276 réponses à ce sujet

[DarkSeraphym]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Batman sure does illegal harm. When the Justicars are associated with a standard of 'they kill bad people', most people don't muster up much empathy.

Even though, far more terrifyingly, its isn't that the Justicars claim to only kill the unjust, but their claim is that the people they kill are unjust.

I suppose I could bring out the list of vigilantes that do kill criminals, but the point isn't Batman in particular (his non-lethal policy wasn't always so), but vigilantes in general.

The point wasn't that Batman does illegal harm. The point was exactly the point you just made with your second line. Batman doesn't decide what is just or unjust, at least not normally. He leaves that for the system itself to decide. Samara, and the rest of the Justicars for that matter, not only prosecute those that they claim are unjust, but they also decide exactly what unjust is. They are essentially the embodiment of executive and judicial power at the sametime.

Once again, correct me if I am wrong as I don't really read many comic books, but the best comparison I could probably make between literary characters is probably something Light Yagami from Death Note to Samara. Light decides not only to prosecute those that he thinks are unjust himself, but to also decide exactly what being unjust actually is.

Modifié par DarkSeraphym, 09 février 2011 - 05:37 .

[Flamewielder]

Dean hits the nail right on the head with his question about Batman's appeal. *bows to Dean*

If a majority of asari felt that the Justicar Order's existence was intolerable, they could have voted for disbandment centuries ago... by force, if the Justicars had opposed it. So ask the question: why do asari like justicars?



Samara frankly states that most asari have a romanticized view of justicars. That when she is asked by asari to adjudicate a case, the verdict often surprises both parties. Why?



Part of the answer may lie in the rarity of justicars. Samara seems to suggest that their enrollment is dwindling, perhaps because of modern asari's society "loosening morals". The are a relic from the distant past, yet the Code is aknowledged in game by a police officer to be "our Code", as in "our Values" or "our Code of Conduct". Are justicars still accepted because their Code aligns with the commonly accepted values of asari society?



But this is a bit beyond the OP's original question...

[DarkSeraphym]

Flamewielder wrote...

Part of the answer may lie in the rarity of justicars. Samara seems to suggest that their enrollment is dwindling, perhaps because of modern asari's society "loosening morals". The are a relic from the distant past, yet the Code is aknowledged in game by a police officer to be "our Code", as in "our Values" or "our Code of Conduct". Are justicars still accepted because their Code aligns with the commonly accepted values of asari society?

I'd be particularly interested, assuming BioWare opted to flesh the issue at some point in time, to see exactly what caused this shift to transpire as the two ideas are quite separate from one another.

[JKoopman]

DarkSeraphym wrote...

JKoopman wrote...

You know, I would agree with you if that was something the game attempted to rationalize in the least, but it doesn't. As far as Shepard should be concerned, Morinth is a sociopathic mass-murderer with a god complex who kills because she enjoys the hunt and nothing more.

BioWare really missed a golden opportunity to build up Morinth's character and make her a sympathetic figure. The choice between Morinth and Samara could've been one of the biggest moral debates in the game, but instead it's just made to be a simple black and white decision via Morinth's prior actions and dialog with Shepard.

It would've been great if Morinth could've caught on that you were working with Samara earlier in your conversation and attempted to sway you over to her side; she could've argued that Samara was the evil opressor and she herself was simply a free-spirit living with a terrible curse, whereas Samara was an unfeeling zealot. It could've even been revealed that Morinth trully loved all the people she killed and hated herself for it, painting her as a tragic figure. Then it would be up to Shepard to decide whether Samara's merciless quest to kill her was justified or not.

Instead, it's hammered in your face that Morinth is a pitiless killer who gleefully murders her willfully-targeted victims, takes sadistic pleasure in preying on them and feels no regret whatsoever for any of her actions. There's no sympathy or pity there; she's just a cold-blooded murderer. Even for an extreme Renegade, it's hard to justify betraying Samara for any reason other than "for the lulz".

Well, just for the sake of discussion, the only person who hammers into your face that Morinth is a pitiless killer is Samara and at one point when conversing with her about being a Justicar, she'll mention that if she has to kill a murderer than she'd rather not know any kind of redeeming qualities about tht individual. What that essentially says is that the Justicar Code demands her to act in a certain way and to keep herself from breaking it, she intentionally leaves out consideration of any kind of qualities in anyone she is after that could redeem them. Perhaps there is the relevant issue here of, like Morinth's word, exactly how much of Samara's word can we trust on the matter as well?

Perhaps BioWare ignored this option because the only person who really talks about Morinth is her mother, and I've already pointed out the biggest problem with just accepting what Samara says as the entire truth, so they saw little opportunity to really elaborate more on Morinth? Even if they had given you an opportunity to hear Morinth's side of the story, which probably would have only been possible from her as only Samara and her family knew Morinth's true nature, would you believe her anyways?

Samara is a Justicar bound not only by her Code but also by an Oath of Submission to Shepard. She might choose to omit certain details, but she's not going to lie to you. I don't even think she can lie; it's probably something covered in her Code. Anything she tells you about Morinth can be taken to be absolute fact, so when she tells a story of how Morinth corrupts an entire settlement into worshipping her as a god and sacrificing their daughters to her, then uses them as mindless human shields to fend off Samara when she'd tracked her down, it can be believed.

Secondly, we have more than just Samara's word to go by and it wasn't even Samara's words that I was referring to. The fact that Morinth is a pitiless killer is hammered into your face by Morinth herself. She dominates, corrupts and kills Nef, someone who loved her so completely she never wanted to be without her, without a single shred of remorse and her dialog in her appartment gives you ample clues into her psyche. She talks about her love of dueling because she enjoys the look in someone's eyes when he knows you're better than him and he's about to die. She talks about a chessboard in her apartment, mentioning that she loves any game where your opponent can think he's about to win right before you kill him. She talks about a statue given to her by a suitor and claims "It has more personality than he did, but it was enough to get him what he wanted. It didn't end the way he hoped." So that's obviously one more lover who she pitilessly murders without a second thought. Then she herself attempts to dominate and murder you before Samara comes in to save you.

Then you're suddenly given a choice between siding with Samara or Morinth? Who in their right mind would choose Morinth? Especially when Morinth's only argument for sparing her is that she's as powerful as her mother, someone who's already loyal to you and sworn to help with your mission, and then (and this has always bothered me) blurts out that she can help you with your mission despite having no possible forknowledge of what your mission is or even that you're on a mission.

It's like BioWare wanted to give players a choice between the two but simply couldn't be arsed to create any kind of logical story-integrated reason to do so, so they just gave you a random arbitrary decision and left it at that.

Modifié par JKoopman, 09 février 2011 - 05:49 .

[DarkSeraphym]

JKoopman wrote...

DarkSeraphym wrote...

JKoopman wrote...

You know, I would agree with you if that was something the game attempted to rationalize in the least, but it doesn't. As far as Shepard should be concerned, Morinth is a sociopathic mass-murderer with a god complex who kills because she enjoys the hunt and nothing more.

BioWare really missed a golden opportunity to build up Morinth's character and make her a sympathetic figure. The choice between Morinth and Samara could've been one of the biggest moral debates in the game, but instead it's just made to be a simple black and white decision via Morinth's prior actions and dialog with Shepard.

It would've been great if Morinth could've caught on that you were working with Samara earlier in your conversation and attempted to sway you over to her side; she could've argued that Samara was the evil opressor and she herself was simply a free-spirit living with a terrible curse, whereas Samara was an unfeeling zealot. It could've even been revealed that Morinth trully loved all the people she killed and hated herself for it, painting her as a tragic figure. Then it would be up to Shepard to decide whether Samara's merciless quest to kill her was justified or not.

Instead, it's hammered in your face that Morinth is a pitiless killer who gleefully murders her willfully-targeted victims, takes sadistic pleasure in preying on them and feels no regret whatsoever for any of her actions. There's no sympathy or pity there; she's just a cold-blooded murderer. Even for an extreme Renegade, it's hard to justify betraying Samara for any reason other than "for the lulz".

Well, just for the sake of discussion, the only person who hammers into your face that Morinth is a pitiless killer is Samara and at one point when conversing with her about being a Justicar, she'll mention that if she has to kill a murderer than she'd rather not know any kind of redeeming qualities about tht individual. What that essentially says is that the Justicar Code demands her to act in a certain way and to keep herself from breaking it, she intentionally leaves out consideration of any kind of qualities in anyone she is after that could redeem them. Perhaps there is the relevant issue here of, like Morinth's word, exactly how much of Samara's word can we trust on the matter as well?

Perhaps BioWare ignored this option because the only person who really talks about Morinth is her mother, and I've already pointed out the biggest problem with just accepting what Samara says as the entire truth, so they saw little opportunity to really elaborate more on Morinth? Even if they had given you an opportunity to hear Morinth's side of the story, which probably would have only been possible from her as only Samara and her family knew Morinth's true nature, would you believe her anyways?

Samara is a Justicar bound not only by her Code but also by an Oath of Submission to Shepard. She might choose to omit certain details, but she's not going to lie to you. I don't even think she can lie; it's probably something covered in her Code. Anything she tells you about Morinth can be taken to be absolute fact, so when she tells a story of how Morinth corrupts an entire settlement into worshipping her as a god and sacrificing their daughters to her, then uses them as mindless human shields to fend off Samara when she'd tracked her down, it can be believed.

Secondly, we have more than just Samara's word to go by and it wasn't even Samara's words that I was referring to. The fact that Morinth is a pitiless killer is hammered into your face by Morinth herself. She dominates, corrupts and kills Nef, someone who loved her so completely she never wanted to be without her, without a single shred of remorse and her dialog in her appartment gives you ample clues into her psyche. She talks about her love of dueling because she enjoys the look in someone's eyes when he knows you're better than him and he's about to die. She talks about a chessboard in her apartment, mentioning that she loves any game where your opponent can think he's about to win right before you kill him. She talks about a statue given to her by a suitor and claims "It has more personality than he did, but it was enough to get him what he wanted. It didn't end the way he hoped." So that's obviously one more lover who she pitilessly murders without a second thought. Then she herself attempts to dominate and murder you before Samara comes in to save you.

Then you're suddenly given a choice between siding with Samara or Morinth? Who in their right mind would choose Morinth? Especially when Morinth's only argument for sparing her is that she's as powerful as her mother, someone who's already loyal to you and sworn to help with your mission, and then (and this has always bothered me) blurts out that she can help you with your mission despite having no possible forknowledge of what your mission is or even that you're on a mission.

It's like BioWare wanted to give players a choice between the two but simply couldn't be arsed to create any kind of logical story-integrated reason to do so, so they just gave you a random arbitrary decision and left it at that.

I never said that Samara would lie to you. If Samara tells you her perception of an individual and it turns out that this particular perception may be wrong in certain areas, it certainly does not mean that she has openly lied to you about certain things. Besides, I'm not debating on whether or not she has done horrible things to people. The only point I had brought up is that Samara has already openly admitted in the game that she herself would prefer to ignore any details that might redeem anyone that she may have to kill. That legitimately brings about the question of whether or not she is a 100% reliable source of information on the matter.

Anyways, onto Morinth. Even had Morinth come up with a way of justifying her behavior, would you actually have been inclined to believe her? The Codex gives you a definition of what it means to be an Ardat-Yakshi and Samara more or less tells you what it means, which both are fairly consistent with one another. Had Morinth just come and tried to justify her behavior, I doubt it would have made much of a difference for most people.

The root of the problem for Morinth's development, I believe, is that her nature was only known between herself, her sisters, and Samara; of which you only got to speak to two of them. If BioWare would have had others know her nature, perhaps even given you a chance to speak with Samara's other daughters, perhaps they could have fleshed her out a littl emore.

[Abispa]

Choose Morinth, get her power unlocked, then replay your Shepard so Samara can be your sidekick in ME3. Unless, of course, you want to see what the ME3 repercussions of your decision are. The problem with that of course is that you are taken out of the ME world and just playing a video game.

[JKoopman]

DarkSeraphym wrote...

JKoopman wrote...

Samara is a Justicar bound not only by her Code but also by an Oath of Submission to Shepard. She might choose to omit certain details, but she's not going to lie to you. I don't even think she can lie; it's probably something covered in her Code. Anything she tells you about Morinth can be taken to be absolute fact, so when she tells a story of how Morinth corrupts an entire settlement into worshipping her as a god and sacrificing their daughters to her, then uses them as mindless human shields to fend off Samara when she'd tracked her down, it can be believed.

Secondly, we have more than just Samara's word to go by and it wasn't even Samara's words that I was referring to. The fact that Morinth is a pitiless killer is hammered into your face by Morinth herself. She dominates, corrupts and kills Nef, someone who loved her so completely she never wanted to be without her, without a single shred of remorse and her dialog in her appartment gives you ample clues into her psyche. She talks about her love of dueling because she enjoys the look in someone's eyes when he knows you're better than him and he's about to die. She talks about a chessboard in her apartment, mentioning that she loves any game where your opponent can think he's about to win right before you kill him. She talks about a statue given to her by a suitor and claims "It has more personality than he did, but it was enough to get him what he wanted. It didn't end the way he hoped." So that's obviously one more lover who she pitilessly murders without a second thought. Then she herself attempts to dominate and murder you before Samara comes in to save you.

Then you're suddenly given a choice between siding with Samara or Morinth? Who in their right mind would choose Morinth? Especially when Morinth's only argument for sparing her is that she's as powerful as her mother, someone who's already loyal to you and sworn to help with your mission, and then (and this has always bothered me) blurts out that she can help you with your mission despite having no possible forknowledge of what your mission is or even that you're on a mission.

It's like BioWare wanted to give players a choice between the two but simply couldn't be arsed to create any kind of logical story-integrated reason to do so, so they just gave you a random arbitrary decision and left it at that.

I never said that Samara would lie to you. If Samara tells you her perception of an individual and it turns out that this particular perception may be wrong in certain areas, it certainly does not mean that she has openly lied to you about certain things. Besides, I'm not debating on whether or not she has done horrible things to people. The only point I had brought up is that Samara has already openly admitted in the game that she herself would prefer to ignore any details that might redeem anyone that she may have to kill. That legitimately brings about the question of whether or not she is a 100% reliable source of information on the matter.

Anyways, onto Morinth. Even had Morinth come up with a way of justifying her behavior, would you actually have been inclined to believe her? The Codex gives you a definition of what it means to be an Ardat-Yakshi and Samara more or less tells you what it means, which both are fairly consistent with one another. Had Morinth just come and tried to justify her behavior, I doubt it would have made much of a difference for most people.

The root of the problem for Morinth's development, I believe, is that her nature was only known between herself, her sisters, and Samara; of which you only got to speak to two of them. If BioWare would have had others know her nature, perhaps even given you a chance to speak with Samara's other daughters, perhaps they could have fleshed her out a littl emore.

I think it would've been nice if Morinth had had items around her apartment from past suitors that she recollected fondly. Maybe a statue or two made by Nef and when you click on them she talks about how happy they were together and how she actually loved her and how "something unfortunate happened" and she's sad the two of them can't be together anymore. Instead, everything you click on in her apartment is simply used as a vessel for conveying what a twisted sociopath she is. What is there to feel sympathic for? She's not a tragic figure, although she easily could have been had BioWare put a little more effort into it. She kills people because she clearly enjoys killing people, not out of some tragic compulsion that she can't resist.

The whole Samara/Morinth decision just reeks of wasted potential.

[Rafe34]

Agreed with JKoop here. There was such an opportunity that was missed, and with Bioware's normal moral choices, I was expecting a huge one as soon as I learned you could choose Morinth or Samara. But Morinth is clearly a psychopathic killer, and though I sided with her once just to see what will happen in ME3 with Morinth, there is no logical reason to choose her, even for a full renegade- unless you really believe Samara is more of a threat. Taking Morinth on board your ship is a huge risk- as a sociopath, she could very easily kill some of your crew.

Put simply, instead of being a moral decision that is in shades of gray, like most of the moral decisions in Bioware's games, it's merely black and white.

[Baihu1983]

Even on my renegade play i cant kill Samara.

[Dean_the_Young]

Flamewielder wrote...

Part of the answer may lie in the rarity of justicars. Samara seems to suggest that their enrollment is dwindling, perhaps because of modern asari's society "loosening morals". The are a relic from the distant past, yet the Code is aknowledged in game by a police officer to be "our Code", as in "our Values" or "our Code of Conduct". Are justicars still accepted because their Code aligns with the commonly accepted values of asari society?

But this is a bit beyond the OP's original question...

This is an element of it: the Justicar Order, at one point in the past, put into effect the other Oaths of Subsumission. An aspect of this, besides recognizing government authority, is also an acceptance of Asari Common Law. And common law does change.

It's a vague, subjective standard, but it is an adaptive mechanism to evolve the Justicars to be somewhat reflective of changing Asari culture.

Of course, on places like Illium, where crime is part of the common law...

[tonnactus]

Morinth is as powerfull as her mother despite being much younger. She has more potential then her mother.That is valid reason.

[Terraneaux]

Another part of the problem, of course, is that the game doesn't really examine the morality of Samara's actions at all - she was written to be an unequivocally 'good' character, who is moral because she is moral, and anybody she kills must have deserved it, because Samara is so moral. It really reeks of bad writing considering that Samara's code has some unfortunate implications i.e. that they'll kill people over non-violent crimes at the drop of a hat, and don't respect the law of the land when it goes against their code. I've mentioned this before, but Samara is possibly the most renegade of the squaddies in ME2, but she *thinks* she's the most paragon, even having the temerity to pre-emptively scold paragon Shep before joining up. The problem, of course, is that the writer went for a simplistic 'Samara is a good person because I say so' without bothering to actually write an interesting character, rather a two-dimensional sue straight out of a shonen anime.

[Rafe34]

Terraneaux wrote...

Another part of the problem, of course, is that the game doesn't really examine the morality of Samara's actions at all - she was written to be an unequivocally 'good' character, who is moral because she is moral, and anybody she kills must have deserved it, because Samara is so moral. It really reeks of bad writing considering that Samara's code has some unfortunate implications i.e. that they'll kill people over non-violent crimes at the drop of a hat, and don't respect the law of the land when it goes against their code. I've mentioned this before, but Samara is possibly the most renegade of the squaddies in ME2, but she *thinks* she's the most paragon, even having the temerity to pre-emptively scold paragon Shep before joining up. The problem, of course, is that the writer went for a simplistic 'Samara is a good person because I say so' without bothering to actually write an interesting character, rather a two-dimensional sue straight out of a shonen anime.

I completely disagree. The writing seemed to be designed to make the character question whether or not Samara was truly good in her actions. Some of Paragon Shep's original responses to Samara's initial cold-blooded murder of an unarmed merc- because that's what it was- merely because she wouldn't answer her question... yeah, I never got the vibe that Samara was good. She is an end justifies the means character, who has good ends, with horrible means. Almost like Cerberus in some ways.

[DarkSeraphym]

Rafe34 wrote...

Terraneaux wrote...

Another part of the problem, of course, is that the game doesn't really examine the morality of Samara's actions at all - she was written to be an unequivocally 'good' character, who is moral because she is moral, and anybody she kills must have deserved it, because Samara is so moral. It really reeks of bad writing considering that Samara's code has some unfortunate implications i.e. that they'll kill people over non-violent crimes at the drop of a hat, and don't respect the law of the land when it goes against their code. I've mentioned this before, but Samara is possibly the most renegade of the squaddies in ME2, but she *thinks* she's the most paragon, even having the temerity to pre-emptively scold paragon Shep before joining up. The problem, of course, is that the writer went for a simplistic 'Samara is a good person because I say so' without bothering to actually write an interesting character, rather a two-dimensional sue straight out of a shonen anime.

I completely disagree. The writing seemed to be designed to make the character question whether or not Samara was truly good in her actions. Some of Paragon Shep's original responses to Samara's initial cold-blooded murder of an unarmed merc- because that's what it was- merely because she wouldn't answer her question... yeah, I never got the vibe that Samara was good. She is an end justifies the means character, who has good ends, with horrible means. Almost like Cerberus in some ways.

It's a real big shame too as she seems like the ultimate Renegade character to me and those are the types of characters I am most fond of. It's unfortunate that I can not  be certain if I can trust how she will interact with myself or the crew once the mission is over.

[DarkSeraphym]

Rafe34 wrote...

Agreed with JKoop here. There was such an opportunity that was missed, and with Bioware's normal moral choices, I was expecting a huge one as soon as I learned you could choose Morinth or Samara. But Morinth is clearly a psychopathic killer, and though I sided with her once just to see what will happen in ME3 with Morinth, there is no logical reason to choose her, even for a full renegade- unless you really believe Samara is more of a threat. Taking Morinth on board your ship is a huge risk- as a sociopath, she could very easily kill some of your crew.
Put simply, instead of being a moral decision that is in shades of gray, like most of the moral decisions in Bioware's games, it's merely black and white.

As a somewhat unstable vigilante subscribing to a code that mandates her every response to any given event who only promised loyalty to you until the mission was over, Samara is also a threat to the crew and Renegade Shepard all at once.

There are logical reasons for choosing to take Morinth over Samara, the question is more so one of whether or not it is pragmatic to take a socipathic killer who kills really for the sake of either gaining power or an unstable vigilante who must act according to a code that half of your crew, including Shepard, probably violate in some manner.

Modifié par DarkSeraphym, 09 février 2011 - 07:40 .

[Terraneaux]

Rafe34 wrote...

I completely disagree. The writing seemed to be designed to make the character question whether or not Samara was truly good in her actions. Some of Paragon Shep's original responses to Samara's initial cold-blooded murder of an unarmed merc- because that's what it was- merely because she wouldn't answer her question... yeah, I never got the vibe that Samara was good. She is an end justifies the means character, who has good ends, with horrible means. Almost like Cerberus in some ways.

The actual way those conversations play out is that Shep expresses shock at Samara's actions, and then Samara 'sets you straight' and you don't get the opportunity to bring it up again.  That's a problem, which certainly contributed to my Renegade Shep throwing her under the bus during the confrontation with her daughter (though it would have been nice if the cutscene let you join in more).  

[Ramirez Wolfen]

Rafe34 wrote...

Agreed with JKoop here. There was such an opportunity that was missed, and with Bioware's normal moral choices, I was expecting a huge one as soon as I learned you could choose Morinth or Samara. But Morinth is clearly a psychopathic killer, and though I sided with her once just to see what will happen in ME3 with Morinth, there is no logical reason to choose her, even for a full renegade- unless you really believe Samara is more of a threat. Taking Morinth on board your ship is a huge risk- as a sociopath, she could very easily kill some of your crew.
Put simply, instead of being a moral decision that is in shades of gray, like most of the moral decisions in Bioware's games, it's merely black and white.

This ^^^

[Terraneaux]

DarkSeraphym wrote...

There are logical reasons for choosing to take Morinth over Samara, the question is more so one of whether or not it is pragmatic to take a socipathic killer who kills really for the sake of either gaining power or an unstable vigilante who must act according to a code that half of your crew, including Shepard, probably violate in some manner.

The funny thing is, I don't think the character was written with even that much depth in mind; I can almost guarantee that the dude who wrote her thought of her as a very 'paragon' and moral character.  

[shatteredstar56]

DarkSeraphym wrote...

Rafe34 wrote...

Agreed with JKoop here. There was such an opportunity that was missed, and with Bioware's normal moral choices, I was expecting a huge one as soon as I learned you could choose Morinth or Samara. But Morinth is clearly a psychopathic killer, and though I sided with her once just to see what will happen in ME3 with Morinth, there is no logical reason to choose her, even for a full renegade- unless you really believe Samara is more of a threat. Taking Morinth on board your ship is a huge risk- as a sociopath, she could very easily kill some of your crew.
Put simply, instead of being a moral decision that is in shades of gray, like most of the moral decisions in Bioware's games, it's merely black and white.

As a somewhat unstable vigilante subscribing to a code that mandates her every response to any given event who only promised loyalty to you until the mission was over, Samara is also a threat to the crew and Renegade Shepard all at once.

There are logical reasons for choosing to take Morinth over Samara, the question is more so one of whether or not it is pragmatic to take a socipathic killer who kills really for the sake of either gaining power or an unstable vigilante who must act according to a code that half of your crew, including Shepard, probably violate in some manner.

Samara, when you recruit her, takes the vow that Shepard is now her code (as I recall it), so she does not have to stop or harm Shepard in the chasing of Collectors.

[LorDC]

Well, Samara vs Morinth choice is example of classical "Lawful Good and Chaotic Evil: so different yet so similar" dilemma. Or it should have been. It seriously lacks exposition.

[DarkSeraphym]

shatteredstar56 wrote...

DarkSeraphym wrote...

Rafe34 wrote...

Agreed with JKoop here. There was such an opportunity that was missed, and with Bioware's normal moral choices, I was expecting a huge one as soon as I learned you could choose Morinth or Samara. But Morinth is clearly a psychopathic killer, and though I sided with her once just to see what will happen in ME3 with Morinth, there is no logical reason to choose her, even for a full renegade- unless you really believe Samara is more of a threat. Taking Morinth on board your ship is a huge risk- as a sociopath, she could very easily kill some of your crew.
Put simply, instead of being a moral decision that is in shades of gray, like most of the moral decisions in Bioware's games, it's merely black and white.

As a somewhat unstable vigilante subscribing to a code that mandates her every response to any given event who only promised loyalty to you until the mission was over, Samara is also a threat to the crew and Renegade Shepard all at once.

There are logical reasons for choosing to take Morinth over Samara, the question is more so one of whether or not it is pragmatic to take a socipathic killer who kills really for the sake of either gaining power or an unstable vigilante who must act according to a code that half of your crew, including Shepard, probably violate in some manner.

Samara, when you recruit her, takes the vow that Shepard is now her code (as I recall it), so she does not have to stop or harm Shepard in the chasing of Collectors.

You'd be correct. However, does she intend to stay behind the moment I am finished with the Collector Base? She doesn't really specify how long this loyalty is going to last short of saying "until the mission is done". I'm going to assume she was only refering to the Collector Base mission so once that is over, there is nothing stopping her then. Besides, if you question her about exactly what you could "get away with" so to speak she'll say something to the effect of "Know that if you make me do anything especially heinous, I may try to kill you once the mission is over."

Modifié par DarkSeraphym, 09 février 2011 - 07:51 .

[Terraneaux]

shatteredstar56 wrote...

Samara, when you recruit her, takes the vow that Shepard is now her code (as I recall it), so she does not have to stop or harm Shepard in the chasing of Collectors.

She also subtly threatens you when you ask her 'you have to do *anything* I tell you?' and goes on to say that she'll try to kill you afterwards if she doesn't like what you've been doing.  I guess another reasoned response would be to take her on the suicide mission but get her killed on purpose, thus killing two birds with one stone.  

[Terraneaux]

LorDC wrote...

Well, Samara vs Morinth choice is example of classical "Lawful Good and Chaotic Evil: so different yet so similar" dilemma. Or it should have been. It seriously lacks exposition.

I don't think there was supposed to be exposition.  I think you were supposed to think 'Samara=more moral than your Shep could ever be, so listen to everything she has to say.'

[Rafe34]

I'm not saying that a truly Renegade couldn't take Morinth. I am saying that it would be stupid.

From a renegade perspective, who is more of a threat? An asari who is bound by a code to serve you until a specified point in time, (thus you could backstab her DURING the final mission to get rid of her- as a matter of fact, that is exactly what I do in my Renegade runs. Samara is not alive at the end of any of them. She normally goes into the ventilation shafts), or an ardat-yakshi who you have been told, and have no reason to believe otherwise, grows more powerful with every kill, and nearly seduced you into dying the first time you met?

You KNOW exactly when Samara is going to turn on you, so you get rid of her right before you know she will. You have no idea what Morinth will do, and you have no idea how much of a threat she will eventually become. She will be stronger than Samara very shortly, and since she's a purely psychopathic killer, she IS going to come after you- you just don't know when.

[shatteredstar56]

DarkSeraphym wrote...

shatteredstar56 wrote...

DarkSeraphym wrote...

Rafe34 wrote...

Agreed with JKoop here. There was such an opportunity that was missed, and with Bioware's normal moral choices, I was expecting a huge one as soon as I learned you could choose Morinth or Samara. But Morinth is clearly a psychopathic killer, and though I sided with her once just to see what will happen in ME3 with Morinth, there is no logical reason to choose her, even for a full renegade- unless you really believe Samara is more of a threat. Taking Morinth on board your ship is a huge risk- as a sociopath, she could very easily kill some of your crew.
Put simply, instead of being a moral decision that is in shades of gray, like most of the moral decisions in Bioware's games, it's merely black and white.

As a somewhat unstable vigilante subscribing to a code that mandates her every response to any given event who only promised loyalty to you until the mission was over, Samara is also a threat to the crew and Renegade Shepard all at once.

There are logical reasons for choosing to take Morinth over Samara, the question is more so one of whether or not it is pragmatic to take a socipathic killer who kills really for the sake of either gaining power or an unstable vigilante who must act according to a code that half of your crew, including Shepard, probably violate in some manner.

Samara, when you recruit her, takes the vow that Shepard is now her code (as I recall it), so she does not have to stop or harm Shepard in the chasing of Collectors.

You'd be correct. However, does she intend to stay behind the moment I am finished with the Collector Base? She doesn't really specify how long this loyalty is going to last short of saying "until the mission is done". I'm going to assume she was only refering to the Collector Base mission so once that is over, there is nothing stopping her then. Besides, if you question her about exactly what you could "get away with" so to speak she'll say something to the effect of "Know that if you make me do anything especially heinous, I may try to kill you once the mission is over."

I assume that means wiping out a race that isn't intent on the destruction of all organic members of the galactic community. I hardly doubt that she would kill Shepard, over a few Collectors, especially after you have her loyalty from Morinth.  Morinth has no morales, and hit on Shepard until Shepard makes the choice to give in to her desires.  She then proceeds to explode Shepard's brain.  Samara will kill her own daughter to save people. Shepard is killing Collectors to save people.  Unless you're going to use a baby to lure them into a trap, I don't think Samara is going to split your head.