Dev Journal: Bone Collector and Deathbringer Units!

We’ve moved over to the paradox forums. Please come visit us there to discuss:
You can still read the collective wisdom - and lolz - of the community here, but posting is no longer possible.

Home Forums Age of Wonders 3 Discussions Dev Journal: Bone Collector and Deathbringer Units!

This topic contains 179 replies, has 72 voices, and was last updated by  chrysophylax páuperem 7 years, 2 months ago.

Viewing 30 posts - 151 through 180 (of 180 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #132083

    terrahero
    Member

    But it can, just not on the magical plane.

    And thats what bothers me. Why should, even fairly unexceptional creatures even, have a magical ward against mental invasions. That no mental invasion could ever, possible overcome, ever.
    Why does the knife only cut one way. And why would it even be a mental thing? Invoke Death could just as easily be explained as an immediate necrosis of all living tissue.

    Actually, archons/high men were always strong against the undead:

    I disagree with this. I wasnt talking about Highman being the best at dealing with Undead, but about how Undead and Highmen matched up against eachother.

    And Highmen did not hold the cards over the Undead in AoW1. They had a bit of Holy damage, which makes it easier for them to deal with Wraiths. But Wraiths still hardcountered the main source of Highman damage (physical) and the majority of the Highmen units.
    It even countered the Highman tier4, infact all Undead were fairly effective against the Astra as it did fire damage and Undead had fire protection.

    And the same holds true in AoW2. 2 Archon units had Death weakness vs 3 Undead units with Holy weakness. I wouldnt call that a unbalanced match up at all.

    Now i know the Theocrat doesnt equal the Highmen and the Necromancer doesnt equal the Undead. That wasnt my point. My point was how in previous installments the force of corruption and enthropy, manifest in Undead, was in balance and a direct antagonist against the force of life and purity, manifest in Archons.

    And we are getting way ahead of ourselves here, as there is still far to much unknown to even make a final verdict on this (as i mentioned before). But my concern is that, currently, it looks like its going in the way where Enthropy is clearly getting countered, which was never the case before.

    If you, or anyone, feels fine with the idea that a Unicorn or a Crusader can have the magical or spiritual power to resist the touch of death, thats fine ofcourse. Its just my opinion, on a subjective level, that i dont like the idea of the ultimate force of entropy unable to afflict and use its power on, in my opinion, “mundane” creatures and units.

    #132090

    And thats what bothers me. Why should, even fairly unexceptional creatures even, have a magical ward against mental invasions. That no mental invasion could ever, possible overcome, ever.
    Why does the knife only cut one way. And why would it even be a mental thing? Invoke Death could just as easily be explained as an immediate necrosis of all living tissue.

    because magic is cooler? Also, invoke death descends from the “morgul blade” wraith making ability in Tolkien.

    That ability only applied to weaker willed people (those who became invisible when putting on the ring), and only to Men (which also includes hobbits). Dwarves, designed for toughness, can’t be made into wraiths, and Elves can only become wraithlike post mortem.

    And as I said, the necromancer probably will have a way to counter strong will, and certainly buff their own units against it.

    #132115

    Draxynnic
    Member

    And Highmen did not hold the cards over the Undead in AoW1. They had a bit of Holy damage, which makes it easier for them to deal with Wraiths. But Wraiths still hardcountered the main source of Highman damage (physical) and the majority of the Highmen units.

    You’re missing quite a few things here:

    First, the way ‘(channel) strike’ abilities worked in previous installments is that it essentially acted as whatever channel was best for the attacker, while having the chance of delivering a secondary effect (on fire, frozen, stunned, etc). So any unit with Holy or Magic Strike would still deal full damage to Wraiths despite also technically having a physical channel. This meant that four units in the High Men lineup were able to deal full damage to the entire undead lineup, including Wraiths. Most races aren’t so lucky.

    Yes, this means that a lot of protections didn’t matter much except against ranged attacks.

    On top of this, High Men cavalry, while not having Holy or Magic Strike, did have Turn Undead, which could arguably be more effective in keeping wraiths at bay as well as granting the opportunity to neutralise any undead unit with Turn Undead without needing the specialised unit like other races did (not to mention risking a priest in melee). This carried through to AoW2 but was nerfed in Shadow Magic, probably because the Paladin was just proving to counter undead too hard. If they wanted to bring the specialised unit, they had two options – the Saint, their regular priest, and the Avenger, their tier 3 ranged/melee hybrid – both of which had better turning abilities than other races’ priests. All in, five of nine non-machine High Men units were able to take care of wraiths without needing magic weapon enchantments – other races are lucky to get as many as three.

