The moral choice...

[no1schmo]

You ever think that, maybe, the moral choice is actually to sacrifice your Beloved? I mean, think about it; from the perspective of the Arisen, who knows nothing about the cycle and the Seneschal and all that jazz, there are three outcomes they could foresee;

1) Lose, the Dragon goes rampaging again, god knows how many more people die across the entire world as it waits for another Arisen to be chosen and then actually succeed.

2) Win a seemingly impossible fight, killing the Dragon, but it will eventually return, because the whole world seems pretty insistent that the Dragon CANNOT be permanently killed, that it will ALWAYS come back. So an indeterminate period of dragon-free years will ensue.

3) Take the deal, resulting in a guaranteed period of dragon-free years of, well, we don't know how long, the game never tells us how long ago the Duke struck his bargain, but it seems a reasonable guess to say 40 years, give or take--too much longer, and he would have died like the Dragonforged when he got his heart back, and too much less, and he wouldn't have withered to an ancient man. And presumably, the Arisen knows how long his lord has been in power, even if we, the players, do not. It's a decent length of time.

Is it really worth risking option 1 to achieve the incredible long shot of option 2, when option 3 is right there? I'm normally not a "sacrifice innocents" sort of person in these kinda of moral dilemmas, but this seems like a very clear "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" situation.

And remember, I am talking about this from the perspective of the Arisen as they are offered this choice with no deeper knowledge about this world's metaphysics or anything. Especially successive Arisen; sacrificing like 3 people a century or so to protect all of humanity seems reasonable, if rather uncomfortable and distasteful. Again, the Arisen has no reason to believe in some sort of fairy tale "Good always triumphs over evil!" thing, and was literally just told that even the last Arisen, who was THOUGHT to have slain the Dragon, instead took this deal. The Dragonforged also seems like a precautionary tale, like "This is what can happen if you challenge the Dragon", although his exact backstory is a bit unclear.

I dunno, just idle thoughts I'm having, no flame wars please.

[zadymek]

Originally posted by no1schmo:

3) Take the deal, resulting in a guaranteed period of dragon-free years of, well, we don't know how long, the game never tells us how long ago the Duke struck his bargain, but it seems a reasonable guess to say 40 years, give or take

We do know. The Duke reigns for 50 years now - at the time of the game. If anything we get two contradicting accounts on the time he took the throne. And his reign was a time of prosperity, or so Pawns say - maybe only in comparison with the current state ;)

The most proper choice is to fight. The dragon clearly expects it, and gives you time to prep. And only comes back to see your progress. You should not let him down. And it's a knightly thing to do.

Should you lose the Greg will likely put on another show, with hardly any casualties, to find another Arisen. Big deal.

The guaranteed period? Sure, you can have a guaranteed period of 50 years, where you build your power naively thinking that you can prepare for the next comming of The Dragon.
...or you can have no Dragon for 1000+ years.

[no1schmo]

Ah, but see, you're bringing in stuff the Arisen wouldn't know. The Arisen doesn't know anything about "1000+ years of peace" (where did you get that, BTW?). He doesn't know the Dragon even CAN be killed; he was just told, after all, that the former Arisen who "slew" the Dragon actually made a deal, so perhaps no one has ever beaten the Dragon and they ALL made deals, as far as he knows. It's true Grigori is less destructive than he COULD be, but he definitely damages the village and kills some people, and the Arisen has no way of knowing that he just does that every so often--there's a whole world out there, after all, and the Arisen would probably assume the Dragon is off terrorizing others during the whole adventure (and he probably is, just in the other worlds entirely). Faced with an impossible battle for an unknown reward, versus a guaranteed 50 years (don't recall the exact number being given but that sounds about right to me) of peace for the whole planet, it just seems like the rational choice; your point about the dragon's "expectations" and the "knightly thing to do" is basically saying the Arisen is being egotistical instead of caring about others, which is probably true in many cases but it's not really defending the choice as moral.

