Abigail Should Require a Sacrifice

[Wendy C.]

It's ONE SINGLE RABBIT, people. 
You're acting like I'm forcing you to kill Toadstool.

[Terra B Welch]

1 minute ago, TemporaryMan said:

I disagree about the limited selection of animals and must-be-inventory-murder part though.  It never mattered if the sacrifice was innocent before -- or whether it had any literal blood for the blood sacrifice.  A life is a life.

Now here's a point I can at least agree with, having to specifically hunt for one of three mobs is what can play a major part in the tedium of this suggestion. Abigail even before never needed a specific blood sacrifice, and as I said, making abigail require one of those three mobs is like forcing wortox to only kill a specific set of mobs for souls.

[Wendy C.]

2 minutes ago, TemporaryMan said:

I disagree about the limited selection of animals and must-be-inventory-murder part though.  It never mattered if the sacrifice was innocent before -- or whether it had any literal blood for the blood sacrifice.  A life is a life.

No, a life is not a life. 
Telling you to capture a small, helpless rabbit, and crush its skull with your hands to harvest its blood is completely different from swatting a butterfly. 

[TemporaryMan]

2 minutes ago, Wendy C. said:

No, a life is not a life. 
Telling you to capture a small, helpless rabbit, and crush its skull with your hands to harvest its blood is completely different from swatting a butterfly. 

Krampus disagrees.

[Wendy C.]

Just now, Duck986 said:

it's not about mob's size/difficulty to kill/type, it's about catching and killing an animal every time you want a second hand in battle.

EXCEPT IT'S NOT. READ THE POST. 

I have literally specified, in the original post, that you only need to do the sacrifice ONCE. Read that back, O. N. C. E. 
After that, you ONLY need to do the sacrifice if she is DEFEATED. HEALTH REDUCED TO ZERO. 
This means, that after the sacrifice, YOU CAN SUMMON AND UNSUMMON AS MUCH AS YOU WANT, AS LONG AS HER HEALTH WAS NOT REDUCED TO ZERO. 

[Frashaw27]

14 minutes ago, Wendy C. said:

Yes, this is exactly what I'm saying. It doesn't actually change her gameplay because you only need to do the sacrifice when she DIES. 
And summoning her immediately after death is already a waste of time, since she's starting at 1 health point. 
So being forced to wait, what *30 SECONDS* before reviving her isn't a big deal, especially considering you likely would have done that already. 

Oh boy, can't wait to dead stop my caves trip because Abby died because she looked at the bunneymen funny. The reason why it's a bad idea is because the moment you lose Abby is one where you then have to either drop everything to go grab revive her, or be forced to deal with a downside that then has no counter acting upside. It is only compounded in somewhere like the lunar islands or the caves where the animals you listed are either highly limited, or straight up just don't exist. By adding that restriction, you only add an annoying blockade in an already annoying mechanic.

[Wendy C.]

Just now, Frashaw27 said:

Oh boy, can't wait to dead stop my caves trip because Abby died because she looked at the bunneymen funny. The reason why it's a bad idea is because the moment you lose Abby is one where you then have to either drop everything to go grab revive her, or be forced to deal with a downside that then has no counter acting downside. It is only compounded in somewhere like the lunar islands or the caves where the animals you listed are either highly limited, or straight up just don't exist. By adding that restriction, you only add an annoying blockade in an already annoying mechanic.

When a PLAYER dies, you are equally expected to drop what you're doing to find the materials needed to help and/or revive them. 
Abigail is Wendy's twin sister, and she would not hesitate to drop absolutely everything and go find a rabbit. 

[Electroely]

3 minutes ago, Wendy C. said:

EXCEPT IT'S NOT. READ THE POST. 

I have literally specified, in the original post, that you only need to do the sacrifice ONCE. Read that back, O. N. C. E. 
After that, you ONLY need to do the sacrifice if she is DEFEATED. HEALTH REDUCED TO ZERO. 
This means, that after the sacrifice, YOU CAN SUMMON AND UNSUMMON AS MUCH AS YOU WANT, AS LONG AS HER HEALTH WAS NOT REDUCED TO ZERO. 

I still think Wendy is better off not requiring a sacrifice. It's just an extra inconvenience that the game has been better without since it was removed.

Just now, Wendy C. said:

When a PLAYER dies, you are equally expected to drop what you're doing to find the materials needed to help and/or revive them. 
Abigail is Wendy's twin sister, and she would not hesitate to drop absolutely everything and go find a rabbit. 

When a player dies, they go to a touchstone or a life giving amulet and come back for their stuff. No input required from other players unless they have an amulet to share to speed things up.

