241 réponses à ce sujet

[EccentricSage]

Giggles_Manically wrote...

EccentricSage wrote...

Giggles_Manically wrote...

Considering you are defiling an holy relic for the name of some goofball cult who is EVIL, and everyone in game says that, I think you are the one who has a skewed view on reality my friend.

Actually the only companions who take that view are Lelliana and Wynne.  Even Alistair can care **** less about the fate of the Urn.

The relic is not holy to my blood mage, nor to me, as the player.

One can call many things good or evil depending uppon perspective.  You fail to actually counter my argument.  Is it evil to use forbiden magic to sacrafice Issolde, a willing sacrafice, in order to save her son without further endangering the people of Redcliff?

Once a person starts to mispell and cuss I start to not care.
However yes its evil to destroy something holy to many thousands of people even if you dont agree with them.
It is evil to kill a woman who was stupid and incompetent, but if there is another option than yes its evil.

Overall the point I am trying to make is no matter your reasoning, or your motives some actions are evil.
Siding with a cult that is comparable to the cultists in Indian Jones and the Temple of Doom, is not only evil but stupid.

Oh give me a break.  Any time a person can not counter another's argument, they turn to the tactic of atacking spelling.  As for cursing, I was not cursinG at you, I just like curse words.  I don't see that as wrong.  But you are entitled to take it however you like and ignore me if you choose.

We fundamentally dissagree.  I beleave ethics are conditional.  You believe in a set of traditional standards set in stone. 

In my view, destroying a sacred relic is not evil if it serves a greater purpose to do so.  My bloodmage sees the Chantry as dangerous and he destroys their relic so that they can never use it.  That is not evil, that is practical.

In my view, and many others, killing Issold is not amoral, as she is a willing 'victim' paying for her part in the massacre at Redcliff.  It is more practical and less risky than trying to make it to the Tower and back without incident.  I would gladly see the death of one guilty party than the deaths of more innocent bystanders or a young child.

Please explain to me where the line is between good and evil, and why you have authority to decide for others beside yourself where that line is drawn.  If there is no logical explanation, then it is evident that your standard only aplies to you and not the world at large, as you are but one person juust as I am.

I don't watch Indiana Jones movies, so I'm not sure what that should mean to me.

[Zjarcal]

Giggles_Manically wrote...

Ignoring that fact that she pulls off an Exorsist like moment, before popping like a pizza pop, the mere fact that there is at least two other options present that avoid it dont make it a good choice.
If you have the mages then good, however if you dont then in that situation I would make Isolde kill Conner.

While the child is blameless, the mother caused it and must end it. Its the lesser of two evils but making Isolde kill Conner puts everything down for good. Outside of Alistair throwing a tantrum.

I just wouldn't call it an evil option.

If you have the mage option available you can still refuse it using the logic that leaving Redcliffe for a few days is too dangerous with a demon on the loose.

Between killing Connor and killing Isolde, neither option is good in the sense that someone will always die, but I wouldn't call either of them evil options unless the players motivations were actually evil.

If a character were to allow Isolde to sacrifice herself simply because they thought she was annoying then yeah, I could call it an evil (or at least jerky) motivation. But if hearing her plea to allow herself to be a sacrifice in order to save Connor moves them to the point they feel it's a better option, I can't see anything evil about doing it.

Neither option is fully satisfactory, that's for sure (aside from the unrealistic "nothing happens while you're gone" mages option), but I still feel that in this case it all boils down to the players motivations before saying that a decision is an "evil one".

Modifié par Zjarcal, 29 août 2010 - 01:34 .

[Sarah1281]

In my view, destroying a sacred relic is not evil if it serves a greater purpose to do so. My bloodmage sees the Chantry as dangerous and he destroys their relic so that they can never use it. That is not evil, that is practical.

You know what's even more practical? Keeping the dragon there to keep people away. There is nothing practical in destroying sucha powerful curative. If you absolutely had to get rid of it (and not just count on everyone failing the gauntlet) then you should have just taken the ashes with you (which, non-game mechanics-wise you could have).



I really think that destroying such a powerful curative so that you don't even potentially let a religion you don't like get ahold of it is really petty, shortsighted, and stupid.

[EccentricSage]

Giggles_Manically wrote...

I dont trust any Blood Mage in the game so I dont ever do any Blood Ritual.
If she dies she learns nothing, if she kills Connor she will never do something so stupid again.
Harsh for Connor but Eamon and Isolde can have another child, and Eamon will watch better.

