Level Up (A5E) My take on an A5e class lineup

[Stalker0]

If we are talking slight adjustments (almost house rule esque), I think that’s fine.

but if deeper changes are made, I do think new names are in order...it does make things cleaner and easier. Now you could say “advanced fighter” as that is a different name than that “fighter”, but you do have to add something to differentiate

 

[glass]

I was speaking on a per-group basis, not overall for every one who ever plays the game.

Whereas I, by saying 1000s, was very obviously talking about the latter.

If I'm not mistaken there is the intent of having enough 5 comptability to play [hb 5e stuff in A5e & the A5e classes will be pretty different. When the GM of an A5e asks the table & gets two people who say "fighter" "wizard" or whatever they still don't know the answer if the A5e classes use the same names instead of different names. If one of those players says "Dreadnought" "Mage" or whatever the GM instantly knows the capabilities of his group at the table.

but if deeper changes are made, I do think new names are in order...it does make things cleaner and easier. Now you could say “advanced fighter” as that is a different name than that “fighter”, but you do have to add something to differentiate

Thanks tetrasodium and Stalker0; it is good to see I am not the only one who thinks so. It seems blindingly obvious to me, so being challenged to support it in detail by seemingly everyone was very confusing.

_
glass.

 

[Lanefan]

I agree, but I think simple name changes would solve that problem.

Fighter -> Warrior
Rogue -> Scoundrel [Swashbuckler]
Cleric -> Priest [Divine Mage?]
Wizard -> Mage [Arcane Mage? Arcanist?]
Paladin -> Templar [Divine Knight]
Ranger -> Hunter
Monk -> Martial Artist
Druid -> Shaman [Elementalist]
Bard -> Skald [Minstrel]
Barbarian -> Berserker
Sorcerer -> Wilder(?)
Warlock -> Witch [no idea on this one - Pact {something}? Mystic?]

Around here a few of those names would run aground on the same sexism issues some existing ones do: Priest refers to males only; Witch refers to females only (and the existing Wizard, Warlock and Warlord generally refer to males only). Witch would - and has in the past - also run afoul of some in the neo-Pagan movement; and Shaman also has issues.

Templar might carry some religious baggage with it as well.

I've lobbed in a few alternative ideas above, in brackets inline with the quote; and I freely admit some are a bit stilted.

 

[glass]

Around here a few of those names would run aground on the same sexism issues some existing ones do: Priest refers to males only; Witch refers to females only (and the existing Wizard, Warlock and Warlord generally refer to males only). Witch would - and has in the past - also run afoul of some in the neo-Pagan movement; and Shaman also has issues.

Templar might carry some religious baggage with it as well.

I've lobbed in a few alternative ideas above, in brackets inline with the quote; and I freely admit some are a bit stilted.

Witch has conotations of being female (in roughly the same way "nurse" does), but is not an inherently gendered term. Priest does not even have that as far as I can see.

FWIW, I do not see any gender issues with Wizard or Warlock either. Warlord possibly, but that could not be used for Level Up anyway.

_
glass.

 

[Charlaquin]

Around here a few of those names would run aground on the same sexism issues some existing ones do: Priest refers to males only; Witch refers to females only (and the existing Wizard, Warlock and Warlord generally refer to males only).

Where’s “here” if you don’t mind saying? In my experience those are all gender-neutral terms (witch is often thought to be gendered, but it isn’t). But, I suppose it makes sense they might be gendered elsewhere

Witch would - and has in the past - also run afoul of some in the neo-Pagan movement; and Shaman also has issues.

Templar might carry some religious baggage with it as well.

Good points!

I've lobbed in a few alternative ideas above, in brackets inline with the quote; and I freely admit some are a bit stilted.

I like Swashbuckler and Arcanist. I’d rather pivot Paladin to Cavalier than “divine knight.” Cleric could maybe switch to Thaumaturge. I don’t know about Elementalist for Druid... Not all of them are focused on elemental magic. Maybe like Greenseer or something? Minstrel works for Bard, though it has a lot less gravitas. Is Skald gendered? For Warlock, maybe Binder would work.

 

[Morrus]

That's a shame. Still, thanks for confirming!




We may change a couple of the more problematic ones though. Paladin and Monk have been mentioned quite a bit (when we made Mythological Figures & Maleficent Monsters, the 'Monk' was used often to give characters punching power) as having significant baggage.

 

[Lanefan]

Where’s “here” if you don’t mind saying?

In the crew I run with.

In my experience those are all gender-neutral terms (witch is often thought to be gendered, but it isn’t). But, I suppose it makes sense they might be gendered elsewhere

Every time I say something like "Priests" with the intent of including all Clerics regardless of gender, someone will yell out "and Priestesses!" Or if I say "Gods" when meaning all divine beings, someone will say "and Goddesses!".

And yes, Witch is very much gendered in some meanings but not all. Depending on situation and-or context, Warlock or Wizard is the male equivalent. (blame my Pagan background...)

If I were ever to have Warlord as a class name it'd be a matter of minutes before someone asked "What about the Warladies?".

I like Swashbuckler and Arcanist. I’d rather pivot Paladin to Cavalier than “divine knight.” Cleric could maybe switch to Thaumaturge. I don’t know about Elementalist for Druid... Not all of them are focused on elemental magic. Maybe like Greenseer or something? Minstrel works for Bard, though it has a lot less gravitas. Is Skald gendered? For Warlock, maybe Binder would work.

Cavalier works as well, but how does one immediately know the class has a religious aspect to it? Abesnt that, I'd have just left it at 'Knight'.

Skald isn't gendered (that I know of! ) but it is tied to a specific culture: Norse. Same problem as the name 'Druid' has; it's tied to a single culture. Simpler to have a name without such ties if possible.

Binder might work for Warlock. I was trying to think of something to highlight the pact aspect - maybe Pact-Bound? - but couldn't come up with anything that worked.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Whether Morrus should change the names of all the classes or not... all he needs to do is check in with Monte Cook to find out how well his 3E Arcana Unearthed did. Because in a lot of ways that book was for 3E what this new book with be for 5E, and thus Morrus can find out just how popular changing all the classes around and giving them all new names actually ended up being.

My own personal assumption is that if he was to present entirely new names for classes... he'd pretty much be shooting himself in the foot. People will be less inclined to buy or play a game they don't recognize. If you don't actually use the baseline game tropes in any way and change over everything (including the most important building blocks, like the class names)... you essentially aren't creating an "Advanced" 5E... you're creating a whole new game like Esper Genesis. And while there were some people who have played EG or played Arcana Unearthed... neither of them have set the world on fire. They were both new variant off-shoots to D&D that had a small following but were not seen as anything more than that. And I don't think that's what Morrus seems to want to go with here.

 

[Lycurgon]

While I don't know the numbers involved, I would assume that Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed was a good seller. It did well enough to get at least 3 supplements published before it was republished when it was upgraded to 3.5e with a bigger full colour book, Arcana Evolved. Then at least 3 more supplements were published for Arcana Evolved too. There were also 2 anthology paper fiction book published and a number of other companies published supplements for it too (at least 4). It is a sign of success when other companies start publishing supplements for a product line.
The Setting is also about to be republished using Monte Cook's Cypher System.

Edit: There was also a line of miniatures produced for it too.