Let's Rewrite Descriptions!

For writers working on documentation, story prose, announcements, and all kinds of Wesnoth text.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

Post Reply
User avatar
Gyra_Solune
Posts: 263
Joined: July 29th, 2015, 5:23 am

Re: Let's Rewrite Descriptions!

Post by Gyra_Solune » March 25th, 2016, 2:30 am

I don't think it's meant to really be like, descended from the actual style of Myrmidons, but more just that the Myrmidons were an elite mercenary troupe at a major battle, and the Nagas being pretty much the mercenaries of the ocean. I figured if anything, it's more pointing at the Myrmidon class of Fire Emblem - really fast agile sword-users. It might also be more out of consideration that the mermen and nagas are typically on hostile terms, and as the mermen are very much ancient-Greece inspired, it makes since that a title from Greek times for soldiers who attacked Troy would be used. So I think you could just keep the Myrmidon as-is, while the Fighter and Warrior designations are hardly uncommon amongst numerous unit lines.

As for the fencer I think all that matters is that they're using small, light swords. A rapier would probably be more pierce than blade since it's really a thrusting weapon, while a saber is definitively more for slashing. Sure, actual nobles used rapiers more often but eh.

User avatar
Aldarisvet
Translator
Posts: 741
Joined: February 23rd, 2015, 2:39 pm
Location: Moscow, Russia

Re: Let's Rewrite Descriptions!

Post by Aldarisvet » March 25th, 2016, 5:54 am

Rapier is definitely can be used for slashing alongside with piercing. But of course such developed hilt is needed to protect a hand against pierce attacks. Such hilts appeared only at the later history when the prevailing style was with pierce techniques.

What I see here -
http://units.wesnoth.org/1.12/pics/core ... t-arms.png
Can still be a later saber, it looks like this - https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... _3012b.jpg
Still a fencer which uses slashing attacks but not piercing is quite strange, but ok.

But It is nonsence to call this -
http://units.wesnoth.org/1.12/pics/core ... -human.png
to call this as saber. What you can see there is a rapier, but moreover such variation of the rapier that is used only for piercing.
Look at this - https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... 281%29.jpg . You cannot make slash attack with this.

And about Myrmidon. Well, the line obviously is about two-sword fighting if you look descriptions. But names of units of lvl2 and lvl3 have nothing with it. That's bad.
Last edited by Aldarisvet on March 25th, 2016, 7:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
facebook.com/wesnothian/ - everyday something new about Wesnoth
My campaign:A Whim of Fate, also see Zombies:Introduction single map campaign
Art thread:Mostly frankenstains

User avatar
Gyra_Solune
Posts: 263
Joined: July 29th, 2015, 5:23 am

Re: Let's Rewrite Descriptions!

Post by Gyra_Solune » March 25th, 2016, 7:37 am

I think that's just a bit of slight iffiness on the attack icon. Really it's not a big deal - rapier-looking swords immediately signal to someone 'fancy noble guy' - but for gameplay purposes it was intentional that the attack type be blade and not pierce. I'd defer to the unit portraits? And the icon only really shows the hilt. The actual blade part isn't visible.

And really the problem with dual sword titles is that almost no actual armies did that. Warriors had shields and spears in almost every case, because a sword in each hand does you little good when it's more important to not die, and humans really aren't agile enough, especially in a battlefield, to get by off just dodging everything. So there's extremely little in the way of actual titles for that. In Wesnoth the word 'myrmidon' is probably just a semi-exotic elite title and again, I imagine more chosen because it's a term familiar to Fire Emblem people, and it generally just sounds nice. It's typically ideal for level 3 units to have distinct, unique identifiers? It marks them as the best of the best and that their specific unique properties have reached their nadir, so having a single term to identify them makes them more recognizable and easier to communicate in a multiplayer context, i.e. 'there's probably an avenger in that forest' or so!

also spring break is inbound so I will probably be able to finish all this up for campaign things!

User avatar
Aldarisvet
Translator
Posts: 741
Joined: February 23rd, 2015, 2:39 pm
Location: Moscow, Russia

Re: Let's Rewrite Descriptions!

Post by Aldarisvet » March 25th, 2016, 8:20 am

You can easely invent logical line which suits descriptions about naga's two-sword style, something like
fighter -> ambidexter -> dimachaerus

Instead of it we have what we have. That tales about Myrmidons are no more than a facepalm. With same success you could name them Spartans. It would be suitable to name some ant-soldiers by the name of Myrmidons.
facebook.com/wesnothian/ - everyday something new about Wesnoth
My campaign:A Whim of Fate, also see Zombies:Introduction single map campaign
Art thread:Mostly frankenstains

User avatar
Eagle_11
Posts: 757
Joined: November 20th, 2013, 12:20 pm

Re: Let's Rewrite Descriptions!

Post by Eagle_11 » March 25th, 2016, 9:19 am

WINR

User avatar
Aldarisvet
Translator
Posts: 741
Joined: February 23rd, 2015, 2:39 pm
Location: Moscow, Russia

Re: Let's Rewrite Descriptions!

Post by Aldarisvet » March 25th, 2016, 9:56 am

Eagle_11 wrote:WINR
This WINR is no more than a perfect instrument to use double standarts and to cover mistakes. But, for example, Hoplite was called Hoplite bacause of reality, is not he? And it is a suitable name.
Names of units should reflect descriptions, and that have nothing with WINR.
You may say that it is too late to change names of naga units, ok. We can make more suitable line in our language and I saw in other languages that they used another word than Myrmidon for it. Also it is possible to change an attack icon of rapier for saber icon. Heh, I know that it is doubtful that someone would make new and correct icon. So nothing will change. But at least those who read this thread would know about differencies between saber and rapier.

Possibly it is a good idea to make some list of wesnoth gaffes. Like Woses that are actually Ents/Treants or Shyde that is actually Sidhe.
Or like Sky drake that was originally named that way because he was supposed to attack from the air and hence he have best defence rate on plain amongst drakes (except Hurricane of course) - 50% vs common 40%. But still he lands on ground before attacking as Glider does.
Also I was wondering how it is possible that a unit with two axes is called deathblade. Well, originaly he had two swords, that is more understandable.

_________________

Btw look at old Lisar. What she holding is 100% rapier. Variation of it that can be used for slashing attacks.
Attachments
vmvBJjtbg5g.jpg
facebook.com/wesnothian/ - everyday something new about Wesnoth
My campaign:A Whim of Fate, also see Zombies:Introduction single map campaign
Art thread:Mostly frankenstains

User avatar
Gyra_Solune
Posts: 263
Joined: July 29th, 2015, 5:23 am

Re: Let's Rewrite Descriptions!

Post by Gyra_Solune » March 25th, 2016, 7:39 pm

Well the Hoplite was called the Hoplite because there's a very intentional classical Greek theme going on with the mermen. I mean they use tridents and javelins and their most powerful seers are entitled sirens and even their healing mermaid variants have sort of an Oracle of Delphi-looking thing going on, and they all are based in a totally-not-Atlantis. Nagas...aren't nearly as well-defined, as a society. They're amphibious snake people, they use swords, that's about it. They're pretty much sea brigands in almost all scenarios. Giving them names like you suggested, however, implies sort of an Ancient Roman motif that they...really don't have. I couldn't pick out a real design undercurrent to their armor, the closest thing that comes to mind is like...Egyptian? Maybe Turkic? All that we can really say is that they're typically mercenary entities that are sometimes in conflict with the orderly Merfolk society - and the Myrmidons were a mercenary entitity that were once in conflict with an orderly Greek society. And I dunno. It just sounds and looks a little better and more fitting for snake people. I could see it being a term that emerges from a reptilian language more easily.

I do fairly well agree that it'd be cool for the Glider line to attack while still airborne. But that's more a matter of how art was developed. I might need to ask for a link of where the Drake redesign was underway as that was clearly a massive project a few years ago that I imagine was a huge and rapidly-developed undertaking. Maybe someone brought up that they wanted Gliders to attack from the air but it was turned down for some reason - I can't know art decisions without understanding why they're there, hence why I make the writing decisions I have based on what I'm presented with. Hence why, for example, I'm going to assume the typical 'rapier' isn't really a thing in Wesnoth, and the slender, noble swords with those specific hilts are just built to be lightweight slashing weapons as an alternative to the very heavy broadswords almost everyone else uses - because everyone who has those types of swords uses them as blade attacks that are never called rapiers.

User avatar
johndh
Posts: 591
Joined: June 6th, 2010, 4:03 am
Location: Music City

Re: Let's Rewrite Descriptions!

Post by johndh » March 27th, 2016, 1:34 am

Names for unit lines can be hard to come up with. We don't want every line to be Fighter - Warrior - Champion, because that's bland; but we don't want to make up names in fictitious languages to end up with Elvish Gylgwynnyn, Dwarvish Svarstrrgarnr, etc., because those names look silly and don't tell you what the unit is (same problem with Khalifate); so we end up taking different terms from Earth's history and misapplying them outside of their historical context, which is fine for more generic terms like Ranger or Peltast, but isn't good for more specific ones like Janissary or Templar. The best ones I've seen are names constructed out of regular words that describe the unit's purpose in a flavor appropriate for the faction, like Steelclad, Tempest, or Flameheart. If we wanted to rename the Myrmidon, that's the approach I'd go for.
Gyra_Solune wrote:Nagas...aren't nearly as well-defined, as a society. They're amphibious snake people, they use swords, that's about it. They're pretty much sea brigands in almost all scenarios. Giving them names like you suggested, however, implies sort of an Ancient Roman motif that they...really don't have. I couldn't pick out a real design undercurrent to their armor, the closest thing that comes to mind is like...Egyptian? Maybe Turkic?
Nagas are originally from the mythology of India and southeast Asia, and I think the armor of the Myrmidon most matches that part of the world.
Hence why, for example, I'm going to assume the typical 'rapier' isn't really a thing in Wesnoth, and the slender, noble swords with those specific hilts are just built to be lightweight slashing weapons as an alternative to the very heavy broadswords almost everyone else uses - because everyone who has those types of swords uses them as blade attacks that are never called rapiers.
Well, let's look at the art. In the sprites, the Fencer line all wield sabres. The portraits disagree. The Fencer seems to be holding some variety of broadsword or side-sword -- too wide to be a rapier, and apparently straight and double-edged (so, not a sabre). The Duelist is harder to assess, since all we can really tell is that it's somewhat narrow and has a complex hilt, so I think you could make an equally strong case for sabre, backsword, side-sword, or rapier. The Master-at-Arms is holding a sabre, and I won't disagree if you call it a hanger.

Regarding that old portrait of Li'sar, it's been replaced for a reason. ;) Anyway, even if we took it as the current canon, it's clearly a two-handed weapon, so it wouldn't be used anything like a rapier, so I'd probably classify it as a relatively narrow longsword with a complex hilt. It seems about the right length for either a longsword or a rapier, but being built for two hands suggests to me that it's mostly a cutting weapon and that the point of balance is probably farther away from the hand than in most rapiers, suggesting that it would perform more like a longsword than a rapier.

I don't think we have any definitive proof that rapiers are a thing in Wesnoth, so let's consider whether it would make sense for them to exist there. In order for that, we need to consider what a rapier does well. A rapier is very long, one-handed, and primarily built for thrusting, but it does have some cutting capability. Against any other type of one-handed sword, you'll have the opponent skewered before he can get close enough to hit you, but it's really only suited for unarmored opponents. For a man-about-town who is concerned about defending his (and his lady's) honor, or fending off thugs in the alleys of Dan Tonk, it could be useful. I'd conjecture that a rapier's length would make it unwieldy for half-swording, and it generally lacks the big, sturdy pommel and crossguard that make its ancestors useful against armor (hint: you flip the sword around and use it as a hammer). So basically, a rapier doesn't make sense on the battlefield of Wesnoth because most of your opponents wear armor that you don't have a way to defeat. A rapier would be quite functional in a civilian context, but without a use on the battlefield, I doubt it would have developed at all, unless there is a pretty hardcore dueling culture among the Wesnothian gentry.
It's spelled "definitely", not "definately". "Defiantly" is a different word entirely.

User avatar
Celtic_Minstrel
Developer
Posts: 1469
Joined: August 3rd, 2012, 11:26 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Let's Rewrite Descriptions!

Post by Celtic_Minstrel » March 28th, 2016, 5:24 am

Aldarisvet wrote:I am working on the translation now and found a silly mistake that has origins from the English version. Units of fencer line have sabre attacks. But anyone who had something with fencing knows that sabres could not have so developed hilt. Obviously it is a rapier as you can see on the attack image picture and portraits. Just check the Wikipedia and images there.
Looking at the portraits for the L1 and L3, I think I agree that it's more of a rapier than a sabre, though the both are fencing weapons so there's certainly some relationship between them.
Aldarisvet wrote:Who really have saber-like swords are nagas.
This however I'm not so sure about — the naga's weapon strikes me as more like a "cutlass" or "scimitar". Though, Wikipedia seems to classify both as a type of sabre... still, the blade is broader than anything I would think of as a sabre (and the images available on the Wikipedia sabre article).
Aldarisvet wrote:We trying to create logical translation for fighter - warrior - myrmidon but its hard with so illogical line. We found no evidence that myrmidons ever used two-sword fighting style and that's really ehh.. disappointing. Possible it would be good to rename it dimachaerus - gladiator type of ancient Rome which used two swords.
I don't really think it's important to directly reference the two-sword style. Just make up something that sort of fits — it's probably where the English name came from, anyway*. (And I wouldn't support renaming it to something like "dimachaerus", because that feels like a more awkward-sounding word than "myrmidon".)

(*Though, perhaps someone like Jetrel could give you some real background into the origin of why it's called "myrmidon". There might even be a good reason.)
Author of The Black Cross of Aleron campaign and Default++ era.
Maintainer of Steelhive.

User avatar
johndh
Posts: 591
Joined: June 6th, 2010, 4:03 am
Location: Music City

Re: Let's Rewrite Descriptions!

Post by johndh » March 29th, 2016, 12:35 am

Celtic_Minstrel wrote: Looking at the portraits for the L1 and L3, I think I agree that it's more of a rapier than a sabre, though the both are fencing weapons so there's certainly some relationship between them.
I'm not an expert, so take what I say with a grain of salt, but to the best of my knowledge they come from very different lineages, have very different properties, and serve very different roles. They're basically polar opposites, really. The rapier is primarily a thrusting weapon, so it's very long, relatively narrow, completely straight, and relatively stiff, and the point of balance is usually quite close to the hand. Sabres are cutting weapons, so they're curved, and some can still thrust to some extent but other examples are so curved that thrusting is basically out of the question.
Extraneous details on lineages:
If you want some more thorough breakdowns on this material, here are some experts on the topic:
All about sabres
Medieval arming sword to renaissance sidesword and rapier
I don't really think it's important to directly reference the two-sword style. Just make up something that sort of fits — it's probably where the English name came from, anyway*. (And I wouldn't support renaming it to something like "dimachaerus", because that feels like a more awkward-sounding word than "myrmidon".)
Do you normally translate loanwords? Myrmidon is borrowed from Greek.
Celtic_Minstrel wrote: This however I'm not so sure about — the naga's weapon strikes me as more like a "cutlass" or "scimitar".
I'd say they're closest to a Chinese dao. The hilt is basically identical, and the blade shape is strongly reminiscent of some types of dao as well (minus the serrations).
It's spelled "definitely", not "definately". "Defiantly" is a different word entirely.

User avatar
Celtic_Minstrel
Developer
Posts: 1469
Joined: August 3rd, 2012, 11:26 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Let's Rewrite Descriptions!

Post by Celtic_Minstrel » March 29th, 2016, 3:11 am

johndh wrote: I'm not an expert, so take what I say with a grain of salt, but to the best of my knowledge they come from very different lineages, have very different properties, and serve very different roles. They're basically polar opposites, really. The rapier is primarily a thrusting weapon, so it's very long, relatively narrow, completely straight, and relatively stiff, and the point of balance is usually quite close to the hand. Sabres are cutting weapons, so they're curved, and some can still thrust to some extent but other examples are so curved that thrusting is basically out of the question.
Extraneous details on lineages:
Eh, okay then. Fencing does use a sabre, though I have no idea how closely that's related to actual sabres used for real combat, and the rapier is also a fencing weapon, but I guess that doesn't necessarily mean they're closely related.
johndh wrote:I'd say they're closest to a Chinese dao. The hilt is basically identical, and the blade shape is strongly reminiscent of some types of dao as well (minus the serrations).
Yeah, that does look quite similar, though I personally would prefer to see it called "cutlass" (or just "sword", as currently) than "dao".
Author of The Black Cross of Aleron campaign and Default++ era.
Maintainer of Steelhive.

User avatar
johndh
Posts: 591
Joined: June 6th, 2010, 4:03 am
Location: Music City

Re: Let's Rewrite Descriptions!

Post by johndh » March 29th, 2016, 4:09 pm

Celtic_Minstrel wrote: Eh, okay then. Fencing does use a sabre, though I have no idea how closely that's related to actual sabres used for real combat, and the rapier is also a fencing weapon, but I guess that doesn't necessarily mean they're closely related.
Having never done any fencing, I can't really say much about the authenticity of the sport. However, there are plenty of people trying to reconstruct the historical, martial types of fencing with these weapons (like British military sabre), which are usually referred to as HEMA nowadays. There are also martial arts from other parts of the world that use sabres, like shastarvidiya (sp?), but I don't know very much at all about them either.
Celtic_Minstrel wrote:Yeah, that does look quite similar, though I personally would prefer to see it called "cutlass" (or just "sword", as currently) than "dao".
I agree. In Chinese, "dao" can refer to any kind of knife or single-edged blade, and it's often translated as "sabre" to differentiate it from the straight, double-edged jian. I think "cutlass" would also apply well to this type of dao, and would reinforce the nagas' aquatic theme. And of course, all of the above can still be called "sword". :)

Now, on the topic of the Fencer line, the sprites and the unit descriptions agree that they wield sabres, and it's really just the attack icons that might be an issue, but really I don't think there's any rule that says a sabre can't have that kind of hilt, especially considering that this is not a historical Earth setting. There's bound to be variations among individuals, especially for a unit like the Fencer who appear to be mostly upper-class gentlemen who probably purchase their own gear and serve in the military as a source of thrill and prestige, so I'm sure that many of them would try to stand out from their peers and use whatever sword they like.
It's spelled "definitely", not "definately". "Defiantly" is a different word entirely.

User avatar
Aldarisvet
Translator
Posts: 741
Joined: February 23rd, 2015, 2:39 pm
Location: Moscow, Russia

Re: Let's Rewrite Descriptions!

Post by Aldarisvet » March 29th, 2016, 4:55 pm

If you look on sprites of fencer line, you will see that despite blades are slightly curved what may made you think that its a sabre, hilts have a cup-form that you can see in the attack icon (so hilts of sprites fit to the icon but contradict portraits), but this hilts are from piercing-only variation of a rapier. So we have total nonsense in sprites - curved blades and cup hilts (piercing-only hilts). Cup hilts cannot be suitable for slashing weapon, this is obvious.
Year, johndh, sabre can't have that type of hilt. That type of hilt (as in icon) needed to put fingers deep into the cup, totally another way to hold a weapon compared a way you hold a sword. Oh, people who had no fencing practice have no idea about this. But just look at differences between sport rapier (epee) and sport sabre.
Also only Duelist holding his weapon right way in the sprite, lol.
facebook.com/wesnothian/ - everyday something new about Wesnoth
My campaign:A Whim of Fate, also see Zombies:Introduction single map campaign
Art thread:Mostly frankenstains

User avatar
johndh
Posts: 591
Joined: June 6th, 2010, 4:03 am
Location: Music City

Re: Let's Rewrite Descriptions!

Post by johndh » March 29th, 2016, 6:48 pm

Aldarisvet wrote: Year, johndh, sabre can't have that type of hilt. That type of hilt (as in icon) needed to put fingers deep into the cup, totally another way to hold a weapon compared a way you hold a sword. Oh, people who had no fense practice have no idea about this. But just look at differences between sport rapier (epee) and sport sabre.
Oh, good point! I hadn't considered the difference in how you have to hold the weapon. :hmm:
It's spelled "definitely", not "definately". "Defiantly" is a different word entirely.

User avatar
pyndragon
Posts: 89
Joined: February 20th, 2013, 10:10 pm
Location: Midwestern United States

Re: Let's Rewrite Descriptions!

Post by pyndragon » April 8th, 2016, 6:01 am

Celtic_Minstrel wrote:I haven't played DiD, but in Delfador's Memoirs, he brings ghosts (and, I think also ghouls) back from some sort of "land of the dead" place. Now, I didn't finish the campaign, so I might've missed some big reveal later, but to me this seems like a case of ghosts that came into existence without the intervention of any mage.
Spoiler:
Celtic_Minstrel wrote:Regarding mudcrawlers, I'm not opposed to the idea that they are, essentially, a created race - some mage conjured them up centuries ago, and they escaped and learned to fend for themselves, or something like that.
In mainline, mudcrawlers seem to mostly appear alongside dark magi (TRoW S4a) or Saurian magi (TRoW S17a and S17b). In UtBS S1, they appear alone but contextually were
Spoiler:
These are the only four mainline appearances AFAIK.
Celtic_Minstrel wrote:I'm not sure on the question of death knights in Wesnoth. I recall a death knight in HttT with no necromancer present, but that doesn't in itself imply that no necromancer had a hand in the death knight's existence (unless I'm forgetting something). In my own interpretation, a death knight is more like a lich than other forms of undead - they've become undead through their own actions rather than from the actions of someone else. However, I don't think there's anything to support that in the Wesnoth lore, so framing them as an ordinary skeleton which happened to belong to some particular charismatic and strong-willed leader, and possibly one who broke free of the necromancer's control, seems reasonable to me.
HttT is a very strong source of lore on this. First there is the Death Knight in S15 with a complex role, and then in S19b, Delfador speaks on the matter:
These Death Knights appear to be minions enslaved by the Lich-Lord. This one must be particularly powerful, since Death Knights are usually strong-willed spirits on their own.
The narrator may later say:
As the last of its generals falls, an ear-splitting screech escapes from the lich. It is clear that controlling such powerful spirits has drained it significantly, and it is seething in anger towards you.
Likewise in UtBS S3, a Death Knight is presented as a powerful free agent.
AKA pydsigner
Current maintainer of The North Wind and author of Heroics Mode.

Post Reply