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.
ReplyDeleteThere'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.
DeleteI 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.
ReplyDeleteI 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.
DeleteHabit 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. ;)
ReplyDeleteShannon at The Warrior Muse