Origins Pack - Natural Auras and Capes
By
Angelxman81,
Posted on: 2010-11-03 17:59 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
Stun/Disorient... I knew I was forgetting something 
And, no, there is no difference between defence as a stat and "strength to" as listed in the Real Numbers screen. In fact, I'm pretty sure that's just the system name of the stat internally that they never got around to changing into something meaningful to a person who is not Arcanaville. In fact, I brought this up multiple times when Real Numbers were being introduced, treating it like a text bug, but apparently it's working as intended.
Effects and statistics need to be standardised so they appear with the same name in all places where they occur. This includes enhancements, recipes, Inventions enhancements, the crafting screen, the Market, Combat Attributes, Real Numbers, combat spam, power descriptions and so on. Right now, attribute names are a real mess.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
Not really saying that I think that the stupidness is going away, just saying that putting it in the novels doesn't make it set in stone.
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Well, I hope you're right, then. I'd really like to put all of this Origin of Powers nonsense behind us and move on with an actual storyline, rather than with author mandates trying to tell OUR backstories.
|
Quote:
all this sort of thing is the game equivalent of, oh, pulling out the stove, sweeping underneath it and cleaning off the backsplash.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Stun/Disorient... I knew I was forgetting something
And, no, there is no difference between defence as a stat and "strength to" as listed in the Real Numbers screen. In fact, I'm pretty sure that's just the system name of the stat internally that they never got around to changing into something meaningful to a person who is not Arcanaville. In fact, I brought this up multiple times when Real Numbers were being introduced, treating it like a text bug, but apparently it's working as intended. Effects and statistics need to be standardised so they appear with the same name in all places where they occur. This includes enhancements, recipes, Inventions enhancements, the crafting screen, the Market, Combat Attributes, Real Numbers, combat spam, power descriptions and so on. Right now, attribute names are a real mess. |
Would it be nice to do?
Sure!
Would anyone notice it?
No!
Or at least so few people that the energy would largely be wasted.
The Nethergoat Archive: all my memories, all my characters, all my thoughts on CoH...eventually.
My City Was Gone
Quote:
I have the agreeance with this, oh muchly much I do.|
Originally Posted by TrueMetal
Of course it's simple inconsistency by the writers. That's what I hate about it. I really, really dislike sloppy writing, especially when it breaks the consistency of, and thus my immersion in, the world/story.
Things that existed first are official canon. If you want to change the official canon, then go and actually change it, don't leave a trace of it. Don't shoehorn in some half-cocked lore that completely contradicts existing lore and leave it to sit side by side. That's just sloppy and unprofessional. |
While I generally agree that characters *in* the story don't have all the information we have, there is a qualitative difference between lowercase "npcs" and uppercase "NPCs", namely that the latter are stand-ins for the Devs and thus have a direct line to the story bible. So I give more weight to what War Witch-NPC says than Azuria-npc says.
The Alt Alphabet ~ OPC: Other People's Characters ~ Terrific Screenshots of Cool ~ Superhero Fiction
Quote:
Giving more weight to the words of character based on out of character information is just silly. Nothing in the game makes War Witch out to be more authoritative than Azuria, who is suppose to be one of the formost experts in her field if I remember right. That they don't live up to some imagined importance you place on the character is not a failing of the writing. In fact giving those characters information they shouldn't have would be really bad writing.
|
Originally Posted by Ironik
I have the agreeance with this, oh muchly much I do.
While I generally agree that characters *in* the story don't have all the information we have, there is a qualitative difference between lowercase "npcs" and uppercase "NPCs", namely that the latter are stand-ins for the Devs and thus have a direct line to the story bible. So I give more weight to what War Witch-NPC says than Azuria-npc says. |
Quote:
These days, the public at large is a bit jaded and always reading between the lines of game dialogue. Pretty early on, I learned that everything my contacts told me AT THE END of a story was always true, and the only false information I was given was mid-story when I would realise it's actually false. In fact, whenever false information popped up, it would always be denoted by phrasing such as "I know it to be true!" (courtesy of Pia Marino) or "they must have done whatever" or "it looks like this and that." The narrative never really told us lies with any certainty, but rather it gave us wrong conjecture that was obviously uncertain.|
Originally Posted by Shadow State
Giving more weight to the words of character based on out of character information is just silly. Nothing in the game makes War Witch out to be more authoritative than Azuria, who is suppose to be one of the formost experts in her field if I remember right. That they don't live up to some imagined importance you place on the character is not a failing of the writing. In fact giving those characters information they shouldn't have would be really bad writing.
|
City of Heroes really just doesn't have any precedent in having the plot itself end on a lie or on falsehood. Even if the the conclusion is presented as mysterious or misleading TO THE CHARACTER, there's usually enough information that the player can figure out it wasn't actually true. The game won't out-and-out tell you what's true and what's false to your character's face, but it would leave you with enough of a hint to know.
The Origin of Powers contacts speak with the authority and phrasing of absolute truth, yet they are full of fluffy bunnies, to pick a less offensive descriptor. To question them is to question writing for the entire game in general, to the point where nothing is left ever certain, and to a lot of people - myself among them - that is not a step up.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
OT Sidebar: Sam, your signature - if only you would add 'to toast' between 'lost' and 'I think' it would ascend into the realms of poetry!|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Of all the things I've lost,
I think I miss my mind the most. |
Carry on.
Quote:
I should think Positron saying "Now as a scientist, I want to point out to you that there is no hard data on any of the theories I mentioned to you,"should make it clear he isn't speaking with the authority and phrasing of absolute truth.|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
These days, the public at large is a bit jaded and always reading between the lines of game dialogue. Pretty early on, I learned that everything my contacts told me AT THE END of a story was always true, and the only false information I was given was mid-story when I would realise it's actually false. In fact, whenever false information popped up, it would always be denoted by phrasing such as "I know it to be true!" (courtesy of Pia Marino) or "they must have done whatever" or "it looks like this and that." The narrative never really told us lies with any certainty, but rather it gave us wrong conjecture that was obviously uncertain.
City of Heroes really just doesn't have any precedent in having the plot itself end on a lie or on falsehood. Even if the the conclusion is presented as mysterious or misleading TO THE CHARACTER, there's usually enough information that the player can figure out it wasn't actually true. The game won't out-and-out tell you what's true and what's false to your character's face, but it would leave you with enough of a hint to know. The Origin of Powers contacts speak with the authority and phrasing of absolute truth, yet they are full of fluffy bunnies, to pick a less offensive descriptor. To question them is to question writing for the entire game in general, to the point where nothing is left ever certain, and to a lot of people - myself among them - that is not a step up. |
And I do have to say, I find it mildly amusing that the whole splitting of the atom thing means that technically all mutants are Science origin.
Quote:
I should also point out that Maxwell Christopher saying much the same about Nemesis surviving his "death" at the end of The Eternal Nemesis or Doc Delilah saying much the same about the History of Faultline at the start of her own arc don't change the fact they they are both absolutely right. The entire game is based on the premise that we make "revelations" without actually going through the process of finding conclusive evidence, and many times we do so even when we're told there's no way to be sure.|
Originally Posted by Shadow State
I should think Positron saying "Now as a scientist, I want to point out to you that there is no hard data on any of the theories I mentioned to you,"should make it clear he isn't speaking with the authority and phrasing of absolute truth.
|
I'm not saying that Positron or any of the other contacts speak as though they are experts, but more that the way the narrative is structured takes a wide swing to the left with these contacts, pretty much shattering a whole bunch of tropes that the narrative of the rest of the game more or less created. More specifically, consider the entire point of the Origin of Powers are to begin with - it's a tutorial mission little different from the University tutorial. It's not just another story arc because it consists of five (well, four - Positron seems to have been dropped out due to some bug) "talk to" missions that don't reward any experience and serve no purpose other than to introduce us to the concept of origins as a plot device. It makes sense we would assume that the origins tutorial would have truth in it, because otherwise it would be completely pointless, wouldn't it?
Well, it is, and it is, but that's kind of what gets my nether goat about the whole thing.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
Yes but those were proven to be true, would you assume Maxwell was right if Nemesis never showed up again?|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
I should also point out that Maxwell Christopher saying much the same about Nemesis surviving his "death" at the end of The Eternal Nemesis or Doc Delilah saying much the same about the History of Faultline at the start of her own arc don't change the fact they they are both absolutely right.
|
Quote:
| ... serve no purpose other than to introduce us to the concept of origins as a plot device. It makes sense we would assume that the origins tutorial would have truth in it, because otherwise it would be completely pointless, wouldn't it? |
Quote:
The guy in a robotic suit could be Natural or Technology; the implication of being Technology (from Positron's comments in the Origins of Power arc) are that you built the suit yourself, while for Natural it's gear you acquired. You could equally argue that someone in a magic suit of armor was Natural.
|
Originally Posted by Shadow State
This is one of the reasons I dislike the Magic Origin. I really don't get why it's all lumped into one origin while there are 4 "Scientific" origins. Why is the guy in a magic suite of armor the same as a highly trained Mage but a guy in a robotic suite gets a separate origin from a highly trained Soldier?
|
"But in our enthusiasm, we could not resist a radical overhaul of the system, in which all of its major weaknesses have been exposed, analyzed, and replaced with new weaknesses."
-- Bruce Leverett, Register Allocation in Optimizing Compilers
Quote:
I suspect that, in game terms, it's going to work out more in the manner of Roger Zelazny's Lord of Light, where a 'god' was described as 'taking on an Aspect and raising up an Attribute', in that they were manifesting as the embodiment of a particular principle.
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Come to think of it, though - and I do know that "incarnate" stands for "an incarnation of a deity" - but basic English actually plays out the new use of the term very well. When my Technology Blaster earns his Alpha Slot, he will become Technology Incarnate. I like the sound of that!
|
"But in our enthusiasm, we could not resist a radical overhaul of the system, in which all of its major weaknesses have been exposed, analyzed, and replaced with new weaknesses."
-- Bruce Leverett, Register Allocation in Optimizing Compilers
Quote:
That's not the way I'd describe it. Admittedly, someone who is Natural is going to use Technology to some degree and it's hard to draw the line between the two, but "building" and "acquiring" would have nothing to do with it from my perspective. Col. Rhodes donning one of Iron Man's old suits and becoming War machine isn't Natural, he's Tech. Batman is on the cusp of Natural/Technology, fairly evenly balanced between the two. The Punisher, though, is Natural.|
Originally Posted by srmalloy
The guy in a robotic suit could be Natural or Technology; the implication of being Technology (from Positron's comments in the Origins of Power arc) are that you built the suit yourself, while for Natural it's gear you acquired. You could equally argue that someone in a magic suit of armor was Natural.
|
That's how I see it.
The Alt Alphabet ~ OPC: Other People's Characters ~ Terrific Screenshots of Cool ~ Superhero Fiction
Quote:
Here's the thing: It "introduces" me to origins as a tangible game aspect - possibly the single worst plot device in the history of the game... And then does nothing with it. It's a bad story, because it's pointless and, moreover, because it's destructive. It ruins what could have been a good plot element, and for what? It does NOTHING with it.|
Originally Posted by Shadow State
But there's a world of difference between it being an introduction to origins and letting it railroad you because you see it as the whole of origins.
|
I may sound like a snob saying this, but the Origin of Powers idea hasn't earned the right to jump the shark. I could have swallowed this if the story were interesting or compelling, if it lulled me into the idea and THEN slapped me with the railroading nature. But no. The story is just about nothing but a straight jacket.
I assume the story is "right" because if it's wrong then it has no reason to exist.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
It seems what bugs you about Origins in this instance is what made you want it removed; it's ambiguity. Between what we know from the Origin of Power, Dr. Brainstorm, and various mission clues, we get a myriad of theories based on different points of view. There's enough ambiguity to allow us to still create our own stories and weave them into the great CoX mythos.
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Here's the thing: It "introduces" me to origins as a tangible game aspect - possibly the single worst plot device in the history of the game... And then does nothing with it. It's a bad story, because it's pointless and, moreover, because it's destructive. It ruins what could have been a good plot element, and for what? It does NOTHING with it.
I may sound like a snob saying this, but the Origin of Powers idea hasn't earned the right to jump the shark. I could have swallowed this if the story were interesting or compelling, if it lulled me into the idea and THEN slapped me with the railroading nature. But no. The story is just about nothing but a straight jacket. I assume the story is "right" because if it's wrong then it has no reason to exist. |
"Samual_Tow - Be disappointed all you want, people. You just don't appreciate the miracles that are taking place here."
Quote:
A mind is a terrible thing to toast.|
Originally Posted by Flarstux
OT Sidebar: Sam, your signature - if only you would add 'to toast' between 'lost' and 'I think' it would ascend into the realms of poetry!
Carry on. |
At least, that is what I have always heard.
"How do you know you are on the side of good?" a Paragon citizen asked him. "How can we even know what is 'good'?"
"The Most High has spoken, even with His own blood," Melancton replied. "Surely we know."
Quote:
I'm hopelessly late to this, but...|
Originally Posted by Golden Girl
Without a cape, you're not much of a superhero
|
No capes!!!
Quote:
...that's been exposed to an alien form of solar radiation. That's like saying the fantastic four are natural origin because any human would get powers when exposed to Cosmic Rays. Superman is more properly a science origin hero.|
Originally Posted by Unknown_User
Good point, Superman could be considered a natural origin since his powers are natural for him or any Kryptonian.
|
Further, lumping aliens and other inhumans into the natural origin is a result of the original devs at Cryptic deliberately leaving out the Inhuman origin. In Jack's mind, the only non-human races that existed were those that existed in canon, things like Kheldians, Avilians, and Coralax. You couldn't make your own aliens by design.
At some point, that changed, but origins were already implemented. Instead of taking the time to add a new origin, inhumans were simply shoehorned into the natural origin, dispite the thematic non-equivalence. The problem is most evident when attempting to run a "natural" inhuman through the Origin of Power arc. The contacts there seem to assume you are a baseline human with advanced training.
Quote:
It's about which is exceptional, the tech, or the man using it.|
Originally Posted by Ironik
That's not the way I'd describe it. Admittedly, someone who is Natural is going to use Technology to some degree and it's hard to draw the line between the two, but "building" and "acquiring" would have nothing to do with it from my perspective. Col. Rhodes donning one of Iron Man's old suits and becoming War machine isn't Natural, he's Tech. Batman is on the cusp of Natural/Technology, fairly evenly balanced between the two. The Punisher, though, is Natural.
That's how I see it. |
The punisher's technology is not super technology, what's exceptional is the skill and training of the man wielding it. Iron Man's armor, on the other hand, is clearly super-tech, lightyears ahead of anything like it. With just a little experience, just about anybody can strap it on and kick butt.
Batman has access to true super-tech, but he rarely goes out in anything higher grade than 'cutting edge'. Batman, like the Punisher, is expectional because of his training an natural ability.
Further, the origins melting into each other a little is expected: see dual origin enhancements. Natural heroes have access to magical baubles and minor gadgets, but if the start getting power from extra-dimensional entities or implanting themselves with advanced cybernetics, their origin comes into question.
Quote:
I disagree. Superman's abilities are a natural part of him. The appropriate analogy isn't the FF but rather Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin -- they could jump higher and run faster on the moon because the conditions are different there. THEY were still the same men. |
Originally Posted by Dementor_NA
...that's been exposed to an alien form of solar radiation. That's like saying the fantastic four are natural origin because any human would get powers when exposed to Cosmic Rays. Superman is more properly a science origin hero.
|
Quote:
|
Further, lumping aliens and other inhumans into the natural origin is a result of the original devs at Cryptic deliberately leaving out the Inhuman origin. In Jack's mind, the only non-human races that existed were those that existed in canon, things like Kheldians, Avilians, and Coralax. You couldn't make your own aliens by design. At some point, that changed, but origins were already implemented. Instead of taking the time to add a new origin, inhumans were simply shoehorned into the natural origin, dispite the thematic non-equivalence. |
Quote:
| The problem is most evident when attempting to run a "natural" inhuman through the Origin of Power arc. The contacts there seem to assume you are a baseline human with advanced training. |
The Alt Alphabet ~ OPC: Other People's Characters ~ Terrific Screenshots of Cool ~ Superhero Fiction
Not to play a game of semantics, but Dementor said the one thing I was thinking that is sort of in-favor of the idea of an alien-type origin...
Calling it "Inhuman".
It was the only word I could think of that covers the concept nicely, but I didn't post it.
This covers all sorts of beings whose exceptional asepct is their natural powers/abilities that are greater than that of a human's.
I still think that the Natural origin fits this perfectly fine, but I do understand the difference.
A change would make the Natural Origin completely about training and physical conditioning and pushing to the peak of potential physicality, while the Inhuman Origin would be entirely about a being who relies on powers, strengths and/or abilities that are far above the baseline human and that they did not have to do anything special to obtain.
I do get it and don't have a problem with the division... However, I also have zero problem with those two being shared within today's Natural Origin (Just like many variants lie within each of the other origins).
With the current origin, "Natural" is a relative term. A natural Ent is far different than a natural human, just as a natural tiger is far different than a natural shrew. 
Quote:
While I am not in favor of any origin changing or anything... The thing is, aliens and nonhumans would not all need be of the Inhuman Origin, just the same as all humans are not of the Natural Origin.|
Originally Posted by Ironik
Also disagree. My aliens are all over the place. I have Nat, Tech and Science off the top of my head. I don't think I have a Magic one simply because that's not how I view aliens, but they aren't all Nats.
|
Those aliens of yours that do rely on natural powers of their own would be Inhuman Origin.
However, those aliens that rely on advanced technology would still be Tech Origin and so on.
Which also brings up another point...
An alien that trains and perseveres to achieve their maximum physicality/strength/power... would that be Inhuman or Natural?
Sounds like Natural... Especially since one of the arguments was that the Natural Origin pushes humans to equal power as any other origin... So, they are no lesser or even any different in strength than an Inhuman... So, they should be completely left as those who did not push themselves as hard as those of a Natural origin... Further muddying the reason for having it (In my opinion).
Still... all that being said... an alien or elf that trains and pushes themselves beyond the baseline of their own race of beings would be of Natural Origin and Inhuman would be best left as those who are not that far above the average for their species.
*shrugs*
@Zethustra
"Now at midnight all the agents and the superhuman crew come out
and round up everyone that knows more than they do"-Dylan
and round up everyone that knows more than they do"-Dylan
Quote:
That's kind of the point. A Natural Jackie Chan is far different from a Natural Ironik. I have to go Tech to compete with him. Tech Matermind, honestly.|
Originally Posted by Electric-Knight
Not to play a game of semantics, but Dementor said the one thing I was thinking that is sort of in-favor of the idea of an alien-type origin...
Calling it "Inhuman". It was the only word I could think of that covers the concept nicely, but I didn't post it. This covers all sorts of beings whose exceptional asepct is their natural powers/abilities that are greater than that of a human's. I still think that the Natural origin fits this perfectly fine, but I do understand the difference. A change would make the Natural Origin completely about training and physical conditioning and pushing to the peak of potential physicality, while the Inhuman Origin would be entirely about a being who relies on powers, strengths and/or abilities that are far above the baseline human and that they did not have to do anything special to obtain. I do get it and don't have a problem with the division... However, I also have zero problem with those two being shared within today's Natural Origin (Just like many variants lie within each of the other origins). With the current origin, "Natural" is a relative term. A natural Ent is far different than a natural human, just as a natural tiger is far different than a natural shrew. |
I just don't see the point of making an "inhuman" origin, since the current crop cover most of the possibilities just fine. Superman has spectacular abilities, sure, but he's still Natural. Now, if he trains to hone those abilities, then he's just a well-trained Natural. That's no different from The Punisher becoming more proficient with firearms. Iron Man got better at using his armor through training, so he's just a well-trained Technology. The Human Torch got better at using his abilities, so he's just a well-trained Science. And so on. Basically training and experience just moves you from amateur to professional status. It doesn't change your inherent Origin.
The Alt Alphabet ~ OPC: Other People's Characters ~ Terrific Screenshots of Cool ~ Superhero Fiction
Quote:
I agree |
Originally Posted by Ironik
That's kind of the point. A Natural Jackie Chan is far different from a Natural Ironik. I have to go Tech to compete with him. Tech Matermind, honestly.
I just don't see the point of making an "inhuman" origin, since the current crop cover most of the possibilities just fine. Superman has spectacular abilities, sure, but he's still Natural. Now, if he trains to hone those abilities, then he's just a well-trained Natural. That's no different from The Punisher becoming more proficient with firearms. Iron Man got better at using his armor through training, so he's just a well-trained Technology. The Human Torch got better at using his abilities, so he's just a well-trained Science. And so on. Basically training and experience just moves you from amateur to professional status. It doesn't change your inherent Origin. |
I can just understand how some think there should be an origin split in defining the difference of a turtle who trained really hard and a grizzly bear who just is as big and bad as it is without ever lifting a weight.
I don't feel any need for a split in those two origins, but... I can see the point (As I am sure you can as well).
Still... I share your assessment... the difference doesn't equate a difference of origin (in my book).
Let's say, in their prime, that Andre the Giant could hit as hard as Mike Tyson.
Should they have two different origins? (Taking it to the comicbook level, so let's argue that Andre could be inhuman, hehe)
P.S. I miss Andre!!
@Zethustra
"Now at midnight all the agents and the superhuman crew come out
and round up everyone that knows more than they do"-Dylan
and round up everyone that knows more than they do"-Dylan
Sam's got a point. More uniformity in mez terminology would be so much better than flavoring-up description text. Disorient and stun are another "interchanged" mez name. Is there even a difference between "Defense to" and "Strength to" in terms of real numbers? I see those quite often as well...
I read that stuff to know what the heck I'm doing, not to be thrilled by someone's thesaurus skills!