Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="LurkAway" data-source="post: 5737522" data-attributes="member: 6685059">What's in a name like &quot;Shakespeare&quot;? Or is it just the name of an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing?My two cents:Terms are evocative, there's no way getting around it.For example, vampires mean garlic and no reflection and fear of&nbsp; sunlight. So then a new vampire series comes out and the author must&nbsp; face the fact that somebody, somewhere is going to wonder why my&nbsp; vampires sparkle in sunlight. Thus the author wisely throws in a fluff&nbsp; explanation that fear of sunlight is just a half-true old&nbsp; wives' tale. (I googled that, BTW, I swear I didn't read any of them).To ignore all that is to be ignorant of meanings attached to words.I think &quot;healing surges&quot; (vs just &quot;surges&quot;), &quot;bloodied&quot; and other bits&nbsp; of terminology in 4E, including some class titles, seem to me to be&nbsp; naive of the meanings they can evoke vs what the rule actually&nbsp; encompass. Can you really blame somebody for being thrown off by a term like &quot;healing&quot; surge, when it can easily and frequently be fluffed as renewed confidence?&nbsp;Since Basic D&amp;D, I always thought that classes could translate&nbsp; somewhat into the fiction. A Thief was a thief (in a dungeon), a Fighter&nbsp; was some sort of warrior (in a dungeon), a Magic User was a boring&nbsp; generic word to describe a mage/wizard (in a dungeon). So the terminology&nbsp; itself may not exactly appear in-game (not &quot;Hello, I'm Bob, the&nbsp; Fighter), but the meaning of the word did carry over. And I think this&nbsp; extended all the way to 3E.BTW, class titles are also inconsistent in their meanings. Arguably, a Cleric and a Warlock actually mean something tangible in the fiction, but an Avenger is only a metagame term?You can educate the older gamers that a 4E class name is&nbsp; not necessarily an in-game concept that should straightjacket your roleplaying, but why naively fault those gamers for&nbsp; attaching valid meanings to words. Those meanings were true in D&amp;D, are still&nbsp; true in various systems, and might be true in D&amp;D again one day.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="LurkAway, post: 5737522, member: 6685059"] What's in a name like "Shakespeare"? Or is it just the name of an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing? My two cents: Terms are evocative, there's no way getting around it. For example, vampires mean garlic and no reflection and fear of sunlight. So then a new vampire series comes out and the author must face the fact that somebody, somewhere is going to wonder why my vampires sparkle in sunlight. Thus the author wisely throws in a fluff explanation that fear of sunlight is just a half-true old wives' tale. (I googled that, BTW, I swear I didn't read any of them). To ignore all that is to be ignorant of meanings attached to words. I think "healing surges" (vs just "surges"), "bloodied" and other bits of terminology in 4E, including some class titles, seem to me to be naive of the meanings they can evoke vs what the rule actually encompass. Can you really blame somebody for being thrown off by a term like "healing" surge, when it can easily and frequently be fluffed as renewed confidence? Since Basic D&D, I always thought that classes could translate somewhat into the fiction. A Thief was a thief (in a dungeon), a Fighter was some sort of warrior (in a dungeon), a Magic User was a boring generic word to describe a mage/wizard (in a dungeon). So the terminology itself may not exactly appear in-game (not "Hello, I'm Bob, the Fighter), but the meaning of the word did carry over. And I think this extended all the way to 3E. BTW, class titles are also inconsistent in their meanings. Arguably, a Cleric and a Warlock actually mean something tangible in the fiction, but an Avenger is only a metagame term? You can educate the older gamers that a 4E class name is not necessarily an in-game concept that should straightjacket your roleplaying, but why naively fault those gamers for attaching valid meanings to words. Those meanings were true in D&D, are still true in various systems, and might be true in D&D again one day. [/QUOTE]

Verification