PDA

View Full Version : The "WotC needs a thesaurus" thread



Flickerdart
2010-08-20, 12:37 PM
I'm sure you're all familiar with the levels gag (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0012.html). How many other things has WotC called by the same name?

Beguiler - a casting class or a Shining South monster race?
Incarnate - a paladin variant, an incarnum class or a psionic power?

Honourable mention goes to Psionic Meditation, which is distinct from Psychic Meditation, though both are feats.

KillianHawkeye
2010-08-20, 01:08 PM
I really don't think you can really fault different writers making different books for different settings for the occaisional reuse of a particular term, although it can be annoying at times.

WarKitty
2010-08-20, 01:15 PM
I believe we had a rather long discussion about full-round casting times versus one-round casting times a little while back.

drengnikrafe
2010-08-20, 01:19 PM
Miracle - Something your 17th level Cleric casts, or what you pray for when your DM starts grinning?
Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Greenish
2010-08-20, 01:38 PM
PC: I wish we didn't have to spend hours traipsing through this swamp…
DM: The efreeti suddenly breaks out in a huge wide grin.

Telonius
2010-08-20, 01:42 PM
Not so much a thesaurus as an encyclopedia...
Medusa vs. Gorgon. This one really drives me nuts.

Greenish
2010-08-20, 01:45 PM
Not so much a thesaurus as an encyclopedia...
Medusa vs. Gorgon. This one really drives me nuts.You'd rather prefer all but one gorgon being immortal?

Boci
2010-08-20, 02:24 PM
I think a bigger issue is that WotC needs to learn which words has a specific meaning in the game. For example, they alternate between the dictionary and game definition of threaten. It is usually easy to tell the difference, but annoying all the same.

PlzBreakMyCmpAn
2010-08-20, 02:50 PM
I really don't think you can really fault different writers making different books for different settings for the occaisional reuse of a particular term, although it can be annoying at times.Yes you can. Require them to have read all the previous crunch before righting theirs.

Seperate fluff and crunch.

Bam. done.

hamishspence
2010-08-20, 02:52 PM
The Beguiler actually goes right back to 2nd edition Faerun. Maybe they thought it was a name too good to waste on a creature, and gave it to a class as well?

Aroka
2010-08-20, 02:53 PM
The Beguiler actually goes right back to 2nd edition Faerun. Maybe they thought it was a name too good to waste on a creature, and gave it to a class as well?

I always confuse it with the belabra anyway. Or is that belabara? Does one have tentacles and one have fur?

Cuaqchi
2010-08-20, 02:54 PM
Not so much a thesaurus as an encyclopedia...
Medusa vs. Gorgon. This one really drives me nuts.

Except the Gorgon as presented is based off of the Mesopatamian Gorghain(sp?) an armoured bull demon. While the Medusa is based off the Greek Gorgons of which Medusa was the most well known.

hamishspence
2010-08-20, 03:01 PM
I always confuse it with the belabra anyway. Or is that belabara? Does one have tentacles and one have fur?

The belabra is a big shell with a mass of tentacles dangling down from under the shell.

I remember in the 2nd ed encounter collection Book of Lairs, in the sample encounter, a wizard's home's been invaded, the wizard mugged, and his pet belabra Snooki has run off the mugger. However, she reacts badly to the party coming on the scene, especially since she has babies nearby, and they ideally have to subdue her without killing her.

Beguilers are small and furry.

potatocubed
2010-08-20, 03:06 PM
PC: I wish we didn't have to spend hours traipsing through this swamp…
DM: The efreeti suddenly breaks out in a huge wide grin.

There's a Planescape adventure that uses this.

The characters are hired by a pit fiend in disguise, who closes the deal with "So, you wish to undertake this task for me?" If the characters say 'yes' he activates his SLA and now they cannot escape the adventure. No matter how badly they want to. :smallbiggrin:

El Dorado
2010-08-20, 07:22 PM
Casting time: 1 round
Action in combat: Full round action

Sorcerer wanting to use his extend spell feat on his summon monster spell.

