Yeah, but now you're talking about killing a dragon - not just any dragon, the dragon that taught all humans how to use the Thu'um - who might turn evil. If he did turn wicked, it's a safe bet you could make him take a dirt nap. But he didn't just help you, he's helped all mortals for millenia. He is the reason people aren't still making sacrifices to Alduin. There would be no Dragonshouts, no Greybeards, no Tiber Septim if it hadn't been for Paarth.

Delphine can bite me. I wish, I wish there were some sort of dialogue option where you could tell her where to stick it.

Unlike rats though, Dragons knew what they were dealing with humans. Humans tried to fight wars with them. Some humans were considered assets and helped the dragons keep the rest of the humans in submission. These were dragon priests and their cults.

People who kill animals, like rats, on some mass level probably don't even acknowledge much of any kind of sentience or personality in these creatures. It might even be worse than this dragon scenario;. Not sure. Dragons knew full well what humans were capable of. It wasn't a matter of "mindless" stomping and aggression on inferior creatures, like we do with rats.

Yes, I can totally envision one of my characters - specifically a dragon slayer - killing the poor old guy. But I'd really go into it knowing that's what I would be doing from the get go. Sort of the same thing I have to do when I make a DB character - gear up to be a jerk, essentially.

On a sidenote, I would've liked dragon armor to only unlock if you kill Paarthurnax or Alduin. It should something Esbern help with, along with his dragon potions. If you look at the concept art, it even looks like Akaviri armor. It seems weird to be wearing it, and be friends with Paarth at the same time. Imagine if he was wearing a big scarf made from the skins of little girls? Why would he even want to be around you, if you're wearing the skins of his brothers? It seems like an armor fit for a "barbaric Akaviri", as Arngier would put it.

When misrule takes its place at the eight corners of the world

When the Brass Tower walks and Time is reshaped

When the thrice-blessed fail and the Red Tower trembles

When the Dragonborn Ruler loses his throne, and the White Tower falls

When the Snow Tower lies sundered, kingless, bleeding

The World-Eater wakes, and the Wheel turns upon the Last Dragonborn.



First off, it's Alduin's destiny to end the world. It has to happen eventually, nothing can change that. However, he isn't supposed to control the world as some dragon god. Secondly, Paarthurnax is the second strongest dragon effectively making him the closest thing to a new dragon king.


Not that difficult. Dragons respect only power. They will follow the most powerful dragon until they doubt his ability, Odahviing tells you as much. And no, nobody needs to be in charge, all dragons have to die. Dragons aren't like mortals. They don't think the same way or feel the same way. They are closer to Daedra.



It's not about morals or judgement. If I didn';t believe in redemption, I would';ve killed Erandur but he's my favourite follower. It's about dragon nature and risk. There isn't anything that proves Paarthurnax's ability to restrain his dragon nature- after Alduin's defeat- for the rest of his immortal life.

Oh, awesome, I kill Paarthurnax and get Esbern and Delphine to be my buddies and help me kill dragons!? COOL!- wait no, I can do that by myself.

I just wish I could send their sorry souls to Sithis. Paarth is a complete beast!

There isn't anything proving you're not a dirty stormcloak traitor. Tullius should've executed you.

They could have done a better job at making Esbern and Delphine more useful. Like I said above about the dragon armor. I mean, not even esbern's potions work right either.

Their combat abilities should be attractive too, but then... followers pretty much svck in general.

No.

At the creation of Mundus (the physical plane) the Aedra discovered they were no longer immortal: in order to keep their energies alive, they had to create new bodies, and so they invented what we understand as love and six, the ability to join souls with other beings and to implant pieces of the combined soul into a new body. The first generation, the nine, were very powerful, but the next generation only had a fraction of their power. The generation after that had even less, and so on, as the divine sparks became more and more divided amongst a growing population.

Most souls are a mix of the various nine divines, with the actual percentages determining aspects of that individual's nature. This isn't true for a Dragonborn, however. A Dragonborn is (or is nearly, perhaps) 100% Akatosh, which is why a Dragonborn has the unique ability to absorb dragon souls into his own. The Amulet of Kings was actually a very powerful soul gem, which contained the souls of every Dragonborn emperor from Alessia to Uriel Septim VII. When Martin shattered the amulet, he (as a Dragonborn) absorbed all the hundreds of dragonsouls contained in the Amulet and suddenly came into possession of a very large portion of Akatosh's power and sentience, enough to defeat Dagon.

The divines have no sense of self, no sentience, no will. The only actions they can take are during rare periods of unanimity, when the collective unconsciousness of the world agrees so strongly that the sleeping gods inside all of them stir just enough for some change to occur, a sort of Miracle by Committee sort of deal... or, of course, during rare events like Martin's shattering of the Amulet, where enough fragments of a divine are united under a single will.

He probably should have.

The Blades wouldn't be trying him under Dovah law. So far as I'm aware theres no such thing, only the right of the stronger to rule the weaker. Thats not law.
His crimes weren't against dragons but humans.

Wouldn't be the first time prophesies have been wrong. This could be one possible future. It is not written in stone. Things can always change.

On another side note, if we are an aspect of Akatosh, I really wish there was more written. For a chief divine, there isn't much to know about Akatosh. About the best I know almost makes me think I should side with the Imperials in the Civil War (besides, they do have a snazzy dragon flag.. and dragons on the hilt of their swords).


The command from Akatosh: Serve and obey your Emperor. Study the Covenants. Worship the Nine, do your duty, and heed the commands of the saints and priests.

Paarthurnax is the last surviving member of those few Dragons, who, over the course of the Dragon War, developed a different view and actually sided with the Ancient Nords. He taught them the Thu'um. He realized that Alduin's defeat was only temporary and stayed behind to see the job finished properly. He is determined not to do what his instincts tell him to. After Alduin's death, he initiates an attempt to influence as many of the rest resurrected Dragons to move towards an attitude of coexistence.

No. Killing Paarthurnax is like starting another Dragon war. Morally speaking, If I did that, I wouldn't be better than the Dragon Priests -those human priests, who went over their head and drove the Ancient Nords to the point of rebellion.

In my game, I won't touch a dragon who doesn't attack my character, or any other mer. Whoever does though, he will feel the Rend. This, is propably the best way to express both the Way of the Voice and the Blades doctrine.

Maybe the Blades will come to understand it, at some point. Otherwise, so be it.

I did it, because Blade would be lost cause without me. I'm sure the Greybeards will find another dragon to hold ransom.

Isn't only the Dragonborn able to kill the dragons for good? Isn't that the whole point of the dragonborn business?

Also, didn't Alduin die in the end? It sure as hell looked like it. If he survived somehow did we just do all this for nothing?

Well, the last time I checked, the Blades' cause, was to protect the Dragonborn, not dictate terms to him. And Paarthurnax didn't seem like a captive.

I consider this a sterling example of narrative on Bethesda's part, it evokes such emotion from people... and for all the talk of how shallow the MQ is, well, consider this debate. There is really no definite answer to this dilemma, it is a grey area.

I create multiple characters, each with different agendas and mostly just to explore the different paths.

Why shouldn't you kill P-nax? He tells you he could become just as power hungry as his brethren, that indeed he has taken Alduin's place in the power structure for the Dova. He repeatedly mentions his struggle with his own nature... and the Blades are sworn to remove the yoke that the Dova would place upon the mortal races.

Why should you kill P-nax? He provided a means to defeat Alduin, for however long, and saved Tamriel OR at worst only prolonged the fate of the entirety of Mundus. He help the Dovahkin, who in turn helped end the Civil War... so in essence P-Nax did this by proxy. He also helped establish the Way of the Voice, which will undoubtedly help the mortal races for eons to come.

Why most people feel duty bound to accept the finality of the second option is beyond me...

It does seem rather gullible, lacking foresight... or perhaps a little too trusting that Paarthurnax would forever be able to battle his own nature. Having personally dealt with addiction and having many friends and family deal with the same thing... I find it hard to believe we can overcome our baser sides. Most everyone relapses at some point.

