By
Afterimage,
Posted on: 2010-02-10 13:25 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
|
Originally Posted by Mr_Grey
The rest of the world looks at the Etoiles as a wretched hive of scum and villainy.
|
|
Originally Posted by Mr_Grey
By "Give the 'Okay...'" I mean that they would shrug their shoulders when the U.S. nuked the bejaybus out of the Isles. Only the Villains know it's not a complete wasteland. The rest of the world looks at the Etoiles as a hive of scum and villainy.
|
|
Originally Posted by M_I_Abrahms
Well, Phipps too. He may be pathetic in his aims, but they still count.
|
|
Originally Posted by Mr_Grey
And I can guarantee you that the people of Egypt were laughing behind their backs all the while.
The Egyptian pharaohs may have demanded worship, but I'm certain the people were wondering just what the Hell was wrong with their leadership when they were out of sight. |
|
Originally Posted by Forsaken_Empire_EU
Boudica as known as Boadicea and Saint Joan of Arc
i think you find theese two have killed alot in their time |
|
Originally Posted by Mr_Grey
And I defy you to provide me an example where incest wasn't considered wrong by the populace.
|
|
Originally Posted by Forsaken_Empire_EU
a what point is there no freedom? if you got robots doing ur job or harder task....... and letting them do do more stuff in their free time?
where the cellblock and no life/socail life? |
Following on from what I said before about loyalists still being able to go to Paragon City, even after chosing to serve Tyrant, here's an interesting quote from Positron:
| When Praetorians leave Praetoria for Primal Earth, they choose if they want to be considered a Hero or a Villain, and are plopped into Paragon or the Rogue Isles. |
|
Originally Posted by Golden Girl
So even if you've helped Tyrant, you can still chose to go to Paragon City - because as far as you're concerned, what you've done is right, so it's only natural that you'll want to go to a place where heroes are welcomed, because that's what you are in your own mind.
But if you've been serving Tyrant for your own ends, then choosing the Rogue Isles would be a better option, as Recluse's style of government matches what you're used to in Praetoria - the strong rise to the top. |
|
Originally Posted by Pendix
You were there were you? Or perhapes your personal superpower is 'perfect-knowledge-of-human-nature-and-social-conventions-through-out-the-ages'?
You wanted an example of incidents of it that werent due to abuse of power or lunacy; you were given one. A dam good one infact, and your responce is 'dont count' becasue you can 'guarantee' somthing you are in no position to 'garantee'. Degrees of inbreeding in aristocay have been common for as long a there has been aristocracy, and the reason is not insanity or abuse of power, (thou it isn't smart either) is to preserve the 'purity' of the 'blue blood'. |
|
Originally Posted by M_I_Abrahms
Again, good for the Praetorians. They're not Evil, just stupid and easily misled.
Golden Girl, the post I made here was actually intended mainly for you. I'd like to see your opinion of the ideas in there. |
Evil doesn't care anything about the 'greater good'. Evil is the Opposite of good. It's a Pure force of nature that is against everything IN nature.
And your Mother Mayhem example is actually arguing that there IS nothing good about these people, if you can still call them that, because if we're going with the established Praaetorians from the PI arc, her patients had nothing mentally wrong with the before they were 'admitted'. They simply broke because she find Torture an entertaining pastime.
So we have a mass-murdering power hungry pedophile, and a Someone who breaks peoples minds out of boredom. Exactly where's the ambiguity here?
|
Originally Posted by M_I_Abrahms
Evil doesn't care anything about the 'greater good'. Evil is the Opposite of good. It's a Pure force of nature that is against everything IN nature.
And your Mother Mayhem example is actually arguing that there IS nothing good about these people, if you can still call them that, because if we're going with the established Praaetorians from the PI arc, her patients had nothing mentally wrong with the before they were 'admitted'. They simply broke because she find Torture an entertaining pastime. So we have a mass-murdering power hungry pedophile, and a Someone who breaks peoples minds out of boredom. Exactly where's the ambiguity here? |
I think the most salient issue is that they're basically trying to recreate something that they created several years ago as a very simplistic and evil group into a group that has more depth. Depending on how they choose to write the story, they can either ignore what they've written before and try to create this sort of 'moral gray area,' which seems to be the way they are going with it. Or they can try to reconcile what they are writing now with what they've written in the past.
The first versions of the Praetorians were basically mirror universe versions of the Freedom Phalanx. You can try to semantically argue that isn't the case all you want, but if you go through Maria Jenkins' arcs even today, there is nothing there that is remotely redeemable about any of them. Tyrant, at the end of the arc, is hanging around in a cave on our world, gloating because he has Statesman hanging there helpless. He's not doing anything for the good of anyone. He's doing something petty and spiteful because at heart he's an evil guy who cares as much about Praetoria as Recluse cares about the people of the Etoile Isles.
Now they can retcon as much as they want, but as long as the storyline is still sitting there for anyone to play, they really can't snow us into believing these people were anything other than evil versions of the Phalanx.
Hopefully, they'll do something at some point to rectify this and justify your faith that these people are more than what we've seen of them thus far, but thus far we really haven't. We have a synopsis of Tyrant's life history that really doesn't jibe with how he was portrayed in previous canon material, but that's all we've seen.
Until we see more, I am still operating under the assumption that Praetoria is nothing more than Goatee Earth.
[QUOTE=Sister_Twelve;2637281]
| Until we see more, I am still operating under the assumption that Praetoria is nothing more than Goatee Earth. |
[QUOTE=Golden Girl;2637288]
|
Originally Posted by Sister_Twelve
Even though the devs at Hero Con said the new version of Praetoria isn't a goatee version? |
|
Originally Posted by Golden Girl
That they've saved the majority of the human race from total destruction?
|
You know what, I'm just going to throw this blanket response to the nitpicking and semantics...
My conviction remains unshaken. It is simply wrong to sleep with kin, I don't care the society or civilization "precedent." It has been illustrated that such behavior has led to deformities and defects. It is considered morally perverse by a great majority of modern society, and I find the notion abhorrent.
If the story remains that Emperor Cole and Dominatrix are in this relationship, and it gets established that they are related, I will NOT be having any "morally ambiguous" characters remain as Loyalists.
Not that I don't have morally deprived characters...
Now, HERE is an avenue you guys could have taken that I would have been hard pressed to argue against...
The Greek Gods were "free from the taboo of incest." They COULD sleep with their kin and their offspring would suffer no ill effects from it. They were GODS, making up rules as they went along.
Since Tyrant is "the Avatar of Zeus," he could be under the effects of this concept... But since his offspring haven't been gods, this is debatable, as it proves he didn't acquire ALL of the benefits of godhood.
Nitpicking because I chose "blanket terms," however, only served to rile me up and contributed nothing to the debate.
|
Originally Posted by Mr_Grey
Again, the genetic defect problem arises in such an instance. The deformities that would arise in a society where such a thing is acceptable could bring ruin to a nation.
|
|
Originally Posted by Mr_Grey
It is simply wrong to sleep with kin, I don't care the society or civilization "precedent." It has been illustrated that such behavior has led to deformities and defects.
|
|
Originally Posted by Mr_Grey
The Egyptian pharaohs may have demanded worship, but I'm certain the people were wondering just what the Hell was wrong with their leadership when they were out of sight.
|
|
Originally Posted by M_I_Abrahms
And we've come around again to the point that I can't reconcile. If someone is going to be called Evil, then they had better BE Evil. People can commit Evil acts, but to be considered Evil is to be the personification of these acts.
Mako is the personification of murder, the only thing he cares about is who, not what WHO, his next meal is going to be. Phipps is the personification of torment. His entire life is centered around tormenting the helpless and destitute. These two people are Evil. Meanwhile Recluse is a pathetic, petulant, petty child throwing a temper tantrum that in all aspects of life, even Villainy, he is always second runner to Marcus Cole. (seriously, the only person to actually defeat and subdue Cole is Cole) Bad? Certainly. Evil? Not even close. Calling him that is akin to diluting the term, much the same way the 90's diluted "awe some" to "mildly impressive". |
(Emphasis mine.)
|
Originally Posted by Mr_Grey
My conviction remains unshaken. It is simply wrong to sleep with kin, I don't care the society or civilization "precedent." It has been illustrated that such behavior has led to deformities and defects. It is considered morally perverse by a great majority of modern society, and I find the notion abhorrent.
|
|
Originally Posted by Mr_Grey
Nitpicking because I chose "blanket terms," however, only served to rile me up and contributed nothing to the debate.
|
| The pharaohs didn't demand worship. The pharaohs were gods, in the eyes of their subjects |
| Incest does not cause genetic defect any more than a normal physical relationship does. What incest does do is increase the chances of a recessive gene asserting itself. If the two partners do not have any recessive genes (or, rather, no recessive genetic defects), the incestuous relationship cannot produce genetic defects, except for example random mutation that is just as likely to happen in a normal relationship. |
| Ethnocentrism, at its finest. |
| So... what you are saying is we should ignore poor arguments or risk "riling" someone up? |
| And in the end, you have not really argued anything but: "I feel this way, regardless of reasoning, regardless of facts and will continue to feel that way. You guys really should just agree with me." Does that sum it up? |
| I guess I can't look at just ONE dimension of a character (one that could have been poor editing in the original canon) and call a character "evil" automatically, without considering other details. |
|
Originally Posted by Mr_Grey
Except the Hebrews and anybody with an ounce of sense who realized "Hey, Pharaohs DIE!" But hey, let's gloss over that fact...
|
|
Originally Posted by Mr_Grey
It's essentially all I've been given. Even when "Well, royalty did it..." was brought up, it was also pointed out that they wound up with defective offspring down the line, which I feel negates the argument.
|
|
Originally Posted by Mr_Grey
You're not debating with me. You're trying to make me feel bad because "Oh no! I insulted somebody who sleeps with their grandchild!" It's not even a real person.
You haven't given me a proper argument, either. You demand that I shouldn't deal in absolutes... Yes, I know that. |
| It's essentially all I've been given. Even when "Well, royalty did it..." was brought up, it was also pointed out that they wound up with defective offspring down the line, which I feel negates the argument. |
| Some sins are unforgivable. This is one of my few lines in the stone that I feel is absolute. I will not support a monster just because he provides a convenience. |
|
Your disagreeing with me does not make me condemn you. I can't judge you by what you say, but what you do, and I don't know you or your works. I guess I'll just have to live with the knowledge that you think I'm a terrible person. |
You did it wrong, 37. Do it like this.
|
Originally Posted by Mr_Grey
You know what, I'm just going to throw this blanket response to the nitpicking and semantics...
My conviction remains unshaken. It is simply wrong to sleep with kin, I don't care the society or civilization "precedent." It has been illustrated that such behavior has led to deformities and defects. It is considered morally perverse by a great majority of modern society, and I find the notion abhorrent. |