GameBanshee Forums

Bloodthroe wrote:The point of this thread was not to connect a game's world or any games' world with the workings of this one, but the people who play those games and about the stereotype of the warrior class and why so many people talk down about the class. As if there is something wrong with it.

Many people have already anwered this question: most role playing games have class systems where physical abilities are advantageous for warrior classes and mental abilites are advantageous for spell-casting classes. Most RPG-worlds have these inbuilt stereotypes, so why should it be surprising that people who play RPG:s pick them up?

Maybe not 600,000 years ago, but homosapiens, a great deal less then 250,000 years ago, were shorter than a person today. Not that the cavemen serve this thread any.

Homo sapiens have only existed for about 150 000 years. But let's leave the cavemen, it's a long discussion to sort out how hominoids evolved and why our species is the only remaining one today.

It was to connect the increase of focus, which can come from surpassing one's physical limitations~not from having natural strength, with intelligence.

I don't know what you mean by "focus", but if you mean the ability to concentrate on something over time, anyone need this to develop anything, physical or mental abilities. Also, since there is no contradiction between focus/disciplined behaviour/concentration ability and being stupid, the need for a warrior class to be "focused" does not in any way mean s/he needs any intelligence. Thus, if people ridicule warriors for being "low-IQ", being disciplined and focus does not demonstrate the opposite. It's not connected.

Btw, why are you so concerned with people finding warriors stupid? Do they believe you are stupid too because you play warrior, or what it the problem? If so, people really need to realise it's only a game.

[QUOTE=Bloodthroe]No, I said we weren't the strongest Hominid species. Which I guess was vague. Of course there were other factors that led to death of the other kinds of our species, but I said it was likely due to that our species had more intelligence and that helped us survive over others that might of had more strength... again cavemen.[/QUOTE]

But as CE has pointed out, there's no indication that other human species were less "intelligent" than we were. Nor is there any necessary correlation being size of brain, and "intelligence," a much debated quality whose value seems more certain in pop culture than in science.

Btw, why are you so concerned with people finding warriors stupid? Do they believe you are stupid too because you play warrior, or what it the problem? If so, people really need to realise it's only a game.

I simply find it disappointing when others will completely over look something for fear of what image they might project from being associated with it.

...double posted

[QUOTE=Bloodthroe]I simply find it disappointing when others will completely over look something for fear of what image they might project from being associated with it.[/QUOTE]

Do you truly think that somebody playing a game would refuse to play a fighter/warrior out of fear of being heckled by their friends?

[QUOTE=Bloodthroe]I simply find it disappointing when others will completely over look something for fear of what image they might project from being associated with it.[/QUOTE]

If everybody played the same class it would be very boring, don't you think? And why on earth do you persist in your belief that people dislike playing warrior classes because they fear something? People's taste differ, you might like playing warrior, somebody else may like to play spellcaster. Do you fear playing spellcaster because of what you think other people may project on you? This entire line of thought seems highly absurd - it is built into the system that warrior classes don't benefit from intelligence skills, thus the stereotype that they are stupid. The character, that is, not you, you shouldn't take that stereotype personally. If you don't like stupid warriors, you should change playing system.

As I posted above, I always play fighter classes, and I've never even got into a discussion of my characters stupidity or intelligence. It's only a game, the people I play with don't discuss or comment on game characters as if they were real people. And I have certainly never encountered anyone who perceived me as stupid because my game character has INT 6.

I often like to play warriors (as I think I've already mentioned in this thread) and when I do - I usually play "smartish" warriors (that is no 8s in int. or wisdom, but usually around 12 with 3ed rules).

But as CE says - taste differs. I don't like playing clerics in D&D, nor monks or druids. I could occasionally be swayed into playing a paladin.
These classes just don't suit me as a roleplayer, but it is certainly not due to any real life fears - neither would I think that (the majority of) people that don't play warriors do so out of fear of being portraied as "dumb" in real life.

If you encounter people that wouldn't play warriors because of "real life" lables, then I got to wonder if roleplaying is for them at all.

I think that in PnP RPGs you actually have to be BETTER at roleplaying to play a stupid character since most RPers tend to be above-average anyway.

[QUOTE=jopperm2]most RPers tend to be above-average anyway.[/QUOTE]

The idea that people who play RPG:s would be smarter than average has been discussed here at SYM before, and I certainly think it's an erranous view. People who play RPG:s tend to like to believe they are smarter than average, like many other groups also like to think they are smarter than average. Actually, people in general like to think they are better than average on whatever variables they value themselves.

Here is the old discussion about RPG, arrgance and intelligence:
http://www.gamebanshee.com/forums/showt ... hp?t=17736

Since I don't play PnP, only computer games, I don't really roleplay my chars but I think it would be very, very difficult to act INT 3 if you have normal intelligence yourself. Just as it's very difficult for actors to play mentally disabled in a realistic way.

Okay, so maybe they aren't smarter than average, but I would say that they are average and above.. Dumb people aren't inclined to play games that require math and whatnot. I doubt any INT 3 PEOPLE are playin DnD.. Though, sometimes I have wondered when playing with certan people. And it is hard to play an idiot when you're smart, but it's harder to play smart when you're an idiot.

[QUOTE=jopperm2]Dumb people aren't inclined to play games that require math and whatnot.[/QUOTE]
Not to restart the debate CE posted a link to, but what math do roleplaying games require besides simple algebra?


I was never asked to differentiate a single logarithmic function while playing BG2

I would say its an exaggeration to say that playing PnP RPGs like D&D requires math skills. The ability to count to 20 is more than enough as far as I know.

Not that it takes math skills, I'm terrible at moth, but if you tell most dumb people that they have to write out a bunch of numbers that describe a person and make calculations for ecery action, they're not going to bite..

@Jopperm: Real life INT 3 people don't play anything at all

I am convinced that regarding intelligence, people who play RPG:s is a representative sample of the normal population (normal = mentally disabled people excluded). If there are any characteristics that differentiate RPG:ers from the normal population, it would most likely be personality traits, not cognitive functions.

I don't know.. there was this one guy on my high school's football team that prolly fits that range.. j/k

That would be a fun study to do. IQ testing on RPG fans vs. say sports fans or NASCAR or something. I bet it would be about the same.

Celegans...*sigh* I don't take the stereotype personally, I think you completely misunderstand me. But I do go to other forums and see people posting to others that they shouldn't choose to play the warrior class, because it sucks. Before the people even get the chance to try it out. Some of the people that say the warrior class haven't even played it.That is what started my idea for this thread. As for me believing that people don't play the warrior class out of fear... I make one post in the form of a question at the beginning of this thread asking others if they thought that some people make fun of the warrior class because they don't know how to play it well and just decide to make fun of it rather then look stupid for not knowing how to play it, and you keep bringing it up that it means I think other people don't play the warrior class out of fear? I'm confused there.

I was just curious as to why so many people make fun of the class when many don't even play it. So I thought it a good idea to start a thread to answer it for me. It seems we've learned that I can't tell the difference between the warrior class I play and myself in real life.

Bloodthroe wrote:<snip>
But I do go to other forums and see people posting to others that they shouldn't choose to play the warrior class, because it sucks. Before the people even get the chance to try it out. Some of the people that say the warrior class haven't even played it.That is what started my idea for this thread. <snip>

Well - now we don't know which forums and for which games, but it is quite possible in thoese games that a warrior does "suck".
Thus advicing others to not play it, is possible not connected with anything other then trying to save a newcommer for some grief.
Remember - it is all subjective what is fun and what is not - so the people saying it "suck" possible belive it does.
I still fail to see the connection between that (warriros suck) and the "training of mind" or being portraied as stupid etc?

Bloodthroe wrote:<snip>
As for me believing that people don't play the warrior class out of fear... I make one post in the form of a question at the beginning of this thread asking others if they thought that some people make fun of the warrior class because they don't know how to play it well and just decide to make fun of it rather then look stupid for not knowing how to play it, and you keep bringing it up that it means I think other people don't play the warrior class out of fear? I'm confused there.
<snip>

I think your two statements (taken from your posts in this thread):

...or are people ridiculing something they don't understand out of fear?"

and

I simply find it disappointing when others will completely over look something for fear of what image they might project from being associated with it.

is what is pointing it towards the fact that you belive (some) people talk down about the "class" due to fears.

It's not of a specific forum or a specific video game. It's about the warrior class in general. I was just curious as to why so many didn't like it and why it seems that many don't even try it.

[QUOTE=Bloodthroe]It's not of a specific forum or a specific video game. It's about the warrior class in general. I was just curious as to why so many didn't like it and why it seems that many don't even try it.[/QUOTE]

So what did you mean when you used the word "fear" in two separate sentences, in relation to people not running warrior characters in RPGs?

[QUOTE=Bloodthroe]It's not of a specific forum or a specific video game. It's about the warrior class in general. I was just curious as to why so many didn't like it and why it seems that many don't even try it.[/QUOTE]

Warrior class in MMORPG is different from Warrior class in NWN and is different from Warrior class in Morrowind and is different from <insert random RPG with a warrior type class>.

You can't conclude that some people who dislike Warrior class in one game does so for remotely the same reason as somebody else who dislikes a warrior class in another game, or in a third or fourth. And you can't conclude that somebody who dislikes a warrior class in one game, does so in other games by default.

You say "so many didn't like it" and "many don't even try it" .... but if you are talking so generally that it isn't even about a singular game or ruleset and about a grey unidentified unmessurable mass of people - then you are trying to compare apples to cars and then wondering why some people don't like the color green. At least that is how it looks to me.

I fail to see where you are comming from and what is the foundation for the line of thought, and most of all - what point you are looking for or trying to debate.