Thusly...I dealt with P-Nax just as his brethren, the danger was too great for the things he might have done in my opinion.

I did on my first character so I could give some of my housecarls a different job (as Blades).

I'll agree, but it could have used more exposition and elaboration, especially on the Blades' part. I like Dragon II, but I understand the complaints there as well. They've created a grey area dilemma that sparks a lot of debate (mages vs Templars/Meredith), but the actual execution is a completely "wtf?" sort of thing. I think the same thing is happening here, where the general problem intrigues people, but the game itself has problems. We're mostly left to form our arguments on general implications not even presented in the game.

Y'know what's also interesting to me is that the dovahkiin on alduin's wall is wearing blades armor and has an akaviri sword. Blades have been in these games forever.. I think the developers like them, and probably are stunned that so many want them to die off. But if that's the case with people, then I think it's a fault of how the story is presented. Maybe. Maybe people are just sensitive.

Korr, the blades HAVE been in the games forever (just about....) Thing is, from my pov, I really REALLY hate "dev constructs" as something I'm SUPPOSED to want to do....

I've come to some interesting conclusions about my ambivalence to certain questlines and so on, based on something greenwarden posted - and some concerted "back-thinking" on my own part. When I first started messing with RPGs, I was the GM (game-master) for my daughter and her friends from school (the "nerds" of their day, which is likely the dark ages to most of you now - mid 70s....) I didn't myself play the game - I developed the game world-setting, drew the maps, populated the world with NPCs and "stuff" - and wrote the scenarios the kids played out. So while I've always had the "RP experience" I've myself never actually "role-played" outside the need for the GM to step in as NPCs.

What that means is that in TES games, I've always just approached them AS IF I WAS THE DEVELOPER. Well.... that's one way to do it, but it's not by any means the only way to play, or even the best way to play. And - it's not the IDEAL way to do it. Which it took greenwarden's post to get me thinking about.... So, yes, as far as role-playing the TG or DB now, I probably can actually go there without agony.

But that still leaves the problem I have with "dev constructs". And that goes back a fair distance (though not the mid 70s....) - back to the first Bioware CRPG I ever played - BG 1. It was a pretty good game. If you could get beyond the need to adhere to the developers' forcing a strict storyline down your throat. I spent a LOT of hours in BG 1 figuring out how NOT TO GO THERE as far as the whole force-fed storyline went. And that's where I get annoyed, MORE than annoyed, with stuff like trying to force-feed me the blades in Skyrim - I didn't like the blades in the previous games, why on earth (or Nirn) would I hand my soul to them on a platter in Skrim?

I want developers to STOP trying to enforce their own preconceived storyline AND its "logical" (to THEM) end, on the diversity of people now playing these games. Back in the BG 1 era, there was probably less than a tenth of the number of people playing these games as there are today, but even then one of the MAJOR gripes about BG1 and Bioware's devs was that there was ONLY ONE WAY TO PLAY THE GAME....

*sigh* Sorry for the rant (and the length of same) - this has been my bête noire for a VERY long time....

You make an interesting point, but I'm still not sure where to stand on that. Especially the statement: "On the diversity of people now playing games". At the end of the day, it's still their game. They try to give a lot of freedom, but they're like any director or musician or whatnot.. the songs a musician creates is theirs, no matter how many fans adore those songs. Same with game developers. It's just an entertainment medium, like music is, and they should have some authority on what their pieces of art will be. They never marketed it as a complete sandbox experience. It's a little bit of both sandbox and story. And their "character" in the game is the world itself. They should have some control over it.

edit: That doesn't have much to do with the Blades though, per se. Just talking in general. I guess be happy that we even have a choice at all here.

It's also a bit of a moral dilemma.

Paarthurnax
Pros:
- Saved the world.
- Helped the first humans free themselves.

Cons:
- Has committed atrocities that can never be forgiven.
- Is a dragon, thus born to dominate. Risk of turning back to the old ways.

Morally, killing Paarthurnax is debetable, but logically, for the best of Tamriel, killing him would be best as we don't need him anymore, and he is currently more of a risk than an asset to the safety of the realm.