PDA

View Full Version : Understanding the playground's lingo



laeZ1
2013-04-12, 01:09 PM
I can hide my ignorance no longer! There are some things that I need to know what they mean!
Abbreviations the playground uses often:
RAI: no idea
RAW: Seems to mean "by the rules". Does it stand for something?
PEACH: Please Examine And Comment Honestly (mostly in the homebrew forums)
BBEG: Seems to be the vilian (Big Bad Evil Guy?)
4e: 4th edition d&d
e6: not 6th edition... not really sure of what it is...

There's probably more I can't remember. I'll post again if I think of more.

TheIronGolem
2013-04-12, 01:16 PM
RAI: Rules As Intended; the "spirit" of the rules as opposed to RAW's "letter" of the rules.

BBEG is indeed Big Bad Evil Guy.

E6 is a 3.x variant where you stop "levelling" at 6th level and all future progression is based on just gaining extra feats, intended for low-magic, "gritty" games and keeping the balance between magic and martial classes from getting out of hand.

Frozen_Feet
2013-04-12, 01:17 PM
RAI = "Rules as intended". Essentially, refers to the spirit in which the rules were made. Often used as a counter-argument against wacky rules.

RAW = "Rules as written". How the rules are portrayed, down to the letter, ignoring their spirit or intention of the writer. Look up "death of the author" in wikipedia or TV tropes.

BBEG is indeed "big bad evil guy". Usually refers to the main antagonist of a game scenario or storyline.

E6 refers to D&D 3.5 variant, where player characters stop advancing after effective character level 6. Past that point, they only get feats at certain intervals, but no other benefits associated with leveling.

snoopy13a
2013-04-12, 01:17 PM
RAI means "rules as intended." If someone uses this phrase they are arguing an interpretation of the rules that might contradict the written rules. Or they are interpreting a point that the rules are silent on by making analogies from other rules.

RAW means "rules as written." Basically self-explanatory.

BBEG is "big bad evil guy."

e6 is a variant of 3.5 D&D which imposes a soft cap on leveling at level 6. Once a character reaches level 6, they may still somewhat advance by gaining feats--I'm not sure of the exact details.

BlckDv
2013-04-12, 01:18 PM
I can hide my ignorance no longer! There are some things that I need to know what they mean!
Abbreviations the playground uses often:
RAI: no idea
RAW: Seems to mean "by the rules". Does it stand for something?
PEACH: Please Examine And Comment Honestly (mostly in the homebrew forums)
BBEG: Seems to be the vilian (Big Bad Evil Guy?)
4e: 4th edition d&d
e6: not 6th edition... not really sure of what it is...

There's probably more I can't remember. I'll post again if I think of more.

RAI: Rules As Intended
RAW: Rules As Written
PEACH: Other than the C usually being "Critique" you got this one.
BBEG: You guessed right.
4e: You guessed right
e6: I *think* this started on EnWorld, Epic 6, a very major revamp of 3rd Edition D&D with Level 6 as the "Epic" level.

Razanir
2013-04-12, 01:19 PM
I can hide my ignorance no longer! There are some things that I need to know what they mean!
Abbreviations the playground uses often:
RAI: no idea
RAW: Seems to mean "by the rules". Does it stand for something?
PEACH: Please Examine And Comment Honestly (mostly in the homebrew forums)
BBEG: Seems to be the vilian (Big Bad Evil Guy?)
4e: 4th edition d&d
e6: not 6th edition... not really sure of what it is...

There's probably more I can't remember. I'll post again if I think of more.

RAI v RAW– Rules as Interpreted v Rules as Written.
PEACH– I've always said it as Please Evaluate and Critique Honestly, but the idea's the same. It means come in with complements and/or constructive criticism
BBEG– Big Bad Evil Guy (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BigBad) (don't click on the link if you don't want TV Tropes to ruin your life)
4e– 4th edition. Other editions are 1e, 2e, 3e and 3.5
PF– Pathfinder. Like 3.5, but better
3.X– Arbitrary 3rd edition (3e, 3.5, PF)
e6– Epic 6 (http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?206323-E6-The-Game-Inside-D-amp-D). It's a variant system for 3.5 where epic levels begin at level 6 instead of level 20
Swordsage'd/Ninja'd– Someone commented with the same thing while you were typing

EDIT: I think I set a new record. Swordsage'd by 4 people.

tyckspoon
2013-04-12, 01:19 PM
RAI: Rules as Intended/Interpreted, used when a rule is applied in a fashion that was probably what it was supposed to do instead of what it strictly says it does (for example, Drowning sets your HP to 0, no matter what it was before. But there is also no given way to stop drowning. RAI would say that A: drowning can not *increase* your HP if you are already in negatives, and B: you stop drowning when you get access to air again.) Contrast with -

RAW: Rules As Written, the rules as applied exactly how the written text is. Gives us oddities like Monks being non-proficient with Unarmed Strikes and being able to cast a Teleport spell to remove yourself from an AMF.

BBEG: Big Bad Evil Guy indeed.

E6: Epic 6th, a rules variant where characters become Epic (end standard level progression) after 6th level. Often recommended for people who dislike the Fantasy Superheroes aspects D&D 3.5 has at higher levels.

laeZ1
2013-04-12, 01:21 PM
Thanks for all the responses so quickly. I'll dig this thread up again if I find more things I don't understand.

Verte
2013-04-12, 01:23 PM
RAI stands for Rules As Interpreted, RAW stands for Rules As Written, and BBEG does stand for Big Bad Evil Guy (or Gal). E6 is a variant way to play 3.5 where all the PCs stop leveling up at level 6, instead gaining feats every so often after 6th level in order to represent smaller increases in power. It's supposed to cause the game to be more lower-powered and lower-magic, since most of the really flamboyant stuff comes with 4th level and higher spells. I'm not super familiar with it, so someone else could probably elaborate more.

laeZ1
2013-04-12, 01:25 PM
Can somebody tell me what MAD means?

Verte
2013-04-12, 01:28 PM
MAD stands for Multiple Ability Dependency. It means that a class needs more than two or three abilities with large positive modifiers to be effective. The monk in 3.5 is an example because it requires Strength, Constitution, Dexterity, all at or above 15 or 16 to be good at its expected role. This is important because a lot of groups use point systems where such an array of ability scores would be impossible.

EDIT: Also, the Common Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Terms thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18512) has a huge list of acronyms and terms that are commonly used here.

Anterean
2013-04-12, 01:48 PM
BBEG : Am I the only one who thinks "Big Bad Evil Girl" ?

laeZ1
2013-04-12, 01:51 PM
BBEG : Am I the only one who thinks "Big Bad Evil Girl" ?

mind = blown:eek:

snoopy13a
2013-04-12, 01:55 PM
BBEG : Am I the only one who thinks "Big Bad Evil Girl" ?

Ha :smallsmile:

To be fair, "guy" is slowly becoming unisex, at least in American English. It's to the point that a group of girls or women can be referred to as "guys."

Verte
2013-04-12, 01:57 PM
Hey, I said it could stand for either before. :smallcool:


BBEG does stand for Big Bad Evil Guy (or Gal).

Razanir
2013-04-12, 02:32 PM
Can somebody tell me what MAD means?


MAD stands for Multiple Ability Dependency. It means that a class needs more than two or three abilities with large positive modifiers to be effective. The monk in 3.5 is an example because it requires Strength, Constitution, Dexterity, all at or above 15 or 16 to be good at its expected role. This is important because a lot of groups use point systems where such an array of ability scores would be impossible.

EDIT: Also, the Common Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Terms thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18512) has a huge list of acronyms and terms that are commonly used here.

MAD is in contrast to SAD, which is Single Ability Dependency. (Or dependent, if used as an adjective)

tomandtish
2013-04-12, 02:35 PM
BBEG : Am I the only one who thinks "Big Bad Evil Girl" ?

I've been married 18 years, and saying that for at least 17 of them.

...and now I'm gonna go hide. :smalleek:

Rhynn
2013-04-12, 02:51 PM
I feel compelled to point out this sticky thread at the top of the forum (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=124685)...

... which links this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18512).

Edit: Which was already linked. Well, the second one.

JusticeZero
2013-04-12, 07:22 PM
MAD, SAD: The sweet spot for balance seems to be to have two key attributes and one 'shouldnt dump', usually con.MAD you need too many high attributes to function and are probably weak as a result, SAD characters can pump one stat and dump everything else and are often overpowered as a result.

E6 (and Pathfinder version P6) is a variant where after level 6, advancement is 'one feat every 5000 XP'. Spellcasters dont get spells over level 3 without workarounds, and higher level spells may not even exist, etc.

