528 réponses à ce sujet

[crimzontearz]

metagaming or not the point of this whole thread was not about the decision itself but about Elnora being sincere.....and she was DEFINITELY not sincere

[AntiChri5]

Look, I'm not arguing for or against killing Elnora.  There are things to be said for both sides that are valid.  The only thing I was pointing out was that someone is not a threat just because they have a gun.  Intent matters, and judging by Elnora's behavior, she is not a threat, gun or no.

Having a gun makes somone a potential threat. Them pointing it at you makes them a sincere threat. Do you seriously think Elnora would hesitate to kill you if she could do so without getting gunned down? Her intent is to escape. If she has to kill you to do it then so be it.

[MrnDvlDg161]

wizardryforever wrote...

Look, I'm not arguing for or against killing Elnora.  There are things to be said for both sides that are valid.  The only thing I was pointing out was that someone is not a threat just because they have a gun.  Intent matters, and judging by Elnora's behavior, she is not a threat, gun or no.

And so I respectfully disagree to say she was a threat.

[wizardryforever]

AntiChri5 wrote...

Look, I'm not arguing for or against killing Elnora.  There are things to be said for both sides that are valid.  The only thing I was pointing out was that someone is not a threat just because they have a gun.  Intent matters, and judging by Elnora's behavior, she is not a threat, gun or no.

Having a gun makes somone a potential threat. Them pointing it at you makes them a sincere threat. Do you seriously think Elnora would hesitate to kill you if she could do so without getting gunned down? Her intent is to escape. If she has to kill you to do it then so be it.

Well that's the real question, isn't it?  The thread seems to have gone in this direction for a while, but I've grown tired of arguing about it.  I'll just say that I don't think she would have shot you at all if you hadn't pulled a gun on her first.  She would have just run and probably not looked back.  And hey, looks like my intuition was right, considering what happens if you let her go (though that has nothing to do with my initial decision).  Now I'll stop (though that doesn't mean that I give up), since I don't think anyone here is going to change their minds.

Modifié par wizardryforever, 22 septembre 2010 - 03:21 .

[crimzontearz]

uhm.....hey wizardry how do you arrive to that conclusion? is it just a feeling? because all cluest hint to the opposite being true.

[AntiChri5]

wizardryforever wrote...

AntiChri5 wrote...

Look, I'm not arguing for or against killing Elnora.  There are things to be said for both sides that are valid.  The only thing I was pointing out was that someone is not a threat just because they have a gun.  Intent matters, and judging by Elnora's behavior, she is not a threat, gun or no.

Having a gun makes somone a potential threat. Them pointing it at you makes them a sincere threat. Do you seriously think Elnora would hesitate to kill you if she could do so without getting gunned down? Her intent is to escape. If she has to kill you to do it then so be it.

Well that's the real question, isn't it?  The thread seems to have gone in this direction for a while, but I've grown tired of arguing about it.  I'll just say that I don't think she would have shot you at all if you hadn't pulled a gun on her first.  She would have just run and probably not looked back.  Now I'll stop (though that doesn't mean that I give up), since I don't think anyone here is going to change their minds.

What do we know?

She has a gun.

She has access to explosive rounds (which nobody we go up against uses against us)

She is willing to kill a helpless opponent.

Do you want her pointing a gun at you?

[Moiaussi]

wizardryforever wrote...

Ever heard the saying "guns don't kill people, people kill people?"  It's true, a gun is just a weapon.  Having one does not make someone a threat anymore than not having one makes someone not a threat.  It's all about intent.  Elnora is no more of a threat than the guy in the Dantius towers in Thane's mission, or Lizbeth Baynam.

If this were reality, I would agree to not trust the gun-holder to be reasonable, but it isn't.  In ME, a soldier has a layer of shields that will absorb fire with no permanent loss in effectiveness, meaning you can afford to be lenient for a short time.  There's nothing stopping you from killing her if she shoots you, since you have her outnumbered and outgunned.  But she will not be able to kill you unless you don't respond at all, which is not something I'm advocating.

Pssst. People with guns do kill people.

Even if you blatantly ignore evidence to the contrary, what is to stop her from shooting you in the back later, when the mercs in front of you have taken down your shields and you have taken cover thinking you are safe long enough to get your sheilds back up? She is alone in that room, but she isn't alone.

[Nimander]

Also note in the 'shields would stop it' sense that in the codex, I'm pretty sure it says that shields don't block projectiles fired from within them. They form a bubble around you. Shephard was standing fairly close to Elnora. This is usually what happens in cut scenes, you're pretty close. Thus, no shields.



I find the 'She COULD HAVE BEEN' thing really odd, and all the 'You shot Baynham/Salarian then?' stuff to be moving the goalposts.



Neither of those were wearing an enemy combatant uniform.

[casedawgz]

She was in an eclipse uniform in a place where dozens of eclipse wanted me dead, she was saying things that sounded a little fishy, and she reached for her gun. It's a bit like saying that the cop in Falling Down was evil for shooting Michael Douglass because it turned out he was reaching for a water pistol. Gotta go with the information you have at the time.

[wizardryforever]

Moiaussi wrote...

wizardryforever wrote...

Ever heard the saying "guns don't kill people, people kill people?"  It's true, a gun is just a weapon.  Having one does not make someone a threat anymore than not having one makes someone not a threat.  It's all about intent.  Elnora is no more of a threat than the guy in the Dantius towers in Thane's mission, or Lizbeth Baynam.

If this were reality, I would agree to not trust the gun-holder to be reasonable, but it isn't.  In ME, a soldier has a layer of shields that will absorb fire with no permanent loss in effectiveness, meaning you can afford to be lenient for a short time.  There's nothing stopping you from killing her if she shoots you, since you have her outnumbered and outgunned.  But she will not be able to kill you unless you don't respond at all, which is not something I'm advocating.

Pssst. People with guns do kill people.

Even if you blatantly ignore evidence to the contrary, what is to stop her from shooting you in the back later, when the mercs in front of you have taken down your shields and you have taken cover thinking you are safe long enough to get your sheilds back up? She is alone in that room, but she isn't alone.

One last thing, then I'm really done here.  I'm agreeing that it's the people who kill, not the guns.  Guns increase the damage someone can do, but they do not automatically bestow some magic property of threatening-ness to somebody that holds them.  Nor does pointing a gun at someone automatically mean that that someone will actually do it.  I called Elnora's bluff on my initial playthrough, and did not die, nor did she stab me in the back.  I did not know what would happen, but I decided to follow my gut, and I was right.

I gotta say, your post comes off as ridiculously paranoid, and I have difficulty believing that Shepard would think that way about one inexperienced merc.

I find the 'She COULD HAVE BEEN' thing really odd, and all the 'You
shot Baynham/Salarian then?' stuff to be moving the goalposts.

Neither of those were wearing an enemy combatant uniform.

Killing her because she is wearing the uniform is a valid reason, since we know how these Eclipse earn their uniform.  I don't have a problem with that.  It's this "all gun wielders are dangerous and will shoot you if given the chance" argument that bugs me.

[AntiChri5]

wizardryforever wrote...
  It's this "all gun wielders are dangerous and will shoot you if given the chance" argument that bugs me.

That was never the argument.

All gun wielders are dangerous and can shoot you.

[Moiaussi]

wizardryforever wrote...

One last thing, then I'm really done here.  I'm agreeing that it's the people who kill, not the guns.  Guns increase the damage someone can do, but they do not automatically bestow some magic property of threatening-ness to somebody that holds them.  Nor does pointing a gun at someone automatically mean that that someone will actually do it.  I called Elnora's bluff on my initial playthrough, and did not die, nor did she stab me in the back.  I did not know what would happen, but I decided to follow my gut, and I was right.

I gotta say, your post comes off as ridiculously paranoid, and I have difficulty believing that Shepard would think that way about one inexperienced merc.

You are coming across as increasingly naive.

Even if she had the gun out like that just in a public street it would legally be considered threatening, and if she refused to drop it and surrender unconditionally, she could be shot. She could also be shot without warning, if a police sniper was in position. Pointing the gun is considering threatening because there is no guarantee they won't pull the trigger, and it cannot be certain that they wouldn't.

Since you don't seem to feel that guns are lethal (due to shields), and seem to think that BW wouldn't kill Shepard off, why do you fire at anyone in the game? I mean.. why not just run past them ignoring their fire? They are obviously all just poor innocents defending themselves against a heavily armed intruder.....

Killing her because she is wearing the uniform is a valid reason, since we know how these Eclipse earn their uniform.  I don't have a problem with that.  It's this "all gun wielders are dangerous and will shoot you if given the chance" argument that bugs me.

Not only are you taking those statements out of context, but you are completely ignoring the fact that legally pointing a gun at someone else is considered threatening, and unless the person doing so has authority to do so, and is exercising that authority properly in doing so, it is also legally considered assault.

[Arijharn]

wizardryforever wrote...

Arijharn wrote...

You don't specifically know that Elnora is not a threat, you're just projecting.

No more than anyone knows that she is a threat. 

She must be a threat if she pulls a gun, and I would wager that makes her more of a threat than not since you know, she could just not of pulled it out which would make her less threatening.

[crimzontearz]

Uhm...you guys do realize that after Liz Baybam fires at you she says "oh my god I'm so sorry I thought you were geth"? In the dark she had no idea someone mowed through the geth defenses and came to the rescue. Elnora is an eclipse merc who earned her uniform killing someone and who was also most probaby ordered to kill you. Her rising a gun to you is totally different from Liz doing the same...why are people even comparing the two? And why are they ignoring that logic dictates that Elnora was faking her moral objection on Eclipse?

[PsyrenY]

Arijharn wrote...

She must be a threat if she pulls a gun, and I would wager that makes her more of a threat than not since you know, she could just not of pulled it out which would make her less threatening.

You are judging a future act by present-day standards of self-defense.  Kinetic Barriers and Ceramic Plating put more burden of proof on Shepard to prove the "imminent harm" standard, and merely having a gun pointed at him is not enough. The Salarian in Dantius towers does so too, yet I'm willing to bet none of you "Paragons" attacked HIM.

Without that self-defense, you have no authority to kill people on Ilium. Even if you renew your Spectre status, you are not in Council Space.

[CaptainZaysh]

Optimystic_X wrote...

You are judging a future act by present-day standards of self-defense.  Kinetic Barriers and Ceramic Plating put more burden of proof on Shepard to prove the "imminent harm" standard, and merely having a gun pointed at him is not enough.

This isn't a valid position, because in-universe kinetic barriers are not a 100% reliable defence against being one-shotted even with a sidearm (witness the demises of Nihlus and Wrex).

Modifié par CaptainZaysh, 22 septembre 2010 - 01:06 .

[PsyrenY]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

This isn't a valid position, because in-universe kinetic barriers are not a 100% reliable defence against being one-shotted (witness the demises of Nihlus and Wrex).

1) Wrex was not one-shot. (And not only that, he was killed by a shotgun at point-blank range.)

2) There are too many variables in Nihlus' case to make an accurate determination. What caliber of weapon was Saren using? Nihlus explicitly let his guard down; were his shields even active, or at maximum? Saren was a Spectre too - was there some flaw in the barrier's defense that he exploited? At that point in the ME-verse, Geth technology was more advanced than any other species, and Saren had access to all of it. Did Elnora possess a similar advantage?

What we do know is that the chances of Elnora having firepower on-par with Saren are pretty slim. We also know that Shepard's gear is more advanced than that of a lone Eclipse.

Modifié par Optimystic_X, 22 septembre 2010 - 01:09 .

[Whatever42]

There is also the point that she was hiding in a room, away from you. You only heard her because she was clearly freaked out. Remember, you broke into their base and attacked them. Its not like they were hunting you down. And now you're going room to room killing them, for no good reason really. You're not even there for them. You're not even there because it directly furthers your mission.



Of course, Shepard does have the obvious attitude that anyone wearing a mercenary uniform is fair game to kill. We routinely invade and excute dozens of mercenaries that have nothing to do with our mission, simply because they might have a few credits. Granted, these are definitely not nice people but even paragon Shepard is a bloodthirsty, homcidal vigilante who gleefully guns his/her way through their criminal organizations to pick a few credits off their bodies.



So gunning down Elnora is perfectly consistant with Shepard's personality - paragon or renegade. Paragon just sounds off high minded ideals to justify murderous rampage. Renegade Shepard is more honest: I'm saving the universe and you guys are scum so I can kill anyone I want.

[PsyrenY]

When does Shepard "invade and execute dozens of mercenaries that have nothing to do with his mission?"

[Shady314]

Optimystic_X wrote...
You are judging a future act by present-day standards of self-defense.  Kinetic Barriers and Ceramic Plating put more burden of proof on Shepard to prove the "imminent harm" standard, and merely having a gun pointed at him is not enough. The Salarian in Dantius towers does so too, yet I'm willing to bet none of you "Paragons" attacked HIM.

Not true at all. I punched him in the face and took his weapon. People do NOT point guns at me. Any real person feels the same.

[Asheer_Khan]

Seriously if i could i would thank her for removing that Volus cheater from the face of the galaxy, and somehow i was surprised how brave/desperate she was rising her gun on Shep despite fact that odds against her were 3 : 1... and by the way i wonder IF and how she will reappear in ME 3.

[CaptainZaysh]

Wrong. All we actually know is that kinetic barriers do not always stop hypervelocity rounds. Everything else you've said is just speculation built on assumption (some of which are amusingly desperate, including the idea that Nihlus may have happened to deactivate his shields just before Saren shot him).



The game has shown that kinetic barriers are not 100% effective against hypervelocity rounds. So, on this specific point, you are just wrong I'm afraid.

[Whatever42]

crimzontearz wrote...

Uhm...you guys do realize that after Liz Baybam fires at you she says "oh my god I'm so sorry I thought you were geth"? In the dark she had no idea someone mowed through the geth defenses and came to the rescue. Elnora is an eclipse merc who earned her uniform killing someone and who was also most probaby ordered to kill you. Her rising a gun to you is totally different from Liz doing the same...why are people even comparing the two? And why are they ignoring that logic dictates that Elnora was faking her moral objection on Eclipse?

Legally, you can only respond in self-defense with approprate force to the threat. Both are armed, one took a shot at you, the other didn't. Both are clearly not interested in a confrontation. Neither are any threat whatsoever to superhero Shepard.

Again, legally, you cannot shoot someone down simply because they are wearing the wrong colors and is clearly a bad person. And how do you know she was faking? Or how do you know the rumors you heard about eclipse are even true? They clearly aren't an illegal organization on Illium. You do not have the legal or moral right to gun down anyone wearing an eclipse uniform. And this isn't self-defense - you are invading their clubhouse and you are not a legal authority.

Many years ago, a SWAT team invaded a drug house and killed a shotgun wielding defender. Turns out it was the wrong house and it was just an ordinary guy woken up in the middle of the night. In this case, Shepard isn't even the police. He's just killing people until someone tells him what he wants to know, which is information not even directly related to his mission.

Shepard is clearly a psychopath and criminal, though, so anything goes.

[PsyrenY]

Shady314 wrote...

Not true at all. I punched him in the face and took his weapon. People do NOT point guns at me. Any real person feels the same.

If you're not a Paragon, why are you even debating this?

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Wrong. All we actually know is that kinetic barriers do not always stop hypervelocity rounds. Everything else you've said is just speculation built on assumption (some of which are amusingly desperate, including the idea that Nihlus may have happened to deactivate his shields just before Saren shot him).

You misread me; I was wondering if they were at full strength, not if he had turned them off. Wasnt he fighting ahead of you?

CaptainZaysh wrote...
The game has shown that kinetic barriers are not 100% effective against hypervelocity rounds. So, on this specific point, you are just wrong I'm afraid.

Wrong about what? That Elnora can't one-shot you? Newsflash: she can't.

[inversevideo]

Shady314 wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...
You are judging a future act by present-day standards of self-defense.  Kinetic Barriers and Ceramic Plating put more burden of proof on Shepard to prove the "imminent harm" standard, and merely having a gun pointed at him is not enough. The Salarian in Dantius towers does so too, yet I'm willing to bet none of you "Paragons" attacked HIM.

Not true at all. I punched him in the face and took his weapon. People do NOT point guns at me. Any real person feels the same.

I follow this path as well. 

And it is interesting to note the difference in outcomes.
With Elnora, she goes down, in a hail of bullets.
With the Salarian worker, you just punch him and take away his gun.

Why is it that when you tell Elnora she made her choice she does not simply drop her weapon and ask for mercy? No, instead she pops off a round screaming 'screw you beyotch' (my Shepard is female).

On the other hand, when I take the gun, from the Salarian, it is clear that he does not want any trouble, as if it were not clear from the start, by the way your team reacts to him, as well as the situation.

So why the different treatment if they both pulled a gun?  Because Elnora is a cold blooded killer, and the Salarian worker is just a frightened soul who wants to go home; and Shepard knows the difference.

Modifié par inversevideo, 22 septembre 2010 - 01:43 .