Is calling a spell by its name IG... metagaming?
Moderators: Forum Moderators, Active DMs
Is calling a spell by its name IG... metagaming?
The thought just occurred to me: "Does calling a spell by its name in-character sound weird?"
I mean, lets take for example: "Greater Magic Weapon"
For one, it sounds more like a noun than anything. Almost as if you're referring to a weapon that is more magical than other magical weapons. Not a spell that puts a buff onto a sword that makes it magically powerful.
Am I the only one who finds this odd?
On an aside, I don't mean that everyone should change how they RP. I just think its odd.
I mean, lets take for example: "Greater Magic Weapon"
For one, it sounds more like a noun than anything. Almost as if you're referring to a weapon that is more magical than other magical weapons. Not a spell that puts a buff onto a sword that makes it magically powerful.
Am I the only one who finds this odd?
On an aside, I don't mean that everyone should change how they RP. I just think its odd.
"Look! It's an intelligent talking bear, it must be normal. Let's make it pay taxes."
https://xkcd.com/1223/
https://xkcd.com/1223/
-
- Contributor
- Posts: 3471
- Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 2:31 am
- Location: Dancing on the line between sarcasm and irony
Re: Is calling a spell by its name IG... metagaming?
???
Wait, let me ring my scryphone and ask Mordenkainen why did he call "sword" his antimagic golem.
*Riiiiiiings*
*Cli-clank*
*Wizard talk*
*Clank*
He called me a *****, and he told me to call it whatever I want if I don't like it.
Wait, let me ring my scryphone and ask Mordenkainen why did he call "sword" his antimagic golem.
*Riiiiiiings*
*Cli-clank*
*Wizard talk*
*Clank*
He called me a *****, and he told me to call it whatever I want if I don't like it.
Don't click weird links, kiddos.
-
- Posts: 800
- Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 5:25 pm
-
- Posts: 663
- Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2014 4:09 am
Re: Is calling a spell by its name IG... metagaming?
I think it is perfectly IC to call a spell by it's d and d name, if your char is intelligent enough to know a lot about magic. For instance a mage who has studied magic all his life would know the "correct" name for spells, ingredients, components and all things magical. But an ignorant barbarian from a tribe would not know that, since he's not educated in the magical arts.
But basically, yeah. Call the spells what you want.
But basically, yeah. Call the spells what you want.
Re: Is calling a spell by its name IG... metagaming?
Wait what?Iceborn wrote:???
Wait, let me ring my scryphone and ask Mordenkainen why did he call "sword" his antimagic golem.
*Riiiiiiings*
*Cli-clank*
*Wizard talk*
*Clank*
He called me a *****, and he told me to call it whatever I want if I don't like it.
Why shouldn't you call it by the name, after all if your spellcraft is high enough it even comes up and says what being cast. So if that's the official name, no reason you wouldn't know it.
Last edited by Sab1 on Sat Apr 01, 2017 1:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Dungeon Master
- Posts: 7110
- Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2015 5:47 pm
Re: Is calling a spell by its name IG... metagaming?
So long as you ID them with your spellcraft skill, or another character tells you what they are- then no it's not metagaming.
That said making up different names for them might be cool? Maybe your mage is from somewhere exotic where they call Magic Missile 'Six Falling Star Attack!' or something. But that's just flavour.
That said making up different names for them might be cool? Maybe your mage is from somewhere exotic where they call Magic Missile 'Six Falling Star Attack!' or something. But that's just flavour.
This too shall pass.
(I now have a DM Discord (I hope) It's DM GrumpyCat#7185 but please keep in mind I'm very busy IRL so I can't promise how quick I'll get back to you.)
(I now have a DM Discord (I hope) It's DM GrumpyCat#7185 but please keep in mind I'm very busy IRL so I can't promise how quick I'll get back to you.)
Re: Is calling a spell by its name IG... metagaming?
Tenser, Mordekainen, Melf and the boys should all call out on copyright infringement, if someone spells their spells incorrectly!
-
- Contributor
- Posts: 3471
- Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 2:31 am
- Location: Dancing on the line between sarcasm and irony
Re: Is calling a spell by its name IG... metagaming?
Hey, I know that my mage was delighted~ each time somebody used his terminology for magic.
Probs Morde and Tenser would too, but they ain't around to care about them! Nyek, nyek!
Probs Morde and Tenser would too, but they ain't around to care about them! Nyek, nyek!
Don't click weird links, kiddos.
-
- Posts: 72
- Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 1:49 pm
- Location: cj's house (underneath)
Re: Is calling a spell by its name IG... metagaming?
It's more fun to keep it vague in my own opinion, but yeah. There's nothing stopping you from calling spells by their mechanical names.
Re: Is calling a spell by its name IG... metagaming?
I've always operated under the idea that the 'english' names are just the nicknames and commonification or rough translations from draconic to common of certain spells.
For instance: in common its 'Magic Missile', in draconic it might be 'Missile of magic.' And IC whenever you're casting spells you're speaking in draconic as the language of magic in general (hence why wizards get it for free)
The idea being that there are quirks due to translations. The common name could simply explain what the spell does or be a quick reminder for it. Another good one would be "Lesser spell breach' and 'greater spell breach'.
Original spell would be LSB, and I figure the 'greater' is taking the earlier spell and just shoving more power into it to make sure it functions better. So instead of simply saying 'Lesser spell breach' in draconic, it would be 'Breach' and GSB would be 'Breach: Greater.' as it's a modification on the original spell. Then Common comes along and goes "oh, this one is called greater spell breach. . .Lets call the base version 'lesser'. Because that makes sense."
For spells with lesser, base, and greater, it might be more nuanced in that the base was probably first created, then experimentation was done with a less powerful version, and a greater version. So that naming convention would probably stick with it.
Of course this is all just my personal RP and none of it need be yours! Just offering some ideas.
For instance: in common its 'Magic Missile', in draconic it might be 'Missile of magic.' And IC whenever you're casting spells you're speaking in draconic as the language of magic in general (hence why wizards get it for free)
The idea being that there are quirks due to translations. The common name could simply explain what the spell does or be a quick reminder for it. Another good one would be "Lesser spell breach' and 'greater spell breach'.
Original spell would be LSB, and I figure the 'greater' is taking the earlier spell and just shoving more power into it to make sure it functions better. So instead of simply saying 'Lesser spell breach' in draconic, it would be 'Breach' and GSB would be 'Breach: Greater.' as it's a modification on the original spell. Then Common comes along and goes "oh, this one is called greater spell breach. . .Lets call the base version 'lesser'. Because that makes sense."
For spells with lesser, base, and greater, it might be more nuanced in that the base was probably first created, then experimentation was done with a less powerful version, and a greater version. So that naming convention would probably stick with it.
Of course this is all just my personal RP and none of it need be yours! Just offering some ideas.
-
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 3:48 am
Re: Is calling a spell by its name IG... metagaming?
As another suggestion somewhat tagged into the above (since my character is JediZero's student it makes sense that they have a similar approach)....my character also uses the IG spell name as the common "lay term" for the spell. The challenge being that my character is a sorcerer and doesn't speak Draconic, so the other part of JZ's suggestion doesn't work for me.
However, being an innate caster my character tends to teach magic to her students in terms of intentions, ideas, colours and emotions. So something like flaming hands might be described as an "orange rage" and mage armor was described as "building a circular wall of white light around yourself'. It's a little esoteric, a little abstract and absolutely suited for my character.
I was both thrilled and a wee bit embarassed when my student sat down in the common room and proudly announced that she'd cast "PURPLE". You can use the spell names when you need to but there are ways to give it flavor.
However, being an innate caster my character tends to teach magic to her students in terms of intentions, ideas, colours and emotions. So something like flaming hands might be described as an "orange rage" and mage armor was described as "building a circular wall of white light around yourself'. It's a little esoteric, a little abstract and absolutely suited for my character.
I was both thrilled and a wee bit embarassed when my student sat down in the common room and proudly announced that she'd cast "PURPLE". You can use the spell names when you need to but there are ways to give it flavor.
-
- Posts: 330
- Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 9:53 pm
Re: Is calling a spell by its name IG... metagaming?
I think this is a brilliant idea. To me it makes sense that characters without formal training wouldn't know its 'proper' name, and instead base it off something else such as colors and/or feelings. Which would then make some awesome RP say between...a sorcerer and a wizard.LasharaDyran wrote:As another suggestion somewhat tagged into the above (since my character is JediZero's student it makes sense that they have a similar approach)....my character also uses the IG spell name as the common "lay term" for the spell. The challenge being that my character is a sorcerer and doesn't speak Draconic, so the other part of JZ's suggestion doesn't work for me.
However, being an innate caster my character tends to teach magic to her students in terms of intentions, ideas, colours and emotions. So something like flaming hands might be described as an "orange rage" and mage armor was described as "building a circular wall of white light around yourself'. It's a little esoteric, a little abstract and absolutely suited for my character.
I was both thrilled and a wee bit embarassed when my student sat down in the common room and proudly announced that she'd cast "PURPLE". You can use the spell names when you need to but there are ways to give it flavor.
"Typical larval god fetus..."-Patrick Rothfuss.
-
- Posts: 308
- Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2017 7:51 am
Re: Is calling a spell by its name IG... metagaming?
I think wizards are very similar to modern scientists and obviously there are magic colleges where many gather and study and share information and books. Considering there's a few hundred or so commonly used spells, I would think each would have a definitive name at least in educated circles. Not that you can't have leeway for your own RP if you want to change names, but don't come down on someone for calling Magic Missle by name.
Plus when you see a scroll in a shop, there's the name of the spell.
Plus when you see a scroll in a shop, there's the name of the spell.
Wouldn't it be awesome if epic wizards could somehow create one new custom spell named after themselves? It's have to be a very limited thing and difficult thing of course but still.Tepes wrote:Tenser, Mordekainen, Melf and the boys should all call out on copyright infringement, if someone spells their spells incorrectly!