Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 3624341" data-attributes="member: 18280">While there are many improvements from 3.0 to 3.5, I fully admit that I don't think this was one of them, nor (for example) what they did with weapon sizes and creature spaces.  OTOH, I don't expect my personal tastes to be universal.Thank you.In either case, though, the connotation is of a modern mercantile establishment within the game.  I very much doubt that Walmart was picked for other connotations than the extremely good odds that nearly everyone hearing the term would know what a Walmart was.  If Zellers was as successful, or the term had been coined a few decades earlier, it might have been Magic Zellers or Magic Sears & Roebuck.Might you be willing to accept that it violates certain conventions of fantasy that some of us have grown up with?  It is one thing to have a magician conjure up creatures from other planes of existence; it is another to imagine Childe Roland doing the same.  It depends, I imagine, on what your formulative views of "paladins" are.  The more something defies your formulative conventions, the more it tampers with your suspension of disbelief, and, therefore, the more likely you are to find it distasteful.  I think this is part of the reason why some people are begining to seek non-magical versions of some classes (such as the ranger).Also, may I note, the paladin's mount is a class ability, whereas the spell is not (and players who find it distasteful have plenty of alternatives supplied in the rules).If you are a 3.5 paladin's special mount, and you find the term "pokemount" insulting, then I officially apologize.Otherwise, I hope you can appreciate the difference between someone expressing distaste with you as an individual and expressing distaste with a game mechanic/flavour text.(IOW, once again, It might also provoke a reaction which, IMHO, seems nothing more than "How dare you express a distaste for the current edition's version of the paladin's mount?" Possibly with an irrational conflating that distaste with a distaste for the game system as a whole, or with those who like the current edition's paladin's mount. However, I don't know of a single example where the term "pokemount" was intended to carry this secondary connotation. Nor, frankly, do you need to use the term "pokemount" to garner the same reaction -- you need merely to imply a distaste for the current edition's version of the paladin's mount.)</blockquote>

Verification