Rogue, Mink and Gunslinger.
Simply because those names cover much more ground then the others. A Thief is simply someone who steals while a rogue is much more. a martial Artist is simply someone who fights with his body while a Monk is much more.
I feel the same for Musketeer although it's harder to describe why.
Rogue and Monk I can agree with but Gunslinger? A Gunslinger and a Musketeer have next to nothing to do with one another - why even have them in the same sentence? It's like comparing an apple to a kiwi.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Whats in a name? Thief or Rogue, Monk or Martial Artist, Gunslinger or Musketeer?
Of those pairs of names for classes, which do you think would be a better name and why?
You forgot:
Barbarian or 'Roid AddictFighter or Combatant
Wizard or Magician
Seriously though. I think thief pigeon holes the class too much, whereas rogue lends itself to greater variation. Same for Monk.
I think Gunslinger is appropriate for the Fighter Archetype it is supposed to be. Musketeer will be the Cavalier, Sharpshooter the Rogue, Hit Man the Inquisitor, Sniper the Ranger, and Gunman the NPC version.
Rogue, Monk, ?
Rogues have to earn their right to the honourable title of thief. Only he who steals everything that fits into his five bag of holding type IV shall be called a thief.
Martial Arts only suggest a fighting style, Monk suggests peace of mind, strengthening the body and such. And before all it suggests lawfulness. A slight rewriting of the class might make it a Martial Artist, but as is, it is written like a monk. (one of those from Diablo 3, not the Name of the Rose)
As the "Gunslinger" class is far from what it will look at the end, I can't see what fits him best, for all I care, he could now be called rubber duck and it would fit well enough. (no offense Paizo, I'm confident that the next playtest will be a lot better)
Mink
There's a fuzy rodent class?
Martial means 'armed' so the term martial artist is a misdemeanor, since it includes anyone that uses a weapon, so Monk is better to represent a class geared-towards self-perfection….of course you could also call the monk class “Gentleman” and it would fit to.
A Rogue as defined in wikipedia is: “A vagrant person who wanders from place to place. Like a drifter, a rogue is an independent person who rejects conventional rules of society in favor of following their own personal goals and values.
In modern English language, the term rogue is used pejoratively to describe a dishonest or unprincipled person whose behavior one disapproves of, but who is nonetheless likeable or attractive”
Which I suppose is better than simply thief: “one that steals”.
Whats in a name? Thief or Rogue, Monk or Martial Artist, Gunslinger or Musketeer?
Of those pairs of names for classes, which do you think would be a better name and why?
What's in a name?
Not a darn thing. Ok, well actually an archtype, but that's pretty much where it ends. One of the things that bugs me about classes (and I do love classes) is the fact a lot of people get hung up in the basic archtype of the class, which leads to (IMHO) bad role-playing and an over emphasis on creating new classes (leading to class inflation).
For example, some people see the "barbarian" and never see any more than a drooling, frothy mouthed, muscle bound moron. Forget the fact you could use the barbarian class pretty much as written to represent a strong and skilled samurai warrior. Some people wouldn't hear of such a thing, simply because they cannot get past a name and a few sentences of fluff.
That's what I feel promotes bad roleplaying. It gets a metagame concept stuck in peoples' heads. You end up with people who think that being a Ninja means you need a "Ninja" class, or that to be a Samurai you need a "Samurai" class, or to be a Spartan you need a "Spartan" class; when really all of those can either be done right in core, or with simple archtypes.
That being said, it's not like it would be better for us to refer to them as PC archtype 1, PC archtype 2, PC archtype 3, etc. So instead we get an idea for an archtype or mechanical framework, and then we try to pick a name for it that gives people a general idea of what the class was built for.
In either case, it's not perfect, but it works.
Bonus Post
For those who were curious what I was talking about with the Barbarian to Samurai comment earlier, here's a quick rundown of why the Barbarian can make for an excellent samurai warrior.
1) Obviously a warrior. Has the best hit die.
2) Proficiency in all simple and martial weapons, as well as light and medium armor. Samurai armor isn't the banded mail and full-plate of D&D/Pathfinder. Most of it would probably be medium armor.
3) Decent skill points. Enough skill points to master some athletic skills and mounted combat while still having enough to put into skills like Diplomacy, Intimidate, and Knowledge Nobility.
4) Rage w/ powers, Uncanny Dodge, Fast Movement, and Damage Reduction. Rage can easily represent the indomitable samurai spirit and willingness to fight to the death. Uncanny Dodge can excel at representing the cinematic samurai being watchful, ready, and capable of fighting multiple foes at once. Fast movement allows them to excel as lightly armored duelists or allow them to move decently in their heavier armors. Damage reduction again signifies that "never say die" attitude.
Heck, replace trap sense with Weapon Training (Samurai) to give weapon training with the yumi (longbow), yari (longspear), naginata (glaive), katana (bastard sword), wakizashi (short sword), nagamaki (falchion), no-dachi (greatsword), and tetsubo (maul), and bam, you got yourself a samurai.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Outside of gaming nomenclature:
"Thief" - someone who steals.
"Rogue" - someone who's broken free of society's strictures. Elephants and government operatives "go rogue".
Neither is particularly apt at describing someone who learns a lot of useful skills and kills people by knowing the details of their anatomy (rather than knowing that if you beat someone hard enough, long enough, he stops moving). In particular, calling a government agent a "rogue" is exactly contrary.
"Monk" - cloistered ascetic; in Asia, often trained in a variety of armed and unarmed combat skills for the perfection of the body and mind.
"Martial artist" - someone who trains in martial arts. In the West, this is usually Eastern martial arts.
They both convey pretty much the same idea.
"Gunslinger" - practiced killer of the American Old West.
"Musketeer" - member of a French 17th and 18th Century company of trained combatants.
|
|
I came in at 2nd edition, so to me a rogue is a thief or a bard. The way the trend is going, the 11 core classes will soon be:
Blob 1
Blob 2
Blob 3
Blob 4
Blob 5
Blob 6
Blob 7
Blob 8
Blob 9
Blob 10
Blob 11
Bill: Jimmy, I noticed your rogue is so much more than just a rogue.
Jimmy: Check it Bill. That's why he's a Blob 9.
Bill: Blobtastic.
Whats in a name? Thief or Rogue, Monk or Martial Artist, Gunslinger or Musketeer?
Of those pairs of names for classes, which do you think would be a better name and why?
Thief vs Rogue: Rogue, because not all Rogues steal things. Rogues do things that are outside the box, and can be tricky--and rogues can steal, but they don't have to.
Monk vs Martial Artist: Monk, because the class is a mystic warrior, and monk implies a spiritual or religious discipline. Martial artist can but is less explicit. Also, while I don't agree with it, apparently Paizo has a rule that base classes have to be one non-compound word (which is why we have the "Magus" instead of the "mage knight" or "spellblade" or whatever).
Gunslinger vs Musketeer: Gunslinger, since the class-alternate can use many different kinds of guns, not just muskets. (IIRC; I haven't paid much attention to the playtest, TBH.)
Whats in a name? Thief or Rogue, Monk or Martial Artist, Gunslinger or Musketeer?
Of those pairs of names for classes, which do you think would be a better name and why?
Meh. I'm on board with most of the opinions on the first two... But, I think that gunslinger is a terrible name for the class as it is. Maybe not as it will be, but that is yet to be seen.
Gunslinger, almost without variance at least among all of the people I know and or game with, brings to mind Doc Holliday, any Clint Eastwood western character, maybe Roland from the King books or the MC from that Red Dead Redemption game. None of these guys bear any real resemblance to the PF class, and likely never will due to technological restrictions.
Part of me expects that there will be some sort of firearm magic item in the book that will let you have a six-shooter, but at an incredible price, so maybe you could play a character like Roland... maybe.
As far as the fighting style, musketeer is far more accurate. I mean, they had pistols, too. They fired their guns and then fought with blades when the enemy closed. The issue would be the traditional French connotation.
If there wasn't a pistol focus, the title rifleman would be accurate as well. I think the class seems more of a buccaneer as is, but that has too much pirate connotation. It is a really hard type of class to name well.
I came in at 2nd edition, so to me a rogue is a thief or a bard. The way the trend is going, the 11 core classes will soon be:
Blob 1
Blob 2
Blob 3
Blob 4
Blob 5
Blob 6
Blob 7
Blob 8
Blob 9
Blob 10
Blob 11Bill: Jimmy, I noticed your rogue is so much more than just a rogue.
Jimmy: Check it Bill. That's why he's a Blob 9.
Bill: Blobtastic.
+1 soo much +1, if you focus to much on a class name being able to cover things outside of their original structure then there is no point to calling them anything in the first place.
