What's in a name ?

[lathany]

I have often liked naming my roleplaying games. Past ones include The Copas Team, KARE 0000, Postcards and The Age of Clans (usually called just Clans). My current games are Swordsmaster : Athory and Fallen Star. However some of my more successful ones didn't have names - such as "Dawn's Vampire Game".

The society game has suffered rather under the name business. It was OK back in the days of Conclave and Thieves Guild (I and II) but after Inferno everything had to begin with I (the letter I and the number 4 were brought to you by Oxford RPGSoc, etc.). Until Vendetta of course.

How do other people feel ? Does a name help to define a game ?

(Discuss !)

Comments

Definitely !

[bateleur.livejournal.com]

In fact, my games even have episode titles (at least, since Fate of Mortals).

Anyway, the reason your Vampire game didn't get a name is that back then Vampire was some obscure game like 'Witchcraft' that only people like Ralph had heard of !

Re: Definitely !

[(Anonymous)]

Full agreement from this corner.

And, I'm afraid to say, I feel that the lack of imagination that often goes into the naming of roleplaying campaigns normally goes hand in hand with a lack of imagination in their other aspects. Fair enough with the society game being generically titled - after all, they have to be the roleplaying equivalent of a supermarket, and contain something for everything, but a private game has no excuse.

I thought "Fate of Mortals" was a fantastic name for a game. Especially given the ultimate punchline. Kudos, Dom - that game was the closest I think I ever got to playing in something with the roleplaying equivalent of literary merit...

This is where I put my foot in it

[lathany.livejournal.com]

Reuben ?

Or have I guessed wrong ?

Dawn.

Re: Definitely !

[bateleur.livejournal.com]

Why thankyou mystery caller - I shall be smug for the rest of the day now ! <wink>

Hmm... I think we may be a little unfair to the society game here...

[ieyasu.livejournal.com]

a) while it does serve a broad market, it does not have to cater to everybody. Indeed, while we've been wanting to avoid doing anything to annoy, Shalazar has been consciously stating, 'hey, this may not be for you.' Broad-based does not have to mean 'pointless.'

b) Also, I think the reason a lot of the society games started with 'i' (or at least, this was my opinion) was that the mailing list was for a very long time rpgsoci, and no one running the games was going to change it. Naming the games with 'i' was easy, and, frankly, a bit of a marketing win.

Now, through happy coincidence (and I assure you it wasn't planned), Shalazar continues the trend of matching names and mailing lists, since Vendetta pushed the list back to rpgsocs (for Society Game--'v' was already taken by vampire).

And as for the usefulness of names...

[ieyasu.livejournal.com]

I usually try to make my names meaningful, as they do a lot to set the mood of the game. (Shalazar's two parts so far are called Age of Wonders and Gathering of Storms respectively.) But sometimes a name has no real meaning, but is given meaning by what is put into it. (Examples of this would be 'Mulholland Drive' or any novel which is just named after the hero.)

In other words, it can define a game, but doesn't have to do so.