Clementine is leading you to your death..

edited September 2012 in The Walking Dead
.. and you're blind to it.

Initially, I thought TellTale's purpose in having Clementine's character was to bring out your paternal side, and to an extent, I still believe this. However, I now believe that Clementine's purpose is a lot darker.

I had my suspicions before, but when we learned of the man on the walkie-talkie who has been misleading Clementine, it confirmed my suspicions: Clementine will lead you to your death.

Now firstly, don't misunderstand me: I am not implying that this is intentional on Clementine's part, I am not implying that she is an evil mastermind, or even that she has any notion of what is happening.

I believe that TellTale have planted Clementine in order to bring your guard down, as a survivalist. There are players on the forum that I believe would follow Clementine blindly out of paternal instinct, and while this may be the "morally right" thing to do, it will eventually kill your Lee.

This makes Clem the most dangerous character in your group. Kenny may be a few fries short of a happy meal right now; Omid, Christa and Chuck may be strangers - but Clem's childlike naivety will go under your danger-radar, and will lead you up sh*t creek without a paddle.

This is obviously up for debate, and I know I will be met with fierce opposition - some, unfortunately will be stubborn refusal - but I hope to have a proper discussion on the matter. My advice would be - trust no-one, not even Clem. Keep your head. Or if you are hellbent on following Clem, by all means do so - but on your head be it. ;)
«1

Comments

  • edited September 2012
    Not only to Lee's death but the whole group like Christa :(
  • edited September 2012
    Don't worry,since episode 1 my Lee kept a bullet in his back pocket,with Clem's name on it, just in case something like this happened.You always have to prepared for anything in the world of the walking dead ;)
  • edited September 2012
    ElderBoss wrote: »
    This is obviously up for debate, and I know I will be met with fierce opposition - some, unfortunately will be stubborn refusal - but I hope to have a proper discussion on the matter.

    What did you mean by "stubborn refusal"?

    It sounds like you mean stubborn refusal to accept your theory is right.
  • edited September 2012
    I killed duck already and im not afraid to put down clementine. Guessing maybe episode 3's zombie clementine attacking him in his nightmare will come back and he will have to put her down too.
  • edited September 2012
    Red Panda wrote: »
    What did you mean by "stubborn refusal"?

    It sounds like you mean stubborn refusal to accept your theory is right.

    I'm sorry if you misunderstood - by stubborn refusal, I mean point-blank refusing to believe Clementine should be nothing but flawless, without backing your disagreement up with something of substance. I'm more than happy for people to disagree. We're all just speculators.
  • edited September 2012
    FarmerJoe wrote: »
    You always have to prepared for anything in the world of the walking dead ;)

    Spoken like a true survivor. :D
  • edited September 2012
    Luigi01080 wrote: »
    I killed duck already and im not afraid to put down clementine. Guessing maybe episode 3's zombie clementine attacking him in his nightmare will come back and he will have to put her down too.

    True, perhaps Lee's nightmare was a foreshadowing. Again, maybe not! But I think for Clementine to come away scott-free would be a missed opportunity for TTG to really test our sense of morality.
  • edited September 2012
    Clementine has done nothing to earn my distrust but it saddens me to think that she is being dishonest with Lee. I thought she trusted him more than that. I would keep my guard up but for the dangers around us, not because I think Clementine would lead me into harm.
  • edited September 2012
    KCohere wrote: »
    Clementine has done nothing to earn my distrust but it saddens me to think that she is being dishonest with Lee. I thought she trusted him more than that. I would keep my guard up but for the dangers around us, not because I think Clementine would lead me into harm.

    That's a fair comment. I mean, it's easy to understand why Clementine would believe the stranger on the radio, and if her parents are at stake, I'm sure she'd do whatever he asked her to do - like keep it from Lee. Either way, I don't think we're in for a happy ending!
  • edited September 2012
    No, I feel a curve ball coming too. Whether this is it or not...
  • edited September 2012
    No, I feel a curve ball coming too. Whether this is it or not...

    It's anyone's guess. :)
  • edited September 2012
    the way i see it is that we should be telling Clementine what to do, not her telling us what to do, that's why when she said we shouldn't take the food from the car my thoughts were "no child, you do not understand how serious our predicament is" where as i think a a lot of peoples thoughts were "oh no, i cant disappoint my precious Clementine" but that is how spoiled brats are made, so i go with what i think is best and if Clementine agrees it's a bonus but if she doesn't, tough luck i'm in charge.
  • edited September 2012
    Sure, tell her you're in charge. You're both on the same railroad. I believe it was Ian Malcolm who said "Ah, ah. Life, ah. Finds a way."
  • edited September 2012
    where as i think a a lot of peoples thoughts were "oh no, i cant disappoint my precious Clementine"

    Exactly the point I was trying to make, but you put it a lot better here! When I told Clementine on the train that we should search for a boat in Savannah before her parents and she replied with "You can't tell me what to do.", I was like

    :eek:
    COME AGAIN, CHILD?!

    Last time I checked, I've saved her life like... at least once an episode.
  • edited September 2012
    Maybe episode 4 will explore the betrayal aspect of TWD. We've seen this in the comics.
  • edited September 2012
    Well hey if Lee needs to die from a fault of Clementine to make the story as good as it can be, Im all for it!
  • edited September 2012
    ElderBoss wrote: »
    There are players on the forum that I believe would follow Clementine blindly out of paternal instinct, and while this may be the "morally right" thing to do, it will eventually kill your Lee.

    Morality has many shades of grey that can be rationalized; that seems to be the moral of the story to date. If it's a question of doing something blatantly, disturbingly wrong in order to survive, is it really worth it?
  • edited September 2012
    Clementine walked alway from the scene of a crime in Episode 1. She is as much on the run as anyone else, especially Lee.
  • edited September 2012
    WAIT! You say that there's a slight possibility, based on your suspicions, without any hard evidence to back it up, and I'm supposed to believe that this advice is for my own good?

    KENNY! Break out the salt-licks, we have another possible danger!
  • edited September 2012
    ElderBoss wrote: »
    True, perhaps Lee's nightmare was a foreshadowing. Again, maybe not! But I think for Clementine to come away scott-free would be a missed opportunity for TTG to really test our sense of morality.

    I believe we HAVE had a case of extreme forshadowing before...


    *Episode 1*

    Lee: Oh pishaw, Duck isn't bitten Larry! If we all work together, we'll ALL make it through this in one piece...

    *Episode 3*

    Larry's ghost: He isn't bitten, eh? How's that teamwork coming again?

    Lee: "..."
  • edited September 2012
    FarmerJoe wrote: »
    Don't worry,since episode 1 my Lee kept a bullet in his back pocket,with Clem's name on it, just in case something like this happened.You always have to prepared for anything in the world of the walking dead ;)

    Exactly. I didn't flinch when Lee was having that zombie Clem dream and I wouldn't if it happens in awake Lee game mode either.
    No, I feel a curve ball coming too. Whether this is it or not...
    Agreed. It is getting exciting to start to speculate on what it may be. I think it can go in several directions..that is implicit with the walkie talkie sequence. I just hope it doesn't fall flat.
    the way i see it is that we should be telling Clementine what to do, not her telling us what to do, that's why when she said we shouldn't take the food from the car my thoughts were "no child, you do not understand how serious our predicament is" where as i think a a lot of peoples thoughts were "oh no, i cant disappoint my precious Clementine" but that is how spoiled brats are made, so i go with what i think is best and if Clementine agrees it's a bonus but if she doesn't, tough luck i'm in charge.

    Precisely. As long as Lee has the caretaker role for her and is making decisions to keep her safe, she needs to do what he says. Permissive parenting styles suck eggs in general but absolutely have no business being in a ZA
  • edited September 2012
    Imagine if Clem turns out to be like that little girl from the movie 'Orphan' and is in fact a 33 year old serial killer with hypopituitarism (totally just wiki'd that).

    Freaky stuff!
  • edited September 2012
    Rock114 wrote: »
    WAIT! You say that there's a slight possibility, based on your suspicions, without any hard evidence to back it up, and I'm supposed to believe that this advice is for my own good?

    KENNY! Break out the salt-licks, we have another possible danger!

    Thems fighting words

    I think OP's right about people letting there guard down and making dumb choices just for Clem. Look at how many people are willing to make a complete detour to go looking for her parents, who are probably walkers. Watch Christa/Chuck/Omid/Kenny get bit on the little adventure.
  • edited September 2012
    LadyJ wrote: »
    Exactly. I didn't flinch when Lee was having that zombie Clem dream and I wouldn't if it happens in awake Lee game mode either.

    Agreed. It is getting exciting to start to speculate on what it may be. I think it can go in several directions..that is implicit with the walkie talkie sequence. I just hope it doesn't fall flat.



    Precisely. As long as Lee has the caretaker role for her and is making decisions to keep her safe, she needs to do what he says. Permissive parenting styles suck eggs in general but absolutely have no business being in a ZA

    After reading your other posts I should of known you'd jump on the chance to put Clem down. I suspect that If you cant get them in the womb then you'll make sure they don't go any further than ten years old. :D

    In the event of a ZA,be careful if you join LadyJ's ZA survivor group. You should be 18+ and castration is a must :eek: children are an inconvenience and wont be tolerated...
  • edited September 2012
    FarmerJoe wrote: »
    After reading your other posts I should of known you'd jump on the chance to put Clem down. I suspect that If you cant get them in the womb then you'll make sure they don't go any further than ten years old. :D

    In the event of a ZA,be careful if you join LadyJ's ZA survivor group. You should be 18+ and castration is a must :eek: children are an inconvenience and wont be tolerated...

    LOL LOL now you're cookin' sparky :)!
    Seriously, I was surprised that you posted that you would shoot her given your other post. And also, I'm not that radical. I am just a pragmatic survivalist. If there are children in a group that I am a part of, obviously they need to be taken care of. I was just pointing out their weaknesses in terms of survival. Babies are a whole nother ballpark and I DO think that with so many unknowns in the world of TWD, they should be discouraged.
  • edited September 2012
    @LadyJ
    I was being somewhat facetious regarding killing Clem but I do have a dislike for betrayers,traitors and deceivers. I'll wait and see how the walkie talkie situation turns out with Clem... :p
  • edited September 2012
    Wrighty wrote: »
    Thems fighting words

    Ain't no room on this thread fer the two of us.
  • edited September 2012
    LadyJ wrote: »
    Babies are a whole nother ballpark and I DO think that with so many unknowns in the world of TWD, they should be discouraged.

    I agree pregnancies should be discouraged but what can you do if the baby is already there?
  • edited September 2012
    Telltale want dark, I'll give them 2 words and they can figure it out from there.

    Clementine... Amputee...

    BOOM!
  • edited September 2012
    KCohere wrote: »
    I agree pregnancies should be discouraged but what can you do if the baby is already there?

    You do what you can to keep it safe if it's already there. The hard question is if there is an infant in a group that is on the move, whether you send the parents or caretakers and the baby away to keep everyone else safe. Same in my opinion with a pregnant woman. Actually the pregnant woman is slightly riskier because you don't know if the baby will be born a zombie or human or if it is an en utero zombie if it will cause the mother to turn and possibly bite someone else. Too many wrongs in that.

    Personally, I wouldn't stay a part of a group with an infant in it unless it was mine. Or a pregnant woman.
  • edited September 2012
    I agree that pregnancies should be frowned upon, at least unless your group is safe. I think that if you lived in Woodbury it would be ok to have one, as well as any other "secure" area. A place like the motor inn? Debateable, but I wouldn't prefer it. On the road? Never. Infants are too much hassle in the ZA if you aren't in some secure area like Woodbury or the Alexandria Safe Zone, places with walls and plenty of people to defend them.
  • edited September 2012
    Gman5852 wrote: »
    Telltale want dark, I'll give them 2 words and they can figure it out from there.

    Clementine... Amputee...

    BOOM!

    oh jesus man this^. Although noone could patch her up probally if she loses arms or legs, we saw this during episode 2 with the bear trap and she probally would just die. still though, scary stuff like that makes it horrifieing.
  • edited September 2012
    Rock114 wrote: »
    I agree that pregnancies should be frowned upon, at least unless your group is safe. I think that if you lived in Woodbury it would be ok to have one, as well as any other "secure" area. A place like the motor inn? Debateable, but I wouldn't prefer it. On the road? Never. Infants are too much hassle in the ZA if you aren't in some secure area like Woodbury or the Alexandria Safe Zone, places with walls and plenty of people to defend them.

    Yeah. Contraception is going to be as readily available in the Zombie Apocalypse as it is in contemporary Utah. Babies are going to be a factor.
  • edited September 2012
    Bet the "Get Lee Laid" groupies didn't take that into consideration.
  • edited September 2012
    the op makes a point but it's kinda obvious to me #'mr x'# is gonna cause problems.
  • edited September 2012
    I tell Clem how it is. i don't act all cute and stuff :p Nobody is "innocent" in this world anymore.
  • edited September 2012
    Gman5852 wrote: »
    Telltale want dark, I'll give them 2 words and they can figure it out from there.

    Clementine... Amputee...

    BOOM!

    More like what's gonna happen to Omid :D

    Or we'll just leave him :(
  • edited September 2012
    Viner16 wrote: »
    More like what's gonna happen to Omid :D

    Or we'll just leave him :(

    "If his leg gets any worse, we'll have to carry him!"

    "Or cut it off." *Pulls out axe*
  • edited September 2012
    but would ttg repeat 'david the teacher' ? hacks off leg, guy dies anyway..turns

    imo that would be a bit of a 'lame' duck move
  • edited September 2012
    Well, cutting off his leg would probably be even worse than leaving it. The entire problem is that he can't go on by himself now, with TWO legs. Cutting one off really ensures that he'll never walk again, and unless he's a damn good hopper, will be left behind.
This discussion has been closed.