|
On December 03 2014 02:53 Alaric wrote:
Dunno, even from what I've seen of Ann Rice's stuff people are heads over heels for it and it's still a Mary Sue depiction of vampires with an excessive emphasis on the sexuality metaphor, so...
Then again Bram Stoker's Dracula is one of my references (along with The Black Company) about how to make a character charismatic without telling you (s)he's charismatic or describing him/her with praises (even in disguise).
Hmm are you talking specifically about Lady? I don't know if she was ever really charismatic or merely Croaker's view of her was warped by how much he fantasized about her.
On December 03 2014 02:57 Requizen wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2014 02:48 onlywonderboy wrote:On December 03 2014 02:44 Numy wrote:On December 03 2014 02:06 onlywonderboy wrote:On December 03 2014 01:23 Numy wrote:
TWD is more about dumb people being dumb than zombies though. Maybe in the show, but I think the comic and game are both really good. I mean, it's like any other zombie show though where people are the real monsters. Not exactly ground breaking but it's handled well in these mediums. I was talking specifically about the show. Heard good things about the game/comic. Also yes I love vampires and fucking hate all this vampire shit last few years. Give me a Hellsing or Dracula over this shit any day. I used so say I hate all of the pretty boy vampire bullshit thing because of Twilight but now I've watched Buffy/Angel sooooo.... Vampires are supposed to be attractive. The original vampire stories are monster versions of aristocracy and how they treat the commoners as possessions/food, much like how Frankenstein is the monster version of terrifying scientific advancement and zombies are the monster version of how faceless, mindless individuals seem harmless but as a crowd will wear you down and make you one of their own. Pretty much all of the classic monsters are allegories of some sort. But they're also fucking cool. Vampires are supposed to be haughty, refined, and beautiful to the point that you want to love them and be loved by them (in fact, mind control and persuasion are some of Dracula's original powers), but they're also supposed to be violent, vicious, and monstrous once that veneer falls away. Buffy and Angel do a pretty good job of showing that, so do the Dresden books. Even Alucard in Hellsing pulls it off when he's not bathing in someone's blood.
Well said. So well said.
The way I see Vampires is that they appear to be "ideal" humans but by gaining all these attributes they become trapped by their own weakness and need for a "species" they deem lower than them. It's how the peasants saw the nobility and how they nobility needed the peasants. Having vampires mingle with humans on an equal level just completely defeats the purpose of them being vampires.
|
Whereas my undead dinosaur idea is not very subtle allegory about the dangers of fossil fuels. I guess I should go write a best seller about it.
|
United States23745 Posts
|
On December 03 2014 02:54 WaveofShadow wrote:
Guys how far Off are we from brain transplant technology?
I need a new body.
Need more protein. Always more protein. MOM GET ME MY PROTEIN
|
On December 03 2014 03:05 Shelke14 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2014 02:54 WaveofShadow wrote:
Guys how far Off are we from brain transplant technology?
I need a new body. Need more protein. Always more protein. MOM GET ME MY PROTEIN
We can rebuild him.
|
Nope, Soulcatcher. In his scenes during the first campaign (first book; I'm saying "him" but does the original text say "him" or "it"? French's equivalent to the it pronoun is awkward to apply to people), the author never tells you that he's charismatic or impressive or classy or whatever. He only tell you about the situation, shows the dialogue, unfolding events, and it just so happens that members of the Black Company display unease in his presence, although they don't fear him either. These scenes establish him and his effect on people fairly well I thought, and contrary to The Lady the author never uses praises to do it (even through Croaker's words).
The Lady is shown as charismatic too, but more as a leader, while Soulcatcher is more as an individual. And in parallel you have Raven to deconstruct the trope of the tall dark stranger. 
Iirc Dracula isn't supposed to be beautiful. He's a bit of the typical Eastern European male, tall, square, unibrow, and it's specifically stated that he's not graceful or anything. However, he has an overwhelming presence (that is a combination of his vampiric nature and his physionomy).
Is Rogue even a thing now? I can't wrap my head around Backspace allowing you to Legend even before Leeroy nerf, and now with Leeroy and Auctioneer nerfs I don't really see what archetypes they have. The Malygos one?
|
Don't really like those changes. Well I don't ever like any of the HS balance changes honestly. They never really seem to be addressing the issue, instead just destroying cards so they never played again which just so happens to stop a particular deck.
On December 03 2014 03:11 Alaric wrote:Nope, Soulcatcher. In his scenes during the first campaign (first book; I'm saying "him" but does the original text say "him" or "it"? French's equivalent to the it pronoun is awkward to apply to people), the author never tells you that he's charismatic or impressive or classy or whatever. He only tell you about the situation, shows the dialogue, unfolding events, and it just so happens that members of the Black Company display unease in his presence, although they don't fear him either. These scenes establish him and his effect on people fairly well I thought, and contrary to The Lady the author never uses praises to do it (even through Croaker's words). The Lady is shown as charismatic too, but more as a leader, while Soulcatcher is more as an individual. And in parallel you have Raven to deconstruct the trope of the tall dark stranger. Iirc Dracula isn't supposed to be beautiful. He's a bit of the typical Eastern European male, tall, square, unibrow, and it's specifically stated that he's not graceful or anything. However, he has an overwhelming presence (that is a combination of his vampiric nature and his physionomy).
Croaker uses him iirc. It took me about to figure out who you meant as it's been awhile since I read the first book where as the book of south is fresh in my memory. I see what you saying, having a character actually use the words charismatic or classy or impressive always feels really cheap writing to me. I never noticed while reading the novels that he actually never did this. Anyway The Black Company is fantastic. Find it so odd that such an important piece of fantasy is not widely known.
Now that I think of it you also have the mute girl as another "deconstruction". I can't remember her name though. Don't know if I've actually read the books after Lady's one.
|
|
|
Dayum that spellstopper and the arcane nullifier. Well the spellstopper needs to be protected itself somehow (don't think mage can grant stealth, so you'd need both next to each other?).
Hobgoblin is weird, the anima golem though, with argus and sunfury protectors in your deck, is quite the powerhouse.
And tree of life asfasfasfasf. It has a high cost so you still have a window, but damn.
Kezan Mystic looks fun. A bit slow against Hunters, but man if I can steal their explosive traps...
Another underwhelming-at-best Rogue card though. Sure you can combo it with cold blood and keep stealthing it to punch your opponent in the face, but he won't stand to AoE at all (and there's so much RNG to hit through stealth with G&G) and there aren't enough interesting pirates to include in a rogue deck.
Auchenai confirmed still best card in the game (along with Nozdormu).
|
Damn some of those cards look great. Not a single terribad card there either.
|
God another terrible rogue card. What the fuck blizzard. That priest card though. See they bringing back the old healing totem effect on a 2 mana drop card now lol.
|
That Hobgoblin looks pretty nice for Zoo/Minis decks.
I do play Warlock on occasion, and I dunno how to feel about the Anima Golem. I guess it's to give non-Giant Lock decks a heavy-hitting option? Is Zoolock even a thing anymore?
|
On December 03 2014 02:54 WaveofShadow wrote:
Guys how far Off are we from brain transplant technology?
I need a new body.
I think we're a bit closer to cybernetic parts. Glorious evolution pls.
|
damn GvG is gonna be interesting
|
On December 03 2014 03:23 Requizen wrote:
Is Zoolock even a thing anymore?
???
Does anyone even play Hunter?
|
On December 03 2014 03:26 Alzadar wrote:??? Does anyone even play Hunter?
I honestly don't know. I only get on every now and then in front of the TV, and on streams the only Lock decks I see are Handlock with Giants.
|
|
|
Ok fair enough. Well Zoolock and Hunter are both super popular still. Decent chunk of Druid/Priest/Warrior. Paladins and Rogues are extinct.
|
Anima golem is terrible unless you silence it since there's a destroy check on EACH turn.
|
On December 03 2014 03:29 WaveofShadow wrote:
Anima golem is terrible unless you silence it since there's a destroy check on EACH turn.
You need to give it a stealthed battle-buddy.
Also apparently Tree of Life + Auchenai Soulpriest = Everyone dies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/v/t1.0-9/s720x720/10675594_823437654365671_5285143768686098651_n.jpg?oh=ab5b0762571405b0ca51011983522ab6&oe=55021667&__gda__=1427960633_f73409a10064df730e2f9bd57cd4d37a)
![[image loading]](https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xaf1/v/t1.0-9/s720x720/10444402_823437701032333_8192123004277336525_n.jpg?oh=c2c9d7569e8ab7df7bd12030b0ad528e&oe=55003558&__gda__=1426364351_402146bc18a6a966f9d11c43950a1408)
