Jump to content

Regalia's motivations


king of nowhere

Recommended Posts

I've been wondering about her and I believe she had deeper reasons for setting up prof the way she did than just "she succumbed to epic crazyness like everyone else".

 

Let's consider the facts:

- she takes over new york, but after a few years of terror she suddenly reins in and stops killing people. she even stops her minions killing people. She only restarts to draw prof in.

- She talks down david for killing steelheart because in newcago civilization had mostly survived.

- she also criticize prof for bringing down epics because epics keep order. as a formmer judge, she probably cared about order a lot

- the land between newcago and babylon is a post-apocalyptic wasteland

- megan describes epic crazyness as the kind of selfishness of children. children wouldn't care of setting up a successor

- regalia knew of calamity's nature

 

So, I think regalia was still mostly in control of herself. she was crazy at the beginning, but then at some point she took control of herself, possibly even conquering her fear. And then she began to plan.

 

She knows that calamity is an epic, and every other epic got his power from him. She knows that epics age. So, eventually, calamity will die of old age, and no more epic will spawn, and after all those died of old age too, there would be no more epics. That's a breaking of the world style scenario, only instead of crazy saidin channelers until they all die you have crazy people with superpowers until they all die.

The end result would be the same. the few survivors would come back from hiding and would rebuild all from scratch, but with every knowledge lost, they'd be back to stone age. And since our civilization mined every valuable mineral easily mined, burned all the oil and coal close to the surface, and exploited all the non-renewable resources that were easier to exploit, a new human civilization would never be able to get past the stone age. We'd be stuck living in huts until the sun becomes a red giant and destroys the planet.

But! It doesn't have to end this way. Civilization can survive under tiranny. It must survive. The good thing is that it doesn't need to survive everywhere. Just a single city that retained technology could, after the death of the last epics, restore that technology to the rest of the world. Humankind can rebuild, and in a few generations it will be as if the epics never existed, if only there is an electronic memory device fillled with science, and an electric source, and someone with the capability to understand it. But that one city must survive. And in order to survive, it needs to be protected against marauding epics. Regalia was doing just that to new york; a place where enough technology survived to rebuild after the epics. she was even trying to attract people with specializations.

But then she got cancer. Without her, new york would fall to anarchy. It needed a new protector. Not the reckoners; eventually, they would be killed. If humankind could not stand up to epics when it had organized armies, what are the chances that a bunch of individuals can do better? David himself is pretty lucky to be still alive.

No, the only way to defend a city is with a powerful epic taking residence there. So she devised a plan to get the mmost powerful epic she knew to take the city. One epic who already had shown a remarkable self-control and goodwill.  And at the same time she would get rid of the reckoners, that in the name of unrealistic ideals threatened the precarious balance on which the future of the world hunged.

 

And this is a book, so the reckoners will win in a good way, but if it were the real world, I'd give regalia's plan a much better chance of success than david's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You bring up some good points, but Regalia expressed what can only be described as sadistic glee at the prospect of David murdering his friends. Furthermore, she says that she's "going to enjoy watching this," in reference to his Rending, implying she finds pleasure in seeing good people corrupted. Otherwise, she enjoys watching people die, which doesn't say good things about her.

Regalia may have done some good things for Babilar, but I doubt her motives were pure, or even decent. She struck me as a very sinister character.

Edited by TwiLyghtSansSparkles
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regalia's motives are definitely much more admirable than other characters, especially the ones suffering from a bad case of the epic-crazies. I (personally) find it hard to think of her as a "bad guy" of the book. Maybe back when she flooded the entire city and killed tens of thousands of people whilst doing so she could be considered as an evil character. But she changed since then. She then understood the risk of the human race losing thousands of years of advancement. Though her methods are rather morally unsettling her motives are pure.

 

But would her plan be more successful then David's. If we (for the purpose of this argument) were to measure success in three attributes 1)kill-count (how many deaths are needed to complete the plan) 2)damage to property 3)longevity (how long will the plan be effective for).

 

> David's plan would win category 2 as the reckoners barely ever destroy property

> Regalia's should plan would win category 3, but the problem with this is for it the hold its longevity it she would need to find a heir and        have a string of heirs after that.

> Category 1 is a lot more blurred and hard to decide. On one hand David's plan would require less sacrifice of civilians to keep the people from uprising. But Regalia's plan would mean other epics wouldn't attack as often probably killing hundreds before they could be properly killed. In the end I decided that Davids plan would cause less causalities.

 

final tally:

David's=2

Regalia's=1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ twylight, you bring up good points. she certainly shows sadistic glee. On the other hand, she repressed those for years. That's quite difficult to understand. if she liked to hurt people, why repress it for years? Maybe she was only somewhat in control of herself, and had to figure out a plan that could satisfy both her desire to protect some people and her epic instinct to kill.

 

@ surgebound: I was actually referring to the chance of success. If they weren't the protagonists of the story, I'd give the chances of the reckoners being able to repel every attack on their city as virtually zero. On the other hand, I give prof a more than even chance of ruling a city until he dies of old age. I mean, steelheart managed to do it for ten years, and he was far less powerful than prof was. even if prof hadn't been able to bypass his prime invincibility, he could have just confined him into shields capable of stopping a nuke, and let him rot there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ twylight, you bring up good points. she certainly shows sadistic glee. On the other hand, she repressed those for years. That's quite difficult to understand. if she liked to hurt people, why repress it for years? Maybe she was only somewhat in control of herself, and had to figure out a plan that could satisfy both her desire to protect some people and her epic instinct to kill.

Who's saying she repressed it? If she's telling the truth about being able to create new Epics, she could have satisfied her craving for watching people corrupted by corrupting Grigori (Waterlog) and Knoxx, and possibly others. If Calamity created those Epics, she could have simply watched their Rendings.

If she did suppress those urges at all, my guess is that she was biding her time, waiting for her chance to corrupt Prof. Besides, if all she wanted was a successor and her motives were indeed pure, why corrupt Prof and force him into it? Why not tell him "I have cancer, take care of my city please" after trying to repair their friendship or even just performing some act of goodwill? Turning your successor into an immortal killing machine seems counterintuitive, for a ruler who wants to do what's right.

Edited by TwiLyghtSansSparkles
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I have not read the Calamity excerpt nor Kobold's spoiler for it but why do we assume that she meant the succesor for ruling her city? She could very well have talked about something she was working on with Calamity. Given his secretive nature I would not be suprised, if Prof also knew how to interact with Calamity or if Calamity were to contact him.

 

Anyway, unleasing an extremly powerful Epic, with a corruption level that you have never seen in him before, making it hard to judge his behaviour, in your city without telling him about it doesn't seem like the best plan for him to actually care for said city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And speaking of her supposed lack of childishness, I'd disagree. Regalia was childish, but not in the "I need what I need and I need it now" sort of way we see from Epics like Megan and Prof. She was childish in the sense that no one was allowed to be better than her. Not in the sense of power levels--I think she'd accepted that Calamity gives some powers to certain Epics and if she didn't have a PI, that was just the way things were--but in a moral sense. She gave into her darker inclinations while Prof suppressed his, making him her moral superior. Regalia couldn't handle this. She couldn't abide the notion that he was better than she was, and she couldn't make herself good again, so what does she do? She makes Prof evil. Once he was fully corrupted and she could look down on him again, she could die happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok I have to back up the 'immoral evil death bringer' version of Regalia. Even if her plan could've worked on paper, she'd obviously seen enough readings, possibly even some of High Epics, and wouldntve know what Phadreus was gonna do. If she wanted the Reckoners dead, which is controversial, she got it. Regalia, in her own definition, are 'The point after an epic gets their powers, and feels an overwhelming urge to kill those closest to them, who know him best, who might be able to find out their weakness.' Prof did just that, evident in the book and excerpt.

Edited by TheSpartanDuck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

king of nowhere, in your original post  you imply that she was drawing specialists to Babilar as pasrt of some effort to help them, but when the Reckoners say that she is attempting to draw specialists to Babilar they were guessing based on her drawing a very skilled doctor. But from the ending we know that she has terminal cancer. She likely needed the doctor to survive long enough to complete her plan, but any other experts were speculation on the Reckoners' part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok, all things considered, my theory seems much more shacky now. Still difficult to accept that she restrained herself for years, and she went to such effort, just to mess around with one person. I still think her behavior fits better if there was a part of her trying to resist, at least for a while, but that part was probably much smaller than I previously thought, and maybe it was definitely gone when she started killing people again

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would make sense in both ways. Epics do strange things, and often do things just to kill their superior epic to ensure safety of themsleves. As David figured out, 'In an Epic's core, there is fear.' Wouldn't it make sense that Regalia was trying to kill them most powerful epic she knew p, who's also working to kill large City running Epics like her?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would make sense in both ways. Epics do strange things, and often do things just to kill their superior epic to ensure safety of themsleves. As David figured out, 'In an Epic's core, there is fear.' Wouldn't it make sense that Regalia was trying to kill them most powerful epic she knew p, who's also working to kill large City running Epics like her?

No, that argument I don't buy. Regalia had cancer. Regalia wasn't afraid of prof jumping in and killing her a few weeks before she would have died anyway. In fact, regalia planned her death: after prof unleashed his power, a screen (set in the place in advance) showed prof exactly where reglia was. and since regalia knew prof and was likely to figure out his weakness, you can be sure prof would have killed her after talking to her. maybe before talking to her.

So,  whatever her reasons were, she certainly did not attack the reckoners for fear of being killed.

In fact, that's pretty much why I am ascribing complex and possibly pseudo-altruistic motivations to her: she knew she was going to die and didn't care much anymore, did she really go through years of planning just to have a last laugh at an old friend-turned-rival?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In fact, that's pretty much why I am ascribing complex and possibly pseudo-altruistic motivations to her: she knew she was going to die and didn't care much anymore, did she really go through years of planning just to have a last laugh at an old friend-turned-rival?

 

If my theory holds true, yes. People can be horribly spiteful, even without Calamity's corruption, so I don't find it surprising at all that a woman who takes pleasure in seeing good people corrupted would plan her friend-turned-rival's downfall for years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clearly Regalia was just jealous that Prof had both Mizzy and David for comic relief while she was stuck listening to Obliteration.

Or cake, she was probably jealous that he had a better cake. Cake's always the answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clearly Regalia was just jealous that Prof had both Mizzy and David for comic relief while she was stuck listening to Obliteration.

Or cake, she was probably jealous that he had a better cake. Cake's always the answer.

 

You didn't think Obliteration was funny? :huh: Try reading his scenes with Yakety Saxy blaring in the background. It's guaranteed to turn your terror into hilarity!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You didn't think Obliteration was funny? :huh: Try reading his scenes with Yakety Saxy blaring in the background. It's guaranteed to turn your terror into hilarity!

So you disagree with the first possibility but what about the cake? Are you suggesting that *gasap*

The cake is a lie?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Chaos locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...