|
|
Zombi_Wizzard
Famous Hero
|
posted March 27, 2015 08:53 PM |
|
|
Stevie said:
Marzhin said:
Don't read too much into the posings. The artists was asked to make them look different in attire and pose, but that doesn't mean the final unit will float or point fingers ingame. Since it will be a brand new model all animations will have to be done from scratch anyway.
Mind you, this holds correct for other side aswell. So it can still mean, his face, for example could turn out not to be skeletal ... just a taught. Remember that several hundered pages ago, it was stated, that there's realy no skeletal liches in Ashan, other than Sandro, and another guy (I forgot) so....
If this would occur, you are left with leggless, floating version of original H7 design. Mask atleast hides his face, which is imo for the best.
Allso, the tematic look ... pretty much all of them are "mummy-liches". It's because that's Ashan's theme for whole Necropolis. Like Marzhin said: Names are just thrown there to mark diferent designs.
You can easyly cover Mummy's shortcommings with this argument also, saying that it COULD turn out to drop the mask and have full skeletal face, for eg. It's realy a void argument, since noone can make a decision based on what COULD be there. For all we know, Priest COULD become headless ...
Also, Marzhin only talks about clothing and stances. So that means, that more or less, if the Sorcerer dosen't have leggs here ... he will not have them in final design. No leggs = floating. And yes, even tho H5 lich didn't float, I always percived him as floating, because he lacked leggs 
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 27, 2015 09:53 PM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 21:55, 27 Mar 2015.
|
For me it's actually the other way around. The suspended naked legs of the Heroes 6 lich simply made me cringe. Also, if you were to read the descriptions, the Undead Sorcerer "has forsaken flesh to the point of becoming a cadaver himself", while the Ancient Mummy reads - "Only bandages and rituals keep his rotten body in one piece, and he hides his desiccated face under a mask.". So here's a deal breaker for me, one lich renounced to his flesh willingly, while the other seeks to keep his own intact. Of course I'll go for the more skeletal one. And if you pay close attention to the Mummy's legs, they still have flesh, the feet especially. No feet bones, nothing. Plus, the "desiccated" part reminds me so much of the H6 lich description I cannot consider it at all. Then there's the bling bling, the mask, the spider head on the robes, and you can pretty much get why it's my least favorite of the options. It's just a masked Heroes 6 lich, and that's all there is to it.
____________
Guide to a Great Heroes Game
The Young Traveler
|
|
Zombi_Wizzard
Famous Hero
|
|
posted March 27, 2015 10:17 PM |
|
|
I would argue tho, that lich does not need to be 100% skeletal to begin with, as it's not a feature that makes him lich at all. Same with Vampire's sword.
Corpses don't rot away overnigh, and besides, if lore says he reverse ages to become eventualy vampire, that means several stages where he still / again has flesh. Imo it's much more in character of a lich to preserve his flesh, than throw it away, Ashan lore or not. The reason for skeletal apearance is simply, that even powerfull lich has lost that battle.
Besides, unlike a vampire, lich is not based on mythology. Yes there is Koschei, but that one isn't skeletal AT ALL. Lich is based on D&D and is modern monster, which leaves it totaly open for interpretation. Note that, even original D&D Lich dosen't always have flesh in all settings.
That said, merging this modern monster with mummy, and giving it name Lich is to me, actualy a rare good thing Ubi has done regarding creature lore. Sadly, it's been done before. Warhammer's Liche Priests.
Also ... surprise surprise, I used to collect and paint Warhammer Fantasy, back in the day ... and guess which faction was / still is mine? Yes It's the Tomb Kings, and I own Liche priest model  Paintjob is rather slopy tho, so if I ever go back to collecting, ill try to remove it and recolour.
So there, I like the mummy on same principle, I like my Tomb Priest in my Warhammer Army 
|
|
Sandro400
Promising
Supreme Hero
Shadow of Death
|
|
posted March 27, 2015 10:18 PM |
|
|
Stevie said:
And if you pay close attention to the Mummy's legs, they still have flesh, the feet especially. No feet bones, nothing.
Pay close attention to Undead Sorcerer then (especially his hands), what else can I say?
And to his head actually, as well as neck. It's the Undead Sorcerer who's body is "desiccated"
I'll add more.
Citation:
"The winning option will be reiterated and customized in order to comply with the game art direction."
____________
Let's play poker game, lich-style!
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 27, 2015 10:44 PM |
|
|
All of their arms and hands have flesh. No point to be made there.
As far as the head goes, the Undead Sorcerer still comes ahead for me because it shows a face with no flesh. The others have it covered, partially with the Priest and totally with the Mummy.
And sorry, but what you added more does not make any point.
Zombi_Wizzard said:
So there, I like the mummy on same principle, I like my Tomb Priest in my Warhammer Army
I guess there's nothing more to be said then, lol
____________
Guide to a Great Heroes Game
The Young Traveler
|
|
Sligneris
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 27, 2015 10:55 PM |
|
|
Well, Priest of Death show more skeletal parts than any of those. I mean, just look at that:
Nothing but bones, while Undead Sorcerer shows off his fleshy armpits...
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 27, 2015 11:00 PM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 23:00, 27 Mar 2015.
|
Stevie said:
I personally believe that the Priest would make for a better Acolyte unit than a Lich. It has some cool features like the robe from the shoulders down covering a bit of the arms, the exposed backbone and the covered face + hood combo. Also the floating book is killer. But Undead Sorcerer appears to be more of a Lich, both in design and in description.
____________
Guide to a Great Heroes Game
The Young Traveler
|
|
Sligneris
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 27, 2015 11:03 PM |
|
|
That being said... are we sure that the Undead Sorcerer is skeletal? I mean...
It kinda looks like he simply put a hat on...
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 27, 2015 11:06 PM |
|
|
|
Sligneris
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 27, 2015 11:13 PM |
|
|
Stevie said:
Empty eye sockets, no nose cartilage, showing teeth and if I see correctly no cheek flesh. Arguably he didn't just put a hat on.
I... hope you're right. After all, that old lich design also looks like it could give the impression of teeth or empty eye sockets on paper sketch, with these desiccated lips and fully glowing eyes...
|
|
Sandro400
Promising
Supreme Hero
Shadow of Death
|
|
posted March 27, 2015 11:28 PM |
|
|
Stevie said:
All of their arms and hands have flesh. No point to be made there.
As far as the head goes, the Undead Sorcerer still comes ahead for me because it shows a face with no flesh. The others have it covered, partially with the Priest and totally with the Mummy.
And sorry, but what you added more does not make any point.
Then why you even bring this point? Out of 3 variants it's the Priest actually who looks more skeletal.
Sorecere's face has a skin, it's just thin and rotted which makes it look like a skull. What you call teeth are desiccated lips. Pay attention to his neck as well.
Really? Because it's the point. I'm genuinely surprised how many people vote for visuals while the vote is about concepts( Vampires: male swordsman, female swordsman, claw fighter). Oh, we have a Lich that looks like a skeleton! We should vote for it!!! But this single citation I gave shows us, that this Sorcerer may receive a mask or more flesh at any moment of development to be more with "game art direction".
Those sketches give only a very, very general visuals. Mummy may lose more flesh, Priest may lose his mask, Sorcerer may gain his legs etc.
That's why I also called those votings a very efficient PR-move. You may all receive "Uncle Fester" again but with a different model, with a hood/mask etc
____________
Let's play poker game, lich-style!
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 27, 2015 11:48 PM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 23:51, 27 Mar 2015.
|
Sandro400 said:
Then why you even bring this point? Out of 3 variants it's the Priest actually who looks more skeletal.
Maybe because before you switched to arms, the conversation was about the Mummy showing his legs?
Sandro400 said:
Sorecere's face has a skin, it's just thin and rotted which makes it look like a skull. What you call teeth are desiccated lips. Pay attention to his neck as well.
You somehow see a desiccated face, I see a skull with no flesh at all. And the description, which is part of the concept, indicates that I am right, as it says that the Sorcerer "has forsaken flesh".
Sandro400 said:
Really? Because it's the point. I'm genuinely surprised how many people vote for visuals while the vote is about concepts( Vampires: male swordsman, female swordsman, claw fighter). Oh, we have a Lich that looks like a skeleton! We should vote for it!!! But this single citation I gave shows us, that this Sorcerer may receive a mask or more flesh at any moment of development to be more with "game art direction".
Those sketches give only a very, very general visuals. Mummy may lose more flesh, Priest may lose his mask, Sorcerer may gain his legs etc.
That's why I also called those votings a very efficient PR-move. You may all receive "Uncle Fester" again but with a different model, with a hood/mask etc
So what you're saying is that one lich can literally look like another in the very end because of the way you interpret that quote? So this vote is completely meaningless as the defining features of the Priest, Sorcerer and Mummy can easily be discarded or interchanged? Because I certainly DO NOT agree with that. You're wasting your time if you argue with me from that standpoint.
I expect the models to reflect the traits I see in their sketches. If not, then it's a sham where they put to the vote one thing but then deliver another. And you cannot hold the voter responsible.
____________
Guide to a Great Heroes Game
The Young Traveler
|
|
Sligneris
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 27, 2015 11:54 PM |
|
|
Quite honestly, that is one interpretation... after all, he does have a fleshy neck, and you simply don't see such a smooth transition from flesh to bone.
Defining traits of these designs are evidently their outfits - each has unique set of robes, Sorcerer has a crown, Priest has a hood, Mummy has a mask... and all of them are rotting and own a book. You can't exactly call something a sham because of your own mistaken assumptions...
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 28, 2015 12:00 AM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 00:01, 28 Mar 2015.
|
Sligneris said:
You can't exactly call something a sham because of your own mistaken assumptions...
Excuse me for assuming that the Sorcerer will have a hat and a staff, while the in-game model might not.
____________
Guide to a Great Heroes Game
The Young Traveler
|
|
Sligneris
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 28, 2015 12:02 AM |
|
|
|
He does have the hat and the staff and it's something that won't be changed, but the assumption I was talking about was Undead Sorcerer being skeletal in the first place...
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 28, 2015 12:07 AM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 00:09, 28 Mar 2015.
|
Sligneris said:
He does have the hat and the staff and it's something that won't be changed, but the assumption I was talking about was Undead Sorcerer being skeletal in the first place...
Then you might want to read again what I was quoting sandro400 for. Here's an excerpt: "Mummy may lose more flesh, Priest may lose his mask, Sorcerer may gain his legs"
And of course, I assume that it's skeletal because it looks skeletal (the head/face), and because we have been VERY vocal about wanting it to be skeletal. If it's a clever trick from their part to make me believe something, then who exactly is at fault?
____________
Guide to a Great Heroes Game
The Young Traveler
|
|
Sandro400
Promising
Supreme Hero
Shadow of Death
|
|
posted March 28, 2015 12:09 AM |
|
|
Stevie said:
Maybe because before you switched to arms, the conversation was about the Mummy showing his legs?
Em, but it was you who pointed to their legs being "fleshy"...
Stevie said:
You somehow see a desiccated face, I see a skull with no flesh at all. And the description, which is part of the concept, indicates that I am right, as it says that the Sorcerer "has forsaken flesh".
Not somehow, it's clearly a desiccated flesh. Plus when you quote something, give full citation. Not simply forsaken flesh, but to the point that he himself became cadaver. And, to my knowledge, "cadaver" doesn't mean "it's only skeleton".
Stevie said:
So what you're saying is that one lich can literally look like another in the very end because of the way you interpret that quote? So this vote is completely meaningless as the defining features of the Priest, Sorcerer and Mummy can easily be discarded or interchanged? Because I certainly DO NOT agree with that. You're wasting your time if you argue with me from that standpoint.
Gosh, what's so hard...
The thing is, we vote for concepts with general visuals. A priest (Undead in priestly robes and preaching hands gestures), an Undead Sorcerer (more "mundane", classical dead mage), and a Mummy (bandages). Ofc they can't look like one another, but any of those sketches may and most likely will be tweaked a little, and this means that the Sorcerer may gain a mask, Mummy may receive more rotten body etc. Skeletal body, btw, isn't the decisive visual factor in any of those 3 variants.
A short, hopefully satisfying example. The Blood Monster obviously can't wield the sword, but he may lose his aristocratic attire for raggedy clothes, his claws may become bigger, his hair - shorter, etc. See, changes within the conceptual model "wild vampire".
I would be happy to be proven wrong, but at the moment (for me) it looks like a cleverly put PR-move to calm all those "necro-rioters", be the good guys again who listen to it's community and give a semblance of choice. Nobody promised you skeletal Liches, to be honest, and it was said (even painted in red) that the final product may (and most likely will) look different.
____________
Let's play poker game, lich-style!
|
|
Greenlore
Known Hero
|
|
posted March 28, 2015 12:13 AM |
|
|
Sligneris said:
That being said... are we sure that the Undead Sorcerer is skeletal? I mean...
It kinda looks like he simply put a hat on...
The description for the undead sorcerer mentions how he has forsaken his flesh,which sounds to me like they are telling us "if you want skeletal liches,then choose that dude"
____________
|
|
Sligneris
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 28, 2015 12:22 AM |
|
|
Greenlore said:
The description for the undead sorcerer mentions how he has forsaken his flesh,which sounds to me like they are telling us "if you want skeletal liches,then choose that dude"
I do hope so, at least, but like many pointed out, the full quote is that he "has forsaken flesh to the point of becoming a cadaver himself".
Cadaver is essentially a dead, rotting corpse. That's not synonymous with "skeletal"
|
|
Stevie
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 28, 2015 12:40 AM |
|
Edited by Stevie at 00:42, 28 Mar 2015.
|
Sandro400 said:
Stevie said:
Maybe because before you switched to arms, the conversation was about the Mummy showing his legs?
Em, but it was you who pointed to their legs being "fleshy"...
Yes, and if you wanted to make a counterpoint, you should've mentioned the fleshy legs of the other models, not hands. But that's the point, you can't see their legs, and you can't know if they're fleshy or not, unlike the Mummy where you know for sure that they are fleshy. The less flesh I see, the better.
Sandro400 said:
Stevie said:
You somehow see a desiccated face, I see a skull with no flesh at all. And the description, which is part of the concept, indicates that I am right, as it says that the Sorcerer "has forsaken flesh".
Not somehow, it's clearly a desiccated flesh. Plus when you quote something, give full citation. Not simply forsaken flesh, but to the point that he himself became cadaver. And, to my knowledge, "cadaver" doesn't mean "it's only skeleton".
It clearly isn't. It's skeletal. But then again, it's only a sketch and we can see two different things. As for the quote, I didn't need to cite it fully to make my point, which is that the Undead Sorcerer forsake his flesh willingly, while the Mummy uses bandages and rituals to maintain and conserve his own. So no matter how you look at it, the best potential for having as little flesh as possible, according to the descriptions, lies with the Undead Sorcerer.
Sandro400 said:
Stevie said:
So what you're saying is that one lich can literally look like another in the very end because of the way you interpret that quote? So this vote is completely meaningless as the defining features of the Priest, Sorcerer and Mummy can easily be discarded or interchanged? Because I certainly DO NOT agree with that. You're wasting your time if you argue with me from that standpoint.
Gosh, what's so hard...
The thing is, we vote for concepts with general visuals. A priest (Undead in priestly robes and preaching hands gestures), an Undead Sorcerer (more "mundane", classical dead mage), and a Mummy (bandages). Ofc they can't look like one another, but any of those sketches may and most likely will be tweaked a little, and this means that the Sorcerer may gain a mask, Mummy may receive more rotten body etc. Skeletal body, btw, isn't the decisive visual factor in any of those 3 variants.
A short, hopefully satisfying example. The Blood Monster obviously can't wield the sword, but he may lose his aristocratic attire for raggedy clothes, his claws may become bigger, his hair - shorter, etc. See, changes within the conceptual model "wild vampire".
I would be happy to be proven wrong, but at the moment (for me) it looks like a cleverly put PR-move to calm all those "necro-rioters", be the good guys again who listen to it's community and give a semblance of choice. Nobody promised you skeletal Liches, to be honest, and it was said (even painted in red) that the final product may (and most likely will) look different.
"Sorcerer may gain a mask" - I do not agree with that, but you just insist in slipping that part through between other points which are more reasonable. If that happens, then it's a sham. I see the Undead Sorcerer without a mask, I voted him partly because of that. If his attire changes, like messing with his hat, or staff or book, then that's NOT what I've voted for, and I'm free of guilt.
Then other things on the Vampires, like bigger claws and shorter hair, are reasonable. That means to ADJUST something, not to REMOVE/ADD something else. What would be unreasonable is for me to get a Blood Monster with no claws, no cape and no colar. If that happens it's not the voter who should be held responsible for voting it, but the devs who put one thing for voting and delivered something else.
Sligneris said:
Greenlore said:
The description for the undead sorcerer mentions how he has forsaken his flesh,which sounds to me like they are telling us "if you want skeletal liches,then choose that dude"
I do hope so, at least, but like mamy pointed out, the full quote is that he "has forsaken flesh to the point of becoming a cadaver himself".
Cadaver is essentially a dead, rotting corpse. That's not synonymous with "skeletal"
Undead Sorcerer has the best potential to be as fleshless as possible. That's what the description is saying, and that's enough reason for me to vote for it.
____________
Guide to a Great Heroes Game
The Young Traveler
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
