397 replies to this topic

[Sav]

I think, if she joined in SoA, it'd be a nice touch if, at the Tree of Life stairs, she says that she can't stick around after Irenicus has been defeated, so at the beginning of Throne of Bhaal she has disappeared and gone to Saradush, because, no doubt, Illasaera would see her otherwise, because she had been tracking the PC for a while after the Elven city.

Or, what if you convinced Il (if that was an option that is) to join you and Melissan was in your party too? That would present a small, no, large problem. I'd imagine you'd wake up to Il dead with a slit throat, if not then Illasaera would keep her distance from Melissan. Melissan might over-react to Il's death.. so you could get your suspicions.

The problem is, we've already played through ToB and we know that Melissan's the enemy. What would she do about Imoen too in SoA? She wants all of the Bhaalspawn to die so she can absorb Bhaal's energy, doesn't she?

[Hendryk]

Oh, nice points! Yes, I suppose that would work, as long as the writer developed Melissan properly as a character. How would you handle ToB though, if Melissan is already in your party? It seems to me that a lot would need to be rewritten and changed.

The 'Hell' plane either is the same pocket plane you use in ToB or another one that stands in the same relation to the Throne of Bhaal as the ToB one. Either way, Melissan, having already been given access to the essence in the Throne itself by Bhaal, would be surpassingly powerful. Thus, I'd redo the hell sequence by putting Mel quite clearly in charge there. As a cover, I'd give her lots of cryptic references to "the will of the goddess"; herself, of course, as she plans to be though the PC might not realize that. Then she would superintend the demons turning on Jon (who would certainly make a point or two himself before he snuffs it) and restore the PC's soul as though it were a personal gift from herself to the PC. Then she'd have a parting speech indicating that she has "calls" elsewhere and leave the party before everyone else returns to Suldanesselar. Plenty for the PC to think about (and the player to chuckle over) there.

If you'd picked her up in SoA, ToB would have to be largely rewritten whether she's joinable there too or simply has more cameo appearances. Obviously, she's got to be elsewhere at certain points; she lets Yaga-Shura's army into Saradush and, as Caedwyr noted, she has her set piece to say before one of the challenge rooms. The latter, actually, could be done even if she is in the party. I'd think the PC would have a really interesting chat with her afterwards. Could lead to one or more different resolutions at the Throne in fact, depending on the PC's alignment and how the relationship has gone to this point.

[dorotea]

With Irenicus, the idea is even more repulsive. BGA the fan-fict at least follows Irenicus' path to redemtion well away from his primary victims, and from his point of view. A mod that asks his victim to to help him find his path is a story I can't imagine wanting to hear.

Er, sorry to have offended you then - but LR Redemtion the mod is being written in coded nonetheless. As for the notion - about PC being a victim... well, it is probably weird, but I think PC's reasons for hating Sarevok are equally strong , and having your father killed in front of you IMHO is at least as bad as being physically tortured. I do not wish to bring Imoen's rape into the discussio here - simply because it is not an established game fact. Having lost friends at Irenicus's hand yet again is about on the same level of villainy as multiple assasinations attempts by Sarevok. Yet - Sarevok is allowed in the party and is redeemed - by the 'victim'.

And being by virtue of birth a spawn of Murder PC is not someone who is very likely assosiated with victimhood... Besides, there is a matter of the stolen soul... which plays a major role in the mod plot and the whole redemption business, and the fact that one needs a soul to 'experience emotions'. In fact the whole concept of the mod is based on this - that the PC soul was once 'shared', and that is why PC is 'the only one' who can redeem Irenicus at all.

The BGA is linked with the mod as its continuation, and I hope that having read it, you might at least give me the benefit of a doubt and assume that LR Redemption has a few more reasons to exist than Irenicus having David Warner's sexy voice and wearing a bondage suit... At least I hope that I was able to write the plot that is credible and 'humane' not 'glorifying evil' or reveling in Stockholm syndrome.

After all - Irenicus's major purpose to commit all his atrocities was 'revenge'. What is the better way to defeat him ultimately and morally than to prove to him that vengeance is not the only way you can take?

[dorotea]

Personally, I dislike the idea of reforming somone else; redemption that stems from introspection, from a true understanding of what you have done and empathy for your victims may make an interesting story. Your BGA does lead me to hope that the mod will be well done (I'm sure it will be well written), but it still seems to be reliant on the idea of redemption impossed from the outside. That rings false. That the role of therapist is played by one of the abuser's victims is not something that will be easy to handle; it will be very easy to end up with a CHANAME who will either have to be a saint and entirely uncaring of the feelings of his or her companions, or a beaten child who sticks by his or her abuser.

Well, lets face it - there are limitations imposed by the game format, thus the redemption process has to be 'shaped' as a series of dialogs. In LR case I did everything possible to make it more of the rant of the 'redeemed' - with PC comments and his/her interpretations of the posed statements. So in fact it is a process stemmed from 'inside' but affected by PC.

All other npcs will have their say and PC will have to make serious and difficult choices in regard to Imoen and Jaheira.

Why do I need PC at all as a factor - again see my previous post. Irenicus as an entity is 'immune' to morality and doubts of empathic nature simply because he has no soul. That is the factor that is very important and that actually made me think of his story and why Ellesime did not succeed in her own redemption attempt at him. In the mod he will be linked with PC by magical means and residual 'sharing of soul' and thus will be able to finally 'feel' something.

This idea actually comes from Imoen-Sarevok conversation in ToB, after she gives Sarevok a spark of her soul.

So, PC-Irenicus relationship is a bit more complicated than therapist-patient, saint-devil, or victim-torturer, as once again - they share connection on that deeper level - result of stolen soul.

It felt like a very interesting concept to explore. Too bad we cannot do it in RL- but of course linking yourself with a murderer in this manner is somewhat of an act of extreme bravery and daring...

[Laufey]

Well, lets face it - there are limitations imposed by the game format, thus the redemption process has to be 'shaped' as a series of dialogs. In LR case I did everything possible to make it more of the rant of the 'redeemed' - with PC comments and his/her interpretations of the posed statements. So in fact it is a process stemmed from 'inside' but affected by PC.

*nods* This is a point that I think is very important to remember. I personally think that Sarevok's redemption could also have been handled better - for one thing it should have taken longer, and there should have been more depth to it. But alas, time was of course limited for the designers.

I also agree, as I said above, that redemption has to come from inside, or it won't be real redemption at all. In the case of Irenicus that is especially difficult, due to his condition, but I think that the solution of having him pick up 'residues' from the PC works. Well, at least it does for me.

[Althernai]

I see all of them as uncapable of crossing back the line after wich killing and torture is done casually and with pleasure. If that line is crossed I can only see any of them as mad or suicidal after that, not functional "good boys/girls".

Does Irenicus feel pleasure from torturing anyone? I don't think so. He has absolutely no empathy for their pain, but it doesn't make him happier either. The only thing that matters is progress towards his goal.

[Althernai]

With Irenicus, the idea is even more repulsive. BGA the fan-fict at least follows Irenicus' path to redemtion well away from his primary victims, and from his point of view. A mod that asks his victim to to help him find his path is a story I can't imagine wanting to hear.

I disagree. Stories where being good is easy are boring where moral choices are concerned. BG2 does this a lot -- in fact, most computer games do. Being 'good' usually means helping some random strangers who have a task for you to do. This task usually coincides with your own interests and even if it doesn't, you get experience and/or money for doing it. In the end, you can be evil by demanding a larger reward, but this is usually unnecessary because what the quest-giver pays you is negligible compared to the money you get from selling all the junk you find on the way. The only real time you are asked to sacrifice something of value for being good is in the Hell Trials, but even there you come out ahead regardless of your choices.

Helping somebody who has hurt you in the past, on the other hand, is not quite so easy. It requires forgiveness, mercy and a bit of faith. After all, the protagonist and his party get almost nothing for helping Jon and, for all they know, he might turn up as an enemy again. A character has to be truly Good to restore the soul of someone who killed several of his aquaintances (if not friends) and tortured both a sibling and the protagonist himself nearly stealing their souls in the process.

[Xenomorph]

Oh, poop. Forgot to log in for that last post.

[Laufey]

One good example that occurs to me is the robber hanging next to Jesus on the cross, who repented at death's door, and was granted forgiveness for that. I believe that story is meant to illustrate that it is never too late, as long as you have the will to change.

I concure. There is always the possibility for redmption, no matter who or what you are. Granted, this is a real-world belief and does not translate well into the DnD universe (or most fantasy settings, for that matter). I also intrinsically believe in reincarnation; though you may have commited horrible things in this life, you have the chance of doing something better in the next one. One cannot achieve spiritual perfection in one life time, after all.

Oh yes...I personally like the idea of reincarnation as well. And I am also one of those people who likes the fantasy settings to be fantastic when it comes to magic, monsters etc, but prefers for the moral issues to be 'real world'. Or at least what I consider real world.

Hm, I remember once reading a short story, can't remember the author I'm afraid. It was about Hitler's punishment after death - getting to relive the *entire* lives and deaths of *every single one* of his victims, through their eyes. Now that is the kind of punishment that I think would really hurt, far, far worse than being toasted by devils with pitchforks. And it is the kind of punishment that I think actually means something, as opposed to the pitchforks, and might actually have a chance of redeeeming even the 'irredeemable'.

Which is, of course, pretty similar to what Dorotea is doing, and why I believe in her storyline. Redemption can't be hasty, and it can't be easy. It has to hurt in order to be worth anything.

[dorotea]

That's funny, how much opinions differ. I actually find it the most repulsive when someone familiar with the crimes of say Irenicus, only from a second-hand goes ahead and dismisses those hundreds and thousands who suffered, and says: "hey, one-two-three out of my whim alone and incredible mine own goodness, I shall redeem him!" Only those whom he viled have the right to grant his forgiveness, me thinks.

I think your fundamental postulate here is that violent and painful (preferrably infinite) suffering of the offender somehow benefits the victim of the crime post-factum... while the offender's true remorse does not. These thousands - do you truly believe every one of them would instantly be brought alive or relieved in their afterlife by thinking every moment 'I am so happy now that he still burns'? Or maybe just maybe it has just the opposite effect ?

What is true for one victim is true for all as well - by redeeming the villain PC does not free the redeemed of the punishment - they make it 'sensible'.

Why? Beacuse I never said that redemption auto equals absolution of the past crimes and forgiveness of those - only God Almighty in monotheistic religions have such an option, and I never tried to play one in my mods. Nobody cancel's the redeemed character's tortures of eternal guilt - that IMHO are far more painful and 'fair' to the victim than that same perpetraitor burning (or turning into a demon) while all the time vainly revelling in his crimes and telling to himself - *I am still not broken they deserved etc etc.*

And if anyone goes about redeeming the villain with this unsufferable attitude that you described - do you truly think they can ever succedd in it? Redemption is *about helping the victims* by making sure they are avenged in the only sensible way - by making their abuser truly suffer not laugh at them.

It is especially valid in case of FR afterlife - when as you know the petitioners of the Abyss hve a choice to become demons and spend eternity happily torturing lesser ones.

But once again it boils to the question - of vengefullness. I believe you don't truly care much about the victims. It just irks you that redeemed character can 'escape punishment' in this manner (even if it will benefit victim.)

There always were plenty of religios and political movements preaching this particular philosophy. There is nothing new under the moon - but I personally disagree that eternal burning in Hell benefits anybody at all, including victims.