Difference between revisions of "Talk:Dilnazen"

Latest revision as of 19:22, 15 June 2007

Breaking it into two paragraphs is one thing, but is the bulleting absolutely nessecary? Third sentence of the first paragraph is positively redundant. Ccelizic 19:58, 11 June 2007 (BST)

• I applied the edits I mentioned in the above post in this chat page, which made that first "paragraph" more of a sentence. It seems to work as a single paragraph so I put them together. Thinking about it, there's nothing particularly important about the punch attack being like all those other monsters that it seemed worth nothing that it shared the punch attack with those creatures. Perhaps it might be simpler to note that it uses the same animation sequence as the above noted creatures, this saves the bother of having to spit that list of critters out each time. It seemed a touch redundant to have every mention of the same creature link to the page for it, so I edited it so the first mention of a particular monster links to its page, each additional mention is not a link though. I expanded out the abbreviations while I was editing it. That bullet in the middle of the article however seemed entirely extraneous. I would not be sure that it flinching from knockback is entirely a "weakness" the more I think about it. Considering the fact that most other things fall flat on their ass in the face of those attacks which is even more debilitating, one could consider it's flinching a partial resistance, but then I digress. I will have to work on a sightings table for this article later, if someone does not beat me to the punch or if I do not get distracted with filling out more weapons articles. Ccelizic 23:22, 11 June 2007 (BST)

• Why bother saying knockback and throwback? It means the same thing essentially to knock something back and throw something back. You could argue that knockdown is different, but in the end the reader is not an idiot, if you say "knockback" with what gets the beast off footing they'll understand. So why not just stick with saying just knockback? Agian, I point to the points agian I stated before. Is it essentially we say it has so and so's punch attack. If you just state out it's attacks and abilities without crosslinking it left and right to different baddies, the reader can figure out what it does precisely without looking up other monsters. In fact I would encourage you to explain what this bad boy can do without saying it's like other monsters. Pretend this is the first time the reader has encountered any monster and he doesn't know what a Bil De Vear is or what a Jarba is and explain the attacks. You could make a single note early on that this creature shares their animation, but then go through and explain what it does without stating "jarba's punch" "bubba's belly blast." "Ned's ninja vanish." Just say, it punches things, it jumps, and flings balls of darkness. Though, in more elaborate ways then that. Ccelizic 21:29, 12 June 2007 (BST)

• yeah i do see your point of any 1st time user looking at this page. What I did kind of want to change was the fact that you used some big words to describe it (no offense btw) like calling it a bug-like bipedal form or luminous blue lights. I honestly think it would be easier to break it down into somewhat simpler words which was why I added "basically Dilnazen are giant bug-men that stand on 2 legs". And I did add what monsters also use the punch attack to let ppl know its similarities to other monsters so that they can employ the same albeit somewhat different strategy against it. The whole meaning of my changes were to "dumb down" some of the big words used to describe it and its attacks. For example I re-edited your description of what the dark matter attack was because no one can really tell what it is; hell i cant even tell what it is but we can discuss that another time. And the flinching weakness was added to make it easier to let players know what weaknesses it has to exploit. Plus i went into detail about a lot of things that don't really need attention because I favored this monster and plus I wanted to add as much stuff as I could because i would be wasting space if the description was too short. On a side note though, thank you for pointing out the ranged weapon resistance of it. BRayJ 13 June 2007 (BST)

6-14 edits

Just some notes, each attack description was saying "that can knock players down". Rather then write it over 3 times and bloat the sentence size overly large, I stripped those out and put in a single sentence saying "Its attacks generally knock players over." I moved the various references to those three critters into a single sentence saying "It shares the animation characteristics of Jarba, Bil de Vear, and Kajibari" that it isn't needed to restate over and over "the punch of Jarba, Bil de Vear, and Kajibari" "the flinch of Jarba, Bil de Vear, and Kajibari" or "The hip thrust of Jarba, Bil de Vear, and Kajibari". Just state it has a move, and if those other critters have it too, the reader can assume they do it in a similar fashion. The flinching is not a weakness, its a partial knockback resistance. Think about it, I whack a Kogg Nad with rising strike and its flat on its ass for 3 seconds allowing me to chain in a combo. I whack this bad boy with a rising strike and he's just going to flinch for a half second turn around and shove one of those huge blades through my abdomen. Sure, knockback and interrupt this thing, but knockback will interrupt most other things a heck of a lot worse. Finally, that face is not bug-like. It's ten hexagons it is not of this earth, it is completely alien, it lacks anything insect-like or man-like or anything of this world. Besides I think what is up there for its initial description is fine enough for anyone to notice it upon site. There is a picture of it up too. --Ccelizic 04:58, 15 June 2007 (BST)

lol well dude i guess i can let Dilnazen stay as it is then. I just wanna put this behind us and move on. However I do feel as if the big words used to describe monsters sometimes lack any actual tie ins with what can be simply put as "basically..." but whatever. I guess the whole reason I began this stupid editing war was because I felt insulted that someone changed things I put on one of my most favorite monsters. Especially since I honestly felt I knew everything about Dilnazen. But, I do remember that I shouldn't put up anything if I don't want it changed since anybody is allowed to edit it w/o question. But yeah I say lets just leave this page as is and move on. On a side note though; Ive been wondering, why do you make everything sound so fancy and use many "big words" to describe stuff? I mean I know people aren't dumb but we also need to remember that not everyone understands such fancy words used to describe things. No offense by the way. BRayJ 11:10 pm, 14 June 2007 (BST)

• I haven't even cracked into the fancy words. This is just standard fare for me. If you want utter and all consuming fancy I can crack open a veritable bonanza of sophisticated, complicated, and multisyllabic utterances that would completely and utterly vex, consternate, and befuddle you. But, I feel the language contained in this article is pretty straight forward. Luminous and bipedal may be a touch more academic then most words, but anyone I know knows their meaning offhand without any assistance from a dictionary. Two-legged sounds lacking, and glowy isn't even a proper word. I could use iridescent and anthroforms but that sounds overly complicated, and I have to use a dictionary to look up iridescent. In fact, I tried to spell it iradescent off the bat when I should have used iridescent. Bug-men is right-out, it sounds like something from out of a B-movie: "It's the attack of the bug-men from Hive Laia!" Besides, how do we know they aren't women, maybe bug-person would be more PC... ;) --Ccelizic 20:22, 15 June 2007 (BST)