Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[SirHoneyBadger]

Well, the D&D version of the flesh golem--which is where all of this is originating, unless I'm badly mistaken--doesn't list as undead. That doesn't mean that DF has to take it's cue from D&D though.

Infact, I'd rather that it never, EVER does.

Point: We already have "phantom limb syndrome" existing in the game. 

Point: We're getting souls.

To me, that evokes (with a couple of admitted leaps) the idea that sure, a "flesh golem" in DF might *start out* as an automaton, but there could atleast exist the possibility that those parts will start drawing their respective souls back to them, eventually.

It may be a bit harder to predict the consequences of that, for players trying to exploit the poor flesh golem in question (and it might lead to some truly awesomely nasty monsters), but I have to assert that it lends itself to a whole lot more interest going on in the game than just the presence of a 2-dimensional meat-sack.

And, in the long run, such a "servant"-if benign- might even prove to be a deal more useful than a senseless, thoughtless, industrial robot.

[Moneo]

I thought he was a combination of many dead people?

He was, but then again... His brain was most likely a combination of one person.

So just think of him as having an obscene number of Donation parts.

Frankenstein was the name of the scientist who reanimated a dead person. The dead person didn't have a name. I'm fairly certain there were no combinations either.

[Sean Mirrsen]

Frankenstein had a constructed body, but was essentially resurrected (though primitively), so he is neither a construct nor undead.

Golems are simply animated matter. You can take a skeleton and animate it as a bone golem. It will probably look the same as a skeleton, but will not be affected by holy symbols. It will, however, be subject to anti-construct measures such as anti-magic fields. If you then disband the golem (not destroy it), its remains would allow you to either make a proper undead skeleton or resurrect the original owner of the skeleton. If you destroy an undead skeleton, you'll likely be unable to resurrect the remains (though a True Resurrection might work), and you won't raise them again, but you can still use the pile of bones for a bone golem.

[SirHoneyBadger]

Golems are simply animated matter. You can take a skeleton and animate it as a bone golem. It will probably look the same as a skeleton, but will not be affected by holy symbols. It will, however, be subject to anti-construct measures such as anti-magic fields. If you then disband the golem (not destroy it), its remains would allow you to either make a proper undead skeleton or resurrect the original owner of the skeleton. If you destroy an undead skeleton, you'll likely be unable to resurrect the remains (though a True Resurrection might work), and you won't raise them again, but you can still use the pile of bones for a bone golem.

No offense, but that's more D&D crap.

I realize that D&D is hard to avoid, but there's just not a large percentage of original thought going on with them, in relation to the sheer amount of material they publish.

Even 4th edition seems to be taking it's "monster" cue from White Wolf's 'Exalted'.

The only real "golem" was the Golem of Prague, which was an animated clay sculpture, brought to "life" by the Hebrew God, through the means of Jewish mysticism. And eventually *that* golem gained independence/free will/became a problem.

[G-Flex]

Hey now, Golems were in Jewish folklore before that specific one. I... think.

[SirHoneyBadger]

You're right about that.

The golem of Prague is far and away the best known (and the only one I could remember), but I'd forgotten that there were earlier golems (I found reference to 2 others), and had to look it up.

Infact, the biblical Adam was considered a "golem", in that he was fashioned from clay. But he wasn't a traditional golem, because-having been created by God-he had a voice.

Traditionally, golems made by magicians lack a voice/the power of speech.

Still, a far cry away from D&D.

[Jackrabbit]

03/16/2009

In any case, next up are the specific goings-on at the hospital. Unfortunately for the critters, this means repeated applications of (1) create a hospital zone and staff settings (2) debug-chop a dwarf (3) see how it goes.

My kingdom for some videos. he he he.

[Sean Mirrsen]

If I say "Undead is a curse upon living that denies them proper death", and "A Golem is some non-living object animated by magic", it will make no references to D&D, at the same time being true with most interpretations of the subject, including D&D.

[praguepride]

The golem of Prague...

*looks up from his meal

"Did someone say my name...oh...nevermind!


Golems at best are true resurrection and at worst constructions like robots. That's pretty standard across the board from all the stories and RPG's I've played. Notably nWoD's Promethean comes to mind


As for the other things? It depends.

What do you consider a spirit? Is it an alien embodiement of thought and energy (again, nWoD sums this thought line up nicely, see also Native American spirits) or are they the disembodied thoughts of the dead crossing over (a more "traditional" European belief. Eastern cultures also believed that ancestor spirits watched over them, but they also had the "nature" spirits I believe).

What do you consider a lich? From all that I can tell, the concept of a lich has always been a mage triumphing over death with their arcane magicks. A "not-dead" mage that should be dead... that sounds like you can use the "undead" adjective.

I like undead being just a template that is applied to existing critters. It makes things more fun. I hope we get to see undead intelligent creatures though. Wouldn't it be horrible if on haunted/evil maps your dead had a chance to come to life? Maybe if they weren't properly buried they might spawn a dwarven skeleton as the body decays, maybe with [trapavoid] to represent the knowledge they still retained from being a worker in the fortress.

[Neonivek]

Praguepride the reason why Golems tend to be mindless robots is because well... Dungeons and dragons and videogames. (It also helps that they steriotyped non-golems into golemness... For example the Durihan)

Original Golems were hardly mindless (though they were servants so to speak) and could think for themselves.

Also a Ghost is the Disembodied Soul as far as Dwarf fortress would be concerned. It just makes more sense

the concept of a lich has always been a mage triumphing over death with their arcane magicks

There is SOMETHING wrong about this sentence... Ohh I think I know... the "Arcane magicks" Since
A) Arcane refers to "Secret knowledge"
and
B) Magick is Pen and Paper RPG spelling. (or you spelled it incorrectly)

I don't really have a point here... other then you need to be careful when dealing with knowledge affected by videogames in determining if it is "status quo"

I like undead being just a template that is applied to existing critters

Not quite... Zombie and Skeleton are "Curses" that are hardcoded.

[dreiche2]

Guys, this "no I am right" discussion even about a fantastical concept such as undead is really silly. It's okay to state your interpretation of it and speculate about what will be in DF, but obviously undead means different things to different people in different contexts, be it D&D or myths or Tolkien or whatever. Obviously, there is no "correct" definition of undead (or ghost or golem or whatever). And even if there was, DF migh just come up with it's own, anyway - or, more likely, ultimately leave it to the raws what undead entails, because I seem to remember that Toady didn't have a strong opinion about either possible interpretations (maybe it's even going to change from world to world).

[Awayfarer]

I think the whole speculation as to "why" the undead are the undead is kinda pointless.

Undead are creatures that have died but are still moving around. Why does there need to be some absolute, immutable origin for them?

[Neonivek]

I think the whole speculation as to "why" the undead are the undead is kinda pointless.

Undead are creatures that have died but are still moving around. Why does there need to be some absolute, immutable origin for them?

There doesn't were just having fun with the debate.

Though I guess if we want to move on from this we need a new subject.

One thing I wonder is how flexable will Curses be? Zombies and Skeletons are interesting in the sense that they have damaged and missing bodyparts. It DOES hint that in theory you could have curses that act a bit more harmfully (A Disease that disolves your brain)

[Mel_Vixen]

The question is what will be the difference between a curse and a desease? Are Lykantrophy and Vampirism deseases or curses or both at the same time?

[Sean Mirrsen]

Lycantropy and vampirism are viruses, but they're a curse in a metaphorical sense. Undead can also be caused by a virus, like in Resident Evil. You can argue about magic, but since any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic...  I think if Resident Evil didn't outright state from the start that the zombies are made by a virus, to the viewer it could just as well be a dark necromancer's doing.