Amon deserved redemption

[Turalyon]

I'll leave it up to you whether this should be seen as a troll topic or not, but hear me out...

Sc2 has gone to great lengths in order to try and sell the concept that redemption is possible for characters who have "fallen". While it's arguable how well this was conveyed, the idea is that even the most reprehensible villain can be saved if they were somewhat innocent and sympathetic to begin with. This is how it was supposed to work with Kerrigan in Sc2 regardless of how dubious/successful the redemption arc turned out to be.

Normally, this would have also applied to Arcturus Mengsk too, but given that he was not classicly a character that one could easily sympathise with, his reduction into nothing but a two-bit villain throughout BW and Sc2 makes him undeserving of redemption because he's just a "bad, bad man, through and through". In relation to redemption, his death in HotS is supposed to signify that there was no other recourse for the character (truth be told, his death seems to be really the result of a narrative bottleneck the writers put him into - they made him so boring that him dying was the only thing left interesting left to explore). Up until LotV, Amon fit the bill of a two-bit villain like Arcturus Mengsk, and therefore should deserve nothing more but death as the end of his story.

However, then LotV comes around and sheds a little bit of light as to how Amon ticks. It turns out he does have a sob story of his own, which he is only very reluctant to tell and only does so during the epilogue in a very limited way. In short, he laments that he was forced to become what he is now, didn't want to be a Xel'Naga in the first place and is only doing things he is doing now because it's the only option he feels he has left. He says this to Kerrigan to draw a parallel with what Kerrigan has been experiencing throughout Sc. Sure, it's not as potentially affecting as Kerrigan's plight, but it's something that defines his motivation as being more than just "me, me, me" (unlike Mengsk, who's motivation for his actions are not really due to his potentially sympathetic history regarding Korhal).

If Amon is like Kerrigan in that the evil that they have committed is a result of extenuating circumstances, then shouldn't Amon have had the chance for redemption as well? He's not a two-bit villain (like Mengsk) that deserves only death with this reveal because if Kerrigan doesn't deserve death for all her sins, then neither should Amon. And yet she is the final judge, jury and executioner of Amon's fate. It's darkly ironic and hypocritical to think that in order for Kerrigan to fulfill her requirements for redemption, she needs to kill something that is very much like her - someone who similarly deserves to be redeemed. Kerrigan doesn't even bother to give him a chance for redemption before summarily executing him with self-righteous claim of "freedom to all" (all except Amon apparently).

This is the where the problems sticks and where the whole redemption theme is undermined with Amon being killed by Kerrigan. If Amon deserves to die without ever being given a chance for redemption (like Kerrigan has on numerous occasions), how are we to accept Kerrigan's act of killing Amon being redemptive in turn?

[ragnarok]

In some ways it was a shame for Mengsk mainly because by the end of BW, there were those who believed he could be redeemed. I personally felt (back in 1998) that this seemed unlikely, but some fanfics proved otherwise.

With regards to Amon, I always felt he never really knew what it'd be like to become a Xel'Naga, with all the responsibilities of continuing the cycle and everything. The fact that he had followers proves he's far from the ONLY one who felt this way.

As for the ascension against his will, that'd obviously make sense too. By using the purity of form concept via LotV's lore, it would have meant that given enough centuries or something, humanity would have been psionically strong enough to qualify for that to ascend to become Xel'Naga. But once that time comes, not everyone would WANT to do such a thing, especially when it comes to the merging with the Zerg, even if there was never once ANY encounters with them. In that regard, it's possible that the species Amon belonged to knew of the Xel'Naga, but not everyone was interested in it.

That, therefore, is a flaw on the Xel'Naga's part: you're not supposed to take the WHOLE of the species and have them merge with another to become the new generation of Xel'Naga. You should have asked for VOLUNTEERS. Of course, this was somewhat touched upon in "The Infinite Cycle" mission where when Artanis and Kerrigan looked over the shrines, they specifically said the Xel'Naga waited at Ulnar for the two destined races to arrive. In that respect, one could argue that the two races came of their own free will, though it can just as easily be argued that the Xel'Naga manipulated them (albeit indirectly).