I only did this on my Dalish, all my other PC's do the happy mage route.

I would call your motivation evil.  Your desire to lord over Issold her mistakes, going so far as to make a mother kill her own innocent child (a sacrafice, wouldn't you say?), just to have the satisfaction of 'teaching her a lesson' shows that what matters most to you is actually forcing your values on others, even at the cost of making someone do something you normaly call evil, which would in turn make you evil for forcing her hand.

I love how the life of an innocent means nothing to you, how you see someon's child as 'replacable', yet preach to others about how their views are evil for differing from yours.

[Giggles_Manically]

Since I am about to be kicked off by family and there need to flip virtual burgers...

I am not saying something IS evil, I am saying that I find it evil.



If others whine about it, oh well thats there issue. I dont destroy a relic that can heal people and is so tied up in history just to go on some ponce fit because I am a poor widdle mage who had a hard life, big whoop.



I dont do the Blood Ritual since I dont like Blood Magic, Blood Mages, or trust either one.If there were no mage options making Isolde kill Conner is the one I would take.

No one learns anything if you kill her, you just leave Conner and Eamon without her.



While it may seem harsh I am juggling a lot of stuff at the time, and killing an stupid woman who made a mistake, or making her learn a lesson, I would take the second.



Good night folks.

[Giggles_Manically]

EccentricSage wrote...

Giggles_Manically wrote...

I dont trust any Blood Mage in the game so I dont ever do any Blood Ritual.
If she dies she learns nothing, if she kills Connor she will never do something so stupid again.
Harsh for Connor but Eamon and Isolde can have another child, and Eamon will watch better.

I only did this on my Dalish, all my other PC's do the happy mage route.

I would call your motivation evil.  Your desire to lord over Issold her mistakes, going so far as to make a mother kill her own innocent child (a sacrafice, wouldn't you say?), just to have the satisfaction of 'teaching her a lesson' shows that what matters most to you is actually forcing your values on others, even at the cost of making someone do something you normaly call evil, which would in turn make you evil for forcing her hand.

I love how the life of an innocent means nothing to you, how you see someon's child as 'replacable', yet preach to others about how their views are evil for differing from yours.

Its harsh.
Not evil, and how is killing her any better really?

[EccentricSage]

Sarah1281 wrote...

In my view, destroying a sacred relic is not evil if it serves a greater purpose to do so. My bloodmage sees the Chantry as dangerous and he destroys their relic so that they can never use it. That is not evil, that is practical.

You know what's even more practical? Keeping the dragon there to keep people away. There is nothing practical in destroying sucha powerful curative. If you absolutely had to get rid of it (and not just count on everyone failing the gauntlet) then you should have just taken the ashes with you (which, non-game mechanics-wise you could have).

I really think that destroying such a powerful curative so that you don't even potentially let a religion you don't like get ahold of it is really petty, shortsighted, and stupid.

Most of my wardens would agree with you, but not my Bloodmage.  Dragons can be slain, and we don't know what other use they might find for the ashes besides as a curative.  Besides, if the Chantry ever did find the temple, ashes in tact, etc. that would be a symbolic boon to them that would be used to strengthen the faith of their followers and strengthen their influence in the region.  That would be very bad for my Bloodmage and his plans.  Hell, it would be very bad for mages in general, as well as elves.

[Zjarcal]

Flip virtual burgers? 

*trying to lighten the mood with a silly question*

Modifié par Zjarcal, 29 août 2010 - 01:48 .

[EccentricSage]

Giggles_Manically wrote...

EccentricSage wrote...

Giggles_Manically wrote...

I dont trust any Blood Mage in the game so I dont ever do any Blood Ritual.
If she dies she learns nothing, if she kills Connor she will never do something so stupid again.
Harsh for Connor but Eamon and Isolde can have another child, and Eamon will watch better.

I only did this on my Dalish, all my other PC's do the happy mage route.

I would call your motivation evil.  Your desire to lord over Issold her mistakes, going so far as to make a mother kill her own innocent child (a sacrafice, wouldn't you say?), just to have the satisfaction of 'teaching her a lesson' shows that what matters most to you is actually forcing your values on others, even at the cost of making someone do something you normaly call evil, which would in turn make you evil for forcing her hand.

I love how the life of an innocent means nothing to you, how you see someon's child as 'replacable', yet preach to others about how their views are evil for differing from yours.

Its harsh.
Not evil, and how is killing her any better really?

How is it evil to kill a willing participant in order to save an innocent, but not evil to force a mother to kill her own child, who she offered to sacrafice herself for? 

You make no sence.

[EccentricSage]

MariSkep wrote...

Giggles_Manically wrote...

I dont trust any Blood Mage in the game so I dont ever do any Blood Ritual.
If she dies she learns nothing, if she kills Connor she will never do something so stupid again.
Harsh for Connor but Eamon and Isolde can have another child, and Eamon will watch better.

There's that Job feeling again...

LOL  I'm glad I'm not the only one.

Zjarcal wrote...

Flip virtual burgers? [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/pouty.png[/smilie]

lulz.  XD

Modifié par EccentricSage, 29 août 2010 - 01:53 .

[Sarah1281]

No one learns anything if you kill her, you just leave Conner and Eamon without her.

I disagree. Everyone learns Connor is a mage, everyone is shown how dangerous mages left unsupervised can be, and Connor learns about demons and tha the shouldn't work with them. Aside from that, who needs to learn anything?

[mousestalker]

EccentricSage wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

In my view, destroying a sacred relic is not evil if it serves a greater purpose to do so. My bloodmage sees the Chantry as dangerous and he destroys their relic so that they can never use it. That is not evil, that is practical.

You know what's even more practical? Keeping the dragon there to keep people away. There is nothing practical in destroying sucha powerful curative. If you absolutely had to get rid of it (and not just count on everyone failing the gauntlet) then you should have just taken the ashes with you (which, non-game mechanics-wise you could have).

I really think that destroying such a powerful curative so that you don't even potentially let a religion you don't like get ahold of it is really petty, shortsighted, and stupid.

Most of my wardens would agree with you, but not my Bloodmage.  Dragons can be slain, and we don't know what other use they might find for the ashes besides as a curative.  Besides, if the Chantry ever did find the temple, ashes in tact, etc. that would be a symbolic boon to them that would be used to strengthen the faith of their followers and strengthen their influence in the region.  That would be very bad for my Bloodmage and his plans.  Hell, it would be very bad for mages in general, as well as elves.

I dunno. I always reckon that my Tabris and Surana characters hold out for the concession rights before they allow Br. Genitivi to run home. Andraste bobble head dolls, "I came to see the Sacred Ashes and all I got was this lousy t-shirt" t-shirts, Ashes snow globes, souvenir puzzle games, black velvet Guardian paintings, not to mention Ashacola, it could turn into something lucrative. 

[EccentricSage]

mousestalker wrote...

EccentricSage wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

In my view, destroying a sacred relic is not evil if it serves a greater purpose to do so. My bloodmage sees the Chantry as dangerous and he destroys their relic so that they can never use it. That is not evil, that is practical.

You know what's even more practical? Keeping the dragon there to keep people away. There is nothing practical in destroying sucha powerful curative. If you absolutely had to get rid of it (and not just count on everyone failing the gauntlet) then you should have just taken the ashes with you (which, non-game mechanics-wise you could have).

I really think that destroying such a powerful curative so that you don't even potentially let a religion you don't like get ahold of it is really petty, shortsighted, and stupid.

Most of my wardens would agree with you, but not my Bloodmage.  Dragons can be slain, and we don't know what other use they might find for the ashes besides as a curative.  Besides, if the Chantry ever did find the temple, ashes in tact, etc. that would be a symbolic boon to them that would be used to strengthen the faith of their followers and strengthen their influence in the region.  That would be very bad for my Bloodmage and his plans.  Hell, it would be very bad for mages in general, as well as elves.

I dunno. I always reckon that my Tabris and Surana characters hold out for the concession rights before they allow Br. Genitivi to run home. Andraste bobble head dolls, "I came to see the Sacred Ashes and all I got was this lousy t-shirt" t-shirts, Ashes snow globes, souvenir puzzle games, black velvet Guardian paintings, not to mention Ashacola, it could turn into something lucrative. 

Whoah man, it's like the Vatican all over again!  XD  (They have pope-cicles and stuff! )

[mousestalker]

Oooh Andraste-pops for the kiddies. And limited edition commemorative plates for the seniors. Lots of possibilities!

[mousestalker]

Also, my Mahariels would totally spend some time in the temple reshaping all the Andraste ears into something more pointy. Let the Chantry explain that...