Messages

Hm...I think people think I'm talking about something else.

Craig, it's true that people act differently depending on moods or situations, but isn't it also true that they tend to have a "default" state that they are most of the time? That's what the article is trying to say, I think. Thanks for the book recommendation.

@ Ertxiem: According to the article, there aren't any "pure" temperaments -- everyone has a primary and a secondary. I'm Melancholic/Phlegmatic, or at least I think so. And yes, the page isn't finished, but it is very close. (The only thing the author still needs to do is the Sanguine blends) That page has actually gone through quite a few renovations as the author learned more about the temperaments.

If you're confused about what you are, that's okay. Most people are; you have to be very good at introspection. Try to keep in mind the general explanation things, like the introduction and "General Misconceptions" section. If you're Melancholic/Sanguine or Choleric/Phlegmatic, you might feel like "all" or "none" of the temperaments apply to you, due to being a blend of opposites and therefore well-rounded.

[That being said, I think the "Temperaments" setup is a bit too... unrefined. Its just taking a few broad categories and saying they exist and how they can be combined to explain each other.]

Saying you're not perfect is no defense against criticism.

It is when your argument is that it claims to or should be perfect:

There have been dozens of different attempts at categorizing personality. I prefer the Myers-Briggs typology. Of course with the handful of concrete knowledge we have on human thought and personality, none of them are going to be as accurate as you might like. That being said, I think the "Temperaments" setup is a bit too... unrefined. Its just taking a few broad categories and saying they exist and how they can be combined to explain each other. It doesn't really use any true scientific reasoning. Just a kind of, "Hey have you guys noticed" approach that has evolved over hundreds of years. That's not to say that broad observation isn't a useful tool in evolving a theory.

Your argument was that it wasn't perfect. My response was that of course it isn't; otherwise there would be millions or possibly billions of different temperaments, since everyone has a unique personality. The reason I thought you hadn't read the article is because it says it very clearly in the introduction and "general misconceptions" section.

I'm sorry if I sound angry or rude, but I've seen similar criticisms against the temperaments that the article tries to address, and I just wanted to clear that up, since so many people seem to instantly dismiss them.

Honestly, I feel like the best way to understand the temperaments (or any horoscope-type thing) is to see how it applies to real life. Seeing what you'd read, I'd encourage you to try and recognize it in people you know, or in media characters. (Set, for example, is Phlegmatic/Melancholic -- very submissive, peaceful, kind, and meek. If you read the Phlegmatic/Melancholic blurb I think you'll see that it fits. And Rahel, for example, seems to be Choleric/Melancholic -- dominant, stubborn, hard to get along with, analytical, and rational)

It's all your decision in the end, though, so if you really think that the temperaments are hogwash, then whatever, I won't try to convince you. I'm not very good at that anyway.

(Are people reading the entire article...?)

Of course they apply in broad strokes...that's exactly what the article says, multiple times. And yes, "introverted" and "extraverted" are very important defining personality traits. I wasn't trying to "dismiss" them, simply saying that they are traits that fall under that category. Such traits are actually very important defining qualities of the Melancholic and Sanguine temperaments.

As the introduction says, temperaments won't describe you completely. Being Choleric/Phlegmatic doesn't mean you're exactly like every other Choleric/Phlegmatic. Even if it can't describe you completely, they can be observed in real life.

Please read the article before making an argument like that...it explains a lot of general things about the temperaments, such as general misconceptions, why they're different from horoscopes and things, etc. It does, in fact, notice that everyone is a "blend" of two temperaments, which allows for a bit more precision, since that makes twelve categories instead of four.

While I understand what you're saying, the article does address such things. I'd encourage you to try and find them in people you know, like your friends and family. You'll probably be able to see how they apply to real life better that way.

The four temperaments are "personality types", like horoscopes or star signs, only actually accurate. Horoscopes are inaccurate because they rely on external variables, such as "if you were born on this day when the stars were in this alignment, your personality is this!", which is silly. Temperaments are more like "if your personality is this, then you can be described by this category". They are not labels or things that circumscribe you, simply handy descriptions. Instead of having to say "introverted, pessimistic, emotional, moved by beauty, cares for order" and so on, you can just say "Melancholic".

A very, very useful and extensive article about them can be found here. Tell me what you think -- what temperaments do you think you are? What temperaments do you think the characters from TRPG are? Do you think the temperaments are complete hogwash? Please tell me what you think.

Ah, that's good. So basically, fire has a smaller range, but deals more damage. (Technically, that actually makes less sense seeing that fire spreads so easily, but whatever) I hope that he balances Shadow next...

By the way, has Craig said anything about adding elemental weaknesses? Right now, using elemental attacks is essentially a disadvantage, since the only enemy modifiers are immunity and resistance.

I played it a little, but I didn't understand how to progress past the...third floor, I believe. I presume that it has something to do with using cards on the statues, but I tried interacting with them, and I couldn't seem to do anything.

Edit: Ah, nevermind. Figured out that there was a "use equipped soul" button. Finished it, and it seemed like none of the opponents ever attack you -- you can just keep hitting "end turn" to build up power and nothing happens. And is there any way to change the ending?

By the way, what are peoples' stances on including Servants of God? Since it's incomplete, I was thinking of leaving it out for now, since future additions may have the potential to require a complete revamp of the page, but it has a lot of unique tropes already, so we could go that route if people want to. Please post and state your opinion, everyone.

Edit: Also, if anyone wants to make an "It Just Bugs Me" page, (information about them can be found at http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ItJustBugsMe) all you have to do is replace the "Main" in the address with "JustBugsMe". Just make sure to index it properly.

I too chose Shadow, both in-game and because it suits me. One of the most common definitions of wisdom involve learning from past mistakes in one form or another, though I also lean towards rationality as well.

(By the way, if anyone's interested in personality traits and things, www.fighunter.com/?page=temperaments is an interesting article in that vein)

Technically, or at least hopefully, all the affinities should be balanced. They're all useful in different situations. Neither should be "stronger" or "weaker" than another. Cyro Cross can potentially deal the most damage out of the four area-effect spells, but you need to be in the center of an enemy formation to get the most out of it, since it centers on the Hero, as opposed to being able to blast things from afar, like with the other elemental skills. Pyro Hail has the smallest area-of-effect, but also the lowest cost, etc. While it's true that they may end up unbalanced, it's still possible to run into something that's resistant to that element, in which case its usefulness diminishes greatly.

With that in mind, I do admit that Shadow skills dealing less damage does bug me and does seem to make things a bit unbalanced.

What would be interesting is if other characters had affinities of their own; that way you'd be prepared for multiple situations, instead of the main character being the only one with elemental skills.