epic fail ...

I tried to execute her at the end of time, but ZixZax oblitirate me before I made a single turn, throwing molotovs at me.

The situation, if we speak in analogies, is as if a “bad” drug dealer was killed by a “good” drug dealer and the policeman investigating the case turns a blind eye to the “good” one, despite the fact that "good" one is now not only a drug dealer, but also a murderer. The law must be the same for everyone without exception.

If that dealer is a key figure to stopping/ending a world war, small infractions like murder can be overlooked for the sake of greater benefit.

Rules are dead and people are alive.

...

...narratively speaking, letting Icara just live without a question does happen rather abruptly though.

I don’t see anything so important in her yet, she revealed the whole truth about that night, after which she sits and does nothing, but gives obvious advices. Now she advises exploring the miners' village, something that hunters would do anyway. In the future, I don’t know, but I’m sure she will prompt me to meet Zandalor, which is also obvious since he was Leandra’s lover. The whereabouts of the wizard can 100% be suggested either by an almost all-knowing weaver or an all-knowing trader of secrets

Well... If you go and play Dos2, you'll come to see that not all good is great, and not all evil is bad. This is the premise of the story in my mind.

If you're keen on killing Icara just because of those reasoning, you should be prepare to kill zig and the rest for defending her.

On a side note. You can kill Icara in End of Time, but you shouldn't do that. I'm pretty sure doing that prevents progress past a certain point, and there's no fix for it.

Postat inițial de kgw145:

Well... If you go and play Dos2, you'll come to see that not all good is great, and not all evil is bad. This is the premise of the story in my mind.

If you're keen on killing Icara just because of those reasoning, you should be prepare to kill zig and the rest for defending her.

I actually go through DOS 1 in order to get through the second one. And even if the Source is not a power like the One Ring, it is inherently evil, the attempt to use it for good will only lead to corruption. In any case, this force is powerful enough to destroy the entire world, which means a deadly cruel ban on its use is a very reasonable decision. There are no more irresponsible madmen who do not know what is right and wrong than wizards. In any fantasy worlds, wizards are to blame for many major disasters., and if not them, then only because wizards are not powerful enough. If the brothers in the order had been more responsible in their work, clearing out not only the parents, but also the gifted twins, the plot of the game, it seems, would not have happened.

P.S. I love madman wizards so much. And knowing that in dos 2 we play as sourcerers, I really hope that i will be able to play something similar.

Source isn't evil. DOS1 doesn't really go deep into that subject iirc, but the second game does.

i dont want spoiler to much.. but you cannot.. she will help you to win the last fight.

also your point with the source and beeing evil or the attempt to use it... if you step one back and watch it from a different angle.. its telling you the story of religion. and how people used religion for good and bad. and that some of them talk literly like in the old religios books like the inquisitors and so on.
it is a great way to tell the story of how religion even you think you doing goods work is and can corrupt yourself.

also practicly you are evil yourself cause you killing others =) so you are not better .. that is why their is the line with "Throw the first stone"..

early in the game you have a vendor in cyceal who sells stuff for scouts .. you have the option to kill her or let her live.. killing her is stupid cuze you need vendors. so killing everything what hase source or uses it is not nessesary.
also tecnicly you using source from time to time yourself too.

Postat inițial de Tiareth:

Even if the Source is not a power like the One Ring, it is inherently evil, the attempt to use it for good will only lead to corruption...

Sure thing, Madora... :)

Postat inițial de Highrule -1:

Source isn't evil. DOS1 doesn't really go deep into that subject iirc, but the second game does.

The opening cutscene and the bard in the second location indicate the opposite. The source was corrupted and all the sourcerers went crazy, starting to destroy everything around. I have only one example of a “good” sourcerer, but one example is too few, and judging by her stories, we can conclude that she uses the magic of the source extremely rarely and in general she possesses this power mostly due to an innate curse. But I already said, even if the source is not evil, in any case, this is too much power to give to any mortal. And even if worthy mortals exist, it is impossible to create a system that will 100% correctly separate the worthy from the unworthy, so it is safer to ban the source for everyone.

Postat inițial de BOT:

also practicly you are evil yourself cause you killing others =) so you are not better
also tecnicly you using source from time to time yourself too.

It is unreasonable to evaluate all characters, in all worlds and cultures, from the moral point of view of a modern person in the 21st century. MCs am the guardians of Order who investigates and destroys the evil of the source.

MCs don't use the source. And even if so, MCS don’t control it, and judging by how after their “touch” the star stones turn into garbage, They are not using the source but destroying it. But in any case, They are as truly LGs ready to suffer a well-deserved punishment from the leaders of the Soucre Hunters.

This will contain Spoilers for the ending of the first game and I have no idea how to black that out, so continue reading at your own peril;



Spoiler: Source is not evil, it got corrupted by something old, something old you as guardians failed to contain, so theoretiucally all the bad things sourcerers have done, was inherently caused by the two source hunters' previous lives' failure to contain the void