no he gave an account of a legendary figure killing a dragon with a dagger. which you said doesn't happen. there would be no real world examples of dragon killing as there is no such thing as dragons.
I am saying his argument is internally inconsistent, yes? Your point?
no he gave an account of a legendary figure killing a dragon with a dagger. which you said doesn't happen. there would be no real world examples of dragon killing as there is no such thing as dragons.
Finally
my point is that he doesn't contradict himself. you said people wouldn't slay a dragon with a dagger. He gave the most relevant non-fantastical counter fact. a old-english epic poem that outside of dragons, demons and a troll is very true to the setting at the time (swords, spears and bows). In such story, which was written in a time filled with unimaginitve people by todays standards, Beowulf kills the dragon with a dagger. If it were possible to give you a real example he would have.
Finally
you're welcome.
The further Beowulf goes, the more symbolic it gets. I wouldn't say people were any less creative then than now. But the dagger practically makes sense there as a piercing blade weapon. Also, not all dragons are very analogous to DA dragons anyway. That wyrm's closer to the classic serpentine dragons.
Do you guys remember the party break in in mark of the assassin? A fan would be an easily concealed(in the open) weapon to take out guards with. I think it would be cool to use unorthodox weapons in such situations.
I can't take a sword in to the party, so I have a fan, that is considered to be an accessory for my outfit.
Do you guys remember the party break in in mark of the assassin? A fan would be an easily concealed(in the open) weapon to take out guards with. I think it would be cool to use unorthodox weapons in such situations.
I can't take a sword in to the party, so I have a fan, that is considered to be an accessory for my outfit.
In most sword wielding cultures you would often carry a dagger or shortsword with you even during formal occasions.
Since here is a topic of suggestions and not a topic to demote others's ideas.We can keep our ideas without problems.Then harps for bards, crossbows for rogues, orbs for mages and polearms for warriors.Everybody happy?
I'm fine with harps being for bards since they aren't a class so they won't show up. Varric has Bianca. I have given up on arguing about some of things people suggest for mages like orbs and stuff (I refuse to have levitating pieces of paper though) and polearms just make since.
Mirrman70
Guest_Aotearas_*
Mirrman70
Why do you argue against other's ideas?What's the problem with you? Are you angry?You don't need to use everything in the game.Go and play with your favorite weapons and let others play with their.If you don't want use, don't use it.
The thing is, the example of a harp doesn't make much sense.
Okay, I suppose you can hit someone on the head really hard with it, but a concealed dagger is better at killing and easier to blend in compared to having to explain why a Bard with his harp would attend a secret slaver conclave for example.
The thing is, the example of a harp doesn't make much sense.
Okay, I suppose you can hit someone on the head really hard with it, but a concealed dagger is better at killing and easier to blend in compared to having to explain why a Bard with his harp would attend a secret slaver conclave for example.
So what you're saying is in a post where people are ask to post what weapons people want to see. They can't if it doesn't fit to what some people don't like, because it doesn't fit in the normal idea of a weapon.
I say let people post what they want.
Aotearas
Hahaha head thing will hurt, probably give a cerebral concussion.
Duel-wielding swords. No I don't care that it isn't realistic (neither is throwing fireballs) and No I don't buy the argument that warriors being restricted to sword and board or 2h and rogues not knowing what swords are in DA2 is somehow an improvement.
Guest_Aotearas_*
So what you're saying is in a post where people are ask to post what weapons people want to see. They can't if it doesn't fit to what some people don't like, because it doesn't fit in the normal idea of a weapon.
I say let people post what they want.
No.
What I am saying is what I had posted. Which was my argument of why I don't see a particular weapon being sensible.
Nothing in my post suggest I wish to impair other people's freedom to express their ideas and I kindly ask you to show me where I had insinuated as such.
That said, whilst everyone has the right to say things like "I want poleaxes", or "innocent looking plushy traps that when sqeezed will squeak cutely, then explode into thousands of enchanted sylverite fragments", everyone else has the right express how they feel about such ideas. After all, this is a forum, which means interaction. If people want to express their opinions and not bother with others, they can do a blog instead.
No.
What I am saying is what I had posted. Which was my argument of why I don't see a particular weapon being sensible.
Nothing in my post suggest I wish to impair other people's freedom to express their ideas and I kindly ask you to show me where I had insinuated as such.
That said, whilst everyone has the right to say things like "I want poleaxes", or "innocent looking plushy traps that when sqeezed will squeak cutely, then explode into thousands of enchanted sylverite fragments", everyone else has the right express how they feel about such ideas. After all, this is a forum, which means interaction. If people want to express their opinions and not bother with others, they can do a blog instead.
Every time you tell someone it doesn't fit. You are doing just that. If you don't like their idea, keep it to yourself. Let them be. They posted it because it is something they would like to see. It doesn't matter if it fits or not.
Every time you tell someone it doesn't fit. You are doing just that. If you don't like their idea, keep it to yourself. Let them be. They posted it because it is something they would like to see. It doesn't matter if it fits or not.
so you are saying that you have the right to state your opinion but since ours don't agree with yours we can't post?
Guest_Aotearas_*
Every time you tell someone it doesn't fit. You are doing just that. If you don't like their idea, keep it to yourself. Let them be. They posted it because it is something they would like to see. It doesn't matter if it fits or not.
I ask again, how does argumenting (pro or contra) somehow means I impair their freedom to express themselves?
Or how do you propose to call me out on trying to impair other people's freedom to express themselves and then say I shouldn't be allowed to post my own opinions? Does not compute.
You don't have to agree with my arguments, neither has anyone else who doesn't like it, I can always agree on disagreeing.
But you're a hypocrite who falsely accuses me of trying to deny others their freedom of speech just because I have another opinion on their ideas and then promptly goes forth to say that I shouldn't post my opinion.
so you are saying that you have the right to state your opinion but since ours don't agree with yours we can't post?
I ask again, how does argumenting (pro or contra) somehow means I impair their freedom to express themselves?
Or how do you propose to call me out on trying to impair other people's freedom to express themselves and then say I shouldn't be allowed to post my own opinions? Does not compute.
You don't have to agree with my arguments, neither has anyone else who doesn't like it, I can always agree on disagreeing.
But you're a hypocrite who falsely accuses me of trying to deny others their freedom of speech just because I have another opinion on their ideas and then promptly goes forth to say that I shouldn't post my opinion.
Technically I could care less. I just find it very crass to tell someone their idea is ridiculous, just because it doesn't fit with your opinion of a good suggestion. It doesn't matter. When someone has an idea of what they want to see, they should be able to post it, without wondering if someone is going to say it is stupid. It might just make them not post. What's the fun with that? There are a lot of ideas on here that I don't think would be good, but you don't see me telling them their idea is stupid. I move on. I like the posts I like and leave the others alone.
The naginata
Actually just polearms in general. But those from the glaive family (like the naginata) I think just look especially awesome.
I would love a glaive or halberd.
Guest_Aotearas_*
Technically I could care less. I just find it very crass to tell someone their idea is ridiculous, just because it doesn't fit with your opinion of a good suggestion. It doesn't matter. When someone has an idea of what they want to see, they should be able to post it, without wondering if someone is going to say it is stupid. It might just make them not post. What's the fun with that? There are a lot of ideas on here that I don't think would be good, but you don't see me telling them their idea is stupid. I move on. I like the posts I like and leave the others alone.
And again, I ask you to show me where I called his idea ridiculous, and/or stupid.
So far all you've been doing is accuse me of things I haven't done. And even when I call you out for it and asked you to show me where I said the things you accuse me of, which is very much the convinient telling with a rebar club that something in your argumentation doesn't make sense right there, you have yet failed to provide a single instance to back up your little witchhunt.
To make this really easy for you:
I never said anyone isn't allowed to express their opinions.
I never said the example we are talking about was ridiculous and/or stupid.
And unless you can somehow show me the parts I missed after rereading my own posts now three times over just to make sure there's nothing to misunderstand (an effort of mine that appears not matched by yours truly), this little discourse on my alleged comment behaviour is done.
And again, I ask you to show me where I called his idea ridiculous, and/or stupid.
So far all you've been doing is accuse me of things I haven't done. And even when I call you out for it and asked you to show me where I said the things you accuse me of, which is very much the convinient telling with a rebar club that something in your argumentation doesn't make sense right there, you have yet failed to provide a single instance to back up your little witchhunt.
To make this really easy for you:
I never said anyone isn't allowed to express their opinions.
I never said the example we are talking about was ridiculous and/or stupid.
And unless you can somehow show me the parts I missed after rereading my own posts now three times over just to make sure there's nothing to misunderstand (an effort of mine that appears not matched by yours truly), this little discourse on my alleged comment behaviour is done.
Sorry you personally did not say it was stupid. You were jumbled in with Mirrman70 when you made the comment about it not making sense. Mirrman70 was the one it was really meant for. You made a comment to me about something I said to Mirrman70. That comment got you involved.
I'm sorry too. I thought I had the right to state my opinion. I'm sorry I don't think that musical weapons and iron fans fit into the DA setting. I'm sorry I have a personal preference for practicality over flash. I am most sorry that the expression of my personal opinions seem to have upset you.
Sword-Chucks, no. That would be more dangerous than nuclear power...
Fans, sure, but would need to be situational, and not comparable to a sword. Keep 'em to cutscenes where they'll shine.
Harps and guitars, what? Legitimately don't 'get it'.
Pole arms, want them. But don't think they'd fit with the combat system unfortunately. Work great in Dark Souls for example.
Multi-weapon sets, Yeah! My swords can't get through a wall-o-fire but arrows and bolts can. My scimitar doesn't work on a golem, but a mace might...
Are you sure the blade could bend to the hilt? Thats pushing it
also just occurred to me, you REALLY don't want that level of flex in a blade, it would make a thrust all but impossible, the blade would deform so much you would loose most of the penetration energy to flex, theirs a reason diamond cross section swords are pretty much the best thrust ins blades, the stiffness that form brings.
Duel-wielding swords. No I don't care that it isn't realistic (neither is throwing fireballs) and No I don't buy the argument that warriors being restricted to sword and board or 2h and rogues not knowing what swords are in DA2 is somehow an improvement.
With you 100% on this. Here's hoping they go back to the way it was in DA:O (granted, I could say this on just about every topic these days).
Retour en haut