I would not call my character a crusader unless he's actually on a crusade. The same goes for witchhunter, pilgrim and other silly class names. When I decide to name my character's class (which I rarely do), I want to describe who they are, not where they fall on Morrowind class spreadsheet. Sometimes there's a good word to describe them, sometimes I can't think of any so I end up using a more general term and then explain it in more detail if I have a chance.

That's another good point. Since when did a crusader become a crusader when he used certain skills? Silliness.

I'd bring up the Bard thing too, but...Bard's College. Fail.

you have good points. There are a few combination of skills that cant be described by TES class names (or doesnt fit the character) but I still refuse those Warrior, they may be warriors, but not Warrior

Fair enough. Although there is something to be said about the nonexistence of Warrior and the rest of the classes in TES now. Meaning what you call yourself is pretty much reliant on roleplay. In other words, Warrior uppercase no longer exists. Just warrior.

Which is a whole different topic and I suppose is part of the underlying point. Roleplay verses gameplay, or something like that.

Since when do a Bard actually fights? I mean, a Bard sings and that's about it. If you're a traveling Bard, and has to kill a wolf to eat, in that moment you're no longer a Bard, you're a Warrior or something.

And yeah, Bard College fail.

Since Nords, haha. "Battle Bards". Although Bard was a class in Oblivion and Morrowind, which never made sense to me with no singing or storytelling.

I think it's rather clear, that when someone says that their character is a pure warrior. It's utterly understood that they mean the character uses no magic. That's the heart of the discussion. What's silly, and I actually mean a far more profane term than that, is that defenders of the "right to be called a warrior" spins this in a side to compare basic mechanical skills, like Speech.

I suggest you talk to Jon Battle-Born. Nord have traditions of warrior-poets according to him. I think there is a difference between this and other types of battlebards though, like someone there to heighten the morale of the troops. The Nordic type seem to be more of a warrior who is also a bard.

I was under the impression that warriors were anyone out there getting into fights, whether they specialize in magic, stealth or melee.

At a certain point you can make almost every definition fit anything. Any meaning a word has is ultimately arbitrary, which includes the term warrior. I like to do it halfway there:

Warriors - primarily melee fighters who is usually found wearing heavy armor, though I suppose the difference between a heavily and lightly armored warrior is minuscule. Using D&D, I'd accept a barbarian being called a warrior, but a rogue might be a stretch for me.

Battlemages - wide term that could be used about nearly all combat/magic hybrid. Technically, the Crusader class from Oblivion could be put here.

Nightblade - stealth magic hybrids, though up for renaming based on circumstance, like the witchhunter class from earlier games not having much to do with blades.

Mages - primarily magic wielders with a hundred synonyms, like sorceror, wizard, witch etc.

And so on and so forth. Knights is something I see as a special category, being a bit misplaced as a class. It is a title, either given to you or taken by yourself. Service to Leyawin is a good example of how I view it.

That would be me, and its exactly the same. MMO and D and D terms differentiate classes by combat magic AND "thief" skills. If a warrior isn't a warrior for using enchanting, then by he same token he shouldn't be by using speechcraft, lockpick, so on and so on.

If you think that doesn't make sense, then I agree.

'S probably why I use the term "fighter" more often instead of "warrior" to refer to the point in the class triangle that isn't mage or thief. (And I realized I may have given into everyone else's definition in this thread. Oops.) Much less confusion for me there.

Personally I think it's a little harder to tell the difference in the Elder Scrolls (Skyrim especially) due to the fact that combat seems to make up a huge part of the game. It's not much of an RPG anymore as it's an action RPG so unless you specialize in a class that avoids combat altogther you're pretty much forced into being a warrior if you go through the main parts of the game. Speech is useless and magic isn't as versatile as it used to be so for the most part you're smashing/backstabbing/sicing/shooting things.

Not sure how you can justify light armor, but say Alchemy isnt for "warriors"...

Finding an enchanted weapon, a warrior cannto use? finding full heal pots makes you not a warrior? You may be putting too much thought into 'other' people playstyles/preferences..."Warrior" is a braud term... Your thinking World of Warcraft warrior, who is a master at arms, and taking it as definition/.. In reality, a warrior is a combatant...

He isn't suggesting that they can't use existing items. Just that creating them goes against the grain. However, using Alchemy has a strong argument as it's no different than cooking, whereas crafting an enchanted item obviously lies within the arcane itself.

"So, what's your trade?"

"Adventurer."

"Too risky for me, going into old tombs and that. Bet you do whatever you have to to survive fighting them trolls and what-not."

"Yep."

Until you remember alchemy's traditionally a magic related skill and the effects your potions have is magic. Its the same with enchanting. Takes no actual magic skill from the user, no magic energy from the user. Its entirely dealt with from magic energy of objects.

Edit: To those bringing up Oblivion and having to know and use the spell, someone completely untrained can gain a really really weak basic spell with any effect, not requiring the user to learn or perform any magic at all. Novice spells in other words. And you never have to cast it, or even actually be able to cast it, magicka wise.

Not necessarily. Remember we are not talking about being an Alchemist, per se, as even the inbred frostbacks can brew two ingredients in a bottle and make a Health potion. While it can be viewed as magic by those that don't know any better, not unlike cooking it's basic chemistry. That "tradition" you speak of is just a part of the diluted mess that some still hold onto as some kind of religion.

Granted that Alchemy is typically associated with witches and such, as they are obviously indulged in magic. But it can be argued that a simple woodsman can put together herbs for common elixirs, that have absolutely nothing to do with magic whatsoever.

Within reason., mind you. That means that seeing as recharging a weapon is done in the field and not associated with a table, it can clearly be argued that it requires no magic ability. However, the actual process of enchanting is hardly considered someth9ing done outside of a character skilled in the arcane arts. It's naive to think otherwise.

There's nothing indicating anything you're saying. It's picking and choosing rules with nothing to go on. You are mixing magic containing materials to make magic potions. This isn't brewing. Enchanting is combining a material with a magic containing gem and effect, no spell casting required.

And enchanting with a table still requires 0 magic ability. All you have to do is know the effect, not even actually be able to cast it in any sense other then understanding, but not actual ability.

Its the same. Saying its naive doesn't change it, its just making things up.

And if you still don't agree, what would you call a warrior with onehanded, heavy armor, smithing, block, and enchanting?

edit:

One last point. You could select warrior in oblivion as your class, yet nothing stopped you from learning other minor abilities...that's what I'd consider enchanting for a warrior. An inconsequential minor ability.

ha true, those 3 are the basic archetypes from which all classes stem and what you can label your character as under the skill sets of each...this is why they group those 3 stones together and why they're the first you encounter if you follow the path of the MQ as if Beth put them there to say "classes are gone yet the spirit still remains".

Well the Nord bard in Markarth wears armor and carries a sword but he refers to himself as a "Skald" which I believe is basically the Skyrim way of saying "battle bard" or "warrior poet".

ha damn you're in denial and are trying so hard to fight the fact that your proud Nordic Stormcloak "warrior" uses the same milk drinking magic that the Mer you detest do

It's a single player game so you can color outside the lines if you wish but replace "pure" with "proud" and ask yourself if a proud warrior Nord Stormcloak would resort to using milk drinking magic to heal his wounds in the midst of battle. Also ask yourself if you feel a proud warrior would mess around with the souls of a fallen foe and disrespect his death in battle so by binding him to your blade and forever in the Soul Cairn instead of Sovngarde or his honored afterlife...it all feels very lowly and not befitting of a proud warrior, hell even the Old Orc has more respect and honor then that.

EVERY character, who is venturing into the wilds, should, and probably would have some knowledge of alchemy.. Its common sense...How would one take care of oneself when out in the wilderness, and out of reach of aid? Its simply ignorant to assume anyone would venture out, without all the necessary skills..

That said, i dont see anyone pointing out that, in time when women did all the cooking/cleaning, that men know how to gather herbs, and cook there own soups, stems, meat, fish, bread, etc.! No.. You consider it a necessiy, that all characters in the game know how to use.. I argue, that all classes need/rely on alchemy, and wouldnt be stupid enough to venute into Labrynthian, without knwoing how to boil up a potion!

Edit: Enchanting IS magic based skill, and you are indeed folding your magical powers into the metal.. Think Dragon Age... Your basically casting a spell onto a weapon.. Youd have to know magic, to place magic into it...The actual definition of "Enchant"im willing t bet isbased on some sort of sorcery, or soemthing similar..

Alchemy, also was primarily used by doctors, or witches.. Practicing magic, or medicine are those who would have been using alchemy.. If were going to be getting technical.

Not making anything up. It's blatant common sense. Cooking and basic Alchemy should be understood by everyone. Even the ones that crawl around in Yellow Snow.

And yes... it is naive to even suggest that disenchanting and enchanting another item is anything but directly related to a magic user. No matter if it actually consumes any Magicka for it's uses or not.

One call call him anything they want. What they can't call him is a pure Warrior, because he's using a skill that utilizes the ability of a Mage oriented character.

EDIT :

(disclaimer)

Granted, this is my opinion and a very strong one at that. We are obviously free to play how we want and call out characters what ever we want. But it still rather basic, no matter how others want to spin it to satisfy the use of magic skills for a hybrid type of character.

Alchemy isn't magic, it's more along the lines of a combo of chemistry and cooking. Alchemy isn't 1 of the skills boosted under the "Path of Magic" (Enchanting is) and mixing physical ingredients isn't supernatural at all. The Alchemy table looks like a crude chemistry set but the Enchanting table is clearly magical with the candles, skull, symbols and the crystal ball with magic green essence...it looks like a setup for a Seance of sorts.

As for your other comment, I have characters who never touch a table or potion and many other players here do as well; not everyone needs a stockpile of potions, Daedric armor fully upgraded and enchanted, or anything of the like to get through hard parts of the game. I once did a run of the MQ wearing ragged trousers and using an Iron Battleaxe with only meat and mead which was difficult yet satisfying.

You've inadvertently touched upon a gripe of mine, I venture out in the wilds without potions but I should be able to start a fire to cook any meat I hunt on the way...as is I have to find a spot with a cook pot which breaks up the feeling of living alone off the land on my adventure.

"Lilija joined the Stormcloaks many years ago, when the first of the skirmishes broke out across Skyrim. I was so proud of her. She served as a Battle Maiden, using her healing arts to help those that fell on the battlefield.

(No I'm not saying she's a warrior. But SCs aren't afraid of healers)

Nords aren't afraid of magic like those in this thread. No one knows Nords like I do. What's denial is trying to ignore facts, which is a warrior can still be a warrior and have other talents. Denying that is bull headed Dand D logic. And alchemy is magic. Its dealing with magic effects, making magic potions. People bring up the old games...it was a magic skill then.

This is just closing your ears going lalala. Do what you want. Nothing stopped a "pure" warrior in previous games from using enchanting.

Th thing is, we aren't talking about Dragon Age. We're talking about Skyrim/TES. And according to TES (Skyrim, at least) any idiot with a soul gem, enchanted item, and an unenchanted item can enchant items. Just because they do doesn't necessarily make them a mage.