It has always looked to me like Vaylin was a sociopath since she was little. She was a violent sadist as a child and Valkorian only enhanced that, he didn't create it. She didn't lose her humanity. She didn't have any to begin with.

This is it exactly. Arcann over and over again consciously makes dark side choices, ordering half his subordinates to kill the other half and doing Taris times five were only two of them. There's no brainwashing to control his choices like we see with Vaylin.

 

Arcann choose to be a despot. Vaylin had no choice.

 

Eh, I don't think I'd go that far. At no point (trigger phrase notwithstanding) are we lead to believe that Vaylin is not in control of her own actions. Her reasons don't really matter; she's taking out her rage on innocent people. There's an explanation for why she does it, but an explanation is not the same thing as an excuse. There's a world of difference between Vaylin and, say, Syo Bakarn.

Yeah, Vaylin was tortured and traumatized but she wasn't brainwashed into falling to darkside or making evil choices in the same way she was brainwashed to kneel before the Dragon of Zakuul, or that the Imperial Agent was brainwashed to obey the Republic or Empire. It's also worth noting that the game does leave it a little ambiguous just how much darkness was already there from the start. Lana postulates that Valkorion "might have awoken Vaylin's inner monster," but she's a Sith and therefore cannot exactly be counted on for empathy. That said, Senya explicitly states that Vaylin was "troubled from the start." Edited June 23, 2018 by OldVengeance

After suffering however many forms of torture on Nathema for however long she did, are you really surprised she has a hostile outlook on the rest of the galaxy? I don't believe Vaylin was a sociopath when she was young, I think she was just trying to show off her abilities to impress her family but as she couldn't control them, innocent people were getting caught hubris.

I don't believe Vaylin was a sociopath when she was young, I think she was just trying to show off her abilities to impress her family but as she couldn't control them, innocent people were getting caught hubris.

 

Honestly, I could almost see it either way, but I certainly hope you're right about that. The fact that they decided showing the torture and brainwashing of a child was pretty awful to begin with, a child that grew up to get tortured just a bit more by our characters before being killed, but the idea that they did it for kicks, rather than trying to explain what she ultimately became, is really disturbing. That's pretty much what "she was always evil/broken" would require, and the fact that so many players view the story that way either shows that the writers botched the story, or that they are even worse than I think. Or maybe that the fan base is.

Edited June 23, 2018 by gamephil

Yeah, Vaylin was tortured and traumatized but she wasn't brainwashed into falling to darkside or making evil choices in the same way she was brainwashed to kneel before the Dragon of Zakuul, or that the Imperial Agent was brainwashed to obey the Republic or Empire. It's also worth noting that the game does leave it a little ambiguous just how much darkness was already there from the start. Lana postulates that Valkorion "might have awoken Vaylin's inner monster," but she's a Sith and therefore cannot exactly be counted on for empathy. That said, Senya explicitly states that Vaylin was "troubled from the start."

 

That and don't forget in the trailer her abilities seem to come out of frustration, frustration she's not able to fight like her brothers, frustration she's unable to defend herself against the Knight, it's possible Vaylin wasn't troubled in the sense of "she's a psycopath" but more on the sense of "She's unable to control her great power", Senya says she was able to move furniture while still in the womb and how she broke a guard's back because she failed to catch a ball (again frustration) so I don't think she was evil from the start but just like any child she would throw a tantrum, except hers can actually kill people.

Honestly, I could almost see it either way, but I certainly hope you're right about that. The fact that they decided showing the torture and brainwashing of a child was pretty awful to begin with, a child that grew up to get tortured just a bit more by our characters before being killed, but the idea that they did it for kicks, rather than trying to explain what she ultimately became, is really disturbing. That's pretty much what "she was always evil/broken" would require, and the fact that so many players view the story that way either shows that the writers botched the story, or that they are even worse than I think. Or maybe that the fan base is.

 

Well 'anything but death' does open the door for endless dark themed speculation. Regardless of what she was like before going to Nathema, whatever Jarok did to her on Nathema left it's mark on her. Yes she makes some brutal choices, but after so long of having that done to her, or witnessing Jarok do it to anyone she tried to befriend she may have no or little understanding of friendships.

 

I don't think the fans are responsible for Vaylin's kotet story, the general distaste for kotfe forced Bioware to rush through what they had planned, and Vaylin like many others are victims of a rushed plot.

I don't think the fans are responsible for Vaylin's kotet story, the general distaste for kotfe forced Bioware to rush through what they had planned, and Vaylin like many others are victims of a rushed plot.

 

Oh, sure, the only way I would hold the fans responsible for this at all is if their reaction to the character altered the devs' plans, and there's no evidence of that, but they did react to her in a specific way that I've seen way too often. It hearkens back to Aribeth in BW's Neverwinter Nights: her husband scapegoated and executed by her king, followed by pretty obvious magical attack that contributed to or even caused her fall, but she still gets blamed by the fans. Vaylin is not unique in this, she's simply the worst example I can remember ever seeing in any media.

 

Regardless, a rushed plot could still have been better. So much better.

Edited June 23, 2018 by gamephil

I will say that Vaylin did feel a like a little bit of a different character in Kotet. If you look back on Kofte, she doesn't seem concerned with destroying Valkorion at all. In fact, she seems almost amused by Arcann's obsession with him. They kind of try to explain the shift at the end "Wrath and Ruin" but her tragic backstory kind of felt like it wasn't really in effect in Knights of the Fallen Empire.

Eh, I don't think I'd go that far. At no point (trigger phrase notwithstanding) are we lead to believe that Vaylin is not in control of her own actions. Her reasons don't really matter; she's taking out her rage on innocent people. There's an explanation for why she does it, but an explanation is not the same thing as an excuse. There's a world of difference between Vaylin and, say, Syo Bakarn.

 

I personally would love to hear what a professional and/or criminal behavior psychoanalyst would think of her. By no choice, I meant that she couldn't have chosen the light side option if she wanted to. She's clearly been conditioned in a way that prevents that.

I personally would love to hear what a professional and/or criminal behavior psychoanalyst would think of her. By no choice, I meant that she couldn't have chosen the light side option if she wanted to. She's clearly been conditioned in a way that prevents that.

 

Based on?

Edited June 24, 2018 by OldVengeance

I personally would love to hear what a professional and/or criminal behavior psychoanalyst would think of her. By no choice, I meant that she couldn't have chosen the light side option if she wanted to. She's clearly been conditioned in a way that prevents that.

 

I also just don't think that there is enough of a difference to let light through between Vaylin and Syo Bakarn. They explicitly showed us the ritual that ended with her eyes going orange. They may as well have had magical symbols on the floor and shown a demonic form possessing her. No, choice was never really in the offing.

 

But, yes, I'd love to see what a professional would say even if I were willing to ignore the overt magic mind control involved. I understand it was done at one point for Anakin.

I also just don't think that there is enough of a difference to let light through between Vaylin and Syo Bakarn. They explicitly showed us the ritual that ended with her eyes going orange. They may as well have had magical symbols on the floor and shown a demonic form possessing her. No, choice was never really in the offing.

 

But, yes, I'd love to see what a professional would say even if I were willing to ignore the overt magic mind control involved. I understand it was done at one point for Anakin.

 

My point was that Master Syo and the Emperor's First Son come across as two entirely separate personalities - one cannot be held responsible for the actions of the other since he didn't even know the First Son existed, much less be able to actually control the First Son.

 

Vaylin, on the other hand? If she was brainwashed into being evil, we have no reason to believe there's anything left of the person she was before. Valkorion certainly had a hand in what she became, but a spooky ritual and glowy orange eyes is not conclusive proof that she's under any kind of mind control. For the sake of clarity, let's break this into what seem to be the three options.

 

1 - Mind Control: Vaylin is under Valkorion's direct control, and would act differently were that control removed. This strikes me as unlikely - why would he need a trigger phrase to force her to obey if she's already doing exactly what he wants?

 

2 - Brainwashing: Vaylin's upbringing irreparably affected her behavior. She may not have turned out this way without Valkorion's intervention, but there's nothing that can be done for her. This is most likely what the writers intended.

 

3 - Free Will: Vaylin's behavior is no one's fault but her own. Valkorion sought to unlock her power, bring out her darker urges, and force her into obedience. Her psychopathy, however, derives entirely from her own personality. This interpretation admittedly has a twinge of victim-blaming. Consider this, though: Does an abusive upbringing automatically make someone an evil psychopath? I think that's an even worse message to send. As such, I prefer to think that Vaylin could have stopped and simply chose not to.

Oh, sure, the only way I would hold the fans responsible for this at all is if their reaction to the character altered the devs' plans, and there's no evidence of that, but they did react to her in a specific way that I've seen way too often. It hearkens back to Aribeth in BW's Neverwinter Nights: her husband scapegoated and executed by her king, followed by pretty obvious magical attack that contributed to or even caused her fall, but she still gets blamed by the fans. Vaylin is not unique in this, she's simply the worst example I can remember ever seeing in any media.

 

Regardless, a rushed plot could still have been better. So much better.

 

Not sure what you mean by Vaylin is blamed by the fans?

Not sure what you mean by Vaylin is blamed by the fans?

 

I've seen people talk about how it was her fault for no longer trusting her mother and staying behind (eg. "That b---h, she should have gone with her mother!"), how Valkorion was right to do what he did to get control of her, I've even seen more than once things about how maybe Valk was actually a good father. And, of course, there's the Arcann vs. Vaylin conversations, where he's actually absolved (or at least thought of as "better") of his crimes because he didn't smile about it, in spite of knowing why she did (laughter, the glorious sound of a spirit breaking). It's quite disturbing, and, as I said, nothing new.

 

Basically, she gets the blame not only for what she's done, but for what her family did to her, and then we also get bits straight from the game like "Every planet Vaylin terrorized" that don't mention what happened during the five years before her to reinforce that. It's less than great.

Edited June 24, 2018 by gamephil

I've seen people talk about how it was her fault for no longer trusting her mother and staying behind (eg. "That b---h, she should have gone with her mother!"), how Valkorion was right to do what he did to get control of her, I've even seen more than once things about how maybe Valk was actually a good father. And, of course, there's the Arcann vs. Vaylin conversations, where he's actually absolved (or at least thought of as "better") of his crimes because he didn't smile about it, in spite of knowing why she did (laughter, the glorious sound of a spirit breaking). It's quite disturbing, and, as I said, nothing new.

 

Basically, she gets the blame not only for what she's done, but for what her family did to her, and then we also get bits straight from the game like "Every planet Vaylin terrorized" that don't mention what happened during the five years before her to reinforce that. It's less than great.

 

Lazy writing and it came from Lana.

 

Well Arcann has the advantage of hiding his smile behind that mask. Regardless he should be on trial ... or executed for his crimes.

Lazy writing and it came from Lana.

 

Well Arcann has the advantage of hiding his smile behind that mask. Regardless he should be on trial ... or executed for his crimes.

 

Lana, Theron, returning companions...

 

I agree that Arcann should have been tried properly, whatever other decisions we made. But it's clearly too late for that, more's the pity. I'll happily allow the Arcann fans their guy, but the way it was done makes my eye twitch, especially in contrast to how Vaylin was handled.

I also just don't think that there is enough of a difference to let light through between Vaylin and Syo Bakarn. They explicitly showed us the ritual that ended with her eyes going orange. They may as well have had magical symbols on the floor and shown a demonic form possessing her. No, choice was never really in the offing.

 

But, yes, I'd love to see what a professional would say even if I were willing to ignore the overt magic mind control involved. I understand it was done at one point for Anakin.

 

Orange eyes are common feature for any type of darksider.

 

We know Vaylin was condition on Nathema, but that conditioning is separate from her desires. That's obviously why she was so desperate to get rid of it.

 

She when she was conditioned to kneel, she didn't want to kneel. But when it comes to her regular darkside behavior, it seems to be entirely what she wants to do.

 

 

Basically, she gets the blame not only for what she's done, but for what her family did to her, and then we also get bits straight from the game like "Every planet Vaylin terrorized" that don't mention what happened during the five years before her to reinforce that. It's less than great.

 

Vaylin did terrorize planets.

Edited June 24, 2018 by OldVengeance

Vaylin did terrorize planets.

 

But she didn't exterminate all life on said planets on a whim ... she was too busy recording the fleet bombing stuff!

Orange eyes are common feature for any type of darksider.

 

Which came about for her when she had rituals done to her, explicitly shown. She went in with blue eyes, they turned during the ritual. That's specific to her.

 

We know Vaylin was condition on Nathema, but that conditioning is separate from her desires. That's obviously why she was so desperate to get rid of it.

 

She when she was conditioned to kneel, she didn't want to kneel. But when it comes to her regular darkside behavior, it seems to be entirely what she wants to do.

 

Right, the "traumatized child becomes a monster because she wanted to" argument. I hope the devs never cop to that being their intent, because showing the child being tortured for kicks instead of to explain her is even worse.

 

Vaylin did terrorize planets.

 

Yes, hence, "not just for what she's done". But, again, thanks for explaining that to me, I guess.

Edited June 24, 2018 by gamephil

*sigh* I get it, I do, people are going to interpret these things differently. Ultimately, whatever interpretations people have of Vaylin herself, it doesn't really change my position: They wrote a story where a mentally ill character was tortured into total madness. Maybe she would have been, anyway. Maybe not. But she was tortured, then they made us torture her more at the behest of her abuser and put words into our characters' mouth that he may as well have said himself. The abuser nonsense was thick in her story and they made our characters part of it. That was unacceptable and always will be regardless of the "monster within" crap that they also tried to push on us. Whatever power fantasy they felt they were catering to by having us drive her to her knees before her abuser is not a good one. Edited June 24, 2018 by gamephil

*sigh* I get it, I do, people are going to interpret these things differently. Ultimately, whatever interpretations people have of Vaylin herself, it doesn't really change my position: They wrote a story where a mentally ill character was tortured into total madness. Maybe she would have been, anyway. Maybe not. But she was tortured, then they made us torture her more at the behest of her abuser and put words into our characters' mouth that he may as well have said himself. The abuser nonsense was thick in her story and they made our characters part of it. That was unacceptable and always will be regardless of the "monster within" crap that they also tried to push on us. Whatever power fantasy they felt they were catering to by having us drive her to her knees before her abuser is not a good one.

 

Yeah, having us blindly listening to Valkorion didn't sit well with me either. The intelligence in the plot dropped rapidly with kotet and imo has passed on into this traitor plot with Theron.

*sigh* I get it, I do, people are going to interpret these things differently. Ultimately, whatever interpretations people have of Vaylin herself, it doesn't really change my position: They wrote a story where a mentally ill character was tortured into total madness. Maybe she would have been, anyway. Maybe not. But she was tortured, then they made us torture her more at the behest of her abuser and put words into our characters' mouth that he may as well have said himself. The abuser nonsense was thick in her story and they made our characters part of it. That was unacceptable and always will be regardless of the "monster within" crap that they also tried to push on us. Whatever power fantasy they felt they were catering to by having us drive her to her knees before her abuser is not a good one.

 

OK, this I do agree with. The story is poorly written in many ways, especially how it forced us to participate in the abuse which was perpetrated against Vaylin.

 

It's the people who claim Vaylin wasn't that bad of a person or should've been redeemable that make me want to draw a line. Whether or not, on a moral and philosophical level, Vaylin's actions are fully "her fault," she was beyond help. I'd rather have been able to kill her without Valkorion's "help." Same with Arcann. Ultimately, Vaylin's a bad person who had worse things done to her. Did she deserve it? No. Does it make her an innocent victim? No again. As I said in a previous post, an explanation is not the same thing as an excuse. I'd give the story credit for introducing these moral complexities, but I really don't think the writers thought all of this through.

OK, this I do agree with. The story is poorly written in many ways, especially how it forced us to participate in the abuse which was perpetrated against Vaylin.

 

It's the people who claim Vaylin wasn't that bad of a person or should've been redeemable that make me want to draw a line. Whether or not, on a moral and philosophical level, Vaylin's actions are fully "her fault," she was beyond help. I'd rather have been able to kill her without Valkorion's "help." Same with Arcann. Ultimately, Vaylin's a bad person who had worse things done to her. Did she deserve it? No. Does it make her an innocent victim? No again. As I said in a previous post, an explanation is not the same thing as an excuse. I'd give the story credit for introducing these moral complexities, but I really don't think the writers thought all of this through.

 

Yeah, redemption didn't seem possible with Vaylin, that said, my last playthrough of KOTET, I went pure DS, I think it would have been better if Vaylin was a possible perk for being a ruthless ******* to both friend and foe alike. She has a few lines that gave me the impression she was more receptive to dark side dialog choices.

I'd argue Arcann was worse in regards to the Knights, Vaylin killed her fair share of subordinates for screwing up one way or another, but Arcann had half of their overall number executed for the failure of the few at the security station, which if I recall Vaylin was hesitant to carry out the order until Arcann snapped at her.

 

"Mother is here. I killed three knights to make sure. Then I killed another three because I hate odd numbers" - Vaylin.

 

They were both as bad as each other.

Edited June 25, 2018 by rumpol