So, Yrlett... [Act 3 spoilers]

[EnemigoDeLaMafia]

i might have missed a few dialog lines so please bear with me. I just want to be sure.

Did she send RT into a trap knowingly?

I first I thought they somehow tricked her. But reading some posts it seems whe deliberately cospired with the drukhari?

[REhorror]

Postat inițial de Hanabi:

I play an openly goody good character and fully saw the turn coming. Here's the thing, she was very opened, dropping hints left and right all act 2.

The way my Iconoclast viewed it. (Views most creatures as equals.)

1: She was trying to find and protect her people, a task she always said is first and foremost.

2: She killed a traitor, who was leaking intel to the Dark Eldar, but in desperation tried to get a lead to her people.

3: In fear (an understandable emotion), she kept her source secret and it ended up blowing up in everyone on that mission's faces.

4: She was genuinely remorseful, ready to let herself die for her betrayal, guilty over what she had wrought. (She was truly penitent) and one of the few characters you can see that with.

5: When Argenta makes her confession, and other people have done their own deeds, everyone around has been a peace of ♥♥♥♥ to everyone. Only in Yrlett's case, her motivation is saving her doomed people.

6: She did everything in her power to make things right in the end, is shocked and genuinely humbled when provided forgiveness, and truly grew as a person. (Which I had provided for other crew mates and their faults).

7: When (in my story) she is reunified with the farseer she shows deference, respect, dogged loyalty. Tinted with regret, shame and an earned sense of humility. And tells the farseer off for disrespecting you, and even stops him from calling you Mon-keigh.

8: Afterwards when they finally head back to the ship, rather than retreating with her people, she asks to stay with you, despite knowing everyone who was involved wants her dead, out of loyalty, respect and trust.

9: When the other crew members try to Kangaroo Court her, you have a bunch of guilty killers that the inquisition would have killed to the last trying to lay accusation against a repentant sinner who truly learned her lesson.
---
My Iconoclast story was that she was pulled from a death world, and only had very, VERY basic knowledge of the empire, next to none about Xenos, and knew Chaos was evil by its feel and what basic education she had.

She was the sort of character who would have never been chosen by Theodora, always wanting to protect her people, save lives, do right by others, and preserve whatever was in her reach.

She views herself as accompanied by flawed individuals of different convictions, some who rightfully hate each other, and that she has the rare power as a Rogue Trader to protect them and try to help them each prosper.

Morhazhai (She killed him, said he was a good foe, but granted him death in the Arena, he killed more people than lived on her homeworld, and was a dangerous sadistic maniac who put a target on her, he had to die.)
---

On my out of character opinion Yrlett is an incredibly well written character who grows leaps and bounds, coming in with the full breadth and width of Eldar ego, but strangely enough learning humanity. Learning to become better and wiser.

As a companion character, this far she has been a treat, as she actually grew and changed as the story went on, played with fire, got burned, learned. Meanwhile most of the other characters have been extremely static and haven't had growth, but it's mostly about getting them to open up.

I don't know if the writers of Owlcat ever read these forums, but whoever wrote Yrlett's story, bravo.

I seem to detect some classical Imperium self-hate.

Which characters are guilty killers who would be hunted down by the Inquisition? Jae and Idira? Probably? Maybe Pascal because he delves in heretek if you let him?
Which characters purposely lead you to an ambush and after realizing her ♥♥♥♥-up, beg for forgiveness.

While I do understand WHY Yrlet does it (she's an emotional child and a racist to boot), it seems her defenders are now trying to paint that OTHER companions are as bad as her.
No, nothing comes close.

Even Jae scheme of trying to legal xenotrade isn't as bad as leading you to your death and trigger ANOTHER succession crisis in the Expanse.

[Hanabi]

Postat inițial de REhorror:

Postat inițial de Hanabi:

I play an openly goody good character and fully saw the turn coming. Here's the thing, she was very opened, dropping hints left and right all act 2.

The way my Iconoclast viewed it. (Views most creatures as equals.)

1: She was trying to find and protect her people, a task she always said is first and foremost.

2: She killed a traitor, who was leaking intel to the Dark Eldar, but in desperation tried to get a lead to her people.

3: In fear (an understandable emotion), she kept her source secret and it ended up blowing up in everyone on that mission's faces.

4: She was genuinely remorseful, ready to let herself die for her betrayal, guilty over what she had wrought. (She was truly penitent) and one of the few characters you can see that with.

5: When Argenta makes her confession, and other people have done their own deeds, everyone around has been a peace of ♥♥♥♥ to everyone. Only in Yrlett's case, her motivation is saving her doomed people.

6: She did everything in her power to make things right in the end, is shocked and genuinely humbled when provided forgiveness, and truly grew as a person. (Which I had provided for other crew mates and their faults).

7: When (in my story) she is reunified with the farseer she shows deference, respect, dogged loyalty. Tinted with regret, shame and an earned sense of humility. And tells the farseer off for disrespecting you, and even stops him from calling you Mon-keigh.

8: Afterwards when they finally head back to the ship, rather than retreating with her people, she asks to stay with you, despite knowing everyone who was involved wants her dead, out of loyalty, respect and trust.

9: When the other crew members try to Kangaroo Court her, you have a bunch of guilty killers that the inquisition would have killed to the last trying to lay accusation against a repentant sinner who truly learned her lesson.
---
My Iconoclast story was that she was pulled from a death world, and only had very, VERY basic knowledge of the empire, next to none about Xenos, and knew Chaos was evil by its feel and what basic education she had.

She was the sort of character who would have never been chosen by Theodora, always wanting to protect her people, save lives, do right by others, and preserve whatever was in her reach.

She views herself as accompanied by flawed individuals of different convictions, some who rightfully hate each other, and that she has the rare power as a Rogue Trader to protect them and try to help them each prosper.

Morhazhai (She killed him, said he was a good foe, but granted him death in the Arena, he killed more people than lived on her homeworld, and was a dangerous sadistic maniac who put a target on her, he had to die.)
---

On my out of character opinion Yrlett is an incredibly well written character who grows leaps and bounds, coming in with the full breadth and width of Eldar ego, but strangely enough learning humanity. Learning to become better and wiser.

As a companion character, this far she has been a treat, as she actually grew and changed as the story went on, played with fire, got burned, learned. Meanwhile most of the other characters have been extremely static and haven't had growth, but it's mostly about getting them to open up.

I don't know if the writers of Owlcat ever read these forums, but whoever wrote Yrlett's story, bravo.

I seem to detect some classical Imperium self-hate.

Which characters are guilty killers who would be hunted down by the Inquisition? Jae and Idira? Probably? Maybe Pascal because he delves in heretek if you let him?
Which characters purposely lead you to an ambush and after realizing her ♥♥♥♥-up, beg for forgiveness.

While I do understand WHY Yrlet does it (she's an emotional child and a racist to boot), it seems her defenders are now trying to paint that OTHER companions are as bad as her.
No, nothing comes close.

Even Jae scheme of trying to legal xenotrade isn't as bad as leading you to your death and trigger ANOTHER succession crisis in the Expanse.

Do you just stalk me to be negative and contrary?

[REhorror]

Postat inițial de Hanabi:

Postat inițial de REhorror:

I seem to detect some classical Imperium self-hate.

Which characters are guilty killers who would be hunted down by the Inquisition? Jae and Idira? Probably? Maybe Pascal because he delves in heretek if you let him?
Which characters purposely lead you to an ambush and after realizing her ♥♥♥♥-up, beg for forgiveness.

While I do understand WHY Yrlet does it (she's an emotional child and a racist to boot), it seems her defenders are now trying to paint that OTHER companions are as bad as her.
No, nothing comes close.

Even Jae scheme of trying to legal xenotrade isn't as bad as leading you to your death and trigger ANOTHER succession crisis in the Expanse.

Do you just stalk me to be negative and contrary?

Stalking, what?
And I don't think it's NEGATIVE and CONTRARY to be against Yrliet's actions, most of the threads rightfully condemn her.

I'm just surprised at some the frankly stupid cases that her defenders are doing, like for example Cutlass Jack with the whole ner-err she doesn't actually betray you at all, you just racist like the last 3 pages.

[Hanabi]

Postat inițial de REhorror:

Postat inițial de Hanabi:

Do you just stalk me to be negative and contrary?

Stalking, what?
And I don't think it's NEGATIVE and CONTRARY to be against Yrliet's actions, most of the threads rightfully condemn her.

I'm just surprised at some the frankly stupid cases that her defenders are doing, like for example Cutlass Jack with the whole ner-err she doesn't actually betray you at all, you just racist like the last 3 pages.

Every time I see you post on a thread you're cutting someone elses opinion down. Trying to get under their skin, being disagreeable on every subject. I said also specifically, it was my Iconoclast character's point of view on how that went down. The character is not an Imperial Dogmatic or a Heretic, who would decipher that series of events totally differently.

Secondly, I do think the character is well written, and I simply plain flat don't agree with you on an OOC level. At the end of the day they wrote a good character in a good game.

[REhorror]

Postat inițial de Hanabi:

Postat inițial de REhorror:

Stalking, what?
And I don't think it's NEGATIVE and CONTRARY to be against Yrliet's actions, most of the threads rightfully condemn her.

I'm just surprised at some the frankly stupid cases that her defenders are doing, like for example Cutlass Jack with the whole ner-err she doesn't actually betray you at all, you just racist like the last 3 pages.

Every time I see you post on a thread you're cutting someone elses opinion down. Trying to get under their skin, being disagreeable on every subject. I said also specifically, it was my Iconoclast character's point of view on how that went down. The character is not an Imperial Dogmatic or a Heretic, who would decipher that series of events totally differently.

Secondly, I do think the character is well written, and I simply plain flat don't agree with you on an OOC level. At the end of the day they wrote a good character in a good game.

I'm disagreeing with your points, hope that isn't offending you.

And no, I do not disagree with everyone nor with every subjects, just the ones I disagree with, in this case, people trying to defend or rationalize a character doing stupid things and putting the blames on OTHER characters instead of her.

You don't NEED to be an Imperial Dogmatic to see the errors in Yrliet's method, Yrliet HERSELF sees that. What's weird is that these people try to defend her actions, something she herself can't even do so.

[Hanabi]

Postat inițial de REhorror:

Postat inițial de Hanabi:

Every time I see you post on a thread you're cutting someone elses opinion down. Trying to get under their skin, being disagreeable on every subject. I said also specifically, it was my Iconoclast character's point of view on how that went down. The character is not an Imperial Dogmatic or a Heretic, who would decipher that series of events totally differently.

Secondly, I do think the character is well written, and I simply plain flat don't agree with you on an OOC level. At the end of the day they wrote a good character in a good game.

I'm disagreeing with your points, hope that isn't offending you.

And no, I do not disagree with everyone nor with every subjects, just the ones I disagree with, in this case, people trying to defend or rationalize a character doing stupid things and putting the blames on OTHER characters instead of her.

You don't NEED to be an Imperial Dogmatic to see the errors in Yrliet's method, Yrliet HERSELF sees that. What's weird is that these people try to defend her actions, something she herself can't even do so.

And unlike Abelard and Argenta, who've advocated to get entire lower deck populations killed, or in a fire and fury deliberately blew away an innocent person, (Possibly twice in the Malice/Commissar thing if you fail to stop her.) Yrlett genuinely repented, regretted and grew.

Idira almost causes a Chaos Infection before act 3.
Heinrix consistently wants the nuclear option on the sniff of the most minor offenses before an investigation has even taken place.
Jae associates frequently with criminals, slavers, and has underhanded the imperium while being loyal to the God Emperor and is a Hedonist moralizing her criminal activity.
Cassia literally fries innocent people's brains and views no remorse to the death and destruction her power causes to loyal imperial servants on the ship she's on.
Pasqal thus far has been the least criminal of the entire cast and crew.
I don't know Ulfar yet as I just reached Act 4.

The only ones here who wouldn't be shipped off by a proper criminal proceeding would be Abelard/Cassia and Pasqal. And only Pasqal for not being murderous. Argenta would either be killed for what she's done, or taken in by the inquisition if not for RT protection.

So when I say nearly none of them are good. None of the companions are genuinely good. Pasqal is a firm true neutral who cares more about machine than man, but isn't a psychopath most of the time.

[REhorror]

Postat inițial de Hanabi:

Postat inițial de REhorror:

I'm disagreeing with your points, hope that isn't offending you.

And no, I do not disagree with everyone nor with every subjects, just the ones I disagree with, in this case, people trying to defend or rationalize a character doing stupid things and putting the blames on OTHER characters instead of her.

You don't NEED to be an Imperial Dogmatic to see the errors in Yrliet's method, Yrliet HERSELF sees that. What's weird is that these people try to defend her actions, something she herself can't even do so.

And unlike Abelard and Argenta, who've advocated to get entire lower deck populations killed, or in a fire and fury deliberately blew away an innocent person, (Possibly twice in the Malice/Commissar thing if you fail to stop her.) Yrlett genuinely repented, regretted and grew.

Idira almost causes a Chaos Infection before act 3.
Heinrix consistently wants the nuclear option on the sniff of the most minor offenses before an investigation has even taken place.
Jae associates frequently with criminals, slavers, and has underhanded the imperium while being loyal to the God Emperor and is a Hedonist moralizing her criminal activity.
Cassia literally fries innocent people's brains and views no remorse to the death and destruction her power causes to loyal imperial servants on the ship she's on.
Pasqal thus far has been the least criminal of the entire cast and crew.
I don't know Ulfar yet as I just reached Act 4.

The only ones here who wouldn't be shipped off by a proper criminal proceeding would be Abelard/Cassia and Pasqal. And only Pasqal for not being murderous. Argenta would either be killed for what she's done, or taken in by the inquisition if not for RT protection.

So when I say nearly none of them are good. None of the companions are genuinely good. Pasqal is a firm true neutral who cares more about machine than man, but isn't a psychopath most of the time.

Let's go 1 by one.
1. Abelard suggests to purge certain clans in the Lower deck because they might be Chaos cultists, especially JUST after a Chaotic incurison. Overplayed? Yes, guilty, no. You can replace these people.
2. Argenta genuinely tries to kind and respectful as possible, but she leaves no mercy to Chaos, as it should be.
3. Cassia, again, no control over her power, and the worst she does is killing a bunch of mooks, which again can be replaced. And again, you can tell her to get it together and she improves.
4. Pascal, can actually delve in heretek which is tech heresy BUT you can convince him out of it, not to.
5. Heinrix, only calls for Exterminatus when a whole planet is engulfed in Chaos, actually a complete and justified case by the Inquisition.
6. Jae, wants to legalize xeno trade, yes, but I did mention her in my post. Again, her corruption is LESS worse than leading you to your death and slavery of your crew.

7. Idira, I did let Argenta put bullet to her head. But she didn't do it because she's in control, she at least has the excuse of being whispered by Chaos.

8. Yrilet, trusts the Dark Eldar because they are Eldar (her kin), gets emotional because she sees a Wraithbone in my chamber, and potentially throw your entire crew, ship and your domain in chaos.

The only ones who would be shipped up to the Inquisition would be Pascal (potential heretek if convinced to be), Jae (xeno trade), Idira (unsanctioned psyker) and Yrliet and Marazhai (JUST for being xenos and unfriendly ones at that).

So no, quite a lot of the companions are good, the fact they kill or accidentally kill a bunch of mooks doesn't make them LESS good, and it makes no sense to accuse them of sin and guilt when Yrliet's crime surpasses ALL of them, and it even gets HER into trouble.

[Hanabi]

I think that's where we differ, a moral person doesn't see 'a bunch of mooks'. They have their reasons, don't get me wrong. You have to remember it's very easy to reduce people you don't know to a number.

Cassia losing control and killing 'a bunch of mooks' is still a bunch of loyal crew, who swore their lives to you, killed in friendly fire. She's killed at least 13 crew men to date as far as I know.

Abelard suggesting a purge, on a scale of a Warhammer ship, is like burning out a neighborhood of several hundred people over a hunch. Again, 'just mooks' in your eyes.

The view of my Iconoclast is every death is a person. Every person Marazhai gave to the Dark Eldar is a massive crime.

Try approaching what you just said, but instead of 'Just Mooks' think like a person who doesn't reduce those under their power to just a number. And that's the nature of the difference.

Yrliet's crime gave 6 people the worst few days of their lives. And when 'mooks and others' came to investigate, you where already gone.

Her crime is worse because you lived through it, despite it only effecting the 6 of you directly. Though may have had staggering ramifications if the Rogue Trader never returned.

Abelard was going to put 100s to death, and most of them loyal. Argenta shot an innocent person to death to cover herself for having killed a Heretic.

On Heinreix I'm talking about every time I talked to someone remotely shady and he butted in. The Proposed World Bomb would have been on you as boss.

Yrliet impacted 7 people total on her crime. You and your 5 comrades where snatch and grabbed so Marazhai didn't have to face your ship or any resistance.

If 'Just Mooks' was battle droids, and not people in your service you might have a point.

Remember, I'm not thinking 'Imperial Law and Statistics.' that would be my Dogmatic Playthrough for when the game is actually finished.

I'm talking about lives, bloodshed, murderous intent, remorse.

Dogmatic = Statistical, Mooks = Number.
Iconoclast = Moral, Mooks = My Crew are people.

And it's a dangerous life without their Rogue Trader's Enterage consistently getting them killed far from enemy lines.

[REhorror]

Postat inițial de Hanabi:

I think that's where we differ, a moral person doesn't see 'a bunch of mooks'. They have their reasons, don't get me wrong. You have to remember it's very easy to reduce people you don't know to a number.

Cassia losing control and killing 'a bunch of mooks' is still a bunch of loyal crew, who swore their lives to you, killed in friendly fire. She's killed at least 13 crew men to date as far as I know.

Abelard suggesting a purge, on a scale of a Warhammer ship, is like burning out a neighborhood of several hundred people over a hunch. Again, 'just mooks' in your eyes.

The view of my Iconoclast is every death is a person. Every person Marazhai gave to the Dark Eldar is a massive crime.

Try approaching what you just said, but instead of 'Just Mooks' think like a person who doesn't reduce those under their power to just a number. And that's the nature of the difference.

Yrliet's crime gave 6 people the worst few days of their lives. And when 'mooks and others' came to investigate, you where already gone.

Her crime is worse because you lived through it, despite it only effecting the 6 of you directly. Though may have had staggering ramifications if the Rogue Trader never returned.

Abelard was going to put 100s to death, and most of them loyal. Cassia shot an innocent person to death to cover herself for having killed a Heretic.

On Heinreix I'm talking about every time I talked to someone remotely shady and he butted in. The Proposed World Bomb would have been on you as boss.

Yrliet impacted 7 people total on her crime. You and your 5 comrades where snatch and grabbed so Marazhai didn't have to face your ship or any resistance.

If 'Just Mooks' was battle droids, and not people in your service you might have a point.

Remember, I'm not thinking 'Imperial Law and Statistics.' that would be my Dogmatic Playthrough for when the game is actually finished.

I'm talking about lives, bloodshed, murderous intent, remorse.

Dogmatic = Statistical, Mooks = Number.
Iconoclast = Moral, Mooks = My Crew are people.

And it's a dangerous life without their Rogue Trader's Enterage consistently getting them killed far from enemy lines.

No, mooks are replaceable, your people don't mean you can somehow prevent their deaths. Death are normal things in Warhammer 40K, you can REPLACE the entire lower deck population each time you visit the next planet. This is what you do the first thing you visit Rykard Minoris.

Cassia can kill hundreds on the ship, and it wouldn't matter as much as Yrliet did.

And Heinrix, Argenta are SUPER nice for their characters, they should have killed you as soon as you speak any Heretical options, they are being out of character because of game reasons.

What Yrliet did is basically a straight out decapitation of your RT's dynasty and you.
1. When you and your retinues are captured by Dark Eldar, your ship could have been destroyed right after when they were waiting for you to come back.
2. With no one to lead, your worlds, millions of people would be destroyed by Chaos cultists and Dark Eldar.
3. The WHOLE sector would be thrown in imbalance as the other RTs would try to devour your territory.
4. The game basically throws in a special character to somehow save you (the Harlequin) and a bunch other plot's armor so you and your crew can make it out alive.

You fail to grasp the implication of being captured by Dark Eldar, of the responsibilities of you as a Rogue Trader, and you compare killing a bunch of mooks on the bridge to be EQUAL to the sin of Yrliet, something her Eldar mind even understands how BAD she ♥♥♥♥♥ up?

I swear some people don't even understand the story or what the characters are saying.

[BlazingScribe]

Postat inițial de REhorror:

No, mooks are replaceable, your people don't mean you can somehow prevent their deaths. Death are normal things in Warhammer 40K, you can REPLACE the entire lower deck population each time you visit the next planet. This is what you do the first thing you visit Rykard Minoris.

Cassia can kill hundreds on the ship, and it wouldn't matter as much as Yrliet did.

And Heinrix, Argenta are SUPER nice for their characters, they should have killed you as soon as you speak any Heretical options, they are being out of character because of game reasons.

What Yrliet did is basically a straight out decapitation of your RT's dynasty and you.
1. When you and your retinues are captured by Dark Eldar, your ship could have been destroyed right after when they were waiting for you to come back.
2. With no one to lead, your worlds, millions of people would be destroyed by Chaos cultists and Dark Eldar.
3. The WHOLE sector would be thrown in imbalance as the other RTs would try to devour your territory.
4. The game basically throws in a special character to somehow save you (the Harlequin) and a bunch other plot's armor so you and your crew can make it out alive.

