Evil Companions

[FlintlockJazz]

 

Regarding sociopaths (or psychopaths, I always get those two mixed up, think it depends on the country you are in as to which is which), they are capable of coherent thought unless they have other compulsions or issues (which is the case with most serial killers, they are usually sociopaths with compulsions that drive them to kill over their own deeply ingrained sense of self-preservation), they just don't care about anyone other than themselves.  They are the closest thing to evil in real life, because they can sit there, know what they are doing is wrong and still do it anyway (and cover up after themselves) or not depending solely on a cost-benefit analysis. 

What you are describing is not a psycho, it is a sociopath.  A sociopath is a person who simply has no moral values or conscious.  They can walk up to a guy selling hot dogs on the street with no money, ask for a hot dog, then pull a knife and kill the hot dog vendor when they refuse to sell them one, or just wait tell he isn't looking and steal one more likely.  Either way they won't feel bad, they didn't have money sure, but they wanted a hot dog anyway.  Durance is very much a sociopath, you ask him why he killed tons of women, children, etc etc just because he "thought" they were Eothasians he will spew some might makes right, the ends justify the means, Eothas caused the stillborn (he knows this is highly unlikely) BS.  Sociopaths need to justify their actions, Durance repeatedly tries to justify his.  He isn't a Wicht, he knows exactly what he is doing.

 

Also I would scale back the liberal agenda CEO nonsense.  Or do you think Obama is a sociopath because he has ordered actions that has caused the deaths of hundreds yet can still sleep at night?  Also for all the smelling like roses comments high powered corporate america executives on the grass roots level are hated and distrusted by most people so yeah.  Just don't confuse "I made a cost benefit analysis that cost 5 thousand people their jobs but improved company productivity and long term viability/health" with "I knifed a guy in an alley because I wanted to make a play for his girlfriend"  They REALLY aren't the same thing. 

 

 

 

I would scale back the strawmanning mate, I made no political stance there just stated a fact that many people in power are quantifiably sociopaths (or psychopaths as they are called over here, terms used are different depending on country).  This is a fact, it does not make a statement about liberal agendas or suchlike, so please don't bring politics into this. 

 

I'm getting a bit bored of the strawmanning and false dichotomy so I'm ducking out of this debate about computer games that is turning towards something else.  Have fun everybody.

[Karkarov]

I'm getting a bit bored of the strawmanning and false dichotomy so I'm ducking out of this debate about computer games that is turning towards something else.  Have fun everybody.

Don't take this the wrong way but people who resort to calling other peoples arguments "strawmen" might as well be saying "I can't refute what you are saying so I will insult you instead".  If you want to agree to disagree and leave it at that, then that is fine by me, but leave the insults out of it.

Edited March 4, 2016 by Karkarov

[Katarack21]

 

Durance can barely understand what's happening to him or the world around him on a day-to-day basis. I doubt he has the capacity to understand why he's doing anything, let alone what any of it means or the purpose behind any of it.

 

I think you're way exaggerating.

 

He functions just fine on a day-to-day basis, and in some interactions with NPCs his observations/interjections actually indicate above-average clarity and even wisdom.

 

Sure he lives in a separate reality in a sense, but it seems to me that that's more due to his refusal to come to terms with Magran's rejection of him and his attempts to rationalize an evil philosophy, than a result of clinical illness.

 

You seem to be arguing from the premise that if someone has just a pinch of craziness in them, their free will and capacity to be responsible for evil acts immediately drops from 100% to 0%.

I'd say it's more of an overlapping spectrum, and I'd put Durance at about "15% crazy, 85% evil" in that spectrum.

 

Yes, he functions so fine on a day-to-day basis that he smells like a trash heap, never showers or bathes, doesn't clean his clothes, gives every impression of being a wandering beggar, and goes on essentially random rants at people for no reason that those people can understand. He's so functional that sometimes he's not sure where he is, or when it is. He's so functional.

 

Being crazy doesn't mean you're a babbling, incoherent mess every minute of every day. It doesn't mean your stupid, either. Having moments of clarity, and even being wise on a general basis, are things that crazy people can do.

 

I'm certainly not "arguing from the premise that if someone has just a pinch of craziness in them, their free will and capacity to be responsible for evil acts immediately drops from 100% to 0%." That's a ****ing strawman. That's *you* attempting to justify your desire to punish a clearly crazy person for actions that they aren't responsible for by making the amount of damage they've suffered seem much less than it is, by making legit statements regarding the damage in question seem utterly ridiculous.

 

What I'm arguing is that Durance is bat**** crazy, that his bat**** crazy originates specifically from that damage that was done to him by the Godhammer bomb, and that because of those facts he's not culpable as "evil". That's what I'm arguing, not your "premise that if someone has just a pinch of craziness in them, their free will and capacity to be responsible for evil acts immediately drops from 100% to 0%".

[illathid]

 

The thing is by this standard absolutely no one would be Evil. No one actually thinks what they're doing is evil. Try to think of the worst people in history, not one of them would say the actions they committed was morally wrong.

No, I think for insanity to excuse ones actions it needs to rise to an elevated level. Like they didn't intend to behead their wife, but they actually though her head was a hat (to mangle a famous example).

 

You assume that everyone is doing what they believe in.  Do people work jobs because they believe in the company?  Or because they need the money?  Do people only rob others because they need to?  Or do some just not care about their victims?  If someone is doing something because they genuinely believe it needs to be done then that's one thing, if they are doing it because they got paid to do it then that's another.  People do things every day that they know is wrong, yet they do it anyway.

 

Regarding sociopaths (or psychopaths, I always get those two mixed up, think it depends on the country you are in as to which is which), they are capable of coherent thought unless they have other compulsions or issues (which is the case with most serial killers, they are usually sociopaths with compulsions that drive them to kill over their own deeply ingrained sense of self-preservation), they just don't care about anyone other than themselves.  They are the closest thing to evil in real life, because they can sit there, know what they are doing is wrong and still do it anyway (and cover up after themselves) or not depending solely on a cost-benefit analysis.  There is a reason why so many CEOs and politicians are sociopaths, and there is a reason why you should be afraid of them.  And unfortunately, most of them are good at covering it up, passing the blame onto others, and come out smelling of roses.  If Durance was a sociopath, you wouldn't know it, you'd think he was The Best Guy Around, he'd be like Eder (they are good at pretending to be what they are not because they don't care about lying to and manipulating people), and everyone would consider him a bro right up until he slit your thought in your sleep because he decided your continued existence was a burden.

I think you're making a mistake regarding what people believe in. People may not think what they're doing is "Good" but very few people think what they're doing is evil. People who engage in criminal acts like stealing usually believe the acts are justified. The system hurt, or the guy was jerk, they had no choice, or they have a family to feed, etc. They may think that other people committing the same acts are evil, but they themselves are a special snowflake and the circumstances excuse it so it's not evil.

[Nonek]

The self righteous seldom have time for self reflection, to take the judgementalism of the self righteous and then prop up their arrogance with the demands of a god, well that is a a fine recipe for such a character as Durance. After all why should the morals and laws of man affect the holy work of one who has been tasked by a god, these are observances for the lesser beings they stand above.

[Ymarsakar]

 

There is no "think you can breathe in water or your not crazy" sanity check. That doesn't exist.

 

That test has to exist, otherwise nobody is sane. There has to be an objective reality to go with an objective test, otherwise half the people can believe the CIA owns that MCDonalds and the other half disagrees. But nobody is right, or rather everyone is right.

 

As for people in power, they are certainly narcissists most of the time. They can level up to malignant narcissists and then psychopath/sociopath later on.

 

For Durance, he doesn't need to cover up his activities to survive. The Dyrwood would praise him for it, and the Dozens would hail him as a hero. In US culture, at least, the sociopath probably understands that he can't admit to eating humans he has killed. Not going to benefit him that much. Many warrior societies have made use of narcissists and psychopaths, by training them to adhere to warrior values and tribal rules. This makes use of their ability to kill people for their own benefit, by making it to the tribe's benefit as well. And when the narcissist fails, hey, one less potential psycho around. It's win win either way for the tribal society.

Edited March 5, 2016 by Ymarsakar

[Stoner]

 

 

Haven't noticed any evil or good in any of my companions, I'm more amused about absolutely insane stuff like this (beware, fat spoilers ahead):

When you bring cattle (poor frightened, hungry people) to the top of Engwithian tower, let bloodthirsty mad zombie it them alive, getting power by absorbing kith souls, and than brutally chopping this zombie after good meal, and noone even reacts to this madness, by saying something like: what the f... is wrong with you, man?...

 

Edited March 5, 2016 by Stoner

[Katarack21]

 

 

There is no "think you can breathe in water or your not crazy" sanity check. That doesn't exist.

 

That test has to exist, otherwise nobody is sane. There has to be an objective reality to go with an objective test, otherwise half the people can believe the CIA owns that MCDonalds and the other half disagrees. But nobody is right, or rather everyone is right.

No, it doesn't. You seem to be going with the idea that if your not completely and totally disconnected from observable reality, you're fine.

 

That's not how it works. Even in the depths of a total psychotic break, that's not how it works. It's more of an overlay changing how reality is perceived. The people who think they can breath underwater are really, really rare and mostly sit around in institutions being catatonic. More likely are the people who think they *could* breathe underwater if you can only find the final ingredient in that recipe the alien gave you last night, that recipe being needed to save the world from the secret Reptilian base under Lake Superior so if the security could just give me that St. Elmo's Wart and let me go I'll get on about my damn business.

 

That's how delusion, paranoia, etc. work. They don't force you to do irrational things with no logic to them. Crazy people aren't being irrational, or illogical. Crazy people are making rational and logical decisions, having rational reactions, etc. *to completely irrational ideas and fears*. As I said, it's logical reactions to an absurd premise.

 

Then there are other symptoms of mental illness, such as a break down of executive function. That ones common with schizophrenics; what that means is a disintegration of the ability to plan ahead, to inhibit the expression of emotions, the breakdown of working memory, the ability to focus attention, etc. What that means is that the people who suffer these symptoms have had a complete or partial loss in the ability to influence or control their own thoughts, feelings, or behaviors, the ability to plan ahead, the ability to focus on one task until completion, etc. They also tend to lose mental flexibility and suffer some forms of amnesia to episodic memory.

 

People who suffer from these conditions are perfectly capable of walking around, going shopping, having a normal conversation with you on the bus, etc. They might seem strange, act a little weird, or they might seem perfectly ordinary. That doesn't mean they aren't completely off their rocker, or that they are in any way responsible for their behaviors. Damage to executive function is *defined* as damage to the ability to influence oneself; delusions and paranoia generally mean that one is reacting in perfectly logical ways to a belief that is irrational and *impossible to influence, control, or change*.

 

Durance is clearly non-functional. He is the Eora equivalent to the wandering homeless preacher ranting about aliens on the street corner.

[illathid]

 

 

 

There is no "think you can breathe in water or your not crazy" sanity check. That doesn't exist.

 

That test has to exist, otherwise nobody is sane. There has to be an objective reality to go with an objective test, otherwise half the people can believe the CIA owns that MCDonalds and the other half disagrees. But nobody is right, or rather everyone is right.

No, it doesn't. You seem to be going with the idea that if your not completely and totally disconnected from observable reality, you're fine.

 

That's not how it works. Even in the depths of a total psychotic break, that's not how it works. It's more of an overlay changing how reality is perceived. The people who think they can breath underwater are really, really rare and mostly sit around in institutions being catatonic. More likely are the people who think they *could* breathe underwater if you can only find the final ingredient in that recipe the alien gave you last night, that recipe being needed to save the world from the secret Reptilian base under Lake Superior so if the security could just give me that St. Elmo's Wart and let me go I'll get on about my damn business.

 

That's how delusion, paranoia, etc. work. They don't force you to do irrational things with no logic to them. Crazy people aren't being irrational, or illogical. Crazy people are making rational and logical decisions, having rational reactions, etc. *to completely irrational ideas and fears*. As I said, it's logical reactions to an absurd premise.

 

Then there are other symptoms of mental illness, such as a break down of executive function. That ones common with schizophrenics; what that means is a disintegration of the ability to plan ahead, to inhibit the expression of emotions, the breakdown of working memory, the ability to focus attention, etc. What that means is that the people who suffer these symptoms have had a complete or partial loss in the ability to influence or control their own thoughts, feelings, or behaviors, the ability to plan ahead, the ability to focus on one task until completion, etc. They also tend to lose mental flexibility and suffer some forms of amnesia to episodic memory.

 

People who suffer from these conditions are perfectly capable of walking around, going shopping, having a normal conversation with you on the bus, etc. They might seem strange, act a little weird, or they might seem perfectly ordinary. That doesn't mean they aren't completely off their rocker, or that they are in any way responsible for their behaviors. Damage to executive function is *defined* as damage to the ability to influence oneself; delusions and paranoia generally mean that one is reacting in perfectly logical ways to a belief that is irrational and *impossible to influence, control, or change*.

 

Durance is clearly non-functional. He is the Eora equivalent to the wandering homeless preacher ranting about aliens on the street corner.

 

 

I'll I have to say is look at the end of the Durance quest. If Durance was as non-functional as you claim, there would be no convincing him he had been betrayed by Magran.

[Katarack21]

 

 

 

 

There is no "think you can breathe in water or your not crazy" sanity check. That doesn't exist.

 

That test has to exist, otherwise nobody is sane. There has to be an objective reality to go with an objective test, otherwise half the people can believe the CIA owns that MCDonalds and the other half disagrees. But nobody is right, or rather everyone is right.

No, it doesn't. You seem to be going with the idea that if your not completely and totally disconnected from observable reality, you're fine.

 

That's not how it works. Even in the depths of a total psychotic break, that's not how it works. It's more of an overlay changing how reality is perceived. The people who think they can breath underwater are really, really rare and mostly sit around in institutions being catatonic. More likely are the people who think they *could* breathe underwater if you can only find the final ingredient in that recipe the alien gave you last night, that recipe being needed to save the world from the secret Reptilian base under Lake Superior so if the security could just give me that St. Elmo's Wart and let me go I'll get on about my damn business.

 

That's how delusion, paranoia, etc. work. They don't force you to do irrational things with no logic to them. Crazy people aren't being irrational, or illogical. Crazy people are making rational and logical decisions, having rational reactions, etc. *to completely irrational ideas and fears*. As I said, it's logical reactions to an absurd premise.

 

Then there are other symptoms of mental illness, such as a break down of executive function. That ones common with schizophrenics; what that means is a disintegration of the ability to plan ahead, to inhibit the expression of emotions, the breakdown of working memory, the ability to focus attention, etc. What that means is that the people who suffer these symptoms have had a complete or partial loss in the ability to influence or control their own thoughts, feelings, or behaviors, the ability to plan ahead, the ability to focus on one task until completion, etc. They also tend to lose mental flexibility and suffer some forms of amnesia to episodic memory.

 

People who suffer from these conditions are perfectly capable of walking around, going shopping, having a normal conversation with you on the bus, etc. They might seem strange, act a little weird, or they might seem perfectly ordinary. That doesn't mean they aren't completely off their rocker, or that they are in any way responsible for their behaviors. Damage to executive function is *defined* as damage to the ability to influence oneself; delusions and paranoia generally mean that one is reacting in perfectly logical ways to a belief that is irrational and *impossible to influence, control, or change*.

 

Durance is clearly non-functional. He is the Eora equivalent to the wandering homeless preacher ranting about aliens on the street corner.

 

 

I'll I have to say is look at the end of the Durance quest. If Durance was as non-functional as you claim, there would be no convincing him he had been betrayed by Magran.

 

Not at all. Magran wasn't the center of his functionality problems, just the cause. We don't get to see whether that knowledge actually changes anything. I would argue that it probably won't make any difference, because what he believes about Magran's loyalty or lack there of won't suddenly make him able to control his outbursts, fix his memory, make him able to focus, etc.

[Romanul]

Yeah, I too think the game needs more Evil companions. I think evil is objective but I won't go into a debate on why evil is objective. I will instead give a short description of the character I would like to see: a slaver searching for fugitive slaves. A kind of character that doesn't complain when I trade a hatchling for 500 copper (like Ender does in WM1) or when I harm the baby (like the G. Mother does). A kind of character that would support my dungeon efforts in the Stronghold and would be willing to trade some of my companions to the slavers. 

On the plus side, the Devil of Caroc is well done and fits my definition of evil. I like how in the Caed Nua debates I can use her to kill the NPCs who ask for my help. Definitely a nice touch. What I would have liked to see is a better explanation/option for why the Devil of Caroc is my companion. The official one is pretty vague and I would have liked to have the option of blackmailing her some way ( a truly evil way basically making her a slave or something). It's not the kind of character I would normally allow free as a companion (without some major leveraging).

[illathid]

Not at all. Magran wasn't the center of his functionality problems, just the cause. We don't get to see whether that knowledge actually changes anything. I would argue that it probably won't make any difference, because what he believes about Magran's loyalty or lack there of won't suddenly make him able to control his outbursts, fix his memory, make him able to focus, etc.

1) you've missed the point I was making. I'm not saying anything about his actual beliefs about Magran. I'm talking about how Durance changed a deeply held belief based on evidence and logical argumentation. If he was non-functional as you claim that wouldn't have been successful, or he would've forgotten about it, etc.

 

2) what outbursts, memory/focus problems are you talking about? He makes interjections the same as other companions, has no problem remembering events that occurred 15+ years ago or since then, and he can focus on any given subject you bring up. I honestly have no idea where you are getting this from.

[Katarack21]

 

Not at all. Magran wasn't the center of his functionality problems, just the cause. We don't get to see whether that knowledge actually changes anything. I would argue that it probably won't make any difference, because what he believes about Magran's loyalty or lack there of won't suddenly make him able to control his outbursts, fix his memory, make him able to focus, etc.

1) you've missed the point I was making. I'm not saying anything about his actual beliefs about Magran. I'm talking about how Durance changed a deeply held belief based on evidence and logical argumentation. If he was non-functional as you claim that wouldn't have been successful, or he would've forgotten about it, etc.

 

2) what outbursts, memory/focus problems are you talking about? He makes interjections the same as other companions, has no problem remembering events that occurred 15+ years ago or since then, and he can focus on any given subject you bring up. I honestly have no idea where you are getting this from.

 

1) Crazy people can in fact change deeply held beliefs. Schizophrenics can change religions, change political positions, etc. That only becomes a problem if the belief in question is delusional or something. The loss of mental flexibility discussed in problems with executive function are for one thing not of that type--it's about the tendency to become stuck in routine habits, not the inability to change ones mind--and are only one symptom of executive dysfunction, experienced by some but not by all patients.

 

2) Durance can recall some events with perfect clarity, others are extremely fuzzy and unclear when discussed, and I recall at least one occasion where he couldn't remember details that were important to him. Sometimes he doesn't even seem clear about where he is, or what's going on. He can focus temporarily on the immediate events, but then he'll go off on unrelated tangents, or start ranting about random things at random times. Difficulty focusing also doesn't mean what you seem to think; it doesn't mean you can never pay attention to anything ever. It means you have a hard time controlling your focus; sometimes you can't pay attention to things, sometimes you pay *WAY* to much attention to things (hyperfocus), but in general outside of an acute manic or psychotic state even a deeply troubled individual can pay attention to a conversation for a minute or to. Even the dude down at the Mission I was sleeping at who wanders around in a daze talking to four or five people who aren't there can stop, say high, chat about the weather, discuss the food in line and then go back to his own little world.

[KDubya]

Yeah, I too think the game needs more Evil companions. I think evil is objective but I won't go into a debate on why evil is objective. I will instead give a short description of the character I would like to see: a slaver searching for fugitive slaves. A kind of character that doesn't complain when I trade a hatchling for 500 copper (like Ender does in WM1) or when I harm the baby (like the G. Mother does). A kind of character that would support my dungeon efforts in the Stronghold and would be willing to trade some of my companions to the slavers. 

 

On the plus side, the Devil of Caroc is well done and fits my definition of evil. I like how in the Caed Nua debates I can use her to kill the NPCs who ask for my help. Definitely a nice touch. What I would have liked to see is a better explanation/option for why the Devil of Caroc is my companion. The official one is pretty vague and I would have liked to have the option of blackmailing her some way ( a truly evil way basically making her a slave or something). It's not the kind of character I would normally allow free as a companion (without some major leveraging).

 

How do you consider Devil of Caroc to be Evil?

 

People came and slaughtered her entire village and family by burning their homes down and killing whomever fled the flames. She survived and brought justice to the guilty. I see no evil in what she did. She did not go and slaughter the entire village of everyone who slaughtered hers, she just meted out justice to the guilty ones.

 

I could see Grieving Mother as evil for her actions and manipulation of people. Mind control seems pretty evil to me.

[illathid]

 

 

Not at all. Magran wasn't the center of his functionality problems, just the cause. We don't get to see whether that knowledge actually changes anything. I would argue that it probably won't make any difference, because what he believes about Magran's loyalty or lack there of won't suddenly make him able to control his outbursts, fix his memory, make him able to focus, etc.

1) you've missed the point I was making. I'm not saying anything about his actual beliefs about Magran. I'm talking about how Durance changed a deeply held belief based on evidence and logical argumentation. If he was non-functional as you claim that wouldn't have been successful, or he would've forgotten about it, etc.

 

2) what outbursts, memory/focus problems are you talking about? He makes interjections the same as other companions, has no problem remembering events that occurred 15+ years ago or since then, and he can focus on any given subject you bring up. I honestly have no idea where you are getting this from.

 

1) Crazy people can in fact change deeply held beliefs. Schizophrenics can change religions, change political positions, etc. That only becomes a problem if the belief in question is delusional or something. The loss of mental flexibility discussed in problems with executive function are for one thing not of that type--it's about the tendency to become stuck in routine habits, not the inability to change ones mind--and are only one symptom of executive dysfunction, experienced by some but not by all patients.

 

2) Durance can recall some events with perfect clarity, others are extremely fuzzy and unclear when discussed, and I recall at least one occasion where he couldn't remember details that were important to him. Sometimes he doesn't even seem clear about where he is, or what's going on. He can focus temporarily on the immediate events, but then he'll go off on unrelated tangents, or start ranting about random things at random times. Difficulty focusing also doesn't mean what you seem to think; it doesn't mean you can never pay attention to anything ever. It means you have a hard time controlling your focus; sometimes you can't pay attention to things, sometimes you pay *WAY* to much attention to things (hyperfocus), but in general outside of an acute manic or psychotic state even a deeply troubled individual can pay attention to a conversation for a minute or to. Even the dude down at the Mission I was sleeping at who wanders around in a daze talking to four or five people who aren't there can stop, say high, chat about the weather, discuss the food in line and then go back to his own little world.

 

 

1) Routine habits, like using priestly magic? Durance never uses it again if you convince him that Magran betrayed him.

 

2) Yeah, no I just finished my play through last night with durance in my party the whole time. You'll need to come up with specific examples you think show this behavior because there was none that I saw the entire game.

[anameforobsidian]

I'm of the mind that even if Durance is crazy, he's not completely out of step with the rest of the world so he still has limited agency.  And even in his saner moments, he's still remarkably amoral (joking about other characters' deaths) etc.  

[Katarack21]

 

 

 

Not at all. Magran wasn't the center of his functionality problems, just the cause. We don't get to see whether that knowledge actually changes anything. I would argue that it probably won't make any difference, because what he believes about Magran's loyalty or lack there of won't suddenly make him able to control his outbursts, fix his memory, make him able to focus, etc.

1) you've missed the point I was making. I'm not saying anything about his actual beliefs about Magran. I'm talking about how Durance changed a deeply held belief based on evidence and logical argumentation. If he was non-functional as you claim that wouldn't have been successful, or he would've forgotten about it, etc.

 

2) what outbursts, memory/focus problems are you talking about? He makes interjections the same as other companions, has no problem remembering events that occurred 15+ years ago or since then, and he can focus on any given subject you bring up. I honestly have no idea where you are getting this from.

 

1) Crazy people can in fact change deeply held beliefs. Schizophrenics can change religions, change political positions, etc. That only becomes a problem if the belief in question is delusional or something. The loss of mental flexibility discussed in problems with executive function are for one thing not of that type--it's about the tendency to become stuck in routine habits, not the inability to change ones mind--and are only one symptom of executive dysfunction, experienced by some but not by all patients.

 

2) Durance can recall some events with perfect clarity, others are extremely fuzzy and unclear when discussed, and I recall at least one occasion where he couldn't remember details that were important to him. Sometimes he doesn't even seem clear about where he is, or what's going on. He can focus temporarily on the immediate events, but then he'll go off on unrelated tangents, or start ranting about random things at random times. Difficulty focusing also doesn't mean what you seem to think; it doesn't mean you can never pay attention to anything ever. It means you have a hard time controlling your focus; sometimes you can't pay attention to things, sometimes you pay *WAY* to much attention to things (hyperfocus), but in general outside of an acute manic or psychotic state even a deeply troubled individual can pay attention to a conversation for a minute or to. Even the dude down at the Mission I was sleeping at who wanders around in a daze talking to four or five people who aren't there can stop, say high, chat about the weather, discuss the food in line and then go back to his own little world.

 

 

1) Routine habits, like using priestly magic? Durance never uses it again if you convince him that Magran betrayed him.

 

2) Yeah, no I just finished my play through last night with durance in my party the whole time. You'll need to come up with specific examples you think show this behavior because there was none that I saw the entire game.

 

1) That's more like a person deciding to not be a Christian and therefore not pray; it has very little to do with the "routine habits" that come with loss of mental flexibility. You simply don't understand what it is; that's okay, but there comes a point where you should start paying attention to those who do. You're whole conception of mental illness is flawed, and  you refuse to listen to the fact that your definitions and concepts regarding it are simply incorrect.

 

2) I'm sorry, I didn't take notes and write down every quote Durance ever said throughout the game. My bad. My 7th playthrough, I'll make sure to do that.

Edited March 7, 2016 by Katarack21

[Hayzeus]

I could see Grieving Mother as evil for her actions and manipulation of people. Mind control seems pretty evil to me.

 

 

I think she did the mind control thing for the sake self-preservation. And because of emotional trauma. Not guilty.

 

The ethics of mind control... well, I think there's something innit. Mind control can be considered an evil act in itself. Or not! For example, Obi-Wan Kenobi (not in Pillars of Eternity) wasn't doing anything terribly evil when he fooled the stormtrooper.

[illathid]

 

 

 

 

Not at all. Magran wasn't the center of his functionality problems, just the cause. We don't get to see whether that knowledge actually changes anything. I would argue that it probably won't make any difference, because what he believes about Magran's loyalty or lack there of won't suddenly make him able to control his outbursts, fix his memory, make him able to focus, etc.

1) you've missed the point I was making. I'm not saying anything about his actual beliefs about Magran. I'm talking about how Durance changed a deeply held belief based on evidence and logical argumentation. If he was non-functional as you claim that wouldn't have been successful, or he would've forgotten about it, etc.

 

2) what outbursts, memory/focus problems are you talking about? He makes interjections the same as other companions, has no problem remembering events that occurred 15+ years ago or since then, and he can focus on any given subject you bring up. I honestly have no idea where you are getting this from.

 

1) Crazy people can in fact change deeply held beliefs. Schizophrenics can change religions, change political positions, etc. That only becomes a problem if the belief in question is delusional or something. The loss of mental flexibility discussed in problems with executive function are for one thing not of that type--it's about the tendency to become stuck in routine habits, not the inability to change ones mind--and are only one symptom of executive dysfunction, experienced by some but not by all patients.

 

2) Durance can recall some events with perfect clarity, others are extremely fuzzy and unclear when discussed, and I recall at least one occasion where he couldn't remember details that were important to him. Sometimes he doesn't even seem clear about where he is, or what's going on. He can focus temporarily on the immediate events, but then he'll go off on unrelated tangents, or start ranting about random things at random times. Difficulty focusing also doesn't mean what you seem to think; it doesn't mean you can never pay attention to anything ever. It means you have a hard time controlling your focus; sometimes you can't pay attention to things, sometimes you pay *WAY* to much attention to things (hyperfocus), but in general outside of an acute manic or psychotic state even a deeply troubled individual can pay attention to a conversation for a minute or to. Even the dude down at the Mission I was sleeping at who wanders around in a daze talking to four or five people who aren't there can stop, say high, chat about the weather, discuss the food in line and then go back to his own little world.

 

 

1) Routine habits, like using priestly magic? Durance never uses it again if you convince him that Magran betrayed him.

 

2) Yeah, no I just finished my play through last night with durance in my party the whole time. You'll need to come up with specific examples you think show this behavior because there was none that I saw the entire game.

 

1) That's more like a person deciding to not be a Christian and therefore not pray; it has very little to do with the "routine habits" that come with loss of mental flexibility. You simply don't understand what it is; that's okay, but there comes a point where you should start paying attention to those who do. You're whole conception of mental illness is flawed, and  you refuse to listen to the fact that your definitions and concepts regarding it are simply incorrect.

 

2) I'm sorry, I didn't take notes and write down every quote Durance ever said throughout the game. My bad. My 7th playthrough, I'll make sure to do that.

 

 

My you are incredibly dismissive. I've actually not presented any of my own thoughts on the matter, as I've been trying to understand what your position actually is. You described mental illness in one way, and I gave evidence from the game that contradicted it. That says nothing about my own views on mental illness. So you should probably slow your roll before you start assuming what other people think.

 

I think it would be helpful to bring this discussion back around to the start. The question isn't whether Durance is mentally ill, he is. The question is whether Durance is mentally ill to the degree that he is not culpable for his own actions.

[Merany]

Agree with Stoner's post... This discussion is boring as f*** and has nothing to do with OP...

You guys are just going nowhere with your arguments and it's pretty obvious you are not convincing one another anytime soon...

Take it to PM... Or maybe a mod should close?

 

On topic... I'm fine with fewer companions but I would have liked the option to "change" them, deeply, make them more "evil".

Aloth, Pallegina and GM come to mind as good candidates for that.

[Ymarsakar]

This is why I like psychological dramas plus life and death dramas, for example Grisaia no Kajitsu.

 

Not a lot of Western focus on those genres and sub genres, although some people like Chris Avellone seems more interested.

[Romanul]

 

Yeah, I too think the game needs more Evil companions. I think evil is objective but I won't go into a debate on why evil is objective. I will instead give a short description of the character I would like to see: a slaver searching for fugitive slaves. A kind of character that doesn't complain when I trade a hatchling for 500 copper (like Ender does in WM1) or when I harm the baby (like the G. Mother does). A kind of character that would support my dungeon efforts in the Stronghold and would be willing to trade some of my companions to the slavers. 

 

On the plus side, the Devil of Caroc is well done and fits my definition of evil. I like how in the Caed Nua debates I can use her to kill the NPCs who ask for my help. Definitely a nice touch. What I would have liked to see is a better explanation/option for why the Devil of Caroc is my companion. The official one is pretty vague and I would have liked to have the option of blackmailing her some way ( a truly evil way basically making her a slave or something). It's not the kind of character I would normally allow free as a companion (without some major leveraging).

 

How do you consider Devil of Caroc to be Evil?

 

People came and slaughtered her entire village and family by burning their homes down and killing whomever fled the flames. She survived and brought justice to the guilty. I see no evil in what she did. She did not go and slaughter the entire village of everyone who slaughtered hers, she just meted out justice to the guilty ones.

 

I could see Grieving Mother as evil for her actions and manipulation of people. Mind control seems pretty evil to me.

 

 

There's an event in Stronghold. An animancer comes to me seeking help. I have the option to consult with my team. The options are to send the Devil to the guy's lab, kill him and destroy his work, the other is to send the double personality Elf to destroy his work but not kill him. I chose to send the Devil and, I may remember incorrectly here, she said "With pleasure!".

 

I believe there are small clues around that show likes killing/hurting people.

 

When I heard her story I said "Oh man, not another she's not evil, she was just abused and is seeking retribution character". But seeing her in that event + some small other flavour text led me to believe she's the only evil companion we get. Sure, you might argue that she's insane (that is referenced at least to times by NPCs) but still, she's definitely neutral evil (if you remember the alignment from Baldur's Gate).  

 

I would have loved to have a Bleak Walkers paladin or a slaver as a companion since those are part of the lore and would have added a bit to the replayability. 

[Romanul]

 

 

 

On topic... I'm fine with fewer companions but I would have liked the option to "change" them, deeply, make them more "evil".

Aloth, Pallegina and GM come to mind as good candidates for that.

 

 

Yeah, I would have loved to see companions evolve towards good/evil and even potentially breaking off if I pushed them too fast (like the Grieving Mother does). However, I realize that would have been a pain to implement. A possible solution would be to cut the number of companions in half if not more. Yes, that would mean you would have to recruit custom adventures to fill all spots but the trade off would be worth it for me. I'm sure other would disagree profoundly. 

[Ineth]

I would have loved to have a Bleak Walkers paladin or a slaver as a companion since those are part of the lore [...]

 

Slavery is one part of the lore that seems to have been kinda deemphasized in the released game, compared to what Josh/other devs (and the guidebook too, I think) have told us about the setting.

 

If I'm not mistaken, slavery is supposed to be a wide-spread phenomenon in this part of the world, with Aedyran and Readceran humans/elves enslaving orlans on a grand scale, and having done so for quite a while.

And the Dyrwoodans used to do it too, but officially agreed to stop in a treaty with Eír Glanfath after the War of Black Trees, so now they do it inofficially by calling it 'indentured servitude'.

 

In the game, this doesn't really come across all that much. Sure, there's that one quest in Stalwart, and that slaver guest in the stronghold, etc., but the whole topic is not presented in an in-your face way at all - if you skip reading the in-game books, you could finish the whole game and not realize that slavery is anything more than an insignificant side-note in this setting.

[KDubya]

 

 

Yeah, I too think the game needs more Evil companions. I think evil is objective but I won't go into a debate on why evil is objective. I will instead give a short description of the character I would like to see: a slaver searching for fugitive slaves. A kind of character that doesn't complain when I trade a hatchling for 500 copper (like Ender does in WM1) or when I harm the baby (like the G. Mother does). A kind of character that would support my dungeon efforts in the Stronghold and would be willing to trade some of my companions to the slavers. 

 

On the plus side, the Devil of Caroc is well done and fits my definition of evil. I like how in the Caed Nua debates I can use her to kill the NPCs who ask for my help. Definitely a nice touch. What I would have liked to see is a better explanation/option for why the Devil of Caroc is my companion. The official one is pretty vague and I would have liked to have the option of blackmailing her some way ( a truly evil way basically making her a slave or something). It's not the kind of character I would normally allow free as a companion (without some major leveraging).

 

How do you consider Devil of Caroc to be Evil?

 

People came and slaughtered her entire village and family by burning their homes down and killing whomever fled the flames. She survived and brought justice to the guilty. I see no evil in what she did. She did not go and slaughter the entire village of everyone who slaughtered hers, she just meted out justice to the guilty ones.

 

I could see Grieving Mother as evil for her actions and manipulation of people. Mind control seems pretty evil to me.

 

There's an event in Stronghold. An animancer comes to me seeking help. I have the option to consult with my team. The options are to send the Devil to the guy's lab, kill him and destroy his work, the other is to send the double personality Elf to destroy his work but not kill him. I chose to send the Devil and, I may remember incorrectly here, she said "With pleasure!".

 

I believe there are small clues around that show likes killing/hurting people.

 

When I heard her story I said "Oh man, not another she's not evil, she was just abused and is seeking retribution character". But seeing her in that event + some small other flavour text led me to believe she's the only evil companion we get. Sure, you might argue that she's insane (that is referenced at least to times by NPCs) but still, she's definitely neutral evil (if you remember the alignment from Baldur's Gate).  

 

I would have loved to have a Bleak Walkers paladin or a slaver as a companion since those are part of the lore and would have added a bit to the replayability. 

 

 

I'd consider her to be pragmatic, not evil, Also consider that she is trapped in a metal shell due to an animancer, the opportunity to kill one is another opportunity for revenge.

 

Violence is a solution to most if not all problems. If you apply enough violence the conditions that are the cause of the problem get fixed.

 

I agree that a Bleak Walker would have made an interesting companion.