Okay, I won't vote and run, but honestly, I don't have a lot to say.
Reject Crawford/Save Ben, I think it's a logical combination.
I don't know why I reject Crawford except for the fact that it makes my moral senses tingle. To me, they're just inhuman. Like Anna said, is survival really worth it if that's what it takes? If you nearly have to lose your humanity? My instinct says no.
As for Ben, I feel sorry for him, and I feel like I can relate. I will not let him go, because I'd go against all I've said so far, and be a total hypocrite all at the same time.
On my main playthrough I dropped Ben. He has been given plenty of chances to not screw things up. If this were still the normal world and fucking up didn't mean dying then sure, I'd help him. But he has caused the most deaths since the ZA in Lee's world and he even begged to be dropped (which, if he was being melodramatic, he should've taken into account that Lee would seriously do it).
bree would still be alive if she had been paying attention and not wanted a vote on something that i felt she had no place being involved in voting on, why not blame the guy that died and became a zombie if he had not been an idiot and died he wouldn't have eaten bree, or we should blame lee for not telling everybody that the zombies want to come in the door and even if they go don't take the hatchet because it is there for a reason and they may come back
*sigh* You're taking indirect blame to a ridiculous extreme. Sure, Brie shouldn't have been standing next to the door, but if Ben hadn't made the utterly stupid choice of removing the hatchet from the door she would be alive. As it was, Ben's stupidity not only killed Brie but would've killed Lee's entire group had Kenny not been fast enough with the hatchet or if the door he was trying to break was a little stronger. Remove Ben from the Crawford raid...just Ben, and everything would've went smoothly, that's what marks Ben as a liability, because his very presence drastically increases the possibility of a fatal problem occurring.
And, honestly, I don't even get what you mean by saying that the walker that killed Brie should be blamed, the guy who became a walker is gone and dead. Maybe we're talking about different things. I'm not saying that Ben would deserve exile or death in a court of law. I wouldn't kick him out or let him go out of some sense of justice, I'd let him go because I care about survival and keeping a guy who keeps screwing up and almost getting everyone killed at Crawford reduces the chances of survival for the group by far too much. And, IMO, this isn't the same as Crawford since they rejected anyone that they thought wasn't useful, I personally would be fine with having a deadweight around, but an outright liability like Ben is another matter.
I chose to reject Crawford and to save Ben. Crawford is one of the most horrible survivor group, just behind the St Johns family, while Ben isn't really a bad person, but that hatchet thing was really dumb, even for him.
PS: does anyone else thinks TT is a bit exagerating with the stupid things Ben does?
*sigh* You're taking indirect blame to a ridiculous extreme. Sure, Brie shouldn't have been standing next to the door, but if Ben hadn't made the utterly stupid choice of removing the hatchet from the door she would be alive. As it was, Ben's stupidity not only killed Brie but would've killed Lee's entire group had Kenny not been fast enough with the hatchet or if the door he was trying to break was a little stronger. Remove Ben from the Crawford raid...just Ben, and everything would've went smoothly, that's what marks Ben as a liability, because his very presence drastically increases the possibility of a fatal problem occurring.
And, honestly, I don't even get what you mean by saying that the walker that killed Brie should be blamed, the guy who became a walker is gone and dead. Maybe we're talking about different things. I'm not saying that Ben would deserve exile or death in a court of law. I wouldn't kick him out or let him go out of some sense of justice, I'd let him go because I care about survival and keeping a guy who keeps screwing up and almost getting everyone killed at Crawford reduces the chances of survival for the group by far too much. And, IMO, this isn't the same as Crawford since they rejected anyone that they thought wasn't useful, I personally would be fine with having a deadweight around, but an outright liability like Ben is another matter.
what i mean about the zombie/man being to blame is because if he didn't die(or if he shot himself in the head) he wouldn't have been a zombie and wouldn't have eaten Bree so he is indirectly responsible for her death, if you feel like indirect blame is ridiculous thats fine by me.
The door obviously didn't have zombies trying to break in when ben took the hatchet, so it was either Lee's fault for not telling him that that door wasn't safe anymore or it was nobody's fault, just bad luck and that they can predict the future
I chose to reject Crawford and to save Ben. Crawford is one of the most horrible survivor group, just behind the St Johns family, while Ben isn't really a bad person, but that hatchet thing was really dumb, even for him.
PS: does anyone else thinks TT is a bit exagerating with the stupid things Ben does?
Yep, i think TT really forced the hate for Ben through. I mean, at the start he leaves Clem to the walkers then doesnt keep an eye on her and she follows Lee to the harbour then loses her AGAIN then starts bitching about the mission in the school then takes the hatchet from the door and gets whats-her-face killed then tells Kenny about the bandit deal AT THE WORST POSSIBLE TIME. Not to mention, he does nothing useful in the entire episode. Felt like TT wanted Ben dead more than Kenny did!
PS: does anyone else thinks TT is a bit exagerating with the stupid things Ben does?
Good question. He's an 18 year-old teenager that probably lived a relatively comfortable and sheltered life until the ZA occurred, so it's a given that he's below-average survivor material, IMO. On the other hand, whether that means it's realistic for a dumb kid his age to remove a hatchet from the only door that's between the group and an overwhelming number of walkers...I'm not sure at all. It's been too long since I was 18.
Good question. He's an 18 year-old teenager that probably lived a relatively comfortable and sheltered life until the ZA occurred, so it's a given that he's below-average survivor material, IMO. On the other hand, whether that means it's realistic for a dumb kid his age to remove a hatchet from the only door that's between the group and an overwhelming number of walkers...I'm not sure at all. It's been too long since I was 18.
You can say that about evryone in the group: Lee was a history professor, Kenny a fisherman, Lilly some sort of bureaucrat... Yet they manage to survive pretty well, at least until Ben arrives...
Crawford fell due to their rules.
I didn't drop Ben because that's just mean. Lee already had a hold of him. Letting go would be the wrong thing to do.
But here's the kicker. I voted against Ben going in the boat. So if Ben proves himself when looking for Clementine does that mean he still gets left behind when the boat is ready to go?
what i mean about the zombie/man being to blame is because if he didn't die(or if he shot himself in the head) he wouldn't have been a zombie and wouldn't have eaten Bree so he is indirectly responsible for her death, if you feel like indirect blame is ridiculous thats fine by me.
Ok, I see your point here. I'd say that now everyone who gets bit has a responsibility to off themselves before they turn, but the first wave of ZA casualties shouldn't be held to that standard since nobody knew what they were dealing with in the beginning, and the walker that bit Brie was likely among the first wave of people who turned since Savannah was a Level 9 Catastrophe when radio news was still working. Also, AFAIK, most survivors don't know that people who die of any causes other than head trauma still come back for at least the first 3 months or so. And, I should mention that I have no problem blaming more than 1 individual for a mistake.:cool: But, in this case, I think that the guy who became the walker that bit Brie is probably in the clear...by my subjective standards anyway.
The door obviously didn't have zombies trying to break in when ben took the hatchet, so it was either Lee's fault for not telling him that that door wasn't safe anymore or it was nobody's fault, just bad luck and that they can predict the future
Guess we'll have to agree to disagree here then. If I was in a small section of a big building during a ZA, saw a hatchet blocking the main door that connects your section with the rest of the building, and didn't know that there were walkers elsewhere in the building but knew there was a horde of them outside, then I would either err on the side of caution or ask Kenny, "Hey, man, are there any walker-related reasons as to why there's a hatchet blocking the main door?", and that would be a crisis averted.
You can say that about evryone in the group: Lee was a history professor, Kenny a fisherman, Lilly some sort of bureaucrat... Yet they manage to survive pretty well, at least until Ben arrives...
True, and IMO, that's what really matters, after 2 episodes of dealing with that disaster magnet I'll finally have a Ben-free episode when Ep. 5 comes out.
what i mean about the zombie/man being to blame is because if he didn't die(or if he shot himself in the head) he wouldn't have been a zombie and wouldn't have eaten Bree so he is indirectly responsible for her death, if you feel like indirect blame is ridiculous thats fine by me.