You fail to grasp the implication of being captured by Dark Eldar, of the responsibilities of you as a Rogue Trader, and you compare killing a bunch of mooks on the bridge to be EQUAL to the sin of Yrliet, something her Eldar mind even understands how BAD she ♥♥♥♥♥ up?

I swear some people don't even understand the story or what the characters are saying.

Gentle reminder, Yrliet risked all the things mentioned.

Argenta actually did it by murdering Theodora. In the middle of a mutiny no less. Even if she was a chaos worshiper (which is dubious from what I know so far), that was impulsive as heck and risked as much or more. And then lied about it for months. And yet no complaints about that.

I think the issue isn't a difference of opinion, its a difference in how the setting is viewed. You view warhammer 40k as this grimdark place and that's the whole point. Viewing Yrliet as a filthy untrustworthy xenos fits the narrative, as does the rampant death on your ship. Don't worry about it, that's just 40k being 40k. That's not a flaw, but it also isn't the only option.

An Iconoclast is a different fantasy. Its the rogue trader played as the one good person in all the universe. The one person trying to make things better for everyone. To them (and the player roleplaying as them), no, those mooks aren't replaceable. Yeah there's no mechanical penalty for their deaths but you know. Those were your people. You took that shortcut in the warp that cost their lives. You decided to save those insight points instead of making the jumps safer. Those deaths are on your head, and by the Emperor you had better make them count, and do better.

The core point that I at least am arguing is this: There is room to view Yrliet as a good character whose arc is enhanced by her betrayal, not harmed by it. That status is partly due to the fact that her actions absolutely make sense, and partly that you have many ways of handling that betrayal, all of which can fit a different ideology of play.

[sleeve]

Without getting into spoilers, if you give Yrilet a chance (despite everyone screaming at you to kill her), you may be in for a surprise (cause I did that).

However, the enjoyment is hampered due to bugs not triggering stuff in Act 4 on my first playthrough so.....

[Hanabi]

I don't think you even understand what I'm saying at this point.

You're expecting me to play the game like a psychotic sociopath. And yeah, that sums up a LOT of Warhammer characters. A LOT of them. Most of them.

If I'm playing someone who actually considers her crew people, the risks are tenuous, dangerous, everything is dangerous. But crew on crew violence shouldn't be condoned.

You're writing is from the perspective of a completes psychopath who doesn't see anyone except the main cast and named characters as alive or human.

That's the same as saying "Just because the man killed 200 people in a paranoid fit doesn't mean anything because they where all just replaceable mooks and we can find 400 more."

I'm not into your 'bunch of mooks' mindset. It's like you can't understand counting people as individuals in large number. It's a very callow, politician based mindset where non of the constituents of his or her domain matter.

And AGAIN I didn't say Yrlett didn't do a Major Betrayal, I'm saying she's the only character that GREW as a character, repented, learned and strives to be better. Yeah she ♥♥♥♥♥♥ up, yeah that betrayal DID deserve a bullet to the head.

Your cast and crew have cost the lives of dozens of your loyal men and women. They have no right to judge anyone for lives lost and danger caused.

Look, if you're going to just claim I don't understand what you're saying. I'm saying counting 1000 people as 'disposable' as long as you don't personally know them or have great personal investment in them, is psychopathic.

Just because they are NPCs in the game, does not mean they aren't alive in the story. And that's what you can't seem to grasp.

I'm going to bed. Maybe your just tired and can't imagine 200 people as 200 people in a story where they aren't given names. Maybe the 'Random death of 13 people you don't know' because one of your allies had an accident and she doesn't really care because that kind of thing happens all the time doesn't matter to you.

But to someone who has a moral compass, 100s, 1000s, millions of lives under their charge, the majority they will never know the name of being killed doesn't mean anything since 'they're mooks'.

But you seem to be unable to calculate the value of a life in a story.

Argenta = One Person (Useful)
Pvt. Tores (who's name you don't know) = Mook who's life doesn't matter. (Useless)

And that's the difference between playing as someone with morals, and playing with someone who only sees the worlds as a Number Based Plutocracy.

And morally speaking, most of the companions are sketch as hell.

I'm going to bed, I gotta be up tomorrow.

And yeah, the upheval of a missing ruler is huge.

[REhorror]

Postat inițial de BlazingScribe:

Postat inițial de REhorror:

No, mooks are replaceable, your people don't mean you can somehow prevent their deaths. Death are normal things in Warhammer 40K, you can REPLACE the entire lower deck population each time you visit the next planet. This is what you do the first thing you visit Rykard Minoris.

Cassia can kill hundreds on the ship, and it wouldn't matter as much as Yrliet did.

And Heinrix, Argenta are SUPER nice for their characters, they should have killed you as soon as you speak any Heretical options, they are being out of character because of game reasons.

What Yrliet did is basically a straight out decapitation of your RT's dynasty and you.
1. When you and your retinues are captured by Dark Eldar, your ship could have been destroyed right after when they were waiting for you to come back.
2. With no one to lead, your worlds, millions of people would be destroyed by Chaos cultists and Dark Eldar.
3. The WHOLE sector would be thrown in imbalance as the other RTs would try to devour your territory.
4. The game basically throws in a special character to somehow save you (the Harlequin) and a bunch other plot's armor so you and your crew can make it out alive.

You fail to grasp the implication of being captured by Dark Eldar, of the responsibilities of you as a Rogue Trader, and you compare killing a bunch of mooks on the bridge to be EQUAL to the sin of Yrliet, something her Eldar mind even understands how BAD she ♥♥♥♥♥ up?

I swear some people don't even understand the story or what the characters are saying.

Gentle reminder, Yrliet risked all the things mentioned.

Argenta actually did it by murdering Theodora. In the middle of a mutiny no less. Even if she was a chaos worshiper (which is dubious from what I know so far), that was impulsive as heck and risked as much or more. And then lied about it for months. And yet no complaints about that.

I think the issue isn't a difference of opinion, its a difference in how the setting is viewed. You view warhammer 40k as this grimdark place and that's the whole point. Viewing Yrliet as a filthy untrustworthy xenos fits the narrative, as does the rampant death on your ship. Don't worry about it, that's just 40k being 40k. That's not a flaw, but it also isn't the only option.

An Iconoclast is a different fantasy. Its the rogue trader played as the one good person in all the universe. The one person trying to make things better for everyone. To them (and the player roleplaying as them), no, those mooks aren't replaceable. Yeah there's no mechanical penalty for their deaths but you know. Those were your people. You took that shortcut in the warp that cost their lives. You decided to save those insight points instead of making the jumps safer. Those deaths are on your head, and by the Emperor you had better make them count, and do better.

I know about Argenta, and that is no crime.
It is legally RIGHT for any SoB, Inquisitor or Space Marine to BLAM characters, no matter their rank, because of the legacy of how high rank characters are still vulnerable to corruption.

And no, Iconoclaust is about CARING for the people, the greater good, each time you do a warp jump, you can discover new resources to help your dynasty, to fight xenos and to help people. These losses are acceptable and these people die for the Imperium's cause or your cause.

What are you suggesting isn't DO BETTER, it's WASTES RESOURCES BECAUSE IT MAKES ME FEEL GOOD, and that isn't doing better.

[Hanabi]

Postat inițial de BlazingScribe:

Postat inițial de REhorror:

No, mooks are replaceable, your people don't mean you can somehow prevent their deaths. Death are normal things in Warhammer 40K, you can REPLACE the entire lower deck population each time you visit the next planet. This is what you do the first thing you visit Rykard Minoris.

Cassia can kill hundreds on the ship, and it wouldn't matter as much as Yrliet did.

And Heinrix, Argenta are SUPER nice for their characters, they should have killed you as soon as you speak any Heretical options, they are being out of character because of game reasons.

What Yrliet did is basically a straight out decapitation of your RT's dynasty and you.
1. When you and your retinues are captured by Dark Eldar, your ship could have been destroyed right after when they were waiting for you to come back.
2. With no one to lead, your worlds, millions of people would be destroyed by Chaos cultists and Dark Eldar.
3. The WHOLE sector would be thrown in imbalance as the other RTs would try to devour your territory.
4. The game basically throws in a special character to somehow save you (the Harlequin) and a bunch other plot's armor so you and your crew can make it out alive.

You fail to grasp the implication of being captured by Dark Eldar, of the responsibilities of you as a Rogue Trader, and you compare killing a bunch of mooks on the bridge to be EQUAL to the sin of Yrliet, something her Eldar mind even understands how BAD she ♥♥♥♥♥ up?

I swear some people don't even understand the story or what the characters are saying.

Gentle reminder, Yrliet risked all the things mentioned.

Argenta actually did it by murdering Theodora. In the middle of a mutiny no less. Even if she was a chaos worshiper (which is dubious from what I know so far), that was impulsive as heck and risked as much or more. And then lied about it for months. And yet no complaints about that.

I think the issue isn't a difference of opinion, its a difference in how the setting is viewed. You view warhammer 40k as this grimdark place and that's the whole point. Viewing Yrliet as a filthy untrustworthy xenos fits the narrative, as does the rampant death on your ship. Don't worry about it, that's just 40k being 40k. That's not a flaw, but it also isn't the only option.

An Iconoclast is a different fantasy. Its the rogue trader played as the one good person in all the universe. The one person trying to make things better for everyone. To them (and the player roleplaying as them), no, those mooks aren't replaceable. Yeah there's no mechanical penalty for their deaths but you know. Those were your people. You took that shortcut in the warp that cost their lives. You decided to save those insight points instead of making the jumps safer. Those deaths are on your head, and by the Emperor you had better make them count, and do better.

The core point that I at least am arguing is this: There is room to view Yrliet as a good character whose arc is enhanced by her betrayal, not harmed by it. That status is partly due to the fact that her actions absolutely make sense, and partly that you have many ways of handling that betrayal, all of which can fit a different ideology of play.

THANK YOU! Take my points. And, if it wouldn't be too rude to ask, I'm curious what your opinion on my original post about Yrlett's story is. I would really appreciate the input of more than one person and you seem to grasp the story difference.

[REhorror]

Postat inițial de Hanabi:

I don't think you even understand what I'm saying at this point.

You're expecting me to play the game like a psychotic sociopath. And yeah, that sums up a LOT of Warhammer characters. A LOT of them. Most of them.

If I'm playing someone who actually considers her crew people, the risks are tenuous, dangerous, everything is dangerous. But crew on crew violence shouldn't be condoned.

You're writing is from the perspective of a completes psychopath who doesn't see anyone except the main cast and named characters as alive or human.

That's the same as saying "Just because the man killed 200 people in a paranoid fit doesn't mean anything because they where all just replaceable mooks and we can find 400 more."

I'm not into your 'bunch of mooks' mindset. It's like you can't understand counting people as individuals in large number. It's a very callow, politician based mindset where non of the constituents of his or her domain matter.

And AGAIN I didn't say Yrlett didn't do a Major Betrayal, I'm saying she's the only character that GREW as a character, repented, learned and strives to be better. Yeah she ♥♥♥♥♥♥ up, yeah that betrayal DID deserve a bullet to the head.

Your cast and crew have cost the lives of dozens of your loyal men and women. They have no right to judge anyone for lives lost and danger caused.

Look, if you're going to just claim I don't understand what you're saying. I'm saying counting 1000 people as 'disposable' as long as you don't personally know them or have great personal investment in them, is psychopathic.

Just because they are NPCs in the game, does not mean they aren't alive in the story. And that's what you can't seem to grasp.

I'm going to bed. Maybe your just tired and can't imagine 200 people as 200 people in a story where they aren't given names. Maybe the 'Random death of 13 people you don't know' because one of your allies had an accident and she doesn't really care because that kind of thing happens all the time doesn't matter to you.

But to someone who has a moral compass, 100s, 1000s, millions of lives under their charge, the majority they will never know the name of being killed doesn't mean anything since 'they're mooks'.

But you seem to be unable to calculate the value of a life in a story.

Argenta = One Person (Useful)
Pvt. Tores (who's name you don't know) = Mook who's life doesn't matter. (Useless)

And that's the difference between playing as someone with morals, and playing with someone who only sees the worlds as a Number Based Plutocracy.

And morally speaking, most of the companions are sketch as hell.

I'm going to bed, I gotta be up tomorrow.

And yeah, the upheval of a missing ruler is huge.

In other words, if you kill 13 person, you are as bad or sketchy as someone who murders millions.

Yep, makes total sense to me.

I don't care for the hundreds or so who die every times I do a warp jump so I'm not "moral", meanwhile you don't seem to care about millions who can end up dead because of your RT being captured by the Dark Eldar?

No, what you are saying isn't "moral", it's basically being judgmental. You judge good people for doing bad things, while you totally forgive a stupid person for doing bad things that result in a MUCH worse situation.