| Author |
 Topic  |
|
ShadowJack
Senior Scribe
USA
350 Posts |
 Posted - 24 Dec 2005 : 00:21:46
|
After being away from D & D for several years, it was quite a shock when I started reading 3rd edition material and discovered Dwarven Mages were allowed. I must admit, having spent years with 1st and 2nd edition rules I was opposed to this new idea. As I become more familiar with the new rules I am starting to 'come around' a bit. How do you Elder Sages feel about this. I am sure many of you spent much more time with the "old rules" than I did, so how did this first strike you? As DM's how have you incorporated this into your game worlds? I am sure this question has been asked before, but I was curious after digging into the DM's Guide to research some campaign issues. 
|
ShadowJack |
|
|
Brother Ezra
Learned Scribe
USA
268 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2005 : 12:38:40
|
| I have a dwarven mage in my current campaign. He's been known to lurk at Candlekeep, so I'll give him a chance to reveal himself and divulge some details about himself...failing that, I'll write a tell-all expose about him when I return from visiting my family for the holidays. |
"Suffering is the touchstone of all spiritual growth."
-St. Sollars the Twice-Martyred |
 |
|
|
Mystery_Man
Senior Scribe
USA
455 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2005 : 13:11:30
|
Well, I always asked in 1 and 2E why wouldn't there be dwarven mages. The rules changes in 3E were welcomed by me. Of course they turn around and make the bard the favored class of the gnome in the revised rules. That one got ignored.
|
Edited by - Mystery_Man on 24 Dec 2005 13:12:59 |
|
|
|
Winterfox
Senior Scribe
895 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2005 : 13:14:16
|
| I don't play PnP, but IMO, the class restrictions back in 1st and 2nd eds helped perpetrate the "Dwarves are comic reliefs/gruff fighters; elves are prancing tree-huggers or mages; halflings are rogues" stereotype that's still present today, within and without D&D novels. Not to mention that the class restrictions were rather nonsensical to begin with. |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2005 : 15:40:46
|
No, they make perfect sense in the implicit setting and play-style of the original AD&D, and in its explicit prototype-setting, the World of Greyhawk. Because current D&D tries to cater to a wide range of campaign worlds, it also makes sense for it not to hard-code such limits into the rules. The problem comes when players or writers decide that because the rules technically allow any-race-any-class, all permutations must be normal things in the setting, regardless of precedent, logic, or fun.
So I feel that not absolutely forbidding dwarven mages is fine, but making it a usual thing is an unnecessary change to the Realms which makes the race less interesting and coherent, and dwarf PCs likewise as they're now a standard choice. Same with the new halflings. |
|
|
|
ShadowJack
Senior Scribe
USA
350 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2005 : 16:45:50
|
Mystery Man,
I agree. I remember thinking, how can dwarves create such powerful magic weapons if they have no arcane spellcasters? The obvious answer was divine magic. In the scheme of things though, a dwarf or halfling should be able to touch the weave as much as any other. I believe what you see in the old rules is an attempt to keep the game balanced... |
ShadowJack |
|
|
|
Hoondatha
Great Reader
USA
2449 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2005 : 17:57:30
|
Personally, I liked the fact that not everyone could be everything, and it's one of the many reasons I never adopted third edition. Plus, dwarves were, from the very beginning described as magic resistant, and it therefore followed that using magic would be problematic.
On the other hand, I'm one of those DM's who'll allow just about anything if given a good enough reason (or, sometimes, just to see what will happen), so I wouldn't necessarily ban a dwarf mage PC outright. But that PC would be practically the only one you'd ever find.
The way I'd personally work it is that one clan, way off deep in the Underdark, managed somehow to harness arcane magic (I'd turn the player loose to come up with ideas why, and see what emerged). So members of this one "Mage Clan" could become wizards, but no others, and they have to marry within the clan to keep the "mage genes" strong enough to continue having wizards. |
Doggedly converting 3e back to what D&D should be...
Sigh... And now 4e as well. |
|
|
|
Kuje
Great Reader
USA
7915 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2005 : 18:12:26
|
| I'd just like to point out that there are a handful of dwarven mages in 2e FR lore. :) But they are rare and the text on why they are dwarven mages explains why they are. |
For some of us, books are as important as almost anything else on earth. What a miracle it is that out of these small, flat, rigid squares of paper unfolds world after world, worlds that sing to you, comfort and quiet and excite you... Books are full of the things that you don't get in real life - wonderful, lyrical language, for instance, right off the bat. - Anne Lamott, Bird by Bird
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2005 : 19:06:44
|
Of course, the problem with using Greyhawk as an example is that the old Greyhawk novels, no matter how you may feel about them one way or another, mentioned dwarven wizards in a few places. DragonLance novels also mentioned dwarven wizards as well, and often times the class restrictions were explained by the fact that they just weren't trained in such things (for example, Wizards of High Sorcery were forbidden from training a Kender in magic, but it never really said Kender couldn't learn magic, or else why forbid a Wizard of High Sorcery from teaching them?)
Early D&D, AD&D 1st and 2nd Edition were all great, but in order to get people used to the background material, they used a lot of rules to reinforce sterotypes. You want to make sure elves use magic but can also use swords? They can mult-class as fighter/wizards. Dwarves generally don't trust magic, except for weapons and armor? They can't be wizards. By now, we pretty much know that either the campaign settings themselves or the books we read make us fairly familiar with the stereotypes, and they don't need to be reinforced with rules. Remember, part of why dwarves and elves couldn't reach high levels in most classes wasn't for any "setting" type reason, but because it would encourage players to play humans.
I think most of us now know, dwarves in general don't favor magic, and wizards are fairly rare among them. Human barbarian tribes are known for not liking magic overly much either, but humans have no restriction against wizardry. Same goes for the Bedine in Anauroch. I think in the end, its a matter of realizing that the DM and the players should work out what types of characters they use.
Heck, dwarves can be druids too now, but I can only think of one, and no one assumes that many other dwarves are going to follow in his footsteps . . . |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 25 Dec 2005 : 01:18:14
|
There are no dwarven wizards in Gary Gygax's novels, and the only other 'old' ones are Rose Estes's appalling things. In Gary's World of Greyhawk, dwarves (and halflings) just can't use wizardly magic. Where you see stereotypes, AD&D was written as a game, first and foremost, which encouraged strategic character choices and reenforced archetypes (Gary's justifiable complaint about 3E is that it neglects them). The original game made big assumptions about readers' famiiliarity with heroic fantasy, myth and legend, and medieval history, so 'getting people used to the background material' doesn't hold.
I'm not arguing that D&D must be that way, simply pointing out that Gary's choices were coherent and reasonable. |
Edited by - Faraer on 25 Dec 2005 01:19:31 |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 25 Dec 2005 : 01:56:33
|
Gary Gygax deserves a lot of credit for being one of the creative forces behind a hobby that many of us enjoy greatly, and for being behind the push to turn it into a phenomenon that managed to carve out a respectable niche in pop culture. On the other hand, Gygax could also be very heavy handed when it comes to what he thought other people should do in their games, and how the game should be played in general. He also created many adventures that were so much there for the characters be challenged by, or for them to develop their characters, but to prove how "tough" the dungeon was, and to make the DM feel smart by using the rules to hose their PCs, who of course should have thought of the rule on page 23, paragraph 3, line 8 before opening the door. Its right there in the rulebooks.
Rose Estes books were published during 1st edition and carried the Greyhawk imprint. How would a person new to the setting reading about a dwarven wizard know to disregard this information? It is in a Greyhawk novel, after all, with no disclaimer on how much or or less official this book should be than Gygax's books (and with all due respect, as a novelist, Gygax was a good game designer).
The original D&D and AD&D books also had suggested reading pages in them detailing the sources that the game was inspired by, which, if the assumption was that everyone was familiar with them, would likely not be there. Why assume everyone had read them, then list all of them just in case.
The Realms predates D&D as Ed's personal playground. I know Ed may not have made the decision to allow dwarven wizards, but the point is, the game, and the setting as presented by WOTC, is a combination of a lot of peoples talents, and trying something new does sometimes lead to some interesting things.
There is, also, an in game explanation for any upswing in dwarven arcane spell casters, that being the Thunder Blessing. You can like it or not, as you will obviously, but the point is there is an explanation for it. And from what I have read, dwarven wizards haven't really been overly represented since this explanation was introduced. I can't think of any dwarven wizards in the novels, and the only named dwarven sorcerer I can think of is Bronia Stonecutter from the FRCS.
|
|
|
|
Beezy
Learned Scribe
USA
280 Posts |
Posted - 25 Dec 2005 : 03:19:31
|
This debate is similar to what happened with everquest. EQ1 certain races could be only certain classes and with EQ2 they changed it so any race can be any class. 99% of people stuck to the old EQ1 stereo types for EQ2 though. Dwarven warrior types etc. Sorry to talk about non-FR things but someone mention Dragonlance first! haha.
I personally wouldn't mind opening up races to mroe classes like dwarven magic users. But I would not want or expect a lot of peopel to use them as PCs or NPCs or characters in novels all the tiems because I feel they would be rare. What dwarf would want his son to be trained as a wizard? That would be so bizarre to the culture that i think it would be a rare occurence. |
|
|
|
Milith holder of HB8
Seeker
USA
63 Posts |
Posted - 25 Dec 2005 : 03:55:37
|
| I remember my first time in a D&D game, I was shown a e3rd players handbook. A friend showed me the races and gave me their favorit class andtold me what classes they didn't play well as. I ended up with a 3rd level gnome sorcerer, who after he tried to stop killing the other pcs (my first game that dosn't pit you against another person) played out pretty fairly. So as long as you have a good friend to show you the ropes it dosn't really harm anything in that sense. Now when I played BG2,I just loved the way the races had been made to stick within their stero types. It taught me alot about the realms and how to play a the game better. As well as reinforce the idea that dwarven mages where rare. |
Hey, babe, see my shiny teeth as I smile my very best wolf smile- Ed Greenwood. |
Edited by - Milith holder of HB8 on 25 Dec 2005 17:35:48 |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11829 Posts |
Posted - 27 Dec 2005 : 22:11:43
|
| my thoughts were, finally... I mean dwarves' make the perfect rune-casters. They also make perfect magic weapon makers, and it irked me that they would have to do it as divine casters in other books. The dwarves from Norse Lore were very magically oriented (and gold oriented). Of course, I agree, dwarven magi should be few and far between (as the majority of the races favors physical labor). |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Forge
Learned Scribe
USA
218 Posts |
Posted - 27 Dec 2005 : 22:18:15
|
| Guys, it's not just about D&D or Gary Gygax, in most all of the genre's fiction Dwarves are dour, anti-social, axe-toting goblin-killers/Merry yet sagacious elder statesmen. Look to some of the source material, Tolkien, CS Lewis, etc... While they don't go so far as to totally disallow the arcanist side of the dwarves, they don't delve into it and set up the paradigm that still stands today. |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 27 Dec 2005 : 22:58:45
|
Well, in Norse Mythology, dwarves make magical weapons and the like and are greedy, but they also clearly can use magic. In a lot of Tolkien's extended information, he mentions dwarves and elves and orcs having their own kind of magic and spells. You have a point that dwarves aren't exactly portrayed as evokers throwing around fireballs or as conjurers summoning demons or elementals and the like, but since "classes" didn't exist until D&D, no one officially ever said dwarves couldn't cast arcane spells until D&D, since the terms "arcane" and "divine" magic really didn't mean a whole lot.
