PDA

View Full Version : We all shine under the sun


RPGnet Columns
10-16-2001, 05:19 PM
Post originally by Nicolas L. Clement at 2001-10-16 16:19:16
Converted from Phorums BB System

Well... I can see some of your points sandy and yes it makes some sense. But I still believe that:

1) thieves are not extremely great leaders in particular since all they care about is their personal greed, so they don't care about the other teamates and if they try to manipulate them, their "trick" won't last for too long. (unless the rest of the team are prostitutes and the thief is a pimp).

2) clerics may have social skills and broad knowledges on stuff. But they are so into their own little ideological world that all they often try to do is to "convert" others and trust me that's a major turn off for many of us. Think about a religion you truly HATE and see if you would follow one of their priest as your leader and you'll get what I'm saying.

3) More importantly, my point #3. I fondly believe that any charismatic, intelligent and wise character can take the role of the leader IN HIS/HER OWN PERSONAL FIELD! Meaning that on a war battlefield, personally I would NOT (repeat NOT) follow a thief or a cleric as my leader! Instead I would follow the fighter since he knows best this type of terrain. If we adventure in a mage tower, trust me I'll let the mage lead since he knows this environment more than any of us. We are in a thief guild? I'll stay reallll quiet and let the thief do the talking since he's good dealing with that kind of crowd. Same would apply to being in a church or a cathedral where the cleric outstand any of us. Ranger in the forest, Monk in a temple etc etc etc etc.......

So basically, we all shine in our own ways and that's the moral of this story. All character types are important in one sense or the other and they should lead the rest of the group depending on where the adventure take place. Doing otherwise would not only be illogical but plain and simply STUPID.

This message was not ment to be disrespectfull, but even though I don't know if you only posted this as an intellectual stimuli, I think this question and answer was pretty obvious...

Sincerly,

Nicolas L. Clement
-FATE rpg creator

RPGnet Columns
10-17-2001, 10:18 AM
Post originally by The_Lone_Cleric at 2001-10-17 09:18:41
Converted from Phorums BB System

Sure,

But in a odd way D&D 2nd edition provided the perfect leader character. The Bard. Cha, Magic, Thief Skills, Some fighting potential. That and they're suppose to be out there mucking it up with folks. ie. People person. In a political campaign they rule the show.

Now, 3rd Edition has opened some doors. One thing I'm curious about would be what multiclasses work best in the leadership arena. Hmmm.

Keep in mind....I play multiclass Cleric/Rogues myself.

RPGnet Columns
10-17-2001, 01:55 PM
Post originally by Nicolas L. Clement at 2001-10-17 12:55:06
Converted from Phorums BB System

Hiya

Agreed on you with that. Multiclassed characters technically should make better leaders than "specialists". The 2nd ed Bard was pretty great for that indeed and any multiclass character should be a good leader (if he/she got the charisma and personality to kick too).

It's kinda like.. a multiclass character have many points of views at once (fighter-thief-mage let's say) so he could be a great leader, while the other "specialists" would mostly be advisors.

But then again, leadership is mostly a personality trait in my opinion. You may have all the potential for it, but if you HATE being the leader, it will never work :)

Sincerly,

Nicolas L. Clement
-FATE rpg creator

btw: nice comment :)