6.0 Story Speculations

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cilia

1. While the "insanity defense" is thrown around humorously and humorously often, this is one point where it's entirely applicable. If someone's not in their right mind, is it really fair to hold the things they did in that state against them?

---

When it comes to the death of someone...yes. If it was a petty thing then no not really. When it comes at the cost of another persons life then yes they should be held accountable. We could fall down an entire rabbit hole in that case of “how much is this person not in the right state of mind and to how far should we extend a hand in giving a pass”. In this case, it came at the cost of people’s lives. The person who caused that should be held accountable regardless of their mental state. Because then in that case, who knows when they could do that again and then again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

I mean, i don’t think anyone is denying that but.... so what? They get a pass? We overlook their sins made because they’re the WoL and they could do no harm? Yet again, if it was an antagonist to do the same people would be getting the pitchforks etc. The double standard is really what i’m pointing out.

---

You didn't really do anything that terrible up until the last quest where your dark side possessed Fray's body and tried to kill people at Whitebrim...which still technically wasn't you and is probably the bigger factor in why they were so willing to help you then forgive and forget.

Random nameless chirugeon guy still stands out in my memory for being the first to offer assistance despite his expression screaming "I have no idea what in the seven hells is going on right now".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

When it comes to the death of someone...yes. If it was a petty thing then no not really. When it comes at the cost of another persons life then yes they should be held accountable. We could fall down an entire rabbit hole in that case of “how much is this person not in the right state of mind and to how far should we extend a hand in giving a pass”. In this case, it came at the cost of people’s lives. The person who caused that should be held accountable regardless of their mental state. Because then in that case, who knows when they could do that again and then again.

---

Considering the perpetrator (the PC) was able to shake off the magical psychosis and are no longer a danger to themselves or others (well, no more than they were before the magical psychosis), I really don't see the issue. Further whatever ills they may have committed against Ishgard and her people absolutely pale in comparison to the services they've done for the country and beyond, so... good luck.

Also see below.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KageTokage

You didn't really do anything that terrible up until the last quest where your dark side possessed Fray's body and tried to kill people at Whitebrim...which still technically wasn't you and is probably the bigger factor in why they were so willing to help you then forgive and forget.

Random nameless chirugeon guy still stands out in my memory for being the first to offer assistance despite his expression screaming "I have no idea what in the seven hells is going on right now".

---

This argument started due to a different interpretation of a certain bit of information in the DRK 63 quest. In it you're tasked with finding Lowdy, the widowed barmaid who poisoned the PC and started a riot at Falcon's Nest to halt the peace talks with Vidofnir. She's since been sentenced to serving hard labor out in the Dravanian Forelands around Tailfeather, overseen by an overly strict proctor (i.e. he's physically abusing her). In order to get the full plan in action, Sidurgu goes to free her for a moment while the PC tries to talk some sense into said proctor. Unfortunately, said proctor won't listen to reason, so the PC implicitly resorts to threats, leading to the guy attacking you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sidurgu

Confront the proctor. Make him see the error of his ways. If he is a good man, then he may yet repent of his wicked ways...
If he refuses, then that is his choice to make, and he will have to accept the consequences of his actions. Doubly so if he bears steel, yes?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lowdy's Proctor

Hm? Who are you? Why do you disturb me?
A concerned adventurer who objects to my treatment of a criminal? Hah! If only you knew her sins. She should have been thrown into Witchdrop.
Alas, the Lord Speaker in his boundless wisdom and mercy demanded that we spare the woman's life. But rest assured I will see that her every waking moment is filled with misery and scorn.
You presume to judge me!? A man of the church!? I will not be cowed by your threats! The Fury guide and protect me! The Fury guide and protect me!

---

The general feel I get from it is "Try talking to him. If that doesn't work, try threatening him. If that doesn't work and he attacks you, it's on him," not "Goad this guy into attacking you so you can kill him." But, that's just me.

The PC does get blood on their hands for reasons of questionable validity before that (Massacring amalj'aa to save a caravan from being tempered? Probably good. Massacring qiqirn bandits because a single merchant got his goods stolen? Quite a bit more questionable) but as stated before the PC isn't in their right mind at that point in time.

It was nothing out of ordinary for the WoL, when dealing with the obstinate old guard of Ishgard. Try talking, when negotiations break down, enforce your will with violence.

Heck, that basically sums up quite a lot of the MSQ.

The conversation was basically, "Are you abusing this woman?" - "Yes, of course! She deserves it." - "Go easier on her, in fact, stop altogether." - "No." - "Do what I say or else." -> Proctor attacks. He also attacks with you with two hedge knights in his service, so he knew his conduct was questionable. He was already intent on burying you, if you gave him too much trouble.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vyrerus

It was nothing out of ordinary for the WoL, when dealing with the obstinate old guard of Ishgard. Try talking, when negotiations break down, enforce your will with violence.

Heck, that basically sums up quite a lot of the MSQ.

The conversation was basically, "Are you abusing this woman?" - "Yes, of course! She deserves it." - "Go easier on her, in fact, stop altogether." - "No." - "Do what I say or else." -> Proctor attacks. He also attacks with you with two hedge knights in his service, so he knew his conduct was questionable. He was already intent on burying you, if you gave him too much trouble.

---

He attacks you with two knights because we literally threaten his life. What else is he going to do? If someone threatened us you know full well the scions are going to come barging on whoever’s doing it. I mean we goad the guy, kill him, and then just let a woman who poisoned us and incited riots go free. Real good decision making there. You’re right though in that, it sums up a lot of the msq. It’s why i don’t really see WoL as a good person lol.

Dark Knight's whole shtick is being judge, jury, and executioner for people who are trying to abuse their authority to commit wrongdoings (Which is not nearly as relevant in the post-Dragonsong War Ishgard).

Being morally ambiguous just kind of comes naturally to it...though I agree that situation could've been handled without killing the guy, seeing as we're pretty much the most influential person in Ishgard short of Aymeric himself and maybe the house leaders. It is, however, much more convenient to just solve problems with violence from a narrative standpoint, which is probably why we're so prone to running into unreasonable people who attack us at the drop of a hat in sidequests.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KageTokage

Dark Knight's whole shtick is being judge, jury, and executioner for people who are trying to abuse their authority to commit wrongdoings (Which is not nearly as relevant in the post-Dragonsong War Ishgard).

Being morally ambiguous just kind of comes naturally to it...though I agree that situation could've been handled without killing the guy, seeing as we're pretty much the most influential person in Ishgard short of Aymeric himself and maybe the house leaders. It is, however, much more convenient to just solve problems with violence from a narrative standpoint, which is probably why we're so prone to running into unreasonable people who attack us at the drop of a hat in sidequests.

---

And i agree that, that is what Drk is. But it doesn’t make it right what we do in those quest-lines either. We can try and hide it behind the fact of the wol was struggling with mental illness or whatever but it still doesn’t justify killings(or letting attempted murderers go).

Except he had his guards and we were alone, we also only threatened him, if I tried to kill every person who ever threatened me, I'd not have made it out of school without ending up in juvey and then jail. Being threatening doesn't give you the right to attempt to kill someone, we didn't didn't act on our threats or swing first, we tried to intimidate him into backing off and his literal first reaction to a threat was to attempt to kill us.
Was it an acceptable outcome for a DRK? Absolutely, their number one goal is to aid the oppressed, if that involves some bloodshed, they really don't care, but the only way I'd agree with us being directly in the wrong in this particular case is if we'd walked up to him without a word and just cleaved him in two, or simply said we were going to kill him and then done so, which isn't what happened at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlitzAceRush

Except he had his guards and we were alone, we also only threatened him, if I tried to kill every person who ever threatened me, I'd not have made it out of school without ending up in juvey and then jail. Being threatening doesn't give you the right to attempt to kill someone, we didn't didn't act on our threats or swing first, we tried to intimidate him into backing off and his literal first reaction to a threat was to attempt to kill us.
Was it an acceptable outcome for a DRK? Absolutely, their number one goal is to aid the oppressed, if that involves some bloodshed, they really don't care, but the only way I'd agree with us being directly in the wrong in this particular case is if we'd walked up to him without a word and just cleaved him in two, or simply said we were going to kill him and then done so, which isn't what happened at all.

---

There’s a huge difference between our world and the 14 world. Threats in 14 i’d imagine are much more serious considering 9 times out of 10 someone’s getting threatened, the threat is carried out. If you see someone approaching you with a big ass sword and armor, you’re going to defend yourself after they’ve threatened you. That’s just the way it is. Their goal is to aid the “oppressed” yet who decides who’s deserving of that aid? Us?We decided to aid someone who already attempted murder and incited riots? Doesn’t seem deserving of that imo, nor worth killing 3 people over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KizuyaKatogami

There’s a huge difference between our world and the 14 world. Threats in 14 i’d imagine are much more serious considering 9 times out of 10 someone’s getting threatened, the threat is carried out. If you see someone approaching you with a big ass sword and armor, you’re going to defend yourself after they’ve threatened you. That’s just the way it is. Their goal is to aid the “oppressed” yet who decides who’s deserving of that aid? Us?We decided to aid someone who already attempted murder and incited riots? Doesn’t seem deserving of that imo, nor worth killing 3 people over.

---

Even in 14's world, if everyone who was threatened killed or tried to kill the one who threatened them, the streets would constantly run red with blood. There are even other quests were we try the same tactic and are promptly told to "sod off" he had the numbers and we hadn't even drawn our weapon, even in 14's world logic he jumped literally several steps to making it a fight to the death. Even in other instances where we've been drawn into these kinds of conflicts, there's normally multiple threats, one side draws their weapon or makes it plane they intend to carry out their threats before the violence starts.

As for the morality of it, I never said it was good, DRK's whole gimmick is they meet out their own version of justice, while it comes with the advantage of not letting laws or those who use them to hide their abuse get away with it, it comes at the cost of the DRK's having no oversight, their word is law, their sword the judge and there are no appeals.
However, that's irrelevant to this particular case as the man vastly overreacted, you could remove the DRK from this situation, put anyone else in their place, hell put a lawful good PLD there and the outcome would have been the same because a PLD would have been fine with using words and their presence to persuade him to back off, but this guy would've thrown the PLD into the same fight to the death immediately as well.