I'm sorry but I thought the canon version of the story was the Jedi Knight. If that is the case at the end of chapter 16, the Outlander chooses to either give Senya their blessing to do so or they shoot at them and they get away. Now assuming the Jedi Knight story is the canon story and a light sider (though neither choice gives you light or dark side choice consequences), the Knight would have let Senya go trusting her and gaining some respect from Senya (something even my dark siders have done because I do trust Senya's judgment nor do I fault her as a mother, war or not) so I don't see that as betraying the Alliance and personally I think the only reason the Alliance would be searching for her is out of concern for her well being and the only ones truly treating them as fugitives and hunting them down as such would be Vaylin as she's a psychopath.

So all that said (and a lot of it just guess work based on the Knight being the canon version), how did Senya betray the alliance?

Add-on: I was reading the Bios on the KOTET page and that's why this question came to mind.

Even as a ls jedi, you need to bring Arcann to justice for killing planets full of people and oppressing his own. At the very least, he needs to be treated as a war criminal. He can't just be whisked away by his mom. She's putting his life above justice for the galaxy. It was pretty clear to me that she isn't going to bring him back to stand trial.

Also, not shooting them means you don't want to kill someone running away from you (which is where a lot of self defense laws end) - not that you condone Senya taking him.

SWTOR is no longer canon, so there isn't a canon version of any of the stories.

They are all as equally viable, so its a very generic betrayal, you went to fight Arcann and stop his reign of terror and she helped him escape justice (whatever form that takes) where he remains a threat to the galaxy and spat on the sacrifices made by those that fought against him.

Even as a ls jedi, you need to bring Arcann to justice for killing planets full of people and oppressing his own. At the very least, he needs to be treated as a war criminal. He can't just be whisked away by his mom. She's putting his life above justice for the galaxy. It was pretty clear to me that she isn't going to bring him back to stand trial.

 

Also, not shooting them means you don't want to kill someone running away from you (which is where a lot of self defense laws end) - not that you condone Senya taking him.

Senya's actions are far more believable than say koths if he leaves she was with you and determined to stop her children at all costs but in the end she is their mother and a parents love can break any commitments if it means saving them.

Jedi are supposed to see the good in all and yes Arcann killed many but so did Vader and if he had survived ROTJ he most likly would have been a force of good again in the galaxy not to mention he saved his mother from Valin that may be the one spark of good in him.

Even as a ls jedi, you need to bring Arcann to justice for killing planets full of people and oppressing his own. At the very least, he needs to be treated as a war criminal. He can't just be whisked away by his mom. She's putting his life above justice for the galaxy. It was pretty clear to me that she isn't going to bring him back to stand trial.

 

Also, not shooting them means you don't want to kill someone running away from you (which is where a lot of self defense laws end) - not that you condone Senya taking him.

What does bringing Arcann to justice mean exactly? A LS, like Darth Enrique said wouldn't shoot him down with Senya on board. That's not justice.

What does bringing Arcann to justice mean exactly? A LS, like Darth Enrique said wouldn't shoot him down with Senya on board. That's not justice.

She doesn't give the option of bringing him in as a prisoner though. It was an act of defiance whether you agreed to let her go or not

What does bringing Arcann to justice mean exactly? A LS, like Darth Enrique said wouldn't shoot him down with Senya on board. That's not justice.

The reason you didn't shoot at them is because, as a jedi, you didn't want to murder them. You're still going to find them and bring them in. Just like cops aren't supposed to shoot people in the back.

Even if you don't put Arcann away to prison, you still need to rehabilitate him into a Jedi, you don't just say "ok, go make the right decisions now". He has to train as a padawan just like Sajar, the dark council member who became a padawan and be under the jedi council's control.

agree she helped him escape to avoid justice...BUT why did she..to perhaps bring him to the light side?

or does she have something else in mind...also is he the unlikely ally we see in the second chapter?

same time next week folks..same bat channel.

She doesn't give the option of bringing him in as a prisoner though. It was an act of defiance whether you agreed to let her go or not

And hats worth shooting them down for? Someone who is no longer a threat and someone who has never intentionally or directly done you any harm?

Senya's actions are far more believable than say koths if he leaves she was with you and determined to stop her children at all costs but in the end she is their mother and a parents love can break any commitments if it means saving them.

