Maybe. All I know is that we should have kept "mage" and "thief" instead of switching to "wizard" and "rogue", especially given the latter's propensity to get spelled wrong.
I think there are several reasons for that.
In ADnD 2E, there were class categories: -Warrior -Priest -Rogue -Wizard
Warriors were the Fighters, Paladins, Rangers. Priests were Clerics and Druids. Rogues were Thieves and Bards. Wizards were Mages and Illusionists (specialized Mages but they got their own section and requirements).
Even to this day the melee classes are categorized as "Warriors". Fighter is a generic enough name but it separates itself from the other warriors. It might not be the best of names but the purpose of it was to make it sound generic enough to fit many concepts or backgrounds.
With the transition to 3E, they wanted to change the Thief to something more generic also, since the name implies a criminal and someone that steals. It would be weird to have a Lawful Good "Thief" that has no skill points in Pickpocket/Sleight of Hand. Also, same with Sleight of Hand, it was changed from "Pick Pocket" in 3.0E, to give it more uses instead of just picking pockets.
And same with the Mage, they introduced the Sorcerer in 3E. A Sorcerer is also a mage but they wanted to avoid that confusion and changed the original Mage to "Wizard".
And same with the Mage, they introduced the Sorcerer in 3E. A Sorcerer is also a mage but they wanted to avoid that confusion and changed the original Mage to "Wizard".
The rogue bit I get (still don't necessarily like, but get), but that seems arbitrary. It's like they're implying that there was a pre-existing distinction between "wizardry" and "magery", which I highly doubt is true.
The rogue bit I get (still don't necessarily like, but get), but that seems arbitrary. It's like they're implying that there was a pre-existing distinction between "wizardry" and "magery", which I highly doubt is true.
This is my personal experience, but on some RP servers I'm playing on NwN2, many people refer to arcanists in general as "mages" in character. And some call Wizards as "book mages".
Basically the "mage" is the typical unarmored robe-wearing (usually) caster that throws arcane spells. And this preconception was started by ADnD, ironically. But with the introduction of the Sorcerer in 3E that was basically the same class, with the same spells and abilities but casting in a different way, a distinction was necessary.
Even in 3E, you have the "Archmage" prestige class and "Mage Armor". Since both the Wizard and the Sorcerer have access to that, they're both "Mages".
Personally, I like the distinction. "Wizard" suggests someone that knows many things, a sage. Even the root of the word comes from "wise". This fits with how the Wizard class functions. Having access to many spells and many skills, especially Knowledge skills.
Personally, I like the distinction. "Wizard" suggests someone that knows many things, a sage. Even the root of the word comes from "wise". This fits with how the Wizard class functions. Having access to many spells and many skills, especially Knowledge skills.
..agreed, but oddly enough being wise does not relate to WIS stat, instead it's related to INT
Point. Though infighting is still better than immobilization when fighting undead, it's just we have all of two options for causing infighting among undead, one of which is out of reach of good-aligned characters.
- Power gaming is overrated. - The less combat focused an RPG is, the better. - Having "broken" gameplay elements can be helpful for immersion, if the thing that "breaks" it makes sense in-universe.
Comments
In ADnD 2E, there were class categories:
-Warrior
-Priest
-Rogue
-Wizard
Warriors were the Fighters, Paladins, Rangers.
Priests were Clerics and Druids.
Rogues were Thieves and Bards.
Wizards were Mages and Illusionists (specialized Mages but they got their own section and requirements).
Even to this day the melee classes are categorized as "Warriors".
Fighter is a generic enough name but it separates itself from the other warriors.
It might not be the best of names but the purpose of it was to make it sound generic enough to fit many concepts or backgrounds.
With the transition to 3E, they wanted to change the Thief to something more generic also, since the name implies a criminal and someone that steals.
It would be weird to have a Lawful Good "Thief" that has no skill points in Pickpocket/Sleight of Hand.
Also, same with Sleight of Hand, it was changed from "Pick Pocket" in 3.0E, to give it more uses instead of just picking pockets.
And same with the Mage, they introduced the Sorcerer in 3E.
A Sorcerer is also a mage but they wanted to avoid that confusion and changed the original Mage to "Wizard".
Basically the "mage" is the typical unarmored robe-wearing (usually) caster that throws arcane spells.
And this preconception was started by ADnD, ironically.
But with the introduction of the Sorcerer in 3E that was basically the same class, with the same spells and abilities but casting in a different way, a distinction was necessary.
Even in 3E, you have the "Archmage" prestige class and "Mage Armor".
Since both the Wizard and the Sorcerer have access to that, they're both "Mages".
Personally, I like the distinction. "Wizard" suggests someone that knows many things, a sage.
Even the root of the word comes from "wise". This fits with how the Wizard class functions.
Having access to many spells and many skills, especially Knowledge skills.
@BillyYank i bet xena could give a few male fighters a run for their money haha
- Power gaming is overrated.
- The less combat focused an RPG is, the better.
- Having "broken" gameplay elements can be helpful for immersion, if the thing that "breaks" it makes sense in-universe.
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
and makes me hungry.