So, what *IS* Ember? (spoilers for her recruitment and early conversation)

[igor140]

I'm starting up my 4th playthrough, and I've just recruited her and gone through the initial conversation. I remember most of this from before, but I'm reminded of how WEIRD her whole backstory is.

She's "several centuries old" and doesn't know the name of her homeland, or her parents, OR HERSELF. I know that in DnD, elves mature notably slower than humans to account for their lore-breakingly long lifespans... but I assure you that my 2 yr old niece knows her name. So am I just woefully unfamiliar with Patherfind elven development? Certainly that can't be normal...

The other character who has forgotten their name has really good reasons for that. But Ember seems to remember most of her life... except where she came from and who she is.

Then there's the issue of Soot. In the earliest conversations Ember, the Commander, and the "narrator" all comment on the fact that Soot is not a normal crow; Soot is something unusual. I think it's a Religion check, but it's revealed (still in that initial conversation) that Soot is actually an aspect/ familiar/ embodiment/ whatever of one of the mot powerful Empyreal lords.

So one of the most powerful fey (that's correct, isn't it?) deities is watching over one little homeless 240 year old "child"... because it's fun?

Ember herself doesn't worship or trust the gods. She states that very clearly; she's listed as being Atheist; and she frequently decries the "good" gods in the same sentences as the "evil" ones... so why is this one particular god-- who Ember herself does not acknowledge, even by name-- care about her so much?

She refers to this god as "grandmother", and says that she was also the "Grandmother" of her father and grandfather, etc... so it's obviously not a direct blood relation. She also acknowledges Soot as an emissary (or whatever) from "grandmother".

Next is her whole manner of speech and whatnot. I'm not talking about her "everyone can be redeemed" thing (that's just adorable)... It's the way she talks about certain things and DOESN'T talk about other things make her seem extremely detached from the world; like she's an observer without understanding that she is an actual participant. It's the same kind of speech patterns usually used to convey that an individual is "other", or "alien", or "from outside".

If you've ever played the very old Xenosaga games (early 2000s), there's a character called "chaos" who talks in a somewhat less stilted way than Ember, but still occasionally says something that's just "off". This character is later revealed to actually be Jesus Christ, 18,000+ years later . That's the kind of "odd" that Ember comes across.

Then there's the whole burning incident. She never actually mentions WHY Hulrun though she was evil, but it is Hulrun... On the other hand, was there some incident that led to his conclusion? Also, that must have happened within the past 10ish years; Hulrun is human, and not prone to living "multiple centuries". Furthermore, several characters talk about how much Hulrun has changed... so chances are Ember's burning was within the past four or five years... right?

But then there's the fact that she survived. Her father died, "she cried"... at which point one of the knights jumped in the fire to save her, fought off his fellow guards, and let her free. That knight later died from his wounds... but she just lost a couple fingers...?

There are a lot of variables, but I actually HAVE pulled two different friends out of fires (I have really stupid friends). They were just campfires, not witch pyres... but still: they were FAR more badly burned than I was in both cases. (In neither case was anyone seriously injured... I think only one of them still has any permanent scarring, and it's minor.)

Point being: it must have been an INCREDIBLE fire for a grown man (her father) to be burned alive, and another to have been burned badly enough that he later died of his injuries. How, then, did she escape only missing a couple fingers?

Or is the implication that her "crying" was actually a spell ("trick"; either by her or by Soot/ "grandmother") that compelled the man to jump in and free her?

It's just too many weird things for there not to be something else going on...

THIS PART REALLY DOES HAVE SPOILERS FOR EMBER WELL INTO THE LATE GAME. SERIOUSLY, DON'T READ THIS UNLESS YOU HAVE FINISHED HER STORY THOUGH ACT 5 OR DON'T CARE ABOUT SPOILING IT

But the craziest part to me is that, given that setup from the beginning of Act 1... nothing is ever revealed. Her personal quests revolve around her preaching career. And while I think it's a pretty good story... the whole "one the most powerful fey deities lives in a shoebox at the end of my bed and consistently saves me from fires, demons, and having to emotionally process the tragedy in my life" is never brought up again.

So... is there more to this story that I'm missing?

[igor140]

A) I co-DM a DnD table, and we absolutely recon'd elves' lifespan. In our world, they live for 120 years max. I think it's really stupid to have a character whose grandfather was alive before recorded history. But whatever.. obviously not the case here.

B) Are you sure that Ember's burning happened as long ago as 48 years? First off, that would put Hulrun in his 70s... which he certainly does not look. Based upon his picture, i would put him at being around 50ish.

Also Seelah, Anevia, and (I think) some less important NPCs all describe Hulrun as having "changed". IIRC, Anevia mentions that he's become more fanatical and more aggressive. If that kind of change happened five decades ago (and CERTAINLY Anevia is not in her 60s), no one would bother commenting on it. People talk about "someone changing" if it's been within the past year or two... maybe upwards of five.

