Horatio's plan...

All things Desktop Dungeons

Re: Horatio's plan...

Postby Nandrew on Thu Aug 30, 2012 8:59 am

The "humans are the real monsters" problem is a little oversaturated itself -- far more interesting to have a morally dim conflict where neither side is particularly pleasant. Anything else is kinda preachy.

There is actually only one unambiguous group of "good guys" in the Desktop Dungeons world. Even the Life Druids of the western forest tend to be nasty and violent.

Anybody looking for a deeper story should be piecing together the lore bites in the various regional subdungeons, though. Otherwise, I like keeping the narrative unobtrusive. ;)
User avatar
Nandrew
 
Posts: 569
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 5:59 pm

Re: Horatio's plan...

Postby Lujo on Thu Aug 30, 2012 11:40 am

In the immortal words of whoever wrote the flavour text for the MtG card Orcish Artillery - "So they want to kill my men? TWO can play that game!" :D

Also, ruining someones economy completely IS about as degrading as genocide. We had a bit of both over here relatively recently and people are still wondering what was worse - war or capitalism...

And the "humans are monsters" theme is a bit oversaturated.
User avatar
Lujo
 
Posts: 2823
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 8:47 am

Re: Horatio's plan...

Postby Darvin on Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:27 pm

far more interesting to have a morally dim conflict where neither side is particularly pleasant.

This has always been my interpretation of the DD universe. The whole questing/adventure thing is still allegory for genocide, though...

There is actually only one unambiguous group of "good guys" in the Desktop Dungeons world. Even the Life Druids of the western forest tend to be nasty and violent.

Hmmm... wonder which group it is. Closest I can think of is the cloaked figure in the Naga City who appears to be trying to prevent a war between the Adventurer Kingdom and the Naga Empire.
User avatar
Darvin
 
Posts: 3102
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 1:44 am

Re: Horatio's plan...

Postby Leotamer on Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:59 am

Wargasm wrote:Wouldn't the joke be better if Horatio were more human than human, so to speak, and he actually had a high regard for his supposedly feral monster allies when the heroes are the real villains, then?

Noone is the hero, everyone is driven by greed or spite.
Leotamer
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 11:28 pm

Re: Horatio's plan...

Postby Wargasm on Fri Sep 07, 2012 1:46 pm

Speaking of in-game text, the Rogue Gold challenge boss should probably also mention that in the old days, we actually had to eat and we were lucky if we could tell one monster apart from another. ;)

EDIT: Oh, and [extreme nitpick] the ability "Poisonous" should be "Venomous." There's a technical difference between poison and venom.[/extreme nitpick]
Wargasm
 
Posts: 336
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 2:22 pm

Re: Horatio's plan...

Postby Lujo on Fri Sep 07, 2012 6:35 pm

That there isn't really a nonsubstantial nitpick, linguistics wise. Unless it is elsewhere defined that the game allows the signifier "Poisonous" to denote the meaning of "venomous" on top of what it allready means, the quality of a "poisonous" monster would rather apropriately be described as "causes poisoning upon ingestion or consumption, or an interaction in which said object is passive". So tehnicaly, it suggests a "poison on death" effect rather than "poisons on attack", with a possible implication of you ingesting the monster or bits thereof as well.

Inuitiveness and gameplay uniformity wise, yes, that IS an extreme nitpick.
User avatar
Lujo
 
Posts: 2823
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 8:47 am

Re: Horatio's plan...

Postby Fran on Sat Sep 08, 2012 12:34 pm

Well, that depends on your access to language.
In german, poisonous and venomous share the same translation, because in the german language, there is no distinction between how you're poisoned so there is only one word. Until now, I only knew the translation of the words, so it made absolutely no difference to me (in fantasy games, I always guessed venom is just a fancy way to say poison, propably coming from the middle ages, and maybe a bit stronger than regular poison).
However, now that I read your explanation of the meaning of the word, it becomes obvious that this isn't the same in meaning.
Oh well, this means I propably should look up the difference on a couple of words with the same translation now... for example, I have no clue about the difference between a dirk and a dagger, as this also shares the same translation.
User avatar
Fran
 
Posts: 410
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 7:06 pm

Re: Horatio's plan...

Postby TigerKnee on Sat Sep 08, 2012 1:46 pm

Funny thing, Mark Rosewater (head designer of Magic The Gathering) actually wrote an article on the "Poisonous" card ability about that. Yes, "Venomous" is technically the correct term but the creature deals damage through "poison counters", and they decided to go with "Poisonous" so as to not "confuse" people.
TigerKnee
 
Posts: 542
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 8:54 am

Re: Horatio's plan...

Postby Wargasm on Sat Sep 08, 2012 1:56 pm

That's a fair bit trickier; there are things called dirks and things called daggers, but there is nothing 100% consistent about when either term is used. MOST dirks are single-edged and MOST daggers are double-edged, but I've seen exceptions to this, too. The closest thing I could come up with to a consistent rule would be that just about all things I've seen classified as dirks are used for piercing/stabbing, whereas daggers tend to veer towards slashing/cutting; either could be used for the opposite job, but they'd be worse at it.

However, I don't think the distinction is ever of vital importance; if you called an emergency hotline to report someone had been potentially fatally injured by a dirk or dagger, there'd be little difference in the treatment. The difference between poison and venom would be rather large, though. (Interestingly, while one could say "envenomed", the victims of poison and venom could both properly be referred to as "poisoned", which would help explain why only pedants and native English speakers would ever know, much less care, about the difference, unless they were medical personnel.)
Wargasm
 
Posts: 336
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 2:22 pm

Re: Horatio's plan...

Postby Lujo on Sat Sep 08, 2012 8:25 pm

I know about the Mark Rosewater article, some of his stuff on MtG design and flavour in particular is actually quite worth a read.

And regarding poison and translation it's even weirder in my language - "otrovan", depending on which sylabble you stress (no stress markings unless vitaly important) means either "poisonous" or "poisonED" in the first person male singular which is the most generally used form. So there'd be a whole separate conundrum if a character with the poison boon god poisoned.

And we don't have a separate word for venom either, it's "otrov" for both. My analysis was purpusefully verbose for joke purposes, a more simple way of putting it would mean that "venomous" would be a characteristic of a living creature with "natural" poison, while "poisonous" would be a quality of a non-living thing. Reporters and such have had a tendency to use the phrase "poisonous viper" since "venomous viper" sounds too poetic and aliterative.

I'm actually down with Mark rosewater, and that very article popped to mind when I said it was an extreme nitpick when considering game mechanics and terminology clarity.
User avatar
Lujo
 
Posts: 2823
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 8:47 am

PreviousNext

Return to Desktop Dungeons

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 6 guests