[TemporaryMan]

1 minute ago, Wendy C. said:

rabbit

I understand that it's more macabre to sacrifice some innocent animal like a rabbit or bird.  I get it.  But the game has never specifically required that.  My experience with the old method was usually that I had to get by a couple days without Abi and then just as the flower was ready for summoning the dogs would arrive; I usually summoned Abigail by killing the first hound myself.  Or a spider.  Or if I was really unlucky, Deerclops.

[Wendy C.]

Just now, TemporaryMan said:

I understand that it's more macabre to sacrifice some innocent animal like a rabbit or bird.  I get it.  But the game has never specifically required that.  My experience with the old method was usually that I had to get by a couple days without Abi and then just as the flower was ready for summoning the dogs would arrive; I usually summoned Abigail by killing the first hound myself.  Or a spider.  Or if I was really unlucky, Deerclops.

And yet you listed things that are significantly more difficult to kill than just using 6 grass and placing it on the ground. 

I never could have imagined that people would be so terribly against the idea that they have to spend 10 to 15 seconds grabbing one of the easiest animals in the game. 
It's ******* SIX GRASS for crying out loud. You can often get a single rabbit, before your first piece of FLINT.
But no, it's too much work, it's too tedious, it's not worth it, etc, etc, etc. 

For a game that advertises itself as *uncompromising*, it's fans sure seem to want everything handed to them for free. 

[Mysterious box]

1 hour ago, Terra B Welch said:

Ugh... Is this another "Nerf Wendy" thread?

I'm honestly getting sick of these, no I do not want some added tedium just to summon abigail, all this would do is force the player to clutter their inventory with critters like rabbits or birds and not actually add any real difficulty.

No thank you.

I mean techincally you could use a stack of bees since those are innocent too.

Hold up I just thought about it why aren't fish innocent what did they do wrong florp...

[Dextops]

1 minute ago, Mysterious box said:

Hold up I just thought about it why aren't fish innocent what did they do wrong florp...

you don't wanna know

[Mysterious box]

35 minutes ago, Electroely said:

I still think Wendy is better off not requiring a sacrifice. It's just an extra inconvenience that the game has been better without since it was removed.

When a player dies, they go to a touchstone or a life giving amulet and come back for their stuff. No input required from other players unless they have an amulet to share to speed things up.

Again to be fair that's still a cost for revival even if it's not necessarily from the player I mean imagine if Maxwell had a set limit of 4 shadow workers/duelist but they never cost any resources to summon nightmare fuel or sanity. It's not game breaking but balance wise it's stupid that's where Abigail is at now not that it matters much anymore.  

[Echsrick]

so it sounds like the others dont want an downside or more balance? like literaly actualy taken care of her sister? instead of just havin her 24/7 out in angry mode and destroy everything so they dont have to take any care at all and even if abigal dies they can just get her back instand thats what i get people dont want to deal whit an consequences if abigal dies and have to work for her revival even if that work is minimal they just dont it seems they just want to have her out all the times actualy more thinkin it makes sense to do some work for the revival like how else would it work? alsol by that by doin so wendy has to help her sister out too by actual givin something physical and blood just seems to be a logical way to revive something alsol its not just abigal that protects wendy wendy in a way alsol protects abigal and what better way to do it then actualy taken care to be carefull and not just be regless so the acident from before times dont happen again? seems only logical to me to be more carefull whit her sister

[Terra B Welch]

49 minutes ago, Mysterious box said:

I mean techincally you could use a stack of bees since those are innocent too.

Hold up I just thought about it why aren't fish innocent what did they do wrong florp...

I already mentioned the bees, read their info on the nerf.

[Mysterious box]

1 minute ago, Terra B Welch said:

I already mentioned the bees, read their info on the nerf.

Yea I noticed afterwards and made a comment on my phone but i guess it didn't go thru ah well. I do agree if they brought it back it should still count towards all mobs with a soul.

[ImDaMisterL]

Hey everyone, just a friendly reminder to be respectful and mindful when commenting, thank you

Have a great weekend!

[Wendy C.]

8 minutes ago, Dr.Medic said:

so it sounds like the others dont want an downside or more balance? like literaly actualy taken care of her sister? instead of just havin her 24/7 out in angry mode and destroy everything so they dont have to take any care at all and even if abigal dies they can just get her back instand thats what i get people dont want to deal whit an consequences if abigal dies and have to work for her revival even if that work is minimal they just dont it seems they just want to have her out all the times actualy more thinkin it makes sense to do some work for the revival like how else would it work? alsol by that by doin so wendy has to help her sister out too by actual givin something physical and blood just seems to be a logical way to revive something alsol its not just abigal that protects wendy wendy in a way alsol protects abigal and what better way to do it then actualy taken care to be carefull and not just be regless so the acident from before times dont happen again? seems only logical to me to be more carefull whit her sister

You seem to be the only person here who actually understands what the point of my suggestion is meant to achieve. 
 

