| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Drakul |
Posted - 11 Apr 2006 : 23:46:44
I have noticed about Drizzt. RAS don't have him usin any type of Ranger spell at all, whatsoever. Does RAS think to have him use those spells or is Drizzt just so bloody honorable that he only uses his swords?? Has anyone else noticed that?? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Crennen FaerieBane |
Posted - 07 Jun 2006 : 07:07:13
I agree with Wooly. Let the fiction characters be on their own. Crunch and Fluff are sometimes not friends.  And seriously, unless Drizzt is killing someone or fighting a PC, just use him as a guild, etc.
C-Fb
P.S. - Unless you run the Chosen of Shar campaign like I have started.  |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 31 May 2006 : 00:31:33
quote:
Originally posted by Zanan
But you have to stick with what you got and many books et all were not available when his first write up's were made, AD&D and 3E. Not that the rules available were bended left, right, and centre with him over the years ... 
That's part of the reason I don't care about statting out fiction characters. They are usually shoehorned into a class that works, but isn't a perfect fit. Later, new rules and classes come out that make it work, but we've already got them statted out for that edition... So I say don't bother statting them unless you need them, and then just go with what works best for you. |
| Zanan |
Posted - 30 May 2006 : 23:48:23
Well, if it was for me, I would have made him a scout instead of a ranger. But you have to stick with what you got and many books et all were not available when his first write up's were made, AD&D and 3E. Not that the rules available were bended left, right, and centre with him over the years ...
I'll have a possible version of him later next month in my Drow Tactics over at the Gate. |
| Jon Grey |
Posted - 30 May 2006 : 04:47:05
I don't claim to be an expert on either the rules or the novels (though I'd consider myself more familiar with the latter) but I think it might be reasonable in a strict rule-based discussion, given the obvious splits that have to occur to make the characters in the novels more "fleshed-out," that you might substitute Drizzt's spellcasting ability for the feats previously mentioned in terms of giving him the weaponmastery that he's reached (for instance, if a player approached me with this idea, I'd consider it), explaining it as Drizzt focusing the time usually allotted to praying for spells to honing his craft with his scimitars. Again, my lack of familiarity with the newer rules might cause some problems with the explanation; just another theory.
Consider this my two cents on the subject, though I find the discussion fascinating. |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 30 May 2006 : 02:40:20
One more point in this discussion, that pops into my head after sitting down and reading the Player's Handbook II at Border's today . . . the retraining rules that appear in the PH II might work well at some point if you are looking at Drizzt having used feats earlier in his career to deal with two weapon fighting. As it stands, with Drizzt only being a 5th level ranger, he still needs the fighter feats to be the two weapon fighter he is in the books, but its something to keep in mind when it comes to effective use of resources.
It also puts me in mind of Elminster and some of the things he could do at one point in time as opposed to what he can do later on. I know, I'm not huge on having specific stats for characters that are mainly supporting NPCs in a campaign, but its nice to know that there is a mechanic to alter some of the specifics that they might have been able to do earlier in their careers. |
| Wandering_mage |
Posted - 30 Apr 2006 : 20:04:09
I was reading in one of my sourcebooks for FR that you could have variant rangers that do not have the spells but instead abilities like freedom of movement, increased movement, and I think one other cool ability. So in other words, it would seem that Drizzt might be based on this variant ranger unofficially per RAS writing of Drizzt. And I think that is fine. The again that is just what I think.  You have to admit though, Drizzt is so unique that he broke the mold in many ways when he was first unleashed into literature. He was my first favorite Realms personality and great deal of many other peoples first favorite as well methinks. |
| Arivia |
Posted - 30 Apr 2006 : 08:03:54
quote:
Originally posted by Dargoth
Perhaps the 3.5 version of Drizzt will give him substitute Ranger levels of an as yet unseen varient levels that sacrifice spell casting for something?
As KnightErrantJR noted above, Drizzt fits the non-spellcasting ranger variant in Complete Warrior in 3.5. The biggest problem today is the 3.5 darkness changes, actually. |
| Dargoth |
Posted - 30 Apr 2006 : 07:48:34
Perhaps the 3.5 version of Drizzt will give him substitute Ranger levels of an as yet unseen varient levels that sacrifice spell casting for something? |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 30 Apr 2006 : 05:34:57
I meant to post this sooner, but I wanted to point out that the lack of Drizzt's spellcasting ability would be a moot point if you consider him to have the alternate ranger class presented in Complete Warrior. No, its not official, but it makes a lot of sense if you look at the class abilities that replace the spellcasting. For example, if Drizzt was an alternate ranger, if he ever gains another level of ranger and is 6th level, he would gain +10 to his movement rate, which seems to fit him.
One thing you have to give to 3rd/3.5 edition . . . it is a bit easier to figure out how to make a character fit a given description of their abilities with all of the options involved. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 17 Apr 2006 : 23:15:25
Ah, thank you for that info. Not having read the reprints of either trilogy, I didn't know about all of that -- I just knew what was in the interview that came out right before The Legacy. |
| BlackAce |
Posted - 17 Apr 2006 : 22:54:57
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Huh. I'd not heard that one... I remember his old interview where he said he thought them up during a phone conversation with one of the TSR folks, and I'd seen that printed somewhere else, too. Have you a source for this Daryth/Canthus bit? I'm truly curious about that...
Foreword of the reissue of the Oiginal Moonshae Trilogy. The gist of it is that at the time he submitted his sample chapter for The Crystal Shard, Darkwalker on Moonshae was the only FR product released and for a while, he assumed the Moonshaes were it as far as the Realms went. Seems TSR soon put him straight but that by then, he'd already written Biggrins Lair with Daryth in it.
I take from that then, that rather than rewrite the entire thing he created Drizzt and Guenhywvar and used them instead. Bob, of course could probably tell us best himself. |
| Faraer |
Posted - 17 Apr 2006 : 19:52:27
Bob recounted Drizzt's genesis in his foreword to the collected Dark Elf Trilogy, reproduced on rasalvatore.com. |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 17 Apr 2006 : 19:36:57
I seem to remember that as well . . . perhaps it was in the new version of the Crystal Shard that mentions this, but he originally thought that as part of the "shared world" idea, they would have some characters in common, and wanted Daryth to be his connection to the Moonshaes books. At some point he was told that all of the characters in his book should be brand new, and that is where the "spur of the moment" Drizzt Do'Urden drow ranger idea came from. I don't think he ever officially started writing Daryth into the story, and I don't even think he told TSR he was going to use Daryth . . . it was just what he was thinking until he found out that the whole cast should be brand new.
But I must say, I also do not remember for sure about where I heard this. I really think it was in the interview that he did in the new copy of The Crystal Shard though . . . |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 17 Apr 2006 : 19:26:23
quote:
Originally posted by BlackAce
If I remember right, RAS said that originally Drizzt and Guenhyvvar were Daryth and Canthus from the original Moonshae trilogy, as written in the sample that got him The Crystal Shard.
As Daryth was originally a thief, then a scimitar wielding ranger with a big moorhound animal companion, it might go along way to explaining why Drizzt is the way he is.
Huh. I'd not heard that one... I remember his old interview where he said he thought them up during a phone conversation with one of the TSR folks, and I'd seen that printed somewhere else, too. Have you a source for this Daryth/Canthus bit? I'm truly curious about that... |
| BlackAce |
Posted - 17 Apr 2006 : 19:16:49
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Aaron L
Drizzt most certainly wasnt based on 2E rules, as 2E was released in 1989, the Crystal Shard was published in 1988, and probably written in 1987.
Drow were a playable race from 1E UA, and as a race were able to use a sword in each hand, thus the reason Drizzt does.
Of course, with his strength he would have been limited to 6th level or so as a ranger, so he could never even get high enough level to cast spells, ha!
Uh, most writers don't even pay attention to game stats when thinking of a character. And RAS himself has said that Drizzt was a spur of the moment creation -- making it even less likely that rules were involved.
If I remember right, RAS said that originally Drizzt and Guenhyvvar were Daryth and Canthus from the original Moonshae trilogy, as written in the sample that got him The Crystal Shard.
As Daryth was originally a thief, then a scimitar wielding ranger with a big moorhound animal companion, it might go along way to explaining why Drizzt is the way he is. |
| Purple Dragon Knight |
Posted - 14 Apr 2006 : 18:36:51
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
3.X is a simple system for awarding experience points, but not really based on how well a PC studies, selftrains, or uses class abilities. The bulk of experuence still comes from killing things.
The 3.5 system is clear on the matter of 'defeating' monsters, and says that XPs can be awarded for scaring away monsters, avoiding them entirely through stealth, swaying them through intimidation or diplomacy, etc. |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 14 Apr 2006 : 18:33:10
He does not appear to be that wise *wink*
Yes if Wis is 12 or better he does have access to one bonus spell per day.
As per second question, that was compaision of awarding expeience in 1st, 2nd and 3rd.
The training rules were also brutal in 1st.
3.X is a simple system for awarding experience points, but not really based on how well a PC studies, selftrains, or uses class abilities. The bulk of experuence still comes from killing things. |
| Purple Dragon Knight |
Posted - 14 Apr 2006 : 18:23:40
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
Hmm, I should have checked what, if Drizzt cast a spell or used an (EX) abilitity when RAS still appears to be writting in a 2nd and/or 1st edition setting (If as Wooly has indicated if the author even considered the rules at all)? Yes Charm animal exists as a spell, however a Ranger gets an animal camanion long before they can even dream of a sucessful casting a spell to charm an animal. Per 3.5 to charm an animal the ranger must be level 6 and Wis 11 to be able to cast any spell level 1 spell at all.
Slight clarification here: rangers both get the Animal Companion (Ex) ability and access to the Charm Animal spell at 4th level if they have a Wisdom of 12 or better, which I believe is the case for Drizzt. Rangers must be 6th level to gain 1st-level spells only if their Wisdom is 11 or less.
Edit: most people I know build their rangers with a 14 Wisdom, so as to gain access to 4th-level spells down the road, so in my experience, 1st-level spells and Animal Companion have always gone hand in hand. As an aside, let me all give you the recommendation I gave to the ranger in my group: if you play a ranger that gains the Animal Companion feat, ALWAYS take the light horse as a companion. Animal Companions for rangers are too weak to bring into a fight by the time the ranger has access to them, so might as well take an animal that will be useful in the long-run (i.e. your mount will be slightly better down the road, gaining Evasion when you reach your 6th-level as ranger, so in combination with Mounted Combat, could become a very resistant mount... the share spell ability is also nice, allowing the rider to heal the mount whenever he/she heals herself...) The ONLY instance where I would not necessarily recommend the light horse as an Animal Companion is when the ranger takes the Nature's Bond feat (from Complete Adventurer), in which case the ranger is considered SIX LEVELS HIGHER (i.e. 3 effective druid levels) for the purpose of determining what Animal Companion he/she can have (i.e. the Dire Bat becomes a very appealing choice then, as it is a relatively cheap flying mount - i.e. a 4th-level ranger with the Nature's Bond feat can have that mount right away, as he/she is considered a 10th-level ranger, while the Dire Bat could be gained at 8th-level or higher...)
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
Oh 3.X clearly is better then:
first. how much you can kill and carry away, and pay for training.
second how much you can kill, optional rule of how much you can carry away, optional rule of experience points awarded for using a class ability (sucessful cast a spell if a spell weilder, killing things if you are a figther, stealing things [from anyone, including party] if a thief).
third, kill things or disarm/defeat/avoid traps are the only things that advance a person in level. How is this better then other broken systems that reply mostly on killing things?
Again, I'm not 100% sure what you're trying to say here... are you talking about the old 2nd edition or new 3.5 system? |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 14 Apr 2006 : 03:51:03
Hmm, I should have checked what, if Drizzt cast a spell or used an (EX) abilitity when RAS still appears to be writting in a 2nd and/or 1st edition setting (If as Wooly has indicated if the author even considered the rules at all)? Yes Charm animal exists as a spell, however a Ranger gets an animal camanion long before they can even dream of a sucessful casting a spell to charm an animal. Per 3.5 to charm an animal the ranger must be level 6 and Wis 11 to be able to cast any spell level 1 spell at all.
"I'm not too sure what you're trying to say here... I think the current rules system, including XP system, allows for plenty of character development... even more so than previous editions, where certain races had to be shoehorned into certain classes"
Oh 3.X clearly is better then:
first. how much you can kill and carry away, and pay for training.
second how much you can kill, optional rule of how much you can carry away, optional rule of experience points awarded for using a class ability (sucessful cast a spell if a spell weilder, killing things if you are a figther, stealing things [from anyone, including party] if a thief).
third, kill things or disarm/defeat/avoid traps are the only things that advance a person in level. How is this better then other broken systems that reply mostly on killing things?
|
| Purple Dragon Knight |
Posted - 14 Apr 2006 : 03:05:11
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
Also animal companion (in 3.5 , not bothering to check this for other editions) does not require casting a spell. This is a (EX) ability of being able to relate to animals.
I said 'Animal Friendship', and perhaps you should have bothered checking, because in 3.5, the spell is now called Charm Animal, and is still available to both druids and rangers...
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
Should he have more ranger levels, then fighter levels in 3.X ? Perhaps but dual weilding swords certainly could justify Fighter level increases instead of Ranger level increases.
How so? if he took the Two-Weapon Fighting feat back when he was a fighter learning under Zaknafein, why can he not now take ranger levels to hone the skills he learned with Montolio and serve as a scout for Mithral Hall? Authors do not think in 'metagaming' mode... to a player, taking the feat as a fighter BEFORE taking the ranger levels perhaps make no sense (and I will note that as a DM, I would give other bonus feats to the ranger if he chooses the melee combat style...) but authors are not obliged to follow the strict letter of the rules.
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
The experience reward systym is a simple but flawed system for character develpment.
Experience should be awarded based of using or at least trying to class abilities. Fighting is clearly a Fighter as well a Ranger skill (with one or two weapons), the 3.0 vitual feat should not have provided experience points for using those feats. This of course my opinion, but using Ranger specific abilities, track or survival for example, should be activities that a ranger gets more skilled at being one with nature. Killing things is a fighting skill, not a ranger skill as such. There again all classes kill in the game.
I'm not too sure what you're trying to say here... I think the current rules system, including XP system, allows for plenty of character development... even more so than previous editions, where certain races had to be shoehorned into certain classes...  |
| Aaron L |
Posted - 14 Apr 2006 : 01:30:43
Yeah, I know, the remark was a joke :)
Im silly sometimes. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 13 Apr 2006 : 23:20:19
quote:
Originally posted by Aaron L
Drizzt most certainly wasnt based on 2E rules, as 2E was released in 1989, the Crystal Shard was published in 1988, and probably written in 1987.
Drow were a playable race from 1E UA, and as a race were able to use a sword in each hand, thus the reason Drizzt does.
Of course, with his strength he would have been limited to 6th level or so as a ranger, so he could never even get high enough level to cast spells, ha!
Uh, most writers don't even pay attention to game stats when thinking of a character. And RAS himself has said that Drizzt was a spur of the moment creation -- making it even less likely that rules were involved. |
| Aaron L |
Posted - 13 Apr 2006 : 21:55:53
Drizzt most certainly wasnt based on 2E rules, as 2E was released in 1989, the Crystal Shard was published in 1988, and probably written in 1987.
