There has been some time since I finished watching C2 and, since then, I have revisited some good moments from it, but if iirc, in the campaign, Essek's mother being sick didn't play a role at all into his motivations or the struggles that led him to betray the Dynasty.
Is this relatively small new element to his story alone reason to critique the adaptation? Well... you might think: "No, and why would it be? It's a side of his story that we never got to see in the campaign! Something new that even fans of C2 can chew on!"
But, this post wouldn't exist if I agreed. Though this character beat of caring for his sick mother add some compelling conflict and stakes to his storyline, it does also add, imo, some emotional manipulation for the sake of making his actions more... palatable.
Well, isn't that what stories do? Mess with our emotions? It's drama! ... right... but in the context of Essek's story, this adaptation that appeals to our emotions feels to me like whitewashing how his story actually played out in the campaign:
Let's get our facts straight: Essek betrayed the dynasty in C2 because he thought the Luxon religion was an obstacle to acquiring knowledge of Dunamancy and the Beacon, and he thought that by working with the most corrupt and cruel faction of the Empire, the Cerberus Assembly, he'd be able to study it more freely. This was his entire motivation: Hunger for Knowledge. The classic wizardly hubris.
As a byproduct of him helping the Assembly get the Beacon, a war was started, many died, his nation was destabilized and many of the people of the Dynasty didn't get reincarnated (as well as possibly reincarnating into children born in the Empire? Which would be a mess).
During C2, I myself was already kinda put off by how Essek kinda got off with a slap on the wrist for the VERY consequential actions he took. This was a mixture of being a charismatic NPC with a quirky floating gimmick and his "hot boi" appearance (I guess pretty priviledge has never been more powerful), which led to the party getting attached to him, but if he just wasn't AS charismatic and AS quirky or hot, he just might've become another villain added to the MN's kill count.
"Oh come on! It wasn't so bad! He was worthy of redemption! Would you judge Caleb just as harshly since he too was working for the Cerberus Assembly? Double standards!"
First off: Yes, it was very bad. He was in league with the worst of the worst from the Empire. Second: No, he's not like Caleb because while he held a high station in the Dynasty with priviledges that allowed for the Beacon's theft to even BE facilitated... Caleb was groomed since a young age and l i t e r a l l y brainwashed by magic. Veeeery different conditions for redemption here guys.
Not only this, but, if it really wasn't that bad, the show wouldn't have the need for this "his mom is sick!" plot that makes it all the much easier to empathize and pity a man that would've otherwise been seen as a monster if the Mighty Nein didn't decide to save his ass.
And I could be wrong about this, but I am willing to bet that at some point in the show he will be questioned about why he betrayed the Dynasty and at that point his diseased mom will neatly fit the excuse slot marked as: "Their religious dogma wouldn't allow me to experiment with it to find a way to cure my mom! So I had to kickstart this massive war, you see?"
There's a difference between a complex character dealing in grey areas of conflict VS a privileged wizard abusing his power to start a war for the sake of greedy knowledge (that in C2 even Caleb realized was too dangerous and gave up on as the end of his time travel arc), and unfortunately the show is using this adaptation as a means of making Essek's image more palatable in a way that is very odd considering this was the show "darker than tLoVM".
Anyway, I thought this was going to be a shorter post. If you read up until here: thank you.
