305 réponses à ce sujet

[AntiChri5]

Justicars have no authority in Ilium, whats the argument?

Another outright fabrication.

Ilium cop: This evidence is inadmissible.

Samara: I vouch for the evidence.

Ilium cop: Thank you for this evidence. This can be very useful.



While we are not aware of the intricasies of Ilium law, she clesrly has some sort of authority.

[AntiChri5]

Fun fact: Killing Samara awards you the more points then any other choice in the game. All of them renegade.

Killing her for Morinth awards you 45 renegade, killing Morinth instead awards you 30 paragon.

Giving the Collecter Base to TIM awards you 15 renegade points.

[Dean_the_Young]

AntiChri5 wrote...

Fun fact: Killing Samara awards you the more points then any other choice in the game. All of them renegade.
Killing her for Morinth awards you 45 renegade, killing Morinth instead awards you 30 paragon.
Giving the Collecter Base to TIM awards you 15 renegade points.

You also get Renegade points for killing criminals in general. Now, since we get even more Renegade points for bigger events, shall we assume a logical extension of the previous pattern.

Considering the game itself is under criticism here, 'Samara is Paragon because the game claims she's paragon' isn't a good defense for the game's internal integrity.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 08 novembre 2010 - 12:14 .

[Dean_the_Young]

AntiChri5 wrote...
Jack talks a big game, but how many people do we actually see her kill? Not many. Less then Miranda.

You're seriously going to deny the game's own assertions in regards to Jack, her claims, and her history? Simply because we didn't personally see it?

If we want to get to the 'but we didn't see it!': we didn't see Kaiden/Ashley die, we didn't see the Council die, we never saw Shepard penetrate in any sex scene, we never saw Tali's face, we never Admiral Hackett, we never saw Torfan/Akuze/the SkyllianBlitz, we never saw Shepard recovered, never saw-

Do your realize how mindblowingly stupid that sounds? 

Morinth isn't controllable. At all.

Since Morinth is an equally obediant party member, and doesn't go rogue in the game, thus rather disproving the claim she isn't controllable by, well, being just that...

And Samara going to Omega and massacring the galaxies worst criminal is a damn good thing.

Sure. If that's all she did.

Massacring the petty criminals, or the criminals who may be integral in preparing for the Reapers, or the criminals who keep some semblance of order on the space station (Aria), or the civilians who are terrified of the carnage and try and stop her, or the people who try and make right through wrong? 

No. It isn't.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 08 novembre 2010 - 12:38 .

[Hoki]

So in the end, paragon points are rewarded for what bioware considers the route of the good-girl, whereas renegade is rewarded to what bioware considers the route of the bad-girl.



Its a shame really. Someone started a thread asking how the game would be if all options were open without having to grind paragon/renegade. Because I cheated I got to choose what I felt like and not worry about that. Samara is dead because shes dangerous and uncontrollable. Bioware things thats being a bad-girl then so-be-it.



They also consider lying on Tali's behalf to be the good-girl thing to do as well, a decision that could result in war with the geth, or not.



Making the right call can be tough sometimes. Sorry Samara, but you are not the law. What was it again? Oh yes.. find peace in the embrace of the goddess.

[AntiChri5]

You also get Renegade points for killing criminals in general. Now, since we get even more Renegade points for bigger events, shall we assume a logical extension of the previous pattern.



Considering the game itself is under criticism here, 'Samara is Paragon because the game claims she's paragon' isn't a good defense for the game's internal integrity.

When does the game claim she is paragon? The game states that killing Samara is renegade and killing Morinth is paragon. That may or may not reflect on their respective alingments but i never attempted to make that claim. All i did in that post was state facts. My opinion on the matter is that renegade and paragon are so broadly defined that a logical argument can be made in most situations of how it fits that alignnent.

You're seriously going to deny the game's own assertions in regards to Jack, her claims, and her history? Simply because we didn't personally see it?



If we want to get to the 'but we didn't see it!': we didn't see Kaiden/Ashley die, we didn't see the Council die, we never saw Shepard penetrate in any sex scene, we never saw Tali's face, we never Admiral Hackett, we never saw Torfan/Akuze/the SkyllianBlitz, we never saw Shepard recovered, never saw-



Do your realize how mindblowingly stupid that sounds? 

Perhaps "see her kill" were the wrong words tp use. Kill durin the course of the game. And my post is still factual. In game, Miranda kills in cutscenes more then Jack. All of the events you mention either happen in game, or happen to Shepard. I am not disputing the claim Jack kills. That would be retarded. I am pointing out that we do not have any specific examples of innocents she has killed, all we have are vauge statements like "was a pirate" and "ran in gangs" and those cannot be used to convict someone of murder, only joining a criminal organisation. Did she commit murder? Yeah probably, but how innocent were her victims?

Since Morinth is an equally obediant party member, and doesn't go rogue in the game, thus rather disproving the claim she isn't controllable by, well, being just that...

Short term. We don't have any evidence that she can be controlled long term, and base on everything we have heard about her character i wouldnt even try. Are you forfetting the fact that she still attempts to kill you? No other ME 2squadmate does that.

Massacring the petty criminals, or the criminals who may be integral in preparing for the Reapers, or the criminals who keep some semblance of order on the space station (Aria)?

I suspect she would not survive long enough to do so. Besides which, it seems to be absurdly easy to find te sort of mercs we fight for all of ME 2. You know, the non petty criminals. The idea of a possible criminal alliance against the reapers doesnt hold any weight, especially since it can be used against pretty much wverything we do in ME 2. If Aria dies another tyrant will step into position and maintain what passes for order on Omega.

[WuWeiWu]

Hoki, it could be said that in order to do the most 'good' you must act out a little 'bad' - that does not mean that that 'bad' action is permissible because it achieved 'good'. It is still a 'bad' action, and one you (you being a 'good' (or 'bad') moral being, like Renegade/ParagonShep) must atone for.



Samara holds herself to a code, and that code exemplifies Law and Justice. Not law and justice, but Law and Justice. For most of her actions, Law and Justice doesn't merely outweigh the 'bad' or 'wrong' action (murder, for example), those actions are suitable and permissible under her Law and Justice. For something 'bad' to be done, merely for the 'good', would be against Samara's concepts of Law and Justice. It's like comparing and contrasting a set of morals on two different levels, you can't easily (if at all) equate the two systems to each other, one depends on a moral sanctity and universality (note: has nothing to do with universal laws/maxims/etc) while the other depends on fluid values and the greater 'good'.



Samara can be considered paragon because she follows that code of morality - the whole reason she is allowed to exist is because she is held strictly to her beliefs; that her beliefs can be held without exception is due to the fact that they are based upon a form of universality. There is no black and white, or even grey, there is merely 'the code'. Murder is considered by most to be immoral, even when it results in the betterment of all; Samara holds that murder isn't moral or immoral, it is a tool. Pirating can be done for many reasons, and under any number of differing moral systems can be either 'bad' or 'good', but it can also be both.



Under Samara's system, it is not the actual act of piracy but the failure to abide by any sense of Law or Justice that causes her to act 'tough'. Not passing judgment isn't possible, but it is possible that somebody who has broken the law hasn't broken the Law. It is also possible for her to remove herself from an instance where she would have to pass judgment, which would be the best example of her form of mercy.





Shepard does things because he or she has judged them to fit within his or her set of codes - Samara goes one step further than that. She doesn't shoehorn everybody under the same code, nor does she expect them to follow her code - what she does do, and this is all from what I gather, is that she holds people to what is Right, and anything less is unacceptable. There are no second chances.

[AntiChri5]

So in the end, paragon points are rewarded for what bioware considers the route of the good-girl, whereas renegade is rewarded to what bioware considers the route of the bad-girl.

Paragon points are awarded for what BioWare considers paragon. And since the paragon/renegade moral duality is a concept invented by BioWare for the Mass Effect games i don't see the point in arguing against how they apply their made up philosophies.

Its a shame really. Someone started a thread asking how the game would be if all options were open without having to grind paragon/renegade. Because I cheated I got to choose what I felt like and not worry about that. Samara is dead because shes dangerous and uncontrollable. Bioware things thats being a bad-girl then so-be-it.

I usually have enough of both to go with whatever i want, i only grind points on NG+ games. And Samara is the most easily controlled and manipulated squadmate in both games.

They also consider lying on Tali's behalf to be the good-girl thing to do as well, a decision that could result in war with the geth, or not.

But not nearly as much a good girl thing to do as taking the shiny magical blue get out of jail free option.

Making the right call can be tough sometimes. Sorry Samara, but you are not the law. What was it again? Oh yes.. find peace in the embrace of the goddess.

Samara may or may not be, but she is certainly more so then Morinth.

[Dean_the_Young]

AntiChri5 wrote...

You also get Renegade points for killing criminals in general. Now, since we get even more Renegade points for bigger events, shall we assume a logical extension of the previous pattern.

Considering the game itself is under criticism here, 'Samara is Paragon because the game claims she's paragon' isn't a good defense for the game's internal integrity.

When does the game claim she is paragon? The game states that killing Samara is renegade and killing Morinth is paragon. That may or may not reflect on their respective alingments but i never attempted to make that claim. All i did in that post was state facts. My opinion on the matter is that renegade and paragon are so broadly defined that a logical argument can be made in most situations of how it fits that alignnent.

I apologize: I was under the impression you were claiming the game thought she was a Paragon, since you brought up that killing her was such a Renegade act as some sort of counterpoint.

Perhaps "see her kill" were the wrong words tp use. Kill durin the course of the game. And my post is still factual. In game, Miranda kills in cutscenes more then Jack. All of the events you mention either happen in game, or happen to Shepard. I am not disputing the claim Jack kills. That would be retarded. I am pointing out that we do not have any specific examples of innocents she has killed, all we have are vauge statements like "was a pirate" and "ran in gangs" and those cannot be used to convict someone of murder, only joining a criminal organisation. Did she commit murder? Yeah probably, but how innocent were her victims?

How guilty are Samara's death toll? When, hell why, does 'not innocent' turn into a carte blanch 'fine to kill'?

If I were to pick out a case with Jack, I'd pick three cases of concern particularly: the other children she killed in her escape, the pair who slept with her who she killed merely on a feeling they'd turn on her and the military parade. Just off the top of my head.

Certainly she never makes any claim that she coincidentally only hurt, robbed, or murdered the wicked

Short term. We don't have any evidence that she can be controlled long term, and base on everything we have heard about her character i wouldnt even try. Are you forfetting the fact that she still attempts to kill you? No other ME 2squadmate does that.

Short term, Samara is uncontrollable as well, and may well threaten to kill you. She leaves. Thane is uncontrollable: he'll die. Ashley and Kaiden were uncontrollable: they refused to return with you.

Long term, we have no evidence she won't be as loyal as anyone else either, for her own enjoyment. To assert a fact on a lack of evidence and contrary to the short-term showings so far is... better left unvoiced.


She only attempts to kill you twice, and both times because you, Shepard, sought her out her attentions: once before you bring her on your squad, in which case she's just another criminal you've ended up taking into your group, and once if you move to let her.

I suspect she would not survive long enough to do so. Besides which, it seems to be absurdly easy to find te sort of mercs we fight for all of ME 2. You know, the non petty criminals. The idea of a possible criminal alliance against the reapers doesnt hold any weight, especially since it can be used against pretty much wverything we do in ME 2. If Aria dies another tyrant will step into position and maintain what passes for order on Omega.

If she fights and succedes and kills the guilty who should live, that is not good at all. If she fights and dies killing to no avail, that is not good either. Going out in a blaze of glory taking plenty of mercs today, and then shortly forgotten as Omega continues around her, is completely pointless.

If you think that I support killing the mercs on the basis that they are mercs, don't. I'd much rather co-opt them than kill them.

Another tyrant might step into Aria's shoes, but Aria's not a horrible tyrant, and Aria is an effective tyrant, and most importantly Aria is an established tyrant I have a working relationship with. I have needed and may need Aria's network again: I do not need a gang war and someone who's unlikely to be a good, secure, or effective as Aria as a replacement. Her living keeps doors open: her dying sees them close and helps no one.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 08 novembre 2010 - 01:07 .

[AntiChri5]

I apologize: I was under the impression you were claiming the game thought she was a Paragon, since you brought up that killing her was such a Renegade act as some sort of counterpoint.

No corpse no foul. I can see where you got the impression.

How guilty are Samara's death toll? When, hell why, does 'not innocent' turn into a carte blanch 'fine to kill'?

To Samara, i don't think there is a concept like "how guilty". It is a yes/no issue for her. I wonder if Samara would kill for someone doing grafiti.

I suspect the vast majority of those Jack kills are people like her. Career criminals kill far more criminals then ordinary people. And, frankly, she has far more reason to kill other mercs/pirates.

If I were to pick out a case with Jack, I'd pick three cases of concern particularly: the other children she killed in her escape, the pair who slept with her who she killed merely on a feeling they'd turn on her and the military parade. Just off the top of my head.

The kids i can't really blame her for. She was kept in a cage, only ever brought out to fight them. She escapes, whacked out on drugs, in one hell of a mental state from all her years of torture. And sees them. Why would she consider anytging but attacking? The couple she killed for screwing her out of her share and her suspicion that they would kill her. They were using her and she got sick of it. Should she have killed them? No, but criminals kill each other over these sorts of disputes all the time. And i don't remember her killing anyone at the parade, just stealing a military craft. Besides, parades are boring. She helped.

I would like to raise a counterpoint, since we are accepring her hearsay as evidence. She tells a story of how she was charged with kidnapping when she stole a frieghter and didnt kill everybody on board, and admits it would have been easier to simply kill them all. So whu didn't she? They didn't mess with her. My reading of Jack is that if you get in her way she will kill you without a second thought. But if you don't she just won't bother.

Certainly she never makes any claim that she coincidentally only hurt, robbed, or murdered the wicked

I think she has only lived among them, and therefore prayed almost exclusively upon them. I mean, really, how many innocents are there in the Omega's of the galaxy? How many of them are worth robbing?

Short term, Samara is uncontrollable as well, and may well threaten to kill you. She leaves. Thane is uncontrollable: he'll die. Ashley and Kaiden were uncontrollable:



She only attempts to kill you twice: once before you bring her on your squad, in which case she's just another criminal you've come to take, and once if you move to let her.



After you recruit her, she makes no 'attempt' that you must resist. Youhave to seek it out.

Morinth is the only squaddie who attempts to kill you, and she does so both before and after recruitment.

[RiouHotaru]

I thought we agreed that the Paragon/Renegade label can't be applied to anyone but Shepard?

[TuringPoint]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Go read up on ammorality before you claim that the only reason for a positive action benefiting others is altruism.

Selfish people often help others because that in turn makes them feel better. Altruism isn't entailed at any point. They aren't kind for kindness sake: they're kind for the feeling they get afterwards. Likewise, a selfish person can pass up stealing someone else's money not because they're selfless, but because they expect something (quid pro quo, for example) in return, and their actions are based on how others reactions will affect them.

I suppose your argument is that no one ever benefits from another's actions, be it selfish or selfless, quote unquote?  Altruism exists - it's more of a concept, the result of any "social formula", than anything else.  Even you seem to justify your arguments for selfishness in terms of how it's most beneficial to everyone.  Which is the foundation of altruism.

So how about you go read up on altruism.  Or just think for yourself for once, apply some of that "selfishness" to the here and now and stop putting your foot in your mouth.  

Ok, ok.  Let's pretend your gimped philosophical definition of altruism is the only one around, for the sake of argument.    People do altruistic things because it makes them feel good.  I suppose people also build hospitals or roads or houses because it makes them feel good?  Ok.  That sounds solid.

....

So what's missing?  Can you figure that out?  It doesn't seem like you'd be able to, but maybe you're just too focused on your current argument, isolated from everything else.  Because that makes you happy.

Nothing wrong with that!  Certainly not, if you've read up on amorality.

Modifié par Alocormin, 08 novembre 2010 - 02:32 .

[Nightwriter]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

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.

You have not proven she is as bad as Morinth.

You have only proven you believe she is not paragon, which you said from the beginning. So how do you agree with him?

You have also proven her Code is strict in some places. Which is hardly disputed. However, Samara has shown that she is aware of this strictness and even tries to manipulate the situation to work around it. 

Are you faulting Samara, or her Code?

Modifié par Nightwriter, 08 novembre 2010 - 03:02 .

[Moiaussi]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Give me a break, Moiassui. We both know the story is an honest narrative and doesn't lie to us about what it tells us unless it gives the truth shortly after. She was going to do it.

We don't know any such thing. Are you saying that everything everyone says in said narrative is perfectly honest? TIM admits to lieing to you. A certain lilttle merc girl lies about her innocence too. Where are you getting all this inside information regarding the Justicar code?

Uncompromising and unyeilding is pretty much the defining trait of the Justicars.

The police certainly believed her to carry through. What in thegame makes you think Samara wasn't going to do just what she said she would?

If you are right, she openly threatened a police officer, which is normally considered viable grounds for arrest. The officer was willing to look for alternative solutions rather than call her out on that. She likely wasn't bluffing, but you seem to be claiming knowledge rather than opinion. Do you have any proof?

Why not? They also have slavery.

Those are labour contracts with non-performance consequences. They are presented as slavery, but there is nothing about the actual contracts that doesn't exist in RL in North Amercia perfectly legally under existing contract law. It may be that labour contracts have changed by that point in time that what we consider normal now is considered strange or wrong in ME, but that doesn't change the actual structure of the contracts.

My Shepards also make no claims to being Justicars or their code as moral justice. If either one believed they would just end up fighting their way out of an unacceptable detention in a day regardless, they wouldn't have let themselves be taken there in the first place.

You are evading the question. Refusing to be taken there would result in the same effect as being in there. Samara is being 'detained' with no charges, indefinitely. Saying that she should resist detainment or 'avoid' it is not an answer as that isn't an available option without using force (since the police seem willing to use force).

And the code is not relevant either unless you can prove her actions would be contrary to said code rather than simply assume so for your own convenience.

Yes. Acceptable responses depend on circumstances, but 'detention beyond 24 hours' does not justify 'blow up police station and kill police officers' without extenuating circumstances far beyond anything Samara can claim.

I'm amazed you would argue that evenan unjust detention gives the right to cop killing, even before you actually establish that her detention was unjust or unreasonable in the first place

Wow. So your Shepard stayed on the Citadel rather than take the Normandy to Ilos? He was being 'detained' too.

No, I said they had a right to hold her because they demonstrated that right. Neither Samara or anyone else contested that right to detain her.

The burden of proof of corruption lays on the accuser, not the police who detain her for fear of what she openly admits her Code compels her to do.

How did they 'demonstrate that right?' By doing so with Samara cooperating instead of fighting them? That, again, is circular logic. And the police are the accusers, as are you. You are the one saying the police were within their rights to not just detain her indefinately, but to use any level of force neccessary to accomplish that, and that the police themselves could not possibly be the kind of corruption the code is designed to guard against.

Justicars serve justice, not pacifism. I think you have your codes confused.

Modifié par Moiaussi, 08 novembre 2010 - 06:26 .

[Phaedon]

OK so since there has been a discussion about justice in the first pages, let me tell you my opinion.



Justice can take different forms and changes from person to person. For that reason, we have invented law, a concept that might contradict moral justice in some cases, but it works most of the time.



Shepard is all about enforcing justice, or at least his/hers version of justice, he/she's a Spectre afterall. Paragon Shepard is about doing things by the book and being diplomatic.



Samara follows a Code blindly, therefore she is paragon.

[Dean_the_Young]

AntiChri5 wrote...

How guilty are Samara's death toll? When, hell why, does 'not innocent' turn into a carte blanch 'fine to kill'?

To Samara, i don't think there is a concept like "how guilty". It is a yes/no issue for her. I wonder if Samara would kill for someone doing grafiti.

Which is exactly a problem. People keep treating her judgement as if it's completely valid and reasonable: 'oh, but it's only the guilty, the innocent have nothing to fear.'

I suspect the vast majority of those Jack kills are people like her. Career criminals kill far more criminals then ordinary people. And, frankly, she has far more reason to kill other mercs/pirates.

Jack on Illium: 'soft targets.'

You don't rob the people with guns. You rob the ones who can't defend themselves.

The kids i can't really blame her for. She was kept in a cage, only ever brought out to fight them. She escapes, whacked out on drugs, in one hell of a mental state from all her years of torture. And sees them. Why would she consider anytging but attacking?

And Samara cares about mitigating circumstances... since when?

The couple she killed for screwing her out of her share and her suspicion that they would kill her. They were using her and she got sick of it. Should she have killed them? No, but criminals kill each other over these sorts of disputes all the time.

And, again, her proof against them was...?

You aren't even denying she's a criminal at this point.

And i don't remember her killing anyone at the parade, just stealing a military craft. Besides, parades are boring. She helped.

That isn't even a defense.

I would like to raise a counterpoint, since we are accepring her hearsay as evidence. She tells a story of how she was charged with kidnapping when she stole a frieghter and didnt kill everybody on board, and admits it would have been easier to simply kill them all. So whu didn't she? They didn't mess with her. My reading of Jack is that if you get in her way she will kill you without a second thought. But if you don't she just won't bother.

That doesn't change that she hijacked a freighter with innocents on board.

You realize that carjacking turns into kidnapping if there's someone stuck in the rearseat when you drive off, yes?

I think she has only lived among them, and therefore prayed almost exclusively upon them. I mean, really, how many innocents are there in the Omega's of the galaxy? How many of them are worth robbing?

Enough that Garrus and Samara see point about fighting a crusade there.

But then, Jack didn't spend her life on Omega either.

Morinth is the only squaddie who attempts to kill you, and she does so both before and after recruitment.

Because you sought it out.

Morinth never tracked down Shepard, tricked him, or try to do death by snusnu. Shepard, knowing exactly what she is, goes to seduce her.

That isn't simple murder on Morinth's part. That's attempted suicide on Shepard's as well.

[Dean_the_Young]

Moiaussi wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Give me a break, Moiassui. We both know the story is an honest narrative and doesn't lie to us about what it tells us unless it gives the truth shortly after. She was going to do it.

We don't know any such thing. Are you saying that everything everyone says in said narrative is perfectly honest? TIM admits to lieing to you. A certain lilttle merc girl lies about her innocence too. Where are you getting all this inside information regarding the Justicar code?

TIM admits lying to you and the truth being revealed immediately after is rather the point. The little merc girl's lie is uncovered three rooms latter. Even the galaxy-shattering deception about the true nature of the Prothean legacy is revealed in ME1.

Mass Effect doesn't do permanent lies. It isn't Fallout or Dragon Age. You can take what someone says on the face of it, and if they're lying it is revealed afterwards. At not point is Samara or does Samara claim to have been bluffing.

I get this information from the game's sources of valid authorities to know about justicars and the issue at hand: the Asari police (who agree Samara would be obliged to kill them), and Samara (who says she would be obliged to break out after a day), and even your teammates (who recognize that Samara's intention is to avoid killing the police).

If you are right, she openly threatened a police officer, which is normally considered viable grounds for arrest. The officer was willing to look for alternative solutions rather than call her out on that. She likely wasn't bluffing, but you seem to be claiming knowledge rather than opinion. Do you have any proof?

Yes.

Samara's recruitment hinges around why she agrees to accompany you in the first place: she doesn't want to kill the police in order to continue chasing Morinth.

Those are labour contracts with non-performance consequences. They are presented as slavery, but there is nothing about the actual contracts that doesn't exist in RL in North Amercia perfectly legally under existing contract law. It may be that labour contracts have changed by that point in time that what we consider normal now is considered strange or wrong in ME, but that doesn't change the actual structure of the contracts.

And yet, detention is now absurd?

You are evading the question. Refusing to be taken there would result in the same effect as being in there. Samara is being 'detained' with no charges, indefinitely. Saying that she should resist detainment or 'avoid' it is not an answer as that isn't an available option without using force (since the police seem willing to use force).

No, I answered the question openly. My Shepards wouldn't be in such a position in the first place, nor do they make a claim to inherent justice in all their acts.

Breaking out of the prison with good enough reasons is not the issue. Breaking out of prison for arbitrary reasons and claiming it's inherently justified, is.

And the code is not relevant either unless you can prove her actions would be contrary to said code rather than simply assume so for your own convenience.

But I don't think her acts are contrary to the code. I've never claimed that.

Her Code is not Paragon is my claim. It isn't paragon in concept (Paragons do not follow inherent justification arguments, are compromisers and not absolutists), it isn't paragon in execution (far too many examples of contradictions between the Code and Paragon actions, such as executions).

Wow. So your Shepard stayed on the Citadel rather than take the Normandy to Ilos? He was being 'detained' too.

He also had a galaxy at stake.

Samara didn't.

As I said.

How did they 'demonstrate that right?' By doing so with Samara cooperating instead of fighting them? That, again, is circular logic. And the police are the accusers, as are you. You are the one saying the police were within their rights to not just detain her indefinately, but to use any level of force neccessary to accomplish that, and that the police themselves could not possibly be the kind of corruption the code is designed to guard against.

They demonstrated that right in that a police officer was able to go to samara, tell her that she was being detained, and Samara didn't kill her as a dirty cop. The only contention so far that the police of Illium don't have that right is, well, from outside the game. You.


Your other argument... makes no sense.

Justicars serve justice, not pacifism. I think you have your codes confused.

Justice is a label. It is not an objective criteria.

I've never claimed the Justicars should be pacifists. But pacifism and lethal absolutism are not binary.

[Dean_the_Young]

Phaedon wrote...

OK so since there has been a discussion about justice in the first pages, let me tell you my opinion.

Justice can take different forms and changes from person to person. For that reason, we have invented law, a concept that might contradict moral justice in some cases, but it works most of the time.

Shepard is all about enforcing justice, or at least his/hers version of justice, he/she's a Spectre afterall. Paragon Shepard is about doing things by the book and being diplomatic.

Samara follows a Code blindly, therefore she is paragon.

...except Samara isn't diplomatic, and Paragon Shepard is just as often about not doing it by the book.

[Dean_the_Young]

Nightwriter wrote...
You have not proven she is as bad as Morinth.

I don't need to.

We could, I suppose, count bodies. We could count which one is more likely to start a galactic incident. We can certainly go with which one so far is more likely to come after you before the Reapers do.

You have only proven you believe she is not paragon, which you said from the beginning. So how do you agree with him?

I explicitly said I don't agree with all he's saying. I was disagreeing with some of your assertions.

You have also proven her Code is strict in some places. Which is hardly disputed. However, Samara has shown that she is aware of this strictness and even tries to manipulate the situation to work around it.

Situational availability for an alternative is not something that can or should be relied upon. When you have a systematic inclination to a bad thing occurring that can possibly be avoided by chance, it's still a bad system.

Are you faulting Samara, or her Code?

Both. And people who equate the Code with Paragon.

[Moiaussi]

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

We don't know any such thing. Are you saying that everything everyone says in said narrative is perfectly honest? TIM admits to lieing to you. A certain lilttle merc girl lies about her innocence too. Where are you getting all this inside information regarding the Justicar code?[/quote]TIM admits lying to you and the truth being revealed immediately after is rather the point. The little merc girl's lie is uncovered three rooms latter. Even the galaxy-shattering deception about the true nature of the Prothean legacy is revealed in ME1.

Mass Effect doesn't do permanent lies. It isn't Fallout or Dragon Age. You can take what someone says on the face of it, and if they're lying it is revealed afterwards. At not point is Samara or does Samara claim to have been bluffing. [/quote]

Precisely why would Samara's bluff have to be called? There is no option involving her whereby you don't help her. TIM's lie is revealed by EDI, not by TIM until you confront him with it. Regardless, claiming it would be consistant with the writing style for you to be right is not proof.

[quote]I get this information from the game's sources of valid authorities to know about justicars and the issue at hand: the Asari police (who agree Samara would be obliged to kill them), and Samara (who says she would be obliged to break out after a day), and even your teammates (who recognize that Samara's intention is to avoid killing the police).[/quote]

All of whom could be basing their opinions on Justicar reputation rather than reality. Which of them actually has dealt with Justicars before?

[quote]Yes.

Samara's recruitment hinges around why she agrees to accompany you in the first place: she doesn't want to kill the police in order to continue chasing Morinth.[/quote]

So? She would only have to shoot the police because they would detain her without her having committed any actual crimes.


[quote]And yet, detention is now absurd?[/quote]

Pardon, I have no clue how you are trying to link Asari labour contracts with Samara's detention. Are you suggesting she signed such a contract? Or are you saying that because labour contracts are poorly understood in the future that detaining people indefinately without charge is somehow 'just?'

[quote]]No, I answered the question openly. My Shepards wouldn't be in such a position in the first place, nor do they make a claim to inherent justice in all their acts.

Breaking out of the prison with good enough reasons is not the issue. Breaking out of prison for arbitrary reasons and claiming it's inherently justified, is.[/quote]

Your shepard was already in such a position in ME1. The Normandy was locked down and Shepard took it. Udina had to be assaulted to accomplish that. It is not 'arbitrary' to break out of a prison when you are attempting to stop a mass murderer whom the authorities are ignoring, and when you are being held without charge indefinately. How is that 'arbitrary?'

