Lancer

The option to create non-traditional characters is there, yes, for those who probably run a non-traditional (I'd call it "strange") world. It doesn't mean you are forced to create a gnomish necromancer/thief/paladin character just because the rules allow it. If your character concept isn't in agreement with the flavor the DM has determined for his world he has all the right in the world to disallow that concept.

Yeah, I do the same. The dwarven fighter/cleric and the human ranger both have deities that grant priest spells to them. I never liked the idea of serving a concept and gaining priest spells for it. There most be something there to grant them for loyalty... and take them away for disloyalty. Besides, slowly removing a PC's spells from the higest level and down is a wonderfully effective way to communicate that his deity is not pleased - then they usually become good little choirboys quickly <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I don't use non-deity mythos either. But my point was really in response to Ender's post about Monte Cook's class to point out that "hey, in AD&D the priest class is damn versatile too, you know." The option is there in AD&D for the DM that wants to use it.

By your logic, the moment you introduce the first house rule into your 3e game.. It ceases to be 3e. My game is still AD&D (I use all the AD&D tables and charts..) though with a little OD&D flavor.. that's all

A couple of years ago I underwent the massive undertaking of creating AD&D priest specialty classes for every single one of the Immortals in Mystara's Wrath of the Immortals Boxed Set.(using the AD&D Complete Priests Handbook and a few OD&D Materials like WotI and the Rules Cyclopedia). It was quite the ordeal trying to decide just what major and minor spheres, and powers the approximately 100 or so Immortals would grant their followers but it was fun albeit in a masochistic manner. Definitely worth the effort.

Actually, in my game you can See above post. My AD&D ruleset actually incorporates some OD&D aspects and it was done so long ago that I sometimes forget what belonged to which game. AD&D priests, however, are allowed to uphold any non-deity mythos of the player's choosing upon the DM's approval. This allows for many, many possibilities.

Yep. I must agree. I did manage to incorporate this aspect of OD&D into my AD&D game. In my campaigns budding paladins must start off as a fighter and reach name level. Then they can choose to become a paladin (of various alignments) or become a lord.

You can do the same with AD&D Paladins.. Don't forget anti-paladins as well.

Don't remind me about how downright ludicrous 3e really is. lol.

Really??? Do the 3E Greyhawk/FR settings have dwarven paladins? (w00t) AFAIK, they don't. And if they do now, then I must be concerned about the dangerous direction gaming is heading towards! It is not as simple as wanting a dwarven paladin PC and that's it. One needs to make sure that the dwarven paladin makes sense within the context of their setting. Meaning, if dwarven paladins don't exist in the gameworld, there shouldn't be any dwarven paladin PCs ever unless there is a very, very good in-game explanation of why all of a sudden such a character exists that normally wouldn't in dwarven society. It would most likely require a truly radical explanation like dimensional transport and wormholes. It is the same reasoning as to why you would never find Buck Rogers on Faerun. Or Bugs Bunny on Mystara. I care about character customization but not to that extent. Not at the expense of believability. I, personally, want my campaigns to mirror fantasy as seen through movies (Conan,Sinbad,..etc) and literature (LotR, Arthur, Hercules etc) as much as possible. I also don't run "cute" or comedic campaigns... I like keeping the tone serious and believable. Maintaining the feel/integrity of a particular setting is also important to me. If you don't mind taking a more lighthearted approach towards fantasy with off-the-wall characters then be my guest... 3e is pre-disposed for such. In this case, the "restrictions" in AD&D actually do more good than bad, IMHO.

That's because you look at the rules within a vaccuum.. You need to look at the rules within the context of your particular gameworld's setting. The setting will always impose restrictions on who or what you can be ... no matter what.

I have never heard of an orc, dwarven or elven (or whatever) paladin. Last time I checked all paladins I've ever heard about in fantasy are human. EDIT: It is nonsense like being able to have dwarven paladins that makes 3E too silly for me. AD&D is da sh!t.

Ok.. To get back on topic.. IMHO, most things in life are better than d20. As Enderwiggin stated in another thread you should try FUZION, FUDGE, GURPS, and d6.. They are all better than d20. I will also thrown in "Savage Worlds.." That also seems to be better than d20.

Sounds like it is just easier to buy a brand new top of the line computer. They are so cheap nowadays that for lazy people (like me) that can't be bothered with the research they come as a true blessing. And wow.. Darque actually sleeps?

Hmm?? No, I am talking about the game.. I got V:TM a little while ago and so far it is a pretty good game.. It would be better yet if my computer had been upgraded some!

I got it not too far ago myself and must say it does seem like a nifty little gem once the performance issues are resolved.

*drools*

Go get out then or at the very least annoy a sibling or spouse or whatever. If I didn't live in a place that despises baseball, I'd be doing that.

*breathes a sigh of relief*

still in detox mode from beating all those games?

Yeah.. what's up with that? You were like "da woman" a year back.. But you have been slipping.. Even Shadowpaladin is ahead of you now! :darque: You have to get your act together!

hehe...He got you there, Darque.

Oh yeah.. just to be complete: I Bastila, she's so hotz0rs.

I am too tired to be coherent now.. So if I babble realize this... Anyhow, I think romances in RPGs is a good thing to have. I mean, it is part of roleplaying right? And if you want your character to have a mate than by gosh let him/her have the option to find a mate. I also think that the romance option should ideally be kept optional, however, and not forced in most circumstances for those that don't dig that sort of thing. BTW, the romances you mentioned in your post (Annah, Bastila) are probably the best computer RPG romances in recent memory. I like how the Annah romance was kept completely optional in PS:T and IIRC it was your choice if you wanted to kiss her or not..etc

You do realize I made that up about the TORG acronym.. I really don't know what it means.. I just thought what I said sounded good. Somehow, I think Darque would like it

TORG stands for The Only Real Game.