Am I the only one who hates the whatever-folk naming scheme?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 72 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Catfolk. Ratfolk. Lizardfolk. Dark folk.

Am I the only one who finds the practice of appending the suffix -folk to the end of words to be lazy and uninspired? I mean, if we're doing that, then why not call dwarves "beardfolk?" Or half-orcs "tuskfolk?" Races with names like that just feel bland to me.

And it doesn't have to be this way. Grippli sounds much better to my ears than "frogfolk" ever did. Instead of "snakefolk," we have Nagaji. Vanara instead of "monkeyfolk." And I know "kitsune" literally means fox in Japan, but I like it a lot better than just calling them "foxfolk!"

Anyway, I'm kind of curious if I'm the only one who shares this particular pet peeve.


I wouldn't say I hate it, but it does annoy me. I think it grates on me because it sounds rustic, though, not because of its widespread use.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

It not the name that annoys me.


Oh my, it annoys me.

Why would any intelligent race call themselves some-animal-folk?

It would be like us humans calling ourselves ape-folk.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Generally agreed but these names have been around for so long that they're iconic at this point. People have certain expectations in their fantasy and there are connotations to specific words. Using new words can be liberating, but people will (consciously or unconsciously) still compare them to the stories they're familiar with. On a side note, the only races I have a hard time keeping straight are Strix and Syrinx. One or the other of those names could have been a bit different. >_>

Sovereign Court

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

Apparently, Inner Sea Races will give us the name the "catfolk" use for themselves. I think the -folk thing is a result of humanocentric naming. :)

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
The Terrible Zodin wrote:

Oh my, it annoys me.

Why would any intelligent race call themselves some-animal-folk?

It would be like us humans calling ourselves ape-folk.

The names in the Bestiary aren't generally what the races call themselves, but what Humans call them.

In that vein, they make perfect sense.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
The Terrible Zodin wrote:

Oh my, it annoys me.

Why would any intelligent race call themselves some-animal-folk?

It would be like us humans calling ourselves ape-folk.

The names in the Bestiary aren't generally what the races call themselves, but what Humans call them.

In that vein, they make perfect sense.

This.

In the draconic that they normally speak, Lizardfolk have some name for themselves. Let's say it is Sloomseth.
Some humans saw them and said "Hey those dudes look like great big, walking, and talking lizard! They must be lizardfolk."

At the same time; those Sloomseth are saying to themselves (in draconic), "Hey those dudes look like upright, hairless, and talking monkeys! They must be Monkeyfolk."

The translation books would show:
Sloomseth = Lizardfolk
Monkeyfolk = Human

And both groups will be offended when they learn the actual meaning of what the other calls them.


They used to be Lizardmen now they are lizardfolk. But it is still from a human point of view. Just like dwarfs and halflings, half orcs and half elfs is.
If they were called Kwazilitzz, Olbytla, Thodologs and Illini that would also have been strange.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cap. Darling wrote:
They used to be Lizardmen now they are lizardfolk.

It's 20th-century gender-neutralization. Lizardmen became Lizardfolk, Mermaids became Merfolk, Catgirls became Catfolk.

Happens in real life, too. "Ladies and Gentlemen" can be replaced by the more politically-correct term Gentlefolk. The 18th century's Kinsmen became the 19th's Kinfolk. Policemen became Police Officers, Garbage Men became Sanitation Workers...

Actually, why not call them "Lizard Officers" and "Merpeople"? Seems like a more novel way to be PC about it all.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This only allows me to call them what I will.

Catfolk = Rakasta
Ratfolk = Ferren or Skaven
Serpent folk = Yuan-Ti

Dark Archive

Only as much as a race calling themselves 'dwarves' or 'halflings' occasionally gives me a twitch.

But yeah, there have been plenty of neat names for the various 'folk' races, such as Valossans or Yuan-Ti or Asaatthi for serpentfolk, or Slitheren or Skaven for ratfolk, etc.

The only one I am totally comfortable is Dark Folk, because no one has ever managed to get one to give up any of their secrets, including what they call themselves (and it's entirely possible that the 'lesser' dark folk don't even know this secret racial name...).


Yeah, it drives me nuts and makes as much sense as any race calling itself "Halflings". A race should have a name,not a lazy naming scheme.


Well, "Halflings" comes from RPG publishers a few decades back avoiding lawsuits from the Tolkein estate over "Hobbit." "Dwarves" was never changed because that one wasn't previously copyrighted.

That said, who describes themselves as "human"? I usually have non-human characters describe themselves and their compatriots using terms like "people."


In a world with many races, most humans would call themselves human, like they do in sci-fi. The other option is to call themselves by culture or nationality.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Dark Folk strike me as a race that would use and encourage that name because it has an air of mystery and fear to it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Bah. I would call myself a 'Darkling'


One could always come up with their own names for them...


"Lizardfolk" and "Halfling" are simply the Common translation of the race name. Like in the Forgotten Realms, they are the Hin (Common translation is Halfling).

Dwarf is the human name for them. Tolkien's dwarves call themselves Khazad.

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The advantage to the animalfolk naming scheme is that someone new to the game or setting knows immediately what anthropomorphized animal is being referenced, without the need for art or explanation.

Give animalfolk made up names (for example, calling tiger-people kzin) and the they writer has to provide a picture or a clear description of the creature.

-Skeld


Ventnor wrote:

Catfolk. Ratfolk. Lizardfolk. Dark folk.

Am I the only one who finds the practice of appending the suffix -folk to the end of words to be lazy and uninspired? I mean, if we're doing that, then why not call dwarves "beardfolk?" Or half-orcs "tuskfolk?" Races with names like that just feel bland to me.

And it doesn't have to be this way. Grippli sounds much better to my ears than "frogfolk" ever did. Instead of "snakefolk," we have Nagaji. Vanara instead of "monkeyfolk." And I know "kitsune" literally means fox in Japan, but I like it a lot better than just calling them "foxfolk!"

Anyway, I'm kind of curious if I'm the only one who shares this particular pet peeve.

Omg I've just been given character names from the heavens. Going to more than likely refer to most others character using this naming scheme from now on, thanks I owe you one.

Gruphy McBeardsfolk


I miss having a halfling name for halflings, I liked listing my character's race as Hin, but I'm pretty sure that isn't IP that is open for use.

The lazy naming all around is a bit bothersome, but I think I may be more bothered by catfolk existing at all (especially as a player race) than by their name in particular.


8 people marked this as a favorite.
Mighty Squash wrote:
... I think I may be more bothered by catfolk existing at all (especially as a player race) than by their name in particular.

+ 637

off topic:
I was once in a large gaming group and 3 of the players always wanted to play some sort of cat race. They beg and plead with every GM (we rotated) to allow them some uber-awesome cat race.
When they came out with catfolk as a playable race we all rolled our eyes. Those 3 would be in ecstasy now. But they actually weren't. It wasn't good enough. Catfolk should have +6 dex, +4 to charisma, soft fall, darvision as well as low light vision, bonus to climb and jump, grab ability, etc...
They still played them every time, but constantly made a point of how they should be better. Always tried to be in charge, but not actually do anything. Run away from serious threats. Stuff like that. "But I'm just playing my character's race, what's wrong with that?!?"
Just to offset the situation, I made Snicker, a LN ratfolk ranger with favored enemy of catfolk. I optimized it to the hilt so they couldn't easily fight him. He didn't just attack them, but he wouldn't let them get away with all the crap they had been doing. Completely in character he made them pull their own share of the load and take risks with the rest. "I agree it probably is in your nature to be lazy and cowardly as a slinking cat. But since you profess to be civilized thinking beings, you are able to overcome your nature and behave as you should. If you chose not to, you certainly won't get the same share of pay as the rest of us. Or feel free to leave since you obviously are not a civilized thinking being."
More than just a bit passive-aggressive, but most of us thought it was hilarious. I think they finally realized they had been pushing it too much and backed off. Later any time the cat-ness started getting too extreme, someone would say something about the Grandson of Snicker being recruited into the group. Then the cat-fans would back off a bit.


Bare in mind some of the folk naming trope is due to product ID laws. You can't copy write anthro animal races in general, but you can product ID things like Yuan-Ti, so to get around such things, snakefolk, catfolk, etc crop up.


I agree completely.

I've ever only chalked it up to common slang in game, and when the need arises, I invent the 'proper name', for the races.

In my campaign, halflings, find that name pejorative.


Ventnor wrote:
Instead of "snakefolk," we have Nagaji. Vanara instead of "monkeyfolk." And I know "kitsune" literally means fox in Japan, but I like it a lot better than just calling them "foxfolk!"

"Naga" and "vanara" are snake and monkey, respectively, in Hindi. People tend to find their own language prosaic.

Grand Lodge

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I just remembered my promised response to the "Am I the Only?" threads.

Yes, you are.


Mighty Squash wrote:
I miss having a halfling name for halflings, I liked listing my character's race as Hin, but I'm pretty sure that isn't IP that is open for use.

Memory may be betraying me but I think the Halfling names for themselves from Tolkein was Kuduk whilst the other races called them halflings or hobbits.

As a second example while humans called them dwarves, the dwarven name for their own race was Khazâd and the elves called them Naugrim.

Most names of creatures and races seem presented as what humans commonly call them, I assume because humans are the most prolific species in most RPG's but also to provide relatability to human rpg players from their historic, literary and mythological sources.

I have 0 problem with the -folk appelation given that basis. As mentioned earlier it also gives you freedom to have their actual racial names be what you want for your game.

I guess if Paizo ever does supplements that details these minor races more we will learn their 'actual' names in the Golarian setting but in the meantime you have the freedom to call them what you wish.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Here's my dirty secret, for giving the "folks" and new homebrew races, better names... I use the name for prescription drugs, and tweak it.

The "Catfolk" get the Viagra treatment, and become, "The Vi'jora".

"Lizardfolk" get a twist on "Ritalin", and are properly known as "The Ritaneez".

Yes, I know, I'm a total weirdo for coming up with this system, but hey, give it a go! :) The drug companies, pay PR companies millions to come up with appealing names. Why not make it a starting point?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Joe Hex wrote:
Yes, I know, I'm a total weirdo for coming up with this system, but hey, give it a go! :) The drug companies, pay PR companies millions to come up with appealing names. Why not make it a starting point?

Wierd? Possibly. Creative and cool? Definately.

I had a GM in high school who would give NPC's names by flipping through a phone book and randomly pointing to a name. Then spell the last name backwords and adapt it as the persons name.

Lots of weird names on NPC's in that game.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

The creature type names are also obviously biased.

In Elvish, we'd be called Elfoids with the Chimpfolk subtype.


137ben wrote:

The creature type names are also obviously biased.

In Elvish, we'd be called Elfoids with the Chimpfolk subtype.

This made me chuckle.


137ben wrote:

The creature type names are also obviously biased.

In Elvish, we'd be called Elfoids with the Chimpfolk subtype.

You sure that is not the '10 second lifespan' subtype of Elfenoid? :)


Gilfalas wrote:
137ben wrote:

The creature type names are also obviously biased.

In Elvish, we'd be called Elfoids with the Chimpfolk subtype.

You sure that is not the '10 second lifespan' subtype of Elfenoid? :)

Nah, 10 second lifespan is a separate Elfoid subtype encompassing Chimpfolk, Boarfolk, and the Boarfolk/Chimpfolk hybrids.


Mighty Squash wrote:
The lazy naming all around is a bit bothersome, but I think I may be more bothered by catfolk existing at all (especially as a player race) than by their name in particular.

I could say the same thing about humans too, lazy name, and more infectious in a world then the bubonic plague.

That said Catfolk have just as much a right to exist in a world as elves and dwarves. And especially humans.

ElterAgo wrote:
Mighty Squash wrote:
... I think I may be more bothered by catfolk existing at all (especially as a player race) than by their name in particular.

+ 637

** spoiler omitted **...

Never happened in my gaming group, though I'll admit when Bestiary 3 dropped I bought the book day 1 BECAUSE of Catfolk, and was VERY happy with their stats. Besides I've seen more people female dogging about elves' stats then any other race. I do hope they stay with the more anthro look the ARG presented though.

GM_Beernorg wrote:
Bare in mind some of the folk naming trope is due to product ID laws. You can't copy write anthro animal races in general, but you can product ID things like Yuan-Ti, so to get around such things, snakefolk, catfolk, etc crop up.

That's pretty much the meat and potatoes of the reason they are named that way. D&D owns the Yuan-Ti name, And a lot of the good cat race names are already in use (Kilrathi, Kizen, Caitian, etc.).


Gilfalas wrote:
Joe Hex wrote:
Yes, I know, I'm a total weirdo for coming up with this system, but hey, give it a go! :) The drug companies, pay PR companies millions to come up with appealing names. Why not make it a starting point?

Wierd? Possibly. Creative and cool? Definately.

I had a GM in high school who would give NPC's names by flipping through a phone book and randomly pointing to a name. Then spell the last name backwords and adapt it as the persons name.

Lots of weird names on NPC's in that game.

Thanks Gilfalas!

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
KingmanHighborn wrote:
Mighty Squash wrote:
The lazy naming all around is a bit bothersome, but I think I may be more bothered by catfolk existing at all (especially as a player race) than by their name in particular.

I could say the same thing about humans too, lazy name, and more infectious in a world then the bubonic plague.

That said Catfolk have just as much a right to exist in a world as elves and dwarves. And especially humans.

ElterAgo wrote:
Mighty Squash wrote:
... I think I may be more bothered by catfolk existing at all (especially as a player race) than by their name in particular.

+ 637

** spoiler omitted **...

Never happened in my gaming group, though I'll admit when Bestiary 3 dropped I bought the book day 1 BECAUSE of Catfolk, and was VERY happy with their stats. Besides I've seen more people female dogging about elves' stats then any other race. I do hope they stay with the more anthro look the ARG presented though.

Big fan of catfolk as well, and glad to see them as an option. I personally prefer the Bestiary 4 look to the Khajiit of the ARG, though. :)


Thing is, I'm sure Paizo could call them something else than suffix -folk. However, I'm sure nobody would give a s&!&. It's just like when some elf lover makes an elven character with the name Illáfêdaredínë Fèmïshântynë of house Hindërylingâer. It means nothing and everybody gets pissed and calles him elf, s!$! head or Bob.
Just that way, ever if they called Catfolk "Paka Watu", everybody would just say "cat people".
Elf, Dwarf, Gnome, Orc and Tengu are established terms, a standard that many other games, books, movies and etc. already use, people know what that is. Paka Watu isn't, so nobody gives a s%*% (and by the way, wtf is a Vishkanya or a Wayang? They're not a selling race, let me tell you that.)
I'm not pulling this out from somewhere where the sun doesn't shine. This is how things work in any kind of business, because it adapts to people around it. There isn't enough time and money to adapt the people to every business.

Someone: "So JJ, what's in store for your next book?"
JJ: "We're implementing the new Paka Watu race to the game to let players play as one of them!"
Someone: "So, wtf is a Paka Watu?"
JJ: "Oh, well Paka Watu is this name that I came up with, the people them selves are like a mix of human and cat."
Someone: "Ah, I see, they're cat people, like a catfolk race, right?"
Paka Watu fanboy/girl: "NO, THEY'RE PAKA WATU, NOTHING LIKE CAT PEOPLE OR CATFOLK, THOSE ARE STUPID NAMES!"
Someoen else: "Paka Watu? WHAT A STUPID NAME FOR A RACE, I'M NEVER PLAYING THIS!"
Everyone else: "Why didn't they just call them cat people, or better yet, catfolk. That's what they are and we can understand that."

The Paka Watu fanboys/girls will have to realise that JJ and the rest of Paizo can't survive from selling books to just the Paka Watu community. And it's not selling out, it's business. Because the name Paka Watu alienates more people than it makes happy.

Other already somewhat established names, like Khajiit, could be used. However, using some of them could also bring out lawsuits due to copyright infringement (just like how Mojang was sued for calling one of their games Scrolls, this was apparently too close to the name Elder Scrolls).

I'm not saying that these are the resons as to why there are so many races called suffix -folk, as we can see there are also a lot that isn't, Nagaji and Grippli for example. But all of this can be a contribution to why.

EDIT: Please note that I'm not a fan of suffix -folk names either, I'm even a bit on edge about the entire animal/human mix thing. It all seems to self/human centered. But it's also something that we can relate to, which is nessecary since Pathfinder (and almost everything else) is made for humans. It would be stupid to put money on developing universal things to not alienate none-humans, in case aliens arrive or if lions all of a sudden would turn sentient.

Dark Archive

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Random memory from a college era AD&D game.

GM's character is an elf named 'Elrod' (Elrond, minus one letter).
Player 1 "Elrod? Does that mean something?"
Player 2 "He's an archer. El Rod. It's elvish for 'the shaft.'"


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rub-Eta wrote:
wtf is a Vishkanya or a Wayang? They're not a selling race, let me tell you that.

I personally like fact they added in indian and indonesia races rather than just boring old half-animals and tolkien rip-offs.


Considering I find it very hard to come up with good-sounding words for anything I don't blame them for using "-folk".

But it still sounds bad. They should try using "-kin" occasionally. "Catkin", "ratkin"; sounds better.

The Terrible Zodin wrote:
It would be like us humans calling ourselves ape-folk.

That would be an insult to apes everywhere.

You're hominids: totally different thing.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gilfalas wrote:
Memory may be betraying me but I think the Halfling names for themselves from Tolkein was Kuduk whilst the other races called them halflings or hobbits.

Close. They called themselves Kuduk. Other races called them halfling (in elvish) or Kud-Dukan or if they had business dealings with them, Kuduk. Hobbit is a product of the translation convention Tolkien used, being "modernized" from holbytla (old english translating Kud Dukan, which I think might be proto-Adunaic). They would have called themselves hobbits if proto-Adunaic were old English. Or maybe I'm mixing my mannish and the proto-Rohirrim shared linguistic roots with the people of Haleth rather than that of Beor and Hador that became Adunaic.

TL;DR If you think anything in Tolkuen's languages is relatively simple and comprehensible you're probably wrong. And I am way too much of a geek.

KingmanHighborn wrote:
Mighty Squash wrote:
The lazy naming all around is a bit bothersome, but I think I may be more bothered by catfolk existing at all (especially as a player race) than by their name in particular.

I could say the same thing about humans too, lazy name, and more infectious in a world then the bubonic plague.

That said Catfolk have just as much a right to exist in a world as elves and dwarves. And especially humans.

No, they really don't. They're a lazy anthropomorphism. Elves, Dwarves, Gnomes, and the various oriental and Indian races have a mythological basis. If anthropomorphic cats and rats had a mythological basis Paizo would have used the mythological terms like they did for the Indian races that many people don't recognize.

Halflings and Orcs at least predate D&D and halflings can be justified by runaway sexual selection.

It's okay to have modern anthropomorphic races, but they're hardly in the "you can't have a wide market fantasy game without them" territory that humans and elves fall in, nor do they come with the respectability of Asian mythologies.


I Think the Notion that turtle folks would have one word for them self a bit boring. Unless ofcause humans are the only race that have more than one culture. Pehaps Humans are just as problematic since they really are called; Inuit, Mennesker, Njeri and hundreds of other thing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
Atarlost wrote:
Gilfalas wrote:
Memory may be betraying me but I think the Halfling names for themselves from Tolkein was Kuduk whilst the other races called them halflings or hobbits.

Close. They called themselves Kuduk. Other races called them halfling (in elvish) or Kud-Dukan or if they had business dealings with them, Kuduk. Hobbit is a product of the translation convention Tolkien used, being "modernized" from holbytla (old english translating Kud Dukan, which I think might be proto-Adunaic). They would have called themselves hobbits if proto-Adunaic were old English. Or maybe I'm mixing my mannish and the proto-Rohirrim shared linguistic roots with the people of Haleth rather than that of Beor and Hador that became Adunaic.

TL;DR If you think anything in Tolkuen's languages is relatively simple and comprehensible you're probably wrong. And I am way too much of a geek.

KingmanHighborn wrote:
Mighty Squash wrote:
The lazy naming all around is a bit bothersome, but I think I may be more bothered by catfolk existing at all (especially as a player race) than by their name in particular.

I could say the same thing about humans too, lazy name, and more infectious in a world then the bubonic plague.

That said Catfolk have just as much a right to exist in a world as elves and dwarves. And especially humans.

No, they really don't. They're a lazy anthropomorphism. Elves, Dwarves, Gnomes, and the various oriental and Indian races have a mythological basis. If anthropomorphic cats and rats had a mythological basis Paizo would have used the mythological terms like they did for the Indian races that many people don't recognize.

Halflings and Orcs at least predate D&D and halflings can be justified by runaway sexual selection.

It's okay to have modern anthropomorphic races, but they're hardly in the "you can't have a wide market fantasy game without them" territory that humans and elves fall in, nor do they come with the respectability of Asian mythologies.

There are creatures from myth and medieval bestiaries that approximate catfolk. You have the Nekomata and several different but similar cat Yokai from Japan, The Kirata (I think) from India, which are tigerfolk, Korrigans (I think), which in Breton myth are sometimes given cat-like properties, the Ewah which is a mountain-lion woman, and the Donestre from Medieval bestiaries, which are lion-like humanoids. Probably some others I am either blanking on at the moment. So they probably have just as much mythological street cred as the Vishkanya, for instance, even if they don't use a specific name from the above mythologies


1 person marked this as a favorite.
SilvercatMoonpaw wrote:


You're hominids: totally different thing.

How about Homarids?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
Symar wrote:


How about Homarids?

The funny thing is, Homarids come from Homarus, which is a genus of Lobster. The take a scientific name and tweak it really is no worse than Xfolk/Xkin.


SilvercatMoonpaw wrote:
But it still sounds bad. They should try using "-kin" occasionally. "Catkin", "ratkin"; sounds better.

Catkin are already a thing.


Rub-Eta wrote:

Thing is, I'm sure Paizo could call them something else than suffix -folk. However, I'm sure nobody would give a s&&*. It's just like when some elf lover makes an elven character with the name Illáfêdaredínë Fèmïshântynë of house Hindërylingâer. It means nothing and everybody gets pissed and calles him elf, s&%+ head or Bob.

Just that way, ever if they called Catfolk "Paka Watu", everybody would just say "cat people".
Elf, Dwarf, Gnome, Orc and Tengu are established terms, a standard that many other games, books, movies and etc. already use, people know what that is. Paka Watu isn't, so nobody gives a s@$% (and by the way, wtf is a Vishkanya or a Wayang? They're not a selling race, let me tell you that.)
I'm not pulling this out from somewhere where the sun doesn't shine. This is how things work in any kind of business, because it adapts to people around it. There isn't enough time and money to adapt the people to every business.

Someone: "So JJ, what's in store for your next book?"
JJ: "We're implementing the new Paka Watu race to the game to let players play as one of them!"
Someone: "So, wtf is a Paka Watu?"
JJ: "Oh, well Paka Watu is this name that I came up with, the people them selves are like a mix of human and cat."
Someone: "Ah, I see, they're cat people, like a catfolk race, right?"
Paka Watu fanboy/girl: "NO, THEY'RE PAKA WATU, NOTHING LIKE CAT PEOPLE OR CATFOLK, THOSE ARE STUPID NAMES!"
Someoen else: "Paka Watu? WHAT A STUPID NAME FOR A RACE, I'M NEVER PLAYING THIS!"
Everyone else: "Why didn't they just call them cat people, or better yet, catfolk. That's what they are and we can understand that."

The Paka Watu fanboys/girls will have to realise that JJ and the rest of Paizo can't survive from selling books to just the Paka Watu community. And it's not selling out, it's business. Because the name Paka Watu alienates more people than it makes happy.

Other already somewhat established names, like Khajiit, could be used. However, using some of them could also...

You've go a solid point about, about a 'fancy' name being confusing, as to understanding what the race is about. I think, a way to handle it, would be to list them by the common name of the race in a Bestiary, like "Catfolk", and somewhere in the fluff text, add the more formal name. Which they probably use themselves.


Hill Giant wrote:
SilvercatMoonpaw wrote:
But it still sounds bad. They should try using "-kin" occasionally. "Catkin", "ratkin"; sounds better.
Catkin are already a thing.

Somehow that doesn't strike me as any worse than saying they shouldn't use "catfolk".

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

Joe Hex: As it turns out, that's precisely what they're doing with catfolk. :)

1 to 50 of 72 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Am I the only one who hates the whatever-folk naming scheme? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.