    It even countered the Highman tier4, infact all Undead were fairly effective against the Astra as it did fire damage and Undead had fire protection.

    See above observation about how Fire Strike worked. The undead fire protection only reduced the chance of being set on fire, it didn’t reduce the damage dealt by astras in melee. Admittedly, though, astras were one of only two units in the High Men lineup above the first tier that couldn’t fight wraiths – but since they flew, wraiths couldn’t touch them either.

    And the same holds true in AoW2. 2 Archon units had Death weakness vs 3 Undead units with Holy weakness. I wouldnt call that a unbalanced match up at all.

    Only in Shadow Magic, actually. Archons got nerfed quite a bit in the transition – in base AoW2 there was no Death Vulnerability in the archon lineup, Paladins still had Turn Undead at base (moved to silver in Shadow Magic) and the entire lineup except archers had Holy Strike and thus countered banshees and other physical protection units. This got toned down quite a bit in Shadow Magic – probably because they were proving to counter undead and other races with a focus on physical protection/immunity a little too hard.

    If you, or anyone, feels fine with the idea that a Unicorn or a Crusader can have the magical or spiritual power to resist the touch of death, thats fine ofcourse.

    I’d hardly call either ‘mundane’.

    Crusaders aren’t ordinary soldiers. They’re effectively the current translation of the concept of paladins in the game, whose lore entry basically consists of a necromancer complaining about how hard they are to deal with. As for thinking of unicorns as mundane…

    …No. Just no. Unicorns are typically portrayed as incarnations of magic, particularly protective and purification magic. Typically, unicorns in games are actually weaker than the unicorns you’ll find in stories to begin with, because that magic is harder to quantify in combat terms than a dragon’s size, armour, and firebreathing, but I’ve seen stories where unicorns and dragons are in the same story and in terms of power and importance, a unicorn trumps a dragon.

    In any case, the way I interpret Invoke Death is essentially the Reaper forcing the target’s soul from their body. It stands to reason that creatures with strong willpower may be able to prevent their souls from leaving in this manner, and/or that Strong Will represents some magic that wards against this sort of attack. Meanwhile, broadening to other theocrat units – cherubs and exalted, from their lore, are presented as afterlives of the faithful. Invoke Death doesn’t work on them because they’ve already died and come back.

    The dragon and manticore are basically just big creatures as far as this ability is concerned, having similar levels of willpower as anything else. Dragons may be somewhat stronger in will than most mortals… this is represented by a higher resistance. Manticores might not even have that.

    Besides, the alternatives are:

    * Put it on the Blight channel instead. IMO, any objections you have regarding things being immune to Invoke Death due to spirit immunity return tenfold when you look at creatures with blight immunity. Yup, apparently beetles would be immune to Invoke Death. I can explain unicorns and crusaders a lot easier than beetles.

    * Have it channel-less. Done this way, there’d be no way to represent any special resistance against it short of making specific exceptions – just base resistance alone.

    #132119

    Draxynnic
    Member

    And Highmen did not hold the cards over the Undead in AoW1. They had a bit of Holy damage, which makes it easier for them to deal with Wraiths. But Wraiths still hardcountered the main source of Highman damage (physical) and the majority of the Highmen units.

    You’re missing quite a few things here:

    First, the way ‘(channel) strike’ abilities worked in previous installments is that it essentially acted as whatever channel was best for the attacker, while having the chance of delivering a secondary effect (on fire, frozen, stunned, etc). So any unit with Holy or Magic Strike would still deal full damage to Wraiths despite also technically having a physical channel. This meant that four units in the High Men lineup were able to deal full damage to the entire undead lineup, including Wraiths. Most races aren’t so lucky.

    Yes, this means that a lot of protections didn’t matter much except against ranged attacks.

    On top of this, High Men cavalry, while not having Holy or Magic Strike, did have Turn Undead, which could arguably be more effective in keeping wraiths at bay as well as granting the opportunity to neutralise any undead unit with Turn Undead without needing the specialised unit like other races did (not to mention risking a priest in melee). This carried through to AoW2 but was nerfed in Shadow Magic, probably because the Paladin was just proving to counter undead too hard. If they wanted to bring the specialised unit, they had two options – the Saint, their regular priest, and the Avenger, their tier 3 ranged/melee hybrid – both of which had better turning abilities than other races’ priests. All in, five of nine non-machine High Men units were able to take care of wraiths without needing magic weapon enchantments – other races are lucky to get as many as three.

    It even countered the Highman tier4, infact all Undead were fairly effective against the Astra as it did fire damage and Undead had fire protection.

    See above observation about how Fire Strike worked. The undead fire protection only reduced the chance of being set on fire, it didn’t reduce the damage dealt by astras in melee. Admittedly, though, astras were one of only two units in the High Men lineup above the first tier that couldn’t fight wraiths – but since they flew, wraiths couldn’t touch them either.

    And the same holds true in AoW2. 2 Archon units had Death weakness vs 3 Undead units with Holy weakness. I wouldnt call that a unbalanced match up at all.

    Only in Shadow Magic, actually. Archons got nerfed quite a bit in the transition – in base AoW2 there was no Death Vulnerability in the archon lineup, Paladins still had Turn Undead at base (moved to silver in Shadow Magic) and the entire lineup except archers had Holy Strike and thus countered banshees and other physical protection units. This got toned down quite a bit in Shadow Magic – probably because they were proving to counter undead and other races with a focus on physical protection/immunity a little too hard.

    If you, or anyone, feels fine with the idea that a Unicorn or a Crusader can have the magical or spiritual power to resist the touch of death, thats fine ofcourse.

    I’d hardly call either ‘mundane’.

    Crusaders aren’t ordinary soldiers. They’re effectively the current translation of the concept of paladins in the game, whose lore entry basically consists of a necromancer complaining about how hard they are to deal with. As for thinking of unicorns as mundane…

    …No. Just no. Unicorns are typically portrayed as incarnations of magic, particularly protective and purification magic. Typically, unicorns in games are actually weaker than the unicorns you’ll find in stories to begin with, because that magic is harder to quantify in combat terms than a dragon’s size, armour, and firebreathing, but I’ve seen stories where unicorns and dragons are in the same story and in terms of power and importance, a unicorn trumps a dragon.

    In any case, the way I interpret Invoke Death is essentially the Reaper forcing the target’s soul from their body. It stands to reason that creatures with strong willpower may be able to prevent their souls from leaving in this manner, and/or that Strong Will represents some magic that wards against this sort of attack. Meanwhile, broadening to other theocrat units – cherubs and exalted, from their lore, are presented as afterlives of the faithful. Invoke Death doesn’t work on them because they’ve already died and come back.

    The dragon and manticore are basically just big creatures as far as this ability is concerned, having similar levels of willpower as anything else. Dragons may be somewhat stronger in will than most mortals… this is represented by a higher resistance. Manticores might not even have that.

    #132121

    IMHO it should be channelless.

    But the ubiquitousness of mind control immunity and it’s cousin strong will (and as such spirit immunity), on stronger units and “special cases” is a big issue for anything utilizing those abilities.

    And having so many units immune to the big ability of a class T4 unit is just not a good gameplay element. All other T4 have either multiple damage channels, rarely resisted ones or multiple big impact abilities as part of their package. The dread reaper with a spirit based death touch would fall into neither of these categories. And that is a big issue if, the big incarnation of death has a signature ability that is useless in most cases. It reduces it to a fancy brute.

    #132129

    Draxynnic
    Member

    It’s one ability out of a package.

    The Dread Reaper in AoW1 was hardly helpless without it. It had decent combat stats, Lifestealing, Cause Fear (probably Fearsome in AoW3, which to be fair is also on the Spirit channel) and Death Strike, which translated into AoW3 would probably mean a multichannel attack, possibly phys/blight/frost to distinguish from Horrors and Watchers with phys/blight/spirit. AoW2 Dread Reapers didn’t have Invoke Death at all, but gained an additional debilitative ability (Energy Drain) and the ability to float over walls.

    It makes sense that some units are simply going to be more resistant to it than their stats would otherwise indicate, or even flat-out immune. Heck, game balance principles dictate that any such powerful ability should have countermeasures. A channel means that such countermeasures and natural resistances are naturally incorporated into existing structures. If it’s channel-less… then the only way to represent increased resistance to it is increasing the Resistance stat directly (which provides increased resistance to everything) or create specific abilities related to Invoke Death that would need to be peppered through creatures and unit enchantments.

    Ultimately, I think Invoke Death for Dread Reapers will prove to be similar to Dominate for Eldritch Horrors. Nice to have, but, well, not worth kicking up a stink over some things being immune to it. Particularly tier 2 units that a tier 4 melee unit can simply beat up the old-fashioned way, healing damage they take in the process through Life Stealing.

    #132154

    Gloweye
    Member

    * Have it channel-less. Done this way, there’d be no way to represent any special resistance against it short of making specific exceptions – just base resistance alone.

    My preference. There is basically no ability in the game that has this, and I think it’s a good plan to use more. Not just Invoke Death, but also the Likes of Throw Curse and a couple of others. Not the conversion abilities though – those fit in spirit.

    #132162

    Draxynnic
    Member

    Then you’d either have an ability that has no countermeasures beyond simply buffing resistance (which will make the recipient strong against anything but physical), or you’d need to introduce a set of specific properties that grant resistance or immunities to it.

    Abilities at this level need to have countermeasures, and working within the existing system is the most efficient means of doing so.

    And as I alluded to above: More things are immune to Domination than to Invoke Death, yet when it works Dominate is a more valuable ability. But the Eldritch Horror is hardly helpless when Dominate isn’t an option. The Dread Reaper I expect to be the same – Invoke Death is a high-risk, high-reward option for taking out a big threat quickly, but the Dread Reaper will hardly be so reliant on it that it’s a big deal when an otherwise relatively fragile unit is immune. And if the ability is made a channel-less one with no countermeasures… than that means it will play a bigger role in the balancing of the Dread Reaper, increasing the risk of it being a one-trick-pony.

    #132168

    Abilities at this level need to have countermeasures, and working within the existing system is the most efficient means of doing so.

    And as I alluded to above: More things are immune to Domination than to Invoke Death, yet when it works Dominate is a more valuable ability. But the Eldritch Horror is hardly helpless when Dominate isn’t an option.

    Yet the existing system as it makes most targets it makes sense to use this ability on flat out easily immune or highly resistant.
    You don’t summon the Eldritch Horror for it’s Dominate, but for it’s meaty body and Shock breath (which very little is immune to and no other unit has so far). For the Dread Reaper on the other hand this ability is it’s big feature. A big feature that is in 95% of the time a waste of action or suboptimal to simply melee attacking is just a bad feature.
    There are other ways to balance it and some were suggested in this very thread. Make it channelless and scale with the targets morale. That would fit with the lost souls unit and the Necromancer and unit theme well.
    But making it spirit based (with a power suitable to the average unresisting opponent) on it’s own means that when it reaches the battlefield, most other factions will simply have the majority of their units immune or highly resistant, making the ability dead weight and frankly superfluous.
    And when there is a dread reaper unit with the ability to invoke death, I want more than a fancy giant.

    #132180

    terrahero
    Member

    Well lets not get ahead of ourselves, we dont know how big of a role Invoke Death will play. All we know is, its back. How big of a deal it is, and how much of the Reaper’s “stat budget” is consumed by just having Invoke Death, we do not yet know.

    It is entirely possible that, just like Dominate on the Horror or Fire Broadside on Juggernaut, its more of a side gimmick. Something you use once in a while or only under specific sitations. Which would certainly fit what a lot of us think Invoke Death would be like, something you use in some situations or in some circumstances.

    So there is no reason, yet, to believe the whole unit hinges on the usefullness of just this one ability. And its also entirely possible (and we might find out today) that the Reaper ends up with another more main-use ability.

    #132187

    Fenraellis
    Member

    I’m just curious to see if they keep up the recent schedule of Dev Journals and release another today.

    No that I would complain if they didn’t. There are plenty of active threads to read anyway.

    #132191

    Draxynnic
    Member

    Well lets not get ahead of ourselves, we dont know how big of a role Invoke Death will play. All we know is, its back. How big of a deal it is, and how much of the Reaper’s “stat budget” is consumed by just having Invoke Death, we do not yet know.

    It is entirely possible that, just like Dominate on the Horror or Fire Broadside on Juggernaut, its more of a side gimmick. Something you use once in a while or only under specific sitations. Which would certainly fit what a lot of us think Invoke Death would be like, something you use in some situations or in some circumstances.

    So there is no reason, yet, to believe the whole unit hinges on the usefullness of just this one ability. And its also entirely possible (and we might find out today) that the Reaper ends up with another more main-use ability.

    Exactly.

    To be honest, on a strength 10 resistance check… I really don’t think this is going to be a case of ‘this is what defines the unit’. What happens on a failed attempt does make a huge difference – in AoW1, a failed attempt has basically used up the turn for a top-tier unit for nothing. In AoW3… I expect it will at least consume action points, but we’re still looking at something that only has a 60% or so chance of working on a bottom-tier unit that any melee tier 4 could probably take out in a turn anyway. Against top-tier units, it becomes a roughly one-in-three chance, unless you’ve synergised it with something else that improves the odds. In three turns, the Dread Reaper could probably kill another tier 4 if it doesn’t die first itself – the gamble may be worth it for a quick kill, especially if you’re attacking from red to begin with, but I still wouldn’t consider it the main attraction of a tier 4 unit. If we were talking about incarnates, maybe, but they get to take over the unit and hide within it to pop out again when their victim dies, not just kill it.

    Now, if Invoke Death deals damage on a failure – say, 25 spirit – then this makes it much more worthwhile. A full attack will probably still be more damaging, but at that level you’re probably doing about as much damage on a failed attack as on a single swing, and depending on the target and how afraid you are of retaliations, it may be worth doing for the chance of an instant kill even if you could otherwise attack from yellow or green. However, if the attack is to deal damage on a failure… then of course, it needs to have a damage channel.

    #132192

    frostling
    Member

    Hi there, let me say that AoWIII is awesome, I really luv this game! What is my opinion about the 2 Necro Units? Man, I think they’re gr8, I wanna try ’em on the battlefield ASAP, can’t wait! Am a real GAMER

    #132203

    Well the value of invoke death could also vary depending on the morale of the target unit, so lower morale exponentially increases it’s chances of success, the idea being that terrified people aren’t like to resist anything…

    That alone would mimic the “channelless” ability people are talking about, and also tie in quite nicely to the ideas mentioned WRT other Necromancer units.

    However, until we get more stats on it, it is really us arguing over possibilities and ideas and far too quickly jumping to conclusions.

    #132208

    Gloweye
    Member

    However, until we get more stats on it, it is really us arguing over possibilities and ideas and far too quickly jumping to conclusions.

    Indeed, a bit to much of this.

    TBH, I would really love morale scaling on Invoke Death.

    #132884

    woebin
    Member

    I really like the concepts of these units and I’m not really good enough at mechanicstalk to contribute a lot to that, but there’s one thing that bothers me. I really, really wish you’d ditch the boob plate design on the Deathbringer (and, honestly, on every female unit/hero/leader/etc wearing armour). It’s incredibly impractical and frankly dangerous to the wearer, and although I realize this is a fantasy game it’s still kind of dumb. Can’t we have badass women who don’t look like sex objects for a change?

    Here’s a bit on why boob plate is a terrible idea: http://www.tor.com/blogs/2013/05/boob-plate-armor-would-kill-you

    #132946

    Can’t we have badass women who don’t look like sex objects for a change?

    SJW?

    Anyway, be thankful it’s not bikini chain mail!!!!

    If you check out the armour on the Deathbringer you can see that nothing about it is really designed to be useful. Look at the shoulder straps etc.

    It’s more of a corset/dress with some metal attached…

    #132950

    Garresh
    Member

    Interesting article, but most people do boob plates just because it seems logical to those who are not aware of how medieval armor works. And honestly there’s tons of misconceptions in fantasy weaponry and armor. At the end of the day, the better question is who cares? I don’t think it looks particularly objectifying. Boobs tend to affect the shape of female clothing. Are all girls clothes sexist? I mean I’m a dude so maybe my opinion is invalid like I’m constantly reminded by tumblr feminists, but I get the feeling most girls here wouldn’t see a problem with the death bringer. She looks creepy and intimidating, but also pretty goddamn powerful and deadly. Really cool aesthetic. And if were being honest, most girls I know who do any arting “objectify” their characters aesthetically worse than this.

    This isn’t a case of sexism. This is a mixture of “women have boobs which, like it or not, shapes clothing” and “typical misunderstanding of historical armor and weapons”. Happens all the time. I mean the boob plate could get ditched and it wouldn’t affect her aesthetic much at all, cause its frankly way down on the list of things that are drawing my attention in the picture(Don’t revoke my man card please). So yeah they could ditch it, and I doubt many people would care. But it seems like an overreaction.

    #132973

    Gloweye
    Member

    If were gonna make the Deathbringer more practical, we’d better change the helmet so that she can actually see stuff..If were gonna talk about realism, its better to see where you opponent is gonna strike, and you might turn out not even to need your armor, because you might just be able to stab the other guy first…

    (And if she sees cause she’s undead/magical/whatever, Im sure that the undeadness/magicalness/whateverness can also protect her better than the armor does.)

    #133099

    woebin
    Member

    SJW?

    I’m not a warrior by any means, but yeah, sure. More social justice can only be a good thing, and I really don’t see the reasoning between using “SJW” as some sort of insult.

