No virgins under the sea?

[MCArt]

Originally posted by Arryn:

quote:

---

Originally posted by MCArt:
And, more importantly, we are talking about a *game*.

So no reason to come down all real life logical on me

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.

---

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!

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