Stupid feat naming: Does it really matter that much?

[Sir Sebastian Hardin]

Sweet, but I could give any one of my players 10 months or 10 years and they wouldn't remember what Golden Wyvern Adept does.
Confusion is very real with such names.

Really? DO they have attention deficit disorders? or learning problems of some sort?
Does anyone have anterograde amnesia?

 

[Imaro]

No. If you add the ability to your character sheet, you don't copy the side bar. If you refer to the ability during play, you don't refer to the side bar.
If you put things in a side bar, you will forget the information.

This makes no sense...you're talking about getting players and DM's to make up their own names for feats. Right? Why wouldn't they, after reading the single sidebar on "naming feats", write the name they just made up as well as the generic name in parentheses next to it on their sheet? Now if the generic name is descriptive and practical it allows the player to glance at it, next to the name he made up, and remember what it does.

How does having the feats default labeled with abstract names, in any way, help in what you are suggesting...This just doesn't make sense, and I'm really tryng to understand what you're trying to say here.

 

[Will]

Sir Hardin:
I have players that forget what to roll for Initiative, consistently, even after playing for months. Yes, it's written on their character sheet.

Sure, 'real' gamers shouldn't have a problem, but if the goal is at all to rope in new players, setting the bar low is a better idea.

Imaro:
Having two things jotted down for each feat is a recipe for confusion. First, there's more 'sheet real estate' eaten up with a bunch of names. Second, people will constantly be flipping back and forth: 'Hm, well, with the Swallow's Dance feat I get a five foot...' "Don't you mean Swallow's Wing feat?" 'What? I... I don't think so. This is the feat that let's me take a five foot step with an AoO...' "Oh, sorry."

 

[Imaro]

Imaro:
Having two things jotted down for each feat is a recipe for confusion. First, there's more 'sheet real estate' eaten up with a bunch of names. Second, people will constantly be flipping back and forth: 'Hm, well, with the Swallow's Dance feat I get a five foot...' "Don't you mean Swallow's Wing feat?" 'What? I... I don't think so. This is the feat that let's me take a five foot step with an AoO...' "Oh, sorry."

Uhm, I don't think you understand what I was talking about. This was about groups who have decided to name their own feats. I would assume that, if you've decided to go this route then the group is experienced enough to keep track of their name and the actual feat. That's why it would be an optional sidebar about it in the book. For those who don't want that type of hassle, the feat names should be both descriptive and easily associated with their effect.

 

[Oldtimer]

Really? DO they have attention deficit disorders? or learning problems of some sort?
Does anyone have anterograde amnesia?

Do you have some sort of sociopathic disorder?

They are normal people in their forties and fifties, with family and work, who meet once a month to play some D&D. Does that make them retarded in your world view?

 

[I'm A Banana]

I would assume that, if you've decided to go this route then the group is experienced enough to keep track of their name and the actual feat.

Why would you assume that?

Also, what does experience have to do with it? It's a niggling little detail that not everyone is going to be obsessive enough to note continually.

Changing the names isn't necessarily advanced-level play, here. And enjoyinig the benefits of a rules element with an annoying name by changing the name shouldn't be reserved only for those 'more experienced' players.

 

[Imaro]

Why would you assume that?

Also, what does experience have to do with it? It's a niggling little detail that not everyone is going to be obsessive enough to note continually.

Changing the names isn't necessarily advanced-level play, here. And enjoyinig the benefits of a rules element with an annoying name by changing the name shouldn't be reserved only for those 'more experienced' players.

Uhm...just what are you talking about here? Please re-read the series of posts that led to me stating this. I suggested that the feats have descriptive, utilitarian names in the PHB, with an optional sidebar talking about changing names. Then asked why this would be worse than having feats with abstract names already designated to them. Mustrum then replied...

The reason why feat names are useful is:
It reminds the players and the DM that feats and powers don't have just to be some abilities people can get to make their character more effective, they also represent something about their personality and their role in the world.

Sure, people could have done that before, but did they? Did you? Sure, it might change a little bit of our understanding of what feats represent (more than just a special ability).

With the removal of Prestige Classes, such feats might even provide more useful - because it allows people to represent their ties to an organization by taking feats associated with it. (Yes, and if a DM wanted, he could enforce it.)

And once you had your fix of the implied setting and want to go to your homebrew, where you probably want to create new organization to fill the setting anyway, the "fluffy" feats gives you ideas where to start.

and...

No. If you add the ability to your character sheet, you don't copy the side bar. If you refer to the ability during play, you don't refer to the side bar.
If you put things in a side bar, you will forget the information.

to which I replied...

This makes no sense...you're talking about getting players and DM's to make up their own names for feats. Right? Why wouldn't they, after reading the single sidebar on "naming feats", write the name they just made up as well as the generic name in parentheses next to it on their sheet? Now if the generic name is descriptive and practical it allows the player to glance at it, next to the name he made up, and remember what it does.

How does having the feats default labeled with abstract names, in any way, help in what you are suggesting...This just doesn't make sense, and I'm really tryng to understand what you're trying to say here.

Then Will replied...

Imaro:
Having two things jotted down for each feat is a recipe for confusion. First, there's more 'sheet real estate' eaten up with a bunch of names. Second, people will constantly be flipping back and forth: 'Hm, well, with the Swallow's Dance feat I get a five foot...' "Don't you mean Swallow's Wing feat?" 'What? I... I don't think so. This is the feat that let's me take a five foot step with an AoO...' "Oh, sorry."

Which last but not least, I replied as follows...

Uhm, I don't think you understand what I was talking about. This was about groups who have decided to name their own feats. I would assume that, if you've decided to go this route then the group is experienced enough to keep track of their name and the actual feat. That's why it would be an optional sidebar about it in the book. For those who don't want that type of hassle, the feat names should be both descriptive and easily associated with their effect.

So, I'm not getting where you're coming from with the "Advanced Player" bit...I never specified a player had to have a degree in featology to come up with their own names. In fact I think it's simple as well, but the argument put forth by Will implied this would lead to dazed and confused players who can't keep track of their feats and the names they created for them.

 

[Will]

Yeah, I confused this argument for the reverse: 'the book has fluff names that don't make sense but players can jot down a more sensible name.'

My bad!

 

[Sir Sebastian Hardin]

Do you have some sort of sociopathic disorder?

They are normal people in their forties and fifties, with family and work, who meet once a month to play some D&D. Does that make them retarded in your world view?

It was a hyperbole in response to another hyperbole (10 years??? come on!)

Anyway: My bad, got carried away. I guess not everybody is a rules-freak like me.

 

[The Little Raven]

It was a hyperbole in response to another hyperbole (10 years??? come on!)

Indeed. The 10 years statement made me think "How the hell do they play D&D if they can't remember a simple name after 10 years of using it?"