From: z_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Why are their level limits?
Date: 27 Aug 92 12:11:44 CST
Distribution: na
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

In article <67013@hydra.gatech.EDU>, ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge Diaz) writes:
> In article <17iqm4INN25n@trigger.ksu.ksu.edu> royalyn@trigger.ksu.ksu.edu (Royalyn S Nelson) writes:
> 
>>In article 3121 27 Aug 92 <66993@hydra.gatech.EDU> writes :
> 
>>>Why can't wizards wear armor?
>>Because a wizard spends too much time indoors studying to have the time to
>>learn how to use the armour.
	
	But what if the mage wants to take time away from his studies and learn
to use the armor properly? No, he isn't going dual-classed as a fighter, he
just wants to get comfortable in armor.

> 
>>That and the fact that the armour also restricts movement
>>and thereby interferes with casting spells.
> 
> I never said anything about casting spells in armor.  Why is everyone putting
> words in my mouth?
> 
> So, how do you explain that a cleric can cast spells in armor?
	
	Big blunder by T$R? :-)

> 
>>>Why can only thieves pick locks?
>>Because only thieves have the time to dedicate to learning the 'craft'.
>>Besides if someone of another class decided to learn something like
>>lock-picking he would then become a multi-classed/dual-classed character
>>and take more time to advance levels because of the split up of experience
>>points between levels.
> 
> Yes, but this is my point.  *I* am not a thief.  However, I could learn
> to pick a lock if I took the time.  Why can't a fighter learn to pick
> a lock without having to go through a class change?  As for taking the
> time to learn the craft:  If a mage can take the time to learn 6 languages
> in addition to all his spells, I'm sure he could instead learn 4 languages
> and lock-picking.

	Maybe treat each thief ability as a non-weapon proficiency. Regardless
of the character's level, she gets it at base chance for a 1st level thief, 
modified by race and dexterity, and improves it by 5% for each level she gains.

> 
>>>Why can only fighters specialize in weapons?
>>What else would a person whose primary reason for being do?  They use a weapon
>>for long enough and they have to become specialized in it....it just happens. 
> 
> After a cleric uses a mace for 10 years, I figure he'd become specialized
> in it, too:  It would just happen.

	I don't see why non-fighters shouldn't be able to specialize in
weapons. It should take an extra weapon proficiency slot, though (so, 3 slots
to specialize instead of one). That cleric won't get a total of three weapon
slots until, what, 5/6th level? (unless you allow extra slots from high IQ to
go to weapon proficiencies, which I do).

> 
>>>Why can clerics not use edged weapons?
>>Some clerics can use edged weapons....check out the 2nd edition rules.
>>Some gods allow edged weapons, particularly the war type gods.
> 
> And what about the other gods?  What's their reasoning behind it?  More
> realisitically, what's the reasoning behind it for the people who made
> up that silly rule?
> 
> Game balance.  That's all it comes down to.

	I only allow speciality priests, and each god has a different selection
of weapons his/her/its priests may choose from (for example, a priest of the
god of death can use a sickle and scythe). Also, I *severely* restrict spells 
for speciality priests (0-3 major spheres and 2-6 minor spheres, based on the
power of the god). However, weaker dieties will give better special abilities.

Brandon Cope