Jump to content

Rawal

Member
  • Posts

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Rawal's Achievements

Tenderfoot Thahd

Tenderfoot Thahd (2/17)

  1. I understand that, but the resources don't appear in the forts either - that is, when I attempt to create a building in the fort I am informed that I do not have the resources, despite having just had the resource report (e.g. no quicksilver despite having just recieved four).
  2. Thank you for the comprehensive list. When should resources become available for use? I've had the "resource report" a few times while on the road, but I don't seem to have access to any materials for crafting with. Am I missing something as simple as opening a box?
  3. I had the same issue regarding the ending slides. Otherwise, fantastic!
  4. Personally, I think Blaze redeems himself slightly with his GF4 appearence, which at least gives him some more depth as a character. I'd probably put him a notch ahead of Rawal, myself - who has no interesting or distinctive character traits whatsoever.
  5. Makes sense. I guess it's a similar theme of freedom vs. safety. Mostly, my objection to Redbeard is that he's terrible at his job, although I admit to supporting greater oversight for Avadon (just as I wouldn't like GCHQ operating completely independently and above the law). I think there's evidence in the text to suggest that essence pools aren't actually infinite - they just get restocked "behind the scenes" within gameplay. So you couldn't quite conquer Terrestia from a single essence pool. I agree that shaping equipment generally is what makes shapers so dangerous though - which suggests the regulating the outsiders who make them is probably just as important as regulating the shapers themselves.
  6. Oh, I think I Taygen is a choice - *if* you believe that creations are all worthless. His plan involves the fewest human deaths of any faction, so if that's all that matters to you, I guess it could be justified? However. It's quite difficult to come out of geneforge believing creations are all worthless. Exactly. The drakons never win, even if you join their faction - moderates end up in control for any pro-rebel ending. The way there is a fair bit bloodier if you do it the drakon's way (compared with Astoria or Litalia), but the end result is, arguably, the most moderate of all. For me, another important difference is that the drakons never claimed (nor, I think, would they manage) to want to eradicate any of the other species. The shapers do. For that reason, I think I'd probably prefer Drakon rule to shaper rule, but I can see why you might disagree. Equally, my impression from G3 and G4 is that as long as you stay out of the drakon's way, they don't care about you enough to bother killing you. The shapers, conversely, are prepared to got to the ends of the earth to hunt down communities they don't like. TL;DR: The shapers are significantly more paranoid than the drakons: The drakons believe themselves superior to the point of invulnerabilty, which makes them more tolerant of the "humans and smaller creations" than the shapers are. Re: Litalia
  7. I'd agree that Litalia probably isn't interested in revenge. Much. But I can't see her taking orders from anyone in GF5, can you? I'd suggest she's sincere in her beliefs, but doesn't want her authority challenged any more than Ghaldring or Shema or any of the rest of them. I seem to recall she pushes out all the trakovites who don't support "her tactics" before GF5 starts? Abolish the damn magocracy, and half the problems will be gone with it Maybe I'm too much of an idealist, but wouldn't democacy be a simple solution? Let shapers (And drakons, for that matter) run for authority if they wish, but they'd better earn their right to rule through something better than just power. I agree though that shapers would never submit to a "weaker" authority. Which is why I think the best, most stable system requires shapers, drakons and serviles coexisting, with each keeping each other in check, with some kind of elected council above all of them. The shapers would have every incentive to prevent their peers abusing their power, and vice versa. See also: Astoria's ending (although that's slightly different, as they divide into two nations rather than one consisting of several factions). Note: This does assume that more insane members of each side get quietly sidelined in favour of moderate. Tholoss for high councillor, anyone? Edit: People exist who actually support Redbeard? Seriously? (major tangent, should probably discuss in the avadon forums instead)
  8. Well, speaking as the OP, I'm finding the derailment fascinating, so by all means go for it. And to respond to the 3 & 4 stuff: In both games, the rebels at least had (mostly) honourable principles at heart. Sure, shaping themselves insane wasn't great, to say the least - but Litalia herself shows that the lifecrafters and Drakons could come back to their senses, given time, and away from the immediate pressures of fighting. The shapers, on the other hand, just wanted to kill everyone who ever opposed them (think of Alwan, back in GF3 with the harmony island rebels) so they could get back to ruling unopposed. The Gull island serviles are an example I think shows a fundamental difference between rebels and shapers. With the ashen islands under rebel control, the serviles were left in peace to live happy, free lives - under a shaper ending, they get ruthlessly crushed. The "little people", be they drayks, serviles or outsiders, can thrive under the rebels, in a way the shapers would never allow.
  9. You can control shaping without being a shaper. I don't see any particular reason you couldn't replace the Shaper Council with a Grand Council made up of drakons, serviles and humans (the three species known to be capable of shaping), give the drayks and gazers a legal right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness", and then go on rigidly controlling shaping just as the Shapers did before. This is, sort of, what happens in Astoria's ending of GF5. I'd agree that the GF5 Trakovites are terrorists. I'm not sure that makes them wrong, however. It's possible to have dodgy methods but still hold good principles. For me, no matter how reasonable individual Shapers might be, they still want to commit literal genocide by wiping out drayks, enslave the serviles, and force outsider humans into a kind of serf-labour. The rebels may have dubious methods in 3 & 4, but how else were they going to get the shapers to listen? For all that I love the Awakened, there was no universe in which the shapers were going to sit down and treat their creations as equals. Shaping created a corrupt and militaristic dictatorship, and, for me, the rebellion's ends really do justify their means.
  10. Sage Taygen is a perfect example, I think. The fact that someone quite that insane can be handed a position of power and authority under the Shapers kinda suggests something is wrong. I agree that if every Shaper was like Alwan, the Shapers would probably be better - but they aren't. For every Alwan, there's a Rawal, or a Taygen, or any of the dozen-odd Shapers we see acting like unpleasant, bullying thugs throughout. Can you explain your argument for 3 and 4? I can understand why you'd consider shaping yourself insane to be a bad plan, but it's possible (and, in fact, I have) completed GF3 and 4 pro-rebel without my skin glowing - so I assume you have a separate reason here. I agree, I think the game design (actual mechanics aside) holds up remarkably well, considering. I think it was probably most obvious in GF2, where I designed my character badly, got fed up of being beaten to a pulp and needing to reload, and went full-Barzite for that rush of canister-fuelled ecstasy you get when joining them. Despite the obvious, um, "concerns", with the Barzites. I rather liked Avadon 2 myself, actually, it's probably my favourite non-Geneforge spiderweb game. But I can see why people got queezy. That's a very interesting perspective, I hadn't thought of it that way before. I guess you could actually take it a step further, with 3D printing? (most obviously, with that guy making gun designs for 3D printers) A few other thoughts: - Anyone else noticed how similar Rawal and Orois Blaize are? Both semi-detached from their nominal side, both doing anything and everything to accumulate wealth and power while staying out of the fighting. They even both do the same "tap you on the head to reshape the PC" thing. I like to think it's deliberate, to show how the Drakons are essentially becoming shapers. - Speaking of Rawal: "They loathe me. It does not matter. I shall own them all, in the end". Quite possibly my favourite quote of the series. - Ghaldring remains, for me, the most interesting character. Looking back from the end of GF5, I struggle to anything he could have done better (as far as himself surviving goes). Even if, at the end of his own faction ending, he'd conceded real power to the humans and serviles, he'd probably have been displaced by an irate Salassar or Khresia-type.
  11. I've just finished replaying the Geneforge series for the first time in a few years, and just had a few thoughts I wanted to throw at someone. My first time through, I was a lot younger, and didn't pick up on a lot of the ethical subtleties woven into the story. First thing to note: I instinctively support the rebels, plumping for the Awakened (1 & 2), Rebels (3 & 4) and Astoria (5). I've played almost all of them through to each of the endings, at one point or another, and while I do sympathise with individual shapers, I really really struggle to see how anyone could honestly support their factions ethically. For all that the rebellion has dubious methods, the shapers are actively promoting genocide (of the drayks/drakons/gazers) and mass enslavement (of serviles). Equally, arguments based on "controlling everything to protect people"? No shaper takes that principle further than Sage Taygen, and even in his own ending, it doesn't work. Second thing to note: I instinctively *play* pro-shaper, because I find it painfully difficult to pass up on the superior rewards and better protections they can offer. Bluntly, I find myself compromising my principles for the good of my characters. This bothers me. Thirdly: In my previous playthroughs,I remember dismissing the Trakovites as being mad, and choosing their endings only for completionism. This time round, I took them a lot more seriously, actually taking the time to read all the personal accounts of shaping gone mad (the burrowing mould subplot in GF3 particularly struck me). I still think they're wrong, however - firstly, because a single Barzite-type "rediscovering" shaping would probably be enough to bring down a Trakovite government, and secondly, because of the obvious and significant value of creatiosn such as Ornks and living tools, not to much the terraforming efforts seen dotted around Terrestia. It was a close call, though. Thoughts, anyone? I'm happy to be argued wrong, if there's anyone who sincerely disagrees with anything I've said. EDIT: A lot of my points seem to be covered in a few recent forum posts, so I'm having a look and replying there when appropriate.
×
×
  • Create New...