Jay R
2013-04-13, 08:26 AM
"Big, Bad Evil Girl" carries connotations that "Big, Bad Evil Guy" - of either sex - doesn't.

Anterean
2013-04-13, 02:45 PM
Ha :smallsmile:

To be fair, "guy" is slowly becoming unisex, at least in American English. It's to the point that a group of girls or women can be referred to as "guys."

I actually wasn't aware of that.
Last time we referred to a girl as one of the guys she was less than amused :smalltongue:

huttj509
2013-04-13, 03:50 PM
I actually wasn't aware of that.
Last time we referred to a girl as one of the guys she was less than amused :smalltongue:

Depends on context. "One of the guys" I could definitely see as offensive, but if you come upon a group of friends and greet them with "hey guys" it would probably be taken as gender neutral, even if everyone you were addressing were female.

English really sucks in terms of gender neutral pronouns. Since we don't assign objects gender (unlike many other languages), "it" demotes someone to an object, and "they" isn't correct when referring to one person, though it's often used.

You could use Big Bad Evil Person, but that leaves out monsters.

BBE AFGNCAAP? ("Ageless, Faceless, Gender-Neutral, Culturally Ambiguous Adventure Person")

JusticeZero
2013-04-13, 06:31 PM
"they" isn't correct when referring to one person.....though even Shakespeare used the singular "they/them/their", and it has been defined as legal and proper English by law in Australia, and possibly other places.

Jeff the Green
2013-04-13, 06:38 PM
"Big Bad Evil Entity"

Water_Bear
2013-04-13, 06:46 PM
What about leaving the G as ambiguous, Guy or Gal depending on situation?

I'm pretty sure Gal is fairly inoffensive, and BBEG is a really good acronym.

Jay R
2013-04-13, 09:58 PM
..though even Shakespeare used the singular "they/them/their", and it has been defined as legal and proper English by law in Australia, and possibly other places.

Lots of Shakespeare's grammar is no longer correct.

JusticeZero
2013-04-13, 10:22 PM
Mmmhm. But singular they is accepted English today too, in spite of what certain people like to irrationally flip out over.

Bogardan_Mage
2013-04-13, 10:44 PM
Lots of Shakespeare's grammar is no longer correct.
So you're saying that correct grammar can change over time? Which pretty much undermines any claim that popular usage (or even increasingly popular usage) is incorrect?

BobVosh
2013-04-13, 10:55 PM
Surprised none of the books came up. Especially confusing for me was when ToB alternated with Bo9S.

For clarity sake: Tome of Battle and Book of 9 Swords. Refers to the same book.

KillianHawkeye
2013-04-13, 11:01 PM
Surprised none of the books came up. Especially confusing for me was when ToB alternated with Bo9S.

For clarity sake: Tome of Battle and Book of 9 Swords. Refers to the same book.

You mean the book which carries the title "Tome of Battle: The Book of Nine Swords"?

Yeah. Right there on the cover. :smallwink:

Rhynn
2013-04-13, 11:18 PM
Lots of Shakespeare's grammar is no longer correct.

I don't think a lot of it was correct at the time, either. A lot of it did become generally accepted and now "correct"...

huttj509
2013-04-14, 01:04 AM
You mean the book which carries the title "Tome of Battle: The Book of Nine Swords"?

Yeah. Right there on the cover. :smallwink:

And if you have a copy, rather than just seeing people talking about it online, you can LOOK at the cover. If not...

TuggyNE
2013-04-14, 01:17 AM
And if you have a copy, rather than just seeing people talking about it online, you can LOOK at the cover. If not...

Bam. There you have it.

Jay R
2013-04-14, 08:42 AM
So you're saying that correct grammar can change over time?

Thou speakest true. Grammar doth change o'er time.


Which pretty much undermines any claim that popular usage (or even increasingly popular usage) is incorrect?

Thou art speaking falsely. 'Tis true that the rules for grammar doth change, but to say "thou speaketh" was false grammar in Shakespeare's time.

Thou shouldst say, not that such a claim hath been undermined, but rather that it be harder to determine, and that the answer doth change o'er time.

Razanir
2013-04-14, 01:08 PM
Thou speakest true. Grammar doth change o'er time.



Thou art speaking falsely. 'Tis true that the rules for grammar doth change, but to say "thou speaketh" was false grammar in Shakespeare's time.

Thou shouldst say, not that such a claim hath been undermined, but rather that it be harder to determine, and that the answer doth change o'er time.

This man hath spoken true. In Shakespeare's time, when we spoke Early Modern English, there were still two forms of "you." The distinction was as in French. "Thou," like "tu," meaneth only a single person thou speakest to and art on an informal basis with. "You" is to be used when thou speakest to multiple people or when formality is required.

Also, "thou" is specifically the subjective form, and "thee" strictly objective. Therefore "Thou speakest to me, but I speak to thee." In contrast, "ye" is the subjective form and "you" is the objective form. So "He speaketh to you, after ye spoke to him"

Finally, the difference between "my" and "mine" is identical to "a" and "an." Hence, if thou were to sing the Battle Hymn of the Republic, it would be "Mine eyes" not "My eyes"

Overall, though, I much prefer languages that distinguish formal and informal pronouns, and wish English had not dropped the use of "thou" in the past 400 years

Bogardan_Mage
2013-04-15, 03:54 AM
Thou art speaking falsely. 'Tis true that the rules for grammar doth change, but to say "thou speaketh" was false grammar in Shakespeare's time.

Thou shouldst say, not that such a claim hath been undermined, but rather that it be harder to determine, and that the answer doth change o'er time.
That is why I specified "popular" usage (or "increasingly popular", which is admittedly a bit ambiguous, I meant usage that is not yet mainstream but growing in popularity and can be predicted to become so within the near future). There is no Academie Anglais dictating what is "correct" English so the only metric I can see for judging such a thing is popularity of use. I don't have statistics for the use of "they" as a singular pronoun but I'd venture a ballpark estimate that it is sufficiently popular (or shall shortly become so) to be considered the correct English of the day.

Razanir
2013-04-15, 10:00 AM
That is why I specified "popular" usage (or "increasingly popular", which is admittedly a bit ambiguous, I meant usage that is not yet mainstream but growing in popularity and can be predicted to become so within the near future). There is no Academie Anglais dictating what is "correct" English so the only metric I can see for judging such a thing is popularity of use. I don't have statistics for the use of "they" as a singular pronoun but I'd venture a ballpark estimate that it is sufficiently popular (or shall shortly become so) to be considered the correct English of the day.

Very intriguing in this is grammatical fallacies. While thou mayest argue that split infinitives and sentence final prepositions are to be avoided like the plague, that is not a rule. Split infinitives exist only because English hath not single-word infinitives like many other languages. And end-of-sentence prepositions are like separable prefixes in German. "Thou turnest the light on" is similar in construction to "Du machst das Licht an"

Also, using formal and informal pronouns is fun, and I think ye all should join me :smallbiggrin:

Jay R
2013-04-15, 10:11 AM
... so the only metric I can see for judging such a thing is popularity of use.

I agree with much of what you say, but this astounds me. I know many different metrics.

1. Clear communication: the distinction between "imply" and "infer" makes a huge difference, and people who confuse them have lost a crucial distinction.

2. How people react to it. A usage that is growing in popularity but still considered wrong by many can affect how people feel about you. An obvious example is this: I won't use such constructions in job interviews.

3. Local differences. I say "y'all" here in Texas as the plural of "you". That would be considered informal in the Midwest, and incorrect other places.

4. Where and how much has the change occurred. The plurals for many originally Latin words like "index" and "forum" have clearly changed in my lifetime. I'm trying to get used to the new versions "indexes" and "forums", but they still seem a little wrong to me, and will to most people my age and older. I suspect people in their twenties of younger have never seen "fora" or "indices".

5. Connotation. Words convey more information than their technical meaning. "Slender" is a compliment; "slim" is a description; "skinny" is a mild insult, veen though they mean the same thing. Using a usage that is primarily used by a certain group of people often makes people unconsciously lump you in with them. (See my use of "y'all", above. Used in NYC, it often makes people think I'm a country hick, which I'm not.)

This only scratches the surface. In almost any area of human behavior, a statement that begins, "The only metric for X is..." is likely to be overly simplistic.


I don't have statistics for the use of "they" as a singular pronoun but I'd venture a ballpark estimate that it is sufficiently popular (or shall shortly become so) to be considered the correct English of the day.

I suspect that it is considered so by most people under thirty, considered an alternate form by most people from 30-50, and considered wrong by many people over 50. It still sounds wrong to me, and when used, carries a connotation of sloppiness of expression. I would never dare use it in a job interview or other place where I want to be considered precise.

Selein
2013-04-16, 12:37 AM
What does SRD stand for?

TuggyNE
2013-04-16, 12:40 AM
What does SRD stand for?

System Reference Document (http://d20srd.org/).

Bogardan_Mage
2013-04-16, 03:42 AM
Very intriguing in this is grammatical fallacies. While thou mayest argue that split infinitives and sentence final prepositions are to be avoided like the plague, that is not a rule. Split infinitives exist only because English hath not single-word infinitives like many other languages. And end-of-sentence prepositions are like separable prefixes in German. "Thou turnest the light on" is similar in construction to "Du machst das Licht an"

Also, using formal and informal pronouns is fun, and I think ye all should join me :smallbiggrin:
I am well aware of all of that, and I'm not sure what you mean by quoting me.


I agree with much of what you say, but this astounds me. I know many different metrics.

1. Clear communication: the distinction between "imply" and "infer" makes a huge difference, and people who confuse them have lost a crucial distinction.
This is fair, if difficult to measure. My earlier use of "increasingly popular" as contrasted with "popular" was ambiguous, but does that make it grammatically incorrect? The distinction between "thou" and "you" also makes a difference, but there's little argument that "you" is now a perfectly legitimate informal singular pronoun, while "thou" (despite a resurgence in this very thread) is regarded as archaic.


2. How people react to it. A usage that is growing in popularity but still considered wrong by many can affect how people feel about you. An obvious example is this: I won't use such constructions in job interviews.
I wouldn't consider a usage to be truly popular until it is popularly accepted as well as popularly used. In addition to usage, I believe the singular "they" is growing in acceptance, even if it is not yet universally accepted.


3. Local differences. I say "y'all" here in Texas as the plural of "you". That would be considered informal in the Midwest, and incorrect other places.
This is just popularity with a different population.


4. Where and how much has the change occurred. The plurals for many originally Latin words like "index" and "forum" have clearly changed in my lifetime. I'm trying to get used to the new versions "indexes" and "forums", but they still seem a little wrong to me, and will to most people my age and older. I suspect people in their twenties of younger have never seen "fora" or "indices".
Those are new versions? I heard it was the other way around. It might just be my social circle, but I hear Latin plurals quite often, at least as much as the Anglicized counterparts. I've also heard it argued by a retired language teacher that it is in fact more correct to use the "English" forms of words regardless of their origin. The example in this case was pronouncing "deity" as DEE-it-ee even though its Latin roots (and popular usage) suggests DAY-it-ee.


5. Connotation. Words convey more information than their technical meaning. "Slender" is a compliment; "slim" is a description; "skinny" is a mild insult, veen though they mean the same thing. Using a usage that is primarily used by a certain group of people often makes people unconsciously lump you in with them. (See my use of "y'all", above. Used in NYC, it often makes people think I'm a country hick, which I'm not.)
As far as I can tell this has nothing to do with grammatical correctness except on points already covered by point #3. I also don't see why this sort of meaning should not be considered part of a word's meaning to begin with. In any case, I would still argue it is dictated primarily by popular usage.


This only scratches the surface. In almost any area of human behavior, a statement that begins, "The only metric for X is..." is likely to be overly simplistic.
Well fair enough, but I'd still say it is the clearest metric, and as you can see several of your alternative metrics are (in my view anyway) just different forms of popularity.


I suspect that it is considered so by most people under thirty, considered an alternate form by most people from 30-50, and considered wrong by many people over 50. It still sounds wrong to me, and when used, carries a connotation of sloppiness of expression. I would never dare use it in a job interview or other place where I want to be considered precise.
Since human beings are wont to age and die, those figures make me confident that within a few decades it will be accepted by the vast majority of the population and thus considered proper English. I don't see what is to be gained by splitting hairs in the intervening decades.

Xefas
2013-04-16, 04:30 AM
"Big Bad Evil Entity"

This still seems a bit restrictive. What if you're playing Exalted in some of its more exotic locales? There's at least one example of an NPC who came into existence by killing all of her other potential existences, and then killing her lack of existence, thus existing as herself.

You could have the antagonist of your campaign be, say, the lack of an antagonist, so the party is incapable of solving the unrest in the Scavenger Lands until they go to the Beyond, kung-fu murder the lack of an antagonist, causing there to be an antagonist for them to, then, defeat, ending the conflict once and for all.

So, maybe "Big Bad Evil Thing"? I feel like that would include both Somethings and Nothings, and Things That Aren't. Which would trickle down and include the exceptionally narrow categories of 'male' and 'female'.

edit: I could see some kind of funky Mythender game where the antagonist is humanity's perception of linear time. Maybe, say, the Future is a Myth, and it's feeding on humanity's fear of future events. But you can't fight the Future directly, so you go kung-fu fight linear time until it dies, and humans get a Doctor Manhattan-esque temporal omniscience in relation to themselves, thus preventing a fear of future events, de-powering the future until it ceases to be.

Ashtagon
2013-04-16, 04:54 AM
BBEG = big bad evil genius

"genius", because it refers to the brains behind the monster, rather than the monster itself. The two could be the same being, but not always. This also highlights that he is a master villain, who shouldn't actually be caught except at the very end of a long campaign arc. If seen earlier, he will inevitably escape, saunter away, or demonstrate obviously superior firepower that forces the PCs to flee.

Lorsa
2013-04-16, 05:54 AM
I agree with much of what you say, but this astounds me. I know many different metrics.

1. Clear communication: the distinction between "imply" and "infer" makes a huge difference, and people who confuse them have lost a crucial distinction.

2. How people react to it. A usage that is growing in popularity but still considered wrong by many can affect how people feel about you. An obvious example is this: I won't use such constructions in job interviews.

3. Local differences. I say "y'all" here in Texas as the plural of "you". That would be considered informal in the Midwest, and incorrect other places.

4. Where and how much has the change occurred. The plurals for many originally Latin words like "index" and "forum" have clearly changed in my lifetime. I'm trying to get used to the new versions "indexes" and "forums", but they still seem a little wrong to me, and will to most people my age and older. I suspect people in their twenties of younger have never seen "fora" or "indices".

5. Connotation. Words convey more information than their technical meaning. "Slender" is a compliment; "slim" is a description; "skinny" is a mild insult, veen though they mean the same thing. Using a usage that is primarily used by a certain group of people often makes people unconsciously lump you in with them. (See my use of "y'all", above. Used in NYC, it often makes people think I'm a country hick, which I'm not.)

This only scratches the surface. In almost any area of human behavior, a statement that begins, "The only metric for X is..." is likely to be overly simplistic.

Can I infer from this that you are volunteering to host online english lessons for us poor people that did not have the fortune of growing up with the language?

Waspinator
2013-04-16, 06:04 AM
Is it wrong that every time I read the words "Big Bad" my brain automatically finishes it with "Beetleborgs"?

Razanir
2013-04-16, 09:26 AM
This is fair, if difficult to measure. My earlier use of "increasingly popular" as contrasted with "popular" was ambiguous, but does that make it grammatically incorrect? The distinction between "thou" and "you" also makes a difference, but there's little argument that "you" is now a perfectly legitimate informal singular pronoun, while "thou" (despite a resurgence in this very thread) is regarded as archaic.

I shall pretend thou art lying


Is it wrong that every time I read the words "Big Bad" my brain automatically finishes it with "Beetleborgs"?

Wherefore? :smallbiggrin: Nah, so why Beetleborgs?


BBEG = big bad evil genius

"genius", because it refers to the brains behind the monster, rather than the monster itself. The two could be the same being, but not always. This also highlights that he is a master villain, who shouldn't actually be caught except at the very end of a long campaign arc. If seen earlier, he will inevitably escape, saunter away, or demonstrate obviously superior firepower that forces the PCs to flee.

The evil genius (and dragon) are different tropes than the BBEG

Ashtagon
2013-04-16, 09:29 AM
The evil genius (and dragon) are different tropes than the BBEG

Agreed, evil genius and BBEG are different tropes. But nonetheless, I maintain that the G in BBEG does indeed stand for genius.

Just because one trope phrase uses a word as a component of the name, doesn't mean other tropes phrases can't use that same word.

Jay R
2013-04-16, 10:05 AM
Can I infer from this that you are volunteering to host online english lessons for us poor people that did not have the fortune of growing up with the language?

