Nano
Arcane
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2016
- Messages
- 4,817
I think pips means drinks. Drink until you pass out, razvedchiki.In which context ?do you need more than 2 pips into ranged weapons?
I think pips means drinks. Drink until you pass out, razvedchiki.In which context ?do you need more than 2 pips into ranged weapons?
Nope…. More likely its people who read it and shake their in disgust at such unnecessary limitation. But that’s the beauty of it all…. We buy the books, review (not revere) the rules and adapt what we want into our game.Yes.So Rangers are unique because they could only be good-aligned and Druids are unique as they were labeled as TN only? Someone wanting to play an evil Ranger is a Snowflake
Yes.
Yes, and a retard.
Because per AD&D, a ranger is not just some guy larping in the wood, but a champion of good with strong altruistic and spiritual value. It's precisely because he's exceptional that he's allowed to receive various boon, the most well-known being his ability to cast spell at level 8.
I dunno why guys keep pretending that the alignement restriction exist in a vacuum, every class concerned got an heavy description of the traits expected from this character. People who are bitching are people who can't read.
Edgy do you know what I think some of you guys may be ignoring, end of the day D&D is a fantasy setting and the ruleset, that includes alignment, define the basic foundation of the mechanics of the RP experience but it shouldnt be more important than the way a DM or game like BG is created to provide fun and entertainment for playersWhat, are you saying that a village wouldn't hire a ranger to camp out in the woods and murder people at night? How terribly close-minded of you.Because per AD&D, a ranger is not just some guy larping in the wood, but a champion of good with strong altruistic and spiritual value. It's precisely because he's exceptional that he's allowed to receive various boon, the most well-known being his ability to cast spell at level 8.
Without Alignments, Planescape wouldn't exist. An entire setting based on "living philosophy" and metaphysical concepts like belief. Dozens of extraplanar beings who were born from the idea of Good and Evil would be reduced to stereotypes of their classical counterparts, probably with a much less unique lore, if any worth speaking of at all.I dunno why guys keep pretending that the alignement restriction exist in a vacuum, every class concerned got an heavy description of the traits expected from this character. People who are bitching are people who can't read.
4E was built for people like this and it's boring garbage. There's your dream game, munchkins. Why aren't you playing it?
"Guys, it's FANTASTY and I just want to play pretend!"Edgy do you know what I think some of you guys may be ignoring, end of the day D&D is a fantasy setting
It is, but not for the reason you think.Our debate around Romance and Lolth is a good example of this
I would rate this popamole if I could.Nope…. More likely its people who read it and shake their in disgust at such unnecessary limitation. But that’s the beauty of it all…. We buy the books, review (not revere) the rules and adapt what we want into our game.Yes.So Rangers are unique because they could only be good-aligned and Druids are unique as they were labeled as TN only? Someone wanting to play an evil Ranger is a Snowflake
Yes.
Yes, and a retard.
Because per AD&D, a ranger is not just some guy larping in the wood, but a champion of good with strong altruistic and spiritual value. It's precisely because he's exceptional that he's allowed to receive various boon, the most well-known being his ability to cast spell at level 8.
I dunno why guys keep pretending that the alignement restriction exist in a vacuum, every class concerned got an heavy description of the traits expected from this character. People who are bitching are people who can't read.
But to cry that a Ranger is a champion of good and we must conform to this, then see a ton of those so called sacred rules bent in every supplement is retarded. Gold Elf Knight Knight, Dwarven Runecaster….. whatever genius.
Maybe you can explain why you disagree with a post instead of being sarcastic, just a suggestion?I would rate this popamole if I could.Nope…. More likely its people who read it and shake their in disgust at such unnecessary limitation. But that’s the beauty of it all…. We buy the books, review (not revere) the rules and adapt what we want into our game.Yes.So Rangers are unique because they could only be good-aligned and Druids are unique as they were labeled as TN only? Someone wanting to play an evil Ranger is a Snowflake
Yes.
Yes, and a retard.
Because per AD&D, a ranger is not just some guy larping in the wood, but a champion of good with strong altruistic and spiritual value. It's precisely because he's exceptional that he's allowed to receive various boon, the most well-known being his ability to cast spell at level 8.
I dunno why guys keep pretending that the alignement restriction exist in a vacuum, every class concerned got an heavy description of the traits expected from this character. People who are bitching are people who can't read.
