37007 réponses à ce sujet

[LobselVith8]

Pious_Augustine wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

Yes, they say that they're being paid.  But they also express fear.  One of the bandits says  something to the effect of:  "better not  let them hear you say that, unless you want a dagger in your back.       Now.... Why would  these people fear a dagger in their back from noble warriors?    And why are they not welcome in Whiterun?  Why does a whiterun guard say:  "you're lucky I don't toss you in prison or what you've done"? 

One bandit is afraid because he thinks that bad talking a wariorr is liable to get his comrade killed. The Alik'r aren't welcome in Whiterun because they've been harrassing redguard women, and probably other citizens trying to find Saadia.

Whiterun is closed off because of the dragon attacks, and the protagonist needs to mention he (or she) is delivering information about Helgen to the Jarl in order to gain entry.

[Joy Divison]

[quote]Yrkoon wrote...

[quote]Joy Divison wrote...
You keep saying the Alikir are ruthless and reckless in their pursuit as if acting that way somehow invalidates their claim. [/quote]
It  kinda does, yes.  (And I thought I   addressed this notion before but whatever, I'll do it again.) Despite what the "lore experts" believe is a simple matter of one side absolutely telling the truth and the other side putting up a ridiculously demonstrative lie, we have no such thing going on here, and this is by developer design.  (most quests in Skyrim are grey-flavored, and so is the lore.  Imagine that!)    This quest IS  a He-said She-said...  

[Various stuff that indicates the Alikir do meaner things than Saadia]

[/quote]
OK, all your evidence points to Saadia having a nicer disposition than the Alikir.  How does that "KINDA" prove their claim is wrong?  Because nicer people are more likely to tell the truth?  And you infered that I was gullible in your post?  OK...

[quote]Yrkoon wrote...
[quote]Joy Divison wrote...
They DO know who they are looking for.  "Brother (because mercs commonly address themselves this way, right Elhanan?), I think she's telling the truth ... she doesn't have the scar."[/quote]
Really?  You call  " Find the Redguard woman with Scar" an adequate intel-gathering profile of   a target we're told committed such a horrible crime, that an entire regiment of Hammerfell's best warriors have been dispatched to another country to retrieve her?[/quote]

Yes.  Because upon inspection of a suspect that fit the demographic of the target, they were able to ascertain, relatively quickly and correctly, that the Redguard woman was not who they were searching for.

With the whole Saadia is nicer so that "kinda" supports her claim, you were grasping at straws.  Here you are just refusing to see that you are wrong.  They do know who they are looking for and this is demonstrated in game.

[quote]Yrkoon wrote...
[quote]Can you show me evidence (besides the testimony of a women on the run which contradicts lore numerous time) that substantiates her story?[/quote]
There is none.  Just as there is none to   support the Alik'r story.  But then again, I'm not  the one here claiming that this is  a "no-brainer", or that either  side is "uttering bullsh**".

But  for what it's worth,  her story does  not contradict lore  (as if such a thing were even  possible in a game world where lore is meted out via multiple perspectives that often contradict  on purpose).  But regardless,  the  lore-friendliness of her  story completely depends on when she fled Hammerfell.... which we're not told.[/quote]

You use quotes, but I never said those words and you are misrepresenting what I did say.  Addai and I have pointed out the holes in her story that do not square with even the contradictory lore - where is the lore that might suggest that the Alikir would be employed by the Aldmeri Dominion?  You keep calling them mercs, chiding them for associating with bandits, and think they are mean because they aren't as friendly as policemen as Saadia is as a barmaid, but you have yet to dig up anything that would remotely suggest that the Aldmeri Dominion might have indeed hired them and that Saadia might afterall, be telling the truth.

Addai has already explained to you why the timeline points to Saadia having thrown her lot in with the Dominion and Kematu says as much, which you seem to (now) acknowledged.

Now you seem to think that the Alikir are mercs hired by a noble house, which I guess that matters to you, but still makes Saadia a lying wench who cozied with the Thalmor.

[quote]Yrkoon wrote...
[quote]Joy Divison wrote...
That she is suppose to listen to Heimskr speak does not cast tons of doubt on the Alikir claim.  Maybe she found religion after realizing the deeds of her crime?  Maybe its just a ruse to sucker poeple into believer her claim that she spoke out against the Aldmeri Dominion.  Maybe she has the hots for Heimskr?  Maybe she just likes the shade of the dead Gildergreen?  Maybe she is watching Heimskr for her Thalmor buddies and preparing a report of Heimskr's daily routines and who in Whiterun is attending his services?[/quote]
Ooh,   Wildly throwing   strands of  spaghetti at the wall to see if any  stick!   Can I play?[/quote]

You already did to LobesVith8.  I wrote this because you were using the pasta throwing line of argument - remember when you said Saadia going to Heiskr

[quote]Yrkoon wrote...
"Oh no mon ami.   It   casts tons of doubt on the Alik'r claim."  [/quote]

Apparently you are allowed to throw spaghetti to support your claims while your debate opponents cannot.  Not really fair is it?

[quote]Yrkoon wrote...
These Alik'r warriors are noble  when they call Bandits   allies,  sell their own leaders out for bail money, and  comb the countryside  for  Redguard women to harass.[/quote]

I get it.  They are mean.  Did you know Robspierre was a gentleman and all around nice guy?

[quote]Yrkoon wrote...
So we should believe  them when they  speak. Even though the very same "code" that makes them noble, forces them to snap shut  when anyone questions them.... And even though  they claim that Saadia  betrayed  them to  the Dominion.... an entity  the  lore tells us t no longer exists in Hammerfell, because these noble warriors drove them out years ago.  Uh-huh.  yeah.[/quote]

Yes.  Because I'm not...ahem...gullible to think that just because Saadia has a more pleasant disposition than the mean Alikir that somehow indicates she is more trustworthy.  And because the Dominion WERE in Hammerfell and because it was these "noble warriors" who drove them out, the Dominion would not be the ones who hired them like the kind lady in the Bannered Mare claims.

[quote]Yrkoon wrote...
[quote]Joy Divison wrote...
Your contention that she's not currently a [useful] Thalmor ally is going to be enough for any Skyrim citizen is a broad claim that you can't substantiate.  ANY Skyrim citizen?  First off, that's wrong because my anti-Thalmor Skyrim citizens (which describes most citizens in Skyrim and and even that milk-drinking Tulius) view her with disgust, suspicion, and a fugitive who deserves to answer for her previous association with the Thalmor.  This isn't some random breton who got mixed up in High Rock political intrigue that Nords would have no understading of, but someone who willingly consorted with their number one enemy.  The difference is signficant and that you are not recognizing it is disingenuous.[/quote]

Ok, my wording was incorrect.   Mea Culpa.  Perhaps I should say, any  non-hopelessly gullible Skyrim citizen.[/quote]

I see this point was missed.  Skyrim citizens will care because Saadia isn't some random breton who got mixed up in High Rock political intrigue that Nords would have no understading of, but someone who willingly consorted with their number one enemy. And, yes, gullible, Saadia the nice barmaid on the run from the mean Alikir...


[quote]Yrkoon wrote...
[quote]In fact, the game does give evidence that Saadia is still considered an asset by the Thalmor - if you aid Kematu, a group of Thalmor Justiciars come after you and carry a Justiciar Execution Order with your race and name.[/quote]
BS.  The Thalmor assassins   encounter(s)  occur without any prerequisites.  (link)[/quote]

Or, maybe not


[quote]Yrkoon wrote...
This is nonsense.    First You have no idea when she fled, and if it was during the Great war then there's nothing dubious at all about her claim, as back then, speaking out against the Thalmor WOULD land you in deep trouble in Hammerfell.  [/quote]

This is just wrong.  Addai already covered this.  If Saadia spoke out agaisnt the Thalmor while under occupation, she could return.  She won't and she's still hunted even thought the Thalmor are gone from Hammerfell.  So her story doesn't square. 


[quote]Yrkoon wrote...
Second, you don't get jack in the way of an explanation when you push the Alik'r for more information.  In fact, they flat out tell you that if you're not happy with the hopelessly vague  info they've given you, you can  take a hike.[/quote]

Initially yes.  But if you speak with Kematu, you get "jack."


[quote]Yrkoon wrote...
Lastly, I don't see how "being polite"   on occasion automatically eliminates one from being an assassin or a bounty hunter anyway.[/quote]

Yes you do think there is a correlation between being polite and being the more trustworthy party.  Your words: "It  kinda does, yes." 


[quote]Yrkoon wrote...They're in a foreign land and they're failing their mission spectacularly.  How do you expect  them to act towards  the one person in the entire world who's expressing an interest in helping them  find their target?
[/quote]

I expect them to act pretty much exactly as they do.  Saadia was pretty much in the same position as they are: discovered and forced to ask the DB for their assistance.  The difference between the two is that Saadia gave me a vague story that does not sqaure with any lore offered in game whereas Kematu was more forthcoming and did give me something that squared with the lore we know about the Dominion-Hammerfell-Alikir.

Addai is right.  The DB does NOT have to help the Alikir and nobody is suggesting it is the "right" thing to do or that the DB should help the Alikir or that doing so is even the more noble path.  A curious DB who does some ivestigative work will come to realize Saadia's story has a lot of holes that can only be filled by conjuring up scenarios that are not supported by in game evidence.

Modifié par Joy Divison, 26 décembre 2013 - 06:27 .

[Yrkoon]

[quote]Joy Divison wrote...
OK, all your evidence points to Saadia having a nicer disposition than the Alikir.  How does that "KINDA" prove their claim is wrong?  [/quote]
Because  their disposition suggests they're not  your  typical Alik'r.  And  if we're dealing with mercs  (you know, MERCENARIES....  people who's motivation is money), then we can  logically question their  mission,  their history, and their  claims.

Here's a snippet from the link  you provided us:

The Alik'r are self-described mercenaries who have only sought out Saadia for her considerable bounty, considering the Dragonborn's share alone amounts to 500 gold. The Thalmor are notorious for using bribery and coercion to motivate their agents, and mercenaries are not known for their undying patriotism.



[quote]Joy Divison wrote...
Yes.  Because upon inspection of a suspect that fit the demographic of the target, they were able to ascertain, relatively quickly and correctly, that the Redguard woman was not who they were searching for. [/quote]
Ok.  I understand starting off with a very general  Demographic  (target is  a female Redguard.) and then working from there while you're on the field.   But if  suspicions are based on nothing but   that, then  you don't have intel.      Instead, you have the  reason why innocents are being harassed.

And  You have no idea if they were able to relatively quickly ascertain anything.  The Dragonborn  does not witness the entire scene, he only  shows up while it's going on.  The response from the agitated victims suggests an ordeal... something very much UNQUICK. 








[quote]With the whole Saadia is nicer so that "kinda" supports her claim, you were grasping at straws.  Here you are just refusing to see that you are wrong.  They do know who they are looking for and this is demonstrated in game.[/quote]
Aah yes.    Translation:  "Refusing to bow and concede to my point  of view means that you're just being deliberately blind and stubborn to the TRUTH®".  A retort that we always see  in any extended debate on the internet.  No thanks.   Understand this already:   This particular quest has been hotly debated for a couple of years now.  Everywhere.    It has popped up on this very thread , alone,  a dozen times since 2011.    There's a reason for that:    Nothing is clear-cut here.   And it is not you and your convictions that is going to suddenly change things.  This quest is riddled with holes, both factual and circumstantial.... and it's on purpose.   Don't make the common mistake that  Skyrim critics make of underestimating Bethesda's  writing.



[quote]
You use quotes, but I never said those words and you are misrepresenting what I did say.  Addai and I have pointed out the holes in her story that do not square with even the contradictory lore - where is the lore that might suggest that the Alikir would be employed by the Aldmeri Dominion?[/quote]
What kind of question is that?       This is a unique situation.  And we might be dealing with rogue elements  within the factions at play here.  You don't see me demanding from you lore that proves that Redguard women with invisible scars always work for the Aldmeri Dominion, do you?

 






[quote]Now you seem to think that the Alikir are mercs hired by a noble house, which I guess that matters to you, but still makes Saadia a lying wench who cozied with the Thalmor.[/quote]
It does no such thing.  All bets are off if we're dealing with Money and feuding nobles. 









[quote]Apparently you are allowed to throw spaghetti to support your claims while your debate opponents cannot.  Not really fair is it?[/quote]
Fine.  Then  from here on out, lets both cease the theory crafting.   Of course,  the debate will end immediately if we do... won't it.




[quote]
[quote]Yrkoon wrote...

BS.  The Thalmor assassins   encounter(s)  occur without any prerequisites.  (link)[/quote]

Or, maybe not [/quote]
Do you really want to go there.? Here's what your link says:[quote]If Kematu's request is accepted, and the Dragonborn helps him capture Saadia, the Dragonborn may encounter a group of Thalmor Justiciars in the wild that carry a Justiciar Execution Order with the Dragonborn's race and name. This may indicate that Kematu was telling the truth and that Saadia truly was a traitor, as she could send Thalmor assassins after the Dragonborn, or it may indicate that Kematu is actually the traitor, and he betrayed the Dragonborn and sent Thalmor assassins so they would not foil his operations.  







[*]It is of note that Iman is not referred to in any documents of the Thalmor, only the Alik'r know of her presence. This may imply that the Thalmor are unaware that an enemy/supporter to their cause from a noblehouse in Hammerfell is in Skyrim. [/quote]^oh my...  would you look at those holes!



[quote]
[quote]Yrkoon wrote...
Lastly, I don't see how "being polite"   on occasion automatically eliminates one from being an assassin or a bounty hunter anyway.[/quote]

Yes you do think there is a correlation between being polite and being the more trustworthy party.  Your words: "It  kinda does, yes."  [/quote]  Except,  I'm not claiming  any sort of  automatic innocence or guilt here.


[quote]I expect them to act pretty much exactly as they do. 
[/quote]
Really? You expect them to be  relentless, reckless criminals, cowards, harassers, Bribers,  and lazy bar flies?  Well, ok, but  that goes against.... THE LORE.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 27 décembre 2013 - 07:30 .

[LobselVith8]

AstusOz wrote...

Just to change track for a bit and address something that's been on my mind. Is Barbas just another aspect of Clavicus Vile? In Skyrim, Vile's power is reduced when Barbas is away from him and that makes it appear as if they're linked on a deeper.

We've already seen another aspect of Vile in Umbra so maybe splitting himself up is something he enjoys. Although, Umbra was due to him mostly being tricked. He might just enjoy horcruxes a bit. 

I think so. I believe Barbaras is another facet of the Daedric Prince, and not simply a Daedric minion. The planes of Oblivion are literally the Princes and not simply other planes of reality, based on how I read the entry when the Chimera of Desolation was freed from Oblivion after the defeat of Mehrunes Dagon (if I recall correctly; it's been some time since I read it, and perhaps I'm mistaken about it).

Modifié par LobselVith8, 27 décembre 2013 - 01:21 .

[happy_daiz]

In regard to the marathon Saadia discussion, I'll just throw in that I turn her in. Every time. Because I can.

I'm not as good at the rp aspect as you guys clearly are. I just do what I think is right. I don't need a back story, or a compelling reason for my blasphemy. I just embrace hedonism, and go about my merry way.

I find it rather interesting/entertaining to read about how others play. It's amazing how one quest (not even a quest line), can still inspire this much discussion.

Modifié par happy_daiz, 27 décembre 2013 - 03:57 .

[Barbarossa2010]

I'm with you actually, except that I support her. I mean c'mon...she's hot. I wish I could say it was for more complex and well thought out reasons, but...well... it isn't.  If its any consolation, I feel sufficiently bad about myself.

Damsels are kryptonite for Dovas. That's roleplaying too...Right?

EDIT: But I do have to say, that for any those that briefly enter this thread and charge it with being "fanatical", "extremist", "distressingly" intolerant of criticism, or other such nonsense, really ought to peruse the last several pages.
 

Modifié par Barbarossa2010, 27 décembre 2013 - 04:26 .

[Elhanan]

Barbarossa2010 wrote...

I'm with you actually, except that I support her. I mean c'mon...she's hot. I wish I could say it was for more complex and well thought out reasons, but...well... it isn't.  If its any consolation, I feel sufficiently bad about myself.

Damsels are kryptonite for Dovas. That's roleplaying too...Right?

EDIT: But I do have to say, that for any those that briefly enter this thread and charge it with being "fanatical", "extremist", "distressingly" intolerant of criticism, or other such nonsense, really ought to peruse the last several pages.
 

In a way, this was one of the points I believe Gopher was trying to make: How old was she if she committed this so-called treason? I have read here of 25+ yrs ago when it occured, and that would make her very, very young at the time. More food for thought....

[Yrkoon]

Barbarossa2010 wrote...


EDIT: But I do have to say, that for any those that briefly enter this thread and charge it with being "fanatical", "extremist", "distressingly" intolerant of criticism, or other such nonsense, really ought to peruse the last several pages.
 

 Indeed.  This is a good point.

As it turns out, we're not the monolithic hive mind they swear we are!   The last 4 pages have  had some of the most heated debate this thread has  seen since... I don't know...the dragon riding discussion of last spring?  And it happened despite Christmas.  And it happened among the hardcore Skyrim fans.  Imagine that.

Of course,   this really only proves how good the writing is in Skyrim, but we Fanatics can just keep that secret to ourselves.     Smile and nod now, everyone.  Smile and nod.

Elhanan wrote...
In a way, this was one of the points I believe Gopher was trying to make: How old was she if she committed this so-called treason? I have read here of 25+ yrs ago when it occured, and that would make her very, very young at the time. More food for thought....

Eh.....   I don't see  the age issue as such a  significant point either way.  It's hard to pin down  character ages in Skyrim.  Ulfric Stormcloak  fought in the Great War.  But he doesn't look much older than mid 40s to me.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 27 décembre 2013 - 07:25 .

[Elhanan]

Yrkoon wrote...

Eh.....   I don't see  the age issue as such a  significant point either way.  It's hard to pin down  character ages in Skyrim.  Ulfric Stormcloak  fought in the Great War.  But he doesn't look much older than mid 40s to me.

But yet, she is young and attractive enough now to use deduction as part of her repertoire (even mentioned by the opposition). Thus the crime she is accused of perpetrating strongly suggests that she would have been done in her teens.

[Addai]

There's no discrepancy with the age. If she was 20 at the time, that would make her 45- easily believable. And I hope you're not suggesting that at that age she can't be held responsible for her actions.

[Elhanan]

Addai67 wrote...

There's no discrepancy with the age. If she was 20 at the time, that would make her 45- easily believable. And I hope you're not suggesting that at that age she can't be held responsible for her actions.

But if she were 5-15, she could have been easily manipulated, if she did this at all. Again, I do not agree with that theory.

[Giggles_Manically]

So last night I just about had the most epic moment of all time in my gaming career.
My dad set up his sound surround last night, connected to a projector.

So I got to play Skyrim on a 100 inch projected screen with sound surround.

Seriously hearing Alduin like that and seeing Skyrim like what was awesome.
Shame I cant do that to often, the bulbs have a kinda wimpy life span.

Still hearing a DRAGON like that gave me goosebumps

[LobselVith8]

Elhanan wrote...

Barbarossa2010 wrote...

I'm with you actually, except that I support her. I mean c'mon...she's hot. I wish I could say it was for more complex and well thought out reasons, but...well... it isn't.  If its any consolation, I feel sufficiently bad about myself.

Damsels are kryptonite for Dovas. That's roleplaying too...Right?

EDIT: But I do have to say, that for any those that briefly enter this thread and charge it with being "fanatical", "extremist", "distressingly" intolerant of criticism, or other such nonsense, really ought to peruse the last several pages.
 

In a way, this was one of the points I believe Gopher was trying to make: How old was she if she committed this so-called treason? I have read here of 25+ yrs ago when it occured, and that would make her very, very young at the time. More food for thought.... 

Saadia never even contests that she was alive and acting as an adult at this period in time or that her involvement caused her to become hunted by the Alik'r, so how are we even trying to contest this? Are we going to question Ulfric's involvement in the Great War, too?

Modifié par LobselVith8, 27 décembre 2013 - 04:01 .

[Yrkoon]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Saadia never even contests that she was alive and acting as an adult at this period in time

Begging your pardon, but as you guys were so keen to point out to me, Saadia does not mention  time periods either way, let alone   her developmental age when she was in Hammerfell.  And the Dragonborn is not given the opportunity to question  her about any such details, either.


Nope, this  part is a dead end.  For both sides.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 27 décembre 2013 - 04:36 .

[Elhanan]

Yrkoon wrote...

Begging your pardon, but as you guys were so keen to point out to me, Saadia does not mention  time periods either way, let alone   her developmental age when she was in Hammerfell.  And the Dragonborn is not given the opportunity to ask her about any such details, either.


Nope, this  part is a dead end.  For both sides.

And again; not proof, but she appears to be quite younger than Delphine based on reactions from others around them, and we know that D is in her mid-fifties.

In any event, Saadia is still serving time at the Bannered Mare under my DB's house arrest....

[LobselVith8]

Yrkoon wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Saadia never even contests that she was alive and acting as an adult at this period in time

Begging your pardon, but as you guys were so keen to point out to me, Saadia does not mention  time periods either way, let alone   her developmental age when she was in Hammerfell.  And the Dragonborn is not given the opportunity to ask her about any such details, either.


Nope, this  part is a dead end.  For both sides. 

When it's suggested Saadia might have been as young as 5 at the time, I suppose it is a dead end.

[Yrkoon]

Well it is. It's a dead end because there's absolutely nothing in-game to support either side's maturity/non-maturity claim.

If we pursue this avenue, nothing will come out of it. At best we'll just end up discussing whether one can make anything other than an Ageless Redguard with Skyrim's Character Creator.

Edit: although there is something semi-related.  The Alik'r  hunters on the road say that their target is supposed to have a scar.  Well, I must say....  I've looked at Saadia  front and back with my own two eyes.  Extensively.   I see no scar!

Modifié par Yrkoon, 27 décembre 2013 - 04:54 .

[Elhanan]

Yrkoon wrote...

Well it is. It's a dead end because there's absolutely nothing in-game to support either side's maturity/non-maturity claim.

If we pursue this avenue, nothing will come out of it. At best we'll just end up discussing whether one can make anything other than an Ageless Redguard with Skyrim's Character Creator.

Proper sleep and diet.



Which leads me to a question: Which of you besides myself simply RP sleeping and eating without some mod or healing mechanic (eg; fondue) involved?

While my characters likely should eat more often, they do get plenty of rest. And shop hours of 8am to 8pm really factor in this regularity.

As far as meals, my Elves lean towards more veggies, my Orc mostly meats and proteins, and the rest are more balanced fare. Yeah, it is stereotypical, but I enjoy it.

[Joy Divison]

Yrkoon wrote...

Here's a snippet from the link you provided us:

The Alik'r are self-described mercenaries who have only sought out Saadia for her considerable bounty, considering the Dragonborn's share alone amounts to 500 gold. The Thalmor are notorious for using bribery and coercion to motivate their agents, and mercenaries are not known for their undying patriotism.

If you are going to quote snippets, I prefer ones that accurately describe the situation and aren’t proverbial spaghetti. “ONLY sought out Saadia for her considerable bounty…” Nope, Kematu’s actions/words at the end of the quest disprove this. And let’s replace “The Thalmor” with your random faction of choice, hell even the Alikir. Now the Thalmor are no longer involved.

Yrkoon wrote...
Aah yes. Translation: "Refusing to bow and concede to my point of view means that you're just being deliberately blind and stubborn to the TRUTH®". A retort that we always see in any extended debate on the internet. No thanks.

You are right to take issue with my tone, but I am hardly looking for anything so drastic. You said the Alikir “don't know who they're looking for.” That’s wrong. You can’t claim that and use that logic in theory-crafting. Because they do. That’s it.

Yrkoon wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...
Now you seem to think that the Alikir are mercs hired by a noble house, which I guess that matters to you, but still makes Saadia a lying wench who cozied with the Thalmor.

It does no such thing. All bets are off if we're dealing with Money and feuding nobles.

Hmm…strictly true with the point about cozying up with the Thalmor. She’s still lying.

Yrkoon wrote...

Do you really want to go there.? Here's what your link says:
If Kematu's request is accepted, and the Dragonborn helps him capture Saadia, the Dragonborn may encounter a group of Thalmor Justiciars in the wild that carry a Justiciar Execution Order with the Dragonborn's race and name. This may indicate that Kematu was telling the truth and that Saadia truly was a traitor, as she could send Thalmor assassins after the Dragonborn, or it may indicate that Kematu is actually the traitor, and he betrayed the Dragonborn and sent Thalmor assassins so they would not foil his operations.

Yep, I do want to go there. After the part in which you bolded, there is a big, fat “SOURCE?” which is internet speak for “this assertion is so dubious it needs some reference supporting it for an objective reader to accept it.” For good reason. What is the endgame, the motivation, the logic in such a hypothetical move by Kematu? What gain is there to be had by inviting the Thalmor to engage in a sensitive operation they were hitherto ignorant of, AND directly them to the single person in all of Skyrim who would be able to detail Kematu’s said operations? The Thalmor are good at abducting and torturing prisoners…what’s Kematu’s plan when the Thalmor learn that he has one of their agents – alive – (whether Saadia is or isn’t, that’s what the DB will tell them) and is making his way back to Hammerfell? So much for preventing the Thalmor from foiling his operations? And what is the dragon-skilling, soul-stealing slaughterhouse that is the DB – who Kematu knows is powerful and resourceful enough to reach his sanctuary – defeats the Thalmor agents and learns of Kematu’s betrayal, well that was beyond stupid. So the bolded part indicates nothing. If the Wiki writer is going to throw spaghetti, at least make it more plausible. I’d be more apt to believe Skulvar Sable-Hilt involved that Thalmor because he saw out his window that the DB deprived him of his favorite scenary at the Bannered Mare.

Yrkoon wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...
I expect them to act pretty much exactly as they do.

Really? You expect them to be relentless, reckless criminals, cowards, harassers, Bribers, and lazy bar flies? Well, ok, but that goes against.... THE LORE.

Yes, really. You asked what did I expect Kematu to do when the DB reaches him in Swindler’s Den. He does none of the things you describe. He recognizes the DB as a worthy warrior, he’s forthright, he wishes to avoid unnecessary bloodshed, he is willing to arrive at a compromise, he does not rough up the captured Saadia, he does not try to skimp out on the reward he promised, he even politely wishes the DB good-bye. In fact, I think we can agree had the Alikir acted in such a manner from the beginning, they would have been a lot better off.

***

But I think we are at the point where we understand each other enough to drawn some conclusions.

You are 100% right that Bethesda’s writing allows for such ambiguity, depth, and replayability to have these discussions – after more than two years – to even take place. Through the life of this thread, I have generally seen eye-to-eye with you on most aspects. That we have such strong differing interpretations is a testament to the quality of writing in the game.

Through the course of this particular debate, I have tacked away from my original contention that “Saadia was lying” toward the “Alikir are telling the truth.” Perhaps this is just a natural course for debate to take, i.e., retreat from the more ambiguous middle-ground toward a pole in an effort to undermine the claims of the other side. I do think you are right that the Alikir claim does not have enough hard and incontrovertible evidence if one went by the judicial standard of presumed innocence; a hypothetical jury would not come to such a verdict because some members would find reasonable doubt. I think it Saadia’s claim goes beyond reasonable doubt – she is lying – but it does not have to follow that the Alikir are telling the truth.

So let’s step away from the false dichotomy. There is nothing demonstrated in-game or in lore that might lend credence to Saadia’s story. This is something the DB would not be able to immediately understand; she would have to do some detective work in order to recognize Saadia did not tell the DB the real reason why she was targeted by the Alikir. Said Alikir have some circumstantial evidence on their side (Alikir-Thalmor enmity, Hammerfell’s occupation, if Saadia’s story were true, she could return home, etc.), but this makes her a likely suspect as opposed to knowing for certain that she sold out Hammerfell. Saadia could have something else that might have prompted a Hammerfell faction to hunt her and it is plausible the Alikir could have used the Taneth story to induce a Skyrim citizen (who ostensibly hates the Thalmor) to assist them. That is, the Alikir could be as skilled at manipulation as Saadia is.

Modifié par Joy Divison, 27 décembre 2013 - 06:06 .

[Joy Divison]

Now, Addai is right. Ultimately the DB has to play the game and make the decision here.

Because The Elder Scrolls invites ambiguity and we just do not have many evil villains, white knights, and connect-the-dots proverbial damsel in distress quests, the DB has to make some hard decisions, often without having all the facts and having to side with disreputable company. Neither the Stormcloaks, Empire, Forsworn, Balgruuf, Paarthurnax, the race dynamic in Windhelm, the “blessing” of the Companions, Roggvir in Solitude, etc., have any easy answer despite their respective champions’ pious claims. Even the game’s primary antagonists: Alduin, Miraak, and Vyrthur are ambiguous – the Greybeards do not tell the DB that destroying Alduin is necessarily the right thing to do. If the DB opts to adhere to the judicial standard of innocent until indisputable evidence says otherwise, the vast majority of the game’s quests will go unresolved, the DB will either not join or not advance any of the faction’s questlines, and not do what most RPGs assume the player will do: kill people with the slightest pretext and take their stuff.

So I’m wondering how many DBs out there have no problem murdering poor Narfi, beating up and extorting Bersi Honey-Hand, walking into caves and killing “bandits” defending their home, or can’t wait to “kill one of Ulfric’s boys / faithless imperial” but will balk at turning in Saadia because the game doesn’t give irrefutable proof that she is a Thalmor lackey?

I don’t always turn Saadia in, but the question most of my DBs keep coming back to is why did Saadia lie and what is she hiding? If she’s not a Thalmor sell-out, then she did *something* that she was unwilling to disclose. She does not give me any reason, evidence, or explanation to discount the Alikir’s claims. As noted above, this does not mean the Alikir are telling the truth, but to most of my DBs, the fact that Saadia is only willing to offer a transparent and incredulous excuse speaks volumes. She does not give me a good enough reason why she should somehow be judged to a different standard than the 100s of other people I come across who generally wind up on the wrong side of my blade.

I think it can be stated with high degree of certainty that Saadia is lying. We might not have enough hard evidence to conclude the Alikir story is truthful, yet neither does the game give us evidence that the Alikir are lying.

[Leo]

Yrkoon wrote...
 Well, I must say....  I've looked at Saadia  front and back with my own two eyes.  Extensively.   I see no scar!

If I remember correctly it should be on the left side of her face, she has the "cat scratch" scar.

[Get Magna Carter]

Korrin turned her in - her words did not seem true (and Korrin hates Thalmor and their agents)

I would disagree with the Wiki's suggestion that Saadia (after being captured) is able to send Thalmor Justicars after the Dragonborn and it is more likely that Thalmor heard about the Dragonborn's role in her capture.
(Though there is, of course, the possibility of her being freed before reaching Hammerfell)
The fact that she claims Kematu wants to assassinate her when he actually takes the trouble to capture her alive suggests she is probably either mistaken or lying about Kematu.

[Abraham_uk]

Get Magna Carter wrote...

Korrin turned her in - her words did not seem true (and Korrin hates Thalmor and their agents)

I would disagree with the Wiki's suggestion that Saadia (after being captured) is able to send Thalmor Justicars after the Dragonborn and it is more likely that Thalmor heard about the Dragonborn's role in her capture.
(Though there is, of course, the possibility of her being freed before reaching Hammerfell)
The fact that she claims Kematu wants to assassinate her when he actually takes the trouble to capture her alive suggests she is probably either mistaken or lying about Kematu.

This is a dilemma.
You have a choice to make.
You don't have very much information to go by.
The information you are given might be lies.

[Dutchess]

Pious_Augustine wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...
 Well, I must say....  I've looked at Saadia  front and back with my own two eyes.  Extensively.   I see no scar!

If I remember correctly it should be on the left side of her face, she has the "cat scratch" scar.

Yup. It's not that clear from afar, but if you zoom in on her face, you'll see it.



You'll probably have to open the image in a new tab to get it large enough.

[Barbarossa2010]

Elhanan wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...

Well it is. It's a dead end because there's absolutely nothing in-game to support either side's maturity/non-maturity claim.

If we pursue this avenue, nothing will come out of it. At best we'll just end up discussing whether one can make anything other than an Ageless Redguard with Skyrim's Character Creator.

Proper sleep and diet.



Which leads me to a question: Which of you besides myself simply RP sleeping and eating without some mod or healing mechanic (eg; fondue) involved?

While my characters likely should eat more often, they do get plenty of rest. And shop hours of 8am to 8pm really factor in this regularity.

As far as meals, my Elves lean towards more veggies, my Orc mostly meats and proteins, and the rest are more balanced fare. Yeah, it is stereotypical, but I enjoy it.

Honestly, I try. Food and sleep have become more and more a part of the experience for me. Its more something of a habit I've brought over from Fallout though. I think it's a good mechanic for role players as opposed to just stim-ing or potion-ing your way through a game. Things happen at a much different pace if you force your DB to sleep 4-8 hours a night, much less having to grapple with finding a place to sleep prior to you being awash in gold, or stop and eat at least twice a day.

Preparing food is a great pastime within game yet extremely useful at the same time. It's yet another crafting system within Bethesda games that makes the experience something worth experiencing. As far as diet goes, my Nords tend to go more for balanced meals. The really should drink less mead though (talk about stereotypes). But they are who they are.