Ah, my bad for missing that. IT's been a long day/week.
Originally Posted by Drath Malorn
In part, I was saying that given BG3's rather poor track record with internal consistency so far, we shouldn't be too surprised if a given mechanics (Opportunity Attack) has different names in different places.
In part, I've long been of the opinion that our goal when providing feedback should not be so much to tell the devs "I think you should aim for this rather than that, because I like my games better when they do this". Rather, it should be tell the devs "your vision, what you're trying to achieve is that, well, the way you're currently doing it fails at delivering that because reasons". At least that how I'd like my feedback to be.
With that in mind, I was thinking that it was maybe pointless to tell Larian "hey, your game isn't even consistent with itself", if this would lead Larian to reply (virtually, in their heads, since they don't reply to anything) "oh but internal consistency isn't remotely part of our vision. We simply don't care about consistency".
Interesting way of thinking about things. That's of course assuming we can accurately gauge what the devs actually are aiming for, which is...not necessarily straightforward for BG3 :P