So I think the only definitive date we have is that Ember was born the year the Worldwound opened (120ish years ago, right?). So she's that old.

The confusing part to me is that there aren't many/ any other elf NPCs to compare her maturity to. Storyteller is the only other major elf character, and he's older than Nocticula... so obviously something atypical is going on there.

Anyway, the point is that I'm not sure whether to chalk up Ember's perceived immaturity to:
1) her age... at which point none of the other questions about her patron, survival, or philosophy are answered; It's just literal armies of grown adults and demons following the idle musings of a child
2) her trauma... in which case, why is that never really addressed, raised, or corrected? Post traumatic regression is absolutely a thing, but you typically don't let that person start a cult. Or, maybe that's how most cults get started... not sure.
3) her connection with her patron/ some other "outside being"... in which case, why do none of her side quests and dialogue pertain to that at all?
4) ... just plain contradictory writing : / Unfortunately, the more I think about this, that's my ultimate conclusion.

Thinking back on previously playthroughs, and how easy it is to demoralize her from her "everyone can be redeemed" philosophy-- and how catastrophically that hits her-- I think it's just a situation where it doesn't really matter WHY she's immature, that's just about all there is to her personality. Which... to be honest... is a bit disappointing : /

[Gracey Face]

Schlumpsha님이 먼저 게시:

Gracey Face님이 먼저 게시:

One thing I almost forgot to mention is that while it has never been specifically laid out, elves do not actually mature more slowly than humans. This was "retconned" in like 2nd edition or so in order to prevent the 50 year old babies in diapers ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ all over the place problem with elves and other similar species. What actually happens now is that elves mature mentally and physically at the same rough rate as humans, but the additional time spent in "childhood" is explained away as them undergoing higher education and greater cultural learning.

WotR still operates with the racial age progressions of 1st edition in mind, not the 2nd one. Meaning a 55 year old elf is both physically and mentally identical to a 8 year old human youth, as per the young character rules from Pathfinder's Ultimate Campaign rulebook.

No it doesn't. Pathfinder both 1 and 2e use the same age progression tables from DND.

An elf is considered to have left childhood at 110 (15 for humans) years, is considered middle aged at 175 (35) years, is considered old at 263 (53) years, is considered venerable at 350 (70) years and has a maximum age limit without magical extension of 750 (90) years. Essentially ignoring childhood and absolute age limit an elf's equivalent human age is just their age divided by 5.

It gives no specifics for how maturation to 110 years old actually works but since it is using DND's age progression then that means DND ageing, which is they physically mature quickly but then undergo education, apply unless the DM decides otherwise.

Actually yeah, the forlorn that I mentioned earlier also exist in pathfinder, at least on Golarion, which prettymuch settles it.

[Gracey Face]

igor140님이 먼저 게시:

B) Are you sure that Ember's burning happened as long ago as 48 years? First off, that would put Hulrun in his 70s... which he certainly does not look. Based upon his picture, i would put him at being around 50ish. /

No, Hulrun is 48. He is just saying that Hulrun could have forgotten a "random witch he burned".

[Schlumpsha]

Gracey Face님이 먼저 게시:

Schlumpsha님이 먼저 게시:

WotR still operates with the racial age progressions of 1st edition in mind, not the 2nd one. Meaning a 55 year old elf is both physically and mentally identical to a 8 year old human youth, as per the young character rules from Pathfinder's Ultimate Campaign rulebook.

No it doesn't. Pathfinder both 1 and 2e use the same age progression tables from DND.

An elf is considered to have left childhood at 110 (15 for humans) years, is considered middle aged at 175 (35) years, is considered old at 263 (53) years, is considered venerable at 350 (70) years and has a maximum age limit without magical extension of 750 (90) years. Essentially ignoring childhood and absolute age limit an elf's equivalent human age is just their age divided by 5.

It gives no specifics for how maturation to 110 years old actually works but since it is using DND's age progression then that means DND ageing, which is they physically mature quickly but then undergo education, apply unless the DM decides otherwise.

Yes, it does. I also gave you the source said rule is written. Should you not possess the book in question, here[www.d20pfsrd.com] are they as well. And over here[aonprd.com] as well, should you prefer aonprd instead. Adulthood for elves begins at 110. Youthhood on the other hand start at 55.

[Gracey Face]

Schlumpsha님이 먼저 게시:

Gracey Face님이 먼저 게시:

No it doesn't. Pathfinder both 1 and 2e use the same age progression tables from DND.

An elf is considered to have left childhood at 110 (15 for humans) years, is considered middle aged at 175 (35) years, is considered old at 263 (53) years, is considered venerable at 350 (70) years and has a maximum age limit without magical extension of 750 (90) years. Essentially ignoring childhood and absolute age limit an elf's equivalent human age is just their age divided by 5.

It gives no specifics for how maturation to 110 years old actually works but since it is using DND's age progression then that means DND ageing, which is they physically mature quickly but then undergo education, apply unless the DM decides otherwise.

Yes, it does. I also gave you the source said rule is written. Should you not possess the book in question, here[www.d20pfsrd.com] are they as well. And over here[aonprd.com] as well, should you prefer aonprd instead. Adulthood for elves begins at 110. Youthhood on the other hand start at 55.

You might want to read what you're referring to. It doesn't support what you say it does. It just gives you an extra age bracket to work with and has no implications to physical development beyond the age based stat adjustment, which to be fair could be meaningful but practically isn't (your body doesn't just drop down a notch on your 35th birthday for example, it's a set of guidelines for the DM to use to make character adjustments.

When I said SPECIFICS I meant SPECIFICS.

[Schlumpsha]

Gracey Face님이 먼저 게시:

Schlumpsha님이 먼저 게시:

Yes, it does. I also gave you the source said rule is written. Should you not possess the book in question, here[www.d20pfsrd.com] are they as well. And over here[aonprd.com] as well, should you prefer aonprd instead. Adulthood for elves begins at 110. Youthhood on the other hand start at 55.

You might want to read what you're referring to. It doesn't support what you say it does. It just gives you an extra age bracket to work with and has no implications to physical development beyond the age based stat adjustment, which to be fair could be meaningful but practically isn't (your body doesn't just drop down a notch on your 35th birthday for example, it's a set of guidelines for the DM to use to make character adjustments.

When I said SPECIFICS I meant SPECIFICS.

You are free to think so. The rules are there in 1st edition. So it is up to you and others whether they use them, alterate them, or to not use them. That is all there is.

[Gracey Face]

Schlumpsha님이 먼저 게시:

Gracey Face님이 먼저 게시:

You might want to read what you're referring to. It doesn't support what you say it does. It just gives you an extra age bracket to work with and has no implications to physical development beyond the age based stat adjustment, which to be fair could be meaningful but practically isn't (your body doesn't just drop down a notch on your 35th birthday for example, it's a set of guidelines for the DM to use to make character adjustments.

When I said SPECIFICS I meant SPECIFICS.

You are free to think so. The rules are there in 1st edition. So it is up to you and others whether they use them, alterate them, or to not use them. That is all there is.

It's not what I think. It's right there in the rules. By the rules you can, if you level enough, get your youth tag removed on a 9 year old human. Does that then mean humans reach peak physical and mental development at 9 years old? That's what you're suggesting. Or at least would have been suggesting if you'd actually read the rules.

It's just a set of guidelines for an extra age bracket which is specifically noted as being intended to be altered by the players and the DM.

[Immortal Reaver]

Ok sorry about Hulrun, misremembered it with date of 3rd crusade (and so mistakenly thought Ember was burned as one of the people in 3rd "crusade").
Hulrun is prelate for 33 years as he was given the possition in 4682 AR. And Ember was saved by Paladin, not by Inquisitor.
Ember was born in same year as Worldwound, 4606 AR. That makes Ember 109 years old when videogame starts (4715 AR).

[Gracey Face]

Immortal Reaver님이 먼저 게시:

Hulrun is prelate for 33 years as he was given the possition in 4682 AR. And Ember was saved by Paladin, not by Inquisitor.

Is that 4682 figure accurate for the game? I know that's the date for the adventure path, but the adventure path also has him being born in 4645 and so being 68 at the start of the 5th crusade (4713) and in the game he is very clearly not 68 years old.

As for Ember being born on the same year as the worldwound, when is that stated? I got a couple of people telling me she is 126 and I personally kill her on every playthrough after the first and don't remember that dialogue on my first playthrough.

Oh and as for paladin vs inquisitor I am pretty sure it was an inquisitor. Either way both groups are part of the same organisation and the inquisitors are specifically set up to keep order amongst both (and also the clergy).

[Schlumpsha]

Gracey Face님이 먼저 게시:

It's not what I think. It's right there in the rules. By the rules you can, if you level enough, get your youth tag removed on a 9 year old human. Does that then mean humans reach peak physical and mental development at 9 years old? That's what you're suggesting. Or at least would have been suggesting if you'd actually read the rules.

Not 'levels', but special accomplishments. The GM may do so as part of an early coming of age rite for instance. And as you've read, the character's stats won't change (both positive and negative ones) unless the character retrains into their "adult class".

Or they may not and instead opt to use the provided aging table. In that case their bodies and mind become that of an adult's at their race's relevant adult age anyway. Which, again would be a time span of another 55 years for elves.

[Gracey Face]

Schlumpsha님이 먼저 게시:

Gracey Face님이 먼저 게시:

It's not what I think. It's right there in the rules. By the rules you can, if you level enough, get your youth tag removed on a 9 year old human. Does that then mean humans reach peak physical and mental development at 9 years old? That's what you're suggesting. Or at least would have been suggesting if you'd actually read the rules.

Not 'levels', but special accomplishments. The GM may do so as part of an early coming of age rite for instance. And as you've read, the character's stats won't change (both positive and negative ones) unless the character retrains into their "adult class".

Or they may not and instead opt to use the provided aging table. In that case their bodies and mind become that of an adult's at their race's relevant adult age anyway. Which, again would be a time span of another 55 years for elves.

The rules specifically call out levels, as well as achievements and other things. And the retraining doesn't change age beyond the time required to retrain a level which is a matter of weeks. And they only need to retrain a single level.

You can have a 9 year old classed as an adult with 21 base strength in the ruleset. Is that indicative of the way a human ages? Again, that is what you're arguing.

[Immortal Reaver]

Gracey Face님이 먼저 게시:

As for Ember being born on the same year as the worldwound, when is that stated? I got a couple of people telling me she is 126 and I personally kill her on every playthrough after the first and don't remember that dialogue on my first playthrough.

Oh and as for paladin vs inquisitor I am pretty sure it was an inquisitor. Either way both groups are part of the same organisation and the inquisitors are specifically set up to keep order amongst both (and also the clergy).

In her introduction on Kickstarter. Upadte 21 Child Crusade.
And for that you can see how Seelah acts with Hulrun. Unless the Paladin was under Hulrun's command, that Paladin would not be branded traitor.

[Gracey Face]

Immortal Reaver님이 먼저 게시:

And for that you can see how Seelah acts with Hulrun. Unless the Paladin was under Hulrun's command, that Paladin would not be branded traitor.

Ignore Seelah, she doesn't matter. Inquisitors are the investigative and enforcement arm for the church they're a part of, which the paladin orders are also a part of, which is why inquisitors will often have paladins and clerics working under their authority. Inquisitors have authority to investigate, try and convict any member of the church they're a part of. Or in other words Hulrun has the authority to declare any follower of iomedae a traitor. And they have the ability to investigate people who aren't members of the church with the backing of the church.

They also function as spies and such as well, but that's not as relevant in the context of Hulrun.

The TL:DR is that he wouldn't just let the guy who pulled Ember out of the fire go, never mind that he wouldn't let Ember go after she escapes. It is quite literally his divine duty to investigate it.


As for the kickstarter intro. Is it ever mentioned in game?

[Steffan]

Gracey Face님이 먼저 게시:

A lot of the characters in this game are wild hypocrites. To the point where I am not entirely sure that the owlcat writing staff understood that what they were writing was hypocrisy, which makes me deeply concerned about what kinds of people they are.

Another example is how they have the god of truth and justice lie not only to the people in general but to her own herald because you were "useful". That is 100% not what the god of truth or justice would do. And you find this out in a conversation where she tries to tell you that no mortal should have divine powers. This is despite the fact she herself is a mortal who gained divine powers and the god she followed as a mortal was also a mortal who gained divine powers. Ridiculous.

While she is very low in my list, I think I can step in and defend Iomedae. I do not think she lied to anybody. But she was very careful with not interfering, which is a different thing. Stakes are very high and she did not want to undermine you without a good reason. She is very sceptic towards the source of your power and while in the good paths this is unjustified, in some other paths it is completely reasonable doubt. She has ascended, yes, but this was as a result of her own efforts not a gift from dark powers.

And yes, a lot of characters are hypocrites. Camellia and Galfrey come into mind. However, I have no reason to doubt the writers. It is a game, after all, where you are expected to make some hard choices.

As for Ember... her story is open for interpretation for a reason. She is one of those mystic preachers that are very charismatic and at the same time do not make sense. Call her a good Rasputin of sorts. And if I recall she was born around the opening of the Worlwound which would make her above 100 years old. She does have a stunted maturity, due to trauma, magic and her elfish nature

[Gracey Face]

steffan8님이 먼저 게시:

While she is very low in my list, I think I can step in and defend Iomedae. I do not think she lied to anybody. But she was very careful with not interfering, which is a different thing. Stakes are very high and she did not want to undermine you without a good reason. She is very sceptic towards the source of your power and while in the good paths this is unjustified, in some other paths it is completely reasonable doubt. She has ascended, yes, but this was as a result of her own efforts not a gift from dark powers.

A lie of omission is still a lie. You could make this argument if you pretended that she didn't know that people were coming to false conclusions but she herself says that she does and that she allowed them to come to these false conclusions because it was useful. Even to the point of dooming her own herald.

She is absolutely a hypocrite, and also deeply evil.