Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Ladies of the Empire: Elspeth von Draken

12346

Comments

  • Vanilla_GorillaVanilla_Gorilla Registered Users Posts: 21,225
    crazycrix said:

    crazycrix said:

    crazycrix said:

    ...Gregor had 8th edition rules and used those for Amber Wizard lord and he had unique model...

    The image that you've posted is in the 8th edition armybook as a generic Amber Wizard (which seems to be it's origin):



    The only rules I can find for him is a mention that he's part of the Defenders of Middenheim formation, where he's a generic Wizard Lord with a bonus spell. So "had 8th edition rules" is, I suppose, technically correct. But...
    Aye, he was based of the regular amber wizard. This is his artwork from the End Times:


    Well, there is no but, he has the rules and the model, so the same as Elspeth got, he also was important in the final chapter of the setting, unlike Elspeth who was forgotten.
    If his model is the generic model then he doesn't have a model. When I say "has a model" I mean a specific unique model for that character. Not a generic model that it also uses. I'd also suggest being a generic character with a single change is different to a character with a datasheet specifically for them.

    I don't think you can claim that a character using the generic model and the generic datasheet with one change is the same as a character with a unique model and ruleset.
    He is based of that model, so this model is his. You can aslo take a model of Elspeth and run it around as a generic lord, or cut her entirely and replace her with Karl to have Karl on imperial dragon. Her stats are mostly the same to the battle wizard of the Empire with few changes here and there. Gregor has less significant changes, but still has them and thus is unique.
    Hahaha. Yeah, no. Using the generic model like Gregor does is not the same as having a unique model.

    Gregor has one change, correct?
    Thanks CA for working with Epic Games to give us Troy for free!
  • DubinekdubajsDubinekdubajs Registered Users Posts: 978

    crazycrix said:

    crazycrix said:

    crazycrix said:

    ...Gregor had 8th edition rules and used those for Amber Wizard lord and he had unique model...

    The image that you've posted is in the 8th edition armybook as a generic Amber Wizard (which seems to be it's origin):



    The only rules I can find for him is a mention that he's part of the Defenders of Middenheim formation, where he's a generic Wizard Lord with a bonus spell. So "had 8th edition rules" is, I suppose, technically correct. But...
    Aye, he was based of the regular amber wizard. This is his artwork from the End Times:


    Well, there is no but, he has the rules and the model, so the same as Elspeth got, he also was important in the final chapter of the setting, unlike Elspeth who was forgotten.
    If his model is the generic model then he doesn't have a model. When I say "has a model" I mean a specific unique model for that character. Not a generic model that it also uses. I'd also suggest being a generic character with a single change is different to a character with a datasheet specifically for them.

    I don't think you can claim that a character using the generic model and the generic datasheet with one change is the same as a character with a unique model and ruleset.
    He is based of that model, so this model is his. You can aslo take a model of Elspeth and run it around as a generic lord, or cut her entirely and replace her with Karl to have Karl on imperial dragon. Her stats are mostly the same to the battle wizard of the Empire with few changes here and there. Gregor has less significant changes, but still has them and thus is unique.
    Hahaha. Yeah, no. Using the generic model like Gregor does is not the same as having a unique model.

    Gregor has one change, correct?
    Correct.

    You see, his artwork depictes him as the model that was used for generic Amber Wizard, so from that point onward that model became Gregor and could also be used for regular mage as well as Elspeth model can be used for whatver you want.

    His Royal Highness, Phoenix King Finubar!

    "It has been too long since I drew a blade in anger, Tyrion. You have been my sword, and Teclis has been my shield. But now it is time I fought my own battles!"

    I used to be crazycrix, then Epic happened 😀
  • UberReptilianUberReptilian U.S.S.RRegistered Users Posts: 1,724

    Sorry for the late reply UR.

    Line of Sight in this game is iffy enough that it's easy to have a unit that relies on seeing the enemy to shoot it not being able to. Just in terms of fun a lord that relies on sitting still and pew pewing the enemy isn't as fun as a lord that runs around doing stuff. I think it's safe to say most folk see it like that anyway. You've also got to keep in mind CA would probably do a CA and stick him on some dumb mount or in a Steamtank, because CA things.

    You do have a point. A lot of what GW wrote is awful. However I look around at the alternatives and there's a bunch of Melee dudes, then there's Falksy. From a perspective of representing the Empire he is better than Elseph. If representation is what you want that's the better choice.

    Lol, we're all just dudes on a forum arguing about nonsense. No need for apologies.

    Yes, LoS is a pain in this game, especially with flamethrower units Irondrakes/Warpfire, but I think that'd be an awful reason for excluding characters like Jubal or Grimm Burloksson or even the Sisters of Twilight. I do sympathise with that mentality though considering CA's reluctance to fix issues like LoS and Footlords (though I imagine they'd give Jubal a Steam Tank cause Engineer LL whether appropriate or not).

    This is where I think the lack of imagination comes into play with some. People look at a character and say it's just X, when in actuality characters are designed with a purpose.

    Marius Leitdorf is a duelist LL and has a similar system to Luthor Harkon in that his madness gives him different buffs or debuffs randomly. Perfect FLC character.

    Kurt Helborg is the cavalry LL. He is DLC material imo as he would bring the missing Cav units and also Grand Master Lord option. He isn't very flashy either but he does have a solid niche and still fits the Empire theme.

    Ludwig Schwarzhelm is 100% not a LL material character, but is PERFECT as a Lord Kroak style character for the Empire and especially Karl Franz. He is a body guard and would focus on keeping the Lord in his army alive, by taking damage for the Lord and just general buffs to them.

    Jubal Falk is the number one IMO as he would finally bring the glorious gunpowder theme the Empire lacks especially in comparison to the Skaven's firepower or the number one gunpowder faction V Coast.

    Valten is... boring IMO so I can't be arsed to defend him lmao. Plus we already have the Religious Fanatic theme with Volkmar he just needs mechanics to reflect this. Being the Chosen of Sigmar isn't very interesting IMO though I guess they could do something with it.

    The other LLs brought up I'm not as familar with (I have a pdf of Tamurkhan but's really terrible quality, so I've never read the thing, just character rules).

    I believe in being fair so I think Elspeph will be a DLC LL as she's flashy and would bring Lord Level Wizard casters, Celestial Hurricanums and FLC Gold Wizards with her, but I think unlike all the others she has the potential to open some really bad cans of worms, like the Nuln LL thing and giving Empire access to Carmine Dragons as units something the Empire should not have (Carmine Dragons had rules in MA, so seeing them as a unit would be highly likely). But since she is just another Gelt with an overused mount at this point, I can't say I see what the hype is all about.

  • sykallsykall Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 577
    edited September 21
    psychoak said:

    sykall said:

    psychoak said:

    sykall said:

    On the internet people seem to throw around the term Mary sue without using its proper meaning. Most of the time it is a short cut to say that someone dislikes this female character, mostly because she is female.

    Within the proper definition many 80 action heroes or characters akin to them are also mary sues, or rather Gary Stews. Often they are ultracompetent characters without any major flaws that can complete inhuman tasks without breaking into sweat. But people rarley complain about such characters.

    Ignorance is hardly surprising, but you're making a hilariously wrong comparison in a futile attempt to point out sexism.

    Most of the 80's action heroes are A: horribly flawed individuals who kick ass and suck at life.

    Or B: cartoon characters with the writing quality of a four year old, and a target audience of the same.

    He-Man isn't labeled a Mary Sue because literally no one takes the writing seriously. It's junk. Which is where the term came from. Junk writing of a girl who was unreasonably good at everything. A Star Trek fan fiction, to be exact.

    The typical movie action hero, on the other hand, tends to be **** at life. Bond is a womanizing alcoholic for instance. Super spy extraordinaire, but he's a lonely **** who drinks away his misery. He also gets his ass kicked. Regularly. I can't think of an action movie where the leading man is actually good at everything, that is at all popular. Divorcees, alcoholics, serial philanderers that can't commit, poorly behaved cops on the verge of getting fired. The rarities that actually are balanced in life and epic badasses both, are generally not teenage boys who suddenly discovered that they're MMA badasses, but life long experts in combat with substantial experience behind them.

    Star Wars is a perfect example of this sexism misdirection.

    Luke is a whiner, and the only thing he's actually good at, besides whining, is piloting, which he gained from years of experience doing daredevil idiocy with hover craft in canyons, and murdering poor little animals for fun. He doesn't even do that unusually well. He's not doing amazing maneuvers to dodge fire, he doesn't have perfect accuracy, and his bacon has to be saved or he'd get nuked in his very first combat mission. Solo is a vastly superior pilot, even Leia is better with a gun, and the only character with less input on decision making is the comic relief. His habit of complaining persists through the second movie, and only after substantial combat and training, along with the removal of his hand in a traumatic event, does the whiny little bitch grown the **** up. At this point, he's still amateur hour, with extremely limited capabilities compared to actual trained Jedi.

    The sequels are headed up by an orphaned junk scrapper, with basically nothing to her name. She hops into a ship, knows everything about fixing it(remotely plausible since she's spent her life scrapping them), takes off for the first time, pilots it like she's been doing it her whole life, and does death defying stunts that are far beyond the capabilities of literally anyone actually real. She then curb stomps the big baddy, who freezes lasers with his mind, using extreme force powers that Luke wouldn't have been able to do even in the third movie, and martial capabilities far beyond someone who got into the occasional brawl growing up.

    Her poor showing regarding interpersonal relationships, is the solitary exclusion to what is otherwise a board flat character with unreasonable expertise. A nearly text book Mary Sue, prequeled with still grossly insufficient experience in an attempt to make her look less obviously shallow, and nothing at all resembling the original flawed and inexperienced character she replaces. Yet the comparison is made as a retort the the label. :)
    Nice essay, honestly.

    You managed to hit my Intention and miss it at the same time. What I intented was to give people a better picture of a mary sue type character. And I wanted was for people to activey think about the term and how it may applies to other characters. That you've done. But I never intended to be infaluable or especially sincerious.

    Your argumentation is also a nice read up, but contains several flaws. For example that you claim action heroes have one flaw, and all who do not are unrealistic figures written for 4 year olds. Sounds a lot like another term for a Mary Sue :wink: Anyway what you essentally saying is: all data that supports my point is correct, here a a few examples, all data that goes against my point does not count. And even then just having a flaw does not make you an anti- mary sue immediatly. Not to mention characterizations of characters change heavily over time. Sometimes bond was depressed, but more often then not the was a bland casanova without any personal problems.

    Minor comments aside of course my post was not perfect, and it was not meant to be. It were just three sentences after all.

    Mary Sue has simple origins but the term and its application can be very complex. It is even discussed whether this term is even applicable outside of fanfictions, if you want to be perfectious. And Mary Sue does not immeadiatly equals bad character, as no trope immeadiatly equals bad.

    Now I could point out other things, but honestly I have better things to do, and this thread was already derailed more than enough.

    It was a small, simplified and generalized post based on personal observations when discussing characters in the internet. And I wanted to give a simple example on how this term could easily be applied to other characters, people do not immeadiatly think of. Nothing less, nothing more.

    You are free to critizes it, but I do not expect me to defend it on levels I did not intended for it.
    I really hope this is a case of ESL. That hurt to read.

    Assuming I translated properly, you appear to not know what a Mary Sue is. Someone with a super power, or even someone who is unrealistically good at something, is not a Mary Sue.

    Mary Sue is a 15 year old Starfleet graduate. Yes, I said 15 year old Starfleet graduate. Wesley who? She excels at everything she tries, attracts the romantic interest of the adults on the show, and saves the ship all by her little lonesome before tragically dying. I know, gross. It's actually not that disturbing for fanfic though, especially since, being "perfect", she was also a good little girl that didn't put out. It was the 70's, teenage girls weren't publishing gay smut involving children on the internet yet...

    Mary Sue is good at everything, because. Not some things, and certainly not things pertaining to a career they trained for and have years of experience in. Such as all the action heroes with badges and special forces training from military stints. That Hollywood loves a **** up and makes them all **** at life in general really drives the difference home.
    Ah okay you are using the absolut strictest definition then. According to this almost no one is a mary sue then. And outside of fanfictions we should probably not use this term. Any further debate is unnecessary then.
    :smile:
    The problem is, that their is no steict definition for a mary sue though. There is no law written saying: "these 10 points make a mary sue. One point less and it is not one"
    Different people use different terms and definitions, and you appear to be very strict.

    But look, what definition you follow, is not important for me. All I wanted to say was, that mary sue is not a gender specific character and that within a certain definition many chatacters could be considered as such.
    I did not even say that mary sues are a bad trope, as no trope is inherently bad. It depends all on its execution.

    And even well liked and influental characters like golden-age superman or Beowulf could be considerd as sues.

    e.g. Beowulf who is still one of the most influental characters of old english literature.
    His entire poem is just a list of his impossible achivments.
    He lost a swimmimg contest in full armour, because he was sadly stopped by several sea monsters he had to slay en route, he fought naked against another monster and won, entered its mothers dangerous realm by holding his breath for several hours and quickly killed her (but he needed a magic sword for it, pussy), and in his old age was bitten in the neck by a dragon, but was still powerful enough to kill it and brag about the richest he just found before dying.
    No internal conflicts, no apperant weaknesses or flaws for this character.
    He was perfect in all ways that count for medieval audience and was immediatly liked by everyone in story except for one guy, who quickly changing his mind after seeing how awesome beowulf is.

    If this poem was written today many people would probably consider beowulf to be a sue. Bur he is still popular and inspiried other authors like Tolkien.

    You are probably not seeing my point. After all you got very passionate about a simplified off-hand comment of mine. So you will probably reject everything I say is wrong, because I say it.

    Sincerley,
    The dog from the internet, who stops barking with this frog
  • UberReptilianUberReptilian U.S.S.RRegistered Users Posts: 1,724
    sykall said:

    no internal conflicts, no apperant weaknesses or flaws for this perfect character.

    Lol wut? He literally dies in the end as you mention. Clearly wasn't perfect if he couldn't kill the dragon without dying himself.
  • LordTorquemadoLordTorquemado Registered Users Posts: 1,554
    makar55 said:

    The fact that this character is being criticized for her gender demonstrates that there is indeed a problem.

    Yes, there is a problem. People gets so upset about the gender nonsense that they become exactly what they despise by positioning against the other gender. It's absurd, but the counterpart too. Just remember that for every action there is a counteract. The sexism inquisition must end, for both sides.

    And just as I said, the gender of the character does not affect the character and shouldn't be considered to bring it or leave it out. In this case for example, Elspeth is a very good and interesting addition to the game.
    I largely agree. To be more accurate. Though I'll note what brought me to make that statement was the below. This is rather obvious criticism of the gender. Hence why I said that instead of "the fact that Gender is being discussed at all demonstrates that there is a problem" because this is clear as day.



    I'm assuming since none of the comments in this chain (Mine, LT's, or the cited) that this is an okay point to make.
    These games are made for males and as far as 80% of TW are not fems there is no need to scrap chars from nowhere.

    When person says some vamp girl would be better than Kurt Herburg or Marius Leitdorf then I guess something is wrong with this person. Maybe he is woman obsessed or something.
    There is no need to scrap chars from nowhere just to add gender diversity, that's true, and in the case of Aranessa, Cylostra or Repanse, you're absolutely right. But in this case you're not. Elspeth is a great and interesting addition, and more importantly, lorefriendly. It is true that there are important characters like Valten, Helborg or Vargeir who need to come, but this one should come too. The Empire has room for all of them.
    "You stumble about in darkness. There is no light here, no mercy. Naggarond has claimed the souls of better heroes than you."
  • SerPusSerPus Registered Users Posts: 2,611

    I'm guessing there's a point behind this question?

    The point is that we can't know for sure what exactly will be changed even if the possibility for change exists. So if we start to operate such possibilities then it can lead us way too far.
  • Vanilla_GorillaVanilla_Gorilla Registered Users Posts: 21,225
    edited September 21
    crazycrix said:

    crazycrix said:

    crazycrix said:

    crazycrix said:

    ...Gregor had 8th edition rules and used those for Amber Wizard lord and he had unique model...

    The image that you've posted is in the 8th edition armybook as a generic Amber Wizard (which seems to be it's origin):



    The only rules I can find for him is a mention that he's part of the Defenders of Middenheim formation, where he's a generic Wizard Lord with a bonus spell. So "had 8th edition rules" is, I suppose, technically correct. But...
    Aye, he was based of the regular amber wizard. This is his artwork from the End Times:


    Well, there is no but, he has the rules and the model, so the same as Elspeth got, he also was important in the final chapter of the setting, unlike Elspeth who was forgotten.
    If his model is the generic model then he doesn't have a model. When I say "has a model" I mean a specific unique model for that character. Not a generic model that it also uses. I'd also suggest being a generic character with a single change is different to a character with a datasheet specifically for them.

    I don't think you can claim that a character using the generic model and the generic datasheet with one change is the same as a character with a unique model and ruleset.
    He is based of that model, so this model is his. You can aslo take a model of Elspeth and run it around as a generic lord, or cut her entirely and replace her with Karl to have Karl on imperial dragon. Her stats are mostly the same to the battle wizard of the Empire with few changes here and there. Gregor has less significant changes, but still has them and thus is unique.
    Hahaha. Yeah, no. Using the generic model like Gregor does is not the same as having a unique model.

    Gregor has one change, correct?
    Correct.

    You see, his artwork depictes him as the model that was used for generic Amber Wizard, so from that point onward that model became Gregor and could also be used for regular mage as well as Elspeth model can be used for whatver you want.
    So no model, and only marginally unique rules. Got it.

    He's an awful candidate. He's more in the game already than Todles.
    Post edited by Vanilla_Gorilla on
    Thanks CA for working with Epic Games to give us Troy for free!
  • sykallsykall Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 577
    edited September 21

    sykall said:

    no internal conflicts, no apperant weaknesses or flaws for this perfect character.

    Lol wut? He literally dies in the end as you mention. Clearly wasn't perfect if he couldn't kill the dragon without dying himself.
    Mary sues are not immune to death. Even in the original fan fic mary sue dies in her story, if I recall it correctly. If the death makes the sue look even better, it could be considered a bonus.

    Im sorry that fighting and killing a dragon in you old age with your neck aorta open and and dragon poison in your veins is not perfect enough for you. He dies. What a loser :p
  • UberReptilianUberReptilian U.S.S.RRegistered Users Posts: 1,724
    sykall said:

    sykall said:

    no internal conflicts, no apperant weaknesses or flaws for this perfect character.

    Lol wut? He literally dies in the end as you mention. Clearly wasn't perfect if he couldn't kill the dragon without dying himself.
    Mary sues are not immune to death. Even in the original fan fic mary sue dies in her story, if I recall it correctly. If the death makes the sue look even better, it could be considered a bonus.

    Im sorry that fighting and killing a dragon in you old age with your neck aorta open and and dragon poison in your veins is not perfect enough for you. He dies. What a loser :p
    I mean I don’t know anything about the origins of the term just that it’s overused nor do I really care, I just find it odd that Beowulf could be considered a perfect character if he dies in his own tale. If he’s perfect he wouldn’t have taken any damage from the dragon because he’s perfect.

    Problem I also find is that story was written over 1000 years ago I believe. Standards for writing have evolved since then, so if you really wanted to critique through a modern lense you could consider him a bland overpowered hero. Doesn’t mean writers nowadays get to be lazy because stories centuries ago weren’t up to our current standard.
  • Vanilla_GorillaVanilla_Gorilla Registered Users Posts: 21,225
    SerPus said:

    I'm guessing there's a point behind this question?

    The point is that we can't know for sure what exactly will be changed even if the possibility for change exists. So if we start to operate such possibilities then it can lead us way too far.
    Ohhhh. K.
    Thanks CA for working with Epic Games to give us Troy for free!
  • yolordmcswagyolordmcswag Registered Users Posts: 2,603
    crazycrix said:

    crazycrix said:

    crazycrix said:

    ...Gregor had 8th edition rules and used those for Amber Wizard lord and he had unique model...

