"The Hand of Trag-Oul"

[Nicodemus Phaulkon]

A short question; undoubtedly more appropriate for the RBD forums, but I don't frequent there.

For your "Hand of Trag-Oul" variant; was the idea of "Trag-Oul" as a Bone Dragon/Dracolich your own invention, or did the idea actually originate elsewhere in the D2 mythology?

With your incorporation of the name, set and role so successfully into the D2x Necromancer character, not to mention the appropriation of the Cleglaw's set as well, I was leaning towards this being a corporate think-tank result. However, if this was truly sprung from your own imagination, you have my admiration for your breadth of scope on this variant (which is not to take away from your plethora of other variants). ;)

*tips helm*

[Roland]

Or, the Arreat Summit.

Teeth:
One of the first gifts of Rathma, this skill allows the Necromancer to summon forth the Den'Trag, or Teeth of the Dragon Trag'Oul. The Necromancers believe that Trag'Oul is the beast on whose back the world lies. In the balance of all things, it is thought that Trag'Oul is the fulcrum point. He is the closest thing the cult of Rathma has to a deity and this spell is the manner in which he protects his chosen.

Bone Spear:
Also known as the Talon of Trag'Oul, this spell summons a long shaft of bone issuing forth from the caster and piercing any opponents in its path. Since the force of this projectile is mystical as well as physical it can pass through one opponent and carry on to the next, rending and tearing through whatever is in its path.

Trag'Oul is the closest thing to a God that the Necromancers, who are also known as the Priests of Rathma, have. The mythology surrounding him is that he is the Dragon upon whose back the world lies, as you can read from the description of the Teeth skill. I an unsure if there is a bit more history to be found about him, but if memory serves they don't go into any more detail than that.

Blizzard is VERY good at detailing backhistory, stories, et al for their games. You should read the manuals for them. They are good reading material in their own right, even if their use for the game is hardly notable.

[Nicodemus Phaulkon]

Completely forgot about that. I did check back into the manual to review the write up on the Necromancer class itself, but I didn't think to check on the details of any of the actual skills. :huh:

Thanks, Roland.

*tips helm*

[Roland]

I just happened to have known the answer, because (as with all Blizzard games) I love reading the manuals, particularly for backstory, etc. I do it with any manual, actually. It's the only thing I bother reading manuals for: the story. :)

Plus, I had just recently dug up my old D1 / D2 / LoD manuals for a quick spin through. :) So, aside from it being virtually committed to memory ANYWAY, it was just recently refreshed. :) So it was an easy answer for me. ;)

Take care.

[NiteFox]

Blizzard is VERY good at detailing backhistory, stories, et al for their games. You should read the manuals for them. They are good reading material in their own right, even if their use for the game is hardly notable.

Of course, you will have to add idiots such as GFraizier into the equation...

"Trang-Oul's" is the proper name for this set despite what the manual might say or other spellings you might have seen.

*Cough*

[TaiDaishar]

Of course, you will have to add idiots such as GFraizier into the equation...

Why the hell you all loathe GFrazier with such a passion?

[Archon_Wing]

because he is self-righteous and annoying. :)

[CelticHound]

Why the hell you all loathe GFrazier with such a passion?

Can't speak for others, but I don't loathe him. I do find him exasperating - in fact he exacerbates my exasperation. ( :o miracle if I spelled that right)

He has a gift for making public posts that simultaneously make me want to applaud him and wring his neck.

In a way, I can understand it. At my previous job, I had a friend named Ray who did tech support. After having to spend the day being patient with customers - some of whom were appalling stupid - he needed to take it out on someone. Given that Geoff deals with the usual b.net crowd, and that primal scream therapy doesn't work well over the 'net, I can see why he sports the 'tude he does.

But I still don't like it when he sports it at me.

-- CH

[TaiDaishar]

I've yet to see Geoff being such an asshole as you describe... only thing that makes me mad about him is all his posts concerning patch 1.1 with the "you'll see" sentences which make incredibly mad... :)

[CelticHound]

He's never been exactly that way to me - and I didn't say that about him, anyway - though we've had an exchange or two where the phrase "just messin' wit' ya" would fit right in. Here's an example of what I meant (quoted from a post on the b.net forums):

1.10 is a lot of work as it's the biggest patch in terms of changes (not file size) ever released by Blizzard (except for beta patches). It's practically an expansion with all of the changes.

There are 100+ new items. There is a new character template (ladder), and many more things. If all the changes were listed line by line it would be 25-50+ pages. This requires time to test all this stuff and keep in mind there's lots of other stuff to work on such as Warcraft III: The Fronze Throne, StarCraft Ghost, and World of Warcraft.

If Blizzard didn't care about Diablo II they wouldn't continue to fix hacks/cheats (do it all the time without announcement), they wouldn't be planning on addressing hacked items, they wouldn't spend any time working on the realms or have the free realms (they cost $$), they wouldn't be working on 1.10.

I believe the context was explaining why 1.10 was taking so long. (I hear people ask about this occasionally. :) )

No problem with the first two paragraphs. And I understand the various reasons why the patch is taking so long. (Aside from resource issues, if this may well be the final patch to D2, wouldn't you want to take the time to nail it?)

That's the applaud part. The third paragraph is pure strangle. He's trying to make it sound like Blizzard is doing all this just as a favor to the fans, but I can justify every single phrase from a business perspective.

- Fixing hacks/cheats & addressing hacked items: If they are going to be selling an MMORPG, having a rep for being hacked is bad for business. Think Credibility.

- Free realms: That was a conscious decision on the part of their marketing depatment to sell more copies of the game. (Maintaining realms goes with credibility for the MMORPG.)

- That leaves working on 1.10. I could lump this in with the credibilty argument, but that would be weak. So allow me to indulge in a fantasy...

Imagine that Blizzard is a software company. In that case, I'll claim they have two major assets: their trademarks & codebase, and their development staff. The first represents what they've done in the past; the second is what will allow them to execute in the future. Next, imagine that the dev staff is a dedicated group of gamers who like to do good work. Putting out this patch to keep the staff happy is perfectly sensible from a business perspective. (Turnover is expensive. Low morale == low productivity is expensive.)

Add to that the notion that releasing this patch creates good will from gamers, and it seems to me that 1.10 makes perfect sense. (Plus it keeps the buzz going and helps sell more copies of D2 - it's still on the shelves, you know.)

-- CH
(plagiarizing from myself.)

(edit: spelling & minor phrasing changes)

[TaiDaishar]

Hmm... by your reasons why do they not adress the hacks solely? I bet that adressing only these issues would've taken a lot less time and man-power...

Blizzard is a company, it needs money to stand but don't think what they is all for the money... A LOT of things they've done in the past shows they are more than that, they're gamers as well (as they always say) and they want to make their games perfect for their fans and of course, for themselves.