477 réponses à ce sujet

[thegreateski]

You're going to feel awfully silly when those Golems assist the population of Orzammar by stepping on you.

Modifié par thegreateski, 10 août 2010 - 02:44 .

[Aedan_Cousland]

Whatever Hawke is up to, apparently it has the potential to drag the whole region into war. That does sound like he might be causing trouble for the Chantry. Divine March, perhaps?

[mllrthyme]

Aedan_Cousland wrote...

Whatever Hawke is up to, apparently it has the potential to drag the whole region into war. That does sound like he might be causing trouble for the Chantry. Divine March, perhaps?

Agreed, except for the Divine March.  From what I've read about Kirkwall (I think it was in the codex?), the Chantry holds political power and I have a feeling that Hawke may ruffle some of their feathers during his rise to power.

[Riona45]

Aedan_Cousland wrote...

Whatever Hawke is up to, apparently it has the potential to drag the whole region into war. That does sound like he might be causing trouble for the Chantry. Divine March, perhaps?

As a matter of fact, I read in an article that the Chantry will wind up "distressed" in this story, but the thing is I don't remember where I read it, and therefore I'm relucant to blab overmuch about something I can't prove.

PS: It's "Exalted March."

Modifié par Riona45, 10 août 2010 - 02:59 .

[RogueGeth]

@jln.fransico: Well not here we don't want to ge closed here. And the thread was quite fun on the weekend.



Anyways maybe Hawke get in part of a Chantry Civil War, the uncorrupted( like Leliana, Alistair, Wynne, and the chantry board helpers) vs. corrupt leaders (err....I don't know). Heck he may even start it himself.

[Riona45]

Alistair's affinity for the Chantry is *way* overstated. Remember that elderly priestess in Denerim who kept mistakenly keeps putting food terms into the Chant of Light (ham, bread, etc.). If you say you like this version of the Chant better than the real one, Alistair laughs and says he agrees. He is irreverent. Saying he'd be part of a "Chantry Civil War" implies that he is affiliated with the Chantry when he really isn't--at least, never willingly.

The same is true for Wynne.  As I said a few pages ago, she states in a conversation with Leliana that she is not religious and does not pine for the affection of a distant god.

Modifié par Riona45, 10 août 2010 - 03:57 .

[LobselVith8]

Riona45 wrote...

Alistair's affinity for the Chantry is *way* overstated. Remember that elderly priestess in Denerim who kept mistakenly keeps putting food terms into the Chant of Light (ham, bread, etc.). If you say you like this version of the Chant better than the real one, Alistair laughs and says he agrees. He is irreverent. Saying he'd be part of a "Chantry Civil War" implies that he is affiliated with the Chantry when he really isn't.

The same is true for Wynne.

I don't know about Wynne (she seemed to be a doormat for Chantry policies in my opinion), but Alistair recognizes the duplicity of the Chantry. He tells about how he witnessed a Harrowing and how they killed the girl because she was too weak to fight the demon, and that's when he stopped wanting to be a templar, or his disgust over how the Chantry controls templars through the use of lyrium that he doubts even helps the ability of templars.

[RogueGeth]

Well I was using them as sort of examples what the type of people that would go against the Chantry rules. Wynne wanting freedom is against current Chantry rules and Alistair has, like lobselvith8 said, seen the darker side of the chantry.

[Riona45]

LobselVith8 wrote...


I don't know about Wynne (she seemed to be a doormat for Chantry policies in my opinion), but Alistair recognizes the duplicity of the Chantry. He tells about how he witnessed a Harrowing and how they killed the girl because she was too weak to fight the demon, and that's when he stopped wanting to be a templar, or his disgust over how the Chantry controls templars through the use of lyrium that he doubts even helps the ability of templars.

Well yeah...that was the point I was getting at actually.

I've said my piece about Wynne a few pages back.  I get that some people don't like her (and I don't think all her views on things are "right," myself) but I do not believe she could be counted on to be on the side of the Chantry regardless of the circumstances.  And she's still not a member of the Chantry, which is what the term "civil war" kind of implied.

Modifié par Riona45, 10 août 2010 - 04:20 .

[Phantom_Crash]

Need another Darkspawn game where you actually sack a small town with a chantry.

[RevengeofNewton]

Riona45 wrote...

Well yeah...that was the point I was getting at actually.

I've said my piece about Wynne a few pages back.  I get that some people don't like her (and I don't think all her views on things are "right," myself) but I do not believe she could be counted on to be on the side of the Chantry regardless of the circumstances.  And she's still not a member of the Chantry, which is what the term "civil war" kind of implied.

Agreed.

Remember what happens if you agree with the Right of Annulment. She will go against you for that.

[LobselVith8]

Riona45 wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...


I don't know about Wynne (she seemed to be a doormat for Chantry policies in my opinion), but Alistair recognizes the duplicity of the Chantry. He tells about how he witnessed a Harrowing and how they killed the girl because she was too weak to fight the demon, and that's when he stopped wanting to be a templar, or his disgust over how the Chantry controls templars through the use of lyrium that he doubts even helps the ability of templars.

Well yeah...that was the point I was getting at actually.

I've said my piece about Wynne a few pages back.  I get that some people don't like her (and I don't think all her views on things are "right," myself) but I do not believe she could be counted on to be on the side of the Chantry regardless of the circumstances.  And she's still not a member of the Chantry, which is what the term "civil war" kind of implied.

I guess the phrasing might have been a little off because of the Wynne comment, but I was agreeing with you about Alistair, Riona45. About Wynne, though, no. Wynne is a doormat for Chantry policies. Listen to her excuse everything they do in her conversations with Morrigan. Templars nearly kill her apprentice and she advocates for that apprentice (who barely survived) to go right back to the Circle. True, she attacks you if she discovers that Morrigan is an apostate, but she does nothing if you tell Knight-Commander Greagoir to basically wipe out the entire Circle once you've rescued Irving. In Awakening, she doesn't want the Circle to be free, she wants it to stay the same.

[RevengeofNewton]

jln.francisco wrote...

RevengeofNewton wrote...

Riona45 wrote...

Well yeah...that was the point I was getting at actually.

I've said my piece about Wynne a few pages back.  I get that some people don't like her (and I don't think all her views on things are "right," myself) but I do not believe she could be counted on to be on the side of the Chantry regardless of the circumstances.  And she's still not a member of the Chantry, which is what the term "civil war" kind of implied.

Agreed.

Remember what happens if you agree with the Right of Annulment. She will go against you for that.

Doesn't she also try to kill you for defiling Andraste's Ashes? I'd say that makes her loyalties quiet clear.

That only makes her loyalties clear if you ignore her trying to kill you for helping enact the right of annulment.

Attacking your for defiling the ashes doesn't make her pro-chantry. Pro-Andraste =/= pro-Chantry.

[tmp7704]

LobselVith8 wrote...

 In Awakening, she doesn't want the Circle to be free, she wants it to stay the same.

Wynne seems very concerned with the possibility of mages falling prey to demonic possession, and considering just the Uldred thing, maybe she simply knows her fellow mages enough not to universally trust them as much as to want them to run around without any supervision. Which would essentially make her agree with the way the Chantry views it.

[Riona45]

LobselVith8 wrote...

I guess the phrasing might have been a little off because of the Wynne comment, but I was agreeing with you about Alistair, Riona45.

 
OK.

About Wynne, though, no. Wynne is a doormat for Chantry policies. Listen to her excuse everything they do in her conversations with Morrigan. Templars nearly kill her apprentice and she advocates for that apprentice (who barely survived) to go right back to the Circle. True, she attacks you if she discovers that Morrigan is an apostate, but she does nothing if you tell Knight-Commander Greagoir to basically wipe out the entire Circle once you've rescued Irving. In Awakening, she doesn't want the Circle to be free, she wants it to stay the same.

Let me put it this way.  I can buy that in some ways Wynne is a doormat and an excuse-maker for the Chantry.  You make some solid points there.  I just don't buy into the idea that she is any kind of Chantry fanatic (ie. would always side with the Chantry no matter what).  Like most people in the game, she is rather complicated.

Modifié par Riona45, 10 août 2010 - 05:19 .

[Batman90]

Tsuga C wrote...
As for the overt hostility to religion, grow the Hell up, kiddies. 

Edit: If the bashing of real-life religion(s) continues, this thread will be reported and locked.  Knock it off.

You're seriously offended by and believe that threads should be reported and locked for "bashing religion?" 

You tell me: why are real-life religions not worthy of any bashing (Especially in a discussion about a fictional religion that represents a real-world religion), considering all of the cards stacked against them?

Bryy_Miller
Well, regardless of the cold, hard fact if it is true.... we, as
the viewer/player, should keep real world worldviews out of our
fiction.

Why should "fiction" be separate from "real worldviews" when the vast majority of fiction relates a message, moral or political view of some sort (For example, the sci-fi genre was in fact originally created with the intent of addressing contemporary issues or issues-that-will-be in a science-based setting)? You really don't have an argument.

Modifié par Batman90, 10 août 2010 - 02:06 .

[Teddie Sage]

"Why should "fiction" be separate from "real worldviews" when the vast majority of fiction relates a message, moral or political view of some sort (For example, the sci-fi genre was in fact originally created with the intent of addressing contemporary issues or issues-that-will-be in a science-based setting)? You really don't have an argument."



Pretty much everything was said there. Many poeple will always be that "touchy" on religious matters. And usually, you can see that "Religions" are always seen as oppressive or corrupted one in video games because they reflect many of the real organized religions in the real world.

[LobselVith8]

Riona45 wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I guess the phrasing might have been a little off because of the Wynne comment, but I was agreeing with you about Alistair, Riona45.

 
OK.

I never really understood why so many people come down so hard on Alistair, especially given what he does for the elves as King and his loyalty to the Warden throughout Origins.

Riona45 wrote...

About Wynne, though, no. Wynne is a doormat for Chantry policies. Listen to her excuse everything they do in her conversations with Morrigan. Templars nearly kill her apprentice and she advocates for that apprentice (who barely survived) to go right back to the Circle. True, she attacks you if she discovers that Morrigan is an apostate, but she does nothing if you tell Knight-Commander Greagoir to basically wipe out the entire Circle once you've rescued Irving. In Awakening, she doesn't want the Circle to be free, she wants it to stay the same.

Let me put it this way.  I can buy that in some ways Wynne is a doormat and an excuse-maker for the Chantry.  You make some solid points there.  I just don't buy into the idea that she is any kind of Chantry fanatic (ie. would always side with the Chantry no matter what).  Like most people in the game, she is rather complicated.

I can respect that. I don't hate Wynne, she does seem to be a good person, but I always found her views on the Chantry a real problem (especially from the POV of a Warden from the Magi Origin), especially since she lost a son and an apprentice to this system and still defends everything about it.

RevengeofNewton wrote...

Attacking your for defiling the ashes doesn't make her pro-chantry. Pro-Andraste =/= pro-Chantry.

Her defense of the Chantry controlling the Circles throughout Thedas makes her pro-Chantry. Wynne attacking the Warden for destroying the ashes is just... odd. Given that the Warden basically says outright that's what he's going to do, and she never says anything to try to dissuade him from that course of action, I'd say it's pretty foolish to be shocked that he then does it and tries to kill the Warden for it.

tmp7704 wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

In Awakening, she doesn't want the Circle to be free, she wants it to stay the same.

Wynne seems very concerned with the possibility of mages falling prey to demonic possession, and considering just the Uldred thing, maybe she simply knows her fellow mages enough not to universally trust them as much as to want them to run around without any supervision. Which would essentially make her agree with the way the Chantry views it.

She never makes the case in Awakening that mages will become possessed if the Circles are freed, though. As for the comment about Uldred, I respectfully disagree. I'd make the argument that Uldred only became possessed because he was fighting against templar tyranny. Wynne rails against the blood mages revolting in the tower, but they're fighting against a system that imprisons them for having magical ability. There's a huge difference between instructing those with magical abilities on the proper use of their powers, and imprisoning mages for having magical ability, killing them regardless of whether it's warranted or not (as the Knight-Commander recommends for the Mage Warden in the Magi Origin regardless of whether he or she was acting on Irving's orders or not), having your emotions and your soul ripped from your body to become an enchantment weaving slave, or living constantly under the watchful eye of people who are ingrained from birth to see you as evil. Uldred wanted the Circle to be free, so his knowledge of demonology got the better of him when a Pride Demon he summoned overwhelmed him. Had that not happened and the blood mages successfully defeated the templars without anyone turning into an abomination, I don't see any reason why my mage Warden would have done anything to stop them. Why live under an oppressive system that can kill you with no valid reason given when you have the opportunity to be free?

Modifié par LobselVith8, 10 août 2010 - 03:28 .

[tmp7704]

LobselVith8 wrote...

I'd make the argument that Uldred only became possessed because he was fighting against templar tyranny.

Considering there was a pride demon it could also be the opposite -- Uldred's attempt to gain power could be effect of otherwise unrelated possession. I.e. the demon wouldn't stand to be controlled in such manner. I don't think we can really determine what exactly happened there.

Wynne rails against the blood mages revolting in the tower, but they're fighting against a system that imprisons them for having magical ability.

Except they're also fighting in exactly the manner the system is supposed to contain. I suppose the argument is akin to whether potential pyromaniac who burns down the asylum to escape it should be allowed to roam free in the first place.

Why live under an oppressive system that can kill you with no valid reason given when you have the opportunity to be free?

I think you may want to look at Sten for answer to this question -- why did he allow himself to be caged when he had full opportunity to be free after his emotional outburst?

The tricky part for the mages is, if they have their equivalent of such emotional outburst, it's pretty much a done deal, they don't get back to being themselves. So they have to make this decision pre-emptively and it's then largely a matter of what they value more -- personal freedom or the safety of population at large which they can potentially (and easily) harm merely by failing just once.

Modifié par tmp7704, 10 août 2010 - 04:27 .