    The image that you've posted is in the 8th edition armybook as a generic Amber Wizard (which seems to be it's origin):



    The only rules I can find for him is a mention that he's part of the Defenders of Middenheim formation, where he's a generic Wizard Lord with a bonus spell. So "had 8th edition rules" is, I suppose, technically correct. But...
    Aye, he was based of the regular amber wizard. This is his artwork from the End Times:


    Well, there is no but, he has the rules and the model, so the same as Elspeth got, he also was important in the final chapter of the setting, unlike Elspeth who was forgotten.
    If his model is the generic model then he doesn't have a model. When I say "has a model" I mean a specific unique model for that character. Not a generic model that it also uses. I'd also suggest being a generic character with a single change is different to a character with a datasheet specifically for them.

    I don't think you can claim that a character using the generic model and the generic datasheet with one change is the same as a character with a unique model and ruleset.
    He is based of that model, so this model is his. You can aslo take a model of Elspeth and run it around as a generic lord, or cut her entirely and replace her with Karl to have Karl on imperial dragon. Her stats are mostly the same to the battle wizard of the Empire with few changes here and there. Gregor has less significant changes, but still has them and thus is unique.
    That's simply wrong. The model was sold as a generic amber wizard, the end times writers used it to show Gregor since he was an Amber wizard. Models can be custom made of anything, but GW sells miniatures with official labels, the armybooks show them off etc. Even during the end times, when Gregor was an established character, the models he used was not marketed as something else than an amber wizard. In fact, Gregor's "unique" model is already in Total war as the generic amber wizard.

    Also about rules, Gregor Martak has zero uniqe ones, he is just a battle wizard lord level 4 with a two-headed Griffon mount. Elspeth is also a level 4 wizard, better stats, some pretty powerful special rules, and a better mount. So based on rules, she is objectively more powerful.

    Also, the reason she did not even try to content the seat for Supreme Patriarch is probably because she's a loner, and her lore explicitly state that she does not work much with the colleges.
  • DubinekdubajsDubinekdubajs Registered Users Posts: 978

    crazycrix said:

    crazycrix said:

    crazycrix said:

    crazycrix said:

    ...Gregor had 8th edition rules and used those for Amber Wizard lord and he had unique model...

    The image that you've posted is in the 8th edition armybook as a generic Amber Wizard (which seems to be it's origin):



    The only rules I can find for him is a mention that he's part of the Defenders of Middenheim formation, where he's a generic Wizard Lord with a bonus spell. So "had 8th edition rules" is, I suppose, technically correct. But...
    Aye, he was based of the regular amber wizard. This is his artwork from the End Times:


    Well, there is no but, he has the rules and the model, so the same as Elspeth got, he also was important in the final chapter of the setting, unlike Elspeth who was forgotten.
    If his model is the generic model then he doesn't have a model. When I say "has a model" I mean a specific unique model for that character. Not a generic model that it also uses. I'd also suggest being a generic character with a single change is different to a character with a datasheet specifically for them.

    I don't think you can claim that a character using the generic model and the generic datasheet with one change is the same as a character with a unique model and ruleset.
    He is based of that model, so this model is his. You can aslo take a model of Elspeth and run it around as a generic lord, or cut her entirely and replace her with Karl to have Karl on imperial dragon. Her stats are mostly the same to the battle wizard of the Empire with few changes here and there. Gregor has less significant changes, but still has them and thus is unique.
    Hahaha. Yeah, no. Using the generic model like Gregor does is not the same as having a unique model.

    Gregor has one change, correct?
    Correct.

    You see, his artwork depictes him as the model that was used for generic Amber Wizard, so from that point onward that model became Gregor and could also be used for regular mage as well as Elspeth model can be used for whatver you want.
    So no model, and only marginally unique rules. Got it.

    He's an awful candidate. He's more in the game already than Todles.
    This is were you are wrong, you can go for quite a unique spin with his connection to Ulric and also bring back the two-headed gryphs. But to each, his own, you would rather have character who’s lore is as relevant as what I had for breakfast today, be my guest. Well, I do not see any of the amber mages in game look like him, so he ain’t generic as he would look quite unique. He also does everything that Elspeth does better. More lore, more relevance and big bad mount. I don’t see a reason to go for Elspeth and truth be told I don’t see a need for additional mage at all, we have Gelt and that is quite enough, I would much prefer to see Cult of Ulric and more repesentation of provinces instead of an another mage.

    His Royal Highness, Phoenix King Finubar!

    "It has been too long since I drew a blade in anger, Tyrion. You have been my sword, and Teclis has been my shield. But now it is time I fought my own battles!"

    I used to be crazycrix, then Epic happened 😀
  • sykallsykall Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 577

    sykall said:

    sykall said:

    no internal conflicts, no apperant weaknesses or flaws for this perfect character.

    Lol wut? He literally dies in the end as you mention. Clearly wasn't perfect if he couldn't kill the dragon without dying himself.
    Mary sues are not immune to death. Even in the original fan fic mary sue dies in her story, if I recall it correctly. If the death makes the sue look even better, it could be considered a bonus.

    Im sorry that fighting and killing a dragon in you old age with your neck aorta open and and dragon poison in your veins is not perfect enough for you. He dies. What a loser :p
    I mean I don’t know anything about the origins of the term just that it’s overused nor do I really care, I just find it odd that Beowulf could be considered a perfect character if he dies in his own tale. If he’s perfect he wouldn’t have taken any damage from the dragon because he’s perfect.

    Problem I also find is that story was written over 1000 years ago I believe. Standards for writing have evolved since then, so if you really wanted to critique through a modern lense you could
    consider him a bland overpowered hero. Doesn’t mean writers nowadays get to be lazy because stories centuries ago weren’t up to our current standard.
    Well Beowulf was a Dane/Viking. Not dying in battle would have been worse for his original audience. ;)
    In other cases you want to make the death of your character more tragic, because s/he is to good for this world and his/her passing will leave the other characters in great pain, because Mary Sue was so great and perfect, and now her light is extinguished.

    And you're right, Beowulf could also be considered a bland and overpowered character through modern lense, which in addition is often the main definition of a Mary Sue for many people.
    But in this discussion I did not try to justify Beowulf as Mary Sue in the modern sense. I wanted to show, that other characters have heavily overlapping attributes and are still liked. In many of his stories superman is an equally overpowered and flawless character as beowulf was for his contemporary audience.
    So they could both be considered Mary Sues to some extend, but people still like them.
    And we can do nothing but to view old stories through our contemporary lenses, even if we conciusly try to avoid it.

    And how complex a poem is, has nothing to do with the time period it was written in, but more with its specific genre and the general taste of the audience. If you look at greek hero myths for example, you will find much more complex characters, despite it being much older than Beowulf.
    Which texts survive until the presents largley depens on which texts were well liked by the audience. If you live in dark times, maybe you want a character who has the power to make the world a better place, even if the character itself is bland and underdeveloped, because you have a certain longing a better world/personal situation. There is a reason that the golden age of superhero comics was during the second world war, despite many of them being bland characters who mainly punched Hitler. Because back then people desperatly wanted someone to punch Hitler.

    The problem with the term Mary Sue is, that it came to be without a core defintion. We had one example in a star trek fanfiction and people used this one example as a rough measuring scale to justify their dislike for other characteres. It is not so much a single trope, but an amalganation of different tropes to different extends. And different people value different subcategories more, than others.

    A small selection would be plot armour, creators pet, chosen one and mary sue. A chosen one should be something of the creators pet, as he should be somewhat likeable and developed in the best of cases. And s/he should also have some plot armour, otherwise it is difficult to see him/her getting to the end of the book. But is every chosen one a Mary Sue? Is every flawless character a Mary Sue? Is every overpowered character a Mary Sue?
    It all depends on the execution, which affects different people diffferently.

    Mary Sue is not a fixed defintion, but more of a gradient based on your personal biases. For example for me personally Warriors of Chaos are the Mary Sue of the Warhammer setting. Other people would use the same justificication for other factions, lets say skaven or the empire or something like that.

    And I have nothing against the term itself, but I do not like it, when people use it as a fixed, objective defintion. And especally when they use it as a convient tool to attack characters they do not like, because they are female, as the trope itself is gender neutral, despite its origins and name.
    Thats all I wanted to express in my comment, which I intentionally overgeneralized and simplified to get my point clear. I had no intention to attack anyone personally, I just wanted to provide a small amount of information with a few off-hand examples to help people get a better picture. Nothing less, nothing more :)
  • dge1dge1 Moderator Arkansas, USARegistered Users, Moderators, Knights Posts: 20,359
    Get back to the thread topic folks, such as it is.
    "The two most common things in the universe are Hydrogen and Stupidity." - Harlan Ellison
    "The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously." - Hubert H. Humphrey
    "Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin/Mark Twain
  • Ares354Ares354 Registered Users Posts: 3,471

    Anyway, away from talk of Gender. Lets look at the remaining Empire TT characters according to 1d4Chan.

    Valten - End times melee guy with Ghal Maraz a weapon already held by Karl Franz, horse mounted.
    Kurt Helborg - Sword dude, buffs Knights, horse mounted.
    Ludwig Schwarzhelm - Melee support lord, horse mounted.
    Luthor Huss - Melee support lord, horse mounted.
    Elspeth von Draken - Death Magic lord, Dragon mounted.

    Among those 5 it's pretty obvious Elsy is the most unique.

    Based on what type of mount character use, you say which one is more unique ? HJAHAHHAHAHAHAH

    Valten, can have mechanic to challange Chaos Champions
    Luthor Huss maybe LH, so his spot as LL is not needed. LS is bodyguard to Franz, again, LH. Kurt Helborg bring Grandmaster Lord type, and focus on Empire Knight, plus he can be put anywhere on map, as second person in Empirem, in military matter, he can command armies away from Empire.
    Elsy sit in Nuln....next to Karl
  • Vanilla_GorillaVanilla_Gorilla Registered Users Posts: 21,225
    edited September 21
    crazycrix said:

    crazycrix said:

    crazycrix said:

    crazycrix said:

    crazycrix said:

    ...Gregor had 8th edition rules and used those for Amber Wizard lord and he had unique model...

    The image that you've posted is in the 8th edition armybook as a generic Amber Wizard (which seems to be it's origin):



    The only rules I can find for him is a mention that he's part of the Defenders of Middenheim formation, where he's a generic Wizard Lord with a bonus spell. So "had 8th edition rules" is, I suppose, technically correct. But...
    Aye, he was based of the regular amber wizard. This is his artwork from the End Times:


    Well, there is no but, he has the rules and the model, so the same as Elspeth got, he also was important in the final chapter of the setting, unlike Elspeth who was forgotten.
    If his model is the generic model then he doesn't have a model. When I say "has a model" I mean a specific unique model for that character. Not a generic model that it also uses. I'd also suggest being a generic character with a single change is different to a character with a datasheet specifically for them.

    I don't think you can claim that a character using the generic model and the generic datasheet with one change is the same as a character with a unique model and ruleset.
    He is based of that model, so this model is his. You can aslo take a model of Elspeth and run it around as a generic lord, or cut her entirely and replace her with Karl to have Karl on imperial dragon. Her stats are mostly the same to the battle wizard of the Empire with few changes here and there. Gregor has less significant changes, but still has them and thus is unique.
    Hahaha. Yeah, no. Using the generic model like Gregor does is not the same as having a unique model.

    Gregor has one change, correct?
    Correct.

    You see, his artwork depictes him as the model that was used for generic Amber Wizard, so from that point onward that model became Gregor and could also be used for regular mage as well as Elspeth model can be used for whatver you want.
    So no model, and only marginally unique rules. Got it.

    He's an awful candidate. He's more in the game already than Todles.
    This is were you are wrong, you can go for quite a unique spin with his connection to Ulric and also bring back the two-headed gryphs. But to each, his own, you would rather have character who’s lore is as relevant as what I had for breakfast today, be my guest. Well, I do not see any of the amber mages in game look like him, so he ain’t generic as he would look quite unique. He also does everything that Elspeth does better. More lore, more relevance and big bad mount. I don’t see a reason to go for Elspeth and truth be told I don’t see a need for additional mage at all, we have Gelt and that is quite enough, I would much prefer to see Cult of Ulric and more repesentation of provinces instead of an another mage.
    He's already in. Just rename a Generic beast Wizard. Done. Exact same model.

    Anyway, back on topic; Elseph Von Draken. A character with a model.


    Post edited by Vanilla_Gorilla on
    Thanks CA for working with Epic Games to give us Troy for free!
  • Vanilla_GorillaVanilla_Gorilla Registered Users Posts: 21,225

    Sorry for the late reply UR.

    Line of Sight in this game is iffy enough that it's easy to have a unit that relies on seeing the enemy to shoot it not being able to. Just in terms of fun a lord that relies on sitting still and pew pewing the enemy isn't as fun as a lord that runs around doing stuff. I think it's safe to say most folk see it like that anyway. You've also got to keep in mind CA would probably do a CA and stick him on some dumb mount or in a Steamtank, because CA things.

    You do have a point. A lot of what GW wrote is awful. However I look around at the alternatives and there's a bunch of Melee dudes, then there's Falksy. From a perspective of representing the Empire he is better than Elseph. If representation is what you want that's the better choice.

    Lol, we're all just dudes on a forum arguing about nonsense. No need for apologies.

    Yes, LoS is a pain in this game, especially with flamethrower units Irondrakes/Warpfire, but I think that'd be an awful reason for excluding characters like Jubal or Grimm Burloksson or even the Sisters of Twilight. I do sympathise with that mentality though considering CA's reluctance to fix issues like LoS and Footlords (though I imagine they'd give Jubal a Steam Tank cause Engineer LL whether appropriate or not).

