Re: No virgins under the sea?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Probably for the same reason you never hear of sacrificing centaur virgins ...

Or dwarven virgins, et cetera. Not only are demon-worshipers evil and sadistic, they're racist, too. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: No virgins under the sea?
 

I've sucefully bloodhunted in a water province. Whether it makes sense or not it can be done.

odd_enuf

Re: No virgins under the sea?
 

Perhaps only water nations can successfully bloodhunt underwater - it would kinda make sense, wouldn't it?

Re: No virgins under the sea?
 

As a water nation with underwater population I kinda assumed there would be underwater virgins but hey no big deal. I assume dwarven wackos sacrifice dwarf virgins also...but hey whadda I know.

Frosted Flake

Re: No virgins under the sea?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Actually, it wasn't you that was the target of my post, it was the thread creator. Quoting you was more relevent to the point(s) I was attempting to convey.

However, since you bring it up, Dom 2's creators have gone out of their way (kudos to IW) to create a game where the pieces, setting, and rules are logical and consistent. Just because something is a game, or fantasy (or both) does not automaticaly imply that you cannot have logic, reason, or consistency. And Dom 2 proves it (or at least tries its very best to).

So the Last refuge of folks who refuse to exercise their aging brain cells, that of saying "it's a game", or "it's fantasy" as an excuse to overlook what they might find as inconvenient issues -- such as virgin girls needing air to breathe -- simply doesn't ... hold water.

That said, remember that gaming is all about having pun, er, fun. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I know continuing this discussion further would drive this thread OT very fast, but I want to say that I am not one of the people that usually come up with the excuse of "it's a game, so logical conclusions or vericacy has no place.

I just wanted to point out that since in a game, and a fantasy game at that, there are bound to be inconsistencies due to the dreaded "game balance".* That said, and as has been pointed out in a post below, there is no obvious logical reason why blood slaves, as representations of human virgins, couldn't represent mermaids or Chaste Lizards as well. But I disgress.

*game balance, the evil beast that since the early 80s prevents D&D wizards from wearing armour! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ June 23, 2004, 18:20: Message edited by: MCArt ]

Re: No virgins under the sea?
 

Hm. If you summon Belphegor, and give him a water-breathing item, will he generate slaves and thralls (instantly drowning...) underwater?

Re: No virgins under the sea?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Do those generated slaves have a gold upkeep ??
I see this as more of a curse from Belphegor because the units are weak, low morale and chew up food supplies.

[ June 24, 2004, 23:24: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

Re: No virgins under the sea?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">All Demon lords are like that - powerful, but bring their own "curse" with them, just like (most of the) artifacts.