352 réponses à ce sujet

[Ryzaki]

This. I hate Orlais and the Chevaliers and the only time I posted in the Chevalier thread was to pay respects to Lambert Valmont for being a badass. There's discussion and debate and then there's antagonizing people you don't agree with.

 

Yep only time I go into the Sera or Dorian thread is if I found something interesting about them. And I'm usually in there for a quick "ooh that's cool!" and then I'm gone. Arguing for pages on pages is just pointless.

 

(Neutral ground though all bets are off arguing for days then).

[Dean_the_Young]

Do you constantly go into a fan thread to whine about the same tired remarks time and time again? I mean decent discussion is one thing because yay but if you know your position isn't going to change why start an argument in a fan thread about the exact same discussion you had the day before. It's pointless. You've made your mind up about the character. Worse you know you can't stand the guy. Why go into his thread just to repeat it constantly? It's not even like it's an discussion at this point it you're complaining about the same crap you've already complained about for the utmost time. And again complaining is fine, but when a vast majority of your contribution to the thread is the same complaints no one's gonna want you around.

 

You can be as "polite" as you want but constantly derailing conversations is going to get people aggressive and annoyed. Again it's the quantity.

 

This is not a one time thing. Hell I rag on Blackwall too but I don't make a point of doing it like freaking clockwork and crapping up the fan thread with it. (Yes I will ****** once in a while in the thread but It's not common enough for most of the damn thread to start blocking me).

 

Ryzaki... have you ever heard my views on the Dalish? Or the mage rebellion? Or the Collector Base? Or many of the other numerous topics I've staked often controversial positions over the years?

 

My whim and interest in engaging varies, but my views are hardly downplayed for the sake of one being 'a fan thread.' My main reason for avoiding most character threads is more because I find them off-topic social clubs  than places to, well, actual exchange views (and disagreements) about a character.

 

Not that this thread can really qualify on that. This isn't 'the thread for people who like Blackwall, all others please leave.' This is a thread whose specific topic is, and I'm quoting the OP here-

 

 

So what did people think when they found out that Blackwall was actually Thom Rainier? What did you do with him after this?

I judged him so that after Corypheous is defaeted he is actually going to join the Wardens. Although after I found out he wasn't a grey warden I refused to even speak to him.

 

 

This is what is considered 'on topic.' Hanako is not 'clogging up the fan thead' here. Hanako is directly engaging the entire premise of the topic. And she is doing so civilly, without straw-manning her opponents or ridiculing them as morally flawed or selectively interpreting the lore in distorted ways to justify this position. (And, helpfully, she has far more interests in the forum than just this one pet topic or an inclination to drag everything back to this view.)

 

You find her stubborn and annoying for her sticking around another thread where she's not wanted? Sure. Whatever. That's irrelevant here, because in this thread she is completely in the right.

 

You should be rejoicing that she's engaging in this topic, because this is the most appropriate way and place for her to express views she clearly holds strongly.

[Milan92]

Just to be clear I agree with Hanako's stance on Blackwall. Difference is I think there's a good dude in there somewhere and I'm a sucker for redemption stories.

 

I think most people agree with it.

 

Its just that they atleast try to look at it with a grey perspective, since thats how the world works. 

 

Not this black and white attitude.

[Dean_the_Young]

Well, you can pop into the Blackwall thread and try to find all the Hanako-related posts from a hundred-plus pages back - I'm not doing your research for you. Maybe then you'll see why she has managed to drive an awful lot of people in there insane to the point that they have put Hanako on ignore. As one of the few people who was actually on the more tolerant side and tried to be relatively nice the whole entire time, it's saying something that I'm finally annoyed enough to call a person out for what appears to have been, well, passive-aggressive behavior in the thread.

 

The short version is that many people tried to politely put forth our points of view, whereupon Hanako would basically do something like this: "no, you're wrong - it's like this and only this, and I'll keep saying this for the next twenty million pages until it drives you insane, including insisting that the character whom I hate is horrible and irredeemable because - when he was a child - he didn't intervene when a group of other kids tortured a puppy."

 

Oh, and did I mention that Hanako essentially attacked those of us who pointed out that Rainier was a kid at the time (vis-a-vis the puppy story) and may have been afraid/outnumbered/didn't want to tell his dad for some reason? See, what Hanakko did was to imply that we, as a whole, must have endorsed cruelty to animals. You call that respectful? And while we're at it - I understand that Hanako yet again posted something inflammatory in the Blackwall thread earlier today (which since got deleted because whatever it was ticked a lot of people off - me, I didn't see whatever it was, so I'm not sure what it was).

 

Anyway, this is officially over with as far as I'm concerned, and I have nothing more to say about it in here. Frankly, I think that if Hanako or you have a problem with anything, then maybe it's time to take it to PMs instead of dealing with it in this thread. I'm totally cool with ryzaki and other people who don't like Blackwall - as long as they're capable of having an intelligent debate without sounding like a broken record and crying boohoo when called out for, how shall I put this, antagonistic behavior. God knows, I displayed almost superhuman patience after the kind of stuff that Hanako did - but hey, if anyone else would like to accuse us of being okay with cruelty to animals simply for pointing out that you can't expect some kid to necessarily run in and play hero like Hanako did, etc. - feel free. *shrug*

 

You? On the more tolerant side? Superhuman patience? After what I've seen of you in the past and present?

 

Haha, I needed a good laugh to start the morning. Thanks for that.

[Dean_the_Young]

I think most people agree with it.

 

Its just that they atleast try to look at it with a grey perspective, since thats how the world works. 

 

Not this black and white attitude.

 

'Grey perspective' doesn't mean 'absolute moral relativism,' which is an angle I've seen many Blackwall supporters (including those in this thread) try and take. Take the people (some in this thread) who have tried to dispute the label 'child killer' because ignorance before the fact, or not striking the blow personally, or that it was unreasonable for him to stop when he realized it, but mainly because they don't like acknowledging the stigma. Even in your post you use the euphism 'it' to substitute- probably because you implicitly realize that no one would take you seriously if you said what you were dancing around.

 

Try it- 'they at least try to look at [child murdering] with a grey perspective, since that's how the world works.'

 

But even that's arguable. 'That's how the world works' and 'grey perspective' don't mean that someone can't do things beyond what are acceptable. Relativism may be used to say child-murdering isn't so bad, or differing concepts of justice may allow mercy after the crime, but nothing about 'grey morality' requires that. The reason that grey morality is grey, rather than black amorality, is that it still holds some moral standards and some sense of holding serious offenders to acount.

 

There's no moral relativism about Blackwall being a child killer or mass murderer, any more than there is relativity about being 'a little bit pregnant.' You are, or you are not, and Blackwall indisputably is someone who is responsible for the murder of children and a significant number of people. 'Grey morality' doesn't challenge objective descriptions of actions.

[Milan92]

'Grey perspective' doesn't mean 'absolute moral relativism,' which is an angle I've seen many Bioware supporters (including those in this thread) try and take. Take the people (some in this thread) who have tried to dispute the label 'child killer' because ignorance before the fact, or not striking the blow personally, or that it was unreasonable for him to stop when he realized it, but mainly because they don't like acknowledging the stigma. Even in your post you use the euphism 'it' to substitute- probably because you implicitly realize that no one would take you seriously if you said 'they at least try to look at child murdering with a grey perspective, since that's how the world works.'

 

But even that's arguable. 'That's how the world works' and 'grey perspective' don't mean that someone can't do things beyond what are acceptable. Relativism may be used to say child-murdering isn't so bad, or differing concepts of justice may allow mercy after the crime, but nothing about 'grey morality' requires that. The reason that grey morality is grey, rather than black amorality, is that it still holds some moral standards and some sense of holding serious offenders to acount.

 

There's no moral relativism about Blackwall being a child killer or mass murderer, any more than there is relativity about being 'a little bit pregnant.' You are, or you are not, and Blackwall indisputably is someone who is responsible for the murder of children and a significant number of people. 'Grey morality' doesn't challenge objective descriptions of actions.

 

I never denied that he is a child killer.

 

But that doesn't mean he doesn't deserve a chance to redeem himself by doing some good.

[Dean_the_Young]

I never denied that he is a child killer.

 

I didn't say you did. You did, however, downplay it remarkably in an appeal to the relativism of 'real world' and 'grey' morality.
 

I'm reminded of George Orwell's quote about how speech is frequently the defense of the indefensible.

 

“In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible. Things like the continuance of British rule in India, the Russian purges and deportations, the dropping of atom bombs on Japan, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments which are too brutal for most people to face, and which do not square with the professed aims of political parties. Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness. Defenseless villages are bombarded from the air, the inhabitants driven out into the countryside, the cattle machine-gunned, the huts set on fire with incendiary bullets: this is called pacification. Millions of peasants are robbed of their farms and sent trudging along the roads with no more than they can carry: this is called transfer of population or rectification of frontiers. People are imprisoned for years without trial, or shot in the back of the neck or sent to die of scurvy in Arctic lumber camps: this is called elimination of unreliable elements.”

 

In this case, the euphism for child murder is 'it.' What a wonderfully vague and harmless substitute.

 

 

 

But that doesn't mean he doesn't deserve a chance to redeem himself by doing some good.

 

 

Arguable- but I don't think anyone (including Hanako) has challenged your right to hold that view.

[Dean_the_Young]

I think Rainer punishes himself thoroughly (Cole is awesome) and genuinely believe his assuming of the Blackwall identity was a misguided attempt at becoming a different (better) person.

 

I agree in his sincerity- but I don't think 'punishing himself thoroughly' is enough to be 'sufficient.' 

 

'Justice' is a social concept, and a part of that is that it generally needs to be imposed by society to be seen as legitimate. Suffering from guilt alone isn't enough. Nor is choosing your own punishment- even if you do good things from it. They may be mitigating factors- but that's for someone else to judge.

 

Which could be the Inquisitor, in the end. I think that was an appropriate way to end his arc, no matter your decision.

[Br3admax]

I didn't say you did. You did, however, downplay it remarkably in an appeal to the relativism of 'real world' and 'grey' morality.
 

I'm reminded of George Orwell's quote about how speech is frequently the defense of the indefensible.

 

In this case, the euphism for child murder is 'it.' What a wonderfully vague and harmless substitute.

At the same time, I'm wondering how you know exactly what anyone means to do when they make such statements. No one uses pronouns to downplay anything. It's kind of assholish to expect someone to write out, "Child murder" every single time they talk about it, excuse my euphemism. 

[JackPoint]

I never denied that he is a child killer.

 

But that doesn't mean he doesn't deserve a chance to redeem himself by doing some good.

Blackwall had a hundred opertunities to come clean on his past to the PC, but he lied and sided stepped the issue at every turn. Thats not the mind set of a man with a concience looking for redemption.

[Dean_the_Young]

At the same time, I'm wondering how you know exactly what anyone means to do when they make such statements. No one uses pronouns to downplay anything. It's kind of assholish to expect someone to write out, "Child murder" every single time they talk about it, excuse my euphemism. 

 

Every time? Sure- and I'm not intending to imply that. But euphisms (including pronouns) are well established ways to shift focus and redirect focus from the unplesant truths.

 

I raised it here not because of the poster in particular, but rather as an example of the trend to downplay and ignore the objective facts that you can find across this thread when talking about Blackwall. Lots of people are big on 'he deserves another chance'- far fewer in his corner are big on being clear on what he deserves mercy for.

[Bugsie]

Given the degree of cognitive dissonance I seem to have about Blackwall and his crimes I feel atonement and/or being to the wardens is 'sufficient'. I see being made a warden a bit like being on death row, even with service there is no escaping the final outcome of that path.

What exactly is 'the mindset of a man looking for redemption' supposed to look like?

[macready1988]

I feel sorry for him. I thought his "crime" was greed and ignorance. I understand the family of the man he was hired to kill were also killed in the attack but its not like it was cold blooded and pre-meditated. Its as much a fault of Orlais sick politics as it is him and his mens crime.

After that he just slipped into depression and despair. Taking Blackwalls identity instead of taking his body to the wardens was stupid. I have no doubt they would have checked or outright believed his story and allowed him to attempt the joining. But either way, he wasnt a stable person then so i guess making the insane choice to become Blackwall is understandable in that light.

On the whole he was one of my favourite characters.

[CredulousAlloy]

Blackwall had a hundred opertunities to come clean on his past to the PC, but he lied and sided stepped the issue at every turn. Thats not the mind set of a man with a concience looking for redemption.

 

Except for the part where he willingly went to his death (as he thought) in order to save his former second-in-command. That in itself shows he has a conscience, no matter how long it took for him to eventually do the right thing. And there's plenty of evidence in the game (much of it coming from Cole, who sees only the truth inside people's heads) to suggest his desire to atone is genuine. Whether you feel he actually deserves the chance is up to you.

[Dean_the_Young]

Given the degree of cognitive dissonance I seem to have about Blackwall and his crimes I feel atonement and/or being to the wardens is 'sufficient'. I see being made a warden a bit like being on death row, even with service there is no escaping the final outcome of that path.

What exactly is 'the mindset of a man looking for redemption' supposed to look like?

 

One who openly acknowledges his failings, for one.

 

The biggest weakness of Blackwall's position is that while he privately admitted to his wrongdoing, he benefited from (and took advantage of) his deception and presumed innocence all the while.

 

Atonement is hard- but it's not only hard because to be meritorious it must be a challenge to forgive one's self. It is also hard because earning back the trust of the public who (rightfully) condemn you is hard, It is a burden to be worked through. Blackwall never did- at least, not until he finally turned himself in. That is when he truly took responsibility for it all, and that's the point his work towards redemption can really be said to begin.

[BraveVesperia]

One thing I've never been clear on is - why didn't he go and join the Wardens anyway? He says in jail that without the real Blackwall to vouch for him, they wouldn't take him, but he's been recruiting people for the Wardens himself, right? So if he can send them along with just a 'Blackwall says it's fine', how come he can't do that for himself?

 

Unless he hasn't been recruiting, and instead simply travels the world, helping people out and such?

 

He's bugged and disappears out of Skyhold after Adamant, so I'm a little lost about the certain aspects of his character.

 

I'd be interested to see how well he takes to being a Warden, considering he has quite an idealised view of them, and in reality they're pretty ruthless.

[Lady Luminous]

One of my playthroughs I was so annoyed because I knew he was Thom Rainer but he abandoned me before I got to see him in jail.

 

He called me a tyrant who had filled the inquisition with thugs and bullies! I was like

Spoiler

"Oh yeah? Well at least I'm not a coward who watched a puppy be strangled who then killed a family for political gain and then took over a dead man's identity!"

Seriously, the guy's got no leg to stand on. Hmpf!

[JackPoint]

One thing I've never been clear on is - why didn't he go and join the Wardens anyway? He says in jail that without the real Blackwall to vouch for him, they wouldn't take him, but he's been recruiting people for the Wardens himself, right? So if he can send them along with just a 'Blackwall says it's fine', how come he can't do that for himself?

 

Unless he hasn't been recruiting, and instead simply travels the world, helping people out and such?

 

He's bugged and disappears out of Skyhold after Adamant, so I'm a little lost about the certain aspects of his character.

 

I'd be interested to see how well he takes to being a Warden, considering he has quite an idealised view of them, and in reality they're pretty ruthless.

If you read the note you pick up from the bandits you fight upon going to meet Blackwall, you understand exactly what hes been doing. Seeking redemption for his crimes is not one of them.

[BraveVesperia]

If you read the note you pick up from the bandits you fight upon going to meet Blackwall, you understand exactly what hes been doing. Seeking redemption for his crimes is not one of them.

Thanks, I'll have a look! I don't think I've read it since my very first playthrough (before I knew anything about him), so I can't remember what it says.

[Ryzaki]

Ryzaki... have you ever heard my views on the Dalish? Or the mage rebellion? Or the Collector Base? Or many of the other numerous topics I've staked often controversial positions over the years?

 

My whim and interest in engaging varies, but my views are hardly downplayed for the sake of one being 'a fan thread.' My main reason for avoiding most character threads is more because I find them off-topic social clubs  than places to, well, actual exchange views (and disagreements) about a character.

 

Not that this thread can really qualify on that. This isn't 'the thread for people who like Blackwall, all others please leave.' This is a thread whose specific topic is, and I'm quoting the OP here-

 

 

 

This is what is considered 'on topic.' Hanako is not 'clogging up the fan thead' here. Hanako is directly engaging the entire premise of the topic. And she is doing so civilly, without straw-manning her opponents or ridiculing them as morally flawed or selectively interpreting the lore in distorted ways to justify this position. (And, helpfully, she has far more interests in the forum than just this one pet topic or an inclination to drag everything back to this view.)

 

You find her stubborn and annoying for her sticking around another thread where she's not wanted? Sure. Whatever. That's irrelevant here, because in this thread she is completely in the right.

 

You should be rejoicing that she's engaging in this topic, because this is the most appropriate way and place for her to express views she clearly holds strongly.

 

You say that like I don't have views that I've argued as well.

 

If you'd seriously make the same debates constantly in a fan thread then meh Dean. It strikes me as supremely petty. If you keep saying how irredeemable someone is and how you want to punish them and you expect to get non hostile reactions I just...I don't know what to say. It's one thing if this was uncommon but everyone knowws how you feel in the thread, you're not bringing anything new to the discussion so why keep saying it? No ones gives a **** after a point.

 

In the right? Fine and it's everyone's right to ignore him and dislike him because of his circular whining about how Blackwall is irredemable.

 

So no I'm not gonna rejoice about someone making a fanthread a hostile tiresome place to be. If he wants to whine about him so much he can make a damn separate Blackwall thread or use one of the many ones that are already there. There's absolutely no reason to clog up the fan thread with the exact same tired debates.

 

As for the seriousness of Blackwall's crime. Yeah it was terrible and he did it for crappy reasons. But you know who else I recruited in DAO who killed people for shitty reasons? Hi Sten. If you want him to spend the rest of his life making up for it? Then send him to the wardens or let him be executed or even conscript him. But don't act like conscripting him because you refuse to let him go to the wardens because it's something he wants (nvm he has severe blinders on regarding the wardens and the reality slap will be as good as anything as a wake up call) and god forbid that happens. It's just petty. Which is fine when you admit you're being petty (like me exiling him with the wardens) and not trying to crouch it in justice and the act like the rest of us are rewarding him.

 

God ****** damnit Dean you got me over here defending Blackwall.

[Reman]

Honestly, I let him atone for his crimes. Thom changed after taking the title of "Blackwall". He was helping the villagers when we first meet him, and one can only assume if he was continuing that pattern when he was still roaming southern Thedas. He does want to help people. He knows what he did was wrong, and his demeanor at the prison in Val Royeaux  about not wanting to let out shows how much he has punished himself. Once I took him back to Skyhold, I wanted him to be him. If he atones, he truly respects the real Blackwall and instead of assuming him, he honors him by fighting for what he stood for as a Warden. Although I could've sent him to the Wardens afterwards, I didn't because the condition of the wardens in the tapestry is pretty crappy. You know the inquisition is going to help the southern wardens anyhow, so Blackwall would still be involved. 

 

Plus the tarot card of an atoned Blackwall is just too good to let go.

[Dean_the_Young]

You say that like I don't have views that I've argued as well.

 

If you'd seriously make the same debates constantly in a fan thread then meh Dean. It strikes me as supremely petty. If you keep saying how irredeemable someone is and how you want to punish them and you expect to get non hostile reactions I just...I don't know what to say. It's one thing if this was uncommon but everyone knowws how you feel in the thread, you're not bringing anything new to the discussion so why keep saying it? No ones gives a **** after a point.

 

In the right? Fine and it's everyone's right to ignore him and dislike him because of his circular whining about how Blackwall is irredemable.

 

So no I'm not gonna rejoice about someone making a fanthread a hostile tiresome place to be. If he wants to whine about him so much he can make a damn separate Blackwall thread or use one of the many ones that are already there. There's absolutely no reason to clog up the fan thread with the exact same tired debates.

 

As for the seriousness of Blackwall's crime. Yeah it was terrible and he did it for crappy reasons. But you know who else I recruited in DAO who killed people for shitty reasons? Hi Sten. If you want him to spend the rest of his life making up for it? Then send him to the wardens or let him be executed or even conscript him. But don't act like conscripting him because you refuse to let him go to the wardens because it's something he wants (nvm he has severe blinders on regarding the wardens and the reality slap will be as good as anything as a wake up call) and god forbid that happens. It's just petty. Which is fine when you admit you're being petty (like me exiling him with the wardens) and not trying to crouch it in justice and the act like the rest of us are rewarding him.

 

God ****** damnit Dean you got me over here defending Blackwall.

 

Clearly because I'm awesome. Or a troll. Or an awesome troll.

 

More seriously- 'making the same debates constantly' is one of those memory blurs that depends more as much on the viewer as the person taking the position. I see no issue, and certainly nothing petty, about holding the same general position- and having occasionally snooped by Hanako's posting history including posts in the Blackwall thread, I can say with some confidence that she doesn't just copy-paste the same things to any given challenge. Certainly no more than one might expect if, say, her verbal sparring partners were giving the same sort of challenges over and over. Which makes the 'you're not bringing anything new' charge as much against the pro-Blackwall crowd as against her. At which point I have to wonder why a pro-X repititive circle jerk is any more deserving of respect than an anti-X repititive circle jerk. But that's all kinda irrelevant to her conduct in this thread, which should be the important frame of refernce.

 

Regarding Sten, if you wish to take the topic there, we can make a few important and conceivably relevant distinctions between Sten and Blackwall. Sten, for one, surrendered to the relevant authorities immediately after his crime- he never rejected it, or hid it. In fact, he never asked to be redeemed either. Recruiting Sten is a pretty utilitarian action with known sins from the start, and with the potential involvement of local authorities who have already judged him, unlike Blackwall who both tries to live up to his assumed morality but also uses it as a shield to escape such judgement. End point being, there are significant moral (and justice) distinctions that can be made between the two, if we wish.

 

I'm not sure we do, however, since I'm uncomfortable with your use of 'you' towards the end. I can't tell whether you're using it in broad non-specifics that don't refer to me, associating me with positions I haven't taken, or a mixture of the two.