absimiliard wrote:

At a meta level I would agree Kylestien. There's got to be no way FBG would punish someone for marrying a Seeker, it would be a horrible design decision on the basis of player retention. If my spouse ate my character I would assuredly be done with this game, quite permanently. Allowing one to inflict such things on oneself is awesome, inflicting them on someone without Explicit Consent . . . they wouldn't do that.

edited by absimiliard on 6/8/2016

Your reasoning is sound, but omits one important point: I'm only at Failbetter for another five working days, and basically, everyone else in the office has drawn their desks back to the other side of the room while I snarl obscenities and type with my feet. I don't know what damage I might do on my way out.

Kylestien: Imagine you are married to a cocaine fiend. If you insist on enabling their habit, don't be surprised when people ignore your protests and try to convince you otherwise. I, however, am the first Seeker who will succeed, so instead I request that you transfer your oaths to me and immediately hand over your teeth.

In all seriousness, I'm giving you silly answers because I don't really know what New Seeking entails yet. You'll likely get better answers in a week, and beyond as the story progresses. For now, just be prepared for Menace reduction requests, and follow Estelle's advice.

I do disagree with the "bitter end" part though — there is no such thing as a sunk cost fallacy without the fallacy. If the cost becomes greater than your spouse is willing to pay, the correct move is to drop out. The only difference is that this quest promises to push the cost upward without limit, so if your spouse values ANYTHING in the game more than Seeking, continuing in the hopes that they'll keep it is a very risky gamble.