264 réponses à ce sujet

[MassivelyEffective0730]

StreetMagic wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

StreetMagic wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

@Massive
Believe me, I'm well aware of that. I think such people are far less objective than they claim, though.

Most of them, yeah. I like to think I'm not one of them. People who are practical and logical to a point where its what is the driving factor of their philosophy.

My philosophy isn't based on morality, its based on economics (which I suppose my morality is based off of as well). I'd like to think people who are the true neutrals (or the neutral good/evils) will be in charge.

Neutral Goods are highly moral. They're the outsiders, but idealists. Luke Skywalker is the poster boy for Neutral Good. They're almost always Jesus like.. Optimus Prime is another.

Not really. They're willing to get their hands dirty if it works towards the goal at hand. You're thinking of the lawful goods.

Lawful is Orderly. Always the Paladins in D&D. The cops of the world. The finger wagging types. Superman is the biggest example.

They're the ones who believe in the moral authority, not necessarily the order. Do you think they'd let an unjust order stand?

[MassivelyEffective0730]

StreetMagic wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

I'm not really paying attention, but I see a painting of Caesar's assassination so I assume that means we are talking about assassinating the current councilors and seizing control of the Council afterwards

See, you're a controller. You wish to have that power yourself, but don't like who has that power.

I just want to destroy the Council completely.

I suppose you could say I'm like that as well. 

I'm the only person I'd trust with that power.

[DeinonSlayer]

StreetMagic wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

I'm not really paying attention, but I see a painting of Caesar's assassination so I assume that means we are talking about assassinating the current councilors and seizing control of the Council afterwards

See, you're a controller. You wish to have that power yourself, but don't like who has that power.

I just want to destroy the Council completely.

Not sure where you fall, StreetMagic, but I'm pretty sure Steelcan, Massively and I are all destroyers.

[Steelcan]

StreetMagic wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

I'm not really paying attention, but I see a painting of Caesar's assassination so I assume that means we are talking about assassinating the current councilors and seizing control of the Council afterwards

See, you're a controller. You wish to have that power yourself, but don't like who has that power.

I just want to destroy the Council completely.

Not in the sense of the endings am I a "controller"

besides, don't tell em you wouldn't want to Ides of March those damned councillors

hell we can marry one of them to the asari and Red Wedding them, its all the same to me

[DeinonSlayer]

Oh, God, this is gonna become a Spiderman thread, isn't it?

[Darks1d3]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

@Massive
Believe me, I'm well aware of that. I think such people are far less objective than they claim, though.

Most of them, yeah. I like to think I'm not one of them. People who are practical and logical to a point where its what is the driving factor of their philosophy.

My philosophy isn't based on morality, its based on economics (which I suppose my morality is based off of as well). I'd like to think people who are the true neutrals (or the neutral good/evils) will be in charge.

Didn't you come on here a couple times ranting about how you wanted to smash Tali's faceplate and watch her die? Or was that just Necanor bait? I really don't want this to degrade into a Waifu wars thread, just an observation.

I believe nobody is truly unbiased, sociopath or no. I freely admit I have my own biases.

Regarding your other post, tyrants are precisely what I want us to avoid. Who, exactly, would you point to as a role model? 

I never said I wasn't unbiased. I simply said that I wasn't one confined to or bound to one side of a spectrum or another. 

As for tyrants, lets just say the ideal. I'm a believer in a meritocracy, and a believer to some extent in the strong ruling over the weak. I'm one who goes for order over chaos.

For the most part, I'm self-aware enough to say I'm full of contradictions and really have no clue how I'd be like as a political leader.

I don't know why this piqued my curiosity, but I have to ask.

When Javik starts talking about the "cosmic imperative" in ME3 and says "The strong flourished, the weak perished. The governments of your cycle seem concerned with ensuring the survival of all". Shepard can either respond with "The weak need protection" or "The week hold us back". Which choice do you usually go with? Are you someone who agrees with each sentiment partially?

[MassivelyEffective0730]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

StreetMagic wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

I'm not really paying attention, but I see a painting of Caesar's assassination so I assume that means we are talking about assassinating the current councilors and seizing control of the Council afterwards

See, you're a controller. You wish to have that power yourself, but don't like who has that power.

I just want to destroy the Council completely.

Not sure where you fall, StreetMagic, but I'm pretty sure Steelcan, Massively and I are all destroyers.

I support the Council system, just with more... me. And as the head voice. What would I do with said power?

I'd get **** done. For good or ill. I'd do it myself if the situation called for it.

[Steelcan]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Oh, God, this is gonna become a Spiderman thread, isn't it?

nah, but now I want to photoshop the Councillor's faces on Robb Stark's body

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Darks1d3 wrote...

I don't know why this piqued my curiosity, but I have to ask.

When Javik starts talking about the "cosmic imperative" in ME3 and says "The strong flourished, the weak perished. The governments of your cycle seem concerned with ensuring the survival of all". Shepard can either respond with "The weak need protection" or "The week hold us back". Which choice do you usually go with? Are you someone who agrees with each sentiment partially?

I'd go with Javik's response to the renegade option. 

The weak hold us back, but they can be made into a resource of their own. I also believe that all have the capacity to be strong (though I do NOT believe that everyone should be so just yet).

[MassivelyEffective0730]

StreetMagic wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...


They're the ones who believe in the moral authority, not necessarily the order. Do you think they'd let an unjust order stand?

The "moral" part in D&D alignments is in the second bit (Good/Neutral/Evil). Lawful/Chaotic is about Order (or lack thereof). Even Lawful Evil types follow a code of some sort.. even if they're ruthless bastards.

Most of the time, Lawful just means having a stick up your ass. While Chaotic is just being spastic. Like, say, Spider-Man. He's Chaotic Good - he just flings around and cracks jokes, never taking anyone seriously.

I don't think you understand the D&D alignment chart.

[DeinonSlayer]

StreetMagic wrote...

I choose Destroy in the end..

But politically speaking, I'd rather decentralize power in Mass Effect. Clean slate.. **** everything up and let them sort it out afterwards. I'd find it more interesting if every species was trying to compete or had their spies or exclusive ambitions, instead of the Council dictating everything (and the outsiders trying to get in. Humans, Volus or whoever can't even think about being competitive without first thinking about membership in the Council. That sucks).

I agree. I could go on for a while about some of the s*** they've pulled, and not just the Spectres.

[TheBlackBaron]

It's kind of funny how the whole Spectre thing pretty much went away after ME1, isn't it? Whether or not you were officially reinstated by the Council in ME2 was basically irrelevant, and in any event, you had very little interaction with the Council in ME2 or 3, since Shepard was mostly acting in either an independent or an Alliance soldier capacity.

In any event, the Spectres operate as the Council's own Special Activities Division, and like it or not, such an institution is too invaluable to a government to go away. Their days of acting like frontier sheriffs or Mega City Judges might end (so no more Shepard walking in "hello friend i am Spectre let me in" a la Noveria), but far more likely that they would go underground than be disbanded.

Modifié par TheBlackBaron, 17 février 2014 - 06:08 .

[CrutchCricket]

Another way to look at it is to notice that just about every major race more or less has their own Spectre analogues:

Salarians- STG obviously, Spectre model based on them.
Asari- Justicars
Turians- Cabals or Blackwatch
Humans- Cerberus (at least when it was Alliance Black ops)
Batarians- Special Intervention Unit (maybe)


Then there's that whole Shadow Broker business... so yeah "above the law" operatives aren't going anywhere.

As for the council, I can't fault them for protecting their powerbase, it's what anyone in power would do. The only thing it's guilty of in my book is complacency and idiocy. I had hoped their replacements from ME2 onwards would be different. Sadly, this was not the case. We can only hope things will be different going forward. One thing I think they should do away with more is the "Space UN" distinction which servers zero purpose and is never acknowledged again. Council members should have direct ties to species governments.

[shodiswe]

Arn't spectres a little bit like CIA other such things? just that they answer directly to the council rather than a complicated networked chain of command?

A Spectre might have plenty of power but if a Council member tells them, "No", then they got no power unless they go renegade on the Council and get kicked out.

[Dean_the_Young]

I've said it before and I've said it again: the Spectres are hilarious misused for their one actually unique asset: cutting through red tape. Giving it to paramilitary personnel to do military actions is akin to giving a high-spec car to someone who walks to work.

There's just so little reason for someone with Shepard's skill set to need it. The difficulties of sending a team of soldiers or police are political, not legal: being a Spectre doesn't actually prevent political reprecussions from occuring, and you can create whatever rules of engagement you want your special forces to operate under to legalize their actions on the ground. Not, mind you, that there's much legal obstruction to sending military teams to pirate outposts or to track down drug lords.

Spectre status is useful for moving within Bureacracies, and would be far more advantageous to solving a threat hiding within the legal system where police can't move freely. Pirates? Small scale. Future!wikileaks? Corporate manipulation of the galactic economy? Political cabals hiding behind privacy laws? That's something judicial unaccountability would actually help for... and not something paramilitary special forces can particularly help with until the takedown. At which point you can just use regular paramilitary tools.

Really, the 'ideal' Spectre isn't a warhound like Shepard, or ruthless bodycount extrordinair like Shepard. The 'ideal' Spectre would be a Volus who frequently changes pressure suits and uses Spectre resources and legal immunity to audit the unethical 1% of galactic power.

[shodiswe]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

I've said it before and I've said it again: the Spectres are hilarious misused for their one actually unique asset: cutting through red tape. Giving it to paramilitary personnel to do military actions is akin to giving a high-spec car to someone who walks to work.

There's just so little reason for someone with Shepard's skill set to need it. The difficulties of sending a team of soldiers or police are political, not legal: being a Spectre doesn't actually prevent political reprecussions from occuring, and you can create whatever rules of engagement you want your special forces to operate under to legalize their actions on the ground. Not, mind you, that there's much legal obstruction to sending military teams to pirate outposts or to track down drug lords.

Spectre status is useful for moving within Bureacracies, and would be far more advantageous to solving a threat hiding within the legal system where police can't move freely. Pirates? Small scale. Future!wikileaks? Corporate manipulation of the galactic economy? Political cabals hiding behind privacy laws? That's something judicial unaccountability would actually help for... and not something paramilitary special forces can particularly help with until the takedown. At which point you can just use regular paramilitary tools.

Really, the 'ideal' Spectre isn't a warhound like Shepard, or ruthless bodycount extrordinair like Shepard. The 'ideal' Spectre would be a Volus who frequently changes pressure suits and uses Spectre resources and legal immunity to audit the unethical 1% of galactic power.

There are clearly threats, like Udinas coup, the Spectres failed terribly on that one however.

It also makes sense that the Turians would want it to be military people, it's the onyl way they know.
The Salarian STG is kind of militant aswell.

If you look at it then it makes sense that the Spectres are recruiting mainly military personel, but we have also been told they got other types of people, diplomats.... Likely Asari poledancers or something... Likely with some commando training aswell to satisfy the Turians need for them to be competent soldiers fit for service according to their traditions.
Turians make a huge distinction between people who served in the military and those who didn't. People who didn't got no political power and can't get into any position of authority.

A Volus could gain political power in the Hirarchy if they go through military training. Those are likely very rare, it would have to be those ultrarare Volus from Multiplayer  

One of those might, possibly get accepted for the Spectres.

[Stalker]

A Spectre is pretty much an executioner of the councils' tyranny. They have the right to force people of every race into obeying the councils' will, even though said race might not even be in the council and thous have no meddling in their politics and laws.

It's actually a pretty terrible idea, but as long as the other races have no means to stop them and the council remains in power, the Spectres are an excellent tool to enforce progress... and of course to have an excuse to let the protagonist go wherever the **** he wants.

[RangerSG]

StreetMagic wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

StreetMagic wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...


They're the ones who believe in the moral authority, not necessarily the order. Do you think they'd let an unjust order stand?

The "moral" part in D&D alignments is in the second bit (Good/Neutral/Evil). Lawful/Chaotic is about Order (or lack thereof). Even Lawful Evil types follow a code of some sort.. even if they're ruthless bastards.

Most of the time, Lawful just means having a stick up your ass. While Chaotic is just being spastic. Like, say, Spider-Man. He's Chaotic Good - he just flings around and cracks jokes, never taking anyone seriously.

I don't think you understand the D&D alignment chart.

No, I do. I'm too ****ing old and geeky to not know about D&D.

Sorry. I'm ashamed to say it, but it's true.


edit: In political terms, Lawful and Chaos are the same thing as our real world Authoritarian and Libertarian scales. It has nothing to do with morals. That's what the "Good" and "Evil" scale is for.

OK, your edit is close to the intended D&D model. I didn't buy your original statement either. A person can be lawful without being rigid as Ned Stark. Law doesn't abrogate the need for mercy or compassion. Nor does Law mandate that those cannot exist. As for Chaos, well, I've always been of the opinion that CG sounds good in a game setting, but in real life, would be the ultimate slippery slope. That much 'certainty' about what's right compared to everyone else will never end well. Assuming they're given the power to act on it.