"Unholy" damage

[derb]

Probably a FAQ but if evil creatures are often vulnerable to "holy" weapons, how about making "drain" attacks "unholy" and making some "good" characters vulnerable to them?

How about a "soul capture" attack that would (if successful) make the target unit change sides?

[turin]

You wouldn't believe how many times an unholy attack has been suggested (and rejected).

That said, a "shadow" type damage, which would basically be "unholy" but not sound so stupid and meaningless, has been proposed before by Jetryl and I support its inclusion tentatively.


As for soul capture, IIRC has also been suggested. It is NOT currently possible with WML, unfortunately, and I think it should be, not for the sake of this special but because a "hits" event would be useful otherwise...

[Glowing Fish]

Most undead have "cold" damage, which functions much like unholy. And while not many units are especially vulnerable to cold, most units don't have a bonus to defend against it.

"Soul Capture" sounds interesting. Its not that different from what "Plague" does, although you can keep the unit's status and what not. It has been used (in a way) in a custom campaign, but I can't tell you where because that would ruin the surprise.

[Jetrel]

You wouldn't believe how many times an unholy attack has been suggested (and rejected).

That said, a "shadow" type damage, which would basically be "unholy" but not sound so stupid and meaningless, has been proposed before by Jetryl and I support its inclusion tentatively.


As for soul capture, IIRC has also been suggested. It is NOT currently possible with WML, unfortunately, and I think it should be, not for the sake of this special but because a "hits" event would be useful otherwise...

Shadow is basically a way of changing absolutely nothing about the undead except for this:

The mermen would no longer be obscenely resistant to their magic damage. The drakes would no longer be especially vulnerable to their magic damage, though the drakes would not be resistant to it as they are to most other damage.

The undead would remain somewhat resistant to cold, though not nearly as much as now (60% -> 30%). Of the undead, the ghost and dark adept lines would be resistant to shadow - especially the dark adept line, which would become more so as it levelled up (think inferno drake).


No living creatures would be vulnerable to shadow damage, but, by the same token, none of them (except the mages of light) would have any resistance to it whatsoever. It would be pervasive, affecting all units alike.

The idea is to make something which is, just like darkness in the real world, NOT the true opposite of light. It is different, it is opposed to it, but it is not the symmetric opposite.

Light and shadow right now are like protons and electrons - the real opposite of light would be like a positron is to an electron. "Unlight", if you will.

[Elvish_Pillager]

The undead would remain somewhat resistant to cold, though not nearly as much as now (60% -> 30%). Of the undead, the ghost and dark adept lines would be resistant to shadow - especially the dark adept line, which would become more so as it levelled up (think inferno drake).

Skeletons and Ghosts, I think, should keep their cold resistance. Skeletons purely for realism (freezing a skeleton != useful), and Ghosts because having less resistance would make them weak to cold.

[scott]

Shadow damage. Definitely.

[xtifr]

The idea is to make something which is, just like darkness in the real world, NOT the true opposite of light. It is different, it is opposed to it, but it is not the symmetric opposite.

Light and shadow right now are like protons and electrons - the real opposite of light would be like a positron is to an electron. "Unlight", if you will.

I wonder if it's worth pointing out that "cold" is just as much of a ficticious concept as "dark". You can't have, e.g. "cold beams" any more than you can have "dark rays".

(Also, I think that light and shadow are more like electrons and electron-holes than like electrons and protons, but that's a minor quibble.)

Anyway, I like the notion of shadow damage. I'm not entirely convinced I know what it means in terms of conventional physics, but WINR, and this is magic we're dealing with here, anyway.

(edited to fix the quote attribution)

[scott]

I wonder if it's worth pointing out that "cold" is just as much of a ficticious concept as "dark". You can't have, e.g. "cold beams" any more than you can have "dark rays".

Oh, I don't know. You could have cold damage if you required a medium. You can cool air to -300°F before it liquefies. When it's -90° you can't breathe it without lung damage (as a former resident of North Dakota, this comes up sometimes).

I also don't know what shadow damage would be. Maybe it attacks your will to live. If it will be associated with drain, then there's nothing physical about it.


Do adepts lose the cold damage or do they get a second spell? If you take away cold then it does take away one of their few weapons against the drakes.

[turin]

If you want to approach is scientifically, cold is the absence of heat. So you could have cold magic be an endothermic reaction that sucks in an enormous amount of heat. (I know it would have to have a fairly complex chemical product at the end... I'm not going to try to actually come up with a reaction that would do this, it probably doesn't exist.)


But yeah, basically WINR and this is magic we're talking about.

[Monkey]

I like the idea
blade, pierce and blunt are weapon stats
fire / cold
light / shadow

how about a fear aura, just like aura of light? maybe different, it could be more like an oposite to leadership, makes not undead creatures next to the unit feel fear and lose moral, therefore diminishing attack or defense whatever.

[Darth Fool]

Wenoth purposefully avoids as much as possible having special abilities that are just the opposite of a pre-existing ability. This helps make the abilities more unique.