When exactly does it show up? :smallwink:

derfenrirwolv
2010-08-20, 07:25 PM
I believe we had a rather long discussion about full-round casting times versus one-round casting times a little while back.

I would propose naming them

1 standard action

1 round- Sorcerer's metamagic

Slow- Summoning spells

Ritual- 1 minute and up

Greenish
2010-08-20, 07:29 PM
When exactly does it show up? :smallwink:After the battle. :smallcool:

Gavinfoxx
2010-08-20, 07:46 PM
Actually, the term 'threaten', in the context of melee combat, does kinda mean what it does in D&D, in real life...

Uh, if anyone wants to get some good terminology for melee combat, as well as a guide to 'what is happening when people fight with swords for real', buy this DVD:

http://www.schielhau.org/xfdvd.html

Greenish
2010-08-20, 07:50 PM
Actually, the term 'threaten', in the context of melee combat, does kinda mean what it does in D&D, in real life...You can threaten squares, or you can threaten to crit.

PId6
2010-08-20, 07:55 PM
Beguiler - a casting class or a Shining South monster race?
I call your Beguiler Beguiler and raise you a Shifter Shifter.

Greenish
2010-08-20, 08:01 PM
I call your Beguiler Beguiler and raise you a Shifter Shifter.Shifter's 3.0 PrC, right?

PId6
2010-08-20, 08:07 PM
Shifter's 3.0 PrC, right?
Yes, from Masters of the Wild.

Tiki Snakes
2010-08-20, 08:09 PM
What about the Shifter Beguiler and the Beguiler Shifter though? :smallsmile:

The four of them should team up.

gorfnab
2010-08-20, 10:53 PM
Currently playing a Beguiler Beguiler in a campaign. It actually works quite nicely. Now we can take this concept one step further with a level of Warlock with the invocation Beguiling Influence. So now you would have a Beguiling Beguiler Beguiler.

Feats that could use a bit of renaming:
Battle Caster (CA), Battle Casting (RotW), Battlecaster Defense (CM), Battlecaster Offense (CM)

On a side note a themed Gish with all of these feats would have some interesting combat options and a fairly decent AC when all of these are combined.

PId6
2010-08-20, 10:58 PM
We should give WotC some credit though; they obviously know how to use a thesaurus, at least when determining book names:


Huh, that is true. They're almost exact synonyms (ruin, horror, close enough). I wonder how many other books are like that? Let's see...

Heroes of Horror <-> Champions of Ruin <-> Exemplars of Evil (spechul doods of bad stuff)
Tome of Magic <-> Spell Compendium (book of magic)
Fiend Folio <-> Monster Manual (monster book)
Draconomicon <-> Dragon Compendium (book of dragons, kinda)
Manual of the Planes <-> Planar Handbook (book of planes)

Anything else?
:smalltongue:

GoatBoy
2010-08-20, 11:05 PM
If you use Generic Classes, you can be an Expert X/Expert Y.

Too bad they changed the feat name from 3.0 to 3.5, because it sure would have been nice for your Expert/Expert to take Expertise.

Gavinfoxx
2010-08-21, 12:24 AM
You can threaten squares, or you can threaten to crit.

Oh, yea, right, duh. I was thinking of squares.

huttj509
2010-08-21, 12:54 AM
Oh, yea, right, duh. I was thinking of squares.

Even more, you can threaten squares, you can threaten to crit, or you can threaten someone as part of an intimidate check :-)

Leon
2010-08-21, 04:14 AM
A Spellchecker and a better Proofreader are what they need.

Kurald Galain
2010-08-21, 05:44 AM
Regarding using the same word for multiple things: in 4E, the term "invocation" refers to any power of a primal class, as well as any invoker power of the non-primal wizard class.

Regarding using different words for the same thing: some people assume that "rolling damage" is not the same as a "damage roll", that "entering" is not the same as "moving into", and that "forced movement" is not a form of "movement". Thankfully, all of these weird notions have been persistently shot down by WOTC, but that doesn't keep them from coming up every week or so.

