So, the way that the entry is written feels like it boils down to a matter of interpretation of the Emperor's character whether its behavior seems "out of character" or not—whether it values freedom over its survival, or whether it values survival over its freedom. The entry is written from the perspective of the former—it seems nonsensical for the Emperor to give up its freedom after everything just on the chance that Orpheus will attack it, especially if you yourself have not been hostile. If you interpret the latter, however, then its decision seems logical even without foreshadowing: in addition to removing the only real piece of leverage it had against you, you have essentially declared war against it by liberating an enemy that is certain to try—and likely succeed—to kill it, if not now then later, and so it decides to ally with the only force capable of challenging you both at this stage (ie, the Netherbrain).
My issue with the trope entry is that it felt like a criticism of the writing decision to have the Emperor do this rather than an actual usage of the trope, which is "a contradictory plot twist that has no buildup whatsoever". To be more specific, I do not view it as a plot twist at all, I view it as a predictable outcome of making the choice in a usual RPG fashion, ie "the person you don't side with becomes your enemy". I didn't view it as contradictory because much of what the Emperor tells you about its origins, motives, and behavior are revealed to be lies or half truths at various points.
But clearly other people feel differently, and interpret the Emperor's character differently. If the trope should be reinstated then I have no objection to that, my bad for removing it. I'm just explaining my reasoning a bit more since that was an issue.
Edited by PriceCheck
Yeah I'm of two minds about it. I think the issue with saying this comes out of nowhere is that while The Emperor siding with the Netherbrain isn't explicitly foreshadowed, the idea that it is a coward who will betray its stated principles to secure its own safety is foreshadowed. Saying it is antithetical to its character is only true if you take its statements at face value, which the game gives you ample evidence that you shouldn't do.
It has spent the entire game hiding in the astral prism, lying to you about who it is, what it is, what it is currently doing, and what it's done in its past while letting you take the brunt of the danger against the Absolute. The one time it appears to put its life on the line in the Githyanki Creche, it is revealed to be a bluff to try and gain your trust that it had no intention of actually following through on.
It is revealed to have (iirc) ambushed and murdered its own lover without discussion when it sensed his intent to Mercy Kill it, and can angrily gloat that its personal friend Stelmane was actually its thrall (and there are documents in the Morphic Pool implying its other subordinates in its organization were thralls as well.) Every truth you learn about it, you learn due to factors outside its control, and given the option, it will still hide these things from you.
I definitely agree the decision was abrupt and ideally you should have been able to question it, and I understand there are a lot of people who did not see it coming. But I know if it necessarily counts for an Ass Pull just because it didn't explicitly tell you that The Emperor siding with the Netherbrain was on the table as an outcome. There was ample evidence that its priorities were not what it claimed them to be.
@Price Check: No worries! I just wanted to make sure it was discussed first since it is kinda a touchy subject for some people, and a lot of it certainly up for interpretation in character, but from a writing angle, I've seen a lot of players feel that specific part of the issue doesn't feel naturally built up to. I've seen people say it wasn't an issue so it borders on Broken Base, but the character in question is so polarizing that it needed a brief look over first.
@Octoya: I'm fine with The Emperor turning against you if you disagree with him and it is telegraphed well. On my playthrough I made it clear I did not want to use the tadpole and had issues with Orpheus being used like that, and the game made it clear this was going to result in conflict. So when it happened, it made sense. But when The Emperor announced he was going to side with the Netherbrain, I recall being confused like I had missed something. I looked over some interactions and details and it felt like something was missing.
From how I view things, its not that The Emperor sides against you, its that he does to by allying with the Netherbrain so suddenly and without signs that he'd do so, that is the issue that I and a number of players have expressed. Its feels like there is something missing about the choice, and so when it happens, it feels like it comes out of no where after everything the player has seen.
I think that part of the choice is what is an Ass Pull, but if it doesn't really fit as one, then I think it can work better as Fan-Disliked Explanation, which fills a "Fans don't like this explanation", and at least can clarify that it feels like an Ass Pull but may not be one.
Edited by keyblade333 Muramasa got.
I get what you're saying here, and honestly that's why I was of two minds—I can see how it can feel like a "wait what?" kind of moment with the way it was executed. For me, going over the situation in my mind the logic of its choice to ally with the Netherbrain worked out enough that I felt like it could be lumped in with the decision to turn on you in regards to what "needs" to be foreshadowed, but then the Emperor turning on you could have conceivably gone other ways too (like fleeing or just trying to kill you then and there, for example.)
I think I'm of the same mind as Price here that I don't mind the entry being reinstated, especially if this is a common reaction in the fanbase. I'm not toootally sure if Fan-Disliked Explanation fits anyway, Ass Pull is admittedly the closest thing I can think of for it too.
I do think the last part of the entry—that the choice is strange because it happens even if Tav is supportive of the Emperor otherwise—can probably be deleted since it's focusing too much on the "turning on Tav" part of its decision, which we all seem to agree was telegraphed.
I find myself agreeing with all this, yeah. I didn't realize it was a touchy subject. I'd also prefer to have the entry reworded a little to emphasize the point on siding with the Netherbrain specifically over the betrayal overall, but I have no objections to Ass Pull being re-added since it does sound like there's a significant number of people who feel that way. It is YMMV after all.
I think both of you made good points about it, so the entry, at lest for now, needs to be adjusted on that side of things.
So something closer to this based on the feedback: The Emperor siding with the Netherbrain in Act 3. If the player chooses to free Orpheus, the Emperor declares it has "no choice" but to side with the Netherbrain and departs immediately. While the game makes it clear that the Emperor will do whatever it takes to survive and warns the player of the consequences for freeing Orpheus, him siding with the Netherbrain has been criticized for not being telegraphed or foreshadowed to the player, not helped by the game not allowing the player to question the Emperor about why they would do so. Some players also feel it runs contrary to its established characterization as someone valuing freedom away from the Netherbrain, given how everything else it does is specifically trying to stop the Netherbrain at all costs. While the Netherbrain says everything about the Emperor was All According to Plan, the Emperor siding with the Netherbrain is never referenced or commented on by it, which doesn't help either.
Muramasa got.
I'll go ahead and put this up then. If it needs any further review or adjustments, let me know, or feel free to do so.
Muramasa got.
Korbl
RE: the "do mind flayers have souls?" thing-
While I feel like it fits "Wasted a Perfectly Good Plot," I can understand why it is deemed to not fit that trope. Is there better fit? Because I feel that raising the question only to then immediately answer it with no followup is a definite waste of an interesting opportunity for storytelling.
Hide / Show Replies
I don't think it really has a fitting entry except maybe Narm. Narm would be on the basis that Withers asks what is supposed to be a thought provoking question, only to then basically shrug- causing unintended comedy, but its not really a big enough of a moment to feel like it really fits as narm.
Muramasa got.
Not sure why The Bear Scene is in "Squick" considering that during the actual panel, people overwhelmingly cheered for it, and the game's sales skyrocketed after it was shown. It's also consentual between two humanoid males, one of whom is capable of shapeshifting, which is the very important part.
People joke all the time on tumblr and twitter about having intimate relations with "hot werewolf daddies" but a game actually lets you do something like that, suddenly there's something wrong?
"People questioned why such a thing was needed" Who? The editor's own friend group?
Edited by Zaiketsu A degenerate and proud of it. Hide / Show Replies
Im willing to go with a middle ground and change it to some may find it squinky, if that’s allowed.
Reads and Thinks too much
I don’t think Lae'zel, Astarion, and Shadowheart fit the YMMV trope of Ronthe Death Eater. For the characters to qualify they must be generally “good” to a reasonable “neutral”, don’t commit much in the way of evil deeds willingly, and not have any strong desire for reprehensible acts (at least in terms of setting), but the audience/fandom despises and demonize them for being annoying, having traits they knee jerk hate, dislike them for reasons outside of their control and/or getting in the way of shipping.
None of them really fit the former with the troper who argues they do fit because they didn’t “choose” to be what they are. Yes Lae'zel didn’t choose to grow up in a facist community, but you might as well say that for every Githyanki who shows up and starts murdering people for “being in the way” or “being inferior” as she herself fully buys into this mentality.
Astarian didn’t choose to be a vampire, but willfully chooses to be very self-centered, arguing to kill those that get in your (as well as his) way, advocates taking over the cult for his own means and power, and was at first only interested in manipulating you for his own gain.
Shadowheart may be a Selûnite who was kidnapped into being a Sharran, but she doesn’t remember that, looks down on other religions for not being Shar worship than any meaningful critique, yet asks for you to be open minded about her’s, doesn’t care about the Shadow-lands killing all inhabitants, even if they were Shar worshippers, because her goddess blesses her to have a higher resistance so others must have deserved it, and is completely willing to kill others to maintain her cover.
They may be redeemable and have sympathetic traits, but, at the start of the game, all of them are very much “evil” to some notable degree.
Edited by CybrTroper
I can see an argument against judging a final product too harshly from its early access content, but not that the Darkness-Induced Audience Apathy trope doesn't apply. I have too many people in my social circle who went from cautiously optimistic to wanting nothing to do with the title entirely on the basis of the early access being a miserably joyless slog with a hateful party full of unlikable assholes, which drearily strings the player along through a series of horrible atrocities they have little power over when it's not railroading them into doing terrible stuff themself "to survive." A few jokes won't change that.
An extremely cursory examination of the Internet conversation surrounding the title following its early access release finds that it's far from an uncommon opinion, and I feel that what would in any other context be a textbook example of the trope deserves to be set forward as such, if with moderating language regarding its being an early access release.
Edited by SpectralTime Hide / Show Replies
Regarding the Ass Pull removal, I feel its removal misses a key point about the entry: its about The Emperor siding with the Netherbrain that is the issue people have criticized. Everything up to that point has indicated that it will do anything to stay free and escape being controlled only to suddenly say it will do the same thing it has actively done everything it can to avoid without any discussion of that fact. There is foreshadowing to it not working with you, but nothing about siding with The Netherbrain. That is what people criticize about the section.
So basically: The Emperor turning against you if you free Orpheus isn't the issue, its him siding with the Netherbrain coming out of no where after everything the Emperor does and says to indicate he will do everything he can to stay free of it while also surviving. Even if you argue that it "makes sense", the game never hints that the Emperor would side with the Netherbrain against you, all his warnings are about how he will stop working with you or that you are making a mistake.
Edited by keyblade333 Muramasa got. Hide / Show Replies