View Single Post
Old 04-08-2012, 09:36 AM   #15
Homesick At Home
TKA-001's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,537
10 year veteran!  Forum Veteran 
Originally Posted by JCarter426 View Post
First, just because it isn't explained doesn't make it a plot hole; obviously Avellone and the other writers did consider this matter, since they wrote material hinting at an explanation but unfortunately got cut from the final game. So at the very least there is an explanation, it just didn't make it in. That's not a plot hole, that's just unfortunate.
Firstly, yes, lack of explanation in the game does make it a plot hole (regardless what amounts of careless design and unfortunate happenstance may or may not be responsible). Take AotC as an example: if the two scenes where Obi-Wan takes the poison dart used by Jango and where he shows it to Dexter - thus establishing Kamino's connection to the assassination plot - were inexplicably not in the film, yet he just showed up at Kamino anyway later on, we would call that a plot hole, wouldn't we?

Better yet, if in KotOR I the player-character's true identity as Revan was to go completely unmentioned after the player leaves the Leviathan, even unto the end of the game - or if Carth's personal connection to Saul Karath was present in your conversations with him but went completely unmentioned on the Leviathan itself - would we not call that a plot hole?

The exact same thing is done with the Exile and Kreia's Force bond here. Past a certain point it is neither mentioned nor seen again.

dialogue that are still in the game that still hints at possible explanations - and indeed, there's always "Kreia was lying", but I'll admit that's not much better than "a wizard did it".
I'm glad that you're willing to admit that, but please in any future debates be courteous enough to not even mention the "Kreia = Liar" card, even conjecturally, unless you're willing to bring up a potential motive for her lying in the case of whatever we're talking about.

1. He says breaking a bond is not a choice, like turning away from the Force, and yet the Exile did this already.
What is this supposed to prove? So because the Exile from a certain point of view did one thing that was said to be sort of impossible, she can do another? Furthermore, the Exile did not choose to turn from the Force. The Jedi explain that she involuntarily deafened herself to it to defend herself from what happened at Malachor; and Kreia sums it up (depending on your alignment, I think) as either "you were afraid" or "you had no choice".

Originally Posted by Zez-Kai Ell, on regular Force bonds as he knows them
"A bond between two living beings is not something easily broken. It is not a choice... it is like breaking a feeling. Like turning away from the Force. To break a bond, your feelings would have to change, or one of you would have to die - but even then, the bond wouldn't go away, it would simply... it would simply be empty, a wound."
2. It's not the act of falling to the dark side that would break the bond, it's the feelings that form the bond changing, causing it to break; Kreia betrays the Exile, the Exile's feelings about her change, simple.
But everyone in the game after Kreia's betrayal still acts as though the bond is there and completely intact. The Exile's still like "****, if I don't go after her Atris'll kill her and I'll die"; and if she kills Atris, Kreia still contacts her as strongly through their bond as ever, and tells her that she'll kill herself if the Exile doesn't follow her to Malachor.

Further, this entire viewpoint of yours hinges on the assumption that an actual trusting relationship with emotional, that is, feeling-based connections (hence the emphasis above) developed between the Exile and Kreia; but nowhere in the game is this actually a guarantee (not even in the canon timeline, as influence with Kreia is independent of alignment and I don't recall the Revan novel ever weighing in on the matter). It's just as easy for the Exile, from the beginning to the end, to stay away from her as much as possible during the journey, or to never do anything that raises influence with her, or to do all the things that piss her off (which, incidentally, include the majority of the game's light-sided choices) because they don't conform to her teachings - and the bond is still as there as ever, regardless of which path is taken; the same whether Kreia approves or disapproves of you. Isn't that the entire narrative point of the bond - that you, the Exile, are stuck with Kreia no matter how much you hate her or don't trust her? That you can't kill her or get rid of her, and that you have to find a way to get rid of the bond first?

You say that the bond is weakened/broken by the changing of the feelings that formed the bond - but this bond was never formed by feelings in the first place. It was formed unconsciously, unnaturally quickly, and in a completely non-standard manner while both of them were lying comatose in the Peragus Facility's sickbay.

"Grant Allen [...] had written a book about the Evolution of the Idea of God. [...] it would be much more interesting if God wrote a book about the evolution of the idea of Grant Allen." ~ G. K. Chesterton, The Everlasting Man

Last edited by TKA-001; 04-08-2012 at 08:40 PM.
TKA-001 is offline   you may: quote & reply,