Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ECMO3" data-source="post: 9357105" data-attributes="member: 7030563">I'm not sure I agree with this. I think Cleric, Druid, Fighter and Monk would be very different than their stereotypical PC D&amp;D representation.&nbsp; A Cleric is typically a religious non-combatant, a priest.&nbsp; There were catholic priest Warriors, but most of them would be conflated with Paladins.A Monk is also a religious person and the vast majority of them both in the east and west are pacifists.&nbsp; Martial Arts has little to do with the Monks most people would understand. An early Druid is basically an uncivilized Barbarian priest and a late Druid is an entertainer, closer to a Bard.&nbsp; I don't think most would think of any nature connection.&nbsp; The term Fighter is not one which envisions a character in armor wielding a Great Axe .... or a Crossbow.&nbsp; When you talk about someone being a fighter, usually they think of a hot head or a gang enforcer.&nbsp;&nbsp; While these fit well in the Fighter class, I don't think they are representative of the Archetype.I think Ranger is more clearly defined than all of these in terms of peoples understanding.&nbsp; In UK and the USA both Rangers refer to soldiers specializing in non-traditional warfare (special operations in modern parlance) and they still exist today.&nbsp; While this does not match the fantasy Ranger, the overall theme is closer than it is with Druid, Cleric and Monk I think.&nbsp; Probably about the same as Bard.Finally Wizard and Sorcerer do more or less match their IRL stereotype, but I don't think many people could tell you the differenceAt least a Paladin would have Armor and be a holy warrior of sorts.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ECMO3, post: 9357105, member: 7030563"] I'm not sure I agree with this. I think Cleric, Druid, Fighter and Monk would be very different than their stereotypical PC D&D representation. A Cleric is typically a religious non-combatant, a priest. There were catholic priest Warriors, but most of them would be conflated with Paladins. A Monk is also a religious person and the vast majority of them both in the east and west are pacifists. Martial Arts has little to do with the Monks most people would understand. An early Druid is basically an uncivilized Barbarian priest and a late Druid is an entertainer, closer to a Bard. I don't think most would think of any nature connection. The term Fighter is not one which envisions a character in armor wielding a Great Axe .... or a Crossbow. When you talk about someone being a fighter, usually they think of a hot head or a gang enforcer. While these fit well in the Fighter class, I don't think they are representative of the Archetype. I think Ranger is more clearly defined than all of these in terms of peoples understanding. In UK and the USA both Rangers refer to soldiers specializing in non-traditional warfare (special operations in modern parlance) and they still exist today. While this does not match the fantasy Ranger, the overall theme is closer than it is with Druid, Cleric and Monk I think. Probably about the same as Bard. Finally Wizard and Sorcerer do more or less match their IRL stereotype, but I don't think many people could tell you the difference At least a Paladin would have Armor and be a holy warrior of sorts. [/QUOTE]

Verification