77 réponses à ce sujet

[TheDrunkenPanda]

Just gonna point out that neither Wynn or Leliana commented on my PC drinking the Blood Juice. And if those two don't comment about it, it's gotta be fine, right?

[Mnemnosyne]

sarahbau wrote...

I agree. It's the endorsement of his work that people seem to be ignoring. Yes, the people he probably sacrificed to make it have already died, but by endorsing his work and reaping the benefits of his research, he and others would be justified in doing future sacrificial research. It's kind of like not wanting to buy something that was made in Sri Lanka because you disagree with the country's politics. The product might have already been made, but by buying it, you're saying "I'm OK with their lax human rights." 

The difference is that by purchasing a product you're giving profit to the company that sold it to you, and thus encouraging them to make more product.

By using the potion, Avernus gets nothing. You can still choose to kill him for what he's done, or at least demand that only methods you consider acceptable are used.  He does not benefit, and since his fate is in your hands, it doesn't lead him to continue similar lines of research if you forbid it.

[AntiChri5]

A noble heroic knight refuses to drink the potion because of how it was made, then is unable to stop he blight because he wasn't powerfull enough. Well done Sir Idiot you just doomed all of Thedas so your honour would remain spotless.

[Hrodberht]

sarahbau wrote...

TheRealIncarnal wrote...

Well, it's an interesting issue.

I mean, it does kind of endorse Avernius' work, but if you're ok with him then it's not an issue.

I agree. It's the endorsement of his work that people seem to be ignoring. Yes, the people he probably sacrificed to make it have already died, but by endorsing his work and reaping the benefits of his research, he and others would be justified in doing future sacrificial research. It's kind of like not wanting to buy something that was made in Sri Lanka because you disagree with the country's politics. The product might have already been made, but by buying it, you're saying "I'm OK with their lax human rights." 

A better analogy is the US Air Force debating whether or not to use some high-altitude medical research results the ****s had obtained by sticking concentration camp inmates in altitude chambers and running them up to 45k ft or so to see what would happen (that's a bit of an oversimplification, but you get the idea).  The argument went-those victims are already dead, and ignoring the existence of medically useful information, just so the research can be done (presumably in a less nasty way) all over again, was just silly.  Same thing with cold water exposure research (pilots going down in the ocean), and burn research (plane crashes frequently involve fire).  I believe in the end they used some of the data, which I agree with, saying that using the data validates the ****'s methods is specious.

Edit-Actually, the data (especially the hypothermia data) is apparently in wide use, quote from a member of the British Coast Guard-
"Some of the work done at Dachau was to evaluate how long a downed airman could survive floating in the cold waters of the North Sea or the North Atlantic.

Any member of Her Majesty's Coastguard can refer you to a document called SAR Graphs and Tables (SAR=Search And Rescue) which gives estimates of survival times of a human afloat in cold water.

It is very important data and part of the decision making process as to how fast to search, how much effort to put into the search and then the point where HM Coastguard stop searching for living persons and wait for the body to turn up."

Modifié par Hrodberht, 10 décembre 2009 - 09:45 .

[Giltspur]

Looking at all the harm Avernus's research had caused I was uncomfortable, in an RP sense at least, with what the stuff might eventually do to me.  So I just sort of left it there.  I mean, it would be there if I decided I needed the power.  All in all though, I felt it more important not to repeat the mistakes of the past Wardens with their pursuit of power at all costs.  

And then the stupid door locked on me after completing the area.  That's realistic.  I kill the Archdemon but can't open the door to a keep that I own. 

[SusanStoHelit]

I agree, none of my characters have drunk the potion. They have all, so far, been 'good' characters and destroyed it. However, I've got one coming along who is far more 'practical' and willing to make 'bad' choices for the greater good. (Yes, I role play my characters.)



However, on looking at what the concoction provides, it seems to me that the benefits for warriors and mages are a mixed blessing at best and probably not worth it. Rogues, otoh, seem to get the best 'deal' out of the concoction. My morally dubious character is a mage, so I don't know whether I'll use it or not. Maybe my next rogue will also be more pragmatic.

[tausra]

As a grey Warden you are going to die, you are tainted and if you do your job right you get annihilated. Drinking what could be poison or might make me into a better Warden is the right thing to do. Wardens don't care about what it takes and what must be sacrificed to end the Blight.

[Herr Uhl]

I see no problem with drinking the potion. It is there, the harm is already made. It is not it is going to kill more people by drinking it. A waste of those lives not to drink it.

