Category talk:Inhabitants by archetype

Player options as categories for inherently non-player subjects

Unlike 1E prestige classes and archetypes, 2E archetypes are player character-only options and therefore inherently non-canon.

The only exception to this are archetypes in War of Immortals, which refer to specific NPCs as having that archetype.

Should any other categories be placed in here, such as occupations that happen to share a name with an edition-specific player-only archetype even when those canon subjects have no connection to it (and in some cases, have not been mentioned in a 2E work)? -Oznogon (talk) 21:49, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

The exception complicates this a great deal, listing 2E archetypes on some but not all NPCs, which then requires any editors involved with character articles to be aware of this difference and remember to follow it accordingly. It also means some, but not all 2E archetypes should have their own articles. I'm unsure how to resolve this matter in a way that won't inevitably result in accidental misclassification.

However, I do think occupations that happen to share the same name as archetypes should be kept separate, such as archeologist (occupation) and archeologist (archetype). While archetypes clearly related to an organization, such as the Bright Lion archetype with the prerequisite to be a member of the Bright Lions, should be consolidated into one article where possible. --Rexert (talk) 00:43, 3 April 2025 (UTC)