D&D 4E Concerned with 4e now, do you agree or not?

[Psion]

Which is a very good reason to name feats and such based on what they do, rather than terrible fluff text. If you're not going to be talking about them in-character, they don't need in-character names.

Good point; I have to agree with that.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

As for Dr. Awkward's "Azure Tragic Howitzer" nonsense, it's exactly that... nonsense. We've already seen plenty of indication that feats will be named simply for exactly what they do: Toughness makes you tougher (more HP), Golden Wyvern Adept makes you an adept in the magical tradition of the Golden Wyvern.

No, in fact we've seen quite the opposite. We've seen feats that are not named anything remotely resembling their function: Dragon's Tail Cut being the most notorious example (although now thanks to Golden Wyvern, perhaps not the most egregious).

As to your second point, Golden Wyvern Adept's game function isn't to make you a member of the tradition. Its function is to let you strategically place holes in your area of effect spells.

 

[The Little Raven]

No, in fact we've seen quite the opposite. We've seen feats that are not named anything remotely resembling their function: Dragon's Tail Cut being the most notorious example (although now thanks to Golden Wyvern, perhaps not the most egregious).

DTC was given as an example and openly stated that it was not going to be in the game. On the other hand, they've given us Toughness (instead of something Exalted-like, such as Ox-Body Technique), Alertness, and First Reaction, all plainly named.

As to your second point, Golden Wyvern Adept's game function isn't to make you a member of the tradition. Its function is to let you strategically place holes in your area of effect spells.

Well, we've only seen the Paragon-tier GW stuff. Who's to say there isn't a "Golden Wyvern Initiate" in the Heroic-tier?

Secondly...

Golden Wyvern initiates are battle-mages who use their staves to shape and sculpt the spells they cast.

That's straight from the wizard/implements article. Having a group called the Golden Wyvern that's described as shaping their spells and having a feat called "Golden Wyvern Adept" that allows you to do exactly that... well... makes sense.

 

[borc killer]

I clicked "I have no concerns" but that's not true. I have one concern, but that's really about the MM.

I did: I don't agree but have other concerns 4e. My only concern is the MM. I don't want my monsters to dumbed down : ( Just wanted a tool to help advance them easier.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

DTC was given as an example and openly stated that it was not going to be in the game.

Nooooo... It was floated out there, shat upon, and retracted.

On the other hand, they've given us Toughness (instead of something Exalted-like, such as Ox-Body Technique), Alertness, and First Reaction, all plainly named.

Yes indeed! Great decision.

Well, we've only seen the Paragon-tier GW stuff. Who's to say there isn't a "Golden Wyvern Initiate" in the Heroic-tier?

I hope not. Someone else said (in a related thread, though I don't remember who or where) that perhaps the more Exalted-sounding names were reserved for Paragon and Epic play. This strikes me as a reasonable compromise. It allows new players to avoid the jargon at entry levels, and gives them the time necessary to master that jargon to make them overall more palatable for a ruleset.

This is me speaking strictly from a technical writer standpoint. These "fluffy" names are primarily bad because they are jargon, and they present a barrier to rules mastery.

Lots of other folks (myself included) just plain "don't like 'em" but that's a matter of taste. I'm (mostly) not arguing from that standpoint.

Secondly... That's straight from the wizard/implements article. Having a group called the Golden Wyvern that's described as shaping their spells and having a feat called "Golden Wyvern Adept" that allows you to do exactly that... well... makes sense.

It makes sense, perhaps. But you're no more informed about the function of the feat than you would be with any of the following:

Golden Wyvern Adept: Gain +1 to hit with any of your spells as long as you are wielding a staff.

Golden Wyvern Adept: You may freely change the area of effect of any of your cone, line, or burst spells to any of these three shapes.

Golden Wyvern Adept: Gain +2 to all Persuasion rolls when dealing with other members of the Golden Wyvern tradition.

etc.

 

[The Little Raven]

Nooooo... It was floated out there, shat upon, and retracted.

The fact that they retracted and openly said it was a bad idea kinda conflicts with this assumption that there will be Exalted-like names for feats and powers.

I hope not. Someone else said (in a related thread, though I don't remember who or where) that perhaps the more Exalted-sounding names were reserved for Paragon and Epic play.

I don't get where you get this "Golden Wyvern Adept" equates to Exalted-like names (such as "Dipping Swallow Defense"). It's a feat that invokes the name of a wizard tradition described in the core book and provides the benefits that the tradition is described as having (ability to shape AoE spells). It's really no different in concept than "Initiate of Bane," from the Player's Guide to Faerun, which merely demonstrates that you are the member of an organization (Golden Wyvern or Church of Bane) and you gain some benefits from that association (ability to shape spells or deity-specific spells).

Lots of other folks (myself included) just plain "don't like 'em" but that's a matter of taste. I'm (mostly) not arguing from that standpoint.

And from that same technical writer aspect... if my technical manual talks about the Golden Wyvern tradition, then I see no problem with having feats with that name in it, as long as they are appropriate.

Golden Wyvern Adept: Gain +1 to hit with any of your spells as long as you are wielding a staff.

The description doesn't say they're more accurate with their spells. It says they're adept at shaping them.

Golden Wyvern Adept: You may freely change the area of effect of any of your cone, line, or burst spells to any of these three shapes.

Sure, this could be another version of this, since it does what the tradition's description says: allows you to shape your spell.

Golden Wyvern Adept: Gain +2 to all Persuasion rolls when dealing with other members of the Golden Wyvern tradition.

Again, not part of the description given for the tradition.

 

[Jhaelen]

I agree with the first point. I know everyone says "but you can just change it!", but the problem is that if you change it the conversation will go like this:

Player A: I use my Sweep Kick feat.
[snip
]DM: I will move heaven and earth in order to avoid using the phrase "Golden Wyvern" in my game. And so will you.

Hee, hee
Actually, this fictional conversation reminded me of some of our sessions because we've got a related problem: We're using a mix of English and German books. It's sometimes incredibly difficult to find out how they translated certain spells, feats or even conditions (stunned/dazed comes to mind: one is 'betäubt' the other is 'benommen', but which is which? Most dictionaries seem to suggest both translations for each term).


Anyway, looking at the poll results so far, I'm a bit surprised that I'm in the clear minority. I think the name of the feat is perfect - at least if you accept that the discipline of the 'Golden Wyvern' is the one that deals with just that: shaping/sculpting spells. I immediately made that connection when I saw the feat's name and remembered having read about it in the 'wizards' implements' article.

If they sprinkle those colourful names all over the PHB you'll have them memorized in no time. I'm pretty sure that after reading the whole thing and maybe poring over the feat lists, spells, etc. for a while you'll be remembering them just as easily as the colourful names that are used in the current edition.

 

[Rechan]

I did: I don't agree but have other concerns 4e. My only concern is the MM. I don't want my monsters to dumbed down : ( Just wanted a tool to help advance them easier.

Actually, my concern about the MM is simply that I have the feeling they're going to pull the MMV problem on us.

Instead of "Here's some rules for leveling monsters" and "Here's an Orc" We'll get an MM cluttered with "Here's an Orc Lurker (statblock), here's an Orc Brute (Statblock) and here's an Orc Soldier (Statblock) and..."

So 300 monsters in the MM turn out to be 100 monsters with 2 variant monsters with class levels all statted out.

Don't freakin' stat NPCs in my MM! Just gimmie a butt load of standard monster stats!

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

It makes sense, perhaps. But you're no more informed about the function of the feat than you would be with any of the following:

Golden Wyvern Adept: Gain +1 to hit with any of your spells as long as you are wielding a staff.

Golden Wyvern Adept: You may freely change the area of effect of any of your cone, line, or burst spells to any of these three shapes.

Golden Wyvern Adept: Gain +2 to all Persuasion rolls when dealing with other members of the Golden Wyvern tradition.

Again...it's not necessary for the feat to indicate exactly what it does in the name. It's not like we refer to Quicken Spell as "Cast another spell in a round while managing my finances feat," or Power Attack as "I'm a trap for the innumerate but boy are big numbers nice feat."

As long as the feat title makes sense given in context, it's good and dandy. In this case, it's an extension of the magic tradition, and makes sense.

And, as I said before...if the feat is on a player's character sheet and they don't know what it does, that's not the game's problem, that's the player's problem.

Brad

 

[Stogoe]

Why do you consider it a strawman? Because you personally don't feel inconvenienced by non-descript fluff?

No, it's a strawman because it's an inaccurate, exaggerated example that's easily knocked down(because of its exaggerated inaccuracies), and that tries to make the attacker look more capable than he really is.