate different ways to approach magic. Just as in reality, there has never been one system to which humans have attempted to perform magic, be it chanting, performing rituals, drawing diagrams, reciting prayers to spirits or gods or angels or demons, requesting to be possessed by outsiders, using force of will, etc.
This enriches a campaign and encourages players to experience the world and all it offers instead of making assumptions based on metagame knowledge.
A: The Witches of Hagwood who make deals with devils and perform terrible rituals may actually be a bunch of neutral evil oracles (or multiclassed characters) with deformities that use spells like death knell on kidnapped children, and cast spells like planar ally to call on servants of their hag queens from Abaddon.
B: The religious mystics who reside in the Starreach mountain monastery practice strange magics of the body, taught by the ancient dragon Xel'toh'shu in ancient times. These mystics are an order of sorcerers (especially dragon bloodline sorcerers), MoMS monks (employing snake and dragon styles), psychic monks (Download Page), and egoist psions (shapeshifting psions), and of course some multiclass combinations thereof. Each embodying a different aspect of the dragon sensei's ancient wisdom.
C: The Sirens of Saldori that live in the Overgrove are mystical humanoids of great strength, with the ability to enthrall the minds of travelers with their words and their realm is guarded by wild animals who loyally answer their call. Their queen is so powerful that it is said that she can delve into your soul and claim you as her own. Because I'm feeling froggy, these are wood giants with the young creature template (makes them smaller and physically weaker with a -1 CR) who happen commonly have levels in bard, and their leader is a 7th level telepath-psion.
3. It makes it easier to play the character you want and have fun doing it. This is loosely related to #1, but it's slightly different. See, no one class or mechanic is going to be the answer to all your ideas. Further, if you dislike playing the class because you don't find it very fun, it's nice to have options. This describes to my friend who had no fun at all playing vancian caster but loved playing a psion up to 13th+ level. Likewise, it describes me, who wanted a shapeshifting witch-y character who dealt with strange spirits and rituals. Neither druid nor witch particularly fit this (in the case of druid I'd have to wait until 5th level just to turn into an animal for example, yet with minor metamorphosis I was turning into foxes, wolves, giant vermin, and wearing different faces immediately).
It also doesn't help that every spellcasting list in the game overlaps significantly. You're injured, so you can go to ... the holy man, the nature shaman ... or the musician.The D&D bard is the Celtic bard, not just a entertainer, which is a minstrel. In the Celtic world, being a Bard is like being a Druid, a very important profession.
Um...that sounded a bit fishy to me, and it does to wikipedia too.
Bard. Do you have anything to support your claim? Because according to this, they were poets and such, and though in Ireland there were two groups, one which was more religious.If anything that kind of demonstrates how bad connecting class and mechanics are in this way. Even celtic bards did different things, had different roles, and were more or less inclined to spiritual pursuits.
Almost like they had different character classes. >_>
It also doesn't help that every spellcasting list in the game overlaps significantly. You're injured, so you can go to ... the holy man, the nature shaman ... or the musician.The D&D bard is the Celtic bard, not just a entertainer, which is a minstrel. In the Celtic world, being a Bard is like being a Druid, a very important profession.Um...that sounded a bit fishy to me, and it does to wikipedia too.
Bard. Do you have anything to support your claim? Because according to this, they were poets and such, and though in Ireland there were two groups, one which was more religious.
What Gygax & co based the D&D bard on was the "File" or "Fili" which is the legendary Irish bard: According to the Textbook of Irish Literature, by Eleanor Hull:
"The file is to be regarded as in the earliest times as combining in his person the functions of magician, lawgiver, judge, counsellor to the chief, and poet. "
It also doesn't help that every spellcasting list in the game overlaps significantly. You're injured, so you can go to ... the holy man, the nature shaman ... or the musician.The D&D bard is the Celtic bard, not just a entertainer, which is a minstrel. In the Celtic world, being a Bard is like being a Druid, a very important profession.Um...that sounded a bit fishy to me, and it does to wikipedia too.
Bard. Do you have anything to support your claim? Because according to this, they were poets and such, and though in Ireland there were two groups, one which was more religious.What Gygax & co based the D&D bard on was the "File" or "Fili" which is the legendary Irish bard: According to the Textbook of Irish Literature, by Eleanor Hull:
"The file is to be regarded as in the earliest times as combining in his person the functions of magician, lawgiver, judge, counsellor to the chief, and poet. "
Which means...nothing.
Which means...nothing.What Gygax & co based the D&D bard on was the "File" or "Fili" which is the legendary Irish bard: According to the Textbook of Irish Literature, by Eleanor Hull:
"The file is to be regarded as in the earliest times as combining in his person the functions of magician, lawgiver, judge, counsellor to the chief, and poet. "
Which means not a minstrel. D&D is based upon myth & legend, magic, not real life.
Which means not a minstrel. D&D is based upon myth & legend, magic, not real life.
Which means...nothing.What Gygax & co based the D&D bard on was the "File" or "Fili" which is the legendary Irish bard: According to the Textbook of Irish Literature, by Eleanor Hull:
"The file is to be regarded as in the earliest times as combining in his person the functions of magician, lawgiver, judge, counsellor to the chief, and poet. "
Except they based it on real life myths & legends. And that is also not the bard that you see today. If you must have class + mechanics to = whatever, then you're doing it wrong with the bard, because apparently you need to invent some entirely new class called Fili.
Or you could just fluff your own damned character the way you want. Your Fili could be a bard, druid, cleric, wizard, sorcerer, or psion. Or you could go a step further and make them more real and just not give them magic at all and let them just be religious scholars and record keeping poets.
It steal means...nothing.
To be more accurate, Gygax and company drew from a wide variety of sources, both fictional, and traditional. Grab a copy of the original First Edition books and look at the Bibliography sometime. (unfortunately an artform lost by both WOTC and Paizo, as Gygax's Bibliography was educational in and of itself.)Which means not a minstrel. D&D is based upon myth & legend, magic, not real life.
Which means...nothing.What Gygax & co based the D&D bard on was the "File" or "Fili" which is the legendary Irish bard: According to the Textbook of Irish Literature, by Eleanor Hull:
"The file is to be regarded as in the earliest times as combining in his person the functions of magician, lawgiver, judge, counsellor to the chief, and poet. "
That bibliography helped get him sued for plagiarism. That's a major contributing factor to why it became a lost artform.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To be more accurate, the Bard in the first editions was a Fighter/Rogue/Druid. A DIVINE caster.
Then it became arcane (it had a spellbook), and then in 3.0/3.5 it became a spontaneous caster.
The most accurate example of actual bards we have in 3.5 is the Fochluchan Lyrist.
That doesn't prevent saving throws from working :PNah we use "psionics are different".The thread made its saving throw against the power and the merger failed.But I used my OP psionics to fuse it with this thread.That's for another thread!The only wrongbadfun is stopping other people having fun.and rogues.
I say yes.
Now, as a DM, you're free to learn the entirety of psionics rules to prove me wrong, but really, who has all that time?Let's dance!
I say yes.
Now, as a DM, you're free to learn the entirety of psionics rules to prove me wrong, but really, who has all that time?Let's dance!
I looked up the relevant power. It requires a willing partner. Objects cannot be willing :P
In all seriousness, can we stop this derail? It's going to irritate people soon.
I say yes.
Now, as a DM, you're free to learn the entirety of psionics rules to prove me wrong, but really, who has all that time?Let's dance!
I looked up the relevant power. It requires a willing partner. Objects cannot be willing :P
In all seriousness, can we stop this derail? It's going to irritate people soon.
Clearly you didn't see the erratta in Complete Psionic (MSRP $34.95).
Also, no. It still amuses me slightly.
Besides, this thread has long since run its course past reasoned opining into petty bickering. As long as everyone else is flogging a dead horse, I'm going to dance on its corpse.
/dance
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As much as many of us would like to think otherwise basically every fantasy book written never mind real world mumbo-jumbo : magic is an art not a science.
Irritating as it might be its those highly intelligent art majors/theologians etc who would be casting in a world of magic - not us, and ironically few role players would be (most I know are core science or/and see the world in absolutes.. see above lol ).
Its not a matter of opinion its a matter of dealing with the reality as it stands. Using science analogs and predictions for how magic should behave is fundamentally weak.
If you think magic is a science (in the face of all cannon never mind our knowledge of reality) well..
"Science (from Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge"[1]) is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.[2][3] In an older and closely related meaning, "science" also refers to a body of knowledge itself, of the type that can be rationally explained and reliably applied."
That TOTALLY describes D&D magic.
Magic has rules. The same spell, generated by the same caster under the same conditions, will operate in exactly the same way. Spells can be taught and utilize formulae. The exact same gestures and incantations and flinging about of miscellaneous material in the same way will produce the same spell every time.
To be more accurate, Gygax and company drew from a wide variety of sources, both fictional, and traditional. Grab a copy of the original First Edition books and look at the Bibliography sometime. (unfortunately an artform lost by both WOTC and Paizo, as Gygax's Bibliography was educational in and of itself.)Which means not a minstrel. D&D is based upon myth & legend, magic, not real life.
Which means...nothing.What Gygax & co based the D&D bard on was the "File" or "Fili" which is the legendary Irish bard: According to the Textbook of Irish Literature, by Eleanor Hull:
"The file is to be regarded as in the earliest times as combining in his person the functions of magician, lawgiver, judge, counsellor to the chief, and poet. "
And what Gygax said years ago in 1e is utterly and completely irrelevant to a completely different game system decades later.
And what Gygax said years ago in 1e is utterly and completely irrelevant to a completely different game system decades later.
Heresy!
;-)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
1. 'Science' vs 'Arts' is rather separate to such a definition. The sciences have a meaning far separate to scientiae. If you want to go down that path I suppose all those working on the large hadron collider are actually philosophers: "philosophy. noun 1.
the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline."
2. This entire discussion is about what should be/makes sense not what currently is.
3. Just like HPs and AC magic needs to follow mechanics that any 8yr old can follow. The simplified and trivialized mechanics are quite separate from whats actually happening.As for the point and click thing:
Try it in game- ANY player plays your sorcerer/oracle or psion due to your limited spells/powers known their as effective as the actual player. Also those chosen will be board recommended or played/seen for decades (really not much individual choosing if your honest). Try that with a wizard or cleric - like light and day. Every morning (or whenever if you leave slots open) you choose/adapt/respond to plans and ideas. The ACTUAL player (and perhaps some stand out players) stand FAR above ineffectiveness. Sorcerers/psions are just another version of big dumb fighters only with more toys (feats/weapons = spells) and less need for wit when it comes to tactics and positioning.Magic is an art not a science. Its not my personal idea or ideal but read more fantasy, play more different games, read mythology, philosophy, theology, occult texts etc etc.Its cannon. Deal with it as you will!!
If this world reawakens with magic (shadowrun or rifts style) I for one will be spending my time between crying under the stairs, glaring and writing angry letters to the editor about how I deserve to be able to cast because I liked fantasy, understand reality and know my tech. All the while scattered 'foolish' noob shades of grey indigo children will be flying and shooting lightning because they just 'get it' while I try and quantify and classify it all through my existing knowledge with my crusty thoughts. I will be the old person trying to use a computer!
Are you...okay? O~o
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1) What does the fact that scientists could also be described as philosophers have to do with art v. science?
2) Art has strictures, codas, and certain measurable properties. It is taught in classes, graded in schools, and weighed as "good" or "bad" by experts.
3) Any apparent "art" (aka "non-measurable elements", which is what you're using it as) that comes with magic, by written canon, completely defies the mechanical canon by which we all play. Either it functions the way we play, or it functions the way the author wants. OR your GM house-rules it, in which case we're not talking about the same experience anyway, and your suggestions only apply to your local experiences and not the wider world of gaming and are thus not really helpful here outside of one more point of anecdotal data. "Deal with it as you will." indeed.
(There is nothing wrong with house-ruling, by the way - I do it all the time - but I hardly presume that my house rules are common.)
Mechanically, the spells are fundamentally represented by a MATHEMATICAL FORMULA. Everything in the game is controlled by mathematical formula. It functions based on mathematical formula.
So, you know, your argument is really weak, there.
Also,
As for the point and click thing:
Try it in game- ANY player plays your sorcerer/oracle or psion due to your limited spells/powers known their as effective as the actual player. Also those chosen will be board recommended or played/seen for decades (really not much individual choosing if your honest). Try that with a wizard or cleric - like light and day. Every morning (or whenever if you leave slots open) you choose/adapt/respond to plans and ideas. The ACTUAL player (and perhaps some stand out players) stand FAR above ineffectiveness. Sorcerers/psions are just another version of big dumb fighters only with more toys (feats/weapons = spells) and less need for wit when it comes to tactics and positioning.
HAHAH, okay, I see now, this is a "lolitrolu!" post!
The entire point is "Prepared Vancian is more powerful!"
Hahah! Yeah, well, no one has disputed this.
Your "point-and-click" is a terrible analogy to get that across though. "Those words, you keep using them: I do not think they mean what you think they mean."
All of us have had a great deal of real gaming experience with sorcerers, clerics, wizards, and (in some cases) psions.
The inherent variability of a psion's powers, despite the limited number of powers known, makes them far superior to a sorcerer in terms of versatility and variability - they are very reactive to the needs of the situation, but in a manner different from mages.
Also, prep-mages suck on any quest with a time crunch. That's their major weakness.
And, you know, it's really odd that you likened the re-emergence of magic to the old person with a computer, which is entirely a concept based around mechanics, technology, and personal skill... you know... as opposed to your use of "art" (aka "that which isn't definable or measurable").
Which means not a minstrel. D&D is based upon myth & legend, magic, not real life.
Which means...nothing.What Gygax & co based the D&D bard on was the "File" or "Fili" which is the legendary Irish bard: According to the Textbook of Irish Literature, by Eleanor Hull:
"The file is to be regarded as in the earliest times as combining in his person the functions of magician, lawgiver, judge, counsellor to the chief, and poet. "
Except they based it on real life myths & legends. And that is also not the bard that you see today. If you must have class + mechanics to = whatever, then you're doing it wrong with the bard, because apparently you need to invent some entirely new class called Fili.
Or you could just fluff your own damned character the way you want. Your Fili could be a bard, druid, cleric, wizard, sorcerer, or psion. Or you could go a step further and make them more real and just not give them magic at all and let them just be religious scholars and record keeping poets.
It steal means...nothing.
He's also not a druid.
Would you care to elaborate?
That bibliography helped get him sued for plagiarism. That's a major contributing factor to why it became a lost artform.I suspect that he's saying that "Appendix N" in the 1E PHB was the impetus behind the Tolkien estate taking legal action against TSR.
Of course, that's a fairly garbled version of events. For one thing, no lawsuit against TSR or Gary Gygax was ever filed by the Tolkien estate - in other words, Gary was never sued for plagiarism (unless MagusJanus is referring to something else entirely). While I can't find any sources, it does seem to be "common knowledge" that Tolkien's estate did make a legal threat against TSR a few years after D&D was released, but it never went to court that I could find.
Further, said legal threat almost certainly had nothing to do with Appendix N. The references to Tolkien-based intellectual properties were excised as of the sixth printing of the OD&D rules in 1977. The Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Player's Handbook, with its Appendix N, wasn't released until 1978.
A garbled version of events is all I'm finding when I look for further information. Even the Wikipedia entry that mentions halflings and treants disagrees with itself about whether or not a lawsuit happened; in the halflings section it says a lawsuit was threatened, but in the section on treants it implies the lawsuit happened.
I get further afield from that, events get even more garbled; general consensus of what information I found is that the lawsuit did happen.
So, I am relying upon the best information I have at the moment. If you have better, please post a link to it so I can correct my misinformation.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
...1. 'Science' vs 'Arts' is rather separate to such a definition. The sciences have a meaning far separate to scientiae. If you want to go down that path I suppose all those working on the large hadron collider are actually philosophers: "philosophy. noun 1.
the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline."
2. This entire discussion is about what should be/makes sense not what currently is.
3. Just like HPs and AC magic needs to follow mechanics that any 8yr old can follow. The simplified and trivialized mechanics are quite separate from whats actually happening.As for the point and click thing:
Try it in game- ANY player plays your sorcerer/oracle or psion due to your limited spells/powers known their as effective as the actual player. Also those chosen will be board recommended or played/seen for decades (really not much individual choosing if your honest). Try that with a wizard or cleric - like light and day. Every morning (or whenever if you leave slots open) you choose/adapt/respond to plans and ideas. The ACTUAL player (and perhaps some stand out players) stand FAR above ineffectiveness. Sorcerers/psions are just another version of big dumb fighters only with more toys (feats/weapons = spells) and less need for wit when it comes to tactics and positioning.Magic is an art not a science. Its not my personal idea or ideal but read more fantasy, play more different games, read mythology, philosophy, theology, occult texts etc etc.Its cannon. Deal with it as you will!!
If this world reawakens with magic (shadowrun or rifts style) I for one will be spending my time between crying under the stairs, glaring and writing angry letters to the editor about how I deserve to be able to cast because I liked fantasy, understand reality and know my tech. All the while scattered 'foolish' noob shades of grey indigo children will be flying and shooting lightning because they just 'get it' while I try
Somethin' wrong with that boy's medulla oblongata!
Somethin' wrong with that boy's medulla oblongata!
No, Kernal Sanders, You're WRONG!
Fergus or the True Lips from the Fenian Cycle is described as acting as poet, musician, lore keeper and a diplomat for Fionn mac Cumhaill. He also speaks/sings to various Fianna and their allies to make them fight better than before as well as calming two armies before they can bash each others heads in. Sounds like the D&D bard to me.
He's also not a druid.
Which is exactly my point. You can play them like that. I would dare say that they have mechanics that can decently represent that.
Untold wonders and secrets exist for those skillful enough to discover them. Through cleverness, talent, and magic, these cunning few unravel the wiles of the world, becoming adept in the arts of persuasion, manipulation, and inspiration. Typically masters of one or many forms of artistry, bards possess an uncanny ability to know more than they should and use what they learn to keep themselves and their allies ever one step ahead of danger. Bards are quick-witted and captivating, and their skills might lead them down many paths, be they gamblers or jacks-of-all-trades, scholars or performers, leaders or scoundrels, or even all of the above. For bards, every day brings its own opportunities, adventures, and challenges, and only by bucking the odds, knowing the most, and being the best might they claim the treasures of each.
None of the "celtic religious overtones" are present. Heck, they aren't even required to be poets or musicians. They can be orators and dancers. They can even be comedians.
At the end of the day, you could use a bard class to represent all kinds of things. I once used the bard class to represent a character of mine whose parents (one a mundane adventurer and the other a magician) and their both teaching him, leading to his beginning his grand adventure with a bit o' sword and sorcery. His performance? He was pretty good at wise-cracking jokes like Spiderman.
Every time someone jumps in and tries to be like "FLUFFFFFFFF" they just shoot themselves in the foot, because it still doesn't fit. Ever. Because there is more than just basic fluff. Otherwise there would only be about a dozen possible characters existing in the whole freaking world. :P
Fergus or the True Lips from the Fenian Cycle is described as acting as poet, musician, lore keeper and a diplomat for Fionn mac Cumhaill. He also speaks/sings to various Fianna and their allies to make them fight better than before as well as calming two armies before they can bash each others heads in. Sounds like the D&D bard to me.
He's also not a druid.
Which is exactly my point. You can play them like that. I would dare say that they have mechanics that can decently represent that.
Not really. The Psion can't emulate Inspire Courage, for example (the Tactician and maybe the Vitalist can). The Druid will have a hard time here, as well. It also lacks mind-affecting spells. Both don't have the skill points and class skills to be artist, wise man and diplomat at the same time.
You can refluff almost anything, but only up to the point where the class doesn't support your concept anymore.
Not really. The Psion can't emulate Inspire Courage, for example (the Tactician and maybe the Vitalist can). The Druid will have a hard time here, as well. It also lacks mind-affecting spells. Both don't have the skill points and class skills to be artist, wise man and diplomat at the same time.
You can refluff almost anything, but only up to the point where the class doesn't support your concept anymore.
He's talking about bards, dude.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fergus or the True Lips from the Fenian Cycle is described as acting as poet, musician, lore keeper and a diplomat for Fionn mac Cumhaill. He also speaks/sings to various Fianna and their allies to make them fight better than before as well as calming two armies before they can bash each others heads in. Sounds like the D&D bard to me.
He's also not a druid.
Which is exactly my point. You can play them like that. I would dare say that they have mechanics that can decently represent that.
Not really. The Psion can't emulate Inspire Courage, for example (the Tactician and maybe the Vitalist can). The Druid will have a hard time here, as well. It also lacks mind-affecting spells. Both don't have the skill points and class skills to be artist, wise man and diplomat at the same time.
You can refluff almost anything, but only up to the point where the class doesn't support your concept anymore.
I didn't say anything about psions emulating Inspire Courage. My contributions to the subject have been the following.
1. Why core magic fails at some of the fluffier aspects of other forms of magic (be they psionics or magic by another name).
2. Why the psionic system is better than core magic from a standpoint of learning it, tracking it, and adapting to a character's needs (IE - fluff).
3. Advocated for deeper understanding of RP and challenged the idea of imprisoning yourself in a self-imposed fluff-trap.
4. Have advocated that there is place in the game, noting that the psionics system, preparation, and spontaneous casting systems appeal to different people for different reasons, and some are fun and work for those people more than others.
Right now, in the game I'm playing in on Friday (tomorrow in fact, looking forward to it), I'm playing a human psion flavored as a witch; another player is playing an android soulknife; another is playing a modified alchemist (a homebrew healing archetype of the player's design that the GM liked); a catfolk bard; an undead antipaladin; and my brother may be joining the game in the future with a human paladin or psychic monk.
We've got a pseudo-preparation caster (the alchemist thingy), a spontaneous caster, a psionic caster, and a few classes with their own mechanics separate from spellcasting as a primary focus.
Everyone gets to be happy.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
insaneogeddin, it occurs to me that we might just not be communicating.
To this end, I will (without attempting to denegrate your point, though I disagree with the percieved points) show what I think you're saying. Please correct me where I am wrong.
How People Respond to Magic
We both seem to agree that the way magic reacts to people doesn't function like anything in reality.
I agree.
But it seems that we disagree on whether this is more or less friendly to immersion. Am I correct on this?
~ To you: "Vancian yields a more immersive experience"
~ To me: "Vancian is less immersive and less fluid"
Have I summed up our positions correctly? If not, please clarify.
How People Play Magic Users
Additionally, it seems that you lump Spontaneous Casters with Power Point "casters" in terms of play style, and then oppose this to prepared casters.
Am I correct?
If so, I disagree with this organization.
To me:
1) Prepared Vancian
2) Spontaneous Vancian
3) Power Points
The latter two share some elements of similarity due to limited known effects, but ultimately don't overlap, and, power points (with augmentation) share some elements of similarity with Prepared Vancian for purposes of variability.
Thus the three different styles generate different styles of play relative to one another.
One of the interesting things is that it seemed that you suggested that Wizards could not "spam" whereas sorcerers and psions could. Am I correct?
If this is your position, only the most wasteful of players "spam" their stuff, unless necessary, and it really doesn't matter whether said players are prepared or spontaneous.
The very suggestion that spontaneous casters don't need to think (because they have a limited selection) is silly. Of course they need to think - they desperately need to think and utilize what they have in a far more clever and witty manner than those who have a larger repertoire.
This is not to say that Wizards (or Wizard players) are inferior - they are not. But neither are Sorcerers or Psions (or the players thereof) which, truth be told, seems to be what you're saying.
Sorcerers are not as powerful as Wizards. Psions are not as powerful as Wizards. We agree. That doesn't make playing one a brainless exercise - instead it just ups the requirements on the character playing to their strengths and minimizing their disadvantages, requiring tactical thinking, "wit" as you say, and careful planning... substantially more before hand than Wizards.
If I've misunderstood your points anywhere, please correct me so that we can continue discussion.
|
First...
I don't want the inclusion of any type of Mana point system in PF, that would include Psionics. I would hope that if Paizo did make a Psionic class (or book) that it would use a mechanic that would dump the point system or have a pool similar to the other classes in the PF universe.
Keep in mind, that isn't was Psi points are. They are the replacement of the castings per day (either by Vance or Spontain) instead of a pool of points to take advantage of certain auxiliary powers or augment the ones you already have.
I'm curious what you mean by this. What mechanic would you suggest? How would it work? What kinds of point-pools do you mean? Like the Monk and Gunslinger? If so, how do you feel about the Quinggong archetype?
Second...
Terry Pratchett firmly makes fun of the Vancian casting (and the awful depictions of magic use by certain authors of the past) by making a pitiful character (We all still love Rincewind, but he is pitiful) unable to do anything but keep an epic spell in his head. Oh, and he makes a horrible tour guide to boot.
More or less what I meant. Also, Journey Quest.
Eh... I don't know. I understand what you're saying, and to some extent I agree, but I'm not sure it's going to go the way of the Dodo anytime soon, if only because it's too deeply ingrained in Gamer Culture to successfully eliminate entirely and still maintain a healthy game. Look at 4E v. PF, for example. While Vancian is only one aspect (and not one that I'm the most fond of), it's one of the major reasons that people rebelled against switching to the new edition. Some came to PF,...Third...
Vancian casting needs to either change or be done away with in the next iteration of this game, be it PF ver2 or another. Having all Spontaneous Casting base their casting stat on Cha is getting tiresome. I go into it a bit more in another thread, but there is more than one or the other that can be done. The Arcanist is a good start.
See, I would still have the spell slots as they are, but not have them forgotten with a single casting. That is what I mean by Vancian casting. "fire and forget"
If spamming is an issue, (It can be with the Sorcerer) then a cool down is preferable to forgetting the spell intireally. Able to recast in a die roll of rounds, higher level spells have bigger or more die. Feats can reduce or eliminate cool downs. My fervent wish is to have a unified, standard magic system that is used for all classes that cast. Concentrate on class abilities, perhaps have some that use powers much like the Bloodline powers for the elemental sorcerers, augmented with class choices, instead of going off the same spell list as another class. Have the cleric switch-out spells from her god between encounters. Have the druid focused on an aspect of their class....
This, of course, would be something to think on for the next version of PF, not something that is in the here and now.
If Psionics was to be introduced in this current mold, I would like to have them be like spontaneous casters with a Psi pool to augment their abilities and or add to their powers. They would use a seperate list of.. Psionic powers. I would be very careful as to what to include and what not to. It would be more focused than the "alternate Wizard" listing that is in 3.5 and Dreamscarred version.