Caves of Narshe Forums [Powered by Invision Power Board]

Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format

Caves of Narshe Forums > Final Fantasy VI > Locke's reasons for joining the Returners?

Posted by: Kame 24th August 2005 22:21

For who did Locke exactly join the Returners? He says in the game: "Someone important was jailed by the Empire. I've hated the Empire ever since..."

We discussed it a little bit in chat...

<Kame> Question guys.
<Kame> When Locke says he hates the Empire because it imprisoned someone he loved, who was he talking about?
<malevolence> "if you can take things with you when you die, i'm puttin air in a bag and chargin people to breathe"
<kara[FFIV]> I dunno. I always wondered about that.
<Kame> The only person we really know anything about is Rachel.
<Kame> And she wasn't in prison when we get to see her.
<kara[FFIV]> Maybe it's a plot hole.
<malevolence> imprisoned her in a coma?
<malevolence> or whatever was up with her
<kara[FFIV]> I guess you have to assume that it's someone random who we never really hear about.
<kara[FFIV]> Even though it seems like it should be a reference to Rachel.
<kara[FFIV]> If Locke didn't know that she was still alive, you could change it to "killed" without problems.
<Kame> I may have been his mom, dad, sister, brother or someone that we never hear of again.
<Kame> *it
<kara[FFIV]> Maybe, but Locke didn't seem to have any of them around while he was running around with Rachel.
<kara[FFIV]> He wasn't fighting the empire while he was with her, so it would have to have been after her accident.
<Kame> But that seems like an important point in the game.
<kara[FFIV]> Yeah.
<Kame> The reason why Locke became a returner.
<kara[FFIV]> I dunno. Either it's something they never explain, which seems silly, or they're referring to Rachel, and it's a
plot hole.
<Kame> Because we know what happened to her, and it wasn't the fault of the Empire
<kara[FFIV]> Yes.
<Kame> All of the other characters seem to have their reasons explained.
<Kame> WHY?!
<kara[FFIV]> okay, the battle music just started over, so I think it's time to go back to the game.
<kara[FFIV]>

<Kame> okay
<Kame> dammit, I'm starting a new topic
<kara[FFIV]> Better quote what we said in chat.
<kara[FFIV]> Unless you want to hear it again.
<Kame> true
<malevolence> i'll bet you my left nut that you hear it again anyway

So... any inkling as to whom Locke is refering to?

Posted by: Djibriel 24th August 2005 22:49

<Kame> Because we know what happened to her, and it wasn't the fault of the Empire.

Her amnesia wasn't the Empire's fault, that's right. But she WAS killed in an Imperial raid on Kohlingen (which is odd, as the Empire, in-game, shows no interest whatsoever in taking over Jidoor/Kohlingen, but whatever).

It's not like Square to leave one sentence like this unexplained. My best guess is that they wanted Rachel imprisoned at the time of coding the line in the game, changed it to 'death' and kinda forget to change the old line.

Which is a crummy guess, I suppose.

One other distant reason few people know about: Emperor Gestahl possesses the very thing Locke needs to revive Rachel: the Phoenix Esper. I think its an NPC in the Auction House who says:

"I need something that will bring back wayward spirits. I heard only in the Imperial capital of Vector does such a thing exist."

Also, hidden in the Emperor's portrait in Owzer's Mansion, is the Key Item "Emperor's Letter.", which reads as follows:

"The treasure is hidden where the mountains form a star..."

So even if it was for the sole purpose of reviving Rachel, it was in Locke's interest to bring the Empire down.

Posted by: Kame 24th August 2005 23:03

Quote (Djibriel @ 24th August 2005 14:49)

My best guess is that they wanted Rachel imprisoned at the time of coding the line in the game, changed it to 'death' and kinda forget to change the old line.

Which is a crummy guess, I suppose.

That's what karasuman and me were thinking...

<kara[FFIV]> I dunno. Either it's something they never explain, which seems silly, or they're referring to Rachel, and it's a plot hole.

RelmArrowny also mentioned that his grandmother was also mentioned briefly in the game as telling him stories of espers. So her maybe?

Posted by: MorgueN 24th August 2005 23:18

Well you don't tell someone who you just met. "The Empire killed my girlfriend and I want bloody revenge". You'd want to seem approachable so say something like the Empire "Imprisoned", Locke 's thinking "I covered that one pretty well". If you want to argue because Cyan wanted revenge remember he was fresh of his grief, while Locke has had it for a while and there was still hope for Rachel's.

Now think about this If I loved someone so much that an organization brought harm to her even possibly killed her. I'd want them to pay and pay dearly. Even to the point I'd join an organization that is dedicated to their downfall. For all that have ever loved someone, Locke's reason are very understandable.

Posted by: Silverlance 24th August 2005 23:18

Why does everything have to have a reason? Can't Square say stuff happened without having to create an elaborate backstory for the event?

I just never got that... Speculating is fine, but it feels like every other speculation-based thread here's about some really unimportant detail that people end up pushing way too far.

So why can't Locke just have a friend who ended up jailed by the Empire? If the FF6 world were limited to the couple of dozen handfull of town NPCs, then it'd be quite a small, underpopulated world. Just because it isn't brought up during the course of play, nothing prevents the characters from having friends and leading, y'know, actual lives.

Posted by: Djibriel 25th August 2005 01:49

Ah, but this is different! Gogo doesn't have an identity, but Square put him/her in the game because they wanted a Mimic. Siegfried's background isn't explained, but Square used him as the kick-ass Colloseum warrior.

This line doesn't seem to do anything. From every angle you look at it, it'd be logical to expect Locke to say "I've lost someone to the Empire, and I've realized its corruption ever since". Locke, however, gives his reason of joining the Returners (which is a rather big thing) away to 'a friend' who is not introduced in the game while skipping the very essence of his life, Rachel and his quest for the Phoenix Esper.

Speculation can only go so far before it gets ridiculous, but you should remember Locke Cole isn't some guy out there; he's a game character. He doesn't have any friends and he doesn't lead an actual life; everything he says and does has some kind of reason behind it, because that's what the game developers chose for him to say/do.

Posted by: Silverlance 25th August 2005 02:14

Quote (Djibriel @ 24th August 2005 20:49)

He doesn't have any friends and he doesn't lead an actual life

Well, with stats like his, it's not like there's much he'd ever amount to. In my days, why, characters were powerhouses when they reached their max level! Deplorable...

But while Locke may be a game character, just because Square doesn't mention something it doesn't mean it's there. Shadow and Relm's relationship is one such example: the game never explicitely states who Shadow is, but rather implies it. So why wouldn't it be able to use a statement such as that one to imply Locke led a normal (if somewhat adventurous) life and had a close entourage of no particular conscequence to the game's storyline?

If Square's writers felt the need to give every statement and reason given by a character a deeper meaning, the game would be horrible and characters would be terribly flat. What draws out a character's personality is the ability to make the character have emotions, make mistakes, and do normal day-to-day things every once in a while. We don't question why Cyan is so machinery-incompatible, he just is. We don't question why Edgar took an interest in machinery, he just did. We're shown that even characters such as Strago have had a life before the events of the game (though this is not exactly a point in my favor, as it does serve a storyline purpose

) So, really, Locke having friends and deciding to join the Returners after one of them gets jailed? Doesn't seem like there's anything special behind it to me, really.

Of course, these are just my thoughts and opinions, and aren't any more valid than anyone else's. I'm not trying to prove a point or to stop speculations, despite my tone. (Just thought I'd clear that up.

)

Posted by: L. Cully 25th August 2005 02:21

I agree that he said "jailed" instead of "killed" so as not to open the huge can of words that such a comment would inevitably effect -- especially since, at the time, Terra's trying to figure out whether she wants to help the Returners or not on her own, and I see Locke as someone who would avoid such a comment lest she should feel pressured. Which I think she would.

Locke's not too eager to talk about Rachel, in general.

Posted by: Moglv99 25th August 2005 21:49

Locke joined the Returners to help stopping the Imperial Force in some kind of revenge for what they did to Rachel...and also, to avoid that somebody suffers the loss of a loved one, just like he did.

Posted by: SorshaFarris 17th December 2020 03:29

So new to this forum forgive the post:
Replaying the original ff3 on snes... yields an interesting bit of info on this topic. Yes I noticed the someone Important to me was jailed by the empire (and immediately pounced on the jailed/killed theory discussed here) after playing just a bit farther into it. Terra mentions: but I don�t have a �special someone� I can only assume then yes the topic of Rachel had to have been brought up but since they are trying to convince Terra to join the returners, Locke was really trying to ease Terra into it, instead of saying. Yah I�m in returners since they �killed� the girl I loved. (Very strong wording to use when your trying to persuade someone of your cause.)

poor Locke tho. And poor Rachel (I cry every time I hear her theme)

just me being sentimental about it all.

Posted by: Glenn Magus Harvey 20th December 2020 06:00

Could be one reason among several for him to join the Returners.

Also, welcome, and it's cool that you're revisiting the game!

Posted by: Eagle Caller 5th August 2021 01:29

Quote

I realized The Empire is rotten to the core

I'm unsure if Locke, Cyan, or Edgar said that. It wouldn't take long for Locke to figure out the Empire is evil. The actions you take get on your reputation.

Locke probably didn't want to sit around and let the Empire take over. He would lose the people he cared about and the things we wants to steal would end up in someone else's hands.