Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DreamChaser" data-source="post: 4108333" data-attributes="member: 1190">I accept that what I'm about to type may be deemed crazy and get me branded a brainless 4e lover but here it goes.I (note the self referential term that does not apply to anyone else) find myself interpreting many comments about the lack of descriptiveness in naming conventions baffling. Why?Because I suspect that themes that are descriptive in practice (if not literally) will rapidly emerge. Take the classing examples of Bigby's or Power Words or Mordenkainen's or Prismatic. Grognards (sheesh that is an obnoxious term but I use it to further demonstrate my point) know exactly what to expect from each of these categories of spells. If a spell has Bigby's in it, there is a very very very good chance that it is a Force spell and relates to grabbing your opponent. Prismatic probably has random effects based upon the color of the rainbow. Mordenkainen's probably relates to &quot;warriorizing&quot; yourself, and Power Word probably doesn't allow a saving throw but deals debilitating effects based upon HP.Additionally, grognard is as meaningless term unless you have the background to grok it.Similarly, White Raven, Iron Dragon, Irridescent Petunia, Maleficent Starfish appear as meaningless and undescriptive to us now as any of the above appear to any newby (okay, White Raven appears to be similar to its descriptor purpose from Bo9S - lead the party in outflanking the opponents). But the point stands.As the designers have said, we haven't seen everything yet. What appears undescriptive may actually be quite clear once we have learned the system.And I don't want &quot;Hit and Shift Rush&quot; as a power name...that just seems lame and uninteresting.DC</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DreamChaser, post: 4108333, member: 1190"] I accept that what I'm about to type may be deemed crazy and get me branded a brainless 4e lover but here it goes. I (note the self referential term that does not apply to anyone else) find myself interpreting many comments about the lack of descriptiveness in naming conventions baffling. Why? Because I suspect that themes that are descriptive in practice (if not literally) will rapidly emerge. Take the classing examples of Bigby's or Power Words or Mordenkainen's or Prismatic. Grognards (sheesh that is an obnoxious term but I use it to further demonstrate my point) know exactly what to expect from each of these categories of spells. If a spell has Bigby's in it, there is a very very very good chance that it is a Force spell and relates to grabbing your opponent. Prismatic probably has random effects based upon the color of the rainbow. Mordenkainen's probably relates to "warriorizing" yourself, and Power Word probably doesn't allow a saving throw but deals debilitating effects based upon HP. Additionally, grognard is as meaningless term unless you have the background to grok it. Similarly, White Raven, Iron Dragon, Irridescent Petunia, Maleficent Starfish appear as meaningless and undescriptive to us now as any of the above appear to any newby (okay, White Raven appears to be similar to its descriptor purpose from Bo9S - lead the party in outflanking the opponents). But the point stands. As the designers have said, we haven't seen everything yet. What appears undescriptive may actually be quite clear once we have learned the system. And I don't want "Hit and Shift Rush" as a power name...that just seems lame and uninteresting. DC [/QUOTE]

Verification