So, I can’t get a grasp on how articulate Attikus is intended to be. This is Attikus describing himself in the ops:
And this is how he explains, to Mellka, what he did to Lothar Rendain (“In His Face” lore):
[quote]I find it sufficiently pleasing that I was the one to deliver this irony directly to the Tyrant. Through his malfeasance, he sought only my humiliation and subservience. His sycophants believed they had wrought for me a manacle of shame and toil. Yet, in the truest sense, they forged their own undoing in the pyre of my ascendance. To this end, I have thusly stricken the serpent upon its tooth, that it should bite at us no longer.
His noir opens include a few comically-overwrought metaphors, but otherwise, his dialogue is pretty plain:
And of course this:
quote I didn’t give you a chance to speak before. I am… uh, that is to say, I want to… uh… eh…
(Attikus) Yeah, that one! Never used that word before.[/quote]
And I’m especially taken by this: in the lore, Mellka is the one who is portrayed as a straight-talker-
But in the ops, it’s Attikus who is the straight-talker-
quote What’s most important to the Thrall?
(Attikus) What you have punched, and what you plan to punch in the future.[/quote]
His in-game banter doesn’t give too much to go by: I never find him particularly talkative in battle. Lots of roaring and grunting, and a preference for pithy observations (“You’re dead, Deande.”) But my feeling is that the text in “In His Face” must be an outlier - a lapse in characterization, maybe the result of the game having several writers…
What does everyone else think?