Kirin Jindosh

[Agenta]

I just managed to beat the Clockwork Mansion level itself with full non-lethal no detects. And I wondered something at the end. I had slaughtered all the clockwork soldiers, but spared the guards and Kirin. As I exited I saw the broken bodies of the soldiers I had killed, destroyed and on the floor in pieces, and as I heard Kirin's plea for survival as his mind was turned into scrambled eggs, begging for help from me. I now wonder why I tried to save him from this new death, and why, after I learned I could not, wished I could kill him and put him out of his misery, but I did leave him there to suffer. I wonder now, as I exit the mansion, why do I feel like I just killed a legend, a great man. I feel... regret over the target for the first time in this franchise. I wonder, why is there not another way? But there is none, and we just deal with that. I realized after this mission just how ruthless Emily and Corvo are, even in Low Chaos. And I wonder, from the last game, what really is the Light at the End, and even is there one?

[Erebus]

Originally posted by I Maria I:

Corvo/Emily came to the Mansion to rescue Sokolov and perform some kind of a punishment.

They came to the mansion to get Sokolov and prevent Jindosh from making a mechanical army. He had to be removed from the picture, it wasn't even punishment so much until it was discovered how much of a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ monster the guy was.

The outcome would be same!

Debatable, could in lore have ramnifications for his employees and staff immediately.

(And without feeling like the main character is a cruel person who does it for him/her-self in the name of revenge).

And the character even questions themselves and debates the decision or at least Emily did.

[Erebus]

Originally posted by I Maria I:

Originally posted by Erebus the Indolent:

prevent Jindosh from making a mechanical army. He had to be removed from the picture, it wasn't even punishment so much until it was discovered how much of a ♥♥♥♥ing monster the guy was

Prevent with kill, not with torturing. It would be lesser "chaos" than the way chosen by non-lethal walkthrough. It really wasn't a punishment, because it didn't have the main idea of it - the understanding of a fault.

Killing him or torturing - the outcome really would be same:
1. Sokolov is saved
2. No more creepy mechanical soldiers
3. You're the winner : )

Originally posted by Erebus the Indolent:

And the character even questions themselves and debates the decision or at least Emily did.

Played as Corvo, didn't notice anything. Maybe I was kinda shocked and he said something and I just didn't mention. Well, I think it's time to start the "Emily walkthrough" : )

I've yet to do a Corvo run, but I'm pretty sure Emily comments and her journal entry also mentions.

[Plastic]

Originally posted by Erebus the Indolent:

Originally posted by I Maria I:

Prevent with kill, not with torturing. It would be lesser "chaos" than the way chosen by non-lethal walkthrough. It really wasn't a punishment, because it didn't have the main idea of it - the understanding of a fault.

Killing him or torturing - the outcome really would be same:
1. Sokolov is saved
2. No more creepy mechanical soldiers
3. You're the winner : )



Played as Corvo, didn't notice anything. Maybe I was kinda shocked and he said something and I just didn't mention. Well, I think it's time to start the "Emily walkthrough" : )

I've yet to do a Corvo run, but I'm pretty sure Emily comments and her journal entry also mentions.

Corvo's journal mentions something of it, but otherwise no comments from what I can remember. Corvo has been through a lot, so I'm guessing seeing someone in that much agony but knowing what wrong he's done didn't affect Corvo all that much.

Though, I think the writing on Corvo's part is pretty lack-luster compared to Emily :/. I've done a high chaos Corvo playthrough and a low chaos Emily walkthrough, and enjoyed Emily's actors emotion and her style of tone in different situations. Corvo's actor seemed pretty... Blegh. Though I don't necessarily blame the actor, much more the writers :c.

[GM Pax]

Originally posted by EverfreeSparkle:

[...] free-will is non-existant. [...]

Oh, you're one of THOSE.

Having anything resembling a discission of morals, ethics, or right-and-wrong with your sort is nothing more or less than a complete waste of time, energy, and oxygen.

[Vibby]

Originally posted by GM Pax:

Originally posted by EverfreeSparkle:

[...] free-will is non-existant. [...]

Oh, you're one of THOSE.

Having anything resembling a discission of morals, ethics, or right-and-wrong with your sort is nothing more or less than a complete waste of time, energy, and oxygen.

If you bothered to read the rest of what I said, you'll know that's not true. Idiot. People like you are absolute morons. The fact that free-will doesn't exist does NOT change how we feel. Humans have this little thing called emotions. You may have heard of it. Even knowing free-will doesn't exist, that doesn't change that we FEEL like it does. This is one of those times where feelings absolutely can drive logic. Because otherwise there is no logic in life.

It's not that hard, honestly. We are illogical creatures, after all. Nothing we do matters. What matters is that we FEEL it matters. It's beautiful that something could come into being that can make sense of the universe and want to live, even though nothing matters in the absolute sense. Absolutely beautiful.

[Yes?]

Originally posted by GM Pax:

Originally posted by EverfreeSparkle:

[...] free-will is non-existant. [...]

Oh, you're one of THOSE.

Having anything resembling a discission of morals, ethics, or right-and-wrong with your sort is nothing more or less than a complete waste of time, energy, and oxygen.

"In addition, free-will is non-existant."

That´s just a lazy cop out that makes it possible for an individual to not take full responsibility for ones actions and makes the matter (anxiety) of making choices irrelevant.

Edit: It´s just a modern version of the old religious view that everything is foreordained, that some had/have.

[Vibby]

Originally posted by Yes?:

Originally posted by GM Pax:

Oh, you're one of THOSE.

Having anything resembling a discission of morals, ethics, or right-and-wrong with your sort is nothing more or less than a complete waste of time, energy, and oxygen.

"In addition, free-will is non-existant."

That´s just a lazy cop out that makes it possible for an individual to not take full responsibility for ones actions and makes the matter (anxiety) of making choices irrelevant.

Only if you're an idiot.

[Yes?]

Originally posted by EverfreeSparkle:

Originally posted by Yes?:

"In addition, free-will is non-existant."

That´s just a lazy cop out that makes it possible for an individual to not take full responsibility for ones actions and makes the matter (anxiety) of making choices irrelevant.

Only if you're an idiot.

That´s a great comeback, guess you didn´t have a choice in the matter though..

[Vibby]

Originally posted by Yes?:

Originally posted by EverfreeSparkle:

Only if you're an idiot.

That´s a great comeback, guess you didn´t have a choice in the matter though..

It wasn't a comeback or an argument, just a fact. I also hate it when peopole tell me how I think, especially idiots who think no free means you are justified to do whatever. It's an observation on how the universe works, not a personal morality statement. Very few people would agree that no free-will=do whatever. Again, check my other posts and you will understand.

[Erebus]

Originally posted by EverfreeSparkle:

The whole meat machine rationale is a cop-out. Self-awareness confers more control than that.

[Vibby]

Originally posted by Erebus the Indolent:

Originally posted by EverfreeSparkle:

The whole meat machine rationale is a cop-out. Self-awareness confers more control than that.

It's not a cop-out, it's an observation on how reality works. It doesn't change how I act, just how I view the universe. Knowing I have no free-will doesn't change the fact I am still of the human condition. Ever wonder why the smartest of people take this view on reality? Because it's the view that has the most going for it. Even quantum mechanics being random wouldn't matter, as we would still be determined by the results of said randomness.

[Lobstersaurus]

Originally posted by EverfreeSparkle:

It's not a cop-out, it's an observation on how reality works. It doesn't change how I act, just how I view the universe.

Lay off the weed, my friend.

[Dr.Abscondus]

Originally posted by EverfreeSparkle:

Originally posted by Erebus the Indolent:

The whole meat machine rationale is a cop-out. Self-awareness confers more control than that.

It's not a cop-out, it's an observation on how reality works. It doesn't change how I act, just how I view the universe. Knowing I have no free-will doesn't change the fact I am still of the human condition. Ever wonder why the smartest of people take this view on reality? Because it's the view that has the most going for it. Even quantum mechanics being random wouldn't matter, as we would still be determined by the results of said randomness.

You're way too smart for this bunch and I think you're getting them all riled up. Keep your head down.

[GM Pax]

Originally posted by EverfreeSparkle:

[...] free-will doesn't exist [...]

This belief of yours is why discussing ethics and morals with your kind of fool is a waste of time.

Thre is no morality in any action, if there is no choice to perform the action or not. If everythign is predetermined, then no-one is ever responsible for their actions .... to be responsible for doing something, you must have the option to NOT do that thing.

Absent free will, there can be no good, no evil; no right, no wrong. Absent choice, there is no responsibility.

My bedroom light has no control over when it is on, or when it is off. Therefor, it is not responsible for being left on all weekend while I am away ... it had no choice in the matter, it has no free well, and so responsibility for being left on does not reside in the lamp.

It is the same for human beings: if we lack self-determination, if we lack the ability to choose whether or not to act, then we also lack any responsibility for those actions (or inactions).

Disavowing free will is a cop-out; "I didn't have a choice" is just an effort to avoid guilt or responsibility for the consequences of one's actions; guilt ("I did somethign wrong and it hurt you.") becomes supplanted wth faux sympathy ("Isn't it unfortunate that the universe made you get hurt?"). Nothing more, nothing less.

[Coin]

Karma is a ♥♥♥♥♥. He made that invention himself, and he himself got fried by it, seems fair.
Also a lot of non-lethal ways to deal with targets are arguably worse than death. Like branding high overseer and sending twins into slavery.