Be warned. This is perhaps the geekiest post yet on this blog. Tread carefully.
This is another one of those random thoughts that struck me late at night when sensible people with jobs to go to tomorrow are in bed. How much self-knowledge can one glean from oneself through a philosophical examination of the races and classes one prefers playing in D&D?
Let’s keep it simple and stick to the basics, as set out in 1st Edition AD&D. For those of you out of the loop for a while, here’s a refresher: races are dwarves, elves, half-elves, gnomes, halflings and humans. Classes are cleric, druid, fighter, ranger, paladin, magic-user (mage), illusionist, thief, assassin, monk, bard.
I’ve always preferred the more martially-oriented classes, especially the ranger. Logical enough, as I’m an outdoorsy, tree-hugger-type, was raised on Robin Hood stories, and did archery at one point. Pun intended. In addition, I enjoyed the fighter-types simply because they needed to be massively thewed, which I’m not. Always wanted to be that guy who could pick up the ogre and toss him bodily into the chasm……
Basic, straight fighters seemed a little too boring and I’m not the military type, so building a soldier character was never all that appealing. As for paladins…..the idea’s nice, but I like to be morally capable of stabbing in the back someone who really needs it. Occasionally, it’s nice to be able to at least threaten to shove flaming bamboo under the bad guy’s fingernails too.
Now the next best thing to a fighter-type is a cleric. Nice solid meaty thwacking ability and magic too! Magic is cool any way you slice it, but I never really warmed to the idea of a mage or illusionist. Maybe the concept of a deity granting magic if you ask nicely makes more sense than wizardly magic, the existence of which is never satisfactorily explained in the 1E canon. Different religions and spiritualities have always been fascinating for me anyway and playing a cleric can be an entertaining way to explore different attitudes from the perspective of someone who, in their own mind at least, has it all figured out.
Following closely behind the religious types comes the thief. Assassins are nifty, but I’ve never been able to take the D&D ones seriously, and it’s not healthy to laugh at a guy who’s got access to the Assassination Table in the 1E DMG.
Thieves, on the other hand, really have the most fun of all the classes. One can be an heroic scofflaw, a suave and dapper jewel thief, an art afficianado or a sinister alleybasher. You get to break the rules, bend them, or just ignore them. Plus, you get to pick locks and climb things. Thieves represent the yearning for joyous, chaotic freedom in all of us.
Monks. . . . .nice idea, but badly executed in 1E. The Oriental Adventures ones were much better, but we’re not talking about them.
Bards. . . .I only ever knew one person who played a 1E bard. Her name (the bard’s) was Maegonlac Brywny (sp?) a lady who commanded my utmost respect. Besides, she was bigger than me.
Now, we’re away to the races. These are funny choices. I always liked elves and half-elves – good in the woods, they make good thieves and they have pointy ears. Gnomes….did anyone ever play a gnome? Humans are dull. Dwarves are cool and it’s just wonderful that my brother-in-law, who is 6’1″, 200+ lbs, (all muscle) likes dwarves best.
So where does that leave us with my personal journey of introspection? I must be a woodsy type who likes explanations for things and daydreams about sneaking around liberating other people’s property. Hmm. . . .
So, what doe your gaming taste in characters say about YOU?
You must be logged in to post a comment.