Some minor thoughts about Gorion's letter by E.
_Connacht_
Member Posts: 169
The letter by Elminster retrieved on Gorion's corpse states that "I urge thee to leave Candlekeep this very night, if possible".
Was it carried by a messenger, with the order of delivering it as soon as possible? Then I think that a more appropriate choice of words would have been "right after you read this letter", rather than "this very night", which is a bit too much deterministic and in real-time, considering travel time of envoys. It's not unreasonable to write "this very night" while being aware that the reader might receive the letter after a couple of days. But from Elminster I would expect something with a better sense of timing, since he's also worried about Gorion's fate as "the other side will move very soon".
Besides, there is no guarantee anyway that a messenger would have reached Candlekeep sound and safe, considering the hostile activity in the Sword Coast. It would have been much better if Elminster directly visited Gorion for an update about the current situation. He's a wizard, he can teleport anywhere and he's known to appear whenever and wherever he wants. In fact, he just appeared in front of Charname at the start of chapter 1 after he sensed that Gorion died but his ward was alive...
Then, was the letter delivered by Elminster in person, considering that we meet him nearby Candlekeep? e.g., he left the citadel by handshaking Gorion, telling him that he understands the situation but wishes to stay neutral, still giving him the advice to take care of himself, and giving a him a message with the hint of reading it in private. Or maybe I think that Elminster approached the gatekeeper, asking him to deliver a letter.
I think that this last one is the most likely scenario. It's not unheard that important people make an official visit and then depart leaving behind a message with further info or instructions for certain, selected friends. And it's not inconceivable too that someone in disguise carries something with the task of giving it to someone else.
I wonder if for someone like Elminster, and for a friend like Gorion, it would have been more reasonable to give the advice by mouth, rather than with a letter that could be read or stolen by others (Imoen in fact reads it). Maybe Elminster didn't feel the necessity to teleport directly inside Candlekeep, violating the restrictions and the magical seals.
Third option: he teleported the letter to Gorion. Magic AT&T.
Was it carried by a messenger, with the order of delivering it as soon as possible? Then I think that a more appropriate choice of words would have been "right after you read this letter", rather than "this very night", which is a bit too much deterministic and in real-time, considering travel time of envoys. It's not unreasonable to write "this very night" while being aware that the reader might receive the letter after a couple of days. But from Elminster I would expect something with a better sense of timing, since he's also worried about Gorion's fate as "the other side will move very soon".
Besides, there is no guarantee anyway that a messenger would have reached Candlekeep sound and safe, considering the hostile activity in the Sword Coast. It would have been much better if Elminster directly visited Gorion for an update about the current situation. He's a wizard, he can teleport anywhere and he's known to appear whenever and wherever he wants. In fact, he just appeared in front of Charname at the start of chapter 1 after he sensed that Gorion died but his ward was alive...
Then, was the letter delivered by Elminster in person, considering that we meet him nearby Candlekeep? e.g., he left the citadel by handshaking Gorion, telling him that he understands the situation but wishes to stay neutral, still giving him the advice to take care of himself, and giving a him a message with the hint of reading it in private. Or maybe I think that Elminster approached the gatekeeper, asking him to deliver a letter.
I think that this last one is the most likely scenario. It's not unheard that important people make an official visit and then depart leaving behind a message with further info or instructions for certain, selected friends. And it's not inconceivable too that someone in disguise carries something with the task of giving it to someone else.
I wonder if for someone like Elminster, and for a friend like Gorion, it would have been more reasonable to give the advice by mouth, rather than with a letter that could be read or stolen by others (Imoen in fact reads it). Maybe Elminster didn't feel the necessity to teleport directly inside Candlekeep, violating the restrictions and the magical seals.
Third option: he teleported the letter to Gorion. Magic AT&T.
5
Comments
Teleportation inside Candlekeep probably isn't even possible, and the fact that his close link to Mystra doesn't allow him to intervene directly in matters of other gods seems plausible. So perhaps he was on his way and couldn't teleport to keep his involvement hidden, or as such an old being he knew better than to keep events from unfolding. Guidance is one thing, direct intervention without knowing how it would influence the outcome is another matter. Or, as said before, he isn't allowed to do more.
In-game explanations aside, of course the real reason is that the game wouldn't make much sense if Elminster killed Sarevok and we went back to Candlekeep with Gorion.
Why could Sarevok kill Gorion so easily and CHARNAME, only months later, can prove the stronger?
Are NPCs just waiting for PCs to show up and don't gain XP themselves?
Or Khalid and Jaheira.
They have been close friends to Gorion for YEARS, yet they are still level 1 and only have rather crappy equipment. While it would make sense that they have been waiting at the Friendly Arm for Gorion for awhile (days or weeks), they won't have been sitting there for years, they would have been adventurers and gained experience. Just that CHARNAME meets them so early in the game that anything higher than level 1 would break game balance.
That's game logic. A game can't always be entirely logical, story-wise, not in each single detail, lest it becomes unplayable or totally unbalanced.
This is absolutely true, but once you come across something that doesn't entirely make sense, there is another step one can take before saying "Oh well, that's game logic for you".
That step is to ask the question: was it necessary to put the player in the position where they have to handwave stuff as game logic? Because sometimes, it really wasn't. In many games this doesn't matter all that much, but for roleplaying games it isn't good to continually ask the player to suspend their disbelief.
Consider your example regarding Khalid and Jaheira (which is something that stood out to me as well before I read your post). Did they have to be portrayed as good friends of Gorion for many years? If so, did they have to be waiting in the Friendly Arm? If so, did the early game have to be made so easy that with Khalid and Jaheira at level 2, the balance of the game would be affected?
There are obviously good reasons for Khalid and Jaheira to play the role that they do, but the example serves to illustrate the point.
Any story can be rock solid if it wants, the writer just needs to do their job right. I'll agree to say that few do, perhaps in part pressured by productivity requirements, so we aren't used to it.
The problem is that we're so not used to it that many of us don't even think of having expectations of consistency and realism within the world's own rules. We end up dismissing things that sound odd to us as "game logic" or whatever, questioning the writer, breaking the fourth wall and sweeping things under the rug. Would we be used to high consistency in audiovisual media, we'd stay immersed and would eventually heat up brain cells trying to figure out why something seems odd and what that could mean within the story. (i.e. questioning one's own comprehension rather than brushing it off as a plot hole or writing failure)
But our intellect isn't valued so high that audiovisual industries would invest too much in writing. I guess that makes your stance empirically justified, problematic as it is.
As for BG1 specifically, the whole deal about both Gorion dying and leaving the protagonist in total darkness about what's going on does feel forced. In other stories that start similarly, like The Belgariad, everything is consistent, we can trust the writer that what sounds odd is not a plot hole but something we need to think about and that will find an answer in time.
OP tries to find answers for BG1 that don't amount to making excuses for the writer's alleged failings, I think it's worthwhile and interesting.
Have I missed something? What is Elminster’s role in the story?
I guess, the developers in the 1990-tees wrote a story and developed a game around it. Then, they filled the game world with all that they could come up with; famous FR persons, their own PnP characters, failed jokes and who knows whatever more. Wish they had spent more time on developing intriguing side quests than filling the game with silly pop culture references. (Glad they focused more on side quests for BG2.)
Where does Artemis Entreri appear?
Incidentally, this unused version of Artemis Entreri has a unique weapon equipped - the "Life-Stealer" dagger, which is +4 with a chance to drain levels.
@jmerry is correct about Artemis being mod content. I goofed up. I meant to say Jarlaxle, but got confused by having played highly modded games in the past. Call it a senior moment... ?