Why do people dislike the Zealot

[BookBarbarian]

Yes, [MENTION=1288]Mouseferatu[/MENTION] already pointed that out to me. Thank you.

I apologize for my snark earlier. It was uncalled for.

For those who want to know more about the Zealot's fluff, but don't own Xanathar's Guide to Everything here is what was in the Barbarian focused Unearthed Arcana:

Path of the Zealot
Some deities inspire their followers to pitch themselves into a ferocious battle fury. These barbarians are zealots—warriors who channel their rage into powerful displays of divine power.

A variety of gods across the worlds of D&D inspire their followers to embrace this path. Tempus from the Forgotten Realms and Hextor and Erythnul of Greyhawk are all prime examples.

In general, the gods who inspire zealots are deities of combat, destruction, and violence. Not all are evil, but few are good.

 

[Istbor]

To be fair.

"a person who is fanatical and uncompromising in pursuit of their religious, political, or other ideals." Is the definition given to the word Zealot.

While modern day usage typically paints a zealot as a religious believer or follower of a particular faith, there is nothing stopping it from meaning an ideal held by a people or political movement.

Honestly, I feel it fits with barbarians quite well. History is filled with Gods or divine beings that held warriors who died in battle for them to a high regard. Cultures that followed or sought to follow the believe that dying in battle was a good death. Someone entrenched in such a culture or following such a divine being could fit the recklessness and ferocity Barbarians are 'known' for.

 

[Dualazi]

I am probably going to regret this but...What's wrong with the Berserker that allegedly makes the Zealot a necessary or welcomed change?

My problem with it is multifold.

1. The name Zealot is terrible. As someone else mentioned, it is immediately evocative of a religious type of person...not a raging barbarian.

The name is fine, it's meant to evoke connotations of someone gripped by religious fervor that drives them to incredible martial heights. They're the fanatical crusaders of the D&D gods.

2. Whether it is intended to "mean" this or not, words have meaning. Whether they are trying to "repurpose/reinvent" a new "D&D" meaning for it or not, "I'm going to be a Zealot!" is not a phrase -in any context- anyone should utter... ever.

well...as opposed to what, exactly? saying "I'm going to play a fighter" doesn't make much more sense, since every class will likely see combat. Other classes aren't as egregious, but saying "I'm a cleric" or "I'm a rogue" feels pretty artificial too.

3. I have an issue with the fact that Barbarian -the class- has become soooo freaking narrow that there is only "Rager" or "Shamanic Spirits-related guy." If the archetype is so pigeon-holed that all you can do with it is give 3 flavors of "berserker rage": Berserker, "Battlerager"<eyeroll>, "Zealot"<angry eyeroll> and 3 flavors of "spirits guy" then maybe it's time to acknowledge the Barbarian is a One-trick Pony deserving of simply being consumed as a subclass of Fighter.

Agreed, most of the way. The fighter really also needs a massive overhaul due to its own lack of identity, but the barb needs a refresher as well.

So, yeah, what's the deal with the Berserker that a "Zealot" is more desirable?

Aside from flavor reasons, which do seem to be the crux of your concerns to be fair, the berserker is just a garbage class mechanically. It was saddled with a massive penalty for using its defining class resource, and it's a penalty that none of the other subclasses share. There's a thread you can dig up here on enworld where someone crunched the numbers, and without the exhaustion penalty the berserker is very close to the zealot, with the subclass in the lead switching based on level. When played by RAW, the berserker loses to every other variation of barbarian by a country mile. Hell, they probably lose to a barbarian without a subclass at all, because at least then you can use all your rages!

Wizards of the coast took the cowards route out as usual, and instead of making official changes to address the problem they just released a corrected version down the line by different name, much like the hexblade was a patch to fix bladelocks.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The way I read Berserker you could choose not to use Frenzy, and hence could Rage without gaining a level of exhaustion.

Not that makes them less rubbish. There are plenty of other ways to get an extra attack as a bonus action (Pole Arm Master, Dual Wielding, Battlerager etc).

 

[CapnZapp]

1. The name Zealot is terrible. As someone else mentioned, it is immediately evocative of a religious type of person...not a raging barbarian.

In Warhammer, a Zealot is very much a frothy fanatic, ready to smack his large weapon into the blasphemous unbelievers.

Translated into D&D classes, a Barbarian subclass makes a lot of sense.

 

[CapnZapp]

The way I read Berserker you could choose not to use Frenzy, and hence could Rage without gaining a level of exhaustion.

Not that makes them less rubbish.

You know something is wrong when the best way of using your subclass' signature ability is to not use it at all!

In this regard at least, the Zealot has fixed what was broken.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

If we are being technical, the literal meaning of the word zealot was a member of a Jewish sect that violently opposed Roman occupation during the 1st century AD. "Simon the Zealot" is mentioned in the Christian Bible.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

All good in theory.

But when customers perceive a new option basically replaces an old one, things become less easy in practice.

I think that's more of a problem with dumb customers than bad creators.

 

[hejtmane]

If we are being technical, the literal meaning of the word zealot was a member of a Jewish sect that violently opposed Roman occupation during the 1st century AD. "Simon the Zealot" is mentioned in the Christian Bible.

One of the first recorded terrorist as while they would knife Jewish tax collectors down in the street just saying. What am i getting at the zealot should have been a rogue and the barbarians I guess should have been Holy Warriors.

Ok now my real take I like the class and names or just that names for a mechanic people over react and get mad about weird things when it comes to D&D sometimes

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I just had a thought, that it could be fun to combine this subclass with the Revenant subrace from UA.