Martin L. Shoemaker wrote: >I'm sorry, but this entire line of reasoning is rationalization, pure and >simple. "Advances by class" and "humanoid" do not mean the same thing, in >any way, shape, or form. No number of examples will prove that, because >that's classic "all swans are white" reasoning. "Advances by class" and >"humanoid" define two sets of creatures that may happen to overlap quite a >bit, but they're not the same. Do golems advance by class? Do zombies? >Skeletons? > The argument isn't "all swans are white." It's "everything that's white in the SRD is a swan." Hence, "advances by character class" as the only thing in the "advancement" catagory is a possible flag for "humanoid."
>Consider also the GMG suggestions for monsters as PCs. While that text does >strongly ENCOURAGE humanoid monsters, it doesn't rule out others. Now I'm on >the road and don't have my books, so I may be misremembering; but I thought >it said that if a PC plays a non-humanoid monster, that PC should still >advance by class. > The PC doesn't *HAVE* to. The DMG allows for advancing in the monster level, as well. DM _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
