POStudios Forum

The Royal Archives => TSL General Archives => Topic started by: B'rrr on July 11, 2010, 06:19:54 PM

Title: Question about the Intro
Post by: B'rrr on July 11, 2010, 06:19:54 PM
So I was just wondering;

The game says that the conditions of Alex and Rosella are the same, they are under the same spell. why is the spell on alex beeing cast from a distance and took a while before it has it's full effect (he could walk back all the way to his room) and the caster appeared in person when casting the spell on Rosella?
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: liggy002 on July 11, 2010, 06:22:16 PM
I thought about this as well.  My guess is that maybe Shadrack cast the spell on Rosella because he intended to leave the black cloak behind which could be a magical way for him to keep tabs on Graham.  Of course, that's just speculation.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Haids1987 on July 11, 2010, 08:34:05 PM
Alex was an easy target, since he was pretty much alone, but he needed a dramatic entrance with Rosella. How else would he freak out that many Green Isles dignitaries at once? ;)
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: wilco64256 on July 11, 2010, 08:54:20 PM
I agree - he really wanted to cause chaos and confusion, if they both just passed out it wouldn't have had quite the same effect.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: oberonqa on July 11, 2010, 09:46:53 PM
This is all based on the assumption that the cloaked man who appeared in front of Rosella was Shadrack....
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: liggy002 on July 11, 2010, 09:57:31 PM
True,

We really don't know for certain if the cloaked menace is Shadrack. 
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Haids1987 on July 11, 2010, 09:59:12 PM
Aw, they're just trying to throw our sniffers off the trail.

It's Shadrack. :pleased:
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: oberonqa on July 11, 2010, 10:10:37 PM
Quote from: Haids1987 on July 11, 2010, 09:59:12 PM
Aw, they're just trying to throw our sniffers off the trail.

It's Shadrack. :pleased:

I'll bet Alhazared, Mordack, or Manannon might have a few words for you Haids.  about how quickly you dismissed the possibility that it might be one of them....
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Haids1987 on July 11, 2010, 10:12:18 PM
Wellllll......

Mordack was turned into fire and then extinguished, Manannan was turned into a cat and placed in a burlap bag (and is presumably still there :P), and Alhazred is safely locked in a cell in the Castle of the Crown.

It's Shadrack. :yes:
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: oberonqa on July 11, 2010, 10:21:21 PM
Quote from: Haids1987 on July 11, 2010, 10:12:18 PM
Wellllll......

Mordack was turned into fire and then extinguished, Manannan was turned into a cat and placed in a burlap bag (and is presumably still there :P), and Alhazred is safely locked in a cell in the Castle of the Crown.

It's Shadrack. :yes:

Oh well.... since you put it that way....

<<stomps off in a huff>>

.....

<<A puff of smoke appears and Shadrack steps out of it>>

Shadrack:  Oh silly mortal.... you have much to learn of the powers of the Black Cloak Society. 

Shadrack:  If I can summon forth a mighty tempest such as the Green Isles has never seen before... what makes you think a silly prison cell can stop me?

Shadrack:  Furthermore, silly mortal... what makes you think I cannot entreat with the Lord of the Dead to bring back a faithful servant... and mediocre chess player?

Shadrack:  And lastly... silly mortal.... should I require the aid of Mannannon, being tied up in a burlap sack would not be an insurmountable challenge.

Shadrack:  But by all means.... keep on thinking it is me. 

<<Shadrack disappears in a puff of smoke>>

<<I come clomping back>>

You were saying, Haids? 

Haids?

Oh dear... someone grab the smelling salts!  Haids!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Haids1987 on July 11, 2010, 10:24:15 PM
...I honestly can't think of anything clever to respond to that. ;]

But still...it's Shadrack.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: B'rrr on July 11, 2010, 11:34:14 PM
Quote from: oberonqa on July 11, 2010, 09:46:53 PM
This is all based on the assumption that the cloaked man who appeared in front of Rosella was Shadrack....

I never stated such assumption, only saying if they are under the effect of the same spell, why are they (or /is he if the spell on both childeren is cast by the same person) casting it in different ways and why did it took quite a while to get a hold on Alex and not on Rosella?

As for the dramatic effect, wouldn't it even be more dramatic to have both cast in public? Also I imagine for the people of the Green Isle it has a greater effect to see their king, their saviour, beeing enchanted then the kings sister. So that argument I do not buy  :-\
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: oberonqa on July 12, 2010, 12:23:58 AM
Quote from: B'rrr on July 11, 2010, 11:34:14 PM
Quote from: oberonqa on July 11, 2010, 09:46:53 PM
This is all based on the assumption that the cloaked man who appeared in front of Rosella was Shadrack....

I never stated such assumption, only saying if they are under the effect of the same spell, why are they (or /is he if the spell on both childeren is cast by the same person) casting it in different ways and why did it took quite a while to get a hold on Alex and not on Rosella?

As for the dramatic effect, wouldn't it even be more dramatic to have both cast in public? Also I imagine for the people of the Green Isle it has a greater effect to see their king, their saviour, beeing enchanted then the kings sister. So that argument I do not buy  :-\

Alexander was raised, for all intent and purposes, by a wizard.  One could argue that Alexander had a natural... tolerance for lack of a better word... when it comes to being on the receiving end of magic as a result of having spent so many years in the service of Manannon.  This paticular advantage would not extend to Rosella, who was raised by her birth parents and was probably not exposed to the same degree of magic as Alexander.

As for the different spell castings, who can say if they are indeed different. 

I am of the firm belief that there was two different entities revealed during the introduction... two different magical users.  You have one who was in the shadowy world looking over things and the caster of a spell on Alexander (and whom I believe to be Shadrack)... and you have the cloaked figure who appeared in front of Rosella and cast a spell on her (this individual's identity is up for grabs... but I sincerely doubt it is Shadrack).

As for the big spectacle theory.... perhaps the purpose of the cloaked figure was to show Graham that his family won't live happily ever after.  If I were bent on revenge (and I believe that the cloaked figure acted out of a pure sense of vengeance by being so bold as to appear in front of Graham... as if to show how powerless Graham was to stop him/her/it), I can think of no greater way to set that revenge in motion than by attacking a parents child... in clear view of said parent.

Now I have not seen the overall story that Cesar, Katie, and crew have put together.  I am merely conjecturing and thinking of theories here... just like all of you.  Waltzdancing and I had many a conversation about who the mysterious cloaked figure in the Town Square is... and I view this conversation in much the same way.  Do not take what I am saying as hints to the storyline to come or even attempts to steer people away from a paticular line of thought. 

When it comes to the storyline of TSL... I am as much in the dark as all of you.  I am saying this because I don't want anyone to think that because I have the Phoenix logo in my signature that I am somehow "in the know".  I am not.

Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: B'rrr on July 12, 2010, 12:43:14 AM
Those are plausible explanations, aye.

as for the natural tolerance, you could leave away the natural if you argue that it is because of years of exposure to spellcasting  ;)
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: GwydionAE on July 12, 2010, 03:26:16 AM
Does it say specifically that they are under the same spell or just that their conditions are the same?  (I'm afraid I don't remember, and the game doesn't really work on this computer so I can't double check. :P)  If it's simply that their conditions are the same, this could refer to their outward appearance as opposed to the conditions of the spell.  Perhaps the spells that they were hit with were in fact slightly different but just have the same outward result.  I took Alexander's white eyes/glowing eyes as part of the spell rather than it just not effecting him as quickly.

Or - branching off of oberonqa's train of thought - perhaps while living with Manannan, Alexander was having spells cast on him without his knowing (perhaps prepping him in case this day came...?), so rather than a tolerance, maybe he's more susceptible to what the spell was really doing to him - there seems to be more going on than "they're unconscious".  So whatever it is could be getting to Alexander differently than Rosella due to this.

Or maybe it was all just for a really cool visual effect, lol.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: B'rrr on July 12, 2010, 07:43:44 AM
it doesn't really say the same spell is cast, but since the condition they are in are the same and saving them is done the same way I assumed it was the same spell.

And I agree that the same spell can have a different effect on people, just like a physical punch can. My question was more because the difference is so great.

I actually do wonder if this is a point worth looking into/speculating about or that it is, what you say; all just for a really cool visual effect, to make a great intro movie. Katie? *puppy eyes*
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: KatieHal on July 12, 2010, 08:20:36 AM
They are under the same spell. :)

Maybe the cloaked stranger cast it on them in different ways to create a distraction with one while laying the curse on the other as well. :)
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: B'rrr on July 12, 2010, 08:32:28 AM
yay! thanks for the reply! <3

But... how can you say 'maybe'? like you don't know it either! you co-designed it!
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: KatieHal on July 12, 2010, 08:53:09 AM
Or maybe I just like messing with you a little bit. :)
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: B'rrr on July 12, 2010, 09:03:47 AM
*sulks*

Another maybe that isn't a maybe...
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 12, 2010, 09:32:15 AM
For Peter Spear's take on Manannan;
Quote
"After the defeat of his brother Mordack at the hands of King Graham of Daventry, Manannan was never seen or heard from again and his fate remains unknown. It is quite possible that the sack remains in Mordack's castle containing the remains of a cat. It is also possible that the cat, Manannan, was able to escape by clawing his way out. It is even possible that he has been able to affect a cure for his feline condition. And, if this is true, then Manannan may well be hiding someplace plotting his revenge. The fact that nothing had been heard of either Hagatha or Mananann since Graham destroyed their brother Mordack is likely a bad sign."-King's Quest Companion, 2nd Edition

 :suffer: :suffer: :suffer:
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Tolin on July 12, 2010, 11:36:23 AM
Hehehe...

The intro is a stunning piece of work...
But... why didn't Valanice at least check on Alexander after he fell, at least for a pulse?
That's the only thing that keeps striking me as a little odd.

Maybe the spell affected Alexander a little differently or required more time due to his
time as Gwydion under Manannan's care.  Who knows what our favorite wizard-turned-cat
may have done to him or experimented with in that time?

Me... I think it's all a side effect of the spell that turned Alex into a fly.
...Okay... not really.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 12, 2010, 12:09:16 PM
Maybe the fact that Alexander has dabbled with magic, multiple times, and is a kinda of amateur magician, has given some resistence to dark magic to a degree? Ya I know Mordack's spell still got to him in KQ5, but who knows...
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Allronix on July 22, 2010, 10:22:50 AM
As I stated in another thread, if we're going with the theory that the Society has been a long-term enemy of Graham and family, then remember their love of the Xanatos Gambit. Long-term plans, deep-seated schemes. It's not too much of a stretch to speculate that while Mannanan was fond of collecting and slaughtering young boys, Alex was a special case, taken and subjected to a lifetime of torture specifically to hit Graham hard.

During that time, who knows what kind of dark spells, rituals, or other time bombs they put in him? The fact Alexander's turned out to have "the gift" for spellcasting himself just makes it worse. All Shadrack would have had to do with him was activate the trigger.

Rosella had no such trigger in place, so Shadrack would have had to strike hard and fast, then vanish. He just picked one hell of a time to do it.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: crayauchtin on July 22, 2010, 10:31:57 AM
Quote from: Allronix on July 22, 2010, 10:22:50 AM
He just picked one hell of a time to do it.
That's because he's one hell of a villain! Here here!
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Hituro on July 23, 2010, 05:02:16 AM
My speculation...

Mordack could still very well be alive.  If you remember in KQ5, Crispin mentions something along the lines that Mordack is a very powerful wizard, and that maybe Graham didn't actually kill him.  When I saw the intro I had assumed that there was more than one villain at work.  I also thought that Alexander was actually under control before the spell actually took place.  And I believe that having him stumble off was merely a way to lure Valanice away for some reason, either to cause panic, a distraction, or something else.  Maybe we'll find out more in future episodes :)

(Posted on: July 23, 2010, 06:58:59 AM)

I also want to add that in the video on the main page, there is a scene where you see 3 figures in black robes flying through some sort of worm hole.  Perhaps it's Mordack, Mannanan, and Shadrack?
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Delling on July 23, 2010, 05:28:08 AM
Quote from: Hituro on July 23, 2010, 05:02:16 AM
I also want to add that in the video on the main page, there is a scene where you see 3 figures in black robes flying through some sort of worm hole.  Perhaps it's Mordack, Mannanan, and Shadrack?

