Greg recently began using translated names for places instead of the modern names.
We want to know your opinion on this perhaps with the result of not continuing it.

It just makes more work for me as the GM, because I am used to the old nomenclature. I am sure for newbies it makes no difference.

It just makes more work for me as the GM, because I am used to the old nomenclature.]

Agreed.


[I am sure for newbies it makes no difference.

I'd argue that it does. Now, I am no newbie, but I use the heck out of Google Maps when calculating distances & naming manors.

1) Distance
- With modern names, I can just toss "From Sarum to Leicester" for instance, and get an estimate on the distance, dragging the route a bit to go via Cirencester. And even if I don't recognize the name, most of the time, Google Maps does: "Where is Buckingham?" "Moment, putting it on Google Maps... Ah, about 30 miles north-northeast of Oxford."
- Also, I can leverage my real world knowledge of UK geography thanks to an interest in Medieval History, with the modern names. I am sure I am not the only Pendragon GM/Player who has this passion and/or the geographical knowledge.
- With PNS, there is an extra hoop to jump through, to look for the modern equivalent. And woe if there is no modern equivalent provided! Then you'll just have to questimate from Google Maps, where it might be, assuming you have a game map provided. If not, you are out of luck and have no idea where it might be.

2) Other placenames
- Older books & adventures tend to use modern names, chief amongst these being KAP 5.1 and GPC, which form the basis of most peoples' campaigns.
- If I am using just modern names, I can go again to Google Maps, look at the map around, say Oxford again, and decide that X sounds like a good name for a manor. Done. If I am using PNS, I then have to start coming up with the meaning of the placename X, adding to the overhead that I need to do. I'd rather not.

And finally a pure personal preference:

3) Evocativeness of names
- I actually find the modern names to be more evocative: Warwick instantly casts my mind back to the Earl of Warwick, also known as the Kingmaker, of the Wars of the Roses. Dukes of Gloucester (future Richard III) and Clarence, the two brothers of Edward IV. Nottingham, who hasn't heard of Robin Hood and the forest of Sherwood, in their Lincoln (not Linden Pool) green?
- Warcastle? What is that? What war is it referring to? I have no idea and I doubt anyone else knows any better, either. Warcastle isn't even the worst, IMHO. Castle of the Ford of the Roe Deer (or other Roe Deer Castles) is a long mouthful to say and remember, when I could just say: Rayleigh. Ford of the Oxen or Oxenford (Oxford) wins the price for needless change.
- In short, with the name change, I lose all the rich mental associations with medieval history, and am left with bland, generic "castle such and such of this and that" that could be in any of the hundreds of fantasy worlds. (Besides, with the name change, one can no longer become 'Lord Grantham' in GPC, which is a darn shame. :P )

Wot Morien sed.

And we still have SalisBURY, which just throws an inconsistent sabot into the mental mill's gears and brings it grinding to a halt...

SalisBURY

There are others, too, such as SilCHESTER. I can understand that those two are kept to avoid confusing new players even more, but for consistency, Silchester should have been Calleva Atrebatum, to follow the idea that the civitates retain their Latin names. Which of course would not be a problem if instead of Londinium we'd have London and so forth... :P

One of the aspects of the Pendragon game that my players and I have always been passionate about is the fact that it is set in places that we know and areas of Britain that we can visualise. Ok, so it's a mythical Britain setting, but we know the towns and villages, manors and castles and general geography. And as a GM it's extremely useful to be able to plug the name of a manor or other place into Google and pull up maps, both present day and historical, and a wealth of other history and information about the location. It's that level of accessible, rich detail which helps distinguish Pendragon from RPGs set in entirely fantasy realms and a huge part of the appeal for my gaming group. Unfortunately, the new, translated names make the places unrecognisable to us and take the mythical Britain setting a step further towards a pure fantasy realm...not a good thing in my opinion. I prefer the balance of historical fact, myth and fantasy of the previous maps and place names (5.1 and GPC) and will be sticking with these for my next campaign.

Agreed.



I'd argue that it does. Now, I am no newbie, but I use the heck out of Google Maps when calculating distances & naming manors.

1) Distance
- With modern names, I can just toss "From Sarum to Leicester" for instance, and get an estimate on the distance, dragging the route a bit to go via Cirencester. And even if I don't recognize the name, most of the time, Google Maps does: "Where is Buckingham?" "Moment, putting it on Google Maps... Ah, about 30 miles north-northeast of Oxford."
- Also, I can leverage my real world knowledge of UK geography thanks to an interest in Medieval History, with the modern names. I am sure I am not the only Pendragon GM/Player who has this passion and/or the geographical knowledge.
- With PNS, there is an extra hoop to jump through, to look for the modern equivalent. And woe if there is no modern equivalent provided! Then you'll just have to questimate from Google Maps, where it might be, assuming you have a game map provided. If not, you are out of luck and have no idea where it might be.

2) Other placenames
- Older books & adventures tend to use modern names, chief amongst these being KAP 5.1 and GPC, which form the basis of most peoples' campaigns.
- If I am using just modern names, I can go again to Google Maps, look at the map around, say Oxford again, and decide that X sounds like a good name for a manor. Done. If I am using PNS, I then have to start coming up with the meaning of the placename X, adding to the overhead that I need to do. I'd rather not.

And finally a pure personal preference:

3) Evocativeness of names
- I actually find the modern names to be more evocative: Warwick instantly casts my mind back to the Earl of Warwick, also known as the Kingmaker, of the Wars of the Roses. Dukes of Gloucester (future Richard III) and Clarence, the two brothers of Edward IV. Nottingham, who hasn't heard of Robin Hood and the forest of Sherwood, in their Lincoln (not Linden Pool) green?
- Warcastle? What is that? What war is it referring to? I have no idea and I doubt anyone else knows any better, either. Warcastle isn't even the worst, IMHO. Castle of the Ford of the Roe Deer (or other Roe Deer Castles) is a long mouthful to say and remember, when I could just say: Rayleigh. Ford of the Oxen or Oxenford (Oxford) wins the price for needless change.
- In short, with the name change, I lose all the rich mental associations with medieval history, and am left with bland, generic "castle such and such of this and that" that could be in any of the hundreds of fantasy worlds. (Besides, with the name change, one can no longer become 'Lord Grantham' in GPC, which is a darn shame. :P )

Exactly! As someone who is into the Wars of the Roses and medieval English history, I find it easier to work with the modern names. And the people I know who are interested in playing know modern Britain. They don't know the Celtic names of the regions, settlements and what have you. I won't even go into pronouncing the words. They generally have enough trouble with Warwick, Worcester or Leicester.

I like the inclusion of 'translated names' in the KAP products. However, I also find the modern names a bit easier to use, and I like the history associated with the names. I once had a knight with a manor at Ebbesbourne Wake. Loved the name for some reason. Modern names also make mapping with google maps easier. I'd suggest some compromise that uses both. For example, in the text one could list both, eg, "Old Sarum (aka The Rock)" or "Marlborough (Sparrowhawk Castle)" but use modern names on a map.

Looks like I am in the minority here, but I appreciate the more "fantasy" names of recent Pendragon supplements. I did not find it hard to figure out what county Glevum was now or that London was the older Londinium. For the evocative and immersive reasons already given for using the more modern names, I find these Romanesque and illustrative names (Castle of the Rock) to be more... Arthurian.

I love maps as much as the rest of you and it bothers me that older Pendragon maps had names that shouldn't exist. I'd love a map of the "new' Britain in 485 with these more illustrious names.

Just my two cents, gents.

I am just getting back into doing work for a new campaign. So the new books and materials with translated names do make for some additional work when working with the older materials and maps. But I do like the more evocative names for the most part. Some better than others.

And my own research is mainly working with old names a lot as well, especially some of the names for hundreds.

My only problem with the new naming system is that that the GPC doesn't use it. However, the occasional extra effort required to locate GPC locations on the new maps is something I can live with, because I definitely find the new names more interesting and evocative.

OK, thank you everyone who voted
It's actually pretty close
I've done a lot of brain grinding on this too
Here is my current positon

I will be using the modern names for places,
AND
the translated names for places in adventures, only the text will use both
It's not like place don't have more than one name these days--ever been to the Windy City, Gotham, the Big Apple?

I think it's important to make it easy to find places, hence Pembroke
But when it is a place for adventure I much prefer Castle at the End of the Land
or for Lilbourne
Castle on the Stream of Lilies

So in locating a place use its modern name: Nantwich
In the actual text for the adventure it is the Valley of Salt

I know this seems like a car-truck, 2-in-1
but I think it answers both needs

and will be much easier, like if you want to detail someone's Estate as per Book of Estate you don't have to guess, or wait,for the names of hundreds and villages in it

And it also makes it much easier for me to finish up a list of castles, cities, and market towns for future use

I agree this is the best possible solution. Whew — what a relief!

The other thing I would encourage you to do, Greg is to just keep names "as-is" if they're already "plain English" — regardless of the meaning of the toponym. No reason to fix something that ain't broke. Some names that we changed need not have — "Horncastle" comes to mind, as does "Warminster" (once we decided we'd live with "minster" despite it's Saxon origins), "Ashbrittle," "Manshead,""Swineshead", "Portland", "Flaxwell", etc. etc. It seems like a lot of energy was spent fixing names that weren't really problematic — just to make them different or "true" to the toponym. I can understand replacing the Saxony "-wich,""-burg", "-shire," and all those places based on Saxon names. But some could have done just fine "as-is."

Your prerogative, of course. Just trying to save you effort and time, 'cause I know it's burdensome and daunting. So why make it harder than it has to be. Cut yourself some slack, man!


T.

My biggest problem is the different names. Consistency of names make it more easy to track where you are. I do not mind if it is Castle on the Rock or if it Sarum. It is easiest if it is the same at every entry. So make it consistent throughout all the books.

Thanks, Cornelious. Other than the one example you cite, I can't think of any others that have different names. Now, most have "colloquial" and "formal" versions — for example, "The Castle on the Birch Hill" and "Birch Hill" — but this is a pragmatic device since it's impossible to use those long names on the maps — and people wouldn't use the formal names in conversation, either. Hopefully people can suss out that "The Castle on the Birch Hill,""Birch Hill", "Birch Hill Castle" and "Castle Birch Hill" all refer to the same place.

Best,


T.

My biggest problem is the different names. Consistency of names make it more easy to track where you are. I do not mind if it is Castle on the Rock or if it Sarum. It is easiest if it is the same at every entry. So make it consistent throughout all the books.
Yes, I agree.
In general a place will have its modern name. A castle or estate is most likely to have its poetic name, and if there is a chance of ambiguity the modern name will appear with it

Thanks, Cornelious. Other than the one example you cite, I can't think of any others that have different names. Now, most have "colloquial" and "formal" versions — for example, "The Castle on the Birch Hill" and "Birch Hill" — but this is a pragmatic device since it's impossible to use those long names on the maps — and people wouldn't use the formal names in conversation, either. Hopefully people can suss out that "The Castle on the Birch Hill,""Birch Hill", "Birch Hill Castle" and "Castle Birch Hill" all refer to the same place.

Best,


T.

True. In your example it will probably become Birch Hill or Birch Hill castle. I and usually my players also want to know where it is. Some use a map of their own so I can name it. That in the book describing the castle it says that its official name is The Castle on the Birch Hill is no problem, but I want to be sure that it is the same as Birch Hill on the map.