BUT spell

s4t8brett
Level 2 Dungeoneer
Level 2 Dungeoneer
Posts: 113
Joined: 23 Dec 2015, 11:04

Re: BUT spell

Post by s4t8brett »

TRANSFORMATION: Here are two more ideas: 1) Helen into Malice, then disspell after Mogdred has left the chamber... or 2) transforming a dead-end into the end-of-quest chamber (or revealing the Corridor of Blades in an otherwise empty chamber)...
User avatar
JamesA
Fright Knight
Fright Knight
Posts: 1572
Joined: 25 Jul 2004, 10:33
Location: London

Re: BUT spell

Post by JamesA »

Just to add my thoughts to this discussion...

I've always believed that the casting of the BUT spell would turn Mogdred's magic sword against him, with the sword then heading in his direction instead of Helen's. Once he had been hit by his own weapon, Mogdred would have made a retreat, causing himself and the sword to disappear.

As for the TRANSFORMATION spell, already mentioned elsewhere in this thread but I agree that it would have been used to reverse the effects of a poison bottle later on in the level (as it eventually would do in Dickon's quest).
James Aukett
Creator of the Knightmare: 25th Anniversary Documentary
User avatar
JamesA
Fright Knight
Fright Knight
Posts: 1572
Joined: 25 Jul 2004, 10:33
Location: London

Re: BUT spell

Post by JamesA »

JamesA wrote: 21 Apr 2021, 21:44 As for the TRANSFORMATION spell, already mentioned elsewhere in this thread but I agree that it would have been used to reverse the effects of a poison bottle later on in the level (as it eventually would do in Dickon's quest).
Forgot to add that in Dickon's quest, the spell used to transform the poison into a life force restorer was as we all indeed know, OPPOSITE (for some reason I can't edit my above post, hence this addition).
James Aukett
Creator of the Knightmare: 25th Anniversary Documentary
Drassil
Senior Staff
Senior Staff
Posts: 2445
Joined: 30 Sep 2003, 16:01

Re: BUT and TRANSFORMATION spells

Post by Drassil »

Thank you for the positive comments about my previous post in this thread.

Personally I struggle with the idea that BUT would have influenced Mogdred's actions directly. It's a lot to ask of a "quite humble" spell, against a foe who can be even more powerful than Merlin on Level 3 (according to Merlin himself in Quest 8). It also doesn't account for the floating sword: newly designed and animated for Series 4, it must have had some intended purpose i.e. I believe the team would have had to do something against it.
Morghanna wrote: 04 Apr 2021, 19:58 :idea: It seems highly unlikely that this scene with Mogdred was intended to be the final encounter.
That's an interesting idea. After all, Malice met Dickon (Quest 6) twice, not counting the bridge.

On the other hand, Mogdred's words suggest to me that it is highly likely to have been Helen's final encounter with him: "There is no escape this time ... I shall now put an end to [your progress] in person. Prepare to receive the doom of Mogdred." Malice, by contrast, is far from threatening when she first confronts Dickon.

And when Malice does meet Dickon for the final encounter, his "most powerful" and "quite humble" spells are both needed, one after the other, in that room. I'm inclined to think that the same would have been true for Helen.
Knightmare: Kid-worthy, Naasty, Inspiring, Groundbreaking, Humorous, Treguard, Mesmerising, Adult-worthy, Rewarding, Essential.
User avatar
Morghanna
Level 2 Dungeoneer
Level 2 Dungeoneer
Posts: 180
Joined: 13 Apr 2020, 16:37
Location: Kent
Contact:

Re: BUT spell

Post by Morghanna »

Sorry. What i meant was that i didn't think this scene with Mogdred would have been the final encounter (the last room) of their quest.
Mogdred might not have returned during their quest, but presumably there were still other challenges ahead.
"I think it's about time you got wise to the ways of real magic. The kind that is borne on the dark side." >:D
AriadnesLayer
Level 2 Dungeoneer
Level 2 Dungeoneer
Posts: 146
Joined: 16 Aug 2007, 00:07
Location: Glasgow

Re: BUT and TRANSFORMATION spells

Post by AriadnesLayer »

Drassil wrote: 02 Apr 2021, 15:18 After all his highly threatening remarks to Helen about ending her quest, personally I can't see anything moving Mogdred to be deliberately charitable,
The.... the spell.... ???

The whole point of being under a spell is that you're.... under a spell. Your actions aren't deliberate.
s4t8brett
Level 2 Dungeoneer
Level 2 Dungeoneer
Posts: 113
Joined: 23 Dec 2015, 11:04

Re: BUT spell

Post by s4t8brett »

I agree with Ariadne's Layer on that: but exactly what Mogdred might have said is hard to predict. The thing is, there are so many things Tim could have written for Mogdred to say in providing a way out; we won't know unless he tells us, and I think we're unlikely to guess it.
Drassil
Senior Staff
Senior Staff
Posts: 2445
Joined: 30 Sep 2003, 16:01

Re: BUT and TRANSFORMATION spells

Post by Drassil »

Drassil wrote: 02 Apr 2021, 15:18 After all his highly threatening remarks to Helen about ending her quest, personally I can't see anything moving Mogdred to be deliberately charitable,
The.... the spell.... ???

The whole point of being under a spell is that you're.... under a spell. Your actions aren't deliberate.
I'm aware that a few Knightmare spells enchanted characters and made them less adversarial, such as CREEP (Smirkenorff), ADORE (Fatilla) and PICKMEUP (the Knightmare VR gargoyle). How susceptible a more powerful, magical character such as Mogdred, Morghanna or Lord Fear could have been to such a spell is a matter of opinion.

Had I originally written -

After all his highly threatening remarks to Helen about ending her quest, personally I can't see anything moving Mogdred to be charitable, especially in the final stages. But we'll probably never know.

- without the word 'deliberately', my point would have been the same.

I used the word 'personally' to acknowledge that this is only how I see it and that others will see it differently.

It's not my intention to post things in a confusing way. If you found my comment unclear, you could have said, "I don't think what you've said makes sense" and I'd gladly have clarified. The fact that you chose instead to be so elaborate and emphatic - bold, and pauses for effect, and a negative emoji, and italics, and underlining - is very disappointing and came across as rude. I wouldn't want to see any member of this forum replied to like that.
Knightmare: Kid-worthy, Naasty, Inspiring, Groundbreaking, Humorous, Treguard, Mesmerising, Adult-worthy, Rewarding, Essential.
AriadnesLayer
Level 2 Dungeoneer
Level 2 Dungeoneer
Posts: 146
Joined: 16 Aug 2007, 00:07
Location: Glasgow

Re: BUT and TRANSFORMATION spells

Post by AriadnesLayer »

Drassil wrote: 02 Oct 2021, 16:06 How susceptible a more powerful, magical character such as Mogdred, Morghanna or Lord Fear could have been to such a spell is a matter of opinion.
I think it was just a matter of the show's creators doing whatever they felt was good TV; I don't think they took a poll on viewer opinions before deciding if magical characters could and should be susceptible to certain spells. I mean, had another quest not been successful and we never saw what the "SPLASH" spell did, you could easily be saying here "I don't think a character like Lord Fear would be susceptible to such a silly sounding spell". But we know that he was.

You have no idea if Mogdred would or wouldn't be susceptible to any spell we didn't see used, and nor do I, and I highly doubt the makers were worried about things like "Oh we shouldn't do this, Mogdred is too powerful." But rather "What effects can we do with the budget we have?"
It's not my intention to post things in a confusing way. If you found my comment unclear, you could have said, "I don't think what you've said makes sense" and I'd gladly have clarified. The fact that you chose instead to be so elaborate and emphatic - bold, and pauses for effect, and a negative emoji, and italics, and underlining - is very disappointing and came across as rude. I wouldn't want to see any member of this forum replied to like that.
If you have a problem with the way I choose to use italics, underlines, and emoticons to convey expression, emphasis and emotion (which I have spent 20 odd years believing was their very function on forums like this where simple text can be hard to intepret, and none of which was intended to be negative), then I would appreciate if you'd send me a private message about it where it can be discussed civily rather than give me a public flogging. It's not my intention to be unclear. If you found my use of those things confusing, you could have said "I don't understand why you've worded your post like that" and I'd gladly have clarified. Simply deciding off the bat that I was being rude, is very disappointing, and as a member of this forum I did not like being replied to like that.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest