After weeks of barely being able to find this place functioning and able to log in, I'm popping in to say that the IGN article really left a bad taste in my mouth. So it's even WORSE than we thought? That the stuff wasn't even cut, it was never there to begin with. The fact that she was just supposed to up and burn or leave to hell and that's all, as the main idea from the start??? How fucking terrible. You say that you create and adjust the character because of EA complaints about edgelord party, add a puppydog who has by far the harshest backstory of all in terms of trauma and physical pain, who did nothing to deserve to be sold, mutilated and enslaved, only to go "anyway she's a viking she wants to go out with a bang".
Bitch no, she if anyone deserves a good, positive ending. Adding breadcrumbs that add hope to her Avernus story is a band-aid on a still-leaking wound. A wound that never really heals for me and I just can't stand it. They affirmed that yes, hope was important. And that's what we see with Hope in House of Hope - that despite the worst circumstances, hope is alive and can even in most dire moments and against all the odds prevail.
So no, that line about "we always saw her at the dock, burning up and dying" triggered me Big Time. Act 3 is, with no cut content, even worse of a situation than us thinking it was just cut. It was made to be so? God the plotholes (read: from a DnD campaign standpoint and compared to the rest of the game)...
