MGuy wrote:No one sees what's wrong with [Radiant] being just a meaningless tag?
Everyone that despises 4th edition and such systems sees a problem with bad naming conventions.
The thing is WotC has loyal sheep. They will buy into anything.
Take Final Fantasy and how they created names for NA release that matched what they r3sembled and the words real meaning, or just made them up like "materia'. Materia
l, one simple dorp of a letter to create a new word and the material that wa being used to give certain aspects and powers to weapons became Materia.
Harmless word, that often isnt even recognized that it has a single letter missing to make it a new word, and serves its full purpose.
As was said by many when 4th came out, it followed the Magic the Gathering rules of making the game two parts.
Like the powers, each card has a set of rules for gameplay, and then some flavor text that is loosely associated with SOME part of the rules, the imagery, or the name of the card, and nothing more.
This is the same way the powers apply their flavor text, and only seem to have similar names and flavor text tot he rules and keyword system because an RPG pulls on those mental visuals more than a card game does.
They applied the wrong system to do things with.
"Radiant" has no more meaning towards heat or light as it does to being wet, as radiation occurs the same in all forms be it heat moving outwards from the source, or ripples in a pond radiating out from the center of the surface disruption.
It is a bad word to choose for things, and resembles the entire Magic Missile pushing a lever argument, because it is implying a function of force or movement, that is not even in the rules.
Magic Missile was ruled to only affect living things, but that still doesn't solve the problems. Likewise "Radiant" keyword doesnt properly define the weapon or the source. Is it saying then that radiant is energy coming out of the sword in all directions such that the pressure from that energy is causing the extra damage? If so, then it isnt anything really special. If it is a source of "holy" energy, then why not give it that keyword? If light, then give it the keyword "light", heat...keyword "heat", fire and so on....
But what do you expect form people who dont understand naming conventions enough that confused 4th edition with D&D so much as to call it that when they designed it?
They really dont understand when the keyword system was made that words have connotations, and meanings outside of the game, including but not limited to the games name.
The want these words viewed in the most gamist sense. These words have NO meaning in the game, but jsut a word for the game to identify one type of thing from another. This is why they said on more than one occasion to add whatever flavor you wanted to the powers, because they werent made to fit in a world, just to fit in the mechanics. That is how Mike "Game Mechanics" Mearls said for it to be.
4th edition is fucked up on so many levels (not character, dungeon, or spell) because of lack of intelligence, bad design and many more things. The keyword system is one such, and proves why it never worked in many more places where the word had to hold to its meaning.
The problem is that Mike Mearl, didnt see a problem with using a word that has a real world meaning and expectations that came with it, when improperly setting up the keyword system, or allowing his underlings and flunkies to do so.
So try not to blame the rest of the people that got screwed over, but place the blame on WotC for using a corrupt and bad system within the game, where they could have taken proper time to test if that system even worked.
It there any question what AD&D saves save against? Breath Weapon, sort of tells you exactly where to use it.
WotC just needs to hire people that speak english to proofread the games and test its written components before even playing it to check to make sure the chosen words work. They need an English speaking editor.
If the tags don't mean anything, the fluff doesn't mean anything, and all that matters are the in-combat effects (damage, DoT, pushes, and status effects) then doesn't this just further prove that a lot of 4E is just a videogame?
Yes. It is a gamist miniature wargame, built upon the grave of a TTRPG, that still tries to claim that it is a full RPG, but unable to use prose properly of have a level (there is that word again....) of understanding that words have meanings outside the game and with a game played mostly in the mind, those words are VERY important to use correctly. Unlike a video game where you see more so can more easily forget the words or names of things and see them for what they are displayed as, rather than what they are written down to be.
