Print

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

[Coidzure Dreams]

Well, in that case, I'm fine with this. The new ideas seem a bit... superfluous, but after other more urgent things are finished (e.g. dwarves not melting randomly, smoothing the air, naming weapons every few seconds), they sound like excellent add-ons.

Indeed.  bug-fixing is the higher priority.  It's just one of those things where we prefer to build something out of things or talk about building something new rather than just about what needs being gotten rid of.

For example, even the melting stuff bug is being discussed as something that can be taken advantage of against invaders/elves/merchants.

[Mishy]

As much as i hate it, i think the term legendary is the same as the current young generations epic. That being, an epic thread is actually utter shit.

[Cheddarius]

Or more specifically, it's utter shit in your opinion. I doubt that the current teens actually take joy in surrounding themselves with items, music, etc. they actively loathe.
Though I guess for a few it wouldn't be a stretch, but that's not the point.

[Pickled Tink]

I notice that you ignored my answer to your complaints Pilsu in favour of lambasting someone else for the same reason.

"Legend, typically, is a short (mono-) episodic, traditional, highly ecotypified historicized narrative performed in a conversational mode, reflecting on a psychological level a symbolic representation of folk belief and collective experiences and serving as a reaffirmation of commonly held values of the group to whose tradition it belongs."

- Folklorists definition of Legend lifted from wikipedia.

Please stop assuming that all legends must be world famous when they don't have to be.

[The_Kakaze]

Ah flame threads!  They really keep the whole forum warm, you know?

[Silverionmox]

I notice that you ignored my answer to your complaints Pilsu in favour of lambasting someone else for the same reason.

"Legend, typically, is a short (mono-) episodic, traditional, highly ecotypified historicized narrative performed in a conversational mode, reflecting on a psychological level a symbolic representation of folk belief and collective experiences and serving as a reaffirmation of commonly held values of the group to whose tradition it belongs."

- Folklorists definition of Legend lifted from wikipedia.

Please stop assuming that all legends must be world famous when they don't have to be.

A dwarf may be a local legend, but there still needs to be a distinction between world champion and county champion, both for matters of skill and matters of notoriety.

[Pickled Tink]

I notice that you ignored my answer to your complaints Pilsu in favour of lambasting someone else for the same reason.

"Legend, typically, is a short (mono-) episodic, traditional, highly ecotypified historicized narrative performed in a conversational mode, reflecting on a psychological level a symbolic representation of folk belief and collective experiences and serving as a reaffirmation of commonly held values of the group to whose tradition it belongs."

- Folklorists definition of Legend lifted from wikipedia.

Please stop assuming that all legends must be world famous when they don't have to be.

A dwarf may be a local legend, but there still needs to be a distinction between world champion and county champion, both for matters of skill and matters of notoriety.

Why?

[Pilsu]

"Legend, typically, is a short (mono-) episodic, traditional, highly ecotypified historicized narrative performed in a conversational mode, reflecting on a psychological level a symbolic representation of folk belief and collective experiences and serving as a reaffirmation of commonly held values of the group to whose tradition it belongs."

- Folklorists definition of Legend lifted from wikipedia.

Please stop assuming that all legends must be world famous when they don't have to be.

That'd work if you didn't have dozens of identical local "legends", created by nothing but grinding a bit after reaching grand master status. They go from zero to hero by some arbitrary, meaningless amount of menial work that levels them up one more time. If you're claiming that their legends reaffirm dwarven work ethic, then humans should not get them at all. Either way, legendary status as a skill rank needs to go or be reworked to actually fit your description.

[Pickled Tink]

That'd work if you didn't have dozens of identical local "legends", created by nothing but grinding a bit after reaching grand master status. They go from zero to hero by some arbitrary, meaningless amount of menial work that levels them up one more time. If you're claiming that their legends reaffirm dwarven work ethic, then humans should not get them at all. Either way, legendary status as a skill rank needs to go or be reworked to actually fit your description.

You have failed to demonstrate how dozens of people working hard at perfecting their craft all being accorded the same social status is a bad thing that automatically disqualifies the use of a "legendary" tag (Merely derisively written it off as "grinding"). That a dozen dwarves in a group of over a hundred achieve the "legendary" greatness in a skill merely serves to further encourage other. "If all these fellows could become that good, so can I!".

As for humans not getting dwarven legends. Civilisations are almost never wholly incompatable. There will always be points of similarity along which you can get a legend that spreads to others that way. A goblin won't respect the legend of a great pump operator, but he will respect that of an excellent swordsman. A more agrarian society, by contrast, would respect millers, farmer, and pumpers more than warriors (Oh look, there goes that "champion" again. Freeloading bastards the lot of em"). Of course, this is getting unbelievably off topic.

[Silverionmox]

I notice that you ignored my answer to your complaints Pilsu in favour of lambasting someone else for the same reason.

"Legend, typically, is a short (mono-) episodic, traditional, highly ecotypified historicized narrative performed in a conversational mode, reflecting on a psychological level a symbolic representation of folk belief and collective experiences and serving as a reaffirmation of commonly held values of the group to whose tradition it belongs."

- Folklorists definition of Legend lifted from wikipedia.

Please stop assuming that all legends must be world famous when they don't have to be.

A dwarf may be a local legend, but there still needs to be a distinction between world champion and county champion, both for matters of skill and matters of notoriety.

Why?

Because the best of the world is most like better than the best of a fortress. His works are better, or his fame reaches wider. That has in-game consequences.

That'd work if you didn't have dozens of identical local "legends", created by nothing but grinding a bit after reaching grand master status. They go from zero to hero by some arbitrary, meaningless amount of menial work that levels them up one more time. If you're claiming that their legends reaffirm dwarven work ethic, then humans should not get them at all. Either way, legendary status as a skill rank needs to go or be reworked to actually fit your description.

You have failed to demonstrate how dozens of people working hard at perfecting their craft all being accorded the same social status is a bad thing that automatically disqualifies the use of a "legendary" tag (Merely derisively written it off as "grinding"). That a dozen dwarves in a group of over a hundred achieve the "legendary" greatness in a skill merely serves to further encourage other. "If all these fellows could become that good, so can I!".

As for humans not getting dwarven legends. Civilisations are almost never wholly incompatable. There will always be points of similarity along which you can get a legend that spreads to others that way. A goblin won't respect the legend of a great pump operator, but he will respect that of an excellent swordsman. A more agrarian society, by contrast, would respect millers, farmer, and pumpers more than warriors (Oh look, there goes that "champion" again. Freeloading bastards the lot of em"). Of course, this is getting unbelievably off topic.

To refer back to the OP, some skills don't get notoriety. People who work hard at perfecting their mundane craft get the credit for being persistent and hard-working, but not for being good at their craft - because anyone can do that. (Name me one legendary miller, truck driver or postman who are known for their skill alone.) Besides, if dozens of people reach the same level, and anyone can be expected to do so given enough time, it's not exceptional but ordinary and they won't be referred to as legendary.

[Pilsu]

You have failed to demonstrate how dozens of people working hard at perfecting their craft all being accorded the same social status is a bad thing that automatically disqualifies the use of a "legendary" tag (Merely derisively written it off as "grinding"). That a dozen dwarves in a group of over a hundred achieve the "legendary" greatness in a skill merely serves to further encourage other. "If all these fellows could become that good, so can I!".

Respect is one thing but it stretches the suspension of disbelief when you start making excuses how it's totally okay to have every mundane task spawn droves of local legends. Literally everyone can be "legendary" at the same time. It waters the very concept down harder than homeopathy. It also means that if you have a grand master of a craft in a village of drooling fucktards, he gets no respect because he's one skill rank short. Respect and social status in general need to be decoupled from specific skill ranks and be made features of their own, just like champions were.

As for humans not getting dwarven legends. Civilisations are almost never wholly incompatable. There will always be points of similarity along which you can get a legend that spreads to others that way. A goblin won't respect the legend of a great pump operator, but he will respect that of an excellent swordsman. A more agrarian society, by contrast, would respect millers, farmer, and pumpers more than warriors (Oh look, there goes that "champion" again. Freeloading bastards the lot of em").

So, the result is that humans would not have legendary pump operators because they would not respect such and thus such a rank would be unreachable. Thing is though, this would mean that other races are somehow inherently incapable of perfecting something just because it doesn't get them chicks respect. It caps their skill for no reason. I see absolutely no reason a human miller with the same work experience would not have the same skill rank. Either that or you're suggesting that humans would still get legendary pump operators, they just wouldn't be considered legendary. Even though it.. clearly says legendary. It also means that our not-legendary miller would be exempt from the economy because some other settlement respects his work ethic.

[Rowanas]

I'm not so sure. There are a few legends (I can't name them right now, give me some time) of small armies composed entirely of mythical figures, all of whom have had stories written about them.

I think that having a fort entirely composed of legendary people is actually more of a testament to the incredible fortress you have built than it is to the cheapness of legendary status.

There are examples of groups of heroes that treat each other like the heroes that they are and also heroes that treat each other like an average friend, so either is a reasonable approach for dwarves to take.

[Silverionmox]

It should be possible, but not standard. As it is now, legendary stone/bone/woodcrafters are a dime a dozen. Recruits became legendary pump operators as standard preparation for their military career. That's a clear sign of inflation of the legendary status. So we can either invent even more legendary skill levels, or respect the idea behind "legendary" and assure that the game doesn't litter legendaries like dead goblins drop cave spider silk socks.

[Aklyon]

everything is better in lengthy saga form.

[Cheddarius]

Respect is one thing but it stretches the suspension of disbelief when you start making excuses how it's totally okay to have every mundane task spawn droves of local legends. Literally everyone can be "legendary" at the same time. It waters the very concept down harder than homeopathy. It also means that if you have a grand master of a craft in a village of drooling fucktards, he gets no respect because he's one skill rank short. Respect and social status in general need to be decoupled from specific skill ranks and be made features of their own, just like champions were.

Fine. Change the word "legendary" to "awesome". Are you happy now?