85 réponses à ce sujet

[Frumyfrenzy]

JasonPogo wrote...


Well If you look at what he wanted to do then yes he need to be killed.  In The Calling he wanted to turn the whole world into Ghouls.  Since Darkspawn don't attack Ghouls then everyone will get along.  Oh except for the fact that Ghouls are corrupted souls that soon die and cannot reproduce.  So in the long run he would just be killing off all life anyway.  Nothing he does is justifiable or something that you can sit back and say he had a good idea.

I just wanted to point out two things: He shares a common goal with the Wardens (and even you) - to stop the blights and the mass slaughtering. The other thing is that he is reasonable and thus you can reason with him. 

It is rather interesting that in his prefered peaceful future non-darkspawn have a place, which is more than you can say about the future Wardens envision, they dream of a complete eradication of darkspawn. Now a ghoulish existence isn't what I'd neccessarily see as a comforting way of existence, but at least you have to give the Architect credit for coming up with any solution at all. Certainly, no way I'm gonna be a ghoul or die in the process of transforming, but it's a start to have some thoughts about and with the Architect about what is and what isn't possible. Looking for and killing the remaining Old Gods was a good thought after all, don't you think?

[In Exile]

[quote]Frumyfrenzy wrote...

[quote]In Exile wrote...

The Architect is pretty irredeemable. He wants to the darkspawn conflict via genocide. That's not particularly different than how the other darkspawn operate. He just happens to have a more refined view than murdering everyone by stabbing them with pointy ends. He caused a blight, and DA:A is all his fault.
I don't think he's different from a darkspawn at all. He can just think.[/quote]

There is more to The Architect than you see of him in Awakening. Let me explain this a bit. The way the Architect sees it, one of two things will happen, if noone comes up with a plan:

A) Eradication of all darkspawn - everyone above ground (+ dwarfs) wins.
Eradication of all living beings and corruption of the environment during a successful blight - darkspawn win.

The Architect obviously does not want A to happen, but he does not like option B  either (which makes him different from his fellows). He had two plans, two failed attempts to stop it all with preferably minimal bloodshed. In 'The Calling' he elaborates on his intentions. So, seriously, given his knowledge of A and B, do you really think he is just like the rest of the darkspawn? He does have a point, doesn't he?[/quote]

Well, the problem is that option C: Darkspawn exist is not at all tolerable to all non-darkspawn. After all, the darkspawn in virtue of their existence are toxic to all not darkspawn.

I have no idea what these plans in Calling are, but from what I have seen in-game as evidence of his motives, he wants to kidnap and bleed Grey Wardens to preserve darkspawn by providing them intelligence and kill archdemons. His plan to kill archdemons gave us the fifth blight, so that was a spectacular failure, and his plan to free the darkspawn created the insane mother who wanted to cause a sixth blight.

All in all, his actions are absolutely catastrophic. It is not entirely clear whether the darkspawn can coexist in the least with the Wardens. In the forest with the elves, he murdered many elves and framed the humans. His intelligent darkspawn are raiders and murders, and even with their vaunted intelligence are still antithetical to non-darkspawn.

What do you see as reedemable about the Architect from the perspective of a non-darkspawn?

[quote]On a side note, I was surprised how hard most characters (Grey Wardens) in 'The Calling' avoided to reason with him. Instead they appeared to follow the same stupid formula: If it's a darkspawn, even if it talks and reasons, it must be bad and be killed. [/quote]

This is because the darkspawn are the blight. Look, the archdemon is just the centre of a blight. It is the intelligence that brings a horde from above ground, organizes it, and allows it to wage war and ravage the world. An intelligent darkspawn that can do all of the same things as an archdemon is just as dangerous.

The problem with the scenario as you set it up is that it doesn't recognize the intrisic problem with the darkspawn, which is that they are the blight in large numbers above ground.

More to the point, the darkspawn cannot reproduce without producing brood mothers. The darkspawn, if they want to continue to exist, have to kidnap innocent women.

There is no negotiation possible.

[quote]If it has plans I disagree with, I don't reason with this oviously reasonable creature (which too merely tries to stop blights), no, I rather try to kill it! Grey Wardens, at this point, appear to be a rather dumb bunch of war mongering soldiers without any real intention of stopping the whole thing. [/quote]

You misunderstand what the blight is. The blight is the corruption the darkspawn inflict onto the land when the explode from the deep roads. If there was something other than an archdemon that could organize them and lead them in large numbers, we would still have a blight.

This is why there is nothing the Architect can do to convince a Grey Warden that he shouldn't be killed. The darkspawn are simply an existence that is cannot exist along with the other races. At best you can have an uneasy peace if the two are segregated, but the other races cannot coexist side-by-side.

[quote]Instead they dim-wittedly prefer waiting for another blight. To me it makes more sense to start talking with this thing, because it is an opportunity, but obviously it has to happen secretly, because of the average Grey Warden's incapability of understanding more than just the next darkspawn kill (because they're evil). Someone with A and B in mind and knowledge of the Architect has to make somthing of it. Merely drinking your enemy's blood and looking for a every possible fight with it just doesn't cut it in the long run. [/quote]

Again, you are acting as if the problem is the archdemon and not the darkspawn. But the archdemon is only a problem because of the darkspawn. In fact, as the Architect's own actions prove, we would not have had a flifth blight had he not found the old god himself.

The darkspawn are the enemy, not the archdemon. The Architect wants to preserve an existence that is antithetical to our own. There is simply no room for negotiation.

The only possible scenario under which we could negotiate with the Architect was if he found a way to either exterminate the darkspawn or turn them back into their non-corrupted races. Otherwise, genocide is the only option. It is a very real us or them scenario.



[/quote]

[In Exile]

Frumyfrenzy wrote...
I just wanted to point out two things: He shares a common goal with the Wardens (and even you) - to stop the blights and the mass slaughtering. The other thing is that he is reasonable and thus you can reason with him.

The blight isn't the threat. The darkspawn are. If there was enough military might to kill every single darkspawn in one campaign, there would be no concern over a blight. The reason why a blight is dangerous is that the darkspawn cannot be stopped alone. They are unthinking killing machines that can be produced in numbers far too large to resist. All they require to kill us all is a leader. This is why a blight ends with the death of an archdemon - because it removes the only possible logical and intelligent organizing influence of a blight.

If we suddenly have intelligent darkspawn with free will, we have a functional army that has superior numbers, superior industrial base, and the capacity to absolutely outbreed us. Intelligent darkspawn are a threat a thousand times greater than archdemonds

It is rather interesting that in his prefered peaceful future non-darkspawn have a place, which is more than you can say about the future Wardens envision, they dream of a complete eradication of darkspawn. Now a ghoulish existence isn't what I'd neccessarily see as a comforting way of existence, but at least you have to give the Architect credit for coming up with any solution at all. Certainly, no way I'm gonna be a ghoul or die in the process of transforming, but it's a start to have some thoughts about and with the Architect about what is and what isn't possible. Looking for and killing the remaining Old Gods was a good thought after all, don't you think?

Right, the Archtitect will allow other races to exist as twisted slaves. Well, awesome. I'm so glad he ives me permission to exist if I either become a bloated, monstrous abomination that can only exist to breed darkspawn as a female, or an absolutely insane tortured lunatic if I'm male.

If the deep roads showed us anything, it is the absolute hell of an existence that being a ghoul is.

This would be like the Grey Warden order saying: we do not want to kill all darkspawn - we want to preserve some, so we can torture them for sport and rape them. Right, that's so much better than genocide.

The future the Architect wants is an endless blight, that cannot be stopped by cutting off the head of the beast because all darkspawn are intelligent. Other races are allowed to live as horrible breeding factories.

[Baldurs Gate]

[quote]In Exile wrote...

[quote]Frumyfrenzy wrote...

[quote]In Exile wrote...

The Architect is pretty irredeemable. He wants to the darkspawn conflict via genocide. That's not particularly different than how the other darkspawn operate. He just happens to have a more refined view than murdering everyone by stabbing them with pointy ends. He caused a blight, and DA:A is all his fault.
I don't think he's different from a darkspawn at all. He can just think.[/quote]

There is more to The Architect than you see of him in Awakening. Let me explain this a bit. The way the Architect sees it, one of two things will happen, if noone comes up with a plan:

A) Eradication of all darkspawn - everyone above ground (+ dwarfs) wins.
Eradication of all living beings and corruption of the environment during a successful blight - darkspawn win.

The Architect obviously does not want A to happen, but he does not like option B  either (which makes him different from his fellows). He had two plans, two failed attempts to stop it all with preferably minimal bloodshed. In 'The Calling' he elaborates on his intentions. So, seriously, given his knowledge of A and B, do you really think he is just like the rest of the darkspawn? He does have a point, doesn't he?[/quote]

Well, the problem is that option C: Darkspawn exist is not at all tolerable to all non-darkspawn. After all, the darkspawn in virtue of their existence are toxic to all not darkspawn.

I have no idea what these plans in Calling are, but from what I have seen in-game as evidence of his motives, he wants to kidnap and bleed Grey Wardens to preserve darkspawn by providing them intelligence and kill archdemons. His plan to kill archdemons gave us the fifth blight, so that was a spectacular failure, and his plan to free the darkspawn created the insane mother who wanted to cause a sixth blight.

All in all, his actions are absolutely catastrophic. It is not entirely clear whether the darkspawn can coexist in the least with the Wardens. In the forest with the elves, he murdered many elves and framed the humans. His intelligent darkspawn are raiders and murders, and even with their vaunted intelligence are still antithetical to non-darkspawn.

What do you see as reedemable about the Architect from the perspective of a non-darkspawn?

[quote]On a side note, I was surprised how hard most characters (Grey Wardens) in 'The Calling' avoided to reason with him. Instead they appeared to follow the same stupid formula: If it's a darkspawn, even if it talks and reasons, it must be bad and be killed. [/quote]

This is because the darkspawn are the blight. Look, the archdemon is just the centre of a blight. It is the intelligence that brings a horde from above ground, organizes it, and allows it to wage war and ravage the world. An intelligent darkspawn that can do all of the same things as an archdemon is just as dangerous.

The problem with the scenario as you set it up is that it doesn't recognize the intrisic problem with the darkspawn, which is that they are the blight in large numbers above ground.

More to the point, the darkspawn cannot reproduce without producing brood mothers. The darkspawn, if they want to continue to exist, have to kidnap innocent women.

There is no negotiation possible.

[quote]If it has plans I disagree with, I don't reason with this oviously reasonable creature (which too merely tries to stop blights), no, I rather try to kill it! Grey Wardens, at this point, appear to be a rather dumb bunch of war mongering soldiers without any real intention of stopping the whole thing. [/quote]

You misunderstand what the blight is. The blight is the corruption the darkspawn inflict onto the land when the explode from the deep roads. If there was something other than an archdemon that could organize them and lead them in large numbers, we would still have a blight.

This is why there is nothing the Architect can do to convince a Grey Warden that he shouldn't be killed. The darkspawn are simply an existence that is cannot exist along with the other races. At best you can have an uneasy peace if the two are segregated, but the other races cannot coexist side-by-side.

[quote]Instead they dim-wittedly prefer waiting for another blight. To me it makes more sense to start talking with this thing, because it is an opportunity, but obviously it has to happen secretly, because of the average Grey Warden's incapability of understanding more than just the next darkspawn kill (because they're evil). Someone with A and B in mind and knowledge of the Architect has to make somthing of it. Merely drinking your enemy's blood and looking for a every possible fight with it just doesn't cut it in the long run. [/quote]

Again, you are acting as if the problem is the archdemon and not the darkspawn. But the archdemon is only a problem because of the darkspawn. In fact, as the Architect's own actions prove, we would not have had a flifth blight had he not found the old god himself.

The darkspawn are the enemy, not the archdemon. The Architect wants to preserve an existence that is antithetical to our own. There is simply no room for negotiation.

The only possible scenario under which we could negotiate with the Architect was if he found a way to either exterminate the darkspawn or turn them back into their non-corrupted races. Otherwise, genocide is the only option. It is a very real us or them scenario.



[/quote]
[/quote]


Pretty solid reply. Very nice, I think you have some very good points there.

[Riona45]

I'm with In Exile on this. Besides, the Silverite Mines quest in DA:A shows you how the Architect would not be the most trustworthy of partners to work with--he has no sense of morality.  And he flat out tells you he intends to use Grey Warden blood for his plan, and sees no difference between that and the Joining.

Modifié par Riona45, 24 juillet 2010 - 10:45 .

[Shepard Lives]

[quote]

[quote]Frumyfrenzy wrote...

[quote]In Exile wrote...

The Architect is pretty irredeemable. He wants to the darkspawn conflict via genocide. That's not particularly different than how the other darkspawn operate. He just happens to have a more refined view than murdering everyone by stabbing them with pointy ends. He caused a blight, and DA:A is all his fault.
I don't think he's different from a darkspawn at all. He can just think.[/quote]

There is more to The Architect than you see of him in Awakening. Let me explain this a bit. The way the Architect sees it, one of two things will happen, if noone comes up with a plan:

A) Eradication of all darkspawn - everyone above ground (+ dwarfs) wins.
Eradication of all living beings and corruption of the environment during a successful blight - darkspawn win.

The Architect obviously does not want A to happen, but he does not like option B  either (which makes him different from his fellows). He had two plans, two failed attempts to stop it all with preferably minimal bloodshed. In 'The Calling' he elaborates on his intentions. So, seriously, given his knowledge of A and B, do you really think he is just like the rest of the darkspawn? He does have a point, doesn't he?[/quote]

Well, the problem is that option C: Darkspawn exist is not at all tolerable to all non-darkspawn. After all, the darkspawn in virtue of their existence are toxic to all not darkspawn.

I have no idea what these plans in Calling are, but from what I have seen in-game as evidence of his motives, he wants to kidnap and bleed Grey Wardens to preserve darkspawn by providing them intelligence and kill archdemons. His plan to kill archdemons gave us the fifth blight, so that was a spectacular failure, and his plan to free the darkspawn created the insane mother who wanted to cause a sixth blight.

All in all, his actions are absolutely catastrophic. It is not entirely clear whether the darkspawn can coexist in the least with the Wardens. In the forest with the elves, he murdered many elves and framed the humans. His intelligent darkspawn are raiders and murders, and even with their vaunted intelligence are still antithetical to non-darkspawn.

What do you see as reedemable about the Architect from the perspective of a non-darkspawn?

[quote]On a side note, I was surprised how hard most characters (Grey Wardens) in 'The Calling' avoided to reason with him. Instead they appeared to follow the same stupid formula: If it's a darkspawn, even if it talks and reasons, it must be bad and be killed. [/quote]

This is because the darkspawn are the blight. Look, the archdemon is just the centre of a blight. It is the intelligence that brings a horde from above ground, organizes it, and allows it to wage war and ravage the world. An intelligent darkspawn that can do all of the same things as an archdemon is just as dangerous.

The problem with the scenario as you set it up is that it doesn't recognize the intrisic problem with the darkspawn, which is that they are the blight in large numbers above ground.

More to the point, the darkspawn cannot reproduce without producing brood mothers. The darkspawn, if they want to continue to exist, have to kidnap innocent women.

There is no negotiation possible.

[quote]If it has plans I disagree with, I don't reason with this oviously reasonable creature (which too merely tries to stop blights), no, I rather try to kill it! Grey Wardens, at this point, appear to be a rather dumb bunch of war mongering soldiers without any real intention of stopping the whole thing. [/quote]

You misunderstand what the blight is. The blight is the corruption the darkspawn inflict onto the land when the explode from the deep roads. If there was something other than an archdemon that could organize them and lead them in large numbers, we would still have a blight.

This is why there is nothing the Architect can do to convince a Grey Warden that he shouldn't be killed. The darkspawn are simply an existence that is cannot exist along with the other races. At best you can have an uneasy peace if the two are segregated, but the other races cannot coexist side-by-side.

[quote]Instead they dim-wittedly prefer waiting for another blight. To me it makes more sense to start talking with this thing, because it is an opportunity, but obviously it has to happen secretly, because of the average Grey Warden's incapability of understanding more than just the next darkspawn kill (because they're evil). Someone with A and B in mind and knowledge of the Architect has to make somthing of it. Merely drinking your enemy's blood and looking for a every possible fight with it just doesn't cut it in the long run. [/quote]

Again, you are acting as if the problem is the archdemon and not the darkspawn. But the archdemon is only a problem because of the darkspawn. In fact, as the Architect's own actions prove, we would not have had a flifth blight had he not found the old god himself.

The darkspawn are the enemy, not the archdemon. The Architect wants to preserve an existence that is antithetical to our own. There is simply no room for negotiation.

The only possible scenario under which we could negotiate with the Architect was if he found a way to either exterminate the darkspawn or turn them back into their non-corrupted races. Otherwise, genocide is the only option. It is a very real us or them scenario.



[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]

This. Had I felt less lazy, I would have written more or less the same things.

The darkspawn, by their very essence, cannot coexist with other species - not peacefully. If the Architect "awakened" all darkspawn, we'd be screwed. An immense army of intelligent murderous monsters. Think about it.

This ain't like the Geth in Mass Effect 2.

Even if they actually became sentient and peaceful (there is no correlation between the two, there never has been. think of humans.) they would still spread the taint (like the Messenger in Awakening).
Any option that does not involve the darkspawn exterminated, or at the very least the Blights ended, would sooner or later result in a world completely overrun by the taint.
In most other settings I'd suggest a peaceful solution, but unless the writers decide to suddenly turn the darkspawn into a misunderstood people with a rich culture, the only solution is Kill 'Em All.

And the Grey Wardens are not, as Frumyfrenzy makes them to be, a stupid, fascist army of idiots who refuse to dialogue with an intelligent enemy - because there is no intelligent enemy.

Modifié par shepard_lives, 24 juillet 2010 - 11:21 .

[Frumyfrenzy]

In Exile wrote...
This is because the darkspawn are the blight. Look, the archdemon is just the centre of a blight. It is the intelligence that brings a horde from above ground, organizes it, and allows it to wage war and ravage the world. An intelligent darkspawn that can do all of the same things as an archdemon is just as dangerous.

In Exile wrote...
Again, you are acting as if the problem is the archdemon and not the darkspawn. But the archdemon is only a problem because of the darkspawn. In fact, as the Architect's own actions prove, we would not have had a flifth blight had he not found the old god himself. 

Darkspawn hear the calling of the old gods and are driven by them to dig them up and corrupt them. They obey and dig without choice. The Architect does hear the calling but is not forced to do anything by it, he has free will. However, he sees what comes next: The corrupted old god leads them onto the surface – a blight starts, including mass slaughtering. The Architect lacks this magical power of command over his brethren, he cannot speak to them in their heads like old gods do. He does not even wish to command them, which becomes quite clear in many moments in the books as well as in Awakening, when he refuses to be adressed as 'The Father' by his creation 'The Mother'.

In Exile wrote...
You misunderstand what the blight is. The blight is the corruption the darkspawn inflict onto the land when the explode from the deep roads. If there was something other than an archdemon that could organize them and lead them in large numbers, we would still have a blight.

No blight without a corrupted Old God - ff that statement is false, go and tell the Architect, because he thinks it's true. He wanted to stop the blights once and for all by killing all remaining Old Gods. I think you rather mean the corruption, which would still be a problem as long as non-darkspawn have contact with darkspawn. If all human were deadly allergic to, say, dogs, were your solution the eradication of dogs? Wouldn't you prefer a territorial solution over drinking their blood and killing them all? Especially when suddenly some dogs start talking to you?

In Exile wrote...
This is why there is nothing the Architect can do to convince a Grey Warden that he shouldn't be killed. The darkspawn are simply an existence that is cannot exist along with the other races. At best you can have an uneasy peace if the two are segregated, but the other races cannot coexist side-by-side. 

Since when is the complete eradication of one party preferable over an uneasy peace?

Modifié par Frumyfrenzy, 24 juillet 2010 - 11:51 .

[In Exile]

Frumyfrenzy wrote...
Darkspawn hear the calling of the old gods and are driven by them to dig them up and corrupt them. They obey and dig without choice. The Architect does hear the calling but is not forced to do anything by it, he has free will. However, he sees what comes next: The corrupted old god leads them onto the surface – a blight starts, including mass slaughtering.

You still don't seem to get it. It is not the archedmon that makes the blight happen. It is the organization of the darkspawn. The archdemon is a proximal cause, not the ultimate cause. If we had some other means of organizing the darkspawn, we would still have a blight.

The point is, intelligent darkspawn can organize themselves. If they choose to attack, they cannot be defeated by Grey Wardens. In fact, Grey Wardens become worthless.

We see in-game that intelligent darkspawn can command regular darkspawn as generals. We see a broodmother organize an all out war on the surface that culminates in the exterminate of at least one major strategic point.

The Architect lacks this magical power of command over his brethren, he cannot speak to them in their heads like old gods do. He does not even wish to command them, which becomes quite clear in many moments in the books as well as in Awakening, when he refuses to be adressed as 'The Father' by his creation 'The Mother'.

Aramanthine is very lucky that darkspawn only listen to the archdemon, otherwise something like a broodmother could go out of control and start a genocidal campaign that would lead to the destruction of the city.

Wait... that sounds oddly familiar. Almost as if that is exactly what happens.

You have yet to address the major points I raised:

1) The blight (dark stormclouds, death of the land, corruption of the animals, eradication of vegetation) has to do with the tainted blood of the darkspawn, not the archdemon. How does removing the archdemon address this?

2) The darkspawn can only reproduce through rape. How does this prevent a constat state of war where they must raid villages of elves, humans, dwarves and qunari to reproduce? How does killing the archdemon address this?

3) Intelligent darkspawn can operate as unit commanders and we already have evidence that they can cause a microcosm of the blight. How does killing the archdemon resolve this?

In Exile wrote...
No blight without a corrupted Old God - ff that statement is false, go and tell the Architect, because he thinks it's true.

Who the hell cares what the guy who wants to enslave everyone as ghouls thinks? Why are you taking him as an authority on the blight?

He wanted to stop the blights once and for all by killing all remaining Old Gods. I think you rather mean the corruption, which would still be a problem as long as non-darkspawn have contact with darkspawn.

No. A blight is a surface invasion with the accompanied corruption. The surface invasion happens if the darkspawn are organized and have a reason to invade the surface. Which is precisely what happens wit the Mother. No old god required.

If all human were deadly allergic to, say, dogs, were your solution the eradication of dogs? Wouldn't you prefer a territorial solution over drinking their blood and killing them all? Especially when suddenly some dogs start talking to you?

There is no coexistence possible. It's a shame that the dogs are sapient. But I would use an even stronger example: people carrying a mortal plague with a 95% fatality rate. Hard choices have to be made. \\

If being around you meant I died, and if the only way you could reproduce was if you raped me, then yeah, I would be very intolerable of your existence.

We can work toghether when our mutual existence doesn't mean the death of one of us. If we had intelligent AIDS viruses, I wouldn't feel particularly bad about killing them versus dying in 10 years so the virus gets to live and reproduce.

In Exile wrote...
Since when is the complete eradication of one party preferable over an uneasy peace?

Since uneasy peace is impossible.

Modifié par In Exile, 25 juillet 2010 - 12:04 .

[filetemo]

how are we gonna make peace with darkspawn if we try to wipe out and enslave elves?

[Frumyfrenzy]

In Exile wrote...
You still don't seem to get it. It is not the archedmon that makes the blight happen. It is the organization of the darkspawn. The archdemon is a proximal cause, not the ultimate cause. If we had some other means of organizing the darkspawn, we would still have a blight. 

The point is, intelligent darkspawn can organize themselves. If they choose to attack, they cannot be defeated by Grey Wardens. In fact, Grey Wardens become worthless. 

We see in-game that intelligent darkspawn can command regular darkspawn as generals. We see a broodmother organize an all out war on the surface that culminates in the exterminate of at least one major strategic point.

In Exile wrote...
Aramanthine is very lucky that darkspawn only listen to the archdemon, otherwise something like a broodmother could go out of control and start a genocidal campaign that would lead to the destruction of the city.

Wait... that sounds oddly familiar. Almost as if that is exactly what happens.

You point is: Even without an archdemon the blights will happen. Therefore kill them all.
My point is: A living old god inevitably leads to a blight. Without old gods blights aren't inevitable anymore, therefore we should think about killing them all.

In Exile wrote...
1) The blight (dark stormclouds, death of the land, corruption of the animals, eradication of vegetation) has to do with the tainted blood of the darkspawn, not the archdemon. How does removing the archdemon address this?

Territorial separation does in conjunction with the removal of the calling.

In Exile wrote...
2) The darkspawn can only reproduce through rape. How does this prevent a constat state of war where they must raid villages of elves, humans, dwarves and qunari to reproduce? How does killing the archdemon address this?

It doesn't and it doesn't have to. Maybe they rape, maybe they don't. You can't start punishing someone because it is possible he will rape. And of course, Even in our non-fantasy world there are necrophiles looking for sexual adventures with willing corpses

In Exile wrote...
3) Intelligent darkspawn can operate as unit commanders and we already have evidence that they can cause a microcosm of the blight. How does killing the archdemon resolve this?

It doesn't and it doesn't have to. Maybe some will kill, maybe they don't. You can't start punishing someone because he is a possible killer.

In Exile wrote...

Frumyfrenzy wrote...
If all human were deadly allergic to, say, dogs, were your solution the eradication of dogs? Wouldn't you prefer a territorial solution over drinking their blood and killing them all? Especially when suddenly some dogs start talking to you?

There is no coexistence possible. It's a shame that the dogs are sapient. But I would use an even stronger example: people carrying a mortal plague with a 95% fatality rate. Hard choices have to be made. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

Interesting, in our country we have something called 'quarantine'. If I may ask, in what country do you live in, where these 'hard choices have to be made', i.e. killing them?

In Exile wrote...
If being around you meant I died, and if the only way you could reproduce was if you raped me, then yeah, I would be very intolerable of your existence.

Why do you conclude from the inability to reproduce without rape, that I inevitably will rape you? 


P.S.
Pretty early in the morning here, I'm off to bed.

Modifié par Frumyfrenzy, 25 juillet 2010 - 01:46 .

[Lord Gremlin]

You people are forgetting something. You can learn detailed Architect's plans from the books, but in Game, in Awakening, you (and more importantly the Warden) never find out what he's up to. That he wants to actually turn all humans and others to ghouls, slaves. And he never tells you that, smart bastard. He promises a painless solution. An end to blights. And everybody happy. And he sounds convincing.

Well, he actually sounds like he's just got high, but still.

[In Exile]

Frumyfrenzy wrote...

You point is: Even without an archdemon the blights will happen. Therefore kill them all.
My point is: A living old god inevitably leads to a blight. Without old gods blights aren't inevitable anymore, therefore we should think about killing them all.

But a blight doesn't happen every day. It took 400 years for this last one. There was at least a century betwen the others. So in fact a blight is  particular rare event.

Let's say we don't kill all the darkspawn. They loiter around for 400 years and don't do  anything other than reproduce, which means just the occasional rape for the odd broodmother. Then they decide that they want some lebensraum. After all, why do they have to suck it up in the deep roads when the other races have cities and above ground?

And suddenly we have a military conquest and a blight, much more dangerous than any other blight, all in about the time it took for the 4th blight to pass and the 5th blight to happen.

So I don't see the particular distinction. The darkspawn failed for 400 years to find an old god. They wouldn't have found it if not for the Architect. A blight could, technically, never happen again if the darkspawn fail to find an old god. Which is just like how my different could could, technically, never happen if the darkspawn want to sit around and sing kumbaya.

The scenarios are much closer than you seem willing to grant.

In Exile wrote...
Territorial separation does in conjunction with the removal of the calling.

What happens if the darkspawn think life sucks in the deep roads? Territorial expansion happens all the time with intelligent races. The dwarves did it. The qunari do it. The humans are famous for it.

If the darkspawn become like us, then they can very well be militaristic like us. And a darkspawn military campaign is equivalent to a force much worse than the blight, because it can't be stopped by stopping an archdemon. That is my point, which you seem to ignore because you happen to think they want to hold hands and hug puppies.

In Exile wrote...
It doesn't and it doesn't have to. Maybe they rape, maybe they don't. You can't start punishing someone because it is possible he will rape.

No, it is a guarantee they will rape. You said it yourself: the Architect does not want option A: the eradication of the darkspawn. If the darkspawn do not reproduce, they will be eradicated.

The logic is simple: if the darkspawn reproduce, they must rape to produce brood mothers. The architect does not want to darkspawn to die out. To not die out, darkspawn must reproduce. Thus darkspawn must rape to produce brood mothers.

This false equivalence with innocent is stupid. Darkspawn don't rape to get their jollies off. They rape to reproduce.

In Exile wrote...
It doesn't and it doesn't have to. Maybe some will kill, maybe they don't. You can't start punishing someone because he is a possible killer.

Again with this presumption of innocence thing. We do not punish accused killers, but we do restrict their liberty tremendously until we can prove whether or not they are killers. Particularly if they are repeat offenders, which the darkspawn at this point are.

In Exile wrote...
Interesting, in our country we have something called 'quarantine'. If I may ask, in what country do you live in, where these 'hard choices have to be made', i.e. killing them?

In the country where they break out of quarantine or otherwise refuse it.

Why do you conclude from the inability to reproduce without rape, that I inevitably will rape you? And further, that therefore you are justified in killing me?

If you tell me you want to reproduce and you are inevitably going to do it, then you are going to rape. And merely talking about rape justifying murder in some abstract sense where rape is just forced sex instead of monstrously transforming me into an insane abomination that has to eat the flesh of my own species and can only survive my leaking out monstrous horrors until I die... well, yeah, that's pretty capital punishment worthy.

I'm sorry, but I just outright reject this false equivalence with innocence.

[In Exile]

Lord Gremlin wrote...

You people are forgetting something. You can learn detailed Architect's plans from the books, but in Game, in Awakening, you (and more importantly the Warden) never find out what he's up to. That he wants to actually turn all humans and others to ghouls, slaves. And he never tells you that, smart bastard. He promises a painless solution. An end to blights. And everybody happy. And he sounds convincing.
Well, he actually sounds like he's just got high, but still.

He just kidnaps you, murders a tribe of elves to get what he wants, and seems perfectly happy to bleed Grey Wardens (even keepin a particular abomination as a pet) all the while his only "succes" seems to be an insane brood mother who wants to start another blight. Yeah, he's totally not damning us all with his insane experiments that he will absolute not stop under any condition.

[Divine Justinia V]

Giltspur wrote...
 (even if he did look like the lovechild of Marilyn Manson and Lady Gaga).

LOLOLOLOL! I found this hysterical. 

I think the Architect was a compelling character. No doubt he was twisted, but that attribute brought extra (for lack of a better term) "oompf" to the game. I'd like to see him in DA 2.

Modifié par VittoriaLandis, 25 juillet 2010 - 01:59 .

[Riona45]

Lord Gremlin wrote...

You people are forgetting something. You can learn detailed Architect's plans from the books, but in Game, in Awakening, you (and more importantly the Warden) never find out what he's up to. That he wants to actually turn all humans and others to ghouls, slaves. And he never tells you that, smart bastard. He promises a painless solution. An end to blights. And everybody happy. And he sounds convincing.

What about what I mentioned in my earlier post?  He flat out tells you he needs the blood of Grey Wardens for his latest plan.  Even if you agree with his plan, there's no reason to assume he would go about acquiring the blood in the most ethical way possible.  There is really no reason to trust him.

I mean, don't the Architect defenders remember how he decorated the Silverite Mines?  I remember hanging corpses and torture devices. 

Modifié par Riona45, 25 juillet 2010 - 02:25 .

[Iscaredeath]

Just to make sure I get the full effect when I import my decisions I let the Architect live with one of my characters. And I found the epilogue interesting in the fact that the darkspawn retreated into the deep roads never to be seen again. So I wonder how that will affect Grey Warden recruiting in later games.

[joriandrake]

Architect is from the expansion right?



How likely is it to add characters from an expansion if even from the main game is unlikely

[Gaxhung]

The Architect is such and anti-villian type, a little tortured, kind of like an anti-hero tortured type but flipped around? Hes almost as good a salesman as Steve Jobs, oh how his people are slaves to their nature, oh how they are misunderstood, oh how he wants to save them and the surface at the same bloody time, how big of him. You can never trust a darkspawn that talks too much, especially when he is cornered. Also, all he is to me is a piniata of xp and lootz!!!



**POSSIBLE AWAKENING SPOILERS**

Look who wants to not kill him, Nathaniel, poor guy didn't even know why his father died and he comes looking for revenge, Valenna's feels so guilt towards her sister's loss, she would do anything to get her back, she has no clue what she is doing, she is blindsided and yes, dumb, nice ****** however.



... hmm I forget who else didn't want architect dead

[joriandrake]

Lol, Architect sounds like Irenicus

[Rykn]

I'm gonna be honest. Only 1 thing made me kill him. Because of the way they make more Darkspawn long story short broodmothers. How are they made? well play DAO and find out. They can't exist without broodmothers and broodmothers are horrible. So I killed him no darkspawn = peace

[Frumyfrenzy]

In Exile wrote...
What happens if the darkspawn think life sucks in the deep roads? Territorial expansion happens all the time with intelligent races. The dwarves did it. The qunari do it. The humans are famous for it. 

And you don't want to eradicate them, don't you? This helps my argument, not yours.

In Exile wrote...
If the darkspawn become like us, then they can very well be militaristic like us. And a darkspawn military campaign is equivalent to a force much worse than the blight, because it can't be stopped by stopping an archdemon. That is my point, which you seem to ignore because you happen to think they want to hold hands and hug puppies.

Again, you want to eradicate for the sheer possibility of militaristic behaviour ('like us'). Therefore you must kill all dwarves, qunari too.

In Exile wrote...
No, it is a guarantee they will rape. You said it yourself: the Architect does not want option A: the eradication of the darkspawn. If the darkspawn do not reproduce, they will be eradicated.

The logic is simple: if the darkspawn reproduce, they must rape to produce brood mothers. The architect does not want to darkspawn to die out. To not die out, darkspawn must reproduce. Thus darkspawn must rape to produce brood mothers. 

This false equivalence with innocent is stupid. Darkspawn don't rape to get their jollies off. They rape to reproduce.

 
Not wanting to be killed by a magically forced war is not the same as wanting to have descendents. I would try to avoid war and still rape noone to procreate, even if this was my only option to produce children. With their will freed of the archdemons control, so the Architect thinks, they have a choice. Here it is the choice to rape or not to rape. Humans, dwarves...all have the ability to rape and the choice, only the darkspawn need to be eradicated for being possible rapists.

In Exile wrote...
Again with this presumption of innocence thing. We do not punish accused killers, but we do restrict their liberty tremendously until we can prove whether or not they are killers. Particularly if they are repeat offenders, which the darkspawn at this point are.

Everyone is a possible killer. Is everybody restricted until he/she proves he/she does not kill? Technically you have to restrict them until they are dead, since only then you rule out the possibility that they kill someone.

In Exile wrote...
In the country where they break out of quarantine or otherwise refuse it. 

In your country, if someone with a contagious disease with a high mortality rate breaking out of quarantine will be killed?

In Exile wrote...

Frumyfrenzy wrote...
Why do you conclude from the inability to reproduce without rape, that I inevitably will rape you? And further, that therefore you are justified in killing me?

If you tell me you want to reproduce and you are inevitably going to do it, then you are going to rape. And merely talking about rape justifying murder in some abstract sense where rape is just forced sex instead of monstrously transforming me into an insane abomination that has to eat the flesh of my own species and can only survive my leaking out monstrous horrors until I die... well, yeah, that's pretty capital punishment worthy.

I'm sorry, but I just outright reject this false equivalence with innocence. 

I edited this particular statement a few minutes after I posted it, because I realized it would be unneccessary. It still is defendable by this: In my country, noone is punished by death for rape and we don't call for an eradication because it is possible that at least some members of a race could be rapists. But again, I edited this statement, because it does invoke more discussion than neccessary.

In a nutshell all your replies still follow this rule: If it at least some members of a race/species have the ability to rape and murder and have the choice of doing or not doing so, then we ought to eradicte the whole race/species asap. You can stick to this rule, but you'd consequently have to kill a lot more than merely darkspawn...including yourself and your own race/species.

Modifié par Frumyfrenzy, 25 juillet 2010 - 09:43 .

[Lord Gremlin]

Rykn wrote...

I'm gonna be honest. Only 1 thing made me kill him. Because of the way they make more Darkspawn long story short broodmothers. How are they made? well play DAO and find out. They can't exist without broodmothers and broodmothers are horrible. So I killed him no darkspawn = peace

Well, he was not the only sentient darkspawn. In Awakening I personally got the impression that all others are much more violent. Disciples, Seeker... I'd rather have the Architect, since we have them anyway. In DA universe it's made pretty clear: it's impossible to kill all darkspawn, their numbers are huge. If they'll be sentient maybe they'll agree to trade lyrium for female criminals? How many females were executed in Ferelden while in other circumstances sentient darkspawn would have bought them? Well, and don't compare that to slave trading. At some point those sold women will even be respected, as broodmothers.

On the other hand, it's a bit like trusting a cannibal only because he's using a fork and speak with british accent.

[In Exile]

Frumyfrenzy wrote...
And you don't want to eradicate them, don't you? This helps my argument, not yours.

Not really following, are you?

Your claim was that a blight (the massed, organized invasion of the surface by the darkspawn) was only inevitable if an archdemon existed. You claimed that in absence of an archdemon, it was no longer a guarantee we would have a blight.

I am pointing out that if darkspawn behave as other races do, then military expasion is inevitable. Yet darkspawn military expansion must be a blight; it is a consequence of what they are.

So we are back to the original point: we must exterminate the darkspawn because they cause a blight, and archdemon or no, they cause blights.

So it does nothing to help your argument, because again,  I am not making this false equivalence between the darkspawn and the other races.

Again, you want to eradicate for the sheer possibility of militaristic behaviour ('like us'). Therefore you must kill all dwarves, qunari too.

No - I want to exterminate because they are wholly unlike us, with the blight, the non-stop rape and the causing ghouls and death and famine while being within 10 km of any non-darkspawn.

Give up the false equivalence.

Not wanting to be killed by a magically forced war is not the same as wanting to have descendents.

But it is the same as going extinct. If the Architect came to you and said he had a brilliant plan for how to make all darkspawn disspear in a generation by making them all sterile, then maybe we would have something to talk about.

The Architect, however, is very clear that he wants his 'species' to survive. As a neccesary condition, that requires reproduction.

I would try to avoid war and still rape noone to procreate, even if this was my only option to produce children.

Good for you. The Architect actively tells you otherwise. His plan is to make ghouls. Female ghouls are brood mothers. You're speaking about nonsensical hypotheticals and making assumptions about how the darkspawn would hug puppies which are quite contrary to the very non-puppy hugging plan the Architect is happy to share.

With their will freed of the archdemons control, so the Architect thinks, they have a choice. Here it is the choice to rape or not to rape. Humans, dwarves...all have the ability to rape and the choice, only the darkspawn need to be eradicated for being possible rapists.

The humans and dwarves can force sex on the unwilling. The darkspawn mutate your body in an insane crusade through physical rape, forced cannibalism, physical alterantion, torture, eventually causing a psychotic break and mutation.

Stop trying to equivocate non-darkspawn rape with the horror that their reproduction causes. Seriously, the darkspawn are not innocent. Let it go, because you aren't any less wrong the 10th time you say it.

Everyone is a possible killer. Is everybody restricted until he/she proves he/she does not kill? Technically you have to restrict them until they are dead, since only then you rule out the possibility that they kill someone.

This is a stupid parallel. Not everyone is the same kind of possible killer. Someone guilty of attempted murder is not a killer, in the same way I am not a killer. But we are not equivalent either legally or morally.

This presumption of innoncence BS is absolutely unrelated to the darkspawn situation.

In your country, if someone with a contagious disease with a high mortality rate breaking out of quarantine will be killed?

In any country, if someone breaks out of a medical quarantine with the potential to cause a pandemic, the military might well use lethal force to restrain them.

We're going right back to presuming innonence when what we're talking about isn't innocent.

In Exile wrote...
I edited this particular statement a few minutes after I posted it, because I realized it would be unneccessary. It still is defendable by this: In my country, noone is punished by death for rape and we don't call for an eradication because it is possible that at least some members of a race could be rapists. But again, I edited this statement, because it does invoke more discussion than neccessary.

But this is a false equivalence. Darkspawn are not human. Even sapient, darkspawn are no equivalent to human beings. You have this pervasive need to frame it as it if was a matter of choice, or of inborn innocence, but it isn't.

The darkspawn murder every living thing in their presence simply by existing next to it. The darkspawn cannot reproduce without brutalizing other races that they must hold as slaves. We do not have to commit crimes against existence to survive on this level.

In a nutshell all your replies still follow this rule: If it at least some members of a race/species have the ability to rape and murder and have the choice of doing or not doing so, then we ought to eradicte the whole race/species asap. You can stick to this rule, but you'd consequently have to kill a lot more than merely darkspawn...including yourself and your own race/species.

No. That is not the rule at all. You keep obsessively trying to make it about this rule, as if the the darkspawn were not a special case, but they are.

If all members of a race/species must murder all things by being next to thing independent of whether or not they wish to and if they must rape and brutalize other species to reproduce, then, and ONLY then, can we justify eradication.

So I can stick to this rule... and kill precisely nothing that isn't a darkspawn.

[Frumyfrenzy]

In Exile wrote...

No. That is not the rule at all. You keep obsessively trying to make it about this rule, as if the the darkspawn were not a special case, but they are.

I think that as soon as some darkspawn have freedom of choice, the ability to think and express their desire to stop this whole bloodshed, they lose their free-to-kill status. You do not think so. We just disagree on this one. 

[AllThatJazz]

 The urge to procreate is a biological imperative, not just a whim or fancy. It isn't an urge that every single member of every single species experiences, but the imperative prevails strongly enough to make a majority of every species feel the urge to procreate. Assuming we can extend this to Darkspawn, then their acts of rape are not the same as those of Dwarves or humans or elves. The latter beings have the choice, it isn't the only way they can reproduce, it isn't even the primary method of reproduction, it is simply a horrible criminal violation, therefore they can be punished individually when such an act takes place. 
Darkspawn can ONLY reproduce through acts of peculiarly horrifying rape, and therefore, in order to perpetuate their species (which they will HAVE to want to do, being governed by the same imperatives as every other species), they will do so. Given that they have to kidnap and torture and rape women of other species in order to procreate, their co-existence with said species becomes impossible, unless those species radically rethink their views on kidnap, torture and rape. Which, in MY Dragon Age, they will not be doing any time soon. 

Just because someone can talk, doesn't make him/her necessarily capable of reason.

In other words: DIE ARCHITECT AND DIE ALL DARKSPAWN.