305 réponses à ce sujet

[Asheer_Khan]

I seriously wonder if this outbreak of the Dark Side which more and more spread among this forum is what Walters and Co really intended when they introduced ME 2...

[Iakus]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

iakus wrote...

Because they broke the law to a degree that the Code says they must die.

That doesn't make it paragon. That just makes it lawful... which many Paragons aren't.

Grrr, after looking through a bunch of paragon/renegade chocies, I've determined that these terms are essentiually meaningless.  They have more to do with Fallout-like "karma" than any sort of alignment definition: good/evil, law/chaos.  The more extreme renegade choices may fall into the more "evil-sociopathic" categories, but that's about it.  I have a hard time believing this was the intent all along.

I still hold that Samara is "lawful neutral" (not "good")  in D&D terms.  I'm also interested in justicars in general and what they're all about.  But as for paragon/renegade,  The question is pointless to ask of anyone but Shepard..

[Dean_the_Young]

Lumikki wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Especially the assertion that Samara would have no issue against a Paragon Shepard. It confuses me. It truly, honestly, does. Especially given how many people claim to really like her.

*snip*

I don't get it. Or rather, I might, but I don't want to attribute it to poor writing and analysis. Samara shouldn't be aligned with Paragon in any respect. Nor should she be aligned with Renegade. She is most definitely neither, in word and action.

Samara is pretty much same as Specter, can be anything she wants.

The office of the spectres is a mistake that should be shuttered before any Council can even hope to claim to rest on legitimacy and due process.

Udina's reigning in of the spectres is one of the greater civil reforms of a human council over the Paragon Council.

[Hoki]

Please, you guys won't respond because you cannot defend the murderous Samara

[AntiChri5]

And that post has me thinking troll.

[Stazro]

Hoki wrote...

Please, you guys won't respond because you cannot defend the murderous Samara

I did, but just go on ignoring it.

[Dean_the_Young]

Asheer_Khan wrote...

I seriously wonder if this outbreak of the Dark Side which more and more spread among this forum is what Walters and Co really intended when they introduced ME 2...

I completely agree. Samara would never be confused fora light-side character in Star Wars.

[Mr. Man]

She fights for those who can't protect themselves, and for justice. Those seem like Paragon options to me.

[Dean_the_Young]

If you go by pithy slogans and self-justifications, everyone's a paragon. Even Renegades.





'For justice!' is about as all-absolving as 'for Humanity!'

[Count Viceroy]

Mr. Man wrote...

She fights for those who can't protect themselves, and for justice. Those seem like Paragon options to me.

Justice as per her code, there's a difference. I suppose the murder of an entire police station, had Shepard  not interveened classifies as paragon behaviour as well? 

Modifié par Count Viceroy, 07 novembre 2010 - 06:44 .

[Jagri]

In compliance with the Justicar Code, there are no morally grey actions: every deed done falls clearly into right or wrong categories. Thus a justicar will defend a village of just farmers to her dying breath if they are being attacked by bandits, but she will kill every person in that village if they are found to be running a smuggling cartel.

I think this falls more in the category of extremism but going back to the original topic I think Samara would favor a paragon over a renegade. Paragon would show her a person who stands for his/her ideals even when the galaxy around them is threatened. A reminder to her that even with the weight of the galaxy on Shepards shoulder he/she is not compromised by fear/greed/rationalized evil/etc. Renegade would simply be a reminder how such great men and women are compromised by those very things.

So perhaps in Samara view the paragon Shepard is a person she wasn't strong enough to be and admires where as the renegad Shepard is just another example of why she took up the code.

Modifié par Jagri, 07 novembre 2010 - 07:03 .

[Nightwriter]

Hoki wrote...

Please, you guys won't respond because you cannot defend the murderous Samara

Damn it, now I really want to respond!

Somebody stop me. He's using his troll powers on me!

[Jagri]

Murder: Unlawful premeditated killing of a human...