But to cry that a Ranger is a champion of good and we must conform to this, then see a ton of those so called sacred rules bent in every supplement is retarded. Gold Elf Knight Knight, Dwarven Runecaster….. whatever genius.
Yes.So Rangers are unique because they could only be good-aligned and Druids are unique as they were labeled as TN only? Someone wanting to play an evil Ranger is a Snowflake
Yes.
Yes, and a retard.
Because per AD&D, a ranger is not just some guy larping in the wood, but a champion of good with strong altruistic and spiritual value. It's precisely because he's exceptional that he's allowed to receive various boon, the most well-known being his ability to cast spell at level 8.
I dunno why guys keep pretending that the alignement restriction exist in a vacuum, every class concerned got an heavy description of the traits expected from this character. People who are bitching are people who can't read.
About that:Then you have Jaheira who is TN, but behaves like NG.
Not really, they're mostly rude and stupid asshole, but that's not enough to make them so. I don't remember them acting with their own interest in mind, it's mostly autistic rage bout people getting OUT OF MY SWAMP.Or the shadow druids, who act like NE.
Eh. I think she just pushes True Neutral as far as it will go. It's been a while since I've played, but I do recall a few quests where she wasn't a complete goody two shoes.Obviously Jaheira should be NG, she's harper and the textbook definition of NG.
Yeah, it's just things taken to an extreme. Jaheira keeps the balance by attacking evil. The Shadow Druids do it by attacking anyone who encroaches their woods.Not really, they're mostly rude and stupid asshole, but that's not enough to make them so. I don't remember them acting with their own interest in mind, it's mostly autistic rage bout people getting OUT OF MY SWAMP.
It's because it is a hard alignment for a player to roleplay as. Mordenkainen,for example,was True Neutral. It is a balance between Law and Chaos,Good and Evil. Nature is the embodiment of this alignment. Self preservation. The druid will probably say "Nature can give(good crops,abundance) but she can also take(droughts,natural disasters)".True Neutral is a complete meme alignment and the one alignment that should have never existed.
no, it's just a dumb alignment that can be used as an excuse to do anything any time you wantIt's because it is a hard alignment for a player to roleplay as. Mordenkainen,for example,was True Neutral. It is a balance between Law and Chaos,Good and Evil. Nature is the embodiment of this alignment. Self preservation. The druid will probably say "Nature can give(good crops,abundance) but she can also take(droughts,natural disasters)".True Neutral is a complete meme alignment and the one alignment that should have never existed.
You mean chaotic neutral?no, it's just a dumb alignment that can be used as an excuse to do anything any time you want
or to just do nothing at all ever
how often is a chaotic person lawful?You mean chaotic neutral?no, it's just a dumb alignment that can be used as an excuse to do anything any time you want
or to just do nothing at all ever
???how often is a chaotic person lawful?You mean chaotic neutral?no, it's just a dumb alignment that can be used as an excuse to do anything any time you want
or to just do nothing at all ever
Always struck me as an odd concept, since a strict belief in the balance of good and evil is inherently adhering to an order in things, a Lawful inclination. An amoral mercenary who only values his contract, a disinterested bureaucrat who exclusively upholds the letter of the law, or a druid who worships the balance of "natural law" all come across as Lawful Neutral affairs.It's because it is a hard alignment for a player to roleplay as. Mordenkainen,for example,was True Neutral. It is a balance between Law and Chaos,Good and Evil. Nature is the embodiment of this alignment. Self preservation. The druid will probably say "Nature can give(good crops,abundance) but she can also take(droughts,natural disasters)".
He means in relation to True Neutral being "a dumb alignment that can be used as an excuse to do anything any time you want", i.e. a True Neutral character's player might do Lawful things whenever it suited them, whereas a Chaotic Neutral would be averse to Lawful actions in general. Point being that Chaotic Neutral is a little better defined than True Neutral, albeit only marginally so.
Even apthy would actually classify as evil. Mostly agree apart from that, though druid would still be a step afar from being lawful, as "natural law" is hardly in itself a lawful concept.True Neutral always seemed the alignment of the confused or the apathetic
NPC Project goes out of its way to portray Jaheira as hardcore neutral. I remember a banter with Khalid where he talks about fighting for good and she tells him off for it.Obviously Jaheira should be NG, she's harper and the textbook definition of NG.
NPC Project goes out of its way to portray Jaheira as hardcore neutral. I remember a banter with Khalid where he talks about fighting for good and she tells him off for it.Obviously Jaheira should be NG, she's harper and the textbook definition of NG.