Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Levistus's_Leviathan" data-source="post: 8104554" data-attributes="member: 7023887">Artificer means &quot;a skilled craftsman or inventor.&quot; Not a class of liars. Barbarian has been/is still often used as an insult, which is why this thread exists. Berserker/Ravager/Battlerager is less problematic than Barbarian.Bard has derogatory origins, but isn't really used that way anymore. Even if it was a problem, which it isn't, they could do Minstrel or Lyrist. &quot;Cleric&quot; is not a problem. You're pretending like it is. Druid - That isn't a problem and your statement is ridiculous. Naming a class &quot;druid&quot; isn't supporting paganism and modern world's view of paganism is not relevant.Fighter is a stupid name, but your argument is stupid, too. D&amp;D doesn't support violence anymore than chess does. I would change &quot;Fighter&quot; to &quot;Warrior&quot; but not because there's any problematic elements of the name, it's just a bad name. Monk - that argument is not relevant, but Monk could easily be changed to &quot;Martial-Artist.&quot;Paladin - <a href="https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/paladin" target="_blank">Here's </a>the definition of paladin for you. Ranger - You go back and forth between saying we can't call a class a certain name because it's offensive and then start making offensive statements. Also, D&amp;D's rangers originated from Aragorn, if my information is correct. Sorcerer - That's not the definition of sorcerer, though. Warlocks - Yes, the 1980's taught us that people who were misinformed about the game overreacted. D&amp;D is popular enough that this isn't a valid concern anymore. Wizards - The term &quot;wizard&quot; is not owned by white supremacists. In short, you're grasping at straws for apparently no reason. Most of the class names in D&amp;D don't need to change, and Barbarian's name probably won't change, so probably have nothing to worry about. Even if it was, that's not the end of the world or the hobby.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Levistus's_Leviathan, post: 8104554, member: 7023887"] [B]Artificer [/B]means "a skilled craftsman or inventor." Not a class of liars. [B]Barbarian[/B] has been/is still often used as an insult, which is why this thread exists. Berserker/Ravager/Battlerager is less problematic than Barbarian. [B]Bard [/B]has derogatory origins, but isn't really used that way anymore. Even if it was a problem, which it isn't, they could do Minstrel or Lyrist. "[B]Cleric[/B]" is not a problem. You're pretending like it is. [B]Druid [/B]- That isn't a problem and your statement is ridiculous. Naming a class "druid" isn't supporting paganism and modern world's view of paganism is not relevant. [B]Fighter [/B]is a stupid name, but your argument is stupid, too. D&D doesn't support violence anymore than chess does. I would change "Fighter" to "Warrior" but not because there's any problematic elements of the name, it's just a bad name. [B]Monk [/B]- that argument is not relevant, but Monk could easily be changed to "Martial-Artist." [B]Paladin [/B]- [URL='https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/paladin']Here's [/URL]the definition of paladin for you. [B]Ranger [/B]- You go back and forth between saying we can't call a class a certain name because it's offensive and then start making offensive statements. Also, D&D's rangers originated from Aragorn, if my information is correct. [B]Sorcerer [/B]- That's not the definition of sorcerer, though. [B]Warlocks [/B]- Yes, the 1980's taught us that people who were misinformed about the game overreacted. D&D is popular enough that this isn't a valid concern anymore. [B]Wizards[/B] - The term "wizard" is not owned by white supremacists. In short, you're grasping at straws for apparently no reason. Most of the class names in D&D don't need to change, and Barbarian's name probably won't change, so probably have nothing to worry about. Even if it was, that's not the end of the world or the hobby. [/QUOTE]

Verification