oceanes

I believe what Jeff added was not an ending, but rather extra questlines that significantly expanded the lore. That's what he did in GF1M.

Ah, the old "Does God command things because they are good, or are things good because God commands them?" question. You seem to be referring to the second view, while I was referring to the first. To prevent this from spiraling into an off-topic theological discussion, (though I would be amenable to one if you so wish in a separate thread), I will say this. In most Christian theologies I have studied, the fundamental rights of God to be sovereign over creation are predicated upon His identification with the four O's, particularly omniscience and omnibenevolence, as the concepts themselves personified, led to the perfection of His justice, and thus inability to make mistakes as a human would. Following the directives of such a being would be, from either a deontological or consequentialist perspective, definitionally the correct choice. I am much less confident speaking on behalf of Judaism or Islam, as my study of those is less comprehensive. The Shapers, obviously, do not claim such traits. They seem to base the ethics of their rule on a kind of materialist utilitarian pragmatism. That is, they seek the best outcome for the greatest number as they see it, and the only hands they trust are their own. Their stance on this is actually not surprising for what seems to be an order of magical scientists who accidentally and by degrees walked their way into being technocrats. They initially took power, I think, out of a combination of a desire to be left alone, a need for non-magical expertise to maintain what they had built, commons coming to them to solve problems and subsequently elevating them to power because they succeeded and seemed to know what they were doing, and a peppering of Shapers like Barzahl with actual will to power and ambition to cement the trend. Shapers seem to value property rights highly, likely because many other groups have tried to take theirs, and significant infrastructure is required to use their arts at a high level. Naturally, to them, this applies to their creations, and to the Shaper order and creation of the the Shapers in general respectively. It's also worth noting that many commons seem to have gotten used to the idea of the Shapers being able to solve any problem, and the Shapers have allowed this, as the mindset cements their rule, and likely reduces unrest.

There are journal entries from Danette, the leader of the Shapers on Sucia, that indicate that the Barring was sudden and completely unexpected, and also that most of the Shapers there expected the island to be unbarred within a year or so, after they'd had a chance to politick and convince the Council of the merits of their work. Obviously this didn't happen, but it does explain why the island wasn't razed. They didn't want to destroy their work when they all thought they'd be back.

The above from JDubkins is why I expressed some sympathy for Alwan's position in G5, despite ultimately being a rebel. Of course, the Shapers, in having to deal with "modernity and the Enlightenment" as you put it runs into something of a different situation as regards the serviles, because they were literally designed to be what they are, and to be happy about it, and it seems like most of them actually are, given that it took a situation like Sucia to create the Takers, and outside influence and the creation of drakons to kickstart the rebellion. It reminds me of an alternate history where the 16th century European explorers discover the New World, only to find it populated not by the Native Americans, but rather Homo Erectus. Now obviously, the serviles are fully sapient, and much more intertwined with their creators than in that example, but it does present a slightly different challenge to an alternate Enlightenment when the ethics can't use universal human brotherhood as a basis, and have to skip straight to universal sapient brotherhood instead, especially when one of the brothers is carnivorous, and may possibly be convinced to eat you if he gets mad enough. (See Barzahl Buffet in Taker ending) I would also add, that in terms of a creation's duty to obey its creator, IRL religious examples from the Abrahamic faiths depend of the idea of God's omniscience and omnibenevolence, both things that the Shapers both manifestly are not, and have never claimed to be, even to themselves.

You know, Barzahl was right about one thing, crazy as he was; traditional Shaping methods are extremely slow, crude, and haphazard. It's a pity they discovered a way to actually see what they were doing, only to immediately jump to self-gene-editing. Simply using the microscopes to improve research times and outcomes for otherwise traditional Shaping research would have served their society far better in the long run, and Sucia might never have been Barred. Of course, it's likely that they did that already, as evidenced by the gazer design originally being Sucian, before Barzahl worked out the bugs, and it's perhaps inevitable that a group like the Shapers would gravitate towards personal power rather than general societal advancement, even if they would benefit too. Also, it's likely that they didn't realize the mental effects of Self-Shaping until after they'd already done it, as it's implied that attempts to Shape a human using the traditional methods always ended in messy deaths, for obvious reasons. After the change of course, Danette and the others were incapable of seeing the drawback of what they'd done.

True. I suppose it depends on what context you are looking at it from. Sucia had no humans on it, so in its genesis, it was ideological, but when put in a broader Terrestrian context it became ethno-nationalist to some extent, as few humans were willing to go as far as the Takers were, initially, and the fact that the Shapers had already delineated a division between humans and creations.

You know, this discussion underscores the fact that the Takers in GF1 and 2 are not so much an ideological movement, really, but an "ethnic" nationalist movement that adopted an ideology to animate their people, the nationality in question being serviles, later expanded to thinking creations as the drayks/drakons became more prominent, with the commons being bolted on as a kind of auxiliary because the movement's philosophy applies to them as well, and the Takers are smart enough to want the manpower. The same applies to the awakened to a lesser degree. The Rebellion as started by Ghaldring continues this, with the ideology becoming more and more prominent in people's thinking as more commons join, so that by GF4 we see little of the Takers' commitment in GF2 to keep Shaping purely in creation hands. There are just too many humans in the movement for that.

Speaking to the original topic of this thread, I find it hilarious that the only leader who seems to explicitly support indigenous nationhood is Barzahl of all people, even if he's only using it as a lever for war support. The more I look at his characterization, the more I'm reminded of Count Dooku, perhaps crossed with Saruman. Does anyone know if this whole utopian strain to Barzhite thought is new to the remake? I've also noticed that the Takers are quick to say that they sympathize with the commons, and Jeff seems to take care to prevent them from being characterized as anti-human. I wonder if that will last?

This is a bit of a digression, but I can't help but ask, have you ever read Ursula K. LeGuin's short story "Those who walk away from Omelas"? It presents a moral quandary that has bearing on the discussions here, and is one of the things that convinced me not to be a utilitarian ethicist. If not, I can't recommend it enough.

You know, I was actually surprised by how relatively reasonable the Takers are to you in GF2I. Sure, they hate you, and at least one outright calls you a traitor if you join them, which was interesting, but Syros in particular was actually very persuasive and intelligent regarding allowing cooperative Shapers to live and work in peace. He even says, at one point, regarding the end goal of their Shaping research, "maybe one day we can even become strong enough to afford to show mercy!" as though such an idea was a sort of fond dream for him. Granted, he is the only one to say this, but it highlights something I've noticed about the takers; I think a good deal of their uncompromising ruthlessness is stoked by the fact that the servile Takers are more aware of just how screwed they are than their Awakened cousins, and the drayks/drakons have a predator species' psychology regarding not showing or allowing for weakness. That's why they see the Awakened as such a danger; they are a crack in creation unity that the Shapers will exploit, and that lever is one their cause cannot afford, at least in the drayks' view. This is also shown somewhat in a bit of dialogue with a cryodrayk whose job it apparently is to manage subordinate drayks and keep them on task, When you question him why the drayks are managed that much, he just responds that their minds need the guidance in order to be productive, and without such, they'd all be doomed. The takers are filled with this sort of survival mode pragmatism, and really it's hard to blame them.

Good info, you seem to have replayed the originals more recently than I have. I thought the canon was that serviles were rarely shaped directly, as they were too complicated and the essence cost too high, that's why they were made to reproduce. Related topics: It's not entirely clear what the process is for the "awakening" of servile intelligence and independence, only that it involves Shapers not being around. I tend to think that there's more going on there than oppression and a simple lack of education, but I could be wrong. Secondarily, it's never explained exactly what Shaper mental control is, only that it exists, and that basically all creations are at least potentially subject to it, even those born rogue. I'm thinking of that one drakon you duel in GF3 or 4, that you can attempt to mentally dominate mid-fight as an example. If the effect is actually magical itself, that could go some way to prevent the Shapers from falling in on themselves. I have to say, I always interpreted the non-drakon side of the rebellion to be less tolerant of dismissing still enslaved serviles the way you suggest, but it depends on how trashed they are, and how war-weary the populace is.

I'll admit I thought of the cold war analogy myself, with the draining of the Geneforges as an equivalent to disarmament. Astoria does seem to be Awakened on the surface, and she could be sincere. The question becomes, what does Shaper rule even look like when an alternative is allowed to continue to exist? Do they just make all their new serviles even dumber to prevent them from wanting to jump the border? Would the Sucians even stand for that? The destruction of the war implies that there probably aren't enough commons to replace the serviles' roles in Shaper society, provided they could be convinced to even try. Is Astoria a Gorbachev/Yeltsin? The thing about cold wars, is that it isn't really a sustainable state of affairs, especially not when the ideology that animates your society is proven to be demonstrably false, and that proof is looking at you. Is Astoria trying to sunset Shaper rule? This is the sort of thing that has young Shapers in Astoria's Terrestria 20 years down the line muttering that Taygen was right. A social order can't survive on inertia alone, see Austria-Hungary for IRL example. If it collapses, then we have Sucia having to be in the awkward position of either propping up the Shapers to avoid a failed state on their border, or integrating them, possibly as a client state, which is kind of hilarious, actually. As for Rawal, I'm not sure I'd call him a Barzhite. Barzhal had ideals, of a sort. Rawal very clearly doesn't. Also, I don't think he's ever actually modified himself. That would be something his fellow Council members would notice and be on the lookout for, especially post-Monarch.

I'm also interested in the idea that future remakes might use the idea of the Sholai continuing to stick their oar in as an excuse to include either an Awakened or possibly even Barzite third way into future plotlines, given who the Sholai were being sponsored by in G2:I, and how warm Barzahl is about them when asked.

Agree with you completely concerning Ghaldring and his overthrow. Shades of Animal Farm's pigs there. My comment was more focused on the idea that the territorial and resource gains of Ghaldring's victory versus Astoria's path would be more likely to lead to a lasting peace, while still preserving the Rebellion's goals, because the balance of power would shift in favor of Sucia. My fear is that Astoria's peace would lead into a Great War aftermath-style interwar period, followed by another worse war, particularly if the Trakovites still exist.

I agree with you about the Awakened being obligated to try. Pinner's attitude definitely has "peace in our time" vibes, given what we see in the ending. Speaking of that, Astoria always struck me the same way. There's just something I don't quite trust about her, and I've always tended to side with Ghaldring as a result, when not going for a specific ending. That said, the Rebel progression has always had distinct Reign of Terror into Napoleon vibes that dismayed me. It's entirely possible that the rebellion as presented in the original games may have broken more than it built, physically, societally, and in terms of life lost. I admit to having some sympathy for Alwan's position in GF5; even as tyrannical and ethically compromised as the Shapers are, he's holding to arguably constructive values as he knows them, and to be honest neither side has any reason to expect a balanced peace to last, except perhaps out of sheer horror, and that response will only last as long as the memory does. I'm really looking forward to seeing how all this is framed in future remakes, as I'm sure you can tell, What do you think?

Yes, the researchers at the Barrier bemoan their lot to the PC, that the reason they haven't been able to get the job done is that Tuldaric basically abandoned them there in favor of the Magus Complex once everything was restored and mostly designed but not actually finished; that's why they're so happy to see you; finally, A Shaper to help! I see Pinner as being not naive really, but just so committed to her principles, or even to Ellhrah's memory, that she feels she has to try, even if deep down, she knows it's doomed. Also, she could just be too tired physically and mentally to bring herself to try to tackle the problem of Creation liberation generally, thinking that the best she can do is ensure the safety of her own people, of Medab and the mountains. She might even be right.

I was more implying emotional suppression rather than healthy control, like the negative reading of Star Wars Jedi. Such a practice, while potentially useful and occasionally necessary, would go a long way to explaining how Shaper culture got to this state we see it in, and why it lasted as long as it did without a rebellion of the same scale as the ones we see in-game. As regards the hallucinating Barzite, I'm doing a Barzite run right now, and it's implied that canisters can end up spoiled or defective in such a way as to cause that effect. There's one you can use in the sublevel of Rising that does this, and it has its own ending slide. I'm not sure if the hallucinations are actually such though, or if possibly Barzahl accidentally stumbled onto an augment giving us something like World of Darkness's "See the Unseen". I haven't used it to see the slide though yet.

I was always intrigued by the thought that we never really see what kind of a person Tuldaric was before the canisters. It would be interesting to know what his conversation with Ellhrah was like. Also, I've noticed that a few characters seem to handle extensive canister use better than others, Trajikov and Tuldaric being examples. Even Phariton isn't wrathful like most, although he doesn't hesitate to kill you if he decides to. My personal head-canon is that the Shaping process doesn't create sociopathy or megalomania as such, but rather removes the sense of caution and fear of consequences that come from a lifetime of being fragile enough to be hurt. Shapers tend to become megalomaniacal because of the Shaper worldview when raised to that state, or in the case of Drayks and Drakons, their own inherent pride and greed. It's clear that the Shapers inculcate immense mental discipline and mental focus as a prerequisite to learning Shaping, which probably includes control of emotions. This starting point might explain why so many altered Shapers seem to be concerned with their research to the exclusion of all else. It's just the natural Shaper cultural trait taken to its end. Heck, even the in-game dinnerware description mentions most Shapers not caring about things like cuisine.

I knew I should have been more clear. I meant in terms of the ending, and I think I used 3. If it's like the GF3 rebel ending that would be "no point" in my mind.

So, question, is there any point to being a low canister use Taker in GF2? I don't think so, judging by the original ending, but I wondered if someone tried it.

Pretty sure the Barzites don't attack, but they also won't sell to you mostly. Haven't gotten to the Takers yet. (As per my Awakened save file)