New name for Warlord

[Elphilm]

I'm not sure I understand why perfectly suitable and commonly used names like Soldier and Knight - both of which imply leadership and fighting in a unit - are worse options than outlandish names like Battlesmith and Myrmidon.

(And before you ask, yes, this thread prompted me to register. )

 

[Kae'Yoss]

I'm not sure I understand why perfectly suitable and commonly used names like Soldier and Knight - both of which imply leadership and fighting in a unit

Knight has a lot of connotative baggage. I couldn't imagine one without a horse and a lance.

Soldier implies leadership, with him being on the receiving side of said leadership.

(And before you ask, yes, this thread prompted me to register. )

I knew we'd get you this way. We were discussing several things, and I was sure that this would get you.

 

[Klaus]

So close...
I thought Myrmidon might be cool, so I looked it up. Other than the historical "soldier of Achielles' which is no big deal, the other definition is 'a loyal follower, esp one who executes orders unquestioningly.' Bummer...that's just the exact opposite of a martial leader class. Cool name, though.

Well, one must learn the value of commands in order to issue them. A "Myrmidon" is a professional warrior, and one with a group mentality at that. Sounds like our class.

 

[reanjr]

Man, Battlesmith was my idea and I don't think it's cheesy and dumb.

Sorry if you took offense. None was intended. Dunno if it makes a difference, but I find a great number of WotC's class names to be cheesy and dumb as well (primarily prestige classes).

 

[reanjr]

So what are they left with? Well, as I stated above, I like Warrior and I think it would be easy enough to explain the difference between a Fighter and a Warrior.

...

All that said, I still think it should be 'Warrior.' While no as cool sounding, it's cool none the less and gets highest marks for remaining generic and avoiding having implied rank, social standing, or exclusive skills (i.e, my wizard may consider himself a Tactician.)

I didn't see your previous comment, but I agree Warrior would be an excellent choice. I think the difference between a Fighter who is great at martial combat and a Warrior who knows how battles are to be fought are fairly obvious when one thinks about it and they would both be wholely appropriate names.

But now we have to rename the NPC class...

 

[reanjr]

I can't believe somebody thought "marshal" was a modern word. I'd have thought that people who play a game that features so many details inspired by medieval warfare would occasionally read a book or two on medieval warfare.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_Marshal

Actually, I was saying that the word marshal as someone who can be found in battle sounds modern. And the link you provide backs me up.

 

[Elphilm]

Knight has a lot of connotative baggage. I couldn't imagine one without a horse and a lance.

I don't see connotative baggage as necessarily a bad thing - it can simply be used as flavor. For example, the Cleric is essentially a warrior-magician with the connotative baggage of military-monastic orders. I could very well envision a martial 4E class that fits the Leader role modeled after the medieval knight. If historical knights could include persons such as this, I don't see why a Knight class should be any stricter.

Soldier implies leadership, with him being on the receiving side of said leadership.

I think that ultimately the word soldier refers to people who serve in the armed forces for pay. In addition, officers often refer to themselves as soldiers, and I believe that terms like "career soldier" are used of both persons with and without an officer's commision. Regardless, you do have a valid point.

Nevertheless, on second thought I do like Myrmidon as a class name; it sits well with the more (at least to modern audiences) obscure class names like Cleric and Paladin.

 

[Reaper Steve]

But now we have to rename the NPC class [Warrior]...

Yeah, here's hoping all the NPC classes forget to show up for 4e (and we get the single NPC from SWSE.) But that may be exactly why WotC didn't use 'Warrior'...it's already used.

WotC...hear my pleas...promote the Warrior to full PC status in 4e and make him a martial leader class, and have him kill the Warlord and take his stuff before he even shows up!

Then maybe a warlord could be a prestige class/talent tree for the warrior.

Look at that, we just recaptialized a class name and saved a new one for something more fitting. Job's a good 'un.

 

[The Human Target]

Damn, look at all the people who think warlord is "fine".

What a terrible name. First off, warlord has pretty heavy negative connotations. It's a bully, a thug who rules by force. Second, a warlord leads an army, not a small group of skirmishers. Third, it's a grandiose title, inappropriate for low-level characters.

And fourth, "marshal" did the job pretty well. Nice and neutral, a marshal's station can be humble or high.

It's really distressing that out of an entire R&D, these arguements haven't been circulated and accepted. I'll be the first to say they're pretty obvious.

Marshal could get confused with Martial pretty easily.

"What power source is the Marshal?"
"Martial."
"Who?"
"Exactly."

I agree with these.

Commander is okat too. Anything but Warlord.

Or Centurion.

 

[Technik4]

WotC...hear my pleas...promote the Warrior to full PC status in 4e and make him a martial leader class, and have him kill the Warlord and take his stuff before he even shows up!

Because it will be lots of fun explaining how a Warrior and Fighter are 2 different classes than sound nearly identical.

Warlord sounds cool to me, though I would be in favor of making more generic class names rather than more specific class names (so if we could think of something genericer than Warlord, like Leader but more d&d-y, thats what I would go with).

Myrmidon is like Barbarian - just implies too much about the character before you get started (like Thief implied more than Rogue does).