Proposal: Eliminate the Holy damage type.

Discussion among members of the development team.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

Post Reply
User avatar
Sapient
Inactive Developer
Posts: 4452
Joined: November 26th, 2005, 7:41 am
Contact:

Post by Sapient » November 29th, 2006, 10:15 pm

Darth Fool wrote: Isn't it as simple as adding an event in the new unit that filters on the new unit as defender where the attack has the special holy and multiplying the damage by some value?
That method would produce incorrect values in the attack dialogs and AI calculations (which would be unacceptable, IMO). There are a couple of better ways of doing it, however, they aren't really simple.
http://www.wesnoth.org/wiki/User:Sapient... "Looks like your skills saved us again. Uh, well at least, they saved Soarin's apple pie."

Gus
Posts: 520
Joined: May 16th, 2005, 5:40 pm
Location: France

Post by Gus » December 2nd, 2006, 1:13 am

Ok, i apologize if this post proves to not be helpful at all...

I have been reading this thread, and i thought that a decent replacement for Holy could be, simply, "Life" damage.
Obviously, it should work well enough against Undead, and it could still work, even though in a reduced manner, against the other units. It works well with healing too.
The only slight problem i could see is that using "life" magic to hurt living being looks a bit like necromancy/death magic. I'm not sure this is of importance though, since the change of name should probably go with a change of design for the "white" mages, and the blade of a Paladin should probably get a new "hallowed" special.

Anyway, that was my proposal, feel free to criticize it =)
Hard work may pay off in the long run, but laziness always pays off right away.

User avatar
Temuchin Khan
Posts: 1711
Joined: September 3rd, 2004, 6:35 pm
Location: Player 6 on the original Agaia map

Post by Temuchin Khan » December 2nd, 2006, 2:25 pm

Gus wrote:Ok, i apologize if this post proves to not be helpful at all...

I have been reading this thread, and i thought that a decent replacement for Holy could be, simply, "Life" damage.
Obviously, it should work well enough against Undead, and it could still work, even though in a reduced manner, against the other units. It works well with healing too.
The only slight problem i could see is that using "life" magic to hurt living being looks a bit like necromancy/death magic. I'm not sure this is of importance though, since the change of name should probably go with a change of design for the "white" mages, and the blade of a Paladin should probably get a new "hallowed" special.

Anyway, that was my proposal, feel free to criticize it =)
"Vital" might make more sense in this context. The idea would be that this damage type uses magic to weaken the bonds that hold a being together. In the case of Undead, it would weaken the magic that holds them together. In the case of normal creatures, it would attack their bodily processes.

However, figuring out how such damage type could possibly hurt demons will be difficult. On that score, I haven't been able to think of anything that makes sense.

I still vote for "radiant" as my preferred name for a new damage type that would replace "holy."

Gus
Posts: 520
Joined: May 16th, 2005, 5:40 pm
Location: France

Post by Gus » December 2nd, 2006, 3:45 pm

No, not "vital" but "life" ^^ Life magic, as in a magic which can act on Life and Unlife. Which can both give life (heal) and take it away (attack), and also destroy the unliving aberrations.
Hard work may pay off in the long run, but laziness always pays off right away.

User avatar
Temuchin Khan
Posts: 1711
Joined: September 3rd, 2004, 6:35 pm
Location: Player 6 on the original Agaia map

Post by Temuchin Khan » December 2nd, 2006, 10:21 pm

Gus wrote:No, not "vital" but "life" ^^ Life magic, as in a magic which can act on Life and Unlife. Which can both give life (heal) and take it away (attack), and also destroy the unliving aberrations.
Yes, and that is among the meanings of "vital" and "vitality."

Besides, "the vitality of the blade" sounds better than "the life of the blade."

But "the radiance of the blade" still sounds the best.

Gus
Posts: 520
Joined: May 16th, 2005, 5:40 pm
Location: France

Post by Gus » December 2nd, 2006, 10:30 pm

Well, "the vitality of the blade" and "the life of the blade" sound equally ridiculous to me ^^ And the same goes for "the radiance".
Now don't get me wrong, i don't think radiant is such a bad name. I just think that it doesn't mean much. Life does. It has been used in a number of other fantasy settings before. It gives a direct explanation for pretty much everything we need (healing, hurting, fighting undead). Radiance needs complicated or at least elaborate explanations. Life is obvious. And Life is much more obvious and wide than Vitality or Vital magic. Much simpler, plainer.

And, to go back to the "sentence"... Blade, Impact, and Pierce do not even belong to the same category of nouns. Blade describes an object or part of it, Impact describes the manner a force is applied, and Pierce describes the property of an object. Sharp, Blunt, and Piercing would be the same category, i assume. The point being: i don't think it's a good idea to reject a name (whatever it may be, this is obviously not limited to my proposal) because it doesn't fit a strict linguistic criterion (that even the most basic and well-accepted types don't fit).
Hard work may pay off in the long run, but laziness always pays off right away.

User avatar
Temuchin Khan
Posts: 1711
Joined: September 3rd, 2004, 6:35 pm
Location: Player 6 on the original Agaia map

Post by Temuchin Khan » December 3rd, 2006, 12:07 am

Gus wrote:Well, "the vitality of the blade" and "the life of the blade" sound equally ridiculous to me ^^ And the same goes for "the radiance".
Unless the blade is shining. Then "radiance" does make sense....
Gus wrote:Now don't get me wrong, i don't think radiant is such a bad name. I just think that it doesn't mean much. Life does. It has been used in a number of other fantasy settings before. It gives a direct explanation for pretty much everything we need (healing, hurting, fighting undead).
But it does not indicate in any way whatsoever doing damage to demons.

On the other hand, insofar as the Bible speaks of God as "dwelling in unapproachable light," the concept of "radiant damage" can include everything that is included under "holy" while remaining open to a wider range of interpretations -- perhaps including even lasers.
Gus wrote:Radiance needs complicated or at least elaborate explanations. Life is obvious. And Life is much more obvious and wide than Vitality or Vital magic. Much simpler, plainer.
Not to me. Honestly, if I saw "Life" as a damage type, my first reaction would be laugh. I'm sorry if you feel hurt, but that would be my first reaction.
Gus wrote:And, to go back to the "sentence"... Blade, Impact, and Pierce do not even belong to the same category of nouns.
This is true.
Gus wrote:Sharp, Blunt, and Piercing would be the same category, i assume.
No. "Sharp, Blunt, Pointy" or "Slash, Crush, Pierce" or "Cutting, Impacting, Transfixing" would be in the same category.
Gus wrote:The point being: i don't think it's a good idea to reject a name (whatever it may be, this is obviously not limited to my proposal) because it doesn't fit a strict linguistic criterion (that even the most basic and well-accepted types don't fit).
What can I say? I'm an aspiring writer, and the question of whether a linguistic formulation sounds good is important to me. Others may have different priorities, but that is one of mine.

Sangel
Moderator Emeritus
Posts: 2232
Joined: March 26th, 2004, 10:58 pm
Location: New York, New York

Post by Sangel » December 3rd, 2006, 12:11 am

This is probably not an issue which will be solved by debate - opinions are too varying - but I thought I'd chip in to say that I think a damage type along the lines of "Radiance" works well, though "Arcane" and "Mystic" have their charms. The only real concern with "Mystic" is that it would be a damage type used AGAINST "Mystic creatures", which may or may not be a problem.
"Pure logic is the ruin of the spirit." - Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

Gus
Posts: 520
Joined: May 16th, 2005, 5:40 pm
Location: France

Post by Gus » December 3rd, 2006, 12:27 am

Temuchin Khan wrote:Unless the blade is shining. Then "radiance" does make sense....
So you're hurting them by light? I thought that earlier in the thread, this proposal had been rejected.
But it does not indicate in any way whatsoever doing damage to demons.
It affects life. That means anything, that's the great thing about life.
On the other hand, insofar as the Bible speaks of God as "dwelling in unapproachable light," the concept of "radiant damage" can include everything that is included under "holy" while remaining open to a wider range of interpretations -- perhaps including even lasers.
Errrr, since God is the basis of everything, arguably any kind of damage is related to god. He's mentioned wielding swords of flame too, so that makes Blade and Fire a godly manifestation i guess? =)
Not to me. Honestly, if I saw "Life" as a damage type, my first reaction would be laugh. I'm sorry if you feel hurt, but that would be my first reaction.
I'm not hurt at all, seeing as, as i've said, it has been used in a number of fantasy settings. I'd tend to trust the authors of those settings more than you. I'm sorry if you feel hurt ;)
What can I say? I'm an aspiring writer, and the question of whether a linguistic formulation sounds good is important to me. Others may have different priorities, but that is one of mine.
Being a linguist, linguistic formulation is of prime importance to me. Not _any_ linguistic formulation, though. And in this case, the one you (and some others) used does not seem to be a good one, simply because otherwise perfectly fine names we have at the moment don't even fit well in this canvas.
In other words, i'm not saying the name should be anything, i'm saying the checking method used is not a good one.
Hard work may pay off in the long run, but laziness always pays off right away.

User avatar
Zhukov
Art Contributor
Posts: 1685
Joined: November 9th, 2005, 5:48 am
Location: Australia

Post by Zhukov » December 3rd, 2006, 12:48 am

Sangel is right. This is getting nowhere fast (unless it's been decided over IRC which would not surprise me at all).

What might help is if we know exactly what this damage type is supposed to do, in gameplay terms.
Something along the lines of:
• Undead/demons/magical constructs get -50% weakness.
• Magical/fearie ceatures like elves/mermen get -20% weakness
• Not-particularly-magic-creatures like woses/naga and maybe drakes get 0%
• 'Normal' creatures like ogres/orcs/humans/saurians/dwarves/trolls get +20% resistence.

(Now everyone can argue about which creatures go into which catagory, oh joy. Anyway, this is just an example.)

PS. I think Radiant is a bad idea. Sorry Temuchin. It doesn't sound good. It basically mean 'glowiness' which doesn't make much sense. Glowy magic damage? Nah. My preferences go towards Arcane and Mystic.

User avatar
Temuchin Khan
Posts: 1711
Joined: September 3rd, 2004, 6:35 pm
Location: Player 6 on the original Agaia map

Post by Temuchin Khan » December 3rd, 2006, 1:58 am

Zhukov wrote:I think Radiant is a bad idea. Sorry Temuchin. It doesn't sound good. It basically mean 'glowiness' which doesn't make much sense. Glowy magic damage? Nah. My preferences go towards Arcane and Mystic.
I didn't suggest it, I only defended it.

Besides, it means more than just "glowiness" "giving off light." It can also mean "emitted or transmitted by radiation," and radiation is something that can certainly cause damage. Besides, in the form of a laser beam, light is quite capable of causing damage even without radiation.

Be that as it may, I have no objections if something else is chosen.

User avatar
irrevenant
Moderator Emeritus
Posts: 3692
Joined: August 15th, 2005, 7:57 am
Location: I'm all around you.

Post by irrevenant » January 21st, 2007, 8:34 pm

In response to the issue that started this thread, IMO, the best way to handle Holy damage is to allow attacks to have multiple damage types. In that case they would just automatically deliver the highest amount of damage possible. I envision this being rare, and mostly (entirely?) used for Holy damage.

That way (eg.) a Paladin's sword will do Holy damage vs undead, but blade damage vs everyone else.

(Alternately there's the workaround of just giving him two different sword attacks - one holy, one blade).

Namewise, I think 'Holy' is fine - though it may not entirely represent the idea on a metaphysical level, it's probably what they would have called it in a metaphysical fantasy world.

P.S. Sorry for the ultra-delayed reply. I didn't notice this thread until Shadow Master referred to it in Off-Topic.

User avatar
irrevenant
Moderator Emeritus
Posts: 3692
Joined: August 15th, 2005, 7:57 am
Location: I'm all around you.

Post by irrevenant » June 9th, 2007, 5:21 am

BTW, has anyone considered 'ethereal' as an alternative name for the 'arcane' damage type? Given that it damages ethereal creatures such as ghosts or the ethereal bodies of creatures such as Walking Corses and Fae it seems more appropiate.

P.S. This looked like the appropriate thread to post this in. Apologies if it is not.

User avatar
Temuchin Khan
Posts: 1711
Joined: September 3rd, 2004, 6:35 pm
Location: Player 6 on the original Agaia map

Post by Temuchin Khan » June 9th, 2007, 2:26 pm

irrevenant wrote:BTW, has anyone considered 'ethereal' as an alternative name for the 'arcane' damage type? Given that it damages ethereal creatures such as ghosts or the ethereal bodies of creatures such as Walking Corses and Fae it seems more appropiate.

P.S. This looked like the appropriate thread to post this in. Apologies if it is not.
Gosh, this thread has so many suggestions, I don't even remember if "ethereal" was considered.

User avatar
Cuyo Quiz
Posts: 1777
Joined: May 21st, 2005, 12:02 am
Location: South America

Post by Cuyo Quiz » June 9th, 2007, 6:18 pm

irrevenant wrote:BTW, has anyone considered 'ethereal' as an alternative name for the 'arcane' damage type? Given that it damages ethereal creatures such as ghosts or the ethereal bodies of creatures such as Walking Corses and Fae it seems more appropiate.

P.S. This looked like the appropriate thread to post this in. Apologies if it is not.
I believe Ethereal and Mystical were among the musings.

Ethereal, by its meaning, didn't actually made much sense. Sure, you can damage ethereal beings, but the "damage" being "ethereal?.

Mystical was considered to overlap too much with the meaning of "magical", IIRC.
Cuyo Quiz,where madness meets me :D
Turn on, tune in, fall out.
"I know that, but every single person nags about how negative turin is; it should be in the FPI thread "Turin should give positive comments" =)"-Neorice,23 Sep 2004

Post Reply