Kiralai Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 So I was just about to complete the quest on Alderaan where you turn the crown in to the Panteer captain, and either ask for monetary compensation (and, I'm assuming, leave the decision of Thul vs. Organa leadership to the Panteers) which is a Dark Side option, or request that the Panteers give the crown to House Thul, which is a Light Side option. Is taking the money and leaving the decision up to the Panteers Dark Side because it's selfish, and the decision to give the crown to House Thul Light Side because you're choosing not to "betray" the Empire for your own good (monetary compensation)? Or is there truly a good reason (in terms of what's best for Alderaan) to specifically request that House Thul get the crown? Would it lead to a swifter peace? I'm having a hard time making a decision from an RP standpoint, as I feel like I don't fully understand the implications of this particular decision. In terms of what's best for Alderaan rather than the Empire or Republic, what is the better choice, if there is one? From a personal perspective, I was just going to go with taking the money (even though my character is overwhelmingly Light Sided) since my BH isn't personally invested in helping the Empire reach its goals (and I assumed House Thul wasn't particularly deserving of the crown anyway), but she made some comment like "You can't put a price on peace, so just keep handing me credits until I say stop," which made me question whether taking the money was at the expense of a chance at peace for Alderaan. It has me a bit confused. Any insight? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alricka Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 When I think about it, it doesn't much matter who is going to rule as long as there is one ruler and the civil war stops. So, in that regard I can understand why upholding the interests of the Empire here is a Light Side choice; it's not only a matter of selfishness vs selflessness, it's also a decisive step towards stopping a war. In terms of who is better suited for ruling Alderaan, none of the guys I've met in my questing there are extremely worthy. Jorad Thul is a fool, Bouris Ulgo was a way too rigid "the end justifies the means"-type and while I haven't met the head of the Organas, I'm sure he's not anything exceptional either. At the end, when you think about it, there isn't a single perfect ruler; no matter who he is, he's a human being and he'll make mistakes. The important thing, IMO, is that the fighting stops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cythereal Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 In terms of who is better suited for ruling Alderaan, none of the guys I've met in my questing there are extremely worthy. Jorad Thul is a fool, Bouris Ulgo was a way too rigid "the end justifies the means"-type and while I haven't met the head of the Organas, I'm sure he's not anything exceptional either. At the end, when you think about it, there isn't a single perfect ruler; no matter who he is, he's a human being and he'll make mistakes. The important thing, IMO, is that the fighting stops. The Organa guy... met him on my Trooper, played through Alderaan, can't remember anything about the guy. Not a good sign for the head of the Organas. Note that the crown quest is an Empire-exclusive quest, too. Something else that's interesting. In the showdown with Ulgo, for the Empire the light-side option is to take Ulgo alive to be tried by the Alderaanians for his crimes and let them handle their own justice. The dark side option is to kill Ulgo then and there. For the Republic, the light-side option is to take Ulgo alive for the Republic to try him for his crimes against the Republic. The dark side option is to take the side of the Alderaanians and kill him on the spot for his crimes. I keep getting the funny impression that the Empire might have better diplomatic sense than anyone gives them credit for... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alricka Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Something else that's interesting. In the showdown with Ulgo, for the Empire the light-side option is to take Ulgo alive to be tried by the Alderaanians for his crimes and let them handle their own justice. The dark side option is to kill Ulgo then and there. For the Republic, the light-side option is to take Ulgo alive for the Republic to try him for his crimes against the Republic. The dark side option is to take the side of the Alderaanians and kill him on the spot for his crimes. I keep getting the funny impression that the Empire might have better diplomatic sense than anyone gives them credit for... Interesting. The Republic's choices are indeed less diplomaticy-savvy than I would have guessd. Taking Ulgo into Republican custody sounds like a political mistake. In fact, I think that keeping him alive is a mistake on its own since he's not without influence and supporters, but at least by giving him to the Alderaanians you'd strengthen the alliance between the two factions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
masterkoto Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 (edited) Today I was doing the same quest and at the same point I am unable to decide what decision I should make. Since I am playing also a light-sided character who isn't interested in the empires interests either, none of the answers seemed to fit. Sometimes I got the feeling Bioware urges the player into light and dark-sided decisions whether there is really one or not. Same thing with the killiks. Leaving the daughter in a hive mind where she thinks to live in peace (where I doubt that she is able to do any individual decisions anymore), light side, or bringing her back to her father trying to disconnect her from the hive, dark side. Sure, I threatened the killiks to release the daughter, but it isn't really mean or evil to bring a father his daughter back. That really freaks me out. More and more I think about just not doing some quests anymore, because the answering options are just stupid, childish or unfitting for my character. On the other side I hate it to leave a quest undone. Need options to refuse a quest permanently or non-sided (gray) answering options. Edit: Okay, here a possible solution: I decided to choose the light side answer because the char says the crown should go to House Thul and not something like the Empire wants to ally with you. Also the Members of Thul treated me very good, so helping them may gives you the chance to win House Thul as a personal ally and may be good for future operations on Alderaan. Also, like you mentioned it, it is a chance to end the civil war, if House Thul is set in the right light. Edited February 29, 2012 by masterkoto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiralai Posted February 29, 2012 Author Share Posted February 29, 2012 If it makes you feel any better, that's the choice I ended up making as well. Even though picking House Thul serves the Empire, it doesn't necessarily have to be your character's intention. And if you pick the Dark Side option, your character basically says "I'll sell you peace...for credits, hand them over," which is pretty disgustingly evil if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LyriaFrost Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Is taking the money and leaving the decision up to the Panteers Dark Side because it's selfish, and the decision to give the crown to House Thul Light Side because you're choosing not to "betray" the Empire for your own good (monetary compensation)? My take on it is that generally light side choices tend to be more "compassion of the moment", not really thinking in terms of long-ranging goals. Usually. Not always, though. Leaving it up to the Panteers, with your suggestion, is (the way I look at it) allowing their way of life to dictate it. The dark side choice is purely selfish, asking for something for YOURSELF. Basically being greedy. "I found your crown thing, reward me for it. I don't give a fig about your whole succession bit." It's kind of a choice between honor/compassion and greed/selfishness. Which is what a LOT of the dark/light choices come down to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rindjata Posted March 1, 2012 Share Posted March 1, 2012 While I actually think the light and dark side choices here make sense (Loyalty to house Thul, that yes, generally tends to treat my characters quite well, or to the Empire as their allies vs greedy mc moneygrabbing), I would also have liked a second light side choice. Funnily enough, I haven't really missed it before I just now did the quest on my bounty hunter (who would generally go "moneys, giff".) There I'd really have liked to pretty much go "I don't give a darn what you do with the crown or how you reward me, a dying man asked me with his last breath to give the crown to you and you're not gonna top that, dummy. It's your problem now." However, a by the way -the House Thulian most of us have most of our dealings with (Jorad Thul? The guy the moff sends us to harass) is NOT the thulian candidate for the crown. I think one of the Siths learn that they intend to place a "young Sith of the house" on the throne. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cythereal Posted March 1, 2012 Share Posted March 1, 2012 However, a by the way -the House Thulian most of us have most of our dealings with (Jorad Thul? The guy the moff sends us to harass) is NOT the thulian candidate for the crown. I think one of the Siths learn that they intend to place a "young Sith of the house" on the throne. Correct. You meet the Thul Sith in question during the Alderaan bonus series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts