D&D General What To Call A Gish?

[Mordhau]

It's fine, but 5e class names all follow the general "rule" that they're just one word. It's "Paladin" and "Wizard", not "Holy Knight" and "Magic-User". That's the main reason why I personally prefer "Arcknight" over "Arcane Knight". "Arcane Knight" just feels clunkier than the other class names than "Arcknight", IMO.

There's no real reason they have to though. The subclasses are frequently more than one word. They're not 'Arcster' and 'Eldight.'

 

[cbwjm]

Literally, ANYthing but "Gish."

All this time I thought I was the only one that hated the term gish.

 

[Thunderfoot]

All this time I thought I was the only one that hated the term gish.

No, there is a small but loyal group that detests its use. The meetings are on Thursday, we have cookies. lmao

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It's fine, but 5e class names all follow the general "rule" that they're just one word. It's "Paladin" and "Wizard", not "Holy Knight" and "Magic-User". That's the main reason why I personally prefer "Arcknight" over "Arcane Knight". "Arcane Knight" just feels clunkier than the other class names than "Arcknight", IMO.

Yeeeep. Stylistic coherence is part of what makes a game…work. It’s why spin-off games like Adventures In Middle Earth or Heroes of Eiru and such have a distinctive style but keep the basics in a style that doesn’t read differently from 5e.

So Arknight for a class, Eldritch Knight for a subclass. Why? Because it’s part of the D&D style guide, and has been since what, 1e ADnD? Earlier?

That doesn't seem to be any worse than openly stealing the tools of currently-living religions for use as weapons of war (when, as I am given to understand it, most Wiccan traditions would openly reject such violence).

While I have no problem with Janisary as a subclass name, I don’t think that using a variation of atheme, which came into use in the works of Alastair Crowley, IIRC, and is used by many traditions, from wiccans to satanists, is a problem.

Edit: just some notes on the atheme. It’s a term that precedes Wicca, and even Alistair Crowley and his cult, or the Hermetic Order of The Golden Dawn, where he developed his earliest practices. He took it from dusty tomes, which had recorded it as one of several older ritual tools found in the Lesser Key of Solomon, and Wicca appropriated it, along with many of the ritual technology used in modern witchcraft.

The names I listed along side it in the OP, like artavus, come from the same root as atheme and are also terms for a ritual blade, or at times a blade used for craftwork.

As for Wiccan pacifism, it isn’t a universal truth of wiccans, and especially not of everyone whose ritual practices involves the tool as such, ie by that name. Not only do some witches use a sword, rather than a knife, many who use the atheme practice fighting sports (often reenactment based, like SCA and some HEMA groups and offshoots), serve in the military of their country, and don’t believe that justified violence, such as self defense and punching Nazis, is a problem.

Further, it’s original usage as a ritual tool was recorded in books in which it was used in ritual bloodletting and sacrifice.

So no, Wicca does not own the atheme, nor any other basic ritual tool.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

There's no real reason they have to though. The subclasses are frequently more than one word. They're not 'Arcster' and 'Eldight.'

I didn't say "have to". I just said "this is a pattern that every class that Wizards of the Coast has published for D&D 5e has followed". I purposefully didn't mentions subclasses, because classes and subclasses are not the same thing and don't follow the same naming pattern.

All 5e classes (including the Mystic) only have one word in their names. I personally prefer this style, so I like shortening "Arcane Knight" to "Arcknight". Subclasses don't follow the same rule, but all 14 classes (official and unofficial) do.

 

[Mordhau]

I didn't say "have to". I just said "this is a pattern that every class that Wizards of the Coast has published for D&D 5e has followed". I purposefully didn't mentions subclasses, because classes and subclasses are not the same thing and don't follow the same naming pattern.

All 5e classes (including the Mystic) only have one word in their names. I personally prefer this style, so I like shortening "Arcane Knight" to "Arcknight". Subclasses don't follow the same rule, but all 14 classes (official and unofficial) do.

There's also a pattern of no classes starting with the letter Z.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

There's also a pattern of no classes starting with the letter Z.

There's a difference between what letter a name starts with, and how many words are in that name (especially because there are very few words that start with Z, compared to many other letters). IMO, the latter is much more noticeable (Bard, Sorcerer, Druid, Monk, and "Arcane Knight") than the former.

. . . IMO, it's very noticeable and a bit pesky to have that difference. I'm not saying that it's impossible for WotC to make a class that has two-word names, I just don't think that it's the style they were going for.

But one would have to ask the designers if this was their intention, or just a coincidence. I'm guessing it's at least slightly intended. Simpler names are easier to remember, more iconic, and give room for lots of different interpretations.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Praxist

Thaumidon

 

[Lyxen]

Gish ONLY applies to the Githyanki... rant over. Sri, had to be done. I'll take my cane and go shake it elsewhere now...lmao

No, I agree completely, it's Githyanki only, and it's a good thing that it has never spread out in editions of the game like it caught on people on the web.

As to what to name ... Spellsword or Magicblade. (Only 29.99 if you order now).

Spellblade ? A bit more generic than spellsword...

I'm not a fan of gish either, I think that was the githyanki term for fighter/mage and it seemed to stick. I much preferred the githzerai name of zerth, though 3e decided to make them monastic warriors instead of fighter/mage type characters. I was a little sad about that.

Yes, that change was strange although it was good in a sense to differentiate the two races. But then zerth should remain a githzerai only term.

 

[Blue]

I will agree to disagree, I won't argue anymore, frankly it doesn't matter much but fighter/magic-user was around long before Gish and I've never accepted that (to me) illogical leap. That being said. Most of my post was tongue in cheek. I don't triggered much more by gamer 'gab'. Too much else to worry about.

You can disagree with opinions, but not with facts. Take your head out of the sand. That the term "gish" has widened beyond it's original usage as only applying to the gith has happened. You are not the keeper of language that you can deny it.