1503 réponses à ce sujet

[EmperorSahlertz]

MariSkep wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Well by the time I did that my warden have had little experience with Darkspawn, but hell I'd happily declare Legion of the Dead the best of the best. They are dwarves.

I see we agree on something. 

[LobselVith8]

Lord Aesir wrote...

I'd rather instigate a reformation than outright destroy it. Some of the more peaceful sides of the Chantry seem fine and I even think the Chantry is partly justified in it's measures against mages, and I play a mage, though those measures require a drastic overhaul. We can all agree on that much.

Personally, I'd rather destroy the Chantry. I see no point in reforming it when their intention is to force their religion onto every person throughout Thedas. I don't think the Chantry's abuses against the elves and the mages are warranted.

EmperorSahlertz  wrote... And nevertheless Wilhelm got to keep his son. Other mages can get to keep their children too.

Only if the mage is a Grey Warden; otherwise, the Chantry takes their child away.

Lumikki wrote...

MariSkep wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

MariSkep wrote...

Uldred was working for Loghain. Wynne explained what Loghain had done. Some of the mages were repulsed by it and refused to work with him, therefore turning down Uldred's offer. Pretty simple.

That's true that Uldred was working for Loghain. How ever, are you saying that  "half" of mages refused work with Loghain, over  they own freedom? You REALLY think that was the reason?

I was giving an in game explanation for why several mages refused the offer (or at least didn't accept it then.) I really don't see why it matters. Ever heard of Uncle Ruckus?

Think about it. If someone offers all mages freedom. Would it matter who it was as long the offer is real?
Many you have sayed that Tower is prison for life for these mage. Now they refused offer because they don't like the person who is giving it? So, you put you personal hate toward this man in other hand and 80 year of prison in other. You choose 80 year prison and no-one ask why?

You realize the Circle sided with Uldred until Wynne revealed that Loghain abandoned the troops at Ostagar, right? Considering that Wynne told the Circle that Loghain abandoned the King and his army to the darkspawn, it's certainly a valid reason why they wouldn't trust him.

Sir JK wrote...

Basically... I want any "free the mages from the chantry" to be a horribly bloody affair. With lots of lives lost on both side (unless you convince them to do slow reforms throughout the centuries). A conflict that when you're done and "victorious" you stand there in the ruins of what you had, free but impoverished and crushed, seeing more than half the people you fought to save killed in the conflict (some by your own side) and genuinely ask the questions: "Was it worth it? Was this what I wanted?"

If it means freedom instead of subjegation, then it would be worth it.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
The problem is that the Circles are technically independent, but the Chantry is the real authority, which is made clear in the Magi Origin, as Irving has no authority to prevent Jowan from being made tranquil.

Well, Gregoir did have evidence, so there's really not much Irwing could do.

Ultimatively, templars, or a templar-like organization, ARE nedded. That much has been said by David..making it a fact.

So a Grey Warden can come in and clean up the mess that the templars are incapable of resolving on their own, like in A Broken Circle? The templars are drug addicts, so I'd dispute that they're needed. Alistair and Anora both agree that the mages have earned the right to look after themselves.

[Newnation]

I'm not a big fan of religion to begin with and to have it control people's lives to the extent it does in DA means my Hawke will be fighting the Chantry.

[Antaress]

I think we should send Chantry to there MAKER

I WANT WAR with that Idiots and end there rule

ALL HAIL BLOOD MAGIC

[Everwarden]

Antaress wrote...

I think we should send Chantry to there MAKER
I WANT WAR with that Idiots and end there rule
ALL HAIL BLOOD MAGIC

As much as the discussion has veered off into a discussion of how best to handle mages... yeah, I agree. My first playthrough will definitely involve killing many templars. 

[Gabey5]

first i would change the templars hideous outfits

[AlexXIV]

Everwarden wrote...

Antaress wrote...

I think we should send Chantry to there MAKER
I WANT WAR with that Idiots and end there rule
ALL HAIL BLOOD MAGIC

As much as the discussion has veered off into a discussion of how best to handle mages... yeah, I agree. My first playthrough will definitely involve killing many templars. 

Good boy.

[Valchrist]

ErichHartmann wrote...

Depends, I would have no hesitation picking fights with Templars. They are too inquisitorial. The Chantry just needs to be purged of fanaticism and reformed. They do serve a greater good. So completely wiping them off the face of Thedas would serve little purpose.

here here:D

[Riona45]

SirShreK wrote...

But please expect no further replies from me. I am already sick of this debate.

LOL!  You're just POed because you've realized you're out of your league debating this.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Riona45 wrote...

SirShreK wrote...

But please expect no further replies from me. I am already sick of this debate.

LOL!  You're just POed because you've realized you're out of your league debating this.

Nah, its probably becasue this debate degenerated into a "Yes it is!" vs. "No it isn't!" debate about 13 pages back.

[Riona45]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Nah, its probably becasue this debate degenerated into a "Yes it is!" vs. "No it isn't!" debate about 13 pages back.

Including the posts that you made?

[EmperorSahlertz]

Riona45 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Nah, its probably becasue this debate degenerated into a "Yes it is!" vs. "No it isn't!" debate about 13 pages back.

Including the posts that you made?

Yep. As I recall I didn't even once open my mind a tiny bit and let go of my ant-mage bias. And as i recall, most (if not all) pro-mage did the exact opposite and refused to see it from a non-mage viewpoint, or at least agree. This threat has just reached that magical point where we will all have to agree to disagree.

Modifié par EmperorSahlertz, 20 septembre 2010 - 12:22 .

[Riona45]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
And as i recall, most (if not all) pro-mage did the exact opposite and refused to see it from a non-mage viewpoint, or at least agree.

Your recall abilities are rather faulty, then. 

[Lumikki]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

This threat has just reached that magical point where we will all have to agree to disagree.

Hehe, that's why I stoped, because different view points are all valid ones. Basicly we have same problems here, than inside game the npcs have, which side to take or more accurate how to see situation. How ever, that was this threads subject anyway, so...

[Lumikki]

MariSkep wrote...

''Everyone's right so let's go beat some bongos and stop applying critical thought to what we're talking about."

Let me ask you this, if I told you drug X was no more effective than drinking sugar water what would be the point of taking drug X? I'm just trying to find some common criteria we can use to judge the Chantry and Templars.

I don't know what you ask. I don't want to judge organisations, because all organisation has good and bad apples. I wanted to find more diplomatic solution than kill them all, because they are different side.

You know, I got this funny idea, because Grey Warden mages are "free". What if we would made all mages in Fereldan Grey Wardens. I'm just wondering how would that affect situation.

[Loc'n'lol]

MariSkep wrote...
When an organisation is establishing policies that affect whole communities of people and become active in politics they must be scrutinized. They are no different then a local lord or politician. The Chantry's rules affect so many (even those beyond their borders with things like missionaries and the Exalted Marches) Why shouldn't they be critized for shortcomings, failures and the like?

Because they can get away with it, essentially. Going against the chantry is like going against the maker or Andraste. If you destroy a chantry, you can expect to have an angry fanatical mob on your arms. What do you do now ? Slaughter them all into submission ? Sure sounds altruistic and benevolent.

[Lumikki]

MariSkep wrote...

Why shouldn't they be critized for shortcomings, failures and the like?

Because complaining someones shortcomings doesn't lead anything postive. In the end if citizens think situation is too bad and no-one is willing to find better solution, it allways leads on revolution. No-one can abuse they power forever, someday it will allways back fire. How ever, if you know what is the problem, gather political influense and start slow change in behaviors, before it's too late. Unless you are only interested about revenge, not about what's good for everyone.

[Chris Readman]

_Loc_N_lol_ wrote...
Going against the chantry is like going against the maker or Andraste.

Nah... it's more like going against their annoying fanclub. Their annoying fanclub that tries to make everyone else members and follow their rules.