Caedwyr Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 Given the fact that there are no kitted NPCs in the game, it seems obvious that BioWare didn't put too much thought into it. Besides Keldorn (Inquisitor), Haer'Dalis (Blade), Valygar (Stalker), Cernd (Shapeshifter), Yoshimo (Bounty Hunter), Korgan (Berserker, I think) Link to comment
CamDawg Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 I framed the discussion rather poorly--I want the armor to be consistent with itself, which means it's either studded leather (which means we change the ground icons, AC, etc.) or it's chain (in which case the avatar icon should change). The issue was not that Valygar was wearing illegal armor, but that it was another factor in favor of standardizing the armor as studded leather as opposed to chain. Link to comment
Kish Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 This, gentlemen, is from the man who brought us "the entire Underdark could be an illusion from Irenicus casting a Wish". That, for the record, is a complete and utter lie. Link to comment
SimDing0 Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 http://forums.pocketplane.net/index.php?to...38053#msg238053 "Irenicus could have easily cast a Wish that would make everyone in the Underdark who would consider helping you glow red to Detect Evil; it would have been child's play for him." What will happen now is that Kish will comment on my paraphrasing, ignoring the fact that this is an equally stupid scenario which would illustrate my case just as well. You know full well what I meant, Kish. Stop hiding behind your bullshit semantics. Link to comment
devSin Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 Besides Keldorn (Inquisitor), Haer'Dalis (Blade), Valygar (Stalker), Cernd (Shapeshifter), Yoshimo (Bounty Hunter), Korgan (Berserker, I think)Those be party members, Jack. When I say "NPCs," I mean everybody other than characters who can join the party. Anyway, turning it into chain mail is bad, as I've discovered. It's too ugly to even imagine. So either leave it, or go full-on studded leather. "Irenicus could have easily cast a Wish that would make everyone in the Underdark who would consider helping you glow red to Detect Evil; it would have been child's play for him."I don't understand this at all. What would glowing red accomplish? Link to comment
devSin Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 Ugly? How come?Because. His entire body turns pink. Legs, arms, and torso. Not only is it hideous, but he just looks plain silly. Link to comment
SimDing0 Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 ...ah. Can we not have the armour modify colours to reflect its BAM? It's kinda blue-ish. Link to comment
Kish Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 I don't understand this at all. What would glowing red accomplish? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It could cost you potential allies, possibly push you toward becoming the Slayer if you killed innocents...but that's all a side issue, really. I picked Irenicus just because he was an archmage and the PC's enemy; my point then--which doesn't have anything to do with this thread--was that magical detection methods are unreliable and thus killing someone just because "they glow red" is wrong. semantics You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. Link to comment
SimDing0 Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 You just gave a wicked demonstration, man. You picked up a tiny little detail in my post and tried your luck on that alone. If you addressed the entire post, and more importantly, the MEANING of the post, rather than picking on the insignificant details and brushing over the rest, perhaps "semantics" wouldn't be a word that came up around you so often. Bullshitting your way through arguments by deflecting the point will only get you so far. Ding0 wins, motherfucker. Peace out, I'm off to work on the Tutu spawn point fix. Link to comment
Andyr Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 For the record, I say leave it as is (sounds like Leather, counts like Chain) for the core fixes. /me huggles Sim and Kish Link to comment
CamDawg Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 Ugly? How come?Because. His entire body turns pink. Legs, arms, and torso. Not only is it hideous, but he just looks plain silly. I believe this is intended--IIRC, the Viconia-Valygar fight is prompted by Viconia taunting Valygar about his pink getup and implying he's gay. In an attempt to get back on topic, the consensus (such as it is) seems to be it's chain Sim won't be buying Kish a beer Valygar being all pink is suboptimal it's better left unchanged Link to comment
Ghreyfain Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 Ugly? How come?Because. His entire body turns pink. Legs, arms, and torso. Not only is it hideous, but he just looks plain silly. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> As opposed to a big burly man wearing a pair of purple football pads with bare knees. My opinion on the matter is that it should be switched to chainmail entirely, partly because leather armour only looks good on thieves, and partly because more of it is chainmailesque than is leather armourish. Link to comment
Kish Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 Ugly? How come?Because. His entire body turns pink. Legs, arms, and torso. Not only is it hideous, but he just looks plain silly. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I believe this is intended--IIRC, the Viconia-Valygar fight is prompted by Viconia taunting Valygar about his pink getup and implying he's gay. Actually, just the opposite--she offers to paint his gear pink, suggesting it would suit him better. She still implies that he's gay, but it would indicate pink is the one color his gear can't already be. Link to comment
CamDawg Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 Actually, just the opposite--she offers to paint his gear pink, suggesting it would suit him better. She still implies that he's gay, but it would indicate pink is the one color his gear can't already be. Ah, so it's not an IIRC then. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.