[SPOILERS] Does anyone else feel that Valkorian was a mistake?

[AnotherSith]

Does anyone else feel that making Valkorian into Vitiate was a mistake when having two completely separate characters would have worked out just fine, if not better?

 

You'd have Vitiate hiding off in Wild Space somewhere plotting and gaining strength and then we stumble on the Eternal Empire who would be led by a completely different character, Valkorian.

 

Same smug and condescending attitude and no real change in mannerisms but his power level would have been roughly equal to Marr, only bolstered by the Dark Side energy of the Eternal Throne (If it really is a Star Forge like the first we encountered making it a huge Dark Side conduit).

 

Marr would still need to die after refusing to bow to another ever again (didn't need to be Vitiate) so while he and Valkorian are going toe to toe and being roughly equal in power (and thus still ahead of most of the PCs by quite a ways) Vaylin just casually wipes out Marr like it's just swatting a fly. Then the scene plays out normally and we help Arcann take out Valkorian (or he does it for us) and Vaylin would incapacitate us and we go into carbonite.

 

Some scenes would be slightly changed as a once isolationist civilization built on the hand me downs of the Rakatta starts bullying the weakened Galaxy now run by a psychotic man-child.

 

Valkorian is living in our head as normal, or at least as normal as voices in ones head can be, and he isn't some God-Level omnicidal maniac turned down-to-earth family man *Guile's Theme* because reasons.

 

And Valyin would be established as an extremely powerful but immature Force User who would later be revealed as an experiment by Valkorian to see what happens when you condense the Dark Side energies of a Star Forge into a newborn. Rather than making her the Star Child of the God-Emperor which I personally find to be a boring cop-out to explain why someone is powerful as it doesn't really have a decent enough check and balance. The Dread Masters were incredibly powerful beings, yet utterly depraved and bound together by some bizarre ritual and still very mortal (when one died it caused the others to slowly go insane from pain and other unpleasant side effects) so it worked as a story element that didn't come across as a cheap special child story element.

 

Heck maybe Valyin IS just that, a mad experiment. Similar to the Children of the Emperor or the Hand. Can't say yet....though I find it unlikely after Chapter 9 and nothing alluding to it has come up.

 

BioWare really seems to be trying to press this idea that Valkorian is the latest host (I really don't see how he could be the 'original' Vitiate body) and has undergone a change of heart in about.....well to be honest the timeline seems rather screwy at the moment since he was likely 'Vitiate' for at least 30+ years while also jumping around Voices for the several centuries he was gearing up the Sith Empire with the first Star Forge he gave to Revan, running Zakuul after tearing up the Eternal Fleet the first time with Gravestone (It might have come with the first Star Forge) and taking control of the Eternal Throne to build a second Rakattan-esque empire in Wild Space.

 

But why not just leave Valkorian and Vitiate as two separate characters rather than trying to combine them. If they should be connected why wasn't Valkorian the hereditary leader of a Zakuul dynasty under the Emperor's control as a puppet while the Dark Council was to lead the Sith Empire against the Republic. Then when Vitiate is weak and being pursued by the Sith, Valkorian could have gone "off the rails" of the original plan and tried to take over for Zakuul.

 

I don't mind threatening antagonists who are very powerful. It wouldn't be fun if the Sith Inquisitor just went Ghost Mode and roflstomped everyone in the first scene. But I find that making Valkorian actually Vitiate is a tad silly.

 

I mean it's WAY too late to worry about it now. /endrant

Edited November 7, 2015 by AnotherSith

[Galdos]

I think the big problem is that the Emperor was just a terrible villain.

 

An all powerful being who wants to kill all life in the galaxy? Pretty boring. He was our enemy because he was evil for the sake of evil. Bioware realized he was a terrible villain (powerful, but terrible) and decided to retcon his character effectively with Valkorian and personally I am extremely thankful.

 

Valkorian is actually interesting but had they left it as 2 separate characters, that means the entire time you are wasting with this Immortal Emperor on Zahkuul, there is STILL a SECOND Immortal Emperor running around even more dangerous. It is just tying up a lose end to help move the story along.

[SithKoriandr]

I have no problem with it. They did it effectively enough. What our characters saw was just his plans in action for his other true empire.

 

The Empire. The Republic. Those were just a means to an end.