I believe those are the fates from KQ7, but I could be wrong.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 23, 2010, 05:29:44 AM
Quote
If you remember in KQ5, Crispin mentions something along the lines that Mordack is a very powerful wizard, and that maybe Graham didn't actually kill him.
Hmm, don't think he actually says that, I can go check later...

Edit;
Here you go; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUwth9qopyA

It's Cassima that say, "what if he's trying to trick you?", but then Graham,says "no he's dead, he'll never come back to hurt anyone anymore".

That's not to say that a story teller couldn't "resurrect" him so to speak, if they wanted to.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: B'rrr on July 23, 2010, 06:34:46 AM
doesn't he like completely disappear/vaporise/whatever?

if you don't see a corpse you can't be sure it is dead *nods*
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 23, 2010, 06:39:43 AM
Right, it snuffs out in a puff of steam/smoke. As you would expect fire to go out... (albeit a bit quicker than fire goes out from rain in real life)
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Fierce Deity on July 23, 2010, 07:05:12 AM
Quote from: Delling on July 23, 2010, 05:28:08 AM
Quote from: Hituro on July 23, 2010, 05:02:16 AM
I also want to add that in the video on the main page, there is a scene where you see 3 figures in black robes flying through some sort of worm hole.  Perhaps it's Mordack, Mannanan, and Shadrack?

I believe those are the fates from KQ7, but I could be wrong.

I think you are referring to the end cinematic. In the end cinematic, there are 3 heads spiraling around a Silver Cloak member. Those are The Fates from KQ7. What Hituro was referring to was the trailer on the home page. Near the end of the trailer, there is a vortex that shows three Black Cloak members flying towards the screen.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Hituro on July 23, 2010, 02:48:44 PM
Anyone ever notice that Crispin wears a black cloak?  Maybe he's part of the black cloak society and his attempt at killing Graham was sticking him with Cedric and feeding him old stuff from an old chest!  Maybe the events of KQ5 were simply just a distraction to keep graham busy while spells were prepared for Alexander and Rosella!  I mean, Cedric just really happened to be right there to watch graham's castle disappear?
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 23, 2010, 03:18:01 PM
Ya, and Crispin is really Shadrack... he was getting back at Mordack for being such a ninny at chess...  

...or have you noticed you never see Mordack and Crispin in the same room together? Could they be the same individual? Hmm...

 :P :suffer:
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Fierce Deity on July 23, 2010, 04:30:07 PM
I just realized that Lady Elspeth Tsepish wore a black cloak for the majority of KQ7. She might be a member too.  :o
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 23, 2010, 04:38:05 PM
Didn't Vlad Tsepish also have a black cloak?

Rosella wears a black cloak for a portion of the game as well...

Oh, Graham wore a black cloak as well back in KQ2 :p...
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: KatieHal on July 23, 2010, 04:38:35 PM
So did her husband for that matter, whom I want to say we saw casting some spells, IIRC? Ah, no, I'm thinking of when Edgar cast a spell to remove the blockage of the entrance to the Vulcanix Underground.

...in a black cloak! DUN DUN DUH.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 23, 2010, 04:40:09 PM
Yep Edgar runs around hiding his identity in a tan cloak in the last chapter.

(http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20080110155653/kingsquest/images/5/56/Edgar.JPG)
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: KatieHal on July 23, 2010, 04:41:22 PM
Not very successfully, I have to say. I mean, was anyone playing the game really fooled by that?
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 23, 2010, 04:44:02 PM
Nope not really :p...

That chapter was unfortunately broken... its a shame we couldn't have switched back and forth between Rosella and Valanice and solved puzzles as both...
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: KatieHal on July 23, 2010, 04:45:26 PM
Agreed. That would've been cool...and was kind of what I thought might happen, too, but not so much. It did wrap up what it needed too, though, so there's that.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Fierce Deity on July 23, 2010, 04:46:30 PM
Quote from: KatieHal on July 23, 2010, 04:41:22 PM
Not very successfully, I have to say. I mean, was anyone playing the game really fooled by that?

Seriously, at least run around in an Assassin's Creed outfit if you're trying to be sneaky (a la a popular theory among the forums).
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 23, 2010, 04:47:37 PM
Well as I understand it, originally they were going to have interactive sequences with Valanice, but they had to be cut due to budget and space.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Fierce Deity on July 23, 2010, 04:52:38 PM
So Edgar was zapped out of the volcano control room, and then the next thing we know, he's riding on Tsepish's horse with Valanice. Was I missing something, or did Edgar just instinctively know where Valanice was?   
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 23, 2010, 04:55:58 PM
Ya, fierce, I think there is something missing its a bit disjointed. That whole side of the storyline isn't even explained. How did get Necromancer, how did he know where Valanice was, etc etc...
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: tessspoon on July 23, 2010, 04:57:18 PM
Never got that either. Or why Edgar just kind of turns around looking defeated during the fight just to get zapped.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: waltzdancing on July 23, 2010, 05:25:21 PM
Quote from: tessspoon on July 23, 2010, 04:57:18 PM
Never got that either. Or why Edgar just kind of turns around looking defeated during the fight just to get zapped.

I never got that either but it did, however, teach me an important lesson. I never turn my back on anyone who attacks you. You never know what stunt they might pull to trick you.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Hituro on July 23, 2010, 11:30:16 PM
Valanice is really Shadrack!  DUN DUN DUUUN!!!!  Oh poor Graham, you're done for now!  :(
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: sahara on July 24, 2010, 08:35:12 AM
Quote from: Tolin on July 12, 2010, 11:36:23 AM
Hehehe...

The intro is a stunning piece of work...
But... why didn't Valanice at least check on Alexander after he fell, at least for a pulse?
That's the only thing that keeps striking me as a little odd.

Me... I think it's all a side effect of the spell that turned Alex into a fly.
...Okay... not really.

Yes, I thought the same thing about Valanice not checking on Alexander.  And why wouldn't she start screaming as she's running back to Graham?  Those aren't major problems, though.  Yes, I thought the intro was amazing... so much better without the character dialogue.  Whoever was in charge of the cinematography and dramatic effects really knew what they were doing.  Sadly, the dramatic tension went away when we heard the first of the character dialogue in that bedroom scene.  When that sense of real drama went away it was like air being let out of a balloon.  I believe the weak link in the game is the narration and character dialogue writing... improve those things and you'll have a winner.  (and include lots more puzzles, too!)
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 24, 2010, 08:41:45 AM
At least one reviewer noted, that they were a bit creeped out by Alexander and Rosella sharing the same bed, and holding hands :p...
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: B'rrr on July 24, 2010, 10:10:11 AM
I found that disturbing aswell!
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Haids1987 on July 24, 2010, 12:02:32 PM
Dude, me too! 

But then I started thinking about how when twin babies are preemies sometimes they're comforted by sharing an incubator, and it helps them heal.  Perhaps that was Cesar's thought process here...?
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: wilco64256 on July 24, 2010, 12:08:40 PM
They are twins, they're both totally comatose, and both under the same spell.  Why keep them in separate rooms?
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Haids1987 on July 24, 2010, 12:09:14 PM
*Nods* Fair enough.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 24, 2010, 12:19:59 PM
Well, at least in real life, adult twins don't generally sleep in the same bedroom (not unless their conjoined) ;), and if they do they usually are in separate beds.

In western culture it is rather taboo to have adult siblings in the same bed in general.

So I can sorta see where some people are creeped out about it.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: wilco64256 on July 24, 2010, 12:27:31 PM
It's not like they climbed into bed together to take a quick nap.  What they're experiencing barely even qualifies as "sleeping."  It's a matter of convenience as much as anything else - they need to be watched over and taken care of, and the guards are already spread pretty thin.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: KatieHal on July 24, 2010, 01:06:51 PM
What Weldon said. I can see why people might go "bwa?" when they see it because it's unconventional to us, but seriously, there's no reason to be creeped out by it.

Sahara--I'd normally say nothing, but since I was one of the writers, I feel compelled to defend my work (on the internet at that--truly, I'm a glutton for punishment :P). We actually quite a lot of consideration into the work and it was not thrown together or whatever. If the style and direction isn't to your liking, well, nothing I can do about that.

As for the tension disappearing when they started talking--well, again, I don't know what to tell you. Obviously, the characters had to start talking eventually. That their opening dialogue would be about what happened was also a given.

But, re: Valanice not yelling up to Graham when she came back, it was rather clearly shown she was out of breath from running there to begin with. She's not exactly the hearty adventuring type her husband is. :)

Anyways--I don't really want to get into a point by point debate. Just wanted to say my piece in defense of my work and explain a few things.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Haids1987 on July 24, 2010, 02:51:12 PM
Quote from: wilco64256 on July 24, 2010, 12:27:31 PM
It's not like they climbed into bed together to take a quick nap.
LOL! My eyes are watering, I'm laughing so hard!
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Lambonius on July 24, 2010, 02:51:37 PM
In the same room, even same bed for convenience sake---yeah I suppose I can see that.  But to arrange them holding hands?  Why would anybody in that situation even think to do that?  Why not just go the extra step and put Alexander's hand on Rosella's crotch?  

;)  *evil laugh
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Haids1987 on July 24, 2010, 02:52:35 PM
Quote from: Lambonius on July 24, 2010, 02:51:37 PM
In the same room, even same bed for convenience sake---yeah I suppose I can see that.  But holding hands?  Why not just go the extra step and put Alexander's hand on Rosella's crotch? 
Oh my gosh, what are you guys doing to me? :D LOL, I'm laughing so hard my family is giving me creepy looks...

EDIT: Can someone post a picture of said hand-holding?  My sister wants to see. ;P
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Lambonius on July 24, 2010, 03:01:35 PM
Quote from: Haids1987 on July 24, 2010, 02:52:35 PM
Quote from: Lambonius on July 24, 2010, 02:51:37 PM
In the same room, even same bed for convenience sake---yeah I suppose I can see that.  But holding hands?  Why not just go the extra step and put Alexander's hand on Rosella's crotch? 
Oh my gosh, what are you guys doing to me? :D LOL, I'm laughing so hard my family is giving me creepy looks...

EDIT: Can someone post a picture of said hand-holding?  My sister wants to see. ;P

Just watch the Let's Play video on youtube.  It'll be somewhere in the first or second part.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Haids1987 on July 24, 2010, 03:03:56 PM
Oh, haha, good advice.  Thank you.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: crayauchtin on July 24, 2010, 03:24:34 PM
I've known lots of twins throughout my life and I've noticed that, even the ones who don't get along very well, when the going gets tough they're there for each other in a way that is astonishing. They may be comatose, but it wouldn't surprise me if even in that state they reached out and held each other's hands in an unconscious effort to comfort each other (or perhaps to be comforted). People in comas have been known to try to hold hands with people before, y'know. It's pretty common. :P
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Allronix on July 24, 2010, 03:26:14 PM
I wasn't creeped out at all by it. Even as filthy as my brain can get, I didn't even factor in any kind of implications. Maybe part of it is that I'm a twin myself (though my sibling and I are identical, and therefore of the same gender).


Perhaps the family thought that physical contact could help the twins strengthen each other and break the spell? Not unheard of for twins to "get" one another in ways that can baffle anyone else, even their parents.  It's also logistically sound. One room, one set of guard dogs at the door and one place for Edgar and Cassima to act as a last line of defense.  We've already seen what Cassima's capable of. I suspect Edgar, if you push him, is quite capable of some of the nastier behavior you can get from a Fae.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: tessspoon on July 24, 2010, 03:36:59 PM
I wonder how much of that twin stuff applies when they don't grow up together? Is it innate and still strong even when separated like they were, or does it require a lifetime of close contact? For that matter, I wonder if Rosella ever felt like something was missing (more so than as would be expected of a sibling knowing that another sibling died at a young age).

Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Allronix on July 24, 2010, 03:55:05 PM
Maybe. http://science.howstuffworks.com/genetic-science/twin1.htm - God knows there's been real-life wierdness when it comes to that.

As for the KQ world? I would not be surprised if they had the feeling of "something missing." I could see Rosella, hope magnet she is, believing Alexander was alive and would come back even if/when Graham and Valanice could no longer do so.  It could also explain why she believed this slave boy in tattered clothing so easily. Likewise, it could also be why "Gwydion" could feel in his heart the Oracle's story was true, even if that mean his whole life was false.

Even if it wasn't there before, I could easily see it coming on strong during the time between 3 and 6.

Crap. Now, I have to factor that into the fanfic...   
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 24, 2010, 03:57:01 PM
There might be some truth to it, but best I've read it could be a mix of coincidences, and probably alot of pseudoscience. Also its not twins per se but actually identical twins that are said to have that kind of connection. This is primarily because they are essentially clones of each other and would in theory have the same brain chemistry...

However, there is a difference between identical and fraternal twins. fraternal twins are basically the same as a brother and sister, or brother and brother, or sister and sister who aren't twins, in that they are genetically completley different individuals. This is what Rosella and Alex would be.

Identical twins on the other hand are genetically the same. Its the identical twins that studies have looked at as having that so called "mysterious bond". They have found that those seperated at birth, seem to develop similar habits and tastes. But again in general your habits are based on a mix of your environement, and not so much your "genetic makeup". Thus many studies have said its probably more coincidental, anecdotal, and fogged by pseudosicence.

Actually I read a journal article a couple of years back, that talked about two identical brothers, where one was homosexual, and the other was heterosexual. One was more masculine, and the other more feminine. One liked GI Joes, and the other liked Barbies... basically. Both were raised in the same family, both given equal love, education, etc. So in that case environment and upbringing didn't seem to be that big of a factor.

Seriously we really don't know much about what makes the brain tick, :p...

As for fraternal twins, I've read that they can have a strong connection but that's more to do with being together all the time, infact two siblings who grow up together but arent' actually twins could have the same potential to develop a deep understanding to each other. But fraternal twins growing apart, have little in common.

Quote
http://science.howstuffworks.com/genetic-science/twin1.htm
Though understand that example is of identical twins, basically clones from a single egg and a single s****. (identical twins are always two males, or two females) as in biological identical. So it wouldn't actually apply in the case of Alexander and Rosella. If we were talking real world...

fraternal twins on the other hand are essentially the same as having one baby born each year :p... and having them grow up together. They are biologically different.

Although its a common misconception that all twins are created equally, when its really just identical twins that are "equal"... :p...
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: tessspoon on July 24, 2010, 04:18:00 PM
True, really should have thought about that before I posted...

Never heard them called paternal vs. maternal twins before, but it makes sense.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Allronix on July 24, 2010, 04:23:07 PM
I know all too well. Remember, I am one.

Is there an awful lot of BS involved when it comes to twins and the like? Yes. spades. For example,  my sister studied English and psychology. She's trying to become a school librarian. I did all my coursework in writing and computers. I'm in tech support. She's married, I'm not. We also go out of our way to try and look different.

On the flip side, there are just as many similarities. It's a great source of amusement to my brother in law.

Still, if there's a place where sympathetic magic like that would actually work, it's in that realm.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 24, 2010, 05:21:52 PM
Well, we are also shown and told in previous king's quests that personality wise the "twins" aren't really all that similar either.

Alexander is more like his father, Rosella is more like her mother.

Alexander is something of a magician, Rosella doesn't seem to be.

Alexander is a bit shy to some degree.  Rosella is strong-willed and a bit selfish.

I'm probably forgetting some of the differences though.... :p
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Allronix on July 24, 2010, 05:44:21 PM
Quote from: Baggins on July 24, 2010, 05:21:52 PM
Well, we are also shown and told in previous king's quests that personality wise the "twins" aren't really all that similar either.

Alexander is more like his father, Rosella is more like her mother.

I'd argue it's the other way around.  ;D  KQ7's intro showed that Rose and Val really had trouble relating to each other, wheras KQ6 showed that Valanice and Alexander seemed to understand each other pretty well.

Graham's stubborn, adventurous, got something of an argumentative and impulsive streak and would rather act than research. In the expanded universe material, he also stubbornly refused to be set up with any princesses circling him like so many sharks, instead choosing a (relatively) minor noblewoman from Kolyma. Age has only mellowed him somewhat. Rosella? Impulsive, adventurous, a bit selfish, stubborn on most anything...save matters of the heart. She turned Edgar down at first, and consented to a courtship in 7.

Alexander is more reserved (some of it is leftover survival mechanism, some of it inclination), a scholar by choice (Valanice is also inclined to it, if the Companion is an indication), and is a lot less impulsive than Rosella is. The only time he really starts acting before he thinks is is Cassima's involved. And then? Like his mom, he had the whole "love at first sight" hit him like a bull on speed.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 24, 2010, 05:53:12 PM
Technically Graham suffered the love at first sight bug as well :p... Through the mirror...

Quote
In the expanded universe material

Do you mean the manual or the companion? Because I'd argue that the manual was intended as part of the complete package... :p. Actually I think its also mentioned in the KQ2 introduction video, about how he has turned down quite a few women and is looking for his one heart's desire.

"KQ2 Introduction: He's searched high and low for the right maiden but remains alone".

Quote
She turned Edgar down at first,
She had to turn him down, as the narrator says, it was either her father or edgar. She nearly jumped into it. "Hunk of man flesh" however it described it, but knew her father came first. Actually rosella isn't as selfish in KQ4 as she was in KQ7. Just look at her diaologue between her and the seven dwarves, and her willingness to help everyone.

Quote
instead choosing a (relatively) minor noblewoman from Kolyma
Hmm, I think it was established she's the daughter of the prince of Kolyma? That's more than minor isn't it?
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: tessspoon on July 24, 2010, 05:57:56 PM
Quote from: Allronix on July 24, 2010, 05:44:21 PM
I'd argue it's the other way around.
That's how the Omnipedia makes it sound. "Where Rosella takes after her more adventurous and outspoken father, Alexander's quieter and more reserved personality reflects both Valanice's influence..."
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 24, 2010, 05:59:36 PM
I don't like that personality bit personally, I never added, it and I think I put a "fact" check on it a long time ago... It needs more citations. alot of this seems to be mostly opinions. I think both can be argued, LOL. They share bits of both their parents imo.

Graham is actually pretty mellow and quiet guy in KQ5 :p... for someone who has lost his family :p...

You could apply any personality for him for KQ1 and KQ2, considering the games don't give him much personality.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Haids1987 on July 24, 2010, 06:00:45 PM
Quote from: Baggins on July 24, 2010, 05:53:12 PM
Quote
instead choosing a (relatively) minor noblewoman from Kolyma
Hmm, I think it was established she's the daughter of the prince of Kolyma? That's more than minor isn't it?
She's the daughter of a prince and a miller's daughter or something, right?  Maybe the lowborn mother lowered her status a little?
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 24, 2010, 06:03:02 PM
That would be going into the realms of pure speculation I think. Who knows....

its basically taken from rumplestiltskin reference isn't it?

In KQ7 she actually acts like she's cock of the rock :p...

Graham is actually a minor noble, himself. Son of a minor knight.

In get the impression in KQ7, and in the novels that the Valanice might actually be higher born. There's this whole exchange in Kingdom of Sorrow over how he won't wear proper clothes of a noble, and Valanice has to keep on scolding him, and showing him proper manners.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Haids1987 on July 24, 2010, 06:04:22 PM
Quote from: Baggins on July 24, 2010, 06:03:02 PM
its basically taken from rumplestiltskin reference isn't it?
Huh?
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 24, 2010, 06:05:24 PM
Wasn't the miller's daughter the queen in rumplestiltskin, the one that had to guess Rumpy's name to keep her child?
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Haids1987 on July 24, 2010, 06:07:13 PM
Oh yeah!  I forgot about that.  ;D  But I was referencing the Companion, it says something about Valanice being the daughter of a prince and a miller's daughter. :yes:
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 24, 2010, 06:08:08 PM
Ya Cedric and Coignice. But ya I think her status is actually higher than Grahams. He didn't settle for less.

Actually the list of "maidens of the kingdom" that came before him during Gerwains party included farmer's daughters I think, LOL So he could have married lower than his status.

Quote
The invitations were sent out, and the whole kingdom turned out for the celebration. From every corner of Daventry the maidens came. Short and tall, slender and plump, fair and dark, pretty and plain. There were maidens from all stations of life, from Dukes' and earls' daughters to the village goose girl and the scullery maid from the castle kitchens. They all had but one thing in common: They greatly admired the handsome King, and were eager to catch his eye. Word had spread that the King was looking for a bride, and they were all thrilled at the prospect of marrying the charming Graham.

For two days the celebration wore on, and though he tried to be cheerful, Graham gradually became somber. None of the maidens he had met quickened his pulse. One maid squinted, another triped over everything in sight. Another was too coy, and the one after her giggled constantly. They all had some fault, however small. It was with great relief that Graham saw his guests ride away at then end of the celebration. He retired to his room to reflect gloomily.

"My kingdom is home to hundreds of lovely maidens," he mourned. "Why is there not one among them who touches my heart and my dreams."

I don't think status was something that factored into it if he was taking look at skullery maids and goose girls...
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Haids1987 on July 24, 2010, 06:12:44 PM
Quote from: Baggins on July 24, 2010, 06:08:08 PM
Ya Cedric and Coignice. But ya I think her status is actually higher than Grahams.

Is it?  Graham is the king of all of Daventry, Valanice only has royalty on one side.  *Shrugs*  I'm an American, we don't have a monarchy here.  I guess that's why I'm ignorant in the ways of royalty status!
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 24, 2010, 06:15:37 PM
Well, I"m American too. :). But anyways.

As we know he was given the kingship through succession, and was made an heir. He wasn't born into it. So bloodline wise ya he's lower born, a minor knight of the realm. He's just happens to be given the position of king. Whereas it seems Valanice was always at least a princess.

Come to think of it Derek/Alexander points out this fact a few times in the KQ6 novel I think, when he talks about Hereward, Graham's father.

Also if it wasn't for the fact that Hereward was mentioned to be a nobleman there may have been no indication of Graham's pedigree. I don't think there is anything mentioned in the games. Other than "knight"?

Come to think, I know its not canon, but  isn't there a story in TSL, that mentioned that Graham was actually lower class, and became a knight through his deeds rather than birth? Or was that only in the demo?
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Haids1987 on July 24, 2010, 06:22:09 PM
Hmmm.  See, that's what confuses me.  It seems like he would be considered higher than Valanice because he IS the king, even if he didn't descend from royalty.  He would start a new (cooler!) bloodline, and that would be considered "royal blood."  Does the fact that his father wasn't a king make Rosella and Alex more lowborn than a prince or princess whose parents WERE kings? 

I don't know if I'm making sense.  But I know what I mean. ;P
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 24, 2010, 06:31:29 PM
Well it depends on royalty system.

For example the Queen is the Queen of England right now because she has the royal blood connection, whereas her husband does not. So he's lower class than her. If she dies, not sure does it pass onto the prince of Wales? Who is the prince of wales right now? I remember hearing that it will probably skip Prince Charles to one of his sons, Harry I think.

In hawaii there were cases where one of the kamehemeha's was lower status than his wife. Actually as you hinted at, marrying outside of a certain status could lower the person's status further in that culture as I recall. On the other hand it could also raise someone's status to marry certain people, and thus they would do this position themselves into power. But I don't think Daventry is hawaian style.

But all I have for evidence of how royalty might work in Daventry is Graham's thoughts in Kingdom of Sorrow, Valanice in that novel, and a few vague references by Alexander and/or Derek in the Companion, :p...

He's definitely formed a new house, but I don't think he's lowered Valanice stature. He may have raised it as well. But how heridetary systems work is overly complicated... I took a bit of English history and the alliances and marriages, decisions on who would become king if the king died, or via coup, made things down right confusing :p... There were wars fought over the position because certain individuals that took over, put into power, weren't as "high born" as they should have been and someone else had a better heriditary claim :p... Many kings constantly were trying to create evidence to prove that they had legitimage heriditary ties :p... sorry if I can't give you specific examples, its been awhle.

Actually I seem to recall in one of the novels there was a knight or something, that the book points out as having higher status as far as nobility claim than Graham, (although he respects Graham and doesn't make a point of flaunting it or trying to challegen Graham), :p... might have been in Floating Castle...

Hmm come to think of it I'm reminded of Richard II of England, his uncle John of Gaunt had a higher claim to the throne over his nephew, but never pushed that fact, and honored his nephew's position. Although he legally could have made the claim and challenged Richard.However, it would have probably started a civil war, and he knew his power was probably stronger as the right hand to the king, and as his advisor. It did ultimately lead to a civil war within a generation or two, if I remember history correctly...
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: KatieHal on July 24, 2010, 08:51:17 PM
Where did it ever say anything about Valanice's parents? I was pretty sure we'd never gotten anything about her before Graham rescued and married her.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Rosella on July 24, 2010, 09:09:52 PM
I'm not sure. I'm guessing it was somewhere in the companion, but I definitely remember knowing that her parents were Cedric and Coignice.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 25, 2010, 01:09:25 AM
Its mentioned in the KQ4 chapter of the Companion, and original and second edition in the An Encyclopedia of Daventry.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: crayauchtin on July 25, 2010, 01:11:46 PM
Quote from: Allronix on July 24, 2010, 03:55:05 PM
As for the KQ world? I would not be surprised if they had the feeling of "something missing." I could see Rosella, hope magnet she is, believing Alexander was alive and would come back even if/when Graham and Valanice could no longer do so.  It could also explain why she believed this slave boy in tattered clothing so easily. Likewise, it could also be why "Gwydion" could feel in his heart the Oracle's story was true, even if that mean his whole life was false.
I've even read of twin's psychically (kinda) knowing whether or not the other was alive. Rosella probably knew for certain that Alexander was alive, despite the fact that eventually their parents gave up.
And, while such strong connections are generally reserved for identical twins, that doesn't seem to always be the case 100% of the time. Maybe that's what makes Alexander and Rosella so special!

Baggins, as for your bringing sexuality into the twins discussion.... one scientific theory *does* explain that, kind of... and only with males, although most of the identical twins I know... both twins have the same sexuality (even though, usually, one is more masculine and one is more feminine).
First of all, homosexual males have a larger hypothalamus (part of the brain) than heterosexual males. How that factors in, I'm not sure, I'm not a scientist. :P Then, scientists point to the fact that male fetuses often have a higher risk of miscarriage or other complications due to the fact that the females body isn't used to the hormones and such caused by the Y chromosome. So, some scientists have a theory that the females womb attempts to "correct" the issue and the result is a homosexual boy. The scientists who think this also seem to think that in the case of twins, it might not affect both of them! Again, I'm not a scientist, I don't understand.... I just think it's neat!

Allronix, bless you and your twin for trying to look different. One pairs of identicals I know, I swear, they try to look the same! I still can't tell them apart!

One nice thing about the world of Daventry versus the real world in that time period is that status doesn't seem to be as much of an issue.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 25, 2010, 04:10:48 PM
Quote
've even read of twin's psychically (kinda) knowing whether or not the other was alive
Right, I know what your referring to, although that's going into the realm of psuedoscience. I can't think of any credible scientists that acknowledge "psychics"... :p Psychic twins in a fantasy world, anything can happen. But in real life, erm... I'm a bit skeptical, and I'd personally avoid using examples of "pseudoscience" to try to explain how it might work in a fantasy setting... :p Better to just say, it would be interesting from a "fantasy perspective"... No offense to anyone out there that believes in psychics... Its just difficult for my scientific background.

In anycase, actually where I've heard these stories, it was always with "identical twins". I don't think I've read one example in fraternal twins (as in non-identical).

Although "identical" twins are not necessarily complete "identical".
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/11/health/11real.html

http://www.pnas.org/content/102/30/10604.full
Quote
One nice thing about the world of Daventry versus the real world in that time period is that status doesn't seem to be as much of an issue.

Depends on the king's quest source really, some hint at issues, others overlook it... The games themselves don't really ever go into I don't think (other than it was beneath the "Handsome Prince" to be interested in a "commoner" in KQ4)... :p

MOE looked at a different side of things, in that Connor proved that you didn't have to be related to royality to have Nobility. As he proves to various characters, and various characters comment on.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Fierce Deity on July 25, 2010, 05:58:04 PM
Quote from: Baggins on July 25, 2010, 04:10:48 PM
Quote
've even read of twin's psychically (kinda) knowing whether or not the other was alive
Right, I know what your referring to, although that's going into the realm of psuedoscience. I can't think of any credible scientists that acknowledge "psychics"... :p Psychic twins in a fantasy world, anything can happen. But in real life, erm... I'm a bit skeptical, and I'd personally avoid using examples of "pseudoscience" to try to explain how it might work in a fantasy setting... :p Better to just say, it would be interesting from a "fantasy perspective"... No offense to anyone out there that believes in psychics... Its just difficult for my scientific background.

In anycase, actually where I've heard these stories, it was always with "identical twins". I don't think I've read one example in fraternal twins (as in non-identical).

Although "identical" twins are not necessarily complete "identical".
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/11/health/11real.html

http://www.pnas.org/content/102/30/10604.full

I always thought that the "psychic twins" belief was loosely based on the social connection of the twins. I don't think they actually can read the other twin's mind. It's just because they are constantly around each other that they may know the other twin better than they know themselves. I've met a set of twins that were like that, and then I met another set of twins that hated each other and actually moved away from each other the first chance they got.

So any theory about "psychic twins" is probably based on a pair of twins that are best friends, cause there definitely isn't any biological evidence that shows that twins are connected through their psyche.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: wilco64256 on July 25, 2010, 05:58:52 PM
Well there was that Lindsey Lohan movie...
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Fierce Deity on July 25, 2010, 06:06:21 PM
Quote from: wilco64256 on July 25, 2010, 05:58:52 PM
Well there was that Lindsey Lohan movie...

Wilco has a very valid point. If Lindsey Lohan can do it, then anyone can.  ;D
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on July 26, 2010, 02:33:12 AM
If Lindsay Lohan can go to jail, anyone can.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Deloria on July 31, 2010, 03:31:56 AM
Quote from: Baggins on July 24, 2010, 06:31:29 PM
Well it depends on royalty system.

For example the Queen is the Queen of England right now because she has the royal blood connection, whereas her husband does not. So he's lower class than her. If she dies, not sure does it pass onto the prince of Wales? Who is the prince of wales right now? I remember hearing that it will probably skip Prince Charles to one of his sons, Harry I think.

Should Elizabeth II die, the crown will go directly to her son, Charles, Prince of Wales. Skipping generations would be illegal. :P

EDIT: Unless, of course, there's a reason someone can't accept the crown (usually religion, though I think there are a few other excluding factors).
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: darthkiwi on July 31, 2010, 07:28:31 AM
Quote
Should Elizabeth II die, the crown will go directly to her son, Charles, Prince of Wales. Skipping generations would be illegal.
I'm pretty sure this is true. The only other possibility that I can think of is that Elizabeth II's husband (Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh) would retain his current position. But that doesn't really make sense, because he is not actually King, he just happens to be married to the Queen.

Quote
Unless, of course, there's a reason someone can't accept the crown (usually religion, though I think there are a few other excluding factors).

Religion is indeed a factor: no Catholic can inherit the throne of England. This is because James II (who ruled in the late 17th century) was a Catholic and aimed to make England a Catholic country again; most of his subjects were not Catholic and saw this as a huge problem. To be honest the law's very out of date now but nobody seems worried enough to change it (probably because there aren't any Catholics who look likely to inherit at the moment).

Apart from that, I can't think of any other reasons why someone who is in line to the throne would be barred from inheriting - unless, of course, they are born out of wedlock.

Of course, you could say that it's unfair that all daughters are barred from inheriting the throne until their brothers die (as in the case of Mary I and Elizabeth I). But that's a whole other kettle of fish.
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Deloria on July 31, 2010, 04:35:47 PM
Quote from: darthkiwi on July 31, 2010, 07:28:31 AM
Quote
Should Elizabeth II die, the crown will go directly to her son, Charles, Prince of Wales. Skipping generations would be illegal.
I'm pretty sure this is true. The only other possibility that I can think of is that Elizabeth II's husband (Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh) would retain his current position. But that doesn't really make sense, because he is not actually King, he just happens to be married to the Queen.
I've considered this. :P Dowager prince, perhaps? :) It's not a situation that's ever come up before. :P

Actually, that's not quite true. :P Philip II outlived his wife, though I'm unsure of what his title was after her death, or if, indeed, he had one (didn't he have enough? :P). :P

Quote

Apart from that, I can't think of any other reasons why someone who is in line to the throne would be barred from inheriting - unless, of course, they are born out of wedlock.
It's been ages since I read the succession laws in the Bill of Rights and the Act of Settlement, but I thought there were a few others? :P

I believe I also recall something about the spouses of Roman Catholics being unable to inherit the throne (as IIRC the reason for James II's conversion to Catholicism was the fact that he married an Italian princess, Mary of Modena).

(Posted on: 31 July 2010, 22:21:55)

For Haids and Baggins:

Valanice was higher born, but Graham holds a higher title than she. Snobs might consider her to have married down as Graham was little more than a commoner (I believe it's said somewhere that he was but a peasant but eventually became a page, then a squire, then a knight, then a king) and by extension, a barbarian. :P In practice though this doesn't matter as marriages were not made for class and in order to breed cultivated young men and women so much as political advantage or, in this case, love. Valanice's lineage is much better as she is technically descended from a prince and the mother was a commoner-made-princess. :P
Title: Re: Question about the Intro
Post by: Baggins on August 03, 2010, 04:11:10 AM
Deloria, I've talked to many people in England on the situation. Apparently the problem with Charles is Camilla.

Apparently traditionally if a Prince married someone who had an affair with another man, then it apparently could forfeit the Prince of Wales's succession to the throne. Essentially it would make it illegal for them to become king.

Those of the more conservative bent want that to take place, and would rather Prince William step into place instead.

Whereas more liberal system, thinks that law is outdated, and should be ignored.

Basically it lead to some rumors of someone from inside Buckingham Palace exposing some memo, that said that the Queen was grooming William as a Shadow King (taking on some of her duties while she lives), and would take her place when she passed away.

Which William later denied.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/theroyalfamily/6925437/Prince-William-I-will-not-become-shadow-king.html

Beyond that it may just be politics as usual (I don't understand British politics) and just smear campaign from conservatives against liberals, and an attempt to discredit Charles.

Quote
I believe it's said somewhere that he was but a peasant but eventually became a page, then a squire, then a knight, then a king
That's what was said in the Silver Lining IIRC, at least in the demo version.

Not in the KQ games though (his background isn't really given, other than he was Edward's favorite and bravest knight). Actually King's Quest Companion says he's the son of Hereward, who was of noble birth himself (and the king's best friend). Although apparently only minor nobility under the Knighthood.

http://kingsquest.wikia.com/wiki/Hereward

His mother's name isn't given, but it is implied that she was a Lady of noble birth herself. Its not clear what level, however.

There are actually few references to other nobles in the kingdom in the official games, other than dukes and earls being referenced in the KQ2 manual, and nobles at the end of KQ1 remake.

The novels went a bit further, talking about several nobles in the kingdom, barons, dukes, etc. IIRC there was at least one knight in The Floating Castle, who always made a big deal about how he had higher nobility than the King  (and by virtue had a better claim to the throne), although like John of Gaunt, he respects the king and supports him, and had no intention of challenging him.

In Kingdom of Sorrow, Valanice is proud of her noble station, berates Graham for not living up to his title, she complains about his choice of wearing lower class clothing in court (old thread bear jerkin), and tells him to wear a wardrobe better fitting his station when in court. BTW, she doesn't seem to have a problem with him wearing his simple adventurer clothing when he is out journeying abroad however (she just prefers when he seeing to the business of the kingdom that he better presents himself). This may have to do with the fact that there are other nobles in the kingdom such as said Dukes and Earls that may have higher nobility than him, and he needs to portray himself at their stature.