Jump to content

[lore] What the heck is Ur-gothoz anyway?


jmerry

Recommended Posts

Copying one over from another thread: demon/devil recognition and Dorn's Abyssal Blade. The blade uses two layers of opcode 177 effects to detect what a "demon" or "devil" is. The first layer checks for race DEMONIC, the second checks for class TANARI (demons) or IMP (devils). The problem with this is that the classes are not applied consistently; only ToB devils use the IMP class. A standard summoned pit fiend is lawful evil but has class TANARI, for example. I propose switching to alignment detection (chaotic evil or lawful evil) for that second layer (ohdsw2hc.EFF and ohdsw2hb.EFF).

Then there's Azothet and Ur-Gothoz. They're pretty clearly supposed to be one from each side of the Blood War. But you look at their stats - both Lawful Evil, both class TANARI. Based on appearances, I'll say Azothet is supposed to be the demon here.

Link to comment

I'm also breaking this into its own thread for visibility.

On 4/8/2022 at 5:29 PM, jmerry said:

Copying one over from another thread: demon/devil recognition and Dorn's Abyssal Blade. The blade uses two layers of opcode 177 effects to detect what a "demon" or "devil" is. The first layer checks for race DEMONIC, the second checks for class TANARI (demons) or IMP (devils). The problem with this is that the classes are not applied consistently; only ToB devils use the IMP class. A standard summoned pit fiend is lawful evil but has class TANARI, for example. I propose switching to alignment detection (chaotic evil or lawful evil) for that second layer (ohdsw2hc.EFF and ohdsw2hb.EFF).

Then there's Azothet and Ur-Gothoz. They're pretty clearly supposed to be one from each side of the Blood War. But you look at their stats - both Lawful Evil, both class TANARI. Based on appearances, I'll say Azothet is supposed to be the demon here.

I'm going to call on the more lore-learned posters here--I'm sure I've got  details wrong--but at a first glance this is a mess.

I think the confusion revolves around Ur-gothoz himself. He's described in the game text as a glabrezu, but when revealed, he uses a cornugon animation. If he's a glabrezu, then he should be CE (creature file is LE) and is properly a demon. Cornugons are LE and are properly devils.

The rivalry and overarching story works either way:

  • If Ur-gothoz is a glabrezu then he and Azothet are both tanar'ri. This is fine as traditionally mariliths and glabrezu clash despite being ostensible allies in Ye Olde Blood War. Per its description the blade is also made by a babau, another type of tanar'ri. In this scenario, Ur-gothoz's alignment needs to change (CE) as well as his animation. The sword getting a bonus vs. demons (if Ur-gothoz is captures) or devils (if Azothet is trapped) doesn't make a lot of sense except that it provides differentiation.
  • If Ur-gothoz is a cornugon then the Azothet rivalry is simply another Blood War conflict. In this case numerous text updates would have to be made, from 'glabrezu' to 'cornugon' specifically, and from 'demon' to 'devil' more generally. Even in BGEE Dorn refers to his 'demonic master' Ur-gothoz, though it does not get more specific than that. Ironically, the sword upgrades makes less sense as it gets bonuses vs. devils if Ur-gothoz is bound, and vs. demons if Azothet is bound--the opposite of what you would expect.
Link to comment

I was definitely speaking from ignorance earlier on Ur-Gothoz's nature - I saw the cornugon animation and didn't even check any of the dialogue/quest log entries. One more data point: their stats are cloned from a glabrezu, GORTAN4. Compared to that creature, the only changes are (a) remove scripting for Tahazzar's group, replace with scripting for Dorn's quest, (b) increase HP by 40, (c) add a min-HP item, (d) change alignment to LE, and (e) change animation to cornugon.

I don't think that made the overall picture any clearer.

Link to comment

I suppose we could ping Philip Daigle on Twitter for confirmation since it was he, IIRC, who wrote this content.

Alternatively, my preferred solution would be to make Ur-Gothoz a devil and update the text accordingly (it should then be “devilish” master but if those lines are voiced, rather keep “demonic” which I reckon can be used to describe a devil in generic terms; not everyone on Toril will be able to tell them apart anyway.)

Azothet should of course be CE.

Edited by Andrea C.
Link to comment

"Demonic" is fine as a generic term - it's used as the race for both demons and devils, after all.

I think there's only one voiced instance of "glabrezu" referring to Ur-Gothoz. String #77317 "It's yours no longer, glabrezu!", used in a dialogue between Dorn and Ur-Gothoz when you summon him for a fight. Vernus has a voiced "glabrezu" line, but that's referring to Xachrimos.

Link to comment

For what it's worth my opinion, rationalising the sowrd's upgrades it should be as follows:

Binding Azothet (who should be a CE tanar'ri/demon) would give +5 vs good and +5 vs devils, basically both "enemies" of a CE individual.
Binding Ur-Gothoz (who should be a LE bateezu/devil, Cornugon would be fine)  +5 vs good and +5 vs demons, with the same logic.
Binding both, should be ok as it is.

Of course this is the solution that will need more edits in dialogue/voiced dialogue.
"Demonic master" could still do, "Devilish master" would be better for a meticolous approach.

Never done that quest, does Ur-Gothoz acts/talks in a way that could be considered more chaotic or more lawful?
Honestly I think they just messed up while writing the quest, no great "mistery" to solve :(.
 

Edited by Frenzgyn
Link to comment

I have no horse in this race, but if there's dialogue that says Ur-gothoz is a glabrezu, he is probably meant to be a glabrezu, no? His animation might be "cornugon" but IIRC fiend animations are generally pretty inconsistent across BG2. (E.g. almost all "tanar'ri" and "demon lords" look like nabassu; cambions and "demon knights" (whatever they are) look like death knights; etc.)

In any event, I don't think it makes much sense to try to reason this out or guess. There are clearly issues that need fixing here - it's a complete mess - and if the point is to follow dev intent then yeah, tweet at the developer and see what they say.

Edited by subtledoctor
Link to comment
14 minutes ago, subtledoctor said:

I have no horse in this race, but if there's dialogue that says Ur-gothoz is a glabrezu, he is probably meant to be a glabrezu, no? His animation might be "cornugon" but IIRC fiend animations are generally pretty inconsistent across BG2. (E.g. almost all "tanar'ri" and "demon lords" look like nabassu; cambions and "demon knights" (whatever they are) look like death knights; etc.)

In any event, I don't think it makes much sense to try to reason this out or guess. There are clearly issues that need fixing here - it's a complete mess - and if the point is to follow dev intent then yeah, tweet at the developer and see what they say.

it deserve an attempt for sure, my reasoning was just considering lore, adding up to what CamDawg said:

The sword bonuses could have sense IF a sword with a tanar'ri trapped inside will give a bonus against bateezu and viceversa, considering they existentially HATE each other (it would explain the differentiation), in case it will turn out Ur-Gothoz was indeed meant to be glabrezu, the +5 vs devil when Azothet is bound and the differentiation itself don't make any sense at all.

Link to comment

Right, so, executive decision time. Looking through everything again... it's still a mess.

On 5/23/2022 at 2:59 PM, CamDawg said:

If Ur-gothoz is a glabrezu then he and Azothet are both tanar'ri. This is fine as traditionally mariliths and glabrezu clash despite being ostensible allies in Ye Olde Blood War. Per its description the blade is also made by a babau, another type of tanar'ri. In this scenario, Ur-gothoz's alignment needs to change (CE) as well as his animation. The sword getting a bonus vs. demons (if Ur-gothoz is captures) or devils (if Azothet is trapped) doesn't make a lot of sense except that it provides differentiation.

In the end, this is the path of least resistance: two changes to Ur-gothoz and accepting that the sword is not really sensible is preferable to a few dozen string changes (including voiced lines) and the sword going from 'not really sensible' to 'seemingly backwards'.

I'm not satisfied with it, but in lieu of something more authoritative, we'll go this way.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...