Favorite / Least Favorite Characters

[Hawki]

Any lack of detail on the developer's part is simply a way for the player to feel more "inside" the Starcraft world. I know he's a vehicle,

Then why are we arguing? My point up to this point is that the magistrate has no personality at all, that he's indeed a vehicle (player character) and as such, like so many PCs, bereft of any real identity.

the fact of the matter is is that he spends most of the entire Terran missions with Raynor

5 out of 10. 5/11 if you include Boot Camp, 6/13 (or more like 5.5) if you include the cut ones. Under no percentage is that "most."

and they talk as though they are at least close associates.

Evidence required. Never mind that the magisrate ever actually says anything.

Raynor's concern for his well-being at the end of those missions is proof enough the two got along well.

Again, evidence. I've listed every time Raynor addresses the magistrate in the game in the last post. Not once is there a sign of concern for well being.

In other words, while their level of friendship is inestimable,

Inestimable. Definition: Too great to calculate.

I can calculate it right now - zero. Or rather, TSTM - too small to measure.

it's clear that an association existed

Association by itself doesn't mean anything. Raynor was associated with numerous people over the course of those events. And unlike the magistrate, we have actual dialogue and other cues showing it.

and you're just putting a cranky attitude on the magistrate because you want to.

Um...yes? That was what I said from the outset, that the magistrate has no personality, so anyone is therefore free to conjure up whatever personality they want to.

And I was actually going for more along the lines of selfish and self-preserving when I wrote him rather than "cranky," but whatever.

[Nissa]

Well, "cranky" was just shorthand.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, "cranky" was just shorthand.

[KaiserStratosTygo]

"there's no lines to read between."

That's rarely a good thing to say.

I doubt anyone here (or anywhere) would agree with you here.

[Hawki]

"there's no lines to read between."

That's rarely a good thing to say.

And yet, people say it all the time. The more common phrase is "reading too much into it." But I can't even give Nissa that much credit because all she's done is make assertions without backing them up.

I doubt anyone here (or anywhere) would agree with you here.

Other than that, I'd actually pick the player-characters, but they're not even characters so I'm not sure they count...

Well, there's one person.

[Turalyon]

The more common phrase is "reading too much into it." But I can't even give Nissa that much credit because all she's done is make assertions without backing them up.

That's funny. I'm sure Nissa was saying pretty much this to me in that Grad's power levels thread I hi-jacked. Whee, it's fun to throw accusations at each other!

Well, there's one person.

I think he was referring to about agreeing with "there's no lines to read between" specifically. Everyone "reads between the lines" since no-one is omniscient - it's the foundation of all (good/bad) speculation. Your view regarding the magistrate is just as much about as "reading between the lines" (in that there's nothing much about the magistrate at all, so I'll just make him a bit of an ass that Raynor doesn't really care about) as Nissa's is.

[Hawki]

I think he was referring to about agreeing with "there's no lines to read between" specifically. Everyone "reads between the lines" since no-one is omniscient - it's the foundation of all (good/bad) speculation. Your view regarding the magistrate is just as much about as "reading between the lines" (in that there's nothing much about the magistrate at all, so I'll just make him a bit of an ass that Raynor doesn't really care about) as Nissa's is.

It's a fair point, and I do agree that everyone reads between the lines. That said, I don't think saying "there isn't a hidden meaning here" (reading between the lines refers to the ability to deduce supposed actual meaning in what is said/written/whatever that isn't otherwise explicit) is reading between the lines in itself. To quote Freud, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Other point, speciifcally, the line "Your view regarding the magistrate is just as much about as "reading between the lines" (in that there's nothing much about the magistrate at all, so I'll just make him a bit of an ass that Raynor doesn't really care about) as Nissa's is." This isn't necessarily what you said (reading between the lines discussion...irony) but how I see the canon magistrate, and how I wrote him, aren't really linked together. Looking at the magistrate, by himself, I don't think there's really anything to see (see the post where I listed all the interaction moments). There are actions taken, but the motives behind those actions is up in the air. Actions by themselves don't really tell you much about a character. And reading between the lines implies that there's hidden meaning, which, by my reasoning, doesn't apply, because there's no hidden meaning to be found, because in every one of those dialogue cues it's the thoughts/actions/feelings of other characters that are important, not the magistrate's. If we agree that the magistrate is just a vessel in which to receive story content, then that by itself kind of negates the idea that there's any meaning to be found within the magistrate himself. This isn't even confined to the magistrate, or StarCraft as a whole. The "silent commander" was used in RTS games prior to this (e.g. Warcraft and Command and Conquer), and I doubt there was any "hidden meaning" to be found with them either.

Now, back to how I wrote him - I have never stated that the magistrate, as I wrote him, is the magistrate I actually see existing in canon. In canon, I have practically nothing to work with. I know what the magistrate does, and that's it. The motives, mindset, etc. are up in the air - perhaps unfair to point out, but even a silent protagonist can have these things established, through elements such as facial expressions, body language, or how other characters react to/regard said character (Link in Wind Waker is an excellent example of this, where he's characterized without dialogue). I can make insinuations about the magistrate's actions, but that's all they are, and all they ever will be (in contrast to Nissa's claim that "he's a cool guy, and Raynor's BFF," treating it as gospel). Taking something and doing something with it isn't reading between the lines, it's simply expanding from a starting point. Now how and why I made the magistrate the way he was is another matter, but besides the point right now. And when writing the lieutenant, I pretty much did a 180 with how Precursor played out, for a variety of reasons. How I write a character isn't necessarily the same way as how I see a character.

[Turalyon]

how I see the canon magistrate, and how I wrote him, aren't really linked together

Not directly, no. Was just making an observation that the reasoning for writing whatever you want about the magistrate because he had no inferable character traits can be seen as "reading too much" out of the position that he has "no inferable character traits" is not that different from Nissa creating a narrative because of her position of the magistrate having some subtle inferable character traits. Yeah, you can rip this apart by saying it's not really the same and I'll just concede now that you're right because the discussion went further than I expected or wanted, so I'll save you the trouble and we'll just leave it at that.

There are actions taken, but the motives behind those actions is up in the air. Actions by themselves don't really tell you much about a character.

Aah, but in the absence of real motivations being readily made apparent (which, as Sc2 has proven, can be questionable and unreliable), one can draw many inferences about one's character from their actions regardless if you are inclined to do so or not. Case in point is Desperate Measures. We can infer/surmise from the call from the Magistrate to the Confeds (and the reply from Duke) that the Magistrate has a strong sense of social justice (regarding the arrest of Raynor) and is willing to break rules to do something about it (contacting an extremist group, the SOK). At the end of the day, sure, one can boil down any character traits within any narrative as really being due to "authorly/narrative convenience" but you can't really negate someone from drawing basic inferences.

And reading between the lines implies that there's hidden meaning, which, by my reasoning, doesn't apply, because there's no hidden meaning to be found, because in every one of those dialogue cues it's the thoughts/actions/feelings of other characters that are important, not the magistrate's. If we agree that the magistrate is just a vessel in which to receive story content, then that by itself kind of negates the idea that there's any meaning to be found within the magistrate himself. This isn't even confined to the magistrate, or StarCraft as a whole. The "silent commander" was used in RTS games prior to this (e.g. Warcraft and Command and Conquer), and I doubt there was any "hidden meaning" to be found with them either.

Oh, I see the problem. We're getting stuck on definitions of idioms and reading into those too much. Should've been more generic and just said something about making inferences instead of "reading between the lines".

I can make insinuations about the magistrate's actions, but that's all they are, and all they ever will be (in contrast to Nissa's claim that "he's a cool guy, and Raynor's BFF," treating it as gospel).

I think that's a bit unfair. I don't think Nissa's position is completely devoid of merit and it's fairly muted counter-point to your position by all standards. Daresay that you maybe reading too much out of Nissa's position? (keep calm, I'm not trying to incite you).

[Hawki]

I don't think Nissa's position is completely devoid of merit and it's fairly muted counter-point to your position by all standards. Daresay that you maybe reading too much out of Nissa's position?

Well, I think the position can be summarized as:

-He's a good person at the end of the day.

-He and Raynor are close friends, to the extent that their friendship is "inestimable."

-These are "childishly obvious" conclusions, and to claim otherwise is to look silly.

So, yeah. And let me make it clear, I don't care about being called childish or silly for disagreeing (I've been called much worse). I don't even mind that the perspective exists at all. But I don't think there's any debate as to what that perspective entails.

[Turalyon]

-He's a good person at the end of the day.

Which is not unreasonable to infer. He does follow Raynor, the "good" guy, all the way to the end so he must be "good" at some level, too.

-He and Raynor are close friends, to the extent that their friendship is "inestimable."

You've got a very good point there. But looking at the post where she made this comment, I think she meant to say "unquantifiable" (or she confused inestimable with "inestimatable" - which is not even a word though it sounds like it could be - but people often get confused and say "inestimable" when what they really mean was unquantifiable. Damn, English is hard!) because otherwise the post and her point doesn't make sense. She's actually acknowledging that there's no real way to know for sure beyond some level of positive association existing between the two.

-These are "childishly obvious" conclusions, and to claim otherwise is to look silly.

I'm sorry to say you read too much out of this. She only makes this claim for one specific instance and with regards to Raynor's line about "you'd better come with me" specifically. Given the long-standing association between Raynor and the Magistrate at the point in time in which this line is delivered, is it easier to believe that Raynor is saying this to the magistrate out of some possible concern for the Magistrate's well-being or that Raynor is just a bullish ass-hole telling the Magistrate what to do?

[KaiserStratosTygo]

And yet, people say it all the time. The more common phrase is "reading too much into it." But I can't even give Nissa that much credit because all she's done is make assertions without backing them up.





Well, there's one person.

That is if you see using quotes from the game and seeing the context of common interactions as "Not backing them up"

which I don't.


I don't think Gradius implied "reading too much into it." with regards to the PCs, I think he meant that since they were all silent yesmen they didn't have a lot of depth on the surface, not that reading between the lines is a bad thing to do.