But yes, dwarves as greedy miner concerned with jewelry and weapons and fighting giants and goblins rather than learning to fly or teleport or the like tends to show that dwarves don't have a long tradition in the arcane. But as I said before, human cultures have been portrayed the same way, without any game rule saying that Tundra barbarians, Ruathym, Uthgardt, or Bedine cannot learn arcane spells.
|
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31774 Posts |
Posted - 27 Dec 2005 : 23:33:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
DragonLance novels also mentioned dwarven wizards as well...
They were the Scions mostly, of dwarven legend.
Scions are in short, golden dwarves. The scions can create illusions that make them appear to be any other type of creature, and are also believed to be ageless and near immortal. The scions are yet another product of the Graygem. They were created in the early days of the Age of Might, and convinced the Smiths (the other Chosen of Reorx) to flee in giant barges towards southern Ansalon. After a hard voyage, the enraged Smiths threw most of the Scions into the sea (inevitably wiping all but thirteen of the Scions out). The remaining thirteen scatter to the winds and one returns to participate in the Second Dragon War. Throughout the rest of time, the scions have appeared every now and again, and it is believed that some of the thirteen survive to this day. They are a mysterious and elusive race, and avoid revealing their true natures to most people.
quote:
...and often times the class restrictions were explained by the fact that they just weren't trained in such things (for example, Wizards of High Sorcery were forbidden from training a Kender in magic, but it never really said Kender couldn't learn magic, or else why forbid a Wizard of High Sorcery from teaching them?)
Most of the more recent 3e lore also explains why this is so, but there are now rules in place for allowing Kender to operate under the strictures of the WoHS.
And that's all for this tiny DL-divergence...  .
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
hammer of Moradin
Senior Scribe
USA
758 Posts |
Posted - 30 Dec 2005 : 07:46:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
There is, also, an in game explanation for any upswing in dwarven arcane spell casters, that being the Thunder Blessing. You can like it or not, as you will obviously, but the point is there is an explanation for it. And from what I have read, dwarven wizards haven't really been overly represented since this explanation was introduced. I can't think of any dwarven wizards in the novels, and the only named dwarven sorcerer I can think of is Bronia Stonecutter from the FRCS.
I delve into this subject in volume III of the Candlekeep Compendium. Click on the link in my sig, and have a look.
To summarize, and add to this, dwarven society in the Forgotten Realms has changed with the Thunder Blessing. The dwarven birthrate increasing alone is a catalyst for change. With dwarven holds filling up now, many young dwarves are setting out to find their own way, and why would magic not be included? Yeah, they have a resistance to magic, but that's stubbornness, not ignorance. Traditional models of a dwarf skew towards fighters, craftsmen, and male. Now, the mold is broken, and every dwarf is able to choose since the burdens of society are not imposed as they once were.
Overall, of course, dwarves are built a certain way, so the majority of the population will still heft an axe, or smelt ore. Its in their blood. |
"Hurling himself upon his enemies, he terrified them with slaughter!"
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium
Candlekeep proverb: If a thing is said often enough, fools aplenty will believe it to be true. |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 30 Dec 2005 : 14:08:44
|
Sorry Hammer, I even thought of your article when I was replying, but in my haste to write up my opinions, I didn't cite it. Appologies. I know you also came up with an interesting place for dwarven druids as well, and my comments about a lack of dwarven druids only applies to canon sources for the Realms. But I see things pretty much as you just summarized. The Thunder Blessing opened up a lot of options for dwarves, and a percentage of them will take advantage of them, but the majority will remain axe wielding warrior, or miners, or smiths, or stonemasons. The whole society isn't going to immediately alter due to it, it will have some minor changes introduced.
|
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 30 Dec 2005 : 14:15:48
|
| Here's an interesting note about the Thunder Blessing, though... While we can obviously infer that it is why dwarves are no longer so magic resistant and why dwarven spellcasters are on the rise, I don't believe dwarven magic use was ever actually addressed in any write-ups of the Thunder Blessing. That's always kinda bugged me, since it's the perfect explanation for that shift. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
hammer of Moradin
Senior Scribe
USA
758 Posts |
Posted - 31 Dec 2005 : 09:03:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
Sorry Hammer, I even thought of your article when I was replying, but in my haste to write up my opinions, I didn't cite it. Appologies. I know you also came up with an interesting place for dwarven druids as well, and my comments about a lack of dwarven druids only applies to canon sources for the Realms. But I see things pretty much as you just summarized. The Thunder Blessing opened up a lot of options for dwarves, and a percentage of them will take advantage of them, but the majority will remain axe wielding warrior, or miners, or smiths, or stonemasons. The whole society isn't going to immediately alter due to it, it will have some minor changes introduced.
No problem, especially since its one dwarf's opinion.
Also, what I came up with is just, what I think, a logical explanation of the rules as I interpret them. If anyone else has any good explanations, they aren't necessarily wrong, since, as Wooly points out, there is no official explanation.
Ya know, there really should be a Realms Yearbook published so we can get some of these burning questions answered. |
"Hurling himself upon his enemies, he terrified them with slaughter!"
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium
Candlekeep proverb: If a thing is said often enough, fools aplenty will believe it to be true. |
|
|
|
Kaladorm
Master of Realmslore
United Kingdom
1176 Posts |
Posted - 31 Dec 2005 : 10:07:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beezy
This debate is similar to what happened with everquest. EQ1 certain races could be only certain classes and with EQ2 they changed it so any race can be any class. 99% of people stuck to the old EQ1 stereo types for EQ2 though. Dwarven warrior types etc. Sorry to talk about non-FR things but someone mention Dragonlance first! haha.
You obviously never met my ogre illusionist, teehee |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 31 Dec 2005 : 16:04:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by hammer of Moradin
Ya know, there really should be a Realms Yearbook published so we can get some of these burning questions answered.
Unfortunately, WotC has established a hands-off policy to explaining things, falling back on the "things have always been that way, but no one knew about it!" explanation. Thinks I that they fail the fans by doing this, since the transition from 1E to 2E (which was, admittedly, very minor) had a huge event to explain the changes. The 2E to 3E transition, a much bigger change, has passed by with the above lame explanation. There's been at least a couple of good opportunities to explain the changes, but they've been ignored. 
But... That's all an aside, and it's not exactly on topic. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Winterfox
Senior Scribe
895 Posts |
Posted - 31 Dec 2005 : 17:03:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kaladorm
You obviously never met my ogre illusionist, teehee
I hope you don't regular turn him/her into a bikini-clad dark elf. (Can you cast an illusion that'll let you appear as another gender now? Was never an option in EQ, to the chagrin of my high elven enchanter.) |
|
|
|
Rory
Seeker
79 Posts |
Posted - 03 Jan 2006 : 02:38:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by ShadowJack
After being away from D & D for several years, it was quite a shock when I started reading 3rd edition material and discovered Dwarven Mages were allowed. I must admit, having spent years with 1st and 2nd edition rules I was opposed to this new idea. As I become more familiar with the new rules I am starting to 'come around' a bit.
I felt the same way, but only for a few days. Now looking back I could never go back to 2nd edition. 3rd edition is just more realistic. |
|
|
|
ShadowJack
Senior Scribe
USA
350 Posts |
Posted - 05 Jan 2006 : 17:19:26
|
Rory,
You have summed up your feelings (and mine) about the 3.0 edition stuff very well. I am looking forward to exploring all of the options available. |
ShadowJack |
|
|
|
Asgetrion
Master of Realmslore
Finland
1564 Posts |
Posted - 05 Jan 2006 : 18:33:50
|
I think dwarven wizards are not such a bad idea - at least considering dwarven Runecasters (which is a prestige class for arcane spell casters, if I remember correctly?).
I also agree that the 3rd edition made the D&D system a lot more realistic, interesting and sensible. Just think about how well multiclassing, feats, magic, skills and prestige classes (if you ignore those published since DMG, MoF, and FRCS ;) work! |
"What am I doing today? Ask me tomorrow - I can be sure of giving you the right answer then."
-- Askarran of Selgaunt, Master Sage, speaking to a curious merchant, Year of the Helm |
|
|
|
Gray Richardson
Master of Realmslore
USA
1291 Posts |
Posted - 06 Jan 2006 : 01:20:58
|
Runecaster is indeed a very cool prestige class, at least flavor wise. I have seen some people complain that the runes are too costly to craft, however they were made cheaper to cast in the Players Guide to Faerūn (it reduced their cost by half) and the price might be offset by their versatility.
Runes however use divine magic, so it is a prestige class for divine spellcasters, not arcane.
Giants and dwarves use runes, and I imagine they did all sorts of cool things with them in the past. Cloud giants used runes to float their castles and cloud lairs. Runestones are engraved across Faerūn.
Surely they could have interesting epic and planar related uses as well. |
|
|
|
Hoondatha
Great Reader
USA
2449 Posts |
Posted - 06 Jan 2006 : 04:53:33
|
I was bored one day and created a large spreadsheet comparing runes to similar, more mundane devices (meaning scrolls and wands, primarily). The end result, even using the 50 gp version from the Player's Guide, is that they were *never* cost effective, and were usually ridiculously overpriced. They had one or two advantages, and were cool from a flavor perspective, but didn't compare to the normal items.
Which is darned strange, considering 3e's penchant for sacrificing everything for the sake of parity. |
Doggedly converting 3e back to what D&D should be...
Sigh... And now 4e as well. |
|
|
|
scererar
Master of Realmslore
USA
1618 Posts |
Posted - 06 Jan 2006 : 05:10:14
|
I for one was glad for Dwarves to be able to employ arcane spells as wizards or sorcerers. Thanks be to the dwarven gods for the thunder blessing  I really like the idea of the dwarven rune caster or to take it up a notch, check out the novel the shadowstone. the main character created his spell book out of sticks. I can see a dwarven mage using some sort of stones/ rocks to create a "spell book" of sorts, and have to rummage through a huge bag of rocks to find that magic missle spell he wants to memorize.
anyways my 2 cents |
|
|
|
The Blue Sorceress
Learned Scribe
107 Posts |
Posted - 06 Jan 2006 : 05:28:58
|
quote:
Where you see stereotypes, AD&D was written as a game, first and foremost, which encouraged strategic character choices and reenforced archetypes (Gary's justifiable complaint about 3E is that it neglects them).
This caught my attention, so I thought I'd say something. There's a certain amount of sense in what's being said, but there comes a time when the sort of game where archetypes limit fun creativity (which is what I think is the real charm of DnD.) I played a little 2E and I didn't like it. The level and class restrictions always bothered me, and I found 3E a relief. We know what Gimli is the stereotypical dwarf and so on, but the fact of the matter is that everything, even games evolve. Particularly when those games are so closely tied to language and creativity.
To use an extended metaphor, the sonnet form is very specific, almost rigid -if you're writing the quintessential sonnet, and even then there's the question of whether you mean a Petrarchan/Italian sonnet or a Shakespearian/English sonnet. It didn't take long for people to start playing with the sonnet form, in fact it could be effectively argued that the English sonnet is just such a play on the form of the Italian sonnet. The changes however were more drastic than that, to the point where modern sonnets sometimes only superficially resemble their forebearers. The fact that these poems change the rules doesn't mean they are any less valuable or that by changing these rules they're somehow "untrue" to the original intention of the creators of the sonnet form. I would even argue that the orignial creators' intent is irrelevant in anything but their own personal creations.
In short, if you prefer to be traditional and dislike the idea of spellcasting dwarves, that's fine, but to be quite frank, Gygax's complaint that 3E isn't in keeping with DnD as he originally concieved of it doesn't have anything to do with, well, anything. His baby's grown up.
-Blue
|
Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely.
I see your walrus and raise you a carpenter |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Dwarven Mages, hhmmmnnn...
