Calderis Posted March 17, 2019 Report Share Posted March 17, 2019 21 minutes ago, Kingsdaughter613 said: Why do you think comic book villains are two dimensional? Many of them are highly complex; the best usually are. Some even switch sides and join the heroes. They’ve come a long way since the Gold and Silver age. I agree with you completely, but it has become somewhat of an enduring caricature. Just meant it as a euphemism, nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingsdaughter613 Posted March 18, 2019 Report Share Posted March 18, 2019 58 minutes ago, Calderis said: I agree with you completely, but it has become somewhat of an enduring caricature. Just meant it as a euphemism, nothing more. Totally! I think I just have too many people in my life who think comics are silly, so now my instinct is to defend them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Oltux72 Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 On 3/17/2019 at 5:26 AM, HSuperLee said: The Lord Ruler gave his wife a death sentence. So, did Kell seek to overthrow him because it's the right thing, or because of revenge? Kell doesn't know. He did what he felt was right, but he never stopped to ask if he felt it was right for selfish or selfless reasons. And I think that really is the best way to look at Kelsier. While I think he considers the morals of his actions I don't think he considers why he's doing them. He does. He just doesn't care. Marsh asked. On 3/17/2019 at 5:26 AM, HSuperLee said: I also think he tends to justify things under the big picture. He didn't make a to do about killing killing people because in his mind it was a step towards taking down the Lord Ruler. In his mind it was just a step towards the net good. In other words, he seems to have an end justifies the means outlook. Yes. On 3/17/2019 at 5:26 AM, HSuperLee said: If I really had to pin down Kelsier's morals, I'd actually resort to the D&D system and put him in chaotic neutral. If you asked himself whether he was good, he would tell you that he is Skaa. There is no absolute good or evil. Whose side are you on? That is the question. He hates the nobility and for good reason, but he is honest enough to admit that if he were a noble Mistborn, he would see things differently. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karger Posted March 20, 2019 Report Share Posted March 20, 2019 (edited) He considers the morality of his own actions but the actual reasons as to why he is doing them seem pretty irrelevant to him. As long as he is doing something that can be considered good or at least neutral it does not matter what he feels personally. Edited March 20, 2019 by Karger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calderis Posted March 20, 2019 Report Share Posted March 20, 2019 (edited) As long as he is working towards something that he feels is right, or just, or worthwhile, or in the best interest of everyone or serves to boost his ego, then the methods he uses to reach that goal don't matter. Neither do the consequences. And therein lies the problem. Edited March 20, 2019 by Calderis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twenty second of the sun Posted March 21, 2019 Report Share Posted March 21, 2019 I feel that kelsier would be an excellent antagonist ,though I believe he does thing for the greatest good, as in the greatest net good meaning if he had a choice between saving orphans while being anonymous and saving orphans while named , he'd choose named as it serves as an ego boost ad has the greatest net good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TousenShadowForged Posted March 23, 2019 Report Share Posted March 23, 2019 On 3/16/2019 at 4:15 PM, Calderis said: Alright, examples at lack of repercussions. Very beginning of the story, the first thing we see Kelsier do is take out Lord Tresting. Yeah, horrible dude. Totally deserved it... So what about all of the skaa that lived on Trestings holdings? The people now forced to run and flee from what will invariably be investigated by the Canton of Inquisition? The people forced to hide and quite possibly starve because Kelsier was more interested in enacting his brand of justice than he was in caring about what it meant for the people he was helping? In killing Tresting, he saved one girl from a horrible fate sure. He also doomed the entire plantation to a life of little food and running for their lives and did nothing to try to help them survive the situation he placed them in. uh they went to the rebels you see the main skaa older man that didn't trust kelsier at first in the caves he even approaches him 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calderis Posted March 23, 2019 Report Share Posted March 23, 2019 6 hours ago, TousenShadowForged said: uh they went to the rebels you see the main skaa older man that didn't trust kelsier at first in the caves he even approaches him I'm aware of that. I'm also aware that Kelsier seeing that old man was a surprise to him. That changes absolutely nothing in what I said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twenty second of the sun Posted March 23, 2019 Report Share Posted March 23, 2019 Wouldn't though as it means they weren't doomed and that kelsier's actions had a net good effect in that regard ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calderis Posted March 23, 2019 Report Share Posted March 23, 2019 27 minutes ago, twenty second of the sun said: Wouldn't though as it means they weren't doomed and that kelsier's actions had a net good effect in that regard ? I'm not saying anything at all about the outcome. I'm speaking about Kelsier's part in it. Kelsier did not direct them to the rebels. The army of which tht old man was a part did not exist yet. Kelsier killed Tresting and left those Skaa to fend for themselves. The fact that they managed on their own has absolutely no bearing on Kelsier's part in it. In their conversation in the caves, Mennis even admits to resenting Kelsier for what he did, but being thankful that that resentment gave him purpose. How many of the other Skaa do you think never reached the point of being thankful? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twenty second of the sun Posted March 23, 2019 Report Share Posted March 23, 2019 well on that neither of us have any idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calderis Posted March 23, 2019 Report Share Posted March 23, 2019 8 minutes ago, twenty second of the sun said: well on that neither of us have any idea. And focusing on that you're missing my entire point. Mennis became thankful because of what he chose to do after the fact. Kelsier did what he wanted, with no regard to the consequences for anyone else. Regularly. If it worked out for them in the end, that was their doing, not his. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwordNimiForPresident Posted March 23, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2019 1 hour ago, Calderis said: And focusing on that you're missing my entire point. Mennis became thankful because of what he chose to do after the fact. Kelsier did what he wanted, with no regard to the consequences for anyone else. Regularly. If it worked out for them in the end, that was their doing, not his. Lets consider what Kelsier did. 1 - Prevented the rape and murder of a child (and future children), where he was the only chance of that act being stopped. Killed the people that were perpetrating said acts of rape and murder. 2 - Caused a few people to go into hiding, and didn't didn't take the time to hide them himself (because he needed to go kill the evil demigod that caused the entire situation in the first place). Perhaps there's a better example in the books you would like to use instead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calderis Posted March 23, 2019 Report Share Posted March 23, 2019 No, there's really not. He saved one person yes. In the most violent way possible, which would cause the most harsh repercussions for dozens if not hundreds of people. Not a few. People who very well could have been tortured or killed or starved to death. Paint it as heroic as you wish, but it's still a moment in which he let his momentary anger overshadow any thoughts of the future, and never stopped to consider that, even after the fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwordNimiForPresident Posted March 23, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2019 15 minutes ago, Calderis said: No, there's really not. He saved one person yes. In the most violent way possible, which would cause the most harsh repercussions for dozens if not hundreds of people. Not a few. People who very well could have been tortured or killed or starved to death. Paint it as heroic as you wish, but it's still a moment in which he let his momentary anger overshadow any thoughts of the future, and never stopped to consider that, even after the fact. What was the non selfish thing to do then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calderis Posted March 23, 2019 Report Share Posted March 23, 2019 26 minutes ago, SwordNimiForPresident said: What was the non selfish thing to do then? Steal her so that they don't come after the skaa for Trestings death... Or you know, suffer the problem and wait for the revolution. Don't thrust people into a life or death situation they didn't agree to and that ultimately changes nothing. Hell, killing Tresting quietly would have been much less nasty than going in, slaughtering everyone and burning down the manner. But that's not flamboyant enough for Kel. Go big or go home... Or go big and deprive people of homes. Same thing right? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwordNimiForPresident Posted March 23, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2019 2 minutes ago, Calderis said: Steal her so that they don't come after the skaa for Trestings death... How could he have gotten her away from the guards without attacking them? The idea that there would be no repercussions for her disappearance is laughable. Tresting would want to know where his little rape treat went. No doubt he would torture and kill at least a few skaa in his displeasure. Also, what does he do with the girl? He should just abandon his plans and become this random child's father? Send her into the underground where she will also be raped and likely later killed? There is no scenario where he takes any action and there is no consequence for the skaa. The least worst thing he could do was break her entire family out of bondage and give them a small chance to make a life for themselves in the underground or rebellion. 7 minutes ago, Calderis said: Or you know, suffer the problem and wait for the revolution. If you can do this then there is no point in arguing. If you would let a child be raped and murdered because of what the consequences of stopping it might be.. I can't think of a way to finish that idea that isn't insulting. 9 minutes ago, Calderis said: Don't thrust people into a life or death situation they didn't agree to They were already in a life or death situation. Any one of them is a slightly debilitating injury or minor sickness away from being beaten to death. All of the women and children are at risk of rape and murder. They're all on the edge of starvation. How is their new situation worse? 10 minutes ago, Calderis said: and that ultimately changes nothing. One less child rape/murder happened. Good enough for me. 16 minutes ago, Calderis said: Hell, killing Tresting quietly would have been much less nasty than going in, slaughtering everyone and burning down the manner. But that's not flamboyant enough for Kel. Go big or go home... Or go big and deprive people of homes. Same thing right? They were all complicit in the fore mentioned child rape and murder. Additionally, what would happen when the other lords and soldiers find Tresting murdered on a night when he was engaging in has favorite pass time? They would go torture and interrogate some of the skaa, then kill some to make a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calderis Posted March 23, 2019 Report Share Posted March 23, 2019 I'm sorry but this is the whole conundrum of the vigilante superhero in general. There's a reason there are tons of stories for superheros that go into all of the people their actions inadvertently harm and the need to question what they do. 26 minutes ago, SwordNimiForPresident said: One less child rape/murder happened. Good enough for me. Save one person and cause a chain of suffering much greater. Seriously, what did Kelsier accomplish? He saved a girl. Good job. He also made a bunch of people's lives worse. And that would extend well beyond the current skaa of that plantation. That's still perfectly good workable land that o ly lost the masters manor. It will be rebuilt, and a new lord appointed, possibly better and possibly worse than Tresting, and new skaa will be shipped in to work it, most likely ripping families apart elsewhere. At that point, your doing far more harm than good, just to appease your own since of injustice at the small picture without looking at the larger one. Kelsier was planning to upend the entire system. Killing Tresting, on top of just harming more people than it helps, also indirectly undermines himself. If your going to rob a bank you don't start killing the bank guards ahead of time and draw attention possibly to yourself, but more importantly to the bank itself. You lay low, you set your plans in motion, and you sure as hell don't do anything to raise the level of alertness prior to that plan moving forward. Regardless, you've shown you place the immediate needs of the girl over the needs of the population. We aren't going to agree on this, so once again, I'll walk away. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwordNimiForPresident Posted March 23, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2019 @Calderis By your logic the entire crew is in the wrong. They should have just accepted the way things were and let the lord ruler torture the skaa for ever. You're basically saying that any small scale good is a net bad no matter what. Kelsier can't see the future, he can only do what feels right. You are correct though, I do place the immediate good of one person who will certainly face harm over the good of people that might. I can't see the future. As I said earlier, if you have the power to stop the rape and murder of a child, and you chose not to, I don't have anything good to say to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calderis Posted March 23, 2019 Report Share Posted March 23, 2019 6 minutes ago, SwordNimiForPresident said: @Calderis By your logic the entire crew is in the wrong. They should have just accepted the way things were and let the lord ruler torture the skaa for ever. You're basically saying that any small scale good is a net bad no matter what. Kelsier can't see the future, he can only do what feels right. No, they were attempting to change the system that was the problem. Not just a symptom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwordNimiForPresident Posted March 23, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2019 Just now, Calderis said: No, they were attempting to change the system that was the problem. Not just a symptom. Yes, but what they did released Ruin and killed millions. In this case it's not even a hypothetical, those people actually died rather than just being exposed to slightly increased risk of death. As near as I can tell the skaa the Kelsier rescued lived, well at least up until Ruin was released, who knows what happened to them after that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calderis Posted March 23, 2019 Report Share Posted March 23, 2019 11 minutes ago, SwordNimiForPresident said: Yes, but what they did released Ruin and killed millions. In this case it's not even a hypothetical, those people actually died rather than just being exposed to slightly increased risk of death. As near as I can tell the skaa the Kelsier rescued lived, well at least up until Ruin was released, who knows what happened to them after that. Your relating an entirely unknown and unforeseeable problem, to the obvious and known outcome of an Allomancer misting killing a noble? Yeah, I'm done with this. That's in no way the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwordNimiForPresident Posted March 23, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2019 15 minutes ago, Calderis said: Your relating an entirely unknown and unforeseeable problem, to the obvious and known outcome of an Allomancer misting killing a noble? Yeah, I'm done with this. That's in no way the same thing. They killed what was, as far as anyone knew, their god. It seems a bit naive to even think there wouldn't be consequences. Outside of that, there is the obvious turmoil that would come with a change in power structure. The nobles raising armies against each other and throwing skaa lives away was an easily foreseeable outcome of what they were doing and, consequently, was the outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calderis Posted March 24, 2019 Report Share Posted March 24, 2019 1 hour ago, SwordNimiForPresident said: They killed what was, as far as anyone knew, their god. It seems a bit naive to even think there wouldn't be consequences. Outside of that, there is the obvious turmoil that would come with a change in power structure. The nobles raising armies against each other and throwing skaa lives away was an easily foreseeable outcome of what they were doing and, consequently, was the outcome. Yes, short term instability, for a (hopefully) long term improvement. I've looked back over this conversation, and I see where it went wrong. It's my fault for not correcting your assumptions earlier. You framed the conversation as "what else should he have done" and I presented alternatives... But this was never about Kelsier needing to have changed what he did. It's about what he didn't do. Mennis is the one that got the Skaa to safety. Kelsier could have directed them towards those caves. He could have gone to the skaa after he killed Tresting and tried to offer them advice or help or storming anything. Instead he played slaughter and then GTFO. It's not about the consequences of his actions existing, it's that he didn't even consider them or care. Which goes right back into everything I've said about Kel's motivations. He claims to care for the Skaa, but it's not about that as much as it's about his hatred of the nobility. I'm not trying to say Kelsier shouldn't have acted. I'm saying he should have done more. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Oltux72 Posted March 24, 2019 Report Share Posted March 24, 2019 8 hours ago, Calderis said: Save one person and cause a chain of suffering much greater. Seriously, what did Kelsier accomplish? He saved a girl. Good job. He overthrew the Final Empire. Either you look at the individual case or you look at the end result. Freedom must be defended or reconquered. That will cost blood. Kelsier knew that and accepted it, even for himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts