Switch Theme:

Do you prefer the classic or modern GW naming convention?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Poll
Do you prefer the classic or modern GW naming convention?
Classic, more generic names
Modern, copyright-friendly names

View results
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Committed Chaos Cult Marine





 Mangod wrote:


First, Saturmorn Carvilli is a f-ing sweet name, and I will definitely steal it at some point.

Secondly, while I don't mind characters having such names (Malus Darkblade, Huron Blackheart, Morbidex Twiceborn, Sly Marbo, etc), that naming structure doesn't really work for a generic character or -unit. Some character named "Sloppit, the Bileous Piper" might have worked as a Pied Piper pastiche/parody, but Sloppity Bilepiper as a generic, descriptive name of a model? It's not exactly Barber Surgeon - Sloppity adds nothing that BILEpiper didn't already tell us.


Go right ahead, I think it makes a fantastic antagonist name.

I get that both GW (and modern D&D) have overdone the two part, adjective actual-name convention too much. And that such heavily reliance on it (for what appears to be legal reasons) often turns everything into a kind of gray goo. I think it is best to drop the extraneous part and just use the actual-name part. Which for the most part everyone does anyways. Good or ill, we know why it is done, and most of the time, it's easy to just forget the extra even exists.

There certainly have been some missteps with GW naming even for me who is mostly a fan of the newer names. Lumineth Wardens and Lumineth Sentinels probably the most annoying to me instead of just calling them Vanari Spearmen and Vanari Archers. Or even names that aren't basically synonyms of each other. I hear tell Stormcast Eternals are even worst in that regard.
   
Made in se
Regular Dakkanaut




Sweden

 Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:
 Mangod wrote:


First, Saturmorn Carvilli is a f-ing sweet name, and I will definitely steal it at some point.

Secondly, while I don't mind characters having such names (Malus Darkblade, Huron Blackheart, Morbidex Twiceborn, Sly Marbo, etc), that naming structure doesn't really work for a generic character or -unit. Some character named "Sloppit, the Bileous Piper" might have worked as a Pied Piper pastiche/parody, but Sloppity Bilepiper as a generic, descriptive name of a model? It's not exactly Barber Surgeon - Sloppity adds nothing that BILEpiper didn't already tell us.


Go right ahead, I think it makes a fantastic antagonist name.

I get that both GW (and modern D&D) have overdone the two part, adjective actual-name convention too much. And that such heavily reliance on it (for what appears to be legal reasons) often turns everything into a kind of gray goo. I think it is best to drop the extraneous part and just use the actual-name part. Which for the most part everyone does anyways. Good or ill, we know why it is done, and most of the time, it's easy to just forget the extra even exists.

There certainly have been some missteps with GW naming even for me who is mostly a fan of the newer names. Lumineth Wardens and Lumineth Sentinels probably the most annoying to me instead of just calling them Vanari Spearmen and Vanari Archers. Or even names that aren't basically synonyms of each other. I hear tell Stormcast Eternals are even worst in that regard.


Stormcast have the opposite problem to Nurgle, in that a lot of units have names that sound familiar, and since they're almost all single-name units...

Liberators, Judicators, Evocators, Retributors, Fulminators, Prosecutors, Castigators - yeah, it becomes hard to tell them apart after a while. At least the Vanguard units (Vanguard-Hunters, -Palladors and -Raptors) have a signifier to set them apart from the rest of the army. I think the Lumineth/Kharadron/Vanguard-approach is the best one: two names, XY, with X being a designation (Paladin) and Y being the function (Defender).
   
Made in us
Courageous Space Marine Captain





SoCal

 thegreatchimp wrote:
Flappity Flappers of Tzeentch!


What next? Tsooty Tzoot Tsuit Rioters of Tzeentch?

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/12/28 05:38:18


   
Made in us
Charging Dragon Prince





West Lafayette, IN

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
 thegreatchimp wrote:
Flappity Flappers of Tzeentch!


What next? Tsooty Tzoot Tsuit Rioters of Tzeentch?


Dude, don't give them ideas...

www.classichammer.com

For 4-6th WFB, 2-5th 40k, and similar timeframe gaming

Looking for dice from the new AOS boxed set and Dark Imperium on the cheap. Let me know if you can help.
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Its AoS, it doesn't have to make sense.
 
   
 
Forum Index » Dakka Discussions
Go to: