Adelbern's Directive

[Narcemus.1348]

@Omar Aschi Popp.7496 said:

@Narcemus.1348 said:I find it interesting that in all of these conversations about whether or not Joko is. Despot, no one brought up his alleged blatant genocide of the elonian centaurs. I understand it may not be 100% true, but to claim to have made your Bone Palace out of the bones of Centaurs you would have to at least killed a lot of them. And I would say that those are not the types of actions taken by a noble leader.

Yes, but is he bad towards his own people?

Using that sort of logic is like saying you can't use the Holocaust to judge "A certain german leader who's name gets kittened" 's leadership, because he didn't view the Jews as his people.

[Athrenn.9468]

@draxynnic.3719 said:Genocide is genocide, but...

This is where the moral argument against genocide breaks down. Either genocide is evil and should never be done, or it is an effective strategy when applied in the right context. You can have one, but you cannot have both.

Sure, we don't have a clear history, but...

Again, if it's a dark age of Elonian history based on our current knowledge of the lore then I wouldn't feel comfortable making any decisive arguments on it just yet. A historian's null hypothesis is that blank pages in history are unknown until evidence surfaces.

Joko didn't break the "we'll free you in exchange for help fighting against Varesh" because it was in Joko's interest. He had a grudge against Varesh, and the world being destroyed would be bad for him too. Doesn't mean his word can be trusted when he keeps a bargain that's entirely in his interest.There's also this thing about trust. If you want people to trust your word, you need to have odds of keeping it that are a lot better than 50%.Palawa's tactic, every time, has been to strike in such a way that by the time the target realizes what's happened, they're too weak to resist.Palawa Joko simply doesn't attack in a way that allows his opposition "time to gather intelligence and formulate a strategy". That's not how he operates. He attacks in a way that ideally gives his target no opportunity to fight back effectively. The only reason Elona beat him the first time is the fluke of having someone who could beat him in single combat and Joko being arrogant enough to accept a duel.If Joko decides to attack a Tyrian nation, you can guarantee that it will not be in a visible manner that allows "time to gather intelligence and formulate a strategy". It would be because he's found a weakness that allows him to effectively eliminate all centralized resistance from at least one nation before anyone can react. Because that's what he does. Which is what makes him dangerous, and why his neighbors, if they're smart and paid attention to history, would be looking to find ways to make sure that he doesn't have the opportunity to find such a weakness.

All of those points which you just raised are precisely why a strategic approach is important. One of the worst possible decisions a general could make is to stage a military invasion of foreign territory that was completely dark to them for several hundred years.

• The Vabbian army knows their own terrain better than continental Tyrians do
• The Awakened hold Vabbi, Kourna, and Istan to draw supplies from, meaning that if it came down to siege warfare the Awakened have the advantage and could outlast their opponents if all three provinces were unified against a common enemy
• The Desolation is a natural barrier that discourages a land-based invasion from the north and no one has seen whether the Elonian army has anti-aircraft weapons to take down airships. Any living force invading Elona from the north could possibly lose a significant portion of their army and the Awakened have the advantage of knowing the local terrain
• An unprovoked pre-emptive attack by foreign invaders will only strengthen Joko's government by creating a visible and aggressive target to rally against
• Modern advances in technology and espionage are some of the strongest advantages that the northern nations have against Elona. The First Boer War is a case study in all the ways technologically superior nations can lose badly against an enemy that has the advantage of local terrain, exacerbated by the Brits' failure in military intelligence which wasn't used effectively at the time. Kryta's best move would be to establish a local network of spies and informants and defeat their enemy using disinformation warfare. They could use their superior recording technology to record incidents of human rights violations and spread footage to the entire population of Elona in a way that cannot be easily thwarted. Their goal should be to destroy the enemy from within and strike once they are on the verge of breaking, thus guaranteeing a victory before the battle is even fought
• The dead are patient. Joko began his war of conquest "within sixty years of Kormir's rise to godhood" (Source: Movement of the World). Elona fell in 1175. Doing the math, that means Joko's war of conquest took over 40 years. If history repeats itself, there is no reason to believe that the war between continental Tyria and Joko's kingdom couldn't turn into a long, bloody affair without a decisive victory. The longer wars last, the further countries will sink into economic difficulties as they struggle to maintain the war effort. Too much is at stake for countries to rush into this

So there you go, a few points about how military intelligence could be used more intelligently using plays from Sun Tzu's and Machiavelli's own books, and before anyone recommends relying on the intelligence provided by the Order of Shadows... I'll just leave you all with this.

Even if we were to suppose that Machiavellianism is an appropriate approach for rulers to take, here's a page from that playbook:

If a foreign government presents a threat or is causing you inconvenience, decrease their ability to do so through employing deniable assets to provoke insurrection in their own nation, thereby distracting them and reducing their ability to cause problems for you.

He also said this:

“Never attempt to win by force what can be won by deception.”

See my points above for why this would be a much more intelligent strategy than what the Guild Initiative could possibly accomplish, especially with their BLATANT ADMISSION to the fact that is completely public knowledge:

"The Guild Initiative is an arm of the Tyrian Explorer's Society. We operate with the endorsement of the five major nations of Tyria and the Captain's Council here in Lion's Arch."

For the record, this is what we define as an endorsement: an act of giving one's public approval or support to someone or something.

DENIABLE ASSETS.

You cannot deny an asset that has your public approval and support.

[draxynnic.3719]

First: Genocide is always a bad thing. Just as killing people is always a bad thing. Sometimes, though, killing an enemy is the way to preserve yourself. In the case of the mursaat... even one is a potential major threat due to the powers they have access to. Now, we don't know for sure that every single mursaat was bad... but it is highly likely that Glint did. In that case, it's being done because every single one, individually, is a threat.

Killing them all because each one genuinely represents too great a threat to leave alone is a very different scenario to wiping out all members of an ethnic group simply because they are members of that ethnic group.

Palawa Joko does not have that excuse for wiping out the centaurs (if, in fact, he did so).

Regarding deniable assets... Modern history has shown that you can have your full support behind something and it can still classify as 'deniable'. The nations of Tyria can say that while they support the Guild Initiative for its role in the fight against the dragons, they have no control over what it does elsewhere. This might, in fact, be true. Palawa may or may not believe it, but such things have happened.

Generally speaking, your 'strategic approach' seems to be pretty much what is happening. There is no large-scale military invasion, from Kryta or anything else. There is a hybrid warfare scenario where the nations of Tyria may or may not have any real control over the agents operating within Elona.

(Incidentally, regarding the dates of when Elona fell... there are actually some significant question marks over all those dates.

being who

is, Joko really couldn't have had effective control of Elona any later than eighty years or so after Nightfall, and sixty is more likely (that would put

at about eighty years of age when Joko took over, an age at which one might normally have expected

to have retired and named a successor. So I suspect that the 1175 date is an error. Certainly, though, what we do know is that after Joko diverted the Elon, Elona was doomed, and they had no warning of that until he'd done it. For any of his neighbours, this makes Joko a 'leave him alone long enough and he might find a way to do something to you' threat.)

[Athrenn.9468]

The Shining Blade didn't have a dragon prophet in their ranks. It seems most likely that their knowledge of the Flameseeker Prophecies would have been obtained through Vizier Khilbron who had a vested interest in manipulating them to further his own agenda of obtaining the Scepter of Orr, by which he planned to open the Door of Komalie for Abaddon's servants to enter Tyria. Khilbron had a vested interest in destroying Abaddon's enemies and used the prophecies to legitimize the Shining Blade's cause since they had a reason to hate the Mursaat and would be a valuable weapon. Meanwhile, the Mursaat were most likely the ones responsible for the White Mantle's knowledge of the prophecies and were using it to legitimize their hold over Kryta in preparation for the "war against the divine" which their members spoke of.

Both sides were doing the exact same thing: using the Flameseeker Prophecies to legitimize the necessity of their part in the conflict. The Shining Blade were a band of royalists who wanted to see Princess Salma on the throne. To that end, they believed the words of Khilbron because it confirmed their narrative. Like most wars, the Krytan Civil War had nothing to do with an objectively good faction versus an objectively evil one. There were two sides warring over control and one had to lose eventually.

Similarly speaking, Palawa Joko had an enemy amongst the centaurs who probably refused to submit to his rule. So he killed them. It was absolutely ruthless, just like it was ruthless for the Shining Blade to hunt down all of their political enemies and exterminate an entire species down to its very last member. Ruthless tactics happen in history and there's no need to sugarcoat them to make them more palatable.

[draxynnic.3719]

You're really claiming moral equivalence between the Shining Blade and Joko exterminating the centaurs?

The Shining Blade formed as a resistance movement after finding out that people who were being taken away to be "trained to become great mages" were actually being slaughtered on the Bloodstone, while if you're paying attention, there are side-quests in Kryta that happen well before the PCs meet the Shining Blade that show that the White Mantle aren't exactly ruling for the good of anyone but themselves and their Unseen. At the point at which going for the Door of Komalie was even possible, it was one last desperate gamble - the Shining Blade were on the verge of destruction and only a handful of Ascended heroes were even capable of seeing the mursaat unless the mursaat chose to allow them to, let alone fight them without being instantly killed by Spectral Agony.

The seven surviving mursaat apart from Lazarus sought to maintain their grip on Kryta - tightening it, in fact. The Shining Blade hunted down a few, but those few were still maintaining a tyrannical rulership over various Krytan settlements. The other four led an assault on Lion's Arch of their own volition.

This leaves Lazarus - an individual that we know is high up enough in the mursaat command chain that he played a part in the takeover of Kryta, and was last seen swearing vengeance on future generations. Pretty much any mursaat, if not opposed by someone who can see them and who is protected against Spectral Agony, could probably destroy an army singlehandedly given an opportunity, and Lazarus' power in the instance where we fight him certainly suggests that he has that potential. So the fact that he happens to be the last of his race (which possibly meant it was functionally extinct anyway, depending on how mursaat reproduce) doesn't change that he is a valid threat.

If there were some other mursaat survivors around that were just chilling in their own homes not bothering anyone, then you may have a leg to stand on. If any of them were children or otherwise noncombatants, then you might have a leg to stand on - some of which might have been killed by the titans (which were indicated to be the only way the mursaat could be defeated at all), although we have no idea of whether there even were any mursaat around at the time the titans were released that could be called 'children'. But at the point when the last survivors were being killed... each and every one of those survivors was a valid military target.

Now, compare to centaurs...

Most centaurs do not have the power of the mursaat. The typical centaur seems to be stronger than the typical human, but not by much, and I get the impression they may be less than the typical norn. Charr level might be about right. Unlike the mursaat, we are not looking at a species where a single

We know from Nightfall that, in the worst case scenario, centaurs can be cowed sufficiently to be enslaved, just like humans. We know they can be pushed out of a territory. While I don't believe we've actually seen centaur foals onscreen, we have had indications that they have normal families and their life cycle is similar enough to humans and other races that wiping them out would have involved killing children and elderly noncombatants in one way or another. And there certainly isn't any realistic possibility of a handful of centaurs presenting a credible threat to Joko the way that even one mursaat could threaten Kryta. Sure, there's always the possibility of a centaur rebellion, but a rebellion purely among the centaurs would be no credible threat (they don't have the numbers) and Joko clearly isn't wiping out the human population just in case they might revolt (unless they're descendants of Turai Ossa).

The killing of the last eight mursaat represent a situation which real-world ideas of genocide aren't really equipped to cope with: one where each individual member of the group is such a threat that they are genuinely dangerous to leave at large without having good reason to believe that they've turned another leaf. And, in fact, we see circumstantial evidence that the Shining Blade were happy to let a being believed to be Lazarus live... when said being was acting against Caudecus, splitting the White Mantle in half, and making declarations that he had no interest in the throne of Kryta and was more interested in fighting the dragons. We have no indication, in that period, that the Shining Blade were raring to destroy FakeLazarus simply because he was a mursaat, since his actions suggested that he didn't have an interest in Kryta. When it came to the real Lazarus, though, their initial assumptions came back into play: Lazarus was a threat that needed to be removed. Livia does express pleasure at the end of the mursaat, but this is rooted in the context of knowing that the threat that she had spent her extended life fighting was finally ended.

The genocide of the centaurs, however, is the sort of situation where the term "genocide" is intended to be used: where a subject and largely helpless population is systematically wiped out, including noncombatants as well as warriors.

[Omar Aschi Popp.7496]

@draxynnic.3719 said:You're really claiming moral equivalence between the Shining Blade and Joko exterminating the centaurs?

The Shining Blade formed as a resistance movement after finding out that people who were being taken away to be "trained to become great mages" were actually being slaughtered on the Bloodstone, while if you're paying attention, there are side-quests in Kryta that happen well before the PCs meet the Shining Blade that show that the White Mantle aren't exactly ruling for the good of anyone but themselves and their Unseen. At the point at which going for the Door of Komalie was even possible, it was one last desperate gamble - the Shining Blade were on the verge of destruction and only a handful of Ascended heroes were even capable of seeing the mursaat unless the mursaat chose to allow them to, let alone fight them without being instantly killed by Spectral Agony.

The seven surviving mursaat apart from Lazarus sought to maintain their grip on Kryta - tightening it, in fact. The Shining Blade hunted down a few, but those few were still maintaining a tyrannical rulership over various Krytan settlements. The other four led an assault on Lion's Arch of their own volition.

This leaves Lazarus - an individual that we know is high up enough in the mursaat command chain that he played a part in the takeover of Kryta, and was last seen swearing vengeance on future generations. Pretty much any mursaat, if not opposed by someone who can see them and who is protected against Spectral Agony, could probably destroy an army singlehandedly given an opportunity, and Lazarus' power in the instance where we fight him certainly suggests that he has that potential. So the fact that he happens to be the last of his race (which possibly meant it was functionally extinct anyway, depending on how mursaat reproduce) doesn't change that he is a valid threat.

If there were some other mursaat survivors around that were just chilling in their own homes not bothering anyone, then you may have a leg to stand on. If any of them were children or otherwise noncombatants, then you might have a leg to stand on - some of which might have been killed by the titans (which were indicated to be the only way the mursaat could be defeated at all), although we have no idea of whether there even were any mursaat around at the time the titans were released that could be called 'children'. But at the point when the last survivors were being killed... each and every one of those survivors was a valid military target.

