A Matter Of Opinion

[imp_resario]

Sender: Moxxie
Subject: re: Armaments, traditions, and customs, vis-a-vis names

Reverein, I need a little help in resolving a minor dispute on a matter of opinion. And weapons.

Namely, the naming thereof.

Now, I've always had a mind for the classics in both music and literature, and giving a weapon a name all its own is a way of establishing personal significance, identity, and legacy, to say nothing of gravitas in recognition of or anticipation of the deeds ascribed to it. What, pray tell, would be Der Ring des Nibelungen without Nothung, the accursed sword of Siegfried? What would be the Arthurian legends without Excalibur or La Chanson de Roland without Durandal?

I would assert, therefore, that the practice is timeless, and has a well-earned place in the modern day, and with modern weaponry besides; that something like, for example, a shotgun can have enough significance to its wielder and within its deeds that it is no less worthy of being given a name than the weapons of old.

HOWEVER, in contrast, a certain colleague of mine does not share my views on this matter and describes the entire practice as, and I quote them directly,

"Cringe, T B H".

Which to me not only shows a lack of dramatic appreciation but also ignorance of the proud tradition upheld by the act of doing so. Thus I put it to a vote in a public forum before my fellow dreamers:

Is the practice of naming weapons really just a relic of a bygone sentimentality, or is it a timeless practice honoring the tools of the world's second-oldest trade?

Comments

Sender: Eustace

[flamekthunder]

Tradition...plays some part and there can be sentimental aspects to it. However there is also practical reason for naming weapons depending on the circumstances and significance of the weapon. If it is one that is stronger or has certain qualities that make it different from more common use weapons, then naming it makes it easier to differentiate from the rest. It may also be required for activating its inherent abilities.

However... If one is naming a weapon with no meaning to it like some kind of collector's item, then I would have to side with your colleague.

[imp_resario]

Hold on, "activating its inherent abilities?"

What, do you have to address a sword by name if you want it to actually cut someone?

[flamekthunder]

For such basic attacks, no. But if a weapon is capable of executing a stronger attack, then using its name as part of the incantation is common. You could say it is as if you, the wielder, are speaking directly to the weapon to draw out more of its power.

However, realistically it's mostly due to the magical properties. Similar to summoning or casting as spell, referring to the weapon specifically helps keep focus.

[imp_resario]

Oh, it's a magic thing.

It sounds like you're talking about weapons that already have names, as well. But I'm talking about giving a name to a weapon in the first place, and more likely than not something not of magical nature.

[flamekthunder]

If you mean just personal significance and identity, then there's nothing wrong with it in general. It's a common practice in my world as while we do have disposable weapons, a weapons that can last through numerous battles is considered worth some kind of title.

[imp_resario]

I see. I think.

Is yours the sort of world where a weapon that can withstand several gruelling battles is a rare feat of craftsmanship?

[flamekthunder]

Not rare, but it does take a skilled weaponsmith.

[imp_resario]

Then it's no wonder.

In my world, modern methods and improved materials have resulted in mass-produced arms capable of regular field use becoming more the norm than the exception; and even the most well-regarded brands, makes, and models are still manufactured in bulk.

So that might make it difficult for an individual weapon out of the lot to really 'stand out' enough to get a name, at least on quality and survival alone.

[flamekthunder]

I see. I suppose that would devalue the weapon's merit and need for proper naming, and makes your initial writing make more sense.

[For Moxxie, naming weapons for whatever reason really would seem more "antiquated" and "traditional" whereas for him it's just the norm.]

However, does it really matter what your colleague thinks?

[imp_resario]

I don't know if I'd say 'devalue'. It's nice to be able to take for granted the fact that your weapon is unlikely to break.

As for my colleague's opinion, I suppose not, but it's still nice to know I'm not completely out of touch. I represent my employers when I work, after all, and if naming a weapon somehow leaves me at a loss of credibility that would be a point worthy of consideration.

[flamekthunder]

How would it be a loss of credibility?

[Does he actually work with weapons...?]