    This is where I think the lack of imagination comes into play with some. People look at a character and say it's just X, when in actuality characters are designed with a purpose.

    Marius Leitdorf is a duelist LL and has a similar system to Luthor Harkon in that his madness gives him different buffs or debuffs randomly. Perfect FLC character.

    Kurt Helborg is the cavalry LL. He is DLC material imo as he would bring the missing Cav units and also Grand Master Lord option. He isn't very flashy either but he does have a solid niche and still fits the Empire theme.

    Ludwig Schwarzhelm is 100% not a LL material character, but is PERFECT as a Lord Kroak style character for the Empire and especially Karl Franz. He is a body guard and would focus on keeping the Lord in his army alive, by taking damage for the Lord and just general buffs to them.

    Jubal Falk is the number one IMO as he would finally bring the glorious gunpowder theme the Empire lacks especially in comparison to the Skaven's firepower or the number one gunpowder faction V Coast.

    Valten is... boring IMO so I can't be arsed to defend him lmao. Plus we already have the Religious Fanatic theme with Volkmar he just needs mechanics to reflect this. Being the Chosen of Sigmar isn't very interesting IMO though I guess they could do something with it.

    The other LLs brought up I'm not as familar with (I have a pdf of Tamurkhan but's really terrible quality, so I've never read the thing, just character rules).

    I believe in being fair so I think Elspeph will be a DLC LL as she's flashy and would bring Lord Level Wizard casters, Celestial Hurricanums and FLC Gold Wizards with her, but I think unlike all the others she has the potential to open some really bad cans of worms, like the Nuln LL thing and giving Empire access to Carmine Dragons as units something the Empire should not have (Carmine Dragons had rules in MA, so seeing them as a unit would be highly likely). But since she is just another Gelt with an overused mount at this point, I can't say I see what the hype is all about.

    I know, but I still feel bad for never replying to that message you sent me :D.

    Yeah, over-simplification does have the problem of simplifying things too much. I do imagine they'd give Jubal the steamtank, but it is what it is. I don't really see Elseph as DLC material. She's got no units, unless you give her Nuln units which would feel off. I see the DLC LL as the Cult of Ulric leader with Elseph as one of a handful of potential FLCs. She is after all quite easy to do and has no units connected to her.
    Thanks CA for working with Epic Games to give us Troy for free!
  • UberReptilianUberReptilian U.S.S.RRegistered Users Posts: 1,724
    sykall said:

    Well Beowulf was a Dane/Viking. Not dying in battle would have been worse for his original audience. ;)
    In other cases you want to make the death of your character more tragic, because s/he is to good for this world and his/her passing will leave the other characters in great pain, because Mary Sue was so great and perfect, and now her light is extinguished.

    And you're right, Beowulf could also be considered a bland and overpowered character through modern lense, which in addition is often the main definition of a Mary Sue for many people.
    But in this discussion I did not try to justify Beowulf as Mary Sue in the modern sense. I wanted to show, that other characters have heavily overlapping attributes and are still liked. In many of his stories superman is an equally overpowered and flawless character as beowulf was for his contemporary audience.
    So they could both be considered Mary Sues to some extend, but people still like them.
    And we can do nothing but to view old stories through our contemporary lenses, even if we conciusly try to avoid it.

    And how complex a poem is, has nothing to do with the time period it was written in, but more with its specific genre and the general taste of the audience. If you look at greek hero myths for example, you will find much more complex characters, despite it being much older than Beowulf.
    Which texts survive until the presents largley depens on which texts were well liked by the audience. If you live in dark times, maybe you want a character who has the power to make the world a better place, even if the character itself is bland and underdeveloped, because you have a certain longing a better world/personal situation. There is a reason that the golden age of superhero comics was during the second world war, despite many of them being bland characters who mainly punched Hitler. Because back then people desperatly wanted someone to punch Hitler.

    The problem with the term Mary Sue is, that it came to be without a core defintion. We had one example in a star trek fanfiction and people used this one example as a rough measuring scale to justify their dislike for other characteres. It is not so much a single trope, but an amalganation of different tropes to different extends. And different people value different subcategories more, than others.

    A small selection would be plot armour, creators pet, chosen one and mary sue. A chosen one should be something of the creators pet, as he should be somewhat likeable and developed in the best of cases. And s/he should also have some plot armour, otherwise it is difficult to see him/her getting to the end of the book. But is every chosen one a Mary Sue? Is every flawless character a Mary Sue? Is every overpowered character a Mary Sue?
    It all depends on the execution, which affects different people diffferently.

    Mary Sue is not a fixed defintion, but more of a gradient based on your personal biases. For example for me personally Warriors of Chaos are the Mary Sue of the Warhammer setting. Other people would use the same justificication for other factions, lets say skaven or the empire or something like that.

    And I have nothing against the term itself, but I do not like it, when people use it as a fixed, objective defintion. And especally when they use it as a convient tool to attack characters they do not like, because they are female, as the trope itself is gender neutral, despite its origins and name.
    Thats all I wanted to express in my comment, which I intentionally overgeneralized and simplified to get my point clear. I had no intention to attack anyone personally, I just wanted to provide a small amount of information with a few off-hand examples to help people get a better picture. Nothing less, nothing more :)

    Wew lad, I'm all for discussions in writing, but I only really had a contention with Beowulf being considered perfect when he got his teeth kicked in by the dragon, not your critique on a term I don't use. I wouldn't call a Harry Potter type a Mary Sue, I'd just say boring AF and underdevolped or lazy writing for modern stories. I get you weren't bashing Beowulf, I just thought the comparisson was flawed. Beowulf is more about the story of the titular character rather than him as a person so I think if we wanted to critise him as a character you absolutely could. I'm also of the belief that just because a ton of people like something doesn't mean criticsm of it isn't valid. Greek myths have held up far better like you say even if I like Beowulf quite a bit it still has flaws.
    I just don't have a lot to say on Mary Sue as I barely know anything about it, it just happens to turn up every once in a while. Wish I had more to say cause I find it quite interesting, but I really only had a minor quibble, not really that important, just thought it was odd. Thinking about it more I can see what you mean.

    I don't think you attacked anyone either, or atleast I don't feel attacked but that's because we're randoms on a CA forum arguing about nonsense. I find it impossible to feel insulted on the internet board even if you actually were harsh and "bullying".

    Also I think bullying poor Adolph has gone on for too long! He killed Hitler after all.





  • UberReptilianUberReptilian U.S.S.RRegistered Users Posts: 1,724

    I know, but I still feel bad for never replying to that message you sent me :D.

