earanhart

There is some evidence (as early as the Ruined School, actually) that many of the powers of Sucia expected to return. It's possible some of them expected to return as fast as a year or two. "Just gotta go explain this whole thing to the Council. Once they see what we are looking at, they'll not just let us but ORDER us to come back and continue our work." That kind of thinking. And I assume whoever reported the Geneforge and the other illegal Sucia research to the Council expected that after an investigation they'd go and burn everything to the ground. For the people wanting to continue, it makes sense to leave the Serviles so it won't take as long to get back up and running when you come back. For the ones wanting or even just expecting the Council to delete the island itself, it didn't matter if any Creations were left behind because after the investigation is done they'll all be destroyed anyways. Even if they were brought back to Shaper lands, they'd most likely be destroyed for having been associated with the illegal knowledge. The failing here is on the Council for not having gone to destroy everything on Sucia the decade after they Banned it. But once that decade passes, a Council seat or two change over, people stop wondering why a location is Banned. They assume some Shaper experiment went horribly wrong and it's simply not safe. Maybe someone accidentally shaped a pyromosquito there, or something. It's not worth asking "why is this place Banned?" unless and until someone has a use for the land. And by all accounts Sucia doesn't look like a very valuable island. Nowhere to put a big port, not in a militarily useful location, no reason to want it unless you wanted isolation. But even then it's not far ENOUGH away to let you have the sense of escape from Council oversight. A shipwreck, someone intentionally going there to violate the Ban, or the Sholai are really the only ways someone ends up there, so what does it matter? And after 2 decades, even if one of the original Council members pushes to send a force to kill everything, the new ones will ask "but why? Anything left there has already gone Rogue and killed or destroyed anything of value. What Rogues don't tear up, weather will."

That's one of the things in all SpidWeb games with a reputation system that I really appreciate. The rep points are so generous that even first time through I don't feel forced to take EVERY decision going either way. I can mix and match as I want. Because how many Awakened Shapers will tell her her entire life (and that of her predecessors) have been devoted to completely useless and worthless activities? Likewise, even the most even-tempered of good people are gonna be tempted to squash the GIFTS eggs, because GIFTS . . .

Huh. I remember way back when trying a "kill everyone" run and I guess I just didn't realize it was different from the Zachary ending other than skipping his trial. I thought he was effectively "not a faction" as far as endings went. Edit: or, rather, that his "faction" and the Shaper Council were the same faction and the one you defaulted into by virtue of being an apprentice in their system.

It would have until Infestation added the Unaligned path which by not having an official name in-world kind of means that for this game at least "factionless" is supportive of the Shaper Council. Although in metaconversations we specifically call that the Unaligned path already, and I doubt any new player would be confused by the term, excepting possibly the singular interaction there and that will be rare. I like "factionless"

But there is a distinct difference between a canister/geneforged Lifecrafter, a trained non-Shaper Lifecrafter, and a Rebel Shaper, regardless of what faction they belong to. All three terms comes with a set of meanings and preconceptions around them that have been given by the lore. If we talk about Lifecrafters, we specifically call forth the concept of people with the ability to Shape who were never trained by the Shapers. They were _never_ a part of that culture. Gretas status as a failed Shaper is important because it places her into a unique position between Lifecrafter and Shaper. Sure, by G4 she has gained most if not all of the abilities of a Shaper, but notice the difference in treatment towards her by both sides versus all the rebel Shapers, and again the difference between her and the Lifecrafters. To call her either a Lifecrafter or a Shaper feels wrong, because she is neither. There exists a fundamental difference about her (and presumably other failed Shapers who join the war on either side) that denies either term. Both sides would view the disloyal or neutral Shaper as an enemy and paint them with the same brush as their enemies (so either Shaper or Rebel), so such a term only exists for the sake of our discussion outside the world. But given that we need to acknowledge that a term we use will be seen by new players. If someone googles "Geneforge 2 Infestation Sharon" and sees us call her an "ex-Shaper", will that make any sense? What about Tuldaric? Or Litalia? The term creates confusion, and as such should not be used. "Rebel Shaper" would apply for Tuldaric and Litalia both, but would that apply to Sharon? And Barzahl could be argued either way, though most Barzites should be considered rebellious (assuming they were ever Shapers to begin with). But disloyal Shaper? Yeah, that makes sense. It technically includes all the Shapers who join the Rebel side, but it more specifically evokes the Sharons of this world. The ones who break Shaper Law but don't join the war, because if they joined the Rebels we'd call them Rebel Shapers and have no issue with the term. So yes, in order for me to understand what you mean, and you to understand what I mean, and a new player to understand what we mean, Ex-Shaper is a bad term.

Do we? Rebel Shaper. Disloyal Shaper. Taker Shaper. Trajkovite Shaper. All terms far more useful and less prone to misinterpretation than "ex-Shaper". I say "rebel Shaper" and you know what I mean, a Shaper acting for a rebellious group. I say "Taker Shaper" and you know exactly what I mean. I say "disloyal Shaper" and while some ambiguity remains it mostly evokes one who is attempting to stay neutral in the power struggles. "Ex-Shaper" implies somehow they've they've lost the defining characteristic of being a Shaper. Was the ability to Shape Shaped out of them? Did they forget years/decades of training to act superior to everyone around them? Is the Monarch an "ex-Shaper"? Or is he merely a "mad Shaper"? The terminology you propose directly conflicts with lore in several places and causes unneeded confusion, solely for the sake of saving a few keystrokes.

If anything bad happens to Emily (to include heavy alteration, amnesia, or Rawal) I will kill everyone on this forum and then myself!

It's been a while since I played GF4, but I don't remember being able to Control a Rogue into killing itself in that game. Sure, Lifecrafters make Creations, but it seems their Control is lacking compared to Shapers. Also, those are very specifically lesser Geneforges. More of a bundle of reusable canisters than a Geneforge. But also, by that time the Takers are no longer the sole powers of the Rebellion and they know WELL the limitations between a canister-junky, a Geneforged lifecrafter, and a Shaper. Only one of those has the knowledge to create a new danger to the Drakons. The other two you can either reproduce or limit their access to power.

I mean, we meet Alwan, a Guardian-in-training and Greta, a failed Agent apprentice, in GF3. And both of them go on to be as influential as at least 4 of the PCs. Heck, Alwan sits on the Council, that's about as high as a Shaper can go. Admittedly, Alwan has the personality of a Thahd when we meet him.

Phariton does the same after a fetch quest for the unaligned, and he doesn't need you to be modified. Proof that traditional methods are best? Possibly.

From the Takers viewpoint (not the Rebels, specifically the Takers) it's not a terminology thing. Even their traitor Shapers are still Shapers. People with the power to create and enslave Creations. This isn't semantics. The Takers hate the Shapers who join them. They're just useful and so tolerated. For now. They don't believe in "ex-Shapers". Neither does the Council. The only ones who MIGHT are the Sholai and the Trajkovites. The rest see rebel Shapers as exactly that: Shapers who are disloyal to the Shaper Council. They haven't STOPPED being Shapers.

I'm not certain Taygen was faced with that ultimatum. I'm convinced he BELIEVED he was. There's a difference, and history would brand him a villain beyond redemption or a heroic monster in hindsight. But no one would say what he did/tried to do was good. They might later believe it was necessary. Necessity is neither good nor evil. It just is. As for ex-Shapers, those really aren't a thing. They can't be a thing. A trained Shaper doesn't need Essence to Shape. We see even 0 canister PCs making small Creations in their cell in the Shaper Citadel, presumably one of the most secure places on the planet specifically designed to contain dangerous Shapers. Any Shaper (human or Drayk) left alive has the potential to become an army or a plague. And if you can't control them, they remain a risk. The question is only how much risk do you accept? How long has infernalism been illegal? How many summoned infernals do we see? So long as the knowledge exists, it will be used. Even Shaped trees are a problem, and I don't mean the Tallest Tree. I mean the wiry, twisted, fast growing weed trees of Drypeak. Will those choke out other trees once they escape Drypeak via a bird or a storm carrying a seed? It only took 2 generations for those to become as rampant as they are here, and they were a mistake made from before all this insanity began. From the Taker mindset, how much do you want to hope that The Last Shaper doesn't decide to go full Taygen or worse in desperation? Granted, should also be thinking that about every Drakon, but now we've come full circle back to the Council.

The Taker view on Sharon is almost certainly the same as the shaper view on the Drayk knight and his shrubberies. I forget her name, but the Takers are more likely to tolerate the Servant in the Upper Research Halls than Sharon: she doesn't keep Creation slaves around, to use Armena Blades words. But we also see their actions towards the Sholai, who aren't Shapers at all. And the Sholai had an actual alliance with the Sucia Takers. As for using the endings to justify or defend a group, none of the endings are fully canon. All of them favor the player characters group for the duration of the ending slides. We can see those as the intent of the groups leaders, but the Ashen Isles will still fall, even in an Awakened ending. Now, if the two groups could learn to work together, Geneforged flying Drakons might be enough to tip the scale for a century or two. And I suspect the Taker Drayks would be behind that idea. But the Awakened don't tell the Takers their endgame. They pretend to all as though they have no plan once the Shapers say "No, you're Rogues."

I would argue that revenge is always a morally bad act. It is simply doing to others what they did to you, and often worse. And the Takers seem to be more about revenge than justice. As for 'death-by-Shaper', I don't think that's any Takers goal. They think they have a chance with the Drakons (and the series shows they actually do). The ones on the front lines today are giving their lives for future victory. That's not suicide-by-Shaper. We've seen a few of those Creations in other games. What I meant was that in the Awakened dream where Shapers say "you know what, sure. We'll leave you alone here. Do your thing" the Takers would probably STILL be gunning for war. And not merely territorial expansion. That their philosophy leads to the belief that they need to be the ones who CLAIM their victory. They must TAKE Free, rather than be handed it. Granted, we'll never know because the Council is, well, the Council.

Even outside of conversation, she states she is from Medab. And she makes a point of telling you. "You might want to know, I am no Taker. I come from Awakened lands." Sure, she isn't saying she's a member, but she also makes a point of implying it. That seems to indicate her fear isn't that great. I read it as an open secret. She keeps her mouth shut about politics, and no one bothers her about it, but everyone knows.