[Terra B Welch]

23 minutes ago, Mysterious box said:

Yea I noticed afterwards and made a comment on my phone but i guess it didn't go thru ah well. I do agree if they brought it back it should still count towards all mobs with a soul.

To be honest, my main issue is the whole "rabbit, moleworm or bird only" thing. Even pre-rework Wendy didn't have to waste time running across the map to the nearest rabbit area, desperately look for moleworms or sit and wait for a bird just to summon Abigail, you just threw down the flower and killed something, it was simple.

If that was still the case for this suggestion, then I'd feel it wouldn't be as bad, having to go for specific critters and kill them a specific way I feel just adds tedium.

Also my Wortox example still stands methinks.

[Guille6785]

37 minutes ago, Dr.Medic said:

so it sounds like the others dont want an downside or more balance?

can we not turn this into "wendy op klei pls nerf" thread #59106

[Wendy C.]

3 minutes ago, Terra B Welch said:

To be honest, my main issue is the whole "rabbit, moleworm or bird only" thing. Even pre-rework Wendy didn't have to waste time running across the map to the nearest rabbit area, desperately look for moleworms or sit and wait for a bird just to summon Abigail, you just threw down the flower and killed something, it was simple.

If that was still the case for this suggestion, then I'd feel it wouldn't be as bad, having to go for specific critters and kill them a specific way I feel just adds tedium.

Also my Wortox example still stands methinks.

The reason why I was so specific is because it's truer to how actual magic works (or *would* work, depending on your opinion of magic). 
The sacrifice requires the blood of an innocent creature, because you are exchanging the life of the animal for the life of your sister. 
It's a cost, a payment. 
A BUTTERFLY, the weakest, most pathetic, and most killable thing in existence is not worth the immortal spirit of a human girl. It's just not. 
And killing things like hounds is likewise, not conductive. It shouldn't require the tainted, poisonous blood of a pure-evil savage. 
I was specific because butterflies and bees is too easy, and hounds and spiders are too evil. 

[Terra B Welch]

1 minute ago, Grim the said:

Imagine if you needed rabits for prestihatitators. Crazy, right?

Imagine if Wortox needed to kill soely rabbits for souls.

[Mysterious box]

18 minutes ago, Wendy C. said:

The reason why I was so specific is because it's truer to how actual magic works (or *would* work, depending on your opinion of magic). 
The sacrifice requires the blood of an innocent creature, because you are exchanging the life of the animal for the life of your sister. 
It's a cost, a payment. 
A BUTTERFLY, the weakest, most pathetic, and most killable thing in existence is not worth the immortal spirit of a human girl. It's just not. 
And killing things like hounds is likewise, not conductive. It shouldn't require the tainted, poisonous blood of a pure-evil savage. 
I was specific because butterflies and bees is too easy, and hounds and spiders are too evil. 

Even with that reasoning butterflies in the constant while weak are one of the most mysterious creatures by nature if anything they work even better as sacrifice going by the rules of magic. But even if that weren't the case they have an effect and the strength of a creature doesn't isn't equal to it's potential.

[Grim the]

While I can't say I agree with it being an innocent creature, I will agree that a cost to initially summon Abigail would be fair, or at least when she dies. Why?

Maxwell's minions take 2 nightmare fuel each to re-summon when they die.

Bernie takes a sewing kit

With spiders, you have to find a new spider, and then feed it meat, and if switched, make another doodle.
 

It's only fair Abigail has a cost too.

Also-

Wanna know why butterflies won't work? They're plants. They may have souls, but they don't have blood.

Also, bees IRL Do Not have blood. They may be alive, but there is not blood in them.

[Terra B Welch]

4 minutes ago, Grim the said:

While I can't say I agree with it being an innocent creature, I will agree that a cost to initially summon Abigail would be fair, or at least when she dies. Why?

Maxwell's minions take 2 nightmare fuel each to re-summon when they die.

Bernie takes a sewing kit

With spiders, you have to find a new spider, and then feed it meat, and if switched, make another doodle.
 

It's only fair Abigail has a cost too.

Also-

Wanna know why butterflies won't work? They're plants. They may have souls, but they don't have blood.

Also, bees IRL Do Not have blood. They may be alive, but there is not blood in them.

I think you're failing to see my point.

If you've read some of my more frequent posts, I mentioned that specifically requiring one of three critters to summon her is what i cannot agree with. What if Webber could only befriend spiders with live animals? Imagine going out of your way to get the critters you need every time you needed more spiders, that's how I feel about that restriction.

Imagine having to exclusively kill a set of critters every time you needed souls as Wortox.

I don't feel it would make her any harder to play, it would just add some pointless layer of tedium.

If the sacrifice requirement were ever implemented, it would be better implemented like how it was pre-rework, kill something, get Abigail, there'd be a cost of having to kill without abigail to assist, just to have her at your side again.