Nope. But thanks for using "infer" correctly.:smallsmile:

Nothing I wrote implies a willingness to teach. I merely pointed out that there are many considerations, not just one.

ko_sct
2013-04-16, 10:16 AM
....................................̱̾͆̓̄͛ͪͪ̍̉͒͂͗ͦ ͎̠̘͇̯̣̺̣͇͚̣̟̖ ̦͇͚̭̮̜̙͋̋̌͑ͥͫ͂̋͑̀ͦ̍̍̈̌ͥͨ ͎̣̱̲̞̰̽́̆̈ͧ͐̔̌͑̋͒̃̅͑͑͆̄̏ ̦͉̗͕̩̘̳͛ͩ̏̑͗ͦ͑ͯ̍̌̇͆ ̠͓͖̖̻̣͉̗̈̆͐ͬ ̪̖̹̻͚͍̯̟͚ͦ̏͆̌ͪ̓̓ͧͭ̎ͧ͌
How about: Big Bad Evil ̛͊̇̐̇̐ͦ̋ͬ̒͗͛̕͘͠҉͍̲̝̜͎̦̹̪̘͎͔͓ṫ̢ͦ͊͒ͥ̓ͬͭͫ̅̅̐̿̌ͦ̽͒͋҉̥ ̝̙͉̮̬̠͎̻̖̱͖͖̫̲̣̬̖̖h̵̬̟̮͖͙͔̥͉̻̖̰̱̩̞͓ͣ̈́̋̔͆͢͜͡i̔ͮͫ͒ͮ́ ̶͍̪͓̜̤͈̯͇̺̒̐͐̑̾̕͠ǹ̢̰͈̲̦̪̫̱̤͔̘̟͖̗ͧ̐ͮ̈́̌̃̀̌́͜͟ͅgͪ͋͂̽ ̸̴̵̛ͥͦ̈̉͋̍̇̾̆̎̾҉͇͙̣̫̭̜̱̮̫̪͚̟͖̯̞͚?
................................... ͪͯ̓ͤͦ͋̽͐͆̔́̀̓̚ ̒̽ͫͤ̐̽͗͗ͥ̈ͨ͊́̉ͪ̔̈́̚ ̽̈́ͥ̃ ́̀̓̈́͒̆ͩ̆̌̅̔ͯ̑̏́ͧ͋ ̄ͤ̌́̋̏̎͛ ͆͛ͯ̂̋̅̿̍̆͂


That way it's gender-neutral, right ?

Razanir
2013-04-16, 02:03 PM
....................................̱͎̠̘͇̯̣̺̣͇͚̣̟̖ ̾͆̓̄͛ͪͪ̍̉͒͂͗ͦ ̦͇͚̭̮̜̙͋̋̌͑ͥͫ͂̋͑̀ͦ̍̍̈̌ͥͨ ͎̣̱̲̞̰̽́̆̈ͧ͐̔̌͑̋͒̃̅͑͑͆̄̏ ̦͉̗͕̩̘̳͛ͩ̏̑͗ͦ͑ͯ̍̌̇͆ ̠͓͖̖̻̣͉̗̈̆͐ͬ ̪̖̹̻͚͍̯̟͚ͦ̏͆̌ͪ̓̓ͧͭ̎ͧ͌
How about: Big Bad Evil ̛͊̇̐̇̐ͦ̋ͬ̒͗͛̕͘͠҉͍̲̝̜͎̦̹̪̘͎͔͓ṫ̢ͦ͊͒ͥ̓ͬͭͫ̅̅̐̿̌ͦ̽͒͋҉̥̝ ̙͉̮̬̠͎̻̖̱͖͖̫̲̣̬̖̖h̵̬̟̮͖͙͔̥͉̻̖̰̱̩̞͓ͣ̈́̋̔͆͢͜͡i̶͍̪͓̜̤ ͈̯͇̺̔ͮͫ͒ͮ́̒̐͐̑̾̕͠ǹ̢̰͈̲̦̪̫̱̤͔̘̟͖̗ͧ̐ͮ̈́̌̃̀̌́͜͟ͅg̸̴̵̛ ͪ͋͂̽ͥͦ̈̉͋̍̇̾̆̎̾҉͇͙̣̫̭̜̱̮̫̪͚̟͖̯̞͚?
................................... ͪͯ̓ͤͦ͋̽͐͆̔́̀̓̚ ̒̽ͫͤ̐̽͗͗ͥ̈ͨ͊́̉ͪ̔̈́̚ ̽̈́ͥ̃ ́̀̓̈́͒̆ͩ̆̌̅̔ͯ̑̏́ͧ͋ ̄ͤ̌́̋̏̎͛ ͆͛ͯ̂̋̅̿̍̆͂


That way it's gender-neutral, right ?

I think that's specifically the 1th, 4th and 8th genders of elder evils.

Lorsa
2013-04-16, 05:06 PM
Nope. But thanks for using "infer" correctly.:smallsmile:

Nothing I wrote implies a willingness to teach. I merely pointed out that there are many considerations, not just one.

Is it then implied that I can not make you reconsider? :smallsmile:

Maybe there are 'actual' courses in english online. Free ones...

BWR
2013-04-16, 05:42 PM
Fun fact: rules like 'no ending sentences with prepositions' and 'no double negatives' are the result of early grammarians attempting to force English to follow Latin grammar.

nedz
2013-04-16, 06:09 PM
edit: I could see some kind of funky Mythender game where the antagonist is humanity's perception of linear time. Maybe, say, the Future is a Myth, and it's feeding on humanity's fear of future events. But you can't fight the Future directly, so you go kung-fu fight linear time until it dies, and humans get a Doctor Manhattan-esque temporal omniscience in relation to themselves, thus preventing a fear of future events, de-powering the future until it ceases to be.
.................................. ̦͇͚̭̮̜̙͋̋̌͑ͥͫ͂̋͑̀ͦ̍̍̈̌ͥͨ ͎̣̱̲̞̰̽́̆̈ͧ͐̔̌͑̋͒̃̅͑͑͆̄̏ ̦͉̗͕̩̘̳͛ͩ̏̑͗ͦ͑ͯ̍̌̇͆ ̠͓͖̖̻̣͉̗̈̆͐ͬ ̪̖̹̻͚͍̯̟͚ͦ̏͆̌ͪ̓̓ͧͭ̎ͧ͌ ̦͇͚̭̮̜̙͋̋̌͑ͥͫ͂̋͑̀ͦ̍̍̈̌ͥͨ ͎̣̱̲̞̰̽́̆̈ͧ͐̔̌͑̋͒̃̅͑͑͆̄̏ ̦͉̗͕̩̘̳͛ͩ̏̑͗ͦ͑ͯ̍̌̇͆ ̠͓͖̖̻̣͉̗̈̆͐ͬ ̪̖̹̻͚͍̯̟͚ͦ̏͆̌ͪ̓̓ͧͭ̎ͧ͌
I take it you've seen the Matrix then ?
.................................. ̦͇͚̭̮̜̙͋̋̌͑ͥͫ͂̋͑̀ͦ̍̍̈̌ͥͨ ͎̣̱̲̞̰̽́̆̈ͧ͐̔̌͑̋͒̃̅͑͑͆̄̏ ̦͉̗͕̩̘̳͛ͩ̏̑͗ͦ͑ͯ̍̌̇͆ ̠͓͖̖̻̣͉̗̈̆͐ͬ ̪̖̹̻͚͍̯̟͚ͦ̏͆̌ͪ̓̓ͧͭ̎ͧ͌ ̦͇͚̭̮̜̙͋̋̌͑ͥͫ͂̋͑̀ͦ̍̍̈̌ͥͨ ͎̣̱̲̞̰̽́̆̈ͧ͐̔̌͑̋͒̃̅͑͑͆̄̏ ̦͉̗͕̩̘̳͛ͩ̏̑͗ͦ͑ͯ̍̌̇͆ ̠͓͖̖̻̣͉̗̈̆͐ͬ ̪̖̹̻͚͍̯̟͚ͦ̏͆̌ͪ̓̓ͧͭ̎ͧ͌

Jeff the Green
2013-04-16, 09:16 PM
Fun fact: rules like 'no ending sentences with prepositions' and 'no double negatives' are the result of early grammarians attempting to force English to follow Latin grammar.

And in fact the result of horribly bigoted sentiment. The emerging middle class had nothing to distinguish themselves from the teeming uneducated masses the way the upper class had titles of nobility. They invented "proper" grammar so they had a way to look down their noses at somebody and have somebody they wouldn't let their daughters marry.