Xerres

Why is the main character doing any of this at all? There's no real choice to not be a vigilante, it progresses the story. The perspective I take is to divorce myself from the feeling of being the 'Main Character'. I drop the pretense of power and control I have knowing the Hero Will Win, and I try to understand how I would react to the events in piecemeal. I would like to believe that I could live up to some higher ideal, but I think my reality, and the reality for most people, is that we aren't as good as we want to think we are. So I don't judge as harshly when people react out of fear or anger, not when its a situation they were forced into. And I feel less sympathy for the people who forced others into that situation now being subject to the same fear themselves. In a vacuum, or an ideal progression of events, I agree wholeheartedly that non-lethal action and preferably non-violent action is the best choice. But I don't think people can be judged by what the perfect choice was. The stress of the situation the Meteors has forced leads to choices that aren't ideal, but that I believe are often the best that can be expected by people in high-stress scenarios. And police are an example, their poor training in America leads them to quickly escalate conflict in far too many situations. Because despite the higher standard we should be holding them to, we don't prepare them to hold that standard. Is Titania trained to keep composure in a high stress scenario with lives at stake? Really I don't know the answer to that, but I assume no. I think most of the heroes of the Reborn story are people who have been forced to handle a situation well outside anything they've prepared for. The fact that so many hold the higher standard is admirable, and it highlights their difference from what I'd consider normal people's reaction. Titania doesn't meet the standard, creating her contrast, but I don't put the weight of the moral responsibility on her. She's someone in an extreme situation, who has come up short of the highest moral standards, but its a situation she never should have been in, and I see her as reacting to it in a way that tracks with how most would react to it. Imperfectly, in absolute terms, but well within reason and logic for the information her perspective allows. To the first there, I'll just say I don't equate 'reasonable' with 'good' or even 'desirable'. If we're both dying of thirst in the desert, and I have a canteen of water, and you kill me for it, I consider that reasonable. For you. Its consistent and reaches a goal: keeping yourself alive. Not good for me, but there's a logic train of though. A horrible train, nasty scenario, but it is what is in that case. The second point, I'll say you're right, because I'm painting too broad a brush. People will react differently, depending on temperament. Timid people running and hiding, for example, is a very valid and likely response that I didn't put forward. I'll re-phrase to say that I think acting with lethal intent would be common enough that it would be hard to judge as an unreasonable action for a person to take. It does depend on how you react to stress. Though knocking people out is probably murder. People don't just go unconscious for a few hours, they get back up or die. Same for throwing in the water and electrocution. In a struggle against a lethal threat, anything but 'run away and hide' is very likely to be lethal or very dangerous to whomever you're struggling against. And 'run away and hide' doesn't get your friend back from the terrorist cult, so accepting the risk of killing will be a pre-requisite. Though Pokemon physics may deflate that medical argument on my part, I'm not sure. Last line there, thank you, that's very nice to say and I appreciate it.

The flaw I personally see in the thought experiment is that they don't believe it, not when violence affects them. True believers would think that continuing the cause would bring their murdered sister back, or that it doesn't matter if a certain father dies in a bombing, he'll be back once they bring in the New World. I actually would say, if their perspective was true belief that they'll remake the world to something perfect, then it is reasonable and logical to accept any losses in pursuit of the goal. Because they aren't real losses, you'll fix everything in the end, and it will be like nothing happened. Morally objectionable? Absolutely, its repugnant and disgustingly self-centered. But if your perspective really is that you'll fix all the death you caused and no one will even remember the hurt, then yes. There's a logical train of thought that the ends justify the means, when the ends will reverse the impact of the means. For an end point of everyone happy and never knowing they were sad, causing the sadness first can be acceptable. There's an ethical discussion to be had there, but I don't remember enough of the primary philosophies behind ethics to really discuss it. I think its the Kant school of thought that would disagree with the utilitarianism, or something like that. Academically I could call it a puzzler, but practically, with us not being morons, we know it's stupid and these people are ushering in the apocalypse. So I go off the fact that their 'belief' in this new world seems to disappear when they are the ones losing something, being hurt. This evaporates their potential high ground, because their position is "It doesn't matter what other people lose, if I get what I want then I'll give it back to them maybe." and devolves to "Oh crap, what if I'm wrong!?!" when they lose something. In essence, they're only willing to gamble with other people's money. For Titania, I think her actions cause her more pain in the end and are a mistake. But her perspective, landing into a hostage situation where her friend has been captured by a terrorist cult. A group, we need to remember, already severely injured the person they just captured (Amaria was still recovering when we met up with them before the impromptu diving contest.) I still believe Titania's perspective is fear that the people that already hurt her friend, and just took her hostage, will do it again. Where I'll concede its not a fully logical action to kill the first Meteors she saw, is that she got stuck outside their hideout. Taking people hostage herself and gathering information would have done more for her. But since its a hostage situation, where someone already injured once by the hostage takers is now at their mercy, I believe fear and fight-or-flight emotions would be in full effect. And I think that with only the single pokemon with her, and an unknown number of enemies inside, even someone as tough as Titania would be scared that she's going to be overwhelmed. Taking prisoners while you're horribly outnumbered is a leap of logic I wouldn't expect from most people. And I will reiterate that violence doesn't lead to great outcomes, but I consider it an understandable and logical response when in a high pressure situation facing people who engage in lethal force frequently. Try to show mercy to the wrong person, and you'll have some Tyranitar sneak attacks coming your way. Edit: I'll throw in that Titania is dehumanizing the people she's fighting to shield herself from guilt, and that does cause her to be more impulsive. I still believe its driven by fear, for herself and her friend, but the dehumanizing tendency 'greases the wheels' on that logic train to lethal action. That said I continue to consider lethal force justifiable in a hostage situation where terrorists have taken a former victim into their stronghold, but the pattern of dehumanizing people is bad and leads to bad outcomes. Which is why she's hit with the guilt after learning they helped Amaria instead of hurting her. I suppose I'll sum up my argument to say I consider the actions terrible, and believe it leads to a worse outcome, but I don't put the 'moral responsibility' on Titania. Given her stressed perspective, I think she acts as reasonably as most people can. I still put the moral failing on the Meteors, for forcing people into a situation where they have to make snap decisions under high stress. I believe Titania's flow of logic is more reasonable than given credit for, and that most people would respond similarly.

I will say that I'm not saying violence is good or desirable. Taking a life or causing grievous injury, even when you 'know' someone 'deserves' it or you have no choice, will leave a deep impact on most people. It isn't a glorious thing or something to aspire to, its terrible and destructive, and its rare that someone isn't affected by it. My contention is that, given their situation, Titania and Saphira acted in a logical and reasonable way. Logic and reason doesn't always mean the best possible outcome, especially when based on a limited perspective, but they're the best tools available to end up at the best outcome you can manage. Again, the fact that these situations are forced on Titania and Saphira is what drastically alters my opinion of what their logical and reasonable courses of action should be. They aren't out for glory or to take something for themselves, they're under attack and acting in defense of themselves and their loved ones. I have far less sympathy for the Meteor characters than I do for Titania, because her regret is for the pain she caused to others, not the pain brought on herself by outside forces acting on consequence of her actions. The deaths in the WTC are tragic, but I consider Titania a victim of the actions of Team Meteor in creating the situation where she's pushed to an extreme. I think if I were an actual person in the shoes of the Main Character, and I didn't know the Plot would protect my life, I would act with lethal intent. Because I would terrified of the people that have already acted with lethal intent to me. My perspective would not be a player who wants a hero to have great ideals that I can aspire to (I love you Superman!), but a frightened victim of a terrorist attack who doesn't want to be killed by these dangerous people. I extend the perspective to Titania and Saphira, believing they're acting on fear and a fight-or-flight response to their situation. It doesn't lead to the best outcome, but its understandable and human, I won't judge them thinking that I would have more control in the same circumstance.

