Do you miss old D&D class names?

[BigAlzBub]

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet. So whats in a name? I'm glad the term thief was dumped since not every 3.x rogue feels the need to steal from the party but that was probably due to the fact that 1st/2nd ed thieves were rewarded for their filching. I'm all for titles but not based off level, after all if you abandon your post at a church, sneak off down a dungeon, kill loads of sentient beings, steal their stuff, and then come slinking back, are you seriously going to get a pat on the back a well done speach and a fancy ceremony? I guess it would depend on what sort of church you work for but you get my point I'm sure . Most titles should be based on achievement not level, that way if you toe the line and be a "goodie little two shoes" within your organisation you get status, as always YMMV

 

[Zappo]

I don't miss them at all. In particular, thief should have been made into rogue a long time ago. I still have people who won't play rogues because they don't want to play criminals. Grrrrr...

 

[Rydac]

Count me amongst those that hate the class name "magic user". That term was one of my D&D pet peeves....my Fightingman with a +1 sword is a "magic user" .

 

[diaglo]

i don't miss them cuz i use them.

 

[Psion]

Magic-user... all characters are "magic-users" in standard D&D. Wizard or mage has the right meaning.

Similarly with "thief" does not do a good job of describing most memebers of the class. Not all characters who tag along with parties that are good at defusing traps are criminals by definition.

 

[Erekose]

Originally posted by Piratecat
What I DO miss is the concept of "name level" and of interesting titles as you go up in levels. They were poorly implemented in 1e, but I loved the idea.

Me too! 9th level was the level all of our players aspired to as the game changed pace - characters gained cohorts, built strongholds and became more than individual "soldiers of fortune".

This can be mimicked in 3.5E but it would be nice if it was embedded into the system.

 

[fusangite]

I'm glad to see them gone. Frankly, while they were at it, I wouldn't have minded them abolishing "Fighter" and "Ranger" as class names too. (But of course, abolishing the name "Ranger" would no doubt kill the class's appeal.) Why did some NPC class end up with "Warrior" as its name while our guys had to stick with "Fighter"?

As for the level titles, if you guys want to go through your thesaurus entries in random order, you can bring back the level titles. Like the wandering prostitutes subtable in the 1E DMG, these advancement charts were obviously generated by someone with a slightly out of date Roget's thesaurus with no reference to what the title actually meant.

I still fondly remember a new 1E D&D class in some magazine based on the Thugee order in ancient India called the Strangler. By about 6th level, the author had run out of synonyms and had begun just stacking on the adjectives a la the Druid (Great Druid --> Grand Druid); I think the highest named level was the "Grand High Holy Strangler."

 

[devilish]

I voted for "Miss 'em" before I read the post, assuming that you referred to the level names. No, I don't miss the class names.

Me too -- I voted yes for level names but would've voted no for class names.

 

[warlord]

I know some of you miss the old class names and level names but am I the only one who misses the assassin the forgotten class.

 

[Felonious Ntent]

It's Thief not Rogue.