Walking Corpses != zombies

Post by **irrevenant** » December 24th, 2006, 1:44 am

I recall a strong disinclination on these forums to refer to Walking Corpses as "zombies". But I just noticed the following dialogue in HttT Scenario 4a:

"Soon we shall have elven zombies serving us!"

P.S. Apologies if this is the wrong forum. If so, which is the right one!?

Post by **Ken_Oh** » December 24th, 2006, 5:38 am

I think Walking Corpses are zombies but zombies might not necissarily be a Walking Corpses.

Krispos · Post by **Krispos** » December 24th, 2006, 6:11 am

True dat, true dat.
(Sorry, couldn't resist

)

mrchadt · Post by **mrchadt** » December 24th, 2006, 9:48 am

Here is a clip on youtube which states what a zombie is. Frankensteins monster was also a type of zombie. I think Alan Partridge says it better, see.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJizBpKdJsc

Oreb · Post by **Oreb** » December 24th, 2006, 10:01 am

Well WC's and Zombie's seem quite similar, they both are the living dead, and they both have a plague effect. I don't see a difference between them both.

Post by **Noyga** » December 24th, 2006, 11:23 am

For me the Walking corpse is a particular type of zombie (Soulless is the other one).
So a walking corpse is a zombie, but a zombie is not necessarily a walking corpse.

Post by **Darth Fool** » December 24th, 2006, 2:36 pm

irrevenant wrote:I recall a strong disinclination on these forums to refer to Walking Corpses as "zombies". But I just noticed the following dialogue in HttT Scenario 4a:

"Soon we shall have elven zombies serving us!"

P.S. Apologies if this is the wrong forum. If so, which is the right one!?

For what it is worth, the objection that you are remembering can at least be found here:

http://www.wesnoth.org/forum/viewtopic. ... 3177#13177

I personally don't care and think that calling them zombies is fine, but avoiding calling them zombies is also fine. The sentence could be changed to uses corpses instead of zombies and work equally well.

Gafgarion · Post by **Gafgarion** » December 24th, 2006, 9:50 pm

I, personally, feel that that said piece of dialogue works better when referring to them as zombies.

Just because Walking Corpse works better in a metagaming sense, doesn't mean that in-game dialogue between characters can't reflect the cultural or personal nuances of those characters.

Post by **Dave** » December 25th, 2006, 4:04 am

Gafgarion wrote: Just because Walking Corpse works better in a metagaming sense, doesn't mean that in-game dialogue between characters can't reflect the cultural or personal nuances of those characters.

I concur.....and very eloquently put!

David

Post by **Jetrel** » December 25th, 2006, 7:14 am

Darth Fool wrote:For what it is worth, the objection that you are remembering can at least be found here:

http://www.wesnoth.org/forum/viewtopic. ... 3177#13177

I personally don't care and think that calling them zombies is fine, but avoiding calling them zombies is also fine. The sentence could be changed to uses corpses instead of zombies and work equally well.

I always thought it was me that made some rag-out rant against that; which I found strange because I really don't care. (It was within the realm of possibility, because I do complain about minor etymological things like that.)

And it turns out it was francisco. Rofflez, plz.

Kamamura · Post by **Kamamura** » January 2nd, 2007, 9:39 am

I think that the term "Walking corpse" is still a bit more specific than the generic term "zombie".

In the fantasy lore, it seems that any living creature may be "zombified" via the use of necromancy. Undead pirates sure need such companions as zombie parrots, and there could be zombie vultures, eagles, and so on.

Though all these creatures are generally "zombies", they flap around more than walk (they are all undead birds, after all), so it would not be entirely precise to call them "Walking corpses". On the other hand, the term "flying corpse" could be also confusing, since it could mean various carcasses used as catapult ammunition in castle sieges - in other words, dead bodies propelled by other than their own (un|super)natural means.

I love discussions like this!

damagister · Post by **damagister** » January 3rd, 2007, 3:51 am

it depends if your referring to a folklore zombie or fantasy folklore speaks about someone being reanimated from the dead with no capability of thought and bound to serve his master by voodoo or you can take everyones favorite fantasy zombie being the rotting bodies animated by a necromancer to swarm down enemies and turn them into zombies.i can go on in description since i am an all time fan of hording zombies. but almost everyone sees zombie as a walking corpse so it doesn't really matter since ppl see them as one in the same

Post by **turin** » January 3rd, 2007, 11:18 pm

I don't like the word zombie.

Post by **zookeeper** » January 3rd, 2007, 11:27 pm

turin wrote:I don't like the word zombie.

I don't like the sound of that either, it brings all sorts of wrong connotations to my mind. I like the name "walking corpse" a whole lot better, as it's more unique and sounds almost a bit funny (which is a good thing in this case), while it seems to avoid some common zombie connotations a bit better.

Post by **Zhukov** » January 3rd, 2007, 11:42 pm

turin wrote:I don't like the word zombie.

Zombie makes me think of shotguns and cricket bats. Walking Corpse makes me think of swords and axes.
Thus, while I have nothing against the word zombie per se, I think walking corpse is better for Wesnoth.

Why are we talking about this again...

This is Zhukov's 2000th post. Congrats, old boy.

-Maeglin the Black

The Battle for Wesnoth Forums

Walking Corpses != zombies

Walking Corpses != zombies

Re: Walking Corpses != zombies

Re: Walking Corpses != zombies