|
| Thread: Bring the mythology back! |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · «PREV |
|
Maurice
Hero of Order
Part of the furniture
|
posted September 26, 2014 12:17 PM |
|
|
cleglaw said:
or they may take medusa but they may use as a priestess in a water themed faction.
Except that the Medusa was already used before within the HoMM world. I realise that was in Enroth / Erathia and the current setting is Ashan, but nonetheless the original Medusa had a stone gaze ability. The current Coral Priestess does not.
|
|
LizardWarrior
Honorable
Legendary Hero
the reckoning is at hand
|
|
posted September 26, 2014 01:24 PM |
|
|
Sandro400 said:
H6 didn't continue that tradition?
Lamasu, Namtaru, Ghoul, nearly all Sanctuary (not just Snow Maiden and Kirin) - and that's to name only new guys.
Yeah, Ashan has it's own variation of mythological creatues (I too don't welcome 2-headed cerberus), but nonetheless it still teachs kids. They find new unknown unit? Use Wikipedia, learn more.
I'm in no way protecting H6 in general, but mythological "touch" was there for me.
Lamasu= in babylonian/sumerian mythology they are human headed winged bulls, not lions, the lamassu was just an undead greek sphinx
Ghoul= it's not a zombie, but a dijin associated with death
Sandro400 said:
And don't tell me that previous installments did everything right, for Cerberus and Medusa were mass-produced, Medusas are archers, Rocs are much smaller etc.
This is because of technical and gameplay limitations 
Quote:
You only want classical or myth units, huh? Okay then...
No treants for you. These were created by Wizards of the Coast, because of copyright issues with Ent. Do you want ents? They started off in Tolkien, so no more of them.
Orcs are now pig men, or just big guys, same as ogres.
If we use Norse myth, we can get Elves, Dark elves, and Dwarves. Back to square one with those guys. Good Luck.
Say good bye to liches. Their first instance was, as far as I can tell, in 1946. Otherwise, they were mages/wizards who brought others back to life, or just a necromancer. Lich just means "corpse". Want a mummy to replace them? The first time a mummy was not just a burial ritual, but instead a monster, was in 1827, as far as I can tell, and that mummy was brought into the twenty second century (year 2100+). Is this classical enough? Venom Spawn ain't no thing.
Gog and Magog are either just people or places. Pit fiend comes from D&D, or is just another ordinary name for Demon. A classical nightmare is just a succubus/incubus, or a witch in a variety of forms.
Gorgon (in its H3, bovine form) is a D&D fabrication. Otherwise, it'd just be Medusa again.
Beholders are yet another fabrication of D&D, and Evil Eyes are at best a talisman against a curse, or is the curse the talisman protects against. Neither is a beast. And I'm not quite sure if troglodytes fit. No dinosaurs of any kind, though dragons suffice.
No halflings, as those are just another Tolkien creation. No Dragon Golems, as beyond a Golem (by mythology) necessitating a human form, none have dared remake a dragon. Gremlins weren't a thing until aviation via powered flight, otherwise you are looking for an imp.
It sure is fun having only mythological and classical creatures! Except, not really.
As stated before, creatures need not be only from mythology or just plainly not made up. However, it needs to have a good quality.
As well, H6 still brought in new creatures, and even didn't use the cliched ones, like a Lamasu instead of a Sphinx. And Namtar (the Namtaru's name sake) is a being not unlike the Grim Reaper, another creature of Mesopotamian origin. As well as those Sanctuary creatures (Kappa, Kirin, Yuki Onna).
Though I'd rather Mercury just be called Quicksilver, as you said, it is extracted from crystals. Why have the two be separate? Crystals already was a resource.
1.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man-eating_tree
2. Ok
3. Yes, but not in their Tolkien ripped form, they are spirits "fairer than the sun to look at"
4.yet mummies existed even before the Ancient Egypt, and what's Necropolis if not a town of reanimated creatures?
5.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gog_and_Magog
6.If gorgons didn't had the black stare ability in h3, would they be that iconic?
7.Argus
8.Namatar isn't a spider and kappa is more of a water goblin than a gorilla
9.Cinnabar is Mercury sulfide, which is a compound from both a metal and a non-metal, mercury itself is a metal
Ok, I see this sparked a lot of tension, this isn't a thread to bash Ashan, it's just an appeal to use inspiration from the mythology without butchering it and make original creatures without ripping them off.
|
|
Protolisk
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted September 26, 2014 03:15 PM |
|
|
LizardWarrior said:
1.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man-eating_tree
2. Ok
3. Yes, but not in their Tolkien ripped form, they are spirits "fairer than the sun to look at"
4.yet mummies existed even before the Ancient Egypt, and what's Necropolis if not a town of reanimated creatures?
5.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gog_and_Magog
6.If gorgons didn't had the black stare ability in h3, would they be that iconic?
7.Argus
8.Namatar isn't a spider and kappa is more of a water goblin than a gorilla
9.Cinnabar is Mercury sulfide, which is a compound from both a metal and a non-metal, mercury itself is a metal
Ok, I see this sparked a lot of tension, this isn't a thread to bash Ashan, it's just an appeal to use inspiration from the mythology without butchering it and make original creatures without ripping them off.
1. So, are we talking about humanoid walking trees, or trees that are mostly stable yet eat the people walking by? So you get to keep Waspworts and such, but not our more benevolent Treants.
3. Though true, the Light Elves aren't so easily matched, as they tend to be put in heaven. However, the dark elves are ussualy dark skinned, but live on/in the ground. Dwarves were made of dust, are master blacksmiths, and live underground. (In one rather awesome case, a Dwarf became a dragon.)
4. So, it's just gonna be a reanimated creature, just like any other zombie, with otherwise no special powers? They've never had any "evil" or "magical" properties related to combat until roughly 1850, when the "mummies curse" became rumored. In fact, the only ability mummies had (beyond just being a vessal for the spirit to make it to the underworld) was healing properties, for the living. If you use their more "evil" incarnation, then you are falling trap to the popularized cliche version, which i thought you were against.
5. Most of the biblical stuff still says they are either people or places, as I said. However, it is true of them being part of a race of giants further down, so I suppose they fit. Still, they are just giants, not so much demons. I guess "evil" can link it, but "evil giant" is a long shot from "flame-throwing lizard demons".
6. I wasn't exactly saying they were or weren't iconic. I was merely listing units that didn't actually have a mythological basis per se (The "gorgons" do, but those would just be Medusa and her two sisters, none of which were bovine.) They could have still turned people to stone, but that wasn't right either. They could have chosen a Catoplebas or similar, yet still, H3 did not.
7. Okay, you got me there. I usually am pretty good when it comes to Greek stuff, but I forgot about Argus. However, the only time he is "beholder" like is (to my knowledge) in the Age of Mythology game. Otherwise, he is not a semi-gelatinous floating eye-ball tentacle beast, but instead a humanoid with lots of eyes. (And sometimes not even all the eyes are even shown.)
8. So, is the name good enough, or isn't it? While it didn't seem like Gog and Magog or the Gorgon had much similar to their namesake, it is true neither does the Namtaru to Namtar. However, they are linked by their actual theme, as Namtar is almost explicitly a being of "fate" and "death", which our spider ladies certainly are. Gorgons should, if we are using mythological basis, turn people to stone, not have an outright killing stare. The Medusa and Basilisks had the same ability, so there should have been no reason otherwise.
Additionally, now the kappa isn't a "water goblin", even though it is a scaly, webbed-footed, water-bowl-headed water spirit, but now its form of being more muscle bound is the point of contention so that you can exclude it? If we are going that way, need I remind you of examples such as:
Titans aren't giant metallic/stone men, they are godly, more fleshy beings.
Cerberus has much more going for it than three dog heads.
Manticores are supposed to have human heads (something that, for all I hate the H5 look of it and believe it to be an eyesore, got right.)
And much more. If a creature is rather close, but suddenly is missing a trait, is it no longer the same creature, if it has many of the other defining traits?
9. Yes, true. But it comes from crystals. We already have crystals in all the other games. Why did they need crystals to buy things, as well as mercury, which can only be obtain by distilling yet more crystals?
If I wanted to be extra argumentative, I could ask about the difference between "gems" and "crystals".
I didn't see it as an Ashan bashing thread. I did see it as one that was ignoring the roots for which it's original argument was based. You ask for less cliche, except there was a lot of cliche to begin with. Dragons are one of the most cliche. "Wizards". "Skeletons". "Minotaur". You ask for mythological units, yet ask for less cliche in the same breath. This is nearly impossible when it comes to the older games, as they were rife with the most cliched line up imaginable. I was start naming all of those, but that would have taken so much time that I deemed it only necessary to show creatures that weren't as myth based as you thought. Though I can see that some do have their exceptions, others still do not.
An extra thought: If you wish to defend something like Argus, who is a humanoid, and make it like a Beholder, which is such a massive shape change, then certainly you must be fine with Cerberus having two heads. Cerberus, in some classical depictions, does have 2 heads, sometimes even 1. It usually has a snake mane. It could have 100 heads.
If you aren't fine with the Cerberus having two heads, then you cannot say that Argus would be a good replacement for the Beholder, as that changes its over all shape (Like making a Dragon a mammal, or the Medusa into a bird lady) to a vast degree.
|
|
blob2
Undefeatable Hero
Blob-Ohmos the Second
|
|
posted September 26, 2014 04:40 PM |
|
|
Drop it guys. This is pointless, it's another of those "f* you nostalgic fans"/"f* you Ubisoft lackeys thread". Like it or not, we won't change Ashan, and how things are handled here. They are to deep in this s*, erm... lore to go back.
The only possible way to get back to the "old ways" is to resurrect H5 with Kickstarter, which is not possible, cus Ubisoft holds the rights to the franchise and will not release it from it's jaws.
(Though seeing potential line-ups in H5, there weren't that many mythological units, there were a lot of some new designs like half-man half-lion or a wywern-man...)
|
|
Sandro400
Promising
Supreme Hero
Shadow of Death
|
|
posted September 26, 2014 04:51 PM |
|
|
LizardWarrior said:
Lamasu= in babylonian/sumerian mythology they are human headed winged bulls, not lions, the lamassu was just an undead greek sphinx
Ghoul= it's not a zombie, but a dijin associated with death
This is because of technical and gameplay limitations
Erm, Lamasu is depicted either with bull's or lion's body and often represents female deity. So no problems here, see? 
Ghoul in Ashan isn't zombie nor djinn, but 1) it's associated with death 2) it feeds on corpses 3) and outside Arabian folklore (when it came to Europe) is classified as Undead. So, I see no problems with Ghouls either.
Nice excuse But I don't think Gorgons were big reptilian bulls in Greek Mythology (I have an idea from where H3 gorgon comes, but it's clearly not 3 sisters). And I remember Basilisk, Djinns (which are not the spirits of Air), Golems, Gremlins...
____________
Let's play poker game, lich-style!
|
|
Sorts
Known Hero
|
|
posted September 27, 2014 12:22 AM |
|
|
Some comments
GORGON: H3 Gorgon comes almost straight from D&D, where its a metalplated bull creature with petrifying breath. Im not sure about the history behind that creature, or why the name is used.
LICH: Well liches, as we know them are pretty much also a creation of D&D writers and developers. There are few a "lich-like" creatures and individuals in different mythologies and folklores, who have probably been sources of inspiration to that whole destroy the phylactrecy to kill the lich theme.
The funny fact is that most D&D liches arent only skeletons, but rather closer to mummies. Most of them retain dessicated skin and even some flesh on their bones (although bone only variants are possible): some pics from D&D rulebooks:
http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/7893040/images/1265151515483.jpg
http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20060625205351/forgottenrealms/images/1/13/Lich.jpg( a human lich and a mind flayer lich)
http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20071210213657/forgottenrealms/images/0/0a/Baelnorn.jpg (a special form of lich but still)
http://www.enworld.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=61747&d=1400610680&stc=1
In addition most D&D lore states that liches don't become piles of bone overnight. Their flesh desiccates over time. So a fresh lich or a lich who bothers with keeping up its looks, could seem rather "fleshy."
In my not very humble opinion, the whole vampires are liches that have gone through a specific transformation, is actually a rather cool and actually original idea. It hasn't just been implemented well to the game.
Also in some folklore, dead witches were thought to be returning as vampires, so there is some mythological background
Vampire: Well... when we already are there. This has been touched so many times in different threads. But most versions of vampires that we see as classic or generic, don't come from myhology or folklore, but are combined by victorian writers... primarily Bram Stoker. Actually even the burning in sunlight didn't exist before the Count Orlock movie in 1923. Before they avoided sunlight, were in deep sleep turing the day and/or seriously weakened by it
Beholder: There is no connection to the Argus. Its a fully D&D origonal creature, made by its creators in 1975 and actually one of the few creatures that are trademarked by WoTC. I think H3 got away with using the beholder because TSR (the former owners of D&D) didn't trademark it, but know if you want to use it outside D&D licence, you have to change the name and its abilities/background (the Shadow Lurkers in H6, Watchers in WoW).
Mythology and folklore: a fun fact a lot of written mythology or religion is already an alteration made by a fantasy writer. The fantasy writer being the scholars who gathered that material and wrote it down in the first place. In many cases has that person gathered the material and made either mistakes in understanding and writing the material or has directly tried to show it in the light of his age or won ideology (many 18-19 century scholars and writers tended to idealize things, while christian authors tended to bring christian elements into the story). In many cases, especially European folklore, cetlic or norse mythology we are already reading something that is based on the mythology, not directly the mythology.
|
|
MattII
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted September 27, 2014 11:25 AM |
|
Edited by MattII at 11:54, 27 Sep 2014.
|
Well the H4 Gorgon is very similar to the Catoblepas of Greek myth. Also, on the lack of either halflings or gremlins, the gnome is sitting idle, along with probably one or two other similar creatures.
On the undead, Ghouls are arabic, Lichs (there named Bokors) and Zombies belong to Vodou folklore, Vampires are of course traditional European, as are Skeletons and Ghosts, so out of the whole H6 lineup, only Fate-Spinners are less than several centuries old at least.
|
|
Galaad
Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
|
|
posted September 27, 2014 11:38 AM |
|
Edited by Galaad at 11:38, 27 Sep 2014.
|
blob2 said:
Drop it guys. This is pointless, it's another of those "f* you Ubisoft lackeys thread".
Always good for me seeing those.
YES bring the mythology back !
|
|
hammerhand
Hired Hero
|
|
posted September 27, 2014 12:08 PM |
|
|
although tolkin use the name elf£¬elf of fantasy noval most probably based on sidhe of Irish folklore£¬ aka Tuatha D¨¦ Danann£¬who associate with woods, earth, other world and fairy magic
|
|
hammerhand
Hired Hero
|
|
posted September 27, 2014 12:12 PM |
|
|
Sorts said:
Beholder: There is no connection to the Argus. Its a fully D&D origonal creature, made by its creators in 1975 and actually one of the few creatures that are trademarked by WoTC. I think H3 got away with using the beholder because TSR (the former owners of D&D) didn't trademark it, but know if you want to use it outside D&D licence, you have to change the name and its abilities/background (the Shadow Lurkers in H6, Watchers in WoW).
Marvel's shuma gorath came out earlier than beholder
this is shadow lurker
this is beholder
|
|
yogi
Promising
Famous Hero
of picnics
|
|
posted September 07, 2015 02:09 AM |
|
Edited by yogi at 02:09, 07 Sep 2015.
|
bump
@ubi: the basis for these games is founded on the myths and legends of the last 50,000 yrs, plenty of lore to play with. spend the money on the sandbox mechanics that foster our creativity, so that we can play through our own stories within these archetypes.
civilization & the like = history
master of magic, aow & the like = fantasy
master of orion & the like = sci-fi
heroes of might and magic = mythology
embrace your strengths!
i feel the series is falling back on fantasy cliches too much, instead of portraying higher philosophical concepts like it used to.
please devs: less tropes, more mythology and philosophy! 
____________
yogi - class: monk | status: healthy
"Lol we are HC'ers.. The same tribe.. Guy!" ~Ghost
|
|
GenyaArikado
Bad-mannered
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted September 07, 2015 02:16 AM |
|
|
Protolisk said:
You only want classical or myth units, huh? Okay then...
No treants for you. These were created by Wizards of the Coast, because of copyright issues with Ent. Do you want ents? They started off in Tolkien, so no more of them.
Orcs are now pig men, or just big guys, same as ogres.
If we use Norse myth, we can get Elves, Dark elves, and Dwarves. Back to square one with those guys. Good Luck.
Say good bye to liches. Their first instance was, as far as I can tell, in 1946. Otherwise, they were mages/wizards who brought others back to life, or just a necromancer. Lich just means "corpse". Want a mummy to replace them? The first time a mummy was not just a burial ritual, but instead a monster, was in 1827, as far as I can tell, and that mummy was brought into the twenty second century (year 2100+). Is this classical enough? Venom Spawn ain't no thing.
Gog and Magog are either just people or places. Pit fiend comes from D&D, or is just another ordinary name for Demon. A classical nightmare is just a succubus/incubus, or a witch in a variety of forms.
Gorgon (in its H3, bovine form) is a D&D fabrication. Otherwise, it'd just be Medusa again.
Beholders are yet another fabrication of D&D, and Evil Eyes are at best a talisman against a curse, or is the curse the talisman protects against. Neither is a beast. And I'm not quite sure if troglodytes fit. No dinosaurs of any kind, though dragons suffice.
No halflings, as those are just another Tolkien creation. No Dragon Golems, as beyond a Golem (by mythology) necessitating a human form, none have dared remake a dragon. Gremlins weren't a thing until aviation via powered flight, otherwise you are looking for an imp.
It sure is fun having only mythological and classical creatures! Except, not really.
As stated before, creatures need not be only from mythology or just plainly not made up. However, it needs to have a good quality.
As well, H6 still brought in new creatures, and even didn't use the cliched ones, like a Lamasu instead of a Sphinx. And Namtar (the Namtaru's name sake) is a being not unlike the Grim Reaper, another creature of Mesopotamian origin. As well as those Sanctuary creatures (Kappa, Kirin, Yuki Onna).
Though I'd rather Mercury just be called Quicksilver, as you said, it is extracted from crystals. Why have the two be separate? Crystals already was a resource.
can we give this like a qp? or is it not "funny" enough for you the moderation
|
|
The_Green_drag
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted September 07, 2015 05:49 AM |
|
|
I certainly agree with the title and most of the OP. But the decline in mythology started as soon as Ubi took over, and I agree it's because of these dreaded "race" factions over themed ones. Oh I miss the golden years when Elf was nothing more than a good ranged unit. 
The art and unit choices is what made h5 such a bummer for me. Fortress is the prime example with so much wasted potential of bringing in Norse myth units. Sylvan, stronghold, and dungeon were a huge bummer as well, kicking out my favorite fliers.
H6 did keep the trend going and so is H7.
Honestly this is the most irritating topic because that is what hooked me on heroes in the first place. I don't give a damn about the many different elf warriors, dark elf witches, Orc warriors, and dwarf warriors that inhabit Ashan. And when we do finally get myth units they jump on the most boring concepts they can think of (sun deer) while tossing aside the most unique ones (thunderbirds).
Honestly though they just suck at making new units. It's as simple as that. The only cool units from H7 are the classic ones. The strider is a perfect example of how bad they are at making new units. The simurgh was cool until they went and made it teleporting. What else did they come up with....root snake...sun deer...shadow teleporting unicorns....I have more imagination in my pinky toe than the entire M&M team has combined. Everything else new is a humanoid that we already have too much of.
It's annoying when the game is full of humanoid races already, then when we get "creature" units, the spot is wasted on a humanoid dryad, or a humanoid mime puppet whatever golem, or a humanoid treeman.
Bottom line, there should be only one race unit per faction if they insist on having them at all, with haven being the only exception.
|
|
Elvin
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Endless Revival
|
|
posted September 07, 2015 09:43 AM |
|
|
The_Green_drag said:
Honestly this is the most irritating topic because that is what hooked me on heroes in the first place. I don't give a damn about the many different elf warriors, dark elf witches, Orc warriors, and dwarf warriors that inhabit Ashan. And when we do finally get myth units they jump on the most boring concepts they can think of (sun deer) while tossing aside the most unique ones (thunderbirds).
Honestly though they just suck at making new units. It's as simple as that. The only cool units from H7 are the classic ones. The strider is a perfect example of how bad they are at making new units. The simurgh was cool until they went and made it teleporting. What else did they come up with....root snake...sun deer...shadow teleporting unicorns....I have more imagination in my pinky toe than the entire M&M team has combined. Everything else new is a humanoid that we already have too much of.
It's annoying when the game is full of humanoid races already, then when we get "creature" units, the spot is wasted on a humanoid dryad, or a humanoid mime puppet whatever golem, or a humanoid treeman.
Bottom line, there should be only one race unit per faction if they insist on having them at all, with haven being the only exception.
Quoted for Emphasis. Screw the lore, we have myths!
____________
H5 is still alive and kicking, join us in the Duel Map discord server!
Map also hosted on Moddb
|
|
kiryu133
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Highly illogical
|
|
posted September 07, 2015 09:54 AM |
|
|
Greenie speaks the truth!
was the same for me: the myth units was what got me interested and what kept me interested. That H3 was also a great game was merely a bonus 
Now, since the lore and units are so snow, I only follow the franchise because the gameplay is still intriguing for, but they're botching that up too...
Soon there won't be any reason to keep track of it and that's just sad.
____________
It is with a heavy heart that I must announce that the cis are at it again.
|
| |
|
|
