Alternate Class names

[Nonek]

Following on from a discussion in Sensuki's Class primer thread, myself and Malekith both found a dissonance present in the presentation of the Rogue as the superior damage dealer when compared to the Fighter. We both came to the conclusion that this dissonance is present because of terminology, a Rogue presents a certain image of thievery, stealth and misdeeds, while a Fighter suggests an expertise in the art of Fighting. Thus I believe a suggestion thread for alternate Class names seemed appropriate.

 

Obviously this is a personal and biased opinion, and my respectful suggestions are simply that, and I might add that I am aware of being a curmudgeonly old relic out of touch with modern norms. So with the aforementioned disclaimer I present an alternate list of names for the classes which are personally problematic.

 

Fighter: Soldier, Legionnary, Guardian, Defender, Shieldbearer, Warden.

Rogue: Assassin, Blademaster, Swordmaster, Weaponmaster, Killer. 

Barbarian: Dervish, Wardancer, Brave.

 

Obviously this makes the profession of Thief no longer associated with what was previously the Rogue class, but that to my mind makes sense, in Eternity anyone can sneak, handle mechanical devices etcetera. In reality anybody can steal, muggers are not expert pickpockets or particularly stealthy, and thieves do not conform to one role.

 

Please feel free to suggest alternate Class names or deride my misguided efforts.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Hmm, has an equivalent of kits, sub-classes or archetypes been confirmed for PE? A bit off-topic from the OP, but IIRC that and multi-classing are under consideration.

 

Anyways, I wouldn't mind being able to rename classes, if only for the small amount of flavor it would provide in-game.

[Karkarov]

Uh no, leave them as is.  A Fighter is a guy who fights.  A Rogue is a guy who specializes in being a sneaky douche.  He does more damage because he stabs people in the back, uses poison, ambushes them from the shadows, etc etc.  Not because he is better with weapons or more skilled with a sword.

Edited October 5, 2013 by Karkarov

[Sensuki]

The names of the classes are fine. The fact that a rogue does more damage than a Fighter does not mean that a Rogue is not a Rogue. It's the same fighting style, just more powerful.

[JFSOCC]

TBH, I think rogue is a pretty generic term, which we've learned to associate with the thief class because of DnD. but the term Rogue is used widely outside of fantasy.

 

Rogue (roʊg)

 

n., v. rogued, ro•guing. n.

1. a dishonest person; scoundrel.

2. a playfully mischievous person; scamp.

3. a tramp or vagabond.

 

IE someone who doesn't play by the rules (or by their own rules)

 

Han Solo is a rogue, he doesn't know anything about thievery, and we can argue he's not even that great of a smuggler, but it's his attitude which determines his character.

 

Rogues are a diverse bunch, but all rogues can be expected to be very individualistic personalities, this is exhibited by selfishness, but also self-reliance. Rogues make up their own minds, and as such may be very opinionated, even when their opinions are considered taboo or otherwise scandalous by the societies they inhabit.

 

It's that personality which draws me to the rogue.

 

As for the barbarian, I've always liked the term "Dreadnought" because they wade into battle with apparent fearlessness. (which may be seen as a lack of self preservation instincts)

DnD Paladins are more like crusaders, but PE paladins, I'd call Knights. Superior trained warriors with a focus on leading others.

Most other classes are pretty aptly named, I think.

Edited October 5, 2013 by JFSOCC

[Nonek]

Well it seems it's mainly a personal matter then, and it's my failure to embrace the Rogue as the superior fighter which is the problem, probably a hold over from my own days of pen and paper where my Rogues only survived by preparing, planning and adapting, where backstabs were rare and they were not the main damage dealers.

 

To be honest however I don't think that the definition of Rogue matches the dedicated combat role that Eternity's Rogue will embrace, but that's neither here nor there.

[curryinahurry]

Nonek, I don't think it's necessary to re-name the rogue into something else, but the point you make is certainly valid in my opinion.  The rogue is de-facto a dex-based fighter in terms of combat.  The fact that it maintains other aspects of it's previous portfolio (stealth, mechanics, etc.) seems to be secondary to the design philosophy of making every class equally viable in combat.  I'm not sure of the wisdom of this type of design, and I personally would prefer the rogue to be a less direct damage dealer in terms of toe to toe combat.  

 

That said, we still know very little about how deflection and critical threat range is going to work.  Threat range might be awarded to the rogue for finesse type weapons, but only available for large ones if rogue takes certain talents at the expense of a more traditional thiefly build (forgoing trap setting or advanced stealth talents for example).  Also if a rogue can destroy un-armored opponent but runs into difficulty the moment armor is introduced, that could be fine as well.  Although it would still annoy me that any class could do more base damage than a fighter; except maybe a barabarian

 

The problem is that this starts describing a rock, paper, scissors type of dynamic; rogue beat wizard, wizard beats fighter, etc.

 

I just hope that we will have the flexibility to build a rogue that is less of a dps machine if we so choose.

Edited October 5, 2013 by curryinahurry

[FlintlockJazz]

I agree, rogues should be renamed weaponmasters or wardancers and the bonus to roguish skills should be passed to more appropriate characters.  I think this shows that the role of 'thief' or 'rogue' is more a mindset than a particular fighting style, and doesn't really fit as a class.

[okkoko]

anyone could have rouge something in them it all depend on how you build your class is my guess

[rjshae]

anyone could have rouge something in them it all depend on how you build your class is my guess

 

Only with the right makeup...

[FlintlockJazz]

 

anyone could have rouge something in them it all depend on how you build your class is my guess

 

Only with the right makeup...

 

What has lipstick got to do with anything?

[Tsuga C]

I always preferred Thief over Rogue as all of my AD&D characters of the topical class were of the stealth-pick-stab variety, not swashbucklers or thugs.  Stalwart traditionalist?  Yes, I am--ain't changin', neither.

[PIP-Clownboy]

Rogue/Fighter are the biggest and blandest offenders. Insanely boring names. 

[rjshae]

^^^^ Part of the problem comes from restricting class names to single words. You can get a lot more colorful with 2-3 words.

[Kjaamor]

I thought the ideas in the original post were pretty good.

 

In terms of the problem though, let's not criticise Rogue or Barbarian. Let's get right to the heart of the matter and collectively sigh that so many years ago a very successfully tabletop roleplaying game - a game at its heart based around characters fighting - decided to name one of their classes "fighter".

[Lephys]

True. "Soldier" would probably be a step up, as it's at least more specific. Although, it's still just a general militarily-trained person, even though your Fighter could be much more of a lone wolf. Considering how few good words there are to describe exactly what a Fighter is and not what it isn't, I think "Fighter" isn't too bad.

 

*Ponders*... I dunno. Warrior really works a ton better, probably. You could say all the classes are warriors (even a Priest could be seen as a divine/holy warrior), simply wielding different weapons and tools. But, it still better describes the class, I think.

 

Names are tough, though. Seems like often a different word always works better in one regard and worse in another.

[Iucounu]

I also thought that for me the name was rather unfitting at first. However, in the end I agree with Karkarov. Their damage probably relies more on their sneaky, elusive and cunning nature, rather than their actual weapon skill, so I have no prob with naming them "rogues"

 

However, I think that some sort of extra defense against the "fighting style" of rogues could be nice. E.g things like alertness, awareness, readiness of mind, lack of special weaknesses etc. (or most simply, one of the four defenses) that make sneak attacks harder or reduce their effectivity.  

That way there could be opponents (other than ovbvious cases like a construct) against which a normal fighter does much more damage than a rogue. 

 

But something like that already seems to be in the game anyway. For example, a rogue does far more damage against "tired" or injured targets, if you take the ability Reversal. 

Edited October 8, 2013 by Iucounu

[Nonek]

I'll justify my suggestions somewhat, in the name of clarity. Both Fighter and Warrior to me speak of the most skill with weapons, armour and fighting techniques obviously. They conjure up the class whose main job is the killing of opponents, champions and such whose skill is unmatched and who know the most about weak points and fighting styles. Warwise if you will. 

 

However the aim of Eternity's Fighters seems to be to that of a classical tank, to be hit, to soak up damage and draw (if not pin down, which is a great addition) enemy attention, their skill would seem to be more in holding the line than doing damage. Thus the alternative suggestions, highlighting the more defensive nature of the class.

 

Whereas with mechanical and stealth skills being made universal, what stands out about Eternity's Rogues to my mind is their superior skill at dealing damage, and thus their obvious superior training with weapons, familiarity with armour and means of making the two interact fatally. Therefore the suggestions to re-classify them with a more suitable name, probably (and i'll admit this) for the satisfaction of old grognards like myself who are not familiar with WOW/4th edition and the new fashion in which all Rogues are treated. That being said it does seem also to be a more logical terminology, especially with the increased combat focus.

 

However I can also see the case for keeping old names as a lot of people know and like WOW and other games where this standard is used, and ease of use is an attractive quality, saving a player much confusion and precious time in his choice of a class and role.

[Malekith]

True. "Soldier" would probably be a step up, as it's at least more specific. Although, it's still just a general militarily-trained person, even though your Fighter could be much more of a lone wolf. Considering how few good words there are to describe exactly what a Fighter is and not what it isn't, I think "Fighter" isn't too bad.

