ubisoft discussions

Quick Suggestions

  • 0 Likes/13 Replies/494 Views
    GothicEnigma
    Original poster 29 posts

    First the main character...Because this is who I'm supposed to play as for the next 100 hours or so.. I'm supposed to care about this character...A character that is a completely selfish, and moronic to an extreme level. Going to refer to the CHaracter as CH for short.

    • CH initially gets their whole raid group captured, against the explicit orders of CH's King.
    • CH KNOWS this is a bad move.. KNOWS they can't fight Kojtve's head on. Yet still antagonizes and pokes them despite knowing they couldn't survive a full on assault by Kojtve.
    • CH doesn't care about any of that, only about CH's self. Everything CH does is entirely selfish at the cost and expense of everyone else around CH.


    Now lets talk about Sigverd and CH, and their completely idiotic response to the King swearing fealty to Harold...

    • Harold says that with him as King there will be peace. They just kicked out Kojtve and took back that land at best, at worse, are now completely safe from enemies.
    • Harold is saying that he wants them to reach out to England, France, and other lands, instead of fighting each other, work together to raid.
    • CH and the brother fly off the wall in rage and disgust at this apparent peace deal. (I get the Sons initial outrage, as he was thinking he'd be King, and at best can now be a Jarl, but seriously...)
    • Instead of just being a Jarl and raiding anyway like Harold and his father wanted.. He... ENTIRELY throws away his title, land, and family to go raiding.. anyway..
    • CH and the son have a secret meeting about breaking away and going raiding, as if their secret meeting is going against the wishes of harold who asked them to raid in the first place...




    Uhh... what?!

    How stupid of a main character, and plot line can you get?

    Oh gee guys after generations of wars, and killing we are being united.. can't have that! I'm going to throw a hissy fit baby rage, throw ALL my titles and claims away and go do what I was asked to do anyway! Raid England! .........

    .....
    ...
    .
    ....


  • Contrary to popular belief, Lorem Ipsum is not simply random text. It has roots in a piece of classical Latin literature from 45 BC, making it over 2000 years old. Richard McClintock, a Latin professor at Hampden-Sydney College in Virginia, looked up one of the more obscure Latin words, consectetur, from a Lorem Ipsum passage, and going through the cites of the word in classical literature, discovered the undoubtable source. Lorem Ipsum comes from sections 1.10.32 and 1.10.33 of "de Finibus Bonorum et Malorum" (The Extremes of Good and Evil) by Cicero, written in 45 BC. This book is a treatise on the theory of ethics, very popular during the Renaissance. The first line of Lorem Ipsum, "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet..", comes from a line in section 1.10.32.

    Contrary to popular belief, Lorem Ipsum is not simply random text. It has roots in a piece of classical Latin literature from 45 BC, making it over 2000 years old. Richard McClintock, a Latin professor at Hampden-Sydney College in Virginia, looked up one of the more obscure Latin words, consectetur, from a Lorem Ipsum passage, and going through the cites of the word in classical literature, discovered the undoubtable source. Lorem Ipsum comes from sections 1.10.32 and 1.10.33 of "de Finibus Bonorum et Malorum" (The Extremes of Good and Evil) by Cicero, written in 45 BC. This book is a treatise on the theory of ethics, very popular during the Renaissance. The first line of Lorem Ipsum, "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet..", comes from a line in section 1.10.32.

    Contrary to popular belief, Lorem Ipsum is not simply random text. It has roots in a piece of classical Latin literature from 45 BC, making it over 2000 years old. Richard McClintock, a Latin professor at Hampden-Sydney College in Virginia, looked up one of the more obscure Latin words, consectetur, from a Lorem Ipsum passage, and going through the cites of the word in classical literature, discovered the undoubtable source. Lorem Ipsum comes from sections 1.10.32 and 1.10.33 of "de Finibus Bonorum et Malorum" (The Extremes of Good and Evil) by Cicero, written in 45 BC. This book is a treatise on the theory of ethics, very popular during the Renaissance. The first line of Lorem Ipsum, "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet..", comes from a line in section 1.10.32.

  • CapCheeks
    40 posts

    Sigurd was mad not because of the raiding thing, he didn't want to swear fealty or bend the knee to anyone else. His father was king and he was due to be king. Swearing fealty to Harald would have meant neither of them being kings anymore and their clan's path forward will always be under Harald's rule.
    And they go off to England because Harald explicitly told them that anyone not bending the knee can no longer stay in Norway.

  • GothicEnigma
    Original poster 29 posts

    @capcheeks

    Which is all utterly stupid.

    The laws and ways that Clans worked back in those days, was that Clans were more or less independent, but were unified under a "King". The son would of lost literally nothing, and gained a massive benefit of having his lands safe of surrounding Clans, and would have been able to go off raiding as much as he wanted, even more so than before. (You couldn't raid as much, or as far if your own lands were always at risk of being attacked by a nearby clan).

    Okay, so he's a stupid son that doesn't get it, that I could live with..

    It's when CH in all of his/her stupidity is added to the mix.. He could of still claimed fealty to the still current King.In-fact, all he had to do was say nothing.. Then hitch a ride with Sigverd to Raid England.. Win/Win... quite literally... Not only does he still have the entire backing of not only his King, but all of Norway as well... The Throne of the Raven Clan would be his (Because his brother threw it away), and all the riches and prestige, and glory of his raids in England would of made him a very honored Jarl as well..

    Again, the only difference between being under Harold as opposed to not, is that you'd have to support him in a war, or risk being kicked out of the Clan alliance (that's what it really was back then between Clans, it didn't work like it did in England with Kings and vassals), and paying a small tax to him at worst, all of which is minor, unless you let your blind self absorbed stupidity get the better of you and your greed dictates I want FULL ultimately control or nothing.. (ANd both characters are written to be that utterly stupid).

    In-fact, the more I think about it, the more utterly stupid your main character seems.. CH is so blinded by glory and honor, it makes No sense that they threw that all away suddenly.. Again, just keeping yourself quiet, staying loyal to the king, but offering to help Sigverd with the raids in England would of gained him massive levels of honor and prestige, to come back home then as Jarl (again since the son threw it away), and potentially even gaining trust, and esteem with Harold, who may even throw extra land, money, and titles your way because of the prestigious gains you had in raiding england...

    It's BEYOND stupid... especially when you realize that a Viking would have understood all of this, as its their very culture and way of life...

    /facedesk

  • CapCheeks
    40 posts

    @gothicenigma Pretty much yeah. For Eivor, he's pretty much in a sworn oath to follow Sigurd instead of anyone else. So, wherever that dude goes, he follows. Sigurd on the other hand just wants to be the top dog and have no one else above him. He can barely contain himself receiving orders from his own father even.
    That said I think you're looking into it too much from a personal viewpoint. True that they both would probably have fared well under Harald's rule but Sigurd is stubborn and Eivor is too blindly loyal to do what's good for him/her. It is stupid from a purely gain/lose perspective but I'd say it does add dimension to both their characters and the story.

    Interested to see how this dynamic between Eivor and Sigurd will change further in the story.

  • GothicEnigma
    Original poster 29 posts

    @capcheeks

    The main issue I have with it, is there is a difference between not liking it, and accepting it, and even hating it, and accepting it...

    But hating it, and throwing away major gains...

    The level of selfish stupidity just doesn't make sense...

    You have to remember these two guys, glory and honor means everything to them.. So.. what do they do? They throw away all glory and honor because they don't get to be top dog vigilantes? CH also had an issue with following any orders.. Both were hot headed morons.

    Still my point stands... not easy characters to get behind and like.. You have to remember as well that at this time in life, clans were family.. Leaving and abandoning your clan is dishonorable (in the way they did). All CH talks about is how his honor was stained, yet he stains it himself at every turn.. Disobeying the King countless times, abandoning the Clan cuz "well that's what my bro is doing"...

    Just makes no sense even by character personalities.. On one hand they keep talking about honor and glory, on the other hand, they do literally everything that would of been considered dishonourable..

  • MeinChurro
    39 posts

    @gothicenigma Childish for sure, I think that makes the story a bit more human. I don't see the concept as bad at all. Sigurd wants to be an independent ruler. A king for that matter - not just a jarl. He still has a power base, they took like half their clan, all the important people that's for sure. Several dozen warriors. He saw an opportunity with making a new alliance with the sons of Ragnar instead, but not only that you can see Basim in his ear pushing him to go to England.

  • MeinChurro
    39 posts

    @gothicenigma Yeah, you could definitely make the argument they are hot headed. They knew their father couldn't afford to war with Kjotve, as the loss of warriors would severely weaken them. Yet, Sigurd/Eivor took half the clan. This mean's his father will be at a much weaker position in relation to Herald than before. I guess they are assuming Harald is honorable and will keep his word.

  • CapCheeks
    40 posts

    @gothicenigma I think to them the less honorable thing to do is to submit to Harald's rule. They are hotheaded, both Eivor and Sigurd, that's true. Eivor disobeyed orders due to vengeance and Sigurd due to ambition. With the vision foreshadowing a betrayal, it seems these two personalities will end up conflicting later in the story.

  • RagnarBeorht
    2 posts

    @gothicenigma As a Samí (People of Lapland from Northern Norway to the Northern Finnish-Russian border) and as a someone who has religiously studied my ancestry, this is exactly the point of the game. These Vikings are incredibly accurate aside from their some of their clothing. Vikings were a do or die culture & pride was very important which is why laws of the Viking age often devolved into Blood Feuds. They were headstrong & preferred charging into battle. Something people in my family do a lot (not the battle but we can be impulsive) because bravery & not backing down is a way to get into Valhalla. Often to a suicidal degree. Eivor is a young, fairly new commander so yes she/he is an inexperienced jackass & the point is ur supposed to shape her/him into a better character.
    And they are headstrong & ambitious so yes they're not going to initially listen to the King, like a rebellious teenager cuz the likelihood is as a new commander they're probably still a teenager cuz of Viking age customs.

    They get overconfident because of the inexperience against someone they hate. Think about it how many teens-young adults get in fights they probably can't win cuz they're being dumb.

    They're focused on a blood feud from a traumatic childhood so yes they're behaving selfishly that's the point as well. You can either feed into it as you play or work to create a better character. It's called character development *cough* take notes Disney Star Wars *cough*.

    First off whilst they do behave like idiots Eivor does still realise that they're power is important & they don't really know Harold so surrendering their power to him is a massive risk to them & I know from experience that swearing fealty on an arm ring is an incredibly sacred & important thing to do because from my own Astaru beliefs I know that my arm ring is a representation of my oaths & honours that I will take to the after life & any oath sworn is important because breaking them leaves a stain on your honour. So yes Harold claims to want peace, but if his ambitions change the oath of fealty still stands & if Harold wants he can seize all of their power whenever it suits him because becoming his vassal means all ur land, resources & soldiers become his first & urs second.
    Imagine it like this. Ur family creates a business over many years with many properties & holdings. Now some other businessman comes along & says he can make your business better if you surrender majority share holds to him & swear a religious oath not to contest him, essentially giving him majority control over the business. You don't if he can deliver so would you be happy swearing that oath & handing over the all the hard work your family put in. No I wouldn't be too happy.
    Their problem isn't raiding with Harold it's raiding FOR Harold as his men not with respect as equals. He throws away the title of Jarl so he can claim the title of King & reclaim his families kingdom alongside newly found power. It's a standard Viking power play. Leave and build up until your powerful enough to win. Never fight unless the odds are in your favour.

    In other words the fight is about power, titles, ancestry & blood feuds not about them being asked to raid. You misunderstanding the Norse blood feud legal system of the Viking age. They'd think modern English or American laws are stupid the same way. For example how stupid is the American law Jay-Walking. Blood feuds have a purpose you do it as a reaction to something else. Laws like jay-walking is just a guy walked in a road when a light didn't shine green so he gets arrested/fined.

    Your problem isn't with the game it's with how Vikings deal with [censored]. And if you know anything about history Harold dies fighting a war in England without the support of other Vikings because he was an [censored] historically speaking & he never fully united Norway because of his past blood feuds many of which he started for no reason. So no Harold wasn't offering peace, he didn't do that historically either. He claimed he could offer peace but Harold's position was always political not for the greater goal of peace. He was a Viking too he probably betrays Eivor later in the game. Not to mention it was an unrealistic goal from Viking perspectives because until that point Norway wasn't Norway, it was a collection of divided kingdoms that only ever united once in their history & that was in the war to avenge Ragnar Lothbrokk, not for the long term goal of unifying. Many of these kingdoms were completely different like the Samí, Kievan Rus, Lade, Halogaland, etc.
    For the time period Eivor & Sigverd were completely realistic in their refusal to surrender their kingdom.
    It's not a stupid plot it's a Viking plot for a Viking game, made about a Viking assassin. Traditional Norse people still behave like this is some circles.

    The Bjornskjall Samí behave like this (my people). The Skjalag Samí behave like this. Some Dane Samí still behave like this & we all share the Astaru religion.
    I'd never give away my family land to a Samí ruler from Tromso. Hell we're still not all united under the current Norwegian government. Bjornskjall were exiled to the UK almost 200 years ago to a farmland around Kateringes where I live & we only bow to Queen Frieda of Bjornoya even tho she's not a recognised monarch with any power. We were exiled for refusing to obey the laws of the Norwegian government. Our farmland is private land so we can exercise whatever danelaws we want within them as long we don't involve the British and keep everything inside our community.
    There's even a feud in my family. My father converted to Christianity for a position in the Freemasons. Half the family joined him, half remained in the Astaru religion & it constantly causes divided.
    I'm not saying this isn't sometimes inconvenient/unreasonable to continue these feuds but it is cultural. It's sort of like how a traditional Hindu family like my dad's best friend has access to the freedoms available in the UK but his wife still holds to the traditions of India & remains a timid housewife. There's nothing wrong with that if you want to continue your traditions & it doesn't make you stupid or a bad person. It's just the way of your people. Britains traditionally Christian. Some of your customs, traditions & laws are incredibly dumb in my opinion but it's just part of the culture. Like British child protections laws are incredibly sexist against fathers & for some reason men with children in a parental role is always viewed as suspicious & possible paedophilia by locals despite there being nothing wrong with a father going to the park with his daughter.
    You see where I'm coming from, it's not the game it's just culture of Vikings.

  • Netspook
    332 posts

    @gothicenigma
    "The laws and ways that Clans worked back in those days, was that Clans were more or less independent, but were unified under a "King". The son would of lost literally nothing"

    Actually, we know VERY LITTLE about how this worked in this exact region and time period, pretty much all the info we have, is from sagas and poems which may or may not be accurate.

    In 872, the year before the story in Valhalla, was the battle of Hafrsfjord (near Stavanger), or at least we have indications suggesting that this was the year. Here, Haralds army defeated an army which may have been put together by the different kings in this region. Several minor kings and jarls probably fell in this battle - Snorre's Saga lists a few such, but it's written over 300 years later so we don't know for sure. Harald won the battle, and probably settled at Avaldsnes (the place is in the game) and ruled from there. He ruled the nearby former minikingdoms directly from there, and there are no sources proving he let any jarls/kings in the rest of the region rule locally under him, but it's considered likely.

    After Harald had crushed all opposition, he ruled with a very hard hand. This includes high taxes, but what was worse, he demanded "veitsle". This means if he and/or his men (could be a small army) entered any settlement, the owner/ruler of this area was responsible of feeding them and providing shelter. This could comletely deplete everything they had stored for the upcoming winter. His hard ways of ruling caused several jarls and others to flee to Iceland in search of new land - there are many records of this, mainly on Iceland.

    So, claiming anyone under Harald was independent, and would have "lost literally nothing", is probably very far from the truth.

  • Ry_mann88
    17 posts

    The choice makes sense in the wider context of the story. Sigurd is aware of something the others aren't and likely wants to be part of that.
    @netspook Exactly, you can hear the subtle context of why Sigurd and the others feel the way they do by listening to the NPCs before Herald is even brought on screen. They know he's a hard ruler, and some even hope they don't get involved.

  • tutenkamu
    2 posts

    The point (explained in the dialogue a few times, eg in the dialogue when Sigurd returns) is that Sigurd and Eivor don't regard their fathers strategy, of forming alliances and softly softly, as working - they are still being attacked, running out of food and taking s*** from others....this is compounded by taking the knee to Harald even though he knew his son/daughter were against it.

    So it makes a lot of sense to me.

  • Slackbladder100
    24 posts

    Everyone's an expert!

    It's a character arc. It sets up potential areas of conflict later in the game. And often in stories and legends the hero starts off as a coarse, reckless or callow youth but grows and changes through the story. Now maybe it's not entirely accurate but it doesn't need to be. It's telling a story, a fictional one at that and so far it seems quite plausible, in tone if not history.

Suggested Topics