[quote=DarkwolfX37]
you skipped a wordand no sod that. if an idea is overused then i'm gonna fucking tell someone thati've literally never heard thatliterally just switch them around :/ and the names relating to talents only applies to ponies, remember. plus, switching them around gives you the chance to go through this whole "oh your name means X:" "wait my name means X?" "oh wow you must be the bearer of X!" "*turns out to be bearer of Y" thing
[/quote]

... That's a really good idea. Gilda would probably try to bypass the whole thing the first time by just asking what their name means. Bam, you've got your bearer. Lolnotoobad.

Also I was planning on having the names deal with talents, since in the canon for this story, the name of an animal is determined by a special spell. The spell connects to the weave of fate (which, just so you know, is malleable and not set in stone, hence [i]weave[/i]) and finds the destined talent of the animal, before giving them a name related to that. The weave explains why some ponies have names completely unrelated to their talent (the weave ends up changing the end talent enough to not be related to the original name).

[quote=DarkwolfX37]
so basically make it more believable no that would would be a terrible idea why would you think to make it believable pfffffftso in other words give them depth yes that's a bad idea dont do that i mean who wants depth in their plot relevant charactersI refer you to semen for a quick example. life comes from non life literally all the time.
[/quote]

There won't be too many minor characters, and any minor characters will likely only be stationed in one tribe/flock/herd/whateverthing. But yeah that adds a lot more depth to the whateverthings than the original idea.