Another name for the Warlord: Ayran

[The Little Raven]

Also, do people like the background I wrote, the concept of a word meaning "inspiring soul" seems to fit the archetype, but can be applied to any good word we can think of.

Made up word for core concepts = bad idea.

People know what a "fighter" is, just based on the name. If you called it a "gaamfingh" because you wanted to use some made up fantasy word meaning "great warrior," people still wouldn't know what it is. After they read it, they'd ask themselves "Why didn't they just call it a fighter?"

 

[Stalker0]

Made up word for core concepts = bad idea.

People know what a "fighter" is, just based on the name. If you called it a "gaamfingh" because you wanted to use some made up fantasy word meaning "great warrior," people still wouldn't know what it is. After they read it, they'd ask themselves "Why didn't they just call it a fighter?"

The difference here is this archetype we are naming isn't a standard achetype we are used to dealing with. As the polls have continually shown, there isn't a good word to describe the class.

Further, many of the dnd words we use now have been "dnded" so that we are used to using them. I mean, if you ask many people what a cleric is, they aren't likely to tell you its a guy in full plate with a big mace, but that's what he is in dnd.

The concept of a shapeshifting druid is only one of many concepts behind the druid. And of course, don't get me starting on ranger.

Of course, people will see the word and go "what's that?" But then they will look it up, and know what it is. They will have a clear concept of what the archetype is, as opposed to bias drawn from history which aren't represented by the dnd mechanics.

 

[The Little Raven]

The difference here is this archetype we are naming isn't a standard achetype we are used to dealing with. As the polls have continually shown, there isn't a good word to describe the class.

Marshal and warlord are both good words to describe the class. The problem is that noone can agree on the best word to describe the class.

Further, many of the dnd words we use now have been "dnded" so that we are used to using them. I mean, if you ask many people what a cleric is, they aren't likely to tell you its a guy in full plate with a big mace, but that's what he is in dnd.

Those are still real words. It's totally different than making up gibberish.

And that name still tells you the basics of what the cleric is: the servant of a god.

The concept of a shapeshifting druid is only one of many concepts behind the druid. And of course, don't get me starting on ranger.

These names still invoke certain characteristics in a way that a made-up gibberish word does not.

Ranger tells you that I'm a wilderness-based scout/tracker, despite what other features I might have. That's based on just knowing the word "ranger," with no association to D&D.

Ayran, on the other hand, tells me nothing about what the class does until I read some explanation, which leads me to ask "Why not just name him something normal, like Warlord?"

 

[Umbran]

So far, we have been obsessed with finding a new that fits the "leader" concept but that fits the standard historical and fantasy cues. But that's a limitation we don't need. For example, to this day arguments are seen on enworld about the ranger archetype. People still don't feel that the mechanics of the ranger fit the archetype they see in their head.

So why not make up a word.

Because class names that don't clearly suggest what the class does are confusing to new players. Nobody, new or old to gaming, can confuse what a "fighter" does. But if I said a party contained a "gobflobble", a "wronkitator" and a "miranginist", you'd have no clue what that meant until you'd memorized the rulebook.

 

[WhatGravitas]

Alright, Aryan won't fly, no problem...but I think its the right track.

No, no, no. Seeing something looking that similar to Aryan, really causes something bad in me. Especially considering your misspelling in this post!

Also, do people like the background I wrote, the concept of a word meaning "inspiring soul" seems to fit the archetype, but can be applied to any good word we can think of.

I like the background... but made-up words... are not so good. Because we have no clue what it means. Because the moniker in the core book is a mechanical moniker for us - while "Ayran" would be a purely campaign-specific thing - an in-game term. You could do that for a setting-specific PrC (because they have in-game ramifications, or at least, they should have), but the core classes should only be something for us, not for the in-game world.

Just as a fighter/paladin should model a knight and samurai alike - because the characters in-game don't know their class name (at least, that was presumed at the start of 3E, later... it got wonkier).

However, I can accept very exotic names, using either foreign words or outdated words. I think of Unfettered, Akashic, Magisters, Warmains, Sprytes (as a race)... I know you frequent the AE boards, so you should get my drift, if I say "Monte Cookian Names" (but don't forget that AU/AE embraced being non-traditional).

Give me a Monte Cookian name, and I'm probably happy!

Cheers, LT.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

Let's relegate this idea to the dustbin of history, lol!

 

[Shortman McLeod]

Ayran, huh?

So I guess that "Fuhrer" will be the prestige class?

 

[TwinBahamut]

I don't think that chaining a random bunch of syllables together is ever a good way to name something. Gibberish is just gibberish. D&D has enough of that already.

If you want interesting sounding names that mean things in other languages, then use an existing real world language, don't make up your own words and claim thay mean something in some fake language. Real world languages have plenty of room for providing interesting words, far more so than is needed for an RPG.

 

[Stalker0]

How about following an existing WOTC naming scheme then.

For example: Warheart, Warsoul, or Warmind.

 

[howandwhy99]

Not only is its pronunciation the name of a country (causing confusion) but it also bares similarity to the word Aryan (which consequently is where said country's name comes from).
The word aryan is associated with racism (see 3rd Reich) and so it would be inadvisable to have such a similar word be the name of a class.

Also no D&D class has a name that is completely made up. I too think though that its okay for the name of a class not to match up completely with what it does necessarily.

Completely, completely agree.

Do not use Ayran or any variation of Aryan.

Go phonetic. Stick with your I-ran example. I-ran shouldn't bother anyone.