Ragzlin, Gut, Minthara etc: These are not reliable evidence sources for us being 'safe' enough to take our time;
You have to take whole argument ... not just snap out that part that suits you.
Let me repeat it for you whole:
IF we presume we have REGULAR tadpole ... meaning until we get information that our tadpole was alterned, where we also learn that we will not turn after certain amount of time passes.
OR
IF we preusume that we will turn IN TIME ... meaning as long as we are "in hurry" bcs of imminent danger of transformation.
THEN Ragzlin, Gut, Minthara, Nere etc.
ARE reliable evidence source for us that we have time.
See the difference?
If you light two candles, first one will burn out sooner ... thats just how it works.
If you are second candle, and you can watch first one ... you can use that observation to guess how much time you have ... as long as it burns, you are fine ... when it burns out, you are next!
our tadpoles are clearly not the same a theirs, we know we have them, they don't
There are differences yes ...
But im not exactly sure if this bridge you made is solid enough to hold the idea. O_o
I mean, there is many mind-alterning magic (or substances) in this world to be used ...
Why presume they have different kind of tadpole?
Especialy since our characters from the start dont even know there are different kind of tadpoles in the first place ... as far as i know, everyone presumes that our tadpoles are regular ones, and we only find out from Halsin, Omeluum or Ethel that they were alterned ... and that once again, is the exact situation we are also told that we have time.
So ... back to the topic, i still see no reason to step out of the game, in order to take our time and explore.
Their tadpoles leave their brains when they die, ours do not
Ours do aswell ofcourse ...
If you kill Astarion permanently, it leaves ... if you kill Lae'zel permanently, it leaves ... if you kill Shadowheart permanently, it leaves ... there are cutscenes for each and every one of them.
The only case it dont leave is when we fall in combat, and will be ressurected afterwards.
Wich (besides it being obvious game mechanic that have nothing to do with story, or lore) can be easily explained by it knowing our intention to ressurect our fallen comrade.
Dont we all?
There's something different between theirs and ours - would you wager the entirety of your life and your immortal continuance of being thereafter (which in this universe you know that you have, incidentally, unlike ours) on simply "Assuming" that ours isn't going to destroy us or do something else irreversible to us, just because it seems like theirs haven't?
Me? Dunno ... chances are that i would not, but cant really imagine the situation properly.
But my character? Yes, certainly.
I can create idiot, who dont realize full extend of danger he faces. (Wyll)
I can create selfish bastard, who dont give a shit what it will take to cheat this thing. (Astarion)
I can create smug character, who will be so full of himself, so he would believe that he will find a way to outsmart this thing. (Gale)
See? Its not impossible.
There is nothing here to tell us, with ANY kind of reliable certainty, that we are not in life-threatening danger.
We have saying in Czech: The drowning person grasp even straw.
If your argument is really build on "oh this isnt certain enough for me to relly on" ...
Then im affraid you dont concider full extend of life-threatening danger. :-/
Also keep in mind that i dont claim to say universal truth ... all i keep saying and keep repeating is that there is no such thing.
That characters who would chill out and explore are exactly just as valid and possible ... as characters who will freak out ans rush towards main quest ignoring rest of the world entirely.
Yes you can, don't lie for the sake of your stance, it only undermines it.
No i dont, thats why i said it ...
Also i dont really appreciate you puting words in my mouth ... if you really wish to talk about it with yourself, please feel free to, there is obviously no need (or reason) for my imput if you are ignoring what i say and replace it with your own words ... but keep in mind that your conclusions are your own then.
You stepped on a land mine. It should explode, it didn't. This is NOT a good situation, and not good news. It is most definitely not something that you should relax about and feel content to ignore and assume you're in no immediate danger - and carry around in your backpack to show to friends - just because it didn't explode already.
Exactly as Wormerine abowe ... you also took it two steppes futher than it was. :-/
For one:
Yes it
is good news ... you should be dead, you are not ... how can that not be good news?
Unless you were trying to commit suicide ofcourse, then you failed wich is rarely seen as good news.
For two:
What i "should" or "should not" assume/do ... is entierly different topic!
Look:
You say: "Its not good idea to carry around an explosive and presume its safe bcs it just didnt explode allready."
I say: "Its possible that some person will carry around an explosive and presume its safe bcs it just didnt explode allready."
See the difference?
I believe it should be crystal clear by now.
and the parallell here is that it SHOULD have turned us while we were passed out on the beach, and 'we' should not have woken up at all (recall that it we were captured inthe afternoon, spent time onthe ship, had the ship crash duringhte night, but woke up othe beach in the morning - long enough that it should have destroyed our personality already.)
Exactly my point.
That we are still here is NOT 'factual proof' that it is not working - it proves only that it's not behaving as our lore books say it should.
I believe the problem here lays in deffinition of "not working" ...
As i read your post, it seems to me that you take it as perfectly safe, no danger at all, nothing (related to this) can go wrong ever again.
Am i reading it wrong?
But what i was trying to say was its "not working" the way it should.
And that means that (as i stated abowe) we either have more time than people in our situation usualy have (that was when i said that our ceremorphosis is slowed) ... or time is not the aspect that bothers us at all (that was when i said that our ceremorphosis is stoped).
But both only in matter of how much time is pressing our characters!
Yes, you are corect in that, it dont mean that we can never ever ever turn ... but i never claimed that.
Our characters even withnessed transformation via pulling the lever ... so unless we purposefully avoided that room, or that lever, we *KNOW* that we can still be in danger just bcs that little shit is still in our heads ...
All im saying is that (presuming our character have the knowledge) we should by now, when we wake up on the beach, have option to realize that *time* matters to us only in a way "the sooner i get the solution, the sooner i will be save" rather than "unless i find the solution soon enough im fucked".
And i see there important difference.
Thats why i mentioned Pheidippides, i meaned it, litteraly ...
If we would be in "regular tadpole" situation, it would make perfect sense to me that our characters would be willing to die of exhaustion in order to pursue any possible solution at hand as soon as possible.
But we are not ... and we should have option to know this ... and therefore we should have option to slow down, so we dont die of exhaustion at the end of our run.
Know what i mean?
It is active and doing things though, and we don't know what, or why - the mental connection episodes, are one example, even without actively using the tadpole powers; even without them, too, it's clearly there, giving us that sensation that we cold do something, and we repeatedly are told about how terrible our characters are looking, and that we can occasionally feel it moving in our skull.
But this only works as reminder for us that tadpole is still there ... it dont affect amount of time we have.
Therefore im sorry, but i dont find it much relevant in topic about how much we need to rush. :-/
[quote=Niara]Halsin has studied these altered tadpoles, but again, ours are not the same as the other absolutist ones he's encountered.
I didnt want to mention it before, but this is pure metaknowledge statement so i feel like i can.
Bcs as far as i know, they are the same.
I can say that these ones don't transform their hosts on their own - they need some kind of trigger, though
You get this information exactly from Omeluum ... it seems like a shame to give it to Halsin aswell.
He could theorize something like this prehaps, but i wouldnt like if he would *know* so much from studying the larva itself ... sounds too deep to me, concidering that all he likely did was to observe it and prehaps "scan" it through some magical means.
Also i dunno, but i kinda like that you need to get pieces together from several sources.
If you need to presume that the character is ignorant, stupid or reckless (that all of them are, in fact - party leader problem) in order for your game to make in-universe sense, then your game design has failed.
Aswell as if you need to presume that your character is flawless, allways perfectly logical, and demands solid prooves for every information s/he gets. :P
As i said abowe, and this i will repeat gladly:
There are 7Billions people in this world, and if you really think you can predict what each and every one would do in specific situation you are either fool, or ignorant.
