Pathfinder 2E Paizo drops use of the word phylactery

[Hussar]

"When, for fear of offending, shocking, or displeasing, a society constrains itself to silence, it is a deadly poison for democracy."
-Robert Badinter (French socialist politician)

What I find funny about the whole discussion is that the word, "phylactery" is just Greek for "amulet". It's not even a Hebraic word. Jews themselves, it appears, call it "Teffilin". I could understand the criticism if a lich's phylactery was called "Teffilin", but that isn't the case.

This has already been asked and answered.

The phylactery in D&D is described EXACTLY like a Teffilin and phylactery is the very first definition given in the dictionary. There is zero doubt here about what is being talked about.

 

[Hussar]

There is no harm at all. I am merely stating my opinion. They can absolutely (obviously) do what they want. I just find it editorially lazy. I mean Soul Cage? What a boring word. And why shouldn't D&D/Pathfinder educate? Is that a bad thing? What a peculiar stance.

I agree that education isn't a bad thing. Totally agree there.

However, how is this educational when it's a complete fabrication and the real world phylactery has absolutely zero connection to a soul cage?

Again, it's no different than if they called a soul cage a Crucifix.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

This has already been asked and answered.

The phylactery in D&D is described EXACTLY like a Teffilin

In Pathfinder. In current D&D editions, it can take any form and the notable exemples are generally gems, sometimes book and stones. Interestingly, as early as 1979, they have been called a jar in Dragon #26 and it didn't bother anyone as far as I know. Iconic lich Acererak's has a phylactery whose form is a great secret and also-iconic lich Xykon has a necklace.

and phylactery is the very first definition given in the dictionary. There is zero doubt here about what is being talked about.

Given the choice, the smart lich wouldn't want a phylactery anyway: it's a very specific item and it exposes it to being found by detection magic. He'd prefer a soul cage, taking the form of a random rock, that I could throw among thousands of similar looking random rocks. Just changing the name and keeping the description isn't helpful if your goal is to break the association between soul-storing item and real-life religious item. To keep the crucifix analogy, it would be like having a cross with an effigy of the lich nailed on it, but called a soul store, and saying there is absolutely no reference to a real life religious item.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

If a roleplaying game used the American flag as an evil magical artifact, how would you feel?

I would think it silly, anachronistic and not in line with anything mystical. Not evocative.

and as far as that goes, people often slip in negative statements about America and other things I hold dear on this site and in various gaming contexts not infrequently.

The fact that I don’t like it is immaterial.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

Nope.

See WotC if you think people don’t flip out over unannounced name changes.

We'll see very soon. With LU being delivered in a few days, reviews will appear, and we'll see if anyone remarks on the use of "soul vessel" instead of phylactery. I might be wrong, but I make the bet that it won't be noticed unless there is a big boxed text emphasizing the change.

 

[Hussar]

We'll see very soon. With LU being delivered in a few days, reviews will appear, and we'll see if anyone remarks on the use of "soul vessel" instead of phylactery. I might be wrong, but I make the bet that it won't be noticed unless there is a big boxed text emphasizing the change.

@Morrus, I mean absolutely no offense here.

LU is a much, much smaller drop in the bucket than Paizo, which, in turn, is a very small drop in the D&D bucket. I'm not really sure that's a fair comparison.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

"When, for fear of offending, shocking, or displeasing, a society constrains itself to silence, it is a deadly poison for democracy."
-Robert Badinter (French socialist politician)

What I find funny about the whole discussion is that the word, "phylactery" is just Greek for "amulet". It's not even a Hebraic word. Jews themselves, it appears, call it "Teffilin". I could understand the criticism if a lich's phylactery was called "Teffilin", but that isn't the case.

Your point?

Jews might call a synagogue beit knesset (house of worship). Of course, synagogue is a Greek word.
Jews call the Holocaust Shoah (catastrophe). Of course, holocaust is a Greek word.

I look forward to your untangling of Hellenic and Hebraic cultures. Please continue.

 

[Morrus]

@Morrus, I mean absolutely no offense here.

LU is a much, much smaller drop in the bucket than Paizo, which, in turn, is a very small drop in the D&D bucket. I'm not really sure that's a fair comparison.

You’re not replying to me.

 

[Justice and Rule]

You’re not replying to me.

I think they're referring to the fact they called Level Up "small", or at least smaller than Paizo.

 

[Argyle King]

Of all the things wrong with Conan, being crucified is so far down on the list that it barely registers.

Note, there is a significant difference between being crucified and a crucifix. They are most certainly not the the same thing. That and why would you presume that a crucifix is used to drive something away? I mean, there's at least one hanging in every single Christian church and many, many Christian homes, never minding being worn on the person. Crucifixes and vampires, I guess?

The point being, if you take something like the crucifix, repurpose it as an 100% evil, unholy item, there's going to be some eyebrows raised.

I did mention before that crucifixes were actually mentioned in the game previously (and shown in the art), as an example of a holy symbol

There's a reason we don't do that any more.

...That and why would you presume that a crucifix is used to drive something away? I mean, there's at least one hanging in every single Christian church and many, many Christian homes, never minding being worn on the person. Crucifixes and vampires, I guess?

The point being, if you take something like the crucifix, repurpose it as an 100% evil, unholy item, there's going to be some eyebrows raised.

I did mention before that crucifixes were actually mentioned in the game previously (and shown in the art), as an example of a holy symbol

There's a reason we don't do that any more.

If a "crucifix" were included as an item in an adventure, my default assumption of what the item did -absent any other information- would not be that it stored a spirit.

Cultural depictions of how a crucifix is used to ward away spirits would (to me) imply that it is some sort of item used to drive a spirit away, not to contain one.

With a backstory to explain why the use were different (and to introduce a magic item to the game) I would find it easier to explain the usage of the word/concept that had been previously presented.

Without that, my default guess at why an author chose that particular word would be to think that it was some shorthand way to explain the concept of a holy symbol used to drive creatures away.

As with the other words brought up during this conversation, context would matter. In a setting like Banestorm, I imagine I would have some different thoughts about what else were implied.