    If you check out the armour on the Deathbringer you can see that nothing about it is really designed to be useful. Look at the shoulder straps etc.

    It’s more of a corset/dress with some metal attached…

    Well, sure, it’s not really a viable set of armour in general. Not arguing about that at all. It’s specifically that the boob plate thing is so pervasive and overdone and I just wish people would grow out of doing it. I don’t think it’s a design the artist necessarily tried to make sexy or anything, I think the boob plate phenomenon is just so common it becomes the default. And then it’ll stay the default unless someone calls attention to it, so I’m doing that.

    Interesting article, but most people do boob plates just because it seems logical to those who are not aware of how medieval armor works. And honestly there’s tons of misconceptions in fantasy weaponry and armor.

    Honestly, a good designer does some research when designing things. I know it’s fantasy but fantasy is still grounded in reality to some extent, and if you put armour on a character it ought to look like armour that’ll serve its purpose.

    At the end of the day, the better question is who cares?

    Lots of people care! Obviously I’m one of them.

    I don’t think it looks particularly objectifying. Boobs tend to affect the shape of female clothing. Are all girls clothes sexist? I mean I’m a dude so maybe my opinion is invalid like I’m constantly reminded by tumblr feminists, but I get the feeling most girls here wouldn’t see a problem with the death bringer. She looks creepy and intimidating, but also pretty goddamn powerful and deadly.

    First off, no, it doesn’t look terribly objectifying in this instance. This isn’t the worst thing I’ve seen or anything at all. And I like the design in general! It’s really just the boob plate which I think is unnecessary and unfortunate.

    As for “all girls clothes” being sexist, of course not. Clothes made out of fabrics or other soft materials tend to sort of fall in line with the figure of their wearer, and that makes sense. I’m pretty sure heavy plate mail doesn’t, though.

    If were gonna make the Deathbringer more practical, we’d better change the helmet so that she can actually see stuff..If were gonna talk about realism, its better to see where you opponent is gonna strike, and you might turn out not even to need your armor, because you might just be able to stab the other guy first…

    (And if she sees cause she’s undead/magical/whatever, Im sure that the undeadness/magicalness/whateverness can also protect her better than the armor does.)

    Oh, sure! It’s fantasy, you can make up an explanation for anything (everyone loves the “a wizard did it” backstory variant, right?). Here’s the thing though: that helmet? It’d be impractical in real life for sure, just like the boob plate would be impractical in real life. The difference is twofold though. First off, the boob plate design is an established trope and not a unique part of this particular design, and so it becomes part of a larger structure rather than just being a problem with this design. Secondly, you might design a male character with the same sort of helmet and it’d be no more or less absurd, but you just wouldn’t put boob plate (or an equivalent, such as this lovely codpiece: https://scs.viceland.com/int/vArray7nArray/htdocs/metallic-package-Array79/arrmour-codpiece.jpg) unless you were intentionally trying to make a joke or a point through satire. That codpiece, incidentally, is from a piece of ceremonial armour, not intended to see combat. Because that’d be dumb.

    I want to be clear: I’m not criticizing this out of any sort of malice or what have you. I’ve loved this series of games since I got a demo of the first one along with some gaming magazine as a kid, and the only reason I bother bringing this up rather than just sighing and moving on is that I have the respect for the devs required to expect better. And it’s not some horrible, egregious case of overt sexism either, it’s just a somewhat unfortunate and problematic design that I’d love to see fade away both in this case in particular and in the media in general. If the design remains the same it certainly won’t stop me from buying the expansion or anything.

    #133100

    Gloweye
    Member

    I guess that IF you play and mod skyrim, you’ll be having a hard time to find good armor mods.

    Well, I just guess im not to much hindered by the tropes….Aside from the boob plate and the helment, I don’t think anyone would have much chance in a good battle with:
    A)those spikes. at that length, they seriously hinder any quick movement you’d want to make
    B)the skirt. Skirts aren’t that useful in combat, and this one is pretty tight around the feet.
    C)Cloaks? just likes capes…. http://youtu.be/AJnFx51hOFY
    D)That sword’s weight isn’t divided optimally, the point of gravity should be closer to the hilt. And even then you’d want to hold it with two hands.

    All four of which are IMO more important than the chest plate..

    #133431

    woebin
    Member

    I guess that IF you play and mod skyrim, you’ll be having a hard time to find good armor mods.

    Actually my favourite Skyrim armour mod was the one that replaced female armour models with slightly altered male armour models specifically to address this issue. But yeah, can’t find it now without sifting through ridiculous things like this (possibly mildly NSFW), so you’re right.

    Well, I just guess im not to much hindered by the tropes….Aside from the boob plate and the helment, I don’t think anyone would have much chance in a good battle with:<br>
    A)those spikes. at that length, they seriously hinder any quick movement you’d want to make<br>
    B)the skirt. Skirts aren’t that useful in combat, and this one is pretty tight around the feet.<br>
    C)Cloaks? just likes capes…. http://youtu.be/AJnFx51hOFY<br>
    D)That sword’s weight isn’t divided optimally, the point of gravity should be closer to the hilt. And even then you’d want to hold it with two hands.

    All four of which are IMO more important than the chest plate..

    You’re probably right about all of these things! I can immediately see your point about the spikes, which are another kind of tiresome trope to make things look more menacing when in reality they’d just get in the way. The skirt seems to have some kind of heavy parts around the feet, so I don’t know what’s going on there at all really, but then I’m not even sure this thing has legs – my read on the picture is that the skirt is actually kind of open down the middle and there’s this long spinal column running down? I dunno. I guess she probably floats but I won’t know until we see her animated. The cape thing is a decent point regarding practicality, but in its defense capes are at least an actual real thing. And as for the sword, well, I’m just not knowledgeable enough about swords to catch that. Nice that you did though!

    I guess the reason the chest plate bothers me more than anything else is that it’s such a clearly gendered thing in addition to just being plain dumb. I do think a good designer should consider the issues you raise here as well, though!

    #133436

    Draxynnic
    Member

    The cape thing is a decent point regarding practicality, but in its defense capes are at least an actual real thing.

    Also, most of the situations lampooned in the Incredibles… aren’t really relevant to battlefield combat.

    There is the risk that an enemy may be able to use your cape to get a handgrip, but it’s an uncommon one – few enemies on a battlefield are likely to have a hand free to do so unless they’ve already lost a weapon/shield or otherwise put at a disadvantage, and if you have a friend next to you than the enemy grabbing a cape or cloak is opening them up almost as much as it’s opening you up. Plus, to get their hands on it in the first place, they probably have to put themselves at additional risk.

    Meanwhile, depending on material, it is possible to use a cloak as something of an emergency defensive tool. A cloak held across the front, for instance, can foul arrows and other weapons, or prevent the enemy from being able to aim at a vulnerable spot in your armour. It also has some practicality advantages as something that can be used to cover up armour to protect against sun and/or weather, but which can be relatively easily removed or thrown back when you don’t need it, while also doubling as a blanket. There are reasons cloaks were popular in their time, although they’ve largely been superseded in the present day.

    Superhero capes, on the other hand…

    #133444

    Gloweye
    Member

    The cape thing is a decent point regarding practicality, but in its defense capes are at least an actual real thing

    Well, I’ve heard that, when of the right materials, you could wrap your cape around you off-arm and use it as a kind of make-shift shield without injuring yourself to much. However, the version the Deathbringer has, is to raggedy for that, while still long enough to potentially get in the way. (I might add, the Incredibles link was more regarding the general idea than that movie’s credibility.)

    As for the sword, this is based primarily on looks, though it could be helped by either making the grip of significant heavier material, and it would also help to use it with both hands – which we don’t really know if she will do so.

    As for my knowledge, I have to add the disclaimer that I don’t really have personal experience, though I’ve been interested in it for quite a while. I generally like this youtube channel for some decent general knowledge:
    https://www.youtube.com/user/SkallagrimNilsson

    As for the skirt issue, I hadn’t really considered to possibility that she’s be floating.. but as you said, we won’t know until we can build the unit.

    #133536

    Kaiosama TLJ
    Member

    Actually my favourite Skyrim armour mod was the one that replaced female armour models with slightly altered male armour models specifically to address this issue. But yeah, can’t find it now without sifting through ridiculous things like this (possibly mildly NSFW), so you’re right.

    Can agree that the mod in the link is a bit sexualized, but I do find it mild compared to these ones: (Warning: Probably NSFW)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HxzjFX2AOk

    To be fair, mods can be a bit like fanfiction. If you look deep enough you can find something good, but most can also be crap.

    I guess the reason the chest plate bothers me more than anything else is that it’s such a clearly gendered thing in addition to just being plain dumb. I do think a good designer should consider the issues you raise here as well, though!

    To cut some slack to the designers here, some armor from ancient times (including Roman I think) had nipples.

    However, as a straigh male I also feel a bit disturbed when I saw bikini armor, especially if is in a same world were armor of same quality is apropriately full-plate mail but only for the guys, it’s super cheesy if you ask me because it’s like the game/story/whatever is practicaly saying “I know that I’m pretending too hard to have some better qualities, but look at me, I got BOOOOBIEESSS!!!”. I could have been watching porn instead to be honest.

    And I may sound like an hypocrite when I say this but I don’t have nothing against characters that uses revealing clothes and/or are sassy, but when these are the only kind of female characters we see and when the “clothes” reach the level of Scarlet Blade something is wrong here.

    Still, I don’t find the Deathbringer clothes and armor stupid, and it’s good that Triumph is averting these tropes a bit. Succubus are half-naked but that’s justified if you ask me.

    #133628

    Morgul
    Member

    Oooh !! Necromancer Class – Finally!! Something to long for after the rather boring Halflings (I´m not really into halflings in general;))
    Cool stuff!! Keep up the good work!

    As for the Necro class, I could think of a creature that feeds on souls…a soul eater sotosay. In other words: Once the creature KILLS (not wounds but kills) a (mortal) enemy, it atuomatically consumes it´s soul granting it more power such as life forth or whatever. Maybe even (not sure if the game mechanics would offer that much) additional experience upon feeding the soul thus making it gain ranks more quickly.

    The Bone Dragon should actually become the masterpiece of the Necro…

    I especially like the idea of the unit which turns dead units into ghouls!!!!!

    Spell Idea: Raise dead. Makes the dead of a (preferably enemy;)) town´s cemetary rise from their graves and attack the town (maybe as zombies and/or skeletons).
    Not sure how to realize technically but maybe it´s possible.

    Despite being aware that a vampire is not really (Not at all to be precise…) the work of a necromancer, I´d like to point out in this context that I´m missing vampires here!
    I hope you´re planning on introducing them maybe as non-racial unit in this DLC, ideally with evolve skill from vamp to powerful vamp lord with the rather classic feats such as life steal, dominate, phase, convert to bat/back to vamp (like in DWIGGS one round each for transformation) but also something special such as transform into pink (it´s absolutely mandatory that it´s pink!) fog – invulnerable fog that is!
    in this fog form, the vamp lord can practically do little else than flee like a thief in the night. Some magic can harm the fog.

    Also ghosts are a little scarce in the game…

    I´ll think of some more stuff – anyway : looking forward to this DLC!

    #133630

    Kaiosama TLJ
    Member
    #133634

    Fenraellis
    Member

    That, and the Deathbringer is a vampire…

    #133641

    I guess the reason the chest plate bothers me more than anything else is that it’s such a clearly gendered thing in addition to just being plain dumb. I do think a good designer should consider the issues you raise here as well, though!

    Well, the utility part depends on what you mean by “utility” and while the piece certainly is gendered, the badness of that depends on the context.

    If you understand “utility” in a modern sense, then yes, such a piece on the armor is dangerous if it is all there is, and “merely decorative” if it is a bit of extra finery.

    Of course, for an ancient/medieval noble person, armor was also supposed to look pretty and have mystical alignments (some expensive chamfrons, practical horse head armor, have decorative points to make them unicorns).

    Then there is the tradition of the “muscle cuirass”, which was used in combat (albeit a fairly simple version). A highly detailed example: muscle curiass, bronze, 4th bce.

    Athena also had a gorgon bearing aegis armor bit.

    The idea with this is that, if women were allowed to fight commonly in a pseudo medieval/ancient society, that the wealthy ones would want to have armor that identified them as parallel to, but different from, masculine muscle armor.

    A 15th century imaginative version is here for the Iranian queen Tomyris. imaginative armor tomyris

    Japan, which does have a tradition of female samurai fighting (naginata’s are the most closely associated weapon) uses make up (and the absence of a mustache) to identify women in art: Tomoe Gozen in armor

    In practice, women would fight in armor customized to fit them just like the mens’, and would usually be perceived as “passing as male”.

    #133645

    Then there is the tradition of the “muscle cuirass”, which was used in combat (albeit a fairly simple version). A highly detailed example:

    eh, the pictures aren’t showing up for me, so here are the links:

    muscle curiass:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_cuirass

    Iranian queen Tomyris

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomyris

    Japanese Onna-bugeisha (warrior woman) Yoshu Chikanobu:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomoe_Gozen#mediaviewer/File:Y%C5%8Dsh%C5%AB_Chikanobu_Tomoe_Gozen.jpg

Viewing 30 posts - 151 through 180 (of 180 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.