Discuss lore and secrets of Dark Souls 3
 2 
Avatar

BobTheHollow

Addicted
First Warden

Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2015 1:32 am
Location: Japan
Souls: 1,767.50
Posts: 208
Reputation: 11
Wiki Edits: 1
#11
Hi, so I made a video to show you the Angels and the Pilgrims' parasites up close: https://youtu.be/CIFtsoIpH_Y

As you can see, the parasite that sprouts from the Pilgrims' corpses has no tree-like features at all. No roots, no twigs, nothing. It seems to be made of some sort of cartilage, even though it has certain humanoid features, it doesn't really have a proper face, and it seems to have cartilaginous, undeveloped wings stretched across its back.

The angels have clear bug-like features on the front and back of its lower body, and the legs are very clearly not twigs or roots, they're bug-legs. Despite the shape, color, and the feather-shaped particles falling from it, the wings don't seem to be feathered. The face is caved in, it's not even a face at all. And may I remind you that the angels seem to be projections created by the parasites.

I think that the root-like material that can be seen in the parasitic growth of the Londor Pilgrims is the material of which these parasites' cocoons are made of, the Pilgrim Butterflies are parasites that have emerged from their cocoons before their metamorphosis could be completed, and the corpse parasites are the larvae which are meant to further evolve into the angelic form, but aren't quite there just yet.

I'm currently working on a theory where these parasites are used to control the minds of the Pilgrims and all the others that have been infected.
youTube.com/BobTheHollow - DkS Lore, PvP and Music Videos
VIP
Avatar

TSMP

Chosen Undead
Peacemaker

Squirming with Insight

Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 11:42 am
Souls: 44,334.50
Posts: 6776
Reputation: 687
Wiki Edits: 564
#12
No, not on the larva things. I meant poking out from under the shells of a normal, non-DLC Londor Pilgrim. There are what looks like branches. Also, wow those things look a lot like the man-grubs. Interesting that the man-grubs also have the feather particle effects coming off their spells, same as the Divine Pillars of Light miracle.

The description for the Cleric set says "It is said that the blue-robed travelers were entrusted with a duty. They bore large covers on their backs to ensure that they would not become seedbeds for spreading darkness." What definition of 'seedbed' doesn't involve plants?

Oh yikes, but yes I can see what you're saying about that angel. It's a **** roach drider with angel wings, what the hell Miyazaki. And what looks to be a random twig poking out of its not-face. I needed to see precisely none of that, jeez. And the bug legs, eugh.

Though, it seems a bit too soon to assume they're parasites, doesn't it? Consider this: the Stone-Humped Hag at the beginning of Dreg Heap, when she becomes an angel (without a grub, mind you; showing that the angel isn't just a projection), one of two things will happen. If you killed her, the angel is hostile to you. But if she died of natural causes, the angel is not hostile to you and will just kill murkmen all day. This shows that, to whatever extent, the Pilgrim's memories transferred over. Furthermore, if we say that the man-grubs have some relation to the angels (which, considering the whole roach thing and the spells they cast, seems likely to me), then Heysel, who was noted by Leonhard for her peculiar camaraderie with other Fingers, does a similar thing where she isn't hostile to you after becoming a man-grub, even though all but one other grub is hostile. Some aspect of her personality carried over, if not all of it.

(In the game's files, aren't the larva things called something that suggests it's a younger version of the angels?)

Seeing that angel up close does bring the locust preachers to mind, though.
Avatar

BobTheHollow

Addicted
First Warden

Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2015 1:32 am
Location: Japan
Souls: 1,767.50
Posts: 208
Reputation: 11
Wiki Edits: 1
#13
Indeed, I cannot yet attest to whether it would be parasitic or symbiotic. Either way, I think there's no contest that the seedbed was a seedbed to such bug-like creatures. I'm open to accepting a species that is neither bug nor plant, though I'd still need to do more lore hunting on the matter. Like I said, I'm still working on this theory and hopefully, it'll be ready for my next Lore Dump video.
youTube.com/BobTheHollow - DkS Lore, PvP and Music Videos
VIP
Avatar

TSMP

Chosen Undead
Peacemaker

Squirming with Insight

Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 11:42 am
Souls: 44,334.50
Posts: 6776
Reputation: 687
Wiki Edits: 564
#14
Well, if it'll help you, here's something I was confused on as to your theory so far: you seem fixated on the idea that these things are a separate entity from a hollow? In addition to the previously mentioned angel and grub showing personality traits from the original, I'd also like to point out that excessive rebirth via Rosaria is supposed to transform undead into grubs (also, I don't think it's a question that the grub hanging off her is Klimt, who worshipped her). Given both those, it sounds more like both the grubs and roach angels are transformations that retain the mind of the original to some extent, not a separate creature. Not unlike undead turning into dragons, really, even though dragons act so differently from people. If you're going to say angels are a parasite or other separate being rather than the undead going through a metamorphosis, I'd think you'd have to be prepared to say the same of a dragon.

Oh, but have you gotten a close look at Klimt-grub, yet? I haven't looked recently, but I remember his skin texture being all kinds of **** up, less smooth than the (presumably) younger grubs.

As to 'seedbed', I won't doubt now that, yeah, bugs. But seriously, what definition of seedbed doesn't relate to plants? There are instances of hollows turning into trees, and there's still the Pilgrim Butterflies to consider. No telling whether or not they're the same thing or a separate thing just yet, but I think there's something going on there.
Avatar

BobTheHollow

Addicted
First Warden

Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2015 1:32 am
Location: Japan
Souls: 1,767.50
Posts: 208
Reputation: 11
Wiki Edits: 1
#15
Thanks for pointing out a possible point of confusion regarding my ideas, I'll work on it as I move forward. About the man grub on Rosaria's lap... I'd invite you to read this thread (and maybe watch the Non Vereor Nox video on my channel if you'd like), then share your opinion with me.
youTube.com/BobTheHollow - DkS Lore, PvP and Music Videos
VIP
Avatar

TSMP

Chosen Undead
Peacemaker

Squirming with Insight

Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 11:42 am
Souls: 44,334.50
Posts: 6776
Reputation: 687
Wiki Edits: 564
#16
BobTheHollow wrote:Thanks for pointing out a possible point of confusion regarding my ideas, I'll work on it as I move forward. About the man grub on Rosaria's lap... I'd invite you to read this thread (and maybe watch the Non Vereor Nox video on my channel if you'd like), then share your opinion with me.

Your reasoning is that you don't think it's Klimt because you think it's possible some other grub is Klimt? That other grub has Great Heal, which is used by high-ranking clerics, sure. But Klimt is an Archdeacon, of which there are only three, whereas we don't know how many 'high-ranking' clerics exist beyond a vague "select few". You're taking two categories that are not necessarily mutually inclusive, and saying that because object X (man-grub) exists in one category (high-ranking cleric), it must therefore exist within the other as well (archdeacon) because all objects from category A (HR cleric) also exist within category B (ArchD). The error here is that, while all archdeacons may be high-ranking clerics by definition, not all high-ranking clerics are archdeacons. In other words, all squares are technically rectangles, but a rectangle is only a square if it was already a square to begin with. The logic doesn't resolve the question, and nothing is proven.

Furthermore, the Saint Bident says Klimt abandoned his faith when he chose to serve Rosaria, meaning he won't be casting miracles at all as a grub. If all the item descriptions that refer to Klimt by name say he joined up with Rosaria, and there is an unusual grub all up in Rosaria's business, then it's perfectly logical to suspect that grub is Klimt. Sure, there's nothing to prove that particular grub is Klimt, but he's the best suspect by far.

All people have the right to their own opinions, on the grounds that no living human currently has the ability to control minds and forcibly re-write a person's worldview and belief system. This is fine, and arguably better for us all in the long run. But it doesn't mean opinions are sacred, just that they're technically inviolate.

Anyways, reading that thread (or the page, at least) brought something else to mind: when plasmafogking was wondering about the Man-Grub Staff and why it would scale off Luck, I was reminded of the description on Anri's Straight Sword, and what it had to say about Luck.

"Sword precious to Anri, another Unkindled. The dullest type of blade found in the ruined land of Astora.

Only, it was once the sword of an earnest noble figure, and its attacks are boosted by that elusive, essential property unique to humans: luck."


So, Luck is a trait unique to humans. Which, interestingly enough, explains why it, as a stat, works in exactly the same way the Humanity counter did in DaS1, where it boosted item find, curse resistance, gave scaling to a select few weapons and one infusion type, and had a strong thematic connection to the Dark. That being the case, man-grubs having high Luck is the same as saying they have lots of humanity. Which, in hindsight, is fitting.

On the subject of bugs and random speculation, I'm reminded of all the Irithyll equipment and Wolnir's sword being eaten by abyssal bugs, along with Gnaw and Dorhy's Gnawing directly summoning bugs from the abyss. That, along with everything else in TRC, puts quite a different spin on what all the dark is, or at least what hides in it. Also, I'm starting to sympathize with Gwyn "I fear the dark so much I set myself on fire". When the gods placed a seal of fire on all the humans and their stuff, was it because all the humans were creepy crawlies? Was Gwyn like "oh hell no" and locked that nonsense away?

I guess the question that needs answering is "are angels what humanity should naturally be, or are they artificial and the result of Londor / Gertrude's machinations?" That question is the key to this puzzle, I think.
Avatar

Rakuyo

Caffeinated
Guardian

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 6:35 am
Souls: 48,958.50
Posts: 849
Reputation: 16
Wiki Edits: 9258
#17
TSMP wrote:Bugs have roots? Since when? :-/


http://bloodborne.wiki.fextralife.com/f ... _Larva.png

http://bloodborne.wiki.fextralife.com/f ... a_Full.png

http://bloodborne.wiki.fextralife.com/f ... _Chaos.jpg

And TSMP, the evidence for that grub being Klimt is really, really thin.
Those who seek dark, will always find it.
VIP
Avatar

TSMP

Chosen Undead
Peacemaker

Squirming with Insight

Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 11:42 am
Souls: 44,334.50
Posts: 6776
Reputation: 687
Wiki Edits: 564
#18
Rakuyo wrote:
TSMP wrote:Bugs have roots? Since when? :-/


http://bloodborne.wiki.fextralife.com/f ... _Larva.png

http://bloodborne.wiki.fextralife.com/f ... a_Full.png

http://bloodborne.wiki.fextralife.com/f ... _Chaos.jpg

And TSMP, the evidence for that grub being Klimt is really, really thin.

Yes, Rakuyo, thanks for illustrating the entire point I was trying to make. Bugs, trees, bug-trees.

In regards to Klimt, I said the giant grub is the best suspect for him by far. When you have a bunch of circumstantial evidence that points to one person(/thing) but not to anything else, it is time to get suspicious. The game does not outright say it, much like it doesn't outright say Kaathe was the one who taught Londor lifedrain, or that he wasn't up to shenanigans in Oolacile. But those fit Kaathe's modus operandi. In Rosaria's Fingers, we have a covenant that uses Klimt's own seal as its symbol, gives out a staff that incorporates his seal, and its sorcerers cast spells that resemble his old weapon.

There's a point where it's perfectly reasonable to suspect that the biggest, oldest grub is probably Klimt, and that's when literally everything that references him suggests as much. No, the game doesn't outright say it, but it doesn't outright say a lot of things. Consider: the Nameless King, and how his item descriptions strongly suggest he's Gwyn's firstborn without actually saying so.
Avatar

Rakuyo

Caffeinated
Guardian

Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 6:35 am
Souls: 48,958.50
Posts: 849
Reputation: 16
Wiki Edits: 9258
#19
TSMP wrote:
Rakuyo wrote:
TSMP wrote:Bugs have roots? Since when? :-/


http://bloodborne.wiki.fextralife.com/f ... _Larva.png

http://bloodborne.wiki.fextralife.com/f ... a_Full.png

http://bloodborne.wiki.fextralife.com/f ... _Chaos.jpg

And TSMP, the evidence for that grub being Klimt is really, really thin.

Yes, Rakuyo, thanks for illustrating the entire point I was trying to make. Bugs, trees, bug-trees.

In regards to Klimt, I said the giant grub is the best suspect for him by far. When you have a bunch of circumstantial evidence that points to one person(/thing) but not to anything else, it is time to get suspicious. The game does not outright say it, much like it doesn't outright say Kaathe was the one who taught Londor lifedrain, or that he wasn't up to shenanigans in Oolacile. But those fit Kaathe's modus operandi. In Rosaria's Fingers, we have a covenant that uses Klimt's own seal as its symbol, gives out a staff that incorporates his seal, and its sorcerers cast spells that resemble his old weapon.

There's a point where it's perfectly reasonable to suspect that the biggest, oldest grub is probably Klimt, and that's when literally everything that references him suggests as much. No, the game doesn't outright say it, but it doesn't outright say a lot of things. Consider: the Nameless King, and how his item descriptions strongly suggest he's Gwyn's firstborn without actually saying so.


Well no, because:

A: There's no need for Klimt to actually be in DS3.

B: Even if he was the most likely suspect, at what? 12,5%? In a lineup of 30? You'd be ignoring the 87,5% likelihood that it's NOT Klimt.
Those who seek dark, will always find it.
VIP
Avatar

TSMP

Chosen Undead
Peacemaker

Squirming with Insight

Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 11:42 am
Souls: 44,334.50
Posts: 6776
Reputation: 687
Wiki Edits: 564
#20
Rakuyo wrote:Well no, because:

A: There's no need for Klimt to actually be in DS3.

B: Even if he was the most likely suspect, at what? 12,5%? In a lineup of 30? You'd be ignoring the 87,5% likelihood that it's NOT Klimt.

Do you know what the definition of "suspect [verb]" is, or are you just arguing for the sake of semantics? I feel like you're missing the point here, because I said more than once that the game doesn't outright state any particular grub is Klimt. You aren't adding anything to the discussion when you say it's possible he isn't in the game at all, or that some other grub is the real one, because that possibility was already assumed before the discussion even began. We're just speculating here, we both know we're speculating, and we both know this conversation will ultimately end with "well, I think this because it makes sense to me, but it was fun to hear your side of the story and now I have new ideas".

But, anyways. Rather than post a lengthy paragraph about why your part B isn't a valid question, I'll just sum it up by saying the evidence only points to two or three grubs as being possibles, so the number of other grubs in the game actually has no bearing whatsoever on the odds. We're talking closer to a 33.33%-50% chance here, and even that's if we assume that all 2-3 possibilities are equally likely. The actual question being discussed is how likely each of those few are, as in if one of them is closer to 80% instead of 50%. What I was saying earlier to Bob was that the reasoning he gave was akin to saying "all lions are felines, therefore this (random feline) could be a lion". It's technically true that any random feline could be a lion, but that doesn't actually prove that the one you pick would be a lion, therefore his argument doesn't do anything to make the Great Heal grub more likely.
 2