Shades = Ankhegs

[Dadalama]

 

 

 

I would prefer that designers be honest about it and just called them vampires, wights, ghuls/ghouls, banshee and elementals. They are not different enough to warrant a new name.

 

Speaking of original ideas, do you know that the original ghouls - from Arabian myths - are not exactly undead ? Yes, they have an affinity for graveyards and are sometimes mentioned as dwelling there, but they're demon shapeshifters. They prey on travellers, deceive them and try to eat them. They can speak very well.

If they called them exactly like DnD and others call them then you would get people complaining that they are not the same as they are in those other games.  I've already seen it with people asking why they don't need fire to kill trolls anymore and that they aren't real trolls as a result.  Fampyrs are quite different from vampires too, they are not blood-drinking immortals who turn into bats but rather zombies that can still think and pass for human, I find that significantly different enough to warrant a different name to avoid false association.

 

That's even more sad because folklore where trolls came from, had nothing to do with fire or wolverine style regeneration. It had to do with sunlight turning them to stone afaik.

 

 

What's even sadder is that many "fantasy fans" struggle with imagination. They can't imagine a troll that is not big, green, weak to fire and regenerates wounds. I like fantasy because it lets writers get away from limitations and create something otherwise impossible. They like fantasy because it's a familiar where everything is predictable.

 

Like Volourn said I think you mean D&D fans. But it is quite sad. And it keeps people from branching out into other fantasy rpgs.

[Volourn]

It's all about context. If there is controversey it's because Obsidian failed. Afterall, LOTR  came first and have their trolls. DnD came later and while LOTR is largely credited for DnD 9which it shouldn't be outside of it being popular fantasy), DnD does many things differently - including trolls. The fact that regenerating fire fearing trolls are now popular or 'expected' means DnD did a great job selling them. It's up Obsidian to sell their new versions of old creatures.

 

For the most part, I think they did well with most of their undead creatures. Trolls, though, were poorly done. They came across as nothing more than boring monsters. Same with xaurips. Just kobold wannabes up to and including their affinity with dragons.

[b0rsuk]

"What's even sadder is that many "fantasy fans" struggle with imagination."

 

Don't you mean DnD fans?  Nobody seemed to have a problem with LOTR trolls not regenerating. Why do people make stuff up?

 

No, I dont.

I know many fantasy fans, I play board games and PnP etc with them. I frequently hear this or that book, or setting is 'too strange'. And it's nothing really crazy, for example Jack Vance's "Lyonesse".

Conversely, they are happy to read the n-th fantasy book which does everything the same way.

 

You'd think reading fantasy would build up tolerance for "craziness".

 

Ultimately, it's worth remembering the word "fan" comes from "fanatic". Literally.

[frabron]

And I have always thought a fan is a device for making the air move :D

[FlintlockJazz]

 

 

 

 

I would prefer that designers be honest about it and just called them vampires, wights, ghuls/ghouls, banshee and elementals. They are not different enough to warrant a new name.

 

Speaking of original ideas, do you know that the original ghouls - from Arabian myths - are not exactly undead ? Yes, they have an affinity for graveyards and are sometimes mentioned as dwelling there, but they're demon shapeshifters. They prey on travellers, deceive them and try to eat them. They can speak very well.

If they called them exactly like DnD and others call them then you would get people complaining that they are not the same as they are in those other games.  I've already seen it with people asking why they don't need fire to kill trolls anymore and that they aren't real trolls as a result.  Fampyrs are quite different from vampires too, they are not blood-drinking immortals who turn into bats but rather zombies that can still think and pass for human, I find that significantly different enough to warrant a different name to avoid false association.

 

That's even more sad because folklore where trolls came from, had nothing to do with fire or wolverine style regeneration. It had to do with sunlight turning them to stone afaik.

 

 

What's even sadder is that many "fantasy fans" struggle with imagination. They can't imagine a troll that is not big, green, weak to fire and regenerates wounds. I like fantasy because it lets writers get away from limitations and create something otherwise impossible. They like fantasy because it's a familiar where everything is predictable.

 

Like Volourn said I think you mean D&D fans. But it is quite sad. And it keeps people from branching out into other fantasy rpgs.

 

Yeah, it's the reason why people are so resistant to guns: they aren't 'fantasy' apparently.  They complain that it isn't 'medieval' despite the fact they accept full plate armour which didn't even appear until the very end of the medieval period, when guns were also taking off.  The "Standard Fantasy World" actually has a lot more Renaissance in it than people realise without being either Renaissance or Medieval but some weird mish mash that loses the flavour and benefits of both, instead becoming rather bland and yet people somewhere along the line decided that it would be the 'default' setting for fantasy.  Tis strange....

[FlintlockJazz]

And I have always thought a fan is a device for making the air move :D

Well, a lot of fanatics do move a lot of air with their mouths.

[anameforobsidian]

More seriously....

 

Fampyrs - Vampires

Wichts - Wights

Eotuns - Ettins

Guls  - ghouls

Caen Gwhla (or something) - banshee

xaurips - almost goblins (Skuldr look more similar, but don't appear in swarms)

blights - elementals

 

Lazy world building. You may as well admit you're just ripping off with a few monsters. Eotuns are mentioned in a description of a magic belt.

If your going to criticize the game at least get it right.

 

Wichts are hardly wights.  Wights are later game than ghouls, level drain, and semi-intelligent.  

Xaurips are kobolds.  They're dumb lizards that serve dragons.

 

 

There's more stuff related to D&D, but that's just because D&D has taken heavily from most European myths already.  Part of fantasy is a connection to myths, so there will always be some overlap.  I'm just glad there's no evil races like Orcs or Drow in this game.

 

Also, wichts (despite being similar to the tradition of kobold) and Skuldyr are relatively unique.

Edited April 21, 2015 by anameforobsidian

[b0rsuk]

Oh, but I'm not blaming PoE for taking these things from D&D. It's you projecting your insecurities :-P. I wasn't the first person to mention D&D in this thread.

[Stun]

I would take issue with someone who equates PoE's Wichts with D&D's Wights. Their only similarities are their names and the fact that they're undead. But in PoE, wichts are undead Children. And that's NOT what Wights are in D&D.

 

On the other hand, Xariups are indeed PoE's version of the Kobold. They're little critters? Check. They're semi-reptilian? Check; They're Tribal? Check. They worship Dragons? Check.

 

 

But I, for one, don't mind the "copy-cat" thing. I welcome it. I backed an IE spiritual successor. I *wanted* similarities. If anything, they didn't give us enough of them.

Edited April 21, 2015 by Stun

[amallric]

They made an interesting system of categories of undead, but then absolutely failed to implement it in practice. Fampyrs are supposed to be relatively "fresh" undead but in the game they are exactly like traditional vampires, thousand years old and ruling over the other undead. Skeletons are supposed to be pure automatons but somehow some of them are able to cast spells. The chanter just randomly summons squeletons, what are these? You are supposed to bind a soul to a corpse to create an undead, how can the chanter bypass all the successive stages to create skeletons? Or do they have a suplly of skeletons somewhere in the world and chanters just teleport them from there? Whatever.

[b0rsuk]

I would take issue with someone who equates PoE's Wichts with D&D's Wights. Their only similarities are their names and the fact that they're undead. But in PoE, wichts are undead Children. And that's NOT what Wights are in D&D.

 

 

Okay, okay, you win ! Clearly, because I was talking about fantasy in general, I meant D&D ! Fantasy is D&D.

[Xosmi]

 

For those who played BG1, I personally feel that the shades in PoE reminded me of the Ankhegs from BG1.

 

Both of them appeared rather early in the game and marked a significant spike in game difficulty.

 

I remember that Ankhegs could one shot my weaker party members and practically forced me to radically change my approach to battles.

 

Such nostalgia!

But you could farm Ankhegs for XP and gold. An hour of killing Ankhegs in that hole and you're level 6.

 

 

 

Yup. clerics loaded up on command, and wizard + ring of wizardry loaded up on sleep spells made this so easy as well.

Edited April 21, 2015 by Xosmi

[Raven Darkholme]

The only time I found Ankhegs hard was on my first BG playthrough ever, even then I realized you could just hit them with sleep or command for free and they won't get up until they are dead. In later playthroughs on higher difficulty I never understood again why I ever found them hard, I just killed them so fast even without sleep.

Shades on the other hand can be annoying if you solo with a caster squishy class. For a party they have lost their first playthrough danger to mee as well though.

[b0rsuk]

That's Baldur's Gate at it's best - confusing, opaque combat system. No idea what monster defenses might be.

[Dadalama]

 

 

 

 

 

I would prefer that designers be honest about it and just called them vampires, wights, ghuls/ghouls, banshee and elementals. They are not different enough to warrant a new name.

 

Speaking of original ideas, do you know that the original ghouls - from Arabian myths - are not exactly undead ? Yes, they have an affinity for graveyards and are sometimes mentioned as dwelling there, but they're demon shapeshifters. They prey on travellers, deceive them and try to eat them. They can speak very well.

If they called them exactly like DnD and others call them then you would get people complaining that they are not the same as they are in those other games.  I've already seen it with people asking why they don't need fire to kill trolls anymore and that they aren't real trolls as a result.  Fampyrs are quite different from vampires too, they are not blood-drinking immortals who turn into bats but rather zombies that can still think and pass for human, I find that significantly different enough to warrant a different name to avoid false association.

 

That's even more sad because folklore where trolls came from, had nothing to do with fire or wolverine style regeneration. It had to do with sunlight turning them to stone afaik.

 

 

What's even sadder is that many "fantasy fans" struggle with imagination. They can't imagine a troll that is not big, green, weak to fire and regenerates wounds. I like fantasy because it lets writers get away from limitations and create something otherwise impossible. They like fantasy because it's a familiar where everything is predictable.

 

Like Volourn said I think you mean D&D fans. But it is quite sad. And it keeps people from branching out into other fantasy rpgs.

 

Yeah, it's the reason why people are so resistant to guns: they aren't 'fantasy' apparently.  They complain that it isn't 'medieval' despite the fact they accept full plate armour which didn't even appear until the very end of the medieval period, when guns were also taking off.  The "Standard Fantasy World" actually has a lot more Renaissance in it than people realise without being either Renaissance or Medieval but some weird mish mash that loses the flavour and benefits of both, instead becoming rather bland and yet people somewhere along the line decided that it would be the 'default' setting for fantasy.  Tis strange....

 

Yeah their "Medieval Fantasy" has them fighting vampires in victorian mansions and visiting old west style "Taverns" and everyone is dressed in the brown and black leather you'd find in a BDSM spoof of Sons of Anarchy. Instead of the usual colorful medieval clothing when the only thing off limits to peasants was deep crimson and certain dark blues.

Edited April 21, 2015 by Dadalama

[Sanctuary]

For those who played BG1, I personally feel that the shades in PoE reminded me of the Ankhegs from BG1.

 

Both of them appeared rather early in the game and marked a significant spike in game difficulty.

 

I remember that Ankhegs could one shot my weaker party members and practically forced me to radically change my approach to battles.

 

Such nostalgia!

Err, shades/phantoms are easily the most annoying enemies in the game, and they arrive en masse.  Ankhegs were super easy to deal with and you almost never, ever had more than three tops (usually only one or two at a time).  Ankhegs could be put to sleep pretty much indefinitely while you killed them one by one.  Shades, not so much.  Plus, Ankhegs didn't randomly teleport to the lowest health/DR of the back row every single time to instantly kill them.

 

 

Woah why all the bashing? PoE hits all the right notes with nostalgia...although Shades posed a problems for weaker members (I'm looking at you Aloth), at least it was not as bad as the Ankhegs who could one shot your party.

 

Ankhegs never did this, unless you just blindly roamed inside the middle of a pack with your entire group...

Then again, I'm just guessing that they would wipe your group like that.  I've never had them wipe out a party, even though it was somewhat close the very first time I encountered them.  After the first encounter though?  Not a chance.  Shades on the other hand are always super obnoxious in this game.  It pretty much takes Ampliflied Wave spam to make them less of a threat.

Edited April 21, 2015 by Sanctuary

[Tigranes]

Ankhegs were bog standard enemies, they were just a bit stronger to discourage you going that direction too early. 

 

Shades and Phantoms, on the other hand, actually force you to learn the game systems and play a bit differently, after which you find they are not difficult at all. That is a good example of enemy design that actually encourages tactical learning and variation. The problem with POE is that there are too few enemies like shades and phantoms.

[Volourn]

Nah. Shades are only a problem at level 2 or 3 when it's just the PC + say Aloth (the most likely first joinable). Once you get more characters/higher level they are a piece of cake. I mean facing shades et al at end of game is just lame.

 

 The 'tatic's needed for them is not hard.  The 'variation' they give is not huge considering that they may very well be the most common type of enemy in the game or at least one of them.

 

 

"No, I dont.

I know many fantasy fans, I play board games and PnP etc with them. I frequently hear this or that book, or setting is 'too strange'. And it's nothing really crazy, for example Jack Vance's "Lyonesse".

Conversely, they are happy to read the n-th fantasy book which does everything the same way.

 

You'd think reading fantasy would build up tolerance for "craziness".

 

Ultimately, it's worth remembering the word "fan" comes from "fanatic". Literally."

 

\Uh. I'ma  fantasy fan and I'm fine with different monsters. the problem is when you change things up you either do it well or you do it poorly. In PE, some of the variant monsters are done welll...others not much.

 

It's why DnD has been so successful... exactly ebcause it takes old fantasy tales/ancient folklore and change it up to work. Afterall, LOTR came before DnD. DnD took the troll and changed it.. and, voila, it worked.  PE takes the troll and does nothing interesting with it. That's why it fails. Trolls in PE having nothing interesting about them. Nothing. Its wicht, on the other hand, while super easy.. does have an interetsing backstory since.. technically, when you kill a PE wicht.. it's a 'former' kid you are killing (even if it is self defense still sad).

 

Wicht > Troll

Edited April 21, 2015 by Volourn

[Tigranes]

They are harder than other enemy types in the early game, and they do require you to use a slightly different strategy compared to them. I don't think they're super difficult or strange in any way, but they are a good example of how to make enemy types not so much "blob of HP".

[Jimmysdabestcop]

Plus Ankhegs always reminded me of Kevin Bacon and Tremors. Didn't they remake the Ankhegs in Mass Effect 1 aka Thresher Maws.

[Volourn]

Uh.. Thresher Maws were pract8icelly world destroying monsters. Ankhegs not  much.  Worm like monsters (even though ankhegs actually aren't worms heh) is an anicent fantasy/sci fi trope.

[Stun]

Plus, PoE shades aren't like BG1 Ankhegs because you can't take "shade shells" to a smithy and have him make "shade plate" out of it.

[Jimmysdabestcop]

Plus, PoE shades aren't like BG1 Ankhegs because you can't take "shade shells" to a smithy and have him make "shade plate" out of it.

 

 

Wait how about Soul Spirit Plate!!!! I want it. I need it. it must be mine. That would be best item ever.