| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 07 May 2006 : 23:02:45
The discussion on the fact that there will soon be a Knight class had me thinking. This is a scarry thing, according to my wife. But the point is, there are a few interesting issues when it comes to class names, professions, and titles.
Fighters . . . almost no one calls a fighter, or anyone, a fighter. In general, anyone who gets in a fight is a fighter, so I imagine the term isn't exactly commonly used to describe anyone's profession.
Warrior . . . anyone primarily fights for a living likely gets called this, even though it is officially the title of the less skillful NPC class. So barbarians, fighters, rangers, paladins, knights, hexblades, samurai, swashbucklers, marshals, and warriors might get hung with this title at some point in time.
Paladins . . . while this generally refers to holy knights that have been trained in some divine spellcasting and learn to channel positive energy in a specific manner, I can imagine, even if they are wrong, that some divine champions, especially LN and NG ones, might be referred to as paladins, and superficially, some common people may not even understand what the difference is between a paladin and a fighter/cleric. (although within church hierarchy I imagine a paladin is not "ordained" to perform or preside over certain ceremonies which even a lower level cleric could, since they aren't actually a full blown preist)
Barbarian . . . depending on the culture, obviously fighters, rangers, scouts, and barbarians would be considered barbarians, and the description barbarian probably modifies a lot of other career fields (druids, spirit shamans, and adepts being "barbarian" priests, for example)
Cleric . . . I imagine no one outside the faith has any idea about the diffence between clerics and favored souls, only that some people are more "formal" priests and others are more informal.
Druids . . . I can picture people thinking of druids as "nature preist" easily not knowing what difference there is between a druid and a spirit shaman.
Knights . . . although anyone can be knighted, I imagine if people see knights as mounted warriors with official standing in the culture, or champions of a cause, church, or nation, fighters, warriors, marshals, knights, samurai, paladins, or even some rangers or scouts might qualify, and technically so could barbarians, but I don't know many that would start "dressing the part."
Marshal . . . since this is used in Power of Faerun as a term for authority figures, I imagine the term is NOT used for members of the class, and they are just seen as warriors good at giving orders and coming up with strategies.
Swashbuckler . . . I'm sure this is used more as a descriptive term than as a profession name, and I can picture agile fighters, rangers, scouts, rogues, bards, hexblades, or Bladesingers getting saddled with this term. Heck, a few years back Dragon Magazine had a themed issue that was about applying swashbuckling mindsets to characters across the spectrum.
Rangers . . . in the north rangers are seen as wilderness warriors that are talented guides, trackers, and protectors of those in the wild, and as such, I imagine a lot of people with this description might not ACTUALLY be rangers . . . rangers, fighters (especially with rogue levels), rogues, scouts and the like could all likely be known as "rangers" if they worked as guides and trackers or bodyguards to travellers in the wild.
Sorcerers . . . this is a fun one. We know from the FRCS that most people have no real idea about the difference in sorcerers and wizards, but among those that know, how many would know the difference between sorcerers and say . . . warlocks? Either people are TOO trusting, assuming all "non preparers" are sorcerers, or they are TOO harsh, assuming that they all have made some kind of unholy pact. This is a fun one to play with really.
What have we learned here? That D&D helps greatly to contribute to the horribly inprecise nature of the English language as a whole . . .
 |
| 4 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| bloodtide_the_red |
Posted - 09 May 2006 : 03:23:54
I avoid the game speak in my games. A ranger is a WildWalker, a druid is a ForestTalker, a fighter is a ReadySword, a wizard is a Spellslinger, a rouge is a QuietCloak. Clerics go by thier god, and there are pelnty of titles in Realmslore. It's not a cleric of Mystra, it's a High Mystery of Mystra, or a LawSheild of Tyr, or a BloodRod of Bane.
And I keep all theas vague. A WildWalker could be a druid, ranger, bard, barbarian or even just a 'wild' bulid type character. A Spellslinger could be any type of spell caster. Basicaly, the players never realy know what class any NPC is.......
Bt |
| Faraer |
Posted - 08 May 2006 : 08:21:52
The general term for people with the fighter and warrior classes is, as you say, 'warrior', but many of them are armsmen or other more specific categories.
I'm personally tired enough of people confusing paladins with different ideas/classes that I'm not enthusiastic about transferring this confusion to the Realms!
'Cleric' and 'priest' are interchangeable.
In the most common usage, 'mage', 'wizard' and 'sorcerer' are also largely interchangeable, with 'sorcerer' having a sinister air. I prefer to stick with Ed's concept of the sorcerer class representing a rare magical wild talent rather than supposing any large numbers of sorcerer-class characters. Most people don't distinguish at all between standard wizards and any of the variant magic types (and the Invisible Art). I don't particularly think there are warlocks, or some of the other classes you mention, in the Realms (though neither am I convinced there aren't).
--Faraer, big fan of the horribly inprecise nature of the English language. |
| Jindael |
Posted - 08 May 2006 : 01:19:32
Just don’t mix gamespeak (My class is fighter..) with in character speak (I fight along side the Company of the Blasted Blade). Your class has no bearing at all on your actual profession.
Some classes DO dictate your profession, such as wizard or cleric. However, when a group of players goes to see a wizard type fellow, do they really know if it’s a wizard, sorcerer, loremaster, or even a really high level assassin? Or if that wizard has taken 3 levels of rogue? No, not really. (And, IMO, some classes shouldn’t be classes; rather their class abilities should be broken down into feats, such as the barbarian.)
And even in some of the more defining classes, don’t let the name get in the way. A lawful good Fighter/Monk of Tyr could easily say that he was a paladin, trained in an unarmed method of fighting. Considering the nifty bonus’s that monks get, your average person probably wouldn’t doubt it for a moment after seeing such a character lay waste to a band of marauding orcs. The fact that the character has never taken levels in the Paladin class is irrelevant, both to witnesses and to the character themselves.
|
| Kaladorm |
Posted - 07 May 2006 : 23:32:17
Barbarian I think most people would use as a derogatory term as well.
Some classes also are more likely to be named correctly. Druids for example I think would rarely get called anything else (perhaps Witches for the females by some), and similarly not many people would get called a druid without a good cause. Especially in the Moonshaes ;). Again you wouldn't get many people called Clerics or Wizards without a good reason.
It seems the general populace are quite ignorant of sorcerors to me, and indeed it seems to be wizards that pop up more frequently so any 'arcane' user would be called a wizard probably.
|
|
|
