D&D General Jaquaying the dungeon - a term to avoid

[Charlaquin]

Hmm… On a closer read, he may actually be implying that people were being attacked for using the term without the s, by people who thought they were defending Jennell by doing so. Which if true is quite a different situation than I initially thought was being described.

 

[Parmandur]

Good dungeon design?

Sandbox dungeon?

 

[Vaalingrade]

If Janelle Jaquays doesn't want me to use the term, then I won't. No-brainer.

Exactly.

I'm not about to tell someone I'm going to use their name in a way that bothers them just because it's more convenient to me.

Not that my lack of using it means much considering I just learned the term in the other thread.

 

[Reynard]

Sandbox dungeon?

I donthinkbthat captures it. The reason I suggested "warren" upthread is because it evokes that kind of complicated pathways while still acknowledging the discrete nature. "Sandbox" suggests something too open to apply to dungeons, IMO.

 

[Parmandur]

I donthinkbthat captures it. The reason I suggested "warren" upthread is because it evokes that kind of complicated pathways while still acknowledging the discrete nature. "Sandbox" suggests something too open to apply to dungeons, IMO.

Also might be a bit equivocal with a massive negadingeon environment.

Hmmmm.

Thracian has promise.

 

[ichabod]

For a new term I would suggest a highly connected dungeon. Connectivity is a term in graph theory, and any "Xandered" dungeon would be k-connected with a high k.

Edit: On further reflection, the above mathematical statement about "Xandered" dungeons is incorrect. I still think highly connected is a good term for them, though.

 

[humble minion]

Well, I'm going to call it "veeblefetzering" from now on.

You have no idea how much self-control I had to exert to prevent myself spinning up an alt account called ‘Harold Veeblefetzer’ and taking theatrical umbrage to this suggestion…

 

[Ancalagon]

I do not remember ever reading a more self indulgent blog post. Wow.

Ok, I think you and @Transformer need to inform yourselves better on what happened.

One of Jaquays' major contribution to the early days of D&D was a design tendency of hers to have multiple possible paths through a dungeon. In most (not all) cases, this makes the dungeon better. But this was an idea, a practice without a name. And things that aren't named, aren't articulated, are easy to miss.

In 2010, The Alexandrian blog - who does a lot of analysis on how to run a game (his rule of 3 clues is a great example) noticed this aspect of dungeon design, and decided to write about it. And, IN HER HONOR, named this design principle after her.

But it turns out she's not happy with this principle being named after her. So, being the "inventor" NOT of the idea, but of the term for the idea, renamed it to something else.

I, for one, am glad to know that Jaquays is uncomfortable with the term, and will stop using it.

 

[Gradine]

Yeah, what the heck? The actual OG designer who invented that style of dungeon design wants the name changed, so Justin Alexander decided to declare that it's now named after him? What the heck?

Hey, if you can't name it after one of your heroes, you might as well name it after someone you have just as high of an opinion of, right?

You clearly have not read the recipe blogs of entitled Midwestern ladies "fixing" food from other nations. But yeah, not great.

I refuse to believe anybody has ever read the blog at the beginning of recipes

 

[billd91]

Justin's post says "I spoke with Jennell earlier this year. We both agreed that the name should be changed, and I said it would be a large project to do it, but I’d make sure it happened by the end of the year."
That's followed a few paras later by "After a bunch of back-and-forth, we finally settled on the term “xandering.”"
TO me that reads as a mutual decision.

I think the we here may refer to JA and his publisher.