I knew you'd chime in.

I knew you'd chime in.:
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Dioxide's CForum ]

Posted by The First Apostle on August 8, 2000 at 12:55:52:

In Reply to: Exacatly. posted by Scaurus(VIP) on August 8, 2000 at 12:40:46:

I remember you arguing the same thing to me Scaurus. I agree with it to a point.

> A bard is not a warrior with spells or a mage with dodge and enhanced damage. A bard is a bard and should have *something* that they do that is artistic or in some way representing their calling.

How would you go about being a barbaric bard? There really isn't just one way
to do it. If I were a Battle bard, I'd be a storytelling defender.

> Sing, write, make pictures, tell jokes, build sandcastles, hell, build creative mounds of bodies of mages if you are a battle bard. But do *something*. Otherwise you are simply doing it wrong.

Doing it wrong? I actually don't disagree with either of you. Having played a Knight
bard, the most fun I got from the character was when I delved into the more creative
aspects of being a bard. I just think it's bad form to say that there is only a right
way to play a bard. To be honest, I have yet to really see a bard that was as dashing
as Delacroix, chaotic as Pippen or as dark as Amberlea. The really good bards are few
and far between imho.

> Sometimes it really is black and white. Playing a bard means you need a component to your character that is bard-like. I sucked at making up poetry on the spur of the moment, or songs, or whatever, so when I played a bard I came up with another facet of the bard/historian/entertainer/etc role, my travel logs. I didn't think they were great unto themselves, but the point was that it was a bard being bardly. That's why Amberlea and others were so good, not because they did *only* that stuff, but because *at least* they did that stuff. Other bards, who just think of the mechanics to the bard skills and songs and use them for pk'ing or other power playing, are not playing real bards. They are playing, as I said, a mage with enhanced damage and a good punch, or a warrior with funky 'spells."

I really liked the role you took as Scaurus. I couldn't stand the friggin' notes you left. ;)
BUT, it was nice to see a bard take on a creative role in one facet or another.

> But that's just my opinion, I may be totally wrong...

> Call me Dennis.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

Name:
E-mail:
Subject:
Comments:	> I remember you arguing the same thing to me Scaurus. I agree with it to a point. > > A bard is not a warrior with spells or a mage with dodge and enhanced damage. A bard is a bard and should have something that they do that is artistic or in some way representing their calling. > How would you go about being a barbaric bard? There really isn't just one way > to do it. If I were a Battle bard, I'd be a storytelling defender. > > > Sing, write, make pictures, tell jokes, build sandcastles, hell, build creative mounds of bodies of mages if you are a battle bard. But do something. Otherwise you are simply doing it wrong. > Doing it wrong? I actually don't disagree with either of you. Having played a Knight > bard, the most fun I got from the character was when I delved into the more creative > aspects of being a bard. I just think it's bad form to say that there is only a right > way to play a bard. To be honest, I have yet to really see a bard that was as dashing > as Delacroix, chaotic as Pippen or as dark as Amberlea. The really good bards are few > and far between imho. > > Sometimes it really is black and white. Playing a bard means you need a component to your character that is bard-like. I sucked at making up poetry on the spur of the moment, or songs, or whatever, so when I played a bard I came up with another facet of the bard/historian/entertainer/etc role, my travel logs. I didn't think they were great unto themselves, but the point was that it was a bard being bardly. That's why Amberlea and others were so good, not because they did only that stuff, but because at least they did that stuff. Other bards, who just think of the mechanics to the bard skills and songs and use them for pk'ing or other power playing, are not playing real bards. They are playing, as I said, a mage with enhanced damage and a good punch, or a warrior with funky 'spells." > I really liked the role you took as Scaurus. I couldn't stand the friggin' notes you left. ;) > BUT, it was nice to see a bard take on a creative role in one facet or another. > > > But that's just my opinion, I may be totally wrong... > > Call me Dennis.

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Dioxide's CForum ]