126 réponses à ce sujet

[Zardoc]

Zix13 wrote...

Zardoc wrote...


Play ME2, go Paragon, see character development that leads to the Jack of ME3. Even more so if you romance her 2. Jack during most of ME2 is an emotionally confused, albeit powerful, child that lashes out against anyone available. During ME2 (again, assuming you play Paragon) you start to change her. The main difference between ME2 and ME3 Jack is that she learned to control her anger issues and is able to focus on things other than violence. 

Go play ME2 and listen to the opinions of her from people on purgatory. 

I gather you didn't understand my point.

[Karrie788]

Zix13 wrote...

Zardoc wrote...


Play ME2, go Paragon, see character development that leads to the Jack of ME3. Even more so if you romance her 2. Jack during most of ME2 is an emotionally confused, albeit powerful, child that lashes out against anyone available. During ME2 (again, assuming you play Paragon) you start to change her. The main difference between ME2 and ME3 Jack is that she learned to control her anger issues and is able to focus on things other than violence. 

Go play ME2 and listen to the opinions of her from people on purgatory. 

That's when you meet her. She evolves throughout the game. Especially after Pragia. She can spare Ranesh.

[Daedalus1773]

TIM is definitely not Lawful anything. He's the leader of a criminal terrorist organization for Pete's sake.

[Karrie788]

Being lawful is not automatically a good thing.

Mr_Blue wrote...

 
http://i.imgur.com/A8uor.jpg

Love it.

Modifié par Karrie788, 13 avril 2012 - 11:21 .

[MaaZeus]

Karrie788 wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Zardoc wrote...


Play ME2, go Paragon, see character development that leads to the Jack of ME3. Even more so if you romance her 2. Jack during most of ME2 is an emotionally confused, albeit powerful, child that lashes out against anyone available. During ME2 (again, assuming you play Paragon) you start to change her. The main difference between ME2 and ME3 Jack is that she learned to control her anger issues and is able to focus on things other than violence. 

Go play ME2 and listen to the opinions of her from people on purgatory. 

That's when you meet her. She evolves throughout the game. Especially after Pragia. She can spare Ranesh.

Jack is hard to put in any D&D alignment category. Her actions are obviously evil, she is a criminal and murderer, even likes some of it, but her motives why she does all that conflicts with actual evil alignments. She is an emotional mess, a human wreck covered and held together by a hard shell of badassery she has built around her. She is sick due to abuse, not straightup evil in my book.

Not that means she shouldnt face the consequences of her past actions, but motives mean a lot when judge characters and their actions. And D&D doesnt go far in this regard. But in any case her quick promotion from abused mess to a teacher is an odd one.

Modifié par MaaZeus, 13 avril 2012 - 11:29 .

[Zix13]

Zardoc wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Zardoc wrote...


Play ME2, go Paragon, see character development that leads to the Jack of ME3. Even more so if you romance her 2. Jack during most of ME2 is an emotionally confused, albeit powerful, child that lashes out against anyone available. During ME2 (again, assuming you play Paragon) you start to change her. The main difference between ME2 and ME3 Jack is that she learned to control her anger issues and is able to focus on things other than violence. 

Go play ME2 and listen to the opinions of her from people on purgatory. 

I gather you didn't understand my point.

I gather you didn't understand mine. That the fact that she's been a serial killer for years is more important than 3 weeks of character development. The fact that she was insecure and ****y didn't raise my opinion of her at all. 

[Apathy1989]

Mr_Blue wrote...

 
http://i.imgur.com/A8uor.jpg

Amazing :happy:

[ticklefist]

sirisaacx wrote...

I'm also not sure Garrus fits into lawful good. I see him as more Neutral good. After all he was a terrible fit for C-Sec.

Correct. He's a good guy with a strong sense of good. It's your rules that can go to hell. He'll get it done his way. 

Chaotic Good.

[january42]

Honestly, I think Hackett's character was written ambiguously with the intent that his morals and ethics mimic Shepard's regardless of playthrough. Hackett approves of Shepard's actions, and supports him/her regardless what Shepard does. That, or Hackett is a hardass realist who knows the political game, compartmentalizes like crazy, and keeps his fingers in multiple different pies.

Hackett is the Renegade admiral in ME1.   He actually gives you the UNC:Negotation mission in ME1, which requires you to have 80% renegade points to get(Also, one of the funniest missions in the game).    I'd call him Chaotic Good actually.   I'd probably go with Anderson for Lawful good.   I have a hard time thinking of a main charachter who falls in there however.   Samara has the Lawful Stupid thing going though.

Edit: Actually, Ashley (or Kaiden) might fit for Lawful Good.

Modifié par january42, 14 avril 2012 - 12:05 .

[Zix13]

january42 wrote...

Honestly, I think Hackett's character was written ambiguously with the intent that his morals and ethics mimic Shepard's regardless of playthrough. Hackett approves of Shepard's actions, and supports him/her regardless what Shepard does. That, or Hackett is a hardass realist who knows the political game, compartmentalizes like crazy, and keeps his fingers in multiple different pies.

Hackett is the Renegade admiral in ME1.   He actually gives you the UNC:Negotation mission in ME1, which requires you to have 80% renegade points to get(Also, one of the funniest missions in the game).    I'd call him Chaotic Good actually.   I'd probably go with Anderson for Lawful good.   I have a hard time thinking of a main charachter who falls in there however.   Samara has the Lawful Stupid thing going though.

Edit: Actually, Ashley (or Kaiden) might fit for Lawful Good.

Kaiden, maybe. Ashley is lawful neutral.

[Abreu Road]

Zix13 wrote...

Zardoc wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Zardoc wrote...


Play ME2, go Paragon, see character development that leads to the Jack of ME3. Even more so if you romance her 2. Jack during most of ME2 is an emotionally confused, albeit powerful, child that lashes out against anyone available. During ME2 (again, assuming you play Paragon) you start to change her. The main difference between ME2 and ME3 Jack is that she learned to control her anger issues and is able to focus on things other than violence. 

Go play ME2 and listen to the opinions of her from people on purgatory. 

I gather you didn't understand my point.

I gather you didn't understand mine. That the fact that she's been a serial killer for years is more important than 3 weeks of character development. The fact that she was insecure and ****y didn't raise my opinion of her at all. 

I really think Jack is one of those cases of alignment progression.
She kind of starts as Chaotic Evil Biotic ****. With Shepard's help she switches to Chaotic Neutral at the end of ME2, and on ME3 she really stands as a Chaotic Good character to me.

[humes spork]

january42 wrote...

Hackett is the Renegade admiral in ME1.   He actually gives you the UNC:Negotation mission in ME1, which requires you to have 80% renegade points to get(Also, one of the funniest missions in the game).

He's also a breadcrumb-giver for a number of more paragon-oriented missions, including besieged base (the actual paragon mission which parallels the negotiation), and dresses Shepard down for a number of renegade-oriented choices, dialog and resolutions (case in point, al-Jilani). Honestly, I think if Hackett has clearly-established ethics from the context of ME1 it's that he's a hardcore realist who's not afraid to get his hands dirty, but keeps his image and the majority of his dealings clean (so, renegon/paragade I suppose). You can argue that in itself is actually a renegade personality trait, and I'd be inclined to agree, but in the larger context of the trilogy it seems he's either neutral or written to mirror Shepard's own morality.

Modifié par humes spork, 14 avril 2012 - 12:15 .

[Zix13]

Abreu Road wrote...


I really think Jack is one of those cases of alignment progression.
She kind of starts as Chaotic Evil Biotic ****. With Shepard's help she switches to Chaotic Neutral at the end of ME2, and on ME3 she really stands as a Chaotic Good character to me.

Maybe, but it's hard to argue that she deserved the chance. Shep should have killed her on the purgatory after learning the little he did about her. Her character progression was unrealistic in any case, as was the alliance taking her. 

Modifié par Zix13, 14 avril 2012 - 12:36 .

[dreaming_raithe]

Pretty good arrangement, IMO. Only Hackett feels just a bit off as Lawful Good, but it's a decent fit. Tali is probably the other possible LG we have in the series, as she's very devoted to both the Migrant Fleet and her father. But I think she's probably Neutral Good with the old "with lawful tendencies" chestnut tacked on.

[KingNothing125]

Modifié par KingNothing125, 14 avril 2012 - 01:01 .

[Zix13]

KingNothing125 wrote...

No. Samara is definately not LG. Thane is not TN. Reapers are neutral evil. TIM is lawful evil. Aria is... about as neutral as you get in ME. But definately not lawful. Actually not really sure where to put Aria, you don't really know anything about her. 

Modifié par Zix13, 14 avril 2012 - 01:10 .

[Karrie788]

Well Aria does manage to *rule* Omega, but I'd put her under chaotic neutral.
I'd put Thane as a True Neutral though. What would you put him under?

[KingNothing125]

Zix13 wrote...

No. Samara is definately not LG. Thane is not TN. Reapers are neutral evil. TIM is lawful evil. Aria is... about as neutral as you get in ME. But definately not lawful. Actually not really sure where to put Aria, you don't really know anything about her. 

After reading your extremely uninformed opinion of Jack, I decided I'm not listening to you. You don't know much about anyone.

[Zix13]

KingNothing125 wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

No. Samara is definately not LG. Thane is not TN. Reapers are neutral evil. TIM is lawful evil. Aria is... about as neutral as you get in ME. But definately not lawful. Actually not really sure where to put Aria, you don't really know anything about her. 

After reading your extremely uninformed opinion of Jack, I decided I'm not listening to you. You don't know much about anyone.

Lol. Because I refuse to believe someone can go from scumbag to good teacher person in 6 months? 

Karrie788 wrote...

I'd put Thane as a True Neutral though. What would you put him under?

 

Probably neutral good. His drell battle sleep business makes his assassin background irrelevant. 

Modifié par Zix13, 14 avril 2012 - 01:23 .

[byne]

Zix13 wrote...

KingNothing125 wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

No. Samara is definately not LG. Thane is not TN. Reapers are neutral evil. TIM is lawful evil. Aria is... about as neutral as you get in ME. But definately not lawful. Actually not really sure where to put Aria, you don't really know anything about her. 

After reading your extremely uninformed opinion of Jack, I decided I'm not listening to you. You don't know much about anyone.

Lol. Because I refuse to believe someone can go from scumbag to good teacher person in 6 months? 

I must have missed the part where Jack was a scumbag and not just a troubled person who dealt with problems the only way she'd learned how: with violence.

[M0keys]

Samara has to be lawful neutral. She's the kind of person who kills anyone if they violate her code. Good, evil, doesn't matter to her. Only thing that stopped her from killing her daughter was genetic/parental barricades.

[filetemo]

I'd say garrus REALLY wants to be lawful but he ends as neutral good. If he was chaotic good he'd blow up facilities just because they poison the flora.

[M0keys]

Oh, and Kasumi is probably a better definition of Chaotic Good than Garrus is.

EDIT: Unless you're measuring chaotic good against "how much like Robin Hood" someone is. Garrus might win there because he created a band of rebels instead of just going basically solo all the time like Kasumi.

Modifié par M0keys, 14 avril 2012 - 01:31 .

[M0keys]

And Zaeed ... might be a better Chaotic Neutral than Jack is.

[Karrie788]

filetemo wrote...

I'd say garrus REALLY wants to be lawful but he ends as neutral good. If he was chaotic good he'd blow up facilities just because they poison the flora.

I don't think he wants to be lawful, he repeatedly complains about rules and regulations. That screams chaotic to me.