Cockatrice

[borisblue]

Can we just have a new giant chicken monster instead?

[Kestenvarn]

I like Eternal's or Zookeeper's, but the others have too much of a mismatch between parts for my taste. I don't like monsters that look like someone just took a piece of one creature and glued it right onto something else without any concern for how it looks. (This is in reference to the appearance of the creature itself with that ridiculous green tail, not a complaint against frankensteined units.)

'Course, I meant only the good ones, or after the others have been polished. There were thirty minutes left before heading to work when I did mine, so had to cut corners to get the joke posted in time.

[Jetrel]

Note: The cockatrice is used in a scenario late in HttT; that's the only place it's used, AFAIK.


Decisions, decisions.

• The image you've made is superb, and is easily superior to the existing unit image. Some argue that it should become smaller, but we could actually make the level rather more interesting by giving the cockatrices a melee attack - I mean; we already have an attack icon for it.

• Personally, I had wanted to switch to a lizard "cockatrice". Essentially, "cockatrice" is a synonym for basilisk, and that's what I'd personally prefer to have. A small, but menacing-looking lizard. Confronted with this new art, though, it really makes me question that sentiment. As silly as the idea of a "giant chicken" is, this rendition actually makes it something other than comedic tripe.

And more than anything else, this is a rare, and exotic campaign unit, so it can be a bit goofy. If a regular unit on a faction were this strange, that would be bad, but this isn't a regular unit.


So, I guess the ball's in your court. If you want to continue with this design, I ask that you make a melee attack of the bird mauling something with its beak, in addition to the ranged attack that needs to be made. We'll probably give it a one-strike melee attack, something like 9-1.

The alternative would be making a lizardly version; just don't make a chitzy cross between the two.



...
I'm actually warming up to the "chicken" design, but I'd probably do two things if I were editing it:
• Remove the "gobbler"; the red dangly thing on the neck.
• Change the color from red to something else.
• Add more "fronds" - like the ones it has on its head, except to more places besides just the head.

[Kestenvarn]

Well, the traditional view* is really quite chimeric... I think Redeth and zookeeper are actually spot on with their jokes, since in the scenario they are termed as 'experiments' and should not necessarily be designed identically.

In heraldry the basilisk is represented as an animal with the head, torso and legs of a [censored], the tongue of a snake and the wings of a bat. The snake-like rump ends in an arrowpoint.

[Steelclad Brian]

In the scenario, cockatrices are the result of arcane experimentation, yes?

Would it be possible to randomly use more than one graphic for the same unit - say, all of the ones in this thread?

I don't know about you guys, but I'm figuring out a way to shoehorn them into my campaign and implementing that.

[Eternal]

I've always wanted to seperate the two: basilisk and cockatrice even though I know they are synonyms.

Cockatrice to me is a... well... a rooster with a lizard tail.

Basilisk to me is a more powerful than cockatrice, ancient looking lizard with more than 4 legs.

If one should ever make a basilisk for Wesnoth it should be something like I described above and not a level up for cockatrice or vice versa. IMO it should be just a different, more powerful monster with the same ability to stone with gaze.

NOTE! This is just my opinion.

just don't make a chitzy cross between the two.

Is this chitzy?

[Tux2B]

They do look more unrealistic, but not better.
And those experimentations are great! I wonder who will use them as first as an avatar

[zookeeper]

I think this is the best one so far.

[Kestenvarn]

I've always wanted to seperate the two: basilisk and cockatrice even though I know they are synonyms.

Cockatrice to me is a... well... a rooster with a lizard tail.

Basilisk to me is a more powerful than cockatrice, ancient looking lizard with more than 4 legs.

Most probably because that's how it was done in Dungeons & Dragons, making it a standard for imitations.

[kshinji]

Its feathers shouldnt be white. Rather green, orange and some red. Other colours too, but only in small amounts. No white. And it should containt some of lizard or snake. Like 2nd pair of legs and a tail. And yellow eyes, and a tongue.

I started drawing, still im bad at it.

edit:

ouch, i forgot to read whole 2bd page.

I am after basilisk, and i'm about to post you my first draft on how would i like to see it.

We could have cockatrice advancing to basilisk. maybe getting additional blow to its stoning attack.

edit:

get impressed by my art

[Noyga]

Really well done, but it looks really like a too large unit when you put it next too an existing unit.

[Stilgar]

I think this is the best one so far.

Agreed, that one rocks. Avoids being just a giant chicken while not looking stitched together from disparate parts either.

[kshinji]

Seeing the argumentation above, i feel i need to state, that i just wanted to isnpire someone with my version.

[Eternal]

Really well done, but it looks really like a too large unit when you put it next too an existing unit.

Hmm...
I guess the cockatrice looks like to be taken seriously and the size adds to that... but I am quite unsure.

[Jetrel]

I think this is the best one so far.

I agree - this is great. I'd start animating.

Really well done, but it looks really like a too large unit when you put it next too an existing unit.

Noyga - using an out-of-date unit graphic like that is a terrible comparison. If you're going to compare it to anything, use the elvish fighter, or orcish grunt.


I don't think there's anything wrong with the size he's drawn the cockatrice at; nothing in the description of the creature prevents it from being a "large" creature. In fact I find that rather more interesting.