Welcome to the Shining Force Central Forums!
SFC Forums Index Shining Forums Shining Force III SFIII Translation Project
Register for your free forum account now or Login to remove this advert.

David's Classes Decision

Poll Closed

A place for those working on the Shining Force III Translation Patch.

What is the most appropriate starting class for David?

Poll ended at Fri Apr 19 2019 12:33pm

Hunter Striker Commando
9
50%
Fighter Striker Commando
0
No votes
Battler Striker Commando
0
No votes
Ranger Striker Commando
9
50%
 
Total votes : 18

Re: David's Classes Decision

Postby knight0fdragon » Thu Apr 18 2019 4:56am

I am not sure if it does. I would be more inclined for Warden to be his first title, then we could go with Commandant for his second title, then maybe we use some other title like Colonel or Marshal for the third title or something just to keep it consistent, even though we technically have no strong basis for Colonel or Marshal. If there is a rank higher than Commandant that involves striking, maybe we can finally have a fair compromise.

BTW, I am not sure why you think Ninjas are only assasins. Ninjas are also thieves, and I can tell you that the thief in The Forbidden Series 1 also goes to Ninja when promoted, so there are examples of this going back to the late 80s.
knight0fdragon

User avatar
Shining Hero
Shining Hero
 
Posts: 1191
Joined: Fri Nov 05 2004 5:36am
Location: Good ol(Not Really) Pennsylvania USA

Re: David's Classes Decision

Postby Tor_Heyerdal » Thu Apr 18 2019 9:09am

knightOfdragon wrote:At no point is that happening. It however does not mean that you get to ignore the bias completely.

If you're going to pretend that the word champion doesn't mean what it means due to your personal bias surrounding that word, then yeah, that's you using your existing bias as justification for treating it like it's not bias and that the word means something other than what it means. That's exactly what's happening.

knightOfdragon wrote:I would think Medion would be the champion of Medion's army

This one is more than a little frustrating because I never said that David was "the" champion of Medion's army. In fact, I explicitly stated that he's NOT "the" champion of Medion's army, but *A* champion of Medion's army. Every single member of Medion's army are all champions of Medion's army. As I will explain in further detail a little bit further down.

knightOfdragon wrote:I stated both definitions of Champion and asked how it relates to David.

No you didn't. You didn't state any definition of Champion. I did.

knightOfdragon wrote:I asked who is rallying behind David? aka 2. a person who fights or argues for a cause or on behalf of someone else. Either the "cause" is rallying behind David, or a group of people is rallying behind David. This is not David, this is Medion, because Medion is the one fighting for the cause, and David comes along.

How can you have this so backwards? You even prove yourself to have it backwards by repeating the definition. "A person who fights or argues FOR A CAUSE or ON BEHALF OF SOMEONE ELSE." He's not a champion because people are rallying behind him. He's a champion because he's rallying behind Medion. If people were rallying behind him, that would make him a leader, not a champion. He's also a champion because he's fighting for a cause. Anyone fighting for a cause is a champion. He's fighting for Medion's cause. That makes him a champion. He's rallying behind Medion and fighting on Medion's behalf. That makes him a champion. The entire Force from Syntesis to Pappets are all champions by definition.

knightOfdragon wrote:A real life example is Bernie Sanders is the Champion of universal health care. This is not because he is simply fighting for universal health care, it is because the "cause" believes in his vision of it, as opposed to others who are also fighting for universal health care.

No. That socialist is not THE champion of universal and totally-not-actually-free-but-would-bankrupt-the-country health care. He's A champion of it. Just like David is A champion of Medion's army.

knightOfdragon wrote:I asked What is the competition in which he can become "champ"? aka 1. a person who has defeated or surpassed all rivals in a competition, especially in sports.
In the war scenario, the entire Force would be the champion, not David. David is not the guy who is taking out enemy battalions, this again falls on Medion. If not Medion, then the next likely champion would be Campbell as far as story is concerned, so we can throw out this definition as well.

Again, I never claimed that David is the champion of Medion's force. Not only did I not say that he was the champion of Medion's force, but I explicitly did say that he's not the champion of Medion's force. I said that he is A champion of Medion's force. These are not the same thing. That said, unless David has canonically died throughout the plot of the game (which I don't recall happening), then he HAS surpassed all rivals in the competition of war in which he's participating. This applies to everyone else on the force too. And no, in a war scenario the force would not be "the champion", the force would be "the champions".

knightOfdragon wrote:Yeah.... you just proved my point with Isabella. She goes from Princess to Princess of Light or whatever new title she is given in the latest translation, She doesn't go from Princess to Priest

That doesn't prove your point. The fact that she doesn't go from Princess to Priest has nothing to do with anything. Nobody tried to suggest anything of the kind. Your point wasn't that she doesn't go from Princess to Priest, so how can it prove a point you didn't make? The point you made was that David can't have a class name based on his social occupation because Rogan's social occupation is not in his class description. But that's discredited by the fact that "princess" is Isabella's social occupation and it's in HER class description, so you're clearly wrong. It doesn't prove your point, it disproves it. David CAN have his social occupation as his class description because there is a precedent for such a thing as seen in the class description of Isabella. And furthermore, she definitely doesn't just stop being a princess just because now she's "Princess of Light". Does she just magically stop being Medion's sister? Of course not. Don't be stupid. Just because she's now the Princess of Light doesn't mean that she's no longer ALSO the Princess of the Empire.

knightOfdragon wrote:Just because a person can perform the actions of their previous class, does not mean they are that class.

