Binty wrote:Careful not to judge Maggie too harshly. The original link-up may not have been her idea; certainly not her choice. She would have little hope that the link would be unpicked carefully. She knew it might be fatal, so what would you do in her place?
Of course, Maggie acted in the only practical, rational way possible. Taking the backlash (assuming that there is no applicable significant amount of backlash one can take on themselves that is "safe") on herself risked her own insanity or death. Given the chance to save herself that fate, Maggie placed the backlash in the only place she could: on the other two casters. She may even have attempted to spread the damage out between the two of them, so that there was a greater chance that both of them might retain some capability (if she wanted to, she probably could have piled all the backlash on one of the other casters, sparing the other entirely, but dooming one to certain croaking).
[speculative tangent]And, just to twist the knife a bit, if Maggie did try to spread the damage evenly, why did Misty die while Jack merely lost his mind? Could it be because Misty had already strained the link herself in order to help Parson? Did she, in helping Parson plan the strategic siege strike, pull a small amount of backlash upon herself? Not enough to break the link then and there, certainly, but enough to make the difference between life and death when the link finally snapped?[/speculative tangent]
Parson's conversations with Maggie seem to reveal her to be a strictly practical person, almost to the point of sociopathy. She seems to view others not as living, thinking beings of equal consideration as herself, but as collections of traits, statistics, and abilities (which, in a world based off of game mechanics, is not that crazy an outlook). She exhibits no compassion whatsoever. She will act in her own best interests whenever it is possible for her (that is, within the constraints of things such as Loyalty and Duty) without concern for how those actions affect the wellbeing of others.
That having been said, she always acts with consideration toward the consequences of her actions. She uses a simple, direct rubric to guide herself and has no pretensions to higher purpose. She does not harm others without cause. She does not strike out at others due to frustration, anger, or hate. She does not act out of pride or zealotry or a pathological need to win. This makes her, in at least a limited way, less of a monster than Parson, Wanda, Stanley, or pre-decrypt Ansom.