Is Delphine completely idiot

[Darius]

Why kill the only way to survive (paarturnax), how she escape the thalmor, why she command us? Idiotic

[sdack]

We just had a thread about it. See here:

https://steamcommunity.com/app/489830/discussions/0/4351113999766275632/

[rompier02]

Hey. Yeah she is.

[fauxpas]

Originally posted by Futile War:

Why kill the only way to survive (paarturnax), how she escape the thalmor, why she command us? Idiotic

Delphine is completely unlikable and unable to look at issue from any angle other than hers, but that doesn't make her point invalid.

[alexander_dougherty]

Originally posted by fauxpas:

Originally posted by Futile War:

Why kill the only way to survive (paarturnax), how she escape the thalmor, why she command us? Idiotic

Delphine is completely unlikable and unable to look at issue from any angle other than hers, but that doesn't make her point invalid.

actually her point is invalid....
She is wanting you to kill Paarthurnax because his name will eventually make him a tyrant, she wants you to kill him because he apparently managed to kill hundreds of Blades in a war before the Blades (or the Dragonguard either for that matter) even existed.....

While their are good reasons for wanting him dead, even if I don't like them, she does not have those reasons.... hers are the stupid reasons.

[fauxpas]

Originally posted by alexander_dougherty:

Originally posted by fauxpas:

Delphine is completely unlikable and unable to look at issue from any angle other than hers, but that doesn't make her point invalid.

actually her point is invalid....
She is wanting you to kill Paarthurnax because his name will eventually make him a tyrant, she wants you to kill him because he apparently managed to kill hundreds of Blades in a war before the Blades (or the Dragonguard either for that matter) even existed.....

While their are good reasons for wanting him dead, even if I don't like them, she does not have those reasons.... hers are the stupid reasons.

Paar's name dooming him to return to his true nature since spirirts unfortunately don't have the free will that mortals do in TES may be the best justification for Paar needing to be killed (and the reason I personally kill my friend) ... but bringing justice for atrocities Paar committed against mankind isn't a bad justification either, especially from a group that is dedicated to the task of slaying dragons.


Had Paar been made a little less likeable and Dephline a little less easy to hate the issue wouldn't be as one sided in my opinion.

[alexander_dougherty]

Originally posted by fauxpas:

Originally posted by alexander_dougherty:

actually her point is invalid....
She is wanting you to kill Paarthurnax because his name will eventually make him a tyrant, she wants you to kill him because he apparently managed to kill hundreds of Blades in a war before the Blades (or the Dragonguard either for that matter) even existed.....

While their are good reasons for wanting him dead, even if I don't like them, she does not have those reasons.... hers are the stupid reasons.

Paar's name dooming him to return to his true nature since spirirts unfortunately don't have the free will that mortals do in TES may be the best justification for Paar needing to be killed (and the reason I personally kill my friend) ... but bringing justice for atrocities Paar committed against mankind isn't a bad justification either, especially from a group that is dedicated to the task of slaying dragons.


Had Paar been made a little less likeable and Dephline a little less easy to hate the issue wouldn't be as one sided in my opinion.

It wouldn't be a bad justification..... if he wasn't peaceful at the time.

It's basically saying to Dragons "No matter how good you become, and how far out of the way you go, we will hunt you down for any past crimes you may have committed". It totally removes peaceful coexistance from the table, so the Dragons have no reason not to continue with the atrocities. If he was committing the war crimes, then it wouldn't be a debate. But he isn't.

Yes I know that his name is an inescapable trap, but if you go after him while is still good, then Dragons will burn down ever village, town and city they can, because in a remarkably short space of time (to them) the mortals will be killing them anyway....

[Chaosium]

She's a breton, can't trust these people. Might as well send her back in the hills where she belongs

[fauxpas]

Originally posted by alexander_dougherty:

Originally posted by fauxpas:

Paar's name dooming him to return to his true nature since spirirts unfortunately don't have the free will that mortals do in TES may be the best justification for Paar needing to be killed (and the reason I personally kill my friend) ... but bringing justice for atrocities Paar committed against mankind isn't a bad justification either, especially from a group that is dedicated to the task of slaying dragons.


Had Paar been made a little less likeable and Dephline a little less easy to hate the issue wouldn't be as one sided in my opinion.

It wouldn't be a bad justification..... if he wasn't peaceful at the time.

It's basically saying to Dragons "No matter how good you become, and how far out of the way you go, we will hunt you down for any past crimes you may have committed". It totally removes peaceful coexistance from the table, so the Dragons have no reason not to continue with the atrocities. If he was committing the war crimes, then it wouldn't be a debate. But he isn't.

Yes I know that his name is an inescapable trap, but if you go after him while is still good, then Dragons will burn down ever village, town and city they can, because in a remarkably short space of time (to them) the mortals will be killing them anyway....

There are two issues that I have, the first being that only a Dragonborn (or another dragon) can permanently kill a dragon, so mortals simply are unable to end the threat as a dragon's return will always loom over thier futures ... and yes, this does mean that unfortunately Dragons and mortals aren't able to 'co-exist' peacefully as anything other than the status quo that Dragons are extremely rare, nearly mythic legends.


But even if we ignore that fact completely the other side of the coin is asking whether a man who broken into multiple houses, tortured and killed entire families when he was twenty should be forgiven and not brought to justice if he lived in peaceful seclusion until his seventies. ... Its a difficult question with arguments for and against both sides.

[SpeedFreak1972]

One small thing with that Delphine asks you to kill Paarthurnax ... ok, but some seem to forget Odahviing is also still out there ...

[alexander_dougherty]

Originally posted by fauxpas:

Originally posted by alexander_dougherty:

It wouldn't be a bad justification..... if he wasn't peaceful at the time.

It's basically saying to Dragons "No matter how good you become, and how far out of the way you go, we will hunt you down for any past crimes you may have committed". It totally removes peaceful coexistance from the table, so the Dragons have no reason not to continue with the atrocities. If he was committing the war crimes, then it wouldn't be a debate. But he isn't.

Yes I know that his name is an inescapable trap, but if you go after him while is still good, then Dragons will burn down ever village, town and city they can, because in a remarkably short space of time (to them) the mortals will be killing them anyway....

There are two issues that I have, the first being that only a Dragonborn (or another dragon) can permanently kill a dragon, so mortals simply are unable to end the threat as a dragon's return will always loom over thier futures ... and yes, this does mean that unfortunately Dragons and mortals aren't able to 'co-exist' peacefully as anything other than the status quo that Dragons are extremely rare, nearly mythic legends.


But even if we ignore that fact completely the other side of the coin is asking whether a man who broken into multiple houses, tortured and killed entire families when he was twenty should be forgiven and not brought to justice if he lived in peaceful seclusion until his seventies. ... Its a difficult question with arguments for and against both sides.

I personally believe in redemption, with the caveat that it's bloody hard work to redeem yourself, and that most who try fail...
I also believe that justice isn't about redemption, it's about protecting the majority....

With regards to Dragons, I agree that the only reason mortals can have anything like a peaceful coexistance is because the Dragons are rare.... and that if a Dragon starts going on a rampage it needs killing. The flip side is that you can't go around killing dragons that aren't killing and destroying, because that rallies the other dragons together, and the last thing mortals need is an army of dragons bent on revenge.

[alexander_dougherty]

Originally posted by SpeedFreak1972:

One small thing with that Delphine asks you to kill Paarthurnax ... ok, but some seem to forget Odahviing is also still out there ...

and that Odahving was an active believer in Alduin, so would happily pick up his agenda, if the mortals start getting uppity.

[ayrtep]

I guess that for some revenge is all that matters. Logic is irrelevant.

[fauxpas]

Originally posted by alexander_dougherty:

Originally posted by fauxpas:

There are two issues that I have, the first being that only a Dragonborn (or another dragon) can permanently kill a dragon, so mortals simply are unable to end the threat as a dragon's return will always loom over thier futures ... and yes, this does mean that unfortunately Dragons and mortals aren't able to 'co-exist' peacefully as anything other than the status quo that Dragons are extremely rare, nearly mythic legends.


But even if we ignore that fact completely the other side of the coin is asking whether a man who broken into multiple houses, tortured and killed entire families when he was twenty should be forgiven and not brought to justice if he lived in peaceful seclusion until his seventies. ... Its a difficult question with arguments for and against both sides.

I personally believe in redemption, with the caveat that it's bloody hard work to redeem yourself, and that most who try fail...
I also believe that justice isn't about redemption, it's about protecting the majority....

With regards to Dragons, I agree that the only reason mortals can have anything like a peaceful coexistance is because the Dragons are rare.... and that if a Dragon starts going on a rampage it needs killing. The flip side is that you can't go around killing dragons that aren't killing and destroying, because that rallies the other dragons together, and the last thing mortals need is an army of dragons bent on revenge.

The problem with that is that we've seen what would happen if an "army of dragons" existed ... if there were enough dragons still in existence to create a rampaging army it wouldn't matter whether mortals "provoked" them or not, tte natural urge and drive to dominate ensures the same end.

[fauxpas]

Originally posted by ayrtep:

I guess that for some revenge is all that matters. Logic is irrelevant.

Okay, so provide some logic then instead of simply throwing poo at the wall, because although Alex and I disagree on this issue both of us have reasoned lines of thought that went into our respective points.


Now I'll do you a favor by addressing the fact that yes, "justice" is a very complicated subject with many facets, rehabilitation, protecting innocents, maintaining the societal contract, and yes, even retribution.


This issue is made harder because per TES lore, spirits and mortals are fundamentally different and operate under different rules regarding free will and the ability to grow, change, and evolve.

[Ihateeverybody]

I am firmly convinced her incompetence was directly responsible for the heads of all those blades being presented to Tidas during at the start of the War.

She has all the attitude of someone who screwed up bad and can't see how it was her fault.

But that would require competent writing. Which I just don't see.