Do you like the name "Golden Wyvern Adept"?

[BadMojo]

I'm fine with it.

Its the sort of addition/change to the game that affects me in exactly zero ways.

Agreed. I won't use Golden Wyvern Adept as a name in-game since I think it sounds goofy, but I don't really care about it as a meta-game rules thing like Power Attack, Combat Expertise, etc. I also won't use the Golden Wyvern organization since I don't need non-setting specific groups; have enough groups with FR and Eberron.

 

[Midknightsun]

Honestly, I don't mind the names. Though, if WotC is truly going to go that route with some of their Feat names, I think it would be best if they offered the fancy names as an aside.

For instance, it could be labelled Spell Shaping (Golden Wyvern Adept, Flying Anemic Crocodile, Hollow Hand Spell, My Mother Made this Feat for Me, etc)

But seriously, I think from an inspirational standpoint it wouldn't be a bad idea to add some colorful suggestive names in parens and give a more Utilitarian name for the feat itself.

Just my 2c

 

[BryonD]

I'm fine with it.

Its the sort of addition/change to the game that affects me in exactly zero ways.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement.



Right now I know what Golden Wyvern Adept does, but it is the only example we have so it is pretty hard to get confused. A year from now if one player starts talking about Golden Wyvern and another player gets confused because they thought of Green Dragon Assault or Pointy Rabbit Expert, or one of the 100+ other randomly named abilities then the need to clarify will have a delaying effect on me.

 

[KingCrab]

You want to see premature reactions, check out the response to Quest cards.

Now that you've mentioned quest cards, comparitively the name isn't bothering me quite as much.

 

[InVinoVeritas]

Hey, it's better than the 2e spell "Frisky Chest."

But yeah, for the basic game, I prefer more descriptive names. Something like "Golden Wyvern Adept" needs an "Order of the Golden Wyvern" to go with it. That's more fluff than I like in my basic game.

Maybe what should be done is release a basic game, and instead of splats, introduce fluff books. Perhaps the Order of the Golden Wyvern has a history, a bunch of special feats for many different classes, and can be plugged into your existing game. Otherwise, I'm left to imagine that there's a secret society dedicated to the art of changing the shape of spells--and that's it.

 

[Derren]

Golden Wyvern Adept is ok when it is part of a big Golden Wyvern talent tree. But as a standalone feat the name is horrible.

 

[llashismll]

I don't see a big problem here, feats names will affect my games in no possible way whatsoever. I don't get why every tends to love Tome of Battle and its many many similarly named maneuvers for martial classes but as soon as WotC brings this trend out among all their classes its an issue...???

Whether I like it or not (I do) the fact remains that it does not detract from the game much. People are worried about confusing new players to this system with "wierd" names. Well years ago we were all new to this crazy and wierd world of "feats" and before that the mystical "THAC0" (shudder). Players adapt, they always have and always will. As long as the system and mechanics is solid I wouldn't give too much thought to a name. A feat is a feat by any other name after all.

 

[Mercule]

Golden Wyvern Adept is ok when it is part of a big Golden Wyvern talent tree. But as a standalone feat the name is horrible.

This. Kinda.

By itself, the name is lousy and senseless. If it is a reference to an order of some sort, that gives it the context to make sense and be pretty cool.

Unfortunately, that sort of thing generally belongs in a setting book, not the PHB. But, since the smattering of proper nouns that EGG used in 1E added a lot of character and interest to the books, I'll wait and see how it's implemented before grousing too much.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

I don't like the name, and I somewhat don't like the feat. The other 3 feats I could mention in passing and most would get the general idea. The name is cumbersome (even if it is a wizard's 'style' similar to a fighter's weapon). Also, unless I'm missing something obvious, it's effects don't seem to have anything to do with the style.

I'm also curious how you [omit] squares from a [close] spell that isn't an area. If a spell doesn't have an area... how does it have squares?

Look at the Eldritch Doom warlock invocation in Complete Arcane. When they mentioned "close" spells, that's what I thought of. It affects everything close to you. So if you explode in a burst of arcane power that hits everything within 20 feet, this feat will allow you to exclude your friends from that burst. Or at least, that's the way I read it.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Agreed. I won't use Golden Wyvern Adept as a name in-game since I think it sounds goofy, but I don't really care about it as a meta-game rules thing like Power Attack, Combat Expertise, etc. I also won't use the Golden Wyvern organization since I don't need non-setting specific groups; have enough groups with FR and Eberron.

That's a good point. What, exactly, are these feats going to be called in the various campaign settings? Or will the Golden Wyvern be shoehorned into every single setting that 4E touches just because they need them so that the feat names make sense?