Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Wulf Ratbane" data-source="post: 3907587" data-attributes="member: 94">Nooooo... It was floated out there, shat upon, and retracted.Yes indeed! Great decision.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 &quot;fluffy&quot; names are primarily bad because they are jargon, and they present a barrier to rules mastery.Lots of other folks (myself included) just plain &quot;don't like 'em&quot; but that's a matter of taste. I'm (mostly) not arguing from that standpoint.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.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Wulf Ratbane, post: 3907587, member: 94"] Nooooo... It was floated out there, shat upon, and retracted. Yes indeed! Great decision. 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. 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. [/QUOTE]

Verification