37 Antworten in diesem Thema

[RoseLawliet]

I'm going through my worldstates in the Keep because I felt like it, and I found the choice of whether to kill Kelder or keep him alive. I've made both choices, and even had Fenris kill him once, but I can't quite decide which Keep tile is the best fit.

 

On the one hand, Hawke either is an apostate living undercover or has an apostate living undercover for a sister. This is Act 1 we're talking about, before there is any reason for people to be deterred against turning you in to the templars if you draw their ire. This guy's magistrate father (I assume) has power enough to at least rouse the templars' suspicions, not that they need it as they apparently know Bethany, at least, is a mage. Add to that that you can get paid up to three sovereigns to do the magistrate's bidding, which can help fund Varric and Bartrand's expedition.

 

However, this truly does seem to be an instance of Kirkwall's guards and government being corrupt. The only person to admit that Kelder is the magistrate's son is Kelder himself, who then goes on to claim that demons made him do everything and asks to be killed. The ideal solution here (which isn't allowed because... I'm not sure) would be to drag Kelder back to Kirkwall and make sure there's a trial that his father has no influence over.

 

Basically, returning Kelder to Kirkwall/his father seems to make the most sense if you're after money and avoiding unnecessary danger BUT it feels like a scummy thing to do... which makes perfect sense because this is Kirkwall we're talking about. Please come and post about philosophy, morality, and ethics! And if at all possible, please keep the discussion on Hawke and their decision-making process. What the companions do doesn't interest me here.

[springacres]

My apostate F!Hawke saw no reason to spare Kelder, even for her own protection.  It was all too easy for her to imagine herself in Lia's place.

 

My M!Rogue Hawke also saw no reason to spare Kelder; he knew how he would feel if someone had treated Bethany the way Kelder treated Lia.  He might be a smuggler with dubious morals, but he draws the line at kidnapping.

 

You're right, though, this is a situation where Kelder, his father and the guards his father sent should all get hauled off to some other magistrate's court to face justice.  I can see a power-hungry or corrupt Hawke sparing Kelder, but otherwise it doesn't seem to make sense.

[RoseLawliet]

Man, reading that makes me feel so damned timid! I guess my biggest problem is killing him without a trial. (For the time period. I try not to get too modern, because I'm very waffle-y and can't decide whether or not I'm for the death penalty. It's kind of a big deal, you know?) All these things without trials. BioWare, are you trying to tell us something?

 

Well, and also I don't think Hawke is some god of combat. Gameplay is skewed because it has to be, but I doubt very much that Hawke, Bethany, and the dog would be able to fight off a large group of thugs or templars. Or thugs and templars. Politicians with grudges can overreact like that.

[springacres]

A very good point, but in real life, a criminal who confesses (as Kelder did) is probably going to get a plea agreement anyway and not have to go through a trial.  (Speaking as a paralegal student whose current courseload includes a class taught by a former DA.)

 

In real life, I'd be all for giving the guy a trial and a life sentence.  (I'm against the death penalty.)  But this is Kirkwall, with a typical fantasy medieval/early Renaissance type setting, so it's much easier than I would like to admit for me as a player to say "screw the magistrate who doesn't deserve his position, screw his son, Kelder deserves to die" and just murder-knife him.  And while realistically you're right about how Hawke & Co. shouldn't be able to take on a bunch of thugs and templars, a Hawke that has helped Fenris take out an entire company of Tevinter mercenaries armed to the teeth probably wouldn't care about taking on templars.  (Particularly if they've also completed Tranquility, which I think might be a prerequisite to unlocking this quest.)

 

I will also admit that some of my attitude towards people like Kelder in DA2 might be carryover from my canon Warden (an M!Surana who Does Not Like People Who Mistreat Elves.)

[Ghost Gal]

Kill him.

 

He wants to die, his victims want him to die (Lia does years later if you decided to kill  him, she mentions that she wasn't thinking clearly that day when she asked you to spare him, but now she realizes he was a monster and she's glad he's dead), the family members of his victims want him to die, and if you let him live his father will not only not prevent him from continuing his crimes, but he'll prevent other people from pursuing justice or keeping him from commuting those crimes.

 

(If I knew there was a way for him to get locked up so he's at least be prevented from hurting other elven children even though he's still alive, I'd take it. But his father has made it clear that he will not take the necessary steps to ensure his son doesn't do it again, and in fact will only continue to enable his killing sprees, which I cannot allow to happen. Sorry Kelder, but the lives of dozens of children trump your own sad, sorry existence.)

 

I will also admit that some of my attitude towards people like Kelder in DA2 might be carryover from my canon Warden (an M!Surana who Does Not Like People Who Mistreat Elves.)

 

Heh, try carrying an attitude over as a city elf, whose alienage was beset by a serial rapist and murderer of elven women whose noble father enabled his killings.

 

Vaughan Kendells, Kelder Vanard.... even their names sound similar!

[thats1evildude]

Fun fact: Kelder's father is voiced by the same actor who did Corypheus.

 

But you should kill Kelder. If he is taken into custody, he will again be imprisoned temporarily, break out and then end up killing another young elven woman. Kirkwall's prison system has been demonstrated as being incapable of holding him. So yeah, take the law into your hands.

[Lythinae]

It bugs me a little that you never run into the guy again, after his 'rar you've made an enemy rar'. I can pretend he had an 'accident'

I've only left him alive once, with a super duper law and order Hawke. Hated the outcome, and Lia's fathers reaction made me sad about how little elves get to see justice for the **** that happens to them, so usually my Hawke breaks out the murder knife. I go with the whole 'wouldn't ask someone to something he isn't ok with doing himself' line of thinking. Dude did spend a year doing shady smuggler-y stuff, it's not the first time he's gotten his hands dirty.

[congokong]

Think of it this way. In the modern world would you really take justice into your own hands as judge/jury/executioner at the risk of your own safety ...and loss of sovereigns? All you're doing by turning him in is following the law; corrupt as it is. Every Kirkwall guard who doesn't kill Kelder on the way back to Kirkwall is just as guilty as you.

 

If you're playing a "get the job done" type this is an easy decision. Besides, you wouldn't even be involved in this if you didn't have a reputation for getting things done on the sly.

[straykat]

I put Kelder partly in the whole context of the Qunari conflict..

 

Both Hawke and the Arishok want and/or have the opportunity to correct injustices and put the law in their own hands. Kelder especially is representative of it in regards to elves. Who is going to give them hope? If you kill Kelder, the interesting thing is how different you are from the Arishok otherwise. He wants to offer hope to elves too. Think about the choice along those lines, I guess? How are you better than him? I'll leave it to you to come up with that. It's fun to play a lawless character like this, but still defies the Qun. Of course, you could be doing it for the very same reasons he does.. and even want to be a Qunari yourself. So that's a reason too. But it sucks.

 

If you don't kill him, you're simply representing the status quo of Kirkwall's current human society. And naturally, you'll probably oppose the Arishok later for these reasons too. It'd be the most consistently "lawful" choice. Although it sucks just as much as following the Qunari.

[Ghost Gal]

Think of it this way. In the modern world would you really take justice into your own hands as judge/jury/executioner at the risk of your own safety ...and loss of sovereigns? All you're doing by turning him in is following the law; corrupt as it is. Every Kirkwall guard who doesn't kill Kelder on the way back to Kirkwall is just as guilty as you.

 

This isn't the modern world though. This is Thedas. And what is the law for if not to keep murderers like him off the streets? If the law allows him to keep killing, then it's a law that deserves to be broken as far as I'm concerned.

 

Besides, if this was the modern world and I came across a serial killer of minority children from an inner city ghetto and knew that his his rich daddy would just post bail and ensure that his son not only never received consequences for killing, but actively prevented his son from going to an institution that would prevent him from doing this again (an insane assylum or prison), you bet your buttons I'd kill him in the modern era just as I would in Thedas. 

 

Besides, think of it this way: if you don't kill him, he'll just go on to kidnapping and murdering more children. Since you had the chance to stop him but didn't, their blood is on your hands.

 

If I have to be morally responsible for loss of life either way, I'd rather be responsible for one death of one mentally deranged serial killer, not dozens of innocent children.

[straykat]

This isn't the modern world though. This is Thedas. And what is the law for if not to keep murderers like him off the streets? If the law allows him to keep killing, then it's a law that deserves to be broken as far as I'm concerned.

 

Besides, if this was the modern world and I came across a serial killer of minority children from an inner city ghetto and knew that his his rich daddy would just post bail and ensure that his son not only never received consequences for killing, but actively prevented his son from going to an institution that would prevent him from doing this again (an insane assylum or prison), you bet your buttons I'd kill him in the modern era just as I would in Thedas. 

 

Besides, think of it this way: if you don't kill him, he'll just go on to kidnapping and murdering more children. Since you had the chance to stop him but didn't, their blood is on your hands.

 

If I have to be morally responsible for loss of life either way, I'd rather be responsible for one death of one mentally deranged serial killer, not dozens of innocent children.

 

The problem with the modern world is getting caught.

 

That's what stops me at least.

 

I guess that's why I need games as an outlet. I don't know.

[Ghost Gal]

The problem with the modern world is getting caught.

 

That's what stops me at least.

 

I guess that's why I need games as an outlet. I don't know.

 

Oh, true.

 

Yeah, one of the reasons I love playing the City Elf Origin in DAO is the pure catharsis of butchering the WASP boys that bullied me in private school for being poor and Jewish--erm, kill Vaughan and his human noble crownies for hurting my city elf's family because they're elves... yeah... that's why... >>;

[straykat]

Oh, true.

 

Yeah, one of the reasons I love playing the City Elf Origin in DAO is the pure catharsis of butchering the WASP boys that bullied me in private school for being poor and Jewish--erm, kill Vaughan and his human noble crownies for hurting my city elf's family because they're elves... yeah... that's why... >>;

 

Sorry to hear that.. I have my issues too. I suggest just punching the bullies. You can usually get away with it. Maybe a fingerwag or two

 

Killing child molestors... not as much.

[springacres]

Oh, true.

 

Yeah, one of the reasons I love playing the City Elf Origin in DAO is the pure catharsis of butchering the WASP boys that bullied me in private school for being poor and Jewish--erm, kill Vaughan and his human noble crownies for hurting my city elf's family because they're elves... yeah... that's why... >>;

As a girl who was bullied herself (in my case it was for being socially awkward and tall for my age) I suspect catharsis might be one of my motivators for playing do-gooder, wipe-the-floor-with-bullies types in RPGs as well. 

[RoseLawliet]

Think of it this way. In the modern world would you really take justice into your own hands as judge/jury/executioner at the risk of your own safety ...and loss of sovereigns? All you're doing by turning him in is following the law; corrupt as it is. Every Kirkwall guard who doesn't kill Kelder on the way back to Kirkwall is just as guilty as you.

 

If you're playing a "get the job done" type this is an easy decision. Besides, you wouldn't even be involved in this if you didn't have a reputation for getting things done on the sly.

 

That's pretty much exactly how I see it. It's really hard for me to do things that obviously would put Bethany in danger. Things that may or may not have unforseen consequences (like allowing Varric to lie your way out of fighting the templars in Act of Mercy, which results in the guy saying he'll commend you to Meredith... who would know you're not a templar) are fair game, because Hawke can be a bit of a gambler.

[RoseLawliet]

I put Kelder partly in the whole context of the Qunari conflict..

 

Both Hawke and the Arishok want and/or have the opportunity to correct injustices and put the law in their own hands. Kelder especially is representative of it in regards to elves. Who is going to give them hope? If you kill Kelder, the interesting thing is how different you are from the Arishok otherwise. He wants to offer hope to elves too. Think about the choice along those lines, I guess? How are you better than him? I'll leave it to you to come up with that. It's fun to play a lawless character like this, but still defies the Qun. Of course, you could be doing it for the very same reasons he does.. and even want to be a Qunari yourself. So that's a reason too. But it sucks.

 

If you don't kill him, you're simply representing the status quo of Kirkwall's current human society. And naturally, you'll probably oppose the Arishok later for these reasons too. It'd be the most consistently "lawful" choice. Although it sucks just as much as following the Qunari.

 

Yeah. Laws really aren't to prevent horrible things, but rather they exist to deter absolute chaos and anarchy. The viddathari the Arishok is protecting should go to the Kirkwall guard, and I don't care if he thinks their different religion should be a get out of jail free card, because it isn't. That being said, I definitely think there's more than enough room for Hawke to be a bit of a well-meaning hypocrite. Certainly Isabela staying free the entire game (if you choose to play it that way) is an example of Hawke bending the rules.

[straykat]

That's pretty much exactly how I see it. It's really hard for me to do things that obviously would put Bethany in danger. Things that may or may not have unforseen consequences (like allowing Varric to lie your way out of fighting the Templars in Act of Mercy, which results in the guy saying he'll commend you to Meredith... who would know you're not a templar) are fair game, because Hawke can be a bit of agambler.

 

I never let those Templars go on a mage. But I do on others.

 

I don't know... some choices work differently on some concepts, but not others.

 

With Kelder, my whole idea of a mage doing it is they're providing the sense of justice that society has failed at. AND they're counteracting the Qunari at the same time, who are also promoting their form of justice. The mage do-gooder and the Qunari do-gooder have serious caveats, but I think that's the poignant part of the story. Thedas is going to have to decide which one is better for them sooner or later.

[RoseLawliet]

I never let those Templars go on a mage. But I do on others.

 

I don't know... some choices work differently on some concepts, but not others.

 

With Kelder, my whole idea of a mage doing it is they're providing the sense of justice that society has failed at. AND they're counteracting the Qunari at the same time, who are also promoting their form of justice. The mage do-gooder and the Qunari do-gooder have serious caveats, but I think that's the poignant part of the story. Thedas is going to have to decide which one is better for them sooner or later.

 

I'm not sure I completely understand what you're saying, so apologies. Do you mean a mage Hawke killing Kelder can feel like they're upholding justice? If so, I'd be more concerned (paranoid, if we're being honest) that being judge, jury, and executioner like congokong mentioned is exactly the sort of thing I would never want the templars to do. I mean, some of them do anyway, but I'd rather they not think like that. -shrug-

[straykat]

I'm not sure I completely understand what you're saying, so apologies. Do you mean a mage Hawke killing Kelder can feel like they're upholding justice? If so, I'd be more concerned (paranoid, if we're being honest) that being judge, jury, and executioner like congokong mentioned is exactly the sort of thing I would never want the templars to do. I mean, some of them do anyway, but I'd rather they not think like that. -shrug-

 

No, I mean.. human society has failed in this setting bigtime. And it took a mage running rampant in a city to wake people up to the little injustices like that. The Qunari already point out the failures, but maybe a mage can be a good alternative to that.

 

I think they can be a good person and do this.

 

The only problematic thing with a "do-gooder" mage Hawke to me is the end.. and their relationship with Anders. Will people remember all the good things or will they only see that they were friends with Anders and he confirmed all of their fears in the end. He can potentially destroy all your work in an instant.

 

But otherwise, no.. I don't feel bad at all.

[Ghost Gal]

 

Sorry to hear that.. I have my issues too. I suggest just punching the bullies. You can usually get away with it. Maybe a fingerwag or two 

 

Killing child molestors... not as much.

 

I always got in trouble when I hit them.

 

My entire childhood was a series of my sister and my male private school classmates teasing and insulting me until I either cried or hit or chased them, and any violence on my part was met with me getting in trouble and them being excused with "she's younger than you" (in the case of my sister) or "they're boys, they like you" (for my male classmates). Naturally, their verbal teasing and bullying got more and more intense over the years, making it harder and harder for me to ignore, because they realized they could say anything they want with impunity and the more hurtful/insulting/frustrating they were the more likely I was to finally cave and hit them and get in trouble for it. Then I hit puberty and I was sexually harassed by those same boys for being potentially f*ckable.

 

That's part of why I hate players excusing systematic oppression of elves and mages in Thedas. The Andrastian laws and social hierarchies are set up so Templars can abuse mages and humans can abuse elves with impunity, but the minute the underdogs hit back everyone comes down on them, saying "they shouldn't have done it" even though no one did anything to stop the abusers and it's downright amoral to expect the abused to just keep living with their abuse.

 

As a girl who was bullied herself (in my case it was for being socially awkward and tall for my age) I suspect catharsis might be one of my motivators for playing do-gooder, wipe-the-floor-with-bullies types in RPGs as well.  

 

Yeah. 

 

I don't think it's any coincidence that video games tend to appeal slightly more to people whose real world experiences are... less than ideal. If that makes any sense.

 

Yeah. Laws really aren't to prevent horrible things, but rather they exist to deter absolute chaos and anarchy. 

 

So ordered, systematic kidnapping and killing of children is just fine as long as it's part of the status quo?

 

I see which direction your moral compass points. 

 

Don't laws like this actually encourage chaos and anarchy though, since the people whom the laws allow horrible things to happen to eventually get tired and rebel against them? If the laws didn't allow humans to commit crimes against elves with impunity, maybe the elves wouldn't have turned to the Qun and the Arishok wouldn't have chosen to fight Kirwall rather than give them up. If the laws didn't allow Templars to abuse mages so horribly for so long, then it wouldn't have gives malcontents like Anders reason to feel that blowing up the whole system would be better than "keep living with it" or trying to reform it (since attempts at reforms were brushed aside time and time again).

 

Both the Arishok's launch against Kirkwall and the Mage/Templar war could have been avoided if the laws had focused on preventing horrible things from happening to innocent people and less on keeping the innocent people under the thumbs of their abusers.

[straykat]

 

 

 

I always got in trouble when I hit them.

 

My entire childhood was a series of my sister and my male private school classmates teasing and insulting me until I either cried or hit or chased them, and any violence on my part was met with me getting in trouble and them being excused with "she's younger than you" (in the case of my sister) or "they're boys, they like you" (for my male classmates). Naturally, their verbal teasing and bullying got more and more intense over the years, making it harder and harder for me to ignore, because they realized they could say anything they want with impunity and the more hurtful/insulting/frustrating they were the more likely I was to finally cave and hit them and get in trouble for it. Then I hit puberty and I was sexually harassed by those same boys for being potentially f*ckable.

 

That's part of why I hate players excusing systematic oppression of elves and mages in Thedas. The Andrastian laws and social hierarchies are set up so Templars can abuse mages and humans can abuse elves with impunity, but the minute the underdogs hit back everyone comes down on them, saying "they shouldn't have done it" even though no one did anything to stop the abusers and it's downright amoral to expect the abused to just keep living with their abuse.

 

 

Sorry to hear that. I got in trouble too.. sometimes more than a fingerwag tbh. But I still find it acceptable to release oneself that way. It's better than having that anger all pent up. That seems to be a bigger problem later down the road. Some of these angry victims grow up and start shooting people. It's insane.

 

I don't have the courage or knowledge to outright murder a child molestor though. lol.. even if I admit I entertain the idea. Punching people, especially as a youth, isn't so bad. As an adult, you now get assault charges.. so I don't recommend it anymore either. Think of all the paperwork!

[Ghost Gal]

Sorry to hear that. I got in trouble too.. sometimes more than a fingerwag tbh. But I still find it acceptable to release oneself that way. It's better than having that anger all pent up. That seems to be a bigger problem later down the road. Some of these angry victims grow up and start shooting people. It's insane.

 

I don't have the courage or knowledge to outright murder a child molestor though. lol.. even if I admit I entertain the idea. Punching people, especially as a youth, isn't so bad. As an adult, you now get assault charges.. so I don't recommend it anymore either.

 

I think my comment that you originally responded to was a response of mine to congokong's "In the modern world would you really take justice into your own hands as judge/jury/executioner at the risk of your own safety ...and loss of sovereigns? "

 

I guess the implication is "You wouldn't do it in the modern world because we (theoretically) have a better justice system, with better mental health insitutes and prisons that would prevent snipes like Kelder get away with it, so why would you take the law into your own hands?"

 

EVEN WHEN YOU REMOVE THE "Well, you'd  get in trouble in real life" SCENARIO (pretend you'd get away with it in real life just like how Hawke gets away with it in game), I don't think that question really applies because, a) Thedas is not our modern world; they don't have that theoretically good criminal justice system or mental health institutes to keep public menaces like Kelder off the street, so why act like it's the same moral situation when it's not? And b ) that implication itself is false since we have corruption in real life, where the rich literally get away with murder and the poor and minorities get life for petty offenses. (In America in particular, the bond system punishes the poor and the mental health institutes are few and far between.)

 

I don't care about laws more than people. As far as I'm concerned, laws should serve to help the people, and those that don't deserve to be broken or changed or replaced. If I was in a situation where I felt that in our modern world Kelder would somehow get the help or the restraint he needed not to kill any more children, yeah I wouldn't kill him. I don't even want to kill him in theory because it's clear that he's mentally ill and he needs help. But if I felt that the same corruption present in the game applied to the real modern-world situation (rich daddy pays people off not to restrain his son from his killing hobby), if the only two choices were "enable him to keep kidnapping and murdering children or kill him to keep him from doing it again," then, sorry Kelder, you're going down like a mad dog.

[straykat]

I think my comment that you originally responded to was a response of mine to congokong's "In the modern world would you really take justice into your own hands as judge/jury/executioner at the risk of your own safety ...and loss of sovereigns? "

 

I guess the implication is "You wouldn't do it in the modern world because we (theoretically) have a better justice system, with better mental health insitutes and prisons that would prevent snipes like Kelder get away with it, so why would you take the law into your own hands?"

 

EVEN WHEN YOU REMOVE THE "Well, you'd  get in trouble in real life" SCENARIO (pretend you'd get away with it in real life just like how Hawke gets away with it in game), I don't think that question really applies because, a) Thedas is not our modern world; they don't have that theoretically good criminal justice system or mental health institutes to keep public menaces like Kelder off the street, so why act like it's the same moral situation when it's not? And b ) that implication itself is false since we have corruption in real life, where the rich literally get away with murder and the poor and minorities get life for petty offenses. (In America in particular, the bond system punishes the poor and the mental health institutes are few and far between.)

 

I don't care about laws more than people. As far as I'm concerned, laws should serve to help the people, and those that don't deserve to be broken or changed or replaced. If I was in a situation where I felt that in our modern world Kelder would somehow get the help or the restraint he needed not to kill any more children, yeah I wouldn't kill him. I don't even want to kill him in theory because it's clear that he's mentally ill and he needs help. But if I felt that the same corruption present in the game applied to the real modern-world situation (rich daddy pays people off not to restrain his son from his killing hobby), if the only two choices were "enable him to keep kidnapping and murdering children or kill him to keep him from doing it again," then, sorry Kelder, you're going down like a mad dog.

 

I know what you're saying. Not sure I entirely agree though. Of course, our world is different (and probably better), but I've always held a fascination with this. Before I played fantasy games, and was just a kid, I was envisioning the same kind of "justice" with comic books and action movies.. set in a modern world. There's still somehow a desire or need for it in parts of our world. Else these things wouldn't be so popular. I think they're closer than it appears.

 

I don't care about the mental illness of real child molestors. It'd be the same as Kelder. I'd be viewed as harsh and too conservative probably if I was in charge, just like some governments are viewed as "behind the times" or something. People get entangled in ideals of understanding and tolerance now. I know they mean well, but I don't think it's just. Or if it's not mental illness, people just aren't punished enough. Like that Subway spokesman just recently. He only got 15 years. He contributes nothing to society --- and now he's going to drain it even more. I don't know where he'll be imprisoned, but the average prisoner costs $30,000 a year. It's a waste. And he isn't the only one. There are thousands..

 

But I digress! Where was I?

 

Nevermind. I'll just play the games and be quiet for now.

[themikefest]

I spared the dirtbag once to see the results.  All the other times, I kill him

[straykat]

I spared the dirtbag once to see the results.  All the other times, I kill him

 

What does happen anyways?

 

You're always the experimenter of the odd choices..