Curse

Shattered Self · Nov 01, 2005, 09:18 PM // 21:18

You're wrong about one thing Fitz: these aren't animals. Animals are the cute non-aggressive little critters that wander aimlessly until a ranger charms them with a bit of honey and suckers them into a life of violence and pain.

The creatures you have described are magical monsters, and thus probably possess more intelligence than you might attribute to them at first glance. For all we know all the various aloe seed monsters are part of a giant telepathic collective that has written prose and verse so beautiful and powerful that the Gods themselves wept, and granted them healing and smiting magic that they might defend themselves from savage monkey farmers.

pyrohex · Nov 01, 2005, 09:53 PM // 21:53

Quote:

savage monkey farmers.

I take umbrage at your flippant elucidation. For all you know, I could be a pretentious pseudo-intellectual proudly presenting my scholastic merits as an erudite scholar of The Classics. I deeply enjoy partaking in contemporary philosophical discourse; it truly stimulates my frontal cerebral cortex - I always leave discussion enlightened to the wonders of human development.

I am Lebeziatnikov, and Pyotr Petrovitch Luzhin is my hero!

As you can see, I am far from a savage monkey farmer. I am merely arrogant, bent on displaying my many colorful, colorable credentials - so please refrain in the future from making such assumptive comments about my civility. Because I am highly learned, and a great scholar, of course. So again, please refrain from your uninformed comments.

By the way, did I mention that I am a highly erudute student of European classics? You should know that fact, because I am very intelligent, and I have studied the manuscripts of the great - in the original language of course! Yes, it was a great deal of work, but my hard work and persistence truly paid off!

So, please, refrain from calling me a savage monkey farmer. Thank you, my beloved underling.

pyrohex · Nov 01, 2005, 09:54 PM // 21:54

The parody escalated a bit much. Sorry.

I probably should have stopped at the second reminder that I am a highly erudite scholar. And I am, did you know that? I've read Shakespeare, Coleridge, Wordsworth, Dumas, Hugo, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy.

You should know that.

Nighteye · Nov 01, 2005, 11:06 PM // 23:06

You know, many animals are very intelligent. They just have a different kind of intelligence than humans, which makes comparison a bit hard, but they're not stupid. If you own cats you'll know what I mean.

Fitz Rinley · Nov 02, 2005, 01:28 AM // 01:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Epinephrine

Of course, this is a behaviourist perspective, and with you mentioning Jungian archetypes you might not like that model.

Ok. That explanation makes some sense.

Warriors should take more baths. Then the bugs would try to eat them too.

The question was to see if the AI was capable fo being tweaked to better represent something more realistic. If so then a proper consensus could be reached and presented. It was a topic for discussion. Locking the thread makes little sense under that concept, unless one doesn't like discussions or debates. Then of course, why be here.

Epinephrine, you are partially correct. I accept the universality of behavioral manifestations which are inevitable based upon biological determinants such as hunger, reproduction, or testosterone causing the inevitability of patriarchy, or even the primary thought pattern of a male being dispersed in the brain while a females is in the frontal lobe being sufficient to promote engendering females away from combative behavior in order to avoid damage to the crittical thinking portions of theeir brain. (See recent studies from Irvine, Ca.) Within that limited framework archtypes control the reality of human beingness. Written history is not as important as existential (folk) history which brings us to terms with psychological imbalances both at the individual and group level.

Fitz Rinley

PS. I do not always use the first definition or the modern one, nor am I above being fascetious, sarcastic, or difficult.

Epinephrine · Nov 03, 2005, 06:04 PM // 18:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

Ok. That explanation makes some sense.

Warriors should take more baths. Then the bugs would try to eat them too.

Works for me. As to the AI tweaks, yeah, the AI needs massive work. I have troble believing even the dumbest Charr on the planet would fire arrows at a brick wall while you nuke him through it.

I've PM'd you about the other.