Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Torment PS:Torment moral tracking changes the ending? and EXISTENTIALIZMO

Silva

Arcane
Joined
Jul 17, 2005
Messages
4,778
Location
Rio de Janeiro, Brasil
I'm playing the Enhanced Edition and it occurred to me that this is one of the few games to track your behavior toward a moral compass in a way as satisfying as Ultima 4 did. But differently from Ultima, here you don't really have a long term consequence/reward for doing it, and so it ultimately feels less impactful a feature, imo, than finally beint able to brave the Abyss as seen in Ultima.

The exception, imo, would be if you had different endings, or even better - entire endgame segments - based on that moral compass. And that's something I never noticed, frankly, in the couple times I've finished PS:T. Perhaps due to it's story getting kinda weak and convoluted post-Sigil, or perhaps there's really no such thing.

So, is there some change in the ending based on your moral compass? If negative (as I suspect is the case), then was this planned in some point in development and ditched at release? It seems such a logical extension of the concept that I find it hard to believe the devs never thought of it.

EDIT: oh, and coming from a playthrough of Nier Automata, I can't shake the parallels in the games. Both have as strong points the exploration of their central themes, and inconsistent narratives and gameplay as the weak points. The difference being that PS:T narrative gets really bad post-Sigil and never recovers, while N:A gets really bad mid-game and then shine again by the end.
 
Last edited:

JarlFrank

I like Thief THIS much
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
33,052
Location
KA.DINGIR.RA.KI
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
There's one change I know about, which is who you are confronted by towards the end before meeting TTO.

If you're lawful, you'll be confronted by Ignus, if you're chaotic, you're confronted by Vhalior.

Not entirely sure if it was lawful/chaotic or good/evil but I remember it as lawful/chaotic.
 

Kyl Von Kull

The Night Tripper
Patron
Joined
Jun 15, 2017
Messages
3,152
Location
Jamrock District
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Dude, that's the point. Good, bad, chaotic, lawful, it doesn't matter; the abyss is where you're headed and the abyss is where you end up. I think the fatalism of the ending is wonderful. From a big picture perspective, the game wants to leave you wondering: what's the point? Was your moral alignment totally meaningless? Or is it perhaps more meaningful because there's no payoff for TNO or the planes or Sigil?

Maybe PS:T veers a little too close to existentialism for some people, but I always thought this was one of the best things about it.
 

Nano

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 6, 2016
Messages
4,648
Grab the Codex by the pussy Strap Yourselves In
I was chaotic good but still fought Ignus (but I didn't recruit Vhalior). Did a quick Google search and people are saying that good/neutral TNO confronts Ignus while evil TNO confronts Vhalior.
 

Silva

Arcane
Joined
Jul 17, 2005
Messages
4,778
Location
Rio de Janeiro, Brasil
Dude, that's the point. Good, bad, chaotic, lawful, it doesn't matter; the abyss is where you're headed and the abyss is where you end up. I think the fatalism of the ending is wonderful. From a big picture perspective, the game wants to leave you wondering: what's the point? Was your moral alignment totally meaningless? Or is it perhaps more meaningful because there's no payoff for TNO or the planes or Sigil?
Hmmm never seen through this angle, but it makes sense.

PS:T veers a little too close to existentialism for some people, but I always thought this was one of the best things about it.
You should try Nier Automata then. Just saying.
 

Alkarl

Learned
Joined
Oct 9, 2016
Messages
472
I believe, though it's been awhile, you also get some extra dialogue if you killed that character prior to confronting them; for example, if you killed Vhailor, the dialogue will reflect this if you encounter him at the end.
 

ga♥

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Messages
7,593
PST narrative gets bad after Sigil? Why? Also why PST:EE can't scale the (new and horrible) UI?
 

CryptRat

Arcane
Developer
Joined
Sep 10, 2014
Messages
3,548
OK, I've only played PS:T once so the only part I played several times is the very end and I don't understand the game as most people here, but
Dude, that's the point. Good, bad, chaotic, lawful, it doesn't matter; the abyss is where you're headed and the abyss is where you end up. I think the fatalism of the ending is wonderful. From a big picture perspective, the game wants to leave you wondering: what's the point? Was your moral alignment totally meaningless? Or is it perhaps more meaningful because there's no payoff for TNO or the planes or Sigil?

Maybe PS:T veers a little too close to existentialism for some people, but I always thought this was one of the best things about it.
I'm interested, why do call fatalist the ending of a game with a large range of possible endings, of which one is clearly a good one?
Are you even talking about the endings in general or one in particular?

If anything in PS:T I reached, on purpose, the logical goal I wanted to reach, and the game let me choose the way I consider the good one to reach it, not unlike many other games, while in Serpent In The Staglands at the opposite I reached a logical conclusion of what I did but it was not the goal I wanted to reach, I would definitely consider this one fatalist.
 

ga♥

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Messages
7,593
By fatalist he means there's literally no way to avoid your fate in PST. Fate dictated by the Planescape cosmogony for mortals and the influence their actions have on the plane they will eventually end up after being dead.

It's that, or literaly "cease to exist".
 

Kyl Von Kull

The Night Tripper
Patron
Joined
Jun 15, 2017
Messages
3,152
Location
Jamrock District
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
OK, I've only played PS:T once so the only part I played several times is the very end and I don't understand the game as most people here, but
Dude, that's the point. Good, bad, chaotic, lawful, it doesn't matter; the abyss is where you're headed and the abyss is where you end up. I think the fatalism of the ending is wonderful. From a big picture perspective, the game wants to leave you wondering: what's the point? Was your moral alignment totally meaningless? Or is it perhaps more meaningful because there's no payoff for TNO or the planes or Sigil?

Maybe PS:T veers a little too close to existentialism for some people, but I always thought this was one of the best things about it.
I'm interested, why do call fatalist the ending of a game with a large range of possible endings, of which one is clearly a good one?
Are you even talking about the endings in general or one in particular?

If anything in PS:T I reached, on purpose, the logical goal I wanted to reach, and the game let me choose the way I consider the good one to reach it, not unlike many other games, while in Serpent In The Staglands at the opposite I reached a logical conclusion of what I did but it was not the goal I wanted to reach, I would definitely consider this one fatalist.

I'm sure this has been discussed to death many, many times. Unless you get one of the nonstandard game overs, like the Lady of Pain kills you, you end up in the blood war. Yeah, you can get there by convincing TTO or blackmailing him or defeating him in battle or just killing yourself with Coaxmetal's knife, you can resurrect your companions or let them rot, but at the end of the game you die and wake up in the abyss. You can take many different approaches, but you end up in the same place. How is that not fatalistic?

SITS is much more binary: there's a good ending and a bad ending--you just didn't get the good one. They are very different in how they play out and their outcome. It's simply that tons of things lock you into the bad ending, making the good one hard to get.
 

CryptRat

Arcane
Developer
Joined
Sep 10, 2014
Messages
3,548
but at the end of the game you die and wake up in the abyss.
Ah ok, I didn't remember that every ending leaded to that. So it makes a little more sense.

Still religiously it's normal that your very first step into escaping the curse of the cycle of reincarnation is to reconcile your soul and body, so it's the normal goal of the game just like saving the world is in another game. But maybe goal and fate are not that distinct, in both case.
 
Joined
May 4, 2017
Messages
629
By the way, Torment is way better with the unfinished bussiness and Yemeth quest, stuff that you won't experience due to the fact you own EE and not vanilla PS:T
 

Ninjerk

Arcane
Joined
Jul 10, 2013
Messages
14,323
There is a way to avoid your fate and it is willing yourself out of existence. Isn't that good enough?
23628.jpg
 
Joined
May 4, 2017
Messages
629
By the way, Torment is way better with the unfinished bussiness and Yemeth quest, stuff that you won't experience due to the fact you own EE and not vanilla PS:T

There's UB for EE now. Checkmate atheists!
By the way, Torment is way better with the unfinished bussiness and Yemeth quest, stuff that you won't experience due to the fact you own EE and not vanilla PS:T

There's UB for EE now. Checkmate atheists!
So now you've got mods but you still got bugs and they ain't little (https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/68520/speak-with-the-dead-bug-spoilers#latest)
 

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
17,949
Pathfinder: Wrath
Maybe PS:T veers a little too close to existentialism for some people, but I always thought this was one of the best things about it.

What do you mean by "veers a little too close to existentialism"? In what way? What kind of existentialism? I don't see any kind of existential conclusion in PS:T, maybe except willing yourself out of existence, quite the contrary, TNO mostly can't escape from the powers of the universe, so they hang like an objective sword of Damocles over him.
 

Silva

Arcane
Joined
Jul 17, 2005
Messages
4,778
Location
Rio de Janeiro, Brasil
What do you mean by "veers a little too close to existentialism"? In what way? What kind of existentialism? I don't see any kind of existential conclusion in PS:T, maybe except willing yourself out of existence, quite the contrary, TNO mostly can't escape from the powers of the universe, so they hang like an objective sword of Damocles over him.
Isn't the fact you are free to pick your own choices even though your original self fucked up good, an example of "Existence precedes Essence" by Sartre? Further, the fact the game doesn't judge your choices (eg: giving you good and bad endings for them), instead leaving it to you - and only you - to make meaning of them, isn't a mark of existentialism*?

I could be wrong though. Kyl Von Kull was vague on his response.


*EDIT: Could this be a different form of C&C? Instead of giving obvious cookie-cutted consequences for you choices ("if you do this, that happens"), give you just subtle cues to make you reflect on what you just did without changing anything significantly? ("You did this? So, how do you feel about that?") I do remember SOMA and Nier Automata having pretty good examples of it too (the first robot you can opt to kill to divert energy in the former, and the Wandering Couple quest in the later).
 
Last edited:

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
17,949
Pathfinder: Wrath
Does a criminal who has served his sentence or was never caught and is now able to choose "veer into existentialism"? Who is the judge that does the sentencing that matters in this context? The game does judge your choices - the UI morality meter. It isn't reflected in-game, however, so I don't know if that counts. Not to mention that TNO's original choice was indeed judged, quite harshly in fact, by his one-way ticket to the Blood War regardless of your other choices, so I think that alone would preclude the existentialist reading.
 

agentorange

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Messages
5,256
Location
rpghq (cant read codex pms cuz of fag 2fa)
Codex 2012
Maybe PS:T veers a little too close to existentialism for some people, but I always thought this was one of the best things about it.

What do you mean by "veers a little too close to existentialism"? In what way? What kind of existentialism? I don't see any kind of existential conclusion in PS:T, maybe except willing yourself out of existence, quite the contrary, TNO mostly can't escape from the powers of the universe, so they hang like an objective sword of Damocles over him.
The ending of the game is basically an adaptation of the conclusion to the Myth of Sisyphus of Camus. Throughout the game the Nameless One is fighting against a cycle that he has no control over, the only thing that a person can have control over, their own consciousness, their will, is being effaced and manipulated. At the end of the game he is able to break this cycle and thus regain his own sense of self, his will. Of course he is then thrust into yet another seemingly endless cycle, that of the Blood War--but the important distinction is that this is a cycle that he can know, accept, gain control of, and even take pleasure in. In the same way that Sisyphus smiles at the conclusion of Camus essay, accepting and thereby taking control of his endless boulder pushing fate, The Nameless One is probably smiling as he picks up the hammer and goes to join the endless battle of the Brood War.
 

Forest Dweller

Smoking Dicks
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
12,196
I remember reading in either a design document or interview that they originally planned for the Transcendent One to act differently towards you at the end based on your alignment. He would basically be the "opposite" of whatever you were (i.e. if you were good he would act like a villain, if you were evil he would be a righteous crusader, and if you were neutral he would basically be in the form that he ended up in in the final game).
 

Kyl Von Kull

The Night Tripper
Patron
Joined
Jun 15, 2017
Messages
3,152
Location
Jamrock District
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Maybe PS:T veers a little too close to existentialism for some people, but I always thought this was one of the best things about it.

What do you mean by "veers a little too close to existentialism"? In what way? What kind of existentialism? I don't see any kind of existential conclusion in PS:T, maybe except willing yourself out of existence, quite the contrary, TNO mostly can't escape from the powers of the universe, so they hang like an objective sword of Damocles over him.

That’s quite the existential dilemma! You’re getting way too hung up on the existence of D&D’s fake pantheon/fake cosmology. You can have existentialist themes in a world with real metaphysics. The whole Planescape setting takes philosphical ideas and makes them literal; it draws a great deal from the well of existentialism, or call it absurdism if you want. The whole “belief can change the nature of a man” speech is an existentialist conclusion that would be equally acceptable to Sartre or Camus.

“If there is anything I have learned in my travels across the Planes, it is that many things may change the nature of a man. Whether regret, or love, or revenge or fear - whatever you believe can change the nature of a man, can. I’ve seen belief move cities, make men stave off death, and turn an evil hag's heart half-circle. This entire Fortress has been constructed from belief. Belief damned a woman, whose heart clung to the hope that another loved her when he did not. Once, it made a man seek immortality and achieve it. And it has made a posturing spirit think it is something more than a part of me.”

How much closer could it come to saying “we make our own meaning” in the context of a dungeons and dragons game?

Does a criminal who has served his sentence or was never caught and is now able to choose "veer into existentialism"? Who is the judge that does the sentencing that matters in this context? The game does judge your choices - the UI morality meter. It isn't reflected in-game, however, so I don't know if that counts. Not to mention that TNO's original choice was indeed judged, quite harshly in fact, by his one-way ticket to the Blood War regardless of your other choices, so I think that alone would preclude the existentialist reading.

You could say the same things about Sisyphus and he is the archetypal existential hero, at least once he gets to the underworld. Anyway, I think you’re looking at this backwards. The final incarnation is born damned, and the fact that he is damned regardless of his actions is practically a one to one analogue for real world man confronting the innevitabilty of death in an absurd and indifferent universe. The final incarnation has no chance of salvation, except in the meaning he creates for himself via his own decisions.

Your morality meter changes but it affects nothing at the very end. That’s a pretty existentialist mechanic. If you could change TNO’s ending by behaving well or badly, that would send a very different message. As is, the choices you do make in the story only have the value you assign them (sure, the game calls them good or evil but you’re neither cosmically rewarded for good nor cosmically punished for evil). As far as the final incarnation is concerned, the universe is indeed indifferent. So do your choices even matter? Maybe the game doesn’t have an existentialist conclusion (for the sake of argument), but it’s undoubtedly asking existentialist questions.

I know I like to read things into games, often frivolously, but I’m kind of stunned that you don’t see this. Really didn’t think anyone would argue this point.

Looks like agentorange ninjaed me on The Myth of Sisyphus, but I was planning to say pretty much the same thing:

The final video where TNO stands at the top of a hill, looks down at the blood war, picks up a weapon and nods as he starts walking down to his eternity of torment, it might as well have been ripped from the pages of The Myth of Sisyphus. One must imagine The Nameless One happy. So, strongly agree.

***
Point of clarification: I probably should have said “the game may veer too close to existentialism for your tastes.” Certainly this was not intended as a criticism.
 
Last edited:

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom