Where monastic orders remained rooted in place, a friar was a mendicant, traveling to preach, educate the people, and treat the sick.
Among the mendicant monk's duties is also collecting tithes and donations to send back to the monastery (to keep it funded). Friars are a specific kind of mendicant monk. Buddhist monasteries also have mendicant monks. They are not friars. (But a 14th century brit might have recognized them as such.)
The specific term for monks who live and work in the monastery is cloistered. They are cloistered monks.
So basically... What PF2 calls a Cloistered Cleric would be better classified as a Mendicant Cleric.
Not sure what impact that should have on the Warpriest Cleric or Monk classes though.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This kind of "lets re-invent the wheel because we've already solved all the other problems" stuff is why I'm moving on from Pathfinder.
This forum is quite bad about that. And most of the suggestions(like many in this thread) are more harmful than good. But it does make sense that Paizo is trying to be legally distinct from D&D. The good news is you can keep referring to stuff as Gnolls, Phylacteries, Wendigos, etc and no one can stop you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just removed some posts that were off topic and harassing. Please keep the conversation to the subject of the thread.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ranger-Pathfinder
Pretty much a non-starter with the Pathfinder society being a thing that has Pathfinder agents: it'd be needlessly confusing to have a Pathfinder Pathfinder working for the Pathfinders...
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The issue I have with Berserker is the same I have with Fighter: It just says what the character does but doesn't come with any theme. Barbarian comes with a natural theme that it acquired through previous editions.The word was poorly chosen, but it now represents something. I don't see a better term even if this one is not perfect.
That is the problem the Barbarian theme is wrong as it subsumes other things. It takes out the space for non berserk tribes folk. Why do the need to be all lumped with the other connotations?
Look I couldn't be further apart from Rysky on most of these issues. I typically hate word updating efforts. But I agree with this one. Barbarian is a bad term. It brings in too much baggage that shouldn't be there. I'd much rather that tribal barbarian people are not all dropped into the same bucket. Berserker is a much better term that can exist in multiple types of societies. There are people with anger issues that aren't part of a barbarian culture.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ranger-PathfinderPretty much a non-starter with the Pathfinder society being a thing that has Pathfinder agents: it'd be needlessly confusing to have a Pathfinder Pathfinder working for the Pathfinders...
Luckily wayfinders are not also called pathfinders, or your pathfinder pathfinder using a pathfinder to pathfind while working for the pathfinders, might get lost in all the paths.
Tongue in cheek: We have Cathartic Mage - how about Cathartic Warrior?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The issue I have with Berserker is the same I have with Fighter: It just says what the character does but doesn't come with any theme. Barbarian comes with a natural theme that it acquired through previous editions.The word was poorly chosen, but it now represents something. I don't see a better term even if this one is not perfect.
That is the problem the Barbarian theme is wrong as it subsumes other things. It takes out the space for non berserk tribes folk. Why do the need to be all lumped with the other connotations?
Look I couldn't be further apart from Rysky on most of these issues. I typically hate word updating efforts. But I agree with this one. Barbarian is a bad term. It brings in too much baggage that shouldn't be there. I'd much rather that tribal barbarian people are not all dropped into the same bucket. Berserker is a much better term that can exist in multiple types of societies. There are people with anger issues that aren't part of a barbarian culture.
What is there were various cultures you could add to a character as a free archetype or background? Just as the Berserker doesn't have to belong to one culture. The cultural aspects of "fantasy wildling barbarians" could be applied to other classes.
So obviously lots of things are getting renamed/ditched with the remaster, one thing I’d like to see is Barbarian being renamed to Berserker, or something along those lines.
Barbarian hasn’t been a good moniker for that class for awhile, among other reasons (mostly insults, or not Greek), it comes down to the many ways to flavor Rage, from actual anger, to fight or flight instincts, to adrenaline, to a battle trance and very little to do with culture.
You don’t have to be from the wilds to be a Barbarian, they can read and write. Barbarian is non-indicative. The core of the class is the Rage. Everyone can have rage. People in the city are more likely to have rage honestly.
"Animals can be driven crazy by placing too many in too small a pen. Homo sapiens is the only animal that voluntarily does this to himself." -- R.A. Heinlein, The Notebooks of Lazarus Long
I always liked The Mad Wizard Weber's Hradani. Took them 1200 years to learn to control The Rage.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
About renaming, I'm really sad about the Gnoll renaming. First, Kholo is a local name, it's not widespread among Gnolls. But there's also an entire Gnoll language. I would have loved to see a name for them that would come from their language (and as such a small description of how sounds Gnoll).
In my opinion, Paizo should remove the Gnoll language from Golarion. It's never used and even when they have an occasion to use it they don't (I assume Kholo is a Mwangi inspired name, considering that it's the name of Mwangi Gnolls).
When you have a common language that virtually everyone is presumed to speak, because you don't want to have to deal with communication problems caused by lack of a common language, one of the consequences of that is that less common languages tend to get glossed over. To me that's an incentive to have a party run into critters that don't speak common, not an incentive to just "remove" the critters' native language from the world.
I can also play with bold text.There’s no playing, you’re discounting Rage in its entirety when it’s the main class feature and fantasy.The issue I have with Berserker is the same I have with Fighter: It just says what the character does but doesn't come with any theme. Barbarian comes with a natural theme that it acquired through previous editions.Barbarian does not have a natural theme, unless you pick Animal Instinct.The word was poorly chosen, but it now represents something. I don't see a better term even if this one is not perfect.No it doesn’t. And it doesn’t mean “nature Warrior”.
It was mentioned (in a Roll For Combat livestream) that in order to keep things backwards compatible, some name will have to remain, the example being Barbarian (since other stuff references Barbarian).With so much else being changed/renamed that seems really really dumb.
It’s a name. What is so paramount that the name can’t be changed or else systems will fall apart? What’s there to be backwards compatible with?
What the heck. Call it "Joe".
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pretty much. They should just watch out for Pinkertons showing up to repo their D&D collection...This kind of "lets re-invent the wheel because we've already solved all the other problems" stuff is why I'm moving on from Pathfinder.Fortunately, the original wheel is still available from WotC if you don't want the Paizo version that got them out from under the Damoclean sword.
Personally, I don't know the law on this, but if a bunch of Pinkertons show up at my door saying "let us in, we're confiscating <whatever>" my answer will be "No. Go away. Come back with a Sheriff's Deputy and a warrant." Meanwhile, I'm calling a lawyer.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes. Would like monk to be less orientalist too, which the name plays a part in. Just the name alone is less offensive than with barbarian, admittedly.
I don't see "barbarian" as offensive, used in the gaming sense. Used in the original Greek sense, I would. As for "monk", how about "lam" (Anglized version of the Mongolian word for "monk"). Or "manach" (Irish). :-)
This kind of "lets re-invent the wheel because we've already solved all the other problems" stuff is why I'm moving on from Pathfinder.This forum is quite bad about that. And most of the suggestions(like many in this thread) are more harmful than good. But it does make sense that Paizo is trying to be legally distinct from D&D. The good news is you can keep referring to stuff as Gnolls, Phylacteries, Wendigos, etc and no one can stop you.
Seems to me anybody in gaming would have a hard time claiming "phylactery" as intellectual property. The word means "a small leather box containing Hebrew texts on vellum, worn by Jewish men at morning prayer as a reminder to keep the law" and descends from Greek via Latin and Middle English. Similarly, "Wendigo" derives from an Ojibway word meaning "a cannibalistic giant". I don't know whence "gnoll" comes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know whence "gnoll" comes.
Original Dungeons & Dragons role-playing game rules (1974), gnolls were described as a "cross between gnomes and trolls." The entire concept was scrapped with the next rules edition, Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, and was replaced with the hyena-man concept.
That said, they were inspired by a Lord Dunsany short story, "How Nuth Would Have Practiced His Art Upon the Gnoles", they appear in video games like Warhammer, EverQuest and heroes of might and magic, Discworld, and there are folklore and literature of hyena/demons (çíyyîm) of the Bible, the were-hyenas of African bushman folklore, and the tall dog men (Cynocephales) of early European travellers logs and bestiaries...
It'd be hard, IMO, to claim it as intellectual property at this point and win. Of course, that wouldn't mean someone couldn't try...
|
What are you trying to do? Convince me that my feelings are wrong? Good luck with that.
You're conflating your opinions, feelings, and facts.
You like Barbarian as a name. Cool.
You say Barbarian is a nature class. That is false.
If it was pleasant to have a debate with you I could have engaged in one. But expressing your disagreement through bolding is hardly a nice move. So we will agree to disagree, thanks.
First I've heard of this. Regardless, that was to point out the disconnect in your point, ignoring the rage and claiming the other components were more important... when they all had Rage in the name and Rage is the core defining ability of the class.
|
|
Seems to me anybody in gaming would have a hard time claiming "phylactery" as intellectual property. The word means "a small leather box containing Hebrew texts on vellum, worn by Jewish men at morning prayer as a reminder to keep the law" and descends from Greek via Latin and Middle English. Similarly, "Wendigo" derives from an Ojibway word meaning "a cannibalistic giant". I don't know whence "gnoll" comes.This kind of "lets re-invent the wheel because we've already solved all the other problems" stuff is why I'm moving on from Pathfinder.This forum is quite bad about that. And most of the suggestions(like many in this thread) are more harmful than good. But it does make sense that Paizo is trying to be legally distinct from D&D. The good news is you can keep referring to stuff as Gnolls, Phylacteries, Wendigos, etc and no one can stop you.
To be clear though, Wendigo is much more than that, similar to Skin-walker in that they are something so evil you aren't supposed to even talk about them. They are taboos.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be clear though, Wendigo is much more than that, similar to Skin-walker in that they are something so evil you aren't supposed to even talk about them. They are taboos.Seems to me anybody in gaming would have a hard time claiming "phylactery" as intellectual property. The word means "a small leather box containing Hebrew texts on vellum, worn by Jewish men at morning prayer as a reminder to keep the law" and descends from Greek via Latin and Middle English. Similarly, "Wendigo" derives from an Ojibway word meaning "a cannibalistic giant". I don't know whence "gnoll" comes.This kind of "lets re-invent the wheel because we've already solved all the other problems" stuff is why I'm moving on from Pathfinder.This forum is quite bad about that. And most of the suggestions(like many in this thread) are more harmful than good. But it does make sense that Paizo is trying to be legally distinct from D&D. The good news is you can keep referring to stuff as Gnolls, Phylacteries, Wendigos, etc and no one can stop you.
That isn't quite right: the Assiniboine, the Cree, and the Ojibwe have a ceremonial dance that was performed during times of famine to reinforce the seriousness of the wendigo taboo called wiindigookaanzhimowin. Kind of hard to reinforce something you don't talk about.
There is also the Wechuge in the legends of the Athabaskan people almost identical to a Wendigo [also a malevolent, cannibalistic, supernatural being] that's happens when someone breaks a taboo and becoming "too strong" by being possessed by an animal spirit: Taboos like having your picture taken with a flash, listening to music made with a stretched string or hide, and the like.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To be clear though, Wendigo is much more than that, similar to Skin-walker in that they are something so evil you aren't supposed to even talk about them. They are taboos.Seems to me anybody in gaming would have a hard time claiming "phylactery" as intellectual property. The word means "a small leather box containing Hebrew texts on vellum, worn by Jewish men at morning prayer as a reminder to keep the law" and descends from Greek via Latin and Middle English. Similarly, "Wendigo" derives from an Ojibway word meaning "a cannibalistic giant". I don't know whence "gnoll" comes.This kind of "lets re-invent the wheel because we've already solved all the other problems" stuff is why I'm moving on from Pathfinder.This forum is quite bad about that. And most of the suggestions(like many in this thread) are more harmful than good. But it does make sense that Paizo is trying to be legally distinct from D&D. The good news is you can keep referring to stuff as Gnolls, Phylacteries, Wendigos, etc and no one can stop you.That isn't quite right: the Assiniboine, the Cree, and the Ojibwe have a ceremonial dance that was performed during times of famine to reinforce the seriousness of the wendigo taboo called wiindigookaanzhimowin. Kind of hard to reinforce something you don't talk about.
There is also the Wechuge in the legends of the Athabaskan people almost identical to a Wendigo [also a malevolent, cannibalistic, supernatural being] that's happens when someone breaks a taboo and becoming "too strong" by being possessed by an animal spirit: Taboos like having your picture taken with a flash, listening to music made with a stretched string or hide, and the like.
Its part of what makes these topics complicated because to some people it IS taboo. Like there are multiple variations of same concept among different cultures. What is secret knowledge to some might not be to others
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
What is secret knowledge to some might not be to others
But then, how do you expect someone to know about it if it's super-duper, above top-secret knowledge no one ever talks about? I mean, if it's not ever talked about, how do you know about it?
Secondly, I'd argue that the Wendigo itself isn't the taboo but what the person did that makes them one. In essence, the legend of the Wendigo is more a fable/parable warning against gluttony, greed, and excess or cannibalism.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
What is secret knowledge to some might not be to othersBut then, how do you expect someone to know about it if it's super-duper, above top-secret knowledge no one ever talks about? I mean, if it's not ever talked about, how do you know about it?
Secondly, I'd argue that the Wendigo itself isn't the taboo but what the person did that makes them one. In essence, the legend of the Wendigo is more a fable/parable warning against gluttony, greed, and excess or cannibalism.
That’s exactly what it is. There are certain tribes, the Algonquin people are not a monolith, to who sharing knowledge like this is a no-no, given the propensity for others to fantasize and mainstream it. But there’s plenty of other ones who are fine with it being shared due to its nature as a taboo. It’s a warning, it’s supposed to be shared.
Basically, as long you don’t heroize it or make it something like a power up, leave it as it is, a horrific evil that teaches against greed and gluttony, there’s not that much of an issue.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Er...well a friar belongs to a monastery...so he's a monk.
A friar very specifically does not belong to monastery, that is the literal difference between a monk and a friar.
Mendicant Orders were non monastic clergy who made their living ministering to the people by living among them.
I would be pretty happy with Barbarian becoming Beserkers. Monk is a bit more tricky for me. I do like the name and I don't see the problem with it as much( but I am ok with it being changed since it does seem to have some issues that do matter to people, and i'd rather not center myself in that conversation) The biggest issue I have with monk is what would one change the name too. I wouldn't mind if a class name had two words, but I know there is a strong desire to keep class names to one neat word. The current version of the Monk is my favorite version for 1 big reason that also makes the concept a bit harder to find a new name. Its mechanics can both represent someone who is just really good in unarmed combat, be it someone trained at a monastery/dojo/martial school or a street fighter( admittedly monk doesn't evoke a street fighter in its name all too well) but it can also be a spiritual warrior, with magic powers, which are implied to be trained via hard work, mental and spiritual focus.
The one word potential alternatives don't quite have the same connotations/adding a magical component to a class with that name *May seem off.* Stuff like Brawler, Pugilist, Scrapper.
If you focus on the mystical aspect you might lose focus on the martial arts aspects. Stuff like Anchorite, Hermit, Ascetic.
TBH I kind of like Hermit, it gives me vibes of either an isolated or wandering individual. One that would be self reliant both spiritually and physically. It would be a very different word and you may need to wiggle the word around to get the right vibes but I actually kind of like it. I mean Paladins have nothing to do with Charlemagne and Druids are also their iconic thing. Even Monk pulls from a wide variety of ideas and put it into one class. I guess a big question should Monk include all of these ideas or should we split them up as well. But if not then, I like Hermit as an alternative.
So yeah I think my vote for a change of name for Monk would be Hermit.(in a hypothetical pf3, changing it in 2e seems unlikely, and could cause problems with the Hermit background)
I think any changes to class names should reference what the class actually does, so while Barbarian -> Berserker makes sense (though I could see another name working better), Monk -> Hermit doesn't quite make sense.
First, the class doesn't focus on seclusion, and the seclusion aspect doesn't quite mesh well with the fantasy of defined martial art styles. While the class doesn't focus on monastic life either, Monk as a term has some existing connotations that make it a bit more clear what the class fantasy is.
Second, Hermit has an even more defined RP prescription than Monk does, making it overall less fitting for a class. It would be like renaming the Fighter to the Soldier. Ideally, class names aim for broad "this is what you do" concepts rather than "this is what you are" concepts.
That is a good point. I would say that a variety of classes blur the line of "this is what you do" and "this is what you are." I will admit this is primarily magic based classes such as Sorcerers, and Oracles. But I would even argue something like Rogue is pretty dam close to Hermit on that scale. The word Rogue doesn't actually explain any more what you do then Hermit does, and in fact outside of gaming has a way stronger connotations on personality. I also tend not to see classes as an in universe thing so tbh I am pretty flexible in what the actual name of what the class is called.
I picked Hermit out of the ones I mentioned because it had the best ring to it imo but I am not married to it. In general I find trying to find any word to replace Monk, will have the difficulty of encapsulating all of what the monk is, and will have to either deal with a ill fitted name or try to separate the two concepts of, martial artist(broadly) and mystical/spiritual warrior.
Yes. Would like monk to be less orientalist too, which the name plays a part in. Just the name alone is less offensive than with barbarian, admittedly.That's a much bigger change to request unfortunately.
Like it or not, monk does have some baked in Asian flavor (I don't think it's a problem personally) what with them basically being a Wuxia hero. I do think the monk name needs to go, but the mechanics can stay. Just rename the class to Wuxia.
I don't think most people would have any idea what 'Wuxia' stands for, and that would only make the problem worse once/if they did come to know what that means.
Removing cultural stereotypes baked into it is, IMO; the better path to take.
They could fix this with some monk fighting based on Boxing, Capoeira, Wrestling, and Pankration. Would probably only take a few small feats to give an iconic ability based on each fighting style. Some of these might already exist - I am not well versed in the Pathfinder Monk.
The real problem for Monk is the class name.
It should be 'brawler'. It's 'Monk' because of the 1970s TV Show 'Kung Fu'. Actual Buddhist Monks are no more brawlers than Catholic Monks are...
But change the name and people will be confused for an edition or two.
Barbarian has a bit of the same problem. The word just means 'foreigner' in a derogatory sense.
The class should be a 'Berserker'. And Warriors that fight by going into an extreme frenzy have varied traditions. Unlike 'Monk' the class design actually seems to already cover the needed ground pretty well.