[quote]But I don't think her acts are contrary to the code. I've never claimed that.

Her Code is not Paragon is my claim. It isn't paragon in concept (Paragons do not follow inherent justification arguments, are compromisers and not absolutists), it isn't paragon in execution (far too many examples of contradictions between the Code and Paragon actions, such as executions).[/quote]

Since the vast majority at least jaywalk and Samara does not attack everyone on sight, it is reasonably safe to say there are exceptions. She doesn't attack jails and kill everyone inside. When Nihlus threatened a village, she backed off to save the village rather than kill him and the village. How is that not paragon? You might find this confusing, but paragons can and do kill in the line of duty. Paragons are not pacifists. You seem to have trouble understanding that though.

[quote]]He also had a galaxy at stake. Samara didn't. As I said.[/quote]

And you don't think Morinth capable of killing more than that police station held? Which seemed to be what.. three officers tops? And how long should Samara be incarcerated on this non-charge that you somehow feel perfectly justified? How about the victims of everyone Samara would stop after taking down Morinth? How about the help she will provide Shepard, and anything else neither she nor the police could predict at the time?

[quote]They demonstrated that right in that a police officer was able to go to samara, tell her that she was being detained, and Samara didn't kill her as a dirty cop. The only contention so far that the police of Illium don't have that right is, well, from outside the game. You.[/quote]

Samara put up with that so she wouldn't have to put down an officer just trying to do her job. She would have done so if force to by the officer though. Shepard provided her an out. It isn't that tough to understand. The officer made it clear she would detain Samara whether it was legal or not. If Samara had agreed to it, it would have been legal, since so far the officer was effectively only asking. The momment the officer tried to use force, the rules would have changed.

Your other argument... makes no sense.

[quote]Justice is a label. It is not an objective criteria.[/quote]

Your statement explains the issue here. You seem to see this as a 'paragons must obey all laws, just or injust.' Justice isn't just a label. It has an actual definition. "Justice is the concept of moral rightness based on ethics, rationality, law, natural law, religion, fairness, or equity, along with the punishment of the breach of said ethics."

Or if you prefer the websters defintion, the relevant defintion is "the maintenance or administration of what is just especially by the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or punishments "
The Justicar's code has been around long enough that it is likely nowwhere near as simplistic as you make it out to be. It isn't the classic 'lawful stupid' mantra of "I detect evil therefore I must kill it." It is pretty clear that Pitne For is involved in shady operations, but she doesn't kill him on sight, even after Shepard presents evidence proving his guilt. She leaves that to the local authorities.

How do you reconcile that with your appearant view of Justicars as rabid shoot on sight vigilantes?

[quote]I've never claimed the Justicars should be pacifists. But pacifism and lethal absolutism are not binary.[/quote]

No, but Samara chose a middle path of agreeing to have Shepard act as her agent. She found a way to get the job done within the code and without having to shoot the officer.

[Moiaussi]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

We could, I suppose, count bodies. We could count which one is more likely to start a galactic incident. We can certainly go with which one so far is more likely to come after you before the Reapers do.

How many bodies does she actually take down? How many galactic incidents does she actually start? Stop talking about everyone's blind fears as if they are reality.

Both. And people who equate the Code with Paragon.

Compare Batman's reputation with his actual conduct (at least in the mainstream comics.. the dark knight stuff he tends to be more willing to use lethal force). He cultivates a scary persona because it is useful to him to have criminals fear him. It throws them off and makes them more likely to cooperate out of fear. But he isn't really like that.

It is likely similar with the code. Not only do Justicar actions get exaggerated, but it is useful to the Justicars to encourage that to convince people to stay honest and to cooperate with them, or at least to get sloppy out of fear when facing them.

Regardless, she does nothing she is accused of on Illium.

[Dean_the_Young]

[quote]Moiaussi wrote...

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

Precisely why would Samara's bluff have to be called? There is no option involving her whereby you don't help her. TIM's lie is revealed by EDI, not by TIM until you confront him with it. Regardless, claiming it would be consistant with the writing style for you to be right is not proof.
[/quote]

I'd argue about this being a bluff, except you won't even stand by that baseless claim below.

[quote]
So? She would only have to shoot the police because they would detain her without her having committed any actual crimes.[/quote]

If she's willing and intending to do it if it comes to it, Moiassi, it's not a bluff.

Since you seem to insist on maintaining something the game never suggests, offers, or supports, I can see this path of conversation has no point.


[quote]
All of whom could be basing their opinions on Justicar reputation rather than reality. Which of them actually has dealt with Justicars before?[/quote]Samara is basing her words on reputation alone?

Really? That's the stand you're going to make? Samara's lying about her intent, everyone else in the game is fooled by her, and only you, the clever player, can see that she doesn't really mean it?


[quote]
Pardon, I have no clue how you are trying to link Asari labour contracts with Samara's detention. Are you suggesting she signed such a contract? Or are you saying that because labour contracts are poorly understood in the future that detaining people indefinately without charge is somehow 'just?'[/quote]If the Asari can rationalize slavery with rules, there's nothing preventing them from rationalizing legal indefinite detention.



