From: "Blitz Krieg" <
blitz_krieg@...>
>From: "Kimes, Dean W." <Dean_Kimes@...>
>
>Well, this debate has certainly heated things up. Its clear there is an
>easily definable line between the roleplayers and the powergamers here.
>I'm not sure where you draw this line.... Please define it a little more so
>I can figure out if you've pre-classified me as a powergamer or a
>roleplayer.
I was speaking in general about some prior posts, so at that point hadn't
'classified' you.
>From your message, I believe you're talking about the Platemail
>issue, but please correct me if I'm wrong. If so, I believe you're
>labelling me as a powergamer, because, as I've previously mentioned, I
>believe our class is Balanced with the use of Plate in mind. I believe
that
>a Bard that doesn't use Plate is like a Monk that doesn't use his punch
>because "Every class can punch".
Ok, can now classify you as a powergamer, since you plainly imply that
anyone who doesn't take the utmost advantage of the abilities of their class
is stupid, so we should all wear plate and all use the weapon combo that
numericaly deals the most damage per unit time. so in real life no one
should drive red cars by your logic since they function as well as any other
and statistically get the most speeding tickets.
>Now, if that doesn't fit YOUR image of a
>Bard, then you're more than free to take the AC hit and not wear it....
>Please don't tell those of us that do choose to wear plate that we're
wrong,
>or aren't roleplayers. I am roleplaying the Bard class as Verant designed
>it.
Never said they were wrong, in fact plainly said I don't care but I wont,
and no you are taking the utmost advantage of the class as designed, no
eveidence you are roleplaying it just because you wear plate.
>I don't like the idea of bards wearing plate personally, it doesn't fit any
>image of the class from a roleplaying perspective as far as I can see, and
>while sure its nice to be able to absorb more damage, it'd be nice to have
a
>bazooka too. Whether bards can ultimately wear plate or not at some point
>is moot to me, I won't 'cause it doesn't fit my image of a bard. to me
that
>image is more important than being as effective as possible. I kinda wish
>they'd institute something similar to the monk's increased AC when wearing
>light armor for bards as an option, not necessarily better than plate or
>even equal, just better than nothing. If not, oh well.
>
>I like the idea of having some bard specific items. Singing swords,
magical
>instruments, any of these would be great! Most of the other classes seem
to
>have items tailored towards them with the exception of bards. Oh yeah sure
>we can use some warrior's castoff magic weapon, but so can a monk, and just
>like a monk, why would we? It'd sure be nice to see something that bard's
>could make better use of than anyone else.
>Bard's are Jack of All trades - Borrowing from many different classes.
>We're different than monks, Monks have their own set of skills. Ours are
>part fighter, part rogue, part magical, part of many things. I'll use any
>weapon or skill that's available to me, that betters my class.
Ok, not much to complain about here, but by this logic shadowknights are
just warriors mixed with necromancers, why do they have shadowknight only
weapons?
>On most of the other issues I'm pretty close to neutral except for binding.
>The way I see a bard, and certainly the way Verant seems to portray them,
>they should travel more than any other character. To have to do this
>without being able to bind is difficult, and one would think a travelling
>minstrel could bind himself anywhere.
>I am wholeheartedly against Bind for Bards. No other Hybrid gets this.
>This is reserved for the pure casters. Yes it would be nice to have, but
>"it'd be nice to have a bazooka too."
Ummm, no other hybrid gets pick locks either, so they should probably take
that away too by your logic.
>I somewhat agreed with everything on the petition but the Bind and the Exp
>issues. I was a little bit peeved to see the petition ask for a bonus in
>ability (Bind) that makes the class stronger, and at the same time ask for
>less of an exp hit.... We are hybrids. Hybrids have a penalty. We can
tank
>and cast spells with our songs.... We get a penalty in Exp for that and we
>should. As far as soloing... Verant has always said this is a group game.
>I don't level any noticeably slower than my GF (High Elf Magician) who I
>group with on EVERY kill. So in groups, as Verant designed the game, it's
>been my exp that we're not really disadvantaged at all. While Bards CAN
>solo and DO solo, I believe Bards belong in a party. If someone chooses to
>solo, then they should take the extra penalties for doing so in a group
>based game.
Best part of your piece hands down. While I disagree on the bind issue, I
too think we do not suffer from an overly large experience penalty. I keep
up with the human monk I most often group with and do better soloing against
some critters than he does. In groups he ends up taking most of the damage
since he deals out so much and wears no armor to speak of. I have not seen
any real evidence we advance much slower than the average character,
although many bards are wood elves and wood elves advance slower than
humans. But then why would you want to be a human and live in some smelly
stone city, yech! Oops, sorry let my character run away with itself there,
no offense intended to our human readership.
Kitasi
The mournful bard of Faydwer on E'ci
"and no one shall work for money,
and no one shall work for fame"
"but each for the joy of the working,
and each to his separate star..."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Campaign 2000 is here!
http://www.onelist.com
Discuss your thoughts; get informed at ONElist. See our homepage.