Zum Inhalt wechseln

Foto

Is the Rivalry bond believable?


  • Bitte melde dich an um zu Antworten
192 Antworten in diesem Thema

#126
Catilina

Catilina
  • Members
  • 1.918 Beiträge

So I'm hearing that either time Hawke is always a criminal for one way or another.... But Bethany gets taken to the circle, so thusly Warrior/Rogue Hawke isn't criminal there - becuase they didn't make her a GW or something, so yeah, their not criminals if Bethany is taken to the Circle...

Haha! Because if she would being Grey Warden, she would be criminal ... is evident! (As all Grey Warden mage are criminal)   ;)  Or her brother / sister would be criminal if  s/he wants to protect her...

Poor Bethany, although as far as I know, she does not so much hate the Circle, such as Anders ...

 

(This is a bullshit, nobody criminal, who dont want going to jail due to an inborn attribution...)



#127
GoldenGail3

GoldenGail3
  • Members
  • 3.543 Beiträge

Haha! Because if she would being Grey Warden, she would be criminal ... is evident! (As all Grey Warden mage are criminal)   ;)  Or her brother / sister would be criminal if  s/he wants to protect her...
Poor Bethany, although as far as I know, she does not so much hate the Circle, such as Anders ...
 
(This is a bullshit, nobody criminal, who dont want going to jail due to an inborn attribution...)


No, GW are permitted to use the right of Consciption on people from the chantry/other people in Thedas without a word, so therefore she's not a criminal. You could claim Hawkes did help in the escape of a Aposate; who became vaguely like Anders in this instance...

#128
SgtSteel91

SgtSteel91
  • Members
  • 1.885 Beiträge

What would that make Blue/Dimplomatic Hawke?



#129
Catilina

Catilina
  • Members
  • 1.918 Beiträge

No, GW are permitted to use the right of Consciption on people from the chantry/other people in Thedas without a word, so therefore she's not a criminal. You could claim Hawkes did help in the escape of a Aposate; who became vaguely like Anders in this instance...

 
It was sarcasm, sorry. It was so absurd to seriously answer on this bullshit:

Shechinah, on 20 Apr 2016 - 7:10 PM, said:snapback.png

If Hawke is a mage then yes, of course. That there is no option for Hawke to do so means that Hawke is always breaking that law and so is always a criminal in the game. If Hawke is not a mage then Hawke remains always criminal because of Bethany.
 


#130
Catilina

Catilina
  • Members
  • 1.918 Beiträge

What would that make Blue/Dimplomatic Hawke?

/ Sarcasm on
Of course, he also a criminal. All Hawkes are criminals, and criminals all his friends too.



#131
GoldenGail3

GoldenGail3
  • Members
  • 3.543 Beiträge

What would that make Blue/Dimplomatic Hawke?


Better than everyone else in Kirkwall...
  • Catilina gefällt das

#132
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20.675 Beiträge

There's no indication that Aveline goes after any apostates (who are not serial killers or something).  It's not her job.  Homicide cops can arrest drug dealers just for drug dealing, but they usually don't.  

 

Aveline doesn't go after apostates... but she also covers up their presence from legal authorities whose lawful duty it is to go after them. In your analogy, Aveline is the homicide cop who sits ontop of a drug den because she has friends involved who benefit her, even as she happily shuts down other other criminal actions that aren't her job.

 

Is it her job? No- and neither is accompanying Hawke. Is it special favors and exceptions in violation with the spirit of her role and duties? Absolutely. It's not Aveline's job to hunt apostates, but it's not her job to help harbor them either.

 

 

So I'm hearing that either time Hawke is always a criminal for one way or another.... But Bethany gets taken to the circle, so thusly Warrior/Rogue Hawke isn't criminal there - becuase they didn't make her a GW or something, so yeah, their not criminals if Bethany is taken to the Circle...

 

Rather, Hawke stops being a criminal (because he/she can no longer conduct that crime) for that particular activity. They might be a criminal if, say, conspiracy is an extended crime- the entire point of the Deep Road expedition is to corruptly buy safety for an apostate- but the crime of harboring an apostate ends.

 

Not that there aren't many, many other activities of questionable legality for Hawke to partake in. Breaking, entering, and manslaughter on the basis of hear-say- ie, the typical quest in Kirkwall- can provide plenty of opportunities for even an unimaginative prosecutor.

 

What would that make Blue/Dimplomatic Hawke?

 

A smooth criminal.

 

-insert gif-

 

More seriously- it makes a point of author awareness failure because the writers clearly didn't put much consideration into Hawke being anything but another RPG character outside the law. Mass Effect had spectre status (with a bit of being a terrorist) or 'lawless' space, KOTOR had the Jedi/Sith privilege, Jade Empire had you opposed by the Evil Empire in the first place. Even DAO had the Warden exemption- not only are Wardens uniquely above the law in the name of the Blight crisis, but Loghain was the enemy- anything you did not only had Warden/Blight privileges, but also the fact that the laws you were breaking were of an illegitimate authority.

 

Thing is... DA2 lacks that. Kirkwall isn't an illegitimate authority. It's corrupt and troubled, but it's far from the Evil Empire, and Hawke lacks any special legal authority or exemption. Hawke gets away with things because Hawke's strong enough to kill those who resist, and bribe enough of the rest, even as Hawke rises to power based on those two things: money, often questionably gained, and killing people who disagree with Hawke's desires.

 

No one bothers to ask if Hawke has any right or justification to kick down doors, kill guards, and loot the homes of total strangers just because someone else asked them to. Stealing every piece of junk that's not nailed down, selling pants that someone presumably stored with the intent to sue... it's never even questioned. It's just ignored in most cases, and handwaved in others- hey, it's self defense, they attacked us- even if Hawke's basis for being there is weak in the first place.

 

It's just never thought through, and rarely justified. When you recruit Fenris, you go on a rampage and basically take over Danarius's manor. You find it empty and infested with demons, which is convenient... but it's not why you're there, is it? You went there to kill a guy. And if the manor had been populated, you would have killed them too- maybe not the servants (maybe- if they didn't attack first), but you would have wiped out all the guards like you do everywhere else because why not. And even when Danarius isn't there, Fenris just... keep it. Squat in it, waiting for revenge, basically stealing private property (loathsome as the man who owns it may be), and it's all good because Fenris is with us and the Captian of the Guard looks the other way. And no one even questions if she should.

 

Hawke isn't some victim of an illegitimate authority- there is a legitimate authority, imperfect as it may be, and Hawke ignores it because we're the PC and we do what we want. We grow in power. We even threaten to take the mantle of legitimate authority ourselves. And we never question if we ourselves are legitimate because of course we are. We're us, and our companions must be good too because they like us and help us, and so we don't question them because they amuse us and we're all that matters.

 

It's this really, really bizaar lack of introspection that leads people to go 'Varric is the best person of the cast', practically the moral paragon of reasonableness and morality, when our introductory scene to Varric Tethrass is of an idle-rich aristocrat casually shooting a poor thief for the sake of a good impression and a lucrative business deal.

 

And we're supposed to root him on, even as he slugs an already pinned, pained, and submitting would-be theif... because, by god that little rat stole from us! That was our money... which takes, like, an hour to earn thirty times more.

 

 

/ Sarcasm on
Of course, he also a criminal. All Hawkes are criminals, and criminals all his friends too.

 

No, Hakwe's friends are criminals if and when they break crimes. No guilt by association here- it's complicity in crimes, or some other action. Aveline is corrupt because she personally enforces uneven application of the laws and standards on people based on personal whims, frequently for her personal interests and benefit. Varric is a blackmailer because that's what he does, when he does go around having fun adventures and telling tales of shooting people poorer than him. Isabella's a slave trader because, by canon, she's engaged in the slave trade.


  • Shechinah und Tz342 gefällt das

#133
Catilina

Catilina
  • Members
  • 1.918 Beiträge

Otherwise, Do not forget to mention in Hawke's sins: that if Hawke recruit Fenris, and help him, he deprived a Magister from his rightful ownership...

 

/sarcasm off

 

In the Act2 the baron died. Kirkwall should have been chosen a baron, but Meredith did not allow this. She had had the power to stop it. The Templars political power is not legitimate in Kirkwall, Moreover, they unable to maintain order also only in the Circle. How they want to do reinforce the city? Hawke' team is the best thing in town (right, Anders are another theme).

 

(Loghain was legitim authority, more than the Templars in Kirkwall. Loghain was governor. The Grey Wardens would have had to go to jail, freely, because an arrest warrant was in force against them.Yes, that's an exaggeration.)

 

The rest has been told in my opinion, and I still consider it. I said, its a deadlock. Anyway: we long deviated from the topic.

 

PS: Hawke's not a murderer. He do not kill, if do not invade. (At least you can play on this way.)



#134
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20.675 Beiträge

Otherwise, Do not forget to mention in Hawke's sins: that if Hawke recruit Fenris, and help him, he deprived a Magister from his rightful ownership...

 

/sarcasm off

 

 

We can accept there are things Danarius has no claim to without denying he has a right to anything.

 

Unless we want to deny property rights as a human right (which, all things considered, you really shouldn't- it rarely works out well for the poor and weak), Danagerius has a right to things that he can claim are his. People aren't property, but a lawfully purchased estate certainly is.

 

Not, mind you, that Danarius is the only one we steal from. What's Hawke's excuse in Mark of the Assassin?

 

 

 

 

 

In the Act2 the baron died. Kirkwall should have been chosen a baron, but Meredith did not allow this. She had had the power to stop it. The Templars political power is not legitimate in Kirkwall, Moreover, they unable to maintain order also only in the Circle. How they want to do reinforce the city? Hawke' team is the best thing in town (right, Anders are another theme).

 

 

 

Arguable- but also irrelevant. Crime, corruption, and other such things don't rely on moral relativity.

 

 

(Loghain was legitim authority, more than the Templars in Kirkwall. Loghain was governor. The Grey Wardens would have had to go to jail, freely, because an arrest warrant was in force against them.Yes, that's an exaggeration.)

 

 

Loghain's authority was far less legitimate- the power of the throne should have either gone to a vote, or to his daughter, by the established laws of succession. Loghain proclaimed himself regent even though there was a capable candidate, and so seizes power despite the established institutions.

 

Templar authority in Kirkwall has a far stronger basis, and is derived through the established institutions. Pre-Act 3, the parts of Templar authority that Hawke and company actually oppose are derived from a transnational authority (the Chantry) and accepted by the local authority (the Viscount). The Templars have the right to be in Kirkwall, and the authority to pursue and apprehend apostates, the acquiesence of the reigning authority, and the logical justification to go after apostate support networks.

 

Even when Meredith does go beyond her political bounds after the Qunari, it's still through the existing institutions and alliances on the established institutions. The nobility isn't united against Meredith but prevented from voting- it's split, and unable to come to a consensus because many are allies of Meredith. Meredith encourages that, and benefits from the vacuum, but she does not force that. She has as much a legitimacy from noble support as Hawke.

 

 

PS: Hawke's not a murderer. He do not kill, if do not invade. (At least you can play on this way.)

 

 

Hawke frequently invades, and kills in the course of invasions, across the game. It'd be easy to get them for Voluntary Manslaughter. After all, deaths that come as a consequence of other criminal activities, even if murder wasn't a prior intent, can easily carry equivalent charges for criminal negligence.

 

Mark of the Assassin, for example. Hawke begins with a criminal intent (robbery), and ends up killing... well, lots of people, including the very Duke who was his host in the course of the crime.

 

Another early Act 1 example is the Hawke estate. Slavers are a nasty sort, alright- but that doesn't give Hawke a right or justification to invade the house and slaughter them in pursuit of heirlooms. You could certainly make legal arguments that the sale was invalid since it was never Gamlen's property to sell, but that alone doesn't justify what's basically a case of home invasion.

 

But, of course, it'd never come up, because we're generally only given unsympathetic people to kill so we don't have to feel bad. Because human rights aren't for suspected criminals!


  • Shechinah gefällt das

#135
roselavellan

roselavellan
  • Members
  • 459 Beiträge

Aveline doesn't go after apostates... but she also covers up their presence from legal authorities whose lawful duty it is to go after them. In your analogy, Aveline is the homicide cop who sits ontop of a drug den because she has friends involved who benefit her, even as she happily shuts down other other criminal actions that aren't her job.

 

Is it her job? No- and neither is accompanying Hawke. Is it special favors and exceptions in violation with the spirit of her role and duties? Absolutely. It's not Aveline's job to hunt apostates, but it's not her job to help harbor them either.

 

That just means that Aveline has a sense of morality (after all, Hawke is going after the real criminals here) that is stronger than her lawfulness. I can approve of that.


  • Catilina gefällt das

#136
Shechinah

Shechinah
  • Members
  • 3.722 Beiträge

 

It is natural. That in real life, when a government chased a minority group of people (ethnic group, political opposition group, religious group etc.), and one-two of them escape, they are criminals? And also criminals, who help them?

I'm right?*

 
*Let me help! The answer (in most instances): NOT.
 
(Question: what viewpoint we look at – the repressive organisation's point of view or the moral point of view. In the game the mages are a minority group, without personal freedom. Fight for their freedom are not crime. If Hawke try to protect her/himself or his sister from this jail, his/her action i can't call "crime")

 

 

Look, I am not making an argument about the morality of the law: I am not saying Hawke is wrong for trying to hide Bethany from the Circles nor am I saying that Hawke is right for trying to hide Bethany from the Circles. That's unrelated to what I am trying to say.

 

I am saying that according to the law in Kirkwall, hiding that Bethany is a mage and knowingly doing so is illegal and therefore Hawke is considered a criminal by the law.    
 



#137
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20.675 Beiträge

That just means that Aveline has a sense of morality (after all, Hawke is going after the real criminals here) that is stronger than her lawfulness. I can approve of that.

 

Most corruption is derived from people thinking they have good reasons for selectively following following the rules or enforcing the rules. That's why notoriously corrupt societies often have decent people and awful governments. Individually, everyone looks out for friends and family- and collectively, that leads to oligarchies, cliques, and systemic unfairness as everyone's personal goodness is more important than overall fairness or consistence.

 

Alas, goodness over lawfullness doesn't actually mitigate corruption over time, because all it does it invite other people to rationalize why their sense of morality and favoritism likewise validates ignorring those pesky, obstructive laws.


  • Shechinah gefällt das

#138
Shechinah

Shechinah
  • Members
  • 3.722 Beiträge

So I'm hearing that either time Hawke is always a criminal for one way or another.... But Bethany gets taken to the circle, so thusly Warrior/Rogue Hawke isn't criminal there - becuase they didn't make her a GW or something, so yeah, their not criminals if Bethany is taken to the Circle...

 

According to what Cullen says during the scene, what they did was considered criminal; "Consider yourselves fortunate. Her cooperation allows us to spare you the punishment for harboring a dangerous mage this once."

 

This is why I am saying that Hawke is always a criminal in the game because according to the law in Kirkwall, Hawke is a criminal for hiding that they themselves are an apostate or for hiding that their sister is an apostate. That there is no option for Hawke to turn themselves or their sister in means that they are always breaking this law.   
 



#139
Catilina

Catilina
  • Members
  • 1.918 Beiträge

Look, I am not making an argument about the morality of the law: I am not saying Hawke is wrong for trying to hide Bethany from the Circles nor am I saying that Hawke is right for trying to hide Bethany from the Circles. That's unrelated to what I am trying to say.

 

I am saying that according to the law, hiding that Bethany is a mage and knowingly doing so is illegal and therefore Hawke is considered a criminal by the law.    
 

And what's wrong with? Meredith accepts his help when the city in trouble, in fact, even when her Templar's are impotent ... Meredith is not only transgressor but also disloyal to her order.



#140
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20.675 Beiträge

Look, I am not making an argument about the morality of the law: I am not saying Hawke is wrong for trying to hide Bethany from the Circles nor am I saying that Hawke is right for trying to hide Bethany from the Circles. That's unrelated to what I am trying to say.

 

I am saying that according to the law, hiding that Bethany is a mage and knowingly doing so is illegal and therefore Hawke is considered a criminal by the law.    
 

 

Not, mind you, that Hawke or anyone else in the party gives much of a hoot about any other laws along the way. DA2's morality follows more from the inherency of feels than any legal architecture- feelings of fairness, or revenge, or greater purpose justify anything (and end up ruining everything).



#141
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20.675 Beiträge

And what's wrong with?

 

Aside from self-interest complicity enabling an insane abomination who instigates two distinct massacres of innocents in an ideological play to remake the world according to his own desires and feels?

 

There's absolutely nothing wrong with lawlessness just because you don't like the laws. Works out great.



#142
Catilina

Catilina
  • Members
  • 1.918 Beiträge

According to what Cullen says during the scene, what they did was considered criminal; "Consider yourselves fortunate. Her cooperation allows us to spare you the punishment for harboring a dangerous mage this once."

 

This is why I am saying that Hawke is always a criminal in the game because according to the law in Kirkwall, Hawke is a criminal for hiding that they themselves are an apostate or for hiding that their sister is an apostate. That there is no option for Hawke to turn themselves or their sister in means that they are always breaking this law.   
 

But that's exactly what I say, Hawke lawbreaker, but the law is not always important. :)



#143
Catilina

Catilina
  • Members
  • 1.918 Beiträge

Aside from self-interest complicity enabling an insane abomination who instigates two distinct massacres of innocents in an ideological play to remake the world according to his own desires and feels?

 

There's absolutely nothing wrong with lawlessness just because you don't like the laws. Works out great.

I like the law, so much! I like the law, that serve the good. And i like lawbreakers, if the law serve the wrong, or, if otherwise is not possible to stop the corruption.



#144
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20.675 Beiträge

But that's exactly what I say, Hawke lawbreaker, but the law is not always important. :)

 

The law is always important- as is how you approach it, apply it, or uphold it. Most of Kirkwall's problems can be traced to insufficient following of the law, by both authorities (corruption within the Templars) and everyone else (who used the Templars to justify their own ruinous choices).

 

Viewing the law is unimportant is why Kirkwall is as bad as it is, and will continue to be so going forward. Corruption can help resolve individual issues, but it's very bad at actually making a good system that evenly and fairly applies to everyone.



#145
Shechinah

Shechinah
  • Members
  • 3.722 Beiträge

 

 
It was sarcasm, sorry. It was so absurd to seriously answer on this bullshit:
 

 

 

What a undelightfully uncharming and unncessarily impolite way to express your opinion on an argument made in a discussion. 

 

Do you consider discussionary disagreements to warrant a dismissal of common courtesy or have I previously committed a faux pas during this discussion that I am unaware of?     
 



#146
Catilina

Catilina
  • Members
  • 1.918 Beiträge

Not, mind you, that Hawke or anyone else in the party gives much of a hoot about any other laws along the way. DA2's morality follows more from the inherency of feels than any legal architecture- feelings of fairness, or revenge, or greater purpose justify anything (and end up ruining everything).

The whole story is the essence that without Hawke also would all goes wrong. That's what this game is.
Absolutely no matter what Hawke doing.



#147
Catilina

Catilina
  • Members
  • 1.918 Beiträge

What a undelightfully uncharming and unncessarily impolite way to express your opinion on an argument made in a discussion. 

 

Do you consider discussionary disagreements to warrant a dismissal of common courtesy or have I previously committed a faux pas during this discussion that I am unaware of?     
 

Thank you, i'm flattered. ;)

But you're right, sorry, sometimes I can be really jerk... nevertheless I still can't take too seriously what you wrote.

 


#148
Catilina

Catilina
  • Members
  • 1.918 Beiträge

The law is always important- as is how you approach it, apply it, or uphold it. Most of Kirkwall's problems can be traced to insufficient following of the law, by both authorities (corruption within the Templars) and everyone else (who used the Templars to justify their own ruinous choices).

 

Viewing the law is unimportant is why Kirkwall is as bad as it is, and will continue to be so going forward. Corruption can help resolve individual issues, but it's very bad at actually making a good system that evenly and fairly applies to everyone.

I said, I basically think the law and order is very necessary. However, if only with the law's circumventing can you act correctly, then you need to break. History has proved this quite often.



#149
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20.675 Beiträge

I like the law, so much! I like the law, that serve the good. And i like lawbreakers, if the law serve the wrong, or, if otherwise is not possible to stop the corruption.

 

Of course you'll never stop the corruption if you think corruption is acceptable if the laws are wrong. Everyone feels the laws they dislike are wrong, and corruption only subsides if the rules are enforced anyway.

 

Societies with low corruption aren't socieites in which everyone likes the laws. They're societies in which laws are applied consistently, whether you like them or not. If you don't abide by laws you don't like, you give every reason for others to ignore the laws they don't like... even the ones you think are 'good.' Which, cumulatively, gives you... corruption, and the sort where 'who you know' matters more than what you actually do.

 

If the applicant gets to choose which laws are good or not, which ones are to be followed or not, they don't actually like the law- they just like permissions to do what they want.

 

 

It is very, very easy to make a case that the laws of the Circle system are 'good.' They provide protections for both mundanes and mages to survive. They allow the pursuit of dangerous people who take risks whose consequences typically fall on mundanes. They provide for the only major society in Thedas where mages aren't elevated to positions of power over mundanes as a matter of birth. It protects a majority from a historically domineering minority, and it offers enclaves for that minority to live without many of the extreme difficulties they might otherwise face in Thedas, privileges that many mundanes will never have.

 

Is it perfect? No- and the failures to uphold the laws by the authorities don't help either, and lead to abuses. But 'good' isn't the same as perfect- and if a system that protects the majority while at least trying to shelter a minority isn't good enough to be worth following, nothing can reasonably be expected to be.

 

So, please- provide what you consider a society of laws, which corruption and breaking can't be justified on account of the laws being indisputably 'good'.



#150
Dean_the_Young

Dean_the_Young
  • Members
  • 20.675 Beiträge

The whole story is the essence that without Hawke also would all goes wrong. That's what this game is.
Absolutely no matter what Hawke doing.

 

Perhaps because no matter what Hawke does, he or she frequently does the wrong thing. Like engage and endulge in corruption for self-serving, short-sighted reasons.

 

Everything going wrong no matter what Hawke does doesn't mean that Hawke doesn't, you know, do things wrong. It might be plot railroading, but that doesn't make Hawke beyond failing.