What should WOTC do about Golden Wyvern Adept? (Keep Friendly)

[Will]

Purple Dragon Knights don't have abilities like 'purple dragonning.'

They have 'heroic shield,' which boosts Aid Another for AC. That makes sense... shield, AC.
'Rallying cry,' a morale bonus to attacks and speed increase to allies. Again, the term and result make sense.
Inspire courage, Fear, fairly obvious.
Oath of Wrath: an oath to defeat somebody, giving bonuses to the purple knight to pursue his wrath.
Final Stand: temp bonus to a bunch of allies, presumably to face down some great force.

Bad example. The name of the prestige class is arbitrary, but you'll note that all the components of that prestige class have relatively clear names that suggest what they do. And each of those abilities suggest the overall class.

I'd have no problem with Golden Wyvern Adept as a prestige class; names of classes are generally accepted as a bit more descriptive than other things.

I also agree that some 3.5e feats have names that leave something to be desired, like combat expertise. Though I'd argue 'combat expertise,' while a bad name, is closer to its intended meaning to random folks new to the game than 'golden wyvern adept.'

To reiterate, I'd have no problem if it was a term like, say, 'Golden Wyvern Spellshaping' or 'Adept Spellweaver' or something.

I suppose another problem is that when I hear 'Golden Wyvern Adept,' I think 'oh, a prestige class.'

 

[Imban]

I still hate the Golden Wyvern name. (For the record, the Purple Dragon Knights are in the exact same boat with me.)

See, one of the first things I thought of when I heard these traditions would be replacing spell schools was "Man, Thay's screwed. Poor Thay." Then I started wondering what the new Zulkirs might be. And I mean, Zulkir of Emerald Frost? Zulkir of the Serpent Eye? (Serpent Eye Zulkir?) Zulkir of the Iron Sigil? Zulkir of the Hidden Flame? Those are all pretty cool. Stormwalker doesn't fit into this pattern well at all, but you can have the Stormwalker Zulkir, sure. And... then I hit Golden Wyvern, and the best-sounding one to me is Golden Wyvern Zulkir, and even that falls kind of flat - sure, the old spell school names were boring and dry, but that neatly avoided them being actively terrible.

Five out of six isn't bad, but sadly I'm pretty sure every grouping of the traditions is going to hit 5/6 with these, either because one of the names in question is kind of bad, or because Stormwalker doesn't follow the naming convention of the others.

 

[Cadfan]

To reiterate, I'd have no problem if it was a term like, say, 'Golden Wyvern Spellshaping' or 'Adept Spellweaver' or something.'

"Golden Wyvern" is a defined term in 4e. It is the proper noun name for "collection of abilities frequently possessed by spellshaping battlemages." Saying "Golden Wyvern Spellshaping" would be redundant, and would probably be too interchangeable with the other Golden Wyvern feats that involve shaping spells.

 

[Cadfan]

Five out of six isn't bad, but sadly I'm pretty sure every grouping of the traditions is going to hit 5/6 with these, either because one of the names in question is kind of bad, or because Stormwalker doesn't follow the naming convention of the others.

I do kind of agree with that. Of the 6 names, Golden Wyvern is the weakest. The others are more evocative.

Serpent Eye: Evokes serpents, symbolizing deception, and "eye" matches up with orbs well.
Iron Sigil: Sigils suggest protection, and iron works well with the thunder aspect.
Hidden Flame: It lights you on fire. This is the easiest.
Emerald Frost: Uses acid (green/emerald) and cold (frost).
Stormwalker: Uses lightning. Not thunder, apparently.
Golden Wyvern: ... shapes spells? Because wyverns are squashy?

I like this type of division of spell schools. I like the elimination of the 9 schools of magic, which obscured more than they illuminated. I like 5 of the 6 names. I don't think most of the complaints leveled against Golden Wyvern are very valid, because most of them complain about the feat. I think its perfectly legitimate to tie a school of magic together with feats that represent mastery in the abilities the school of magic focuses upon. I don't think anyone will have any trouble remembering what this feat does. I just don't particularly like this particular name.

I don't really know what I'd have called Golden Wyvern if it had been up to me.

 

[Will]

Proper noun names for things are not going to work well for a lot of newcomers to the hobby. At all.

I have a group full of them. They can barely remember what 'power attack' does.

Secondly... hold up... Golden Wyvern is a defined term for 'collection of abilities frequently possessed by spellshaping battlemages'? If it's a collection of abilities, what would lead someone to understand what 'Golden Wyvern Adept' signifies?

It'd be like having a feat called 'Monk Adept.'

 

[Cadfan]

Secondly... hold up... Golden Wyvern is a defined term for 'collection of abilities frequently possessed by spellshaping battlemages'? If it's a collection of abilities, what would lead someone to understand what 'Golden Wyvern Adept' signifies?

Presumably, having read their own character class entry would fill them in on what "Golden Wyvern" means. If your characters could handle 9 schools of magic that were separated largely by D&Disms (you can't "conjure" an illusion? really?), then I am sure they can handle this. If they could not handle 9 schools of magic in 3e, then perhaps playing a spellcaster is not appropriate to their temperament.

It'd be like having a feat called 'Monk Adept.'

It would be more like a feat named "Initiate of Anhur," except better because there are fewer schools of magic than there are deities. Also, taking the "Initiate of Anhur" feat in a campaign without Anhur requires the permission of the DM since one of the prereqs is "patron deity Anhur." Taking the feat "Golden Wyvern Adept" doesn't seem to require actually being part of any organization, anymore than "Spell Focus: Evocation" does now.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Golden Wyvern: ... shapes spells? Because wyverns are squashy?

Gold is malleable.

 

[Cadfan]

Gold is malleable.

This is true, but my personal preference is for squashed wyverns. Never liked them much.

 

[KingCrab]

"Golden Wyvern" is a defined term in 4e. It is the proper noun name for "collection of abilities frequently possessed by spellshaping battlemages."

Is this official? Do we know the other golden wyvern feats are also about shaping yet?

 

[KingCrab]

Gold is malleable.

Pudding is malleable.

Moreso than gold at least.