Difference between revisions of "Talk:Elementals"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m |
|||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:::Some elementals are sentient, and some elementals aren't (as evidenced by the tell-reception of [[Krrathknar]] and others). Sending tells, in and of itself, is probably not evidence of sentience but rather a nonsensical game mechanic; any loyal denizen will send tells for ORDER <x> FOLLOW <absent target> or ORDER <x> LOSE, including mounts and bees. I would classify elementals on the whole as both sentients and nonsentients, varying based on purity, size, age, or simply their ability to communicate with complex beings. -{{User:Delphinus/sig1}} 07:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC) | :::Some elementals are sentient, and some elementals aren't (as evidenced by the tell-reception of [[Krrathknar]] and others). Sending tells, in and of itself, is probably not evidence of sentience but rather a nonsensical game mechanic; any loyal denizen will send tells for ORDER <x> FOLLOW <absent target> or ORDER <x> LOSE, including mounts and bees. I would classify elementals on the whole as both sentients and nonsentients, varying based on purity, size, age, or simply their ability to communicate with complex beings. -{{User:Delphinus/sig1}} 07:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC) | ||
::::I agree that to generalise all elementals as one or the other would undermine the complexities of their true nature (and would also make them less interesting). For now I will place them in both categories, but I suppose that ultimately we will have to decide whether this in itself is sufficient or we would again like to attack the inconsistency (if it wasn't intended) via the coding angle instead of otherwise. [[User:Asara|Asara]] 14:23, 20 September 2008 (UTC) | ::::I agree that to generalise all elementals as one or the other would undermine the complexities of their true nature (and would also make them less interesting). For now I will place them in both categories, but I suppose that ultimately we will have to decide whether this in itself is sufficient or we would again like to attack the inconsistency (if it wasn't intended) via the coding angle instead of otherwise. [[User:Asara|Asara]] 14:23, 20 September 2008 (UTC) | ||
::::Actually, since the "class loyals" category is already categorized under denizens -and- creatures, just class loyals will do for now. [[User:Asara|Asara]] 21:58, 20 September 2008 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 21:58, 20 September 2008
Copied over from Talk:Elemental
Edit history note: for category placement, are these creatures sentient? by Asara.
- The elementals cannot recieve tells, but they can recieve orders. Adding to the confusion, ORDER <elemental> LOSE <name> results in a tell from that elemental of "I no longer follow", implying some amount of sentiency. A bit puzzling as to where to place them in my opinion. Seems somewhat related to my Humgii topic on the forums, too, so it would be nice to get some feedback there... Soludra 19:55, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- Also, it appears that there is an Elementals page already in existence, although I don't think it adequately covers the points I made above concerning sentience. Soludra 20:46, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- Some elementals are sentient, and some elementals aren't (as evidenced by the tell-reception of Krrathknar and others). Sending tells, in and of itself, is probably not evidence of sentience but rather a nonsensical game mechanic; any loyal denizen will send tells for ORDER <x> FOLLOW <absent target> or ORDER <x> LOSE, including mounts and bees. I would classify elementals on the whole as both sentients and nonsentients, varying based on purity, size, age, or simply their ability to communicate with complex beings. -Delphinus @ 07:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
- I agree that to generalise all elementals as one or the other would undermine the complexities of their true nature (and would also make them less interesting). For now I will place them in both categories, but I suppose that ultimately we will have to decide whether this in itself is sufficient or we would again like to attack the inconsistency (if it wasn't intended) via the coding angle instead of otherwise. Asara 14:23, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, since the "class loyals" category is already categorized under denizens -and- creatures, just class loyals will do for now. Asara 21:58, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
- Some elementals are sentient, and some elementals aren't (as evidenced by the tell-reception of Krrathknar and others). Sending tells, in and of itself, is probably not evidence of sentience but rather a nonsensical game mechanic; any loyal denizen will send tells for ORDER <x> FOLLOW <absent target> or ORDER <x> LOSE, including mounts and bees. I would classify elementals on the whole as both sentients and nonsentients, varying based on purity, size, age, or simply their ability to communicate with complex beings. -Delphinus @ 07:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC)