Forums
SPOILERS - ZAROS' PLAN
Quick find code: 341-342-251-65853133
Kemtros
said
:
Cthris said :
It doesn't matter how Zaros and Zamorak understand the terms of the agreement because they were not the ones to create the legal bindings; the Cthonians did. Zaros and Zamorak just appropriated the magic for their little agreement. It completely depends on the cthonians understand of working against the contract, and it is completely plausable that the cthonians would consider any action that causes the contract to fail to be working against the contract.
There is no way for the contract to backfire on Zaros. He did the ritual. He's done. That's it. It is now entirely on Zamorak to do whatever Zaros asks. Even if the explanation of the contract was brief, it made it pretty clear that Zaros held up his end. He is safe from being erased from existence. Zamorak is the only one at risk.
Haha Kemtros, promise me you never will become a lawyer okay, or try making a deal with the devil because you would be royally screwed
The clause was "if you work against the contract you die" not "If you don't hold up your side of the bargain you don't die"
You can't just assume that the two are univocal clauses. It doesn't matter if Zaros holds up his side of the agreement. All the matters is if someone works against the contract which is an ambiguous term thus leading to the possibility that Zaros is not safe.
Cthris said :
It doesn't matter how Zaros and Zamorak understand the terms of the agreement because they were not the ones to create the legal bindings; the Cthonians did. Zaros and Zamorak just appropriated the magic for their little agreement. It completely depends on the cthonians understand of working against the contract, and it is completely plausable that the cthonians would consider any action that causes the contract to fail to be working against the contract.
There is no way for the contract to backfire on Zaros. He did the ritual. He's done. That's it. It is now entirely on Zamorak to do whatever Zaros asks. Even if the explanation of the contract was brief, it made it pretty clear that Zaros held up his end. He is safe from being erased from existence. Zamorak is the only one at risk.
Haha Kemtros, promise me you never will become a lawyer okay, or try making a deal with the devil because you would be royally screwed
The clause was "if you work against the contract you die" not "If you don't hold up your side of the bargain you don't die"
You can't just assume that the two are univocal clauses. It doesn't matter if Zaros holds up his side of the agreement. All the matters is if someone works against the contract which is an ambiguous term thus leading to the possibility that Zaros is not safe.
22-Nov-2016 17:13:38 - Last edited on 22-Nov-2016 17:14:28 by Cthris
Cthris
said
:
Kemtros said :
Cthris said :
It doesn't matter how Zaros and Zamorak understand the terms of the agreement because they were not the ones to create the legal bindings; the Cthonians did. Zaros and Zamorak just appropriated the magic for their little agreement. It completely depends on the cthonians understand of working against the contract, and it is completely plausable that the cthonians would consider any action that causes the contract to fail to be working against the contract.
There is no way for the contract to backfire on Zaros. He did the ritual. He's done. That's it. It is now entirely on Zamorak to do whatever Zaros asks. Even if the explanation of the contract was brief, it made it pretty clear that Zaros held up his end. He is safe from being erased from existence. Zamorak is the only one at risk.
Haha Kemtros, promise me you never will become a lawyer okay, or try making a deal with the devil because you would be royally screwed
The clause was "if you work against the contract you die" not "If you don't hold up your side of the bargain you don't die"
You can't just assume that the two are univocal clauses. It doesn't matter if Zaros holds up his side of the agreement. All the matters is if someone works against the contract which is an ambiguous term thus leading to the possibility that Zaros is not safe.
Does anybody have the direct quote? Much easier to dissect it's meaning if we need not rely on memory (the wiki's transcript isn't up yet).
Kemtros said :
Cthris said :
It doesn't matter how Zaros and Zamorak understand the terms of the agreement because they were not the ones to create the legal bindings; the Cthonians did. Zaros and Zamorak just appropriated the magic for their little agreement. It completely depends on the cthonians understand of working against the contract, and it is completely plausable that the cthonians would consider any action that causes the contract to fail to be working against the contract.
There is no way for the contract to backfire on Zaros. He did the ritual. He's done. That's it. It is now entirely on Zamorak to do whatever Zaros asks. Even if the explanation of the contract was brief, it made it pretty clear that Zaros held up his end. He is safe from being erased from existence. Zamorak is the only one at risk.
Haha Kemtros, promise me you never will become a lawyer okay, or try making a deal with the devil because you would be royally screwed
The clause was "if you work against the contract you die" not "If you don't hold up your side of the bargain you don't die"
You can't just assume that the two are univocal clauses. It doesn't matter if Zaros holds up his side of the agreement. All the matters is if someone works against the contract which is an ambiguous term thus leading to the possibility that Zaros is not safe.
Does anybody have the direct quote? Much easier to dissect it's meaning if we need not rely on memory (the wiki's transcript isn't up yet).
22-Nov-2016 19:44:42
Cthris
said
:
Haha Kemtros, promise me you never will become a lawyer okay, or try making a deal with the devil because you would be royally screwed
No need to be condescending.
Original message details are unavailable.
The clause was "if you work against the contract you die" not "If you don't hold up your side of the bargain you don't die"
You can't just assume that the two are univocal clauses. It doesn't matter if Zaros holds up his side of the agreement. All the matters is if someone works against the contract which is an ambiguous term thus leading to the possibility that Zaros is not safe.
Do you have the exact quote? When did either of them outright say "If you work against the contract, that is a violation of your end of the bargain"? The idea is that Zamorak has to perform a single action. Now, if Zaros tried to make that be multiple actions, I could see that being a violation, but we were talking about Zaros requesting an impossible action being a violation of the contract, but whether or not the action is possible is still not an issue. Zaros only agreed to the idea that Zamorak must perform an action for him. There was nothing about that action being impossible, so again, if Zaros requests something that Zamorak cannot do, then Zamorak fails. It only means that he failed to uphold the end of the contract. Zaros certainly would have rigged the contract and doom Zamorak to failure, but it still would not be a violation of that contract.
Haha Kemtros, promise me you never will become a lawyer okay, or try making a deal with the devil because you would be royally screwed
No need to be condescending.
Original message details are unavailable.
The clause was "if you work against the contract you die" not "If you don't hold up your side of the bargain you don't die"
You can't just assume that the two are univocal clauses. It doesn't matter if Zaros holds up his side of the agreement. All the matters is if someone works against the contract which is an ambiguous term thus leading to the possibility that Zaros is not safe.
Do you have the exact quote? When did either of them outright say "If you work against the contract, that is a violation of your end of the bargain"? The idea is that Zamorak has to perform a single action. Now, if Zaros tried to make that be multiple actions, I could see that being a violation, but we were talking about Zaros requesting an impossible action being a violation of the contract, but whether or not the action is possible is still not an issue. Zaros only agreed to the idea that Zamorak must perform an action for him. There was nothing about that action being impossible, so again, if Zaros requests something that Zamorak cannot do, then Zamorak fails. It only means that he failed to uphold the end of the contract. Zaros certainly would have rigged the contract and doom Zamorak to failure, but it still would not be a violation of that contract.
22-Nov-2016 21:00:19
Quick find code: 341-342-251-65853133 Back to Top