Druids, elfs, and true neutral

[badet]

Hm, I've been thinking, and thinking. i cant figure out why elfes cant be druids. And why cant elfes be true nutral? thats probably the closest thing you can get to the "elf mentality", a true nutral warrior or druid with karisma 20

[SixOfSpades]

Oh, Elves can be True Neutral, they just can't be Druids. I agree, that makes no sense either. Maybe BioWare deliberately trimmed the legal classes for Elves so everybody wouldn't play Elves.....I mean, what kind of sense does it make that the ONLY race that can be a Fighter/Mage/Thief cannot be a BARD.

[Keraptisdm]

Originally posted by SixOfSpades: Oh, Elves can be True Neutral, they just can't be Druids. I agree, that makes no sense either. Maybe BioWare deliberately trimmed the legal classes for Elves so everybody wouldn't play Elves.....I mean, what kind of sense does it make that the ONLY race that can be a Fighter/Mage/Thief cannot be a BARD.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't that class restriction go back (way back) to the Advanced Dungeon and Dragons (AD&D) rules? I'm talking back to 1st Edition rules (when I was playing ). If it does, you'll have to ask Gary Gygax why he set it up that way.

Excellent questions though. You're thinking "beyond the fog of war".

Oh, and Mr. Baggins, did you notice I stated what the abbreviation AD&D meant? I CAN be taught!

[ 09-26-2002, 03:02 PM: Message edited by: Keraptisdm ]

[I wish my name was Baggins]

This has the potential to be words from the mouth of a moron because I never was a big PnP (note easy use of the lingo there) player but maybe since elves are pretty powerful, not to mention immortal, they are able to be triple class Fighter/mage/thief but to be the jack of all trades Bard would thta not make then an inherently stronger character (read maybe too strong thus overplayed) given thier racial bonuses and how well they mesh with the Bard character type? Or am I just a moron here?

[SixOfSpades]

Nah--to be the TRUE Jack-of-all-trades, and thus unstoppable, you'd have to be a Cleric/Thief/Mage, or maybe even a Fighter/Cleric/Thief/Mage, neither of which exist. As for the concept of Bards, even Elven Bards, being overpowered.....hoo hoo ho hoo HOO HA HAAAAA!!!!

[I wish my name was Baggins]

I can dee your point six...here is where my lack of PnP experience comes into play.

[Telchar of Nogrod]

I don't believe that there should be any class/race restrictions, except in imposible casses. I've been playing AD+D for a long time and I've always disagreed with class/race restrictions. I could understand level limits for certain class/race combinations. My main reason for this comes from my beliefs on role playing. If you can make an arguement for any type of character based on literature or imagination then that character can exist. Like the idea of Wood Elves not being able to be Druids is ridiculous. Whenever I DMed a game, I would alter the rules as I saw fit to mold them to the world I created. Of course, when I play a character in someone else's world, I go with the flow and let the DM run the show. In BG, you have to go with thw flow. Bioware is the DM and we are the players; but, don't let that stop you from imagining new and different ways to play your character. Try that next sub-quest a little differently. For my next time through, I'm going to face off with the Doomsayer. I never knew you could do that. I can't wait!

[Lord Brass]

Oddly enough, as Keraptisdm may well remember, Bards used to be fairly well rounded characters. They were an optional class, and had starting parameters that had to be meant. I cannot off the top of my head remember the exact levels, as I haven't looked at the books in a while (and they're in the loft at the moment). However, you had to have several levels as a fighter; followed by one more level (at least) as a thief, and then transferred to become a Bard. They had their own set of spells and abilities, and several magical items that only they could use.

Why can't elves be Druids? Who really knows, they can in 1^stEd(Rev.)AD&D; just be thankful that they don't follow the original version of the game too closely. Level limits were rife for all but a handful of classes. Most elves could make a maximum level of 7 as a Cleric, regardless of their stats. Thieves were one of the few classes that allowed unlimited advancement. Don't ask me why.

The real reason for all of this nonsense is simple in the end: you wouldn't play humans at all if such conditions didn't exist. At least that's what the makers must have thought.

[I wish my name was Baggins]

In my roleplaying (AD&D) experience I have never played a human...Of course that means that the one game that I have really played I was a Centaur Ranger. However, in BG the majority of my characters are human with the exception being the Halfling fighter/thief that I am playing now. As I try to recall why this is true I would have to say that my decisions rest in the back of the book in the tables and charts that say who can do what...and since I thought it not too fair that I could build characters experience through their many travels I would eventually hit a wall barring future advancement. I think that is a hokey rule and I wish that it were not there.

[Keraptisdm]

Originally posted by Lord Brass: The real reason for all of this nonsense is simple in the end: you wouldn't play humans at all if such conditions didn't exist. At least that's what the makers must have thought.

I think you are correct, Lord Brass. And as Telchar stated, as DM's we would allow modifications in our world. I removed the class level limitations on non-humans in some instances. How could an Elf, that lives for nearly 1600 years max out at ?11th? level as a mage? For gosh sakes in that amount of time he/she could read more manuals, scrolls, etc. than 10 elministers!

Speaking of Elves, did you guys/girls notice Kivan's line while underground? "Why must we emulate the ways of the dwarves...." And he says it with some contempt too. What a touch.