Defense of Patroklos

[Thaeonblade]

Thank you.

For what?

Pat was set-up in promotions and previews the " Heir To The Title of Holy Warrior" and the Main Hero of the new story. Never in those previews did it say that Pat starts out as an unlikable asshole who murders people in cold blood.

Which is honestly part of the fundamental difference between Sieg and Patroklos and why comparing them doesn't work for Patroklos. Another difference that you agreed on is that the plot is heavily contrived in favor of Patroklos, which is part of the problem of why the character is bad. If the story at least let the brat face some genuine consequences for his actions like Siegfried and other characters have, then the hate that myself and others feel for him wouldn't be so bad.

But as the horrible story stands, Patroklos is way too pampered by the plot and that actually enables Pat to remain unlikable and not go through genuine, natural and un-contrived character development.

Also, if Pat is supposed to "start" as the villain, then how the hell did he get Soul Calibur? This isn't a nitpicky complaint that can be hand-waved or ignored, there's already rules set up in past games about how the sword chooses it's wielders. Mainly that those wielders (Xianghua, Siegfried, King Arthur, Hilde's ancestor) and potential other wielders (Characters with soul calibur as an ultimate weapon (Kilik, Talim, Nightmare (III shows why as odd as it was), Sophitia (III), Cassandra, Ivy, Yoshimitsu and so on) had to have strong wills and be pure of heart, strength and intention.
PS: the weapon profile on Soul Calibur comes from Soul Calibur II's Weapon Gallery

When Pat first got the sword, he had none of those qualities. Not to mention that according to past games, Pat. should still be malfested unless the writers simply forgot about it or decided to ignore it for plot convenience. So at the point when Sieg decided to give him the sword (A dumb move, I won't deny that), there is no reason or logic behind how the brat can touch the sword and much less unlock it's power in later chapters.

In short, Pat got the sword because the plot said that he got the sword. He gets to unlock his true style because the plot said that he could. He got to perform a feat that no one else has ever done because the plot said so. He also is somehow able to defeat the essence of Soul Calibur even though it had previously controlled him because the plot said that he could. Even though he was previously too weak of will to keep Soul Calibur from making him kill his sister and yet is strong enough to send himself back in time hours later.

You can't separate the bad story from Patroklos because the horribleness of both are bonded together. They feed each other like a symbiotic cycle. What harms or weakens one will effect the other and vice versa. Patroklos' reputation is harmed by the bad and contrived story while the already weak story is further harmed by the fact that Patroklos (The main protagonist and primary viewpoint of the story) has almost no likable, redeemable or identifiable qualities that make him worth following, caring for or rooting for. I actually had more fun watching this brat get beaten up by ZWEI and Nightmare than I did beating anyone with him...because I didn't care about him to where I wanted him to win.

That alone is why Patroklos is objectively worst than Siegfried. (Fully admitting that I really do personally hate the brat, but all that the facts and evidence presented in the games do is vindicate that hate.)

Say what you want about Sieg and he's overrated or that his hands were dirty as well (missing the point that redemption was the main theme of his later character arc), but the story actually made him suffer hard for all of his actions. (Especially in post-xianghua fight Soul Calibur and Soul Calibur II which I'd describe as his purgatory and even in III and IV) It didn't shelter or pamper him or automatically give him a holy sword from the start and beat the audience over the head with the fact that we're supposed to like him without giving us a reason to like him. Even in III and IV, the story still isn't forcing us to like him because we're not forced to only follow his viewpoint. Even as the main hero in III and IV, Sieg was still just a part of a larger story with other characters and motivations tied into the mix of the tale of souls and swords.

Can't say any of that for Patroklos for reasons already stated.

 

[Nyte]

For what?

Pat was set-up in promotions and previews the " Heir To The Title of Holy Warrior" and the Main Hero of the new story. Never in those previews did it say that Pat starts out as an unlikable asshole who murders people in cold blood.

Which is honestly part of the fundamental difference between Sieg and Patroklos and why comparing them doesn't work for Patroklos. Another difference that you agreed on is that the plot is heavily contrived in favor of Patroklos, which is part of the problem of why the character is bad. If the story at least let the brat face some genuine consequences for his actions like Siegfried and other characters have, then the hate that myself and others feel for him wouldn't be so bad.

But as the horrible story stands, Patroklos is way too pampered by the plot and that actually enables Pat to remain unlikable and not go through genuine, natural and un-contrived character development.

Also, if Pat is supposed to "start" as the villain, then how the hell did he get Soul Calibur? This isn't a nitpicky complaint that can be hand-waved or ignored, there's already rules set up in past games about how the sword chooses it's wielders. Mainly that those wielders (Xianghua, Siegfried, King Arthur, Hilde's ancestor) and potential other wielders (Characters with soul calibur as an ultimate weapon (Kilik, Talim, Nightmare (III shows why as odd as it was), Sophitia (III), Cassandra, Ivy, Yoshimitsu and so on) had to have strong wills and be pure of heart, strength and intention.
PS: the weapon profile on Soul Calibur comes from Soul Calibur II's Weapon Gallery

When Pat first got the sword, he had none of those qualities. Not to mention that according to past games, Pat. should still be malfested unless the writers simply forgot about it or decided to ignore it for plot convenience. So at the point when Sieg decided to give him the sword (A dumb move, I won't deny that), there is no reason or logic behind how the brat can touch the sword and much less unlock it's power in later chapters.

In short, Pat got the sword because the plot said that he got the sword. He gets to unlock his true style because the plot said that he could. He got to perform a feat that no one else has ever done because the plot said so. He also is somehow able to defeat the essence of Soul Calibur even though it had previously controlled him because the plot said that he could. Even though he was previously too weak of will to keep Soul Calibur from making him kill his sister and yet is strong enough to send himself back in time hours later.

You can't separate the bad story from Patroklos because the horribleness of both are bonded together. They feed each other like a symbiotic cycle. What harms or weakens one will effect the other and vice versa. Patroklos' reputation is harmed by the bad and contrived story while the already weak story is further harmed by the fact that Patroklos (The main protagonist and primary viewpoint of the story) has almost no likable, redeemable or identifiable qualities that make him worth following, caring for or rooting for. I actually had more fun watching this brat get beaten up by ZWEI and Nightmare than I did beating anyone with him...because I didn't care about him to where I wanted him to win.

That alone is why Patroklos is objectively worst than Siegfried. (Fully admitting that I really do personally hate the brat, but all that the facts and evidence presented in the games do is vindicate that hate.)

Say what you want about Sieg and he's overrated or that his hands were dirty as well (missing the point that redemption was the main theme of his later character arc), but the story actually made him suffer hard for all of his actions. (Especially in post-xianghua fight Soul Calibur and Soul Calibur II which I'd describe as his purgatory and even in III and IV) It didn't shelter or pamper him or automatically give him a holy sword from the start and beat the audience over the head with the fact that we're supposed to like him without giving us a reason to like him. Even in III and IV, the story still isn't forcing us to like him because we're not forced to only follow his viewpoint. Even as the main hero in III and IV, Sieg was still just a part of a larger story with other characters and motivations tied into the mix of the tale of souls and swords.

Can't say any of that for Patroklos for reasons already stated.

Well said. If anything, I found Z.W.E.I. to be a better protagonist than him. Hell, Pyrrha came off to me as being more heroic and an all-around better person, and she's supposed to be the villain!

 

[Alex.J]

Patroklos was very "endearing" in the story mode and clearly displayed himself as a warrior worthy of Soul Calibur through his heroic and selfless acts like:

- Ignorance of an obvious evil when it's staring him in the face, when he has part of said evil's power in his very blood.
- Has murdered countless innocent people unprovoked in a quest for misguided vengeance.
- Disrespects friend and foe alike.
- Selfishlessly abandons the organization that gave him a free sword, training and had helped him find his sister.
- Displays a very arrogant and cocky attitude for a so-called "Holy Warrior."
- Cries and whines in denial when his obvious flaws and mistakes are shoved into his face.
- Rejects his sister for reasons beyond her control even after she saved his life .
- Has an obsession with his sister and mother that contains strong undertones of incest.
- Never makes up his own mind on what he wants in his life.
- Is easily led around by anyone and everyone.
- Murders his sister after going through a character arc for the purposes of saving her.

You're a lawyer representing Patroklos in a trial before a Video Game Supreme Court with all of the Soul Calibur guest characters as Jury and Edgemaster as Judge with the prosecution displaying an apparently strong case against Patroklos based on his failures, actions and the overall poor quality of SCV's story especially in regards to Patroklos wielding Soul Calibur.

Would you defend Patroklos? Why or why not? If you would, how would you present your case and how successful do you think it would be? If you choose not to defend him, what would you do instead?

PS: We're ignoring the blatant deus ex machina in the form of Soul Calibur's out of nowhere time travel ability.

Also, limit reliance on the Art book and focus on the games.

As a lawyer in this case, you must let me know what the charges are before I would take his case. Further information would also be useful. Is this a civil suit of someone seeking damages? Is this a criminal case and he's going to jail? What am I working with?

 

[Marginal]

- Ignorance of an obvious evil when it's staring him in the face, when he has part of said evil's power in his very blood.

That's not really a crime. Especially when Dumas is dictating the law of the land. In court, this would be impossible to make stick as there were no such things as war crimes tribunals then.

- Has murdered countless innocent people unprovoked in a quest for misguided vengeance.

He did that legally. Totally fine.

- Disrespects friend and foe alike.

Not a crime.

- Selfishlessly abandons the organization that gave him a free sword, training and had helped him find his sister.

This breaks what law?

- Displays a very arrogant and cocky attitude for a so-called "Holy Warrior."
- Cries and whines in denial when his obvious flaws and mistakes are shoved into his face.
- Rejects his sister for reasons beyond her control even after she saved his life .
- Has an obsession with his sister and mother that contains strong undertones of incest.
- Never makes up his own mind on what he wants in his life.
- Is easily led around by anyone and everyone.

Not crimes either.

- Murders his sister after going through a character arc for the purposes of saving her.

Technically this never happened. He time traveled and fixed that.

PS: We're ignoring the blatant deus ex machina in the form of Soul Calibur's out of nowhere time travel ability.

Nope. We are not since you're trying to charge him with a crime that never happened.

PS if you're rude about your reply, or you disrespect me, you will be jailed as that's apparently a crime.

 

[Alex.J]

@Thaeonblade What do you think of Marginal's post?

 

[Nyte]

I haven't seen a main character I wanted to die in a slow and horrible death this much since Sasuke Uchiha.

 

[Thaeonblade]

That's not really a crime. Especially when Dumas is dictating the law of the land. In court, this would be impossible to make stick as there were no such things as war crimes tribunals then.

He did that legally. Totally fine.
Not a crime.
This breaks what law?
Not crimes either.
Technically this never happened. He time traveled and fixed that.

Nope. We are not since you're trying to charge him with a crime that never happened.

PS if you're rude about your reply, or you disrespect me, you will be jailed as that's apparently a crime.

1. I wasn't literal about everything being worthy of being charged as a crime, merely that these were personality faults and mis-actions that paint Patroklos in a heavily negative light and image.

2. Good point, but it doesn't absolve Patroklos. Keep in mind that Patroklos was born with soul edge energy from Sophitia and this is known and demonstrated to react to similar energy sources or even soul edge itself. In short, there's no reason why Patroklos shouldn't be able to sense the source of ultimate evil when it's staring him in the face.

Also, Dumas was defeated and overthrown and even came out publically in his identity as Nightmare, so his Law of the Land isn't going to hold up anymore. Also, Hungary was part-ways dominated by the Holy Roman Empire and the Ottoman Empire during the 1600s and the game isn't clear about which empire that Dumas owed subservience to (art book clarifies that it's the holy roman empire if I recall correctly)...either way, I doubt that the

3. Yes it is even if it's not acknowledged. Especially since the majority of those people weren't even the targets that Patroklos was after and again, there's nothing indicating that he wouldn't be able to sense/tell the difference. Last that I checked, murdering the innocent is a crime.

4. Incest is a crime in many cultures, especially between siblings and parents and the strong incest tones are pretty hard to miss even if technically nothing happened.

5. Ignoring it because the deus ex machina is what lets Patroklos reset time and "fix" things. It also has no set-up, it's a clear cop-out and a deliberate example of narrative backtracking. So no, we're ignoring it. Patroklos killed Pyrrha and pays the consequence rather than get a convenient reset button.

As a lawyer in this case, you must let me know what the charges are before I would take his case. Further information would also be useful. Is this a civil suit of someone seeking damages? Is this a criminal case and he's going to jail? What am I working with?

Let's say that it's a criminal case where Patroklos faces possible imprisonment or death for his actions:

The actual charges in mind would be the following:

- Mass Murder (many of whom were unarmed and non-malfested)

- Accomplice to Graf Dumas

- Threatening your own sister with a weapon after she saved your life and made no aggressive move against you

- Kinslaying (probably the most legally defensible on further thought since Pyrrha was the Crimson Despair at this point)

Everything else would be mostly character flaws and actions that underline the lack of likability that the character has, though they technically would only act as character references and not as actual charges.

And even that wouldn't help if the character references are more negative than positive since your jury and judge can be influenced to act against you and are less likely to be sympathetic. And honestly, I would not blame them.

 

[Alex.J]

- Has murdered countless innocent people unprovoked in a quest for misguided vengeance.


Also, Dumas was defeated and overthrown and even came out publically in his identity as Nightmare, so his Law of the Land isn't going to hold up anymore. Also, Hungary was part-ways dominated by the Holy Roman Empire and the Ottoman Empire during the 1600s and the game isn't clear about which empire that Dumas owed subservience to (art book clarifies that it's the holy roman empire if I recall correctly)...either way, I doubt that the

He fought in a war for Dumas. That makes him a war hero. Murder is allowed during times of war. Are you the new ruler? Why does Dumas' law of the land no longer hold up? The storyline says nothing of new laws of the land does it? No proof of new laws = no crime.

And since Zwei killed Nightmare, lets say for arguments sake he became new leader. He is allies with Pat right? Doubt he would punish him or take him to court. So again, no crime.

- Has an obsession with his sister and mother that contains strong undertones of incest.

4. Incest is a crime in many cultures, especially between siblings and parents and the strong incest tones are pretty hard to miss even if technically nothing happened.

Zero proof he committed the act = no crime committed.

- Murders his sister after going through a character arc for the purposes of saving her.

Time travel, so never happened in the universe in which this "trail" is taking place. Therefore no evidence = no crime committed.

 

[Xyerith]

He fought in a war for Dumas. That makes him a war hero. Murder is allowed during times of war. Are you the new ruler? Why does Dumas' law of the land no longer hold up? The storyline says nothing of new laws of the land does it? No proof of new laws = no crime.

And since Zwei killed Nightmare, lets say for arguments sake he became new leader. He is allies with Pat right? Doubt he would punish him or take him to court. So again, no crime.


Zero proof he committed the act = no crime committed.



Time travel, so never happened in the universe in which this "trail" is taking place. Therefore no evidence = no crime committed.

No Alex that's not how it works. You completely disregarded theaeonblade's statement #5 in response to Marginal where theaeonblade ignored stuff that happened in the confines of the story because he didn't like it.

 

[Alex.J]

No Alex that's not how it works. You completely disregarded theaeonblade's statement #5 in response to Marginal where theaeonblade ignored stuff that happened in the confines of the story because he didn't like it.

Loooooooool. True man.

Theaeonblade said himself that the jury would be SC characters. They do not have the knowledge we do of seeing time travel. Therefore Thaeonblade's opinion doesn't matter. Since the jury isn't Theonblade. And the only SC characters who would be against Pat are dead, the rest are his friends or N/A. Case closed.

 

[Marginal]

The only ones who would even potentially be aware of the time travel are Algol and Edgemaster.

 

[Project Bokuho]

Defend? Nope.

 

[Marginal]

True. Pat is 100% offense.

 

[Project Bokuho]

True. Pat is 100% offense.

NFL has too many QBs. They won't hire him.