Ravens_cry
2010-08-21, 06:10 AM
There was a discussion on the whole "level" issue in either the AD&D 1st edition PHB or DMG, so blame TSR.

Kurald Galain
2010-08-21, 06:16 AM
There was a discussion on the whole "level" issue in either the AD&D 1st edition PHB or DMG, so blame TSR.

Ah, so we can take the blaming to a whole new level!

Ravens_cry
2010-08-21, 06:19 AM
Ah, so we can take the blaming to a whole new level!
Yep, and I see what you did there.
But I am too level headed to stoop to that level so I shall let you off by levelling a warning.

Quellian-dyrae
2010-08-21, 03:31 PM
It's such a shame that a diamond-mind specialized swordsage/swashbuckler can't benefit from its insightful strike or its insightful strike when it's using insightful strike...

Moriato
2010-08-21, 04:22 PM
Another thread reminded me that a Ring of Regeneration doesn't actually give you the "special ability" Regeneration, but simply lets you heal 1 hp per hour, and "regenerate" limbs as the spell Regenerate. Except that it doesn't do anything else that the spell Regenerate does, so it's really not very much like Regeneration OR Regenerate :smallfrown:

Kantolin
2010-08-21, 04:25 PM
Sacred Healing is a feat in the Complete Divine and also the PHB2. These both do different things, and were summarily a source of confusion a few times.

Fax Celestis
2010-08-21, 04:39 PM
We should give WotC some credit though; they obviously know how to use a thesaurus, at least when determining book names

They apparently lost this for 4e.

Player's Handbook. Player's Handbook 2. Player's Handbook 3.
Adventurer's Vault. Adventurer's Vault 2.
Martial Power. Martial Power 2.

They're bad with acronyms too: don't take the PP from PP because it doesn't advance PP; take the PP from PP instead, because it does advance PP.

JaronK
2010-08-21, 05:24 PM
They need a dictionary. Swashbuckler: a group of duelists who "swashed" their swords across their bucklers to indicate a willingness to duel anyone who challenged them. So why is the class not proficient with bucklers?

Not to mention they need a dictionary on their own for their books. What exactly is an encounter? How many times do we need to debate the definition of True Dragon? How about listing whether all abilities are Ex, Sp, Su, or Na, or just a straight forward rubric for doing so?

JaronK

Aroka
2010-08-21, 06:09 PM
don't take the PP from PP because it doesn't advance PP; take the PP from PP instead, because it does advance PP.

I feel dirty after reading this.

vicente408
2010-08-22, 12:09 AM
They apparently lost this for 4e.

Player's Handbook. Player's Handbook 2. Player's Handbook 3.
Adventurer's Vault. Adventurer's Vault 2.
Martial Power. Martial Power 2.

They're bad with acronyms too: don't take the PP from PP because it doesn't advance PP; take the PP from PP instead, because it does advance PP.

Didn't 3.5 also have the Player's Handbook 2, Monster Manual 2, etc?

Fax Celestis
2010-08-22, 10:39 AM
Didn't 3.5 also have the Player's Handbook 2, Monster Manual 2, etc?

Yes, but they also had the Fiend Folio, the Fiendish Codices, the Complete series, the Races series...

Under 4e's naming convention, Complete Divine would've been Divine Power 1, and Complete Champion, Divine Power 2.

Roderick_BR
2010-08-22, 03:44 PM
Not so much a thesaurus as an encyclopedia...
Medusa vs. Gorgon. This one really drives me nuts.
Wasn't Medusa A gorgon? As in, gorgon is a race, and Medusa an individual? I may be wrong, of course, with all the different interpretations of mithologies.