A barbarian is a barbarian until your background for him says otherwise. I am not going to guess samurai from the powers selected above.
Rogue, Martial Artist, Gunslinger.
Those are the widest terms you can use for those classes.
A rogue doesn't need to steal, a martial artist doesn't need to be a monk, and a gunslinger can have a wider range of firearms then just a musket.
|
Thank you all for sharing your thoughts.
I think that with the transition from 2nd to third edition the change of name from thief to rogue was an excellent one. It opened up the class to numerous character concepts.
I would also prefer to swap out the name Monk for Marital artist. While yes a martial artist is a bit of a misnomer, so is Monk. I think that a monk implies someone who has withdrawn from society into seclusion so he can better meditate or pray about spiritual and theological matters. Usually when I have someone new at the gaming table and they hear about the monk character class, their first thought is that of a monk with a tonsure who illuminates manuscripts.
Likewise, I think a name change from monk to martial artist would free people of preconceptions of shaven heads, prayer beads and orange robes. It would make it easer for people to lots of other possible character concepts. Perhaps a “borne Identity type character? A street thug, a prizefighter…I am sure there is a much longer list.
Now the gunslinger and musketeer, well I had a preference to Musketeer, because at least to me when I see gunslinger and I see the grit mechanic, I think of Rooster Cogburn and Mr Lebeef and that little girl in well “True Grit”. I think of a western, which to my mind is a bit of a different genre. Perhaps musketeer, who has points of Panache to spend for daring deeds, might be closer to what Paizo has in mind. Who knows? It is after all just a thought and idea.
And Karel Gheysens, yes I would prefer a Mink class as well. Particularly prefer a mink on a cold winter night.
Ricca, the gunslinger and Musketeer, I was merely thinking of the images and “genre” that these two words would evoke that’s all.
Well Richard Leonhart, I suppose my thoughts are that with a more general name like martial artist instead of monk, and then it might be easier to conceive of a broader range of character concepts. And while I agree that monk implies peace of mind, to my mind that would also apply to a tonsured monk, or “name of the rose” monk as well. I also agree the way the class is written it quite nicely expresses an “oriental “ ascetic who has trained in “ open handed “ combat.
On a complete aside Richard Leonheart, did you ever see the study National Geographic did of the ocean currents, by using “rubber duckies?” Apparently a container full of rubber duckies was ripped off a ship and ripped open in a storm spilling the ducks into the sea. The national geographic then tracked and took note of where these ducks appeared and washed up on shore and was able to surmise where some ocean currents went.
Magus black, indeed there are quite a few misnomers and distinctions that are unique to the Pathfinder and to the previous editions of the Dungeons and Dragons game; There is a distinction between fighting un armed and armed. There is also a distinction between divine and arcane magic. Oh also there is a distinction between devil and demon. I think these distinctions are unique to the game.
Ashiel I’m glad you brought up the barbarian. Coincidently I once played a barbarian and played him as a Samurai. I simply re “flavored” the rage as Ki. Of course he would have to shout when he attacked.
Again thank you all for your posts. I apologize for not getting to everyone.
if i could remove the class names from the books when teaching newer players i would it tacks me like 3 or 4 games to teach them not to pigeon-hole them selfs
. . .One of the things that bugs me about classes (and I do love classes) is the fact a lot of people get hung up in the basic archtype of the class, which leads to (IMHO) bad role-playing and an over emphasis on creating new classes (leading to class inflation).
For example, some people see the "barbarian" and never see any more than a drooling, frothy mouthed, muscle bound moron. Forget the fact you could use the barbarian class pretty much as written to represent a strong and skilled samurai warrior. Some people wouldn't hear of such a thing, simply because they cannot get past a name and a few sentences of fluff.
That's what I feel promotes bad roleplaying. It gets a metagame concept stuck in peoples' heads. You end up with people who think that being a Ninja means you need a "Ninja" class, or that to be a Samurai you need a "Samurai" class, or to be a Spartan you need a "Spartan" class; when really all of those can either be done right in core, or with simple archtypes.
+1
I think it sucks that people can't be flexible with the names, but since they can't we should do what we can to accommodate normal psychology. I really like the way d20 Modern had six basic classes, one that emphasized each ability score: Strong Hero, Fast Hero, Tough Hero, Smart Hero, Dedicated Hero, and Charismatic Hero.
Essentially, they let you use whatever nomenclature you preferred, and only labeled their game mechanics.