SusanStoHelit wrote...
However, I've got one coming along who is far more 'practical' and willing to make 'bad' choices for the greater good. (Yes, I role play my characters.)

Role playing a RPG? You bastard!

[Mnemnosyne]

tausra wrote...

As a grey Warden you are going to die, you are tainted and if you do your job right you get annihilated. Drinking what could be poison or might make me into a better Warden is the right thing to do. Wardens don't care about what it takes and what must be sacrificed to end the Blight.

As one of the last two surviving Wardens in Ferelden, your job is to not die, at all costs, until you can strike a killing blow on the Archdemon.  Admittedly you don't really know this at the point where you go to Warden's Keep, but you have the general idea that it is your job to defend against the Blight and you're one of the only two people left in Ferelden to do it.  Putting yourself at unnecessary risk is hardly the right thing to do.

That's why I say that when we decide to drink the potion we're really playing it a bit out of character because we as players are aware that the potion most likely isn't going to hurt us (and if it does we can just reload).  From an in-character standpoint, it would be too risky for any reasonable person to try, especially a person in a position where they are valuable as one of the last two Grey Wardens in Ferelden.

[TechNomad]

It is an interesting dilemma. True that not partaking in the knowledge doesn't undo what was done in gaining that knowledge, but partaking in it also validates and vindicates those who used unethical means to achieve it. Who's to say that that knowledge wouldn't have been gained at some point down the line and the unethical conduct was merely a shortcut to an eventual outcome.



But the beauty of RPGs is the ability to do stuff that we wouldn't normally do, needless to say, I drank the potion, hehe.

[Auraad]

Koyasha wrote...

Some people foolishly believe that knowledge that has been gained through means they consider "immoral" or "wrong" should not be profited from.
Clearly that is an idiotic attitude. Not profiting from said knowledge does not undo what was done, and makes whatever was endured by those involved meaningless.

This attitude, of course, is absolutely wrong. Here goes a comparison:
Person A misuses a child (in a certain way, you get the idea) and makes a movie from it.
This Person puts the movie on a desk.
Person B (the hero) takes the movie from the desk and drinks it ... I mean, watches it.

Well, you still think it's a good idea?
The thing is, in drinking the potion (or watching the movie) you show the producer that what he did was right. Only in banning these things and clearly state that these things are morally wrong such "Persons A" will stop doing their stuff ...

[T0paze]

Well, if you destroy the potion, it means that the death of all those tortured Grey Wardens has indeed been in vain. One might say that it's what Avernus says (he says something like he gave their death a meaning), but the difference between a good PC and Avernus is that Avernus actually committed all those atrocities. A good PC might have never even thought about doing such things, but he arrives at a moment when everything has already been done and the only thing that is left is that concoction. If the PC destroys it, then those Grey Wardens really died for nothing.

This problem is not unknown in science. A number of scientists, especially in WWII Germany, conducted their experiments on people, and using the results of their their experiments creates a certain moral dilemma. However, such data ARE used (with certain ethical considerations, but still) because they might benefit science and, ultimately, medicine.

- - -

I wonder why is the word N A Z I filtered here?

Modifié par T0paze, 11 décembre 2009 - 10:26 .

[Allattar1]

Well luckily for us here the outcome is drink dodgy potion gain a few abilities we might/ might not find useful. It isn't essential to us.



Another more real scenario is the German research into hypoethermia in world war II.

They did terrible experiments on prisoners, mostly Jewish, Gypsy or other minorities.

From that research a lot of knowledge is used today on how to treat people suffering from hyopthermia.



The outcome in the game is do I take advantage of the dodgy research and drink a strange cocktail.

The real life scenario is despite the source of this research it is saving a lot of lives today.



In the game we can say yes no, dont care, and we only affect ourselves.

The real example is do we ignore this research and condemn people to die, or reduces there chances of survival, or do we use the research and help people live.



Its a moral choice the game just scratched the surface of

[Zenon]

After being pressured into getting intentionally poisoned and fate chained to die sooner or later in the end, for my hero this felt like a way out to regain control of his own fate again. If it works. Actually drank it before even confronting the mage playing guinea pig for his newest brew after reading the notes. Was a little bit disappointed afterwards. Used these powers very rarely, since others were more useful. Perhaps if my hero chose to become a blood mage and have certain entropy spells for healing himself it would have been good for him.



The research methods were unethical, the goal not. Hard to judge. Similar to golem dilemma. I figured, as long as there are willing participants the anvil would be ok. But didn't trust Branka or any king to keep up a high ethical standard if the Darkspawn threat keeps growing, so there you have it. I broke the anvil even though Shale didn't mind being a golem, as long as free will would be involved. The worst thing about the golems is, IMHO, to use control rods to turn them into a marionette while they still have a sentient mind, emotional soul, etc.

[noretus]

RP wise I didn't trust the stuff either. My characters are practical but not exactly evil ( Chaotic Neutral maybe ). I don't want to gulp down some mysterious juice that's been sitting there for who knows how long. The effects may or may not be useful but I already drank some putrid blood already and now I have nightmares, eat like a pig and die in 30 some years. Don't need another dose no matter how 'improved' it's supposed to be, thank you. I destroyed the bottle so that some happless moron doens't go drinking it.



Good idea, but it's too early for me to go testing it.



I told the mage to carry on his research, ethicly.

[Taritu]

My first character didn't drink it. I meant to ask Avernus about it and maybe drink it later (but couldn't reenter the keep. Blrrghhh). My reasoning was "I don't know what this thing will do to me, it could have negative effects."



If you know it works, I think it's ok to drink it. If making more requires torturing people, then making more would be bad, but if it doesn't then it might be acceptable depending. (Not that you're given that possibility.)



Avernus is clearly a genius.



(The rogue powers are clearly most useful. In particular I like the passive stealth boost.)

[Auraad]

...Avernus is clearly a genius.

....)

In my story, he's a DEAD genius ...  

[Lauranis]

MusukoYo wrote...

Just out of curiosity, what do you think a potion derived from blood magic would contain?

Hint: it's probably not fruit punch.

Mmm, fruit punch

[InvaderErl]

The first time I didn't notice the notes and just downed the drink having no idea what it was.

[DeathWyrmNexus]

SpaceAlex wrote...

Meh, at least if you drink the potion, the crazy wizard's experiments were not all for nothing. The deaths of all those victims pay off in the end. If, on the other hand, you destroy it, their deaths meant nothing.

That's how I see it anyway.

Pretty much this. I can't help what was done. I can't bring them back. I can only punish the person who did it and make sure their death weren't completely useless. It doesn't justify it but at least it doesn't cheapen it.

[Fleapants]

Whatever it takes.



Buttoms up!

[Alex Savchovsky]

noretus wrote...

RP wise I didn't trust the stuff either. My characters are practical but not exactly evil ( Chaotic Neutral maybe ).

RP-wise my character felt he needed all the advantage he could get in the last fight. It would be too irresponsible even for his chaotic good self.

[highcastle]

My main character left it there. He just couldn't bring himself to trust the work of a blood mage. Everyone who drinks it...well, they're taking Avernus' word that it works the way he says it does. But he's a blood mage. Their spells and rituals don't always go the way they intend, and there can be serious consequences. Just because we didn't see any in this game doesn't mean that down the line, something nasty won't come out of that little concoction. At the same time, my character didn't want to destroy it completely. He didn't trust it enough to drink it, but he didn't distrust enough to destroy it completely. So he left it, and maybe someone with more magical training could look into it later.



But for those who think it would be evil to destroy the concoction or that it somehow makes the deaths of those involved not matter...I disagree. By drinking it, you're condoning what was done to those poor souls. By destroying it, you're saying that nothing is worth the atrocity done to those folks. I don't see it as evil at all. Is it evil not to profit from evil? No. Paraphrasing from Alistair, using evil to fight evil is just wrong. It's the first step in that slippery slope, which may be fine for some characters' personalities, but didn't jibe at all with mine.

[axdorffe]

i just wanna say that remember how avernus was able to sruvive for over 400 years.. well if you guys remember his notes concerning the concoction go a little into about conquering death....imo one of DAO's larger yet understated themes(the writers really did a great job with overlapping and unerlaying themes, deep plot lines.. well done!) anyways from what i took out of it, not only was this unlocking the potentional of the taint within you but it also seemed to temporarily gain more control of it and the lifespan issue of the grey wardens....... avernus has had the taint well over 400 years..... over 10 times the lifespan 13 times the lifespan from the point you drink the darkspawn blood. if anyone is confused as to what im referring to, check your codex on avernus's notes..

[axdorffe]

and one more thing i wanna point out, seems like this choice is similar to the dark ritual choice, basically imo you make one you likely to make the other, not necessarily evil by any means, but thats of course a matter of opinion and point to the thread ; )