So as long as she kills people lawfully she isn't Murderous. If anything I think the Code need be reviewed and or abolished. You should blame the code/law.

[Count Viceroy]

Samara isn't lawful in the slightest...

[Jagri]

So the Code of the Justicar isn't consider lawful then? A entire race would beg to differ.

[AntiChri5]

People always say Samara is Lawfull Good, Lawfull Neutral or (very rarely) Lawful Evil.

[Hoki]

Stazro wrote...

Hoki wrote...

Please, you guys won't respond because you cannot defend the murderous Samara

I did, but just go on ignoring it.

I am not ignoring you, you're the one who took me seriously and we agreed on pretty much everything.

Samara and Morinth are both mass murderers and both deserve to die. Had there been an option to kill both while they were locked in biotic combat, I would have chosen that. Think about it, shepard could have pulled out pistol and shotgun and ended them both at the same time.

Samara simply cannot be rehabed. She is a crusader for a religion that is not universal, and if her code is illegal in other cultures and civilizations, then she'll do it anyways.

Morinth is a monster, she kills because she must. Whether its an addiction or a disease, it can be cured.
I'd rather cure her with a bullet, but unfortunately we have to choose between her and her mother, and her mother is far more dangerous.

[Hoki]

Jagri wrote...

So the Code of the Justicar isn't consider lawful then? A entire race would beg to differ.

So what, the christian nations probably thought that the crusades were just and fair, every other religion probably wouldn't appreciate christians coming to their turf and killing their police force for trying to maintain their own laws.

So who cares if every Asari respects Justicars, if a justicar leaves asari space and begins to deal out *justice* on other cultures, she is now an enemy of the state, with highest kill/capture priority.

[Nightwriter]

That does it. I'm in.

You're wrong.

Morinth and Samara are totally different creatures who could never be put into the same category. Morinth preys on the innocent and kills them for pleasure. Samara protects the innocent and kills when her Code commands her - not for sadistic thrills. You are totally disregarding the fact that motivation plays a part in the measure of a person's morality.

Samara's Code is extreme, yet she follows it out of a positive motivation to do good, manipulates it whenever she can in an effort to achieve the best outcome, and is willing to commit self-sacrifice for her beliefs. Morinth is literally willing to sacrifice everyone else in the galaxy before any harm comes to her.

Morinth: selfish.
Samara: selfless.

And yet they're both to be killed like they're part of the same batch? Super lame mind math. Super lame. 

[Asheer_Khan]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Asheer_Khan wrote...

I seriously wonder if this outbreak of the Dark Side which more and more spread among this forum is what Walters and Co really intended when they introduced ME 2...

I completely agree. Samara would never be confused fora light-side character in Star Wars.

I didn't talk about Samara's aligment... but as usuall... you didn't understand what i am talking about.<_<.

[Dean_the_Young]

And, as always, you miss a point about a point.



Insightful as always, Khan.

[Nightwriter]

I don't know. I'm not any smarter in the Star Wars universe than the Mass Effect one. There really is no telling what stupid twistings of moral truth my silly paragade brain might create. I mean, I killed Bendak Starkiller in a death match because he needed to go down, he was a mass murderer, but that was a dark side action, was it not? The moral blurriness continues...

Anyhoo.

Failing to pin down paragon and renegade I shall now throw a bunch of true or false statements at Dean in an attempt to figure the issue out.

True or false: renegades seem largely and chiefly compelled by survivalism.

[ADLegend21]

Hmm Samara punishes the wiked (law breakers, murderers, smugglers, mercs) She doles out hard justice because the code she follows demands it. She follows the rules she's bound by which is what paragons do. renegades break rules to do whatever, Samara does not so she's paragon. If she did all the things she did (wiped out the eclipse sisters, kill morinth) for selfish reasonsshe's a renegade, but since she adhears to the code and all it's principles she's paragon.

[Dean_the_Young]

Nightwriter wrote...

