"demon" in spell descriptions

ankheg

It's a minor thing but I noticed that in BG they alway use the "demon" expression for any kind of fiend. Even the program has only one race "demonic" for demons and for devils as well. (altough they have the right alignment)

Shin

This is addressed very well in the Spell Revisions mod where it's described accurately what kind of fiend you summon. They are also significantly buffed so that e.g. a Pit Fiend or Balor is capable of putting up a fight even in the later game.

Sarevokok

I really loved playing with those Gate spells.

Miloch

For accurate scripting, while all fiends have the DEMONIC race, real demons (tanar'ri) should have the TANARI class and baatezu (devils) should have the IMP class.

theJoshFrost

I for one don't think the word demon should be used in the video game. I think the satanic imagery is really bad for our youth, and it will turn them away from the Lord. the video game is demonic and it's going to corrupt all the players and make them satanist

Oh wait. Never mind. I'm crazy. Sorry.

ankheg

Miloch said:

For accurate scripting, while all fiends have the DEMONIC race, real demons (tanar'ri) should have the TANARI class and baatezu (devils) should have the IMP class.

That is the point. Spells like Bolt of Glory use the term demon, and I belive it refers the demonic race. (altough didn't checked) Anyway it can be confusing.

Miloch

Well, "fiend" is a more accurate term if it applies to both tanar'ri (demons) and baatezu (devils). Which is the case with Bolt of Glory, cavalier bonuses, and probably just about everything else of that nature in the game. So it should probably say "Fiends" instead of "Demons" in string #26281 (Bolt of Glory description) and wherever else it applies. I guess @Jalily or someone handles this sort of thing.

Jalily

I've fixed the strings for Bolt of Glory, Gate, Cacofiend, Summon Fiend, and the Cavalier bonuses. Anything else I missed?

ankheg

Racial enemy, and wild surge 54 perhaps?

Miloch

Marginally related, but I think all instances of "demonknight" and "demon knight" should be changed to "death knight" because that's the proper name for the creature (it's not a demon nor even a fiend, but a type of undead creature).

Jalily

@Miloch Unfortunately, at least one line references the "demon" part of "demonknight": "Have you had the pleasure of seeing? A demon in knight's clothing, a demonknight that serves the underworld." I ran this by Dave, and he said we should just leave it alone.

ankheg

Jalily said:

@Miloch Unfortunately, at least one line references the "demon" part of "demonknight": "Have you had the pleasure of seeing? A demon in knight's clothing, a demonknight that serves the underworld." I ran this by Dave, and he said we should just leave it alone.

True, but what about my two?

Jalily

@ankheg I tweaked the surge text, but there aren't any references to demons in the BG1 racial enemies.

ankheg

Jalily said:

@ankheg I tweaked the surge text, but there aren't any references to demons in the BG1 racial enemies.

My mistake it was only in BG2.

Miloch

@Jalily @Dave
I don't see why this wouldn't make sense:

Have you had the pleasure of seeing? A demon in knight's clothing, a death knight that serves the underworld.

"Demon" in that sentence being a generic term for a foul creature, but to imply it actually is a demon is erroneous. In any case you should think about standardising "demonknight" and "demon knight" (the latter is preferable, since it is an alternative if misleading term for death knight).

This should probably be changed too (string #4502):

[DRIZZT DO'URDEN 5] I've sparred with demons from the Nine Hells themselves! I shall barely break a sweat here today!

Either demons -> devils or Nine Hells themselves -> Abyss itself.

Shin

Miloch said:

This should probably be changed too (string #4502):

[DRIZZT DO'URDEN 5] I've sparred with demons from the Nine Hells themselves! I shall barely break a sweat here today!

Either demons -> devils or Nine Hells themselves -> Abyss itself.

The latter is probably more suitable given Drizzt's history.

Dave

@Jalily @Miloch

I'm okay with the Drizzt line change. Let's leave the other one alone. The line will sometimes seem arbitrary, but I want to limit the fiddling we do with the original creative decisions when it's not a clear case of correction or substantial improvement.

Miloch

@Dave - well what about standardising to "demon knight" at least? I thought you folks were all about standardising punctuation (in this case, a missing space).

As for "creative decisions" - I think that was already done at some point since the creature file is DEATHK.CRE - not DEMONK.CRE (and its stats are clearly those of a death knight).

Dave

@Miloch Yes, "demonknight" should be one word. I thought we'd already corrected the two-word version, unless different editors are working at odds.

Miloch

@Dave - no, actually "demon knight" should be two words. As in that link, it is a barely-acceptable substitute for death knight. I've seen other posts (from @Jalily et al.) where you all have changed things like Black Talons to Blacktalons on the basis of canon nomenclature, so I don't know why this would be any different.

Jalily

@Dave, I agree with @Miloch on "demon knight" being two words. Unlike "death knight," this change won't affect any references to it at all. It's on the level of correcting "doppleganger," I'd say.

The Drizzt line is voiced, so we're stuck with it, unfortunately.

Miloch

Jalily said:

The Drizzt line is voiced, so we're stuck with it, unfortunately.

Bah, that didn't occur to me. For the same reason, we're stuck with most of Dynaheir's completely wrong "thees" and "thous" in her supposedly "antiquated dialect."