Page 1 of 1

Are Pookas really that evil?

Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2008 10:33 pm
by PookasRule
OK, as you can probably tell by my username I am somewhat of a Pooka fan, but I have been generally been pondering on whether the little green meanies are truly on the side of the Opposition or are just wandering spectres defending their homeland. For example: (It has been a while since I saw the later series, so my memory may not be entirely accurate)

1. Tregard states that if you are touched by a Pooka, your lifeforce is drained but you aren't killed outright - not immediately anyway. Most, if not all, enemies in the game require just one strike to end a dungeoneer's quest. Perhaps it is not the Pooka's intention to kill.

2. The incident with the Pooka in the bottle is another example. The dungeoneer never actually controlled or commanded it, merely summoned it, perhaps implying that the Pooka (hereafter referred to as Puck, its given name) answered to no one. One could also argue that the dungeoneer didn't actually command him either, stating its name merely signalling to it that it was alright for it to leave the bottle. Once Puck had exited he could have attacked anyone, including the dungeoneer, but he chose to merely depart the scene, scaring the goblins and goblin-master off in the process. Perhaps fear is the chief weapon of the Pooka.

3. Pookas were only found in certain places - in and around the castle. This, along with the lack of evidence of any allegiance they have, suggests to me that they are merely forest spirits intent on defending their home.

I am probably completely wrong about this, but it is just a pet theory.

Re:Are Pookas really that evil?

Posted: Wed Nov 26, 2008 8:19 am
by HStorm
Well, evil's a highly subjective concept anyway - I think the BNP is evil for instance, but there are some people out there who think it's the hope of the world - but in any case, you don't have to be a member of a particular organisation or alignment to be evil. Pookas don't appear to be members of the Opposition, but they sure as heck are a hindrance to a quest.

I think pookas and forest phantoms are just more colourful versions of the skull-hauntings of earlier years. This means they are probably mindless and act entirely on instinct; they have a need to feed on life force, hence they attack passers-by, but they bear no actual malice to those they prey on. Humans are just part of the food chain.

It's a bit like sharks when we swim in the sea. They need to eat, we appear to be edible, they eat us. It's a nasty way to go, but are the sharks 'evil' for doing it? (And, not wishing to stir up a veggie v meatie debate, but are we not equally 'evil' when we eat roast beef?)

Most of the time, the word 'evil' is just a label we apply to something terrible that has happened for reasons we don't fully understand. As soon as we do understand it, even if we still don't approve of it, some of that edge goes away and it seems less evil. There are exceptions, but I wouldn't class pookas as evil, no.

Re:Are Pookas really that evil?

Posted: Wed Nov 26, 2008 9:48 pm
by sozboz
Strike me as a throwback to the computer games of the day where everything that moves kills you.

Re:Are Pookas really that evil?

Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 1:49 pm
by AriadnesLayer
According to folklore Pookas are not evil at all, although they can be mischievous.

Touching them caused damage to life force, and therefore they had to be avoided, but the same can be said about touching nettles, it doesn't mean they are evil!

There is no way of knowing exactly where their loyalties lie mainly because they spoke in a weird language nobody can understand :D They also come across as quite demented.

If anyone is able, can you try playing the "Pooka chant" backwards to see if it is actually saying anything?

Re:Are Pookas really that evil?

Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 3:38 pm
by HStorm
Speaking of pookas backward-babbling, apparently they released a message from the Devil on an LP they made in the 1960's. It was called Sergeant Pooka's Lonely Hearts Club Band...

Ouch.

Re:Are Pookas really that evil?

Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 4:01 pm
by sozboz
Nettles are evil.

Re:Are Pookas really that evil?

Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 8:33 pm
by Pooka
What's most interesting about pookas is that they always appear as plants. In folklore, they have the power to shape-shift, and yet we never see them as anything but green, floaty and swirly with plants growing out of their heads.

It's true they are mischievous, but they can be terrifying as well (the horse pooka is a good example of this), so maybe the pookas in KM are revelling in their 'scary' mode, although I'd agree they're not on the Opposition's side. They may also be defending their home, as PR said. I think I agree with that!

The thing about life force is all conjecture, though, as no pooka ever touched a dungeoneer. A couple of skull ghosts got to touch, and life force was drained, but no dungeoneer was ever killed by that slight lack of life force damage. If a pooka had touched a dungeoneer, it would have either had no effect or been edited out is my guess.

And finally, I think Puck attacked Skarkill and the goblins because there were more of them. Unless this was Shakespeare's Puck, and he was attacking them because he's a nice guy!

Re:Are Pookas really that evil?

Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 3:38 pm
by Ironlord
HStorm wrote: Speaking of pookas backward-babbling, apparently they released a message from the Devil on an LP they made in the 1960's. It was called Sergeant Pooka's Lonely Hearts Club Band...
And let's not forget the time that Judas Pooka covered Better By You, Better Than Me on the Stained Grass album, which Skarkill decided to play backwards to reveal the hidden message, causing an enchanted shotgun to appear out of nowhere (complete with standard jangly haunted sword noises) and blast him square in the face. Any of you still wondering why he had that metal cap over his eye? Wonder no longer.

Re:Are Pookas really that evil?

Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 3:54 pm
by PookasRule
And let's not forget the group of Pookas who kept the dungeon in fear for seventeen years with their upcoming album Chinese De-Pook(r)a-cy.

Re:Are Pookas really that evil?

Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 4:22 pm
by HStorm
Oh no, an unending crop of pooka-related pop music puns... :o ...what have I set in motion?!?!?! :-[

Re:Are Pookas really that evil?

Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 4:26 pm
by Snowwiewolf
HStorm wrote: Oh no, an unending crop of pooka-related pop music puns... :o ...what have I set in motion?!?!?! :-[
*Turns HStorm in to a Pooka*

Ask a silly question, get a silly answer ;)

Re:Are Pookas really that evil?

Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 7:12 pm
by HStorm
Yay! Being magically transformed into something ridiculous by a crafty Finlander! Just like old times! :D

Welcome back, Snowwie!

Re: Are Pookas really that evil?

Posted: Wed Dec 22, 2010 8:35 pm
by Aldarion
We've gotten this far talking about pookas, and no-one's mentioned
"a benign but Miss-CHIVVY-us creature - very fond of rumpots, crackpots and how are you Mr Wilson?" (!)