I'd also like to say it not only makes giving into the rage of the slayer make more sense for good guys, it makes falling evil in hell as you take your revenge make more sense.
You WON and got Imoen back, NOTHING went wrong, and you were WINNING against Irenicus... that wouldn't turn you evil if you were good.
But your rage against Irenicus for killing your sister might make you turn evil.
@Erinne well I do remember that he takes tons of damage, but doesn't that also happen when you encounter him in Trademeet? Wow I feel like a hypocrite, I should definitely remember that. All I remember is, that you DO encounter him in Trademeet, and that he ends up teleporting away somewhere else.
Anyone know if that does damage to him in Trademeet like it does in Saradush?
Edit: also @moopy I totally wish all of what you said happens... Then I wouldn't be guilt tripped into bringing Imoen along throughout the entire game...
"Failing" is not a particularly heroic trait. I would be pissed at the game--not at Irenicus--if I came all the way to Spellhold to free Imoen only to have her die. That feels far more of a cop-out to me than being able to rescue her.
Especially since there's, y'know, resurrection magic in the world. But hey, let's just conveniently ignore that and fluff it as "not possible" whenever the story has someone die!
Khalid, fine; Jaheira is a druid, who are not generally OK with resurrection (though oddly enough, Jaheira is actually an exception to that, what with Harper's Call and all), and I could see her not wanting to resurrect Khalid. But Minsc should have sought to have Dynaheir resurrected, or at least addressed the possibility.
@moopy: The problem with Imoen dying at Spellhold is that it would come across as incredibly weak and repetitive, given that it follows
Yoshimo's betrayal and death.
That's actually a character you might have spent a significant amount of time with, whereas Imoen doesn't play an active role until after you save her.
Although the best argument for keeping her alive would be her hilarious exchanges with the ToB NPC, particularly if she's the one who brings him back:
Imoen: "So... Sarevok. You've had an itty-bitty piece of my soul in there for quite a while, now. What's it been like?"
Sarevok: "Well, other than a slight obsession with my weight and the resurgence of a few pimples, it's been simply grand."
And it makes sense that the option to give up the Bhaal essence doesn't come into play until Amelyssan is dead - if you relinquished that power beforehand, it would have gone straight to her.
@lDanielHolm: There are canonical limitations to resurrection, after all - I just assumed Dynaheir was gibbed, since you never actually find her body...
@Xavioria: Actually, it'll be interesting to see how the game plays out if you don't take Yoshimo or Imoen with you - I won't need either of them for the EE if there's a new evil thief around...
I'd also like to say it not only makes giving into the rage of the slayer make more sense for good guys, it makes falling evil in hell as you take your revenge make more sense.
You WON and got Imoen back, NOTHING went wrong, and you were WINNING against Irenicus... that wouldn't turn you evil if you were good.
Except for the part where, having saved Imoen, you discover that Bodhi has taken her soul - a violation that clearly affects Imoen deeply. If you're Good, that's enough to trigger the Slayer transformation, whereas if you're Evil you just enjoy the power of this new form.
I was pleased to be able to rescue Imoen. She's the only NPC I always have with me. I don't game for such dark and depressing themes, in fact, if it was impossible to rescue Imoen that likely would have ended my Baldur's Gate involvement. So I'm quite pleased they made the change.
@Xavioria - don't have ToB installed at the moment so I can't check, but everything I can find online about the quest says it is in fact possible for him to escape. So I guess I must be misremembering, perhaps there was some other path you could take in that quest that ended with him being killed.
@lDanielHolm - funny you should bring up resurrection magic, since Bhaalspawn should not be able to be resurrected (that's why the game ends when you die - your body instantly disintegrates so your companions can't resurrect you). The fact that Imoen can be resurrected during normal gameplay is an oversight, probably because she was a last minute addition and at the start of BGI the developers likely hadn't decided that she was a Bhaalspawn as well (plus it would've given away the plot twist way too early).
@Xavioria: I think you're confusing Viekang's appearance in BG2 (where he "explodes" if you talk to him at Trademeet) and ToB (where he successfully teleports through the barrier if you cast Horror on him).
Viekang got smashed upon the magical barrier around Saradush. That's what I suspect was his ultimate fate. And even if he survived it doesn't matter. Because although for sure there were some stragglers left alive, their portion of the divine essence is insignificant. And once the majority of it gets sealed away forever or absorbed by the protagonist/new god they will have no access to more of it. So they aren't a threat.
As for the OP - Imoen willingly relinquishes her essence at the end, because she never wanted it. So that makes her an ordinary human at the end of the series.
His teleport causes him to explode as a side effect, even though it says it does a gizillion damage, it's completely safe to him.
You don't talk to him, you just walk in and once you get so close, he freaks out and explodes, with no explanation at all for WTF!? just happened..until ToB.
The guy who tries to teleport out and dies is the guy who stole the magic shop guy's spellbook, you can tell him to use the teleport scroll he wanted and watch him chunk or you can tell him what would happen and he'll stop.
Vieking's teleport is a divine power, similar to your own pocket plane ability, and isn't foiled by the magics of mere mortals.
However, at the end of it all, you have earned the right to decide what happens to Bhaal's power. Vieking didn't participate in the final battle and had no say in the matter. When you decide that Bhaal's power should be sealed away, any other Bhaalspawn left lose the divine part of their souls and become normal people.
Resurrection can function just fine on anyone, as long as they didn't die of old age, are native to that plane, and you have some scrap of their remains even just a bit of a finger bone or even a few pinches of dust are enough (unlike raise dead, resurrection completely restores the body to full condition from that little speck). It can even be used to resurrect creatures that have been turned into undead (though it requires their bodies to be destroyed first), killed by massive damage or death effects, and can even resurrect Elves/half-elves, Half-Orcs and gnomes, that raise dead won't work on (though BG doesn't enforce that part).
The only way a creature can't be resurrected is if they fail their system shock roll for resurrection (which isn't implemented in BG).
It's not that Bhaalspawn can't be resurrected, the divine part of your soul is simply lost, and you could theoretically be resurrected from the pile of dust that remains, but you would no longer have any ability to affect the outcome of the prophesy since you'd no longer be a child of Bhaal, and thus the story is over for you anyway, for all intents and purposes (not to mention, setting a contingency to auto-raise you when you die works just fine..and then the game-over screen pops up anyway..haha).
Given that the writers themselves originally planned on Imoens death. Attempting to justify what it is, which is deus ex machina, doesn't make it not deus ex machina.
It is an established fact that they intended on her to die, changed their mind at the last minute, and their are holes in the story that they attempted to patch with deus ex machina.
Most importantly, you've got the deal with Yoshimo's death backwards. They gave him to you to replace Imoen in the tutorial, to replace what was about to happen to Imoen. As I understand it, he wasn't originally suppose to die in Spellhold. When they decided to not kill Imoen in Spellhold, they decided to kill her replacement (Yoshimo) as he was no longer needed at that point, and they still got the emotional effect of killing a NPC permanently. (But it wasn't nearly as good)
By the time ToB was written this changed direction was set, so Imoen got dialogue in ToB, and Yoshimo didn't. This should be reversed.
Also, the stole her soul instead to try to attempt to make me angry is again, them patching the hole they created because of fan backlash towards Imoen's death. It didn't make me mad, no big deal, I'm just going to go kill Bodhi and get it back.
But to KILL an unresurrectable character, which is established TONS of times by the main charname death, would have hit home. Which was their intention. The soul thing, was a failed attempt, to mimic the same despair, and was deus ex machina. Which is always what happens when you take an already written story, change a major plot element, and attempt to patch every place that touched.
@lDanielHolm - funny you should bring up resurrection magic, since Bhaalspawn should not be able to be resurrected (that's why the game ends when you die - your body instantly disintegrates so your companions can't resurrect you). The fact that Imoen can be resurrected during normal gameplay is an oversight, probably because she was a last minute addition and at the start of BGI the developers likely hadn't decided that she was a Bhaalspawn as well (plus it would've given away the plot twist way too early).
I've always seen the disintegration as primarily symbolical; the Bhaalspawn essence returning to Bhaal. Not all the Bhaalspawn disintegrate, at least not that we see. The Bhaalspawn Sarevok murders in the opening video, for example.
@moopy: See, the problem I have here is that you're using the term "deus ex machina" to describe a fairly common situation in storytelling: the writers changed their minds. This isn't a retcon, it's a revision, and that's perfectly legitimate. You're arguing to "reverse" a decision that was made before the game was finalized (unlike, say, content relating to "Ascension", the impetus for which was Gaider's acknowledgment that the dev team just didn't have enough time to give ToB the best possible ending).
And here's the thing: you're wrong about the emotional effect of Yoshimo vs. Imoen. Consider that, if Imoen had died at Spellhold, that would make her functionally unusable as a character in BG2: she'd be with you at Chateau Irenicus and that's it. Why would her death have any effect on the player, especially those players who either didn't use her or didn't even play BG1?
Yoshimo, on the other hand, is someone you meet at the start of BG2 who can stay in the party through the entire first half of the story - he's True Neutral, and the only "pure" thief in the game (ie: not multi/dual-classed). His betrayal and death impacts the player because you've seen him banter with other party members, you've leveled him up, you've learned a bit about his history. None of that is possible with Imoen until after Spellhold.
So no, it isn't deus ex machina. It's just a rewrite you don't agree with, and that's fine.
Well technically, Yoshimo's story had a BUNCH more to it planned, especially some stuff in ToB (he has 2 lines of dialog talking to Sarevok about Tamoko, that still made it into the game, and WILL fire if you cheat Yoshimo into the party in ToB, and beat the 2nd Pocket Plane challenge with both in the party), but was cut due to time constraints (some of which was caused by the having to cram Imoen back into the story at the last minute).
The reason her death would be a big deal, for one is you fought the entire game to save her, to have it snatched away from you at the last second.
And, there is a large difference in a revision, and revising a major plot element and not rewriting the plot elements that touched well to the point that you have to BS.
Best example:
Oh no, Imoen has Bhaal spawn essence so she has to permanently die. This is an unsolvable situation from everything we've learned through the last 100+ hours of story line.
*Solar appears*
Nah man, you can just choose to give it up, no big deal. YAY! Unsolvable situation given all prior information solved in one second with nothing ever even hinting at this possibility.
That is quite literally the definition of deus ex machina.
"is a plot device whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new event, character, ability, or object. Depending on usage, it can be used to move the story forward when the writer has "painted himself into a corner" and sees no other way out, to surprise the audience, or to bring a happy ending into the tale."
But bottom line of what you aren't understanding, is if you do a revision on a major plot element when writing is complete and there isn't time for a major rewrite, you are GOING to paint yourself into a corner and have to use deus ex machina, and unless you can find ANY time in the series the ability to give up bhaal essence was hinted at, this is deus ex machina by definition.
Because all of a sudden solar saying you can give up bhaal essence is an "unexpected intervention of some new ability" that wasn't hinted at or foreshadowed.
I'm literally quoting the definition now. So unless you can point to where in the 100's of hours of game play before this happened it was hinted at, then you just don't want to admit deus ex machina was used, which is a well established result of last minute revisions, and also bad writing.
I'm not disagreeing with you, that a major revision occurred that I disagree with. What is absolutely wrong in what you said, is that, that revision DID lead to deus ex machina, and that is a text book example of bad writing, and THAT is the reason I disagree with it.
If you feel that keeping Imoen alive was worth a revision of the extent that it required an asspull (thats what deus ex machina is) to get out of, that's cool.
Edit:
Also, if you think Yoshi's death might have more impact than Imoen being killed off... you didn't see the fandom go nuts when her perma death was revealed.
Edit 2:
If they had wanted to make this NOT deus ex machina, they would have started hinting at this possibility somewhere in the middle of Shadows of Amn. The reason they didn't, is they didn't think it all the way through until it was too late. Which was my entire point of a major rewrite at the last minute occurring. If this had been the original plan, the way would have been paved far in advance.
Deus ex machina is simply a plot device which is introduced the moment it is utilized. Often this seems lame, but it doesn't have to be -- for instance, if it is used in the climax of the first novel in a series, then treated as a regular plot device after that in the rest of the series, then there's nothing wrong with it.
Of course, this is introduced just at the end of a series, which is where problems arise, but it does at least remain logically consistent; the PC is offered the same choice.
Remaining logically consistent in the future, doesn't make it not deus ex machina.
And it is widely considered to be poor writing.
The idea is, if you know you are going to need the a certain character, ability, or event to exist. You bring it up several chapters ahead of time. You hint at it, mention it, foreshadow it in some way. So that when it gets sprung on you, your readers say OH MAN I REMEMBER SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT BEING MENTIONED, ETC... as opposed to, WOAH THATS A COOL NEW IDEA.
Which is why in a well thought out and a story finished in advance (like this one) it only comes up with major plot device revisions (like this example)
In your example, it would be better to foreshadow the plot device at least a few chapters before it is going to be needed, then use it at the end of the book, then continue to use it as a regular plot device in the series.
I am not comfortable with absolute statements. There are situations where you WANT to blind-side your audience, and if you cannot hint at it subtly enough through earlier content, then it may have to be a deus ex machina. It is a tool, just like any other in a writer's tool box; it just needs to be used correctly.
I can't think of a possible reason you'd want to blindside them with a solution to an unsolvable problem. You tend to want to blindside them in other areas, and that wouldn't be deus ex machina.
The other reasons for doing it are humor attempts like in Monty Python.
It _IS_ generally considered to be bad writing because it appears lazy, which this example clearly is.
The reason it is lazy is if they wanted to use this they should have had Solar bring it up much earlier. Like when you are talking about killing them all, have Imoen chime in concerned, and have Solar say something as small as, "There are perhaps means of taking care of that situation when it arises." It would imply that Solar had a solution they didn't want to reveal yet, so they could still blindside you with what the solution was, without it being an asspull.
To your point, it absolutely has a purpose, if used correctly like in Monty Python where it is hilarious. However, basically every writer I've ever talked to thinks it is generally considered to be a cop out and lazy, unless it is being done on purpose for the sake of doing it. You may disagree with that, but most writers wouldn't.
But as I pointed out above, you could have just as easily blindsided your audience with the solution, without it being deus ex machina. If they had properly prepared in advance. Which is exactly how you combat deus ex machina. Which is exactly why the majority of writers find it to be lazy, that is because it shows you didn't prepare.
Just to address the earlier point of CHARNAME's body 'disintegrating' when s/he dies, I always figured that was symbolic, like the statue of Sarevok in the BG1 ending cinematic. It was more a representation of the essence fading away than the physical body turning to dust. If that's true, it at least makes sense why Imoen wouldn't disintegrate either if she died.
By the way, recalling the BG1 cinematic... there are waaaaaaaaaaaay more than the 'score of mortal progency' that Alaundo predicted... he might have been a great prophet, but apparently couldn't keep counting once he ran out of fingers and toes.
I agree with moopy that it was sloppy writing not to give any foreshadowing about her being able to give up her Bhaal essence at the end of TOB. It would also have been nice to have been given a reason in-game for her being resurrectable.
However, Imoen's sort of grandfathered in at this point. It would have made things tidier if she had died in Spellhold, but them's the breaks. She's not my favorite character, but a lot of people are very, very attached to her. I guess it just goes to show you that you can't give a bunch of gamers a cute red-head for a little sister and then kill her off without uproar and tumult and torches and pitchforks.
Well technically, Yoshimo's story had a BUNCH more to it planned, especially some stuff in ToB (he has 2 lines of dialog talking to Sarevok about Tamoko, that still made it into the game, and WILL fire if you cheat Yoshimo into the party in ToB, and beat the 2nd Pocket Plane challenge with both in the party), but was cut due to time constraints (some of which was caused by the having to cram Imoen back into the story at the last minute).
He also has a line at the end of SOA when you get sucked into Hell with Irenicus for the for-real-this-time-final-battle. I almost fell out of my chair when it triggered, and when I told one of my friends he straight up didn't believe me until I loaded up my save game and showed him.
@lDanielHolm: That definition is technically accurate, but I think @moopy is using it in the more critical context with which it's often associated - the idea of the writer manipulating the world to allow a contrivance that solves an "unsolvable" problem. I disagree that this is the case for BG2/ToB.
The reason her death would be a big deal, for one is you fought the entire game to save her, to have it snatched away from you at the last second.
Again, you're working on the assumption that all BG2 players
1) used Imoen throughout BG1 and were therefore attached to her 2) played BG1 in the first place 3) cared about Imoen at all.
By BG's very nature as a variable narrative, one or all of the above assumptions could be false.
Another way to think about it: which video game deaths are considered the most memorable? Aeris Gainsborough from "Final Fantasy VII", Mordin Solus from "Mass Effect", John Marston in "Red Dead Redemption", Crono in "Chrono Trigger", etc. What do these deaths have in common? They're all characters you have prolonged and direct contact with, who follow you throughout a large part of your adventure and to whom the player forms attachments. They're also characters you can't opt out of including in your storyline - "Mass Effect 2", for example, allows great flexibility in the recruitment of your party, but you literally can't progress to the next stage of the game without Mordin.
If Imoen were a mandatory party member in BG1, or if you could spend more time with her in BG2 before her abduction, this might have been true of her. But it isn't. It is, however, more likely to be true of Yoshimo, since there's no innate reason to drop him until you meet Jan or Nalia.
And, there is a large difference in a revision, and revising a major plot element and not rewriting the plot elements that touched well to the point that you have to BS.
Except that it doesn't touch well to the point at all. Look, if you'd argue that she should have died at the final battle with Amelyssan, fine, I can understand that. But the writers made the right decision with the Spellhold storyline: killing off a character who's been sidelined throughout the entire game lacks gravitas.
Oh no, Imoen has Bhaal spawn essence so she has to permanently die. This is an unsolvable situation from everything we've learned through the last 100+ hours of story line.
*Solar appears*
Nah man, you can just choose to give it up, no big deal. YAY! Unsolvable situation given all prior information solved in one second with nothing ever even hinting at this possibility.
You do realize that this option only comes up at the end because you and Imoen are the last ones standing, right? The Solar doesn't reveal this option beforehand because if either of you had given up your essence, it would have gone straight to Amelyssan.
"is a plot device whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new event, character, ability, or object. Depending on usage, it can be used to move the story forward when the writer has "painted himself into a corner" and sees no other way out, to surprise the audience, or to bring a happy ending into the tale."
The key word here is "contrived". I don't agree that the endgame fits this description, simply because the Solar's dialogues with you foreshadow this: she asks you why you want to stop Alaundo's prophecy, and whatever answer you choose, she replies with: "Perception is truth, god-child." In other words, yes, there is another way out of the bind you're in, but the Solar can't allow you to make that choice until Amelyssan and the Five are dead.
If they had wanted to make this NOT deus ex machina, they would have started hinting at this possibility somewhere in the middle of Shadows of Amn. The reason they didn't, is they didn't think it all the way through until it was too late. Which was my entire point of a major rewrite at the last minute occurring. If this had been the original plan, the way would have been paved far in advance.
The reason it doesn't come up in "Shadows of Amn" is because "Shadows of Amn" has nothing to do with the Bhaalspawn storyline. Irenicus has no connection to the events of BG1 or ToB - you're the one who gets drawn into his plot.
But as I pointed out above, you could have just as easily blindsided your audience with the solution, without it being deus ex machina. If they had properly prepared in advance. Which is exactly how you combat deus ex machina. Which is exactly why the majority of writers find it to be lazy, that is because it shows you didn't prepare.
The Wikipedia definition uses a rather loaded adjective: "contrived." I disagree that a deus ex machina necessarily feels contrived, and I would use this definition instead, as it is much more detailed: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DeusExMachina
1. A deus ex machina is a solution, not simply a plot twist. 2. It is sudden or unexpected. 3. The problem to which it is a solution must be portrayed as hopeless or unsolvable.
Under that definition, a well-planned deus ex machina is precisely what you describe, and not at all negative.
So basically, they had a storyline where Imoen died, they decided to change it at a late stage and implemented some small dialogues to sort of correct it.
Within the whole broad storyline (dialogues where CHARNAME is mentioned as the only Bhaalspawn left and others specifically hunting him/her), it is still incorrect and feels a bit awkward.
Wow. I now understand why Black Isle decided to keep Imoen alive. If anything this dialogue has turned my irritation towards them to giving into duress into sympathy. The hoops people are willing to jump through to justify something are mind blowing. Reminds me of a conversation I had with a Twilight fan where I pointed out the writing was mediocre due to sentence structure and continuity. That went over just as badly. Their take on continuity was very similar to the deus ex machina defense, "that makes it surprising because you didn't expect it!"
However, as great writers prove every day, you can surprise someone in a way that requires no asspulling or continuity breaking.
If you want some great examples go read Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time. He foreshadows things 1000's of pages in advance so slightly that you read over it and ignore it, and then brings it out and uses it later. You are completely surprised and yet it isn't an asspull because he prepared for it books in advance.
@Bluesorcereress Yeah, I knew about that one, he also has a line when everyone is giving their support when talking to Ellesime right before you head to the tree to face Irenicus. But the fact he even has lines in ToB is even more ridiculous. I mean sure, everyone knows they had already starting trucking with ToB before SoA was released, but it's still a bit odd that they left those lines in, on the other hand, they didn't know until last minute that Yoshimo's story line had been cut off and slapped an excuse for the Fate-weaver for why she can't summon him (even though they have no problem summoning other characters that died in SoA and you left dead, resurrected and some bonus XP intact). So you would expect there to be some overlooked things here and there.
Given that you are LITERALLY a god within the confines of the pocket plane, is it really that much of a stretch that you could simply bring his spirit to the pocket plane, remove his geas yourself, and then raise him to aid you in your quest to redeem his honor for being forced to betray you?) Even if you don't consider the quest-line for the Priests of Illmater to remove the Geas, you could still easily rationalize adding him that way in ToB.
Comments
You WON and got Imoen back, NOTHING went wrong, and you were WINNING against Irenicus... that wouldn't turn you evil if you were good.
But your rage against Irenicus for killing your sister might make you turn evil.
UGGGGGGGH.
I'm probably done now I promise.
Anyone know if that does damage to him in Trademeet like it does in Saradush?
Edit: also @moopy I totally wish all of what you said happens... Then I wouldn't be guilt tripped into bringing Imoen along throughout the entire game...
Especially since there's, y'know, resurrection magic in the world. But hey, let's just conveniently ignore that and fluff it as "not possible" whenever the story has someone die!
Khalid, fine; Jaheira is a druid, who are not generally OK with resurrection (though oddly enough, Jaheira is actually an exception to that, what with Harper's Call and all), and I could see her not wanting to resurrect Khalid. But Minsc should have sought to have Dynaheir resurrected, or at least addressed the possibility.
That's actually a character you might have spent a significant amount of time with, whereas Imoen doesn't play an active role until after you save her.
Although the best argument for keeping her alive would be her hilarious exchanges with the ToB NPC, particularly if she's the one who brings him back:
Sarevok: "Well, other than a slight obsession with my weight and the resurgence of a few pimples, it's been simply grand."
And it makes sense that the option to give up the Bhaal essence doesn't come into play until Amelyssan is dead - if you relinquished that power beforehand, it would have gone straight to her.
@lDanielHolm: There are canonical limitations to resurrection, after all - I just assumed Dynaheir was gibbed, since you never actually find her body...
@Xavioria: Actually, it'll be interesting to see how the game plays out if you don't take Yoshimo or Imoen with you - I won't need either of them for the EE if there's a new evil thief around...
@lDanielHolm - funny you should bring up resurrection magic, since Bhaalspawn should not be able to be resurrected (that's why the game ends when you die - your body instantly disintegrates so your companions can't resurrect you). The fact that Imoen can be resurrected during normal gameplay is an oversight, probably because she was a last minute addition and at the start of BGI the developers likely hadn't decided that she was a Bhaalspawn as well (plus it would've given away the plot twist way too early).
As for the OP - Imoen willingly relinquishes her essence at the end, because she never wanted it. So that makes her an ordinary human at the end of the series.
You don't talk to him, you just walk in and once you get so close, he freaks out and explodes, with no explanation at all for WTF!? just happened..until ToB.
The guy who tries to teleport out and dies is the guy who stole the magic shop guy's spellbook, you can tell him to use the teleport scroll he wanted and watch him chunk or you can tell him what would happen and he'll stop.
Vieking's teleport is a divine power, similar to your own pocket plane ability, and isn't foiled by the magics of mere mortals.
However, at the end of it all, you have earned the right to decide what happens to Bhaal's power. Vieking didn't participate in the final battle and had no say in the matter. When you decide that Bhaal's power should be sealed away, any other Bhaalspawn left lose the divine part of their souls and become normal people.
Resurrection can function just fine on anyone, as long as they didn't die of old age, are native to that plane, and you have some scrap of their remains even just a bit of a finger bone or even a few pinches of dust are enough (unlike raise dead, resurrection completely restores the body to full condition from that little speck). It can even be used to resurrect creatures that have been turned into undead (though it requires their bodies to be destroyed first), killed by massive damage or death effects, and can even resurrect Elves/half-elves, Half-Orcs and gnomes, that raise dead won't work on (though BG doesn't enforce that part).
The only way a creature can't be resurrected is if they fail their system shock roll for resurrection (which isn't implemented in BG).
It's not that Bhaalspawn can't be resurrected, the divine part of your soul is simply lost, and you could theoretically be resurrected from the pile of dust that remains, but you would no longer have any ability to affect the outcome of the prophesy since you'd no longer be a child of Bhaal, and thus the story is over for you anyway, for all intents and purposes (not to mention, setting a contingency to auto-raise you when you die works just fine..and then the game-over screen pops up anyway..haha).
@shawe
Given that the writers themselves originally planned on Imoens death. Attempting to justify what it is, which is deus ex machina, doesn't make it not deus ex machina.
It is an established fact that they intended on her to die, changed their mind at the last minute, and their are holes in the story that they attempted to patch with deus ex machina.
Most importantly, you've got the deal with Yoshimo's death backwards. They gave him to you to replace Imoen in the tutorial, to replace what was about to happen to Imoen. As I understand it, he wasn't originally suppose to die in Spellhold. When they decided to not kill Imoen in Spellhold, they decided to kill her replacement (Yoshimo) as he was no longer needed at that point, and they still got the emotional effect of killing a NPC permanently. (But it wasn't nearly as good)
By the time ToB was written this changed direction was set, so Imoen got dialogue in ToB, and Yoshimo didn't. This should be reversed.
Also, the stole her soul instead to try to attempt to make me angry is again, them patching the hole they created because of fan backlash towards Imoen's death. It didn't make me mad, no big deal, I'm just going to go kill Bodhi and get it back.
But to KILL an unresurrectable character, which is established TONS of times by the main charname death, would have hit home. Which was their intention. The soul thing, was a failed attempt, to mimic the same despair, and was deus ex machina. Which is always what happens when you take an already written story, change a major plot element, and attempt to patch every place that touched.
And here's the thing: you're wrong about the emotional effect of Yoshimo vs. Imoen. Consider that, if Imoen had died at Spellhold, that would make her functionally unusable as a character in BG2: she'd be with you at Chateau Irenicus and that's it. Why would her death have any effect on the player, especially those players who either didn't use her or didn't even play BG1?
Yoshimo, on the other hand, is someone you meet at the start of BG2 who can stay in the party through the entire first half of the story - he's True Neutral, and the only "pure" thief in the game (ie: not multi/dual-classed). His betrayal and death impacts the player because you've seen him banter with other party members, you've leveled him up, you've learned a bit about his history. None of that is possible with Imoen until after Spellhold.
So no, it isn't deus ex machina. It's just a rewrite you don't agree with, and that's fine.
The reason her death would be a big deal, for one is you fought the entire game to save her, to have it snatched away from you at the last second.
And, there is a large difference in a revision, and revising a major plot element and not rewriting the plot elements that touched well to the point that you have to BS.
Best example:
Oh no, Imoen has Bhaal spawn essence so she has to permanently die. This is an unsolvable situation from everything we've learned through the last 100+ hours of story line.
*Solar appears*
Nah man, you can just choose to give it up, no big deal. YAY! Unsolvable situation given all prior information solved in one second with nothing ever even hinting at this possibility.
That is quite literally the definition of deus ex machina.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deus_ex_machina
"is a plot device whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new event, character, ability, or object. Depending on usage, it can be used to move the story forward when the writer has "painted himself into a corner" and sees no other way out, to surprise the audience, or to bring a happy ending into the tale."
But bottom line of what you aren't understanding, is if you do a revision on a major plot element when writing is complete and there isn't time for a major rewrite, you are GOING to paint yourself into a corner and have to use deus ex machina, and unless you can find ANY time in the series the ability to give up bhaal essence was hinted at, this is deus ex machina by definition.
Because all of a sudden solar saying you can give up bhaal essence is an "unexpected intervention of some new ability" that wasn't hinted at or foreshadowed.
I'm literally quoting the definition now. So unless you can point to where in the 100's of hours of game play before this happened it was hinted at, then you just don't want to admit deus ex machina was used, which is a well established result of last minute revisions, and also bad writing.
I'm not disagreeing with you, that a major revision occurred that I disagree with. What is absolutely wrong in what you said, is that, that revision DID lead to deus ex machina, and that is a text book example of bad writing, and THAT is the reason I disagree with it.
If you feel that keeping Imoen alive was worth a revision of the extent that it required an asspull (thats what deus ex machina is) to get out of, that's cool.
Edit:
Also, if you think Yoshi's death might have more impact than Imoen being killed off... you didn't see the fandom go nuts when her perma death was revealed.
Edit 2:
If they had wanted to make this NOT deus ex machina, they would have started hinting at this possibility somewhere in the middle of Shadows of Amn. The reason they didn't, is they didn't think it all the way through until it was too late. Which was my entire point of a major rewrite at the last minute occurring. If this had been the original plan, the way would have been paved far in advance.
Of course, this is introduced just at the end of a series, which is where problems arise, but it does at least remain logically consistent; the PC is offered the same choice.
And it is widely considered to be poor writing.
The idea is, if you know you are going to need the a certain character, ability, or event to exist. You bring it up several chapters ahead of time. You hint at it, mention it, foreshadow it in some way. So that when it gets sprung on you, your readers say OH MAN I REMEMBER SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT BEING MENTIONED, ETC... as opposed to, WOAH THATS A COOL NEW IDEA.
Which is why in a well thought out and a story finished in advance (like this one) it only comes up with major plot device revisions (like this example)
In your example, it would be better to foreshadow the plot device at least a few chapters before it is going to be needed, then use it at the end of the book, then continue to use it as a regular plot device in the series.
The other reasons for doing it are humor attempts like in Monty Python.
It _IS_ generally considered to be bad writing because it appears lazy, which this example clearly is.
The reason it is lazy is if they wanted to use this they should have had Solar bring it up much earlier. Like when you are talking about killing them all, have Imoen chime in concerned, and have Solar say something as small as, "There are perhaps means of taking care of that situation when it arises." It would imply that Solar had a solution they didn't want to reveal yet, so they could still blindside you with what the solution was, without it being an asspull.
To your point, it absolutely has a purpose, if used correctly like in Monty Python where it is hilarious. However, basically every writer I've ever talked to thinks it is generally considered to be a cop out and lazy, unless it is being done on purpose for the sake of doing it. You may disagree with that, but most writers wouldn't.
But as I pointed out above, you could have just as easily blindsided your audience with the solution, without it being deus ex machina. If they had properly prepared in advance. Which is exactly how you combat deus ex machina. Which is exactly why the majority of writers find it to be lazy, that is because it shows you didn't prepare.
By the way, recalling the BG1 cinematic... there are waaaaaaaaaaaay more than the 'score of mortal progency' that Alaundo predicted... he might have been a great prophet, but apparently couldn't keep counting once he ran out of fingers and toes.
However, Imoen's sort of grandfathered in at this point. It would have made things tidier if she had died in Spellhold, but them's the breaks. She's not my favorite character, but a lot of people are very, very attached to her. I guess it just goes to show you that you can't give a bunch of gamers a cute red-head for a little sister and then kill her off without uproar and tumult and torches and pitchforks.
He also has a line at the end of SOA when you get sucked into Hell with Irenicus for the for-real-this-time-final-battle. I almost fell out of my chair when it triggered, and when I told one of my friends he straight up didn't believe me until I loaded up my save game and showed him.
-Blue
1) used Imoen throughout BG1 and were therefore attached to her
2) played BG1 in the first place
3) cared about Imoen at all.
By BG's very nature as a variable narrative, one or all of the above assumptions could be false.
Another way to think about it: which video game deaths are considered the most memorable? Aeris Gainsborough from "Final Fantasy VII", Mordin Solus from "Mass Effect", John Marston in "Red Dead Redemption", Crono in "Chrono Trigger", etc. What do these deaths have in common? They're all characters you have prolonged and direct contact with, who follow you throughout a large part of your adventure and to whom the player forms attachments. They're also characters you can't opt out of including in your storyline - "Mass Effect 2", for example, allows great flexibility in the recruitment of your party, but you literally can't progress to the next stage of the game without Mordin.
If Imoen were a mandatory party member in BG1, or if you could spend more time with her in BG2 before her abduction, this might have been true of her. But it isn't. It is, however, more likely to be true of Yoshimo, since there's no innate reason to drop him until you meet Jan or Nalia. Except that it doesn't touch well to the point at all. Look, if you'd argue that she should have died at the final battle with Amelyssan, fine, I can understand that. But the writers made the right decision with the Spellhold storyline: killing off a character who's been sidelined throughout the entire game lacks gravitas. You do realize that this option only comes up at the end because you and Imoen are the last ones standing, right? The Solar doesn't reveal this option beforehand because if either of you had given up your essence, it would have gone straight to Amelyssan. The key word here is "contrived". I don't agree that the endgame fits this description, simply because the Solar's dialogues with you foreshadow this: she asks you why you want to stop Alaundo's prophecy, and whatever answer you choose, she replies with: "Perception is truth, god-child." In other words, yes, there is another way out of the bind you're in, but the Solar can't allow you to make that choice until Amelyssan and the Five are dead. The reason it doesn't come up in "Shadows of Amn" is because "Shadows of Amn" has nothing to do with the Bhaalspawn storyline. Irenicus has no connection to the events of BG1 or ToB - you're the one who gets drawn into his plot.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DeusExMachina
1. A deus ex machina is a solution, not simply a plot twist.
2. It is sudden or unexpected.
3. The problem to which it is a solution must be portrayed as hopeless or unsolvable.
Under that definition, a well-planned deus ex machina is precisely what you describe, and not at all negative.
Within the whole broad storyline (dialogues where CHARNAME is mentioned as the only Bhaalspawn left and others specifically hunting him/her), it is still incorrect and feels a bit awkward.
However, as great writers prove every day, you can surprise someone in a way that requires no asspulling or continuity breaking.
If you want some great examples go read Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time. He foreshadows things 1000's of pages in advance so slightly that you read over it and ignore it, and then brings it out and uses it later. You are completely surprised and yet it isn't an asspull because he prepared for it books in advance.
Given that you are LITERALLY a god within the confines of the pocket plane, is it really that much of a stretch that you could simply bring his spirit to the pocket plane, remove his geas yourself, and then raise him to aid you in your quest to redeem his honor for being forced to betray you?) Even if you don't consider the quest-line for the Priests of Illmater to remove the Geas, you could still easily rationalize adding him that way in ToB.