1) I can live with Arcane damage
2) It seems odd to move Holy damge -> Arcane damage and then move the
white mage's name to a more religious one. I would prefer either
keeping the current white mage name.
I can live with the apprentice mage, mage, master mage, arch mage line.
3) I really have no opinion on the matter, except that we really
should not share artwork in mainline between two different unit types.
If both the normal apprentice mage and woodland mage level into the
same mage unit at level 2 that is fine, but if they are two different
units, then I think there is a problem.
Finally, I don't really care too much. These are only suggestions, so
do as you will.
Dfool
On 4/2/07, Noy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi people
I've got three proposals I just want to pass on the list before they get
implemented.
#1 Holy/Arcane Damage.
I think its time that we reopen this debate and close it once and for all.
After discussing it with numerous people and looking at previous
discussions, I've decided that Arcane should be the name that we adopt.
Initially I narrowed it down to three: Mystic, Dispel and Arcane. However
Mystic I decided against because it might be linked with indian mystics or
mysticism, which are religions in their own right. Since the damage-type was
supposed to be non-denominational (though units could use it in whatever way
it wished) I thought mystic is not really appropriate.
The choice then fell to Dispel and Arcane. To be honest I like dispel,
actually I came up with it. Its very descriptive of what my original concept
for the new holy should be, which is a point in its favour. However several
people have said that they found that it was awkward in some settings, and
wanted something more emotive. Arcane fits this bill better, its mysterious,
and has none of the connotations that limit mystic. Since the concept is
supposed to be a bit supernatural, I can accept that not having a clear
descriptive name, is not a serious problem. All in all I think unless a
serious objection comes out against it, I will commit this change sometime
this week. I've spoken to most of you about it and there seems to be a lot
of support, if not an acceptance, so I hope we can get this done pretty
soon.
#2 Mage renaming.
Jetryl has put forward a proposals to rename the upper level mages,
something i think is a very good idea. His proposal is here:
http://www.wesnoth.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15012
And it looks as such:
L1 "apprentice/novice mage"
L2 "mage" "white mage"
L3 "silver mage" "master mage" "mage of light"
L4 "arch mage"
L5 "elder mage"(defador)
I think we should move forward on this, although maybe a better word than
master (Even though it is correct for period, its sounds grammatically
funny).
At the same time we might think about also changing the white mage line as
well, since we might as well do it for consistency's sake. Eleazar and I
have discussed this, and I'd personally like to see a more religiously
themed name for them (Something like Clergyman/priest and rector) because
they are religiously inspired units, While eleazar would like to use cleric
and keep mage of light. I'm not so partial either way, but it is something
to discuss.
#3 Rebel mages.
Mythological and jb have been consistent and persuasive argument about
changing the use of mages in both the elves and the loyalists. We've agreed
to it, but under several balancing stipulations. One is that the movetype
must be different from the elves, and the second is that it must have a
different alignment. So we'd like to keep it a human, mage serving the
elves, but a different starting unit than the regular mage. Given that we've
wanted to remove the white mage from the rebels inventory, I think this is a
good opportunity to do so. We'd like to create a "woodland mage" to replace
the mage in the elves. What we need is art. I was thinking that we'd have
two different level 1 mage art, but they can later share the lvl 2 and 3 and
4 art. The main change will be the woodland mage would have 5-4 magic fire
attack, rather than the 7-3. This will avoid balancing problems all
together.
Anyway, that is that, any comments?
Noy
_______________________________________________
Wesnoth-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"In theory, theory and practice are the same,
but in practice they're different."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
John W. C. McNabb
-------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Wesnoth-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
