D&D General What is the purpose of race/heritage?

[doctorbadwolf]

I was suggesting "minor feature" or "minor ability" but if it is that dear to you, I can't stop you from trying to make fetch happen.

"Fetch", as it were, has already happened.

And what I was trying to point out was that your claim that "minor" is shorter to write and needs no explanation is not true. In order to be shorter, you create the requirement of explanation, and in order to need no explanation, you create the requirement for two words and twice the characters.

Whereas ribbon is very easily understood, pops up often in every online venue in which I see discussions of dnd, and is quicker to write than "minor feature", and once explained is much clearer than "minor feature", which could easily refer to features that are weighed in balance considerations, but that are small and not defining.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Ribbons' kind of evolved to mean tertiary abilities that are so situational that they might not come up at all. Like Countersong.

Countersong isn't a good example, because it clearly is meant to be significant. It is just one of many features that undervalues the Action, and overvalues Advantage.

 

[Reynard]

"Fetch", as it were, has already happened.

And what I was trying to point out was that your claim that "minor" is shorter to write and needs no explanation is not true. In order to be shorter, you create the requirement of explanation, and in order to need no explanation, you create the requirement for two words and twice the characters.

Whereas ribbon is very easily understood, pops up often in every online venue in which I see discussions of dnd, and is quicker to write than "minor feature", and once explained is much clearer than "minor feature", which could easily refer to features that are weighed in balance considerations, but that are small and not defining.

I wasn't being terribly serious. I don't care what people call things, but I do think that random jargon invention just confuses issues that are otherwise pretty straight forward. I mean, you aren't actually suggesting that "ribbon" is intuitively easier to grasp than "minor ability" are you?

 

[TwoSix]

I wasn't being terribly serious. I don't care what people call things, but I do think that random jargon invention just confuses issues that are otherwise pretty straight forward. I mean, you aren't actually suggesting that "ribbon" is intuitively easier to grasp than "minor ability" are you?

Sure, but ribbon is a term of use introduced by the game designers in a published article. That's a pretty strong weight in favor of a term's adoption.

I'd also argue that "ribbon" delivers the metaphor of being decorative and bearing little weight more potently than "minor ability" does. It's a specific evocative phrasing, which is the main reason it's picked up so much traction in the last seven years.

 

[TwoSix]

Countersong isn't a good example, because it clearly is meant to be significant. It is just one of many features that undervalues the Action, and overvalues Advantage.

I think Countersong wasn't intended by the designers to be a ribbon, but is generally considered a de facto ribbon because of its lack of potency, as you indicated.

 

[Reynard]

Sure, but ribbon is a term of use introduced by the game designers in a published article. That's a pretty strong weight in favor of a term's adoption.

I'd also argue that "ribbon" delivers the metaphor of being decorative and bearing little weight more potently than "minor ability" does. It's a specific evocative phrasing, which is the main reason it's picked up so much traction in the last seven years.

Do they use it in the actual game materials? I can't say that I have noticed it until relatively recently.

 

[Reynard]

I think Countersong wasn't intended by the designers to be a ribbon, but is generally considered a de facto ribbon because of its lack of potency, as you indicated.

Aaaaand the term is already useless because different people are using it in different ways. The same thing happens pretty quickly to most jargon because there are too many people applying it how they think it should be applied versus how it is actually intended to be applied. Look at "simulation." No one can decide what it means, except insofar as everyone else using it wrong.

 

[payn]

Aaaaand the term is already useless because different people are using it in different ways. The same thing happens pretty quickly to most jargon because there are too many people applying it how they think it should be applied versus how it is actually intended to be applied. Look at "simulation." No one can decide what it means, except insofar as everyone else using it wrong.

Useless to you maybe. All I need to do is read the context in which it is used to understand what they mean.

 

[Reynard]

Useless to you maybe. All I need to do is read the context in which it is used to understand what they mean.

Sure. But if you have context, you don't need jargon.

I'm not railing against "ribbon" or anything. I just think it is kind of silly term that doesn't really imply what people who already know what it means think it implies. For example, I was trying to figure out how it related to UI ribbons. Jargon is usually for the benefit of people "in the know" and is therefore intentionally a little exclusionary. RPGs -- who are still trying to shed their gatekeeping history -- needs less of it, not more, IMO.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I wasn't being terribly serious. I don't care what people call things, but I do think that random jargon invention just confuses issues that are otherwise pretty straight forward. I mean, you aren't actually suggesting that "ribbon" is intuitively easier to grasp than "minor ability" are you?

Yes. I am.

Minor ability has much more ambiguity. Ribbon was immediately obvious the first time I heard it. Nearly every venue of D&D chatter online uses it exactly because it is evocative and intuitive.