 

His change is no different than "From a certain point of view"

[Seireeni]

That would have actually changed quite a bit: it would have made Valkorion far more likeable. I mean, if Valkorion wasn't Vitiate, what would his evil deeds even be? Sure, Zakuul made a rather aggressive visit to the core worlds in the trailer, but that's about it. He would be a nice, manipulative but pretty polite old man who made some mistakes. Not a eldritch abomination that wanted to wipe out the whole galaxy and killed a planet full of people, who now seems to pretend to be a somewhat nice old man.

 

Not to mention that the most effective way to make your villain look evil is to have him personally do something bad to a character we know and possibly even like. In the trailer, it's mostly Arcann and Thexan killing people we don't even know. Add Vaylin killing Marr, and Valkorion never personally did anything that would make the player dislike him - especially since Marr attacks first. I don't know about others, but if Valkorion wasn't Vitiate, I would consider killing him in cold blood (like the PC automatically does if s/he doesn't kneel to him) to be a pretty clear dark side option.

 

Me, I quite liked this reveal. Vitiate was a boring villain, and Valkorion would barely be a villain if his evil deeds were restricted to his evil deeds. Together, they make a far better villain. Vitiate gets traits that make him feel more complex than "Cthulhu wannabe", and Valkorion becomes a clear bad guy.

[Anysao]

I actually liked the old Emperor's personality. While I'm not necessarily disparaging his new form, I just liked who he was before this more. I would have preferred a slower transformation from Vitiate into Valkorion. I think it's the fact he had a wife and children that surprises me...

 

Anyway, to answer your question: No, I think it was smart to make both Emperors the same man (but I cannot for the life of me figure out why they bothered giving him two names). This Immortal Emperor is a much more personal challenge to the Empire and Republic.

[Leaveshill]

Two immortals, all-mighty emperors? That'd make the entire story and lore from SWTOR seem... off. We can't have Vitiate and Valkorion, "two Vs", dominating life and being immortals "force-gods". One is enough. It's a great concept, even though the Vitiate-part became... horrible after the JK ending. Vitiate went from being calm and calculating to turn into a retarded killer with too much force available. Horrible. Ziost was dull, SOR was dull. Thank god for Valkorion, this is the real deal; an interesting demi-god. The Emperor wasn't all bad as a "I'm gonna devour you all and turn into a god", as the motivation was decent to wipe out all life, I assume. Yet... it's dull. Enemies that just wanna kill everything sucks. Valkorion isn't even "a villain" as things stand, he's more neutral. Dark, but not the typical "me evil me smash" villain, Vitiate was definitively one of those.

So, good change, no doubt about it.

 

And again. TWO IMMORTAL EMPERORS...? Two living beings that makes every other being in the history of the galaxy seem like weak insects? I think not. One "god" is enough.

[CrutchCricket]

I also think having two immortal emperors is worse. But really the biggest mistake was introducing Zakuul in the first place. I mean you have war, you have a great enemy overshadowing it, what's the point of bringing in a third faction to play Bigger Jaws? Other than cost cutting and lumping in everything under one storyline I can't see any other benefit.

 

Can they make it work? It's possible. But whatever they do I do think it'd be a mistake to completely abandon the Vitiate line. Whether you think it's lame or cliche, a omnicidal planet eater is what we bought into. Replacing him this way is the worst thing they can do for his character.

[Sallysassalot]

I'm just not impressed with how they've handled the villain to be honest. Valkorian is basically the shadow villain creating the events of KOTOR 1 and 2. Then he kills the Exile, traps Revan and then just disappears because reasons.

 

Then he comes back some hundred years later, kills a bunch of people, then just disappears because...reasons.

 

Then he comes back again to rule over everyone. Then allows himself to be killed because...reasons.

 

It's just not a very fluid story for him. I also hate how they set up his kids. He clearly isn't interested in them, only becoming interested in them when Arcann kills his brother. Then he pays attention to him for the first time ever, only to tell our character he really hated how blood thirsty Arcann is. And now he's all about how Arcann is destroying his legacy and we must stop him.

 

It's just so disjointed. The story isn't over yet so I'm not willing to cast it aside entirely but I'm not impressed so far. I really think it was a bad move to try and connect swtor to kotor and they should have kept them as totally separate people with one dying before he could finish his plan and Valkorian picking up where the last empire left off.

[that_Spartan_IV]

I'm of the opposite opinion. I think Vitiate was the mistake. There never should have been a Vitiate, thus allowing Valkorian to be something else entirely.

[Ellanverange]

The entire KotFE story feels like a gigantic mismatch, the voice of Arcann, Arcann's character (generic bad guy...again). Vitiate being Valkorian makes no sense and is just totally stupid. Vaylin's character is the perfect example of lazy writing.

 

The concept of The Eternal Empire is cool, the Alliance characters are good and well written most of the time, but omg the antagonists suck so much, and there's no real reasoning as to why Valkorian is hiding in the outsider's head apart from he "respects her" or some ********.

 

I'm not saying the whole thing is a mistake, but it feels like there's been some serious errors in the planning of the story, and it annoys me because they sacrificed game content for story content that is sub-par.

[Altheran]

BioWare really seems to be trying to press this idea that Valkorian is the latest host (I really don't see how he could be the 'original' Vitiate body)

The idea Vitiate is able to use hosts is set from even before the launch of the game. Refer to the Teneb Kel/Darth Thanaton comic. (Side note : it explains the conflicts between Thanaton and Zash, as Zash's ritual is basically the same, then with the inquisitor as well, since he wants it to remain his secret)

 

That aside, the story seems quite coherent IMO. Twisted but coherent.

 

Take look at this interpretation :

 

Vitiate is a being able to transcend bodily tether, spread his consciousness, take over hosts, and able to perform ever youngness.

300y ago, Vitiate imprisoned Revan. Revan influenced him (Maelstrom Prison dialog). Vitiate became milder, and took distance with the Sith Empire. Eventually took his ship (Gravekeeper), and reached Zakuul. Took over and became known as Valkorian there.

A few years ago, Revan is freed from custody, then half dies, leaving only a dark Revan lying somewhere. This one somehow started to drift the Emperor into evil again.

As the dark Revan rose and fell, the Emperor acted evil. Eventually, after the fall of Revan he kept acting evil and he destroyed Ziost, and turned his sons into conquerors. But has short as this dark influence was, this state of mind faded, and became back more like the older Valkorian whose changes are deeper. In the end, he is the Valkorian we know.

[OldVengeance]

I think Revan always overestimated his own influence on Vitiate, he'd been planning his scheme to devour the galaxy long before him. It's why Lord Scourge had planned to betray him for centuries. Speaking of Scourge (among other people), he tells us the Emperor can't feel emotion, which makes his whole "I knew love" thing on Zakuul all the more baffling.

 

Honestly, from playing the game, I almost suspect that Bioware regretted making the Sith Emperor character and wanted a do-over. So they basically just rebooted the character by writing a another Immortal Emperor and declaring him to be the new identity of the old one, with little to no explanation. Even characters who never met the Valkorian identity repeatedly call him that instead of the name they new him by, so it sometimes seems like they are trying to forget about ever writing Vitiate in the first place.

 

Either that or there's more going on than has been revealed because more than once, characters bring up the odd discrepancy between Vitiate and Valkorian's behavior. The only reason we know that they are the same is because NPCs and autodialogue keep saying they are, and later Darth Marr made that cryptic comment about his presence in the Force being deceptive.

 

Maybe a future twist is that they actually aren't the same character. Although I doubt it.

 

Personally, I do think Valkorian is a much more interesting character, but I wasn't a fan of the idea of them being the same. Not only does it not really make any sense, but I was kind of excited to face off against the Doug Bradly voiced world eater again. The sinister corrupting influence of Valkorian is cool, but it feels like he's not the same person at all. In the case of Jedi Knights and Sith Warriors, it also means he wanted bizarrely flip flops on trying to kill or corrupt them.

Edited November 8, 2015 by OldVengeance

[Triyun]

People who hate the Sith Emperor for being a Sith, actually basically just don't like the Sith. People can pretend all they want, but the Sith are evil. They always were always will be.

