[forum] A question about an FPI
Moderator: Forum Moderators
Forum rules
Before posting a new idea, you must read the following:
Before posting a new idea, you must read the following:
[forum] A question about an FPI
Pardon me if it is against the rules to question the FPI list in any way. However, there was one thing that I thought about in it.
Is questioning this against the rules? If so, please lock this thread.
The logic behind the reasoning given against this FPI, however, seems to fall for the slippery slope fallacy. It states that asking for the ability to make abilities that directly provide immunity without needing to resort to WML trickery will lead to people asking for things that trump this ability, and so on an so forth - it is assuming that one action will snowball into other actions that go in the same general direction. As I mentioned before, this is a fallacious argument.FPI list wrote:24. There should be an ability that cancels out Poison/Magic/Drain/etc.
Result: The developers feel that this would lead to an 'arms race' where eg. "Immunity to Poison" would result in the creation of "Super Poison that even effects the Immune", "Immunity to even Super-Poison" etc. resulting in 'levels' of abilities. The developers feel that this would add an unwanted complexity to the game.
Is questioning this against the rules? If so, please lock this thread.
I'm just... a guy...
I'm back for now, I might get started on some work again.
I'm back for now, I might get started on some work again.
Re: A question about an FPI
I think the difference is that (I assume) you're asking for an ability as in a type ability WML tag. Whereas the frequent proposers of that idea wanted a unit in game with an ability like that.
- Ken_Oh
- Moderator Emeritus
- Posts: 2178
- Joined: February 6th, 2006, 4:03 am
- Location: Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Re: [forum] A question about an FPI
It isn't the slippery slope fallacy that the devs are worried about. They just don't want multiple depths of abilities/anti-abilities for mainline anymore than there already is.A Guy wrote:The logic behind the reasoning given against this FPI, however, seems to fall for the slippery slope fallacy.
Re: [forum] A question about an FPI
For what it's worth, undead and mechanical units are already immune to poison, and I've yet to see someone asking for super-poison affecting those.
It's spelled "definitely", not "definately". "Defiantly" is a different word entirely.
- Ken_Oh
- Moderator Emeritus
- Posts: 2178
- Joined: February 6th, 2006, 4:03 am
- Location: Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Re: [forum] A question about an FPI
The devs realize this. That's what I meant by "anymore than there already is."
Honestly, I think this FPI rule isn't as important as just saying "mainline isn't going to change much."
Honestly, I think this FPI rule isn't as important as just saying "mainline isn't going to change much."
Re: [forum] A question about an FPI
Yeah, a (corrosion?) special would be nice for UMC. Maybe also a immune trait, that protects against potion, but not plague or drain, etc.johndh wrote:For what it's worth, undead and mechanical units are already immune to poison, and I've yet to see someone asking for super-poison affecting those.
Formerly known as the creator of Era of Chaos and maintainer of The Aragwaithi and the Era of Myths.
-
- Posts: 179
- Joined: December 21st, 2009, 12:10 am
- Location: Somewhere
Re: [forum] A question about an FPI
Actually, that's not true. I've seen at least one UMC that planned to have a "mold" weapon special, which was poison which affected the undead.johndh wrote:For what it's worth, undead and mechanical units are already immune to poison, and I've yet to see someone asking for super-poison affecting those.
*has nothing else to say*
Necromancy most foul! - Doc Paterson
All hail my new campaign, Lords of the North! Now on the add-ons server!
Necromancy most foul! - Doc Paterson
All hail my new campaign, Lords of the North! Now on the add-ons server!
Re: [forum] A question about an FPI
Entirely unrelated posts are entirely unrelated.
Re: [forum] A question about an FPI
Ah, I see your point. I wanted to suggest such a thing a while ago, but I remembered the FPI. I was never a fan of the logic behind it, but I decided to bring it up because I had a little time and decided to finally get this out of the way.Gambit wrote:I think the difference is that (I assume) you're asking for an ability as in a type ability WML tag. Whereas the frequent proposers of that idea wanted a unit in game with an ability like that.
I'm just... a guy...
I'm back for now, I might get started on some work again.
I'm back for now, I might get started on some work again.