Comparing the nobility who's morality is all over the place to a honor bound military organization, when a few of the latter's members who committed crimes that are frowned upon by said organization is fubar. I guess the actions of a few determines the whole? Right?
Well, given the fact that every last chevalier is a brutal murderer by definition... I don't think it much matters.
Well, given the fact that every last chevalier is a brutal murderer by definition... I don't think it much matters.
Comparing the nobility who's morality is all over the place to a honor bound military organization, when a few of the latter's members who committed crimes that are frowned upon by said organization is fubar. I guess the actions of a few determines the whole? Right?
They are nobility and having code of honor won't make it prettier i can have code of honor but if i will start shoot to civilians hardly will make it prettier. We know how their initiation looks like we have been told by ferelden and orlesians about them well you complain that i judge them because few members but you claim they are great and ferelden (when we heard that not only from fereldens) spread lies because of 2 members so well....
The question is: if we had a chevalier companion, which of the known warriors would you ditch?
I would always give them a chance to explain themselves, like I did with companions like Sten and Zevran. After that, I will enact what I see as proper judgement. If said Chevalier companion was similar to Dorian in the "I hate what my group has become" and regrets their actions, I wouldn't kill or imprison them. But if they are approving of or even meh on what the Chevaliers do, I wouldn't hesitate a second.
*shrugs*They are nobility and having code of honor won't make it prettier i can have code of honor but if i will start shoot to civilians hardly will make it prettier. We know how their initiation looks like we have been told by ferelden and orlesians about them well you complain that i judge them because few members but you claim they are great and ferelden (when we heard that not only from fereldens) spread lies because of 2 members so well....
You forgot- they don't have Geneve's convention and Rules of a Man.
They did have Augustine's just war rules, and probably Aquinas' version as well depending on dates. At least in our world. The question is, do they have Andrastian counterparts in Thedas?
Isn't that their job?
She may have been addressing the murders of innocent elves as part of the chevalier initiation rite, as opposed to fighting opponents.
I wouldn't be surprised if the initiation prepares them for putting down the eventual elven riot that crops up every other week.And yet you balk at the thought of a chevalier who kills a city elf as part of a traditional initiation rite?
I doubt most of the chevaliers enjoy it (that's probably why they get drunk to do it) but it's expected of them and helps them bond and become a band of brothers. What if they secretly regret having to kill city elves but are ardent in their belief that the chevaliers, as a whole, are a respectable group that help a lot of people and do good? Would you let that potential companion live?
Isn't that their job?
I'm referring to their initiation.
Sten killed an entire family (including kids!) because he was upset that he lost his sword and once you get to know him, he doesn't hide the fact that the Qunari will soon invade, killing any innocent person that doesn't convert to the Qun. And yet you let him live?
And Zevran LOVED his job - he enjoyed killing countless people for money. Sure, some of them may have deserved it, but how does that make it better? He was still a mass murderer.
And yet you balk at the thought of a chevalier who kills a city elf as part of a traditional initiation rite?
I doubt most of the chevaliers enjoy it (that's probably why they get drunk to do it) but it's expected of them and helps them bond and become a band of brothers. What if they secretly regret having to kill city elves but are ardent in their belief that the chevaliers, as a whole, are a respectable group that help a lot of people and do good? Would you let that potential companion live?
Personally, I let them live because I don't like killing people outside of combat, and figure that they can be useful and possibly find redemption. I would do the same for a chevalier, but would engage with them to ensure that they do find redemption. The inability of which to do is extremely annoying for Sten and Zevran; I don't like either of them and feel that their natures are overly glossed-over by the narrative and dialogue options.
She may have been addressing the murders of innocent elves as part of the chevalier initiation rite, as opposed to fighting opponents.
I wouldn't be surprised if the initiation prepares them for putting down the eventual elven riot that crops up every other week.
I wouldn't be surprised if the initiation prepares them for putting down the eventual elven riot that crops up every other week.
Ah, yes, because being the tyrants' iron fist justifies so very much.
Ah, yes, because being the tyrants' iron fist justifies so very much.
I guess rioting is against Orlesian law.
One would think that if there was a riot every other week, that rulers who gave a **** would try to find the root cause and stop it... but apparently they're content to have their death squads handle everything.
I wouldn't be surprised if the initiation prepares them for putting down the eventual elven riot that crops up every other week.
I don't see how murdering a random man or woman prepares anyone for dealing with a riot of innumerable people.
Wasn't that said they do that at night to kill elves as initiation (if that was in case they would simple send them openly) i very doubt that they wait for elves to riot...
I don't see how murdering a random man or women prepares anyone for dealing with a riot of innumerable people.
Well, presumably it prepares them to be OK with murdering elves?
Sten killed an entire family (including kids!) because he was upset that he lost his sword and once you get to know him, he doesn't hide the fact that the Qunari will soon invade, killing any innocent person that doesn't convert to the Qun. And yet you let him live?
And Zevran LOVED his job - he enjoyed killing countless people for money. Sure, some of them may have deserved it, but how does that make it better? He was still a mass murderer.
You mean the same family whose deaths haunt Sten? And why should I kill a man or woman for what they might do? I should just kill everyone them since they may someday kill somebody.
And for all I, and even Zevran knows, none of those people he killed were innocent. The one who is known to be innocent by Zevran haunts him.
And yet you balk at the thought of a chevalier who kills a city elf as part of a traditional initiation rite?
I doubt most of the chevaliers enjoy it (that's probably why they get drunk to do it) but it's expected of them and helps them bond and become a band of brothers. What if they secretly regret having to kill city elves but are ardent in their belief that the chevaliers, as a whole, are a respectable group that help a lot of people and do good? Would you let that potential companion live?
In both cases, Sten and Zevran were not sworn to defend the people they killed. Meanwhile the Chevaliers, who are to protect Orlesian citizens, have to pass an initiation that has them kill an innocent Orlesian citizen.
As I told leaguer, I will ask them about their feelings towards what they did. If they regret and want to make amends and/or 'restore the glory of the Chevaliers', fine. If they still see their order as anything but the hypocritical glorified thugs that the Chevaliers are and don't need to change however, then they will either be killed or imprisoned.
One would think that if there was a riot every other week, that rulers who gave a **** would try to find the root cause and stop it... but apparently they're content to have their death squads handle everything.
Easier said than done especially when the elves are barely considered sentient by the populace. Plus judging by the anger of the elves i don't think anything short of steel would pacify them.
So you're justifying the chevaliers' murders by the idiotic racism of Orlais' human population? Maybe the utter destruction of the empire is the best choice after all.
@Sasha Braus- Innocence is subjective, Zevran is haunted by the one he deemed to be innocent.
It's desensitization.Well, presumably it prepares them to be OK with murdering elves?
@Sasha Braus- Innocence is subjective, Zevran is haunted by the one he deemed to be innocent.
No, he found out later she was not guilty of the treasonous act she was executed for.
So you're justifying the chevaliers' murders by the idiotic racism of Orlais' human population? Maybe the utter destruction of the empire is the best choice after all.
That may not be far-fetched. It seems like quite a bit is optional, and I can imagine Ferelden's sovereignty and the possible emancipation of the Dales would benefit from Orlais being too weak to threaten either nation.
No. Just brainstorming the true intent behind the initiation, and the correlation between the usage of Chevaliers to put down the riots.So you're justifying the chevaliers' murders by the idiotic racism of Orlais' human population? Maybe the utter destruction of the empire is the best choice after all.
That may not be far-fetched. It seems like quite a bit is optional, and I can imagine Ferelden's sovereignty and the possible emancipation of the Dales would benefit from Orlais being too weak to threaten either nation.
Retour en haut