Jump to content

Why no priests of other deities, such as Rymgand, Abydon or Hylea?


Recommended Posts

Or any of the others? All that would be needed would be to add some weapon foci and it would provide for more variety? Is there any reason why Obsidian limits us to the ones currently available? Personally I would love to play a priest of Rymgand. Dispositions and such would be the following:

 

Rymgand, Favoured Dispositions: Cruel, Stoic; Condemned Dispositions: Benevolent, Passionate; Favoured Weapons: Battleaxe, Estoc

 

Or something like that...any thoughts?

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think cruel doesn't fit Rymrgand, but it's difficult.

 

Besides that: I have no idea why we are limited to the current selection of priests (and paladin orders). Maybe with expansions...

Deadfire Community Patch: Nexus Mods

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, for sure. I'd love to play a Rymrgand priest... or an Ice-Godlike for that matter.

 

I think they simply haven't had time to make those yet. I mean, for Deadfire, they needed 3 sub-classes for every class, so priests (which already had 5) took a backseat.

 

We can always hope for Pillars of Eternity 3.

Edited by Heijoushin
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Resource constraints mainly, but I'm a bit miffed because I think Wael and Skaen are in not that interesting. Wael is too obscurantist to be interesting to me. It's almost like a novelty cult than anything else. I guess Skaen makes for a good evil priest, but It's evil in a way I don't find compelling. It's fun to run into a Skaen worshiper because they are bat-**** about revenge. I want something less rabid and more dispassioned. I'd replace Skaen by Rymrgand and Wael by Woedica probably.

 

Also I thought they should have at least added Ondra for Deadfire...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this may seem heretical *cough* but I think they should leave it this way, along with excluding certain custom subclasses. At a minimum, it provides room for unique characters like Pallegina that can't be reproduced through your character builds.

  • Like 1

"It has just been discovered that research causes cancer in rats."

Link to post
Share on other sites

They need to keep the options from the first game for those who will import their characters. I'm confident more options will come with expansions (hopefully something related to quests or the story).

 

Some priests might conflict with the story in the first game, like Woedica and

Ondra, in the WM

and others seem to be too different from normal priests (Galawain's are hunters, Ondra's are giftbearers, Abydon's are smiths, Hylea's are artists...). Not that the Watcher couldn't be different, but Rymrgand does seem to me the best choice for the next one.

 

New godlikes would be good too, ice specially.

sign.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure why people think Rymrgand is evil.  He is at his core, an expression of the natural cycle of decay over time.  A blizzard is not evil, people might die because of it, homes might be destroyed, but that is just a natural result of the blizzard, the blizzard is not out to cause those things.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure why people think Rymrgand is evil.  He is at his core, an expression of the natural cycle of decay over time.  A blizzard is not evil, people might die because of it, homes might be destroyed, but that is just a natural result of the blizzard, the blizzard is not out to cause those things.

 

Maybe he seems evil because he wants those things to happen. But I agree with you, I didn't get the impression of evil during his quest. I'd love to play as one of his priests and do whatever suits him without actually being evil. :rolleyes:

 

I wonder how Rymrgand would behave if he got his way and most souls were fragmented into oblivion. Would he try to destroy the other gods then? What about him, does he want to be the last sentient essence? Will he gladly end himself then?

sign.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

In one sense he's not strictly evil, but one could suggest all the gods are inherently malevolent and none are particularly good. Well Eothas might be the exception but that remains to be seen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In one sense he's not strictly evil, but one could suggest all the gods are inherently malevolent and none are particularly good. Well Eothas might be the exception but that remains to be seen.

 

I just replayed the end of PoE and

 

 

Thaos mentions that we were in a sanctum of Woedica and there are others for other gods. Ondra says that the Deadfire had to be destroyed because of the Engwithans, so my guess is that Eothas is going to his or another god's sanctum. Is he pissed off now and wants to destroy other gods or get more powerful? Or does he still follow the same behavior from before dying?

 

Edited by InsaneCommander

sign.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think cruel doesn't fit Rymrgand, but it's difficult.

 

Besides that: I have no idea why we are limited to the current selection of priests (and paladin orders). Maybe with expansions...

Why does Cruel not fit? Is he (it) not the merciless winter god?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure why people think Rymrgand is evil.  He is at his core, an expression of the natural cycle of decay over time.  A blizzard is not evil, people might die because of it, homes might be destroyed, but that is just a natural result of the blizzard, the blizzard is not out to cause those things.

Not evil, cruel. Nature is ultimately indifferent but that indifference can be perceived as cruelty. You could just give him the same attributes as Berath but then there would be little difference, no?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well with all the gods you can't give them all unique combinations that make sense.

 

Rymrgand may be perceived as merciless, but being without mercy is not the same as being cruel. Also the chat with Rymrgand in Twin Elms shows that mercy is not out of bounds for him.

The rational disposition is also described as being "cold" - emotionally. That fits pretty well. At the same time I don't know if stoic fits 100%, but I can't find anything better. :)

 

But of course it might be that we will see an aspect of Rymrgand that is really cruel. But so far it seems he's just... cold.

  • Like 1

Deadfire Community Patch: Nexus Mods

Link to post
Share on other sites

Will be happy to go Hylean.

 

Doubt that modding will allow to add confessions, but maybe it will be possible to rewrite one of the existing subclasses.

 

Hylea priest may suffer penalty indoors and get buffs under the open sky.

Dispositions should be centered around the ideas of mercy and breaking quo-statuses for innovation.

Unique spells may involve smth with birds (bird swarms, charming songs).

 

Hylea is the only one my atheistic ass is ready to support :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think cruel doesn't fit Rymrgand, but it's difficult.

 

Besides that: I have no idea why we are limited to the current selection of priests (and paladin orders). Maybe with expansions...

Why does Cruel not fit? Is he (it) not the merciless winter god?

 

 

The Cruel dispositio really requires you to be pointlessly vindictive rather than simply ruthless.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not evil, cruel. Nature is ultimately indifferent but that indifference can be perceived as cruelty. You could just give him the same attributes as Berath but then there would be little difference, no?

Cruelty implies the intent to do something nasty or unkind for the sake of the action itself, or self satisfaction.  A ruler whose country is starving and poor rations his food because he has to, he knows some people may die or become sick because of this, but if he doesn't his nation will run out of food.  Knowing something negative will result from your actions doesn't make you cruel or evil for committing that action, it is the intent that matters.

 

Rymrgand does not intentionally do cruel things for his own satisfaction, all evidence indicates he is not a particularly emotional being at all and gets no real satisfaction from much of anything.  "He" does it because it is part of the natural order of life, and he got assigned the job of enforcing it.  There is no evidence to indicate he gets any joy out of it.  So by definition Rymrgand is not cruel, because he gets no personal satisfaction from it. 

 

Or to put it more case in point, this is difference between cold/ruthless and cruel.

 

One assassin is paid to kill a person, they hunt them down, track them to a good ambush point, and shoot them one time in the head killing them.  While they are there they see someone witnesses the killing, so they also kill that person with one shot to the head.

 

Assassin two is paid to kill a person, the hunt them down, track them to their home while their kids are there, they force the victim to watch while they kill the victims kids, them they slash the victims wrist and watch as they slowly bleed out.

 

Can you tell who is cruel in this example?

 

Edited by Karkarov
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Rymrgand wants all souls ground to dust, eventually. A blizzard is a poor comparison when judging him morally, since unlike a natural disaster he has a sense of self and volition.

 

Really so far the only God that seems unambiguously good is Abydon. Guy took a bullet for the planet.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Rymrgand wants all souls ground to dust, eventually.

 

Dubious. Unless we're to believe that souls, the wheel and soul entropy weren't a thing until after the Engwithans created the gods, these things would happen anyway. That Rymrgand has been labelled as the god in charge of soul entropy doesn't mean he wants is or even makes it happen.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's also worth noting that the original guidebook implies that Berath, Rymrgand and, I seem to remember, Ondra are in some sense older gods. So it's not clear that the same rules regarding causation/description of the natural order apply to them, as apply to, say, Woedica.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was my understanding that Woedica was in someways the higher-order god, or at least was so to start. Perhaps that doesn't translate to oldest though. I can see how Ondra might be given an anthropic lore that tells of the creation of the seas, even when that is not the actual case. Berath does in many ways seem to almost pre-date all else, but that may largely be an anthropological artifact as well.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Abydon is basically Prometheus, but his designed intent by the Engwithans was to protect progress. So it's not clear if he aids humans out of goodness, or duty.

Humans evolved to procreate like any other organism, doesn't mean they don't genuinely fall in love with the people they're doing that sort of thing with. Just because he was designed to want to protect people doesn't mean it's no longer moral for him to do so. I'm not sure it's a meaningful distinction at all.

 

 

Rymrgand wants all souls ground to dust, eventually.

 

Dubious. Unless we're to believe that souls, the wheel and soul entropy weren't a thing until after the Engwithans created the gods, these things would happen anyway. That Rymrgand has been labelled as the god in charge of soul entropy doesn't mean he wants is or even makes it happen.

 

This isn't an implication, it's his stated intent. It's the nature of what he was. He didn't invent decay, but he is designed as the embodiment of it and when given the opportunity to remove souls from the cycle forever in Sun in Shadow, he takes it. I suppose once could argue that the fact that he was designed to behave that way removes some culpability, but I don't personally believe that, and if you did, then you're essentially arguing there's no such thing as responsibility or morality in the first place. Which is fine and has a certain logic to it, but again, not gonna see a lot of takers probably.

RE: The age of the Gods. Given what we know now I'd say that what that really means is just that the "older" Gods are the ones whose depictions and mode of worship have changed the least over time, at least in the regions described in the guidebook.

Edited by The Sharmat
Link to post
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...