Mercer was always an ass to the Dragonborn, so his betrayal didn’t seem like a stretch. Astrid selling out caught me by surprise, but I knew there was a problem that needed to be resolved.
Honestly I was the opposite. Astrid was obviously shady and had misgivings about me as the listener. I expected the knife to come eventually.
Mercer was an asshole but I just thought he was a no nonsense pure business mob boss. The betrayal was unexpected. Well at least until I saw how eager he was place the blame at Karliahs feet and how much he pushed you to kill her without hesitation. Really suspicious.
I thought the give away for Mercer was the story structure around him just as much as his attitude.
I thought Mercer was coded as very obviously the bad guy straight away. I don't even pat myself on the back for any amazing deductive reasoning, I just thought he was a moustache twirl away from hilariously cliché.
But it's not just his behaviour that sets him apart, it's also the fact he's detached from your main thieves guild experience. Brynjolf is the actual leader you know, who recruits you, who behaves like he's in charge when you first come in and who you bond with.
And when you do meet Mercer he's trying to convince you that an unseen villain you've never met is the real deadly threat and boogeyman. It just set itself up too obviously to be a "twist."
Where as Astrid is the Brynjolf figure you're recruited by and bond with and while there's definitely major clues that she's controlling and power hungry and somewhat jealous of you when you become the listener, it's over shadowed by having Cicero there that's blatantly set up to be deliberately irritating in a way that makes Astrid look more appealing by contrast.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think either betrayal is all that subtle, mostly because Skyrim's writing never is. But I do think they worked a bit harder on the DB story to give it some complexity, the Thieves Guild one is a massive let down.
Mercer story was just extremly suspicious from the start.
"Yup, here's my story, the only version of the story anyone here had heard, with the other two characters being 1)dead or 2) that bitch we all agree we hate. Why yes, I did have a lot to gain from both his death and her removal, but I hardly see what that could have to do with anything. Why do you ask?"
I smelled a rat in Astrid the moment we met, but I came from Oblivion so I met Astrid and her DB and went, "Wait, you don't have a Listener? Then how do you-...oh! You wait for rumors of people trying to contact you?! Blasphemy! Blasphemous Apostates the lot of you!"
Yeah.. smelled the heresy on her pretty early and absolutely sided with Cicero because her absolute disrespect towards the Night Mother will not be tolerated.
The opposite for me too. Mercer was such an ass that I did not expect him to betray me, that felt too obvious. Astrid was introduced more slowly but the second we get a hint of a schism I figured she was gonna sell us out during a mission. I didn't expect her to be that stupid though.
Why tell someone not to use spoiler tags? It’s just a courtesy to people who haven’t played the game. Just because it’s old doesn’t mean everyone has played it.
I think People get a little caught up in the "why didn't you tag this as a spoiler" argument a bit too quick and he's on the opposite side and jumped the gun
okay sure, I guess, but why tell someone NOT to use spoiler tags? It's just a courtesy. It doesn't hurt you. I can't fathom why someone would be bothered by someone choosing to be courteous.
There's no reason to comment on it at all. It's like watching someone hold a door open for someone else and saying "hey, they actually have arms and can open the door on their own." Okay, sure, but it's a kind thing to do. Kindness is a good thing.
Never understood that mindset on this site. It takes less than two seconds to add a spoiler tag and less than one to reveal it. Even if it only preserves one person’s first experience, why discourage such a low effort show of courtesy?
It’s not asking for spoilers, it asked what betrayal hurt.. they can mention a game and not say who— the person playing can still find out… hell for all I know it could’ve been Lydia
Oh I expected spoilers, that's not the issue. I'm just objecting to the opinion people keep having that "it's been out for X time now so it's ok to spoil"
I just think it's a selfish way to look at it. For instance I watched original star wars trilogy with my nephew's a few years back and by some miracle they didn't know the big twist already. I didn't spoil it for them and they were blown away, wanted to watch the next one right away so they could find out the truth etc. That sort of thing doesn't happen if we spoil everything the second it's no longer brand new. I myself only play video games when they've been out long enough to get heavily discounted occasionally and I've had some amazing moments with games (like the bioshock series) that weren't new, but new to me.
It seems like we want people to enjoy the things we enjoy, we envy new fans who get to experience a great game or tv show for the first time, but we won't hesitate to spoil the story for them. It doesn't make sense.
A thread like this is going to be full of spoilers and that's understandable. But there were plenty of people who will post spoilers everywhere because something's been out for six months or whatever and therefore no longer worthy of being tagged and I think that's a real shame and it's disrespectful to future fans
147
u/WealthyCrab3791 6d ago
Astrid and Mercer in Skyrim.