LordFowl Posted May 14, 2018 Posted May 14, 2018 Renaming chemicals is not the point of this thread. In fact, discussion has long gone off-topic. This suggestion proposes changing secret chems to be based off of phoron, legitimized, and become a priority of not the main priority of the toxins researcher. Under these considerations, I am voting for dismissal - secret chems ate not designed to be a primary mechanic, in fact highlighting their importance would somewhat contradict their role, their role being a supplement to an existing mechanic - chemistry. A toxins rework would require a lot more than secret chems. Furthermore, the presence or lack of phoron is not the source nor the solution to this recent controversy. Adding mystical element (phoron) to a non-mystical chemicsl (Azoth) does not really change anything.
Kaed Posted May 14, 2018 Author Posted May 14, 2018 Renaming chemicals is not the point of this thread. In fact, discussion has long gone off-topic. This suggestion proposes changing secret chems to be based off of phoron, legitimized, and become a priority of not the main priority of the toxins researcher. Under these considerations, I am voting for dismissal - secret chems ate not designed to be a primary mechanic, in fact highlighting their importance would somewhat contradict their role, their role being a supplement to an existing mechanic - chemistry. A toxins rework would require a lot more than secret chems. Furthermore, the presence or lack of phoron is not the source nor the solution to this recent controversy. Adding mystical element (phoron) to a non-mystical chemicsl (Azoth) does not really change anything. That was literally what I was proposing to do, to expand on phoron and as a side job, port the secret recipes over to it to give them canon plausibility. Renaming them is definitely part of this, and on topic. It's not phoron researchers primary mechanic to handle secret recipes, no, but they are the ones who will be pioneering research into uses of phoron and the ones who should be making the weird shit, not chemists who spend their shift making medicines and poisons. And it makes a big difference to the number of people here in this thread who think the 'mystical hoodoo' needs to be cut out. The whole concept of developer dismissal, to my knowledge, is largely based around the idea that is no one wants to take up a project suggested, and if you get enough dismissals, the project is deemed unworkable because no one wants to do it, or because it unbalances something. There's even general divisiveness in thread about the subject. Well, I've gotten what I wanted from this thread feedback, and am going to begin poking around at doing this. It is probably going to take a while, and I'm not even entirely sure I know enough about code to do it, but for the time being, consider it an active project of mine. As for the bit about it 'not really changing anything', I don't see what relevance that has. There are dozens of other projects about adding game content currently (many of them by burger), and they just add some sort of new feature or change a feature to something new and more expanded. Change happens because someone wants a change.
Bauser Posted May 14, 2018 Posted May 14, 2018 The philosopher's stone isn't even something we can use without a wizwoz being present, or some magical adminbus. That's what makes the presence of alchemists on the payroll so silly. At round-start (or in any round type other than wizard), it's widely presumed that the designs of their practice are fantasy nonsense. The specific names of the chemicals don't bother me for the reason you just pointed out: In the event that they can become relevant at all, the (magic) cat's already out of the bag. I'm just bothered by alchemist-flavored scientists. Which is tangential to the subject of this thread.
Itanimulli Posted May 14, 2018 Posted May 14, 2018 The philosopher's stone isn't even something we can use without a wizwoz being present, or some magical adminbus. That's what makes the presence of alchemists on the payroll so silly. At round-start (or in any round type other than wizard), it's widely presumed that the designs of their practice are fantasy nonsense. The specific names of the chemicals don't bother me for the reason you just pointed out: In the event that they can become relevant at all, the (magic) cat's already out of the bag. I'm just bothered by alchemist-flavored scientists. Which is tangential to the subject of this thread. So what your saying is "Enforce realistic role-play?" Because I can deffo agree with that.
Recommended Posts