Now, compare to centaurs...

Most centaurs do not have the power of the mursaat. The typical centaur seems to be stronger than the typical human, but not by much, and I get the impression they may be less than the typical norn. Charr level might be about right. Unlike the mursaat, we are not looking at a species where a single

We know from Nightfall that, in the worst case scenario, centaurs can be cowed sufficiently to be enslaved, just like humans. We know they can be pushed out of a territory. While I don't believe we've actually seen centaur foals onscreen, we have had indications that they have normal families and their life cycle is similar enough to humans and other races that wiping them out would have involved killing children and elderly noncombatants in one way or another. And there certainly isn't any realistic possibility of a handful of centaurs presenting a credible threat to Joko the way that even one mursaat could threaten Kryta. Sure, there's always the possibility of a centaur rebellion, but a rebellion purely among the centaurs would be no credible threat (they don't have the numbers) and Joko clearly isn't wiping out the human population just in case they might revolt (unless they're descendants of Turai Ossa).

The killing of the last eight mursaat represent a situation which real-world ideas of genocide aren't really equipped to cope with: one where each individual member of the group is such a threat that they are genuinely dangerous to leave at large without having good reason to believe that they've turned another leaf. And, in fact, we see circumstantial evidence that the Shining Blade were happy to let a being believed to be Lazarus live... when said being was acting against Caudecus, splitting the White Mantle in half, and making declarations that he had no interest in the throne of Kryta and was more interested in fighting the dragons. We have no indication, in that period, that the Shining Blade were raring to destroy FakeLazarus simply because he was a mursaat, since his actions suggested that he didn't have an interest in Kryta. When it came to the real Lazarus, though, their initial assumptions came back into play: Lazarus was a threat that needed to be removed. Livia does express pleasure at the end of the mursaat, but this is rooted in the context of knowing that the threat that she had spent her extended life fighting was finally ended.

The genocide of the centaurs, however, is the sort of situation where the term "genocide" is intended to be used: where a subject and largely helpless population is systematically wiped out, including noncombatants as well as warriors.

Do not try to redefine words.Genocide has NOTHING to do with helplessness, systematic, or types demographics.

Genocide is the extermination of a genus. Stop attributing feelings where none belong.

Stop justifying certain acts when your vested interest party commits them, and condemn the very same acts when comited by your enemy.

Now speaking objectively on the subject of genocide, good or evil the absolute truth of the matter is that a problem removed entirely from the equation, is a problem solved.

I can appreciate the certainty that such total solutions bring, good or bad.

[Aaron Ansari.1604]

@"Omar Aschi Popp.7496" said:

Genocide is the extermination of a genus. Stop attributing feelings where none belong.

Also not true. If we're going by the formal definition, the U.N. defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group; (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; © Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group." (Some editing of the format for clarity, without altering any of the meaning.)

The term is defined by intent. That first part is essential, and also why there've been so very few convictions on charges of genocide. Without those 'feelings', as you call them, it's murder, assault, oppression, and forcible relocation- terrible things in their own right, but not genocide. Palawa Joko boasting of driving the centaurs extinct? That's genocide. Livia (and the last Seer, and presumably other elements of the Shining Blade over time) helldriven to exterminate the last mursaat? Also genocide. The term's definition doesn't make any accommodations for the victims happening to be a valid military target, and besides, the language the Blade use isn't that of military necessity. They clearly express a desire to end the mursaat race. The question can be raised regarding the moral significance of the genocide label due to the lack of non-combatant mursaat, and that does give ANet enough wriggle room to let the good guys get away with it. (The general murder-hobo ethics ubiquitous to RPGs also helps.) But that doesn't mean the label doesn't apply.

[Omar Aschi Popp.7496]

@Aaron Ansari.1604 said:

@"Omar Aschi Popp.7496" said:

Genocide is the extermination of a genus. Stop attributing feelings where none belong.

Also not true. If we're going by the formal definition, the U.N. defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group; (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; © Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group." (Some editing of the format for clarity, without altering any of the meaning.)

The term is defined by intent. That first part is essential, and also why there've been so very few convictions on charges of genocide. Without those 'feelings', as you call them, it's murder, assault, oppression, and forcible relocation- terrible things in their own right, but not genocide. Palawa Joko boasting of driving the centaurs extinct? That's genocide. Livia (and the last Seer, and presumably other elements of the Shining Blade over time) helldriven to exterminate the last mursaat? Also genocide. The term's definition doesn't make any accommodations for the victims happening to be a valid military target, and besides, the language the Blade use isn't that of military necessity. They clearly express a desire to end the mursaat race. The question

can

be raised regarding the moral significance of the genocide label due to the lack of non-combatant mursaat, and that does give ANet enough wriggle room to let the good guys get away with it. (The general murder-hobo ethics ubiquitous to RPGs also helps.) But that doesn't mean the label doesn't apply.

I get my definition of words from the dictionary and their literal meaning.Not an impotent, oberbloated, corrupt beurocracy.

Edited so I don't get slapped.

Look up the etymology of genocide please.There are no feelings in language. That's like saying a word changes meaning depending on how long the vowel is held.

[Omar Aschi Popp.7496]

@Aaron Ansari.1604 said:

@"Omar Aschi Popp.7496" said:

Genocide is the extermination of a genus. Stop attributing feelings where none belong.

Also not true. If we're going by the formal definition, the U.N. defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group; (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; © Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group." (Some editing of the format for clarity, without altering any of the meaning.)

The term is defined by intent. That first part is essential, and also why there've been so very few convictions on charges of genocide. Without those 'feelings', as you call them, it's murder, assault, oppression, and forcible relocation- terrible things in their own right, but not genocide. Palawa Joko boasting of driving the centaurs extinct? That's genocide. Livia (and the last Seer, and presumably other elements of the Shining Blade over time) helldriven to exterminate the last mursaat? Also genocide. The term's definition doesn't make any accommodations for the victims happening to be a valid military target, and besides, the language the Blade use isn't that of military necessity. They clearly express a desire to end the mursaat race. The question

can

be raised regarding the moral significance of the genocide label due to the lack of non-combatant mursaat, and that does give ANet enough wriggle room to let the good guys get away with it. (The general murder-hobo ethics ubiquitous to RPGs also helps.) But that doesn't mean the label doesn't apply.

PS

Oppression and forced relocation of a people is not genocide no matter how bad you want it to be. Genocide by definition requires EXCLUSIVELY wholesale extermination.

Not relocation.Not no rights.Death.Of EVERYONE of that type.

[Athrenn.9468]

@"Aaron Ansari.1604" said:The question can be raised regarding the moral significance of the genocide label due to the lack of non-combatant mursaat, and that does give ANet enough wriggle room to let the good guys get away with it.

Another point might be that "genocide" as we know it as an international war crime wasn't invented until the mid-20th century in response to WWII. Before that, we had the concept of massacre (a French word meaning "slaughterhouse, butchery") which was not directly related to the extermination of an ethnic group. When we debate the morality of in-game entities, it's important to ask ourselves whether the term genocide is canonically established and defined by international law (again, in-game, not real-world) as a war crime. Judging the actions of another culture in another time period by modern-day laws from countries on Earth is an interesting philosophical exercise for us as players, but it carries no weight in the game world unless evidence proves otherwise.

[Torolan.5816]

I don´t know about you, but I felt pretty unheroic when I killed the last Mursaat. And not because he was such a good guy or iconic figure, I learned to loathe the Mursaat in GW1.

The commander killed him for a rather flat reason, the desire of revenge of an old woman clinging to life with the help of a probably massively dangerous artifact. Not because he held the crown of Kryta in his hands and crushed it gleefully while the bleeding corpse of Jenna was lying at his feet, but just to prevent the slim chance that he may rise again soon. Even when you have no moral issues with that, it is simply not heroic at all.

If that justification is already enough to act, Palawa Joko will be hunted and destroyed soon.

[Omar Aschi Popp.7496]

@Torolan.5816 said:I don´t know about you, but I felt pretty unheroic when I killed the last Mursaat. And not because he was such a good guy or iconic figure, I learned to loathe the Mursaat in GW1.

The commander killed him for a rather flat reason, the desire of revenge of an old woman clinging to life with the help of a probably massively dangerous artifact. Not because he held the crown of Kryta in his hands and crushed it gleefully while the bleeding corpse of Jenna was lying at his feet, but just to prevent the slim chance that he may rise again soon. Even when you have no moral issues with that, it is simply not heroic at all..

This is exactly how I feel.I feel as the PC I am nothing but a weak willed patsy who just does enough for cookies from my queen. And trying to live up to Destinys Edges (laughable) shadow.

The entire story is a linear cringefest devoid of any option, intelligence, real meaning. It's knee-jerk all around!

For YEARS before HoT I have been saying killing elder dragons seems stupid and why. And for years the pacts has tried to kill all of them. Now all of a sudden because Balthazar wants to do it it's wrong?!

We go out of our way to religiously persecute amd murder people of a different way of life (sons of svanir) but the go on about how Joko is the bad guy?! Because he does the same thing?

It's ok when Asura torture, mutilate, and rape the skirt cultureBut Joko is the bad guy?

It's ok when your kingdom has a centuries old secret police that has questionably unhinged com and staff, amd ALSO fails at being the secret police by wantonly allowing ministry corruption, crown corruption, genocide of centaurs, peace with the enemy...

Anet played the Shining Blade as this exclusive elite arm that knows everything..Yet Caudecus happened. Elder Dragon SOP fail happened. Balthazar happened. Oh sure you can track a mursaat for 300 years but not Balthazar.

[Omar Aschi Popp.7496]

MORE LIKE RUSTED BLADE

[Torolan.5816]

I did not write the stuff about the Mursaat to come to the defense of Palawa Yoko, mind you. Palawa Yoko is a selfrighteous, vain and petty super villain and any justification to not get rid of him when the opportunity arises or after he invades my land would be odd for me. He combines the worst attributes of an absolute tyrant, a silver tongued agitator, a ruthless general and a burecrat.

Admittedly, he is quite clever in his approach and he has time on his side. He indeed already has shown that he is vulture waiting for someone to close to die from thirst so that he can pick the bones, and contrary to Lazarus he is a visible, immediate thread for all creatures who do not live under his rule. He can and will probably follow the letter of a contract but not the spirit, but that makes him even more dangerous and hard to negotiate with.

Only because oppression shows you it´s probably nicest face, it still is and stays oppression. If I aim to look up to a ruler, I would choose from figures like Old Fritz from Prussia, Abraham Lincoln, Gandhi or Spartacus.

[Omar Aschi Popp.7496]

@Torolan.5816 said:I did not write the stuff about the Mursaat to come to the defense of Palawa Yoko, mind you. Palawa Yoko is a selfrighteous, vain and petty super villain and any justification to not get rid of him when the opportunity arises or after he invades my land would be odd for me. He combines the worst attributes of an absolute tyrant, a silver tongued agitator, a ruthless general and a burecrat.

Sorry I did not mean to spin it that way. I only used Joko as an example. Could have been any "bad" guy.

You just got me all riled up thinking about what our actual choices in game are.

[Torolan.5816]

I actually kind of agree with you in that regard. The killing of Lazarus is indeed a knee jerk move, and the tolerance of the commander for going missing in action on a whim with his guild members is way to high. Your team is always formed around people who regularly stay with you and then there is the odd renegade guild member whose immediate goals align with your goals so that he or she stays close. This kind of behavior actually killed Snaff and Glint.

[Sir Vincent III.1286]

Speaking of centaur genocide. Isn't that what humans are doing in Harathi?

[Omar Aschi Popp.7496]

@Sir Vincent III.1286 said:Speaking of centaur genocide. Isn't that what humans are doing in Harathi?

Yes. That's my point. Why is it only ok to be a despot when it suits our narrative.

We go on and talk a big game about how gw2 is supposed to be all races coming together to fight dragons (which technically have hereditary rights over us)... forcing things like the Charr peace treaty..

What races Anet?

Not Skirtt.Not Centaur.Not half the Human population.Not half the Norn population.

I guess centaurs are just a sub-race like skritt. They are not intelligent or noooooothing.

[Sir Vincent III.1286]

@Omar Aschi Popp.7496 said:

@Sir Vincent III.1286 said:Speaking of centaur genocide. Isn't that what humans are doing in Harathi?

Yes. That's my point. Why is it only ok to be a despot when it suits our narrative.

We go on and talk a big game about how gw2 is supposed to be all races coming together to fight dragons (which technically have hereditary rights over us)... forcing things like the Charr peace treaty..

What races Anet?

Not Skirtt.Not Centaur.Not half the Human population.Not half the Norn population.

I guess centaurs are just a sub-race like skritt. They are not intelligent or noooooothing.

The funny thing about humans in GW2 is that there's no such thing as morality. They will adapt their way of thinking to whoever is in power. The humans claim to follow the teachings of the human gods, but all those teachings are lies. The teachings of the gods are filled with moral contradictions. Take the Wintersday for example, Dwayna and Grenth fighting over moral superiority -- it's petty.

Palawa Joko is a tyrant and he's proud of it. You don't get to be a tyrant if you're good to your own people -- that wouldn't make sense. You don't get to be the Scourge of Vabbi by showing kindness to your loyal subjects. No. The truth about Palawa Joko is he could care less about his subjects. He let them learn, argue, etc. just to give them the perception of freedom, but this freedom is a lie. People in Vabbi lives in fear. They fear for not washing their dishes or washing their clothes. The fact that they don't know how to use a basic tool shows that these people are kept like livestock waiting for slaughter. They don't see the evil in it because they were born in it and that is their reality.

Unlike the Krytan rule, in my opinion, the Free City of Amnoon has the better government of not discriminating anyone.

[Konig Des Todes.2086]

@Omar Aschi Popp.7496 said:

@Aaron Ansari.1604 said:

@Omar Aschi Popp.7496 said:

Genocide is the extermination of a genus. Stop attributing feelings where none belong.

Also not true. If we're going by the formal definition, the U.N. defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group; (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; © Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group." (Some editing of the format for clarity, without altering any of the meaning.)

The term is defined by intent. That first part is essential, and also why there've been so very few convictions on charges of genocide. Without those 'feelings', as you call them, it's murder, assault, oppression, and forcible relocation- terrible things in their own right, but not genocide. Palawa Joko boasting of driving the centaurs extinct? That's genocide. Livia (and the last Seer, and presumably other elements of the Shining Blade over time) helldriven to exterminate the last mursaat? Also genocide. The term's definition doesn't make any accommodations for the victims happening to be a valid military target, and besides, the language the Blade use isn't that of military necessity. They clearly express a desire to end the mursaat race. The question

can

be raised regarding the moral significance of the genocide label due to the lack of non-combatant mursaat, and that does give ANet enough wriggle room to let the good guys get away with it. (The general murder-hobo ethics ubiquitous to RPGs also helps.) But that doesn't mean the label doesn't apply.

PS

Oppression and forced relocation of a people is not genocide no matter how bad you want it to be. Genocide by definition requires EXCLUSIVELY wholesale extermination.

Not relocation.Not no rights.Death.Of EVERYONE of that type.

Not entirely accurate. The Holocaust is considered a genocide, but there are clearly still Jews - even German Jews - still around. This first began with the relocation and removal of rights, before outright killing and enslavement.

In fact, it was the Holocaust which resulted in the term "genocide" being coined. And most slaughters which are dubbed genocides are, in fact, not extermination of everyone "of that type". If they did, then there'd be no Native Americans, no Armenians, etc.

Also the "geno" in genocide doesn't come from genus (a taxonomic rank in biology, originating from the Latin word of the same name that means "origin; type; group; race"), but the greek word génos (which means "race, people").

[Squee.7829]

This thread has become a weird thing when people who claim "it's not right to let an organization encroach on someone else's territory" but then spend days explaining why it's ok to exterminate an entire race because of "objectivity. " I'm not even sure what's going on anymore.

[Omar Aschi Popp.7496]

@Konig Des Todes.2086 said:

@Omar Aschi Popp.7496 said:

@Aaron Ansari.1604 said:

@Omar Aschi Popp.7496 said:

Genocide is the extermination of a genus. Stop attributing feelings where none belong.

Also not true. If we're going by the formal definition, the U.N. defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group; (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; © Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group." (Some editing of the format for clarity, without altering any of the meaning.)

The term is defined by intent. That first part is essential, and also why there've been so very few convictions on charges of genocide. Without those 'feelings', as you call them, it's murder, assault, oppression, and forcible relocation- terrible things in their own right, but not genocide. Palawa Joko boasting of driving the centaurs extinct? That's genocide. Livia (and the last Seer, and presumably other elements of the Shining Blade over time) helldriven to exterminate the last mursaat? Also genocide. The term's definition doesn't make any accommodations for the victims happening to be a valid military target, and besides, the language the Blade use isn't that of military necessity. They clearly express a desire to end the mursaat race. The question

can

be raised regarding the moral significance of the genocide label due to the lack of non-combatant mursaat, and that does give ANet enough wriggle room to let the good guys get away with it. (The general murder-hobo ethics ubiquitous to RPGs also helps.) But that doesn't mean the label doesn't apply.

PS

Oppression and forced relocation of a people is not genocide no matter how bad you want it to be. Genocide by definition requires EXCLUSIVELY wholesale extermination.

Not relocation.Not no rights.Death.Of EVERYONE of that type.

Not entirely accurate. The Holocaust is considered a genocide, but there are clearly still Jews - even German Jews - still around. This first began with the relocation and removal of rights, before outright killing and enslavement.

In fact, it was the Holocaust which resulted in the term "genocide" being coined. And

most slaughters which are dubbed genocides

are, in fact, not extermination of everyone "of that type". If they did, then there'd be no Native Americans, no Armenians, etc.

Also the "geno" in genocide doesn't come from genus (a taxonomic rank in biology, originating from the Latin word of the same name that means "origin; type; group; race"), but the greek word génos (which means "race, people").

Weird part is I actually did learn this(origin of genocide) before but forgot. As for the other thing I assumed the attempt would qualify for the title, not necessarily the completion.

Because say you were trying to conquer a city somewhere in open war and you kill the entire population as a means to 100% win. Is that genocide?

That's a slippery slope.Is carpet bombing genocide? Was Hiroshima genocide? Is war genocide? Nothing about war isn't systematic.

But regardless of how we define it, why is it okay for X to do it but not Z?

[draxynnic.3719]

On the etymology of genocide: The term may have a particular etymology, but language is based on mutual agreement on what words mean. There are plenty of words that have meanings different to what you'd expect from their etymology.

For that matter, one could consider that what we call "genocide" can often be regarded as attempting the etymological meaning of the term. As far as I know, nobody in the real world has been able to successfully complete a total genocide in modern times. But attempts have certainly been made.

@Torolan.5816 said:I don´t know about you, but I felt pretty unheroic when I killed the last Mursaat. And not because he was such a good guy or iconic figure, I learned to loathe the Mursaat in GW1.

The commander killed him for a rather flat reason, the desire of revenge of an old woman clinging to life with the help of a probably massively dangerous artifact. Not because he held the crown of Kryta in his hands and crushed it gleefully while the bleeding corpse of Jenna was lying at his feet, but just to prevent the slim chance that he may rise again soon. Even when you have no moral issues with that, it is simply not heroic at all.

If that justification is already enough to act, Palawa Joko will be hunted and destroyed soon.

To be honest, I did feel like that was a disappointing end to the arc. Lazarus deserved to have a significant impact in his own right, not simply being thrown in as a footnote to the storylines of Balthaddon and Caudecus. I do think that jumping Lazarus right away given the opportunity is justified if you know his history - he's been complicit in some horrible things, including some done to his own followers, and there is nothing to indicate that he has even a shred of remorse. If you believe in capital punishment at all, Lazarus has earned it - not simply because he happens to be a mursaat, but because the things that he's actually done are bad enough.

If, hypothetically, there was only one person left of a particular ethnic group and that one person was a serial killer, I don't think anybody rational would throw around accusations of 'genocide' if appropriate measures were taken to prevent them from killing again. It might well be the de facto end result, but the motivation is different. After all, murder is a crime, but killing in self-defence or the defence of another is usually excused.

At the very least, though, it would have been better for Lazarus' history to be shown to the PC so we can get the impression that the PC has made their own decision. Maybe replace part of the Shining Blade induction ceremony stuff with an instance that shows Lazarus being a villain.

@Sir Vincent III.1286 said:Speaking of centaur genocide. Isn't that what humans are doing in Harathi?

Not really, since what we see are the war camps - it's indicated that there are additional settlements in the mountains, which is probably where any noncombatants are.

The litmus test could well be what happens if and when the centaurs offer a truce. The intensification of the war in recent years has been indicated to be Caudecus' doing, who's shown to be a bigot against both centaurs and charr. With him and the Ulgoth out of the way, centaurs that share Qindova's thinking might have the opportunity to have a say. I'm not holding my breath on ArenaNet pursuing that arc, though.

@Squee.7829 said:This thread has become a weird thing when people who claim "it's not right to let an organization encroach on someone else's territory" but then spend days explaining why it's ok to exterminate an entire race because of "objectivity. " I'm not even sure what's going on anymore.

Aye-yup. Apparently interfering with a tyrannical ruler is bad because overthrowing him (or her) can disrupt society, but it's perfectly kosher for that tyrannical ruler to wipe out populations in the name of maintaining order.

[Omar Aschi Popp.7496]

@draxynnic.3719 said:Aye-yup. Apparently interfering with a tyrannical ruler is bad because overthrowing him (or her) can disrupt society, but it's perfectly kosher for that tyrannical ruler to wipe out populations in the name of maintaining order.

Why is it okay for you to commit atrocity, religious persecution, genocide, treason, and mass murder?

What makes you morally exempt?You as the player character.

And then have the hypocrisy to mouth justice and good, and point fingers at another tyrant...

[draxynnic.3719]

@Omar Aschi Popp.7496 said:

@draxynnic.3719 said:Aye-yup. Apparently interfering with a tyrannical ruler is bad because overthrowing him (or her) can disrupt society, but it's perfectly kosher for that tyrannical ruler to wipe out populations in the name of maintaining order.

Why is it okay for you to commit atrocity, religious persecution, genocide, treason, and mass murder?

What makes you morally exempt?You as the player character.

And then have the hypocrisy to mouth justice and good, and point fingers at another tyrant...

I don't know where 'treason' is coming from regarding the player character... asura going against the Arcane Council? One person's treason is often another's just rebellion, though...

Regarding the rest: Generally speaking, the "self defence or in defence of others" clause, writ large.

The White Mantle isn't persecuted by the PC simply because of their religion. They're persecuted because they've been kidnapping and murdering people, masterminding a crime wave, manipulating or possibly outright triggering the centaur war and, ultimately, declare war on the nation of Kryta. If the White Mantle had set up their own nation in the Maguuma Jungle and remained there not bothering anyone, it's likely that they'd be viewed as being a bit strange but not otherwise bothered, although the Shining Blade might keep a close eye on them. Even as they are, White Mantle members who want to surrender or defect have been given the opportunity to do so.

Similar arguments apply, mutatis mutandis, to the Flame Legion, Sons of Svanir, and Nightmare Court.

Palawa Joko isn't motivated by defending others.