Curse

Clord · Aug 29, 2007, 09:30 AM // 09:30

Norn have no need for armies, because they call that grouping against common threat "Great hunt", Norn barely understand what that one dwarf mean with asking army because they use different words to tell same thing. It is clear when players character tell than that he "understand" and then speak "their way". While that Dwarf get just angry to them because not know how to tell them same thing. Player's character understand very well Norn while dwarf just got hard time to cooperate with them to gain their trust and help.

stueyman2099 · Aug 29, 2007, 09:44 AM // 09:44

Kinda like the way you speak (write) english.

Vanessa Dwager · Aug 29, 2007, 10:00 AM // 10:00

I understood the Norn perfectly because I follow closely the Norse way of life.

In fact, the more ogden got upset the more I started to not like him. :\

tmakinen · Aug 29, 2007, 10:18 AM // 10:18

It's not just a different way of saying the same thing, there's a big philosophical difference between Dwarven and Norn thinking.

Dwarfs are social beings with a hierarchical society (and a king on the top). As a trade, an individual gives up some of his freedom to get the benefits of the society. A dwarven soldier is bound by rules to carry out the commands given by his/her superiors and can expect to be punished if s/he refuses to follow the orders. As a compensation for this loss of freedom a dwarf can expect that the society protects him/her from outside threats.

Norns are individualists without any clear social hierarchy. They do not trade out any freedoms for benefits from the society. A norn fighter fights on his/her own volition, without superiors, and can quit without consequences other than a potential loss of honor depending on circumstances. This is in accordance with the basic tenets of being a norn: you're supposed to be strong enough to stand on your own. If there isn't any need for protection from the society, there isn't any need to give up personal freedoms either.

Vanessa Dwager · Aug 29, 2007, 10:25 AM // 10:25

I have to agree disagree on Norn being individualists. From what I've seen when a Norn has done something very heroic and proven them self they claim ownership of a homestead. Somewhere in a quest dialogue one Norn spoke of how younger Norn came to him to listen to his stories around a camp fire.

If compared to the Norse the Norn's Leadership is more of a tribal states system rather than a monarchy. The older Norn prove themselves and become leader of a Homestead and they watch over the young and constantly push them to become a braver warrior.

MithranArkanere · Aug 29, 2007, 10:28 AM // 10:28

Norn are as big as dumb.
Dwarves behave more like ants, tag along and you'll be able to kill anything. That's waaaaay more wise.

GranDeWun · Aug 29, 2007, 01:47 PM // 13:47

For such strong individualists, Norn all seem to have suspiciously similar fashion choices...

MSecorsky · Aug 29, 2007, 04:43 PM // 16:43

Those who would give up freedoms for security deserve neither.

thezed · Aug 29, 2007, 06:10 PM // 18:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSecorsky

Those who would give up freedoms for security deserve neither.

LOL!! Do you relize how many of your own freedoms you have given up for security??

Do you kill people at will? No, because you have given up that right for the security that others are not allowed to do it to you.

Do you plow down the streets, driving on either side and ignoring stop lights? No, you have given up that freedom fro the security of an orderly and safe transportation system.

Do you walk right into a bank vault, grab whatever cash you want and walk off? No, you have given up that freedom for the security of your own assets and of a stable economy in wich to live.

I could go on and on. Ever law passed by state, federal or local athorities is a freedom you have given up in exchange for security.

Unless of course you are an active anarchist, doing what you want without any regard for the law. In that case, it is only a matter of time before you give up your freedoms for OUR security.

MSecorsky · Aug 29, 2007, 06:35 PM // 18:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by thezed

LOL!! Do you relize how many of your own freedoms you have given up for security??

Do you kill people at will? No, because you have given up that right for the security that others are not allowed to do it to you.

Do you plow down the streets, driving on either side and ignoring stop lights? No, you have given up that freedom fro the security of an orderly and safe transportation system.

Do you walk right into a bank vault, grab whatever cash you want and walk off? No, you have given up that freedom for the security of your own assets and of a stable economy in wich to live.

I could go on and on. Ever law passed by state, federal or local athorities is a freedom you have given up in exchange for security.

Unless of course you are an active anarchist, doing what you want without any regard for the law. In that case, it is only a matter of time before you give up your freedoms for OUR security.

Perhaps, Capt. Bad Analogy, I should use the proper quote and not a paraphrase.

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Esan · Aug 29, 2007, 06:36 PM // 18:36

Apropos a thread on the meaning of words, MSecorsky is paraphrasing a famous quote attributed to Ben Franklin. The full quote is:

Quote:

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

(Important items bolded.)

Note further that most people understand liberty/freedom to mean freedom of self-determination, not freedom to commit crimes. The issue is sometimes clouded by laws that criminalize acts of self-determination, but none of your examples are in this gray area.

Edit: too late, I see.

MSecorsky · Aug 29, 2007, 06:39 PM // 18:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Esan

Apropos a thread on the meaning of words, MSecorsky is paraphrasing a famous quote attributed to Ben Franklin. The full quote is: (Important items bolded.)

Note further that most people understand liberty/freedom to mean freedom of self-determination, not freedom to commit crimes. The issue is sometimes clouded by laws that criminalize acts of self-determination, but none of your examples are in this gray area.

Edit: too late, I see.

Thank you Esan for the vigilance.

thezed · Aug 29, 2007, 06:52 PM // 18:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSecorsky

Perhaps, Capt. Bad Analogy, I should use the proper quote and not a paraphrase.

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Okay. NOW I agree with you. Didn't realize you were paraphrasing a Franklin quote.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Esan

Note further that most people understand liberty/freedom to mean freedom of self-determination, not freedom to commit crimes. The issue is sometimes clouded by laws that criminalize acts of self-determination, but none of your examples are in this gray area.

Now we get into a whole debate about what is self-determination and when do you draw the line between self-determination and violating the self-determination of others. True, my "murder" example would obviously be a violation of anothers self-determination. But I would argue that trafic laws and economic laws/controls DO violate a persons self-determination.

I won't go deep into that debate here. If you haven't guessed, I'm a "Political Anarchist".

R!ghteous Ind!gnation · Aug 29, 2007, 07:00 PM // 19:00

... so Franklin invented glasses huh? ..... errr.... we are way off topic lol.

Nevin · Aug 29, 2007, 07:16 PM // 19:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSecorsky

Those who would give up freedoms for security deserve neither.

LOL!!!!!!!! You should be a comedian.

MSecorsky · Aug 29, 2007, 07:17 PM // 19:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by R!ghteous Ind!gnation

... so Franklin invented glasses huh? ..... errr.... we are way off topic lol.

No, not really. The Norn are good examples of this in practice... they give up effectively no essential liberties for their freedoms and individuality, whereas the Dwarves have given up a greater degree of freedoms for collective security (albeit it could be argued as to what being given up is essential or not from a Norn perspective).

The Norn, it seems, have gone so far as to not even form a country.

MSecorsky · Aug 29, 2007, 07:18 PM // 19:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevin

LOL!!!!!!!! You should be a comedian.

And you should be educated.

HawkofStorms · Aug 29, 2007, 07:22 PM // 19:22

Hehe I recognized the quote immidately and am loving the people who laughed at it.

Just because somebody famous made a quote doesn't suddenly make it "correct." If Thomas Hobbes said "Life is like a toliet," just cause Thomas Hobbes said it doesn't make it profound.

The wisdom in the Franklin quote (which is more profound then the above made up Hobbes quote) is in the words themselves, not in the man. Show reverence to them because of what they are, not who said them.

tyche7 · Aug 29, 2007, 07:47 PM // 19:47

I not know what you to be talking about.

SotiCoto · Aug 29, 2007, 08:17 PM // 20:17

These quotes are irrelvant.

Whether Benjamin Franklin said something or not is irrelevant. If he is remembered for saying it, it isn't because he is wise enough to know it but simply that he was socially skilled enough to say it in a memorable way.

Everyone has the keys to wisdom inside them, and unlock the doors in their own way.... often completely without their knowing. Some wisdoms are mutually exclusive and even contradictory... but that doesn't mean either is invalid. Afterall, there is no universal truth.... All is subjective.

*Coughs*

Personally... I'm with the Norns.
Both the Norns and Dwarves are social creatures. The Norns just have a much more "primitive" social structure than the Dwarves do. Their individual instinct rules more highly than their group instinct does. This is primarily due to the fact that they have no natural enemies of great enough force to necessitate them cooperating en-masse to defeat them. In theory... Norn social structure has not progressed all that far because they are big and strong and there is very little that an individual Norn or at most a very small group of them cannot individually achieve within their knowledge.
The Dwarves on the other hand have had a social structure drilled into them for a great many generations... enough that any knowledge of a way of life like that of the Norn has been disgarded and forgotten as unnecessary in the past and not in any way taught any more. They have enemies that they cannot individually conquer and tasks that they cannot individually achieve. They learn to be a part of a society rather than an independant individual from birth... and therefore they know no other way of life.

Basically... the two are fairly incompatible.... so obviously they don't understand each other.

I would imagine that the protagonist only understands the Norn because... despite being part of another social structure much like that of the dwarves.... the player-character is a hero with a long list of individual achievements and the capability to function in, at most, small groups away from mainstream society.
... That and the fact that the protagonist is a smartarse know-it-all throughout the Eye of the North cutscenes (remember the comment at the scrying pool... or before that when meeting Ogden and Vekk).