View Single Post
Old 2012-04-21, 15:22   Link #55
阿賀野型3番艦、矢矧 Lv168
*Graphic Designer
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Belgium, Brussels
Age: 32
Originally Posted by Trajan View Post
1. and 2. Actually, if Kiritsugu never intended to honor the contract when he entered into it, then he didn't bargain in good faith, therefore the contract would be void. But more importantly, its clear that after the contract was signed Kiritsugu still intended Archibald and his fiancee to die, so these two points are irrelevant.
Again, this has no relevancy whatsoever. The spell prevents him to do anything against Kayneth and co. only on the moment it has been sealed and thereafter. It doesn't force him to stop any schemes prepared beforehand.

3. Normally, its true that you do not have an affirmative duty to prevent harm from befalling someone. If I see someone choking on food, I can do nothing, watch them die, and not be civilly or criminally liable. However, this contract prohibited Kiritsugu from intending harm to befall Archibald and his fiancee. Therefore, it gave rise to an obligation on Kiritsugu's part to at least warn Archibald of harm that Kiritsugu knew was certain to befall Archibald.
You are looking this whole point with a law/court perspective, while it has nothing to do in this case. It is a spell that would simply restrict the practioner will and possibilities to go against the conditions of the said spell.
The spell has the only 1 condition: Kiritsugu cannot harm himself Kayneth and his entourage.
It would be another matter if the condition was "Kiritsugu has to protect Kayneth at all cost".
My interpretation is correct, and it is the way the contract should work. Intent is a mental state, not a physical act. Let's say I signed a contract with you that said "you give me $1 million and I won't harm you or intend for harm to befall you." You really think it would be okay if the day before we signed the contract, I offered my partner $500k to kill you, and then sat back and didn't warn you that it was going to happen? Please.
That paragraph explains clearly the fatal flaw of your reasoning: the premise of actual contract is wrong and not applicable here. Think of it as a "restriction curse" not a contract that which is under the directive of laws.

It's true that nothing happened to Kiritsugu after Archibald's death, but that's hardly evidence of anything. It's a mistake. Writers are not perfect. I'm sure if Rider called Saber "Foil" one time some apologist would defend it as intentional, but it would clearly be a mistake. Same thing here.
It is not a business contract, and it is -not something that would lead to a penalty-.
It is a curse that would OUTRIGHT prevents Kiritsugu to harm them, therefore, he CANNOT do anything for real. It isn't a "if you fail to do that, punishment time", that's not the way it works and that's the reason why Kayneth could seal the deal, because there is NO magus that can go against a self restriction curse of this caliber.

Even if Kiritsugu wished to do so, the spell would make him unable to points a gun against Kayneth and shoot: the spell is already in effect. From that very moment, Kiritsugu himself cannot harm Kayneth and -he- alone.
Klashikari is offline   Reply With Quote