Greenish
2010-08-22, 03:47 PM
Wasn't Medusa A gorgon? As in, gorgon is a race, and Medusa an individual? I may be wrong, of course, with all the different interpretations of mithologies.Yeah, Stheno, Euryale, and Medusa were the three sisters turned to gorgons because the greek gods were jerks. The other two got immortality so they'd be tormented by their hideousness for all eternity, while Medusa (who the gods mainly were wanting to punish) didn't and consequently got killed.

dgnslyr
2010-08-22, 04:01 PM
They're bad with acronyms too: don't take the PP from PP because it doesn't advance PP; take the PP from PP instead, because it does advance PP.

All we need now is some PP.

I couldn't help myself. Sincere apologies for vexed forumites.

Curmudgeon
2010-08-22, 04:19 PM
There's a fair amount of use of "regular" and "normal", without explanation. Before Tome of Battle and then Rules Compendium, lots of people insisted "Tumble at one-half speed as part of normal movement" only applied to a move action. We now have authoritative evidence that it means any motive form for which you have a listed speed. So "normal" doesn't mean just a move action. But apparently "regular" does.
If you have a base attack bonus of +1 or higher, you can combine one of these actions with a regular move. :smallconfused:

Xallace
2010-08-22, 06:59 PM
Regarding using the same word for multiple things: in 4E, the term "invocation" refers to any power of a primal class, as well as any invoker power of the non-primal wizard class.

Primal class powers are referred to as "Evocations." Not sure where the wizard invocations are from.

Kurald Galain
2010-08-23, 04:20 AM
Primal class powers are referred to as "Evocations." Not sure where the wizard invocations are from.

From 4.4. And you're right, the word is "evocation", not "invocation". However, that is the word for both.

2xMachina
2010-08-24, 01:10 AM
There's also Draconic Knowledge...

There's the invocation. The feat. The other feat.

Lhurgyof
2010-08-24, 01:17 AM
I dunno if this has been mentioned yet, but blackguard. Blackguard is pronounced "Blaggard", so therefor the Greyguard is a "Greggard"? Get a dictionary, WotC! :smallfurious:

Greenish
2010-08-24, 08:57 AM
I dunno if this has been mentioned yet, but blackguard. Blackguard is pronounced "Blaggard", so therefor the Greyguard is a "Greggard"? Get a dictionary, WotC! :smallfurious:Funny thing, I never connected the two. Anyway, the class might really be called "Blackguard" instead of "Blaggard", for all we know. Ain't a bad name.

Siegel
2010-08-24, 10:50 AM
Regarding using the same word for multiple things: in 4E, the term "invocation" refers to any power of a primal class, as well as any invoker power of the non-primal wizard class.

Regarding using different words for the same thing: some people assume that "rolling damage" is not the same as a "damage roll", that "entering" is not the same as "moving into", and that "forced movement" is not a form of "movement". Thankfully, all of these weird notions have been persistently shot down by WOTC, but that doesn't keep them from coming up every week or so.

Evocation actually

tonberrian
2010-08-24, 11:25 AM
Axiomatic Strike (Player's Guide to Faerun) and Axiomatic Strike (Complete Warrior), though I suppose I should cut the writers some slack - they're both crappy monk feats.

I don't know if any of them will stack with my +1 axiomatic unarmed strike.

vicente408
2010-08-24, 03:03 PM
I dunno if this has been mentioned yet, but blackguard. Blackguard is pronounced "Blaggard", so therefor the Greyguard is a "Greggard"? Get a dictionary, WotC! :smallfurious:

The work "blackguard" can be pronounced as either "blaggard" or "black guard," according to regional differences or one's preference. Both are acceptable.

Grey Guard has no connection to the word "blackguard" other than looking similar. Their pronunciation is unrelated. Blame the English language for things like that, not D&D.

Esser-Z
2010-08-26, 11:32 AM
There's a Planescape adventure that uses this.

The characters are hired by a pit fiend in disguise, who closes the deal with "So, you wish to undertake this task for me?" If the characters say 'yes' he activates his SLA and now they cannot escape the adventure. No matter how badly they want to. :smallbiggrin:
"Iron Heart Surge."
"Crap."

A totally legit use of IHS, actually!