On Fri, 1 Oct 1999, Lange, Stephen wrote:
>
> We are looking at the "Hybrid" designation from different perspectives. I
> see a Hybrid as Magic + Armor/Weapons/Skills or a Melee class. Pure
> Casts/Priests all can melee with a weapon subset, hybrids get casting plus a
> larger subset of weapons and true armor.
These are completely arbitrary definitions.
> Class Armor (Plate/Magic Subset)
> Wizard No
> Enchanter No
> Necromancer No
>
> Cleric Yes
> Shaman Yes
> Ranger Yes
> Shadowkight Yes
> Paladin Yes
>
> Fighter Yes/Default
> Rogue Yes
>
> Im sorry, but you have to looks at a classes restrictions. The simple fact
> is, pure casters cannot wear True Armor. Hybrids can wear a limited subset,
> and Melee'ers can wear all. Do you refute this basic statement? If you do
> how can you deny that a druid and shaman are a hybrid.
So a wizard wearing shining metallic robes (better AC than
plate) is a hybrid?
We've got several categories of classes here:
Int-based casters:
Melee skills go as 3*level.
Can wear cloth and patchwork-level armor.
Wis-based (primary) casters:
Melee skills go as 4*level.
Druid:
Can wear up to leather.
Shaman:
Can wear up to banded.
Cleric:
Can wear up to plate.
Non-casters:
Melee skills go as 5*level.
Monk:
Can wear up to leather.
Rogue:
Can wear up to banded.
Warrior:
Can wear up to plate.
Classes that don't quite fit:
Melee skills go as 5*level.
Ranger:
Can wear up to banded.
Paladin, shadownknight, bard:
Can wear up to plate.
What you define as a hybrid is really up to you. The classes
run the full spectrum. Even the four categories I've used
above are somewhat arbitrary, although I personally feel they
are the most appropriate. I wouldn't hold anyone to these
categories though, much less make an argument about what
classes should get what based on them.
--
John H. Kim
kim@...