85 réponses à ce sujet

[Frumyfrenzy]

In Exile wrote...

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.

This got me thinking:
A highly contagious virus with a high mortality rate (within 12 months of infection) ravages among people in England. Luckily, most english people and only them share genes, which make them immune to the effects of the virus (but still contagious) except for one thing: they lose their fertility. They can however have children with women which do not carry the virus. Since those women would die, the english must rape if they want to reproduce. Thereofore, following your rule, in this scenario, eradication is justified. Again, here we disagree. 

Modifié par Frumyfrenzy, 25 juillet 2010 - 02:06 .

[In Exile]

Frumyfrenzy wrote...

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. 

I have a hard time believing someone telling me he doesn't want to kill people as he's currently removing the livers from his still living victim.

You happen to think intelligence is the only think that is required to make something equivalent in moral standing to humanity, at the exclusion of all other traits. I disagree.

[In Exile]

Frumyfrenzy wrote...

This got me thinking:
A highly contagious virus with a high mortality rate (within 12 months of infection) ravages among people in England. Luckily, most english people and only them share genes, which make them immune to the effects of the virus (but still contagious) except for one thing: they lose their fertility. They can however have children with women which do not carry the virus. Since those women would die, the english must rape if they want to reproduce. Thereofore, following your rule, in this scenario, eradication is justified. Again, here we disagree. 

No, that's still not my scenario. The virus would have to be more virulent (the blight seems to spread within weeks or months, not a year) and it couldn't be exclusive to humans. The corruptions affects wolves, bears, grass, even the sky.

Per the dragon age wiki:

With each passing day, a blight grows. The earth itself withers and
dies; the land is leeched of moisture, turning everything dry and brown.
The sky fills with rolling, black clouds that block out the sun, making
it easier for the darkspawn to surface. As this wasteland spreads, the
corruption of the blight spreads with it, diseasing all in its path.


So our highly contagious virus is still not sufficient to satisfy the first conjuct. Our infected british people do not kill all things in virtue of their existence.

Try again.

[Frumyfrenzy]

In Exile wrote...

So our highly contagious virus is still not sufficient to satisfy the first conjuct. Our infected british people do not kill all things in virtue of their existence.

Try again.

Well, then this virus does indeed infect across species borders. Everything else stays the same in the example. Wasn't too hard to add that.

[AllThatJazz]

Frumyfrenzy wrote...

In Exile wrote...

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.

This got me thinking:
A highly contagious virus with a high mortality rate (within 12 months of infection) ravages among people in England. Luckily, most english people and only them share genes, which make them immune to the effects of the virus (but still contagious) except for one thing: they lose their fertility. They can however have children with women which do not carry the virus. Since those women would die, the english must rape if they want to reproduce. Thereofore, following your rule, in this scenario, eradication is justified. Again, here we disagree. 

If these English men started raping and horribly disfiguring and forcing into cannibalism Scottish/Welsh women en masse in order to ensure their own survival? Yes, eradication would indeed be justified. If by England, however, you mean Britain, then it would hardly be necessary. Evacuate any non-British women, then destroy our international travel infrastructure, which would remove the capability of the British to travel off our small island and we are completely quarantined and unable to affect anyone.

The problems with translating this to the DA world are: 

a) The Darkspawn aren't confined to a little island somewhere, they can teem out of entrances to the Deep Roads almost anywhere in Thedas, most of which have been forgotten about.

Even if complete quarantine was possible, it's the same result as being eradicated by the Wardens. The Darkspawn would die out because they can't reproduce. Since the Architect wants the continued existence of the Darkspawn, quarantine is therefore not a solution he would accept.

Modifié par AllThatJazz, 25 juillet 2010 - 02:53 .

[In Exile]

Frumyfrenzy wrote...

Well, then this virus does indeed infect across species borders. Everything else stays the same in the example. Wasn't too hard to add that.

Ah, but it changes the scenario dramatically. You see, darkspawn do not need to eat to survive. Humans do. Our infected humans kill everything but themselves in a given area. They cannot subsist of it. Their choices are to remain fixed and die of starvation, or try to migrate and spread their illness. Even if they are not raping to procreate, they are still spreading, well,  blight.

So the scenario isn't similar at all. Now, if you want to start adding more special darkspawn features, like the fact that they don't need to eat to survive, then we'd need to add stuff like the virus makes the majority of them wild animals with no possibility for higher thought...

... and we move toward your equivalence with people breakding down.

[Frumyfrenzy]

In Exile wrote...

You happen to think intelligence is the only think that is required to make something equivalent in moral standing to humanity, at the exclusion of all other traits. I disagree.

I disagree that we disagree here.  

[Frumyfrenzy]

In Exile wrote...

Ah, but it changes the scenario dramatically. You see, darkspawn do not need to eat to survive. Humans do. Our infected humans kill everything but themselves in a given area. They cannot subsist of it. Their choices are to remain fixed and die of starvation, or try to migrate and spread their illness. Even if they are not raping to procreate, they are still spreading, well,  blight.

Territorial separation for me is still preferable over eradication. I'd leave the english to their island.

[mildmort]

The worst concern about the architect seems to be to make broodmothers or organize the military.

What I am concerning might be ......the third one.

[In Exile]

Frumyfrenzy wrote...

Territorial separation for me is still preferable over eradication. I'd leave the english to their island.

What makes you think the English would want to die out in pain on their island? It's awesome you give them your permission to exist, but they might not be very happy with that arrangement. This is the problem. You are attributing a self-sacrificing notion to the darkspawn.

Yes, if the darkspawn would happily allow themselves to die via mass starvation and celebacy, I'd be all for them being allowed to think. But that's absurd.

[Darth_Trethon]

Yeah there's a word on the Architect.....he's f______ dead!!! You claim to have read The Calling but miss the part where he's a bloody monster that wants to destroy all the humans and his "reasonable" manner only lasts until he reveals all the details of his plan.



I am pissed off at the devs for leaving no hint of his true plans and nature in Awakening....It's almost as if they want to trick players into letting him live.

[Lord Gremlin]

Darth_Trethon wrote...
It's almost as if they want to trick players into letting him live.

That's the point. Like Morrigan romance ending, Alistair post-coronation break-up and other. If Architect's true plan would have been revealed in the game only those who played evil-mad characters would let him live.

[Head.crab]

Not sure if anyone mentioned this, but deciding between the Architect's solution and continuing as they have been, there's only 7 old gods, and 5 are dead already. Don't you think they'd rather take their chances with only 2 to go rather than side with the Architect?

[Darth_Trethon]

Lord Gremlin wrote...

Darth_Trethon wrote...
It's almost as if they want to trick players into letting him live.

That's the point. Like Morrigan romance ending, Alistair post-coronation break-up and other. If Architect's true plan would have been revealed in the game only those who played evil-mad characters would let him live.

Huh....did I miss something conveniently ommited in the game about Morrigan? I haven't read the comics so there's potential there. I usually only play as a male so what's this about Alistair break-up?

[Lord Gremlin]

Darth_Trethon wrote...

Lord Gremlin wrote...

Darth_Trethon wrote...
It's almost as if they want to trick players into letting him live.

That's the point. Like Morrigan romance ending, Alistair post-coronation break-up and other. If Architect's true plan would have been revealed in the game only those who played evil-mad characters would let him live.

Huh....did I miss something conveniently ommited in the game about Morrigan? I haven't read the comics so there's potential there. I usually only play as a male so what's this about Alistair break-up?

I was referring to Dark Ritual of course and Morrigan leaving after the final battle. As for Alistair, unless PC is a human noble he will break up with her after he made king, and it happens after landsmeet.

[Darth_Trethon]

Lord Gremlin wrote...

Darth_Trethon wrote...

Lord Gremlin wrote...

Darth_Trethon wrote...
It's almost as if they want to trick players into letting him live.

That's the point. Like Morrigan romance ending, Alistair post-coronation break-up and other. If Architect's true plan would have been revealed in the game only those who played evil-mad characters would let him live.

Huh....did I miss something conveniently ommited in the game about Morrigan? I haven't read the comics so there's potential there. I usually only play as a male so what's this about Alistair break-up?

I was referring to Dark Ritual of course and Morrigan leaving after the final battle. As for Alistair, unless PC is a human noble he will break up with her after he made king, and it happens after landsmeet.

Oh I knew about those....I thought there was something completely left out of the game like the Architect's plan. Those are anoying but at least you can plan for them infuture playthroughs. They didn't have anything of the sort regarding the architect.

[Artemis_Entrari]

I've read The Calling, and anyone who thinks the Architect's plan makes sense, or is a course of action a sane human being should agree with, must have missed the part about him basically wanting to eradicate every single creature that isn't able to drink the darkspawn taint (ala the Wardens) and survive.

I don't care if his ultimate goal is a "noble" one (for his kind). But the means in which he arrives at that end are far and away not the kind of thing any sensible person should agree to.

Also, I don't see how he'll play a part in DA2.  In my game, I killed him.  So unless our choices no longer matter, he's dead in my (and I'm assuming a lot of other people's)  game and can't be heard from in any future installments.  If they wanted him to appear in DA2 or beyond, then there shouldn't have been a kill him option.  Either you side with him, or he should have somehow escaped the battle still alive.

Modifié par Artemis_Entrari, 25 juillet 2010 - 04:45 .

[BeastMTL]

The Architect definitely was not explained enough in Awakenings to make a solid judgment. In the end I always kill him because:

1- Darkspawn seem to breed much faster than humans.

2- Intelligent Darkspawn doesnt mean they have any morality (humans do, and it's not better is it).

3- Given enough time, a huge army of these guys may show up and bring forth something as bad/worse than a Blight.

[Lord Gremlin]

vilnii wrote...

Indeed the Architect has a logic which is beyond insane

Well, he's not insane, he's a darkspawn. And he's planning to do what's best for darkspawn: get rid of the Old Gods who can enforce their will upon them and make all other sentient races their slaves. He wants to do what's best for him and other darkspawn. And since he doesn't want to risk his own safety he tries to reason with the Warden.

Another point here is that  Architect is very lonely, he's an outcast. Others actually enjoy Old God's song. So he wants to make others like himself. Although I bet any genlock would make fun of his face anyway.

[SirOccam]

I have The Calling but haven't gotten around to reading it yet. In Awakening, maybe I didn't think about it enough, but it sounded to me like he wanted to neutralize the call of the Old Gods and therefore end Blights for good.

My character's thought process involved 3 main points:
1. Ending Blights forever: good
2. Can still kill Darkspawn...I'm not signing a peace treaty
3. If Morrigan did have "evil" plans for the God Baby...this might inhibit those. And if they were good/neutral plans, it shouldn't have any effect

The way I see it, I could kill the Architect and continue on as before, with 2 more potential Blights to face. Or I could let him try his crazy plan, hopefully remove the threat of Blights, but if not, I can still proceed as before, and wipe them out.

It's very possible I missed some crucial point, but that's what it came down to for me.

Modifié par SirOccam, 26 juillet 2010 - 12:59 .

[Some Geth]

SirOccam wrote...

I have The Calling but haven't gotten around to reading it yet. In Awakening, maybe I didn't think about it enough, but it sounded to me like he wanted to neutralize the call of the Old Gods and therefore end Blights for good.

My character's thought process involved 3 main points:
1. Ending Blights forever: good
2. Can still kill Darkspawn...I'm not signing a peace treaty
3. If Morrigan did have "evil" plans for the God Baby...this might inhibit those. And if they were good/neutral plans, it shouldn't have any effect

The way I see it, I could kill the Architect and continue on as before, with 2 more potential Blights to face. Or I could let him try his crazy plan, hopefully remove the threat of Blights, but if not, I can still proceed as before, and wipe them out.

It's very possible I missed some crucial point, but that's what it came down to for me.

This is how I see it too .

[Demx]

He's dead mate, or more like

Dragon Age: Origins - Awakening = Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening

It was all a dream.

[Some Geth]

Siradix wrote...

He's dead mate, or more like

Dragon Age: Origins - Awakening = Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening

It was all a dream.

No!

[In Exile]

Lord Gremlin wrote...
Well, he's not insane, he's a darkspawn. And he's planning to do what's best for darkspawn: get rid of the Old Gods who can enforce their will upon them and make all other sentient races their slaves. He wants to do what's best for him and other darkspawn. And since he doesn't want to risk his own safety he tries to reason with the Warden.

Right, but that would be like a cannibal trying to convince you it would be awesome if we let him eat you. Sure, he's totally not insane from his PoV, but he is from yours, and trying to reason with you on the finer points of being dinner is on the crazy side.