The "What's a good name for this?" thread

Hmm... To my eye "Oscillatron" has specifically a cheesy sci-fi feel.

If that is your intention, then I think that the name is a rather good one!

If not, then—after determining whether others feel as do I, too, of course—it may not be ideal.

Edited by ArsThaumaturgis on Jan 2nd 2024 at 1:13:28 PM

Really? It doesn't sound cheesy to me. FWIW, as I said before, it's the superweapon of a Latin American superstate under a militaristic dictatorship; I can see a dictatorial leader who has a fair interest in scientific literature and has read some of the "norteamericano dog"-made publications (to be up to date on the enemy's advancement, if nothing else) get it into his head that "Tectonic Oscillatron" sounds more impressive than "Tectonic Oscillator" for his citizens, allies and enemies.

Edited by MarqFJA on Jan 2nd 2024 at 3:38:22 PM

Belated, but thank you to ArsThaumaturgis Trainbarrel for the answers!

I decided to go with "Incoming Tides'', especially because one of the biggest changes of the Allies include massive number of aircraft carriers (Essex-class aircrafts, to be specific) pouring into the Pacific.

No, I agree with AT. Name-Tron has a decidedly 80s pulp SF sound to it. It evokes a time period when electronics were the next big thing.

And yet -tron has a history of use to coin names of high-tech devices both before and after the '80s.

...and therefore... it shouldn't sound pulpy? If you like how it sounds, feel free to disregard my opinion, but I'm not sure what the point is in arguing over its validity.

(If this helps, if you go through the Real Life folder, you'll notice there are basically two types of devices listed: particle accelerators, and heavily branded commercial products. The former are all ultimately named after the cyclotron (and even there the naming scheme is rather dated compared to acronyms involving the word 'collider') and the latter don't really sound particularly military due to the same 'mass marketability' quality that makes it sound cheesy. The fact that an earthquake machine is in the same field of pulp technology as shrink rays and weather control devices probably doesn't help - a particle weapon facility named something like the Kaleidotron or Supersymmetron would be easier to take seriously.)

What would be a good name for a female character, who is a young sorceress dressed in dark-colored Edwardian-era dress? She specializes in dark magic, particularly turning antique toys into deadly weapons.

Barbera "Barbie" Tinkerer

It's also used for apparatuses used in experiments and other kinds of scientific applications outside of the contexts you mentioned, e.g. "biotron" and Climatron.

And to be fair, the popularity of -tron during the latter half of the 20th century wasn't limited to pulp fiction, but also extended into real life; that era is when terms and names like "jumbotron" and "Gravitron". It was driven by its connotation of technological supremacy — ironically thanks to biologists (via the "phytotron") rather than the electronics industry or particle physicists.

Actually, I probably should've clarified early on that this Latin American superpower exists in an alternate-history version of the '80s based on the Command & Conquer: Red Alert Series (i.e. the NSDAP remained an obscure footnote and slowly died out, WW2 was instead started by the USSR attempting to conquer Europe), being one of the great powers of the Communist International bloc. It wouldn't be weird for it to jump on the -tron trend of the times now, would it?

Edited by MarqFJA on Jan 3rd 2024 at 2:16:59 PM

The thing is, each of those uses has its own context, and to some degree its own sound. At least some of them also have the advantage of being familiar, being accepted through exposure. All of which can affect how a word is perceived.

That said...

I mean, that sounds like a setting in which a cheesy sci-fi device—and thus a cheesy sci-fi name—would be at home, yes.

Well, the setting in question does largely take itself quite seriously, with little in the way of camp. Far more like the modern Nolanverse Batman movies than Adam West's version of the character, to use an analogy. Plenty of War Is Hell that doesn't shy from realistic depictions of war crimes and the like, Soviet military structures emulate real-life Soviet architecture of the era (i.e. largely brutalism's utilitarian and minimalist style, with some influences from construcivist and Stalinist styles) instead of looking like the architect was a cartoonist with a big hard-on for dieselpunk and Russian Orthodox Church aesthetics, Imperial Japan uses Cyber Ninja armed with high-tech versions of Stock Ninja Weaponry instead of "classic"-looking ninjas armed with simple swords and what not, and most definitely no shotgun-totting riot police being used as a superpower's basic frontline infantry.

Edited by MarqFJA on Jan 3rd 2024 at 3:03:25 PM

Okay, fair enough. Then I'd suggest against "Oscillatron", as previously mentioned.

[edit] To be clear, your rationale for the term is not, I think, incorrect. It's technically a plausible word.

But my argument isn't really against that rationale. It's that, from a modern perspective (or at least, my own perspective at this point in time), with context that includes cheesy sci-fi works, it sounds like a name drawn from such works.

Edited by ArsThaumaturgis on Jan 3rd 2024 at 2:20:07 PM

So you're suggesting that I go with "Oscillator" instead?

Hmm... Yes, I would say so "Cabrakan Tectonic Oscillator" sounds like it should work.

(How would you feel about adding "Focussed" before "Tectonic"? That might convey that it's targetted, rather than just making earthquakes wherever it is.)

Well, you don't see people needing to add that to "weather machine" even if clearly has that level of fine control, no?

Are weather machines usually targetted, however? My impression is that they're usually intended for overall control—which may allow specific changes simply as part of that—or for local control.

Anyway, weather machines are seldom, I think, intended primarily as weapons, and for a weapon stating in its name that it can be targetted might add both to the intimidation and "morale-boost" factors, I feel. It says, both to its users and its potential victims: "This is no arbitrary or localised machine; this is a weapon that we can point at who we want."

Edited by ArsThaumaturgis on Jan 4th 2024 at 1:44:35 PM

That's true, but the same thing could be said for a tectonic weapon; a truly useful one would be able to target specific areas, rather than being a "use and pray it hits what you want" deal, and so one that falls under the latter would an example of bad design.

Also, an argument could be made that not making such a specification in the name can help make your enemies underestimate its capabilities. Especially if they already look down upon you, just like the US does in my setting up until it's too late. Actions speak louder than words, after all; let the world laugh until they unleash their superweapon upon their enemies, and watch as the world falls into horrified silence when said weapon shatters all expectations of being a glorified propaganda stunt.

Edited by MarqFJA on Jan 4th 2024 at 9:33:27 PM

Perhaps, but the existence of such a weapon doesn't necessarily imply that the weapon is well-designed.

Sure, but then I'd suggest hiding the fact that it's a tectonic weapon at all. Call it simply the "Cabrakan Oscillator" and let your enemies laugh—until the ground splits beneath them and spews fire on their buildings.

[edit] Of course, trying to intentionally have one's foes underestimate one does mean that one can't reasonably attempt any sort of show of strength. One risks looking weaker than one is, and inviting more conflict—and thus more casualty—than one might have.

Edited by ArsThaumaturgis on Jan 4th 2024 at 11:06:50 AM

I think that there is a wide spectrum of precision that is possible. From it can target a single person to, somewhere on your country. I would think about how such a weapon would work.

Putting focused in the name suggests that there is an unfocused version. I don't think focused is the right word.

I mean, I would imagine that the early prototypes might have been unfocussed: first establish how to generate tectonic events, then, once that's working, establish how to direct them to where one wants.

[edit] As to the word, it might be less about the precision with which the device can be targetted than about the means of the targetting: by focussing the oscillations on a desired location. (A bit like "High-intensity Focussed Ultrasound", I imagine.)

Edited by ArsThaumaturgis on Jan 5th 2024 at 2:16:47 PM

I didn't know that ultrasounds or any device have focused in the name. Then it makes sense.

Surname ideas? First name Davion.

The surname's origin language may not be that relevant because he's (african-)american. Could be english, an anglization, or some other language as long as it sounds good with "Davion". It could be some kind of a reference or an allusion?

Basically the story takes place in the late 2010s or the early 2020s. Davion is some sort of a technological genius, but not necessarily an actual scientist. He and at least two other guys build a scifi-ish long term exploration submarine that should be self-sufficient, and go on a long trip with Davion as the captain. They encounter pulp-esque stuff, telepathic octopi, etc. and might get into a fight with modern pirates and capture one. Then they discover Atlantis and have to fight its evil dictator with the pirate and the atlantean dissidents.

Davion Collins sounds good to me.

Davion Ensen?

With a first name ending on "-ion", then the surname flows better as something simple without a pause in it.

Also, "Ensen" means "Inspiring, Master of their own destiny, Intuitive".

found out about this Latin term while looking up Tales games: innominatus. Its apparently Latin for "nameless".

I'm considering using it and a pluralzied form (I think it would be innominatii) for an underclass that is defined by having their legal identities stripped from them (if not their actual sense of self). But to mirror existing naming conventions I want terms beginning with "i" that fir the middle and upper classes (these need not be Latin).

Edited by MorningStar1337 on Jan 7th 2024 at 7:40:05 AM