Jump to content

Ah, Rymrgand, why do you exist?


Recommended Posts

Even one of those book pages - slipped between the sides of the current prologue where Eotahs emerges - that would say something along the lines of "you tried to convince people that the gods were made by kith - but everybody just went 'lol, lmao'" would have sufficed I think. 

Edited by Boeroer
  • Like 1

Deadfire Community Patch: Nexus Mods

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, thelee said:

deadfire's narrative would be so much more cohesive with poe if they even just had one like minor quest in the early crit path where you DID try to say something about the fakeness of the gods (even just to a companion) and what you're talking about happened.

Absolutely. A little of this goes a long way. For example, you can have a very small discussion about Durance with Eld Engrim (I think) at Vilario's Rest, right at the beginning of the game. There's nothing more to it and it doesn't lead anywhere, but boy it's good. There's an instant continuity there. But with this god thing, it never exists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I  was with the impression that souls   coming back  constantly eventually  they become too broken to be useful. Here we are speaking about souls that got fragmented (as the Hiravias) multiples time after thousands of lives. And therefore, the best option is to eliminate said soul.  Of course, I have not been reviewing this world lore for some time, so I'm rusty,

Another way to see the purpose of this god is the fact he can bring the end to everything on Eoras. Not even Woedica or Eothas with the new body may be able to avoid it.  Therefore, it may be the final triumph of the mortals: Even the inevitable end, entrophy, is now under their control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

A bit late to the topic, but 2020 was weird for all of us. I feel that Rymrgand simply steps in to assume control of natural processes and entropy, to ensure that they don't happen outside the gods' control (and we all know, if there's anything Engwith loved, it's control). Souls will fracture either way, and leaving that to chance, rather than appointing one of your buddies to watch over the process is asking for trouble.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...
On 1/21/2021 at 4:35 PM, thelee said:

keeping in mind boeroer's apt point [which would also explain why you can't just go around shouting to everyone that the gods aren't real in deadfire], it is definitely the case that at least in deadfire there's a lot of talk about how flawed the natural process was (hollowborn, etc.) and so the engwithans wanted to fix the natural process and also improve humanity in the process (of course they basically genocided so many peoples in the process of stripping away all other competing belief systems and creating the gods in the first place so...). eothas being eothas also takes this to mean that gods become obsolete over time, whereas woedica seems to think it's the constant tyrannical rule of gods that will do this.

 

this might have to be one of those moments where we just "embrace the mystery" and hope in the distant future some retcon clarifies it.

I'm necroing a thread and apologize, but I always feel the need to push back against the notion that the natural wheel was flawed and that the artificial wheel was an improvement. 

As far as I've seen, the only source that claims that the natural wheel was problematic is Woedica in the burned book and I find her very untrustworthy.  She's in the middle of trying to pitch how badly kith need the gods so of course she's going to try to instill fear in the watcher in terms of what might happen without their guiding hand. 

She has shown time and again that her MO is to manipulate others through lies and deception to get them to do what she wants.  Her actions with Thaos, her turning Magran against Eothas in Poe1 (Magran comments that she won't be rushed to action by Woedica again).  If her comments about how bad the natural wheel was occured in front of the other gods then I might believe it but she only mentions it when in a 1 on 1 conversation with the watcher where she is obviously trying to manipulate us.

Out of all the gods I trust her statements the least, even less than Wael.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trustworthy godess or not - the book of Woedica was added very late in the patching cycle after a lot of players voiced confusion about the motivation of the gods and the history and lore of the engwithans. The book was added to add a bit more exposition/explanation and make things clearer to players. I wouldn't make much sense to then add something that misleads players even further.

Also Woedica is not known for trickery or skullduggery but for law, justice and oaths- so why shouldn't one trust that she says what she really thinks/recalls about the whole shebang? She might be an extemely autocratic and even cruel deity but she's especially not know for lying.   

In D&D she would be a lawful evil goddess.

Edited by Boeroer

Deadfire Community Patch: Nexus Mods

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't know that about when the book was added, that certainly makes it more trustworthy. 

I don't think I agree that Woedica is bound to truthfulness, though.  Thaos was her "champion" and he relied primarily on deception and half truths to manipulate people.  It's implied that she manipulated Magran into using the godhammer.  I think she's capable of lying or at the very least overstating or obfuscating her case in order to manipulate the watcher. 

She's a god of order and law but I don't think it's true that order/law = truth.  I dont think oaths = truth, either.  I think she is very much a "ends justify the means" god.  I see her analogue in real life being the politician who is comfortable with deception and lies because in her head she's doing what's necessary to keep order.

I should add that I appreciate the response.  Part of me is wondering if I missed something in game that makes Woedica more credible because people generally seem to take her at her word and I find her really untrustworthy.  Something along the lines of "the fastest way to find out the right answer is to emphatically state the wrong answer on the internet"?

Edited by crdvis16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...