The door obviously didn't have zombies trying to break in when ben took the hatchet, so it was either Lee's fault for not telling him that that door wasn't safe anymore or it was nobody's fault, just bad luck and that they can predict the future
You're constantly taking things to the extreme, which is a major fallacy. Logically speaking if a door (which you came in from to get away from walkers, mind you) is obviously blocked with a tool, a tool that was found in a shed only hours before, you'd logically think said tool is there purposely to block the door.
Ben does not think. He acts without giving a second thought to anything he does. It's one of his major character flaws. There are many examples of his thoughtlessness and cowardice throughout the game, and taking the axe away from the door is another one of these examples. Each time those mistakes have consequences. In the case of the axe, brie died from it, and the group almost did too.
Ben isn't a bad person, he's just stupid. He's a very good person at heart, but he acts without thinking (actually fairly common for 17-18 year olds ) Being stupid doesn't make you bad, but it does mean you might make a lot of mistakes. My point is, keep Ben away from power tools, as well as doors being blocked by axes.
You're constantly taking things to the extreme, which is a major fallacy. Logically speaking if a door (which you came in from to get away from walkers, mind you) is obviously blocked with a tool, a tool that was found in a shed only hours before, you'd logically think said tool is there purposely to block the door.
Ben does not think. He acts without giving a second thought to anything he does. It's one of his major character flaws. There are many examples of his thoughtlessness and cowardice throughout the game, and taking the axe away from the door is another one of these examples. Each time those mistakes have consequences. In the case of the axe, brie died from it, and the group almost did too.
Ben isn't a bad person, he's just stupid. He's a very good person at heart, but he acts without thinking (actually fairly common for 17-18 year olds ) Being stupid doesn't make you bad, but it does mean you might make a lot of mistakes. My point is, keep Ben away from power tools, as well as doors being blocked by axes.
taking things to the extreme is just how i look at the world, i cant really form an opinion on something that is in a grey area (like whether bree's death is ben's fault) unless i think about it in the extreme.
If the people of crawford hadn't hung the guy from the bell, the bell wouldn't have been rung, (you can hear the bell ringing when Lee is asking where Ben got the hatchet) and the zombies wouldn't have been drawn back. If you know people come back, and noise attracts them, that was a pretty bad decision.
crawford is just plain cruel but in a weird way it sorta makes sense but the rules and cons and arsehole nature id rather pick a fight with a polar bear
BRING IT ON SNOWBALL YOU WANT THIS FISH COME AND GET IT
ben is a nervous clumsy 18 yr old like me well im fatter and stouty but hey i can be bait so i thought to give the lanky git a chance
Might aswell blame the cop for crashing into the first zombie we saw then, had that not happened Lee might have ended up in completely different predicaments.
Lee would have actually headed to the [SPOILERS] Prison where Rick's group go to.He may have actually met Rick and the group of he survived aswell.
Remove Ben from the Crawford raid...just Ben, and everything would've went smoothly, that's what marks Ben as a liability, because his very presence drastically increases the possibility of a fatal problem occurring.
I always wondered why everyone gave me weird looks for bringing Clem, but the idea of known screw-up tagging along didn't give anyone even a bit of a pause. Hey, let's bring the cowardly clutz with us on a stealth raid of murder town!
... Hey, bringing Clem -saved- someone; bringing Ben -killed- someone. I'm one up on the decision making there.