 

*Ponders*... I dunno. Warrior really works a ton better, probably. You could say all the classes are warriors (even a Priest could be seen as a divine/holy warrior), simply wielding different weapons and tools. But, it still better describes the class, I think.

 

Names are tough, though. Seems like often a different word always works better in one regard and worse in another.

Gladiator

[Messier-31]

As for the barbarian, I've always liked the term "Dreadnought" because they wade into battle with apparent fearlessness.

 

You just don't go easy on people translating games to other languages, do you?

 

Unconsciously you would make us (foreigners) have to change the "barbarian" to something else. "Dreadnought" literally is translated to something that in polish resembles more of a "armadillo". Tough luck in searching for a good synonym for "barbarian", we would have to stick with that nonetheless... so the entire class-name change fails on foreign ground.

 

Even oficcial class-names, like "cipher" are tricky to transtale! People responsible - have fun with that.

[Jarmo]

Much depends on what the finalised classes are going to be in the end.

What talents are available to what classes.

 

If rogue is as accurate in hitting with sword as a fighter, but simply does more damage (even excluding backstabs) then blademaster sounds appropriate.

But if a fighter parries with the same blade like a pro, while a rogue sucks at it no matter what, then "blademaster" starts to sound a lot less descriptive.

 

 

Everybody can sneak, yea. Can everybody pick locks or pickpocket?

Is rogue the only class that can take "improved hidy-hoo" talent? How about the "masterful pocket grabber" talent?

Those don't sound at all like something a "weaponmaster" should have an exclusive access to.

 

[JFSOCC]

 

As for the barbarian, I've always liked the term "Dreadnought" because they wade into battle with apparent fearlessness.

 

You just don't go easy on people translating games to other languages, do you?

 

Unconsciously you would make us (foreigners) have to change the "barbarian" to something else. "Dreadnought" literally is translated to something that in polish resembles more of a "armadillo". Tough luck in searching for a good synonym for "barbarian", we would have to stick with that nonetheless... so the entire class-name change fails on foreign ground.

 

Even oficcial class-names, like "cipher" are tricky to transtale! People responsible - have fun with that.

 

Dread (fear) nought (nothing)

Call them fearless instead. or Braves, I dunno.

I have a pet peeve against localisation anyway, I've always felt that something should be enjoyed in the original language, if possible. But that probably comes from having seen Dutch translations fail at keeping meaning and emotional depth of the original work. Plus, I learned to speak, read and write English because I came in contact with it through media; this would not have happened had everything be translated to Dutch.

 

However I can also see the case for keeping old names as a lot of people know and like WOW and other games where this standard is used, and ease of use is an attractive quality, saving a player much confusion and precious time in his choice of a class and role.

I'm perfectly fine with forcing a player to spend some time choosing his class. But maybe that's just me

 

I can see the problems you (and some others) have with the rogue, but it seems to be with the function, rather than the name of the class. I'm not sure if we know enough yet to determine that.

 

However, the idea that a rogue is a street/dirty fighter who knows to strike where it hurts has always been part of the rogue stereotype. Giving them extra critical damage makes sense IMO. More damage output doesn't mean they're the superior combatants anyway. It might very well be that this bonus is easily outmatched by armour or ability, or that the fighter class compensates by having much more utility in combat, apart from his damage output.

 

I imagine that fighters may have lower damage per second, but probably have more seconds in which to do damage before needing to withdraw,

[PrimeJunta]

Gotta go with Messier-31 re Dreadnought. The Royal Navy trademarked that one. It invokes a massive armored battleship, not a raging barbarian.

 

 

"There are only two hard problems in computer science, cache invalidation and the naming of things."

 

On the one hand, bland names let you, the player, flesh out your character concept because they don't say all that much about what it's like. But they're bland and boring.

 

On the other hand, descriptive and rich names spark the imagination and are interesting, but restrict you to the concepts they describe.

 

So really I dunno. Guess we'll have to see how it plays out. Personally I don't care all that much either way.

[Messier-31]

Quite, localisation might be problematic, as @JFSOCC pointed out. I played mostly the Polish version of Baldur's Gate series (which I think was terrific), and mostly the English version of Fallout series (because Polish was horrific). Given that this whole thing about Project Eternity, like my participation through Kickstarter and this here forums (with respectable colleagues) revolves around English speakers, I will play it in English. So, call the classes as you will, but with common sense.

 

"Rogue" is old and good. But here are some other words I could think of: scoundrel, rascal, knave, scamp

[motorizer]

Fighter sounds a bit dull to me but I don't mind the others.

 

Being able to rename the class for your own character would allow you to add a bit of flavour, you'd still be a fighter or whatever but the classname could be knight, gladiator, warrior, mercenary, axe maniac, pugilist...whatever you want to put in.

 

Something that adds a little to the background of your character.