276 réponses à ce sujet

[Terraneaux]

shatteredstar56 wrote...

Samara will kill her own daughter to save people. 

Samara will kill *anyone* at the drop of a hate if her code requires it, whether she reasons it's a moral or pragmatic choice to make or not.  She's forsworn morality.  

[LorDC]

Terraneaux wrote...

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.'

Well, problem is that I just can't think of the way how Bioware could squeeze more exposition into the plot.
And Samara is not portrayed as "moral" only as "fanatically obeying the code".

[DarkSeraphym]

shatteredstar56 wrote...

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.

Considering the fact that killing a mercenary was somehow "just" (must have been since her code says she can't harm innocents) just because that mercenary refused to talk, I kind of worry about what Samara's defintion of a "heinous" crime would be.

[DarkSeraphym]

Rafe34 wrote...

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.

You know, I've never actually taken the option of just getting Samara killed in the Suicide Mission. From a roleplaying perspective, the mission of sending someone who actually knows something about computers through the ventilation shafts sounds like it could have serious ramifications if that person failed to hack open those doors, even though you and I both know all that happens is that particular person dies.

Modifié par DarkSeraphym, 09 février 2011 - 08:07 .

[LorDC]

shatteredstar56 wrote...
I hardly doubt that she would kill Shepard, over a few Collectors, especially after you have her loyalty from Morinth.

This is biggest mistake you can make with Samara. She will do anything that is dictated by her codex. Loyalty will mean nothing to her as soon as oath ends.

[Terraneaux]

LorDC wrote...

Well, problem is that I just can't think of the way how Bioware could squeeze more exposition into the plot.
And Samara is not portrayed as "moral" only as "fanatically obeying the code".

Well, that's how you understand it because you seem to have a decent grasp of both morality and the narrative.  But I think the code was meant to be 'moral' given that 'she only kills bad guys' (which isn't really true at all, and even if it was, why not try to rehabilitate said 'bad guys.'), and that we were meant to think that Samara was awesome for following the code, even though our own alter ego within the game universe was incapable of it (obviously because Shep isn't as awesome as Samara, amirite?)

[shatteredstar56]

DarkSeraphym wrote...

shatteredstar56 wrote...

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.

Considering the fact that killing a mercenary was somehow "just" (must have been since her code says she can't harm innocents) just because that mercenary refused to talk, I kind of worry about what Samara's defintion of a "heinous" crime would be.

The mercenary wasn't innocent because she had killed people.  When you kill someone you can no longer be called innocent.  Samara could have also said she was just defending herself, since the person wouldn't stop shooting and she just wanted the shipping manifest.  
Other then that, the mercenary knew she was an ardat yakshi, and still shipped her out anyway, despite knowing how she lived. That pretty much cancels out innocence.

[tonnactus]

DarkSeraphym wrote...
 Even had Morinth come out and said "I didn't want to be locked away like my sisters. I wanted to be free. I knew I had to do whatever it took to stop my mom from capturing me. I knew I had to become more powerful just to even stand a chance against my mom",

Exactly.Her mother would hunt her,no matter if she kill people or not.Follow her nature also improves her survial chances when her mother find and want to kill her.

[LorDC]

Terraneaux wrote...
Well, that's how you understand it because you seem to have a decent grasp of both morality and the narrative.  But I think the code was meant to be 'moral' given that 'she only kills bad guys' (which isn't really true at all, and even if it was, why not try to rehabilitate said 'bad guys.'), and that we were meant to think that Samara was awesome for following the code, even though our own alter ego within the game universe was incapable of it (obviously because Shep isn't as awesome as Samara, amirite?)

"Killing only the bad guys"(figuratively speaking) is basis of any societal or personal morals and legal system. Devil is in the details. How far are you supposed to go with punishing bad guys? Or more importantly: who are those "bad guys"?
And there are hints everywhere that code is seriously different from "common" morals. Even the first scene where she kills mercenary without any explicit reason. You know, people don't usually kill or even slap person who just don't want to talk to them.

[DarkSeraphym]

shatteredstar56 wrote...

The mercenary wasn't innocent because she had killed people.  When you kill someone you can no longer be called innocent.  Samara could have also said she was just defending herself, since the person wouldn't stop shooting and she just wanted the shipping manifest.  
Other then that, the mercenary knew she was an ardat yakshi, and still shipped her out anyway, despite knowing how she lived. That pretty much cancels out innocence.

I never said the mercenary was innocent. I already pointed out that Samara doesn't kill innocent people. What I also pointed out was that Samara wanted information, the mercenary refused to give it, she killed the mercenary. Perhaps there is no cause-effect relationship there and Samara would have killed the mercenary even if they had given her the information, but what we can tell from that example is that Samara's code probably defines a "heinous" crime in much looser terms than we would (Murder and Rape are two examples of heinous crimes today).

Likewise, if I am not mistaken Samara mentions in talking about the Code that she'd defend a village to the death if she had to but the moment she would find out they were involved with smuggling operations, she'd be forced to kill them too. If smuggling, which is normally only a felony (not one worth the death penalty) depending upon the amount smuggled yet Samara is willing to kill an entire village just because they were operating as smugglers, I think a lot of actions ReneShep would take are going to set Samara off.

Modifié par DarkSeraphym, 09 février 2011 - 08:29 .

[JKoopman]

LorDC wrote...

And there are hints everywhere that code is seriously different from "common" morals. Even the first scene where she kills mercenary without any explicit reason. You know, people don't usually kill or even slap person who just don't want to talk to them.

Where are people getting the notion that Samara kills some innocent defenseless merc in her recruitment mission?

A) She was a high-ranking member of the Eclipse Sisters, and in order to earn membership in that criminal gang you need to commit at least one murder. That she was a high-ranking member indicates she likely killed far more than that.

She knowingly aided an Ardat-Yakshi by helping to smuggle her off-world, knowing exactly what she was and what she would do, and then refused to cooperate with Samara. Knowingly helping a murderer to flee the authorities and then refusing to cooperate when questioned makes you guilty by accessory, even under today's laws.

C) She was personally threatening Samara, had just ordered her "best troops" to attack her, had pulled a gun on her and was presumably about to pull the trigger.

Pardon me if I don't see how "innocent" she was.

Modifié par JKoopman, 09 février 2011 - 08:47 .

[DarkSeraphym]

JKoopman wrote...

Where are people getting the notion that Samara kills some innocent defenseless merc in her recruitment mission?

A) She was a high-ranking member of the Eclipse Sisters, and in order to earn membership in that criminal gang you need to commit at least one murder. That she was a high-ranking member indicates she likely killed far more than that.

She knowingly aided an Ardat-Yakshi by helping to smuggle her off-world, knowing exactly what she was and what she would do, and then refused to cooperate with Samara. Knowingly helping a murderer to flee the authorities and then refusing to cooperate when questioned makes you guilty by accessory, even under today's laws.

C) She was personally threatening Samara, had just ordered her "best troops" to attack her, had pulled a gun on her and was presumably about to pull the trigger.

Pardon me if I don't see how "innocent" she was.

I don't think anyone here is arguing whether or not the mercenary was innocent. We are arguing whether or not death was a suitable punishment for the crime.

Anyways, responses to your arguments: (I apologize but I am in a law student in the United States so I can only make comparisons based upon our own laws).

A) Habeas corpus, it's a modern legal term that normally refers to your right to trial but it's actually latin for "You are to have the body" or "Show me the body". It's an old idea created during the time of absolutist monarchies in which it was not uncommon for people to be tried under the suspicion of murder and convicted, despite the fact that there was no actual body to prove a murder was committed. Even though this person is a high-ranking Eclipse Sister, the point is that by modern legal standards Samara is killing someone on the mere suspicion of a crime (whether or not the suspicion is warranted really isn't relevant) when she doesn't have physical evidence that such a murder has been committed short of that. If the only thing she had to go on was that earning the uniform usually means killing someone, then by our modern-day legal philosophies Samara has already acted unjust.

 Of course, but guilty by accessory is a separate crime entirely from murder, one of the only crimes in the United States that you will have much of a chance of getting the death penalty for. However, simply because you were an accessory to the crime does not mean you will also be convicted of the exact same crime at the sametime. In short, you could argue from a legal standpoint that Samara was in her right to kill Morinth, but the question is was it ok to kill someone simply because they were an accessory?

C) This would have been your best argument had Samara not said "Tell me what I need to know and I will begone from here" and "Your life hangs on the answer." Given the fact that Samara threatened her life simply for an answer to a question (this is speculation since we've never seen the sutras of the Justicar Code), there are only a few things we can conclude from this: 1. Samara was only considering whether or not the Sister gave her the info, as she threatened her life based upon whether or not she answers, 2. There is some kind of clause in the code that allows for people suspected of murder to redeem themselves if they help the Justicar (highly unlikely as Samara says she doesn't want to know redeeming information), or 3. Samara was going to kill her because she was likely a murderer anyways and lied to get the information out of her (which is probably against her code too). Take from that what you will. To me, it seems more like she killed the mercenary simply because they wouldn't talk and Samara lost her patience.

Like I said, I don't think anyone here is attacking Samara for killing an "innocent" mercenary. We are attacking Samara because, by our legal standpoints on what justice is today, Samara acts in a fairly unjust manner. It's one thing for her to argue that killing someone who could become problematic in the future, at least under the guise of pragmatism. It's another entirely to try to hide it under the guise of justice.

Modifié par DarkSeraphym, 09 février 2011 - 09:19 .

[Flamewielder]

@Dark
For my information, would the merc be considered accessory to murder or accomplice? What criteria would be used in the US to distinguish the two?

*thinks back on the snapped neck scene*

I take it that the Code puts the burden of proof on the defense, then...

Modifié par Flamewielder, 09 février 2011 - 09:34 .

[James2912]

Samara is a super self righteous religious nut who thinks her values should be forced on everyone and Morinth is a serial killer. Samara might be a little better depending on your POV but not that much really.

I edited the name! Made an oopsie!

Modifié par James2912, 09 février 2011 - 10:10 .

[Rafe34]

Samara had the merc down and on the ground, entirely NOT a threat. A truly paragon option would be to take her into custody. I'm not saying that's the SMART thing, but its certainly NOT a paragon option for her to break the merc's neck with her foot.

[Flamewielder]

Actually, James, Mordin would be a MASS murderer, not a serial killer... but we get your meaning.

[Ramirez Wolfen]

Rafe34 wrote...

Samara had the merc down and on the ground, entirely NOT a threat. A truly paragon option would be to take her into custody. I'm not saying that's the SMART thing, but its certainly NOT a paragon option for her to break the merc's neck with her foot.

But that boob view was totally needed.

[DarkSeraphym]

Flamewielder wrote...

@Dark
For my information, would the merc be considered accessory to murder or accomplice? What criteria would be used in the US to distinguish the two?

Typically, an accomplice (which can also be known as a principle to a crime) is someone who was present when the crime took place and helped the crime to be committed in some fashion.

An accessory actually has two different distinctions, an accessory before the fact and an accessory after the fact. The difference in the two is that an accessory before the fact is someone who had the mens rea (criminal intent is the easiest way to describe it) and aided in setting up the crime. An accessory after the fact is someone who also had the mens rea and aided the crime in some manner after it already been committed. A good example of this is someone who cleans up a murder scene or helps a criminal get away from the scene of the crime.

Anyways, I don't think that the mercenary was either one. Ardat-Yakshi are a little more complicated than United States criminal codes can really compare to because Ardat-Yakshi, amongst the Asari culture, are known to have an addiction to killing and as such there is probably a law somewhere in Asari codes that says it is illegal to help a known one in some fashion (speculation). However, as far as I know, for United States codes I don't think there is anything illegal about driving a convicted serial killer from New York City to Boston if the serial killer wasn't already in the process of committing a crime at that time. "Serial killers" is a term you would be more so likely to see in a school of criminology than you would see in the school of law so I really can't say with 100% certainty. However, given the fact that I don't think Morinth was doing anything illegal by United States criminal codes, I don't think the mercenaries could be accessories at all. Once again, I would imagine there is some kind of law in Asari codes that makes it illegal to transport known Ardat-Yakshi so that would just make them criminals and not necessarily accomplices or accessories.

Modifié par DarkSeraphym, 09 février 2011 - 09:41 .

[gloops]

I don't think this has been mentioned yet. Samara is a far greater threat to your crew than Morinth. Garrus, Grunt, Jack, Kasumi, Mordin, Thane, Zaeed and the Cerberus related crew are all potential victims of Samara's moral zealotry post-suicide mission. On the other hand, Morinth is only interested in Shepard. I pick Morinth over Samara because of my heavy Renegade leaning, but based on threat to the crew I think you should choose Morinth even if you're Paragon.

[Flamewielder]

[quote]DarkSeraphym wrote...
However, as far as I know, for United States codes I don't think there is anything illegal about driving a convicted serial killer from New York City to Boston if the serial killer wasn't already in the process of committing a crime at that time.[/quote]
If you knew of the person's crime and drove him out of state, wouldn't that qualify as A&A?

I'm under the impression that Morinth, given that her name is on the Justicar's execution lists , may already be considered a dangerous fugitive/convicted of at least one murder, perhaps even multiple ones. If so, wouldn't such a criminal fall under the US Marshals purview?

From the looks of things, the Code apparently puts the burden of proof squarely on the defense.
[/quote]

[James2912]

I meant Morinth in my above post! sorry! Its been edited.

[Ramirez Wolfen]

gloops wrote...

I don't think this has been mentioned yet. Samara is a far greater threat to your crew than Morinth. Garrus, Grunt, Jack, Kasumi, Mordin, Thane, Zaeed and the Cerberus related crew are all potential victims of Samara's moral zealotry post-suicide mission. On the other hand, Morinth is only interested in Shepard. I pick Morinth over Samara because of my heavy Renegade leaning, but based on threat to the crew I think you should choose Morinth even if you're Paragon.

Actually, Morinth showed some interest in Grunt, although she could have been teasing.

[jbblue05]

gloops wrote...

I don't think this has been mentioned yet. Samara is a far greater threat to your crew than Morinth. Garrus, Grunt, Jack, Kasumi, Mordin, Thane, Zaeed and the Cerberus related crew are all potential victims of Samara's moral zealotry post-suicide mission. On the other hand, Morinth is only interested in Shepard. I pick Morinth over Samara because of my heavy Renegade leaning, but based on threat to the crew I think you should choose Morinth even if you're Paragon.

Good point.

But what if those squadmates blue bar is higher than their red bar?

[DarkSeraphym]

Flamewielder wrote...

DarkSeraphym wrote...
However, as far as I know, for United States codes I don't think there is anything illegal about driving a convicted serial killer from New York City to Boston if the serial killer wasn't already in the process of committing a crime at that time.

If you knew of the person's crime and drove him out of state, wouldn't that qualify as A&A?

I'm under the impression that Morinth, given that her name is on the Justicar's execution lists , may already be considered a dangerous fugitive/convicted of at least one murder, perhaps even multiple ones. If so, wouldn't such a criminal fall under the US Marshals purview?

From the looks of things, the Code apparently puts the burden of proof squarely on the defense.

Yes, but what crime did she commit exactly? Perhaps I am mistaken, but I hadn't thought that she had killed Nef just yet so unless fleeing as an Ardat-Yakshi is a crime (it very well could be), then they would indeed be accessories. Unless it's an actual crime from Asari law, or Citadel law for that matter, she probably wouldn't be. I would say that according to the Justicar code, that person is obviously an accessory but since accessory is a "legal" term and there is nothing binding about the Justicar Code to anyone else, from a legal perspective I couldn't say without knowing actual Asari or Citadel law.

That is what bothers me most about the Code. It places the burden of proof off of the prosecution and straight onto the defense, which is essentially the defendant having to prove they didn't do something (Middle Ages style of legal system).

EDIT: I see now what you were trying to say. Since Morinth is an actual fugitive and they were aware that she was trying to escape, there is a good chance you could get prosecuted for being an accessory to any crimes she'd commit, on top of being tried for housing a wanted fugitive.

Modifié par DarkSeraphym, 09 février 2011 - 10:49 .

[DarkSeraphym]

gloops wrote...

I don't think this has been mentioned yet. Samara is a far greater threat to your crew than Morinth. Garrus, Grunt, Jack, Kasumi, Mordin, Thane, Zaeed and the Cerberus related crew are all potential victims of Samara's moral zealotry post-suicide mission. On the other hand, Morinth is only interested in Shepard. I pick Morinth over Samara because of my heavy Renegade leaning, but based on threat to the crew I think you should choose Morinth even if you're Paragon.

I mentioned it a couple of pages ago. Likewise, it's a topic I've mentioned on another forum that was referenced on the first page.