People who treat D&D's classes as like being in any way representative of fiction outside of D&D are my nemesis, I just saw a post that was like "remember the difference between a Sorcerer a Warlock and a Wizard is this" and treating like those words as if their very D&D specific meanings were like universally accepted I'm going to start taking hostages
"remember as we all know a Paladin is like this" Oh I'm sorry I didn't get the memo that Charlemagne's twelve peers could all use divine smite and divine sense and cast divine sense and summon magic horses. You piece of shit. Don't ever talk to me
"the difference between a Druid and a Cleric" You are nothing. Words mean things here in the real world.
The definitions aren't even consistent across different editions of Dungeons & Dragons. The earliest codified use of the term "sorcerer" in D&D had X-Men style mutant powers rather than being a wizard variant. Druids in 2nd Edition were a militant brotherhood who determined their internal rankings by having anime-style tournament arcs. The bard's first core-book appearance was as a high-level prestige class for dual-class fighter/druids. If you wanted to be a wizard with a sword in BD&D you had to be an elf, because the race/class split didn't exist, and "elf" was the hybrid arcane caster class. "Warlock" has meant about four different things. If you're trying to universalise these definitions, you aren't just going to be wrong about fantasy fiction more generally, you're also going to be wrong about most iterations of D&D.












