Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dausuul" data-source="post: 5048187" data-attributes="member: 58197">Agreed. It's vital to pick your battles and minimize the number of new concepts your players are required to assimilate in order to grok your game world. Furthermore, a completely new element is easier for players to assimilate than a change to an existing element (and the removal of an existing element is easier than either).When designing a game world, I hardly ever rename stuff. It doesn't offer enough bang for the buck. I prefer to reserve my &quot;new concept points&quot; for actual new concepts... I'll even go so far as to invent historical figures like the primeval elf-lord Eladar, just so I can stomach continuing to use the name &quot;eladrin.&quot; It's a stupid name IMO, but it's what we got.(This, incidentally, is why &quot;just re-fluff the things you don't like&quot; is not a sufficient answer to bad fluff in the rulebook. The vast majority of a well-built game world uses the default fluff in order to make it easier to comprehend; every piece of bad default fluff the DM has to re-do is several pieces of good custom fluff that have to be left out.)But funny.To take your question more seriously, I'd probably pick an English title for them that more or less summarizes the concept, with a bit of dwarven flavor... &quot;earth companion&quot; perhaps.But if your players are like 95% of the players I've encountered, expect a lot of jokes along the lines of &quot;scanque,&quot; &quot;hor,&quot; and &quot;hookah&quot; no matter what you call them. (And the more seriously you take it, the more they'll make fun of it.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dausuul, post: 5048187, member: 58197"] Agreed. It's vital to pick your battles and minimize the number of new concepts your players are required to assimilate in order to grok your game world. Furthermore, a completely new element is easier for players to assimilate than a change to an existing element (and the removal of an existing element is easier than either). When designing a game world, I hardly ever rename stuff. It doesn't offer enough bang for the buck. I prefer to reserve my "new concept points" for actual new concepts... I'll even go so far as to invent historical figures like the primeval elf-lord Eladar, just so I can stomach continuing to use the name "eladrin." It's a stupid name IMO, but it's what we got. (This, incidentally, is why "just re-fluff the things you don't like" is not a sufficient answer to bad fluff in the rulebook. The vast majority of a well-built game world uses the default fluff in order to make it easier to comprehend; every piece of bad default fluff the DM has to re-do is several pieces of good custom fluff that have to be left out.) But funny. To take your question more seriously, I'd probably pick an English title for them that more or less summarizes the concept, with a bit of dwarven flavor... "earth companion" perhaps. But if your players are like 95% of the players I've encountered, expect a lot of jokes along the lines of "scanque," "hor," and "hookah" no matter what you call them. (And the more seriously you take it, the more they'll make fun of it.) [/QUOTE]

Verification