[zadymek]

Originally posted by no1schmo:

Ah, but see, you're bringing in stuff the Arisen wouldn't know. The Arisen doesn't know anything about "1000+ years of peace" (where did you get that, BTW?).

1. I didn't say peace.
2. I operate on levels of magnitude rather than years. 1000+ is just a proposal. The Dragonforged says that his heart was stolen something like 1000 years ago. And you learn that it was stolen by the current dragon. Pardon, current Dragon.
That means that the current Senechal can hold his office for a very long time. And no need to send the Dragon if you do not need a replacement, aye?

Let's face it: Dragons only return every 50 or so years if you have taken the deal.

Originally posted by no1schmo:

He doesn't know the Dragon even CAN be killed; he was just told, after all, that the former Arisen who "slew" the Dragon actually made a deal, so perhaps no one has ever beaten the Dragon and they ALL made deals, as far as he knows.

Yes, he gets told about the fake dragons-bane. The word is about the other one who slew the wyrm before the imposter though. And even if the Arisen would doubt that anyone have ever slain the dragon, he'd also be aware that the deal is merely a posponement of a great tragedy.
And why would he assume that he, the true Arisen, cannot win in the first place? Is that how challenges work in RL? Ppl giving up when others have failed?

The duke is a coward, the Dragon challenges you, you are not like the duke and take up the challenge. This is what heroes do.


BTW Why the 50 years. It may as well be 10 or 20. The alleged imposter before Edmun got 100. Maybe the Dragon gets impatient?

Originally posted by no1schmo:

and the Arisen has no way of knowing that he just does that every so often-

The Arisen doesn't have to know this, but has every right to learn about the dragon working in cycles. From the Faith ppl, like Haslett, who explains the whole dragon schematics.
https://dragonsdogma.fandom.com/wiki/Haslett#Quotes

[zadymek]

Oh, and almost forgot.
We are omitting one, tiny detail here.
There's a person's life at stake. And lore wise this is the Arisen's beloved.
It's not like the Arisen just decides to fight or go away and take the throne.
So yeah, there's also this.

[no1schmo]

But wait, hold on; the Dragonforged lost his heart 1000 years ago, meaning the Seneschal has been looking for at least 1000 years. That tells us nothing about how long he waits to start the search; if I knew it would take centuries to find my replacement, I'd probably start early. For all we know, actually, there might have been no pause at all, with a new Dragon immediately setting off to start the cycle anew. And again, the Arisen knows nothing of this, although I realize you were just responding to my request for information and not making a counter-argument when you said that.

The word is about the other one who slew the wyrm before the imposter though.

I'm literally not sure what this means, I'm afraid.

And even if the Arisen would doubt that anyone have ever slain the dragon, he'd also be aware that the deal is merely a posponement of a great tragedy.

A tragedy he can postpone for 2 generations if he makes a sacrifice, or could occur TOMORROW if he fails to do something that might well be impossible.

And why would he assume that he, the true Arisen, cannot win in the first place? Is that how challenges work in RL? Ppl giving up when others have failed?

The Duke was also a "true" Arisen--this phrase is not in the game and is meaningless, unless our Arisen is so arrogant to think he's better than all the others despite being a nobody. Why would he assume he CAN win? Yes, in real life, that is what people do, when challenged to swim across the Pacific Ocean or jump over the Grand Canyon, aka, things that seem physically impossible and life ending.

The duke is a coward, the Dragon challenges you, you are not like the duke and take up the challenge. This is what heroes do.

...and? Being a "hero" isn't really a thing here; this isn't a JRPG where the protagonist has grown up his whole life babbling about wanting to be a great hero, then actually goes on that character-developing journey. Furthermore, I could just as easily turn it around; a hero is willing to make a personal sacrifice to save the lives of others, not selfishly doom people to save something important to himself, nor have the ego to think he can fight off a walking, fire-breathing mountain with a 3-foot sword, one that he knows has terrorized the world since time immemorial and already kicked his butt once before. It's not like we have some magical sword, the Dragonslayer blade bequeathed by a god or something.

I didn't forget that detail at all, as I directly referenced "sacrificing innocents" in my initial post. But that's just it; it's a personal sacrifice to save others, and that, to me, seems like the more moral and heroic choice, for anyone who doesn't have a childlike notion that all the people can be saved all the time and that good guys always win (I don't mean you, I mean an Arisen who chooses that option). You could argue it's still immoral to sacrifice that knowingly, no matter what, but in "RL", sometimes you have to make a choice where all options are bad.

[zadymek]

Originally posted by no1schmo:

I'm literally not sure what this means, I'm afraid.

From certain NPCs you learn of the Dragon putting to ruin lands west from Gransys, 150 year ago. That means it was and then dissapeared. Made a deal no doubt.

Originally posted by no1schmo:

A tragedy he can postpone for 2 generations if he makes a sacrifice, or could occur TOMORROW if he fails to do something that might well be impossible.

Yes, if he can make a sacrifice.

Originally posted by no1schmo:

Why would he assume he CAN win? Yes, in real life, that is what people do, when challenged to swim across the Pacific Ocean or jump over the Grand Canyon, aka, things that seem physically impossible and life ending.

Yes, and that's why the Newly Arisen doesn't have to assume anything. He just does it.

Originally posted by no1schmo:

Furthermore, I could just as easily turn it around; a hero is willing to make a personal sacrifice to save the lives of others, not selfishly doom people to save something important to himself, nor have the ego to think he can fight off a walking, fire-breathing mountain with a 3-foot sword

"personal sacrifice" is just sophistry if you are not the one that gets to die.
On the other hand this "ego" is a major trait behind all true heroic deeds.
The will to sacrifice innocent life in exchange for benefits probably isn't.

Originally posted by no1schmo:

I didn't forget that detail at all, as I directly referenced "sacrificing innocents" in my initial post. But that's just it; it's a personal sacrifice to save others, and that, to me, seems like the more moral and heroic choice,

It may seem moral, on some level, but it clearly is not heroic.
"Heroic" implicates something brave or great. And indirectly an effort.

[no1schmo]

Your argument seems to have boiled down to "Yes, but it's not very heroic!" But I didn't ask about heroism (although I would argue the most important aspect of heroism is morality, not ego or effort or greatness--the difference between a Jedi and a Sith), I asked about morality. Sacrificing an innocent is obviously not, in and of itself, heroic, or moral, but in this context, having to choose between sacrificing 1 life versus dozens or hundreds or thousands, it certainly seems more moral to me. The only real variable is how likely it is to win--if you actually have a good shot at winning, then it can make sense to take that path. But when the chances are, as far as you know, infinitesimal, I just don't see it. Sometimes all options available to you suck, but you still have to make a choice.

[zadymek]

Originally posted by no1schmo:

Your argument seems to have boiled down to "Yes, but it's not very heroic!" But I didn't ask about heroism (although I would argue the most important aspect of heroism is morality, not ego or effort or greatness--the difference between a Jedi and a Sith), I asked about morality.

1. You mentioned "heroism", I just debunk the notion.
2. As for morality. I said it seems moral. But in reality it's about sacrificing one for the benefit of many, a calm calculation. It has nothing to do with morality.

And it's not 1 life vs 12s-100s-1000s. It's 1 life guaranteed vs maybe 1 maybe 1000s. And if you are ready to risk, your life, not that maybe 1-1000s, you may save that 1 life. That's how I look at this issue.

Originally posted by no1schmo:

The only real variable is how likely it is to win--if you actually have a good shot at winning, then it can make sense to take that path. But when the chances are, as far as you know, infinitesimal, I just don't see it. Sometimes all options available to you suck, but you still have to make a choice.

Variables? Sure.
The hero fell every single obstacle that stood on his way. He's offcially the best match for the dragon in the entire realm.

Now, this kind of thinking, about "good shots", about the odds, is the domain of wise, cunning maybe, not brave. The idea behind heroism is bravery, standing against the odds.

1 chance in 100 000? Sign me in!

'Tis a moral choice in hero's code, win or die trying.