I didn't have a choice on killing Ghetsis, because its still a kid's game, and the story must remain light. So killing him or not means nothing, there was never a possibility of doing it, and in a story for a kid's game things will work out fine. From the perspective of someone actually being forced to live in a city actively under attack by a terrorist organization, the idea of demanding people hold to the ideal of non-lethal opposition is ridiculous. Like you say, Pokemon have replaced ordinary weapons. Pokemon can be deployed with lethal intent. The MC is almost killed by a sneak attack from a Tyranitar. If I approach everything non-lethally, and without the protections of being the main character in a pre-set narrative, then that's admirable. But if the person I tried to take in non-lethally has an extra pokeball with a Hydreigon and that Hydreigon bites my head off while I'm trying to bring them in, then my admirable corpse will be tossed in with the rest of the bodies. It is a terrorist organization deploying weapons with lethal intent. In ideal circumstances, I agree that non-lethal solutions are best and a peaceful resolution is the greatest possible outcome. But I do not expect people who are being shot at to stick to my ideal principles, and stop their assailants non-lethally. I accept that their life, and the lives of others, have to take precedence over the ideal solution. If you are faced with mass murderers wielding lethal weapons, and you lack the protection of a main character's plot armor, then it is a logical response to act with lethal force of your own to secure your safety. Ideally if there is a man waving a gun around and threatening people with it, I would still be happiest if they were non-lethally subdued and taken into custody. But if you happen to be a black man in 1950's Alabama and the guy waving a gun is wearing a white hood, I will understand if you shoot them first. Extreme example, but Team Meteor is trying to massacre a city of people, and if you weren't the MC then you'd just be another of their victims aboard that train.

In a humanist or academic sense I can absolutely step back and acknowledge that there are extenuating circumstances to the situation many of the Meteors find themselves in. Declaring a group to be 'The Enemy' and then unilaterally deciding their lives are forfeit is a terrible idea that will lead to terrible things. However, when I say Titania and Saphira are responding reasonably, I'm referring to just that, their response. Violence has been forced on them, they are in a situation of having to engage with a known terrorist group that has committed mass murders. Stopping and saying "Are you guys holding guns and wearing those terrorist cult uniforms not so bad?" is not a reasonable expectation. They treated Amaria's wounds, that's certainly nice of them. From our position, outside the story, we can see they aren't bloodthirsty evil doers. From Titania's position, she just got down there, and a terrorist cult just took Amaria away and locked her out. What's more reasonable: "The members of the cult that attempted human sacrifice are maybe doing something nice." or "The members of the cult that has helped perform terrorist actions have taken away a wounded person, oh crap oh crap oh crap." Unlike the Meteor's, whose only regrets seem to be that they had to suffer what they put others through, Titania obviously regrets killing them when she finds out the truth. Because she isn't a bloodthirsty villain, or dissociating herself from the impact of her actions like the Meteors, she's doing what it seems needs to be done in her situation. Her situation being trapped in a terrorist hideout. I can judge the actions to be inappropriate in hindsight, but I can't fault the response based on the information she has. Whatever reason people may have for joining the Meteors and staying on even while the group begins mass murdering, they have to accept that its the consequence of their actions that put them in a position that forces others to respond in violence. I accept that many can't leave because they fear they'll be killed, but that isn't Titania or Saphira's fault. Your situation is terrible, but you're part of a terrorist group, you've been killing people across the city, and people will fight to not be another of your victims.

I'm not suggesting all of Team Meteor is evil and has to be killed. I am saying that they started the shit, they've been killing people this whole time, and that makes it a reasonable and logical action to kill in turn. Saphira did nothing wrong when she killed the Meteors attacking her house and family. She was forced into a situation by the Meteor dumbasses out to abduct children. Titania kills the Meteors she finds in the facility devoted to poisoning the cities' water supply because they're terrorists engaged in a terrorist activity of trying to kill people. Having mercy on the Meteors is fine, once they've surrendered. Then you can sort out who was actively going along with the actions and who was forced into it, and the degree of punishment required then. But, they have to surrender first. If they remain a part of Team Meteor, then they're part of a campaign to murder a city, and you have to respond accordingly. It doesn't matter why they're part of Team Meteor, how good a person they think they are, what the hierarchy of needs tells about why they turn to unlawful behavior, they're killing people. You have to stop them from killing people. Coming around back to my original point: Titania and Saphira are not in the wrong. They are not acting in an extreme manner. They are acting extremely reasonably. If Titania and Saphira happened to be on the train, or crushed in one of the buildings by the Tangrowth, or caught in the volcanic explosion, or caught up in any number of the horrible things the Meteors planned, none of the Team Meteor members we've seen so far would even lose sleep over having killed them. Maybe Taka. Maybe. Until they surrender, until they stop presenting an active threat to the lives of everyone in Reborn City, meeting them with lethal force is the most logical way to defend yourself and others. Because until it affects them personally, none of them have shown themselves willing to stop. Taka's the most sympathetic by far, but he still has more blood on his hands than Titania or Saphira, and for him it wasn't to save anyone but himself.

I am a pacifist and strongly against the death penalty and prison system in general for our actual government, but I still understand when direct violent action is acceptable and frankly necessary. Once you are part of Team Meteor, once you are attempting to kidnap and torture children, when you willingly accept that wiping out a city of people is okay because you wanted a better life, then you are the aggressor and a lethal response is acceptable. I have some sympathy for some of them, but for the most part they're just so damn self-absorbed and only care about what affects them. Its not regret for what they actually did, but regret for what that caused people to do to them in turn. "Oh that Dragon Lady killed so many of us... all we were doing was invading her home and attempting to kidnap her young sister. How could she attack us like that!?!" "My friend died sort of... I don't really care about the city we were bombing, its just that my friend is gone! And she only stopped being a terrorist when her family was going to die instead of other people's families. So sad." Team Meteor started shit, and the fact they cry foul when people defend themselves, like that is the horrible crime, just really stretches my ability to feel any sympathy for the self-obsessed knobs.

Regarding Titania and Saphira, their actions are a response to what has happened. Maybe they're generally ruthless people, but they didn't just wake up and decide 'I'mma kill some people today.' The city is under attack by terrorists who are killing indiscriminately to achieve their goals. Saphira killed members of a terrorist group that were in the process of abducting children to be tortured. Titania killed people intentionally poisoning the city's water supply. They aren't villains, they frankly aren't even extreme. They're responding rationally to the existence of a child murdering terrorist cell. I don't care if the Meteors like each other and feel sad when they lose their friends. They killed everyone on that train, they killed an innocent girl and many others with the Tangrowth attack, they were going to wipe out the city with the Camerupt. They are actively trying to kill a city full of people. Taka has killed more people than Titania, his Tangrowth is the one that killed the girl who was just sitting in her room. At least Titania looks people in the eye, gives them a fighting chance, and is only targeting the organization on a murder spree. The idea that Titania and Saphira are in any way in the wrong is bizarre to me. Like saying that if the Manson Family burst into your house to kidnap your child sister, you're a monster if you shoot them, because they super like each other and will be sad now. Who cares how much they like each other? They're killing children, their free trial of being alive has now ended.

Very important. I really can't stand the Meteors expecting sympathy. "Oh, that Dragon Woman killed my friend! All we were trying to do was kidnap and torture children, how could she be so extreme!?!" "I don't want to disappoint my dad, so the little girl killed in her room for nothing just had to happen, ain't on me." "How could Titania actually kill people? Just because they're fanatical cultists committing terrorist acts doesn't mean its okay to stop them before they kill again!" I can feel sympathy for Taka because he finally tried to break off and leave, but its ridiculous how surprised they are when people forced to fight for their lives react with deadly force against the people attacking them. Or maybe its supposed to be the point, but either way I feel no sympathy for dead Meteors. They tried to kill me, they succeeded in killing lots of other people, they don't get to cry foul when they're the ones in danger.