Jump to content

Destroying the war Droids???


Syoko

Recommended Posts

 

The last part where you talking to the people in the lab, and chooce between killing them or letting them just walk...

 

Now I understand this game is suppose to have light side and dark side options, but come on! No option to have them medically checked up, x-rayed, CAT scanned, and all that other for such inplants?

GIVE ME A BREAK! That is just plan storyline false drama stupidity right there.

Edited by Parali
spoiler tags added
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last part where you talking to the people in the lab, and chooce between killing them or letting them just walk...

 

Now I understand this game is suppose to have light side and dark side options, but come on! No option to have them medically checked up, x-rayed, CAT scanned, and all that other for such inplants? GIVE ME A BREAK! That is just plan storyline false drama stupidity right there.

 

That's the point. Quick and easy (and thoughtless) is just *BLAM* dead. Dark Side.

 

The thoughtful solution is realizing what you did and letting them go like you did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last part where you talking to the people in the lab, and chooce between killing them or letting them just walk...

 

Now I understand this game is suppose to have light side and dark side options, but come on! No option to have them medically checked up, x-rayed, CAT scanned, and all that other for such inplants? GIVE ME A BREAK! That is just plan storyline false drama stupidity right there.

 

Let them go, but get their ID cards. A follow up email shows that Coruscant Security did EXACTLY what you just did, and you get their ID's specifically for that reason. Light Side pragmaticsm at its finest!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

One of the possible ways to clear up confusion here is to posit that hey, Garza could be dark side in her choice. Or just generally dark side. She lies to the Senate, she covers stuff up, she ducks responsibility, she protects power over the good of the whole... Yup.

 

If you interpret this as Garza being dark side, it all makes sense.

 

But, as in the real military, you make your decision if you buck orders and take the licks.

 

SN

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good luck with not following orders in the real military. "I told you to do this but since you killed someone I will just forget about it". Not likely. Any officer who is worth something (and Garza is worth something, even if ruthless she is effective) would question the CO who made the call to not follow their order and wonder if that CO would ever do it again, maybe even to the point of recreating the original issue with chapter 1.

 

I agree with the OP, there are a lot of story line (and side story line) options that just do not make any dam sense at all. Example in spoilers (side mission from Coruscant)

 

 

Like on Coruscant a side mission is to help the 'True Republic' but getting proof of a senator who is going to break ties from the Jedi and join the Sith (which this entire game is based on the fact that Sith are evil and Jedi are good) and when you go to the droid with the proof to steal it you get caught, well you are posed a choice that the 'right thing to do' would be let the senator continue his plans because he has the 'right to' however trying to stop him is evil because it is preventing him from doing what he believes or some such.

 

Edited by Luceon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the OP dilema, there is a reason why your character is sent on the mission. It is because the Republic couldnt get a military unit into the area easily. Therefor it is up to you to be judge, jury, and executioner. And as LukeDanger sates the mission has a follow up email.

 

Good luck with not following orders in the real military. "I told you to do this but since you killed someone I will just forget about it". Not likely. Any officer who is worth something (and Garza is worth something, even if ruthless she is effective) would question the CO who made the call to not follow their order and wonder if that CO would ever do it again, maybe even to the point of recreating the original issue with chapter 1. [/Quote]

 

I have stated this in another thread but I do think it needs to be repeated. The military in Star Wars: The Old Republic is not the same as a modern military. It seems based more upon early european military as you can go from an enlisted soldier to NCO to officer. It also has a more open leadership structure (Jedi and Senators are sometimes in charge). So it is not unreasonable to see a less strict discipline.

 

(Just put a little rant in: That people expect the military in Star Wars I find to be bad but not as bad as people who think Sith should be dressed as Jedi... but with darker robes.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 years later...
Good luck with not following orders in the real military. "I told you to do this but since you killed someone I will just forget about it". Not likely. Any officer who is worth something (and Garza is worth something, even if ruthless she is effective) would question the CO who made the call to not follow their order and wonder if that CO would ever do it again, maybe even to the point of recreating the original issue with chapter 1.

 

I agree with the OP, there are a lot of story line (and side story line) options that just do not make any dam sense at all. Example in spoilers (side mission from Coruscant)

 

 

Like on Coruscant a side mission is to help the 'True Republic' but getting proof of a senator who is going to break ties from the Jedi and join the Sith (which this entire game is based on the fact that Sith are evil and Jedi are good) and when you go to the droid with the proof to steal it you get caught, well you are posed a choice that the 'right thing to do' would be let the senator continue his plans because he has the 'right to' however trying to stop him is evil because it is preventing him from doing what he believes or some such.

 

Actually in the military the defense of "I was just following orders in not a viable offense. I just looked it up under the means of military personnel following "unlawful orders". In the military you take an oath to protect the Constitution and follow the orders of the president and your superiors. However what happens when your superiors give an unlawful order, like killing unarmed presumed innocent civilians? This phrase was most used during the Vietnam war when there were many cases of unlawful orders being presented to soldiers and the decision had to be made whether to follow them or not. In one case a platoon captain in 1968 in Vietnam supposedly was ordered to "lay waste" to a village under presumed orders from his commanding officer. The commanding officer had supposedly ordered this platoon captain to "kill every living thing”. When the platoon captain was in court after ordering his platoon to round up and gun down every civilian in the village, he used the defense of "I was just following orders". The defense did not stand and he was charged with 22 counts of murder, because even though he was following orders he was not following the Constitution and such within the constitution it is illegal for murder to occur.

 

So in this scenario of the trooper we would be undergoing this very exact same sentiment. The trooper is ordered to kill presumed innocent civilians by the General Garza without any proof that they are dangerous other than the ramblings of a mad man. In this case, within military protocol this would be to stop an unlawful order from taking effect. You can choose the light side point and still be within the legal bounds of real military.

 

I am adding both articles form where I referenced my points:

https://warontherocks.com/2017/07/when-can-a-soldier-disobey-an-order/

https://www.thebalancecareers.com/military-orders-3332819

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...