Why CompoundWord Monsters Don't Bother Me

[Samir]

There are good CompoundWord names and bad CompoundWord names. The most egregious example for the latter is a class from the PHB3 that we are forced to call the Battlemind.

It sounds like it was made in a random name generator and it describes the class very poorly (a Battlemind doesn't really battle with his mind, that's a Psion's job).

In fact, while we're talking about PHB3 names, let's mention the Ardent. Once again, the word poorly describes the class. In addition, it attempts to use an adjective as a noun and ends up sounding awkward.

Somebody said the Battlemind should have been named the "Sentinel" and the Ardent should have been named the "Empath." I couldn't agree more.

 

[Ryujin]

There are good CompoundWord names and bad CompoundWord names. The most egregious example for the latter is a class from the PHB3 that we are forced to call the Battlemind.

It sounds like it was made in a random name generator and it describes the class very poorly (a Battlemind doesn't really battle with his mind, that's a Psion's job).

In fact, while we're talking about PHB3 names, let's mention the Ardent. Once again, the word poorly describes the class. In addition, it attempts to use an adjective as a noun and ends up sounding awkward.

Somebody said the Battlemind should have been named the "Sentinel" and the Ardent should have been named the "Empath." I couldn't agree more.

Something simple like "Psychic Warrior" might also have sufficed. There's absolutely nothing wrong with truly descriptive titles.

 

[Squire James]

Jeez, what a bunch of nitpicking ruleslawyers... (runs and hides - that's a 23 on the Stealth check).

 

[Ryujin]

Jeez, what a bunch of nitpicking ruleslawyers... (runs and hides - that's a 23 on the Stealth check).

You forgot the Bluff, first

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Ardent

In all fairness, that's the legacy name from 3Ed.

Somebody said the Battlemind should have been named the "Sentinel" and the Ardent should have been named the "Empath." I couldn't agree more.

I couldn't agree at all.

"Psychic Warrior", as noted, was just fine and quite descriptive. "Sentinel" doesn't have any particular links to being psychic, and while cool, it just doesn't describe that class in any unique way.

"Empath" definitely has links to being psychic, but it is usually in the context of being aware of the emotional and physical states of others, not manipulating them. And of course, there was that famous episode of classic Star Trek, which added healing to the mix...healing that involved removing the injuries and suffering them yourself THEN healing yourself. All totaled, it just doesn't sound like a leader...definitely not any better than "Ardent", anyway.

 

[Ryujin]

"Empath" definitely has links to being psychic, but it is usually in the context of being aware of the emotional and physical states of others, not manipulating them. And of course, there was that famous episode of classic Star Trek, which added healing to the mix...healing that involved removing the injuries and suffering them yourself THEN healing yourself. All totaled, it just doesn't sound like a leader...definitely not any better than "Ardent", anyway.

I likely would have gone with something like Pusher for the Ardent, though in truth I don't think that Ardent is all that bad.

Definition of ARDENT

1: characterized by warmth of feeling typically expressed in eager zealous support or activity <ardent proponents of the bill>

2: fiery, hot <an ardent sun>

3: shining, glowing <ardent eyes>

All three could be said to be descriptive, of a psychic leader character.

 

[Samir]

"Psychic Warrior", as noted, was just fine and quite descriptive.

It's too descriptive--to the point of sounding somewhat cheesy--and yet simultaneously too generic, like calling a Rogue a "Dagger Fighter." I'm aware the name is from 3.5e, but it also breaks 4e's naming convention, which only uses single-word class names.

"Sentinel" doesn't have any particular links to being psychic, and while cool, it just doesn't describe that class in any unique way.

"Sentinel" denotes a guard who challenges all oncomers. Perfect for the Defender role. It especially refers to one who guards against surprise attacks. The emphasis on perceptiveness connotes mental abilities, including special senses, observation, intelligent analysis, and, by extension, Psionic powers. The BM's method of defending relies on preternatural awareness and that ties in nicely. Plus, as you said, it sounds cool, and that's always a bonus.

"Empath" definitely has links to being psychic, but it is usually in the context of being aware of the emotional and physical states of others, not manipulating them. And of course, there was that famous episode of classic Star Trek, which added healing to the mix...healing that involved removing the injuries and suffering them yourself THEN healing yourself. All totaled, it just doesn't sound like a leader...definitely not any better than "Ardent", anyway.

Empathy usually implies both recognizing and (to an extent) sharing the emotions of others. Influencing emotions is one step further, and pretty thematic for a psychic character IMO. I think Empath is much more descriptive of the class than "Ardent," which could just as easily describe a fire mage or a particularly zealous Divine class.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

It's too descriptive--to the point of sounding somewhat cheesy--and yet simultaneously too generic, like calling a Rogue a "Dagger Fighter." I'm aware the name is from 3.5e, but it also breaks 4e's naming convention, which only uses single-word class names.

"Too desciptive" and a single-word naming convention aren't going to win me over...especially since that convention evaporates after 11th level.

"Sentinel" denotes a guard who challenges all oncomers. Perfect for the Defender role. It especially refers to one who guards against surprise attacks. The emphasis on perceptiveness connotes mental abilities, including special senses, observation, intelligent analysis, and, by extension, Psionic powers. The BM's method of defending relies on preternatural awareness and that ties in nicely. Plus, as you said, it sounds cool, and that's always a bonus.

Imalready conceded he coolness, but to me, once we get past that and the first sentence of this quoted section, I'm afraid that, to my ears, at least, it simply sounds too generic- it could just as well be a synonym for the Defender role.

 

[Ryujin]

It's too descriptive--to the point of sounding somewhat cheesy--and yet simultaneously too generic, like calling a Rogue a "Dagger Fighter." I'm aware the name is from 3.5e, but it also breaks 4e's naming convention, which only uses single-word class names.

Please... it's DaggerMASTER. No, no cheese there at all

Not a fan of Blue Oyster Cult, I see.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrd2xf5DIlU[/ame]

 

[Dr_Ruminahui]

As a GM who has suffered through this, I can safely say that not all bad compound names are WotC fault.

In may campaign, the PCs came across what were essentially halfling versions of tieflings (they were reskinned spriggans). They then ran away from the NPCs who could actually tell them what these creatures were called.

Instead, needing something to call these creatures, they created their own name... which was "Linglings"... which then stuck, largely because the players could tell it annoyed me.

Morale of the story - never let the players name anything.