Stupid feat naming: Does it really matter that much?

[Will]

Well, for those of us who find it annoying, it's more the idea of seeing a LOT of things like it.

Remembering one bizarre, unevocative name or changing the label is no big deal; I think almost everyone would agree.

The problem comes if you are remembering/changing dozens and dozens of labels. Some think this would be a significant obstacle to playing the game effectively.

Now, will there be many such labels? No way to be sure, but news from devs suggest somewhere between 'some' and 'many.'

Though I suspect trolling, because the 'why do people dislike this, no big deal' has been said about a dozen + times on this board.

 

[RigaMortus2]

It is a bad idea because of communication.

If I tell my players that Power Attack is called Mountain Impact, they will say "ok".
If I tell my players that Golden Wyvern Adept is called Master of Battle Spells, they will ask "What does Golden Wyvern Adept do?".

If two months into the game they forget what Mountain Impact does I'll say "Power Attack" and they say "Oh, yeah." If they forget what Master of Battle Spells is I'll say "Golden Wyvern Adept" and they will say "Which was what again?".

Being dumb sounding has nothing to do with it. I might love Golden Wyvern Adept on flavor grounds. It is still really bad communication.

Like any new game, it will take time to memorize the new feats and spell names and what they do. I highly doubt when 3E came out you knew right away what Power Attack did. It takes time to memorize the effect (some people still forget you can't power attack w/ light weapons).

Once you become familiar with the new feats and their names, I don't think it will be as big of an issue as you are making it out to be.

 

[Deset Gled]

There was an article in an issue of Dragon magazine not too long after 3.0 first came out. It was about how to (properly) design a feat. There were a number of good rules in there. One of them was that you should always give a feat a simple name that describes what the feat does. IIRC, they even gave examples of core feats that originally had longer, more colorful names, as well as the new (released) names. I'll try to find the complete article when I'm home in a couple of days (I'm visiting relatives right now).

So I guess this isn't 100% on topic, but you could say that naming is one of the basic design-level changes that WotC has implemented in the new edition. In 3.0, simple naming was a specific design consideration. In 4e, they have flip-flopped, in favor of colorful, descriptive names. Whether or not that's good or bad is a matter of oppinion.

 

[RigaMortus2]

Well, for those of us who find it annoying, it's more the idea of seeing a LOT of things like it.

Remembering one bizarre, unevocative name or changing the label is no big deal; I think almost everyone would agree.

The problem comes if you are remembering/changing dozens and dozens of labels. Some think this would be a significant obstacle to playing the game effectively.

Now, will there be many such labels? No way to be sure, but news from devs suggest somewhere between 'some' and 'many.'

Though I suspect trolling, because the 'why do people dislike this, no big deal' has been said about a dozen + times on this board.

For each person that doesn't like the fluff name, there will be a person that doesn't mind it. WotC isn't going to be able to make everyone happy (or angry) with their decission to rename some feats more flavorfully.

I am sure there are some people who do not like some of the current feat names.

 

[shilsen]

Speaking of that, shil, I going to rename some spells on Emil Shiraz's list... I can't decide if his gem-based version of Brambles/Spikes will be called "The Carat and the Stick" or "Diamonds Scar Forever". Both are good.

*flips out and beats Mallus with a stick*

 

[Will]

For each person that doesn't like the fluff name, there will be a person that doesn't mind it. WotC isn't going to be able to make everyone happy (or angry) with their decission to rename some feats more flavorfully.

I am sure there are some people who do not like some of the current feat names.

First, are you sure 'doesn't like' = 'doesn't mind'? Second, so?

The OP was asking 'what's the big deal.' The answer is 'X folks don't like it because of Y.'

Step 1: 'What's so bad'?
The names are bad because they don't evoke what they are and aren't convenient for certain folks to use.

Step 2: 'No big deal, just change it'
There are practical issues and obstacles with changing a bunch of names.


Really, a lot of this smacks of 'your tastes are wrong,' which is highly irritating.

 

[Mallus]

*flips out and beats Mallus with a stick*

You should realize by this point I can pun in my sleep.

 

[BryonD]

I highly doubt when 3E came out you knew right away what Power Attack did. It takes time to memorize the effect (some people still forget you can't power attack w/ light weapons).

Once you become familiar with the new feats and their names, I don't think it will be as big of an issue as you are making it out to be.

I strongly disagree.

I've said this before. Being able to know something BEFORE you read it is a completely different point than being able to effortless recall it once you read it once. I did not know what Power Attack did, but the effect is so obviously associated with the name that I have never once had to even stop to think about it since that first reading.

If you list 20 random 3X PH feats and read them to a person on the street, they will not be able to guess what many of them do. If you read the names and descriptions of those 20 feats to the same random person and then quiz them on it five minutes later, they will be easily able to get most, and probably all, of them correct.

If you take 20 feats with random, arbitrary names and read the description to a random person and then give them the same quiz, they will get almost all of them wrong.

Knowing what the feat does from the name alone before you read it has nothing at all to do with the problem.

 

[Oldtimer]

Like any new game, it will take time to memorize the new feats and spell names and what they do. I highly doubt when 3E came out you knew right away what Power Attack did. It takes time to memorize the effect

This is certainly true, but I claim it takes less time if the name suggests the effect. Power Attack is suggestive of a powerful attack, so it's easy to remember once you've read it. The names under debate here are not. And that's the whole issue.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Why should core feat names be fluff free when nothing else is? Classes, class abilities, spells, magic items and non-core feats all have fluffy names. Either remove all the fluff and turn D&D into GURPS or make the feats like the rest. 3e's heart was in the right place but the weight of D&D tradition is too strong.