What is better Shapers or Rebels?

Hatchling Cockatrice · February 27, 2008

Quote:

Originally written by Xel'Raga:
Yeah, shapers are defiantly the evil, strong rapist, and the rebels the weak old victim. Give me a break, but hey, on second thought......

The woman takes out a gun and the rapist tries to run away but she shoots him in the head, seem right to you LT?

Firstly, "defiantly" is not the same word as "definitely".

Secondly, while I wouldn't lose too much sleep over something like that happening, it's not an accurate analogy. The Shapers have never shown any desire to retreat or surrender: the only time we've seen them negotiate with rebels is when they were trying to make them betray the rebellion.

By the way, knowing Jeff, I don't think Nazi Germany is the real-world allegory he had in mind when he made Geneforge. If anything, he was thinking of the American Civil War:

Quote:

We are not only fighting armies, but a hostile people, and must make old and young, rich and poor, feel the hard hand of war, as well as their organized armies.

Sound familiar? Sherman's March to the Sea destroyed civilian infrastructure, including railroads, farms and houses, on a massive scale; the war might have been lost without it. Was it right or wrong?

Articulate Vlish · February 27, 2008

Sherman's March? Ah yes. "War is cruelty, there is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is the sooner it's over." I believe it is.

Garrulous Glaahk · March 1, 2008

the shapers have the right idea, creating life should be controlled. However, over the many years of crating life, and destroying it, they have lost sight of the true meaning of life. The look in that servile's eyes as it awakens into full consciousness is soon dimmed by the mistreatment that the shapers dish out. The love of life that thahd comes to know in the brief time before it is thrown into combat, to live or die, isn't even seen anymore by the shapers.

Garrulous Glaahk · March 1, 2008

however, the rebels are not correct either. Many simply lust for power, and wish to steal the power from the oppressors without understanding them. The rest believe in what they do, still not seeing that the Shapes have a point. However, their attempt to counter Shaping with Shaping, the only way they can win, causes much more harm than good. The war has been laying waste to Terrestria. By mistreating life in the same way as the Shapers (forcing them to fight, like the Thahds and whatever) they have become like them.

Garrulous Glaahk · March 1, 2008

The Trakovites are, in a way, looking at the grand scale of things. As someone said earlier, they are the hippies of Terrestria. They believe that the power of Shaping, of creating life magically, should be stopped. This view would, indeed, stop the suffering quite well. However, by stopping the creating of life, they have also stopped a source of happiness. Most creations are happy and content with their lot in life. As the Final Fantasy character Seymour said, you must kill someone to release them from the suffering of life. In his madness, he failed to see the joy that living holds for all of the world's living creatures, especially humans. To end suffering is to end everything else!

Edit: By the way, all, i am a new member here, and i am a TOTAL GEEK, if anyone wants to know more about me

Edit: the last board i was on prefered each point being a separate post, but i an handle that.

Magnificent Ornk · March 1, 2008

Welcome to the boards.

People here prefer it if you use the EDIT button to add more stuff to your last post, rather than make several posts in a row. It just makes it easier to read and to keep track of who is saying what. When you visit the boards a lot, it becomes quite instinctive to expect a new person when you start reading a new message. So then if someone double posts, a lot of people get a little jab of annoyance.

A lot of little jabs amounts to a sizable offense, so double posting is frowned on a lot harder than you might think. This is a common policy on message boards, not just a peculiarity of this board. If you want to be a thorough geek, you'll need to know this kind of thing.

Garrulous Glaahk · March 2, 2008

Quote:

Originally written by Nioca:
See, this is another place where your logic is flawed. The Rebels aren't just after self-preservation; they plan to annihilate the Shaper empire.

The two above goals you stated are not mutually exclusive. Quite the contrary, annihilation of the Shaper empire is necessary to achieve self preservation and autonomy.

Quote:

Now, if they were after just the removal the Shapers from power, I could support that. But they want to destroy it entirely.

And for good reason. If you refer back to the Rebel ending I posted for Geneforge 3, the Shaper Council from Poryphra make it quite clear that they will never surrender, that even if the world is torn apart they will be the rulers of it.

Quote:

And you say they're justified in doing so?

That's exactly what I'm saying. I didn't think I was being vague or ambigious.

Quote:

Turns out, there's another word for what the Rebels are after: GENOCIDE.

I'm sorry Nioca, but I don't support genocide, I only support the killing of individuals who are against the Rebels 'in spirit'.

Quote:

I also want to add that, to my knowledge, no one here is saying that the Shaper genocides were justified.

What? According to my recollection, numerous posters have justified the genocide of the Drayks and Drakons, because "If the Shapers hadn't struck first, the Drayks would have." Typical neo-con logic.

Understated Ur-Drakon · March 2, 2008

Quote:

Originally written by Lepus timidus:

Quote:

Originally written by Nioca:
See, this is another place where your logic is flawed. The Rebels aren't just after self-preservation; they plan to annihilate the Shaper empire.

The two above goals you stated are not mutually exclusive. Quite the contrary, annihilation of the Shaper empire is necessary to achieve self preservation and autonomy.

No, they can achieve self-preservation and autonomy by overthrowing the Shapers, rather than obliterating both them and any two-year-old who might have inadvertently supported the shapers.

Quote:

Now, if they were after just the removal the Shapers from power, I could support that. But they want to destroy it entirely.

And for good reason. If you refer back to the Rebel ending I posted for Geneforge 3, the Shaper Council from Poryphra make it quite clear that they will never surrender, that even if the world is torn apart they will be the rulers of it.

The council equals 9 Shapers. However, there are more than 9 shapers within the whole of Geneforge. And, quite frankly, once the Shapers are removed from power, it only would become necessary to quell those that'd actively oppose the new regime... but then we're just heading back in a cycle of control again, aren't we? No freedom; just bigger and tougher-to-kill jailers.

EDIT: Correction; Council consists of 9, not 3. Good catch, Nick.

Fact is, there is no freedom until the factions break out of their cycles of control. But right now, neither faction, with the exception of the Trakovites, is willing to give or meet half-way. Everyone (Shapers, Rebels, and potentially Trakovites) holds a mentality of all-or-nothing. Either win/keep control of the world and destroy all who even slightly oppose you, or die trying. And until one of those factions decides to relent, aiming for something more feasible and even possible, the only difference between the regimes will be how scaly the overlords are.

Quote:

And you say they're justified in doing so?

That's exactly what I'm saying. I didn't think I was being vague or ambigious.

Quote:

Turns out, there's another word for what the Rebels are after: GENOCIDE.

I'm sorry Nioca, but I don't support genocide, I only support the killing of individuals who are against the Rebels 'in spirit'.

No, you've blatantly stated that you're for killing anyone who helps the Shapers in any way, with an exception for the 'saintly' rebels. That's genocide. It's an oxymoron to say the rebels are justified in doing what they're doing, then turn around and say that you don't support genocide. The Rebels are trying to commit genocide. If you justify what the rebels are doing, you justify genocide. Plain and simple. But you most certainly cannot have it both ways.

Quote:

I also want to add that, to my knowledge, no one here is saying that the Shaper genocides were justified.

What? According to my recollection, numerous posters have justified the genocide of the Drayks and Drakons, because "If the Shapers hadn't struck first, the Drayks would have." Typical neo-con logic.

No, the posters are saying that the Shapers had reasons for doing so, not that they were justified in doing so (with an exception for Nayld, who's an oxymoron in every sense of the term).

Kyshakk Koan · March 3, 2008

The Shaper Council consists of nine. A shame they don't ride dragons and wear the nine rings.

Unflappable Drayk · March 3, 2008

In the fiery depths of Quessa-Uss, dark lord Galdring made a creation, and in this creation, he poured his cruelty, his malice, and his will to dominate all life! One creation to rule them all!

Garrulous Glaahk · March 4, 2008

Quote:

Originally written by Nioca:
[QB]

No, they can achieve self-preservation and autonomy by overthrowing the Shapers, rather than obliterating both them and any two-year-old who might have inadvertently supported the shapers.

Inadvertently? Such a statement suggests that either the Outsider humans have no free will, or they are too obtuse to recognize that their support of the Shapers, both materialistically and in spirit, results in further oppression and slaughter of Creations.

Also note that the Shapers have no problem with exterminating those who support free Creation colonies in a non-military capacity. Why you remain silent on this fact, while constantly whining about the mere suggestion that the Rebels might be doing the same, is a mystery to me.

Quote:

[qb]

However, there are more than 9 shapers within the whole of Geneforge.

Sure. Yet the opinion of the Shaper Council of Terrestia reflects the 'We must be masters of everything we create' ideology that perfuses Shaper society. There are a few good Shapers (Lilita, Carnelian), but they are in the tiny minority.

Quote:

And, quite frankly, once the Shapers are removed from power, it only would become necessary to quell those that'd actively oppose the new regime...

That's what the Rebels are doing presently... killing their enemies. The sage creating a wand of disruption for Shaper loyalist troops is just as much an enemy to free creations as a Guardian in the vanguard of the Shaper army.

That's the best way to kill your enemy, Nioca. You don't just kill his troops when they invade your territory, allowing them to come back to hammer at you again and again (eg. the Awakened ending for GF 2.)
You counterstrike. You enter his territory and burn his crops, kill those who provide his soldiers with provisions and shelter, raze any of his fortifications to the ground, and butcher anyone who tries to resist.