One thing the Xel'Naga should have considered was the possibility of reversing the ascension. What could APPEAR to be a great thing may end up being something entirely different, and the destined races' view could be wrong. To use a real life example, it'd kind of be like when you first enter college and start choosing your majors. You shouldn't exactly look THAT far ahead because you don't know what you're really getting yourself into.

And in that sense, I feel that once Amon discovered the details regarding the ascension, he became resistant to it, but the Xel'Naga had him ascend anyway, and he despised it.

Of course your part of why Kerrigan killed him in that sense, obviously she felt that the destruction he did meant it was necessary. She didn't realize that the way Amon felt was that because the Xel'Naga seeded life and that created conflicts, he wanted to bring about an end to the conflicts. In that sense, he certainly has grounds.

That's why it was foolish for Kerrigan to have just killed him without looking at the bigger picture. Of course, if the life on barren worlds in the epilogue was her doing, then you could argue perhaps she DID look at it from Amon's POV or something afterwards. Otherwise, how would she be any different from Amon?

[Visions of Khas]

I'm working on my own analysis of Amon, but he doesn't deserve redemption. Neither does Kerrigan. Manipulating and killing millions, if not billions, over the course of millenia just to get back at a few people who have long since died? Yeah, totally relatable.

[TheEconomist]

StarCraft shouldn't be about redemption of key characters to begin with. It should be about conflict and intrigue. Should have been Game of Thrones in space.

[Visions of Khas]

You know nothing, Jon Star.

[ragnarok]

I'm working on my own analysis of Amon, but he doesn't deserve redemption. Neither does Kerrigan. Manipulating and killing millions, if not billions, over the course of millenia just to get back at a few people who have long since died? Yeah, totally relatable.

It depends because he was merely trying to make the universe a peaceful place, his method was wrong though

[Turalyon]

I'm working on my own analysis of Amon, but he doesn't deserve redemption. Neither does Kerrigan. Manipulating and killing millions, if not billions, over the course of millenia just to get back at a few people who have long since died? Yeah, totally relatable.


StarCraft shouldn't be about redemption of key characters to begin with. It should be about conflict and intrigue. Should have been Game of Thrones in space.

Thing is, Sc2 is about redemption of key characters whether it's deserved or not (it's not imo) and irrespective whether we, the audience, like it or not (I don't like it either).

With that limitation in mind, the denial of a possibility of redemption to someone such as Amon (if Kerrigan needs it because she's done great evil but was "innocent" to begin with, then Amon needs it more because of his greater evil but was "innocent" to begin with) sort of undermines the very moral framework the story is trying to put up. If we are to whitewash Kerrigan's evil away in a utilitarian manner to justify her redemption (which is what the game asks us to do), then one cannot rationally exclude Amon based differences like the length of time they were evil (Kerri's being shorter), the numbers of people killed (Kerri's being fewer), the magnitude of their evil acts (Kerri's being smaller) or the existence of a morality pet (Kerri's had one in Raynor) because they are rendered arbitrary by the initial premise of whitewashing Kerrigan's evil away in a utilitarian manner.

If the story really wanted to be about redemption, Kerrigan would have redeemed herself by redeeming and turning Amon "good" again somehow, not by killing him.

[KaiserStratosTygo]

Mengsk deserves redemption too.

[Visions of Khas]

Well, the Overmind was redeemed without even trying, so sure. Why not.

[Turalyon]

Mengsk deserves redemption too.

Not really according to the rules determined in Sc2. He does have a sob story and potentially innocent starting background too but it is abundantly clear throughout BW and Sc2, that it is not his primary motivator. There is nothing in Sc that allows one to garner sympathy for him (beyond feeling sorry for how he's been rendered into a cardboard cutout of a character) so having no possibility of redemption for him is apparently thematically justified according to Sc2.

Like I said, Amon is very much like Mengsk for the most part until LotV sheds some light to his motivation. Since Sc2 suggests that motivation is important for redemption to take place, Amon's motivation for action ("I'm only trying to fix a supposed injustice that was done to me and to all others in future") is quite a bit more sympathetic than Mengsks "I'm only doing it for power".


Well, the Overmind was redeemed without even trying, so sure. Why not.

Ah yes, the vaunted Overmind retcon. The Overmind's "redemption" is justified in Sc2's terms precisely because it's been given a sob story and a change in its primary motivation in Sc2. Because it is revealed to be "innocent" and only wanting "to protect its own kind", the evil it has committed is worthy of being redeemed - which it is, automatically. This particular instance actually strengthens my position in regards to Amon's lack of opportunity for redemption undermining Sc2's theme of redemption.

[ragnarok]

Mengsk deserves redemption too.

If he learned anything in the end, which he didn't.

[KaiserStratosTygo]

If he learned anything in the end, which he didn't.

Sure he did.

He learned that Kerrigan was worse than him.

#Mengskslifematters

[Nissa]

Amon was a shoved in, un-set-up generic baddie with no appeal. All he deserves is to be forgotten.

#writerangerforever

Mengsk had the set up, the past, and the interesting dialogue (in SC1). He didn't necessarily deserve redemption, but he did deserve to have more screentime, cause more mischief, say more epic things, and not die like a loser to a Mary Sue.

[TheEconomist]

Thing is, Sc2 is about redemption of key characters whether it's deserved or not (it's not imo) and irrespective whether we, the audience, like it or not (I don't like it either).

You're right, of course.

[ragnarok]

Sure he did.

He learned that Kerrigan was worse than him.

#Mengskslifematters

I keep telling you, this is something she merely has to learn, which takes time.

[Turalyon]

Amon was a shoved in, un-set-up generic baddie with no appeal. All he deserves is to be forgotten.

#writerangerforever

Mengsk had the set up, the past, and the interesting dialogue (in SC1). He didn't necessarily deserve redemption, but he did deserve to have more screentime, cause more mischief, say more epic things, and not die like a loser to a Mary Sue.

I have no objections in regards to the above because that's exactly the way I feel too. But this thread is not about that.

What I'm saying is that even with what limited story they did have going in Sc2 (this redemption thing I keep alluding to), it undermines its own message about the redemption of a "(supposedly) sympathetic villain" (in Kerrigan) by denying it to another similar "(supposedly) sympathetic villain" (in Amon). In such a case, the redemption message they were peddling may have been better served if they didn't include a sob story about Amon's origin and kept him just as the "greatest evil incarnate ever", like he was before LotV shed some light on his motivations. Course, people will still complain about him being a "generic baddie 1.0" but at least whatever anemic story they had would held more water thematically.

[ragnarok]

I have no objections in regards to the above because that's exactly the way I feel too. But this thread is not about that.

What I'm saying is that even with what limited story they did have going in Sc2 (this redemption thing I keep alluding to), it undermines its own message about the redemption of a "(supposedly) sympathetic villain" (in Kerrigan) by denying it to another similar "(supposedly) sympathetic villain" (in Amon). In such a case, the redemption message they were peddling may have been better served if they didn't include a sob story about Amon's origin and kept him just as the "greatest evil incarnate ever", like he was before LotV shed some light on his motivations. Course, people will still complain about him being a "generic baddie 1.0" but at least whatever anemic story they had would held more water thematically.

They can do this in future DLCs and for us to get to know what Amon was like prior to his ascension to Xel'Naga. THEN we can see if he deserved redemption or not.

[Turalyon]

^ Great, so after what, over 15 years now, they can't even properly write one story that is thematically cogent without resorting to DLC to artificially bloat it out for another Godknowswhat number of years? This isn't even taking into account that no-one really cares enough about Amon already to know.

Anyhow, read my original post Rag. I've stipulated why Amon deserves redemption because Sc2 says Kerrigan deserves redemption, that Amon and Kerrigan are potentially sympathetic and share similarities. Kerrigan got a free pass, so Amon should have at least got a whiff of one, if not being given a similar pass. The flipside is also true. If Amon's death is his redemption, then Kerrigan shouldn't be the one to be doing it because, in a similar vein to Amon, she should really die for her redemption, too. With what we actually have in LotV, there's some values dissonance going on.

[ragnarok]

^ Great, so after what, over 15 years now, they can't even properly write one story that is thematically cogent without resorting to DLC to artificially bloat it out for another Godknowswhat number of years? This isn't even taking into account that no-one really cares enough about Amon already to know.


Of course not. You need to wait at least 15 centuries for that....

[Nissa]

I have no objections in regards to the above because that's exactly the way I feel too. But this thread is not about that.

What I'm saying is that even with what limited story they did have going in Sc2 (this redemption thing I keep alluding to), it undermines its own message about the redemption of a "(supposedly) sympathetic villain" (in Kerrigan) by denying it to another similar "(supposedly) sympathetic villain" (in Amon). In such a case, the redemption message they were peddling may have been better served if they didn't include a sob story about Amon's origin and kept him just as the "greatest evil incarnate ever", like he was before LotV shed some light on his motivations. Course, people will still complain about him being a "generic baddie 1.0" but at least whatever anemic story they had would held more water thematically.

I respect your opinion, but I can't get to that point because I'm too tripped up by how foundationless Amon is. His very existence is the nonsense you talk about. Though yeah, nothing weakens a good baddie more than a sob story.

[KaiserStratosTygo]

Arcturus Mengsk did nothing wrong, with more time he would have found the final solution to the Kerrigan question.

[ragnarok]

Arcturus Mengsk did nothing wrong, with more time he would have found the final solution to the Kerrigan question.

So you think. He became the very thing he fought against. That's the problem with way too many people in the SC universe: the more you fight the beast, the more you become the beast

[Turalyon]

I respect your opinion, but I can't get to that point because I'm too tripped up by how foundationless Amon is. His very existence is the nonsense you talk about.

Trt to parse your hate out of it for a minute (yeah, I found it hard too but I was able to do it eventually).

I'm trying to decide which was better for the (lame) story that Sc2 was trying to tell: a foundationless, generic cliche big-bad or one with a last minute tacked on "sympathy for the devil" background that clearly alludes to another evil character seeking redemption. Because the general Sc2 story wants to be about redemption (or so I'm led to believe), Amon would have served this particular this type of a story better as the former (a foundationless, biggest evil ever!) rather than the latter since the defeat of a great uncompromising evil would be redeeming (like what HotS was trying to sell - and failing miserably - with Mengsk's death at Kerrigan's hands). By going the latter option, it actually muddies the message regarding redemption because the ultimate redemptive act involves an evil person in need of redemption killing another evil person in need of redemption. A more coherent and satisfactory redemption story would have that evil person in need of redemption actually help/redeem that other evil person in need of redemption instead. Hence, Amon deserved redemption!


Though yeah, nothing weakens a good baddie more than a sob story.

Thankfully Amon's a crappily written "bad" baddie then... there was nothing left to ruin.

[ragnarok]

Thankfully Amon's a crappily written "bad" baddie then... there was nothing left to ruin.

That's only because Blizzard put him in more as an afterthought or something. They probably didn't want the Protoss story in LotV to fight the swarm again since we already got that in WoL, so someone else was needed.

[Nissa]

I get your point, Tura. I just can't be bothered to care about Amon.


Arcturus Mengsk did nothing wrong...

Uh....what? Mengskie poo set Zerg on his enemies for his own personal power, abandoned Kerri to the Zerg, ruled the Dominion with an iron fist...

Wait, were you referring to SC2? In that case, Mengsk oppressed miners, forced a guy in a booby-trapped suit to do his bidding, and attacked his own son's facility. But if you meant he did nothing bad to Kerrigan in SC2, he did capture and pretend to kill Raynor.

But, despite all that, I still think he was right to want to kill Kerri. Likewise, nobody else's motivations to keep her alive were all that explained.

[KaiserStratosTygo]

"Uh....what? Mengskie poo set Zerg on his enemies for his own personal power, abandoned Kerri to the Zerg, ruled the Dominion with an iron fist...
"

They were supporting the Confederacy and were dissdents.

They deserved it.

All 2 Billion+

It's a war, war has collateral damage

or actually those 2+ billion were probably robots beause you don't REALLY KNOW FOR SURE.

Mengsk deserves redemption, because he learned things or whatever the meme is.


"Wait, were you referring to SC2? In that case, Mengsk oppressed miners, forced a guy in a booby-trapped suit to do his bidding, and attacked his own son's facility. But if you meant he did nothing bad to Kerrigan in SC2, he did capture and pretend to kill Raynor. "

They are terrorists! Mengsk was trying to save humanity he says so!

Paid for by the Political Advocacy Coalition for Arcturus Mengsk and his legacy

[Nissa]

Oh Kaise, never leave. :D

[drakolobo]

Paid for by the Political Advocacy Coalition for Arcturus Mengsk and his legacy
" Congratulation!,you are the person that we need"
http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/starcraft/images/6/6e/DefendersofMan_SC2-NCO_Logo1.png/revision/latest?cb=20160331023648
Defenders of Man's HR department, draft board.

[ragnarok]

They were supporting the Confederacy and were dissdents.

They deserved it.

All 2 Billion+

It's a war, war has collateral damage

or actually those 2+ billion were probably robots beause you don't REALLY KNOW FOR SURE.


If we follow that rule, you might as well have killed the rest of humanity and said "that was just a necessary casualty of war to save everyone," even though there's no one alive left.

[Turalyon]

^ That rushing sound is so more pleasant when going over Rag's head.

[ragnarok]

^ That rushing sound is so more pleasant when going over Rag's head.

That's just the paradox of it all: you have to kill everyone in order to save everyone.

[Gradius]

That's just the paradox of it all: you have to kill everyone in order to save everyone.
Haha, yeah! ;)

Wait. What?

[ragnarok]

Haha, yeah! ;)

Wait. What?

Oh don't tell me you never heard that infamous quote, "We had to destroy the city in order to save it."

Blizzard merely takes things to an extreme scale.

[Visions of Khas]

Somebody's been looking through Harbinger's play book.

[ragnarok]

Somebody's been looking through Harbinger's play book.

More like too many people got confused in how to save lives and how to destroy lives. Even the live action marvel films picked up this concept via Age of Ultron....

[Visions of Khas]

Even the live action marvel films picked up this concept via Age of Ultron....

Yeah. Ultron's goal was to force all of humanity to evolve to a point, either biologically or socially, where things like the Avengers would be unnecessary.

I see Ultron only skimmed the Sparknotes of Origin of the Species.

[Turalyon]

That's just the paradox of it all: you have to kill everyone in order to save everyone.

Yep... still not getting it, I see.

[KaiserStratosTygo]

" Congratulation!,you are the person that we need"
http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/starcraft/images/6/6e/DefendersofMan_SC2-NCO_Logo1.png/revision/latest?cb=20160331023648
Defenders of Man's HR department, draft board.

: D


Oh Kaise, never leave. :D

Worry not my friends.

I shall never leave.

:>


"^ That rushing sound is so more pleasant when going over Rag's head."

Oh, you mean this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ES7XJIE9n08

Rag might be familiar with that by now.

[ragnarok]

Yeah. Ultron's goal was to force all of humanity to evolve to a point, either biologically or socially, where things like the Avengers would be unnecessary.

I see Ultron only skimmed the Sparknotes of Origin of the Species.

And interpreted it completely wrong.