[Spoilers] Hylea

[Longknife]

Not so much a spoiler, I just wanted to talk about her.

 

 

Am I the only one that thought she came across as a total ditz and an idiot?

 

You talk to Berath and Berath's just like "listen man, I get your concerns, but this is how the world works. There's a balance to it, and any attempt to toy with it and disrupt the world will only cause problems, you feel me?" There was a Taoist quid pro quo to Berath that just made sense, and before I even spoke with the other Gods, I was convinced to sign on with Berath. Hell, even knowing the end-game truth I consider Berath a worthy "God" as there's a respect for the natural order and nature of things.

  So when I promised to do what Berath wanted, I thought "crap, what if Hylea is really convincing too and has an option that seems better?"

 

 

So I do her mission and talk to her, and I didn't kill the dragon. She asks why and I say because motherhood is one of her pantheons, as are winged creatures, and that dragon was a mother. Hylea then responds with "but dragons breed death and destruction for others, what beauty could they bring to this world?" One of my responses was essentially "DEY R PURTY. DEY R A WONDER TO BEHOLD." I chose it thinking "this'll NEVER work, my character sounds like a retard."

It ****ing worked. Girl is all like "INDEED, THEY TRULY ARE BEAUTIFUL, THE WAY THEY LIGHT **** ON FIRE."

 

So at this point I'm like "listen dude, I need your help jumping in that big freaking hole" and she says you got it, she then asks me to return the souls to the Hollowborn.

Rightfully, I can bring up Berath's cautions and respond with something along the lines of "Wouldn't that have reprocussions? Surely it's not that simple and things are bound to go wrong?"

She responds "BUT IF YOU CAN SAVE EVEN JUST ONE BEAUTIFUL LIFE BY DOING SO, IT WILL BE WORTH IT~~" in her mystical-ass, sing-songy tone.

 

Listen dimwit, people get reborn in this universe. If they end up waiting in the wheel as souls a tad longer and some parents had to experience failed births, that's unfortunate and inconvenient, but simply returning the process to normal saves those souls in the long run. I'm sitting here concerned that something might go wrong if I try to return these souls to 4-year-old bodies, bodies that've been neglected with minimal care or the like, and your best counterargument is "YOLO?"

 

So as I stand there critiquing what I just heard, all this idiot can say is "I LIKE SONGS AND BIRDS AND PAINTINGS ~~"

 

 

 

 

 

This is a God? This is the most disappointing sorry excuse for a "God" I've ever seen. If she's supposed to offer the morally good (or at least well-intentioned) option, I'm not anywhere close to convinced. I can expect a bit of "do it because it's the right thing" where, say for example we spare someone who's death could mean we get to advance in the plotline and see to the greater good of the world, meaning we're sparing them with no plan B ready but we do so because we're determined to do things the right way and to find a plan B instead of resorting to murder. That I can expect from a "morally good" sort of alignment; I can expect some degree of missing logic if it means upholding to morals. But when there's another god saying "listen I can guarentee you that all damage will cease the moment those souls are returned to the Wheel" and all this girl can say is "WE SHOULD TAKE UNNECCESARY RISK BECAUSE SONGS R PRETTY AND I WANT TO HEAR DEM," then I wish she could get fired from her job. I wish there were an employer these Gods answered to and that when layoffs rolled around, Hylea got the axe.

 

 

 

  I just wanted to know, am I the only one that responded this way? Am I the only one that thought she came off as a total ditz?

[Primislas]

She acts according to her personality and ideals she's supposed to represent. As a mother-figure she can't deal with the grief of having hollowborn children. And she has some nice lines: great sorrow has to be followed with great joy, balance demands it. Ever the artist, our Hylea. It's not supposed to be "the good" decision, even though it feels as if a knee-jerk "that sounds great!". In the spirit of the game, our knee-jerk well-intentioned reaction immediately gets a reality check, with Berath being extremely convincing and persuasively eloquent dissuading PC from this route. But I have to say that Abydon was just as convincing, with Wael's offer being an interesting rebellious option. It's Rymrgand who made little sense to me. I guess sending souls to him would've strengthened him? But what's in it for Eora or at least for me? And, well, Woedica... what an astonishing way for authors to trample on justice, law, order and retribution that only the people role-playing selfish jerks would even consider restoring her rule. "Hey, guys! What if we make the goddess of Justice and Retribution the Big Bad?" In retrospect it's a deliciously twisted meal.

Edited April 3, 2015 by Primislas

[stratigo]

well at least there is no god of "I am an evil prick" Like in DnD.

[Voss]

 

 

  I just wanted to know, am I the only one that responded this way? Am I the only one that thought she came off as a total ditz?

 

But, given the nature of the gods.... this is entirely fitting.  She is beauty and art and birds and... nothing else. 

None of the gods have a moral dimension.

 

I'm poking at the different endings (for what little they're worth, sadly, since you can't do the really obvious thing and point out to everyone that the gods are useless creations of idiots), and feel the 'give the souls back to the hollowborn' should actually be a terrible idea, with horrifying consequences.  Most of them are _dead_.  Others have been in some creepy joining with animals souls.  That should all end badly, with crazed corpses and wichts that are even more unhinged running about.

[Longknife]

 

 

 

  I just wanted to know, am I the only one that responded this way? Am I the only one that thought she came off as a total ditz?

 

But, given the nature of the gods.... this is entirely fitting.  She is beauty and art and birds and... nothing else. 

None of the gods have a moral dimension.

 

 

But she's a derp. The point of choices is they're all supposed to feel valid. I cannot imagine myself being convinced by her, making it hard to think up a character that would support her without that character being a derp themselves.

 

 

Come to think of it, Wael of all people kind of falls into the same category. Wael's speech is essentially "launch them into SPACE! :D Because SCIENCE! :D" Then when you say "but we have no clue what would happen then and these are lives we're talking about," his response is "exactly! SCIENCE! :D"

 

I'd just be a bit more satisfied if two of my choices weren't derpy as hell. Woedica is the selfish choice, Berath is the sensible one, Magran and co offer the sensible experiment (aka we're not quite sure what this will do entirely but it should at least strengthen those who remain) and the rest make very poor arguments.

[Gallenger]

I ultimately went with Rymrgand's choice (entropy). 

 

I don't know Hylea's choice isn't *that* off base - she's a God after all, God's perspective on things is a little unusual lol.  Grieving mother will likewise encourage you to take her advice and attempt to restore the souls to the hollowborn.  Her point of "but if you bring just one child back" she's talking about the beauty that would create - because there are people all over the Dyrwood that are concealing their hollowborn children, and if they suddenly turned into normal kids all of a sudden, they'd be overjoyed.  Not to mention what would become of the feral packs of kids wondering around in the wilderness (wichts lol).   I saw it as a pretty good turn for your traditional "good" option.  Because you are literally bringing people back to life - or massively increasing their quality of life, on a fairly large scale. 

 

1.  If it works, you *would* create a lot of happiness in the world, and people would be extremely pleased.   

2.  If it doesn't work, there are more souls in the machines than there are living hollowborn, so they'll return to the cycle anyways. 

3.  Any side effects (kids growing up with weird soul problems) could be outweighed by a few normal kids existing. 

 

 

 

I ultimately picked Rymrgand's choice, because I liked Rymrgand.  He offered the souls a way out of the cycle to live with him in his nirvana of wintery-happiness.  He likewise mentions that you're not sure how the souls will behave, since they've been out of the cycle for so long, and furthermore, who knows if the machine(s) have done messed up things to them - best just to remove them from the cycle altogether. 

 

The mystery choice is just as well - because nobody will know where this large conglomeration of souls has gone, and boy will they seek it - since ultimate power will lie there lol.  That's the kinda thing Wael would really get off on lol. 

Edited April 3, 2015 by Gallenger

[Shadenuat]

I went with Hylea's choice simply because it made some people happier in the present and because it is unjust to take anyone's choice of living their life away.

 

What does it matter? PoE's world seems to be self-preserving, if you send souls back to the wheel they'll reborn, if you send them into hosts they'll eventually die and also be reborn, if you destroy them other souls will split and make more souls. It's a no-choice as long as it doesn't affect main character anyway.

[Primislas]

I ultimately picked Rymrgand's choice, because I liked Rymrgand.  He offered the souls a way out of the cycle to live with him in his nirvana of wintery-happiness.  He likewise mentions that you're not sure how the souls will behave, since they've been out of the cycle for so long, and furthermore, who knows if the machine(s) have done messed up things to them - best just to remove them from the cycle altogether. 

 

The mystery choice is just as well - because nobody will know where this large conglomeration of souls has gone, and boy will they seek it - since ultimate power will lie there lol.  That's the kinda thing Wael would really get off on lol. 

Ah, but if you're unsure about the state of the souls, why waste them on Rymrgand's realm? From what I've seen and heard, it doesn't really sound like wintery-happiness. Rather the grinding machine of the final death. So sacrifice them as Abydon and Magran beckon, use them to some good.

 

There was a fascinating speculation in a nearby thread about Eothas. What if he too was captured by the soul machines. All in all Wael's option feels as a rebellion against gods and the cycle, but what if by doing this you were releasing Eothas back to space (maybe empowering him with all the other souls in the process)? Although if Eothas was indeed captured, every option gets a very interesting new angle.

Edited April 3, 2015 by Primislas

[Nerdwing]

Hylea was, in her first incarnation, the Patron Deity of Autism.

[Sleazebag]

D&D gods still make Hylea look like a genius in comparison.

[Sonntam]

 

 

 

 

  I just wanted to know, am I the only one that responded this way? Am I the only one that thought she came off as a total ditz?

 

But, given the nature of the gods.... this is entirely fitting.  She is beauty and art and birds and... nothing else. 

None of the gods have a moral dimension.

 

 

But she's a derp. The point of choices is they're all supposed to feel valid. I cannot imagine myself being convinced by her, making it hard to think up a character that would support her without that character being a derp themselves.

 

 

Come to think of it, Wael of all people kind of falls into the same category. Wael's speech is essentially "launch them into SPACE! :D Because SCIENCE! :D" Then when you say "but we have no clue what would happen then and these are lives we're talking about," his response is "exactly! SCIENCE! :D"

 

I'd just be a bit more satisfied if two of my choices weren't derpy as hell. Woedica is the selfish choice, Berath is the sensible one, Magran and co offer the sensible experiment (aka we're not quite sure what this will do entirely but it should at least strengthen those who remain) and the rest make very poor arguments.

 

I think your problem is that you are looking from a logical standpoint and not from the standpoint of roleplaying a character. Someone who is sworn to solve the Hollowborn problem may be tempted by Hylea's suggestion. After all Hollowborn's problem is the lack of souls. If souls are returned to the body, everything should work out well. And if some children die anyway, they will return to the Wheel the normal way. And if some children are already dead, Wheel it is again.

 

It's pretty self-regulatory, except a couple parents become happier this way.

 

As for Wael, he really fits characters that can't decide on a single thing and/or feel this is not their decision to make. After all, gods don't know all there is to the world either.

 

For many characters those choices are really sensible, simply because they have different priorities (making people happy NOW or maybe some characters care more about helping themselves through confronting Thaos and don't really care what happens to the souls themselves). It allows rather good roleplaying. 

 

For me all of the solutions were non-choices except what Berath offered. I don't see the point of condemning them, though. More choices is always better than less.

[Longknife]

 

 

 

 

 

  I just wanted to know, am I the only one that responded this way? Am I the only one that thought she came off as a total ditz?

 

But, given the nature of the gods.... this is entirely fitting.  She is beauty and art and birds and... nothing else. 

None of the gods have a moral dimension.

 

 

But she's a derp. The point of choices is they're all supposed to feel valid. I cannot imagine myself being convinced by her, making it hard to think up a character that would support her without that character being a derp themselves.

 

 

Come to think of it, Wael of all people kind of falls into the same category. Wael's speech is essentially "launch them into SPACE! :D Because SCIENCE! :D" Then when you say "but we have no clue what would happen then and these are lives we're talking about," his response is "exactly! SCIENCE! :D"

 

I'd just be a bit more satisfied if two of my choices weren't derpy as hell. Woedica is the selfish choice, Berath is the sensible one, Magran and co offer the sensible experiment (aka we're not quite sure what this will do entirely but it should at least strengthen those who remain) and the rest make very poor arguments.

 

I think your problem is that you are looking from a logical standpoint and not from the standpoint of roleplaying a character.

 

 

My issue is I consider it a stretch of the imagination. I can roleplay a character that wishes to do good for the world, but I have no real desire to roleplay a total derp who cannot see Berath as a tempting, more secure counter-offer. If I were to roleplay such a character, I would see both options as being morally good, but with Berath's being less likely to blow something up by a clear mile, and ultimately settle for that choice since all souls have still been saved.

[Sonntam]

 

 

I think your problem is that you are looking from a logical standpoint and not from the standpoint of roleplaying a character.

 

 

My issue is I consider it a stretch of the imagination. I can roleplay a character that wishes to do good for the world, but I have no real desire to roleplay a total derp who cannot see Berath as a tempting, more secure counter-offer. If I were to roleplay such a character, I would see both options as being morally good, but with Berath's being less likely to blow something up by a clear mile, and ultimately settle for that choice since all souls have still been saved.

 

I often roleplay really flawed characters who are either very selfish or have personal issues that make thinking clearly difficult. Roleplaying someone who makes good decisions that never blow up their faces is boring. There is a reason I stopped playing complete goody-goody types. I want more drama in my games than that.

 

You make clever characters, I make characters who may not see very clearly. I mean, if my character was a parent who lost a child, would they still feel the same way, that it's more important that the cycle moves on rather than that parents get their children back, broken, but alive? They may emphatise very strongly with the children that had Hollowborn children.

 

People often make good choices as long as they have no personal stake in this. But if someone has an emotional connection, then there is more nuance. Even if such a character would forego Hylea's choice, it would still be interesting from roleplaying perspective, because now they would have to live with the doubts and the "what could have been".

[Longknife]

 

 

 

I think your problem is that you are looking from a logical standpoint and not from the standpoint of roleplaying a character.

 

 

My issue is I consider it a stretch of the imagination. I can roleplay a character that wishes to do good for the world, but I have no real desire to roleplay a total derp who cannot see Berath as a tempting, more secure counter-offer. If I were to roleplay such a character, I would see both options as being morally good, but with Berath's being less likely to blow something up by a clear mile, and ultimately settle for that choice since all souls have still been saved.

 

I often roleplay really flawed characters who are either very selfish or have personal issues that make thinking clearly difficult. Roleplaying someone who makes good decisions that never blow up their faces is boring. There is a reason I stopped playing complete goody-goody types. I want more drama in my games than that.

 

You make clever characters, I make characters who may not see very clearly. I mean, if my character was a parent who lost a child, would they still feel the same way, that it's more important that the cycle moves on rather than that parents get their children back, broken, but alive? They may emphatise very strongly with the children that had Hollowborn children.

 

People often make good choices as long as they have no personal stake in this. But if someone has an emotional connection, then there is more nuance. Even if such a character would forego Hylea's choice, it would still be interesting from roleplaying perspective, because now they would have to live with the doubts and the "what could have been".

 

 

I can roleplay flaws with the proper motivation. FFS my character I just finished I roleplayed as a hothead and thus took aggressive choices when they were clearly detrimental or unneccesary.

 

This however...It's too close. The alignment between the effects of Hylea and Berath are similar with both wanting something positive, but whereas one explains to you that there's a natural order and that disturbing it could have any number of negative outcomes, the other responds "YOLO 420."  If you roleplay a character that supports either of these two, they probably have an interest in "the greater good." But whereas one guarentees you the safety of the souls, the other does not. Any rational human being would take the safe choice. There is no greed or anger or personal flaw to motivate you the other direction as you're calmly talking to both and both are offering the same thing with one having a superior argument.

 

 

My point is I find it an utter shame that the spectrum of character archetypes with reason to support Hylea would be abysmally small. Berath would take a disproportionately larger cut of the morally good characters, thus making Hylea a very....wasted option. I could make 20 characters with varying personalities and not once roll a character with the proper motivations to support her. The same cannot be said for Woedica or Berath or Magran or even Rymrgand.

 

 

But Hylea and Wael? I consider them very, VERY limited when it comes to characters that'd support them, to the point I question if I'll ever see the effects of their endings. In both cases, this could be avoided if my concerns were met with actual answers, and not responses akin to "BIRDS R PRETTY" or:

 

 

[Primislas]

 

This however...It's too close. The alignment between the effects of Hylea and Berath are similar with both wanting something positive, but whereas one explains to you that there's a natural order and that disturbing it could have any number of negative outcomes, the other responds "YOLO 420."  If you roleplay a character that supports either of these two, they probably have an interest in "the greater good." But whereas one guarentees you the safety of the souls, the other does not. Any rational human being would take the safe choice. There is no greed or anger or personal flaw to motivate you the other direction as you're calmly talking to both and both are offering the same thing with one having a superior argument.

 

 

My point is I find it an utter shame that the spectrum of character archetypes with reason to support Hylea would be abysmally small. Berath would take a disproportionately larger cut of the morally good characters, thus making Hylea a very....wasted option. I could make 20 characters with varying personalities and not once roll a character with the proper motivations to support her. The same cannot be said for Woedica or Berath or Magran or even Rymrgand.

 

 

But Hylea and Wael? I consider them very, VERY limited when it comes to characters that'd support them, to the point I question if I'll ever see the effects of their endings. In both cases, this could be avoided if my concerns were met with actual answers, and not responses akin to "BIRDS R PRETTY" or:

 

 

 

 

But guess what. Berath is speculating (or actively trying to manipulate you). Just like all the other gods do. Berath claims souls can (and have to be) returned to the cycle. SIX other gods say they are too broken for it, so they either have to be disintegrated or sacrificed. Out of curiosity I loaded the save and restored the souls. The slides said nothing of "broken semi-feral" children, furthermore the souls that found no bodies to return to, returned to the cycle through the increased birthrate of twins in a year that became known as "the Year of Hylea's Splendor". So... yeah, Hylea was right. She's your actual benevolent/passionate choice, whereas Berath is rational/stoic I guess.

Edited April 3, 2015 by Primislas

[Longknife]

But guess what. Berath is speculating (or actively trying to manipulate you). Just like all the other gods do. Berath claims souls can (and have to be) returned to the cycle. SIX other gods say they are too broken for it, so they either have to be disintegrated or sacrificed. Out of curiosity I loaded the save and restored the souls. The slides said nothing of "broken semi-feral" children, furthermore the souls that found no bodies to return to, returned to the cycle through the increased birthrate of twins in a year that became known as "the Year of Hylea's Splendor". So... yeah, Hylea was right. She's your actual benevolent/passionate choice, whereas Berath is rational/stoic I guess.

 

 

How is Berath speculating? What Berath is offering is a certainty. It's the way things work by default. Anything else is variance from the norm.

[Sonntam]

 

But guess what. Berath is speculating (or actively trying to manipulate you). Just like all the other gods do. Berath claims souls can (and have to be) returned to the cycle. SIX other gods say they are too broken for it, so they either have to be disintegrated or sacrificed. Out of curiosity I loaded the save and restored the souls. The slides said nothing of "broken semi-feral" children, furthermore the souls that found no bodies to return to, returned to the cycle through the increased birthrate of twins in a year that became known as "the Year of Hylea's Splendor". So... yeah, Hylea was right. She's your actual benevolent/passionate choice, whereas Berath is rational/stoic I guess.

 

How is Berath speculating? What Berath is offering is a certainty. It's the way things work by default. Anything else is variance from the norm.

 

The souls were ripped from bodies. Their natural place would be in the bodies they were stolen from. 

 

Equally all souls will eventually "die" through Rymgrand's touch. That is actually part of the Wheel, if you will, since all souls will get worn out and need to be put to rest eventually. Rymgrand only argues that the time has come now. 

 

Feeding souls to other souls is a valid way of keeping the cycle up, too. Some animals eat souls and become stronger and some kith make themselves stronger through similar rituals. Since some souls can become shards and break (and through this become weaker) this is important to keep souls strong enough to survive. 

 

In a couple decades the decisions will likely not even matter, since the cycle has a way of rebalancing itself. 

 

All of this is pretty valid and has a place in the world. It's all natural. 

[Elerond]

 

 

This gods that we speak are artificially made to fulfill some role that they creators though gods should fulfill, which means that they are quite flawed gods that can have very flawed logic in what they do.  

 

 

[Longknife]

 

 

This gods that we speak are artificially made to fulfill some role that they creators though gods should fulfill, which means that they are quite flawed gods that can have very flawed logic in what they do.  

 

 

 

I get this, I'm just a tad disappointed in it from a roleplay perspective. I wanted to be challenged with tough decisions, not "here's a safe choice, here's a choice some ditz obsessed with birds told you might be cool."

[mutonizer]

Interesting since I actually went with Hylea myself.

 

 

 

Her quest with the dragon made immediate sense soon as I saw the dragon had youngs and her choice was the one the character I was playing could understand best, for the symbol it represented in the Eastern Reaches. Magran and whatnot choices just didn't fit really, wouldn't accomplish anything, while Hylea's choice, even if just one made it, that would be a an immediate symbol that would spread across the land.

 

Kind of a bummer she still tried to buy me off with "great power" though, that part didn't make sense.

Got completely wasted by Thaos though, repeatedly...so, failure anyway, but still, good idea and all that

 

 

[dukefx]

I don't know what you have against Hylea. I chose Galawain because of the might bonus and I was OK with his version as well. If I wouldn't have cared about stats I'd have surely chosen Hylea. Hylea's idea isn't the "good" choice, it's the "right" choice. Think of it as a theft. Someone steals your bike:

 

Hylea would want it returned.

Wael would want it to be thrown somewhere where it won't be found easily. It'd end up as a rusty piece of garbage or someone would find it and use it.

Galawain would dismantle it and give the pieces away which would serve as spare parts and could fix a lot of other bikes

Woedica would take it and use it.

Berath would melt it down and eventually someone would use it to create a new bike.

Rymrgand would smash it and lock it away so it can't be used nor recycled.

 

If I were a thief and stole your bike, which god would you pray to?

[Logos]

You can make any god one dimensional if you want. You've already given reductive interpretations of Wael and Hylea, but the others are just as easy,

 

Galawain: fight fight fight fight FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT

 

Woedica: *draws on raccoon eyes in eyeliner after artfully ripping her new jeans, then accidentally gets some on her Cure t-shirt* Woe(dica) is me, and you will pay for it in the end, ahahaha I'm not chaotic evil at all

 

Berath: Always look on the bright side of life *whistles*

 

That you can do this doesn't really say anything about them but more about your hermeneutics of popular culture.

Edited April 3, 2015 by Logos

[GayLenin]

Interesting since I actually went with Hylea myself.

 

 

 

Her quest with the dragon made immediate sense soon as I saw the dragon had youngs and her choice was the one the character I was playing could understand best, for the symbol it represented in the Eastern Reaches. Magran and whatnot choices just didn't fit really, wouldn't accomplish anything, while Hylea's choice, even if just one made it, that would be a an immediate symbol that would spread across the land.

 

Kind of a bummer she still tried to buy me off with "great power" though, that part didn't make sense.

Got completely wasted by Thaos though, repeatedly...so, failure anyway, but still, good idea and all that

 

 

 

Looks like you need that "great power" after all.

 

[Christliar]

All of the gods felt really shortsighted and kind of dumb (except Berath). I don't even get what they *do*. They don't answer prayers, don't create anything and don't involve themselves in the world. Except for Berath who actually has a domain that he keeps up to snuff, it's like a world governed by a bunch of Ao's from D&D, but it's not even that because they don't "govern" anything, they are just there for some stupid decision a bunch of people made 2000 years ago. So I don't think it's surprising that Hylea is all BIRDIES!! I think they all are a little unhinged.

if they are supposed to be "symbols" for anything, that can't be right, because even in the real world a religious text or representation can't be a "symbol" for anything. ALL religious texts and representations are allegories and can NOT be symbols. Schiller already mused on this in the 18th century.

[mutonizer]

 

 

Looks like you need that "great power" after all.

 

 

 

Hehe, yea, really got my butt kicked repeatedly but the wench didn't help with anything!