Elohims should be "Spiritual" rather than the current implementation of "Tolerant"

[PotatoOverdose]

I would be all for the Grigori getting tolerant, but I don't see why the Elohim would need to loose tolerant for that to happen. In terms of Lore, if you look at the lore behind grigori heroes, their backgrounds, and the grigori people as a whole, tolerant would seem to fit them very well. Whether it would be balanced or not (I think it would be, but that's just my opinion) is another matter entirely. As for the Kurios, their lore shows that they have a distinct caste system (e.g. centaurs are the main fighters) with other minor magical creatures thrown in to the pot. However, nowhere in Kurio lore does it say that they are terribly accepting of dwarves, elves, orcs, etc. On the other hand, one of the Grigori heroes is, lorewise, an orc so...(according to the lore forums).

 

[Breunor]

I think the problem is not so much whether or not the Elohim ought to be tolerant (maybe some others should have it as well, but that doesn't directly impact whether or not the Elohim ought to have it) but how the Tolerant trait works.

Perhaps a better way of handling it would be instead of getting the city buildings of those that you conquer, I would propose this. (Major tweaks will be needed)

The Elohim get a new unit called an "Emissary". They would be available with say, Trade, cost 60, have 0 combat ability and move two. The idea would be that you go to a city of another civ which you have open borders with, and deploy the Emissary to "pick up" some culture of the city he visits, and then brings it back to the Elohim city, which then would get a limited ability to build stuff from the civ you got the culture from. The more culture you mix, the more stuff you get. (I realize this is not hammered out at all, but just a first idea) Any thoughts?

I was thinking is similar lines, but being simpler. I thought a tolerant civilization gets control of the city, and any units it builds, but --

The AI controls the city production! That is, a tolerant Civ/conqueror isn't telling the captured city what it should do, and is subject to the poor skills of the AI or some similar mechanic; this represents that a tolerant conqueror has to put up with less than optimal city impacts of that conquest.

Of course, some other compensation needs to be given to the Elohim then. They perhaps should get less war weariness, or some of the advantages like Ur_Vile_Wedge mentions (which seems kind of neat) or some of the apparent advantages from FF (which unfortunately I've never played).

Best wishes,

Breunor

 

[Imuratep]

Spiritual would change a lot of things for Elohims, since monks would gain xp over time and get free mobility, as well as allowing Elohims to build temples faster and change civics/religions at will.

Monks would not gain more xp by spiritual - only units with channeling do this. I'm sure about this as I played Capria several times and their crusaders also do not gain xp though she is spiritual.

 

[blacknight]

I really didn't like the idea of being able to build others' UUs, especially for the Elohims. But it sounds like FF did a great job! "Tolerant" is perfect for Decius, and gathering unique features for traits seems to be fun and fit the Elohims. I would not mind at all this getting added to FFH core.

 

[Jules.lt]

Monks would not gain more xp by spiritual - only units with channeling do this. I'm sure about this as I played Capria several times and their crusaders also do not gain xp though she is spiritual.

Is that so? They do get mobility though, don't they?
I just started my game as Varn Gosam of Elohim and I haven't got monks yet.
That's actually good, I was afraid that this trait might be a bit overpowered for them because of monks with potency but now I'm reassured

 

[zbelg]

Arguing about the 'lore' for an almost entirely original fictional universe is kind of pointless. The "Tolerant" trait is part of the fun and uniqueness of the Elohim, I really don't find it important to try to restrict a civilization because their 'theme' doesn't completely fit with it.

 

[KillerClowns]

Arguing about the 'lore' for an almost entirely original fictional universe is kind of pointless...

You're new around here, ain't you?

The "Tolerant" trait is part of the fun and uniqueness of the Elohim, I really don't find it important to try to restrict a civilization because their 'theme' doesn't completely fit with it.

I believe Kael said something to the tune of game play trumping flavor, damned if I can find the exact quote. Now you mention it, this may be a case of that happening.

 

[Rystic]

At the very least, the Elohim can be knocked down from 'Good' to 'Neutral'. When you see a Good leader marching around with The Demon Armies of Hell, the first thought that comes to mind isn't "Wow, it's amazing how tolerant they are!"

Again, I support the Grigori for tolerant. Cassiel has no particular dogma, no reason to single out any group. A lot of people here are saying Cardith should get it, but again, Demon Armies of Hell... and Centaurs! seems a bit weird. I don't think any Good or Evil leader should have Tolerant. Is it really good to tolerate evil?

The biggest problem I see is that without tolerant, the Elohim are bland. This is true, but it doesn't mean tolerant is the only way to make them interesting. Considering the Elohim see all the Unique features, why not use that? They're suppose to be the guardians of ancient sanctuaries, but nothing they have is tied to this. Personally, I think players have the most fun when they play with a goal in mind, like feasting with vampires as the Calabim, building Temples of the Hand and rituals as the Illians, pirate coves as the Lanun, etc. Something where the player says "I want to play X so I can do Y". The Elohim's special could be a reward from controlling/visiting Unique features (like Auric visiting Letum Frigis). Right now, players are motivated to play the Elohim so they can build the UU's and UB's of other teams. It's a nice add, but it's really just distracting from the main problem.

 

[MasterofDisasta]

Considering the Elohim see all the Unique features, why not use that? They're suppose to be the guardians of ancient sanctuaries, but nothing they have is tied to this. Personally, I think players have the most fun when they play with a goal in mind, like feasting with vampires as the Calabim, building Temples of the Hand and rituals as the Illians, pirate coves as the Lanun, etc. Something where the player says "I want to play X so I can do Y". The Elohim's special could be a reward from controlling/visiting Unique features (like Auric visiting Letum Frigis).

Many people agree with you on this idea. In fact, that exact unique feature idea is one of their distinguishing features in fall further. If the option is already in fall further, why bother changing it in basic FFH? It's already an option if one just downloads fall further. I don't see why people feel the need to incorporate fall further's changes into basic FFH. I see no problem with having two versions of the same game. In fact, I save many copies of FFH, both old editions and versions with modmods, because I enjoy a variety of game options. I think this is a great idea that was implemented in Fall Further but I don't feel that its absence detracts from my other versions of FFH, I think that it actually adds replay value by giving me a different way to play the Elohim.

 

[Rystic]

Many people agree with you on this idea. In fact, that exact unique feature idea is one of their distinguishing features in fall further. If the option is already in fall further, why bother changing it in basic FFH? t's already an option if one just downloads fall further.

Because the Elohim are bland in vanilla FFH. Also, a lot of ideas started in Fall Further were incorporated into basic FFH later (like lair exploration).

I don't see why people feel the need to incorporate fall further's changes into basic FFH.

This isn't what I'm saying at all.

I think this is a great idea that was implemented in Fall Further but I don't feel that its absence detracts from my other versions of FFH, I think that it actually adds replay value by giving me a different way to play the Elohim.

They don't have to copy Fall Further directly. I think that the FFH team can come up with its own mechanic for the Elohim that could relate to Unique features.

 

[MasterofDisasta]

They don't have to copy Fall Further directly. I think that the FFH team can come up with its own mechanic for the Elohim that could relate to Unique features.

Ok, that was an incorrect assumption on my part. I've just become used to seeing threads where posters suggest changes to the main game that just happen to come right out of a modmod. I incorrectly assumed that your idea was intentionally similar to fall further and make myself look foolish with my rant-ish response.

Now that I realize what you were saying, I totally agree with you that a new Elohim mechanic for unique features would definitely be a lore-appropraite and fun addition. Making the mechanic require the Elohim to travel to the improvement does sound like the best idea, since it gives the player an interesting quest to pursue even while in the "warrior spam" phase.

However, I wouldn't say that the Elohim are bland in regular FFH, once the tolerant trait is taken into account. However, replacing it with spiritual without adding any other mechanic probably would make the Elohim fairly bland. I agree with you on this as well; if the Elohim are going to lose tolerant, they need to gain another equally interesting mechanic in order to compensate. Just adding spiritual will make them boring again.

But then again, I still like tolerant on the Elohim even if I do think the worst abuses (like the demons one you brought up) shouldn't be allowed.

 

[WarKirby]

I believe Kael said something to the tune of game play trumping flavor, damned if I can find the exact quote. Now you mention it, this may be a case of that happening.

I have to disagree.

I select the elohim when I want to play pacifist good. Tolerant feels like the game is trying to force me to do something I don't want to (declare war) to make the most out of my Civ.

This argument would be valid IF conquest was only one of the ways to utilise tolerant. If it were feasible to get cities by culture, or trade. But it is not.

 

[Rystic]

Tolerant would make more sense if units were born with random races, although I'd love to see that in particular go to the Grigori or Kuriotates.

 

[MasterofDisasta]

I have to disagree.

I select the elohim when I want to play pacifist good. Tolerant feels like the game is trying to force me to do something I don't want to (declare war) to make the most out of my Civ.

This argument would be valid IF conquest was only one of the ways to utilise tolerant. If it were feasible to get cities by culture, or trade. But it is not.

I don't think the only way to utilize tolerant is through a warmongering playstyle of declaring wars on others. I've played through an entire game without being forced into at least one war, and if I take an enemy city in the defense of my nation, I will get a benefit out of the tolerant trait.

I also wouldn't agree that the lore makes the Elohim out to be pacifists. The Elohim do not look favorably upon warfare, but even Ethne seriously considers it as a way to promote the greater good. This can be clearly seen in the Hyborem's Whisper entry of the pedia. Compared to the other nations of Erebus who are all very warlike, the Elohim seem like pacifists but in this dark and war torn world there can be no such thing as a surviving pacifistic nation.

This doesn't mean you can't play them that way, but I don't think the Elohim should be designed with the assumption that the player will never enter a war; that is even more in contradiction with their depiction in lore.

 

[Rystic]

Even if they keep tolerant, I still think they need a unique mechanic that you can use without going to war.

 

[MasterofDisasta]

Even if they keep tolerant, I still think they need a unique mechanic that you can use without going to war.

This you've convinced me on. I still don't think that tolerant's mechanics by themselves force the player to declare war, I think that the absence of any other fun Elohim specific mechanic leaves the player bored until they get the chance to utilize tolerant. If the Elohim had some unique mechanic to puruse, particuarly one that was strongest in peacetime, players would not feel that the only way to play the Elohim is to explore all the benefits of the tolerant trait.

 

[Imuratep]

I don't think the only way to utilize tolerant is through a warmongering playstyle of declaring wars on others. I've played through an entire game without being forced into at least one war, and if I take an enemy city in the defense of my nation, I will get a benefit out of the tolerant trait.

If you go this way you are dependent on your opponent - you have to HOPE someone declares war on you and with a high probability are not fitting to what you need as a warmonger probably will have more tools to lead war, not to improve your builder playstyle. If I want to play a civ, I want the one to influence the game, I want to work with the unique mechanic, I want to be the acting part.
And THAT can only be achieved by leading war.
As I said before I don't have anything against the Elohim being able to lead war, but that it's the only way. Easier culture flips would give them an additional tool to use tolerent and IMHO would add a lot to their playstyle. A pity the development phase is over because tolerant could have been made a lot of more interesting.

 

[someone67]

At the moment there are people who like tolerant because it is a fun mechanic and others who don't because they think it has been given to the wrong civ. I can see a way to make bot factions happy: Add a new Elohim leader, without tolerant! There already is a leader in game who could be used for that purpose: Thessalonica. In addition to her current traits, she could be given spirritual. I know that she is designed to be a minor leader and therefor not to be as strong as a normal leader to not make the "Return of Winter" scenario to hard. But I don't think this would make the scenario either much harder or actually unwinable.

Easier culture flips would give them an additional tool to use tolerent and IMHO would add a lot to their playstyle. A pity the development phase is over because tolerant could have been made a lot of more interesting.

I don't see this as a new feature, but a bug. Right now, nearly the only way to culture flip anything is to sacrefice a great bard for a zero culture city.

 

[Breez]

I guess the way I viewed the Pacifist's getting this trait is

Tolerant is a powerful ability. It is balanced by their Pacifism. Giving tolerant to a war monger civ exponentially increases their power.

 

[Monkeyfinger]

Culture flipping felt balanced around low/mid levels in vanilla and the exact mechanics were ported over to FfH, where conventional wisdom is that you need to turn up the level unless you were already playing on the ones where you couldn't culture flip anything in BtS.