Jedi are supposed to see the good in all and yes Arcann killed many but so did Vader and if he had survived ROTJ he most likly would have been a force of good again in the galaxy not to mention he saved his mother from Valin that may be the one spark of good in him.

I agree. And that's why I am confused the Bios say she betrayed the Alliance.

And hats worth shooting them down for? Someone who is no longer a threat and someone who has never intentionally or directly done you any harm?

Well, he did put you in carbonite for five years...

And hats worth shooting them down for? Someone who is no longer a threat and someone who has never intentionally or directly done you any harm?

The morals isn't the question. It was how did she betray the alliance.

But if you want to do the moral- who is saying he is no longer a threat. The new trailer shows him about to do battle again (to whomever he is against). If he's able to do that, I'd say he could still pose a threat.

And a leader of an army who has caused much death and destruction throughout the galaxy may have to answer for his crimes, not let his mom come be a getaway driver.

I agree. And that's why I am confused the Bios say she betrayed the Alliance.

Yes, her actions are believable and even understandable but how she and her son are dealt with is beside the point. The question was how did she betray the alliance. Simply put, she went rogue, did not communicate with her peers and abetted a mass murderer in his escape. I don't see how that's not a betrayal.

The morals isn't the question. It was how did she betray the alliance.

 

But if you want to do the moral- who is saying he is no longer a threat. The new trailer shows him about to do battle again (to whomever he is against). If he's able to do that, I'd say he could still pose a threat.

 

And a leader of an army who has caused much death and destruction throughout the galaxy may have to answer for his crimes, not let his mom come be a getaway driver.

But hasn't the Jedi always been about redemption over killing?

I agree. And that's why I am confused the Bios say she betrayed the Alliance.

Alliances goal = bring Arcann to justice.

Arcann flying off into the sunset != justice.

The morals isn't the question. It was how did she betray the alliance.

 

But if you want to do the moral- who is saying he is no longer a threat. The new trailer shows him about to do battle again (to whomever he is against). If he's able to do that, I'd say he could still pose a threat.

 

And a leader of an army who has caused much death and destruction throughout the galaxy may have to answer for his crimes, not let his mom come be a getaway driver.

So just because he didn't lose all 4 limbs and isn't in a wheelchair he's still a threat? Even when hes potentially going to be on your side, he's still a threat because he can still fight?

This isnt isn't a story about what if's.

Yes, her actions are believable but how she and her son are dealt with is beside the point. The question was how did she betray the alliance. Simply put, she went rogue, did not communicate with her peers and abetted a mass murderer in his escape. I don't see how that's not a betrayal.

I'm just basing it on how the story plays out in Chapter 16. If you shot at her and she escapes, something a light sided Jedi wouldn't do, they don't believe in harming unarmed people, doesn't matter who it is, could be their worst enemy and they still wouldn't kill them, then yes she betrayed the Alliance and is a fugitive. But seeing as the Jedi Knight is used as the canon version of the story it's safe to assume based on the way the story plays out the Outlander says and I quote "I'm trusting you Senya." and that Arcann is no longer a threat, I'm pretty sure that was said to which Senya replies "Thank you Commander, your (can't remember the exact words) will be remembered." To which if you watch the scene play out Arcann is pondering on your behavior towards him during all this. It's getting him thinking. It just to me doesn't add up to the bio.

So just because he didn't lose all 4 limbs and isn't in a wheelchair he's still a threat? Even when hes potentially going to be on your side, he's still a threat because he can still fight?

 

This isnt isn't a story about what if's.

Pretty darn sure Anakin lost all four limbs...and he became an even bigger threat.

Pretty darn sure Anakin lost all four limbs...and he became an even bigger threat.

That isn't the point of what I'm trying to say, surely you understood.

So just because he didn't lose all 4 limbs and isn't in a wheelchair he's still a threat? Even when hes potentially going to be on your side, he's still a threat because he can still fight?

 

This isnt isn't a story about what if's.

Heard of a guy named Anakin Skywalker?

and you're right it isn't about what ifs. She on her own accord took the #1 threat away on her own without clearance or approval. Your quesiton was how did she betray- there is why. She went rogue.

I'm just basing it on how the story plays out in Chapter 16. If you shot at her and she escapes, something a light sided Jedi wouldn't do, they don't believe in harming unarmed people, doesn't matter who it is, could be their worst enemy and they still wouldn't kill them, then yes she betrayed the Alliance and is a fugitive. But seeing as the Jedi Knight is used as the canon version of the story it's safe to assume based on the way the story plays out the Outlander says and I quote "I'm trusting you Senya." and that Arcann is no longer a threat, I'm pretty sure that was said to which Senya replies "Thank you Commander, your (can't remember the exact words) will be remembered." To which if you watch the scene play out Arcann is pondering on your behavior towards him during all this. It's getting him thinking. It just to me doesn't add up to the bio.

I believe it's still a betrayal even if you let it slide long enough to see how it plays out. And I would think that regardless of the knight's opinion and actions on the matter, the overwhelming majority of the alliance would still describe it as a betrayal. Maybe sometime later on they'll consider it a heroic act of betrayal that aided the alliance in the end. But, as for now, she just abetted a mass murderer.

But hasn't the Jedi always been about redemption over killing?

who said he had to be killed? They could have taken him prisoner. But by her going rogue and taking that decision away from those in charge to herself, she betrayed the alliance.

And her betrayal may end up for the greater good, but it still was a betrayal. Just one that might be forgiven.

So just because he didn't lose all 4 limbs and isn't in a wheelchair he's still a threat? Even when hes potentially going to be on your side, he's still a threat because he can still fight?

 

This isnt isn't a story about what if's.

You seem to be letting your bias overshadow everything.

We have no idea what he is going to do until we get to the story. He has done quite a bit that he needs to answer for.

He killed countless of people on five planets just because he thought people were hiding you.

Locked you in Carbonite for five year

Until I experience the story I am not sure what my lightside jedi are going to do but they will insist on him answering for the things he has done but that doesn't mean they will want to kill him but they will want justice serve and if that means having him sent somewhere else for a time then they will do it and allowing someone else to train him they will do it.

My sorcerer, pure dark side, if given a choice she's killing him. She's not stupid enough to leave him alive when she wants the throne for herself.

You seem to be letting your bias overshadow everything.

 

We have no idea what he is going to do until we get to the story. He has done quite a bit that he needs to answer for.

 

He killed countless of people on five planets just because he thought people were hiding you.

Locked you in Carbonite for five year

 

Until I experience the story I am not sure what my lightside jedi are going to do but they will insist on him answering for the things he has done but that doesn't mean they will want to kill him but they will want justice serve and if that means having him sent somewhere else for a time then they will do it and allowing someone else to train him they will do it.

 

My sorcerer, pure dark side, if given a choice she's killing him. She's not stupid enough to leave him alive when she wants the throne for herself.

You say we have no idea, and I suppose we don't, but it seems pretty darn obvious that hes going to be by your side somehow. The plot seems to be heavily implying so. Enough of the people on the forums think so too and dislike the idea.

He did bad things, I think we can all agree on that, but the potential good he might do, right outweigh that somehow.

I personally just don't see how he's going to go against you again, with Vaylin being the main villain of Kotet and then there's Valkorion.

Is it really biased of me to think that Arcann will probably help us out defeating his sister and/or his father?

And in another thread someone linked this, https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CxarussUQAAM6pi.jpg:large

Arcann shows blue eyes here, the only time he had blue eyes was when he accidentally killed thexan and showed emotion. I think its supposed to imply that hes no longer full of rage. But you'd probably call me biased for thinking that too:rak_03:

It's from the official swtor Twitter btw.

I believe it's still a betrayal even if you let it slide long enough to see how it plays out. And I would think that regardless of the knight's opinion and actions on the matter, the overwhelming majority of the alliance would still describe it as a betrayal. Maybe sometime later on they'll consider it a heroic act of betrayal that aided the alliance in the end. But, as for now, she just abetted a mass murderer.

I guess... just doesn't make a lot of sense and besides we know Lana will respect the Outlander's judgment and never question it and same with Theron, no matter how unpleased he is with it. Koth would be the one most upset by all this and probably considered it a betrayal.

who said he had to be killed? They could have taken him prisoner. But by her going rogue and taking that decision away from those in charge to herself, she betrayed the alliance.

 

And her betrayal may end up for the greater good, but it still was a betrayal. Just one that might be forgiven.

Wouldn't he have been killed if he was brought into justice though? I mean going based on the Jedi Knight story the Republic would want him dead as would the Sith. Jedi don't work like that.