Skip to content

What's the problem with Dynaheir?

DougieDougie Member Posts: 34
edited September 2012 in Archive (Feature Requests)
I've read a few of the conversations about Dynaheir and whether there should or shouldn't be a solution to her presumed death. This is based very much on the fact that she was a favourite of many. However, the balance of opinion seems to be that this cannot be done because of the integrity of the storyline.

What is meant by integrity?

Is it plausability? If so we should remember that the context is not only a fictional story, but one based on magic, raised undead, and resurrected creatures of all shapes and sizes. Putting all of that to one side, there are still numerous possible explanations that would be more convincing than that of "Sarevok, didn't I kill you already?" (paraphrased)

Is it consistency with the facts? Well, the only evidence of Dynaheir's death is the testimony of Minsc. He may have been her faithful protector, but he also chooses his actions and values according to the direction of a minature giant space hamster. He has also just been released from a prison where Irenicus is known to have used illusion and deception as a part of his interrogation. Dynaheir could equally be in another area believing that Minsc has been killed.

Is it to do with rationale? She is a skilled wizard being pursued by an adversay (Edwin) who wants to kill her, she's been captured and held prisoner by gnolls, is now the subject of attention of Irenicus , who, we do know, has captured Minsc. If anyone had the ability and motive to disappear for a while it is Dynaheir. If it's possible that Dynaheir could imagine that Irenicus may torture Minsc, it would be in Minsc's best interest if he believed that she was dead.

Is it consistency of story line between BG1 and BG2? It can't be this either, as we would have to remove Jaheira, Minsc, Viconia, Ajantis, Edwin, Xzar from BG2, incase they were killed in any particular game of BG1, because of arguments of integrity.

Is it lack of precedent? Gandalf, as far as everyone in LOTR was concerned, was killed, he came back with a fantastic explanation, and every charater, reader and viewer accepted it because it was a fantsy context.

Is it potential impact on the programming of the game? As Dynaheir makes no appearance in BG2, it would be no more than creating a new character, but all of her biography is already prepared.

There seems to be no reason at all why Dynaheir could not be brought back, particluarly if she did not hold a role central to the main storyline. That way each individual player can decide on their own view of what right or wrong in the Baldur's Gate world.

Those preferring the consistency of their choices can choose to recruit her, while those who believe Minsc (or Boo) can ignore her and pretend she's not there.
«13

Comments

  • KithrixxKithrixx Member Posts: 215
    edited September 2012
    I'd also like to point out that Khalid was killed so "thoroughly" by Irenicus that he could not be brought back (even though Jaheira has Harper's Call at that point in time). Sometimes, NPCs just have to stay dead for the sake of the story. Minsc saw Dynaheir get obliterated or tortured into nothing by Irenicus, and it's something that has deeply affected his character development and the character development of others, as Aosaw pointed out with Aerie and Edwin. Therefore, in my opinion, it has to remain. If you want her to come back, I'm sure that it will be easily accomplish-able with mods.
  • MilochMiloch Member Posts: 863
    Dougie said:

    Is it lack of precedent? Gandalf, as far as everyone in LOTR was concerned, was killed, he came back with a fantastic explanation, and every charater, reader and viewer accepted it because it was a fantsy context.

    However, unlike LotR where only maiar (and rarely elves) can be resurrected, pretty much anyone can in the Forgotten Realms (except elves, though that may have been a 1st-edition rule that didn't carry forward).
  • DougieDougie Member Posts: 34
    Hi Aosaw

    I take your points, but I wasn't talking about Khalid, and I wasn't suggesting that she had to be installed with dialogues as fully developed as the others.

    There are several players who simply want to be able to have the option to have her in their party and develop her character, not her storyline. So:

    1) She doesn't need to have any additional banter or sidequests

    2) She's a wizard and most likely would have some skills in illusions. A simple text from Dynaheir saying something like Serie can offer Minsc more than she ever could, so she's created an illusion to ensure he never recognises her. (That could be taken further with a revelation that she discussed the matter with Boo). But it's surely not beyond the wit of the average script writer to find an explanation.

    3) The same.

    4) Exactly the same scenario, she's disguised herself from Edwin, and this is the reason why she's allowing Minsc to continue believing that she's gone. She's watching Edwin, watch Minsc, to see if he'll lead him to her. But she's watching over Minsc at the same time.

    So it is entirely possible, with a bit of imagination, for a new character to be created callen Dynaheir, with the old appearance and voiceset, and who explains in her own text how she is able to fit in.

    No problem.
  • DougieDougie Member Posts: 34
    Kithrixx

    As I said, it is easy to explain the situation with a few lines of text. Minsc doesn't need to know, and Edwin doesn't need to know.
  • DougieDougie Member Posts: 34
    Aosaw

    1) What would it add and Why bother? It would add an option that varous people have asked for under a heading of Feature Requests.

    2) Why would she? As suggested earlier, it could be for many reason, including to actually protect Minsc.

    3) Unless she is actually protecting Minsc from harm.

    4) What's the bloody point? (Calm down) Because people were asked what they wanted and that's what they said they wanted. The simple solution, to keep everyone happy, is to make it optional.

    It would add nothing of value to you because you don't what the character, but it would clearly add value to those who have specifically requested this feature.
  • Raistlin82Raistlin82 Member Posts: 256
    Dougie said:


    Is it potential impact on the programming of the game? As Dynaheir makes no appearance in BG2, it would be no more than creating a new character, but all of her biography is already prepared.

    I agree with everything you said, except for this.
    Minsc has some dialogue about the death of Dynaheir, and he even starts having the same kind of relationship he had with her with a BG2 character... another "witch".

    The totality of the impact on the game, other than making a new character with all that it includes, would be to find which of Minsc's dialogues need Dynaheir to be dead, and remove them or replace them in case he already met her in BG2. Apparently, that's considered too much work for the devs.

    As for the fans opposing the idea, most of them are just nostalgia-fueled irrational people, who want EVERYTHING to be EXACTLY like they remember it.
    They don't want new options, they don't want new dialogue, new characters... basically, they don't want an ENHANCED edition. They want the regular edition, because it's FAMILIAR. They just don't realize it.
  • DougieDougie Member Posts: 34
    Aosaw

    You're entitled to your view, but so is everyone else. You don't have to respond to every person that mentions Dynaheir coming back, every time they mention it, good for your health.

    By exactly the same token, if Dynaheir was introduced to the game, you wouldn't have to interact with her or even acknowledge her, you could simply ignore her. That way you get your way and other people get their way.

    As for the explanation, it wouldn't take long to work something out. "I am in hiding, but I will aid you as you once aided me", "Minsc must not know that I am alive, or else he will be in danger".
  • DougieDougie Member Posts: 34
    Hi Raistlin

    I agree with just about everything you say, too.

    I still think it's possible for the NPC to self-explain.
  • DougieDougie Member Posts: 34
    RedGuard

    Let me rephrase that slightly:

    "You can make up all the fan fiction you want, but at the end of the day Sarevok died in BG1 and that's the story. Changing such a fundamental of the story at this point seems silly and in the case of Charname would ruin your characterisation."
  • The_New_RomanceThe_New_Romance Member Posts: 839
    edited September 2012
    I believe adding Dynaheir in under some type of explanation would be a metric shitton of work. But boy. It would be so great to have everyone talking about her death (as far as they know), then have a new NPC show up who in the end turns out to be a strangely changed Dynaheir, who has somehow gone underground and disguised herself. Charname can't believe it, but then Boo actually tells them it's true. Holy shit, that would be trippy, and Dynaheir could basically have a totally screwed up personality (which might be a reason why Minsc wouldn't want her back as a witch, plus he already got himself a new one).

    I like the idea, but I don't think Trent Oster will like even more unpaid 4 a.m. shifts :D
  • DavidWDavidW Member Posts: 823
    I read a review of Buffy the Vampire Slayer ages ago which said that Joss Whedon (the show creator) excelled at giving fans not what they wanted, but what they (and the story) needed: conflict, deaths, character development through challenge and tragedy, and so forth. This feels pretty similar.

    I totally get that many people want Dynaheir to survive into BG2. She's a very evocative, interesting character; her story arc in BG1, and her relationship with Minsc, is powerful, despite its fairly minimal content; it's heartbreaking when you discover her death, and so it's a major emotional moment. I, and I think many people playing, were shocked by it and very much wished she could somehow have survived.

    ...and that's exactly why she should stay dead.
  • MilochMiloch Member Posts: 863
    edited September 2012
    My point above was that death is rarely final in the Realms, and there's no really compelling reason why Dynaheir should have to *stay* dead forever. To your point @DavidW, the death itself creates the emotional event; the resurrection can just as well create another. Also it is not unprecedented in literature. Sir Walter Scott was compelled to raise Athelstan from the dead in Ivanhoe and likewise Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's fans demanded he resurrect Sherlock Holmes. There are some who may have preferred they'd stayed dead, but just as many or more who were pleased with the character reinstatements.

    Edit: If it were done though, it would require something along the lines of the work required for an NPC mod... so I'm not saying it should be in the unmodded game. And as usual, mods have the obvious advantage - if folks don't like it, they needn't install it.
  • DeeDee Member Posts: 10,447
    I still maintain that retconning a character's death is not the job of an enhanced edition. Not only is it more work than I think would be worthwhile, but if you put it in the actual game, you're forcing every player to accept the change as canon. Even if I don't interact with her--which would require a rather large disruption of my immersion to begin with--I'd still know that she was there, that the change had been done against my will.

    Sarevok is a special case. He was added in Throne of Bhaal as part of its initial release. His return was sort of contrived, but it also didn't alter the story, because the story was already written with him in it. Dynaheir was written out of the story. Every character around her changes because she's no longer alive. If you return her to life--and, worse, if you return her to life without allowing all those characters to acknowledge her return--then you're just bringing back a character for no reason.
  • RedGuardRedGuard Member Posts: 672
    Dougie said:

    Aosaw

    You're entitled to your view, but so is everyone else. You don't have to respond to every person that mentions Dynaheir coming back, every time they mention it, good for your health.

    By exactly the same token, if Dynaheir was introduced to the game, you wouldn't have to interact with her or even acknowledge her, you could simply ignore her. That way you get your way and other people get their way.

    As for the explanation, it wouldn't take long to work something out. "I am in hiding, but I will aid you as you once aided me", "Minsc must not know that I am alive, or else he will be in danger".

    I can understand wanting a character back (even if it does go against the established story), but I have to scratch my head at asking for it in such a half assed way. If she were to come back then it would need the appropriate gampeplay and story changes to do the character justice.
    Dougie said:

    RedGuard

    Let me rephrase that slightly:

    "You can make up all the fan fiction you want, but at the end of the day Sarevok died in BG1 and that's the story. Changing such a fundamental of the story at this point seems silly and in the case of Charname would ruin your characterisation."

    Funny use of the word slightly. I can't help but feel that whatever I say you will continue to push through and miss the point in the pursuit of wish fulfillment.
  • DougieDougie Member Posts: 34
    RedGuard

    The suggestion of bringing her back is such a "half assed way" was a response to the claims that she could not be brought back because of impact on the storyline, and to show that it could actually be done.

    That you're suggesting that if she were to come back it the storylines would need some changes is at least progress, but still misses the point that people who have are asking for this NPC to return just want a good looking sorceress in their team, not a relationship with the character.
  • DeeDee Member Posts: 10,447
    If that's what you want, then ask for that. A new NPC sorcerer character that isn't also a romantic interest is a great request, and it also doesn't disrupt the story and characters that were written fourteen years ago.
  • theJoshFrosttheJoshFrost Member Posts: 171
    If we bring Dynaheir back, let's bring back a whole cast. Tazok? Silke? GORION? Those two jerk offs in the beginning of the game? I'd totally recruit those guys.
  • RedGuardRedGuard Member Posts: 672
    edited September 2012
    @Dougie I suggest you take the advice of @Aosaw . If all you want is another sorceress then the call should be for that and not a drastic change of the established story that alters the well loved characterisations of certain characters (not to mention it would go against Dynaheir's characterisation as well if she came back in such a fashion).
  • ChrisYuiChrisYui Member Posts: 94
    It's pretty clear that what you want is a mod that changes the story of the game. There is no reason to require that the original canon story be changed. There are a lot of other people who enjoy the story as is, and forcing the original story to change for a vocal few is not good. Even the idea of adding in an option, is kind of ridiculous. Can you imagine? A checkbox at the beginning of the game - "Dynaheir faked her death."

    Why you wouldn't put this request in for a Modder, I do not know. Just because the game is being enhanced does not mean it's a chance for you to change the storyline. The original storyline was made already - and it's pretty great. If you want to change the game, use a mod. That's what they're there for, and the EE will make it all the easier to mod.

    When characters die in games it often gives more depth to the game itself, the characters, and the surrounding character's relationships. In this case it certainly did, and I see no reason to change it.
  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 16,317
    edited September 2012
    @theJoshFrost Tazok is in BG2....... remember. He looks nothing like himself and has found yet another master. His death however is not guaranteed since you do not have to go to Firkraags dungeon.
  • ego1steego1ste Member Posts: 88
    If Minsc banters are such problem make him dead instead. So player that start game can choose either Minsc or Dynaheir. Problem solved.
  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 16,317
    @ego1ste the player choosing between Minsc or Dynaheir implies that there would be a choice in the matter in the storyline. Irenicus should be in control over who lives and dies in his dungeon, not the player.
  • ego1steego1ste Member Posts: 88
    edited September 2012
    @elminster So make Irenicus have a change of mood and kill Minsc for a change :)
    Either way my solution is just one of many that writers can come up with.
    Post edited by ego1ste on
  • DougieDougie Member Posts: 34
    It's pretty clear that the main barrier to whether BGEE provides some reason to allow a character like Dynaheir to continue from BG1 to BG2 is the question of what is the point.

    The point I would say is this (and apologies if this has already be discussed, but I've only recently joined), BG1 and BG2 were never intended to run into each other and would be played as seperate entities. As such the player would make decisions about their party configuration at the start of the each game, only with a reference to that particular game. So it didn't matter that certain characters were killed at the start of BG2 because it didn't affect the gameplay; BG1 was over and BG2 was yet to begin.

    Now though, with BGEE, BG1 and BG2 are bound together, and the decisions made at the start of BG1 are influenced by the knowledge of what happens at the start of BG2. So there is no point of wasting any time on Dynaheir (and by extension Minsc) or Khalid (and by extension Jaheira).

    So, the point is, by allowing some way to bring back characters who were killed off when the two stories were distinct, we can preserve the value of those characters now that the two stories have become continous.

    Obviously the storylines cannot be preserved if we just pretend that they weren't killed, but it could be resolved by some text that explains that they were believed to have been killed, and certain other NPCs must continue to believe that.

    It is slightly awkwatd, but less so that 4, 5 or 6 NPCs in BG1 who now have pre-determined deaths that we can do nothing about. That's would not the same game as it was before.
  • TanthalasTanthalas Member Posts: 6,738
    Eh, that like saying there's no point in watching Movie 1 because Movie 2 kills several characters off.
Sign In or Register to comment.