That's the way war has (and still) is being conducted. It's the way a righteous war is meant to be conducted. It's what the Shapers did on Sucia and Drypeak, so I fail to see why the Rebels shouldn't use the same methods against an Empire which systematically enslaves and brutalizes them. They have no choice. It's either that, or die. If the Shapers and Outsider humans were to surrender to the Rebels, they would most likely be spared. No such luxury applies to 'rogue' creations.

Quote:

Fact is, there is no freedom until the factions break out of their cycles of control.

A big fat red herring. Whether the Drakons are big meanies who delight in roasting puppies is a completely separate issue. We are discussing whether the Rebels are justified in waging 'indiscriminant' warfare in order to defend against enslavement and genocide.

Quote:

No, you've blatantly stated that you're for killing anyone who helps the Shapers in any way, with an exception for the 'saintly' rebels. That's genocide.

No, it's not. Allow me to repeat that timeless quote by Michael Corleone:
"I don't want to kill everyone, Tom. Just my enemies."

I only support the killing of enemies of free Creations, not some innocent human who dissociates themselves from the corrupt Shaper regime, or a Shaper colony who wishes to remain neutral in the war. No Rebel I know of wants to kill 'all' humans, just the ones who are out to kill them.

Quote:

It's an oxymoron to say the rebels are justified in doing what they're doing, then turn around and say that you don't support genocide.

Targeting your enemies =/= genocide. You might as well just argue that the Allies attempted to commit genocide when they nuked Japan, and carpet bombed Germany.

Understated Ur-Drakon · March 4, 2008

Quote:

Originally written by Lepus timidus:

Quote:

Originally written by Nioca:
No, they can achieve self-preservation and autonomy by overthrowing the Shapers, rather than obliterating both them and any two-year-old who might have inadvertently supported the shapers.

Inadvertently? Such a statement suggests that either the Outsider humans have no free will, or they are too obtuse to recognize that their support of the Shapers, both materialistically and in spirit, results in further oppression and slaughter of Creations.

Can you at least read the posts in-context? Sheesh, it's like you have the attention span of a fly on caffeine.

For context:

Quote:

No, they can achieve self-preservation and autonomy by overthrowing the Shapers, rather than obliterating both them and any two-year-old who might have inadvertently supported the shapers.

Quote:

Originally written by Lepus timidus:
Also note that the Shapers have no problem with exterminating those who support free Creation colonies in a non-military capacity. Why you remain silent on this fact, while constantly whining about the mere suggestion that the Rebels might be doing the same, is a mystery to me.

Because that's beside the point. We're not debating whether the Shapers are justified to do that. We both know the answer to that is no. We're debating whether the Rebels are justified in their acts. You think they are. I say otherwise. Hence, the impasse.

Quote:

However, there are more than 9 shapers within the whole of Geneforge.

Sure. Yet the opinion of the Shaper Council of Terrestia reflects the 'We must be masters of everything we create' ideology that perfuses Shaper society. There are a few good Shapers (Lilita, Carnelian), but they are in the tiny minority.

Yet, according to your draconian policies, anyone who supports the Shapers in any way must die. It's not black or white; there's a lot of gray area in the middle, which is why your policy on this doesn't work. Have you considered that some of the outsiders are just trying to live their lives under the regime? Or are the people just trying to feed their families as much an enemy as the warriors out on the field?

Quote:

And, quite frankly, once the Shapers are removed from power, it only would become necessary to quell those that'd actively oppose the new regime...

That's what the Rebels are doing presently... killing their enemies. The sage creating a wand of disruption for Shaper loyalist troops is just as much an enemy to free creations as a Guardian in the vanguard of the Shaper army.

Wrong. It's not by the sage's hand that free creations die. It's a direct result of someone pointing that wand at a creation and firing. Let's turn the situation around. Say aforementioned wand ends up in the hands of the Rebels. Does that make the sage a rebel?

Quote:

That's the best way to kill your enemy, Nioca. You don't just kill his troops when they invade your territory, allowing them to come back to hammer at you again and again (eg. the Awakened ending for GF 2.)
You counterstrike. You enter his territory and burn his crops, kill those who provide his soldiers with provisions and shelter, raze any of his fortifications to the ground, and butcher anyone who tries to resist.

There's a difference between striking back and destroying everything in your path, a difference you refuse to see. Only someone intent on causing more suffering than necessary would burn crops and butcher civilians. It's senseless destruction.

Quote:

That's the way war has (and still) is being conducted. It's the way a righteous war is meant to be conducted.

There's no such thing as a righteous war. Just because that's how things have been done doesn't make it right, and I'll add that wars have been conducted without going out of one's way to commit atrocities that you apparently support.

Quote:

It's what the Shapers did on Sucia and Drypeak, so I fail to see why the Rebels shouldn't use the same methods against an Empire which systematically enslaves and brutalizes them. They have no choice. It's either that, or die. If the Shapers and Outsider humans were to surrender to the Rebels, they would most likely be spared. No such luxury applies to 'rogue' creations.

Why? Because two wrongs DO NOT make a right! Because the Rebels in fact do have a choice! Just because the oppressor tried to genocide them does not give them the right to repay in kind! In fact, it denies them that right all the more simply because they of all people SHOULD KNOW BETTER.

Quote:

Fact is, there is no freedom until the factions break out of their cycles of control.

A big fat red herring. Whether the Drakons are big meanies who delight in roasting puppies is a completely separate issue. We are discussing whether the Rebels are justified in waging 'indiscriminant' warfare in order to defend against enslavement and genocide.

The two are related more closely then you realize, but I'll concede. If only to keep to the more pressing issues.

Quote:

No, you've blatantly stated that you're for killing anyone who helps the Shapers in any way, with an exception for the 'saintly' rebels. That's genocide.

No, it's not. Allow me to repeat that timeless quote by Michael Corleone:
"I don't want to kill everyone, Tom. Just my enemies."

Get a dictionary. Look up genocide. No, wait, how about I bring the definitions to you.

Quote:

Webster's Definition of Genocide:
The systematic killing of, or a program of action intended to destroy, a whole national or ethnic group.
Wiktionary\'s Definition of Genocide:
1. The systematic killing of substantial numbers of people on the basis of ethnicity, religion, political opinion, social status, or other particularity.
2. Acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.

There's no exception to those words. No clause that states that, if the people you're genociding are enemies, then it's not really genocide. No matter how you try to wriggle out of it, the Rebels are attempting to commit genocide.

Quote:

I only support the killing of enemies of free Creations, not some innocent human who dissociates themselves from the corrupt Shaper regime, or a Shaper colony who wishes to remain neutral in the war. No Rebel I know of wants to kill 'all' humans, just the ones who are out to kill them.

And how do you suppose the Outsider humans do that? The Rebels can't even dissociate themselves from the Shapers and their ways, let alone some poor guy stuck smack in the middle of Terrestria!

Quote:

It's an oxymoron to say the rebels are justified in doing what they're doing, then turn around and say that you don't support genocide.

Targeting your enemies =/= genocide. You might as well just argue that the Allies attempted to commit genocide when they nuked Japan, and carpet bombed Germany.

It does if your enemies are pretty much all of a certain nationality. And, surprise! In the Rebel's case, it is!

Magnificent Ornk · March 4, 2008

Originally by Nioca:

Quote:

Get a dictionary. Look up genocide. No, wait, how about I bring the definitions to you.

Quote:

Webster's Definition of Genocide:

The systematic killing of, or a program of action intended to destroy, a whole national or ethnic group.

Wiktionary\'s Definition of Genocide:

1. The systematic killing of substantial numbers of people on the basis of ethnicity, religion, political opinion, social status, or other particularity.

2. Acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.

There's no exception to those words. No clause that states that, if the people you're genociding are enemies, then it's not really genocide. No matter how you try to wriggle out of it, the Rebels are attempting to commit genocide.

You're really arguing the wrong definition here, Nioca. Nationality can be wriggled around. Political opinion cannot.

Dikiyoba.

Understated Ur-Drakon · March 4, 2008

EDIT: Oops. Massively awful misinterpretation on my part (of Dikiyoba's post).

Garrulous Glaahk · March 4, 2008

Quote:

Originally written by Nioca:
Sheesh, it's like you have the attention span of a fly on caffeine.

For context: No, they can achieve self-preservation and autonomy by overthrowing the Shapers, rather than obliterating both them and any two-year-old who might have inadvertently supported the shapers.

So you admit that the Outsider loyalists (apart from the two year olds, the little dears) have free will, and know that their actions assist in the continuation of an era of oppression and genocide. Nice to know that you're willing to concede that point.

As for the two year olds, you're right. I don't support the targeting of two year olds, as they aren't enemies of the Rebels. But if they happen to get killed while their parents are being targeted, that's just tough. Stuff like that happens in war all the time.

You don't think two year olds were killed in the carpet bombings of Dresden, the nuclear bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, the napalming of Vietnam, the bombing campaign against Serbia, the artillery bombardments and air strikes against the West Bank and Lebanon...? I could go on and on, but I don't think I need to drill the point home with a sledgehammer.

Quote:

Because that's beside the point. We're not debating whether the Shapers are justified to do that. We both know the answer to that is no.

Nice to see that you're willing to concede another point. So rebellion against the Shapers is justified, nay, a moral responsibility?

Quote:

Yet, according to your draconian policies, anyone who supports the Shapers in any way must die.

Shaper loyalists must die.

Quote:

Have you considered that some of the outsiders are just trying to live their lives under the regime?

Like the Germans under the Nazi regime? The people get the government that they deserve. If the Shaper loyalists refuse to stand up and fight against the draconian policies of their government while supporting genocide and enslavement both materialistically and in spirit, then they deserve everything they get.

Do you think my Slavic ancestors in the camps cried when German 'civilians' were killed in the indiscriminant aerial bombardment of Germany? And no, this isn't an appeal to emotion, it's just a simple observation. If you and your family are being exterminated and enslaved, the fact that a few 'civilians' who either implicitly or explicitly supported your extermination were killed in the fight for your freedom is the least of your worries.

Quote:

Wrong. It's not by the sage's hand that free creations die.

Haha, good stuff. So I can construct bombs for terrorists, but as long as I'm not the one who actually detonates them and kills kaffir, I'm absolved of blame.

Quote:

It's a direct result of someone pointing that wand at a creation and firing. Let's turn the situation around. Say aforementioned wand ends up in the hands of the Rebels. Does that make the sage a rebel?

If they sell the wand to rebels, their intention is to support the Rebellion, and that makes them fair game for the Shaper regime. There are exceptions to this, such as merchants who deal with both sides, but they are few and far between. For instance, the sage in Dhonal's Keep clearly makes his wands for the Shaper army.

Quote:

There's a difference between striking back and destroying everything in your path, a difference you refuse to see. Only someone intent on causing more suffering than necessary would burn crops and butcher civilians. It's senseless destruction.

It's not senseless. Hungry troops can't march, unsheltered troops are vulnerable to harsh weather, fewer soldiers can be recruited for military actions. Military actions (especially insurgencies) tend to fail when they don't have the support of the local populance. Genghis Khan engaged in a lot of 'senseless' destruction, and look where it got him.

Quote:

Webster's Definition of Genocide:
The systematic killing of, or a program of action intended to destroy, a whole national or ethnic group.
Wiktionary\'s Definition of Genocide:
1. The systematic killing of substantial numbers of people on the basis of ethnicity, religion, political opinion, social status, or other particularity.
2. Acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.

There's no exception to those words. No clause that states that, if the people you're genociding are enemies, then it's not really genocide. No matter how you try to wriggle out of it, the Rebels are attempting to commit genocide.

False. It is not genocide to target those who are actively or passively enslaving and destroying your people. The fact that they happen to be part of a nation or political group is incidental (nice try, Diki).

For example, were the Allies committing genocide when they killed the Germans and Japanese, and targeted the Nazis for imprisonment and execution post WWII? Are the Americans committing genocide when they attempt to undermine and destroy radical Islamic political groups, such as Hamas? Were the British committing genocide when they attempted to wipe out the IRA?

The fact of the matter is that if your 'political enemy' holds as one of their core beliefs that you don't have the right to exist, and actively tries to establish that wet dream, then they are all fair game. Added to which, bludgeoning an imperialistic and highly aggressive nation into submission is not genocide.
It is not genocide to target Shaper loyalists, any more than it was genocide for the Yanks to blow up Nazis and Nazi sympathisers. And if anyone gets in the way, tough titty for them!

Easygoing Eyebeast · March 5, 2008

Timid Wolf over here's "arguement" fails. Let's see why.

Scenario One:

Deep in the Other Continent, an enterprising Shaper University is running a bakery with specially Shaped bread that doesn't go bad. Of course, the Shapers don't do the actually work in the blazing bakery, that's for the Serviles. From the Other Continent, a caravan brings the magical bread to Terrestia. Here, they are sold first to the Army, then to the civilians. One of the loyalist soldiers with this bread makes it to Aziraph Camp Gamma, and dies scouting around the Rebel Camp. His killer, a Rebel, victoriously takes it, as it is necessary to feed the soldiers. Therefore, the soldiers are being fed, in part, by the toiled slavings of enslaved Serviles in the Shaper Empire, and are passively supporting it.

Scenario Two:

The Unbound are released. Terror spreads across Western Terrestia as the Western Morass and the fortresses beyond fall. Mad Drakons kill everyone. The Shapers have to fight to push down minor insurrections and panicked rebellions. Eventually, these are wiped out either by the Unbound. Indiscriminately, the Drakons have killed brethren.

The second one is game canon. The first one is never explicitely stated, but fits easily.

EDIT:

Quote:

False. It is not genocide to target those who are actively or passively enslaving and destroying your people. The fact that they happen to be part of a nation or political group is incidental (nice try, Diki).

Yes it is.

Quote:

For example, were the Allies committing genocide when they killed the Germans and Japanese, and targeted the Nazis for imprisonment and execution post WWII? Are the Americans committing genocide when they attempt to undermine and destroy radical Islamic political groups, such as Hamas? Were the British committing genocide when they attempted to wipe out the IRA?

Allies: Did the Allies ruthlessly kill every German they got their hands on? Didn't think so. The Allies didn't even kill all of the Nazis, as they tolerated in the name of political freedom things like Neo-Nazis, and the old Nazis were allowed to surrender. Some were just horrid war criminals that needed to be killed.

*A Note: The connection between the Nazis and the Shapers is slight. Stop bringing it up. And I don't care about your supposed Slavic ancestors. You just keep dredging them and the Nazis up to appeal to emotion*

Americans: Are we killing every Islamic political group or Muslim? Didn't think so.

British: Is every Irishman a member of the IRA then?

Quote:

The fact of the matter is that if your 'political enemy' holds as one of their core beliefs that you don't have the right to exist, and actively tries to establish that wet dream, then they are all fair game. Added to which, bludgeoning an imperialistic and highly aggressive nation into submission is not genocide.

Somewhat. No one's arguing that the Drayks and Drakons shouldn't fight back, and that the Shapers have the right to simply kill them all. Just because they do it doesn't mean it's right to do it.

And "highly aggressive"? I don't think so. If anything, the Rebels are being highly aggressive. They didn't have to go beyond the Ashen Isles, they didn't have to bring the horrors of this Great War to the far flung corners of Terrestia. But they did. Now the Shapers are just taking back their territory, where the civilians (Rocky Point, Dillame, Electrified Fields refugees) are glad for a return to normality.

Magnificent Ornk · March 5, 2008

Originally by Lepus timidus:

Quote:

Genghis Khan engaged in a lot of 'senseless' destruction, and look where it got him.

Genghis Khan isn't exactly a positive role model.

Sorry, Lepus, but I'm convinced if I were a servile or drayk, I would be completely unable to trust you. Your determination to kill every enemy and disregard for any life that doesn't directly support you means I can't trust you not to target me as an enemy at a future date over some other issue. It means I can't trust you not to do something like release the Unbound into Illya Province with no attempts to save anyone in the Safehouse or to send another round of Unbound in after the Shapers surrender. In short, I can't trust you to do a better job than the Shapers are doing. I'd join Gesselin Freehold, so I'm sure I'm fighting and probably dying for freedom, not for a different form of oppression.

Dikiyoba.

Edit: Fixed quote.

Understated Ur-Drakon · March 5, 2008

Quote:

Originally written by Lepus timidus:
So you admit that the Outsider loyalists (apart from the two year olds, the little dears) have free will, and know that their actions assist in the continuation of an era of oppression and genocide. Nice to know that you're willing to concede that point.

No, I'm not. You're under this wonderful fantasy that the Outsiders can do whatever they darn well please, and that if they rebel, they get a nice shiny medal and moral satisfaction. Fact is, the only thing people like that will get is a thorn lodged in their heart. And that's only if they're lucky enough to avoid becoming Creation chow for some Shaper's pet.

And here's another thing: most outsiders don't see the darker side of the Shapers. They don't see toiling slaves, cruel experiments, and tyrannical overlords. They see creatures who enjoy serving humans, mystical new bioinventions, and benevolent, if strict, rulers. The average outsider doesn't even set foot inside a Shaping lab. So what are they to know about the mysterious Shapers?

Now look through the eyes of the same outsider, and look at the destruction the Rebels are causing. Except, from an outsider's eye, they don't look like Rebels; they look like power-hungry terrorists who's sole purpose in life is to destroy and pillage anything in their way. The fact that they consist of creations is all the more support for Shapers and strict creation controls.

Quote:

Because that's beside the point. We're not debating whether the Shapers are justified to do that. We both know the answer to that is no.

Nice to see that you're willing to concede another point. So rebellion against the Shapers is justified, nay, a moral responsibility?

Rebellion being justified? Yes. Rebellion being a moral responsibility? Not unless the person can actually do anything significant. Getting themselves or, god forbid, others killed doesn't count.

Genocide against the Shapers being justified? No. It doesn't even need a reason, the mere idea of the question speaks for itself.

Quote:

Have you considered that some of the outsiders are just trying to live their lives under the regime?

Like the Germans under the Nazi regime? The people get the government that they deserve. If the Shaper loyalists refuse to stand up and fight against the draconian policies of their government while supporting genocide and enslavement both materialistically and in spirit, then they deserve everything they get.

Do you think my Slavic ancestors in the camps cried when German 'civilians' were killed in the indiscriminant aerial bombardment of Germany? And no, this isn't an appeal to emotion, it's just a simple observation. If you and your family are being exterminated and enslaved, the fact that a few 'civilians' who either implicitly or explicitly supported your extermination were killed in the fight for your freedom is the least of your worries.

It's funny you should drag that up (again), but I seem to recall that the Nazi regime was also the government of many of the Jews who were killed. Tell me, did the Jews get the government they deserved as well?

Quote:

Wrong. It's not by the sage's hand that free creations die.

Haha, good stuff. So I can construct bombs for terrorists, but as long as I'm not the one who actually detonates them and kills kaffir, I'm absolved of blame.

Hmmm. Maybe if I start drawing connections between the rebellion and Al-Queda, and then throw them in your face every chance I get, you'll finally lay off the Nazi garbage.

Anyway, you're assuming that everyone who opposed the rebels, directly or indirectly, is equally guilty. Allow me to clue you in: they're not. I'm not saying that the sage isn't an enemy, I'm saying that the sage isn't as guilty as the person or makes the kill, if only because the sage doesn't know what the wand is actually being used for. He doesn't know that it's being used to oppress free creations, he just thinks it's to put down a radical group of malcontents. In the bomb scenario, the person making it knows exactly what it's being used for, and thus is as guilty as the actual bomber, if not more so for knowingly enabling the crime in the first place.

But this explanation is probably lost on you, because you keep proving that you're incapable of seeing things as other than black or white.

Quote:

Webster's Definition of Genocide:
The systematic killing of, or a program of action intended to destroy, a whole national or ethnic group.
Wiktionary\'s Definition of Genocide:
1. The systematic killing of substantial numbers of people on the basis of ethnicity, religion, political opinion, social status, or other particularity.
2. Acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.

There's no exception to those words. No clause that states that, if the people you're genociding are enemies, then it's not really genocide. No matter how you try to wriggle out of it, the Rebels are attempting to commit genocide.

False. It is not genocide to target those who are actively or passively enslaving and destroying your people. The fact that they happen to be part of a nation or political group is incidental (nice try, Diki).

And it's just coincidence that each and every one of the targets are either Shapers or closely tied to the Shapers? I'm sorry, but I'm not buying it. And, honestly, I don't think you buy it either. The Rebels are after genocide. Freedom is an afterthought that'll quickly end up discarded when the Drakons take the throne.

---

So, after further consideration, I have a question. You act as if it was such a glaringly obvious decision to support the Rebels. So why, in every poll made after GF4, does the majority of voters support the Shapers over the Rebels?

(In this one, it's 65% for Shapers, 35% for Rebels; that's almost a 2:1 ratio for the Shapers)

Garrulous Glaahk · March 5, 2008

Diki:

Quote:

Sorry, Lepus, but I'm convinced if I were a servile or drayk, I would be completely unable to trust you.

So you don't trust anyone who employs scorched earth tactics?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scorched_earth

Magnificent Ornk · March 5, 2008

You have focused on destroying people more than destroying infrastructure. And honestly, if the world becomes no more than a burnt husk, it doesn't matter whether the Shapers or Rebels are the master of it, because there's nothing left.

Dikiyoba.

Understated Ur-Drakon · March 5, 2008

There's a difference between scorched earth and your policy, Lepus. Scorched earth destroys infrastructure and resources, not people. You'd turn Terrestria into a massive, burnt-up graveyard.

Unflappable Drayk · March 5, 2008

Quote:

So you admit that the Outsider loyalists (apart from the two year olds, the little dears) have free will, and know that their actions assist in the continuation of an era of oppression and genocide. Nice to know that you're willing to concede that point.

As for the two year olds, you're right. I don't support the targeting of two year olds, as they aren't enemies of the Rebels. But if they happen to get killed while their parents are being targeted, that's just tough. Stuff like that happens in war all the time.

You don't think two year olds were killed in the carpet bombings of Dresden, the nuclear bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, the napalming of Vietnam, the bombing campaign against Serbia, the artillery bombardments and air strikes against the West Bank and Lebanon...? I could go on and on, but I don't think I need to drill the point home with a sledgehammer.

Ok, I will respond to this quote divided by paragraphs.
Paragraph 1: The average outsider doesn't know jack about the shapers or rebels, all they know is that the shapers are the government, and that makes them better. So, yes they do have free will, just ignorant free will.

Paragraph 2: Thats why I don't understand why you are so pro-war, do you like killing children?

Paragraph 3:God dammit, GENEFORGE IS NOT LIKE THE REAL WORLD!!!!!!!!

Quote:

Nice to see that you're willing to concede another point. So rebellion against the Shapers is justified, nay, a moral responsibility?

No one here believes that the massacre of the Drayks was reasonable, but the rebellion is not justified if they use the same, hated tactics that the shapers use.(like if a country went to war with another country because they where cruel in battle, but then the attacking country uses the same cruelty, its called being big, fat, hypocrite.)
However, you seem to say that the shapers fighting back is wrong, their current position is fine, if the average grunt isn't a complete arse.

Quote:

Shaper loyalists must die.

Aha! But according to you earlier, all people who support the shapers must die, so all those ignorant farmers MUST die, by your point of view.

Quote:

Like the Germans under the Nazi regime? The people get the government that they deserve. If the Shaper loyalists refuse to stand up and fight against the draconian policies of their government while supporting genocide and enslavement both materialistically and in spirit, then they deserve everything they get.

Do you think my Slavic ancestors in the camps cried when German 'civilians' were killed in the indiscriminant aerial bombardment of Germany? And no, this isn't an appeal to emotion, it's just a simple observation. If you and your family are being exterminated and enslaved, the fact that a few 'civilians' who either implicitly or explicitly supported your extermination were killed in the fight for your freedom is the least of your worries.

I have said this before, the average citizen doesn't see the bad side of the shapers.

Quote:

Haha, good stuff. So I can construct bombs for terrorists, but as long as I'm not the one who actually detonates them and kills kaffir, I'm absolved of blame.

If the terrorists stole it from a storage complex, no the person who made the bomb isn't, what you are suggesting is that a person made a bomb and then GAVE it to the terrorists, it isn't like that in the situation you quoted.

Quote:

False. It is not genocide to target those who are actively or passively enslaving and destroying your people. The fact that they happen to be part of a nation or political group is incidental (nice try, Diki).

Last time I checked, there are no drayk/drakon labor workforces and they rarely die in battle, so yes it is genocide.

Quote:

It is not genocide to target Shaper loyalists, any more than it was genocide for the Yanks to blow up Nazis and Nazi sympathisers. And if anyone gets in the way, tough titty for them!

Even if people hate a fraction, it doesn't mean killing them en mass isn't genocide.

My god LT. Oh and by the way, I haven't read the posts after the one I quoted, as soon I saw this I had an urge to respond, so don't smack me if someone else already said what I'm saying.

Burgeoning Battle Gamma · March 5, 2008

Can a mod lock this thread? This isn't going anywhere besides "I'm right, you're wrong".

Unflappable Drayk · March 5, 2008

No reason to, we are doing more than contradicting each other.

Magnificent Ornk · March 5, 2008

Originally by olop4444:

Quote:

This isn't going anywhere besides "I'm right, you're wrong".

Probably not, but this isn't the first time the debate has occured and probably won't be the last. Just ignore this thread.

Dikiyoba.

Understated Ur-Drakon · March 5, 2008

No one likes a mini-mod, Olop. Just for future reference.

Garrulous Glaahk · March 8, 2008

Quote:

Originally written by Nioca:
There's a difference between scorched earth and your policy, Lepus. Scorched earth destroys infrastructure and resources, not people.

Well aren't you naive. Pray tell, how does an attacker destroy infrastructure without causing civilian casualties? I'm sure Israel and the U.S.A would love to hear about your revolutionary war tactics.

Garrulous Glaahk · March 8, 2008

Quote:

Originally written by Nioca:

Quote:

Originally written by Lepus timidus:
[qb]So you admit that the Outsider loyalists (apart from the two year olds, the little dears) have free will, and know that their actions assist in the continuation of an era of oppression and genocide. Nice to know that you're willing to concede that point.

No, I'm not. You're under this wonderful fantasy that the Outsiders can do whatever they darn well please, and that if they rebel, they get a nice shiny medal and moral satisfaction.

No, just no. I've said no such thing. There is an inherent danger in opposing any tyrannical regime, but as the old saying goes, ‘All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing’

Quote:

And here's another thing: most outsiders don't see the darker side of the Shapers.

I disagree. The Outsiders have lived alongside the Shapers for centuries, and I think that they must have at least some inkling of the cruelty of Shaper experiments (guards in research labs), that serviles are capable of independent thought (the servile keeper in Drypeak disposing of Sencia), and of the genocide of the drayks (Outsiders serve in the Shaper armies).

Quote:

Now look through the eyes of the same outsider, and look at the destruction the Rebels are causing. Except, from an outsider's eye, they don't look like Rebels; they look like power-hungry terrorists who's sole purpose in life is to destroy and pillage anything in their way.

Or perhaps it looks like a bunch of independent serviles who... wait... didn't the Shapers tell us that the serviles were dumb placid beings who loved to serve?

That would be my first thought, if I were an Outsider, which is why I find it completely implausible that Outsider believe, and continue to believe, that serviles are dumb creatures happy to serve. Are they as gullible as the citizens of Oceania for 1984?

Quote:

Genocide against the Shapers being justified? No. It doesn't even need a reason, the mere idea of the question speaks for itself.

It's not genocide to kill your enemies. If the Shapers were willing to surrender, (or offer a truce/compromise), there would be no justification to slaughter them. But we both know that the Shapers will never concede defeat, or even compromise, with the Rebels wishing for autonomy. So unfortunately, the Shapers must die.

The fact of the matter is that the Shapers adhere rigidly to a dogma which encourages them to snuff out any independent Creation life. So until the Shaper faction either changes their ideology or surrenders, said Creation life is entitled to fight back against any Shaper which wishes to destroy them (which, as it currently stands, is 99% of them).

Quote:

It's funny you should drag that up (again), but I seem to recall that the Nazi regime was also the government of many of the Jews who were killed. Tell me, did the Jews get the government they deserved as well?

The Jews were a minority at the time, so I would consider than far less culpable than non-Jewish Germans. And from memory, the Jews did 'declare war' on Germany via boycotts.

Quote:

Anyway, you're assuming that everyone who opposed the rebels, directly or indirectly, is equally guilty.

I never said this! What I asserted was that such a distinction is incidental. The fact of the matter is that at the end of the day, the Outsiders are enemies of the Rebellion. Hence there is no reason why the Rebels should bend over backwards to spare them when they employ scorched earth tactics.

Even if the Outsiders are 'enemies out of ignorance' (as Dikiyobi keeps stressing, something which I doubt), they are still enemies. If a man runs at you with a knife, you don't hesistate to defend yourself merely because he might be mentally unstable.

Quote:

And it's just coincidence that each and every one of the targets are either Shapers or closely tied to the Shapers?

Congratulations, your powers of deduction amaze me. You're quite right when you speculate that it's probably not a coincidence when the Rebels target a sect which wishes to exterminate and enslave them.

For clarification, an analogy. An alien race known as the Gorg invade Earth, believing that humans are an inferior species, deserving only vapourisation. The human retaliate to this invasion with brute force, first defeating the Gorg infantry on Earth, and then boarding the Gorg starships and butchering a crew who fights to the death.

Would you class the above as genocide? Apparently so, given that the humans were targeting the Gorg for extermination.

Quote:

So, after further consideration, I have a question. You act as if it was such a glaringly obvious decision to support the Rebels. So why, in every poll made after GF4, does the majority of voters support the Shapers over the Rebels?

For the same reason that democracy doesn't work: People are stupid.

Understated Ur-Drakon · March 8, 2008

Quote:

Originally written by Lepus timidus:

Quote:

Originally written by Nioca:
You're under this wonderful fantasy that the Outsiders can do whatever they darn well please, and that if they rebel, they get a nice shiny medal and moral satisfaction.

No, just no. I've said no such thing. There is an inherent danger in opposing any tyrannical regime, but as the old saying goes, ‘All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing’

Yeah, but I also believe that the average person shouldn't feel morally obligated to get themselves killed for naught, either. Even if every outsider simultaneously rose up and attacked the Shapers, I doubt they'd do more than put a dent in Shaper forces. They're just too heavily out-gunned. And I'm not talking Nazis vs. Jews outgunned, I mean Japan vs. the atom bomb. And in that confrontation, if you recall, the atom bomb won.

Quote:

And here's another thing: most outsiders don't see the darker side of the Shapers.

I disagree. The Outsiders have lived alongside the Shapers for centuries, and I think that they must have at least some inkling of the cruelty of Shaper experiments (guards in research labs), that serviles are capable of independent thought (the servile keeper in Drypeak disposing of Sencia), and of the genocide of the drayks (Outsiders serve in the Shaper armies).

Yeah, but these incidents are in the minority. The Shapers have proven that, if anything, they're especially apt at covering their tracks and conjuring a very convincing illusion of something they're not. GF3 is a particularly strong example; even amongst the typical Shaper, the idea of smart, independent serviles is nothing more than a rumor. The Geneforge was completely covered up and concealed, and if it wasn't for the Sholai, it probably would have remained that way. Now, if the Shapers are so skilled in covering their tracks that they can conceal information from themselves, what does that tell you about the chances the Outsiders have of stumbling on useful information?

Additionally, when the Shapers deem that something (like Drayks) must be exterminated, it's typically someone from the Shaper sect that's sent to deal with it. Litalia is one such example.

Quote:

Now look through the eyes of the same outsider, and look at the destruction the Rebels are causing. Except, from an outsider's eye, they don't look like Rebels; they look like power-hungry terrorists who's sole purpose in life is to destroy and pillage anything in their way.

Or perhaps it looks like a bunch of independent serviles who... wait... didn't the Shapers tell us that the serviles were dumb placid beings who loved to serve?

That would be my first thought, if I were an Outsider, which is why I find it completely implausible that Outsider believe, and continue to believe, that serviles are dumb creatures happy to serve. Are they as gullible as the citizens of Oceania for 1984?

Are you actually insinuating that all serviles are smart creatures who desire freedom? Because there's a load of in-game evidence that states otherwise.

Anyway, it would look more like the Drakon and human sides of the rebellion are ordering them around. After all, how many independent serviles have you seen on the frontline that have not been accompanied by humans or Drakons? Not many.

Quote:

Genocide against the Shapers being justified? No. It doesn't even need a reason, the mere idea of the question speaks for itself.

It's not genocide to kill your enemies. If the Shapers were willing to surrender, (or offer a truce/compromise), there would be no justification to slaughter them. But we both know that the Shapers will never concede defeat, or even compromise, with the Rebels wishing for autonomy. So unfortunately, the Shapers must die.

We both know? Really? That's funny, because there is no possible way for anyone (aside from Vogel) to know that. Different situations can result in different stances. But of course, the Rebels are currently more interested in inflicting as much damage as possible than even giving negotiation a shot, so I guess it really wouldn't matter anyway. I mean, even the Shapers are more willing to negotiate than the Rebels (not by a wide margin, considering it's more on an individual basis, but still). So, quite frankly, it's still genocide

Quote:

Anyway, you're assuming that everyone who opposed the rebels, directly or indirectly, is equally guilty.

I never said this! What I asserted was that such a distinction is incidental. The fact of the matter is that at the end of the day, the Outsiders are enemies of the Rebellion. Hence there is no reason why the Rebels should bend over backwards to spare them when they employ scorched earth tactics.

I agree that some people will get caught in the crossfire. It's pretty much unavoidable, and is effectively why war should be something of last resort.

However, the methods you propose and support take it one step further. Rather than accidentally killing civilians, these methods dictate that one should go out of their way to kill civilians.

Quote:

Even if the Outsiders are 'enemies out of ignorance' (as Dikiyobi keeps stressing, something which I doubt), they are still enemies. If a man runs at you with a knife, you don't hesistate to defend yourself merely because he might be mentally unstable.

Fair enough, but you don't then turn around and attack nearby bystanders too.

Quote:

And it's just coincidence that each and every one of the targets are either Shapers or closely tied to the Shapers?

Congratulations, your powers of deduction amaze me. You're quite right when you speculate that it's probably not a coincidence when the Rebels target a sect which wishes to exterminate and enslave them.

For clarification, an analogy. An alien race known as the Gorg invade Earth, believing that humans are an inferior species, deserving only vapourisation. The human retaliate to this invasion with brute force, first defeating the Gorg infantry on Earth, and then boarding the Gorg starships and butchering a crew who fights to the death.

Would you class the above as genocide? Apparently so, given that the humans were targeting the Gorg for extermination.

You see, there's a vital flaw in your little example here. The humans weren't targeting them because they're alien; they're targeting them because they pose an immediate threat. But the Rebels, along with your methods, are making very little discrimination between who's a threat and who's just a person in the wrong place at the wrong time. So while the example isn't Genocide, the rebel actions are.

Nice try, though.

Quote:

So, after further consideration, I have a question. You act as if it was such a glaringly obvious decision to support the Rebels. So why, in every poll made after GF4, does the majority of voters support the Shapers over the Rebels?

For the same reason that democracy doesn't work: People are stupid.

You sure about that? Or could it be that, with the advent of GF4, people started seeing a side of the Rebels that they didn't like?

Quote:

Originally written by Nioca:
There's a difference between scorched earth and your policy, Lepus. Scorched earth destroys infrastructure and resources, not people.

Well aren't you naive. Pray tell, how does an attacker destroy infrastructure without causing civilian casualties? I'm sure Israel and the U.S.A would love to hear about your revolutionary war tactics.

Perhaps I could have stated that a little better. Let's try again, shall we?

Quote:

There's a difference between scorched earth and your policy, Lepus. Scorched earth destroys infrastructure and resources. It doesn't involve chasing down every single person who might possibly support the opposing side (which effectively includes everyone in your path) and ruthlessly murdering them in cold blood.

Ah. Much better.

AMEND: To all those with the patience to follow this debate, I direct your attention to this thread , and implore you to vote. Thank you.

Garrulous Glaahk · March 8, 2008

Nioca:

Quote:

lepus:

For clarification, an analogy. An alien race known as the Gorg invade Earth, believing that humans are an inferior species, deserving only vapourisation. The human retaliate to this invasion with brute force, first defeating the Gorg infantry on Earth, and then boarding the Gorg starships and butchering a crew who fights to the death.

Would you class the above as genocide? Apparently so, given that the humans were targeting the Gorg for extermination.[/qb]

Quote:

You see, there's a vital flaw in your little example here. The humans weren't targeting them because they're alien; they're targeting them because they pose an immediate threat.

Ahh, but the very fact that they come from an alien society is relevant, because said alien society sees humans as disposable inferior beings, deserving only to be crushed.

How are the Shapers in Geneforge any different from the Gorg in my hypothetical scenario, exactly?

The Gorg believe that humans are an inferior species. The Shapers believe that Creations are an inferior species. Check!

The Gorg believe that humans only deserve extermination. The Shapers believe that independent Creations deserve extermination. Check!

The humans respond by massacring the Gorg. The Rebels respond by massacring the Shapers. Check!

The simple fact of the matter is that the humans target the Gorg for extermination because the Gorg first wished to exterminate the humans. Is this genocide?

And just to expand the analogy further, the humans learn that there are human food slaves on the Gorg homeworld, and that the Gorg are planning to attack again, because they will never allow independent humans to exist.

Do you:

A: Firebomb the crap out of them.

or...

B: Sit on your hands, because a pre-emptive strike might be considered 'genocide' by the U.N? :rolleyes:

I'd mention the Nazis, but obviously you're tired of that (very apt) comparison. I just think it's rather contradictory of you to claim that my Gorg scenario isn't an example of genocide, whereas the Rebels vs. Shapers scenario is.

To be brutally honest, I wonder if their is a little bit of speciesm going on here. Perhaps posters would be more supportive of Rebel tactics if said Rebels were all humans. But instead, the Rebels who have the cahones to beat the crap out of people are actually 30 foot high firebreathing reptiles.

Magnificent Ornk · March 8, 2008

There is a significant difference between the two scenarios. The attacking Gorgs are apparently all soldiers, while the Outsiders are not. Now, if the Gorg crew contained non-combatants and the humans deliberately targeted them along with the soldiers, or even just made no effort to spare them, then we have the same situation in both scenarios.

Dikiyoba.

Unflappable Drayk · March 8, 2008

LT:

How can you write those shameless lies!?

Understated Ur-Drakon · March 8, 2008

Quote:

Originally written by Lepus timidus:
The simple fact of the matter is that the humans target the Gorg for extermination because the Gorg first wished to exterminate the humans. Is this genocide?

No, the humans target the Gorg because they're an immediate threat. Additionally, what's attacking is their main attack force. Tell me, are the outsider humans in Geneforge either an attack force or an immediate threat? No. And that's where the analogy falls short. The humans in the analogy are effectively fighting against an enemy, while the rebels are simply slaughtering everything that crosses their path or happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Maybe if they had actually focussed the fighting on the shapers, they would never have had to worry about releasing the unbound.

Quote:

And just to expand the analogy further, the humans learn that there are human food slaves on the Gorg homeworld, and that the Gorg are planning to attack again, because they will never allow independent humans to exist.

Do you:

A: Firebomb the crap out of them.

or...

B: Sit on your hands, because a pre-emptive strike might be considered 'genocide' by the U.N? :rolleyes:

How 'bout C: Launch an attack that cripples their army and/or economy and/or government, without blowing their entire population into tiny little bits.

It's disturbing to note how your answers for everything tend to lean toward a mantra of 'blow everything up'.

Quote:

I just think it's rather contradictory of you to claim that my Gorg scenario isn't an example of genocide, whereas the Rebels vs. Shapers scenario is.

When a rational, open-minded person looks at it, they can see how it really isn't contradictory.

Quote:

To be brutally honest, I wonder if their is a little bit of speciesm going on here. Perhaps posters would be more supportive of Rebel tactics if said Rebels were all humans. But instead, the Rebels who have the cahones to beat the crap out of people are actually 30 foot high firebreathing reptiles.

I think the term generationist might be better fitting. I, personally, have nothing against Drakons as a whole; just the most recent generation. And since they're just becoming the next generation of Shapers, it's not really a wonder why. I'd rather have the current regime of Shapers in place then a new regime that'll be even harder to throw off.

Magnificent Ornk · March 9, 2008

Ultimately, I am better. Until I come along, the Shapers and Rebels are in a stalemate. Look at the whole Shaper Monarch episode for an example. Then, I come along, and the problem gets fixed.

No matter which side I choose, I can always beat the other. The world should bow to me.

Garrulous Glaahk · March 9, 2008

While I haven't yet played the full version of the last 2 games, it seems that both sides are rapidly and irreversibly degrading into blodthirsty savages.

SHAPERS: they're arrogant, cruel, and generally resemblant of modern day politicians. they have obviously been in power for too long, but have some moral restraint. they have basically lost sight of the R& 2 E's that separate good from greed, they have lost touch with the people, while they are right to keep shaping under control, they have lost touch with the people; and only know how to rule through repression and try to destroy threats rathe than appease them. they are not beyond redemption, but their leaders have become largely power mad.

REBELS: they started out as good guys, but seem to be locked in a downward spiral that will make them worse than the people they seek to overthrow. their biggest problems are:

1. the inherent decaying of sanity and morals caused by shaping and war.

2. they have lost sight of their goals, where as they once sought to reform, now they just want to destroy.

3. they are killing off the people they want to liberate, they have dissociated themselves from the people even more than the shapers. there's no point in winning if there's nothing left when you're done. What authority has a king with no subjects who rules over a few acres of barren radioactive rock?

Outsiders: the average human. humans as a rule are stupid and too clever for our own good at the same time. they are a product of society and ignorance, if you grow up with something it takes a lot to convince you otherwise. stop with the WWII analogies, and let me use the civil war example. the south thought what they were doing was right because there was no proof otherwise. when in doubt people just go with the flow. free will is nothing if you don't see a decision. I don't know about you, but if a bunch of scary fire breathing lizzards came and started killing everything I would asume they were the bad guys and run to the nearest shaper. what most of you seem to ignore is that there is no black and white answer, just a thouroly headache inducing sea of grey.

Basically, we'd be better off if the world was ruled by ornks

Magnificent Ornk · March 9, 2008

And you chose this thread of all places to make your first post? Dikiyoba welcomes you to the board!

Articulate Vlish · March 9, 2008

Ale193

Please, try not to think good and evil, black and white. It's pretty much a grey zone, IMO.

Which is one of the things I like about this series.

Garrulous Glaahk · March 10, 2008

Quote:

Originally written by Nioca:

Quote:

Originally written by Lepus timidus:
[qb]The simple fact of the matter is that the humans target the Gorg for extermination because the Gorg first wished to exterminate the humans. Is this genocide?

No, the humans target the Gorg because they're an immediate threat.

So you're conceding the point that simply because one appears to be targeting a race, does not mean that one is committing genocide. Excellent!

Quote:

Additionally, what's attacking is their main attack force.

Nonsense. The troops on the starships aren't attacking... the ones on the ground are! So apparently, you're willing to tolerate those motherships full of troops hostile to human existence in the Earth's stratosphere. And it was genocide for the humans to force their way onto the ships and slaughter them.

Quote:

Tell me, are the outsider humans in Geneforge either an attack force or an immediate threat?

Let's stick with the Shapers, atm.

Are the Shapers an immediate threat? No, not all are, any more than the Gorg on those starships are 'immediate threats', nor the anti-human Gorg soldiers in training back on their homeworld.

Have the Shapers declared a war of extermination against all independent Creations, much as the Gorg have against the humans?
Yes, they have. Simply because not every Shaper is at Quess-Uss's doorstep with a Discipline Wand in hand does not change the simple fact that they are sworn enemies of the Rebellion. If a people declare that their aim is to exterminate you (and are more than willing to carry it out, see the genocide of the Drayks, the extermination of the Awakened in GF 1 and GF 2), you are more than justified in engaging in a 'pre-emptive' strike out of self-defense. Hit them before they hit you, parry dodge and spin, wot wot.

Quote:

No. And that's where the analogy falls short. The humans in the analogy are effectively fighting against an enemy

Wait! Didn't you previously assert that they were only fighting against an immediate threat? Immediate threat is NOT synonymous with enemy.

Quote:

, while the rebels are simply slaughtering everything that crosses their path

No, the Rebels are killing their enemies. Or, if you don't consider the Outsiders their enemies: The Rebels are killing their enemies, while inflicting a lot of collateral damage. Reminds ya of the good ole United States of America, hey?

Quote:

Maybe if they had actually focussed the fighting on the shapers, they would never have had to worry about releasing the unbound.

They did, but:

1. You (and numerous posters) are still willing to label even that genocide. Apparently your enemy needs to have a Discipline Wand pointed against your temple before you're morally justified in striking back.

2. They lost, so now they need to resort to more desperate measures.

Quote:

And just to expand the analogy further, the humans learn that there are human food slaves on the Gorg homeworld, and that the Gorg are planning to attack again, because they will never allow independent humans to exist.

Do you:

A: Firebomb the crap out of them.

or...

B: Sit on your hands, because a pre-emptive strike might be considered 'genocide' by the U.N? :rolleyes:

How 'bout C: Launch an attack that cripples their army and/or economy and/or government, without blowing their entire population into tiny little bits.

Ahh, I see. So you choose A: Firebomb the crap out of them. Because the best way to cripple the economy is with a good ole fashioned firebombing (or nuking).

Quote:

It's disturbing to note how your answers for everything tend to lean toward a mantra of 'blow everything up'.

Nonsense. I'd rather try the more conservative methods of dispute resolution first (compromise, pinpoint military strikes, etc.), but if they don't work, then it's time for the gloves to come off.

Ineffable Wingbolt · March 10, 2008

The reason why I believe the drakons are doing this more out of vengeance then a scorch earth policy. A scorch earth policy is something you do in lands you can't hold for long. If your going to be in area for a while your going to want to make some attempt to preserve resources. The drakons completely leveled Dhonal Keep and the surrounding town. Why? That is in territory that remains in rebel control even if you take the most pro shaper ending possible. Why not take the fort and make it your own? No they did it out of vengeance. Same thing for Poryhphra, that another city that comes firmly under rebel control but they still have some strange urge to level it completely.

Lets apply this to your humans combating the alien menace. I defeat the aliens and destroy most of their ships and even manage to capture one their ships. Out of vengeance I destroy the ship instead of try to reverse engineer it.

Now you can make justifications for the Drakons creations of the unbound and their whole sale destruction of both shaper and outside, but my point is that the Drakons have razed cities too the ground when they didn't have too(when they where wining). I'll even argue that the two examples I gave you it would have been advantageous for them not too. Also Greta made commit to the effect that large number of drayks and drakons where sitting around doing nothing while a war was going on.

Edit:

I put forward that after the rebellion started to lose the war they effectively abandon the human/servile, so the could blame for failure would be shifted away from them. So instead they decided to make the unbound which they think will win the war. They get to claim all the credit, with out all the effort of having large armies on the borders fight grueling campaigns like the human counterparts, and set themselves up as the rulers. I argue if they given more support to human half instead of their own wretched scheming (against their own allies no less) they wouldn't have need the unbound.

Understated Ur-Drakon · March 10, 2008

Quote:

Originally written by Lepus timidus:

Quote:

Originally written by Nioca:

Quote:

Originally written by Lepus timidus:
[qb]The simple fact of the matter is that the humans target the Gorg for extermination because the Gorg first wished to exterminate the humans. Is this genocide?

No, the humans target the Gorg because they're an immediate threat.

So you're conceding the point that simply because one appears to be targeting a race, does not mean that one is committing genocide. Excellent!

But it is if they actually are targeting that race.

Quote:

Additionally, what's attacking is their main attack force.

Nonsense. The troops on the starships aren't attacking... the ones on the ground are! So apparently, you're willing to tolerate those motherships full of troops hostile to human existence in the Earth's stratosphere. And it was genocide for the humans to force their way onto the ships and slaughter them.

Nope. You see, the troops on the starships are part of the invading forces. Thus making them an immediate threat.

Quote:

Tell me, are the outsider humans in Geneforge either an attack force or an immediate threat?

Let's stick with the Shapers, atm.

Read as: I'm never going to admit that I might possibly be wrong, and thus will steer the debate away from those dangerous waters.

Quote:

Have the Shapers declared a war of extermination against all independent Creations, much as the Gorg have against the humans?
Yes, they have. Simply because not every Shaper is at Quess-Uss's doorstep with a Discipline Wand in hand does not change the simple fact that they are sworn enemies of the Rebellion. If a people declare that their aim is to exterminate you (and are more than willing to carry it out, see the genocide of the Drayks, the extermination of the Awakened in GF 1 and GF 2), you are more than justified in engaging in a 'pre-emptive' strike out of self-defense. Hit them before they hit you, parry dodge and spin, wot wot.

Fine, but that's still no justification for genocide. The Rebels didn't even grant the chance for Shapers to surrender. Whether or not they would have is moot, all the more so because the global mindset of the sect does not represent the individual; the fact that they killed them simply because they're Shapers is genocide.

Quote:

No. And that's where the analogy falls short. The humans in the analogy are effectively fighting against an enemy

Wait! Didn't you previously assert that they were only fighting against an immediate threat? Immediate threat is NOT synonymous with enemy.

Don't be an idiot, you know what I mean.

Quote:

, while the rebels are simply slaughtering everything that crosses their path

No, the Rebels are killing their enemies. Or, if you don't consider the Outsiders their enemies: The Rebels are killing their enemies, while inflicting a lot of collateral damage. Reminds ya of the good ole United States of America, hey?

A lot of unnecessary collateral damage that could be avoided rather easily. Yet it isn't. So, if anything, that makes the Rebels guilty of numerous counts of negligent homicide.

Quote:

How 'bout C: Launch an attack that cripples their army and/or economy and/or government, without blowing their entire population into tiny little bits.

Ahh, I see. So you choose A: Firebomb the crap out of them. Because the best way to cripple the economy is with a good ole fashioned firebombing (or nuking).

True, but I didn't choose A, now did I? I choose a path that got the job done without becoming a complete monster myself.

Quote:

It's disturbing to note how your answers for everything tend to lean toward a mantra of 'blow everything up'.

Nonsense. I'd rather try the more conservative methods of dispute resolution first (compromise, pinpoint military strikes, etc.), but if they don't work, then it's time for the gloves to come off.

Really? Because most of this debate, you haven't advocated any sort of diplomacy or such. Just blow everything up in this grand pre-emptive genocidal strike.

Garrulous Glaahk · March 10, 2008

Nioca:

Quote:

Read as: I'm never going to admit that I might possibly be wrong, and thus will steer the debate away from those dangerous waters.

Read as: I'm rather busy atm, so I wish to prioritise what we discuss.

Quote:

Fine, but that's still no justification for genocide. The Rebels didn't even grant the chance for Shapers to surrender.

In the GF3 Rebel Ending (and the Taker ending), your PC is sent as a diplomat to the Shapers to tell them of the invasion. Naturally, the Shaper Council in Poryphra make it quite clear that they will never surrender.

Quote:

Whether or not they would have is moot,

No, it's not moot. Shapers have been conditioned not to 'bow' to their Creations, hence there was no point of offering the Shapers a chance to surrender PRIOR to the invasion, because:

1. It would have been laughed at (witness GF2 Taker/Awakened ending).

2. The Rebels would have lost the element of surprise, which apart from the Geneforge, was the only advantage they have over the Shapers.

3. The diplomats would almost certainly have been killed (witness rebel endings to GF 1, GF 2, GF 3)

But I do agree that once the invasion has been launched and the Rebels have some leverage, Shapers should be offered a chance to surrender and recant their anti-Creation ideology. And they were. None of them took it.

Quote:

all the more so because the global mindset of the sect does not represent the individual;

I'm going to disagree with you, here. An individual wouldn't be a member of the Shaper sect unless they believed in the inferiority of their Creations, and their right to snuff out independent Creation life. In fact, having such an attitude is a prequisite for being allowed to progress in their sect. You might as well argue that being a fullly member of the KKK does not necessarily mean that you are racist (I thought I'd give you a break from the Nazi analogies

).

Quote:

the fact that they killed them simply because they're Shapers is genocide.

No, it's called a pre-emptive strike. If the KKK declare a race war, the racial minorities will probably be targeting anyone wearing a white hood and chanting white supremacy slogans. I'd hardly call that genocide. In fact, I'd call it common sense.

The problem is that individuals such as yourself and Diki think that the Shapers can be reasoned with by independent creations, when it's shown time and time again that Shapers will do nothing of the sort (unless it's a turncoat rebel). Just off the top of my head:

1. In the GF 1 loyalist ending, the Awakened are exterminated by the Shapers.

2. In the GF 2 loyalist ending, Medab is raised to the ground and the inhabitants enslaved. The Drakons in Zhass-Uss are destroyed.

3. In the GF 2 Awakened ending, the Awakened adopt your wet dream resistance, where they fight purely in self defense against waves of Shapers. The Shapers never let up, nor are they willing to acknowledge the existence of independent serviles and Drakons.

4. In the GF 3 Rebel ending, the Shapers make it clear that they will never surrender to their Creations.

5. In GF 4, Alwan makes it quite clear that he wishes to exterminate all Drayk life. This is despite the fact that Alwan is possibly one of the most progressive Shapers in the game. How on earth could a Drayk/Drakon negotiate with such a man?

But by all means Nioca, tell me how independent serviles and Drayks can negotiate with the Shapers for autonomy, when Shaper ideology makes it quite clear that independent serviles and Drayks shouldn't exist in the first place?

Such pipe dream thinking is the equivalent of thinking that the blacks could have negotiated with the KKK for freedom from discrimination, apartheid and racial hate back in the 1950's.

Understated Ur-Drakon · March 10, 2008

Quote:

Originally written by Lepus timidus:

Quote:

Fine, but that's still no justification for genocide. The Rebels didn't even grant the chance for Shapers to surrender.

In the GF3 Rebel Ending (and the Taker ending), your PC is sent as a diplomat to the Shapers to tell them of the invasion. Naturally, the Shaper Council in Poryphra make it quite clear that they will never surrender.

The Shaper Council. Not every Shaper on the face of the world. 9 Shapers. Somehow, despite them wanting to, I don't think they speak for every Shaper in the Geneforge world.

Quote:

Whether or not they would have is moot,

No, it's not moot. Shapers have been conditioned not to 'bow' to their Creations, hence there was no point of offering the Shapers a chance to surrender PRIOR to the invasion, because:

1. It would have been laughed at (witness GF2 Taker/Awakened ending).

2. The Rebels would have lost the element of surprise, which apart from the Geneforge, was the only advantage they have over the Shapers.

3. The diplomats would almost certainly have been killed (witness rebel endings to GF 1, GF 2, GF 3)

What, the Rebels were incapable of attaching a note to those lovely invasion cards they sent in GF3? "Oh, and any Shaper who agrees to cooperate won't be killed."

Quote:

But I do agree that once the invasion has been launched and the Rebels have some leverage, Shapers should be offered a chance to surrender and recant their anti-Creation ideology. And they were. None of them took it.

I'm sorry, but I've never seen or am failing to recall anything along those lines. Could you post evidence to those claims?

Quote:

all the more so because the global mindset of the sect does not represent the individual;

I'm going to disagree with you, here. An individual wouldn't be a member of the Shaper sect unless they believed in the inferiority of their Creations, and their right to snuff out independent Creation life. In fact, having such an attitude is a prequisite for being allowed to progress in their sect.

And what about those few Shapers that, privately, don't? By your argument, Litalia must believe creations inferior as well.

Quote:

the fact that they killed them simply because they're Shapers is genocide.

No, it's called a pre-emptive strike.

Do you even know what a pre-emptive strike is?

Quote:

The problem is that individuals such as yourself and Diki think that the Shapers can be reasoned with by independent creations, when it's shown time and time again that Shapers will do nothing of the sort

And they can be. How else can you play an intelligent servile and join the Shapers in GF4? And the Shapers aren't this constant war-mongering bloodthirsty threat; if they were, the Ashen Isles wouldn't remain under rebel control in the events of the Shaper ending.

Quote:

But by all means Nioca, tell me how independent serviles and Drayks can negotiate with the Shapers for autonomy, when Shaper ideology makes it quite clear that independent serviles and Drayks shouldn't exist in the first place?

Because there's the miraculous species inside the Rebellion that can negotiate with the Shapers without overly inciting prejudice. They're called *gasp* HUMANS!

Oh, but I forgot. The Creation side of the Rebellion effectively threw the human side away, and refuse to trust or even really acknowledge them except as a nuisance and/or inferior.

See, someone like the PC in GF4 might have possibly been able to negotiate a truce, if the Rebellion had laid off the 'annihilate the Shapers or die trying' garbage. If the Drakons had actually been open to negotiation, this could easily have ended in less bloodshed. But instead, the Drakons chose the coward's way out, and unleashed a mutant horde of uber-creations against the Shapers.

Garrulous Glaahk · March 10, 2008

To me its obvious that the shapers are bad, however the rebellion has effectively become twice as bad. what Lepus doesn't seem to understand is that this is not a war against some random race of aliens; its a Rebellion, the point of a rebellion is to overthrow a corrupt government and/or gain independence, to reform not to destroy a attacking force, but to reform and make things better. they're just killing everybody. if this were a war where two countries were fighting, with an obvious good and evil side or even the gorg scenario; I would adopt Lepus's policies of mass destruction and just leveling the enemy territory and killing everyone in it. but this isn't you're effectively firebombing yourself.

if your fighting for morals, you can't fight without them. its become a senseless ware of mutual vengeance instead of a glorious revolution for the common good.

the rebels have switched from the enlightened beliefs of the awakened (what happened to them anyway) to the crazed ideology of the takers.

Lepus's analogies are all void because they are reflecting the wrong type of war. this is nothing like WWII, its more like a wildly out of control cross between the American Civil War and the French revolution with a side of Nuclear Armageddon.

I agree with Lepus on the Genocide thing. its not genocide to kill your enemies, even if they are all the same race, its only genocide if you're killing them because of their race, not because they dissagree with you. this does not however, justify the slaughtering of hapless civilians, even if it's not genocide it's still mass murder.

Really both sides are equally at fault, but the shapers are less likely to trigger an apocalypse, so a no truly enlightened factions remain, I'd have to side with them. Basically, everyone involved is majorly and unavoidably screwed.

Understated Ur-Drakon · March 10, 2008

Quote:

Originally written by Ale193:
I agree with Lepus on the Genocide thing. its not genocide to kill your enemies, even if they are all the same race

Or nationality. Or political opinion. The Shapers fall under both, and lets not kid ourselves, the Rebels aren't targeting people because they're enemies. The Shapers are being targeted because they're just that: Shapers. That is genocide.

Ineffable Wingbolt · March 11, 2008

Quote:

Originally written by Nioca:

Quote:

Originally written by Ale193:
I agree with Lepus on the Genocide thing. its not genocide to kill your enemies, even if they are all the same race

Or nationality. Or political opinion. The Shapers fall under both, and lets not kid ourselves, the Rebels aren't targeting people because they're enemies. The Shapers are being targeted because they're just that: Shapers. That is genocide.

To be fair the actual shapers are a government organization that is heavily geared towards military if you where to rebel against that government, government/military officials would be fair game.

However what I have against the drakons is that they order the unbound to destroy everything they see. Not only does that kill alot of innocent people but its also counter productive, (those unbound didn't seem to bright). Say for example you get one that takes the term everything a little bit to literal. You have any idea how much it be slowed down destroying every tree and rock between two villages.

Second their a significant amount of innocent people who in no way economically or military support the shapers yet would dwell with them. Their called refugees. Imagine by the point in the war their will be large amount of refugees who have fled the war areas.

Did they really have to order them to destroy all life? Why not just say target Shaper forces? I mean it would be quite humorous watching an unbound destroying every tree between two village if it took a very broad term of the word(unbound don't come across as being to bright), but I'm not sure thats what drakons wanted exactly.

Thirdly how many drayks/drakons does it take to screw in a light bulb? Do they seriously need the combined resources of both races to work on the unbound? Greta seems to think that they have large numbers of both just lying around. If they had at least sent more drayks to battle they might not have had to worry about the tribe of cryo-drayks rebelling. The shapers may be arrogant and it might be possible to get a few who are as arrogant as the drakon average but most are humble in comparison to the drakons ex:

Drakon1: We lost a battle.
Drakon2: Blame it on the humans
Drakon1: Then what?
Drakon2: We will pull our troops back let the humans fight the shapers alone, stop maintaining the geneforges and put all our resources into building a new super weapon even thought the first one didn't seem that effective.
Drakon1:sounds good

Garrulous Glaahk · March 11, 2008

Perhaps I should clarify that Shapers are not technically a race; they are a Nation and thus share a common political opinion. I would think that most off my enemies would share at least political opinion, if not Nationality; thats generally why their my enemies in the first place. I would have to have a lot of enemies for them to include a variety off opinions and nationalities. THIS DOES NOT HOWEVER, mean that I condone the rebels actions, whether or not it's considered genocide they're still massacring largely innocent civilians. Really, the fact that they are being so indiscriminate about who they kill is proof that it's not genocide.

Whatever happened to the awakened? they were the only faction I could play without feeling guilty, the only ones with any commons sense. their beliefs were just the way I felt about the issue. have they all died and left the game without any truly enlightened faction. the rebels started out like them, but now they've started to go insane. I don't like the shapers either, but they're the best of a bad lot.

Understated Ur-Drakon · March 11, 2008

Quote:

Originally written by Ale193:
Really, the fact that they are being so indiscriminate about who they kill is proof that it's not genocide.

Except they're targeting the Shapers simply because they are Shapers, not because they're enemies. Before, a Shaper could join the Rebellion. Then the Drakons took over; aside from Greta and Litalia, who were already a part of the Rebellion, how many Shapers have you seen in the Rebellion since?

And don't tell me that it's just Shaper mindset, because Master Hoge, a rather high-ranking Shaper who should be all for Shaper propaganda, also joined the Rebellion in GF3.

Quote:

Whatever happened to the awakened? they were the only faction I could play without feeling guilty, the only ones with any commons sense. their beliefs were just the way I felt about the issue. have they all died and left the game without any truly enlightened faction. the rebels started out like them, but now they've started to go insane. I don't like the shapers either, but they're the best of a bad lot.

The Awakened were killed off in official canon for the end of GF2. However, since GF5 involves 5 full factions, I fully expect them to make a comeback.

Garrulous Glaahk · March 11, 2008

Quote:

Originally written by Nioca:
[QB]

Except they're targeting the Shapers simply because they are Shapers, not because they're enemies.

Are you obtuse?

Understated Ur-Drakon · March 11, 2008

No. Are you?

Garrulous Glaahk · March 11, 2008

I don't think so. I'm very careful not to repeat the same assertions ad nauseum, especially when they have been soundly refuted.

Sign In

What is better Shapers or Rebels?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment