129 réponses à ce sujet

[kormesios]

I haven't seen this question posed, although it's possible it was discussed and lost in the "How do I kill her?" results when I searched.

As far as I can tell, most forumites and maybe the game accepts it as a given that she's evil.

What's the evidence?  We have her actions, which consist of:

- Saving the Grey Warden treaties
- Delivereing them to the Wardens when needed
- Saving the hero and Alistair from certain death
- Healing them, encouraging them, and getting Morrigan to help them

Against this, we have:

- Chasind legends, which are innaccurate in most verifiable details
- Morrigan's claims about her supposed methods of prolonging her life, which could be a ploy to get the real grimoire (and is based on a fake book anyway, so it's not clear if it'd be reliable)
- Her non-denial/non-admission when you confront her; but she seems amused, rather than concerned by the PCs accusation

So, weak rumors against witnessed actions, but "everyone" is going with the rumors as fact.  Have I missed something?  Why is apparently everyone sure she's evil in the way described?

I see several other possibilities, like: Morrigan manipulating the PC to get Flemeth's power, Flemeth just being old & batty & tired; "Flemeth" being the name assigned to some random witch of the wild, and not the real "Flemeth" of legends.

[hexaligned]

She's selfish, if you want to define that as evil, then sure

[Serogon]

She made killing templars into a game. At the very least she's completely insane.

[Trelow-LMG]

Vagina? Check.



Guess that answers that. Evil it is.

[Maria Caliban]

Serogon wrote...

She made killing templars into a game. At the very least she's completely insane.

To be sure, what else are you going to do when you have a young daughter to raise and men coming along every couple of months to kill you both? Especially if she's as old as she seems to be, she's had to kill them for centuries now.

Personally, I don't think I'd care after awhile.

[Aderis]

Define Good and Evil. Answer that before you ask others' whether she is good or evil.



Take 'our' world for example. The Spanish conquerors (Can't spell the proper word for them >.<) were probably viewed as evil demons when they slaughtered the Indian Tribes in Central America for gold and riches but because of that very treasure they brought home they were hailed as heroes. Same goes for them, we view their culture's and 'blood sacrifices' as evil because they require human lives but to them it was towards their belief meaning they viewed it was proper and right.



Talk to Morrigan and ask her about whether any of those were true or not. History is written by the victor or so that's what I've seen and heard.



Back to me properly answering your question, Flemeth is meant by all accounts of what you hear to 'look' evil. In truth, you can count her as evil as by Relharts post she is selfish. She helps you because in the end she will get something from it (as Morrigan states, two things). She will get a body bearing within it a child born with the essence of an old god. I view her as someone who does what she must to survive but I definately don't see her as someone who is 'evil' by any means.

[Midnight Reyn]

Maria Caliban wrote...

To be sure, what else are you going to do when you have a young daughter to raise and men coming along every couple of months to kill you both? Especially if she's as old as she seems to be, she's had to kill them for centuries now. 

Agreed. Plus I think Morrigan's own thoughts on the matter sum it up nicely - Flemeth made Templar hunting into a game to shield young Morrigan from what was actually going on, and what would happen if they caught them both.

I might be biased, though, as the Templars give off a nasty 'quad' vibe for me.

[kormesios]

Just to be clear, this thread was not so much a question about "what is evil" but "Is there any reason to blieve Flemeth do any of the lurid things she's accused of, like posessing generations of kidnapped 'daughters'?"

Maria Caliban wrote...

Serogon wrote...

She made killing templars into a game. At the very least she's completely insane.

To be sure, what else are you going to do when you have a young daughter to raise and men coming along every couple of months to kill you both? Especially if she's as old as she seems to be, she's had to kill them for centuries now.

Personally, I don't think I'd care after awhile.

If I were a social worker, I don't think I'd leave a child with her.  Her rearing skills were questionable--Morrigan never learned to play nice with others.  Basic kindergarten stuff was lacking, really.

That being said, I agree about completely the templars: Bad men were coming to kill her and her daughter, or maybe kill her and kidnap her daughter.  Explaining it as a "game" is the best strategy.

[nuculerman]

She's just selfish and self serving. I personally don't consider that evil. But there is the fact she's an abomination. Which again, doesn't really make her evil. Wynne is as much of an abomination as Flemeth.



There's no reason for her to send Morrigan. But she does. The only logical explanation is that the baby was her idea and preplanned between her and Morrigan for reasons Morrigan didn't necessarily understand. So Morrigan's explanation makes the most sense from all the evidence we have. Flemeth is an abomination that stays in this world by possessing the bodies of her "daughters" when it's time for her current host to die. That makes her a murderer and a kidnapper. That makes her evil by most definitions.



As for the explanation that everything Morrigan said is a lie and Flemeth is just a slightly crazy old woman... She can shapeshift into a high dragon. And a giant bird. And other people. It's highly unlikely she's just an old woman who has unlocked the powers of shapeshifting no one could have possibly taught her.

[Aderis]

Serogon wrote...

She made killing templars into a game. At the very least she's completely insane.

No, she was defending her child and as Morrigan stated it was a game to help keep the child from realizing the brutal truth. You can't tell me that you wouldn't defend your child if someone from a supposed 'church' came out and tried to kill you and your child just because you didn't care to conform to 'their' rules and ways. People fear what they do not understand and in their way they killed her because she wasn't in their control but what did she ever to do them...aside from killing those they sent to kill her in the first place?

[kormesios]

Aderis wrote...
Back to me properly answering your question, Flemeth is meant by all accounts of what you hear to 'look' evil. In truth, you can count her as evil as by Relharts post she is selfish. She helps you because in the end she will get something from it (as Morrigan states, two things). She will get a body bearing within it a child born with the essence of an old god. I view her as someone who does what she must to survive but I definately don't see her as someone who is 'evil' by any means.

What is your evidence for any of this?  You seem to be blindly believing Morrigan and the Chasind legends.  They are both inherently questionable sources.

[interesting03]

She's an apostate and a heretic, of course she's evil. She needs to be made tranquil or burned at the stake. There can be no middle ground here.

[Serogon]

The whole "protecting her from the truth" thing seems strange to me because from what Morrigan says of her, protecting her from any sort of truth or anything that could even remotely be considering coddling would be completely avoided by Flemeth.

EDIT: Also...

interesting03 wrote...

She's an apostate and a heretic,
of course she's evil. She needs to be made tranquil or burned at the
stake. There can be no middle ground here.

You're... you're joking, right? PLEASE tell me you're joking.

Modifié par Serogon, 24 novembre 2009 - 05:32 .

[KalosCast]

The Darskpawn are as much a threat to her as they are to the rest of the world, so her helpful actions are far from altruistic.

[Aderis]

Morrigan was sent with you for a reason was she not? She even explains it to you that this was her purpose from the start (or she did to my elf) that she was there to bear the child and take the untainted essence of the god.



As for the questionable sources everything any of us know concerning the two are questionable. Based on what I've seen from talking to someone Flemeth has 'no' reason to lie to and the actual story that Leliana (spelling?) tells it isn't without a doubt closer to the truth then what story is told in the world.

[chaos-zhan]

"We believe what we want to believe. It's all we ever do"

[Aderis]

chaos-zhan wrote...

"We believe what we want to believe. It's all we ever do"

Agree.

[Original182]

Yes Flemeth is evil. She consorted with demons and dark power, you cannot possibly still be "not evil" after that.

Next we'll argue is that abominations are not evil because they do what they have to do to escape and survive against Templars as well.

[Serogon]

Original182 wrote...

Yes Flemeth is evil. She consorted with demons and dark power, you cannot possibly still be "not evil" after that.
Next we'll argue is that abominations are not evil because they do what they have to do to escape and survive against Templars as well.

Well, not all of them are evil. Some are forced into it (remember the end of the Circle of Magi plot?) and some just can't resist (failed Harrowings). You're saying that all those failed apprentices and half the Circle of Magi are evil?

[cpip]

Original182 wrote...

Yes Flemeth is evil. She consorted with demons and dark power, you cannot possibly still be "not evil" after that.
Next we'll argue is that abominations are not evil because they do what they have to do to escape and survive against Templars as well.

Actually, I'll argue abominations are evil because they seem to clearly delight in the suffering they cause.  It is possible Flemeth enjoys doing evil deeds -- though it's uncertain just what deeds she's done that are actually Evil, and not merely Legend.

I'll argue that whether she's good or evil doesn't really matter as much, or at least isn't likely to matter to most of the characters I'll play.

[Aderis]

Abomination's are demons, those that the bodies once belonged to were devoured when they were too weak willed to stop the demons. Once you become an abomination, by choice or not, that demon has basically just devoured the soul or spirit of the person originally owning the body that is now used as a vessel for the demons to view the world.



As for that question, is the desire demon in the Circle of Magi tower evil if she is giving him something that he desires in return for her ability to see the world through his eyes? Sure she is taking away his free will but he is happy. Giving him something no one else could because of what he became earlier in his life.

[Original182]

Serogon wrote...
Well, not all of them are evil. Some are forced into it (remember the end of the Circle of Magi plot?) and some just can't resist (failed Harrowings). You're saying that all those failed apprentices and half the Circle of Magi are evil?

But in the end, they will just wantonly kill everyone if not stopped, regardless of whether they were just unfortunate apprentices or not. Are the templars then evil for wanting to kill them?
If no, why are they considered "evil" for hunting Flemeth and Flemeth was not considered evil, but justified in killing them as self defence? Are abominations then justified in killing everyone to defend themselves?

What is evil now? How do we define it?

[Aderis]

Evil is defined by a person's Belief.

[Serogon]

Original182 wrote...

Serogon wrote...
Well, not all of them are evil. Some are forced into it (remember the end of the Circle of Magi plot?) and some just can't resist (failed Harrowings). You're saying that all those failed apprentices and half the Circle of Magi are evil?

But in the end, they will just wantonly kill everyone if not stopped, regardless of whether they were just unfortunate apprentices or not. Are the templars then evil for wanting to kill them?
If no, why are they considered "evil" for hunting Flemeth and Flemeth was not considered evil, but justified in killing them as self defence? Are abominations then justified in killing everyone to defend themselves?

What is evil now? How do we define it?

Two people killing each other doesn't mandate that one of them is evil. It's hardly fair to call the original person evil, since now, they don't even really exist any more. It's the demon that's killing people, the original person's body is just a puppet. So no, the abomination isn't evil. The demon is. While Flemeth may be evil for other reasons, she isn't evil for killing templars. And the templars aren't evil either, they're misguided (well, possibly not in this situation).

EDIT: An extra detail: self defense is NEVER evil, since the person is merely defending themselves, but an evil person may be attacked and kill in self defence because they're evil.

Modifié par Serogon, 24 novembre 2009 - 05:52 .

[kormesios]

Original182 wrote...

Yes Flemeth is evil. She consorted with demons and dark power, you cannot possibly still be "not evil" after that.

Again, why do you believe this?  Scared Chasind folk, the same types as peasants who think *all* mages are evil and have to be imprisoned in a tower, tell scary stories.  At least some of the stories are definitively wrong; none are unambiguously true.

Assuming Morrigan's first tale is roughly correct, it's still ambiguous.  It's well established that people can be posessed by non-evil fade spirits--Wynne, for example.  Obviously Flemeth isn't on a massive killing spree these days--Morrigan says she never actually saw her kidnap any men, like in the stories.

So far, I haven't seen a single good piece of evidence on this thread that Flemeth is what she's described as.  We have people who've never met her saying she's horrible.  And Morrigan--who witnessed nothing especially evil, but claims to have read evil stuff "by" Flemeth in a a fake book owned by the Templars.

Batty, as I said.  But is there anything unambiguous in game, or are we just believing tales of scared children?  Or a clear dev post, at least, that we are meant to interpret all the bad stuff as "true"?  I'm definitely open to the possibility that I'm missing something, but if so I'd like someone to tell me what.

To put it a different way: I was half-expecting, once I gave the book to Morrigan, to find from Morrigan that it was all a mistake one way or another.  Either the first grimoire was a forgery by the Templars, or it was a plan by Flemeth to help Morrigan "come into her own".  Obviously neither one happened, but would this have been inconsistent with *any* of the evidence we had before we murdered her?

Modifié par kormesios, 24 novembre 2009 - 05:54 .