**Spoilers** Why Not Revive Statesman With A Ritual?
By
Agent White,
Posted on: 2012-02-10 08:00 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
Quote:
A heroic sacrifice is equally heroic when it wins a great victory as when it staves off a horrible defeat. There are plenty of ways to make the Statesman's sacrifice mean something without altering any of the major plot points, and I people have already suggested ways to do this.
|
Originally Posted by Thunder Knight
That would, indeed, have been an awesome ending to the story.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
Actually, if you'll recall WWD #1, if the target of the power theft is alive, the artifact explodes and the power reverts to the rightful owner.|
Originally Posted by Dark Energon
The reason States won't be brought back using this is simple, no matter how much i hate it personally.
When he comes back, he comes back a mortal. He won't be the States we knew, and it is very unfair to put him through the rest of his life if we can't figure out a way to get his powers back 1st. Let his death stand for a reason, not bring him back and have age/time torment him for years, esp after he already lived well over a 100 years on this planet. As much as i'd like to revive him, let him be with the loved ones who have been waiting on him so long. The people we all know he missed for many decades. |
I'm really, REALLY hoping that in part 7 we call Statesman back somehow right when Wade's using his power to summon Rularuu, causing Wade to get thrown into the Shard for Rularuu to devour. It's better still if Statesman can be shown to have known this would happen, and sacrificed himself to destroy Wade.
Then, we could say a final farewell to Statesman before he returns to his rest, the torch firmly passed to those that come after him.
"I do so love taking a nice, well thought out character and putting them through hell. It's like tossing a Faberge Egg onto the stage during a Gallagher concert." - me
@Palador / @Rabid Unicorn
Quote:
Yeah, that was indirectly my point: that it would have been an awesome (if extremely non-interactive) ending to a story... but the story's not yet over, so it would have been completely inappropriate to have an ending right then and there.
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
A heroic sacrifice is equally heroic when it wins a great victory as when it staves off a horrible defeat. There are plenty of ways to make the Statesman's sacrifice mean something without altering any of the major plot points, and I people have already suggested ways to do this.
|
Another thing about Wade's ritual is that it was copied from one used to kill both Inperious and Romulus with Imperious willingly giving his blood and life to end the threat of Romulus. The fact that Wade only killed one person with it may have set up a magical imbalance that gives him some major bad karma.
_________
@Inquisitor
Quote:
Agreed, Statesman is dead, let the poor ******* enjoy his eternal rest.
|
Originally Posted by ShadowMoka
Statesman died happily and can be with his lost family again. It'd be a bit selfish to bring him back.
|
------->"Sic Semper Tyrannis"<-------
Quote:
Uh, yeah. I do expect the Devs, if it's important to a story like I dunno.....THIS ONE....to give me more than a 'because' reasoning for why a perfectly valid power doesn't work when it's been shown demonstrably beforehand to work. I don't mind if a power fails, so long as the reason for failing isn't full of fail itself. |
Originally Posted by Cathulhu
The reason that "resurrection powers" (Empathy, Dark, etc) didn't work on Statesman is simple.
Because any one who has used "resurrection powers" in the game knows they sometimes fail, Thus for them to fail on this occasion is perfectly consistent with how the powers work. If resurrection always worked it would be a valid complaint, but in this case it is not. Do you expect the Devs to explain why resurrection didn't, and also why it did work, every time it is used? <Edit added this> Add in the fact that Wade wanted to make sure he killed Statesman and used exotic rituals to pull it off. This would be analogous to a murder mystery set in our world where a hit man shoots the victim in the head then the doctor fails to save the character. Since doctors often fail to save head shot victims it is a given that the doctor failing in this case is reasonable and needs no further elaboration. You are essential asking Why could the doctor not save the hit mans victim? |
Would you really be satisfied being told that your primary melee power for instance, which you were told in the story was the main thing that could beat a villain, doesn't hit...well, because it doesn't? That's what we're being told here. It's painfully contrived to keep Statesman dead in this case.
Using your doctor's analogy above, have you ever heard of a situation where the doctor is told they can't try and revive the victim? It's their obligation to try any and all reasonable means to save a life. But you're also putting a caveat on a murder where anyone could see saving them would be pointless because the death was instantaneous. Statesman did not die instantaneously. There is precedent for rescuing him from a situation where he was 'definitely dead'. Why then do we have a situation that because 'A Wizard Did It', this is somehow an exception proving the rule? It's rationalizing something away that shouldn't need to be, and that continues and will continue to remain my point.
S.
Part of Sister Flame's Clickey-Clack Posse
Quote:
No, that's not disingenous AT ALL. Writing is writing, and that's the point I was making. I wasn't coming from a position of flexibility in my situation, I came from a point where I felt at the time I was entirely justified in my reasoning to go 'just because' and was confronted with the reality that when you present that to people, they're not going to accept it, and they are going to challenge it.|
Originally Posted by PowerLeveler
Tabletop RPGs and MMOs are entirely different beasts. Whatever reasoning your tabletop players threw at you for what they were doing, you could roll with. You had that flexibility, and you were dealing with a handful of people. There is none of that flexibility in an MMO, and they are dealing with thousands of people. Comparing the two in terms of what kind of writing is needed doesn't work. When you walked into your groups, you had an idea of what the other players were capable of, and could deal with it because there were five of them. Trying to establish why each of a few thousand people weren't able to bring him back doesn't work, at all.
If you need more proof wander into the RP forum and see how thrilled they all were about the Well being the source of incarnate powers. The devs DID hammer something down there, but it didn't fit a lot of characters and Words were said. So here, the devs gave people a chance to explain their own reasons for not bringing him back, or why they're unable to, and now Words are being said. I'm not saying this story was GOOD at all, mind you, but the point you in particular are trying to make doesn't work. You're ignoring the scaling effect from a tabletop RPG to an MMO, and that's disingenuous. |
That is a question of story logic, it's a question of credibility, it's a question of internal consistency, it's a question of characterisation, it's a question of GOOD WRITING.
Good writing would've circumvented everything here. If you can't write a decent enough answer to 'what if...?' then are you really trying hard enough? All the story at this point needed was some post-mission detailing explaining just why the ritual worked, just why powers wouldn't aid in a resurrection. Instead, we get two things that are outrightly godmoding (and godmoding is consistent in any media):
1) Despite previously established means of bringing characters back from the dead, nothing bar nothing works here for no reason beyond 'because'.
2) Statesman, who to the best of my knowledge has never stated this anywhere else, decides that dying is fine despite the situation going on around him. So at this point we can infer from the dialogue that what...he's had an ongoing death wish for some time and when an opportunity arises to die (right in the middle of something that can threaten not just Earth but the cosmos!), he's going to take it. Are you seriously going to argue to me that this makes for a heroic death?
I really, really want to hear how there is no correlation in the way a tabletop and an online game are written, because they are both the bedrock on which they live and die.
S.
Part of Sister Flame's Clickey-Clack Posse
There is one thing I want to say (and I'm going to restrain my initial shock and anger at the suggestions) about Statesman wanting to die because of his age and his mortality and how it would weigh on him. And the answer is one word, in one character, and noone bar noone thinks he suffers for having been long-lived as well.
Wolverine.
Sersiously, noone complains about Logan being over a hundred years old. Noone. In fact, it works into his 'cool' factor for so many people. And yet what happens to him? He loses loved ones. He gets experimented on and given powers that could be argued change his fundamental personality whilst removing his memories.
He spends decades fighting injustice, sticking up for the little guy, protecting the weak and innocent, and generally being you know....a hero.
And not once that I know of does he sit there and go 'oh woe is me for having lived so long, I wish I could just end it all' because that would not only instantly knock off his 'cool factor', but any reader of his comics or watcher of his various media adventures would want to know why he's had this inexplicable change of heart when his entire character is rooted in surviving.
And by the way....Logan is just a 'ordinary guy,' just like Marcus Cole. In fact, they're both born in the same century. Yet what...because Wolverine is played by Hugh Jackman and he swears and he does this that and the other, it's okay for him to be over one hundred years old and apparently not having issues with it, but Cole does?
COME ON. We come back to the same rationalization and excuse motif that started in this thread. 'Statesman is weak'. 'Statesman wants to die.' 'Statesman is so old he doesn't want to live anymore'. Is this really how people want to characterise/excuse/rationalise the signature character of the game? That he really wasn't anything without the powers?
If that's really how he is, then not only does he deserve to stay dead, he didn't deserve the powers in the first place. Who in their right mind would want that man as their premiere hero?
Take a step back folks, and just look at the portrait of Statesman that's being painted here and you tell me if that's one you really want to be satisified with.
Tootsifruit!
S.
Part of Sister Flame's Clickey-Clack Posse
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by RadDidIt
The only thing I can say is that the unexplained will be explained. (See: Letter Writer.)
Soon. But, I do agree. Playing Dev'ils Advocate. |
I appreciate the sentiment, but I believe I can see a horse bolting away from an open gate from here....
S.
Part of Sister Flame's Clickey-Clack Posse
Quote:
Happens all the time -- most deaths in hospitals take place because a decision is made to allow the patient to die.
| Using your doctor's analogy above, have you ever heard of a situation where the doctor is told they can't try and revive the victim? It's their obligation to try any and all reasonable means to save a life. |
Current Blog Post: "Why I am an Atheist..."
"And I say now these kittens, they do not get trained/As we did in the days when Victoria reigned!" -- T. S. Eliot, "Gus, the Theatre Cat"
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kurrent
It would have made much more sense and been more fitting if States had died as part of a heroic sacrifice. Such as...
<cue Statesman stepping onto the triggger of the ritual> Darrin Wade: "Do you have any last words before you die?" Statesman, in obvious agony, struggles to his feet despite the pain coursing through his body as his powers are stripped away. "Yes... Wade..." he managed to force out through clenched teeth. "You're not... the only one... who can use ritual magic." <Camera pulls back to reveal the ghostly figures of Numina, Kelly Nemmers, War Witch and Archmage Tarixus, all hovering at equidistant points of a circle surrounding the entire mountain top. As Wade looks at each of them in turn, some of the rock slides off of the side of the mountain top, revealing glowing runes.> Numina: "You have shown us that you are indeed a much greater threat than we had credited you, Darrin Wade. But your glee will be fleeting." Tarixus: "Very, very fleeting." (with appropriate cackle) Kelly Nemmers: "The power of Statesman has been a force for good and justice for nearly a century, Wade. But all of us--and even Marcus himself--would rather it disappear from the world forever than fall into the hands of one as wicked and depraved as yourself." War Witch: "Which is why we came up with this particular ritual. We had a very good idea of your plans, and this was our final failsafe we had prepared with Statesman's help over the last week: a magical working that would only be triggered by Zeus's power being ripped out of Marcus Cole's body. A working that would use such an event to destroy not only the subject, as you had planned, but the caster as well." Tarixus: "You see, boy, no one wants you to have the power of Zeus. Your predilection with the Shadowgod already made you dangerous, but letting you have the power to breach the dimensions and bring the Beast here is unacceptable." Numina: (to War Witch) "Marcus can't hold out much longer. I can feel the Incarnate energy gradually wrest itself free due to Wade's magic." War Witch: "Then it is time." Statesman, slowly walking toward Wade, gold and crimson energy splashing around him (voice subdued but firm): "I would sacrifice my life to save my daughter, or to bring her back. Just like I would sacrifice it to end your menace once and for all." As he finishes, Statesman grabs Wade's shirt. Darrin Wade: "You fools! This masochistic exercise will destroy all of you, too!" Kelly Nemmers (with a spectral smile): "Hadn't you noticed, Darrin? We're already dead." <Cue the entire mountain exploding, followed by Statesman's cinematic reunion with his wife and daughter.> Now THAT would have been a good, heroic, climactic ending. You like that one, Oz? K |
Kurrent,
Currently everything I'm reading that isn't the actual story in the game that ends in Statesman dying are ones that I like.
But hey, I'm just a guy who likes heroes being heroes. What would I know? *laughs*
S.
Part of Sister Flame's Clickey-Clack Posse
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Venture
Happens all the time -- most deaths in hospitals take place because a decision is made to allow the patient to die.
|
And it really doesn't have much to do with the story here, with all due respect Venture. I think I've outlined (and more than once, to be perfectly blunt) the precedents and points where this isn't applicable. Respectfully, I'm going to leave my answer at that because to say it again would really just be pedantic on my part.
S.
Part of Sister Flame's Clickey-Clack Posse
Quote:
I think we win the thread, Azure. If anyone objects, they obviously lack insight.
|
Originally Posted by AzureSkyCiel
Also, Red Widow is a violent tomboy in this universe and rolled as a TW/ brute using the fusion hammer
|
Quote:
You haven't. What you have done is demonstrate in great detail that you are going to be unreasonable about this.| I think I've outlined (and more than once, to be perfectly blunt) the precedents and points where this isn't applicable. |
The devs don't have to fill out a form in triplicate to declare a death as final and beyond resurrection. There has been no shortage of such in the game, going as far back as Captain Indomitable in i0. Actually, given that finality is the default state for death, it is the cases where the death is not final that are the exceptions, not the rule. Who Will Die? commits a litany of sins, but this is not one of them.
Current Blog Post: "Why I am an Atheist..."
"And I say now these kittens, they do not get trained/As we did in the days when Victoria reigned!" -- T. S. Eliot, "Gus, the Theatre Cat"
Quote:
If the entire point of the story was that the villain is not supposed to be beaten, yeah, I'd be okay with that. In fact, there's various precedents for this, where enemies that I know for certain I could defeat simply aren't attackable, or are just impervious to damage (Reichsman), because I'm not supposed to defeat them at that point in the story.
|
Originally Posted by SuperOz
Would you really be satisfied being told that your primary melee power for instance, which you were told in the story was the main thing that could beat a villain, doesn't hit...well, because it doesn't?
|
My problem is that the permanency of Statesman's death doesn't make any sense.
Ms. Liberty already knows about and has access to Ouroboros. It wouldn't take her but 5 minutes to pop back in time and warn her Grandpa about his ensuing demise. She used it before to try and intercept a group of villains attacking her mother who were also using the time-traversing power of Ouroboros. Regardless of what Statesman felt at the moment he "surrendered", what he felt in an earlier time would have adversely affected his perception in the present. The presence of Ouroboros breaks the justification for his permanent death with ease.
As for him dying "happy" - the only person who realizes this would be Statesman himself (or possibly a telepathic hero at the scene). The rest of us would only know what we saw - one of the proudest heroes in history slain by some overzealous punk with aspirations far beyond his station.
Raid Leader of Task Force Vendetta "Steel 70", who defeated the first nine Drop Ships in the Second Rikti War.
70 Heroes, 9 Drop Ships, 7 Minutes. The Aliens never knew what hit them.
Now soloing: GM-Class enemy Adamaster, with a Tanker!
Quote:
Why does it have to be the ending of the story? Is it somehow wrong to have a story that's awesome all the way throughout, as opposed to crappy until the very end that I may well not have the patience to stick out to? What's wrong with making the Statesman's death a heroic last stand? Hell, what was wrong with doing the same for Alexis? It takes nothing away from the overall plot line yet it makes their specific plot points much more memorable, or at least memorable for much less unpleasant reasons.
|
Originally Posted by Thunder Knight
Yeah, that was indirectly my point: that it would have been an awesome (if extremely non-interactive) ending to a story... but the story's not yet over, so it would have been completely inappropriate to have an ending right then and there.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
The reason why the rez powers won't work is because statesman is dead. When our heroes get defeated, we aren't really dead, just close to death or dying. That's why we can get TPd to the hospital and be just fine. Rez powers don't actually bring back the dead, they're more like a souped-up defibrillator. States is completely 100% dead, and thus rez powers won't work.
|
Originally Posted by SuperOz
Uh, yeah. I do expect the Devs, if it's important to a story like I dunno.....THIS ONE....to give me more than a 'because' reasoning for why a perfectly valid power doesn't work when it's been shown demonstrably beforehand to work. I don't mind if a power fails, so long as the reason for failing isn't full of fail itself.
|
Quote:
I think most villain 50s would have something to say about that. And heroic ones, too. |
Originally Posted by Hopeling
Obviously, with Statesman dead, we don't have anyone to stand up to Recluse.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sylph_Knight
As for him dying "happy" - the only person who realizes this would be Statesman himself (or possibly a telepathic hero at the scene). The rest of us would only know what we saw - one of the proudest heroes in history slain by some overzealous punk with aspirations far beyond his station.
|
Let dead stay dead.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Superoz
Using your doctor's analogy above, have you ever heard of a situation where the doctor is told they can't try and revive the victim?
|
Wanted: Origin centric story arcs.
If you've only played an AT once (one set combo) and "hate" it - don't give up. Roll a different combo. It may just be those sets not clicking for you.
Quote:
Except the two characters couldn't be more polar opposites.|
Originally Posted by SuperOz
-snip-
S. |
Marcus Cole is an ex-soldier turned Hero, who for years and years has been THE unofficial mascot of America and US based Heroing, along with a pretty prominent world Hero figure. He's the parallel to Recluse himself, he's a paragon and a true blue believer in the good in people and 'Truth, Freedom and Justice'.
Wolverine is-
"You're chatting too much, bub. Time to pipe down." *SHNKT*
Yeah. Logan is about as far from that as you can get. States is a believer in doing things the right way. Wolverine goes on claw-abouts (word coined by Deadpool). He doesn't do reasoning, niceness or very much of the whole 'friend' thing. He just cuts stuff up.
Logan seems to have a lot of emotional baggage. Which he deals with by clawing people. And being borderline headcase most of the time.
And he's never been a figurehead. Marcus has. For years and years and years he's been 'doing the right thing'.
And now we're here. The new Incarnates. The next generation of Heroes, with power enough to fight the Coming Storm. Ultimately, we don't need him...and he knows that. He even says it. We step up to the plate, and he can finally do something a bit less self-less and rest.
*shrug* I mean, sure, something maybe a bit more 'epic last stand' would have been good. I liked K's suggestion back up thread, it read really well and had an A grade Epic stamp.
But I'm also not too 'meh' about it. Hell, I doubt I'd be able to have coped in his place. Iunno.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zwillinger
GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Captain_Photon
NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.
|
Quote:
And it doesn't occur to you how baseless of a conclusion that is? That a corpse with what looks like a smile was happy to be dead? It's a heavy-handed "you just know" it storytelling technique that people use when they have no other means of conveying a fact they want to treat as a certainty.
|
Originally Posted by Stormbird
... you mean, aside from the mention made (and I forget the exact wording) when you go to him that he seems to have an expression that shows he died at peace/happy?
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
What, apart from the Menders rather tight grip on time travel via Ouroboros? The 'do as we say to keep the timestream going the way it should be' schtick?|
Originally Posted by Sylph_Knight
My problem is that the permanency of Statesman's death doesn't make any sense.
Ms. Liberty already knows about and has access to Ouroboros. It wouldn't take her but 5 minutes to pop back in time and warn her Grandpa about his ensuing demise. She used it before to try and intercept a group of villains attacking her mother who were also using the time-traversing power of Ouroboros. Regardless of what Statesman felt at the moment he "surrendered", what he felt in an earlier time would have adversely affected his perception in the present. The presence of Ouroboros breaks the justification for his permanent death with ease. |
Yeah, I don't see that happening, otherwise EVERYONE would go back and undo every death, ever. And Time would probably implode. Which would suck.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zwillinger
GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Captain_Photon
NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.
|
Quote:
Frankly, I find the "Bring him back!" to be pretty selfish. Either that or the "heroes" demanding it are so insecure in their own abilities they shouldn't be out of super-diapers.
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
And it doesn't occur to you how baseless of a conclusion that is? That a corpse with what looks like a smile was happy to be dead? It's a heavy-handed "you just know" it storytelling technique that people use when they have no other means of conveying a fact they want to treat as a certainty.
|
Wanted: Origin centric story arcs.
If you've only played an AT once (one set combo) and "hate" it - don't give up. Roll a different combo. It may just be those sets not clicking for you.
Quote:
Sylph, I shared all of your reasoning when I began the thread. But the Devs have made a summary pronouncement about these issues in the Souvenir from Statesman's death:|
Originally Posted by Sylph_Knight
My problem is that the permanency of Statesman's death doesn't make any sense.
Ms. Liberty already knows about and has access to Ouroboros. It wouldn't take her but 5 minutes to pop back in time and warn her Grandpa about his ensuing demise. She used it before to try and intercept a group of villains attacking her mother who were also using the time-traversing power of Ouroboros. Regardless of what Statesman felt at the moment he "surrendered", what he felt in an earlier time would have adversely affected his perception in the present. The presence of Ouroboros breaks the justification for his permanent death with ease. As for him dying "happy" - the only person who realizes this would be Statesman himself (or possibly a telepathic hero at the scene). The rest of us would only know what we saw - one of the proudest heroes in history slain by some overzealous punk with aspirations far beyond his station. |
>>>You may always remember that moment when you stood over Statesman's body. His face was smiling. It almost looked like he was simply playing dead, if not for his lifeless eyes staring past you. It seems that Statesman welcomed his death; perhaps he finally grasped the rest he was looking for after fighting crime for several decades.<<<
I have already commented on it, but whatever you may have thought before, the Devs have there flatly announced that Statesman was looking for peace after several decades of fighting crime and welcomed his death, and died with a smile.
This constitutes, as Sam ably put it, the final ruination of Statesman.
"How do you know you are on the side of good?" a Paragon citizen asked him. "How can we even know what is 'good'?"
"The Most High has spoken, even with His own blood," Melancton replied. "Surely we know."
<snip scene>
Now THAT would have been a good, heroic, climactic ending. You like that one, Oz?
The problem is that... Chapter 5 wasn't meant to be the end of the story. There's still two parts left. Darren Wade had to be successful in getting Statesman's power and in safely escaping, so he can continue to hold onto that power throughout the next two chapters.... until you, the player, defeat him at the actual end of the story, in Chapter 7.