A Final Games? (spoilers)

[Rowena]

Spoiler Warning

At the end of the book Katniss votes for having one final Hunger Games in which Capitol children would be reaped, although one gets the feeling that she is only voting for that to stay on Coin's good side and doesn't actually think Panem should hold any more Games. What do you think about this? Would it be fair, or not? And the question that resonates most with me - would they really be able to only have one, or would they simply start having a Games each year where they reaped Capitol children and everyone else had to watch?

[vividlyvisceral]

I sort of had a whole 'What the Hell Hero?' moment when I read that entire discussion between Coin and the victors. After all this time, they think they need a final, almost 'ceremonial' Hunger Games to bookend the entire disaster of a century they've been having? Well, three quarters of a century.

She was most likely trying to stay on Coin's good side though. 'Most likely.'

-it wouldn't be fair. I also have doubts that Coin would know how to work the entire arena process properly, even with Plutarch's help.

As for having more games after that, up in the air. If they announced it's a final ceremonial one- yes. It would be the last one. It's hard to go back on that once you've told the public it's the end, unless everyone begged for another, then it'd be entirely up in the air.

+I know I'm writing a story about Capitol children in the Hunger Games, but it isn't a final ceremonial one at all. I'd rather not touch that idea because there's no... correct way of doing it I find. That's why I've just gone and created an entirely new AU instead.

[megasaurus]

I don't think that they'd only be able to have one and stop it at that. After all the pain that they've gone through they wouldn't want it to stop at that, they'd just want them to keep suffering.

[Purple Embers]

I hope they wouldn't because as Meg said it would turn into more then revenge, just like what happened to the Capitol after the Rebellion. I seriously thought Katniss would vote no, but as Viv also said, she was probably trying to stay on Coin's good side. Well I hope she was.

[vividlyvisceral]

If she wasn't then I don't think she'd have the right to deliver the final line she did in Mockingjay. She'd be a hypocrite. They all would be.

[Deleted]

even after all that has happened i think No games.Because if they had one they are killing innocent children just like the capital forced All the victors to do.I also think that the kids and grand children of snow only acted the way they did because they were raised to do so! so no games!

[KATE]

I was good with the final Games actually. Yeah they were bad, but in sense of the books it made sense. The dictators had to get to power somehow, the capitol people put Snow there and allowed him to keep control. They needed to be punished as well for what happened.

[Rowena]

I think that a) it's wrong to punish the Capitol children for what their ancestors and government do - as Brooke said, they were raised to act the way they did; and b) even if it was a ceremonial "last Games," which I imagine the District citizens would have different opinions on (some "they deserve it!" and some "just let it be over"), afterwards, the push from the Districts to have more could be too powerful for the new (weak?) government to handle.

However, as Vivid pointed out, there's now way Katniss could have said that last line if they'd been having Capitol Games continuously, or even if they'd had one, plus she probably would have mentioned it 'cause she'd probably have to go, and they were Coin's idea anyway, not whoever replaced her, so we the readers have to assume that didn't happen.

[maxrider12]

I have mixed feelings about this one. On one hand, the Capitol needed to be punished for what they had done. They had condoned the Games for seventy-five years. Some Capitolites had seen every Games, and done nothing to stop them. They had seen people vote on who to send into the Games. They had traumatized every victor for seventy-five years and destroyed (I did this math) 1716 families. (That's how many people died in all the Games), then thrown the victors back in. Even one Games would be enough to scar someone so much, they would end up like Mrs. Everdeen.

On the other hand, two wrongs don't make a right, and it's best to forgive and forget. (Actually, my motto is "Forgive and never forget, because right when you forget, you're gonna end up with a knfie in your neck.") Not all of the Capitolites condoned the Games, not all of them watched the Games, and not all of them enjoyed the Games in the slightest. Why should they be punished? Besides, how would the victors feel? Glad? Angry? Sad?

So, I am of two minds about a final ceremonial Games.

[scriptumhaedus]

I'm wanting to write a SYOT where Coin didn't die and sort of takes over on the tyranny factor, by saying that instead of doing one final game, they were going to do games until all the Capitol children are hunted out of existence... So it's meant to be something I can continue on, but I'm in the midst of another SYOT series, and I don't know if I can handle two. I guess I'll try it out, and see.

[maxrider12]

scriptumhaedus I like the idea, but here's an idea: (LOL idea twice)

I feel like Coin would be smart enough to know that the Capitol would repopulate itself every year, and so it would never truly be killed by the Games. Instead of trying to hunt them out of existence, it would feel better if she just tryed to either kill them off as they did in the regular Games, not out of existence, or just try and kill the entire Capitol at once.

Sorry for being a jerkazoid about it, I just keep trying to find the most realistic ideas.