For as long as I have been playing some version of D&D I have never liked the term “fighter” or “fighting-man”. I just would have preferred that a different name was used for the class. I think "warrior" sounds much better. The use of "fighter" is not a deal breaker or anything like that. It is just one of those things in a game I enjoy that happen to be somewhat annoying. I am sure everyone has something that is "not right" about something they enjoy also.
F is for Free
In this case, free means “free to download”. I am doing this for fun and not a professional (read as paid) game designer so I will make the B/X Toldara expansion available for free download. There may come a time when I offer a lulu print option in a manner similar to the Basic Fantasy RPG.
On a related note, F also stands for "first week" of the A to Z challenge - I am done posting for it!
I'm a big fan of the core classes. Pathfinder has added all these extra classes and archetypes that while look cool don't interest me that much. Typically I play the fighter, and yes, I agree that warrior would be a better term, I think perhaps warrior brings to mind a more specific class of fighter which is why they don't use it.ReplyDelete
There's nothing wrong with the core classes at all. I think the extra classes actually make more sense in the more basic type game. That sounds like reasonable logic on the fighter vs. warrior label.Delete
I don't know if you ever watched it, but there was a cartoon known as He-Man. In it, there is a character called Man-At-Arms. Does that name bother you? I really didn't like the descriptive names used like that in the show. I mean I am bad with names, but I hope I am not that bad.ReplyDelete
I actually think it is interesting that you prefer warrior over fighter. I don't. Not because of the quality of the label, but habit. AD&D classes as Fighter, Magic-User, Cleric, Thief. They aren't Warrior, Mage, Priest, and Rogue that was used in 2E. It is just about habit for me. I never used the alternate names in other editions so it always seems off to me to use alternate names for D&D for classes.
On a side note. It is very important, if possible, to create your own unique terminology for things. It helps being the world to life. It is often just a simple thing like you are doing. For example, instead of Paladin, they are Knights. Or better yet, Knights of X(insert the label here.)
Yeah, I remember He-Man. No, Man-at-Arms is a terrible name & so is Man-e-Faces. Ugh all around.Delete
Habit is a powerful force. I don't hate the label fighter and prefer it much more than "fighting man". I agree about the 2E labels; I think the change from thief to rogue is just bland.
You nailed my idea with your thoughts on custom terminology. I think that would help several of the campaigns I have played in.
I'm rather partial to the term "warrior," myself. ;)ReplyDelete
Shannon at The Warrior Muse