 

That said I don't see Valkorian necessarily less evil, or proof the Sith Emperor is changing that. Palpatine during many times in his own scheming chose to be good and conceal his nature. Certainly he did not advertise his evil either during his chancellorship or his Emperorship. He deliberately left events to unfold and both Luke his intended future apprentice and the Rebel Alliance to get stronger in the events leading up to Dark Empire before once again revealing himself. He allowed his rivals for control over the Imperial Military to destroy themselves.

 

He was also obsessed with controlling the Imperial Fleet centrally, a Death Star fulfilling that purpose, it wasn't just about wanton destruction. All of this was about absolute power.

 

I see Vitiate/Valkorian still following that. The Sith Empire was something he inherited along with its structures and was useful as a blunt instrument. But the Sith Empire was by its nature a organization with many Dark Lords. In the comics that depicted the original Empire, it resembled more a feudal structure with individual lords controlling their own militaries. We know the more Dark Lords there are, the weaker individuals become and they have a tendency to try and kill each other off. Hence the reasoning behind both the later Rule of Two and Rule of One.

 

After the Soul Bomb, Bane sought out to create a 1000 year plan of a Sith Empire focused under a single Sith Lord with a single apprentice as the heir. This culminated in Palpatine's vision of a New Order. Palpatine wanted centralized control (one Emperor leading the Eternal Fleet), a powerful apprentice playing off several people against each other (Valk's kids vs the PC), and ultimately make the Galaxy accept him willingly (something the Galaxy basically will do with the alliance if the PC accepts Valk).

 

Valkorian still very much seems exactly like how a Sith Emperor behaves based on everything we know about how Palpatine behaved both in the Canon and EU.

[EdwinLi]

---

 

Yep that mostly how I see things.

 

Valkyorian, as he stated, created the Eternal Empire to surpass the Sith Empire by order and his control over it.

 

As much people want to believe the Sith Empire was his "ideal" Empire it was not. There are so many mistakes with the Sith Empire that Valkorian had to start over with a new Empire, being the Eternal Empire, to create his ideal Empire which he succeeded in. However, he knows that if his old empire got involved with the Eternal Empire and/or the Republic it will ruin his ideal Empire thus the isolation.

 

In chapter 2 you see Valkorian commenting about the flaws of both the Republic and the Sith Empire which he learned from those flaws and created the Eternal Empire.

[CrutchCricket]

I'm of the opposite opinion. I think Vitiate was the mistake. There never should have been a Vitiate, thus allowing Valkorian to be something else entirely.

lol, technically true, but that boat has sailed long ago.

 

It would've been interesting if the "Immortal Sith Emperor" really was a myth the Dark Council kept propagating to maintain power and stop infighting from reaching a critical stage. Though how they would stop infighting within the ranks of those who knew would still be problematic.

 

People who hate the Sith Emperor for being a Sith, actually basically just don't like the Sith. People can pretend all they want, but the Sith are evil. They always were always will be.

 

That said I don't see Valkorian necessarily less evil, or proof the Sith Emperor is changing that. Palpatine during many times in his own scheming chose to be good and conceal his nature. Certainly he did not advertise his evil either during his chancellorship or his Emperorship. He deliberately left events to unfold and both Luke his intended future apprentice and the Rebel Alliance to get stronger in the events leading up to Dark Empire before once again revealing himself. He allowed his rivals for control over the Imperial Military to destroy themselves.

 

He was also obsessed with controlling the Imperial Fleet centrally, a Death Star fulfilling that purpose, it wasn't just about wanton destruction. All of this was about absolute power.

 

I see Vitiate/Valkorian still following that. The Sith Empire was something he inherited along with its structures and was useful as a blunt instrument. But the Sith Empire was by its nature a organization with many Dark Lords. In the comics that depicted the original Empire, it resembled more a feudal structure with individual lords controlling their own militaries. We know the more Dark Lords there are, the weaker individuals become and they have a tendency to try and kill each other off. Hence the reasoning behind both the later Rule of Two and Rule of One.

 

After the Soul Bomb, Bane sought out to create a 1000 year plan of a Sith Empire focused under a single Sith Lord with a single apprentice as the heir. This culminated in Palpatine's vision of a New Order. Palpatine wanted centralized control (one Emperor leading the Eternal Fleet), a powerful apprentice playing off several people against each other (Valk's kids vs the PC), and ultimately make the Galaxy accept him willingly (something the Galaxy basically will do with the alliance if the PC accepts Valk).

 

Valkorian still very much seems exactly like how a Sith Emperor behaves based on everything we know about how Palpatine behaved both in the Canon and EU.

The problem with your reasoning is you're applying it to the Volkarion persona. The Vitiate persona on the other hand has always been less Sith and more Eldritch Abomination-y. As a child Tenebrae was born with completely black eyes and was already stupid powerful, killing his peasant "father" and torturing his mother as a boy. Then he curbstomps the local Sith Lord and takes over all of Nathema, feeding off their suffering. Then when the war goes bad for the Sith Empire he calls the remaining thousand lords and tricks them into doing the Nathema ritual, becoming immortal and how we know him from the Revan novel/ original game.

 

That's a little different than what Sith do. Even Palpatine who was always considered to be pure evil had a relatively normal upbringing and didn't really do too many crazy things until he met Hugo Damask (Darth Plagueis). Vitiate on the other hand was written as the Antichrist. Prior to Zakuul I kept expecting Abeloth or the Ones to show up (and they still can, I guess). Bottom line: Sith are sociopaths, Vitiate has been portrayed more as a literal monster.

[Triyun]

A force user born with power but not the training to control it can easily turn to evil and the dark side. Especially a powerful one. And especially when they are raised in darkness. From what I've read it sounds like Vitiate was especially powerful with the force at a very young age in the middle of an Empire swirling with the dark side. We know from the Cave on Dagobah and Malachor V that there are places in the galaxy strong with the dark side. If you're a powerful force user born in the middle of the Sith Empire, it stands to reason that the proximity to so much dark side power alone would make you more effected by the dark side than if you're in a place like Naboo as Palpatine was. Add a complete lack of a nurturing home and there you go.

 

To me the ritual was not too much unlike the Soul Bomb Bane performed (albiet it seems even more effective at raising his own power). Bane and then Palpatine when he killed Plageius and later Tyrannus both did these things to serve an end of increasing their own power, but were also in part driven by hatred. Vitiate's motivations seem the same except on a grander scale, both because of the need with even more Sith Lords as potential rivals, and grander means. It is not unknown based on Darth Traya's musings in KOTOR 2 and the 90s comics, that the ancient Sith of Vitiate's early life were far more skilled sorcerors than the Jedi, and it is also known by Bane's time that the Sith's own abilities in the dark side has weakened and much knowledge was lost. Bane's Order spent much of its 1000 year plan trying to rebuild Sith strength, even while having to hide it. So its not unlikely that Vitiate would've had both need and ability unavailable to Palpatine until Palpatine had both decades of practice and the ability to practice more in the open, which we see more in Byss and the DE Trilogy.

 

But the equally important thing to keep in mind, is even when Palpatine was pure evil, he was able to show a different side of himself to the citizens of the galaxy and even manipulate and cloud the vision of powerful Jedi like Yoda. Even as he was a murderous vengeful psychopath in some areas, he could also convince Grand Admiral Thrawn, a very rational dispassionate man genius to join him. Say what you will about Thrawn he definitely was not easy to manipulate and was not for unncessary killing and tyranny for tyranny's sake. That's not too different than Vitiate and Valkors separate personalities and actions, and appearing more complicated than not.

 

Sith Lords are obsessed with power. Sith Lords also know the greatest threat to Sith Power comes not from Jedi or the Republic, but from other Sith Lords obsession with power. I still think the idea of Valkorion plays into that.

[nimmerstil]

Does anyone else feel that making Valkorian into Vitiate was a mistake when having two completely separate characters would have worked out just fine, if not better?

 

If it wasn't for Vitiate and Valkorian being the same entity, Valkorian wouldn't be a fraction of the bad guy he is now and drawing upon his power occasionally could be an option.

[CrutchCricket]

A force user born with power but not the training to control it can easily turn to evil and the dark side. Especially a powerful one. And especially when they are raised in darkness. From what I've read it sounds like Vitiate was especially powerful with the force at a very young age in the middle of an Empire swirling with the dark side. We know from the Cave on Dagobah and Malachor V that there are places in the galaxy strong with the dark side. If you're a powerful force user born in the middle of the Sith Empire, it stands to reason that the proximity to so much dark side power alone would make you more effected by the dark side than if you're in a place like Naboo as Palpatine was. Add a complete lack of a nurturing home and there you go.

Except he wasn't raised in darkness. He was raised on farm. And Medriaas (the former name of the planet) was an agricultural world on the fringes of the Sith Empire. There is no evidence it was a dark side nexus. There is also no evidence his upbringing was anything but normal until his step-father confronted his mother about his Force-sensitivity. Of Tenebrae himself though, his "eyes were said to be as black as the void of space, and even as an infant he showed no emotion, nor did he ever cry. Animals avoided him, and his voice seemed to carry power and weight beyond his years." (Wookiepedia). It straight up reads like the Antichrist. As for darkness and upbringing, compare Darth Bane. Dessel hated his father but it took years of abuse before anything happened, and when it did, he simply made his father have a heart attack in his sleep and he didn't even realize what had happened until years later. That's untrained power. Tenebrae on the other hand immediately fed on his step-father's anger, snapped his neck and then spent months torturing his mother and neighbors, very consciously, very deliberately. Then he later curbstomped his real father a full Sith Lord. Whereas Bane would take months if not years of intensive training to even challenge the top apprentice at the academy. "Vitiate is simply more powerful" doesn't really cover it. Bane was the Sith'ari, the prophesied dark side chosen one, almost the Sith version of Anakin. Vitiate was a nobody as far as Sith lore was concerned. His power and nature are written very differently from just about every other Sith you can think of.

 

To me the ritual was not too much unlike the Soul Bomb Bane performed (albiet it seems even more effective at raising his own power). Bane and then Palpatine when he killed Plageius and later Tyrannus both did these things to serve an end of increasing their own power, but were also in part driven by hatred. Vitiate's motivations seem the same except on a grander scale, both because of the need with even more Sith Lords as potential rivals, and grander means. It is not unknown based on Darth Traya's musings in KOTOR 2 and the 90s comics, that the ancient Sith of Vitiate's early life were far more skilled sorcerors than the Jedi, and it is also known by Bane's time that the Sith's own abilities in the dark side has weakened and much knowledge was lost. Bane's Order spent much of its 1000 year plan trying to rebuild Sith strength, even while having to hide it. So its not unlikely that Vitiate would've had both need and ability unavailable to Palpatine until Palpatine had both decades of practice and the ability to practice more in the open, which we see more in Byss and the DE Trilogy.

Quick note: The ritual at Ruusan was called the Thought Bomb, not Soul Bomb. And Bane gained nothing from it in terms of power. It was simply the most effective way of ending the entire Brotherhood of Darkness.

 

The Nathema ritual seems to share some similarities but its differences are more distinct. Apart from there being no receptacle for the power in the Thought Bomb ritual, the Thought Bomb also affected only Force-users (or more specifically, those with high enough sensitivity to actually use the Force). Non- Force users were completely immune and really weak ones like Darovit were mildly affected at best. The Nathema ritual on the other hand stripped the life and Force from everything on the planet to such an extent that even droids were destroyed. I don't believe that is only a matter of scale. I think it's either a difference in ritual, or a fundamental difference in the governing power. Vitiate seems to consume like Nihilus does and Nihilus was not a normal Sith. He was at least a normal man once. Vitiate however was born different.

 

As for Vitiate's motivations it's hard to speculate because they keep changing lol. But if we go with the common theme of consume/destroy all life, that's definitely not a typical Sith motivation. Maybe it can be framed in Sith terms but it's certainly not native to most Sith beliefs.

 

But the equally important thing to keep in mind, is even when Palpatine was pure evil, he was able to show a different side of himself to the citizens of the galaxy and even manipulate and cloud the vision of powerful Jedi like Yoda. Even as he was a murderous vengeful psychopath in some areas, he could also convince Grand Admiral Thrawn, a very rational dispassionate man genius to join him. Say what you will about Thrawn he definitely was not easy to manipulate and was not for unncessary killing and tyranny for tyranny's sake. That's not too different than Vitiate and Valkors separate personalities and actions, and appearing more complicated than not.

 

Sith Lords are obsessed with power. Sith Lords also know the greatest threat to Sith Power comes not from Jedi or the Republic, but from other Sith Lords obsession with power. I still think the idea of Valkorion plays into that.

It's heavily implied that Thrawn joined up specifically because of the threat of the Far Outsiders (Yuuzhan Vong). He wasn't exactly duped. And even in the Imperial military, he stayed or was kept away from most of the really atrocious things the Empire did.

 

And I'm not saying Vitiate could not be manipulative. He certainly was. His Sith Empire still saw him as a savior until the truth came out. But after the Treaty of Coruscant he distanced himself from all that and went full Eldritch Abomination and his true face was revealed. Going back to pretending to be a good guy and manipulating people, even if it's a whole batch of new people that have no idea what he's done before just doesn't make sense.

[cool-dude]

No one else thinks Valkorion is Zildrog?

[Burana]

Valkorion is a likeable character, unlike Vitiate. The emperor's ultimate goal (my opinion) is to take control of our character, come back to life through us. For this he drags your character into war with Arcann, just so your ultimate goals appear aligned, and it would be easy to get control of you. Every time he offers his assistance just when it matters most, when you are about to lose your best friend or even die yourself. Every time it will be harder and harder to resist him (unless you started accepted his power from the beginning). If you start doing it, Lana will express her concern and tell you that you may pay the ultimate price if you accept his help.

 

To be honest, I forget sometimes that Valkorion IS Vitiate, or so we were told by Satele Shan and Darth Marr. And what if he is not? Should we maybe accept his help? He is a sweet old man in my head, almost Santa Claus...

 

I find Valkorion very interesting and confusing, and I am very curious on where it all goes.

[nimmerstil]

To be honest, I forget sometimes that Valkorion IS Vitiate, or so we were told by Satele Shan and Darth Marr. And what if he is not? Should we maybe accept his help? He is a sweet old man in my head, almost Santa Claus...

 

He is Vitiate, the PC also confirms it - the Inquisitor at least recognizes him, first when meeting Marr, then again in the throne room. And Valkorian admits being Vitiate during the dream.

 

If he wasn't he'd be a whole lot nicer.

[Pietrastor]

Doesn't really help that Vitiate/Valkorian have different voice actors to reconcile the 2 either.

 

I reserve the judgement unitl the story's done. KOTFE gives me a glipmse of hope they actuallyhave some plan and a real storytelling idea for this ancient entity character other than "muahaha I will kill all and live like a painter" nonsense villain, but it's too soon to tell. If what we saw in KOTFE is it, just Vitiate being nice on Zakuul while maniacal on Dromund/Ziost then it was pointless. It still doesn't say anything about the character or bring the developement to any conclusion and is even more confused writing than in the original game.

 

This character has been given such importance and focus in th story it has to amount to something worthy. Not just conflicted OP force user with a goal that makes no sense and has no point. And it can't really be just "escaping destiny or proving that he's beyond destiny". That already happened in Ziost, job well done, he's immortal and doesn't even need a body. If that's what his character was about (which is hard to guess considering the story doesn't even seem to know really) then KOTFE is just pointless dragging of it.

Edited November 10, 2015 by Pietrastor

[OldVengeance]

Valkorion is a likeable character, unlike Vitiate. The emperor's ultimate goal (my opinion) is to take control of our character, come back to life through us. For this he drags your character into war with Arcann, just so your ultimate goals appear aligned, and it would be easy to get control of you. Every time he offers his assistance just when it matters most, when you are about to lose your best friend or even die yourself. Every time it will be harder and harder to resist him (unless you started accepted his power from the beginning). If you start doing it, Lana will express her concern and tell you that you may pay the ultimate price if you accept his help.

 

To be honest, I forget sometimes that Valkorion IS Vitiate, or so we were told by Satele Shan and Darth Marr. And what if he is not? Should we maybe accept his help? He is a sweet old man in my head, almost Santa Claus...

 

I find Valkorion very interesting and confusing, and I am very curious on where it all goes.

 

But why would he need to do any of that? We know that destroying his body can't kill him, so he wouldn't need our body to come back at all? And why would he possibly need our help to defeat Vaylin and Arcann if, even without a body, he's already powerful enough to eat planets all by himself.

 

And if he had planned to devour all life in the galaxy to become a god, why would he possibly care about taking back his Eternal Throne at all? That's a severe drop in the scale of his ambition. None of those make sense.

Edited November 10, 2015 by OldVengeance