Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 65

Thread: Stalker Lore Question

  1. #1

    Default Stalker Lore Question

    So the lore would seem to imply that a Stalker shell is possessed by the spirit of a dead dark templar. However, the portrait clearly shows a living, breathing protoss head tacked onto the chassis.

    What gives?
    Aaand sold.


    Be it through hallowed grounds or lands of sorrow
    The Forger's wake is bereft and fallow

    Is the residuum worth the cost of destruction and maiming;
    Or is the shaping a culling and exercise in taming?

    The road's goal is the Origin of Being
    But be wary through what thickets it winds.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Stalker Lore Question

    Zombie? Maybe the dead corpse of a DT is matched up with an available spirit?

    Or maybe the Protoss saw the Terran adjutant and thought that they could do it better.


    "Seeing Fenix once more perplexes me. I feel sadness, when I should feel joy."
    - Artanis.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Stalker Lore Question

    Quote Originally Posted by Nissa View Post
    Or maybe the Protoss saw the Terran adjutant and thought that they could do it better.
    If that's true it finally showed the protoss showing some change for once by somewhat trying to copy a terran idea, instead of just believing their methods are always best

  4. #4

    Default Re: Stalker Lore Question

    The wiki says

    While dragoons were piloted by crippled protoss warriors, the stalker is controlled by the shadow-essence of a Dark Templar warrior fused into a metal body.[2] Nerazim who control stalkers undergo this process voluntarily,[3] said process involving a Void-powered ritual[1] which fuses their shadow essence to the machine.
    It doesn't say that the machine has to be purely mechanical; just that the shadow essence was fused with it. It doesn't necessarily mean that they are dead either. It's probably just a convoluted way to say that the dt has been cybernetically and irreversibly augmented. Alternatively, the head could be synthetic despite its organic look. It's kinda interesting to see that some official or past art renditions of the unit seems to be purely mechanical though. I'm guessing this was debated internally.

    Good catch either way. Another lore misstep for the records!

  5. #5

    Default Re: Stalker Lore Question

    I think the more pertinent question is why is there even an exposed head (artificial or alive) on the Stalker chassis at all? Surely, the cybernetic/technological aspects of the chassis itself it would cover any sensory capabilities and be placed more appropriately/effectively along the chassis. It's not as if it needs to eat or talk which it can't because they have no mouths anyway and that Protoss communicate psionically. What other purpose does it serve beyond being an obvious target-able weakpoint?
    Yes, that's right! That is indeed ME on the right.


    _______________________________________________

  6. #6

    Default Re: Stalker Lore Question

    From what I'm reading, it seems dragoons have a difficult time integrating themselves into society after their transplantation. I'm guessing the dark templar, being individualistic, would place some emphasis on an individual retaining their place in society. So, even if they're mechanical, the bust and arms would assist with this psychologically.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Stalker Lore Question

    ^ I suppose that could explain why Immortals to seem have faces/heads on them, too, given they're supposed to replace/be an upgrade to Dragoons. Still, it's kinda weird that such a high minded and psionic species (who's identity you'd think would transcend/be beyond their physical forms) would concern itself with a slight cosmetic/physical detail as including a head. I mean, why does it have to be a visible "head" specifically? If it's an "individual" thing, why does every Stalker have a head and not some other random physical or cosmetic detail instead? It seems more like a uniformity/conformity type choice/decision than an individualistic one to me.
    Yes, that's right! That is indeed ME on the right.


    _______________________________________________

  8. #8

    Default Re: Stalker Lore Question

    I think it's something you should not interpret literally

  9. #9

    Default Re: Stalker Lore Question

    Quote Originally Posted by Visions of Khas View Post
    From what I'm reading, it seems dragoons have a difficult time integrating themselves into society after their transplantation. I'm guessing the dark templar, being individualistic, would place some emphasis on an individual retaining their place in society. So, even if they're mechanical, the bust and arms would assist with this psychologically.
    Why would they have a different time with the integration? The Dragoons are still templar, after all, just in a metallic exoskeleton. Unless the Khalai feel that to fall in battle is considered a disgrace.

  10. #10

    Default Re: Stalker Lore Question

    Dragoons are clearly an expy of dreadnoughts from WarHammer 40K, which have a difficult time integrating into society themselves, as revered as they are. Stalkers, on the other hand, are just protoss wraithguards. It's probably reflective of khalai and nerazim ideals more than anything.

Similar Threads

  1. Any tips on countering muta with stalker/templer?
    By masakari in forum StarCraft II Discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 12-25-2010, 06:15 AM
  2. The Stalker
    By Scar in forum StarCraft Universe Lore Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 07-25-2010, 04:38 AM
  3. Awesome Stalker blink micro replay (High Platinum)
    By Skyze in forum StarCraft II Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-09-2010, 03:44 AM
  4. Cool Stalker trick
    By Carsickness in forum StarCraft II Discussion
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 04-07-2010, 07:27 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •