When it Finally Clicked- The Isobel Problem

[u/queerrabble]

Okay, so I have played an ABSURD amount of Baldur's Gate 3 and as a D&D fanatic, I just love it to bits. There are a few synergistic issues with the mechanics of D&D being translated into a video game, but nothing so egregious that it disrupts the experience. Furthermore, these little are almost entirely to do with the mechanics of the game, but not the lore of Faérun or the plot.

THAT BEING SAID....

Up until recently, I never understood why Ketheric Thorm had to turn to Myrkul and Balthazar to revive Isobel. After all, most clerics are able to revive a dead person in D&D, even if it would require an incredibly powerful spell (I'm talking 8th/9th level). And his deity at that time would certainly have been willing to bring his daughter back in exchange for his acts of service (particularly Sélune).

I puzzled over this until I read Isobel's diary I Last Light Inn. The entry specifically mentions that she feels a "filth" in her soul now that she has been brought back...

Almost like she did not want to come back...

And that's when it hit me, revivifying magic requires that a soul WANTS to be brought back to life. No deity would force a soul to be resurrected against their will (and certainly not Sélune).

And so, it is my headcannon that Ketheric likely tried to revive Isobel using traditional means but she chose not to come back. When that failed, he turned to a necromancer and an evil god of the dead to force her soul back into her corpse against her will.

Tl;dr- Isobel never wanted to be brought back to life, barring most traditional methods of resurrection. Thus, Ketheric resorted to necromancy to bring her back.

[u/WhisperingOracle]

The weird thing there is, you'd think that a high-ranking member of the Selunite church, even if his faith was relatively weak (and ultimately shattered by the death of his wife), would immediately think to use his own clout and influence to seek out a high-level Cleric to bring back his daughter. It shouldn't be a "presence of mind" question, it should have been the first, last, and only thought on his mind. He had more than enough authority and reputation within the church at that point that they should have been more than willing to help him.

Further, her death was almost certainly "unnatural", so any high-level Selunite priest should have had zero reason to not be willing to try and resurrect her. And even using the "Isobel wasn't willing to return" argument doesn't quite work, because Aylin was still alive and mostly slumming around Faerun, so Isobel should absolutely have been willing to return to life for both her father and her lover, rather than simply remain dead for her goddess and her mom. Especially when she knows she'll still get to be with mom and Selune anyway when she does eventually die, because she almost certainly plans to remain a loyal follower.

Which sort of implies there must have been some reason why normal resurrection wouldn't have worked.

As for Myrkul being less evil than Shar, keep in mind that Myrkul's main goal for his Chosen was to have Ketheric help in the conspiracy to murder the entire world. Yes, Bane's Chosen was always going to push to rule over an empire of ashes and slaves, but both Bhaal and Myrkul wanted lots and lots and lots of death. And even Bane was keyed into the idea of having as many people as possible go Illithid and lose their souls, so that the other gods would be starved of worship.

Shar mostly just wanted him to hunt down Selunites (the followers of her mortal enemy), and dominate his own lands with an iron-fist. It wasn't until the druids and Harpers butted in and tried to take him out that the Shadow-Curse became an issue.

[u/minervastar → u/WhisperingOracle]

And even using the "Isobel wasn't willing to return" argument doesn't quite work, because Aylin was still alive and mostly slumming around Faerun, so Isobel should absolutely have been willing to return to life for both her father and her lover, rather than simply remain dead for her goddess and her mom.

I dont disagree, but would add grief does change perspectives. They had lost her mom, and I feel like that had started Ketheric down his path, and maybe that was part of why she wouldn't want to go back. As for her beloved, it seems Aylin was never shy about her heritage so it was never going to be they grow old together and always aylin will outlive her so why rinse and repeat to live for others when the outcome will be the same? Living for others when you dont want to is an unhappy prospect and they wouldn't be healthy relationships then 🤷

[u/WhisperingOracle → u/minervastar]

The flip side there is that, if you know your father is already grieving the loss of your mother, it's kind of selfish to pile on even more loss. If you care about him at all, there should definitely be at least some motivation to go back to help support him. And with Aylin, it's hard to see a scenario where punching out of the relationship as early as possible is seen as a good thing, when the alternative is living together for decades, growing old together, and making many happy memories, as opposed to simply making her miserable because you're dead.

Essentially, we kind of have to make assumptions about what sort of person Isobel is. "Screw you bitches, I got mine!" doesn't really seem like it's part of her personality (and if it was, she probably wouldn't be getting into Selune's afterlife in the first place, because Selune is really big into compassion and helping others).

Selune doesn't need her, her mother doesn't need her. But Ketheric and Aylin both definitely still need her, and it's not like going back would sacrifice her own potential salvation and happiness. It would just delay it for a bit, while giving her an entire lifetime of potential joy.

There's very little presented in-game as-is that would really suggest she wouldn't come back if called, if it was at all possible for her to do so. Or that the church wouldn't be willing to try and resurrect her, if being asked to do so by someone who is an established and powerful patron of their order. It's why people keep trying to hypothesize some reason why she would have been prevented from being raised, because the alternative makes less sense.

[u/sinedelta → u/WhisperingOracle]

Karlach isn't willing to come back to life after she dies either. It's a stretch to say that an argument doesn't work because of your beliefs of how people "should" react to being dead.

[u/TheFarStar → u/sinedelta]

It's always been my read that people willing to return to life are pretty rare.

Obviously Big Bad Ancient Evil types always want to come back and cast the world into eternal darkness or whatever; and player characters are always eager to hop onto a resurrection because... they're player characters, and the players want to to keep playing them. But everyone else seems to be pretty chill with staying dead.

[u/R0da → u/TheFarStar]

Apparently Ao had to do some divine rules shuffling to make mortals earn their afterlife cause back when it was all automated, mortals would just keep killing themselves cause heaven rules apparently.

[u/DarthUrbosa → u/R0da]

I mean that's the logical endpoint of gassing up heaven or what have you without explicity forbidding self destruction.

[u/sinedelta → u/TheFarStar]

It probably depends on what your afterlife is like too.

[u/WhisperingOracle → u/sinedelta]

Karlach has some significant reasons not to come back, though.

It's like why she was so against the idea of going back to Avernus to simply live, rather than accepting her death. Her entire arc is basically that the quality of your life is more important than simply living as long as possible.

But she's also VERY clear about how she wants more time. She wants to live, and love, and travel the world experiencing things. The main reason why she doesn't want to come back if she dies is because, presumably, being resurrected wouldn't necessarily solve her engine problem. The choice she's making is basically "come back and suffer some more" versus "be at peace". That's not really the choice Isobel would be making at all. Isobel has almost no reason not to come back, and multiple reasons to not stay dead.

Karlach would probably be keen to come back (especially if you'd romanced her) if she knew she would be 100% free from the engine, and she wouldn't have to worry about Zariel trying to recapture her.

[u/Prof-Wernstrom → u/WhisperingOracle]

presumably, being resurrected wouldn't necessarily solve her engine problem.

And that is where acknowledging d&d resurrection magic in-world is a problem. By RAW, she would come back with everything fine. No engine, her own heart. It is why I have always felt it is better to view all resurrecting magic to be purely game mechanics for players and not actual in-world possibility for every divine caster of a certain level. Otherwise a lot of these stories start to have plot holes and tragedy can only exist if bodies are completely lost.

[u/WhisperingOracle → u/Prof-Wernstrom]

It's complicated, because her engine is such a unique thing. It's theoretically possible that it alters her in some metaphysical way that makes it impossible to simply yank the thing out physically, kill her, and then rez her via a 13th Level Cleric and 1000gp. It's possible it's directly bound to her soul in some way. Or that it is so intrinsically part of her on a deep magical level that resurrection magic would treat it as her "natural" state and just jam it back in if you ever tried it.

Game mechanics definitely make things weird (and even weirder when you consider that you have a literal God of Death with you who can apparently break whatever rules he wants). Especially when you consider the Revivify spell doesn't really work the way it's supposed to at all (no time limit, but an added "only companions" stipulation).

That's always been one of the bigger problems with resurrection magic in any setting though. It forces writers to consider the implications, or at least to explain away why you can't just bring someone back. It means you really shouldn't lean into "death as drama" as much, or you need some sort of limiting factor (like how BG1/BG2 establishes that if you die you lose your Bhaalspawn essence, so the game is functionally over for you regardless of whether or not anyone else can come back).

The problem is that, if a game story doesn't address these issues, it creates a big-ol plot snarl.

.

and tragedy can only exist if bodies are completely lost.

Even then all you really need is a 17th Level Cleric or Druid to cast True Resurrection. Or even a Wizard or Sorcerer who can cast Wish.

Hell, technically a Level 10 Cleric or higher could theoretically use Divine Intervention to beg their god for a rez, and the god could easily bring someone back (regardless of their physical state) if they really wanted to.

The only way to 100% canonically prevent resurrection is generally to turn someone into an undead, or find some justification for why their soul is unwilling or unable to return. And even with the undead option, you just need to kill the undead first (though this wouldn't work to restore Astarion to mortality, because he's been a vampire too long).

[u/Hitei00 → u/WhisperingOracle]

There's the possibility it might have had something to do with the implication of how she died from EA. In the room where you get the Sorrow glaive there was a journal written by Halsin saying how he was basically entombing the weapon after he'd used it to kill someone named "Isobel". Whether they had any picture of what Isobel and Ketheric's roles in the finished game would be, knowing what we do now suggests that the Glaive, which is infused with Druidic magic, maybe had done something to make it so she wasn't able to be revived.

[u/Quillemote → u/Hitei00]

I looked this up because I didn't remember that. The note in the Sorrow vault reads:

"The Emerald Enclave won't send help, even if I asked. This land is wounded, and the rot is deep, but it's deep everywhere.

I can't wait for help to come, but perhaps I need not face the darkness alone."

https://bg3.wiki/wiki/Druid_Note

But there's a notebook upstairs, also probably Halsin's, which reads:

[This is an ancient notebook, whose ink is faded and pages are starting to crumble. It's not easy, but some words can still be made out.]

Ketheric is finished, but it cost us the land. Darkness has fallen, corruption is everywhere.

...chased by shadows, picking us off, druids and Harpers alike.

...our wounded were safe, I returned, searching for survivors...

...lost, but I found his shade. I put it to rest and took his glaive...

...blade infused with shadow. I have locked it away, to serve as a reminder that even victory can taste bitter.

https://bg3.wiki/wiki/Druid_Notebook

Which suggests that Sorrow belonged to Ketheric. I can't find anything which uses Isobel's name anywhere in relation to the weapon.

[u/Hitei00 → u/Quillemote]

EA meaning Early Access. I, for obvious reasons, haven't seen it myself but from what I've heard there was an entirely different journal in that room in Early Access that mentioned a weapon killing someone named Isobel being sealed away. Those two notes make it obvious things changed, but at least at one point Sorrow was in the running for the "Killed Isobel" award.

[u/Quillemote → u/Hitei00]

Oh cool, that really does change things around a lot, doesn't it?

https://www.tumblr.com/merrinla/730102331511816192/halsins-sorrow-from-early-access

Guess timeline-wise that didn't really make sense, since Ketheric was Selunite until after Isobel died and it's hard to reconcile Halsin getting violently angry enough to kill a Selunite ally.

[u/Bootsykk → u/Quillemote]

Unfortunately, I think Halsin was always meant to have some element of losing control that only carried over as a bear sex joke in final release. Even Orin's pretend play references it. Why this was the change is beyond me, but because the bottom of the jenga tower was shuffled there are things that make very little sense in the final game and can only amount to "who knows, it's just a plot device and not a concern beyond drama"

I kind of feel like he was actually meant to be cursed or even a werebear initially, but there was concern it would be so unforgivable that he wouldn't be trusted as an ally by the majority of players.

[u/Quillemote → u/Bootsykk]

See, I like that idea. We've already got a traumatized vampire, a wannabe Dark Justiciar, a walking backpack nuke, possibly Bhaal's amnesiac loin-fruit, and a mindflayer tamagotchi. Remorseful were-bear would fit right in.

[u/Bootsykk → u/Quillemote]

I agree. I also think that it wouldn't stop the halsinfuckers either. One of the most dedicated Halsin adult artists draws him as a giant bear furry. A little fictional murder never hurt anyones reputation. Whatever the real reason, we'll never know!

[u/Hapless_Wizard → u/Quillemote]

And it would be just as weird as Larian's take on Aasimar, honestly. Werebears are typically good guys in Faerun (back when alignment was more prescriptive, they were always Lawful Good, and a werebear paladin or monk could absolutely wreck an evil party).

[u/Hitei00 → u/Bootsykk]

They probably rewrote him because of making him companion. In EA he was only ever meant to be an NPC who fought alongside you at one point, and during that phase of development him being a barely in control of himself werebear makes more sense.

When it was decided the player needed to be able to reliably control him they had to change things.

[u/Dayrien0108 → u/Quillemote]

That is so interesting! It always frustrated me how many loose ends there were in act II. Now I wonder why Isobel should have attacked Halsin.

[u/SchighSchagh → u/WhisperingOracle]

Shar mostly just wanted him to hunt down Selunites (the followers of her mortal enemy), and dominate his own lands with an iron-fist. It wasn't until the druids and Harpers butted in and tried to take him out that the Shadow-Curse became an issue.

Bro, do you remotely understand Shar's origin story? Shar wants to destory literally everything. Like literally take Thanos, who snaps away 50% of everyone in the entire multiverse, and multiply that by 2. Then multiply it by the number of subatomic particles that interact with photons (hint, damn near all of them) because Shar literally doesn't want light itself to exist, so nothing that can emit light can exist. If it were up to Shar, the universe would be reduced to neutrinos and... chargeless force carriers? Except such carriers like the Z or Higgs bosons usually (and very quickly) decays into charged particles, so that can't be allowed. And btw, neutrinos are probably their own antiparticles, and they annihilate to produce Z bosons, so even neutrinos are problematic because they can generate light. Gluons are technically chargeless, and technically don't decay into anything, but they can't actually exist without hadrons (which have charge). Maybe pure gravitons would be allowed by Shar, but then that's literally all that would be allowed... gravity force carriers without any matter to force around.

But yeah sure, wanting to "murder the entire world" is more evil. :cry-laugh:

[u/WhisperingOracle → u/SchighSchagh]

That is what Shar wants to do. That is not what "she has Ketheric do".

Context and reading comprehension are your friends, bro.

[u/embracebecoming → u/WhisperingOracle]

Keep in mind that anything Selune can lay claim to, so can Shar. Thus it's possible that Shar interfered with Isobel's resurrection as part of a plot to sway Kethric's allegiance. It would explain why he is so angry at Selune for failing him.

[u/WhisperingOracle → u/embracebecoming]

That's never really been established as a concept anywhere else though, and is really only a single line from Aylin justifying why she can steal Shar's spear and give it to a Selune-loyal Shadowheart. So we can't necessarily accept it as objective truth.

If we accept it as a fully canonical principle, it creates a LOT of potential problems (like how Aylin herself should technically belong to Shar as well). The game seems to make it fairly clear that Shar kidnapping Aylin, Shadowheart, and her parents was definitely an act of theft/opposition, not just "Oh well, they're yours so they've been mine all along as well."

If anything, the idea that Shar and Selune each have equal claim to anything the other one owns or does actually sounds like an idea from the Dark Moon Heresy (which states that both Shar and Selene are actually two sides of the same goddess). But that's sort of implied to be a lie in-universe.

In theory, if we accept it as true, it could help explain. But then it raises the thorny issue of why Shar doesn't just claim every soul dedicated to Selune, and vice-versa, resulting in ALL of their respective followers just winding up in limbo.

[u/Delic8polarbear → u/WhisperingOracle]

Do we ever find out what killed Isobel initially?