[quote]
Your shepard was already in such a position in ME1. The Normandy was locked down and Shepard took it. Udina had to be assaulted to accomplish that. It is not 'arbitrary' to break out of a prison when you are attempting to stop a mass murderer whom the authorities are ignoring, and when you are being held without charge indefinately. How is that 'arbitrary?'[/quote]Because the threat and the means to address it are entirely disproportionate between.

When Shepard is locked down, the galaxy is days from extinction.

When Samara is retrained, a selective killer is free to kill individuals in drips and drabs.

When Shepard broke out, he didn't openly broadcast he would shoot his way out through the Citadel, which would still have been justified because the threat was that big.

When Samara promised to break out, she does so knowing that Morinth poses no such threat, and that the damage she is likely to cause (to the police, to the public as a consequence) in overcoming the police would outweigh Morinth's own crimes.


[quote]
Since the vast majority at least jaywalk and Samara does not attack everyone on sight, it is reasonably safe to say there are exceptions. She doesn't attack jails and kill everyone inside. When Nihlus threatened a village, she backed off to save the village rather than kill him and the village. How is that not paragon?[/quote]Why would it innately be? Renegades can have rules they are restrained by as well. Why is attacking Nihlus in the first place Paragon?

Samara doesn't attack everyone on sight because they might be a criminal,but she acknowledges she would if she saw them do it or knew about it. That is very much an issue.

[quote]
 You might find this confusing, but paragons can and do kill in the line of duty. Paragons are not pacifists. You seem to have trouble understanding that though.[/quote]Strawman. Show or cite where I've ever claimed where Paragons should be pacifists.


[quote]
And you don't think Morinth capable of killing more than that police station held? Which seemed to be what.. three officers tops?[/quote]In the first room alone. Are you going to claim that's all the police station held.

Morinth, givenenough time, is certainly capable of killing more than that police station held. Eventually. Samara, however, was going to kill all the ones who would resist her in the near-now, easily outweighing Morinth's own crimes in the same period.

[quote]
And how long should Samara be incarcerated on this non-charge that you somehow feel perfectly justified? [/quote]It depends when the station would be allowed to let her go. A lack of a distinct time, though, does not validate blowing her way out now.

[quote]
How about the victims of everyone Samara would stop after taking down Morinth?[/quote]Since this is a suicide mission with no valid expectation of coming back, and there's no certainty we even will find Morinth, and the ineptitude of arguing by infinite future possibilities, the answer is 'no weight to this argument'.

[quote]
How about the help she will provide Shepard, and anything else neither she nor the police could predict at the time?[/quote]Things you can't predict are, by extension of the definition, not things you can argue grounds on.



[quote]
Samara put up with that so she wouldn't have to put down an officer just trying to do her job. She would have done so if force to by the officer though. Shepard provided her an out. It isn't that tough to understand. The officer made it clear she would detain Samara whether it was legal or not. If Samara had agreed to it, it would have been legal, since so far the officer was effectively only asking. The momment the officer tried to use force, the rules would have changed.[/quote]There is no 'whether it was legal or not'. The only one suggesting it wasn't legal is you.

Samara would fight an army of dirty cops doing dirty deeds. This is one of the things we know first and foremost about the Justicars. Another is that anyone who does a crime is not innocent, whether compelled or not. If the cop was doing something illegal, ordered or not, Samara would have killed her.




[quote]
Your statement explains the issue here. You seem to see this as a 'paragons must obey all laws, just or injust.' [/quote]No. I don't. I've even repeated, many times, that paragons break laws as well.

In fact, I've argued against that following law absolutely, as Samara does, is paragon.


[quote]
Justice isn't just a label. It has an actual definition. "Justice is the concept of moral rightness based on ethics, rationality, law, natural law, religion, fairness, or equity, along with the punishment of the breach of said ethics."[/quote]If you can't see how subjective and nebulous each one of those underlined words are, you're the last person who should be arguing that justice is objective.

[quote]
The Justicar's code has been around long enough that it is likely nowwhere near as simplistic as you make it out to be. It isn't the classic 'lawful stupid' mantra of "I detect evil therefore I must kill it." It is pretty clear that Pitne For is involved in shady operations, but she doesn't kill him on sight, even after Shepard presents evidence proving his guilt. She leaves that to the local authorities.[/quote]There's also no proof that Pitne For is involved in shady operations, and the police already at hand.


[quote]
How do you reconcile that with your appearant view of Justicars as rabid shoot on sight vigilantes?[/quote]By the fact I don't have that view, and you should stop attributing to me arguments I do not make.

[quote]
No, but Samara chose a middle path of agreeing to have Shepard act as her agent. She found a way to get the job done within the code and without having to shoot the officer.
[/quote]A happy coincidence that can't be applied everywhere. The fact that she needs someone to get her out of such a issue is a demonstration of the limitations and failings of the Code.