    Yeah, over-simplification does have the problem of simplifying things too much. I do imagine they'd give Jubal the steamtank, but it is what it is. I don't really see Elseph as DLC material. She's got no units, unless you give her Nuln units which would feel off. I see the DLC LL as the Cult of Ulric leader with Elseph as one of a handful of potential FLCs. She is after all quite easy to do and has no units connected to her.

    I always say I really am not fused if I don't hear back from others online. It's the internet not work. Also I write far too much.

    I can agree except for units as I literally listed some. Celestial Hurricanum is used by Empire mages and is the final 8th unit from the Empire, Wizard Lords and FLC Gold Wizard. Theme is magic, CA tend to go on simple themes like Markus = Hunter or Nakai = Monster or Hellebron = Evil so it wouldn't be hard to find some obscure lore source like Rangers for HE were.

    Jubal is the other perfect DLC LL besides the Middenheim idea imo.
  • Giveaway412Giveaway412 Registered Users Posts: 345
    Honestly I think the great thing about Elspeth is her aesthetic. She really captures the dark, gothic side of the Empire well. Their superstition is something that honestly isn't always reflected all that much so seeing this grim fairytale, Bloody Mary, omen of death in-game would be awesome.

    I definitely don't want the Empire to get recruitable dragons but I think for one LL it wouldn't hurt. You can definitely do flavor things for certain LLs that wouldn't work well for the whole faction, i.e. Arkhan the Black. I also don't really see "no dragons" as a hard and fast rule, unlike Bretonnia's "no knights on foot rule". And notably, Louen and Alberic can still fight on foot.
  • ErminazErminaz Senior Member Las Vegas, Nevada, USARegistered Users Posts: 5,710
    sykall said:


    Well Beowulf was a Dane/Viking.

    He was not a Dane but a Geat who traveled to Hrothgar's court in Denmark.
    Tacitus Quotes:
    Auferre, trucidare, rapere, falsis nominibus imperium; atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    They plunder, they slaughter, and they steal: this they falsely name Empire, and where they make a wasteland, they call it peace.

    Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges.
    The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the government.

    I found Rome a city of filth covered marble and left it a pile of rubble. - Me
  • psychoakpsychoak Registered Users Posts: 3,185
    sykall said:

    sykall said:

    sykall said:

    no internal conflicts, no apperant weaknesses or flaws for this perfect character.

    Lol wut? He literally dies in the end as you mention. Clearly wasn't perfect if he couldn't kill the dragon without dying himself.
    Mary sues are not immune to death. Even in the original fan fic mary sue dies in her story, if I recall it correctly. If the death makes the sue look even better, it could be considered a bonus.

    Im sorry that fighting and killing a dragon in you old age with your neck aorta open and and dragon poison in your veins is not perfect enough for you. He dies. What a loser :p
    I mean I don’t know anything about the origins of the term just that it’s overused nor do I really care, I just find it odd that Beowulf could be considered a perfect character if he dies in his own tale. If he’s perfect he wouldn’t have taken any damage from the dragon because he’s perfect.

    Problem I also find is that story was written over 1000 years ago I believe. Standards for writing have evolved since then, so if you really wanted to critique through a modern lense you could
    consider him a bland overpowered hero. Doesn’t mean writers nowadays get to be lazy because stories centuries ago weren’t up to our current standard.
    Well Beowulf was a Dane/Viking. Not dying in battle would have been worse for his original audience. ;)
    In other cases you want to make the death of your character more tragic, because s/he is to good for this world and his/her passing will leave the other characters in great pain, because Mary Sue was so great and perfect, and now her light is extinguished.

    And you're right, Beowulf could also be considered a bland and overpowered character through modern lense, which in addition is often the main definition of a Mary Sue for many people.
    But in this discussion I did not try to justify Beowulf as Mary Sue in the modern sense. I wanted to show, that other characters have heavily overlapping attributes and are still liked. In many of his stories superman is an equally overpowered and flawless character as beowulf was for his contemporary audience.
    So they could both be considered Mary Sues to some extend, but people still like them.
    And we can do nothing but to view old stories through our contemporary lenses, even if we conciusly try to avoid it.

    And how complex a poem is, has nothing to do with the time period it was written in, but more with its specific genre and the general taste of the audience. If you look at greek hero myths for example, you will find much more complex characters, despite it being much older than Beowulf.
    Which texts survive until the presents largley depens on which texts were well liked by the audience. If you live in dark times, maybe you want a character who has the power to make the world a better place, even if the character itself is bland and underdeveloped, because you have a certain longing a better world/personal situation. There is a reason that the golden age of superhero comics was during the second world war, despite many of them being bland characters who mainly punched Hitler. Because back then people desperatly wanted someone to punch Hitler.

    The problem with the term Mary Sue is, that it came to be without a core defintion. We had one example in a star trek fanfiction and people used this one example as a rough measuring scale to justify their dislike for other characteres. It is not so much a single trope, but an amalganation of different tropes to different extends. And different people value different subcategories more, than others.

    A small selection would be plot armour, creators pet, chosen one and mary sue. A chosen one should be something of the creators pet, as he should be somewhat likeable and developed in the best of cases. And s/he should also have some plot armour, otherwise it is difficult to see him/her getting to the end of the book. But is every chosen one a Mary Sue? Is every flawless character a Mary Sue? Is every overpowered character a Mary Sue?
    It all depends on the execution, which affects different people diffferently.

    Mary Sue is not a fixed defintion, but more of a gradient based on your personal biases. For example for me personally Warriors of Chaos are the Mary Sue of the Warhammer setting. Other people would use the same justificication for other factions, lets say skaven or the empire or something like that.

    And I have nothing against the term itself, but I do not like it, when people use it as a fixed, objective defintion. And especally when they use it as a convient tool to attack characters they do not like, because they are female, as the trope itself is gender neutral, despite its origins and name.
    Thats all I wanted to express in my comment, which I intentionally overgeneralized and simplified to get my point clear. I had no intention to attack anyone personally, I just wanted to provide a small amount of information with a few off-hand examples to help people get a better picture. Nothing less, nothing more :)
    You're still in the "being absurdly good at something" category. Beowulf isn't a Mary Sue because Beowulf is just a dumb **** warrior who kills things and beats his chest. The lack of objective realism doesn't make him a Mary Sue. If he is also a great inventor, is blessed with unusual wisdom, etcetera, then he is a Mary Sue. Now maybe the inventor part of the story was lost, but I can't see anything beyond sheer stupidity in fighting a dragon solo. There are plenty of Mary Sues in comics though, particularly while various third rate authors were trying to upstage each other with their juvenile writing.

    You said I was strict, that ten things make a Mary Sue, but 9 out of 10 don't. You are instead arguing that one out of ten things make a Mary Sue and thus basically everything is. Which is the only way someone could possibly justify calling Elspeth a Mary Sue, since there's no indication that she's good at anything besides death magic. Thus defeating your own purpose for posting.

