What would WotC need to do to win back the disenchanted?

[the Jester]

I don't think the problem with the name has anything to do with the class itself. Its just the fact that the word "Warlord" tends to conjure up an image of a guy with a big army: one who is leading it to war.

For some people, I guess. For others a warlord might be a guy at the head of a band of a dozen or so raiders. Again, it just takes a little imagination.

It would be like having a seafaring class, and naming it "Admiral." So your first level Admiral swabs the decks and at 10th level you get to captain the ship and not until 20th level are you expected to have multiple Captains working under you. Its just a weird usage of the word.

Now that I can agree with. But I ask you this- how many people object to the term "marshal" for a class in 3e? Because "marshal" is closer to "general" than "warlord" is imho.

Changing the high elf to the Eladrin was another such silly little thing.

Grey elf, but hey. The high elf comes down squarely in between elves (= old wood elves) and eladrin (= old grey elves) in 4e imho. Shrug.

The moral of the story (to me, anyway) is that rpgs are like the English language: they steal grammar and words and beat them into new shapes suitable for their own purposes. Heck, if you want a good example of D&Ds historical willingness to do this, try to get some agreement on what a morningstar looks like out of the 1e days. There are more important things to worry about. Does this class work? Does this weapon offer something cool to the game? Really, ultimately, if you don't like the name it is simple stuff to change it. "I don't allow warlords, but the centurion is exactly the same with a new name."

As I see it- not to be repetitious, but hey- the problem here lies in a failure to imagination. Sticking to the warlord as my example, if you cannot stretch your imagination around the warlord as-is, all you need to do is imagine a new name that does work for you. Seriously- NOT THAT HARD, folks.

 

[Wicht]

Really, ultimately, if you don't like the name it is simple stuff to change it. "I don't allow warlords, but the centurion is exactly the same with a new name."

Centurion means the guy with a hundred men under him (loosely a hundred I understand, in real life the number actually varied) so I can't see that as in any way a good replacement.

In seriousness, I have had people tell me since before 4e came out that if you don't like what something is called, just rename it in your home games. But if I have to pay good money for a game, I don't want one where I have to go through and rewrite large swathes of it for my own enjoyment. A change here or there is fine, but one reaches a limit where its just not enjoyable. One might as well write their own system. So, could I accept the Warlord? Sure. But 4e changed too much of how I understood the game world. Reinventing how all the classes work, how dragons are codified, how alignments are understood (or ignored as the case may be), how demons and devils work, the nature of the planes, etc, etc; it all just added up to something that was a big turn off. It was not an edition change, it was a clean sweep of the game. If WotC wants to know how to win back the disenchanted they need to be aware that completely altering the fabric of the game world was a big no-no for some of us and just left me, personally, very cold to the system. I'm not a hater of 4e. But there was not a single thing about it that appealed to me enough to accept the slaughtering of things I actually enjoyed in Dungeons and Dragons.

 

[Ranes]

...How many people object to the term "marshal" for a class in 3e? Because "marshal" is closer to "general" than "warlord" is imho.

Oh, I do. And don't even get me started on the PrC names.

The moral of the story (to me, anyway) is that rpgs are like the English language: they steal grammar and words and beat them into new shapes suitable for their own purposes.

The writers of D&D are sometimes too quick to do this. I find class names like Warlord and Marshal much harder to live with when they're brought to bear by people - I'm looking at WotC and Paizo writers in particular - who don't seem to know that there is no such word as 'foes'. Foe means enemy, singular or plural, dagnabbit!

If you don't like the name it is simple stuff to change it. "I don't allow warlords, but the centurion is exactly the same with a new name."

Lordy, that's even worse.

As I see it- not to be repetitious, but hey- the problem here lies in a failure to imagination. Sticking to the warlord as my example, if you cannot stretch your imagination around the warlord as-is, all you need to do is imagine a new name that does work for you. Seriously- NOT THAT HARD, folks.

Then you see it incorrectly. Far from representing a lack of imagination, my love of language enables me to give form to my imagination in ways that have entertained friends and strangers alike for decades.

Umbran, hi. WotC can win me back with a 5th edition that's a 3.5/Pathfinder love-in that doesn't use the word 'foes'.

 

[NoWayJose]

For some people, I guess. For others a warlord might be a guy at the head of a band of a dozen or so raiders. Again, it just takes a little imagination.
<snip>
Sticking to the warlord as my example, if you cannot stretch your imagination around the warlord as-is, all you need to do is imagine a new name that does work for you. Seriously- NOT THAT HARD, folks.

Dude, I'm making up a new class. It's called Prisoner. Except that he's out of prison and hangs out with adventurers all the time. So ya, he's not really a prisoner per se, but the class is still called Prisoner. Likewise, in-game, a PC can be prisoner in-game but he's not necessarily a Prisoner class.

What? You don't get it? Dude, the whole world is a prison, see? It just takes a little imagination, which you are clearly deficient. Why are you complaining so much anyway? It's not as if this was a thread about winning back the disenchanted.

Why isn't this class called Ex-Prisoner or Escaped Prisoner? Dude, if you don't like it, you can just change the word Prisoner to something else. Don't forget to change the word Prisoner on every copy of every D&D book you own, and when your DM or any other player says 'Prisoner' remember to constantly remind them about the new change. You might even volunteer to edit THEIR copies too!

Why is this a unique class instead of a standard class with a Prisoner background? No, it's not because a bunch of prisoners are running around adventuring and I needed to create rules to roleplay them! No, that would be stupid. it's because I created a new power source, Criminal, and I needed a new Criminal Striker class. Isn't that a great reason?

Are you going to nitpick the etymology of the word prisoner now?

 

[Maggan]

Dude, I'm making up a new class. It's called Prisoner. Except that he's out of prison and hangs out with adventurers all the time. So ya, he's not really a prisoner per se, but the class is still called Prisoner. Likewise, in-game, a PC can be prisoner in-game but he's not necessarily a Prisoner class.

I'd play it if it was a fun class. Then again, I'm used to the WFRP career system, which can be a lot more free when it comes to what people are called in relation to what they do than D&D.



/M

 

[Remathilis]

Dude, I'm making up a new class. It's called Prisoner. Except that he's out of prison and hangs out with adventurers all the time. So ya, he's not really a prisoner per se, but the class is still called Prisoner. Likewise, in-game, a PC can be prisoner in-game but he's not necessarily a Prisoner class.

What? You don't get it? Dude, the whole world is a prison, see? It just takes a little imagination, which you are clearly deficient. Why are you complaining so much anyway? It's not as if this was a thread about winning back the disenchanted.

Why isn't this class called Ex-Prisoner or Escaped Prisoner? Dude, if you don't like it, you can just change the word Prisoner to something else. Don't forget to change the word Prisoner on every copy of every D&D book you own, and when your DM or any other player says 'Prisoner' remember to constantly remind them about the new change. You might even volunteer to edit THEIR copies too!

Why is this a unique class instead of a standard class with a Prisoner background? No, it's not because a bunch of prisoners are running around adventuring and I needed to create rules to roleplay them! No, that would be stupid. it's because I created a new power source, Criminal, and I needed a new Criminal Striker class. Isn't that a great reason?

Are you going to nitpick the etymology of the word prisoner now?

Of course, the alternative is worse:

Which would you rather play:

* Fighter or Battlemaster?
* Wizard or Arcanist?
* Cleric or Divine Speaker?
* Rogue or Shadowsneak?
* Ranger or Woods Stalker?
* Barbarian or Rage Lord?
* Warlord or Battle Captain?

etc. I'd rather have a name that invokes an archetype (even poorly) than some compound or nonsense name like rune priest, lurk, favored soul, duskblade, warblade, ardent, or battlemind!

 

[the Jester]

Dude, I'm making up a new class. It's called Prisoner.... Dude, if you don't like it, you can just change the word Prisoner to something else.

Okay. See how easy that was?

Don't forget to change the word Prisoner on every copy of every D&D book you own, and when your DM or any other player says 'Prisoner' remember to constantly remind them about the new change. You might even volunteer to edit THEIR copies too!

If you're seriously suggesting that one won't be able to keep the details straight of renaming a class without changing anything else, then I think the problem might be that you significantly underestimate people in general. Do you really think it's that hard to make a simple mental substitution?

 

[Aeolius]

Are you going to nitpick the etymology of the word prisoner now?

Number Six?

 

[Nifft]

there is no such word as 'foes'. Foe means enemy, singular or plural, dagnabbit!

Next thing you'll be telling me there're no such words as "fees", "fies", or "fums".

- - -

Levity aside, you're neglecting temporal multiplicity. If I slew a foe on Friday night, then another foe on Saturday, and a third foe during my Sunday brunch, how did I spend my weekend? "Slaying _______." What exactly?

Cheers, -- N

 

[Kaiyanwang]

etc. I'd rather have a name that invokes an archetype (even poorly) than some compound or nonsense name like rune priest, lurk, favored soul, duskblade, warblade, ardent, or battlemind!

I agree completely - even if one could find a justification for the designers: after a while, you used Fighter, Warrior, Knight... what name use for the next class? Well, ok, we will go with Warblade..

Actually, I wonder if mine is the real explaination, or there was an actual intention to name the class Warblade "because sounds cool". Who knows.