Yes, it does. If a sniper can use a bow, he's an archer. If a hero can use a sword, he's a swordsman. If a wizard can cast spells, he's a magician. Plain and simple. You can be more than one thing. These aren't military ranks (except for maybe Commander and General). They're occupational skills. Just because you gain a new occupational description or skill doesn't mean you magically stop being or having the old occupational skill.

knightOfdragon wrote:Class in Shining Force also holds the meaning of a Title, which is why we can promote. To call a person of a promoted class their less class name is demeaning, just like calling a person of a promoted title a lesser title is demeaning.

In some cases, yes, but not universally or necessarily.

knightOfdragon wrote:You wouldn't call a store manager a cashier because he running a register.

Yes. I would. I don't care if he's the King of Spain, if he's working the cashier, and I'm talking about it afterwards, I'm gonna' call him "the cashier" or "the guy behind the cash" or "the checkout guy", because that is the capacity he's serving in that relevant moment. Unless maybe he's actually dressed as the King of Spain, with a crown and everything, in which case, I would call him "that cashier who was dressed like a king."

knightOfdragon wrote:You wouldn't call a Software Architect a Developer because he is writing code.

Yes. I would. I wouldn't deny that he's a software architect, but he's still performing the capacity of a developer, and therefore is such.

knightOfdragon wrote:Also, each promotion title implies the previous abilities. We know a wizard can perform the duties of a mage. We know a hero can wield a sword.

EXACTLY! So Wizards are Mages, Snipers are Archers, Heroes are Swordsmen, Princesses of Light are Princesses, Cavaliers are Knights, and etc.

knightOfdragon wrote:Do we know a champion is also a chieftain? No, because it is not a natural progression.

No, but we know that THIS champion is... more or less. lol. You're definitely right that it's not a natural progression, but hey, sometimes unnatural progressions happen. And even if we do not give him the class label of either Chieftain or Champion (which I don't think we should now, because he's not technically Chieftain, and Champion is already held by Penn--why don't you make all these objections to Penn having the champion class? All of my arguments pertain to Penn as well, but all of your objections pertain to Penn too, so you should be opposing Penn having the Champion class by your own logic), it won't actually change the fact that he is still, by definition and in fact, the acting chieftain of Stump Village turned champion of Medion's cause. With or without those class labels. It's still canonically true.

knightOfdragon wrote:What do you think we are doing here exactly? We are literally establishing new canon for David because his class does not translate well.

We most certainly are not. We're trying to find the right class name for him based on the foundation of ALREADY EXISTING canon. The goal here is not to just make shit up. We don't even NEED to make shit up. There's plenty of established canon to work with.

knightOfdragon wrote:We are simply trying to keep it as close to existing canon as we can, which is why we have this pretty awesome debate going on.

More like we are trying to make it completely in line with existing canon if possible, but then keep it as close to existing canon as we can if divergence should prove necessary. Which, thus far, it hasn't.

knightOfdragon wrote:He has been given the title of Commander, LF confirmed this for us. Which is why I asked the question "do the Generals share the same address in the game file?". LF confirmed that they do, so now I agree that David should not be general in this regard since there is a very clear distinction.

Okay. Fair enough. Agreed.

DomingoRules! wrote:I do think going from Chieftain to Commander accomplishes exactly that. As he goes from being a leader of a village, to a leader of an army. Both are leadership roles that carry similar responsibilities, yet the latter takes that authority to the next level, while also suggesting combat experience. Sure, he's not in the same leadership position as Medion, but that doesn't take away how actively he involves himself in leadership responsibilities when it comes to voicing his opinion, not to mention (again) the battle against the Juggernaut. Just saying. Besides, all armies have things like captains, commanders, and so on, so just because he's not the main leader doesn't mean he can't be a leader. Just more of an auxiliary one, which he essentially is whether Medion knights him as such or not, because that's the role he applies to himself through his actions.

I absolutely agree. Although my initial reaction to the idea of Commander without General is one of skepticism, as it seems odd that there would be some characters who go "Commander > A" and one character who goes "Commander > B". But then, when I think about it for a moment, I remember that we have some characters going "Master Monk > A" and other characters going "Master Monk > B", so there is actually an established precedent there.

DomingoRules! wrote:Or like how Slade goes from being a Thief, to being a Ninja. Aside from relying on stealth, they aren't remotely similar.

That's true. They're also not a quote unquote "natural progression". But hey, sometimes unnatural progressions happen.

DomingoRules! wrote:One's a robber, the other's an assassin.

Technically, historically speaking, ninjas were spies, not assassins (at least not typically). But I guess that within the realm of fantasy, the word ninja has taken on this meaning in the modern era, and such is life, I suppose. The word has taken on this definition in the common lexicon of the people at large in addition to its historical definition. In the minds of many, outright supplanting it. And to preempt knightOfdragon using this statement from me as justification for promoting bias, I'll reiterate the "in addition to" part. Just because this fantasy bias exists doesn't actually stop the historical definition from still being a thing. Yes, the word "champion" can be used in your biased way, Mr. Ofdragon, but that doesn't actually mean that it can't be used in any other sense anymore.

DomingoRules! wrote:It's simply taking the core element of a job that depends on stealth, and applies it to Slade's new role in which he goes from a wayward thief, to a (veritably so) military soldier that demands combat prowess.

What I'm about to say isn't hugely relevant, but I just think it's interesting because I love history, and so I'd like to point out that historically, real ninjas actually did not have a demand to possess combat prowess. Like, at all. Some of them surely did possess combat prowess--law of averages--but that actually wasn't part of the job description. But again, when it comes to fantasy ninjas, which Slade is (which is why what I'm saying here isn't relevant), then yeah, it's certainly a very big part of the job description. lol.

DomingoRules! wrote:And likewise to David, who very possibly returns to watching over his home after the game, I'm sure Slade returned to being a thief regardless of now being a ninja; albeit a wiser thief who deeply considers the consequences of the items he steals before doing so.

Well said, and agreed. Which supports the statement that just because he's a Ninja now doesn't actually magically make him stop being a Thief. Now, he COULD stop being a thief, but that would be his own personal initiative, and not some magical result of having become a ninja. Although I'm sure that even if he did stop stealing, there would still be many people who would say "once a thief, always a thief." So I suppose this is somewhat subjective in some cases.

knightOfdragon wrote:I am not sure if it does. I would be more inclined for Warden to be his first title, then we could go with Commandant for his second title, then maybe we use some other title like Colonel or Marshal for the third title or something just to keep it consistent, even though we technically have no strong basis for Colonel or Marshal. If there is a rank higher than Commandant that involves striking, maybe we can finally have a fair compromise.

I am pleased and honoured that you support my Warden suggestion. The rest of that all sounds really good to me as well. I very strongly support Commandant. I also support Colonel or Marshal, but not quite as strongly as I do Commandant, because they're less canonically established. But they seem a potentially fair compromise.

knightOfdragon wrote:BTW, I am not sure why you think Ninjas are only assasins. Ninjas are also thieves, and I can tell you that the thief in The Forbidden Series 1 also goes to Ninja when promoted, so there are examples of this going back to the late 80s.

Just because there's another example of this doesn't actually make it a natural progression, though. Ninjas are not inherently thieves, and becoming a ninja is not the logical, inevitable, or probable end-point of being a thief. I personally know several thieves IRL, and I can certainly tell you that none of them have become ninjas. Although, I suppose that if they were good ninjas, I wouldn't really know about it, would I? xD Also, totally irrelevant, but if you're not playing any of the remastered re-releases, the Thief is f*cking useless in the original NES version. xD I went through the entire game with that useless sod. Brings nothing to the table other than increased flee chance, which I never even used anyway. lol.

legalize freedom wrote:Warden passes the smell test also. Warden is really good.

Thank you for supporting my suggestion. :)

@knightOfdragon: I know I've gotten a little heated, and I would like to apologize for all the salt, but uhh... yeah, I'm a little salty... And more than a little passionate. Sorry about that (the salt, not the passion). No hard feelings.
Creator of Shining Force III: 16-bit (WIP).
Tjelladallak våriiikeõdõtsyk jeissõ'eilamnikinõhõn. Ii'tuntoimjähädälläjät, niin miietsy iimpa'tyõhõnja.
Creator of Shining Force III: 16-bit (WIP).
Tjelladallak våriiikeõdõtsyk jeissõ'eilamnikinõhõn. Ii'tuntoimjähädälläjät, niin miietsy iimpa'tyõhõnja.
Tor_Heyerdal

User avatar
Shining Member
Shining Member
 
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri Jan 11 2013 4:18am
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: David's Classes Decision

Postby legalize freedom » Thu Apr 18 2019 12:20pm

Tor_Heyerdal wrote:@knightOfdragon: I know I've gotten a little heated, and I would like to apologize for all the salt, but uhh... yeah, I'm a little salty... And more than a little passionate. Sorry about that (the salt, not the passion). No hard feelings.


You have been more than a little confrontational and argumentative in this thread. It's unbecoming of the discussion and frankly, diminishes your credibility.

I can appreciate your passion, but please try to be more respectful.
legalize freedom

User avatar
Shining Legend
Shining Legend
 
Posts: 1903
Joined: Sat Apr 29 2006 4:09am
Location: Texas, USA

Re: David's Classes Decision

Postby knight0fdragon » Thu Apr 18 2019 1:03pm

@Tor_Heyerdal,l You have nothing to apologize for, we are simply debating, at no point were insults thrown. I actually disagree with what LF is saying, argumentative is not a bad thing, but I will concede that we just drop the argument at this point since we clearly have different views and will not be giving in anytime soon.

Also, Warden works as long as the promotion works with it. Like Warden -> Striker -> Commando makes no sense. Also, since we brought up the tank, it makes more sense that David becomes a Commander (Which is one reason I used Commandant instead) in his 2nd class. His story is slightly different than Scenario 1 with Fynnding sending a crew of rejects to open a dam lol
knight0fdragon

User avatar
Shining Hero
Shining Hero
 
Posts: 1191
Joined: Fri Nov 05 2004 5:36am
Location: Good ol(Not Really) Pennsylvania USA

Re: David's Classes Decision

Postby DomingoRules! » Thu Apr 18 2019 5:19pm

knight0fdragon wrote:BTW, I am not sure why you think Ninjas are only assasins. Ninjas are also thieves, and I can tell you that the thief in The Forbidden Series 1 also goes to Ninja when promoted, so there are examples of this going back to the late 80s.


I feel like the progression from thief to ninja in Forbidden Series 1 is just the result of Square being unable to come up with anything better. There really isn't much of a natural progression to a thief, other than maybe a master thief, but that wouldn't really bring anything new to the table in regards to abilities; especially if they were set on giving the job class access to magic from the start. So they just went with the closest alternative they could come up with. Then Shining Force (along with many other things) just copied them.

Unless of course D&D did it first, as is oftentimes the case when it comes to any form of modern fantasy.

Tor_Heyerdal wrote:
DomingoRules! wrote:One's a robber, the other's an assassin.

Technically, historically speaking, ninjas were spies, not assassins (at least not typically). But I guess that within the realm of fantasy, the word ninja has taken on this meaning in the modern era, and such is life, I suppose. The word has taken on this definition in the common lexicon of the people at large in addition to its historical definition. In the minds of many, outright supplanting it. And to preempt knightOfdragon using this statement from me as justification for promoting bias, I'll reiterate the "in addition to" part. Just because this fantasy bias exists doesn't actually stop the historical definition from still being a thing. Yes, the word "champion" can be used in your biased way, Mr. Ofdragon, but that doesn't actually mean that it can't be used in any other sense anymore.


Well, to my knowledge, they also didn't parade around in black garbs that gave away their profession. They looked like anybody else walking the streets, because they depended on not drawing attention to themselves. It really just comes down to where the line is drawn between fantasy, and reality. A line that was likely blurred because watching murder is typically more entertaining than watching espionage

As for ninjas not inherently being fighters, while certainly true (since even in the case of performing assassination, you don't need to know how to wield a sword if you know how to poison somebody), I'm fairly confident that they would still generally be more suited for combat than the average hoodlum. No doubt they'd have some form of training to defend themselves in case their mission goes awry, since said missions would typically involve being planted in the middle of enemy territory.
Xbox 360 Gamertag: Mr GURVMLK
PSN Account: Mr_GURVMLK
Nintendo ID: Mr_GURVMLK
3DS Friend Code: 1246-8952-3737
Xbox 360 Gamertag: Mr GURVMLK
PSN Account: Mr_GURVMLK
Nintendo ID: Mr_GURVMLK
3DS Friend Code: 1246-8952-3737
DomingoRules!

User avatar
Shining Legend
Shining Legend
 
Posts: 1849
Joined: Tue Feb 17 2009 5:50am

Re: David's Classes Decision

Postby legalize freedom » Thu Apr 18 2019 6:32pm

knight0fdragon wrote:Also, Warden works as long as the promotion works with it. Like Warden -> Striker -> Commando makes no sense. Also, since we brought up the tank, it makes more sense that David becomes a Commander (Which is one reason I used Commandant instead) in his 2nd class. His story is slightly different than Scenario 1 with Fynnding sending a crew of rejects to open a dam lol


I think Warden is about the only class brought up so far that could work with both lines. It infers both a leadership position and a certain level of combat skill, at least to my mind. Maybe it's because of the way it has been used in fiction, like in Dragon Age for example. I see a Warden as both a guardian and an enforcer. Granted it does work better with the General line.

Warden > Striker > Commando
Warden > Commander > General
legalize freedom

User avatar
Shining Legend
Shining Legend
 
Posts: 1903
Joined: Sat Apr 29 2006 4:09am
Location: Texas, USA

Re: David's Classes Decision

Postby Rune » Thu Apr 18 2019 6:53pm

I prefer commando to commander, when considering the tank. Why, because he's taking a small team in for an elite special operations mission. Somehow it doesn't feel like a crew of rejects, as KOD put it, as in scenario 1. However, I also prefer commander with warden, than commando with warden.
Bury me with my money.
Bury me with my money.
Rune

User avatar
Shut the feck up fatty.
Shining Legend
 
Posts: 7410
Joined: Thu Sep 16 2004 9:33pm

Re: David's Classes Decision

Postby knight0fdragon » Thu Apr 18 2019 7:12pm

DomingoRules! wrote:
knight0fdragon wrote:BTW, I am not sure why you think Ninjas are only assasins. Ninjas are also thieves, and I can tell you that the thief in The Forbidden Series 1 also goes to Ninja when promoted, so there are examples of this going back to the late 80s.


I feel like the progression from thief to ninja in Forbidden Series 1 is just the result of Square being unable to come up with anything better. There really isn't much of a natural progression to a thief, other than maybe a master thief, but that wouldn't really bring anything new to the table in regards to abilities; especially if they were set on giving the job class access to magic from the start. So they just went with the closest alternative they could come up with. Then Shining Force (along with many other things) just copied them.

Unless of course D&D did it first, as is oftentimes the case when it comes to any form of modern fantasy.

Tor_Heyerdal wrote:
DomingoRules! wrote:One's a robber, the other's an assassin.

Technically, historically speaking, ninjas were spies, not assassins (at least not typically). But I guess that within the realm of fantasy, the word ninja has taken on this meaning in the modern era, and such is life, I suppose. The word has taken on this definition in the common lexicon of the people at large in addition to its historical definition. In the minds of many, outright supplanting it. And to preempt knightOfdragon using this statement from me as justification for promoting bias, I'll reiterate the "in addition to" part. Just because this fantasy bias exists doesn't actually stop the historical definition from still being a thing. Yes, the word "champion" can be used in your biased way, Mr. Ofdragon, but that doesn't actually mean that it can't be used in any other sense anymore.


Well, to my knowledge, they also didn't parade around in black garbs that gave away their profession. They looked like anybody else walking the streets, because they depended on not drawing attention to themselves. It really just comes down to where the line is drawn between fantasy, and reality. A line that was likely blurred because watching murder is typically more entertaining than watching espionage

As for ninjas not inherently being fighters, while certainly true (since even in the case of performing assassination, you don't need to know how to wield a sword if you know how to poison somebody), I'm fairly confident that they would still generally be more suited for combat than the average hoodlum. No doubt they'd have some form of training to defend themselves in case their mission goes awry, since said missions would typically involve being planted in the middle of enemy territory.



I can definitely give more examples. In TMNT, the foot clan starts out as kids who are thieves. In Fire Emblem, thief promotes to assassin, which is what you believe a ninja is. In batman begins, Bruce Wayne is arrested for being a thief and gets trained to be a ninja. The connection is there, both are classes designed to be quick and undetectable, they are masters of illusion, and they wear light nimble clothing.

Btw, Ninjas do not go parading around in ninja garb lol. The only reason we see it in movies and video games is so that we can make that association.
knight0fdragon

User avatar
Shining Hero
Shining Hero
 
Posts: 1191
Joined: Fri Nov 05 2004 5:36am
Location: Good ol(Not Really) Pennsylvania USA

Re: David's Classes Decision

Postby knight0fdragon » Thu Apr 18 2019 7:39pm

legalize freedom wrote:
knight0fdragon wrote:Also, Warden works as long as the promotion works with it. Like Warden -> Striker -> Commando makes no sense. Also, since we brought up the tank, it makes more sense that David becomes a Commander (Which is one reason I used Commandant instead) in his 2nd class. His story is slightly different than Scenario 1 with Fynnding sending a crew of rejects to open a dam lol


I think Warden is about the only class brought up so far that could work with both lines. It infers both a leadership position and a certain level of combat skill, at least to my mind. Maybe it's because of the way it has been used in fiction, like in Dragon Age for example. I see a Warden as both a guardian and an enforcer. Granted it does work better with the General line.

Warden > Striker > Commando
Warden > Commander > General



I am not sure it does, the point of the Warden in Dragon Age is to raise and maintain an army. “Striker” does not feel like a class that also emphasizes this.
knight0fdragon

User avatar
Shining Hero
Shining Hero
 
Posts: 1191
Joined: Fri Nov 05 2004 5:36am
Location: Good ol(Not Really) Pennsylvania USA

Re: David's Classes Decision

Postby DiegoMM » Thu Apr 18 2019 7:57pm

Warden reminds me of a magical class, like a more combative shaman. there is something mystical implied.
But maybe is just me.
Speaking...tires me.
Fighting...tires me
I'm tired.
Speaking...tires me.
Fighting...tires me
I'm tired.
DiegoMM

User avatar
Shining Hero
Shining Hero
 
Posts: 508
Joined: Wed May 05 2010 2:48pm

Re: David's Classes Decision

Postby DomingoRules! » Fri Apr 19 2019 1:20am

knight0fdragon wrote:Btw, Ninjas do not go parading around in ninja garb lol. The only reason we see it in movies and video games is so that we can make that association.

That's what I said. Was just raising a point in regards to real ninjas versus fantasy ninjas, since them being spies rather than assassins came up.
Xbox 360 Gamertag: Mr GURVMLK
PSN Account: Mr_GURVMLK
Nintendo ID: Mr_GURVMLK
3DS Friend Code: 1246-8952-3737
Xbox 360 Gamertag: Mr GURVMLK
PSN Account: Mr_GURVMLK
Nintendo ID: Mr_GURVMLK
3DS Friend Code: 1246-8952-3737
DomingoRules!

User avatar
Shining Legend
Shining Legend
 
Posts: 1849
Joined: Tue Feb 17 2009 5:50am

Re: David's Classes Decision

Postby knight0fdragon » Fri Apr 19 2019 3:55am

Oh, by they, I thought you meant thieves do not go parading around in garbs and that is why thieves are not ninjas
knight0fdragon

User avatar
Shining Hero
Shining Hero
 
Posts: 1191
Joined: Fri Nov 05 2004 5:36am
Location: Good ol(Not Really) Pennsylvania USA

Re: David's Classes Decision

Postby DomingoRules! » Fri Apr 19 2019 6:37am

Pronouns can be deceptive when context is misleading, or indistinct.
Xbox 360 Gamertag: Mr GURVMLK
PSN Account: Mr_GURVMLK
Nintendo ID: Mr_GURVMLK
3DS Friend Code: 1246-8952-3737
Xbox 360 Gamertag: Mr GURVMLK
PSN Account: Mr_GURVMLK
Nintendo ID: Mr_GURVMLK
3DS Friend Code: 1246-8952-3737
DomingoRules!

User avatar
Shining Legend
Shining Legend
 
Posts: 1849
Joined: Tue Feb 17 2009 5:50am

Re: David's Classes Decision

Postby Tor_Heyerdal » Sat Apr 20 2019 8:27am

knightOfdragon wrote:@Tor_Heyerdal,l You have nothing to apologize for, we are simply debating, at no point were insults thrown. I actually disagree with what LF is saying, argumentative is not a bad thing, but I will concede that we just drop the argument at this point since we clearly have different views and will not be giving in anytime soon.

I tremendously respect your attitude regarding this. And I agree that argumentativeness is not a bad thing in and of itself. And it does nothing to diminish credibility. I was apologizing for the salt, not the argumentativeness. I'm outright not sorry for being argumentative. lol. One needs to be argumentative in order to present an argument and debate its validity (or lack thereof). The idea that such a thing diminishes credibility is ridiculous, as it suggests that the only way to present a credible argument is to not argue. So I disagree with LF on that particular point as well.

I second the motion to drop the subject, because yes, we clearly have different views and will not be giving in any time soon. But what's more than that is that it's wholly irrelevant at this point. All we're really doing now is debating semantics because Champion is not even on the table, since it's already been assigned to Penn. So no amount of arguing this subject is actually going to be of any practical use to anyone. lol. So yeah, best to just drop it.

knightOfdragon wrote:Also, Warden works as long as the promotion works with it. Like Warden -> Striker -> Commando makes no sense. Also, since we brought up the tank, it makes more sense that David becomes a Commander (Which is one reason I used Commandant instead) in his 2nd class. His story is slightly different than Scenario 1 with Fynnding sending a crew of rejects to open a dam lol

I completely agree.

DomingoRules! wrote:Well, to my knowledge, they also didn't parade around in black garbs that gave away their profession. They looked like anybody else walking the streets, because they depended on not drawing attention to themselves. It really just comes down to where the line is drawn between fantasy, and reality. A line that was likely blurred because watching murder is typically more entertaining than watching espionage

Indeed. lol You're especially right about the garb. The "ninja uniform" is pure fantasy fiction. That never actually existed historically. At all. xD

DomingoRules! wrote:As for ninjas not inherently being fighters, while certainly true (since even in the case of performing assassination, you don't need to know how to wield a sword if you know how to poison somebody), I'm fairly confident that they would still generally be more suited for combat than the average hoodlum. No doubt they'd have some form of training to defend themselves in case their mission goes awry, since said missions would typically involve being planted in the middle of enemy territory.

While that seems a reasonable assumption on the surface, as far as I'm aware, no, that wasn't really the case. Ninjas were not trained in how to fight, on any level. Their plan B in the case of getting caught would've more likely been to just kill themselves.

knightOfdragon wrote:I can definitely give more examples. In TMNT, the foot clan starts out as kids who are thieves. In Fire Emblem, thief promotes to assassin, which is what you believe a ninja is. In batman begins, Bruce Wayne is arrested for being a thief and gets trained to be a ninja. The connection is there, both are classes designed to be quick and undetectable, they are masters of illusion, and they wear light nimble clothing.

The connection is certainly well established in the realm of fantasy at this point. That still doesn't mean that the progression is logical, but the fact does remain that the connection is established in fantasy, and it's not going away any time soon. I think it's important to acknowledge both of these facts and to distinguish them. It's true that the connection is established, and it's also true that the progression is not logical. But despite the fact that the progression is not logical, the connection is still established within the realm of fantasy, and there is a certain biased expectation among gamers as a whole regarding that otherwise illogical connection, which is why we're going to continue seeing it. Just like how swords go "shwing" when unsheathed in movies and TV due to the biased expectation of viewers despite the fact that swords don't really do that irl unless the scabbard is made of metal (which is not typically the case because it would dull the blade). There is a certain logic behind the connection insofar as "people what try to be stealthy" is a shared factor among them. But it's not the kind of logic that "logically follows". Like, it logically follows that 3 proceeds 2, and it logically follows that landing proceeds falling, and it logically follows that pooping proceeds eating. They're natural progressions. All 2s are followed by 3s. All falls are followed by lands. All eats are followed by poops. Not all thievery is followed by ninjutsu. lol. It doesn't "logically/naturally follow". But again, despite that, the connection has been established in the realm of fantasy (especially RPGs), and it's a connection that the Shining Force franchise has wholeheartedly embraced. As such, that's just the way it is. Sometimes, unnatural progressions happen, and that's okay.

DiegoMM wrote:Warden reminds me of a magical class, like a more combative shaman. there is something mystical implied.
But maybe is just me.

It's just you. Again, the word warden means: "a person responsible for the supervision of a particular place or thing or for ensuring that regulations associated with it are obeyed."
Someone responsible for watching a jail cell is a warden. Someone responsible for overseeing student welfare is a warden. A janitor responsible for maintaining the tidiness of a hallway is a warden. David is "a person responsible for the supervision of Stump Village and for ensuring that regulations associated with Stump Village are obeyed." Word for word, David is the Warden of Stump Village. Any "acting chieftain" is a warden. David is the "acting chieftain" of Stump Village.
Creator of Shining Force III: 16-bit (WIP).
Tjelladallak våriiikeõdõtsyk jeissõ'eilamnikinõhõn. Ii'tuntoimjähädälläjät, niin miietsy iimpa'tyõhõnja.
Creator of Shining Force III: 16-bit (WIP).
Tjelladallak våriiikeõdõtsyk jeissõ'eilamnikinõhõn. Ii'tuntoimjähädälläjät, niin miietsy iimpa'tyõhõnja.
Tor_Heyerdal

User avatar
Shining Member
Shining Member
 
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri Jan 11 2013 4:18am
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: David's Classes Decision

Postby legalize freedom » Sat Apr 20 2019 12:39pm

Tor_Heyerdal wrote:I tremendously respect your attitude regarding this. And I agree that argumentativeness is not a bad thing in and of itself. And it does nothing to diminish credibility. I was apologizing for the salt, not the argumentativeness. I'm outright not sorry for being argumentative. lol. One needs to be argumentative in order to present an argument and debate its validity (or lack thereof). The idea that such a thing diminishes credibility is ridiculous, as it suggests that the only way to present a credible argument is to not argue. So I disagree with LF on that particular point as well.


This is a side bar, but worth responding to I believe...
I was confounded in school when in writing class they taught the concept of writing to make an argument (debate) because you have to pick a position and spin everything to that point of view. I recognized, even back then, that you can't make a valid argument by defending a position (and now spin and defending positions is a cancer that has taken hold of our discourse). We are somehow supposed to ignore all information to the contrary in order to "prove" something.

If you really want to make a valid argument you argue it from all sides and allow the evidence to guide the outcome. I don't need to "win" a debate or "prove" a point, I need the logical conclusion of the topic. I want to be enlightened. That doesn't happen when you're defending a position.

So yes, when someone argues exclusively for a specific position, presents tenuous evidence or makes irrational statements to help "prove" said position (presenting something as fact that isn't or speaking beyond their knowledge as if they aren't), credibility goes down.

Citing a simple example: "David is either village chief or he's not."
That statement is not true, but was presented as fact. Irrational if you will. Since this situation, like most things, is grey. Very few things can be realistically dealt with in absolutes.

Having said that, I do appreciate your passion and your input. I would just like to see it presented more constructively.
legalize freedom

User avatar
Shining Legend
Shining Legend
 
Posts: 1903
Joined: Sat Apr 29 2006 4:09am
Location: Texas, USA

Re: David's Classes Decision

Postby DomingoRules! » Sat Apr 20 2019 3:41pm

Tor_Heyerdal wrote:
DomingoRules! wrote:Well, to my knowledge, they also didn't parade around in black garbs that gave away their profession. They looked like anybody else walking the streets, because they depended on not drawing attention to themselves. It really just comes down to where the line is drawn between fantasy, and reality. A line that was likely blurred because watching murder is typically more entertaining than watching espionage

Indeed. lol You're especially right about the garb. The "ninja uniform" is pure fantasy fiction. That never actually existed historically. At all. xD


Which reminds me of a ninja character in the PS1 title Vanguard Bandits, whom during one bit of dialogue explains that the reason he became a ninja was because he thought it meant he'd get to wear said black outfit. Yet that wound up not being the case, as he's one of the most casually dressed party members you get. His mech looks like a traditional fantasy ninja though (aside from being green), so I guess there's that. Still, not once does his employer ever send him on a mission of assassination, or anything of the sort. All his missions are about collecting information, or delivering said information to others, plus I believe one rescue operation depending on which path you take during a certain dialogue tree. That is, before he's ordered to join your party as a soldier, but even then he oftentimes disappears from the group of his own accord, only to return with important intel.

So I guess not all games do ninjas wrong. :thumbsup:
Xbox 360 Gamertag: Mr GURVMLK
PSN Account: Mr_GURVMLK
Nintendo ID: Mr_GURVMLK
3DS Friend Code: 1246-8952-3737
Xbox 360 Gamertag: Mr GURVMLK
PSN Account: Mr_GURVMLK
Nintendo ID: Mr_GURVMLK
3DS Friend Code: 1246-8952-3737
DomingoRules!

User avatar
Shining Legend
Shining Legend
 
Posts: 1849
Joined: Tue Feb 17 2009 5:50am

Re: David's Classes Decision

Postby Tor_Heyerdal » Sat Apr 20 2019 8:13pm

legalize freedom wrote:I was confounded in school when in writing class they taught the concept of writing to make an argument (debate) because you have to pick a position and spin everything to that point of view.

Right. You pick a position (not arbitrarily, but because it seems to you to be the correct position), and you spin everything to that point of view. And then if it doesn't hold up to argument and someone presents an argument from a different position that provides logical reasoning that indicates that your position is flawed, and you're able to recognize that reasoning for what it is, then you discard your position and re-evaluate your perspective based on the new information. That's not confounding, that's just how we figure out the value of a position: by testing it against other positions. Sometimes that test doesn't yield any different results on either side, and that's okay too. It's not some immoral or unhelpful thing. It's called debate, and it's good and healthy. If you don't believe in debate, then you shouldn't have even started this thread in the first place to welcome debate.

legalize freedom wrote:I recognized, even back then, that you can't make a valid argument by defending a position

You can if the position you're arguing for is a valid position and both parties are willing to listen to reason and admit their faults when they're made to recognize them (or when they recognize them themselves, which sometimes happens when presenting one's own argument, as merely the act of putting one's own thoughts into words can sometimes help one to realize that their own logic is flawed).

legalize freedom wrote:If you really want to make a valid argument you argue it from all sides and allow the evidence to guide the outcome. I don't need to "win" a debate or "prove" a point, I need the logical conclusion of the topic. I want to be enlightened. That doesn't happen when you're defending a position.

It certainly does happen when you're defending a position unless you refuse to admit when you're presented with information that proves you wrong. Which has not happened, at least not knowingly on my part. Quite the contrary, there have been MANY times throughout this debate where I've admitted to being wrong. So I really don't appreciate this. Just because things get heated doesn't automatically mean a refusal to admit evidence that plays against your point. Even if you are willing to admit that you're wrong, you can't reach a point of realizing that you're wrong without having the argument. I present my points, you present your points, we agree on some things, we disagree on some things, and the other's points help one to realize that one is wrong about some things. Maybe they don't help one to realize that one is wrong about all the things that one is wrong about all at once, but that's not a bad thing.

legalize freedom wrote:So yes, when someone argues exclusively for a specific position, presents tenuous evidence or makes irrational statements to help "prove" said position (presenting something as fact that isn't or speaking beyond their knowledge as if they aren't), credibility goes down.

Citing a simple example: "David is either village chief or he's not."
That statement is not true, but was presented as fact. Irrational if you will. Since this situation, like most things, is grey. Very few things can be realistically dealt with in absolutes.

While it's true that many, many things cannot be realistically dealt with in absolutes (maybe even most things), that doesn't mean that nothing can, and this is certainly one such thing that can. You're wrong when you say that this statement is not true. Either David is village chief or he's not. There is no middle ground. You can't be "sort of" chief. You can't be "half chief". Just like you can't be "sort of" the president. There is no grey when it comes to a title. You either have the title or you don't. David is certainly the defacto chief. He's the acting chief. He's the stand-in chief. He's the closest thing they have TO a chief. But that doesn't make the fact that he's either chief or not any less absolute; he's still not actually chief. The in-game dialogue makes that explicit. Furthermore, "getting a little salty" does not constitute "arguing exclusively for a specific position, presenting tenuous evidence, making irrational statements, presenting something as fact that isn't, or speaking beyond one's knowledge as if one isn't" And to imply that this is what "getting a little salty" necessarily entails... THAT'S an irrational statement.

legalize freedom wrote:Having said that, I do appreciate your passion and your input. I would just like to see it presented more constructively.

Like knightOfdragon said, I haven't insulted anyone. I've gotten a little bit salty, sure, and I already apologized for that (maybe that was a mistake, as I'm now being treated like the bad guy as a result in a situation where there is, in fact, no bad guy at all) but I haven't degenerated into ad hominem. I haven't started attacking anyone. I haven't strayed from the argument. I haven't lost sight of the topic. Literally all I'm guilty of is getting a little frustrated. Everything I've said has been with the express purpose of reaching some kind of understanding in BOTH directions (successful or otherwise). I've admitted fault at least a half a dozen times or more where logic has been presented to me that indicated I was in error. I have not come at this purely with the intent of "winning", as you seem to imply. It has been entirely constructive. In fact, your very example you're using against me alludes to one such admission, when I admitted that I was wrong that David was chief of Stump Village when it was presented to me that the in-game dialogue makes it explicit that Stump Village has no chief. If I was mindlessly (ie, non-constructively) just trying to win the argument, I would not have admitted to being wrong about that or any of the other several things I admitted to being wrong about. I have allowed the evidence to guide the outcome. I would never have reached the point of suggesting "Warden" otherwise, as if I had not allowed evidence to guide the outcome, I would still be stuck on arguing for "Hunter", which I also discarded several pages back. Someone who's not being constructive and not allowing evidence to guide the outcome doesn't discard ideas that have been proven wrong (or at least insufficient) and then try to come up with something better, thereby re-evaluating one's position.
Creator of Shining Force III: 16-bit (WIP).
Tjelladallak våriiikeõdõtsyk jeissõ'eilamnikinõhõn. Ii'tuntoimjähädälläjät, niin miietsy iimpa'tyõhõnja.
Creator of Shining Force III: 16-bit (WIP).
Tjelladallak våriiikeõdõtsyk jeissõ'eilamnikinõhõn. Ii'tuntoimjähädälläjät, niin miietsy iimpa'tyõhõnja.
Tor_Heyerdal

User avatar
Shining Member
Shining Member
 
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri Jan 11 2013 4:18am
Location: Ontario, Canada

Previous

Return to SFIII Translation Project

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest