Have your say on a popular topic: A new beginning.
Edwin_Odesseiron
Member Posts: 226
BEFORE YOU VOTE! READ!! Do NOT vote as a knee-jerk reaction based on similar threads. This is not a thread to bring Dynaheir back.
After reading a few threads on the matter, I understand it would be impossible to bring Dynaheir back. So fine.
Don't.
However..
I feel there should be a new NPC Wychlaran witch brought in. No, not just for Dynaheir fans, but for the good of the story. Here's why:
The Wychlaran are extremely important members of Rashemi society, they are the leaders. Spiritual and otherwise. Judge, jury, executioners. Their word is law, and disobeying one is punishable by death. Taking this into account, I find it extremely difficult to believe that after Dynaheir's death, another would not be sent to either take her place, or at the very least find out what happened.
The fact that Minsc seeks out another witch in the form of Aerie, (as well as his epilogue in TOB) shows how much he is still dedicated to his mission - How much he fears failing it. Yep, for the entire *saga.* Despite going through (literally) hell and back with the protagonist, the tradition of his people, the relevance of his Dajemma still weights on him above all other things.
The Rashemi are obviously very tradition/culture orientated. For a little bit of in-game proof of the above in BG2, you meet a Rashemi merchant who Minsc has a conversation with. The merchant asks "Boo is your witch?" underlining the importance of the Dajemma to their people. So *all* representations of Rasheman throughout the series emphasise the importance of this tradition. All exposure we've had of these people implies that this is a very serious matter to their nation, not to be taken lightly.
For more in-game proof of the above (if you haven't read about Rasheman elsewhere), let's go to BG1. Try rescuing Dynaheir first, then recruiting Minsc, and see the interaction between the two. He considers his mission a failure simply because he lost her in an ambush, and it was strangers who saved her instead of him. He actually presents his head for the taking, to be killed for this failure. Dynaheir absolves him of the death sentence and their journey continues. So think about it: he is willing to die, submitting his life to her judgment simply for *losing* her, never mind her actually *dying* in BG2. Which is why it's so hard to believe that Minsc would not be sought out to at the very least be questioned. So, if you've read anything about Rasheman, this story arc makes perfect sense.
In fact, leaving it "as is" makes zero sense. It is uncompleted.
I feel this would be a perfect "middle ground" to all those who want Dynaheir back. It gives the player a new Rashemi witch NPC (besides, a good/neutral-aligned pure mage would be welcome), yet does nothing to detract from Minsc's character development, and no fundamental interactions/canon have to be changed. It could even add a new Minsc-based quest or two (perhaps to prove his worth to the new witch after failing Dynaheir), add another dimension to Edwin's interactions and other NPC's as well. Taking all that into consideration, it would actually *enhance* the story, while quite literally taking nothing away from it. The new NPC would also feel "established", not a "stranger" like the others were, because she would be part of the lore we already know and love.
Some main points of rebuttal against this might be:
- It would ruin Minsc's character development! He lost Dynaheir and this has affected him!
Invalid point. He takes on Aerie as his witch. This would be a more serious, official version of that.
- Well, since he takes on Aerie, why do we need a Wychlaran?
1. Because Aerie is not a Wychlaran, and as explained above, Dynaheir's death would definitely be investigated by the order.
2. Aside from this, Minsc + Aerie's "partnership" is entirely cosmetic (except for his berserk thing if her health gets low.) It is never mentioned or acknowledged anywhere else, ever again. Even if you finish TOB as Aerie being Minsc's witch, it is not mentioned. The fact that it was even put in there alludes to a bigger point: That another witch was *needed* for Minsc to protect to successfully complete his Dajemma (and for the good of his character development), but the writers at the time didn't expand on this for whatever reason. This new NPC and Minsc's partnership would be "official." It would be acknowledged by the game and in interactions.
- It would ruin the game's canon.
No, it wouldn't. The game would continue to acknowledge the significance of Dynaheir's death and the impact it had on Minsc. The new NPC would take nothing away from this. She would be new content that does not override anything already present.
- It would fundamentally change the game because it would force an NPC upon you if you have Minsc.
Who said you HAD to take her? This is the beauty of writing, and BG has always been about giving options to the player. Initially, she could just have been sent to question Minsc on what happened. What happens after the questioning would be up to you, and any number of different options could be written in, from killing her, to recruiting her, to dismissing her. This could be resolved as a sidequest, or by ending up with a new NPC, all depending on your choices.
These are the basic arguments that would arise that I could think of. There's probably more. But I honestly see no good reason for this not to be strongly pursued by us fans.
The more I think about it, the more Minsc's story arc regarding this matter seems utterly incomplete, especially for such a pivotal and well-loved character of the series.
Most of the naysayers seem to be people who want everything left untouched. To them I say: Why are you even on here? Save your money and play BG2. Forget about the enhanced edition, the other new NPC's it will bring, the new features, quests, and additions. Remain in the year 2001. Do whatever you want. Just don't prevent the rest of us from enjoying it. Don't say "no" for the sake of saying no. Make sure there's a good reason for it, supported by logic and reasoning and game lore, as I have provided.
At the end of the day: Don't like her? Don't recruit her. She'd be there as an option for those of us who find such things important.
This is the middle ground, the perfect solution from any way you look at it. Don't bring back Dynaheir. Replace her. Which is exactly what the Wychlaran would do.
After reading a few threads on the matter, I understand it would be impossible to bring Dynaheir back. So fine.
Don't.
However..
I feel there should be a new NPC Wychlaran witch brought in. No, not just for Dynaheir fans, but for the good of the story. Here's why:
The Wychlaran are extremely important members of Rashemi society, they are the leaders. Spiritual and otherwise. Judge, jury, executioners. Their word is law, and disobeying one is punishable by death. Taking this into account, I find it extremely difficult to believe that after Dynaheir's death, another would not be sent to either take her place, or at the very least find out what happened.
The fact that Minsc seeks out another witch in the form of Aerie, (as well as his epilogue in TOB) shows how much he is still dedicated to his mission - How much he fears failing it. Yep, for the entire *saga.* Despite going through (literally) hell and back with the protagonist, the tradition of his people, the relevance of his Dajemma still weights on him above all other things.
The Rashemi are obviously very tradition/culture orientated. For a little bit of in-game proof of the above in BG2, you meet a Rashemi merchant who Minsc has a conversation with. The merchant asks "Boo is your witch?" underlining the importance of the Dajemma to their people. So *all* representations of Rasheman throughout the series emphasise the importance of this tradition. All exposure we've had of these people implies that this is a very serious matter to their nation, not to be taken lightly.
For more in-game proof of the above (if you haven't read about Rasheman elsewhere), let's go to BG1. Try rescuing Dynaheir first, then recruiting Minsc, and see the interaction between the two. He considers his mission a failure simply because he lost her in an ambush, and it was strangers who saved her instead of him. He actually presents his head for the taking, to be killed for this failure. Dynaheir absolves him of the death sentence and their journey continues. So think about it: he is willing to die, submitting his life to her judgment simply for *losing* her, never mind her actually *dying* in BG2. Which is why it's so hard to believe that Minsc would not be sought out to at the very least be questioned. So, if you've read anything about Rasheman, this story arc makes perfect sense.
In fact, leaving it "as is" makes zero sense. It is uncompleted.
I feel this would be a perfect "middle ground" to all those who want Dynaheir back. It gives the player a new Rashemi witch NPC (besides, a good/neutral-aligned pure mage would be welcome), yet does nothing to detract from Minsc's character development, and no fundamental interactions/canon have to be changed. It could even add a new Minsc-based quest or two (perhaps to prove his worth to the new witch after failing Dynaheir), add another dimension to Edwin's interactions and other NPC's as well. Taking all that into consideration, it would actually *enhance* the story, while quite literally taking nothing away from it. The new NPC would also feel "established", not a "stranger" like the others were, because she would be part of the lore we already know and love.
Some main points of rebuttal against this might be:
- It would ruin Minsc's character development! He lost Dynaheir and this has affected him!
Invalid point. He takes on Aerie as his witch. This would be a more serious, official version of that.
- Well, since he takes on Aerie, why do we need a Wychlaran?
1. Because Aerie is not a Wychlaran, and as explained above, Dynaheir's death would definitely be investigated by the order.
2. Aside from this, Minsc + Aerie's "partnership" is entirely cosmetic (except for his berserk thing if her health gets low.) It is never mentioned or acknowledged anywhere else, ever again. Even if you finish TOB as Aerie being Minsc's witch, it is not mentioned. The fact that it was even put in there alludes to a bigger point: That another witch was *needed* for Minsc to protect to successfully complete his Dajemma (and for the good of his character development), but the writers at the time didn't expand on this for whatever reason. This new NPC and Minsc's partnership would be "official." It would be acknowledged by the game and in interactions.
- It would ruin the game's canon.
No, it wouldn't. The game would continue to acknowledge the significance of Dynaheir's death and the impact it had on Minsc. The new NPC would take nothing away from this. She would be new content that does not override anything already present.
- It would fundamentally change the game because it would force an NPC upon you if you have Minsc.
Who said you HAD to take her? This is the beauty of writing, and BG has always been about giving options to the player. Initially, she could just have been sent to question Minsc on what happened. What happens after the questioning would be up to you, and any number of different options could be written in, from killing her, to recruiting her, to dismissing her. This could be resolved as a sidequest, or by ending up with a new NPC, all depending on your choices.
These are the basic arguments that would arise that I could think of. There's probably more. But I honestly see no good reason for this not to be strongly pursued by us fans.
The more I think about it, the more Minsc's story arc regarding this matter seems utterly incomplete, especially for such a pivotal and well-loved character of the series.
Most of the naysayers seem to be people who want everything left untouched. To them I say: Why are you even on here? Save your money and play BG2. Forget about the enhanced edition, the other new NPC's it will bring, the new features, quests, and additions. Remain in the year 2001. Do whatever you want. Just don't prevent the rest of us from enjoying it. Don't say "no" for the sake of saying no. Make sure there's a good reason for it, supported by logic and reasoning and game lore, as I have provided.
At the end of the day: Don't like her? Don't recruit her. She'd be there as an option for those of us who find such things important.
This is the middle ground, the perfect solution from any way you look at it. Don't bring back Dynaheir. Replace her. Which is exactly what the Wychlaran would do.
- Have your say on a popular topic: A new beginning.57 votes
- Yes, absolutely. This would add to the game, especially to the character development of Minsc.22.81%
- No. I liked the year 2001.77.19%
Post edited by Edwin_Odesseiron on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
In my opinion it works better as a sidequest for Minsc where a tribunal of witches show up to judge him and his failure to protect Dynaheir, rather than the Rashemi sending another witch for him to protect.
I do agree that it's weird that the Wychlaran just ignore the death of one of their own and never investigate. Exploring that area would be very interesting.
As I said, this is the middle ground. If you wanted it as a sidequest, you could pursue it as a sidequest and leave it at that, resolving the matter that way. If you wanted to take her on as an NPC, then you could do that too. Adding this NPC would not be a hinderance to you in any way whatsoever. Why would you vote no and take away the possibility of such an NPC, especially when it obviously means so much to so many fans?
The Wychlaran aren't relevant to the overall story of BG. Dynaheir and Edwin may represent larger factions in Faerun, just as Xzar and Montaron represent the Zhentarim and Jaheira and Khalid represent the Harpers; that doesn't mean these forces are (or have to be) directly involved in the actual plot.
As for Minsc, the whole point of his storyline is that Dynaheir's death pushes him to evolve beyond the role that was set out for him (which is all the more evident in his epilogue), so the fact that the next "witch" he takes on isn't Rashemi at all is perfectly appropriate. He's fulfilling the role he thinks is appropriate rather than what his cultural tradition demands. And he's not alone: every character in BG2 who has a pre-existing affiliation (ie: Keldorn and the Radiant Heart, Jaheira and the Harpers, Viconia and the drow, etc.) undergoes a similar transformation where they break away from the specific demands of their factions to define themselves as individuals. Results vary - Keldorn doesn't need to leave the Radiant Heart, but he still has to face that conflict - but there's still a tension there between the person and the organization they belong to. Why take that away from Minsc?
(As an aside: if you want to have a meaningful debate, don't give yourself softball questions and then answer them to support your own argument. Your "poll" is ridiculously defensive, and that just makes your position look weak - "if you disagree with me, you must be a purist so what are you even doing on this forum?!")
Here's a question that might actually be useful if you're genuinely interested in discussing the concept: how would the introduction of another Wychlaran (which in turn would put Minsc back into the role he already served in BG1) be anything more than a repetition of Dynaheir's plot in BG1? What would be the point of repeating the exact same dynamic?
Seriously, this poll lacks of the ever popular "I just want to see the results" option, a simple "No" and possibly a "Yes, but...".
Minsc doesn't have a personal quest in BG2, unlike the other NPCs, so I agree with the comments that a new NPC isn't neccessary. As a quest, yes, Minsc should get one and it should deal with the loss of Dynaheir. Minsc is one of the NPCs in the starting dungeon, it's implied Dynaheir died there, so this should be treated like Jaheira's loss of Khalid; addressed in dialogue and then an actual quest to give the character a new direction.
As for Nalia as new witch, if I remember the previous discussion right, it turned out to be a mod (possibly the Nalia Romance?).
I agree that it'd be an enhancement if Minsc gained a personal quest, which was always a conspicuous omission in original BG2. I also agree that another Wychlaran investigating Dynaheir's fate is a credible and interesting suggestion for how to give Minsc a quest.
On the other hand, however, developing a whole new joinable NPC is a lot more work than developing a cameo appearance for a side-quest. The devs have limited resources, like everyone else, and I don't agree that a Wychlaran NPC would be the best use of the devs' time. It's not inherently a poor concept for an NPC, but there are other classes of NPC which I reckon should be a much higher priority (even supposing that the devs ever decide that they have time to develop additional official NPCs).
On the third hand(?!), I reckon your idea is a pretty good proposal for a mod.
In my mind he could be tried, and depending on the MC's influence get absolved or condemned. As one angry mushroom described.
Either way he is faced to admit he failed his manhood test, but it is not as important to him as it was before. He had his companions and he has travelled the world. Maybe he even no longer blames himself for Dynaheir's death, though still regrets he didn't/couldnt do more.
It would be nice to see a resolution to minsc's side story
Maybe write the NPC's stats and story and post in @Shandyr's NPC topic?
You want to bring her back or at least her memory back, and knowing the rules of the Enhanced Edition about change old content and specially taking in fact that Dinaheir death was totally bound to the core of the main saga you know that revive her isn't an option, so you try to bypass these restrictions with a new characters that would become a copy of Dinaheir.
While i recognize that sometimes i do the same i have to say that this kind of cloning doesn't feel right.
1° - This new character would be forever the shadow of Dinaheir, made for the sole prupose of fill the void of her absent. No matter how good the character's script is done, nostalgia will make all Dinaheir's fans feel dissatisfied with the NPC. It's a course of action doomed to failure. Even if for a miracle this idea works it will be clearly a forced introduction for the NPC "Hi i'm X and i'm here to replace Dinaheir, can i join?"
2° - Yes, this will spoil Minsc story, because his story didn't ended with the death of Dinaheir, but with how he dealed with that fact. Minsc is already a strange fella that doesn't work his mind so well inside a foreign place trying to fit in. Aerie's witch proposal isn't a solution, it's just a way that Minsc use to deal with Dinaheir's death.
Now something more serious:
While i understand and do not condemn your wish to see Dinaheir or her memory back on BG2, i can't condone or support how you did this OP.
You didn't brought an idea to be discussed, you brought what you belief and in the own OP you tried to discredit any opposing idea. You antecipate the core of probale arguments against your idea and presume failures in every one of them to discredit their merit. Don't feel mad at me when i say that this kind of behavior only discredit your own argument, your presumptions resemble the fear you have of get this idea refused by the community, what implies that you think your own idea is flawed.
The don't like don't... way of think is an old member of this forum from the begin of it existance and it never worked, the game would become a total mess if everything possible followed this idea, let make aliens NPCs (don't like don't recruit), pansexual romances (don't like don't pursue)... and there goes on with tons of ideas that... don't like don't... This isn't a solution, it's a way to impose what one want when to proper argument is used to justify it.
Even the pool answer is biased, "No, i liked the year 2001" resemble someone outdated or that doesn't support the enhanced edition and the 2013 idea. So or i agree with you, or i'm outdated or/and i don't want to support the enhanced edition.
For the reasons presented, my answer is No for the idea, a simple No, based on the upper justifies. Still, if you present this idea as a Mod to be done, i would highly support it.
But Kamuizin has it exactly right. Minsc's story is about how he deals with the loss. One could argue its where his true journey really begins.
And not really seeing the arguement that we should not play the EE edition if we disagree with you. There is more to the game than just that.
I'm not so sure a new NPC who would explore the same/a similar backstory would be seen as a copy that can never rival the original. If she has a different and better/more defined personality (which is bound to happen with more dialogue in BG2), she can stand on her own. And technically, the origin would also allow some variation with her class. Throw in a few cleric levels like Dynaheir had the Cure Poison ability. Make her a sorcerer instead and cover a class that is not represented yet. There are ways to set her apart from Dynaheir, in personality and gameplay. Nalia was just doomed because Imoen is unnaturally popular, not because she is a similar build.
Secondly, I've yet to read one counter-argument that makes any sense or holds any weight. Minsc's journey starts at the death of Dynaheir? Yes, true enough, and I never contested this. However, you people do realise he is actively *seeking out a witch* to complete his journey? He only chooses Aerie (or Nalia apparently) because there are no Rashemi witches present. The importance of his Dajemma is obviously very high priority to him, actually higher than aiding you.
To the others saying this new NPC would be a "replacement, in Dynaheir's shadow." Can't agree with that. Dynaheir existed, but was never really explored in terms of personality or story. BG2 fleshes out their NPC's. This new character would have her own personality, story, and traits. Just because she's from the same place doesn't mean she'd be the same person. I daresay BG2 is played more than BG, as well, so if anything, the opposite would occur.
And to the people saying the presentation of my OP makes my argument sound weak because I added a type of "FAQ" in there? It's painfully clear that you are irked by the fact I countered your arguments before you made them. So attempting to call my points "weak" only shows the limited scope of your own points, especially since no actual relevant ones have been made. Also, everyone is conveniently ignoring the thousand good lore-based arguments I presented prior to this. That is made obvious by people only addressing the second half of my poll, instead of the lore-based first half. Why? Because lore-wise, you are bested. The story really is incomplete and you all know it.
But, I'll attempt to be a touch more mature than the finger-pointing going on here.
In actuality, I acknowledge that this is my fault for having a poll option. Because people can in their little tantrums click "no" and move on. Every vote should have to come with a "why did you vote what you voted?" section. I foolishly relied on people to be mature and have a discussion instead of clicking a response quickly and moving on.
What I should have done was put this proposal forth as a discussion-only. That way people would be forced to give their opinion and promote a discussion instead of hiding the reasoning of their opinions behind a poll. This is a discussion forum, after all.
All in all, most of you seem to be hypocrites, accusing me of something and then doing exactly the same thing yourselves.