1807 réponses à ce sujet

[Ravauviel]

marshalleck wrote...

Ravauviel wrote...

That assertion does not in any way invalidate the fact that all old gods have been tained (with no exception). Perhaps the fate of Morrigan's child will be different, but until then this cannot be proven otherwise.

Not all Old Gods have been tainted however, and your reasoning fails to account for the fact that an Old God is obviously helpless to defend itself against darkspawn while imprisoned.

If you want to argue that imprisoned Old Gods are at risk of being corrupted and becoming Archdemons, I would agree with you completely. I would also argue that is why they should be freed, and not left to the mercy of darkspawn.

I am not dealing in hypotheticals (I have no interest in ifs and buts since such conjecture is worthless). Have all old gods not been tainted? Do you have a link to proof of this claim? If so then I will happily admit to a flaw in my reasoning. 

[marshalleck]

Felene wrote...

marshalleck, you still yet to quote anything I wrote that proofs my logic is your logic.

You're obviously not reading my posts, because I've already told you how I am applying your logic. I won't simply repeat myself ad nauseum.

Modifié par marshalleck, 12 décembre 2009 - 05:40 .

[marshalleck]

Ravauviel wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

Ravauviel wrote...

That assertion does not in any way invalidate the fact that all old gods have been tained (with no exception). Perhaps the fate of Morrigan's child will be different, but until then this cannot be proven otherwise.

Not all Old Gods have been tainted however, and your reasoning fails to account for the fact that an Old God is obviously helpless to defend itself against darkspawn while imprisoned.

If you want to argue that imprisoned Old Gods are at risk of being corrupted and becoming Archdemons, I would agree with you completely. I would also argue that is why they should be freed, and not left to the mercy of darkspawn.

I am not dealing in hypotheticals (I have no interest in ifs and buts since such conjecture is worthless). Have all old gods not been tainted? Do you have a link to proof of this claim? If so then I will happily admit to a flaw in my reasoning. 

There are seven known Old Gods. There have been five Blights. That leaves two unaccounted for.

[Felene]

marshalleck wrote...

Okay, well now that this thread seems to be working again.

Old Gods imprisoned in the earth become tainted, presumably because the power that keeps them imprisoned also deprives them of the ability to defend themselves. Your reasoning is flawed. There's no way to prove or disprove a claim that Old Gods willingly become Archdemons, so there's no way to prove that corruption is the inevitable conclusion.

The Old Gods that are imprison underground are not able to defend themself, yes.

But a Old God that can defend itself cannot be taint?

Simply be able to defend itself doesn't mean it is immune.

[Felene]

marshalleck wrote...

Ravauviel wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

Ravauviel wrote...

That assertion does not in any way invalidate the fact that all old gods have been tained (with no exception). Perhaps the fate of Morrigan's child will be different, but until then this cannot be proven otherwise.

Not all Old Gods have been tainted however, and your reasoning fails to account for the fact that an Old God is obviously helpless to defend itself against darkspawn while imprisoned.

If you want to argue that imprisoned Old Gods are at risk of being corrupted and becoming Archdemons, I would agree with you completely. I would also argue that is why they should be freed, and not left to the mercy of darkspawn.

I am not dealing in hypotheticals (I have no interest in ifs and buts since such conjecture is worthless). Have all old gods not been tainted? Do you have a link to proof of this claim? If so then I will happily admit to a flaw in my reasoning. 

There are seven known Old Gods. There have been five Blights. That leaves two unaccounted for.

That is because they have not being found yet. It is only a matter of time before they are being found by darkspawn or something else.

Modifié par Felene, 12 décembre 2009 - 05:44 .

[marshalleck]

Felene wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

Okay, well now that this thread seems to be working again.

Old Gods imprisoned in the earth become tainted, presumably because the power that keeps them imprisoned also deprives them of the ability to defend themselves. Your reasoning is flawed. There's no way to prove or disprove a claim that Old Gods willingly become Archdemons, so there's no way to prove that corruption is the inevitable conclusion.

The Old Gods that are imprison underground are not able to defend themself, yes.

But a Old God that can defend itself cannot be taint?

Simply be able to defend itself doesn't mean it is immune.

And being spared death doesn't guarantee another Blight. You're guessing.

[Ravauviel]

marshalleck wrote...

Ravauviel wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

Ravauviel wrote...

That assertion does not in any way invalidate the fact that all old gods have been tained (with no exception). Perhaps the fate of Morrigan's child will be different, but until then this cannot be proven otherwise.

Not all Old Gods have been tainted however, and your reasoning fails to account for the fact that an Old God is obviously helpless to defend itself against darkspawn while imprisoned.

If you want to argue that imprisoned Old Gods are at risk of being corrupted and becoming Archdemons, I would agree with you completely. I would also argue that is why they should be freed, and not left to the mercy of darkspawn.

I am not dealing in hypotheticals (I have no interest in ifs and buts since such conjecture is worthless). Have all old gods not been tainted? Do you have a link to proof of this claim? If so then I will happily admit to a flaw in my reasoning. 

There are seven known Old Gods. There have been five Blights. That leaves two unaccounted for.

Ah, that is not the answer I was looking for, it is quite weak. Out of the past 5 blights all of them have been caused by corrupted old gods. "Being at risk" for something inevitably assumes a counterfactual. Human beings are at risk of contracting illnesses but not all do. In the case of old gods however each and every one of them has succumbed to the taint, there is no exception to the rule. Thus logically positing that all old gods inevitably fall to the taint. Conjecture aside of course, if that is the basis for your reasoning then I shall respect it but please do not portray it as fact.

[marshalleck]

Ravauviel wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

Ravauviel wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

Ravauviel wrote...

That assertion does not in any way invalidate the fact that all old gods have been tained (with no exception). Perhaps the fate of Morrigan's child will be different, but until then this cannot be proven otherwise.

Not all Old Gods have been tainted however, and your reasoning fails to account for the fact that an Old God is obviously helpless to defend itself against darkspawn while imprisoned.

If you want to argue that imprisoned Old Gods are at risk of being corrupted and becoming Archdemons, I would agree with you completely. I would also argue that is why they should be freed, and not left to the mercy of darkspawn.

I am not dealing in hypotheticals (I have no interest in ifs and buts since such conjecture is worthless). Have all old gods not been tainted? Do you have a link to proof of this claim? If so then I will happily admit to a flaw in my reasoning. 

There are seven known Old Gods. There have been five Blights. That leaves two unaccounted for.

Ah, that is not the answer I was looking for, it is quite weak. Out of the past 5 blights all of them have been caused by corrupted old gods. "Being at risk" for something inevitably assumes a counterfactual. Human beings are at risk of contracting illnesses but not all do. In the case of old gods however each and every one of them has succumbed to the taint, there is no exception to the rule. Thus logically positing that all old gods inevitably fall to the taint. Conjecture aside of course, if that is the basis for your reasoning then I shall respect it but please do not portray it as fact.

All as a result of their imprisonment. Again, there is no reason to believe that an Old God being set free will inevitably lead to another Blight. A resurrected Old God is not trapped under the earth, held in place until the darkspawn can find it.

Modifié par marshalleck, 12 décembre 2009 - 05:50 .

[Felene]

marshalleck wrote...

Felene wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

Okay, well now that this thread seems to be working again.

Old Gods imprisoned in the earth become tainted, presumably because the power that keeps them imprisoned also deprives them of the ability to defend themselves. Your reasoning is flawed. There's no way to prove or disprove a claim that Old Gods willingly become Archdemons, so there's no way to prove that corruption is the inevitable conclusion.

The Old Gods that are imprison underground are not able to defend themself, yes.

But a Old God that can defend itself cannot be taint?

Simply be able to defend itself doesn't mean it is immune.

And being spared death doesn't guarantee another Blight. You're guessing.

Well, aren't you guessing too?

The point of all the arguments:

If the child can become an archdemon and the PC knew it, then PC is acting selfish?

If the child can become an archdemon and the PC doesn't know it, is PC acting selfish?

If the child cannot become an archdemon and the PC knew it, then PC is not acting selfish?

If the child cannot become an archdemon and the PC doesn't know it, then PC is not acting selfish?

Modifié par Felene, 12 décembre 2009 - 05:58 .

[marshalleck]

Felene wrote...

Well, aren't you guessing too?

The point of all this argument  is if the child can become an archdemon then the PC is acting selfish.

But, of course, if the child cannot become an archdemon and PC know it from the begin, and choose to accept the offer with that knowledge already in mind at the time, then, PC is not acting selfish?

Selfishness has no bearing on what I am talking about. I'm discussing whether it is a valid claim that all Old Gods inevitably become Archdemons.

Modifié par marshalleck, 12 décembre 2009 - 05:52 .

[Ravauviel]

marshalleck wrote...

Ravauviel wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

Ravauviel wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

Ravauviel wrote...

That assertion does not in any way invalidate the fact that all old gods have been tained (with no exception). Perhaps the fate of Morrigan's child will be different, but until then this cannot be proven otherwise.

Not all Old Gods have been tainted however, and your reasoning fails to account for the fact that an Old God is obviously helpless to defend itself against darkspawn while imprisoned.

If you want to argue that imprisoned Old Gods are at risk of being corrupted and becoming Archdemons, I would agree with you completely. I would also argue that is why they should be freed, and not left to the mercy of darkspawn.

I am not dealing in hypotheticals (I have no interest in ifs and buts since such conjecture is worthless). Have all old gods not been tainted? Do you have a link to proof of this claim? If so then I will happily admit to a flaw in my reasoning. 

There are seven known Old Gods. There have been five Blights. That leaves two unaccounted for.

Ah, that is not the answer I was looking for, it is quite weak. Out of the past 5 blights all of them have been caused by corrupted old gods. "Being at risk" for something inevitably assumes a counterfactual. Human beings are at risk of contracting illnesses but not all do. In the case of old gods however each and every one of them has succumbed to the taint, there is no exception to the rule. Thus logically positing that all old gods inevitably fall to the taint. Conjecture aside of course, if that is the basis for your reasoning then I shall respect it but please do not portray it as fact.

All as a result of their imprisonment. Again, there is no reason to believe that an Old God being set free will inevitably lead to another Blight.

If, after the Maker's curse an old god was released and did not acquire the taint, I would agree with you 100%, however that has not been the case, perhaps the future will make it so but that again is speculation. A condition that has not been met cannot be logically construed as being factual.

[marshalleck]

Ravauviel wrote...

If, after the Maker's curse an old god was released and did not acquire the taint, I would agree with you 100%, however that has not been the case, perhaps the future will make it so but that again is speculation. A condition that has not been met cannot be logically construed as being factual.

I don't disagree. Consider my participation in the ritual to be testing a hypothesis.

I have never once asserted in this thread that my way is the 100% correct way. I only have been taking issue with others (Felene, Lotion) who have been making absolute statements.

Modifié par marshalleck, 12 décembre 2009 - 05:56 .

[Ravauviel]

marshalleck wrote...

Ravauviel wrote...

If, after the Maker's curse an old god was released and did not acquire the taint, I would agree with you 100%, however that has not been the case, perhaps the future will make it so but that again is speculation. A condition that has not been met cannot be logically construed as being factual.

I don't disagree. Consider my participation in the ritual to be testing a hypothesis.

Very well, I can respect that.

[Felene]

marshalleck wrote...

Felene wrote...

Well, aren't you guessing too?

The point of all this argument  is if the child can become an archdemon then the PC is acting selfish.

But, of course, if the child cannot become an archdemon and PC know it from the begin, and choose to accept the offer with that knowledge already in mind at the time, then, PC is not acting selfish?

Selfishness has no bearing on what I am talking about. I'm discussing whether it is a valid claim that all Old Gods inevitably become Archdemons.

So far, yes. Or, do you disagree?

And, you cannot leave selfishness out because this thread is for discussing "Dark Ritual - a selfish act as a Grey Warden?"

Modifié par Felene, 12 décembre 2009 - 06:05 .

[marshalleck]

Felene wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

Felene wrote...

Well, aren't you guessing too?

The point of all this argument  is if the child can become an archdemon then the PC is acting selfish.

But, of course, if the child cannot become an archdemon and PC know it from the begin, and choose to accept the offer with that knowledge already in mind at the time, then, PC is not acting selfish?

Selfishness has no bearing on what I am talking about. I'm discussing whether it is a valid claim that all Old Gods inevitably become Archdemons.

So far, yes. Or, do you disagree?

And, you cannot leave selfishness out because this thread is for discussing "Dark Ritual - a selfish act as a Grey Warden?"

I actually can leave that out, because the thread has long evolved past that point. If you're curious, go back something like 30 pages and read. You'll find my opinion. I am not interested in just endlessly repeating myself.

[fantasypisces]

And I still don't agree that it is selfish. Felene you are just too focused on only the child bit, not what comes out of it that doesn't necessarily involve the child. Allowing your friend Alistair to live (or Loghain, so that a country keeps it's prized general, so a daughter keeps her father), allowing you to live (which could be selfish, until you take into other accounts) so that your lover and friends are not heartbroken. So that Morrigan gets what she wanted (but for this you have to believe she is not an evil person, I personally do 'not' feel she is evil). Allowing there to be two grey wardens to survive instead of one -- makes it easier to train/find new recruits and run the Ferelden order. Plus, you ended the blight!



In fact I would say: Saving Loghain and doing the Ritual with Morrigan is very far from being selfish, for many of the reasons I outlined above.

Could the child become tainted? Maybe, but all of us can only guess. I say it isn't likely, or if the situation arises Morrigan would do something about it (either herself, or get help to stop it, afterall, Morrigan is 'not' pro-blight). And catching it early is much easier to stop then having a full blight on your hands, blights take time to build up, even with an Archdemon running the show. Plus, even if it does occur, having two Grey Wardens (possibly three, if Alistair wasn't a puss and loghain lived) is much easier for rebuilding to stop any potential future blight. And you would still have Loghain as the General, but this time not so anti-anything-ferelden.

[DariusKalera]

[quote]Felene wrote...

[Repost.]

[quote]DariusKalera wrote...

Your assumption is that you know, for certain, that the child can become an archdemon and therefore can lead another Blight.  Simple fact is, you can not know for certain.[/quote]

[quote]Felene wrote...

But if the character choose to take the ritual, a Old God is reborn. Thus, created a possibility for another Blight.[/quote]

The child is a Old God that can be tainted by a darkspawn and become an archdemon that can start a Blight.

Please note I say can, as in "able to", not will, as in "it will happen".

[quote]Are all Archdemons Old Gods?  Yes.[/quote] Yes. This is my logic and fact.

[quote]Are all Old Gods Archdemons?  No.[/quote]

Now that is not my logic, my logic is "All Old Gods can become archdemon."

[quote]The Old Gods have to be found and corrupted.[/quote]

I do hope you mean can be found and corrupted.

[quote]They are found by Darkspawn using the Old Gods' "song" to find them.[/quote]

Warning, [SPOILERS for the Dragon Age book: The Calling.]

The "song" is called "the Calling."

Old Gods are found by darkspawn who hear the Calling all the time and was driven by it to search for any Old God left on Thedas.

[quote]However, we do not know where this "song" originates from.  Is it from their soul, thier body, or is it from some mystical force that just surrounds them?    We do not know.[/quote]

Yes, we don't know for sure if the child can call for darkspawn by this way.

[quote]We do not even know if the ritual baby can even become an Archdemon.[/quote]

You assume the baby is immune to the taint?

Now that is wishful thinking.

Which falls in to the navie reason.

[quote]Felene wrote...

"navie" - "I trust Morrigan!" "I think Old God is good!" "I hope the child won't be taint!"

Yes, thinking with only personal benefit is selfish.

But thinking without any responsibility and consequences makes it not selfish?

Simply following one's own believe regardless of the situation and the lives at stake make them unselfish?

A person believes in him/herself to be correct regardless if he/she is wrong others will suffer for the consequences of his/her action is selfish.

One of the definetion of "selfish" - Having regard for oneself above others' well-being.[/quote]

[quote]You assume that it can be simply to prove your point.[/quote]

And you assume that it can't be simply to prove your point.

[quote]You can not prove it one way or another.  If the child can not become an Archdemon, then the Grey Warden did not act against thier duty and therefore, the act is not selfish.[/quote]

Same goes for you, you can't prove it one way or another. If the child can become an Archdemon, then the Grey Warden did act against thier duty and therefore, the act is selfish.

[quote]You stated that "A Grey Warden will sacrifice to life to prevent a Blight at all costs."  But, that does not mean that they must sacrifice thier lives to prevent a  Blight.[/quote]

Ehh, NO, have you ever read the Grey Warden motto?

"In war, victory. In peace, vigilance. In death, sacrifice." - Grey Wardens' motto

Please note the "In death, sacrifice."

Yes, a Grey Warden will sacrifice his/her life or anyone's life to do his/her duty.

If PC refuse to die and agree the ritual which creat a possibility of a new Blight.

Then, PC are acting selfish by against his/her duty.[/quote]

1:  The child is not an Old God.  It does however have the soul of one.  There is a distinct difference there.  You do not know if a human, which the baby would be, can be turned into an Archdemon.  You are assuming that the soul is the core of what turns an Old God into an Archdemon.  However, from what information is given, it is the body that is corrupted first and then that corruption spreads to the soul.  

2:  When I said "Are all Old Gods Archdemons?" I was not using your logic.  I was making a point that just because something is an Old God does not automatically mean that it is an Archdemon as well. 

3:  No, I mean they have to be found to be corrupted.  If they are not found they can not be corrupted, it is that simple.

4:  No, we do not know if the baby can call for darkspawn this way, or if the baby would even want to.  From the way you worded your response, you seem to be putting forward the idea that the Old Gods, and there fore the baby, want to become Archdemons.  Nothing in the literature nor in the game even hints at this.

5:  Naive reasoning has nothing to do with it and I never said anything about the child being immune to the taint.  I simply stated a fact.  We do not know if the child can become an archdemon.  Being the child of a Grey Warden might prevent it or the fact that it no longer has an uber powerful dragon body might prevent it as well. 

6:  I have never stated that it could be, or that it could not be.  I have only said in all my posts that we do not know one way or the other. 

7:  Also, as for the Grey Warden oath, it still does not say that one must die to stop a Blight.  Up until the ritual revelation, it was assumed by all the Grey Wardens that it was though.  Is dying int he service fo the grey Wardens a sacrifice?  Yes, of course.  I never said it was not.   But that sacrifice can come at really any time, not just when an Archdemon needs to be killed.  It can come at the Joining, as Daveth found out, or it could come 30 years down the line when the Grey Warden travels to the Deep Roads to battle Darkspawn there.

[Felene]

fantasypisces wrote...

And I still don't agree that it is selfish. Felene you are just too focused on only the child bit, not what comes out of it that doesn't necessarily involve the child. Allowing your friend Alistair to live (or Loghain, so that a country keeps it's prized general, so a daughter keeps her father), allowing you to live (which could be selfish, until you take into other accounts) so that your lover and friends are not heartbroken. So that Morrigan gets what she wanted (but for this you have to believe she is not an evil person, I personally do 'not' feel she is evil). Allowing there to be two grey wardens to survive instead of one -- makes it easier to train/find new recruits and run the Ferelden order. Plus, you ended the blight!

In fact I would say: Saving Loghain and doing the Ritual with Morrigan is very far from being selfish, for many of the reasons I outlined above.
Could the child become tainted? Maybe, but all of us can only guess. I say it isn't likely, or if the situation arises Morrigan would do something about it (either herself, or get help to stop it, afterall, Morrigan is 'not' pro-blight). And catching it early is much easier to stop then having a full blight on your hands, blights take time to build up, even with an Archdemon running the show. Plus, even if it does occur, having two Grey Wardens (possibly three, if Alistair wasn't a puss and loghain lived) is much easier for rebuilding to stop any potential future blight. And you would still have Loghain as the General, but this time not so anti-anything-ferelden.

I never say the decision is bad.

In fact one of my PC did take the offer and I did mention it in this thread.

I can clearly see the beneficial factors about the offer.

But agree with all the beneficial factors about the offer does not mean I think it is not a selfish decision.

I am focus on the Old God child, that is because it is the most obvious consequence PC has to consider when making the decision of accept the offer or not.

[robertthebard]

Felene wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

Wow, you clearly don't understand your own logic.

The situation you describe does not apply to me, because I reject it out of hand the proposition that something which *could* occur, is guaranteed to occur.

No, you are the one who has clearly fail to read and understand my post.

The duty of Grey Warden is to end Blight, prevent Blight at all cost.

Does a Broodmother start Blight?

Your logic is flawed.  If the duty of a Grey Warden was to prevent blights, then they would never be out of the Deep Roads, except to recruit.  They'd also have to recruit in dungeons, since nobody save the Dwarven Legion of the Dead would willingly sign up to move to the Deep Roads to die fighting darkspawn.  Don't use part of the motto to support your claims while ignoring the rest of it, because it doesn't fit with what you are trying to claim.  In Peace, Vigilance.  If their duty is to prevent Blights, there would never be any peace, for them.  Therefore, your logic is flawed.

Let's look at the other part of this motto, shall we:  In War, Victory.  Last I checked, even with the ritual, the Blight was stopped, so we have honored our duty there.  We slew the Archdemon, and ended the Blight.  This is what's required of us by Fereldan.  End the Blight.  We did, and nothing in the epilogue says we cheated death, and dishonored our Order.  Quite the contrary, everyone is singing our praises, and in my game, Loghain is rebuilding the Grey Wardens in Fereldan, oh the delicious irony of that.

Without Brood Mothers, there would be no more darkspawn.  No more darkspawn means no more Blights.  Eventually, the darkspawn that do exist would be destroyed, and presto, if any Old Gods remained, they would be safe, because there would be nothing left to corrupt them.  To read what you have in this quote, the Grey Wardens should never be above ground except to get new recruits, something they will need a lot of, in order to be constantly hunting down brood mothers to kill them.  This is obviously not the case, or they wouldn't have the fortress in the Anderfels, and there would be no Soldier's Peak.  The existence of both of these disproves this whole "duty to prevent Blights" thing.

[MassEffect762]

I'm amazed this thread is still going, I see marshalleck is still enforcing Morrigans corner.

[Felene]

I would like to write out my logic which leads to my statement, "The Dark Ritual is a selfish act as a Grey Warden."

So people can stop forcing their "Felene's logic" on me, and save me from quoting myself again and again.

To start, I would like to state my thoughts on the description "selfish."

Selfish is:

-Holding one’s self-interest as the standard for decision making.

-Having regard for oneself above others’ well-being.

Thus, for the statement "The Dark Ritual is a selfish act as a Grey Warden." to be true, PC's decision has to include his/her self-interest, or having regard for him/herself above others’ well-being.

Now, I would like to point out I do not think the act is bad or wrong or evil.

In fact one of my PC did take the offer and I did mention it in my previous post.:innocent:

I can clearly see the beneficial factors about the offer.

But agree with all the beneficial factors about the offer does not mean I think it is not a selfish decision.

And I would like to mention, again, the current Blight is indeed ended in the game regardless of PC's choice.

[marshalleck]

MassEffect762 wrote...

I'm amazed this thread is still going, I see marshalleck is still enforcing Morrigans corner.

Not so much really. My interest in this topic is down to a few lines here and there. I'm content to allow others to compose essays in their defense, I just watch from the sidelines.

I'm not even playing the game any more. All my interest is in Mass Effect 2 now.

[Lotion Soronarr]

robertthebard wrote...
So any time you don't do the ritual is selfish, and the bolded part of your own quote proves it.  Since you have clearly stated in this quote that "Anything that sacrifices others or harms them to futher your goal is selfish."  If you don't do the ritual, and die, or allow another Grey Warden to die in your place, you have committed a selfish act.  You stated this as fact.  Note, that I am not putting words in your mouth, you stated this.  You have killed another Grey Warden, even if it is yourself, to further your own agenda.  You have thereby committed a selfish act.  This is taking things absolutely at face value, and quoting you directly.

Buh'??
How is sacrificing YOURSELF selfish? Just what kind of anti-logic here are oyu using.

Read the bolded part again and that read your statement again. Slowly. Take some time for it to settle in.

Saving Connor is a selfish act, because it's done to further your own agenda.  You have killed a demon to do so, regardless of whether you allow Jowan to do the ritual, or go get the Circle mages.

Not saving Connor is also a selfish act because you killed a child.

Incorrect. Your'e basicly saying "everything is selfish" because you allways havea goal. Regardless of what that goal is. Saving the world? Selfish! Helping others? SELFISH. Cause you did somethingg to further your goal?
Youre characters motivations= Goals? Thoughts? Apparently nothing matters.

This isn't an argument, this is an anti-argument. A black hole of nonsens.
I see no point in even discussing this further.

Note that the ritual doesn't necessarily have to be purely selfish, but it is always on the evilish/unwise side.

You're starting to get desperate here, Lotion.  The fact is, regarding
the bolded part first, that the darkspawn are not the only ones that
can hear the Archdemon.  Anyone tainted can.

Thank you for missing hte point entirely.
The fact that anyone tainted can hear them IS the point. It establishes a celar connection between the taint and the Old Gods.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Allattar1 wrote...

Lotion it is possible to be abusive and oppressive in replies, without using four letter words.
You downright ignore replies, or dismissive them as thats not proof.
I detailed every assumption you assume is fact.

I'm the one ignoring replies? No, my good man. You're so blinded by your ignorace you can't even see the irony.
If you have posted any concrete proof you managed ot hide is so subtly withing your posts that I haven't found them.
Eitehr bring your proof out nicely structured, listed and concise, or dont' even bother.

You refuse to acknowledge that you don't know about souls in DA:O. There is nothing to back up what you believe here.

And here we have obvious lies. Read a bit back. You can cleary see that I stated several times that we don't know how the ritual works exactly.

B.t.w. - if you want to belive Morrigan, I can quote some of her comment on the ritual that are downright damening.
I'll go dig them up.

"At this early stage the child can absorb the essence and not perish"

"Ignoring that after but one night it could barely be called a child...no, it will not be hurt."

Where exactly does it say that the child doesn't have a soul? It only sez that in such early a stage the child can absord the archdemon essence and not "die" (phisicly?)

The thing is I have always said here that the only bit of knowledge we know for definite is that we do not know.

We dont know how souls work.
We dont know what Morrigans duty is.
We dont know if the child with the old gods soul will be morally good or evil.
We dont know if the old soul can be re corrupted or not.
We dont even know if Morrigan really knew anything at the beginning of the game or if she did. Plenty of places to learn about Flemeths plans, mid game.

We do know that the old gods soul dies for good if the archdemon tries to jump into a body already with its own soul. That we do know.

So the whole argument of is this morally right or wrong comes down to, does your character believe Morrigan? Does your character care about believing Morrigan? Does your character want to live?

Is the ritual a wise choice and is the ritual a moral choice are two different question, but they are somewhat loosly connected. It's morality is dubious at best and it's unquestionably a unwise decision, by the very virtue of so many unknowns and so many thing that can go wrong.

Hell even Morality is based on society, morality is what ever society decides it is.

I will not get into a debate of subjective/societal vs. Objective/universal morality.
Suffice to say I'm a firm believer in the latter.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Again, you cannot have it both ways. The darkspawn are soulless, and so when the Archdemon jumps to them, they just become a new archdemon. Riordan tells us this. This is not supposition based on artificial moral dilemmas. When a Grey Warden makes the killing blow, the Archdemon jumps into the closest tainted body. It doesn't check for a soul, it checks for the taint. In this fashion, Grey Wardens kill Archdemons by sacrificing themselves, because two souls can't inhabit the same body, and once the Archdemon jumps, it's stuck where it ends up. The offspring from the ritual cannot have a soul. If it did, and since the taint in the offspring is from a Grey Warden, then the end result would be the same thing as the Archdemon jumping into a Grey Warden. Dead Old God, dead baby. There can be no other outcome if the baby has a soul.

Aaaand if you read the post above I have just proven that this is not a fact.

The child can indeed have a soul.

I'm not be fully developed or strong enough to withstand the old god essence, and that's why the essence is not destroyed. There can a be a dozen other explanations. So no, what you claim is not a fact.