That does it. I'm in.

You're wrong.

Morinth and Samara are totally different creatures who could never be put into the same category. Morinth preys on the innocent and kills them for pleasure. Samara protects the innocent and kills when her Code commands her - not for sadistic thrills. You are totally disregarding the fact that motivation plays a part in the measure of a person's morality.

Samara's Code is extreme, yet she follows it out of a positive motivation to do good, manipulates it whenever she can in an effort to achieve the best outcome, and is willing to commit self-sacrifice for her beliefs. Morinth is literally willing to sacrifice everyone else in the galaxy before any harm comes to her.

Morinth: selfish.
Samara: selfless.

And yet they're both to be killed like they're part of the same batch? Super lame mind math. Super lame. 

Without agreeing with him, I'll just throw in a few points that you seem to have accidentally overlooked.



Samara, by her own admission, is also willing to sacrifice everyone else in the galaxy on the basis of her Code. There's no body limit to her willingness to do harm either, only a identifier tag. Morinth will sacrifice everyone to protect herself, but Samara will kill them herself if they don't meet her standards.


Samara's version of innocent and guilt is also removed from yours and mine. You and I and most people here understand innocent to include anyone not involved, including criminals, petty or major, not a part of the situation. Morinth certainly wasn't only chasing innocent virgin girls, but I doubt thought twice over lumping any, shall we say Renegade?, people she's seduced in the category. A man can be an embezler, and in the context of, say, a terrorist bombing, is lumped with innocents. We also recognize different levels of guilt: justified crimes, minor criminals who should not be killed out of hand, all the way up to people who should certainly be killed. We also recognize that the situation someone is in should dictate our responses: we do not kill criminals who are not a threat, we do not kill others simply for getting in our way.

Samara does not make those distinctions. Guilty and innocent are black and white, all or nothing. A corrupt official can be put down simply for being corrupt, regardless of the harm he's actually done to others. Someone can be a perfectly fine and sympathetic person otherwise ('a loving father', in her words), and Samara will kill them on the basis of a single act. Helpless before her, coerced, just doing a completely legal job, that doesn't matter if you're either over the line or merely opposing her for any reason. Killing police selfessly doesn't make it any better.


There also comes an entirely separate issue of the functional morality of ammorality. Selfish people are not innately immoral: because they only care about how others affect them (think of them, treat them, favor them), the selfish often most careful of how they act to others. Simply because they care only of themselves, they can often be largely good people just to avoid troubles and gather favor. Yes, Morinth is ammoral. Yes, she kills selectively. The crime is in the killing, though, not the selfishness.

Which is rather a good contrast to the principal of Samara. Selfish intent not preventing good (as saving the galaxy from the Collectors certainly is, regardless the reason), and good intent not preventing evil.

[Hoki]

Nightwriter wrote...

That does it. I'm in.

You're wrong.

Morinth and Samara are totally different creatures who could never be put into the same category. Morinth preys on the innocent and kills them for pleasure. Samara protects the innocent and kills when her Code commands her - not for sadistic thrills. You are totally disregarding the fact that motivation plays a part in the measure of a person's morality.

Samara's Code is extreme, yet she follows it out of a positive motivation to do good, manipulates it whenever she can in an effort to achieve the best outcome, and is willing to commit self-sacrifice for her beliefs. Morinth is literally willing to sacrifice everyone else in the galaxy before any harm comes to her.

Morinth: selfish.
Samara: selfless.

And yet they're both to be killed like they're part of the same batch? Super lame mind math. Super lame. 

But its not about intentions, its about results.

What does it matter if you're intentions are good if the result is a police station full of dead cops, or worse if the actions of these zealots results in inter-species war/conflict?

I'm not saying Morinth and Samara are the same, one may be selfless and the other selfish, but they're both dangerous murderers in the end and both must either be put down or rehabilitated.
Morinth can theoretically rehabilitated, Samara will never be.