Really, Omicron? What's the point of this? Seriously, you should know better than this; no one has criticized the spell itself, and instead criticized the name. You'd have a leg to stand on with the criticism of SV if ES had removed a flowery name to make a super simple one, but he didn't. It's an unrelated complaint.
But... what? What is this chain of logic? My post is the argument of why I like the name; the name doesn't exist as an abstract thing in a vacuum, it exists as the name of something, and so I... explain why I like the name as it connects to the spell? And that obviously makes me talk about the spell? What? Are you just trying to see bad faith where there is none and conjure mean-spirited arguments where they don't exist because you're so used to disagreeing with me? That's not very good debating!
No, I don't have some sort of desire to disagree with you, whatever you might think. I'm seeing "bad faith," as you put it, because your "how come now you don't like it" line was directed at a position no one appears to be holding, and comes off as trying to catch SV in some sort of hypocrisy (that doesn't exist).
How come people are complaining about Death Ray's name when Total Annihilation (specifically, EarthScorpion's rewrite) was fine?
Total Annihilation wasn't in the core book and I saw it as an option, rather than a core example of how to design Sorcery.
Total Annihilation is pretty much a bland name, and it could use a better one (though it's better than Death Ray). The name, however, wasn't changed in the rewrite, so why would it be relevant to how much the rewrite was liked?
See, Dragon Slave is cool.
For my part? Because the Dev's are on record for wanting less of a sci-fi, transhumanist feel to Exalted - hence why 'magitech' isn't really a term in 3e, even if magical devices might be.
I get this sense as well.
only if it's a spirit killing effect as well.
Avoiding things that sound like something you'd get out of a D&D campaign is a useless and counter-productive design standard. It's so vague, all-encompassing, and arrogant. Especially with things like names. Want to hear some canonical weapons from 3.5e D&D?
sure if you want to make the argument that exalted is a purely simulationist setting with no narrativist elements.
By this logic, "Magma Kraken" should be "Lava Tentacles," Travel Without Distance should be "Teleport," Cirrus Skiff should be "Cloud Taxi," and so on. I mean you could use that logic, I suppose, but you'd end up with a much less evocative naming schema for the whole thing.
Or even "Glass Grapeshot".
