Two last comments on Sean's rant

[Corinth]

Gotta ditto the sentiment, Sean. You've been a class act about this, and I appreciate it.

 

[Frostmarrow]

Splendid tea this here. So, is it rogue or rouge?

 

[Mindcrime]

You know, if the perceived "terminology abuse" by d20 publishers really gets your titties in twist, write a fricken style guide and a) post it on the Wizards d20 web site or b) include in the quarterly update of the SRD. Microsoft wrote a software tech writer's style guide which has (rightly or wrongly) become the norm for software tech writers. Bitching about it in a personal rant makes you look like a language nazi, and they went out of vogue in 1998 when the PC movement started winding down in its fervor to rewrite the English language to be as non-offensive as possible.

Chris

 

[Coik]

Hail the dog with a switchblade !! Hate those Iconics...

Thanks, Rashak! I knew I wasn't the only one...

And Someguy is right...it is a rabbit. Check out Sluggy Freelance to see where I ripped it off from.

So, I'm guessing that nobody saved a copy of the origional rant? Don't get me wrong, I'm sure we'll get plenty of yuks from the revised one too, but I just think the original will be a bit funnier...

 

[enrious]

Guys, what's a scone?

I know it's some sort of English food but that's it.

 

[Aaron L]

The rant can be found at Mr. Reynolds website, the address is in his post. And if it is supposed to be aimed at game designers, then I 100% agree. But when I read it, I couldn't tell. Sorry I misinterpreted, I'm stupid sometimes.

 

[Coik]

The rant can be found at Mr. Reynolds website, the address is in his post.

No, no...I don't care about his revised rant...I want to see the original one.

And to my mind, the only place the language used should matter is in the stat block. One of the reasons the English language has synonyms is because constantly saying the same word over and over and over and over and over and over again is dull and repetitive. If I write a module, I want the freedom to alternativly refer to a female spell caster as a "sorceress," "mage," "glib glob badober" or what have you in the text without having the WotC Language Police descend on me and beat me to a bloody pulp because I havne't done things the way they, in their all-knowing wisdom, have decreed that Things Should Be Done. (Of course, they'd have to wait until the Rules Police finished beating me for including a NG pegasus when the rules clearly state that pegasi are *always* CG, damnit! ) I'll say she's actually of the wizard (sorry, Wizard...have to have that capital letter, don't we?) class in her stat block, all right? Now, what's wrong with that? So long as I get the mechanics right, who cares what words I pick to describe something outside of the actual crunchy bits?

But then, I've always thought that the "Game Mechanics For Every Adjective in the English Language" rules design of 3e has been one of its biggest weaknesses.

Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.

 

[Wolfspider]

It's over, Coik. It's ok. Really. Breathe, breathe....

 

[seankreynolds]

You know, if the perceived "terminology abuse" by d20 publishers really gets your titties in twist, write a fricken style guide and a) post it on the Wizards d20 web site or b) include in the quarterly update of the SRD.
Chris

This has nothing to do with WotC not posting a style guide. We give a list of languages in the PH ... use that list instead of making up your own word for a language (the word "elvish" doesn't appear in the PH, DMG, or MM, so why would you insert it into a book you write when a term already exists in the books and the SRD?). When you give a magic item description (in DMG format, mind you) for a magic sword allows the user to fly, you shouldn't say that "the sword bears an enchantment that lets the user fly as the fly spell" any more than you should say "the sword bears an illusion that allows the wearer to fly as the fly spell." When you describe a suit of armor, you shouldn't call it "mithril breastplate" any more than you should call it "mithral brassplate" -- the word is spelled a way in the book, so copy that spelling!

We have a reasonable expectation that (1) people don't need to have their hand held every step of the way, and (2) they can read what is presented in the books. I'm going to continue to hold that reasonable expectation and not write game material to talk down to an 8-year-old level.

 

[Arcane Runes Press]

This has nothing to do with WotC not posting a style guide. We give a list of languages in the PH ... use that list instead of making up your own word for a language (the word "elvish" doesn't appear in the PH, DMG, or MM, so why would you insert it into a book you write when a term already exists in the books and the SRD?).

How about because "elvish" has been a word in the fantasy lexicon for a Looong time now? The word was "made up" long before 3rd edition was a gleam in WoTC's collective eye.

When you describe a suit of armor, you shouldn't call it "mithril breastplate" any more than you should call it "mithral brassplate" -- the word is spelled a way in the book, so copy that spelling!

Why? Theater, Theatre. Grey, Gray. Armor, Armour. Mithril, Mithral. The spelling is different, the definition is the same. Mithril as a spelling was around a looong time before the SRD or the 3rd edition PH, DMG or MM. The fact that some nebulous "we" decided to favor one existing spelling (of the name of a completely fictional metal no less!) over another doesn't mandate the same choice for everyone else.