D&D (2024) UA Groups: Expert, Mage, Priest, Warrior

[cbwjm]

And "Expert" somehow isn't? Or "Mage" in a game where most classes can cast spells?

Mage in dnd tends to specifically refer to those that cast arcane spells, so it kind of does work.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

There's no reason to think this is true.

We know that the Expert has 1 full caster, 1 half-caster and 1 base non-caster.

What reason is there to think that each of the class groupings has to have the same spellcasting?

Just a thought that popped into my head, I think it's extremely unlikely as well.

 

[Yaarel]

The word Paladin is just as ethnocentric. Monk and Barbarian are possible issues for other reasons, but it doesn't look like WotC's planning on changing any of them.

Even so, in English, the term "paladin" also specifically means an advocate or champion of any kind of cause.

The English word rarely refers to its historical meaning.



"Barbarian" like "savage" is actually problematic if representing a culture. However for D&D a "savage" class that is intentionally animalistic like a werewolf concept seems ok.



"Monk" refers to any kind of monastic community, so is somewhat more multicultural.

Personally, I would rather call the "Monk" base class "Athlete", anyway, to emphasize the unarmed physical feats, and open the base class to more character concepts.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

Even so, in English, the term "paladin" also specifically means an advocate or champion of any kind of cause.

The English word rarely refers to its historical meaning.



"Barbarian" like "savage" is actually problematic if representing a culture. However for D&D a "savage" class that is intentionally animalistic like a werewolf concept seems ok.



"Monk" refers to any kind of monastic community, so is somewhat more multicultural.

Personally, I would rather call the "Monk" base class "Athlete", anyway, to emphasize the unarmed physical feats, and open the base class to more character concepts.

Athlete, wow, not even Martial Artist?

 

[Yaarel]

Devotee could apply to any class, its too generic.

Priest is fine, it's no worse then the term Cleric itself, in fact it's much more broadly applible to more religions then Cleric or Paladin themselves are and those terms aren't going anywhere.

Priest is highly problematic. Like saying "White".

Religion is the most important, most sacred, aspect of any reallife culture.

To violate the religions of other cultures is highly offensive. Nothing is more offensive to a reallife culture.

Priest is wrong.

 

[Yaarel]

Athlete, wow, not even Martial Artist?

"Martial Artist" has too many syllables.

Athlete works best − especially if a Warrior class.

The Shaolin-esque Monk can be an Athlete subclass. Ideally, it is possible to build a character concept that is a mythologically accurate Shaolin Monk, but at the same time use these same features in ways that fit seemlessly in any other D&D culture.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Athlete, wow, not even Martial Artist?

I like Adept.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Priest is highly problematic. Like saying "White".

Religion is the most important, most sacred, aspect of any reallife culture.

To violate the religions of other cultures is highly offensive. Nothing is more offensive to a reallife culture.

Priest is wrong.

I know you feel strongly about this, and I respect that, but I just don't see this complaint getting the momentum you would need to actually change WotC's mind.

 

[bedir than]

Priest is highly problematic. Like saying "White".

Is there literature or anything that supports this. I know you said that Islamic imams object to being called priests, but I've literally met dozens and studied Near Eastern Cultures & Civilizations -- this objection never came up. Saying "we're like priests but different" was a rather common way to introduce themselves to outsiders.

 

[Yaarel]

Is there literature or anything that supports this. I know you said that Islamic imams object to being called priests, but I've literally met dozens and studied Near Eastern Cultures & Civilizations -- this objection never came up. Saying "we're like priests but different" was a rather common way to introduce themselves to outsiders.

To offer an analogy to help an other culture to understand is one thing.

It is a different thing to imperialistically or colonialistically misrepresent an other culture − and then arrogantly insist one has some kind of right to misrepresent an other culture.

It matters to refer religious topics accurately, sensitively, and with nuance.