|
GunnerJ posted:A funny thing about gay sex in Roman times is that two dudes boning would only be scandalous if they were of different social classes and the lower class guy was the top. Ancient sexual mores are very different from our own! In a lot of the Greco-Roman world I'd bet the idea of a woman owning property and having enough legal agency to choose her own spouse would be a lot more shocking than her being into other women. I don't remember if it's come up yet in the LP or not, but part of the background material about the tiers is that they actually have gendered rules for land ownership; but it's women that can own land, not men. There's a whole lore thing where basically men control the sea, women control the land, so women can't be captains of ships, and men can't own land. So women owning property and having legal agency wouldn't be anything to bat an eye about in Tyranny, but it is also not a strictly "egalitarian" society, either.
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 04:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 23:00 |
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:I don't remember if it's come up yet in the LP or not, but part of the background material about the tiers is that they actually have gendered rules for land ownership; but it's women that can own land, not men. There's a whole lore thing where basically men control the sea, women control the land, so women can't be captains of ships, and men can't own land. So women owning property and having legal agency wouldn't be anything to bat an eye about in Tyranny, but it is also not a strictly "egalitarian" society, either.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 06:15
|
|
|
There's mitigating factors about this same-sex marriage having, well, Deya in it making GBS threads it up either. - The people who are shown to be nice and competent are very much in the minority here. - There's really not many marriages shown at all honestly. I'm struggling to remember a hetero couple here at all honestly. The depictions here are nice for basically being a normal thing that no one is commenting on. That so many of them are lovely or broken people is really more a product of Tyranny, as that's the norm for people here.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 06:16
|
|
|
I'll add my voice to the chorus pointing out that in Tiers, women owning property is the default state, and as a matriarch of her house, Phaedra can sleep with whoever she wants. No, what really gets me is that Phaedra and Deya live in a hovel just as everyone else. This is not the modern age when millionaires can live in obscurity. Here, if Phaedra is getting a cut of the merchants' profits, then someone (Raetomonn?) will want in on that, so she should have a retinue of guards protecting her slice of the pie. For that matter, let's say that some of the merchants decide that they'd rather not pay taxes and trade anyway. What will Phaedra do to get her dues? And if she doesn't prevent one merchant from not paying, well, suddenly nobody will pay. The only way I can reconcile this is to consider her ownership of Lethian's Crossing to largely be a ceremonial matter. The local merchants run the town and pay for the muscle. They throw her some money which she then spends on charitable endeavours and helping the community (such largesse was fairly common in ancient societies, as I understand). Her "ownership" of town is a useful fiction, a nod to the traditions forbidding men from owning property. Her being in a lesbian relationship and unlikely to have children works out best for all concerned. With no chance of a direct heir trying to claim true power, once Phaedra passes, the merchants can prop up a second cousin on the understanding they will play along with the state of affairs. So even if we were not around, once Deya tries to claim she's the new owner of the town and raise the charges, she is in for a rude awakening, likely accompanied by a sharp knife between her ribs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 16:45
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:If I'm not mistaken, this is the first gay NPC in Tyranny - and she was married to another woman with no one remarking on it as anything unusual. In a Bronze Age setting. Verse more than hinted that she was, ah, closer to some of her Sisters than others, and there's a blink-and-you'll-miss-it throwaway comment from one of the two Disfavoured guarding your sleeping tent in the first act area that she'd cheerfully do more than keep your bed warm, regardless of the Fatebinder's gender.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 17:19
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:I don't remember if it's come up yet in the LP or not, but part of the background material about the tiers is that they actually have gendered rules for land ownership; but it's women that can own land, not men. There's a whole lore thing where basically men control the sea, women control the land, so women can't be captains of ships, and men can't own land. So women owning property and having legal agency wouldn't be anything to bat an eye about in Tyranny, but it is also not a strictly "egalitarian" society, either. Women inherit land, men inherit ships. It's in Eb's conversation that we skipped most of to not piss off Barik. The role of landholder is most definitely coded as female in the Tiers, and the role of wanderer is coded as male; though there is Welby among the Bronze Brotherhood as an exception to that. We may see an exception going the other way later on.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 17:24
|
|
|
its in the gender choice screen at character creation. different from the north, where they are said to have an egalitarian thing goin on, which is ofc ahistorical in 2020 ad, much less 2020 bc
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 17:27
|
|
|
I, for one, am perfectly fine with fantasy games not sticking to a standard of medieval european homophobia and sexism. There's a point to be made about various other historical views on sexuality and gender, but more to the point, why does there need to be bigotry if it doesn't serve the story? Would the game be any more interesting if Phaedra had gotten disowned and killed for wanting to marry a woman, or if their relationship had been heterosexual? Does it hurt the story to be in a setting where women are expected to own land? I enjoy learning about cultures that were gay as hell and ones that had different views on gender, but I don't think you need to be able to draw a historical analogue unless you're making a narrative point of some sort. Tyranny is also chock full of fascism and racism, which are also things that suck, but unlike the above, those need to be around to tell the story the game wants to tell.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 17:48
|
|
|
i dont think sexism and homophobia is separable from tyranny, really, but sure i'll shut it on that subject i guess
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 17:50
|
|
|
They're definitely part of historical tyrannies, that much is true, and they are relevant for discussing the broader subject. I'm not saying you shouldn't talk about them in the thread! I'm just wondering if people think it hurts the story for them to differ from their historical analogues.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 17:52
|
|
|
generally, universal history is whig history, and modern historical fiction is sorta whig history by default. but dead peeps really are very alien to us in very material ways, strongest to us in religion but in lots of other ways too, and historical gaming never fully explores this, never mind fantasy-ahistorical-historical stuff like tyranny like asscreed has the most whig possible secret society. maximum whiggery, just whig as hell (really julian jaynes was the least whig intellectual in history. "before the end of the bronze age people didnt even have consciousness". kinda a big bullshitter tho) bob dobbs is dead fucked around with this message at 18:11 on Dec 2, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 18:00
|
|
|
nobody gave a single gently caress about belief in religion for any religion until like 700 bc, well into the iron age, forex
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 18:09
|
|
|
Zulily Zoetrope posted:They're definitely part of historical tyrannies, that much is true, and they are relevant for discussing the broader subject. I'm not saying you shouldn't talk about them in the thread! I'm just wondering if people think it hurts the story for them to differ from their historical analogues. I don't think it hurts the story, because at least so far the story seems to be a modern story with nothing to say about historical societies. I mean, it comes out of the gate with the delivery of a Magical WMD, which is an extremely modern metaphor. If it tried to actually say things about historical societies it'd get immediately derailed by how bizarre ancient societies are to modern audiences, and they'd never get around to talking about Tyranny like they wanted, so it looks like they set it in antiquity for the aesthetic (and maybe press? I remember around release that all the articles had a line in there about "not your standard fantasy! bronze age!"), then drowned everything in metaphor and then went on to tell a modern story. Regarding sexism/homophobia, Tyranny's stance is clearly that sexism or homophobia has nothing to do with tyranny, which, historicity aside, also seems...probably wrong in the modern day too? At least in the narrowly-scoped political context of 2000s America, it definitely is a very, uh, pointed stance to take, in a "by omission" sort of way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 19:23
|
|
|
I'd also argue that Deya and Phaedra being gay women is relevant to this plot chain specifically because only women can legally own land, so a man marrying Phaedra for her land and then killing her would make no sense, because if any man was going to be able to inherit the land (they couldn't) it probably wouldn't go to her husband but to Lethian's son, if it was a 'women inherit but if no woman is available the closest male relative can hold the land until a woman is born' situation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 19:32
|
|
|
I think separating the two is important for a few reasons. One is because a lot of settings - especially low fantasy -- have a tendency to have misogyny and homophobia in to titilate the reader with how adult they're being. c.f. Game of Thrones and its perpetual cry of "wasn't the past horrible to women! get a good long look at how horrible the past was to women! really gather round, don't be shy! you can jack off if you like!" That stuff's gross as hell when it happens and I'm rather Tyranny chose to avoid it entirely rather than risk falling into the poop. The other thing is that Tyranny clearly has a lot to say about the incompetence of fascism. There's a perpetual myth in fantasy that while tyrants are evil because they oppress women and minorities, they are also stronger and more efficient than their good counterparts. Tyranny is making an important and more rarely-voiced point that regardless of bigotry, having an absolute unquestionable ruler still creates an utter clownshow of a regime that can't tie its own shoelaces without betraying itself fifty times.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 00:20
|
|
|
You have all the dragons, undead, spells, potions, supernatural monsters and everything magic on top of species like elves and orcs and the peasants farm tomatoes and other crops certainly not available in medieval Europe and everything is fine but as soon as a person isn't white enough or a woman isn't treated "historically" like trash enough it's full on screeching. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 02:14
|
|
|
Poil posted:You have all the dragons, undead, spells, potions, supernatural monsters and everything magic on top of species like elves and orcs and the peasants farm tomatoes and other crops certainly not available in medieval Europe and everything is fine but as soon as a person isn't white enough or a woman isn't treated "historically" like trash enough it's full on screeching. if you have an ostensible exploration of how people are little shits to one another without really significant and central categories of how people are poo poo to one another(maybe the most significant in terms of scope of peeps affected), tho, isn't that missing something? i mean, maybe sexism and discrimination against gender minorities just can't be explored without being gross, but they took a fair whack at racism without being overly gross bob dobbs is dead fucked around with this message at 02:37 on Dec 3, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 02:27
|
|
|
bob dobbs is dead posted:if you have an ostensible exploration of how people are little shits to one another without really significant and central categories of how people are poo poo to one another(maybe the most significant in terms of scope of peeps affected), tho, isn't that missing something? I’m not saying it can’t be done well (Disco Elysium comes to mind) but the bar is much higher. pumpinglemma fucked around with this message at 02:45 on Dec 3, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 02:41
|
|
|
pumpinglemma posted:You can’t really have fantasy sexism and homophobia the same way you can have fantasy racism, though. There’s no sexuality version of the tiersmen - either queer people are accepted or they aren’t. The moment you put misogyny or homophobia in the game, you’re attacking people’s real-life genders and sexualities, and you’d better have a drat good reason. fair point guvnor peeps have experimented w adding third genders and stuff in the past in fantasyland, but thats still problematic in material ways. one of these days someone will figure out a way to interrogate it w/o bein a little poo poo themselves but it'll prolly be some writer, not a video game org. i was impressed w the handling of racism in the game, ex the dlc, so i was annoyed at the nonhandling of other bigotries
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 02:44
|
|
|
aren't you all blowing this way out of proportion? in this setting women own land, men own ships. the way I see it there have been no negative connotations assigned to same-sex relationships by default. Deya and Phaedra don't really seem to be a jab at those goshdarned homersexuals, they feel like just another hosed up couple in a really hosed up situation. now why they were written specifically as a same-sex couple could tell a lot about the writers, but for practical purposes in the game's storyline it doesn't seem to be very important, but maybe I'm wrong. Poil posted:You have all the dragons, undead, spells, potions, supernatural monsters and everything magic on top of species like elves and orcs and the peasants farm tomatoes and other crops certainly not available in medieval Europe and everything is fine but as soon as a person isn't white enough or a woman isn't treated "historically" like trash enough it's full on screeching. while I understand your point, this game doesn't seem to be high fantasy, it seems to be trying to keep a low-to-mid fantasy level with the added issue of describing itself as a "bronze age" setting, which seems to be throwing everybody off for different reasons, mainly historical accuracy. compared to other, more high fantasy settings - where dragons and orcs are so commonplace that they lose almost all their metaphorical and allegorical connotations - this game's themes and innuendos seem to be less obscure, a lot closer to the surface. I assume that's why a lot of people end up reading way too much into some things, even though investigating the intents of a narrative is always a good thing after all. in my opinion there's no need to get all worked up over this stuff, at least for now. maybe the endgame will be filled with full-on, alt-right ultraconservative speaking points, who knows?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 08:35
|
|
|
Ah sorry I was thinking more in general terms how a lot of people act, not this game specifically. I apologize for not being clear on that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 09:27
|
|
|
The world of Tyranny is as much a Bronze Age setting, as the one presented in Baldur's Gate is a Late Medieval one – not at all, aside from some aesthetical trappings. We don't really know how would a portrayal of homosexuality look like in a Bronze Age world, because the concept of sexual orientation itself (and the huge right-wing pushback against it) is a pretty modern one. Marriage was not something you were supposed to do out of love or to have a sexual partner, it was pretty much all about creating a household and having kids who could inherit your stuff when you die. I"m not sure how would a proper Bronze Age portrayal of a lesbian relationship look like. Probably it wouldn't be an official marriage, because why marry if there's no one to inherit your land in the long run, but also not something that would get people riled up. Probably much less scandalous than a heterosexual unofficial relationship would be.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 10:14
|
|
|
Throwing in some fantasy racism and homophobia etc would take away from the core story tbh Even though authoritarianism and facism do, in real life, draw heavily on all of the above, Tyranny is trying to tell how facism etc dont work EVEN FOR THE ELITES. We're a fatebinder, as high in the system as anyone can get short of being an archon basically, and the system still doesn't work for us. We're not an adventurer, trying to overcome prejudice and bigotry to see that good triumphs, we're a judicial enforcer sent out to see to the proper running of the empire. And what we're mostly seeing is the system is broken at its heart. Even if we hadn't already gone into the Oddwalls, the mercenaries are pulling us in regardless. We have Archons running around breaking Kyros's peace, we're having to leap well over the line of lawfulness ourself. That's the story the devs are trying to tell. Not of the value of diversity, but the problems inherent in the system.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 13:18
|
|
|
Veloxyll posted:Throwing in some fantasy racism and homophobia etc would take away from the core story tbh There's plenty of fantasy racism though. Just look at how everyone treats the beastmen. They may not think along the same lines as humans, but they're certainly not incomprehensible to anyone willing to pay attention and most people act like they're dumb animals. Hell, I'd peg Kills-In-Shadow as significantly more intelligent than Baric or Verse. As to the acceptance of homosexual relationships, I always put that down to Kyros' influence on the world due to him refusing to identify as a specific gender and most likely having taken consorts over the years. Don't want to risk pissing off the Tyrant by inadvertently declaring something she does illegal. That would be a very quick way to get a pissed off Fatebinder burning your town to the ground.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 20:28
|
|
|
Veloxyll posted:Throwing in some fantasy racism and homophobia etc would take away from the core story tbh Unless GreatEvilKing is presenting the Disfavored in a drastically different light than the game does, their whole thing seems to be they're very fantasy racist, and that the fantasy racism ends up bringing them no benefits but causing an incredible amount of self-sabotaging. It causes them to repeatedly run into obvious bad situations and get themselves killed, and then when they do win a victory they advocate for just burning the village and killing everyone, which is completely counterproductive to their ostensible goals of pacifying a rebellion. It's one of the factors in why the people who should be their allies hate them - I think Verse talked about resenting their rampant nepotism and race-based merit system. Tyranny seems to be identifying fantasy racism as a system that doesn't even work for the "elite" fantasy racist group itself, and also by extension one of the problems inherent in the greater system of tyranny. I think that's a good inclusion, and am not sure how the game's themes are weakened by condemning fantasy racism as a key problem. e: oh, I didn't much think about the beastmen since they've been pretty out of focus for most of the LP but that's also a good point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2020 20:47
|
|
|
Well, the execution of Deya by the Fatebinder Cleopatra Jones is happening, people!
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2020 01:02
|
|
|
TheGreatEvilKing posted:Well, the execution of Deya by the Fatebinder Cleopatra Jones is happening, people! While I tend to focus on magic like anyone else while playing Tyranny, times like this are why my Fatebinder always wields the Hammer of Sunder. Every judge needs a gavel. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2020 01:40
|
|
|
I always went for a fists/magic build, both because it's powerful and because I always had this mental image of my Fatebinder showing up places and being all "I am unarmed; I am only here to arbitrate, and my only weapon is justice" and when someone inevitably started poo poo and ended up as a smoldering pile of ashes and guts, she could toss down an appropriate one-liner like "I guess justice wasn't on their side."
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2020 10:28
|
|
|
Zulily Zoetrope posted:I always went for a fists/magic build, both because it's powerful and because I always had this mental image of my Fatebinder showing up places and being all "I am unarmed; I am only here to arbitrate, and my only weapon is justice" and when someone inevitably started poo poo and ended up as a smoldering pile of ashes and guts, she could toss down an appropriate one-liner like "I guess justice wasn't on their side."
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2020 16:05
|
|
|
Cleopatra Jones and the Ineptly Run Mercenary Company Last time on Tyranny, we did a bunch of sidequests culminating in us meeting the stupidest narcissist who proudly bragged in front of a Fatebinder about killing her wife. Goons sentenced her stupid rear end to death.   : [Attack] I've heard enough, you disgust me. Really this conclusion sums the character up perfectly. Upon being confronted by a Fatebinder, a mage, a towering Beastwoman, and a Scarlet Fury, Deya thinks she's somehow going to fight her way out of this with a hairpin. What a moron! TheGreatEvilKing summary posted:
 She dies horribly. She drops her necklace which gives +1 Finesse. It's there I guess.  Killing this worthless failure gets us to nearly two wrath because we didn't tell anyone, despite the game never actually giving us the option. No, we can't go get Sandro and go to Eldian. Look, Tyranny, you're usually better about this stuff. I would expect this from Numenera, not you.  I'm going to elide this random encounter - we find a bunch of orange berries, we use our Lore to discern they're not poisonous, and we eat them for a buff.  Welcome to Deserter's March!  Are you ready for internal politics of the Bronze Brotherhood?   : He went too far! Death is inevitable in war, but slaughtering innocent settlers? What possible reason could he have had to kill them? There is literally a Kyrosian army unit sworn to Tunon stationed in the town. I do not understand the Brotherhood's position at all.  : Everyone calm down.: Locke looks back and forth between you and Myrek and sighs. You are right, Fatebinder. He addresses Myrek. Have your men lower their weapons and I will have my men do the same.: Fatebinder, I implore you to help us. I want to avoid more bloodshed if at all possible.We are given a choice of whether to talk to Locke or Myrek first, so of course we pick on the reasonable guy.   : It would seem not everyone in the Brotherhood agrees with Raetommon's methods...: No. We might be mercenaries, but we aren't murderers. Myrek is a loyalist, so he follows Raetommon's orders without question, no matter how crazy they are! Myrek isn't an evil person, he just has a hard time thinking for himself and is easily manipulated.In other works, Myrek is Boxer the horse who must work harder until he is eventually sent off to be made into glue.  : Do you know where I might find Raetommon? : Why does Raetommon want the Forge-Bound Master?: If I only knew, I might have been able to prevent this. Raetommon has become increasingly unstable since Kyros' forces tried to take Lethian's Crossing from him.: Perhaps he means to better arm the Brotherhood. We can always use quality weapons, so getting a hold of Forge-Bound iron would be an exciting prospect. With Kyros' forces on the move, that would be welcome. I'm pretty sure that killing these guys only has a point if you want to farm Brotherhood Wrath, which...eh? : [Leave] I will speak to Myrek. : I don't care if you trust me, but you will listen to me if you want to stop all this bloodshed. Myrek is the classical authoritarian follower who believes his leader is the "magic helper" who can solve all his problems.  : Why are you in Deserter's March? : So if Raetommon sent you, you know where he is. : [Subterfuge 44] [Lie] I just need to talk to him. You want all this to be over, don't you? This is sadly why we're here. : Keystone? What's that? : Why did Raetommon take the Forge-Bound Master? : How can you follow a man who kills his own men so indiscriminately?  : Yes! Myrek makes the declaration vehemently. I know everything he does will be good for everyone. We just have to trust him!I regret nothing about reusing this portrait. Admit it, you weren't going to keep track of these Brotherhood jackoffs anyway.  : [Lore 44] If the men Raetommon kills are traitors, the Bronze Brotherhood must have a lot of them.: Myrek purses his lips, his eyes moving back and forth and he considers your words. You might have a point, Fatebinder, but I still don't trust your motives. I am not going to turn over the leader of the Brotherhood on speculation. : Raetommon invaded Lethian's Crossing and attacked everyone - including his own men.I didn't see that part, all I saw was him throwing away his men worthlessly. There are a few instances in which the dialogue directly contradicts what the game shows (like Graven Ashe saving us from Nerat) and I'm not sure which we're intended to go with.   : Locke thinks Raetommon is acting in his own self-interest. He wants you to see Raetommon for who he really is.: No! He's doing what's best for Lethian's Crossing! Myrek looks conflicted. Isn't he? He shakes his head.: Yes! He must be... He trails off, confused. Despite what you might think we can't actually convince him. We're given the choice to go back to Locke, but I apparently screwed something up and we can't convince him.  : I tried, but if he can't be convinced, he will have to be killed. : You are welcome to try, but he is stubborn. I don't think he will change his mind.: Myrek, please - following Raetommon will only end in your death. He can't be trusted. He killed his own men. He endangered the entire city for his own selfish needs! Now the thing is there is absolutely no reason for Myrek to be doing this and it doesn't help Raetommon at all. He has some men. His job was to gather reinforcements for the men Raetommon pissed away like an idiot. If he engages the rebel Brotherhood now he won't be able to complete his mission - but because only an idiot could follow Raetommon at this point, here we are! TheGreatEvilKing summary posted:
 We are forced to kill Myrek. Locke is very sad about it.  : If you want to find Raetommon, search Myrek. If anyone knows where that madman has gone, he would.We loot Raetommon and take an "Oldwalls Keystone". Lock gets excited and sends us back to Twin Rivers. Off we go!  Along the way we find this on a dead Disfavored. It's pretty clear that the Kyrosian forces are done with the Brotherhood's poo poo and are massing to wipe them off the map once and for all. More astonishingly, the Brotherhood has pissed off the Disfavored to the point where they're either willing to risk fighting two wars at once OR pissed off both armies into declaring a truce to wipe them out. Good job, idiots! You could have just kept accepting Nerat's money.  We swing by and tell Sandro the witch is dead and he thanks us for our efforts.  This is the point where Cleopatra Jones personally throws her allegiance to the laws of Kyros right into the gutter. We'd already done a few shady things - such as claiming the Spire - illicitly, but right now we are publicly and visibly going into the Oldwalls with an entire town and mercenary company who know about this. We have in our possession an item which can undisputedly be linked to the Oldwalls. Even with claiming the Spire we were still doing that for the greater glory of Kyros, and we've had enough evidence to suspect this is all bullshit, but this is the part of the game where we are dunked in the river Lethe and cleansed of our delusions.  No going back now! In we go!  We're accosted by this Brotherhood patrol. : Myrek gave me the keystone. : Well, there was an altercation between some of your Brothers and Myrek didn't survive. : Brothers fighting Brothers. Ferris shakes his head. We have bigger problems and shouldn't be killing each other! I supposed it's the price we pay... But that doesn't explain why you're here. : What happened here? I want you all to keep this in mind. Raetommon had some way of making the Bane flee, and yet abandoned his men to die outside the Oldwalls. I can't stress enough how this guy not only didn't have the winning hand, but played it completely incompetently.  What an incompetent idiot. : What is the Brotherhood doing inside the Oldwalls?: Ferris looks at you like you're crazy. I don't see how that is any of your business, really... but, I suppose I also don't see how it would hurt to tell you since you're already here..." He shrugs.: Ever since Raetommon spend a night inside to prive he was worthy to be the First Brother, he's spent more and more time in here. He said he mapped out the path so he can get through without attracting the Bane. And we've never had a problem as long as we stayed in this room.: We can hole out and no one knows we're here! You're the first one I've seen in here who wasn't part of the Brotherhood.It keeps getting worse! Raetommon deliberately left Welby and the men he thought might be disloyal out to get killed by the Bane. Remember, he left them outside and now we know he sent the Bane out. It's a deliberate purge of his own men at a time when he needs every mane for his plan of 1) Fight the Bane but somehow don't take losses 2) Fight Graven Ashe and the Disfavored, who are better equipped and supported by sorcerers.  : Give me that torchkey. Sounds good, Eb, you're wearing next to nothing and I'm sure he hasn't seen a woman in weeks. : If you think you can get it from him, go ahead and try. Wait, what?  I assume this is supposed to be a reference to her hair and not a reference to Your Least Favorite Political Badmen, but who knows?  : Because I'd wager you all my rings for your torchkey that you can't handle more than... two minutes of this? I'm certainly happy to find out for sure.: Eb signs another gesture into the air, halting the drowning spell. : Nicely done. : [Leave] I'll be back.TheGreatEvilKing summary posted:
Alright, we need to talk about this scene. There's a lot going on here, and this feels very much like the writers taking time out of portraying an allegorized fantasy tyranny to step into the wonderful world of 2017 politics. "Snowflake" per Miriam Webster was first used as an insult in 1860 in Missouri against slaveowners and their defenders to imply they cared more about white people than black people. That usage faded until Fight Club became popular and "snowflake" was applied to the overly sensitive whoever to argue they weren't special and needed to shut up. The word wasn't even invented until the 18th century! Ferris is clearly using snowflake as an insult here - after Eb threatens him - and it's very hard to decouple this from the modern usage. I'll assume that's intentional, as the authors very deliberately drew from the modern day to make this Bronze Age game. Eb immediately opens by waterboarding the guy, torturing him until he gives us the key that we need. It's clear this is painful, as the words "choking" and "retching" are used and he is literally brought down to one knee as he gasps for air. This isn't some abstract magic bullshit pain ray, this is an allusion to an actual torture method used by the CIA and the Spanish Inquisition. This isn't even something Eb resorts to reluctantly, she steps in before we even have the opportunity to convince the man and makes casual banter about gambling. Torture is the weapon of Kyros.  Literally one of the first things we can do in the game is order the captured Vendrien Guard commander to be tortured to death, and that leads to his crucifixion at the side of the road. Think back to how we found Lantry at the Scarlet Chorus camp and all the people being tortured there, or literally everything Nerat does. This entire segment is very strange to me, because it can be read as a juvenile power fantasy of shoving alt-right assholes into the trash or showing that Eb is a ruthless torturer. The first reading is just embarrassing on the part of the writers and is comparable to Terry Goodkind, so we'll leave that alone. The second reading is more interesting and we're going to go into it more. The game portrays Eb as the face of the rebellion known even to the Archons. Nerat and Ashe discuss her and her powers in the war camp without mentioning Tarkis Arri - the actual war leader - at all. It is Eb who comes to meet with us to negotiate a prisoner exchange, telling us that unlike Kyros, they don't slaughter their prisoners. It's a clear declaration of moral superiority, combined with the rebellion actually caring about its captives as opposed to the sheer contempt shown by the Scarlet Chorus. Yet in the face of this rather slight resistance Eb casts all this aside and tortures this man for being suspicious of the person entering the forbidden secret area. The game makes it very clear this is an expedient - either Lantry or Sirin can get you past here, or you can use Subterfuge to lie and say you want to swear fealty to Raetommon. You don't need to torture this man, but Eb steps in and does it anyway. It casts her, and by extension the entire Vendrien Guard, in a new light, and I'm afraid a rather unflattering one. The official basis for the rebellion is that the rebels are better than Kyros morally and that Kyros' cruelty cannot be tolerated (the unofficial basis, is of course, Arri the "Apex patriot"). The actual rebellion has Eb swearing allegiance to gain a privileged position in Kyros' regime and now torturing a man because it's the easy way out. The Nietzsche abyss quote is overused yet relevant here - if you cannot tell the difference between the behavior of the resistance and the tyrant, why follow the resistance? Next time: I hope you like Bane! TheGreatEvilKing fucked around with this message at 02:36 on Dec 12, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 04:43
|
|
: Did you avenge my wife?
|
Spoiler: It's actually the Terry Goodkind one. We're not dealing with Hugo Award winners, here. These are writers of a fantasy video game, and here, violence is abstract. Eb used her cool water magic to choke a dude (which, by the way, is also literally one of the activated abilities she learns on her talent tree, so unless you avoid spending points on it, she's doing that constantly), because she's a "badass" who doesn't take any lip. I think the more interesting discussion to have in this situation is why, in fiction, "badass" is so often synonymous with "remorseless sociopath". Also, the way they just kind of let modern-style dialog sit in the middle of the Bronze Age-inspired setting yet also include a whole bunch of Bronze Age terms is very haphazard and careless. Like, I'm generally inclined to defend a lot of the decisions made for Tyranny, but the tone is all over the place.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 05:18
|
|
|
How do Lantry or Sirin get the torchkey? I assume Sirlin just uses her voice control.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 05:23
|
|
|
I dont know posted:How do Lantry or Sirin get the torchkey? I assume Sirlin just uses her voice control. Lantry drugs them. EclecticTastes posted:Spoiler: It's actually the Terry Goodkind one. Ugh, that seriously shits all over what they're trying to say here - but these are the guys who picked the Bronze Age because "combat was up close and personal".
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 06:34
|
|
|
Ya'll are applying modern morals to bronze age assholes. Eb's casual violence is a product of being in a world where nearly everyone uses casual violence. She just choked a guy, she didn't murder him.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 06:46
|
|
|
TheGreatEvilKing posted:. The Nietzsche abyss quote is overused yet relevant here - if you cannot tell the difference between the behavior of the resistance and the tyrant, why follow the resistance? Because even if the rebels have no objections to oppression as long as its them on top, they don't have the ability to oppress people as hard as Kyros does. A practical difference, rather than a moral one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 06:50
|
|
|
the up closeness and personalness and inequality of premodern warfare made the participants have really different attitudes towards it which make it jibe weirdly with kyros's edicts which are just wmds. consider this poem from bertrand de born, who was a medieval poet, slew like dozens of men personally and based upon his general experiences doing so wrote this (tr. ezra pound):quote:...We shall see battle axes and swords, a-battering colored haumes and a-hacking through shields at entering melee; and many vassals smiting together, whence there run free the horses of the dead and wrecked. And when each man of prowess shall be come into the fray he thinks no more of (merely) breaking heads and arms, for a dead man is worth more than one taken alive. this is alien to us because an artillery shell aimed right can get you wherever you are and whoever you are, but without artillery and with enough armor there were large amounts of time where peeps could actually enjoy the experience of battle and slaughter at relatively little risk, because arrows are way less scary than shells. its the foundation of why ancient generals accompanied their troops to battle and why modern ones do not. even the most tyranty of modern tyrants would accede to you that the actual experience of war was hell but if you go back far enough you find fuckers who would enjoy it, and durably enjoy it for decades. totally alien to modernity our stories are tainted by this, because we love to festoon our futuristic or medieval or whatever fantastical meat on homeric or other bronze or iron age bones. we think that this is just the nature of the story but chroniclers before modernity should be regarded with a little suspicion - was this guy like de born, that fucker? bob dobbs is dead fucked around with this message at 07:06 on Dec 11, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 07:01
|
|
|
TheGreatEvilKing posted:Lantry drugs them. I am an enormous RPG nerd, and have played basically every CRPG worth playing in particular, and the only game with writing that even comes close to reaching the level of "serious" writing is Disco Elysium. Everything else with good writing has the unspoken qualifier, "for a video game". Tyranny's writing is great, for a video game, so yeah sometimes there's bits where there's no deep, well thought-out reason for it and it's just because the writers thought it'd be "cool".
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 07:06
|
|
|
I feel like you could also read the situation as Ebb being 'corrupted' by following around the PC and her party of baddies. I mean they've probably been together for a week, or a couple of weeks, in game time by now, right? Probably if everyone else in the party is all vicious and brutal all the time then there probably isn't a whole lot of room for acting out any sort of kindness or mercy, and by stepping out and volunteering to waterboard the opposition she's able to draw a clear line between 'us' and 'them' with her firmly in the 'us' category. Alternately, maybe it's just a case of a Tyranny writer remembering Vader's force choke scene and deciding that it was cool enough that they wanted it in the game. In any case, thanks for the update!
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 08:22
|
|
|
sunken fleet posted:I feel like you could also read the situation as Ebb being 'corrupted' by following around the PC and her party of baddies. I mean they've probably been together for a week, or a couple of weeks, in game time by now, right? Probably if everyone else in the party is all vicious and brutal all the time then there probably isn't a whole lot of room for acting out any sort of kindness or mercy, and by stepping out and volunteering to waterboard the opposition she's able to draw a clear line between 'us' and 'them' with her firmly in the 'us' category. I'm sure TheGreatEvilKing will go into it in more detail later when we talk with Eb properly, so I'm just gonna say that you're drawing a conclusion from very incomplete information.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 08:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 23:00 |
|
|
The slow death image doesn't load for me. ------- Huh, I thought you could convince Myrek if you saw Raetommon throw away the lifes of his followers it the old walls first. I didn't actually try it, because he sucked and I didn't want to go out of my way to try and save him, but I genuinely expected it. Side note: I got my fatebinder to over 300 lore without NG+ and without abusing retraining too much. I have to say, fireballs with 300 lore behind them are fun! Full spellpower sigil, magefire, multiple bounces, increased AoE...  
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2020 10:32
|
|