reject crawford/save ben. I have read alot of these types of discussions and, have for the most part, tried too stay out of them. Morality is a subject which differs with the individual and to try too convince someone that your views are right and thier's are wrong is very hard, if not downright impossible. But I've finally decided to put my own opinions on the subject down and will not broach the subject further afterwards. Let me start with alot of peoples favorite punching bag, Ben. Its obvious the only reason this character was created was to test the morale values of each player. To push those values to the breaking point and then give you the opportunity to act upon them. I saved Ben and have no regrets doing so. Alot of blame has been laid on this character, and in some cases justifiably so, but his actions are just a contributing factor, a catalyst for the events that followed, and not the sole reason for all the tragic consequences that occured afterwards. Yes its true that Ben played a role in the deaths of Duck and Katjaa, but so did Lilly's persistence in remaining at the motel, or even more directly, Lee's neglect of his duty to protect Katjaa and Duck's retreat to the RV when he laid down his rifle to hug Clementine before she boarded, giving the walker the opportunity to attack them. Ben's deal with the bandits and failure to admit it was a factor in Carley's death but the blame there should fall with the person who committed the act Lilly, she lost all rationality after Carley said that she should stop acting the spoiled little girl and be more like Lee and in a fit of anger drew her gun and murdered her. Yes Ben played a role in alot of events like these, its what his character was created for, but the entire blame for the deaths that occured was not solely his. Everyones darling little Clementine's actions were indirectly responsible for the deaths of Lee, Kenny, and Ben, if you saved him, wheres the outcry for that? TT made Ben's character so incredibly, impossibly stupid that IMO it hurt the credibility of the game. Yes in the end I saved him because IMO it was the right thing, the human thing to do. I would not want to live in a world where humanity becomes an extinct concept. In a world like that your entire existence could be termed as walking dead. I write this, not in an effort to change anyones morale views but because I wanted to express my belief that no matter what world you live being human is not a sign of weakness.
I don't want to write too much in this topic for fear of influencing the poll but I'm interested looking at the Ben question through the prism of Crawford Survivalist Philosophy.
Ben
He's a young kid, he's an idiot, he's put you in danger multiple times but he's not bad, he's well meaning, he has the potential to be useful and will keep trying to be.
Now Ben has split this forum into 2 camps.
Those who would drop him because he's a threat or because he already screwed up & those who would save him out of compassion or his potential use. This particular issue is very relevant to the supporters and opponents of the way Crawford is run.
What I want to know is this
Did you support or agree with Crawfords policy of removing potential threats?
&
Did you drop Ben?
I'd really like forum answers to this and explanations, don't just vote and leave.
Poll is coming in a moment
I am strongly against Crawford and their philosophy, you don't condemn those who are at a disadvantage to death and save only those who meet your 'requirements', you help them -- if you start killing your own by forcing them to survive alone or simply terminating them just because they aren't like you, the only thing separating you from the walkers is that you chose to do it.
Despite all the times Ben failed and messed up, I know he only wanted to do what was right. When he told me to let him go I couldn't do it because it goes against what I believe, I had to save him because I wanted to give him another chance to do something right. I also saved him because I feel that it was the right thing to do, nobody deserves to die like that even if they wanted to.
I reject Crawford's way of life, but I also let Ben go. I don't think this is necessarily inconsistent.
The way I saw it, Crawford was forcing people to do things against their will by way of the initiation of violence, or threat thereof, that resulted in harm and/or death.
Ben, on the other hand, chose to let go--he made the choice to give up and conveyed a preference for death. Meanwhile, walkers were closing in on me and he wasn't even making an effort to save himself. So I dropped him.
Setting aside how his actions are responsible for a lot of other death, and how he could not be trusted or relied on, that's why I did it.
Comments
Reject Crawford/Save Ben, I think it's a logical combination.
I don't know why I reject Crawford except for the fact that it makes my moral senses tingle. To me, they're just inhuman. Like Anna said, is survival really worth it if that's what it takes? If you nearly have to lose your humanity? My instinct says no.
As for Ben, I feel sorry for him, and I feel like I can relate. I will not let him go, because I'd go against all I've said so far, and be a total hypocrite all at the same time.
And, honestly, I don't even get what you mean by saying that the walker that killed Brie should be blamed, the guy who became a walker is gone and dead. Maybe we're talking about different things. I'm not saying that Ben would deserve exile or death in a court of law. I wouldn't kick him out or let him go out of some sense of justice, I'd let him go because I care about survival and keeping a guy who keeps screwing up and almost getting everyone killed at Crawford reduces the chances of survival for the group by far too much. And, IMO, this isn't the same as Crawford since they rejected anyone that they thought wasn't useful, I personally would be fine with having a deadweight around, but an outright liability like Ben is another matter.
PS: does anyone else thinks TT is a bit exagerating with the stupid things Ben does?
what i mean about the zombie/man being to blame is because if he didn't die(or if he shot himself in the head) he wouldn't have been a zombie and wouldn't have eaten Bree so he is indirectly responsible for her death, if you feel like indirect blame is ridiculous thats fine by me.
The door obviously didn't have zombies trying to break in when ben took the hatchet, so it was either Lee's fault for not telling him that that door wasn't safe anymore or it was nobody's fault, just bad luck and that they can predict the future
Yep, i think TT really forced the hate for Ben through. I mean, at the start he leaves Clem to the walkers then doesnt keep an eye on her and she follows Lee to the harbour then loses her AGAIN then starts bitching about the mission in the school then takes the hatchet from the door and gets whats-her-face killed then tells Kenny about the bandit deal AT THE WORST POSSIBLE TIME. Not to mention, he does nothing useful in the entire episode. Felt like TT wanted Ben dead more than Kenny did!
You can say that about evryone in the group: Lee was a history professor, Kenny a fisherman, Lilly some sort of bureaucrat... Yet they manage to survive pretty well, at least until Ben arrives...
I didn't drop Ben because that's just mean. Lee already had a hold of him. Letting go would be the wrong thing to do.
But here's the kicker. I voted against Ben going in the boat. So if Ben proves himself when looking for Clementine does that mean he still gets left behind when the boat is ready to go?
You should take a look at fallacies, since you tend to use them a lot:
http://commfaculty.fullerton.edu/rgass/fallacy3211.htm
You're constantly taking things to the extreme, which is a major fallacy. Logically speaking if a door (which you came in from to get away from walkers, mind you) is obviously blocked with a tool, a tool that was found in a shed only hours before, you'd logically think said tool is there purposely to block the door.
Ben does not think. He acts without giving a second thought to anything he does. It's one of his major character flaws. There are many examples of his thoughtlessness and cowardice throughout the game, and taking the axe away from the door is another one of these examples. Each time those mistakes have consequences. In the case of the axe, brie died from it, and the group almost did too.
Ben isn't a bad person, he's just stupid. He's a very good person at heart, but he acts without thinking (actually fairly common for 17-18 year olds
taking things to the extreme is just how i look at the world, i cant really form an opinion on something that is in a grey area (like whether bree's death is ben's fault) unless i think about it in the extreme.
BRING IT ON SNOWBALL YOU WANT THIS FISH COME AND GET IT
ben is a nervous clumsy 18 yr old like me well im fatter and stouty but hey i can be bait so i thought to give the lanky git a chance
I would have chosen Reject Crawford/Save Ben
I hated the way Crawford ran things,I would only kick someone out if they were purposely getting people killed.
Lee would have actually headed to the [SPOILERS] Prison where Rick's group go to.He may have actually met Rick and the group of he survived aswell.
I always wondered why everyone gave me weird looks for bringing Clem, but the idea of known screw-up tagging along didn't give anyone even a bit of a pause. Hey, let's bring the cowardly clutz with us on a stealth raid of murder town!
... Hey, bringing Clem -saved- someone; bringing Ben -killed- someone. I'm one up on the decision making there.
I am strongly against Crawford and their philosophy, you don't condemn those who are at a disadvantage to death and save only those who meet your 'requirements', you help them -- if you start killing your own by forcing them to survive alone or simply terminating them just because they aren't like you, the only thing separating you from the walkers is that you chose to do it.
Despite all the times Ben failed and messed up, I know he only wanted to do what was right. When he told me to let him go I couldn't do it because it goes against what I believe, I had to save him because I wanted to give him another chance to do something right. I also saved him because I feel that it was the right thing to do, nobody deserves to die like that even if they wanted to.
Reject Crawford/Save Ben
The way I saw it, Crawford was forcing people to do things against their will by way of the initiation of violence, or threat thereof, that resulted in harm and/or death.
Ben, on the other hand, chose to let go--he made the choice to give up and conveyed a preference for death. Meanwhile, walkers were closing in on me and he wasn't even making an effort to save himself. So I dropped him.
Setting aside how his actions are responsible for a lot of other death, and how he could not be trusted or relied on, that's why I did it.
"Fucking hell! I'm sick of all the idiots dying. FUCKING LIVE ASSHOLE"