View source for Template talk:Antidualnature

Well this is odd. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 20:48, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
:Care to be a little more specific? If you have suggestions for a better presentation then I am all ears. --{{User:Eagle of fire/signature}} 21:25, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
::Not the presentation, the stance. It's pretty silly. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 21:27, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
:::The Dual Nature stance is what is pretty silly. I can't actually believe there is so much support for it. It goes against everything I been trying to achieve and how we been playing the game since 2005. O_o --{{User:Eagle of fire/signature}} 21:29, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
::::Zombies play as zombies, survivors play as survivors? Yep, totally unusual. :/ {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 21:33, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
:::::You are describing the normal way of playing. Dual Players don't do that. It is the whole point of this template. --{{User:Eagle of fire/signature}} 21:43, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
:::::::Missed this one, oops. That is how dual nature works - when alive, play as a survivor. Doot-dee-doo, survivory stuff. Then, when a zombie, play as a zombie. Nam nam nam, zombie stuff. Revived? Survivor again. It's pretty flavoursome and very grokkable. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 22:25, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
::::::::Grokkable? (???) Anyways, you just described how ridiculous it is. If you can't stick to one side of the game then you deserve the template I just created. I.e.: being treated like a spy from both sides. Why DN players could not see this coming is way beyond me. It is only logical. --{{User:Eagle of fire/signature}} 22:38, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
:::::::::To grok: ''verb'', to understand innately and entirely. Also it's not ridiculous. It's competely flavoursome. When a survivor dies, they become a zombie. They don't become a dead survivor. Even if you want to completely remove the rest of the genre entirely (in which dual-natured play is 99.99999% par for the course), then you just have to look at how standing up as a zombie after dying gives you zombie play options. You can't barricade and install generators and pick up items as a zombie. You can eat and claw and ransack. Same goes in reverse - revived zombies can't ransack buildings or groan/bellow or infect survivors. They can free run and cade and search and all that other harman stuff. Dual nature just makes sense, it's pretty much the opposite of ridiculous. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 22:56, 18 November 2010 (UTC)  
::::::Just saying, it's in-genre and sensible - how many films feature a survivor dying and then continuing to actively help survivors? I can only really think of ''Day of the Dead'' (the original loosely, more strongly in the awful awful remake), whilst every other instance is more along the lines of "Oh hey Johnny's dead. Oh hey Johnny's now eating Jimmy." {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 21:57, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
:::::::I completely agree. However, this is not a Holywood movie but an internet browser game. There is not a lot of games, movies or about anything zombie in which you can come back from the death 378 times and still remains exactly the same either, isn't? Thus I simply can't adhere to the comparison. --{{User:Eagle of fire/signature}} 22:10, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
::::::::[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grok Read moar Heinlein]. As for zba!!ngh, my own Dual Nature alt is a trusted ally with two survivor groups when she's breathing. --{{User:Spiderzed/Sandbox/Sig}} 22:50, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
::::Zombies standing neatly queued in a cemetery and being careful not to rock the boat in the meantime is what is pretty silly. I goes against everything the zomie genre tries to achieve and how it has been running since 1968. Srsly, DN is for me the only way to play a harmanbargar without feeling utterly and ridiculously out of place. --{{User:Spiderzed/Sandbox/Sig}} 21:37, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
:::::I am not going to turn this talk page into a fan page discussion about people who like Dual Nature or not. The template should tell you pretty much what I think about DN and I don't feel the need to add to it. The [[Talk:Dual_Nature_Policy]] page is there for that. --{{User:Eagle of fire/signature}} 21:43, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
::::::This is a talk page that isn't restricted by being a group page/user page/admin page. Therefore, you can hardly force any discussion to an end. --{{User:Spiderzed/Sandbox/Sig}} 22:24, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
:::::::One way is Arby's, but an Arby's case based on this talk page is utterly ridiculous. --{{User:Axe Hack/Sig}} 22:29, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
::::::::I could put an 800px pic on it. That would probably help to make it look like SERIOUS BUSINESS in A/A. --{{User:Spiderzed/Sandbox/Sig}} 22:35, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

== ''People on UDWiki have differing opinions shocker!'' ==

[[UDWiki:Specific Case Editing Guidelines]] Thanks kids. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 22:58, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

I would have to agree on Dual Nature, the point of the game is you can be a zombie, get shot down and revived to be a human, think of it this way, you start off as a survivor and if you're into roleplay, you go about you business scoping builds and living in the post-apocalypse that is Urban Dead, of course when you do get eaten you're now a zombie. Your entire purpose as a zombie would be to eat the brains of any human you encounter, then you get revived and as a survivor you're sort of like "Oh thanks chap, good show saving me back there I seem to have blacked out entirely, anyway I'll be off on my way now to get gnawed upon in some other suburb". In my mind Dual Nature ''makes complete sense'', as the individual would not supposedly be aware of his/her actions after zombification, or revivification allowing the person to live "two lives" as one person. Whether people abuse Dual Nature as an excuse for spying or not is just a part of internet communities in general, but I'm sure some people who ask for respect when they roleplay in this manner are a high enough level and in control of a few other friends enough to grief the person right back. It's a post-apocalypse, everything is supposed to be anarchy. --{{User:EveryTimeV/sig}} 23:09, 18 November 2010 (UTC)