inherit
529
0
7,815
Nightscrawl
3,266
August 2016
nightscrawl
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Nightscrawl on May 11, 2020 17:48:35 GMT
I'm now a bit more confident in my theory that the Venatori did it to make their comrades' jobs easier. Thanks for making this mental bridge. I had always thought that was kind of a hanging line because it's never mentioned again. The first time I played, I waited for some reveal regarding the frozen river. When none came, I just chalked it up to some freak weather event (those do happen) and moved along. I like your explanation much more. |
|
inherit
ღ I am a golem. Obviously.
440
0
24,190
phoray
Dreadnaw Rising
12,573
August 2016
phoray
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
|
Post by phoray on May 11, 2020 20:54:41 GMT
The townspeople were not soldiers. Considering Orlais, I'm pretty certain they didn't even choose her to "lead" them, but even if they did somehow democratically vote her in, they wanted her to make decisions about trade. She wasn't a general.
Regardless of any and all information, she had no right to make this decision for them. And she's a horrible person for assuming she could make this decision on their behalf. She is literally responsible for death, I don't care if she tried to reduce her death toll, she's responsible for it. If it got down to it, would she have sent herself in the stead of a child? or would she have sent the child on? we all know the answer. Continuing the "deal" with the Red Templars was as much about protecting herself as anyone else.
|
|
inherit
1685
0
1,633
riverdaleswhiteflash
1,501
Sept 28, 2016 8:03:42 GMT
September 2016
riverdaleswhiteflash
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire
|
Post by riverdaleswhiteflash on May 11, 2020 22:51:40 GMT
The townspeople were not soldiers. Considering Orlais, I'm pretty certain they didn't even choose her to "lead" them, but even if they did somehow democratically vote her in, they wanted her to make decisions about trade. She wasn't a general. Regardless of any and all information, she had no right to make this decision for them. And she's a horrible person for assuming she could make this decision on their behalf. She is literally responsible for death, I don't care if she tried to reduce her death toll, she's responsible for it. If it got down to it, would she have sent herself in the stead of a child? or would she have sent the child on? we all know the answer. Continuing the "deal" with the Red Templars was as much about protecting herself as anyone else. Of course. I've already conceded that she was likely trying to protect herself. But that doesn't mean she didn't save other people's lives in the process. When you say she didn't have the right to make this decision "regardless of any and all information," do you mean that you'd still condemn her actions even if absolutely everything else she could have done, including spreading the information in order to let the rest of the village decide for her, would have gotten the entire village killed?
|
|
inherit
ღ I am a golem. Obviously.
440
0
24,190
phoray
Dreadnaw Rising
12,573
August 2016
phoray
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
|
Post by phoray on May 12, 2020 0:42:51 GMT
When you say she didn't have the right to make this decision "regardless of any and all information," do you mean that you'd still condemn her actions even if absolutely everything else she could have done, including spreading the information in order to let the rest of the village decide for her, would have gotten the entire village killed? I'm trying to parse this correctly. She had knowledge the rest of the town didn't have, and perhaps the education to truly understand the situation. Maybe she suspected, rightly, that the people would want to mount a defense, a trap, or an attempt to escape if they were informed. And she decided, probably rightly, that it would only result in a slaughter/enslavement of the entire town. So to save herself, and the people of the town, she decided to keep them in the dark. I firmly believe she had no right to make this decision. It's cowardly, even if, perhaps, the best strategic thing to have done from a Military/Utilitarian stand point. If she'd told the village, and they'd all gotten themselves killed, and all we'd found was an abandoned town and some codexes, maybe some words from the survivors in the cages we freed, to piece together the whole story, then she wouldn't have committed the crime she was being tried for in the first place. So what is the timeline of your question? The moment the Templars wanted to trade food and goods in exchange for people was the moment she would have realized this had become a slavery transaction. So she is absolutely guilty of selling the first batch of people into slavery. It's only later she finds out that the slaves are dying and that they're in a hostage situation. so even if THAT was the moment she'd tell everyone, then she would be tried as a slave trader at the very least. I'm not a utilitarian so there is very little that is going to redeem her for me. I'm not putting myself in her shoes to try to see what decision I'd make. I'm putting myselves in the shoes of the villagers. And I see someone who has made my village into a little pig pen. At intervals, she's sold my fellow pigs on the market, while telling my fellow remaining pigs and I that they just decided to change careers and move one state over to start a better life. I am not a pig, an infant. My fate is my own, and if I choose to risk likely death by sneaking through the snow at night to potential freedom, that's my choice. And she took that from me. |
|
inherit
1685
0
1,633
riverdaleswhiteflash
1,501
Sept 28, 2016 8:03:42 GMT
September 2016
riverdaleswhiteflash
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire
|
Post by riverdaleswhiteflash on May 12, 2020 1:57:03 GMT
When you say she didn't have the right to make this decision "regardless of any and all information," do you mean that you'd still condemn her actions even if absolutely everything else she could have done, including spreading the information in order to let the rest of the village decide for her, would have gotten the entire village killed? I'm trying to parse this correctly. She had knowledge the rest of the town didn't have, and perhaps the education to truly understand the situation. Maybe she suspected, rightly, that the people would want to mount a defense, a trap, or an attempt to escape if they were informed. And she decided, probably rightly, that it would only result in a slaughter/enslavement of the entire town. So to save herself, and the people of the town, she decided to keep them in the dark. I firmly believe she had no right to make this decision. It's cowardly, even if, perhaps, the best strategic thing to have done from a Military/Utilitarian stand point. And I firmly believe that because it was the best strategic thing to do from a utilitarian standpoint, she had less right not to do it. You blame her for the deaths? Those people would have died anyway. And you don't seem to be giving her any credit for the remaining lives.Well, we aren't told much of the timeline. And what little we get comes from what Madam Poulin says in her initial description of the situation, which omits the very worst part and might not be accurate at all. But here goes... The way she describes it, it sounds like the first people the Red Templars kidnapped were the people who'd worked in her quarry, and the Red Templars kidnapped them by reopening the quarry and then just not letting them go home one night. I don't think she outright sold those people: she sold the business they worked for, and then they were kidnapped at work by their new employers. Then, as her story goes, the Red Templars stopped pretending there was nothing wrong, and started openly kidnapping people. That's probably when they start "asking" for her input as to who's in good enough shape to survive being seeded with Red Lyrium: the ones they tricked into coming to the quarry would all have been, since they thought they were being recruited for hard manual labor, but the Red Templars can't be sure of anyone else. That's the point at which she starts doing wrong, since she was tricked into "selling" the first few victims, but it's also the point where it becomes clear that it's the only option. It's also probably the part where she learns that the Red Templars are in fact Red Templars, since at that point, why would they hide? I think that answers your question? I think you're asking if I'd condemn her for the people she sold before she realized they were being seeded with Red Lyrium, right? The answer is that I'm not sure she actually deliberately sold anyone before the Red Templars revealed themselves as such. But suppose that by trying to help you make your own decision, she condemned the whole village, even those who would have chosen not to know if they'd known the situation? I don't mean that people would have chosen to die fighting or fleeing: I mean that I don't think the village would have been allowed to choose. She says the Red Templars would have killed her if she'd told anyone, but what would they have done after they had? They'd still have needed more people, and they'd have lost the person doing their choosing for them. And we know they were willing to take the whole village at once if they didn't think their arrangement was working for them. I don't think letting the villagers make an informed decision about the risk was an option. I think as soon as the Templars realized the villagers had enough information to do so, they'd have moved to make sure nobody could use it. So Poulin's probably making their choice for them no matter what she does: what you're condemning her for is making the choice where some live. Feel free to put yourself in the shoes of a villager who would have wanted to know despite the danger, just as long as you don't forget the ones who wouldn't have.
|
|
