Planescape Torment analysis

[Lumpy]

In my opinion, the main philosophical ideas in Torment would be: 'Changing the nature of a man only leads to torment', and 'You can only escape your fate to a more painful one'.

Most important characters in Torment are an illustration of those concepts:
Morte, in nature a lying, knowledge hungry skull from the pillar, is changed into his Good self by his guilt. Naturally, this guild torments him. (note: Morte is the only fallen-from-grace who doesn't long for his former existance)
Dak'kon, his nature changed by his belief, a fallen from grace githzerai. Seeking to escape his fate of not knowing himself and being a broken shell, he stumbles into a more painful one, at least for a githzerai - eternal slavery to the Nameless one.
Nordom's change of nature and fall from grace are caused by the planes - specifically, Limbo. He is tormented by this loss, maybe more than other characters. As other FFGs, he loses his wings.
Fall-from-grace is changed by her suffering in Baator. She lies to herself that she is happy with her new nature, but like in the others' cases, she is tormented by the loss.
Trias, his nature changed by greed (I think), has fallen from his celestial home, and, of course, lost his wings. Like the others, he is tormented.
Pharod, a more tragic character, who is changed by greed. In trying to escape his fate on the Pillar of Skulls, he changes from a rich nobleman into the King of Rags, but this only brings him even more suffering.
Fhjull is changed by the betrayal of Trias, and, obviously, loses his wings.

On the other hand, there are those characters who accept their nature and fate. Vhailor and Ignus, rather than changing their natures, embrace them in their purest form. Thus, Vhailor becomes a creature of pure justice, and Ignus a creature of fire and chaos. They are the ones least tormented, and nearly happy.
Also, Ravel knows that her fate is that of punishment in the maze, and that in trying to escape the maze, she would only receive further suffering. So she accepts that fate, and her nature remains unchanged.

Finally, we have the Nameless One. Trying to escape his fate of eternal damnation in Hell, he goes to Ravel to change his nature. But his new fate is much worse than his previous one, and his new nature only brings him torment. So, during the course of the game, he finally accepts his true fate, his true nature, and in regaining them, he leaves his torments behind.
Thus, the question of the game isn't as much "What can change the nature of a man", but rather "What is the price for changing one's nature".
[/repost to prove how teh smart I am and to have some interesting discussion for a change]

Post whatever random shit goes through your brains too.

 

[Zomg]

I just replayed it, so this is fresh. I'm not interested in abstracting the themes, but three things really stick about PS:T. The first is a good, robust fantasy setting - thank TSR for that, both the very early batshit planes stuff from 1st edition AD&D, and that little spasm before their death where they put out several neat settings. The second is that there's lots of individually good writing and concepts. Even minor characters usually have unique voices (literary voices, I mean). The Sensorium stuff is great, and I was floored by the effect of the Deionarra and Ravel stones. The third is the roleplaying - the player's version of the Nameless One has literary depth distinct from the character that is thrust upon you. The interaction with Ravel absolutely makes different renditions of TNO into distinct virtual people, for example.

There's lots of bad stuff, but I think it's all obvious.

 

[flabbyjack]

the Nameless One experience is different for everybody

It is intelligent reflections like those that are turning cRPGs into a dying genre, something that only indie dev studios progenerate. 'RPG' is a filthy gimmick used when selling games to people with far less intelligence than it's creators.

 

[TalesfromtheCrypt]

the Nameless One experience is different for everybody

It is intelligent reflections like those that are turning cRPGs into a dying genre, something that only indie dev studios progenerate. 'RPG' is a filthy gimmick used when selling games to people with far less intelligence than it's creators.

OK

 

[Lumpy]

The third is the roleplaying - the player's version of the Nameless One has literary depth distinct from the character that is thrust upon you. The interaction with Ravel absolutely makes different renditions of TNO into distinct virtual people, for example.

True enough. Planescape Torment is probably the only RPG so far where the protagonist can have some actual depth. Even in the other classic RPGs like Fallout or Arcanum, the PCs were hardly complex.

 

[Human Shield]

Great post.

I think Torment was the only RPG to attempt a narrativism RPG. It is a shame that it was stuck with the D&D rules with its focus on combat, making a lot of the system incoherent.

 

[Gambler]

Sorry, but you make it sound... well, moralistic in Judo-Christian sense. You make it sound like the whole Torment thing was just a mistake, and that the point of the game is to warn people not to do such mistake. (At least I read it this way.)

I would say that one of the main ideas of the game is about responsibility. In the beginning TNO was doomed, but in the end he consciously accepted responsibility for his own actions. Thus, Torment is not a mistake, but a very important transition. And in the end, the situation does not just revert to where it started, it is resolved in a meaningful and even positive way. That is why the game feels so... complete.

(Disclaimer: I saw only Lawful Good ending.)

 

[Lumpy]

Sorry, but you make it sound... well, moralistic in Judo-Christian sense. You make it sound like the whole Torment thing was just a mistake, and that the point of the game is to warn people not to do such mistake.

I would say that one of the main ideas of the game is about responsibility. In the beginning TNO was doomed, but in the end he consciously accepted responsibility for his own actions. Thus, Torment is not a mistake, but a very important transition. And in the end, the situation does not just revert to where it started, it is resolved in a meaningful and even positive way. That is why the game feels so... complete.

(Disclaimer: I saw only Lawful Good ending.)

I'm an atheist.
And I wouldn't say the point is to warn people, I was just observing a common theme throughout the game. Yes, it doesn't get back to where it started, because after millennia of suffering for trying to change his own nature and his fate, the Nameless One understands that coming to terms with it is the better solution, and he evolves through his understanding.
He never tried not to take responsibility for his actions, the whole point of his search for immortality was penitence. The lower planes could never give him the occasion to repent, all they offered was pure punishment.
On the other hand, one of the possible explanations for his decision to end his own life was, indeed, penitence. Knowing that his existence would make more and more people suffer, he decides to sacrifice himself and go to hell forever in exchange for the good of humanity. It's an irony of sorts, a great deed which becomes meaningless if he doesn't end up in hell anyway, in spite of it.

BTW, there is only one ending. Well, two, actually - you can also erase yourself from existence completely. But you don't get a cinematic for that.

 

[JarlFrank]

Planescape Torment was, basically, the most amazing game I ever played. The ending really had some kind of impact on me. PST = pure awesomeness.

Now to the interpretation.
The ending shows you that, no matter how you try to flee from it, embracing your destiny might be the best solution both for you and others. By gaining immortality TNO tried to flee from his fate, which was hell. Still, only then all the problems began, and by his immortality others had to suffer. Also, he suffered by losing his memory and personality on each death, and in the end, as he embraced his fate and chose to die, he was in some way released, even though he went to the blood war for all his sins.
The changing of his nature was the way in which he now saw that it was the only *right* thing to do. Before, he tried to flee his fate, he was weak and lost his memories and personality, but now, as he accepts his fate without any fear of it, he became strong and confident.

That's it for now, I could write a lot more about it, but maybe I'll do it later as I don't have time now.

 

[aries202]

Nive read, and very intelligently written, to.

I'm not going to comment much on the game, Torment, as I sadly never played it to the end (my computer died in the middle of a Torment game, so I had to get a new computer).

I just want to say that your analysis is pretty good, and clearly demonstrates that (video) games can & should be interpretated like books, movies or tv-series.

It made me think - and that's always a good thing.

 

[JarlFrank]

Nive read, and very intelligently written, to.

I'm not going to comment much on the game, Torment, as I sadly never played it to the end (my computer died in the middle of a Torment game, so I had to get a new computer).

I just want to say that your analysis is pretty good, and clearly demonstrates that (video) games can & should be interpretated like books, movies or tv-series.

It made me think - and that's always a good thing.

Play the game to the end and you will have a lot to think.
The end is the most intense part of the game.

 

[Annonchinil]

I think one of the important aspects of Planescape is the importance of mortality, thus I believe that Ravel did not make TNO immortal but ended up striping his mortality from him. Making him be rejected by the other planes and by death. It also begin to weaken him as he did not have one of the most permanent parts of his soul.

I also believe that you guys are wrong about the ending, the whole point of "What can change the nature of the man?" was that simply striving to avoid punishment does not change who you really are. Even though the Good Incarnation felt regret and tried to do good in order to atone he only came to Revel after realizing that he was doomed to hell. His crimes are what drive him to change and will always be a part of him. Vhailor, the representetive of purest Justice killed Trias for his crimes after he saught redemption (reminded me of 1984)

Pharod sought to find a sphere that he thought would help him avoid his fate, but in the end it didn't matter. This reminded me of the story of the Good Samaritan about how random rules, etiquette and traditions do not necessary lead to the best results. Again the strive to avoid punishment didn't change his nature nor his fate.

Ravel's nature was changed, if you joined the sense society and achieved access to some of the sensory stones there was one that was a message from her to you from one of her victims (I think that's where it is). I always felt that before you meet her she was someone scary/evil. Her punishment and incarceration certainly changed her nature. However I don't think that should be taken to mean that punishment is automatically good.

Ravel I believe loved TNO (not in that way) and did a lot to help him, she saw the Lady of Pain as a prisoner and tried to help her. Her nature was beginning to change before the player's maze, when she met the good incarnation and he posed to her the question, nor do I believe it caused her Torment. Even when she was punished there was no Torment do to her acceptance of it, she made the best of it turning her prison into a garden.

There is a lot more, but I am tired. Either way I think that fate, justice and responsibility where key themes of Planescape. A lot of the characters went against their nature because it caused them suffering and I believe their Torment was just an extension of that. Also the "happiest" characters like Vhailor where also the most simple and felt the least human.

 

[Annonchinil]

Oh and I agree that more games should make you think about the story, Metal Gear Solid 3 did that for me, but not to the extent of Planescape.

 

[Lumpy]

I just want to say that your analysis is pretty good, and clearly demonstrates that (video) games can & should be interpretated like books, movies or tv-series.

Not really, very few games can actually be interpreted in literary terms, because most are shallow and focus on the plot and not on the meanings.

Also the "happiest" characters like Vhailor where also the most simple and felt the least human.

Well, yeah. The part of humanity that they had lost was the complexity, the intricacy of our minds. They abandoned all secondary traits, and allowed the one that was the most important for them to dominate them entirely. So yes, they do abandon (not willingly tho) a part of their humanity, but become happier beings because of that.

 

[AZ]

In my opinion - the complexity of the story was why PST was not a "success". Most "rpg" gamers feel insecure in the world around them - so they escape to fantasy which is a simple world, and in the usual story they make this world even more straightforward by "killing the evil" treating. However in PST everything was very complex, so the escapist jut got more frustrated. That's why BG, NWN 1-2, Oblivion are "successful".

 

[Raapys]

I disagree. BG, NWN, Oblivion, whatever, were more successful because; Combat was a much bigger part of those games( gamers like to kill ), they didn't have so much text to read through, and because the infinity game engine generally doesn't appeal to all that many people( unlike, say, Oblivion's classic FPS style ).

On the other hand, the 'unimportance' of combat and the amount of text are both reasons for why the game actually became a classic.

 

[Azarkon]

It's occured to me that the biggest difference between playing PST and most, if not all, other Western RPGs is that PST's characters, by which I mean both the party NPCs and the flavor/quest NPCs, were simply more compelling. The problem with most RPGs these days, and this includes NWN 2 by the way, is that you seldom actually care about the game world and its inhabitants. Sure, you might feel some attachment towards one or two key characters, but for the most part you're apathetic and, well, "apathy is death." If I don't feel anything towards the characters then why would I bother to play through their boring-ass fedex quests? That there is the problem - if you can't craft compelling NPCs, and most RPG makers can't (or don't bother to try), then of course players will come to know RPGs by the combat - it's the only thing that could possibly be entertaining because listening to run-of-the-mill NPCs certainly isn't.

So, yeah - compelling NPCs > just about everything else in a RPG. I'm sure some Codexers will disagree and mutter "roleplaying" but, hell, why would I want to roleplay in a world I don't care about? A RPG with compelling characters but no roleplaying is still a great interactive novel. On the other hand, a RPG with boring characters and every roleplaying option you can think of is just a waste of my time.

Make me care, first; everything else follows.

 

[Hümmelgümpf]

What about the girl from another plane, who is afraid to pass through anything that resembles a portal? She is about to accept her fate, but is still tormented.

 

[JarlFrank]

What about the girl from another plane, who is afraid to pass through anything that resembles a portal? She is about to accept her fate, but is still tormented.

She doesn't accept her fate of being stuck in Sigil, or being teleported to random places. That's why she asks you to help her if you initiate dialogue with her. And that's why she has that fear of doors: because she tries to avoid being teleported to random places, and not just accepting that it will happen.

 

[aboyd]

Ravel knows that her fate is that of punishment in the maze, and that in trying to escape the maze, she would only receive further suffering. So she accepts that fate, and her nature remains unchanged.

Ah. Hmm. I recall thinking she was fighting against her fate most insidiously. That's why even though she was mazed, she had found ways to get out in the forms of Mebbeth, Marta, and Ei-Vene. I always had the impression she was seriously powerful and dangerous. She didn't seem scared of the Lady of Pain at all.

I would say that one of the main ideas of the game is about responsibility. In the beginning TNO was doomed, but in the end he consciously accepted responsibility for his own actions. Thus, Torment is not a mistake, but a very important transition.

Co-sign.

BTW, there is only one ending. Well, two, actually - you can also erase yourself from existence completely. But you don't get a cinematic for that.

Looks like there are at least 3 officially supported endings, with various combos of videos to go with them:

http://crap.planescape-torment.org/end.htm

...and during the endgame, there are many ways you can interact, and some are mutually exclusive. So even with 3 endings, there are a handful of additional different "reveals" you can encounter in dialogue as you talk with your egos and mortality.

Good game. I've completed it 5 or 6 times. I still haven't taken Vhalior and Ignus into my party, still haven't see what Vhalior does to Trias, still haven't done anything with Coaxmetal, and on and on. There is so much to do, I've still got plenty to see.

 

[Lumpy]

But those don't really count as different endings. I mean, you do end up the same way in both cases.
The difference would be that if you merge with TTO, all your companions get resurrected and sent back to Sigil. If you kill him, then they remain dead, and the ones you may have resurrected die too because the plane collapses (no more regrets -> no fortress).

 

[IdaGno]

Planescape Torment was, basically, the most amazing game I ever played. The ending really had some kind of impact on me. PST = pure awesomeness.

Summed up nicely here: http://www.gamerswithjobs.com/node/7545

 

[Nameless0ne]

When the game was launched...i had read a LOT about it being very different and set in Planescape setting. I really wanted to get my hands on it...and when i finally got it.............OMFG ... game simply 0wed me....i love it so so much

Even to this day....i reinstalled the game on my new PC...after playing through all those KOTORs, NwNs and such recent stuff.....nothing even comes close to this gem...nothing!

The Nameless One...is perhaps the most detailed game character even written...kudos to Chris Avellone for that and the amazing piece of narrative story-telling. Not to mention the incredibly detailed NPCs....morte, NORDOM, everyone!!!

And i just love BlackIsle....while it lasted

 

[APostmodernLens]

Planescape as an example of postmodernist themes

Hi I'm a newcomer so go easy on me. I havent actually played the game and I'm struggling to find it actually.

From everything I've read on Planescape, it seems that it is amenable to a postmodernist analysis. For example, the character being named The Nameless One signifies that the character doesnt and even shouldnt have a true transcedental meaning or narrative. This and the concept of planes of existence demonstrates adherence to a central postmodernist theme of meaning as always fragmentary and never able to be soldified in a totalising way.

In terms of the enjoyment of the game, seeing the game through a postmodernist lens offers added enjoyment because the instability of meaning and the very fact that we all elucidate our own readings of the game make it worthwhile. However, I notice that some readings given attempt to locate this original and authorial vision that the game can provide one meaning which makes all other readings irrevelant. This is flawed and we should embrace all readings as having merit.

Also, just one question

1: Do any other users of this site like the ideas of postmodernism as a way of analysing games?

P.S. This is just a preliminary and basic analysis "I" have written until I have played through the game.

 

[Gragt]

Re: Planescape as an example of postmodernist themes

From everything I've read on Planescape, it seems that it is amenable to a postmodernist analysis.

NOOOOOOOOOOOO!