185 réponses à ce sujet

[IanPolaris]

Koyasha wrote...

Aveline is good at protecting her men and cleaning up visible, obvious crime.  I do not feel she is particularly good at investigating less obvious crime, and she tends to be very easy on her men, even those who commit serious offenses.

Indeed Aveline is a prime illustration me of a commnt that a well known libertaian author, Neil Smith, made about policemen.  "Police are like parents.  They don't care about justice.  All they want is quiet."

-Polaris

[Torax]

IanPolaris wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

I thought "the wall" was their equivalent of being placed in stocks. I may be wrong though.

I understood it to be punishment duty although the game doesn't specify what. 

-Polaris

Probably a guard detail on a thin wall along the outside of the Fortress. Maybe 3-4 feet wide or so. Enough to strike the fear in a guard forced to stand there if a large wind came. A position that doesn't really offer any more defense but gets them to behave for now on.

[Rockpopple]

No, she didn't volunteer the information. She didn't need to - Hawke's not a member of the guard. Why should she tell him or the Arishok everything that's going on in town that doesn't concern them directly?

As for why the elves feel she wasn't doing anything about it, you're asking why a people that have been systmatically abused by humans in power think a human in power is dragging her feet when it comes to their complaints? I'm not saying they didn't have a legit complaint - I'm sure they did. But come on, even if she was trying her damndest to investigate, I'm sure they'd still feel not enough was being done. That's just (ironically) human nature.

As for why the guard's still on duty, I think you're making the error of putting our Western values / or even earthly values if you want to put it that way, on how things work in Kirkwall. I would too, but then I realise that there's no reason to think a guard would be taken off duty while an investigation was going on. We'd have to have proof that that's how things work in Kirkwall or any other country. It's not hard to think that people in Authority in the nations of Thedas abuse their power on the serfs regularly. Look at how the Chevaliers are portrayed, for example. I'm not saying it's right, but we shouldn't be surprised if it doesn't work the way it does here in our world/country.

EDIT: Duh. I was tapdancing too fast. The guard wasn't still on duty - he was dead. Those elves killed him. Herp.

As for her punishment of that guard, I don't know how tough "10 days on the wall" is, but even in our world it's not a regular occurrence for someone accused of bribery to be fired/jailed summarily, even today - when we're supposed to be much tougher on corruption than in the past.

And if you bring Aveline to speak to Emeric about his case, you'll see why she doesn't take him seriously. She explains herself clearly. Plus she DID investigate on Emeric's claim, and she was embarrassed for it when she found nothing and pissed off a noble to boot. Once bitten, twice shy. She has no reason to stick her neck out for him again on exactly the same evidence as before.

Aveline might have been dragging her feet on the elf case, but we don't know that. There's no evidence either way. To accuse her of doing so because the victims feel she was - and that's really the only evidence there is to saying she was dragging her feet - isn't fair to the character, in my humble opinion.

Modifié par Rockpopple, 14 avril 2011 - 12:44 .

[In Exile]

[quote]Koyasha wrote...
I honestly did feel like she wasn't doing as much as she should have been there.  If she was investigating, why did the elves feel like she wasn't?  Why was the guard still on duty?  Did the accusations seem baseless on the face of it, so baseless that she didn't feel the need to take away the guard's authority?  Because if you take an accusation like that seriously, the first thing you need to do is suspend that individual's authority so they cannot do it again while you investigate (and so they cannot use that authority to hamper the investigation). [/quote]

They're elves, so I don't think she really knew that their were any reasonable allegations or evidence. She's lawful good to an absurd fault. She is not kind to guardsmen that shirk their duty (she shook up the guard when she was made Guard Captain and to the guards who sold out the qunari).

[quote]Frankly I also find she's very easy on her guards.  Earlier in the same qunari quests, if you take her to interrogate the guard at the Hanged Man, she gives him, as punishment for accepting a bribe, abandoning his duty, and knowingly allowing a group of delegates to be kidnapped, ten days on 'the wall'.  Presumably this is an unpleasant assignment?  That's it?  Why doesn't she summarily dismiss him from the guard, and perhaps lay charges for accepting bribery on him too!? [/quote]

It sounded like what he did was accept a bribe in return for telling the anti-qunari contingent where they would be. That said, given how ridiculously dangerous Kirkwall seems via nightime travel I wouldn't be half surprised that "the wall" = death sentence for the unwary/untrained.

A 'routine patrol' for Donnel involves several fights to the death, after all. I think dismissing him from the guard would be the kinder punishment.

[quote]So I honestly don't find it hard to believe that she isn't being as diligent as she should be in investigating this.  Another obvious example where she doesn't investigate enough is with Quentin, where despite having the location of the warehouse and plenty of evidence from Emeric, she ignores it and behaves as though he's a crackpot. [/quote]

Elves are subhuman. With Quentin, she raids a nobleman's mansion (in a city where her entire existence is funded by them and their taxes) on the basis of the evidence he found. After that, when the political heat is too great, she goes straight to Hawke and has him investigate. She says he has no evidence and it looks like a concidence (if you take her with you to speak to Emeric she makes a case for her having done her job).

[quite]Aveline is good at protecting her men and cleaning up visible, obvious crime.  I do not feel she is particularly good at investigating less obvious crime, and she tends to be very easy on her men, even those who commit serious offenses.
[/quote]

I think you're underestimated the apparently comical danger that her guards are in day-to-day.

[TEWR]

Frankly I also find she's very easy on her guards. Earlier in the same qunari quests, if you take her to interrogate the guard at the Hanged Man, she gives him, as punishment for accepting a bribe, abandoning his duty, and knowingly allowing a group of delegates to be kidnapped, ten days on 'the wall'. Presumably this is an unpleasant assignment? That's it? Why doesn't she summarily dismiss him from the guard, and perhaps lay charges for accepting bribery on him too!?

You think she went easy on him? She scared the **** out of the b*stard! Seriously, look at him! He's afraid of Aveline. And even after she gave him his punishment, didn't he run out of there as fast as possible?

[Dean_the_Young]

'On the wall' refers to a number of various punishments that often involved forcing stress positions for extended periods of time: sometimes it even involved forcing people to remain standing until they passed out, splashing water on them to revive them, and forcing them to continue. Execution and length per day varied by army, but it was not 'unpleasant duty'.

[Mnemnosyne]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

'On the wall' refers to a number of various punishments that often involved forcing stress positions for extended periods of time: sometimes it even involved forcing people to remain standing until they passed out, splashing water on them to revive them, and forcing them to continue. Execution and length per day varied by army, but it was not 'unpleasant duty'.

Mm, if that's what's meant by that, then I agree it was an adequate punishment.  The game isn't too clear, but hopefully that's the correct interpretation, because it really seems like far too lenient a punishment if was what I first understood it to be.

[hoorayforicecream]

I never got the feeling that Aveline followed the law to the letter. She's more of a 'spirit of the law' person, though she does adhere to procedure moreso than Hawke. For example, she's got this banter with Fenris:

Aveline: Thank you for that tip, Fenris.
Fenris: You caught them, then?
Aveline: Yes—a whole nest of slave runners working out of the Undercity.
Fenris: I imagine you imprisoned them?
Aveline: Sadly, they never made it to prison.
Fenris: You always know how to make me smile, Aveline.

Also this one with Merrill:
Merrill: Why don't you arrest us, Aveline?
Aveline: What?
Merrill: We break the law. I'm pretty sure. There are laws for almost everything. You're not a bad guard, are you?
Aveline: No!
Merrill: That's good. Is it because you're fond of Hawke? I kind of am.
Aveline: How very nice for you. Keep it to yourself.
Merrill: I'd rather keep it with her/him.

Anyway, when it most of law enforcement comes down to the choice of either 'let it go' or 'make them dead', it's kind of silly to quibble. Just sayin'.

[Aggie Punbot]

Aveline was wanting to arrest the elves for the murder of the guard, a crime that has been proven to have happened (what with the existence of a body and all) as well as having the admitted perpetrators of said crime within reach. She was not currently investigating the rape of the elven girl because that would be something that she would have to look into after the murdering elves had already been brought in for questioning (which was never allowed to happen).

Given the tensions between elves and humans, it's likely that the full truth of most crimes between the two groups is never able to be verified because unscrupulous humans will lie to protect their buddies and elves will lie to protect their kin from the 'evil humans'.

Aveline isn't in the wrong here; she was trying to enforce the law over a crime that was proven to have happened and never had a chance to investigate or verify a crime that is rumored to have happened.

Modifié par TS2Aggie, 13 avril 2011 - 10:51 .

[TOBY FLENDERSON]

The compound was more like a provence or state of Kirkwall with its own governance but still exited under the laws of Kirkwall. it was a question of federal law vs. state/provincial law.

[Dean_the_Young]

Koyasha wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

'On the wall' refers to a number of various punishments that often involved forcing stress positions for extended periods of time: sometimes it even involved forcing people to remain standing until they passed out, splashing water on them to revive them, and forcing them to continue. Execution and length per day varied by army, but it was not 'unpleasant duty'.

Mm, if that's what's meant by that, then I agree it was an adequate punishment.  The game isn't too clear, but hopefully that's the correct interpretation, because it really seems like far too lenient a punishment if was what I first understood it to be.

Even if it was standing up for sixteen hours a day for ten days, that would be a rather severe punishment. Standing doesn't sound hard until you actually do it for a number of hours, and know you have hours more.

[tmp7704]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Even if it was standing up for sixteen hours a day for ten days, that would be a rather severe punishment. Standing doesn't sound hard until you actually do it for a number of hours, and know you have hours more.

Especially if it's done in full gear.

[Torax]

tmp7704 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Even if it was standing up for sixteen hours a day for ten days, that would be a rather severe punishment. Standing doesn't sound hard until you actually do it for a number of hours, and know you have hours more.

Especially if it's done in full gear.

True it's not like it's standing in a t-shirt and jeans. It's standing in full leather and plate with shield and sword.

Edited to add.

I doubt having to stand in P.T.'s would come close to having to wear full plate armor.

Modifié par Torax, 13 avril 2011 - 11:47 .

[frylock23]

I'll just add that the Arishok was a bit hypocritical in my opinion. He makes it clear that he has no intention of respecting the law of Kirkwall, but when it comes to the law of Qun, he absolutely expects you to turn over Isabela. I was thinking that I might turn Isabela over until I considered that point. Why bother turning her over when he wouldn't turn over the elves?

[KJandrew]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
]Even if it was standing up for sixteen hours a day for ten days, that would be a rather severe punishment. Standing doesn't sound hard until you actually do it for a number of hours, and know you have hours more.

Still the man is guilty of corruption, dereliction of duty and maybe accesory to murder yet he gets just a temperory punishment. Jevan got kicked out just for corruption, this guy should have been sacked and or arrested

[TEWR]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
]Even if it was standing up for sixteen hours a day for ten days, that would be a rather severe punishment. Standing doesn't sound hard until you actually do it for a number of hours, and know you have hours more.

Oh god do I know how that feels. At my old job at BJ's Wholesale Club I would have to stand around for 8 hours a day and I was lucky if they remembered to give me my break without me getting pissed off. I can't imagine how strenuous that would be for double the hours, let alone wearing heavy sets of armor.

KJandrew wrote...
Still the man is guilty of corruption, dereliction of duty and maybe accesory to murder yet he gets just a temperory punishment. Jevan got kicked out just for corruption, this guy should have been sacked and or arrested

Jeven was also guilty of sending men to their deaths on purpose. The corruption was only a portion of it all. Plus as a commanding officer in charge of various guards, you can't just give a man like that a second chance. You definitely can't give him another chance when he tries to rally people to forcefully take back his position because his crimes were revealed.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 14 avril 2011 - 03:42 .

[DaeJi]

Being given land to stay at is not the same as being given land to govern over. The Qunari did keep people lot, the same as a homeowner would. Since the Qunari had no interest in staying in Kirkwall, and thus no interest in fostering relations, the idea that they would be given an embassy is... anyway, the situation is more akin to homeowner-ship. Free to live by must stay within the law.

[Aggie Punbot]

frylock23 wrote...

I'll just add that the Arishok was a bit hypocritical in my opinion. He makes it clear that he has no intention of respecting the law of Kirkwall, but when it comes to the law of Qun, he absolutely expects you to turn over Isabela. I was thinking that I might turn Isabela over until I considered that point. Why bother turning her over when he wouldn't turn over the elves?

That is essentially what most religions are: the idea that your beliefs are the only correct ones and everyone else should believe them too.

Modifié par TS2Aggie, 14 avril 2011 - 10:50 .

[ForeignPatriot]

TS2Aggie wrote...

frylock23 wrote...

I'll just add that the Arishok was a bit hypocritical in my opinion. He makes it clear that he has no intention of respecting the law of Kirkwall, but when it comes to the law of Qun, he absolutely expects you to turn over Isabela. I was thinking that I might turn Isabela over until I considered that point. Why bother turning her over when he wouldn't turn over the elves?

That is essentially what most religions are: the idea that your beliefs are the only correct ones and everyone else should believe them too.

I don't think its hypocritical because what he sees as the demands of the Qun don't necessarily change. 

Isabela MUST be brought back to face punishment because she knowingly stole a SACRED relic from the Qunari. Leaving without her or allowing her to go without facing punishment would go against their code of honor.

This is why he bring up the duel. If you kill HIM then his duty to bring back the book with the thief dies with him and frees the rest of the Qunari to return to Par Volen.

However, in the eyes of the Qun, the elves are simply avenging an injustice. Once they become part of the Qun, he has a duty to protect them.

In fact, he recognizes this duty to "protect" your own when he duels Hawke. He knows why you wouldn't want to hand her over so, he decides to settle it with "honor".

The demands of the Qun don't necessarily mean that you have to agree with what he says (just like he doesn't agree to hand over the elves) but they do require you to act within the Qunari code of honor which, in this case, means fighting to the death. 

[JohnZ117]

Here is a list of what we(or atleast I) do not know about the situation:

whether or not the land the Qunari are sheltered is an embassy, or still under Kirkwall jurisdiction
 
what Kirkwalls laws are and how they respond to criminals seeking sanctum

whether or not the crime the murdered guard is accused of actually happened as stated(the possibilities of the murderers or the female elf lying cannot be dismissed considering the circumstances)

how long the elves gave the guard to investigate said crime before killing the accused(was it a period of weeks or only a day or two, for example)

This is what I recall at this moment.  Feel free to add to or correct if needed.

[Herr Uhl]

JohnZ117 wrote...

whether or not the land the Qunari are sheltered is an embassy, or still under Kirkwall jurisdiction

David Gaider wrote...

Under no circumstances is the qunari compound foreign soil.

[TEWR]

ForeignPatriot wrote...

TS2Aggie wrote...

frylock23 wrote...

I'll just add that the Arishok was a bit hypocritical in my opinion. He makes it clear that he has no intention of respecting the law of Kirkwall, but when it comes to the law of Qun, he absolutely expects you to turn over Isabela. I was thinking that I might turn Isabela over until I considered that point. Why bother turning her over when he wouldn't turn over the elves?

That is essentially what most religions are: the idea that your beliefs are the only correct ones and everyone else should believe them too.

I don't think its hypocritical because what he sees as the demands of the Qun don't necessarily change. 

Isabela MUST be brought back to face punishment because she knowingly stole a SACRED relic from the Qunari. Leaving without her or allowing her to go without facing punishment would go against their code of honor.

This is why he bring up the duel. If you kill HIM then his duty to bring back the book with the thief dies with him and frees the rest of the Qunari to return to Par Volen.

However, in the eyes of the Qun, the elves are simply avenging an injustice. Once they become part of the Qun, he has a duty to protect them.

In fact, he recognizes this duty to "protect" your own when he duels Hawke. He knows why you wouldn't want to hand her over so, he decides to settle it with "honor".

The demands of the Qun don't necessarily mean that you have to agree with what he says (just like he doesn't agree to hand over the elves) but they do require you to act within the Qunari code of honor which, in this case, means fighting to the death. 

You know, the whole thing could've been settled easily with no more bloodshed if Hawke just proposed a counter-offer.

Arishok: I am now free to return to Par Vollen.... with the thief.
Isabella: Wait, what?
Hawke: No she stays here. You have what you wanted.
Arishok: Then we shall settle this with a duel, basilit-an.
Hawke: I have a counter-offer.
Arishok: Speak.
Hawke: You have your relic. You can return home now. In return for leaving peacefully, I give you these.
Arishok: What.... are those?
Hawke: These.... are cookies. Here try one.
*gives Arishok a cookie*
Arishok: These.... are delicious. We do not have these in Par Vollen. This should be rectified.
Hawke: If you leave now and let us keep Isabella, I will give you the cookies and the recipe to make them.
Arishok: Marevas Basalit-an Hawke! So shall it be!
Varric: I don't believe it.....

*scene jumps to Cassandra*

Cassandra: The Champion of Kirkwall got rid of the Qunari by..... giving them cookies?
Varric: You cannot make this up, Seeker. I couldn't make this up, even if I wanted to.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 14 avril 2011 - 05:46 .

[earl of the north]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

ForeignPatriot wrote...

TS2Aggie wrote...

frylock23 wrote...

I'll just add that the Arishok was a bit hypocritical in my opinion. He makes it clear that he has no intention of respecting the law of Kirkwall, but when it comes to the law of Qun, he absolutely expects you to turn over Isabela. I was thinking that I might turn Isabela over until I considered that point. Why bother turning her over when he wouldn't turn over the elves?

That is essentially what most religions are: the idea that your beliefs are the only correct ones and everyone else should believe them too.

I don't think its hypocritical because what he sees as the demands of the Qun don't necessarily change. 

Isabela MUST be brought back to face punishment because she knowingly stole a SACRED relic from the Qunari. Leaving without her or allowing her to go without facing punishment would go against their code of honor.

This is why he bring up the duel. If you kill HIM then his duty to bring back the book with the thief dies with him and frees the rest of the Qunari to return to Par Volen.

However, in the eyes of the Qun, the elves are simply avenging an injustice. Once they become part of the Qun, he has a duty to protect them.

In fact, he recognizes this duty to "protect" your own when he duels Hawke. He knows why you wouldn't want to hand her over so, he decides to settle it with "honor".

The demands of the Qun don't necessarily mean that you have to agree with what he says (just like he doesn't agree to hand over the elves) but they do require you to act within the Qunari code of honor which, in this case, means fighting to the death. 

You know, the whole thing could've been settled easily with no more bloodshed if Hawke just proposed a counter-offer.

Arishok: I am now free to return to Par Vollen.... with the thief.
Isabella: Wait, what?
Hawke: No she stays here. You have what you wanted.
Arishok: Then we shall settle this with a duel, basilit-an.
Hawke: I have a counter-offer.
Arishok: Speak.
Hawke: You have your relic. You can return home now. In return for leaving peacefully, I give you these.
Arishok: What.... are those?
Hawke: These.... are cookies. Here try one.
*gives Arishok a cookie*
Arishok: These.... are delicious. We do not have these in Par Vollen. This should be rectified.
Hawke: If you leave now and let us keep Isabella, I will give you the cookies and the recipe to make them.
Arishok: Marevas Basalit-an Hawke! So shall it be!
Varric: I don't believe it.....

*scene jumps to Cassandra*

Cassandra: The Champion of Kirkwall got rid of the Qunari by..... giving them cookies?
Varric: You cannot make this up, Seeker. I couldn't make this up, even if I wanted to.

Nonsense!

Now if there were cake and cookies.

[TEWR]

earl of the north wrote...

Nonsense!

Now if there were cake and cookies.

But you see, the cake is a lie. If Hawke had promised the Arishok cake and he found out it was a lie, there wouldn't be anything left of Kirkwall.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 14 avril 2011 - 06:00 .

[Dean_the_Young]

KJandrew wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
]Even if it was standing up for sixteen hours a day for ten days, that would be a rather severe punishment. Standing doesn't sound hard until you actually do it for a number of hours, and know you have hours more.

Still the man is guilty of corruption, dereliction of duty and maybe accesory to murder yet he gets just a temperory punishment. Jevan got kicked out just for corruption, this guy should have been sacked and or arrested

Jevan was also the guard's own commander, and his crimes were against ht Guard. Different scales of crimes, and with different victims. While it's a nice Western conceit that any officer of the law should be immediately kicked out in light of any corruption, that isn't how it's worked for much of history and isn't even how it always works today. Short of killing him, you could put the dude in jail for fifty years and it would be a 'temporary' punishment.

This isn't some light punishment. This is a punishment that, if forced upon a POW, would get an American soldier accused of war crimes.