Talk:Final Fantasy magic/Archive 1

message: Can someone complete that list on acquiring Blue Magic? I don't know too much about the earlier Final Fantasies, so I can use some help on that. Thanks! Valhallia 08:11, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blue Magic 

message: The Final Fantasy XI magic consists of more catergories: Ninjitsu, Summoning, and Songs. Although Summoning has its own section elsewhere on Wikipedia, should we give a section to Ninjitsu and Songs?
I wouldn't know about that, most of the Magic in this article are spells that have appeared several times throughout the series. I think we should hear what the others have to say on this. Also, next time you should probably sign your post by placing four tildes(~~~~) after your edit. :) Valhallia 11:36, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Final Fantasy XI Magic 

message: Is there any place on the net that explains why they used this system for the fire, water, etc. spells? 216.199.4.212 10:45, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explanation for ra/ga suffix naming system? 

message: It's not mentioned at all under white. Is it classified as something else? (the preceding unsigned comment was made by User:64.229.255.69 at 19:56, 30 December 2005)
:This article isn't exhaustive. We don't, can't, and probably shouldn't list every spell that has ever appeared in any Final Fantasy game. Such a listing is much too detailed for a general interest encyclopedia, and would almost certainly get voted for deletion. That kind of detail is better suited to fan sites, such as GameFAQs or the Final Fantasy wiki. This article is intended to serve only as a representative sampling of some of the most common magic spells that have appeared in the series, and although the guidelines are a bit fluid, "Dia," having appeared in only one game, is not very common. – Seancdaug 04:25, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dia 

message: Ultima is classified as white magic in FF2, where it made its first (and most prominent) appearance.
As such, I put it there. JONJONAUG 03:12, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't recall there being a differentiation between white and black magic in Final Fantasy II. ~ Hibana 03:26, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There was a split in the manual. - Bill3000 03:09, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ultima is white magic 

message: Should this article contain information on Kingdom Hearts's magic? --70.25.168.90 21:02, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think if we don't limit it to Final Fantasy (as the name implies) it will get too big and out of control.  There are parts of this article that are very rough because people seem to want to include every minor variation in spells between the different FF versions.  I would prefer a general description of the spell without listing all the variations.  After all, there are articles about most, if not all FF releases. wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 15:12, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Nope. This is a Final Fantasy magic article, after all. >Gamemaker 16:41, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

text: If we include KH magic, we'd have to include SMRPG magic as well. Crazyswordsman 03:58, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Kingdom Hearts'' 

message: I decided to be WP:BOLD and add the magic page changes from Ryu's sandbox. — Deckiller 22:23, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change 

message: :Image:FinalfantasyVI_ultimaspell.png is tagged for deletion. If it is to be used by this article, it should be put somewhere. -- ReyBrujo 03:34, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ultima picture 

message: We feel that a full list of spells is unencyclopedic, and more suitable to a wikia or wikibooks. The same goes to Ether in Xenosaga and so on. That's why we're just providing a prose overview here. — Deckiller 22:26, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of spells 

message: Does anyone else agree that Green Magic should be added to the artical? As of Final Fantasy XII, there are now Green Mages/Green Magic, which is basically the effect magic from previous games (that was split between Black and White) placed in it's own category. -- Jelly Soup 05:23, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Green Magic

message: Isn't that a pretty bad example? It's Edea's limit break, not an average spell. --81.129.40.225 12:19, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ice spell 

message: In Final Fantasy IV, in the village of summoned monsters Leviathan clearly states that he is not the King of the summoned monsters also in the village NPCs claim that their king is watching over them from high above. While Bahamut is optional to get and he does not clearly claim that he is the king of summoned ones according to rest of the game I think it should be him. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.141.154.4 (talk • contribs) .
:If I recall correctly, I believe that in FF IV Advance, Leviathan is referred to as the King of the summoned monsters, while Bahamut is referred to as their god. Somebody might want to double-check the reference, though. Mathfreq 21:44, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leviathan or Bahamut 

message: Somewhere in the text for FFVIII's use of summoning (Guardian Forces) it mentions that it does not play an integral part in the story. I choose to disagree, vehemently. I'd say the Guardian Forces play a very important part in the plot, and that the article should be changed accordingly.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.22.108.229 (talk • contribs)<noinclude>
:How much more elaborate should the explanation be? It specifically states that Summon Magic "has a significant impact on one of the story's major subplots. During the game, it is revealed that the powers of Guardian Forces (Final Fantasy VIII's title for summoned monsters) are dangerous to the human psyche, and that regular usage of such magic results in amnesia. Due to this, the game's main characters have forgotten a significant portion of their early lives." It's already sufficient and concise. Broadening it any further would be beyond the scope of the article. ~ Hibana 22:52, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Concerning FFVIII's Summoning Text 

message: It's certainly not the case that Ultima is one of the "most powerful spells in the game," contrary to its description under the Blue Magic section of the article. Zodiac is powerful indeed, but Ultima is actually very weak. Mathfreq 21:18, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This isn't supposed to encompass every spell's role in every game. Ultima is, in general, a very powerful spell. Certainly, there are many exceptions, especially in later games. ~ Hibana 21:21, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right; this article shouldn't set out to discuss fine points and subtle differences across all the games but rather to give a general overview. Just the same, if the article is going to go out of its way to mention a specific spell from a specific game, then that reference should be accurate. I don't think it's accurate to state that Ultima is one of the strongest spells in Final Fantasy Tactics. Mathfreq 21:42, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Final Fantasy Tactics and ''Ultima'' 

message: I still think an "Other Magic" section would be appropriate for magic that appears in only 1 game and for stuff that isn't always considered magic (songs, ninjutsu, geomancy). It's kinda annoying seeing every magic type listed. --Jopasopa 23:09, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. I believe that every type of magic should be listed, even if it exists in only one game (such as the Dark Arts piece I added). Although, I suppose that an "Other Magic" section on the same page would be appropriate, as you have suggested. I gave this subject a title; hope you don't mind. HeroOfVirtue 23:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess I'm okay with seeing them listed and maybe a short description of the magic type, but do such insignificant magic categories really need their own section? And of course of separate section for para-magic such as songs, ninjutsu, geomancy, sword magic, etc. --Jopasopa 20:12, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that having separate sections for less-used magic is overkill.  IMHO, the goal is to educate the reader about the topic, not to list everything that anyone knows about it. wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 03:29, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll work on an "other magic" section, then someone can try to trim it down. Even though I feel them significant and they have a chance to reappear, I will include green and arcane magic in it. Also, unless I missed it in the article, I feel that FFXI's "magic skills" (healing magic, elemental magic, enhancing magic, enfeebling magic, divine magic, dark magic, summoning magic, blue magic, ninjutsu, singing/wind instrument/string instrument (song)) should be noted since, along with maybe XII's classification, it is probably the neatest categorization. Is it okay if I make note of it, if it isn't mentioned already? Also, I'm not really sure whether to put "spellblade" under Other Magic or Para-Magic, or if it even belongs under those. I'm putting it on Other Magic since it usually requires MP but is not as common or as significant as white/black/blue/time/summoning magic, but someone could change that if given a good reason. --Jopasopa 14:24, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Other Magic

message: That "no reliable reference" tag is a bother to see in that article. It's like seven months since that tag went up, and frankly I see little to no attempt to fix it. Where the so-called wikiproject members? You guys only concern on removing spoiler tags? Is this article made up just for fun, to spend free time on the computer and all? Really, how does referencing work in this article? Quote interviews? Read up final fantasy books? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 219.95.168.6 (talk) 13:01, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Watch the personal attacks. Also, we are working on other articles right now; this one is on queue. Sources include strategy guides, interviews, the official website, official game reviews, etc; but not fansites. — Deckiller 13:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're free to expand the article and make it better if you want, Mr. "IP". Kariteh 14:37, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Spoiler tags are against our writing style as they are an insert into the body content that serve no function except to break up the flow of an article and redundantly reiterate that WP is not censored, a fact that should be implicit.  No Reliable Reference tags are a warning about the article and a need to improve it, it should not be removed until the issue is resolved, regardless as to how long it takes to address the issue.  --Daedalus 16:12, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference 

message: Are those Japanese spell levels right? I had the impression that they used -da as well? As in, Cure, Cura, Curada, Curaga, or something to that effect? --Kajitani-Eizan 08:23, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spell Levels 

message: Are we stating that creature's appearance in a game even when it's part of that game's summoned beast species but cannot be summoned by the party? For example, if Fenrir was a type of wolf in a game, would we put something like "monster" or "enemy" there? If not, then I'm changing Kirin's status in FFXI from boss to no. Also if not, why are FFXII ships included there? I'm guessing that's because most recurring summonings are featured as airships in that game, so it's worth mentioning. Also again, I'm not sure if "boss" is the appropriate term for Kirin in FFXI, as he is technically a (High) Notorious Monster/(H)NM, but I guess those terms would confuse some people. --Jopasopa 22:57, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say put No for Kirin in FFXI, if he's not identified as an Avatar. The green Yes are for Summoned Creatures that can be used by the party, while grey Yes are for the creatures identified as Summoned Creatures in the game's story but who can't be used by the party. (Titan in FFIX is a special case, as he is "summoned" by Fenrir when the party summons the latter.) I'm not sure what was the point of mentioning the FFXII airships. Then again, I'm not sure the whole table is relevant or too trivial. Kariteh 23:03, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there any point in keeping "Adremmelech" in this table? It only appears in two of the games, and as a ship in a third. I think it should be removed.SirMeh 22:47, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, only appearing in Ivalice games he is not representative of summons in the series, unlike say Ifrit and Shiva.  As a side note, where is he a ship?  --Daedalus 15:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Ah. Well, the table listed it as a ship, so I simply assumed so. My mistake I suppose. SirMeh 18:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table of appearances 

message: Okay, so I came up with some ideas to cleanup that section:
1) Get rid of the table thingy. Or at least return it to the state where it only states the more popular summonings. It's annoying me like the Blue Magic list that was on the Blue Mage page. Maybe which summonings appear in which game can be imported to that game's character page?
2) Get more in-depth with a game's summons by adding more prominent ones to either the races or, like I said above, bring stuff like that to the character pages. I'm thinking about making an avatar race section (for FFXI) and leaving the FFXI summoning magic section for mostly game mechanics and a quick review on the 3 types of summons (celestial, terrestrial, and elemental).
--Jopasopa 16:40, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I hope this doesn't come across as a personal attack, but it seems the person who expanded it had the intent of adding all summons (and even then, it's missing some). I'd settle with 3 appearances, but as of right now I'm getting rid of one-timers and two-timers. --Jopasopa 20:57, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The chart will be better off deleted with just 4+ appearance summons. Also, since it's 3+ currently, I'm adding Diab(o)los since he appears in VI (GBA), VIII, and XI. Unless remakes don't count toward counting a summon's appearance? --Jopasopa 21:09, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say that remakes count, it is an appearance after all.  --Daedalus 21:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I'd just remove the whole table. I don't think there's much sense in choosing an arbitrary number of appearance like this. I believe a general, well written paragraph of text with references and mythologic connections would be enough, and better than a "mute" table which doesn't really inform much. Kariteh 22:42, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleaning up the summoning magic section 

message: ...the more I realize that this might fit into the Gameplay of Final Fantasy article. I don't think any substantial out of universe info can be found on the magic of Final Fantasy. We can keep looking, though. — Deckiller 10:37, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The more I think about it...

message: I've tried to ask this before, yet no one bothers to answer me and someone called me a vandal. So here it is: Where exactly does Carbuncle appear in FF12? This is in reference to the table of the summons' appearances, which lists Carbuncle as a ship in FF12. Leonhart9999 06:24, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why yes, Carbuncle is a ship in FF12. Not a summon. It does not feature in the game, but it is there. References point to the Official Game Guide and the Ultimania. — Bluerです。 なにか? 08:26, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Kariteh 09:44, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice one. — Bluerです。 なにか? 09:51, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Carbuncle in FF12?