    I should probably apologize to third rate authors. That was really uncalled for.
  • LordMolochLordMoloch Registered Users Posts: 117
    Ares354 said:

    Anyway, away from talk of Gender. Lets look at the remaining Empire TT characters according to 1d4Chan.

    Valten - End times melee guy with Ghal Maraz a weapon already held by Karl Franz, horse mounted.
    Kurt Helborg - Sword dude, buffs Knights, horse mounted.
    Ludwig Schwarzhelm - Melee support lord, horse mounted.
    Luthor Huss - Melee support lord, horse mounted.
    Elspeth von Draken - Death Magic lord, Dragon mounted.

    Among those 5 it's pretty obvious Elsy is the most unique.

    Based on what type of mount character use, you say which one is more unique ? HJAHAHHAHAHAHAH

    You must have missed the other obvious factors that make her more unique than 'Germanic Fighty Boi #17': Female. Magician.

    Personally I'd like to see her as a legendary hero tied to Nuln, so only an Empire faction leader can access her and only if they hold Nuln. However, I would also be fine with having her leading a Nuln subfaction. Either way she would be more interesting that any of the other four listed in Gorilla's Post.
  • Vanilla_GorillaVanilla_Gorilla Registered Users Posts: 21,225

    Ares354 said:

    Anyway, away from talk of Gender. Lets look at the remaining Empire TT characters according to 1d4Chan.

    Valten - End times melee guy with Ghal Maraz a weapon already held by Karl Franz, horse mounted.
    Kurt Helborg - Sword dude, buffs Knights, horse mounted.
    Ludwig Schwarzhelm - Melee support lord, horse mounted.
    Luthor Huss - Melee support lord, horse mounted.
    Elspeth von Draken - Death Magic lord, Dragon mounted.

    Among those 5 it's pretty obvious Elsy is the most unique.

    Based on what type of mount character use, you say which one is more unique ? HJAHAHHAHAHAHAH

    You must have missed the other obvious factors that make her more unique than 'Germanic Fighty Boi #17': Female. Magician.

    Personally I'd like to see her as a legendary hero tied to Nuln, so only an Empire faction leader can access her and only if they hold Nuln. However, I would also be fine with having her leading a Nuln subfaction. Either way she would be more interesting that any of the other four listed in Gorilla's Post.
    I didn't respond to Ares comment for obvious reasons. However I'll clarify that (to me at least) gender has nothing to do with it. She's a Magician and rides a Dragon. The Dragon inherently makes her more unique than the other Empire LL choices because it's a Dragon. You can call the Dragon stupid lore (which I'd agree with) but you can't close your eyes and pretend it's not there.

    Legendary Hero would be a good way to implement her, frankly she's too powerful relative to the other Empire LLs to not take some of their shine away if she's implemented.
    Thanks CA for working with Epic Games to give us Troy for free!
  • UberReptilianUberReptilian U.S.S.RRegistered Users Posts: 1,724

    Unique...Magician.

    Balthasar Gelt?

    However, I would also be fine with having her leading a Nuln subfaction.

    Heresy of the utmost display!! Nuln = Gunpowder. Not magic. Keep all mages away from Nuln.
  • eomateomat Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,597
    Legendary Hero is actually not a bad way to implement her at all. Hold Nuln and build her Black Tower unique building to get access to her. Whichever way she comes I want her, the Carmine Dragon and her Black Tower added to the Campaign map. I would love for it to be creepy looking with the Gardens of Morr beneath. Also the Battle map if you fight near it to be dark and have Morrslieb in the sky.
  • sykallsykall Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 577
    @psychoak

    How are you continously missing the point I am making? I am not saying character X is a Mary Sue. I just provide examples, that even well liked characters could, COULD be considered Mary Sues to a certain extent, because Mary Sue is first and for most a subjective defintion. But every time you appear to take me seriously, and seek some attribute to why Character X can't be a Sue, because of reason Y.

    What kind of powers make a Mary Sue? What kind of Skills make a Mary Sue? What kind of Character Traits make a Mary Sue?
    That is all based on someones own perspective, influenced by previous experiences, the genre and style of the story itself, and a myriad of other influences. And what is a well-liked character for some poeple, is a Mary Sue for others, as it is an subjective term, first and foremost.
    You could also go in the other direction and ask, what a well-structured character would be. It is an equally subjective defintion.

    And in the beginning I just wanted to inform people, that it is a gender neutral term, because in my personal experience, many people use the term mostly to have a short hand insult for disliked female characters. Thats all, I just wanted to inform people.
    How you could get so frivveld up by an off-hand comment with a few non-serious examples is beyond me, to be honest.
    I hope I've written it up in a way you can understand. If not, then I have done all I could to explain it to you. If you are still upset, then thats not my problem.

    Anyway this derailment has gone far enough, and the moderator will probably soon close this thread when things continue like this. So I'll keep my mouth shut from now.
  • Ares354Ares354 Registered Users Posts: 3,471

    Ares354 said:

    Anyway, away from talk of Gender. Lets look at the remaining Empire TT characters according to 1d4Chan.

    Valten - End times melee guy with Ghal Maraz a weapon already held by Karl Franz, horse mounted.
    Kurt Helborg - Sword dude, buffs Knights, horse mounted.
    Ludwig Schwarzhelm - Melee support lord, horse mounted.
    Luthor Huss - Melee support lord, horse mounted.
    Elspeth von Draken - Death Magic lord, Dragon mounted.

    Among those 5 it's pretty obvious Elsy is the most unique.

    Based on what type of mount character use, you say which one is more unique ? HJAHAHHAHAHAHAH

    You must have missed the other obvious factors that make her more unique than 'Germanic Fighty Boi #17': Female. Magician.

    Personally I'd like to see her as a legendary hero tied to Nuln, so only an Empire faction leader can access her and only if they hold Nuln. However, I would also be fine with having her leading a Nuln subfaction. Either way she would be more interesting that any of the other four listed in Gorilla's Post.
    She is female, and that is nothing unique about her. Its unique thing in Empire, if we are looking for some kind of representations. Yet again, she bring less to game then Valten, in terms of game mechanics. She dont fit to Nuln as LL. And Dragon dont fit Empire at all, THIS forum said so many times, when was talking about adding Franz Dragon, so yea.
  • LabriaLabria Registered Users Posts: 1,268
    Empire have many more interest missing characters who make more sense as leaders of own factions in the game. I doubt Elspeth will be add to the game at all.

    Elspeth looks like most boring character for Empire. There is nothing special about her except her gender. She will be just less interest copy of Balthasar Gelt with boring dragon mount and almost same starting position in Nurn.

    After all, Empire can easy get generic Wizard lord with lore of death and maybe dragon mount in the future. :#
    Dwarfs need Slayer Lord pack: https://imgur.com/x74HxxU
    Liu Chong and He Yi should be playable in 194.
Sign In or Register to comment.