Drow were a playable race from 1E UA, and as a race were able to use a sword in each hand, thus the reason Drizzt does.
Of course, with his strength he would have been limited to 6th level or so as a ranger, so he could never even get high enough level to cast spells, ha! |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 13 Apr 2006 : 21:22:15
Mabe he got level drained, maybe RAS does not want to do Ranger Spells.
Also animal companion (in 3.5 , not bothering to check this for other editions) does not require casting a spell. This is a (EX) ability of being able to relate to animals.
Should he have more ranger levels, then fighter levels in 3.X ? Perhaps but dual weilding swords certainly could justify Fighter level increases instead of Ranger level increases.
The experience reward systym is a simple but flawed system for character develpment.
Experience should be awarded based of using or at least trying to class abilities. Fighting is clearly a Fighter as well a Ranger skill (with one or two weapons), the 3.0 vitual feat should not have provided experience points for using those feats. This of course my opinion, but using Ranger specific abilities, track or survival for example, should be activities that a ranger gets more skilled at being one with nature. Killing things is a fighting skill, not a ranger skill as such. There again all classes kill in the game. |
| Drakul |
Posted - 13 Apr 2006 : 21:05:32
I am well aware of his stats in the FRCS. What I am sayin is that in the novels he should have more levels in Ranger. I am also aware of his befriending a dolphin or seal to get Guenhwyvar back. But just think about his use of the Ranger class throughout ALL those novels. He would have more than 5 levels. |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 13 Apr 2006 : 21:01:40
Hmm Ranger 5 have no spells unless Wisdom is 12 or better in 3.5 (I know he was ranger 5 in 3.0, but not what his Wis Score was). In prior editions One needed to be a Ranger 8th (both in 1st & 2nd) in order to be able to cast a spell at all. He in the prior editions of course also lost the ability to cast Drow spells, because he was on the surface. As best I can tell RAS is still basing character on 2nd Edition rules (also not sure if Drizz't was ever presented under 1st rules as there was IIRC only i 1st Edition FR book). |
| Purple Dragon Knight |
Posted - 13 Apr 2006 : 20:35:59
Look at his stats in the FRCS: he doesn't have enough ranger levels to cast anything flashy. He did an Animal Frienship spell back when they all got stuck on an iceberg: he had a seal go retrieve his Guenwyvar figurine at the bottom of the sea.
At other times, he may just be casting Low-Light Vision on himself, or perhaps Camouflage and other spells that would not even appear visible to people accompanying him. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 13 Apr 2006 : 19:04:25
quote:
Originally posted by Drakul
Granted, but he was a fighter before he became a Ranger. So in acuality, he would be a Fighter/Ranger.
Sort of. He was envisioned as a ranger, first and foremost. It was only when he became popular and the Dark Elf trilogy was written that the fighter training came in. |
| Drakul |
Posted - 13 Apr 2006 : 18:00:28
Granted, but he was a fighter before he became a Ranger. So in acuality, he would be a Fighter/Ranger. |
| silverwizard |
Posted - 13 Apr 2006 : 17:29:54
What I think is that he wanted Drizz't to be more of a fighter (e.g. master scimitar-wielder) than ranger (defender of nature), but the game system (2E) wouldn't let him. Drizz't's official 2E stats are: CG e(drow)m R16. He couldn't be a ranger/fighter, and he couldn't be a fighter because he would lose the tracking/stealth abilities that the ranger class offers. On the other hand, he couldn't be just a ranger either, but I believe it was preferred over fighter because of two-weapon fighting, animal empathy, hide in shadows/ move silently. The side effect? Spells. RAS's solution? He never uses them.
So, to cut a long story short, 3E helped giving Drizz't a more balanced class/level allocation, and by balanced I mean "closer to the author's vision". |
|
|
