About the Elvish & Dwarvish units.

miyo · Post by **miyo** » November 6th, 2004, 2:26 pm

Fama wrote:A friend of mine kept on bragging about this, so here it goes:
Shouldn't the Elvish & Dwarvish units be Elven & Dwarven? Like "Elven archer" and "Dwarven fighter"? Or is there are reason for them to be Elvish & Dwarvish? (Everytime I see the name "Elvish" I think about Elvis... Elvish scout... Hmm...)

Why must we use the Tolkien way? Wesnoth is not Lord of the Rings.

- Miyo

Post by **turin** » November 6th, 2004, 3:23 pm

miyo wrote:
Fama wrote:A friend of mine kept on bragging about this, so here it goes:
Shouldn't the Elvish & Dwarvish units be Elven & Dwarven? Like "Elven archer" and "Dwarven fighter"? Or is there are reason for them to be Elvish & Dwarvish? (Everytime I see the name "Elvish" I think about Elvis... Elvish scout... Hmm...)
Why must we use the Tolkien way? Wesnoth is not Lord of the Rings.

- Miyo

it sounds better, and IMHO tolkiens reasons for doing it apply here too.

pg · Post by pg » November 6th, 2004, 5:39 pm

Does this really matter in the slightest? It's "ish" right now and it would be work to change it without any real advantage.

Post by **turin** » November 6th, 2004, 5:52 pm

pg wrote:Does this really matter in the slightest? It's "ish" right now and it would be work to change it without any real advantage.

asthetically it looks better.

i mean, the same argument you gave applied to cavalry (was renamed cavalryman, and good thing it was), and orcish crossbow -> crossbowman.

yeah, its work to change, but it makes the game look more polished. (to those who think its a good idea in the first place).

autolycus · Post by **autolycus** » November 6th, 2004, 5:58 pm

Actually, I'm sure that Elvish and Elven are two slightly different adjectives. Elven would mean being totally of the Elves, while Elvish would mean possessing certain qualities from the Elves. It's easier to explain by analogy.

For example: we say 'wooden ship' meaning that the ship is made almost completely or completely of wood; we say 'greenish colour' meaning that is somewhat green or green-like but not green exactly.

Elvish (adj) and Elvish (noun) are different too. When I say 'I speak an Elvish language' I mean a language which has some things in common with what Elves speak; when I say 'I speak Elvish', I mean I speak the language itself.

So the difference between an Elven Pillager and an Elvish Pillager is that the former is an elf who behaves like a pillager, the latter is pillager who behaves like an elf.

Elvish_Pillager · Post by **Elvish_Pillager** » November 6th, 2004, 6:07 pm

autolycus wrote:So the difference between an Elven Pillager and an Elvish Pillager is that the former is an elf who behaves like a pillager, the latter is pillager who behaves like an elf.

No, it's more subtle than that: An Elven Pillager is an Elf who is a pillager; an Elvish Pillager is a pillager who is like an elf. (In fact, he also is an elf.)

Anyway, I think Elven and Dwarven sound terrible, we should keep the current names. (AND IDs, of course.)

Shadowfury333 · Post by **Shadowfury333** » November 6th, 2004, 11:19 pm

I prefer Elven and Dwarven, easier on my eyes and ears.

Shadowfury333 · Post by **Shadowfury333** » November 6th, 2004, 11:20 pm

I prefer Elven and Dwarven, easier on my eyes and ears.

Fama · Post by **Fama** » November 7th, 2004, 9:10 am

I like the elven & the dwarven better, and I left the orcish units out from the list for a reason; the "orken" just doesn't work. But I understand that there might be some reasons why you couldn't change it, and it ain't _that_ important.

PS. Thanks for moving this, didn't really know where to post.

Dacyn · Post by **Dacyn** » November 7th, 2004, 11:00 am

Fama wrote:I left the orcish units out from the list for a reason; the "orken" just doesn't work.

What about 'orc'?

Post by **freim** » November 7th, 2004, 1:57 pm

miyo wrote: Why must we use the Tolkien way? Wesnoth is not Lord of the Rings.

Because it's linguistically more correct.

Elvish_Pillager · Post by **Elvish_Pillager** » November 7th, 2004, 2:04 pm

frame wrote:
miyo wrote: Why must we use the Tolkien way? Wesnoth is not Lord of the Rings.
Because it's linguistically more correct.

Wh must we be linguistically correct? Wesnoth is not Lord of the Rings.

Also, we already have such things as Nightgaunts and Halbardiers, so why bother with elvish/elven differences?

Post by **turin** » November 7th, 2004, 2:55 pm

Elvish Pillager wrote:
frame wrote: Because it's linguistically more correct.
Wh must we be linguistically correct?

because it makes sense to, it makes the game seem better IMHO, and the majority seem to agree with me.

Elvish Pillager wrote: Wesnoth is not Lord of the Rings.

we can still be linguistically correct, though.

Elvish Pillager wrote:Also, we already have such things as Nightgaunts and Halbardiers, so why bother with elvish/elven differences?

just because we have stupid names in one place doesn't mean they all must be stupid.

Post by **freim** » November 7th, 2004, 3:09 pm

Elvish Pillager wrote: Wh must we be linguistically correct? Wesnoth is not Lord of the Rings.

I see absolutely no reason why not to be. "Wesnoth is not Lord of the Rings" is totally unrelated and irrelevant.

Dacyn · Post by **Dacyn** » November 7th, 2004, 3:10 pm

turin wrote:the majority seem to agree with me.

So would a poll be relevant on this?

The Battle for Wesnoth Forums

About the Elvish & Dwarvish units.

Re: About the Elvish & Dwarvish units.

Re: About the Elvish & Dwarvish units.

Re: About the Elvish & Dwarvish units.

Re: About the Elvish & Dwarvish units.

Re: About the Elvish & Dwarvish units.

Re: About the Elvish & Dwarvish units.

Re: About the Elvish & Dwarvish units.