spoiler What are people's opinions on Morrigan?

[SpellAndShield]

Hatred, Love, I can definitely appreciate people doing their thing with Morrigan.... :thumbsup: :whistling:

[Utotri]

 

Sorry if I wasn't clear on what I said above,but I was actually agreeing with you that helping Radcliffe is a good strategy,but deciding to do something else to further the goal dose not make her evil.

 

It depends on what is chosen instead. Here nothing is chosen instead, so all you win is two measly days or so. The lack of effort to help those in dire need can hardly be seen as anything other than evil, I'm sorry.

I was also giving Ameranthine as an example of this point that in you can do either or,but it is up to you to make the call if it was worth it or not.

 

There is a forced choice between two evils in Amaranthine. You can't be blamed either way.

If you have seen the movie saving private Ryan,you will note all but one guy from the original team dies saving one person who wasn't even going to help the war effort and good soldiers die saving him. While yes it is morally good to do such,but was it good strategically most will say that more manpower for the war was lost.

 

Saving a certain private who isn't in dire need, just because his brothers all fell and then sacrificing men for such a mundane task is not morally good, it is morally evil, especially in a war.

She was making her views call on a strategic decision that she saw wouldn't be worth the risk of it,Sten also thinks that chasing after the Urn is a waste of resources that should be spent against the blight,so are you going to call Sten evil too for not fully wanting to help Eamon.

 

Sten is brainwashed by the Qun. He does not understand he is evil at times. He is much like conservative Christians or Muslims, who use their fairytales as an excuse to be ignorant about how to devise a proper morality.

 

You can't call someone evil because of a strategic decision of their view they thought it was right,history will later judge it a good or bad decision,but you can't call them evil for it either.

 

This is nonsense. History judges based on incomplete sources. Historians make an educated guess, and then there's always discussion about this. The time to properly judge a decision is when it is made, because then you don't know what follows and there is no danger of falling into the finalism pitfall. If a certain strategic decision places a far too small value on human life, especially those of innocents, it is just to call it evil.

 

It can't win in the eyes of Morrigan because it's too weak to break their chains and therefor deserves its fate

Exactly. Now how is this not evil?

 

So you find Nature evil? This is the survival of the fittest,this is how many things work,and I probably shouldn't have said deserved as that's the wrong way to say it,but in her eyes a circle that can't win its freedom on its own is not strong.

 

Nature can't contemplate its own actions. I find nature evil, it is even quite evident I'd say, but it has no meaning when applied to nature.

 

Yes it is, because if Good & Evil isn't a perception than the opinions of Morrigan should all include she is evil.

 

This isn't logical.

This is not clearly the case though,I recommend my Nietzsche quote on such like this(also Master-slave morality by him too). I say just because we view it as that dose not make it true to everyone, some people are viewed evil,but they see themselves doing good.

 

There can always be discussion about what is good and what is evil, but there are guiding principles behind those considerations. The main question is if these principles are arbitrary or not. There are principles that I feel are not arbitrary at all, such as the right to life and freedom of conscience. I do not see much value in your quote of Nietzsche. He is not known to be consistent in his philosophies and here too the quote can be shot at from different angles. Isn't truth quite powerful? What about things that can be measured? What if there are powers prevalent that lead to the truth? But let me ask you then: When do you consider something evil and when do you consider someone evil?

 

 

A good example of this also is if you ever played Warcraft 3 campaign with as Arthas before he becomes a Death Knight,this is a prime example of how it is mere perception not a truth. Arthas thinks that pruging the city of plagued people before they bolster the army of damnded even more is good and will end up putting them out of their misery,but Janna and Uther say no that's bad and rash evil thing too do and that there might be another way. The problem is that the plague is already starting to turn people into the undead and Arthas sees this as the only quick choice to stop this from getting out of hand. While it was a good decision he was thought as a monster by Uther and Janna for doing something because that's how THEY saw it. The choice is yours too see how you will,but you can't say she's evil because a decision she thought was right for the greater good of the goal.

Again, this seems to be a choice between two evils where Arthas can't really be blamed for his choice. I can't comment properly, I didn't like WC3 and haven't seen the campaign.

[Lehcar]

You have all still failed to justify her insistence on running off with the bast*rd forever.

[LobselVith66]

You have all still failed to justify her insistence on running off with the bast*rd forever.

 

The logic of making more money with a sequel, of course... an evil sequel made by evil people for evil reasons. :thumbsup:

[RustyBlade]

You have all still failed to justify her insistence on running off with the bast*rd forever.

She obviously wants to raise the child to adulthood and then possess it to extend her lifespan like Flemeth was going to do to her or already has done to her (since I didn't kill the old bat.)

[LobselVith66]

You have all still failed to justify her insistence on running off with the bast*rd forever.

She obviously wants to raise the child to adulthood and then possess it to extend her lifespan like Flemeth was going to do to her or already has done to her (since I didn't kill the old bat.)

 

It's been mentioned earlier in this thread that the lead writer of DA, David Gaider, already stated Morrigan's child will be normal. The first Grimore only works to explain how a unique abomination like Flemeth can inhabit her daughter's body. It was also mentioned earlier that the only reason Morrigan did the ritual is because the Orleisan Wardens didn't come as planned.

 

 

 

It depends on what is chosen instead. Here nothing is chosen instead, so all you win is two measly days or so. The lack of effort to help those in dire need can hardly be seen as anything other than evil, I'm sorry.

 

I don't see what people see about her as so evil because she advocates pragmatic decisions. She makes tough decisions. Agree with them or not, the point is we should applaud the writers for writing complex characters and not one-dimensional cartoon characters. Morrigan is a complex character. She gives up a chance at happiness (if romanced) to protect possibly the last Old God (since the other two will be killed after the next two Blights). She is trying to preserve something from extinction. It's just like when she advocated releasing Sten.

 

As for being evil, this isn't Vaughan we're talking about. Agree with them or not, in her POV, she advocates a pragmatic decision over one based solely on emotion. The Anvil, the Elf/Werewolf conflict, Redcliffe. It's an issue of survival of the fittest from Flemeth's teachings, and she continually advocates the Warden to make decisions to enpower him/her. Why should an apostate care about a town that has likely killed apostates in the past and distract herself from stopping the Archdemon, especially when other treaties need to be resolved to defend against the Blight and no one knows how many days they would need to defend Redcliffe against a siege, in addition to the fact that no one (not even the Bann) has admitted to knowing any way to enter the castle?

[LobselVith66]

Blah blah blah.

Whats with the arguing? The OP just asked for an opinion, and it gets turned into a debate that I get 4-8 notifications about a day?

 

K. So. Gaider has let it out of the bag that the kid is going to be a normal child. Geeze, with that in mind I find it absolutely amazing that so many of these comments completely ignore the fact that a decent sized chunk of the reason for the ritual is BECAUSE SHE WANTS TO SAVE YOUR LIFE AND SOUL.

 

So howz about every body takes a step back, grabs a deep, cleansing breath, and just chills out. Cuz I'm having a Flemeth moment here where I see one of the mods coming in to close this down in the near future if we don't. And this thread does have the potential to be a nice, conversational discussion.

 

True enough.

 

Speculation aside, I guess we'll have to wait for DA2 to give us a definitive answer regarding Morrigan.

[Lehcar]

You have all still failed to justify her insistence on running off with the bast*rd forever.

She obviously wants to raise the child to adulthood and then possess it to extend her lifespan like Flemeth was going to do to her or already has done to her (since I didn't kill the old bat.)

 

Is there a possinility she'll become the next villain?

[Coous]

Yes it is, because if Good & Evil isn't a perception than the opinions of Morrigan should all include she is evil.

 

What I meant by this is simply that Good and Evil are personal views on things and not a 100% true all around from every angle.The reason why I brought up Arthas during his Culling of Stratholme is a prime example of this very thing of stated above.You say that not helping defend Redcliffe is the Evil and bad thing to do,but doing something is the right thing to do. This is where the Arthas thing comes right into play is he is taking action to quell it before it gets further out of control which makes it good according to you. This is however the case he is later just resented and labeled a monster for doing something thought right and best course of action by everyone later on. This is why I say Good and Evil are not the right words to use with a character that is complex as such. This is why it is mere perception and not a truth,but if it was a truth everyone would be saying she is evil this is however not the case as the opinions of her vary so,but this is the last I will say on such as this is not a debate on what Good & Evil is and it being personal views.After all this is opinions of Morrigan thread and not a discussion of her character thread no matter how interesting it can be at times.

[RustyBlade]

You have all still failed to justify her insistence on running off with the bast*rd forever.

She obviously wants to raise the child to adulthood and then possess it to extend her lifespan like Flemeth was going to do to her or already has done to her (since I didn't kill the old bat.)

 

Is there a possinility she'll become the next villain?

 

It has been said that she would be back in DA2. Whether or not she will be "the villain" is anybody's guess. They could throw us all a curve and have the joy of motherhood turn her into a loving nurturing person :blink: