Nudedragon Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 (edited) No, you're saying that people should try to do good things no matter what even if it means their death. I'm saying people should follow the natural path of self-preservation. Look, you can interpret it that way if you want, but that's not what I'm saying. The stance is valid, we define our heroes as those who risk their own lives to help others. It is you who brought that up, though, not I. Your second statement is hard wired into every mobile living creature. Nevertheless, you indicated that "my" stance was the "good" one. Assuming that you believe our views are opposed, what's that say about your opinion on self preservation? It's like that episode in Stargate: Atlantis where the Atlantis crew was helped by a Replicator named Ava Dixon. Her reward? Destruction of her body while her mind was preserved in virtual reality. All because of the nature of Replicators as a "security risk", just as you are judging Paarthurnax because of his nature as a dragon. Since you edited your post: I've not watched that show. You misunderstand, I'm not judging Paarthurnax for the way he is now, I'm saying that he's still responsible for what he did in the past. If a Josef Mengele had survived the second world war, and somehow lived for a couple hundred years in peace, would he be absolved of his actions during wwII purely as a factor of age? Edited July 15, 2013 by Nudedragon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidbossVyers Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 Yes, risking one's life to save others is good, but not to do so is not evil, but neutral and natural. If you believe good is something to be rewarded, then how dare you reward Paarthurnax with death when his other option was something that comes naturally? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nudedragon Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 Yes, risking one's life to save others is good, but not to do so is not evil, but neutral and natural. If you believe good is something to be rewarded, then how dare you reward Paarthurnax with death when his other option was something that comes naturally? True, self preservation is not inherently evil, mass murder and the enslavement of every mortal species is! Paarthurnax was a part of the dragon's attempted genocide and enslavement plan, by choice. He then lived for thousands of years without enslaving or killing anyone: does that absolve his prior crimes? I say no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidbossVyers Posted July 16, 2013 Share Posted July 16, 2013 As the Greybeards said, all dragons were. And it was hardly choice as there were 3 factors: draconic nature, loyalty to Alduin, and fear of Alduin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nudedragon Posted July 16, 2013 Share Posted July 16, 2013 So, group behavior excuses misbehavior? Lots of people pirate games, that doesn't mean theft is ok. The dragons all had the choice to make their own path, or join Alduin in conquest of nirn, and they chose conquest. Loyalty isn't an excuse in any universe, and they didn't fear alduin that much. Paarthurnax betrayed alduin because alduin's pride became so great that he claimed to be a god, it wasn't for the mortal's sake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted2627243User Posted July 17, 2013 Share Posted July 17, 2013 I just use the Paarthurnax Fix mod that gives you a lore friendly option to bypass the quest. Unmodded it is a stupid almost limiting quest that forces you to pick a side. A dent in an otherwise great game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blacksupernova Posted July 18, 2013 Share Posted July 18, 2013 If the heroes of old, the one who lived under the cruelty of dragon and the one who bore the hatred toward dragon so much as creating a shout strong enough to take away immortality of Alduin, spared Parthurnaax, then I see no reason for the individuals who would not have existed if not for Parthurnaax's intervention to judge his life. Even if he is to be judged for his crimes, it should be the court of skyrim (assume there is one), the Empire, or the people of Skyrim to decide his fate, not individuals like the Blades or Dragonborn, similar to how Superman only captures bad guys but refuses to kill them. If everyone gives themselves the right to decide the fate of others (like the Blades), the world would be in chaos. Perhaps Parthurnaax should be punished for his past crimes, but should it be death penalty considering all the good he has made? There is clemency in law after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nudedragon Posted July 18, 2013 Share Posted July 18, 2013 If the heroes of old, the one who lived under the cruelty of dragon and the one who bore the hatred toward dragon so much as creating a shout strong enough to take away immortality of Alduin, spared Parthurnaax, then I see no reason for the individuals who would not have existed if not for Parthurnaax's intervention to judge his life. Even if he is to be judged for his crimes, it should be the court of skyrim (assume there is one), the Empire, or the people of Skyrim to decide his fate, not individuals like the Blades or Dragonborn, similar to how Superman only captures bad guys but refuses to kill them. If everyone gives themselves the right to decide the fate of others (like the Blades), the world would be in chaos. Perhaps Parthurnaax should be punished for his past crimes, but should it be death penalty considering all the good he has made? There is clemency in law after all. The graybeards wouldn't hide Paarthurnax if they thought the empire would tolerate him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpectralDragon Posted July 18, 2013 Share Posted July 18, 2013 Regarding the above argument about parthuunax (or however it's spelled), isn't the fact that it is tearing both ways at justice what makes it "the parthuunax dilemma?" Mistakes are a fact of nature and the universe. Sometimes people happen to make big mistakes. Maybe the dragons were enslaving the human race, however there is no evidence that I can see how tyrannical that rule was. If it wasn't terribly tyrannical then was what Parthuunax did really so horrid? Also, war in and of itself means that both sides are guilty. That is the nature of war. Rising up to kill the dragons because they are enslaving you does not negate the fact that you are killing them. Was it necessary? Probably, but the blood is still on their hands regardless. Also, IMHO, you cannot, and should not, judge a dragon on human standards. Anyway, I choose to keep him alive. He could more easily bend the dragons to follow his ways knowing how they think. If you killed him, history would repeat itself since the dragonborn would not live long enough to make a difference. Also, I liked the dragon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CasperTheLich Posted July 18, 2013 Share Posted July 18, 2013 Do we actually know it was the dragons that crushed the enslaved populations, personally (pre-war)? I’ve only seen references to alduin’s dragoncult itself (that is up until the dragon war). The best I can tell, the dragons (for the most part) left select mortals to rule over other mortals in their stead, and it was they who became overly oppressive.iirc, even esbern said it was the dragoncult, though I’m not sure if the dragons themselves are counted as members of said cult (though I would think not). the dragon war was a war of genocide, for both factions. the dragons and their cult were hunted to extinction. that was justified I would say... under the circumstances, though that doesn't make it right, or good. same with the falmer/nord war. as always imho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts