1503 réponses à ce sujet

[EmperorSahlertz]

MariSkep wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

What the Dalish did was a tactical disaster.

sigh.

Sight all you want, it doesn't change the fact. It was stupid, they should have expected the response, and they brought it on themselves by going too far.

MariSkep wrote...

Not only did it lose them the war and nation, they could have avoided both completely by just wearing the Orlesians out in a war of attrition.

Yeah that totally wouldn't have resulted in the exact same thing. 

Most likely not. There would have been no direct threat to Val Royaux so the other nations would have had no inclination to assist Orlais other than for the sake of helping Orlais itself. By attacking Val Royaux the Dalish (at least symbolically) threatened the entirety of Andrastian faith and thus presented a clear reason for the other nations to assist Orlais. The Dalish should have forseen this. They didn't. They clearly aren't the "tactical geniuses" you make them out to be by attacking Val Royaux.

MariSkep wrote...

But the Dalish lost themselves on tehir own crusade of genocide against the Orlesians...

Ok, sure, whatever. I'm sure those blood thirsty elves had all sorts of policies about destroying all other religions cultures and raping peasant women.

And which of these happened BEFORE the Dalish's own genocide against the Orlesians? None? Didn't think so. All the Orlesian had done before was to send in a few missionaries to try spread the chant of light. They didn't once try to force their belief on the Dalish. The Dalish could convert or they could just disregard the missionaries and go about their business. Instead they chose to murder the missionaries. Brilliant. Afterwards they even attacked a couple of outlying villages along the border, for no apparent reason other than to say to the Orlesians: "Stay out" which they also could just have written in an angy letter to the Emperor of Orlais with approximately the exact same effect. All the Orlesians did was eredicate the nation which had almost eradicated theirs. A very common practice of warfare during those times.

Modifié par EmperorSahlertz, 21 septembre 2010 - 11:13 .

[LobselVith8]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

What the Dalish did was a tactical disaster. Not only did it lose them the war and nation, they could have avoided both completely by just wearing the Orlesians out in a war of attrition. The Dalish had the upper hand and they threw it away. But the Dalish lost themselves on tehir own crusade of genocide against the Orlesians... Too bad the Orlesians got a chacne to return the favor eh? But I guess that when it is a human who commits the genocide its wrong while for the elves its fully justified?

Genocide? Why do you think the Dalish wanted to exterminate humanity? The Dalish and the Orlesians were fighting a war based on territorial disputes and the Chantry trying to convert the elves to the Maker. Given the respect that some Dalish elves show to the Grey Wardens, why assume that they wanted to kill all humans? 

No one really knows who started it. If Orlais attacked the Dales first, then their actions were the same as those of the Rebel Queen, Prince Maric, and Loghain in Ferelden - to preserve their nation and heritage from an invading force.

DMC12 wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Doesn't that merely create the opportunity for an Toussaint L'Ouverture type mage who rises up against his oppressors to free his people? People have historically fought for their freedom, I don't see any reason that mages would be any different.

While L'Ouverture is a fascinating person, who not only drove out Napoleon, but lead to him selling the Louisiana territory over to the Americans, and thus preventing him from later invading the U.S. if his army succeeded in Europe... he's not the best example. Haiti's not a nice place. It's not a powerful or influencial place, and most of the world rightly sees it as having a horrible government.

But the problem of that situation versus the mage situation is also the types of people involved. The case of the Haitians and the French was one of master and servant, while the case of the Chantry and the mages is one of watcher and the abnormal.

To explain it from my point of view more clearly, I'll use a real world example. It's a touchy subject, but I feel it works. The case of the mages and the chantry, I think, is best represented by insane asylums and the mentally ill. Statistically, the mentally ill are more dangerous than the general populace, with conditions like schizophrenia and sociopathy. They're still human and should be treated with respect, but they can't function in society like a normal person can because there's something abnormal about them. In the case of the mages, there's something abnormal about them as well that they can't function in society like the average person can. It's not a mental problem, but it can be a problem nonetheless, so they have to be separated. There should be reform though, but I don't think the mages can just be "set free".

Fair enough. I can see what you mean, since mages do possess incredible power, but keeping them under the Chantry is always going to create the scenerio for mages to seek their freedom from those they see as their oppressors (as Uldred and the blood mages did), even with the threat of death and the Right of Annulment. The Magi Warden can ask for independence, Wynne mentions that the meeting in Cumberland is about the Circles debating whether they should break completely from the Chantry, and the Orzammar Circle is free from Chantry oversight, so mages are never going to be content living under the rule of the Chantry. It seems likely that they're going to revolt, and that it's going to lead to a war between the two.

[thegreateski]

MariSkep wrote...

thegreateski wrote...

Can we just agree that the Dalish were complete tools who deserved to have their arse beat and that the Humans went too far when they dismantled the Dalish nation?

For not helping during the Blight, sure. That was a complete dick move. For attacking an already hostile neighbor, no way.

You mean that time when they burned down the completely innocent town? Thus starting the war?

[EmperorSahlertz]

LobselVith8 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

What the Dalish did was a tactical disaster. Not only did it lose them the war and nation, they could have avoided both completely by just wearing the Orlesians out in a war of attrition. The Dalish had the upper hand and they threw it away. But the Dalish lost themselves on tehir own crusade of genocide against the Orlesians... Too bad the Orlesians got a chacne to return the favor eh? But I guess that when it is a human who commits the genocide its wrong while for the elves its fully justified?

Genocide? Why do you think the Dalish wanted to exterminate humanity? The Dalish and the Orlesians were fighting a war based on territorial disputes and the Chantry trying to convert the elves to the Maker. Given the respect that some Dalish elves show to the Grey Wardens, why assume that they wanted to kill all humans? 

No one really knows who started it. If Orlais attacked the Dales first, then their actions were the same as those of the Rebel Queen, Prince Maric, and Loghain in Ferelden - to preserve their nation and heritage from an invading force.

Yet you seem to believe that the Orlesians wanted to kill all elves. Actually the word is misused in both cases as it were never the goal of either race. However both did kill lots of civilians without a doubt.

[thegreateski]

MariSkep wrote...

thegreateski wrote...

MariSkep wrote...

thegreateski wrote...

Can we just agree that the Dalish were complete tools who deserved to have their arse beat and that the Humans went too far when they dismantled the Dalish nation?

For not helping during the Blight, sure. That was a complete dick move. For attacking an already hostile neighbor, no way.

You mean that time when they burned down the completely innocent town? Thus starting the war?

Innocent town?

Tensions had supposedly been mounting for a long time and that by the same logic the 'immortality of the elves is propoganda against the greatness of the Divine' people just used, this could just as easily be a story told by Orlais to validate their actions against the Dales.

Things being "tense" doesn't justify a raid on a town full of civilians.

and they didn't use the Elves immortality as an excuse. The Dalish burning down a town was their excuse.

That said. Both the Humans and the Elves were being complete and utter jerkoffs during that time. Grey and grey morality. DA's bread and butter.

Modifié par thegreateski, 21 septembre 2010 - 11:26 .

[thegreateski]

Apparently they were structured like any other society during that time. Ruled by the noble houses. The Keepers of the current Dalish clans are supposedly descended from those houses.

[RazorrX]

Herr Uhl wrote...

MariSkep wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

ErichHartmann wrote...

RazorrX wrote...

Well remember that Hawkes sister is an apostate and by definition Malificar to the chantry and deserving of death . . .

That's true for fanatics who believe everything they are told without question.

Not even for them. Apostate is not the same as Maleficar.

Apostate = Non-circle
Maleficar = Blood mage

Not necesarily. A maleficar is anyone who doesn't practice magic according to the dictates of the Chantry. Much more literally going off the Chant itself it's anyone who uses magic against others.

But the chantry doesn't invoke laws that way anymore. The chantry to me is the chantry that exists now, not the chant. And my definition is the one used by templars and other chantry personnel, so I say that it is valid.

Sure, there are other kinds of magic than blood magic that'll brand you as maleficar, but simply not being outside the circle doesn't.

According to my nice dragon age origins hardback guide: 
Mages who do not join the chantry or who leave it have turned thier back on the chantry and the maker and are labled apostates.

Now here is the good part:
it is assumed that they wish to practise blood magic.

Thus to the chantry if you are an apostate you ARE a Malificar. 

Even in game you will see the terms used together regarding any non circle mage by templars and/or revernend mothers.

[EmperorSahlertz]

RazorrX wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

MariSkep wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

ErichHartmann wrote...

RazorrX wrote...

Well remember that Hawkes sister is an apostate and by definition Malificar to the chantry and deserving of death . . .

That's true for fanatics who believe everything they are told without question.

Not even for them. Apostate is not the same as Maleficar.

Apostate = Non-circle
Maleficar = Blood mage

Not necesarily. A maleficar is anyone who doesn't practice magic according to the dictates of the Chantry. Much more literally going off the Chant itself it's anyone who uses magic against others.

But the chantry doesn't invoke laws that way anymore. The chantry to me is the chantry that exists now, not the chant. And my definition is the one used by templars and other chantry personnel, so I say that it is valid.

Sure, there are other kinds of magic than blood magic that'll brand you as maleficar, but simply not being outside the circle doesn't.

According to my nice dragon age origins hardback guide: 
Mages who do not join the chantry or who leave it have turned thier back on the chantry and the maker and are labled apostates.

Now here is the good part:
it is assumed that they wish to practise blood magic.

Thus to the chantry if you are an apostate you ARE a Malificar. 

Even in game you will see the terms used together regarding any non circle mage by templars and/or revernend mothers.

An apostate is simply any mage who refuses to follow the Law of the Maker, or in practice refuses to follow the Chantry's guidelines.
The reason most apostates are assumed to be maleficar is because they usually are. Many apostates tend towards blood magic simply to stay alive. This has caused a blur between the lines for the common people. However it appears that Templars know the difference, since they for example didn't just kill Anders where he stood every time they caught him. However wether the apostate is maleficar or not matters little if he refuses to go to the tower. In that case he will have to fight for his freedom or die.

[EmperorSahlertz]

MariSkep wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
 However it appears that Templars know the difference, since they for example didn't just kill Anders where he stood every time they caught him.

And yet, wonders of wonders, they not once suspected Uldred or any of the mages he trained. Instead they went after Jowan. Is there a video gameprize for completely missing the big picture?

Jowan had openly used Blood Magic, Uldred had shown no sign of corruption. Come to think of it I don't recall it ever being stated specifically that he was a Blood Mage, only that he had dabbeled in demonology.
On a side note Uldred was a senior enchanter and must have earned the trust of both Irving and the Templars. You are quick to blame the Templars yet again when the mages themselves also failed.

[EmperorSahlertz]

MariSkep wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

MariSkep wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
 However it appears that Templars know the difference, since they for example didn't just kill Anders where he stood every time they caught him.

And yet, wonders of wonders, they not once suspected Uldred or any of the mages he trained. Instead they went after Jowan. Is there a video gameprize for completely missing the big picture?

Jowan had openly used Blood Magic, Uldred had shown no sign of corruption. Come to think of it I don't recall it ever being stated specifically that he was a Blood Mage, only that he had dabbeled in demonology. [/qoute]

I was half joking but tell me, what method would the Templars have for reveling blood mages, that would work on apostates but not maleficar living inside the Tower?

And yes he's a blood mage just like the apprentices under him he enlisted to help take over the tower.

On a side note Uldred was a senior enchanter and must have earned the trust of both Irving and the Templars. You are quick to blame the Templars yet again when the mages themselves also failed.

No I am not. I despise Wynne, that idiot who was talking to Nial and especially Irving. It's just that you mentioned the Templars ha the power to sense the corruption so... why didn't they?

I don't think they have the power to sense corruption. I meant that when tehy are out hunting an apostate they can tell wether or not he is a maleficar by the spells he uses. And judging by the fact  that they bring apostates in at all they clearly don't think all apostates are maleficar.

[Tamyn]

I don't want to fight or help the Chantry. I want to find out the truth about darkspawn, the Maker, the black city and the Fade.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Tamyn wrote...

I don't want to fight or help the Chantry. I want to find out the truth about darkspawn, the Maker, the black city and the Fade.

 But.. But.. But... You can't just ignore the Chantry! We demand you pick a side!

[EmperorSahlertz]

MariSkep wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
I don't think they have the power to sense corruption. I meant that when tehy are out hunting an apostate they can tell wether or not he is a maleficar by the spells he uses. And judging by the fact  that they bring apostates in at all they clearly don't think all apostates are maleficar.

But Templars know very little about magic, how it works, where it comes from and even demons. They can't be relied upon to even make the distinction between apostate and maleficar except in extreme examples (like Jowan.) It wouldn't surprise me if anyone over a certain age wasn't either killed or made Tranquil on the spot.

Given the Codices about Demons are written by both mages AND Templars I'd guess they know quite a lot about both magic and demons.

[EmperorSahlertz]

The one about Pride Demons I think, I'll look it up next time I get a chance. I can't really give you any explanation about the Templars at Ostagar since it seems completely contradictory to the Templars at the tower who are present when the mages are sent into the fade during the Harrowing. Perhaps these two Templars aren't usualy stationed at the tower and a just Chantry guards. Otto always came across to me as an old Templar in denial that he was lyrium addeled and unable to do his job. Not a good example of Templar work. He was only sent to the alienage to investigate not to solve, and he even admits than other Templars would probably be better for the job, however he refuses to let himself retire.

[LobselVith8]

thegreateski wrote...

MariSkep wrote...

thegreateski wrote...

Can we just agree that the Dalish were complete tools who deserved to have their arse beat and that the Humans went too far when they dismantled the Dalish nation?

For not helping during the Blight, sure. That was a complete dick move. For attacking an already hostile neighbor, no way.

You mean that time when they burned down the completely innocent town? Thus starting the war?

You're assuming that Orlais is being entirely truthful that the attack on Red Crossing started the war. From the POV of the elves of the Dales, the attack on Red Crossing could have been a response to a prior attack made by the Orlesians, possibly one that resulted in the deaths of civilians.  Again, we don't know, we can only speculate.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

What the Dalish did was a tactical disaster. Not only did it lose them the war and nation, they could have avoided both completely by just wearing the Orlesians out in a war of attrition. The Dalish had the upper hand and they threw it away. But the Dalish lost themselves on tehir own crusade of genocide against the Orlesians... Too bad the Orlesians got a chacne to return the favor eh? But I guess that when it is a human who commits the genocide its wrong while for the elves its fully justified?

Genocide? Why do you think the Dalish wanted to exterminate humanity? The Dalish and the Orlesians were fighting a war based on territorial disputes and the Chantry trying to convert the elves to the Maker. Given the respect that some Dalish elves show to the Grey Wardens, why assume that they wanted to kill all humans? 

No one really knows who started it. If Orlais attacked the Dales first, then their actions were the same as those of the Rebel Queen, Prince Maric, and Loghain in Ferelden - to preserve their nation and heritage from an invading force.

Yet you seem to believe that the Orlesians wanted to kill all elves. Actually the word is misused in both cases as it were never the goal of either race. However both did kill lots of civilians without a doubt.

I don't recall making that remark. Perhaps you're confusing my comments about the fall of the Dales. And I'd agree that the attacks in the war between Orlais and the Dales lead to a lot of bloodshed, but all wars do.

[RazorrX]

Again, I can understand how you want to defend the Templers and chantry any chance you get, but this has nothing to do with me attacking them. The official stand of the chantry is that if you are apostate you are also by default a maleficar.



The first doctrine of the Chantry is : Magic is a sin of pride. It was magic that lead to the Maker turning away from the world for the second time. Magic is a curse. Mages are manifesting sin against the maker by their very existence.

The maker decreed that Magic is to serve man, never to rule over him. This is one of the main dogmas of the Chantry. It was Emperor Drakon of Orlais who decided that magic need to be controlled, so he created the mage circle and the Templers to watch over it.

To the chantry to practice magic without being a member of a circle is a capital offense. Further it is a sign that you have spurned the Chantry and the Maker. The Chantry further believes that the ONLY reason for mages to NOT submit to the circle is because they wish to practice the forbidden magic - Blood Magic. Thus they are Maleficar. You can even see them being used interchangeably in game. Morrigan for example is referred to as an Apostate and a Maleficar over and over.

Here is one quote on that for you:

"Mages who refuse to join the circle - or who flee the circle after joining - are referred to as Apostates. It is assumed that a mage who does not wish to be part of the circle has rejected the teachings of the Chantry and renounced the Maker. To a lesser extent, it is assumed that the mage wishes to be free to practice blood magic."



Note also that the original chantry was VERY militaristic, and used force where persuasion would not work. "The Chantry is urged by its own dogma to proselytize - forcefully, if need be." and further "The teachings of Andraste had many followers prior to the Chantry's official creation, and in many places these teachings took on different forms - different interpretations on the role of magic and on exactly what were the crimes of mankind against the Maker and how (if at all) mankind could earn his forgiveness. These heresies had to be crushed if the Chant was to be one song. So, too, did the Chantry need to battle different faiths such as the remaining worship of the Old gods and the pagan beliefs of the elves."