Dark Prince of Camelot

[X] Let in only Matthew, Piper, Gavin or Annabelle, and only one of them.

Let's not let the people who voted to murder us in our head. Further, only letting one in limits the strain on Mordred's psyche and limits the violation of them seeing our mind.
 
@Gally
If they get let it, can it be set so Bailey sees what her past self did by betraying the queen?
And every other bad thing all the knights did - would be good to have them all see their past selves at their worst.
 
Write In Proposal
[X] Let them in conditionally. Only three: Annabelle, one from the 'Yes' panel and one from the 'No' panel.

Annabelle's trustworthy not to fuck with our head unnecessarily, and she's seen quite a bit of our headspace anyway. Moreover, she'll keep the other two in line and has a link to us anyway. Taking an additional person from each side of the debate is prudent too, and they'll feel more comfortable having three versus one (as one voter suggested) while we will be better off having only three people rummaging through our head like a freshman with a panty drawer.

Plus, the rule of three is always fun to invoke.
 
[x] Let them in

Perhaps we can show them Camelot as we saw it. The shining utopia of our childhood, turned into a cesspit of corruption and rot as we grew older and wiser. The memories that set Mordred on the path to Camelot's ruination in order to save the world from the monsters the Round Table were becoming.

Or perhaps memories of our time in the modern age. The acts of a normal teenager who plays a flute on the streets. A guest at the Bone's. A hero who saves his benefactor and their kin. A crusader who fought monsters to help the innocent. The magician who tried to save a life and the mourner when he failed. The hero who bartered with Sa'Lanyah for the life of the woman he might have loved.
 
[X] Let them in conditionally. Only three: Annabelle, one from the 'Yes' panel and one from the 'No' panel.
 
???

All I remember Bercilla doing is reacting... poorly to walking in on Gwynn and Lorelei. When did she betray the queen?
Ah yeah I got her confused with Bedivere.

Edit
My point about showing the knights at their absolute worst stands, though.
They need to get a dose of reality and find out everything wasn't all black and white.
 
Last edited:
Ah yeah I got her confused with Bedivere.
Honestly the worst I think of Bercilla is that she didn't speak out against the... Well the atrocity that had to be committed to end the civil war and that she continued supporting the government that did it to her last breath, but even then Mordred himself was the one who carried out that order and the lack of anyone speaking our against it could have just been because Mordred wasn't their to see it?
 
[x] Let them in

@Gally
So, I've been thinking about why Mordred even started down his whole path of darkness in the first place, and his reasoning never really made sense to me. Which, by itself, would be fine--evil people being irrational, big deal. But his sudden change in character between him being sealed away in the final battle of Camelot and him being reawakened at the start of the quest has had me wondering. On top of that, whenever Mordred muses about his past, he seems to always avoid thinking too hard about why he acted the way he did when he rebelled, and what he was even trying to accomplish (yes, he outlined his goals and reasons in generic/vague fashion, but he never seemed to have fleshed out his thoughts on the matter in a way that held water, even in terms of internal consistency). Couple that with just how readily and happily he acclimated to a normal lifestyle with the reincarnations of his former enemies as friends (and abandoned his ambitions of conquest or revolution pretty much within days), and now the bombshell that Mordred is and has been under mind magic for quite some time...

Was Mordred's whole "turn to the dark side" something caused by external, magical influence? And was some factor involved in him being sealed away and reawakened again many, many years later (or his soul bond with Annabelle, perhaps) responsible for undoing or disrupting some/all of that influence that basically allowed him to return to his more normal self?

It's the only thing that allows me to reconcile Mordred with how he's been since the start of the quest (and the Mordred from his earlier days, before his rebellion) and the Mordred who sided with all kinds of horrible, monstrous people and factions to tear down a country full of innocent people for the purpose of...starting a country of his own from the ashes of the one he'd just destroyed? While somehow taking on all of the evil factions he'd just sided with and aided in destroying their greatest and most powerful foes? Because, really, if all he wanted to do was make a country like Camelot but better, all he had to do was start up a nation/kingdom of his own somewhere else. Somewhere that was ruled by people whom he could reasonably justify in overthrowing, but one that wasn't so strong that he had to ally with the worst of the worst to do it. That way, at least, he wouldn't have to murder his own friends and family (along with his own countrymen), and he wouldn't be removing the greatest opposition to forces he really didn't like and didn't think he could coexist with beyond a temporary alliance. So yes, being severely influenced by mind-magics makes far more sense, and explains the sudden, drastic shift in character.
 
Actually I've been wondering myself, had Mordred actually intended to survive his attempt to bring down Camelot or did he mean to put a Capital C in clean when he wanted to whip the slate clean.
 
But his sudden change in character between him being sealed away in the final battle of Camelot and him being reawakened at the start of the quest has had me wondering.
Was there a change? What do you see as his portrayal at the beginning of the quest and in the earlier days? Because I can't say I saw him as anything but a teenager who thinks things through... poorly. I always considered his rebellion a tantrum, a quest to destroy that which he didn't like without much thought given as to what will come next.

I can't say that his latest thoughts about himself disagree with the view I held of him at the very beginning:
That raw, savage rage that brought you from the brink…the furious desire to command and be obeyed…the need to leap into the fray, feel iron crack against the strength of your armor, feel flesh part before the sharpness of your sword. Fight violence with violence, injustice with injustice. Destroy. Conquer. Burn.

That is Mordred Pendragon.
That was him alright. He saw that Camelot was unjust, he saw that it would stay forever unjust, and he sought to destroy it. He didn't offer anything in its stead.

He is only now starting to realize that he might have had a problem. "I might've fucked some things up" seems to be a refrain in his life. But he is not, and was not, malicious.

His attitude towards the Knights shifted from 'defenders of what he loathed' to... well, whatever it is in the last update. It was noticeable after one week spent with them. There is nothing left for them to fight over.

That is to say, I can't see inconsistensies in his characterisation. Could you clarify what you mean?
 
Last edited:
Was there a change? What do you see as his portrayal at the beginning of the quest and in the earlier days? Because I can't say I saw him as anything but a teenager who thinks things through... poorly. I always saw his rebellion as a tantrum, a quest to destroy that which he didn't like without much thought given as to what will come next.

I can't say that his latest thoughts about himself disagree with the view I held of him at the very beginning:

That was him alright. He saw that Camelot was injust, he saw that it would stay forever injust, and he sought to destroy it. He didn't offer anything in its stead.

He is only now starting to realize that he might have had a problem.

His attitude towards the Knights shifted from 'defenders of what he loathed' to... well, whatever it is in the last update. It was noticeable after one week spent with them.

That said, I can't see inconsistensies in his characterisation. Could you clarify what you mean?
I think there might of been a lot of mental instability, PTSD and guilt mixed in as well.

Remeber, he killed thousands and started a famine with Hellfire on his mothers orders, was paralysed traumatically, stuck like that and in pain for weeks and finally was seemingly betrayed by some of the people he loved the most.

That'd fuck anyone's mental state up, especially as it included having his entire world view destroyed and his belief in those around him destroyed.

And after all that he hears that his mother, who he puts the blame on to stave off his own guilt, might become immortal forever. A teenage mind can't really handle that. Especially as he was probably putting a lot of emphasis on changing things for the better and making it all right after she died of old age or something and he became king to help with the fact he had done horrible things in the war.

Mordred was at his most fucked up, he had a single shred of hope for his own redemption in his view and there was a very easy to blame scapegoat right there. In one sentence Merlin took that away, before he had a chance to heal and stabilise.

It broke him. And recently after he accomplished his ill thought out, impulsive, childrish goal, he latched on to the persona of Morgan to stabilise himself.

Pity that's gone too. Along with Gala. It's probably going to screw him up and make him slightly more unstable mentally.
 
Back
Top