When did this discussion turn so hostile? Can't we keep it civil and polite and only argue against each others arguments? There's no need for any antagonism between us. I personally have enjoyed debating the issues here immensely, so far it has been very rich and interesting and I hope it won't end now due to petty name-calling and insults.
The lack of basis and sources to arguments is something both sides have done and do. It's just as baseless to say that, for example, the majority of non-chantry controlled mages inevitably turn into abominations as it is to say that the chantry actively supports slavery in Tevinter. Both statements lack any basis whatsoever.
I try to argue against some of these statements (admittedly, mostly only ones against the Chantry). Like assumptions to what is the exact motivation behind the exalted marches. Each and every one of them are probably individual cases with a whole range of motives and reasons each. To assume that the only reason they are called is because the target is of a different religion is a bit flawed in my meaning, but it is certainly one of the reasons. But I don't think it is the primary reason in any of the cases. Granted, this is a baseless statement and an opinion. But so is any statement of the opposite position. Unless we're given a transcripts of what was said in Val Royeaux and character-analyses of the people involved during the time the exalted march was planned we will never know the exactly why any single exalted march was declared.
In a similar vein I argue against accusation that the Chantry supports this and that transgression. First, in many cases it seems to assume that the organisation is all-powerful, all-knowing and all-seeing. It is of course neither. In many cases it would simply be impossible for the Chantry to know about it or do anything useful about it.
It seems that sometimes they are judged by the fact that it's members are nothing but human. If a few members committ atrocities then the entire organisation should burn (but when members of other groups do it it's completely excused or those individual members own fault). That if it doesn't automatically rush to the aid of anyone that might be suffering then it's clearly supporting the cause (even if noone else does either and/or it couldn't possibly do anything about it).
The members are only human, with all the flaws, limitations and inabilities that come with it. It's not a big malevolent organisation that conspires against anything it doesn't control, nor is it benevolent and perfect. It's a big flawed group of humans, just like everything else. Does it need to improve? Definantely. Does it do many wrongs? Absolutely. Would anyone else be better? No.
However, I will definantely support the option to fight the Chantry, might even take it on a character or two.
To finish off, I'd like to thank anyone participating in the thread. I've really enjoyed reading and posting it. Thank you.
Also, if anyone dissects this post to quote it, mind that everything is in a context. Taking out a small part of it might ruin the point of it.
What do peole want to do more? Fight the Chantry or help them?
Débuté par
bloodmage13
, sept. 13 2010 02:28
Retour en haut
#1327
Posté 25 septembre 2010 - 03:17
EmperorSahlertz
-
- Members
- 8 809 messages
I don't think that whole mage "parole" (only using the word 'parole' for lack of a better word) thing is realistic I'm afraid. The only reason it works in our days are because of the wonders of internet databases and telephone connections. Thedas got neither ("no ****"), so exactly how would any Chantry they should report to even know they are there or actually allowed "parole"? By the mage carrying a document? Those things could easily be forged. The easiest way of allowing this parole would be to task a Templar to be the mage's constant companion.
#1328
Posté 25 septembre 2010 - 03:50
LobselVith8
-
- Members
- 16 993 messages
[quote]Herr Uhl wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
You think? Fair enough. You're welcome to think whatever you want, but I'm giving you what's been referenced and you're disputing it because you prefer something else that has no basis in the lore. Orlais claims the war started when Red Crossing was attacked - no reference to heads on pikes or any crap you imagined.[/quote]
I was overstating for effect. But I think that it would take more than being rude to missionaries for the chantry to react. Sending templars to protect missionaries that feel threatened is understandable. And as far as I've gathered, that was before the blight, which then lasted for about a century, where the elves just stood by and looked. It is in the core value of their religion that their way is right, they will send missionaries.
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
Then they outlawed the elvish religion and forced the elves to either be homeless or go live in ghettos with no representation and barely any rights.
[/quote]
Over the top? Yes. I said that they weren't without fault. [/quote]
I've repeatedly said my point: the Chantry is using religion to convert people and trample over those who don't convert. I've referenced that their Exalted Marches have been used to attack people who didn't submit to their particular religious views. Here's a quote to further support my stance on this:
[quote] ShrinkingFish wrote...
[quote]Jalem001 wrote...
1. No. Nowhere in the DA lore does it say that most people refused to convert back. The Chantry was just surprised at how hard it was.
2. The massacres weren't common practice, and none were ordered by the Chantry as far as we know.
[/quote]
Brother Genitivi disagrees with you...
"Dealing with those of the local populace which had converted to the
qunari religion proved difficult, especially as some of these had lived
under the qun now for generations, and the response by many armies was
simply to exterminate all those who had converted. Officially the
Chantry denies this, claiming most converts fled north into Rivain and
Par Vollen, but the mass graves at Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell
attest otherwise. Indeed, so many were slain at Marnus Pell that the
Veil is said to be permanently sundered, the ruins still plagued by
restless corpses to this day."
[/quote] [/quote]
[quote]Herr Uhl wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
[quote]The Chantry declared war on Tevinter because it said Andraste was mortal - why they completely ignore the slavery and mistreatment of elves by Tevinter is beyond me, but that's the Chantry for you.[/quote]
[/quote]
So, just saying that she was a mortal, not making mages the de-facto rulers again? You keep saying this, but I'm not buying. [/quote]
Besides their precedent for attacking others who refuse to follow their religion? Again, you're welcome to ignore the Chantry attacking the Dales, outlawing their religion, forcing the elves who chose to live with humans to convert to their religion, and murdering innocent men, women, and children since they shared the same religious beliefs as the Qunari.
[quote]Herr Uhl wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
I don't pretend that there aren't good people who are members of the Chantry or good templars who aren't hateful of mages, but I also don't think that the Chantry is a bed of roses that should be defended when they're controlling mages, looking down on people from other religions and forcing theirs throughout Thedas, not caring about the Tevinter using slaves but going to several wars with them over their declaration that Andraste was a mortal woman, and sending in templars against the Dalish because they threw out their missionaries.
[/quote]
Longest sentence ever award to you. [/quote]
You mean that I back up what I say with facts from lore?
[quote]Herr Uhl wrote...
They are a flawed government, that do many unnecessary things. [/quote]
Like starting wars with people who don't share their religion or mudering innocents because they converted to the Qunari religion, you mean?
[quote]Herr Uhl wrote...
Then why do they attack them for a razed chantry? They could do the same at any time in that case. Your point there just makes the contemplated march seem more justified, as they "thread carefully". [/quote]
I never said they attacked them. Did you bother reading what I wrote? Apparently not. Your "witty" remarks will have to suffice, I suppose. The Divine contemplates an Exalted March that's unlikely to happen because Orzammar controls the lyrium trade, and the Chantry is dependent on it. Given their history of attacking people merely for not sharing their religion, I see the Chantry as a bad organization.
[quote]Herr Uhl wrote...
And you have still to tell me how it is a bad thing that they contemplate a march over the death of Burkel and the sacking of the chantry. You seem to want to ignore that and just point at what has happened in the past, avoiding the subject. I reacted against the "It is abvious that they used Burkel as an excuse", what do you mean by that? That they planned it, or that they used the reason for contemplating the march as the reason to contemplate the march?
[/quote]
Obvious as in there's a precedent for it in their behavior towards other nations and people. They only contemplate a war because their followers might gain power in Orzammar; they never seem to care enough to do anything for the casteless who have suffered for generations. The Chantry focused on the lyrium trade to keep the templars under control. The Chantry also has a habit of attacking others who don't share their religious beliefs, as I repeatedly said: The Dales, Tevinter, and the innocent men, women, and children slain at Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell who followed the Qunari religion.
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
You think? Fair enough. You're welcome to think whatever you want, but I'm giving you what's been referenced and you're disputing it because you prefer something else that has no basis in the lore. Orlais claims the war started when Red Crossing was attacked - no reference to heads on pikes or any crap you imagined.[/quote]
I was overstating for effect. But I think that it would take more than being rude to missionaries for the chantry to react. Sending templars to protect missionaries that feel threatened is understandable. And as far as I've gathered, that was before the blight, which then lasted for about a century, where the elves just stood by and looked. It is in the core value of their religion that their way is right, they will send missionaries.
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
Then they outlawed the elvish religion and forced the elves to either be homeless or go live in ghettos with no representation and barely any rights.
[/quote]
Over the top? Yes. I said that they weren't without fault. [/quote]
I've repeatedly said my point: the Chantry is using religion to convert people and trample over those who don't convert. I've referenced that their Exalted Marches have been used to attack people who didn't submit to their particular religious views. Here's a quote to further support my stance on this:
[quote] ShrinkingFish wrote...
[quote]Jalem001 wrote...
1. No. Nowhere in the DA lore does it say that most people refused to convert back. The Chantry was just surprised at how hard it was.
2. The massacres weren't common practice, and none were ordered by the Chantry as far as we know.
[/quote]
Brother Genitivi disagrees with you...
"Dealing with those of the local populace which had converted to the
qunari religion proved difficult, especially as some of these had lived
under the qun now for generations, and the response by many armies was
simply to exterminate all those who had converted. Officially the
Chantry denies this, claiming most converts fled north into Rivain and
Par Vollen, but the mass graves at Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell
attest otherwise. Indeed, so many were slain at Marnus Pell that the
Veil is said to be permanently sundered, the ruins still plagued by
restless corpses to this day."
[/quote] [/quote]
[quote]Herr Uhl wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
[quote]The Chantry declared war on Tevinter because it said Andraste was mortal - why they completely ignore the slavery and mistreatment of elves by Tevinter is beyond me, but that's the Chantry for you.[/quote]
[/quote]
So, just saying that she was a mortal, not making mages the de-facto rulers again? You keep saying this, but I'm not buying. [/quote]
Besides their precedent for attacking others who refuse to follow their religion? Again, you're welcome to ignore the Chantry attacking the Dales, outlawing their religion, forcing the elves who chose to live with humans to convert to their religion, and murdering innocent men, women, and children since they shared the same religious beliefs as the Qunari.
[quote]Herr Uhl wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
I don't pretend that there aren't good people who are members of the Chantry or good templars who aren't hateful of mages, but I also don't think that the Chantry is a bed of roses that should be defended when they're controlling mages, looking down on people from other religions and forcing theirs throughout Thedas, not caring about the Tevinter using slaves but going to several wars with them over their declaration that Andraste was a mortal woman, and sending in templars against the Dalish because they threw out their missionaries.
[/quote]
Longest sentence ever award to you. [/quote]
You mean that I back up what I say with facts from lore?
[quote]Herr Uhl wrote...
They are a flawed government, that do many unnecessary things. [/quote]
Like starting wars with people who don't share their religion or mudering innocents because they converted to the Qunari religion, you mean?
[quote]Herr Uhl wrote...
Then why do they attack them for a razed chantry? They could do the same at any time in that case. Your point there just makes the contemplated march seem more justified, as they "thread carefully". [/quote]
I never said they attacked them. Did you bother reading what I wrote? Apparently not. Your "witty" remarks will have to suffice, I suppose. The Divine contemplates an Exalted March that's unlikely to happen because Orzammar controls the lyrium trade, and the Chantry is dependent on it. Given their history of attacking people merely for not sharing their religion, I see the Chantry as a bad organization.
[quote]Herr Uhl wrote...
And you have still to tell me how it is a bad thing that they contemplate a march over the death of Burkel and the sacking of the chantry. You seem to want to ignore that and just point at what has happened in the past, avoiding the subject. I reacted against the "It is abvious that they used Burkel as an excuse", what do you mean by that? That they planned it, or that they used the reason for contemplating the march as the reason to contemplate the march?
[/quote]
Obvious as in there's a precedent for it in their behavior towards other nations and people. They only contemplate a war because their followers might gain power in Orzammar; they never seem to care enough to do anything for the casteless who have suffered for generations. The Chantry focused on the lyrium trade to keep the templars under control. The Chantry also has a habit of attacking others who don't share their religious beliefs, as I repeatedly said: The Dales, Tevinter, and the innocent men, women, and children slain at Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell who followed the Qunari religion.
Modifié par LobselVith8, 25 septembre 2010 - 03:55 .
#1329
Posté 26 septembre 2010 - 11:31
EmperorSahlertz
-
- Members
- 8 809 messages
It has NEVER been merely because of different religions. In case you didn't notice: Qunari AND Dalish both had invaded Andrastian lands, in both cases the Exalted March was a defensive response. The Exalted March on Tevinter was probably in an attempt at regaining lost ground. The chantry had just lost a buckload of territory from the schism.
You try to oversimplify all the exalted marches so you can twist them into your picture of how wretched the Chantry is. You fail at seeing the big picture of why all the Exalted Marches have really been called. Also you fail at understanding that the Chantry itself NEVER gives the order to murder innocents, that is just the armies of the participating lords. Also you conveniently refuses to mention the atrocities the elves and qunari commited to the humans prior to the Exalted Marches, as that doesn't fit into your picture.
You try to oversimplify all the exalted marches so you can twist them into your picture of how wretched the Chantry is. You fail at seeing the big picture of why all the Exalted Marches have really been called. Also you fail at understanding that the Chantry itself NEVER gives the order to murder innocents, that is just the armies of the participating lords. Also you conveniently refuses to mention the atrocities the elves and qunari commited to the humans prior to the Exalted Marches, as that doesn't fit into your picture.
#1330
Posté 26 septembre 2010 - 04:59
LobselVith8
-
- Members
- 16 993 messages
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
It has NEVER been merely because of different religions. [/quote]
Let me guess, the men, women, and children of Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell had it coming?
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
In case you didn't notice: Qunari AND Dalish both had invaded Andrastian lands, in both cases the Exalted March was a defensive response. The Exalted March on Tevinter was probably in an attempt at regaining lost ground. The chantry had just lost a buckload of territory from the schism. [/quote]
I never mentioned the Qunari for this. Do you even bother reading what I write? Given your prior comment above, apparently not. The Dalish codex mentions templars were sent in after missionaries were kicked out and I'm going to make the assumption they weren't sent in to sell girl scout cookies. Your claim that they started the war is based on the claim by Orlais, who also took over the Anderfels and Ferelden, actions that were fully supported by the Chantry, based out of Orlais.
According to the Dalish, Orlais and the Chantry started the war because the Dalish refused to convert to their religion, which seems supported by the fact that the Orlesian Empire made worship of the elven gods illegal after they destroyed the Dales and forced the elves (who they sent to the alienage) to convert to their religion. After people converted to the Qunari religion in Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell, the Chantry wiped them out. Tevinter endorses slavery and Orzammar treats its casteless as less than people, but the Chantry attacked the former several times and contemplates attacking the latter as a result of issues with the Chantry religion.
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
You try to oversimplify all the exalted marches so you can twist them into your picture of how wretched the Chantry is. You fail at seeing the big picture of why all the Exalted Marches have really been called. Also you fail at understanding that the Chantry itself NEVER gives the order to murder innocents, that is just the armies of the participating lords. [/quote]
I guess you missed the quote above where I reference that the Chantry does exactly that: the men, women, and children of Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell were murdered by the Chantry. And this is referenced by a member of the Chantry: Brother Genitivi.
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Also you conveniently refuses to mention the atrocities the elves and qunari commited to the humans prior to the Exalted Marches, as that doesn't fit into your picture.[/quote]
Yes, the elves were enslaved by humans (Tevinter) and then helped humans (under Shartan) lead a rebellion (with Andraste) that freed the elven and human slaves of the Tevinter Imperium.
And I never referenced the war with the Qunari in this debate about the Chantry's Exalted Marches - I referenced the Dales and Tevinter, as both nations were attacked when they refused to adopt the religion of the Chantry. Prior to this, I mentioned the Chantry's mistreatment of mages and their use of them as their footsoldiers against the Qunari armies and the Qunari's advanced technology. Again, you don't even bother to correctly reference what I've said.
This quote makes me feel that I should let this debate rest, especially since you didn't even bother to read anything I wrote but felt like debating it anyway:
[quote]Riona45 wrote...
Says the guy who all but admitted to trolling:
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Well, I get as much a kick out of taunting mage supporters as mage supporters get at hating the chantry, and come on, its not like its hard to do either. And no I don't like mages, I made that clear quite early in this thread.[/quote]
It has NEVER been merely because of different religions. [/quote]
Let me guess, the men, women, and children of Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell had it coming?
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
In case you didn't notice: Qunari AND Dalish both had invaded Andrastian lands, in both cases the Exalted March was a defensive response. The Exalted March on Tevinter was probably in an attempt at regaining lost ground. The chantry had just lost a buckload of territory from the schism. [/quote]
I never mentioned the Qunari for this. Do you even bother reading what I write? Given your prior comment above, apparently not. The Dalish codex mentions templars were sent in after missionaries were kicked out and I'm going to make the assumption they weren't sent in to sell girl scout cookies. Your claim that they started the war is based on the claim by Orlais, who also took over the Anderfels and Ferelden, actions that were fully supported by the Chantry, based out of Orlais.
According to the Dalish, Orlais and the Chantry started the war because the Dalish refused to convert to their religion, which seems supported by the fact that the Orlesian Empire made worship of the elven gods illegal after they destroyed the Dales and forced the elves (who they sent to the alienage) to convert to their religion. After people converted to the Qunari religion in Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell, the Chantry wiped them out. Tevinter endorses slavery and Orzammar treats its casteless as less than people, but the Chantry attacked the former several times and contemplates attacking the latter as a result of issues with the Chantry religion.
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
You try to oversimplify all the exalted marches so you can twist them into your picture of how wretched the Chantry is. You fail at seeing the big picture of why all the Exalted Marches have really been called. Also you fail at understanding that the Chantry itself NEVER gives the order to murder innocents, that is just the armies of the participating lords. [/quote]
I guess you missed the quote above where I reference that the Chantry does exactly that: the men, women, and children of Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell were murdered by the Chantry. And this is referenced by a member of the Chantry: Brother Genitivi.
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Also you conveniently refuses to mention the atrocities the elves and qunari commited to the humans prior to the Exalted Marches, as that doesn't fit into your picture.[/quote]
Yes, the elves were enslaved by humans (Tevinter) and then helped humans (under Shartan) lead a rebellion (with Andraste) that freed the elven and human slaves of the Tevinter Imperium.
And I never referenced the war with the Qunari in this debate about the Chantry's Exalted Marches - I referenced the Dales and Tevinter, as both nations were attacked when they refused to adopt the religion of the Chantry. Prior to this, I mentioned the Chantry's mistreatment of mages and their use of them as their footsoldiers against the Qunari armies and the Qunari's advanced technology. Again, you don't even bother to correctly reference what I've said.
This quote makes me feel that I should let this debate rest, especially since you didn't even bother to read anything I wrote but felt like debating it anyway:
[quote]Riona45 wrote...
Says the guy who all but admitted to trolling:
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Well, I get as much a kick out of taunting mage supporters as mage supporters get at hating the chantry, and come on, its not like its hard to do either. And no I don't like mages, I made that clear quite early in this thread.[/quote]
#1331
Posté 26 septembre 2010 - 05:02
Eternal Phoenix
-
- Members
- 8 471 messages
Anathemic wrote...
wwwwowwww wrote...
Anathemic wrote...
The current Chantry is totally perverted in what Andraste originally wanted:
"Magic is meant to serve man, not to rule over him"
ZOMG WE MUST IMPRISON AND PERSECUTE ALL MAGES LOCK EM UP IN DA TOWA!!!!
No, Andraste's original message was that magic is a powerful tool, and like everything that comes with power comes great responsibility.
So it's a typical religion then? Skewing what is meant to serve their needs and desires.
Religion is humanity's way of coping with mysteries and what they don't understand. So yes the Chantry is a religion but uses their ideaology to pervert society's way of thinking that all mages are bad and Exalted Marches are of the Maker's will, too bad one of their Exalted Marches got pwned when they tried it on the Qunari
Real Templar disproves -99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999.
I just looked at the latest posts. Anyone would think that an argument about beliefs in this world was going on. Instead an argument over beliefs in a game world is going on. I myself would help the Chantry. The Templars are the best.
Modifié par Elton John is dead, 26 septembre 2010 - 05:05 .
#1332
Posté 26 septembre 2010 - 05:11
LobselVith8
-
- Members
- 16 993 messages
Elton John is dead wrote...
I just looked at the latest posts. Anyone would think that an argument about beliefs in this world was going on. Instead an argument over beliefs in a game world is going on.
You do realize it's a forum for discussion about a game, right?
#1333
Posté 26 septembre 2010 - 07:24
EmperorSahlertz
-
- Members
- 8 809 messages
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
It has NEVER been merely because of different religions. [/quote]
Let me guess, the men, women, and children of Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell had it coming?[/quote]
And how exactly is the Chantry responsible for the armies just not bothering with trying to convert the populace in those towns? The Chantry did NOT give a specific order to kill those people. It was just impatient leaders of the army who couldn't be arsed.
"Dealing with those of the local populace which had converted to the qunari religion proved difficult, especially as some of these had lived under the qun now for generations, and the response by many armies was simply to exterminate all those who had converted. Officially the Chantry denies this, claiming most converts fled north into Rivain and Par Vollen, but the mass graves at Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell attest otherwise."
Is the entry in question. The Chantry just denies what the armies did, because frankly it makes the Chantry look bad. But just because the Chantry denies it, does not make them responsible for the massacres. Quite the contrary, as if they had actually ordered it, they wouldn't bother denying it.
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
In case you didn't notice: Qunari AND Dalish both had invaded Andrastian lands, in both cases the Exalted March was a defensive response. The Exalted March on Tevinter was probably in an attempt at regaining lost ground. The chantry had just lost a buckload of territory from the schism. [/quote]
I never mentioned the Qunari for this. Do you even bother reading what I write? Given your prior comment above, apparently not. The Dalish codex mentions templars were sent in after missionaries were kicked out and I'm going to make the assumption they weren't sent in to sell girl scout cookies. Your claim that they started the war is based on the claim by Orlais, who also took over the Anderfels and Ferelden, actions that were fully supported by the Chantry, based out of Orlais.
According to the Dalish, Orlais and the Chantry started the war because the Dalish refused to convert to their religion, which seems supported by the fact that the Orlesian Empire made worship of the elven gods illegal after they destroyed the Dales and forced the elves (who they sent to the alienage) to convert to their religion. After people converted to the Qunari religion in Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell, the Chantry wiped them out. Tevinter endorses slavery and Orzammar treats its casteless as less than people, but the Chantry attacked the former several times and contemplates attacking the latter as a result of issues with the Chantry religion.[/quote]
The very fact that you don't mention the Qunari while still trying to make every Exalted March sound like it was caused by religious difference instead of international politics just further shows how you try to twist and turn evidence into something its not. And again, the Templars referenced in the dalish entry is obviously about the Exalted March itself. Unless you think they wouldn't mention that in their story? The Dalish entry can't be used for anything really as it makes the whole war sound like something that happened in an afternoon instead of spanning a decade, and at the same time makes it sound like the Dalish are blameless. At least the humans have the courtesey to admit that they at least are partially to blame.
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
You try to oversimplify all the exalted marches so you can twist them into your picture of how wretched the Chantry is. You fail at seeing the big picture of why all the Exalted Marches have really been called. Also you fail at understanding that the Chantry itself NEVER gives the order to murder innocents, that is just the armies of the participating lords. [/quote]
I guess you missed the quote above where I reference that the Chantry does exactly that: the men, women, and children of Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell were murdered by the Chantry. And this is referenced by a member of the Chantry: Brother Genitivi.[/quote]
And gain, that was NOT the Chantry's orders being carried out, but the result of impatient leaders.
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Also you conveniently refuses to mention the atrocities the elves and qunari commited to the humans prior to the Exalted Marches, as that doesn't fit into your picture.[/quote]
Yes, the elves were enslaved by humans (Tevinter) and then helped humans (under Shartan) lead a rebellion (with Andraste) that freed the elven and human slaves of the Tevinter Imperium.
And I never referenced the war with the Qunari in this debate about the Chantry's Exalted Marches - I referenced the Dales and Tevinter, as both nations were attacked when they refused to adopt the religion of the Chantry. Prior to this, I mentioned the Chantry's mistreatment of mages and their use of them as their footsoldiers against the Qunari armies and the Qunari's advanced technology. Again, you don't even bother to correctly reference what I've said.[/quote]
So because the Elves were inslaved hundreds of ears before, they are granted a free pass at mass murdering of missionaries and defenseless villagers? Nice.....
It was a case of total war. The war between Orlais and the Dales was about the utter destruction of either state. We've got no reason to believe the Dalish would have allowed any Chantry to stand if they had won. But because the Orlesians did it to the Elves they are bad men?
And no, mages aren't used as a "footsoldier" any more than a common peasant is in that war. Why is it any worse that a mage gets drafted than a peasant? Its doubtful eitehr got much choice in the matter. And some could actually have voluntiered you know (SHOCKING!!).
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
This quote makes me feel that I should let this debate rest, especially since you didn't even bother to read anything I wrote but felt like debating it anyway:
[quote]Riona45 wrote...
Says the guy who all but admitted to trolling:
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Well, I get as much a kick out of taunting mage supporters as mage supporters get at hating the chantry, and come on, its not like its hard to do either. And no I don't like mages, I made that clear quite early in this thread.[/quote][/quote][/quote]
And again: The difference between taunting and trolling is: Taunting provokes but brings valid points to the debate. Something I never stopped doing in any of my posts. Trolling on the other hand is just pure derailing and name-calling.
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
It has NEVER been merely because of different religions. [/quote]
Let me guess, the men, women, and children of Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell had it coming?[/quote]
And how exactly is the Chantry responsible for the armies just not bothering with trying to convert the populace in those towns? The Chantry did NOT give a specific order to kill those people. It was just impatient leaders of the army who couldn't be arsed.
"Dealing with those of the local populace which had converted to the qunari religion proved difficult, especially as some of these had lived under the qun now for generations, and the response by many armies was simply to exterminate all those who had converted. Officially the Chantry denies this, claiming most converts fled north into Rivain and Par Vollen, but the mass graves at Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell attest otherwise."
Is the entry in question. The Chantry just denies what the armies did, because frankly it makes the Chantry look bad. But just because the Chantry denies it, does not make them responsible for the massacres. Quite the contrary, as if they had actually ordered it, they wouldn't bother denying it.
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
In case you didn't notice: Qunari AND Dalish both had invaded Andrastian lands, in both cases the Exalted March was a defensive response. The Exalted March on Tevinter was probably in an attempt at regaining lost ground. The chantry had just lost a buckload of territory from the schism. [/quote]
I never mentioned the Qunari for this. Do you even bother reading what I write? Given your prior comment above, apparently not. The Dalish codex mentions templars were sent in after missionaries were kicked out and I'm going to make the assumption they weren't sent in to sell girl scout cookies. Your claim that they started the war is based on the claim by Orlais, who also took over the Anderfels and Ferelden, actions that were fully supported by the Chantry, based out of Orlais.
According to the Dalish, Orlais and the Chantry started the war because the Dalish refused to convert to their religion, which seems supported by the fact that the Orlesian Empire made worship of the elven gods illegal after they destroyed the Dales and forced the elves (who they sent to the alienage) to convert to their religion. After people converted to the Qunari religion in Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell, the Chantry wiped them out. Tevinter endorses slavery and Orzammar treats its casteless as less than people, but the Chantry attacked the former several times and contemplates attacking the latter as a result of issues with the Chantry religion.[/quote]
The very fact that you don't mention the Qunari while still trying to make every Exalted March sound like it was caused by religious difference instead of international politics just further shows how you try to twist and turn evidence into something its not. And again, the Templars referenced in the dalish entry is obviously about the Exalted March itself. Unless you think they wouldn't mention that in their story? The Dalish entry can't be used for anything really as it makes the whole war sound like something that happened in an afternoon instead of spanning a decade, and at the same time makes it sound like the Dalish are blameless. At least the humans have the courtesey to admit that they at least are partially to blame.
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
You try to oversimplify all the exalted marches so you can twist them into your picture of how wretched the Chantry is. You fail at seeing the big picture of why all the Exalted Marches have really been called. Also you fail at understanding that the Chantry itself NEVER gives the order to murder innocents, that is just the armies of the participating lords. [/quote]
I guess you missed the quote above where I reference that the Chantry does exactly that: the men, women, and children of Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell were murdered by the Chantry. And this is referenced by a member of the Chantry: Brother Genitivi.[/quote]
And gain, that was NOT the Chantry's orders being carried out, but the result of impatient leaders.
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Also you conveniently refuses to mention the atrocities the elves and qunari commited to the humans prior to the Exalted Marches, as that doesn't fit into your picture.[/quote]
Yes, the elves were enslaved by humans (Tevinter) and then helped humans (under Shartan) lead a rebellion (with Andraste) that freed the elven and human slaves of the Tevinter Imperium.
And I never referenced the war with the Qunari in this debate about the Chantry's Exalted Marches - I referenced the Dales and Tevinter, as both nations were attacked when they refused to adopt the religion of the Chantry. Prior to this, I mentioned the Chantry's mistreatment of mages and their use of them as their footsoldiers against the Qunari armies and the Qunari's advanced technology. Again, you don't even bother to correctly reference what I've said.[/quote]
So because the Elves were inslaved hundreds of ears before, they are granted a free pass at mass murdering of missionaries and defenseless villagers? Nice.....
It was a case of total war. The war between Orlais and the Dales was about the utter destruction of either state. We've got no reason to believe the Dalish would have allowed any Chantry to stand if they had won. But because the Orlesians did it to the Elves they are bad men?
And no, mages aren't used as a "footsoldier" any more than a common peasant is in that war. Why is it any worse that a mage gets drafted than a peasant? Its doubtful eitehr got much choice in the matter. And some could actually have voluntiered you know (SHOCKING!!).
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
This quote makes me feel that I should let this debate rest, especially since you didn't even bother to read anything I wrote but felt like debating it anyway:
[quote]Riona45 wrote...
Says the guy who all but admitted to trolling:
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Well, I get as much a kick out of taunting mage supporters as mage supporters get at hating the chantry, and come on, its not like its hard to do either. And no I don't like mages, I made that clear quite early in this thread.[/quote][/quote][/quote]
And again: The difference between taunting and trolling is: Taunting provokes but brings valid points to the debate. Something I never stopped doing in any of my posts. Trolling on the other hand is just pure derailing and name-calling.
#1334
Posté 27 septembre 2010 - 08:20
Lotion Soronarr
-
- Members
- 14 481 messages
LobselVith8 wrote...
The Chantry declared war on Tevinter because it said Andraste was mortal - why they completely ignore the slavery and mistreatment of elves by Tevinter is beyond me, but that's the Chantry for you.
That was the trigger, but hardly the only reason. More like the last straw.Or is it so hard to belive that the Chatnry wanted to smite Tevinter for slavery and blood magic, but restrained itself up to that point?
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
You suspect a few of them may be blood mages, and have no proof any of them are abominations.
The abominations roaming outside (we do ran into a few in the game) did not come from the tower. So there's only one place left - mages outside of the tower.
And I aks again - do you presume that free mages are immune to possesion? They are not. Thus, it stands to reason that some of them WILL become abominations... and it's the templars who will go after them, not the collective.
I figured mentioning that the Chantry treated the mages as sub-human and took away their rights to use them as slaves and foot soldiers said it all.
I beg to differ. Mages are treated well in the tower. Again, Wynne mentions that the templars were the first to treat her like a human being.
Mages used as soldier? Shocking..as if regular citizens are exempt from that.
A Broken Circle.
I don't recall anything about that.
IIRC, Wynne attacks you if your are a blood mage, not for anulling the tower.
Either way, I don't see what that has got to do with anything.
I think what's pointless is trying to comprehend that sentence. I referenced some statements by David Gaider a few pages back - is that what you mean? Or my references to the codex? Or you using assumptions as facts and then attacking me for suggesting something?
In order to sugegst something, you use woulds like"MAYBE" or "COULD". What I've seen from you lacks such words. You don't imply possibility, you imply absoluteness.
Again, referincing the Codex is nice, but reading too much into it - not so much.
No, they can't. Circle mages take the Harrowing to prevent that. Or are you suggesting that the Harrowing is a load of bull? If not, why take away a child from a mother who is a Circle mage? And Connor brought damage to Redcliffe because his mother was afraid of losing him to the Chantry - it never would have happened if mages weren't imprisoned for having magical ability. There's no reason the Circles can't teach mages without turning the Circles into dungeons lorded over by lyrium addicted soldiers.
Harrowing is a test to see if you are capable of resisting a demon. There is no guarantee that just because you resisted one demon, you will resist another. Demons differ in their approach and power. A persons willpower and state of mind changes.
The Harrowing is NOT a immunization against possesion, no more than me solving a crossword puzzle is a gurantee I will solve every crossword puzzle, every time.
Men, women, and children getting killed is blown out of proportion? And given the insurrection against the templars, I think that there are plenty mages who wanted freedom from the templars and the Chantry. Mages are either killed or turned into emotionless drones who craft runes on command. Uldred made a deal with Loghain to give the Circle more independence from the Chantry. And you're suggesting to trust Wynne? She tells her apprentice that he should return to the Circle despite the fact that the templars nearly killed him (and were trying to).
Yes, blowing out of proportions. You turn one dead man into a mountain of corpses.
And yes, people will ALWAYS want more freedom, no matter how much freedom you give them. It's never enough. The grass is always greener on the other side.
Wynne? Why shouldn't I trust her? Why would she lie about something like that? And the same question can be asked of you - why do you trust her to be telling the truth about her apprentice? Or is this some sort of selective trust, when it suits you?
#1335
Posté 27 septembre 2010 - 08:42
ShrinkingFish
-
- Members
- 1 214 messages
This is to Lotion Soronnar...
I've been reading through a lot of your arguments with others and I noticed a pattern... so it prompted me to ask...
You seem to often take the really extreme argument in order to push your opponent to the opposite extreme and you then switch to the reasonable, moderate argument and therefore make your opponent appear incorrect and an extremist.
Is this a calculated effort? Or are you just doing it by accident?
I've been reading through a lot of your arguments with others and I noticed a pattern... so it prompted me to ask...
You seem to often take the really extreme argument in order to push your opponent to the opposite extreme and you then switch to the reasonable, moderate argument and therefore make your opponent appear incorrect and an extremist.
Is this a calculated effort? Or are you just doing it by accident?
#1336
Guest_Raga_*
Posté 27 septembre 2010 - 09:46
Guest_Raga_*
Guest_Raga_*
-
- Guests
bloodmage13 wrote...
I ask this question because many people on this forum seem to have strong feelings about the Chantry and the templars. I personally would like to fight the Chantry unless they allow me to make some major changes.
Um, neither? Or rather both? How about fight them when they do something I think is bad? And helping them when I think they do something worthwhile? Cause they do a lot of both.
#1337
Posté 27 septembre 2010 - 12:07
Lotion Soronarr
-
- Members
- 14 481 messages
ShrinkingFish wrote...
This is to Lotion Soronnar...
I've been reading through a lot of your arguments with others and I noticed a pattern... so it prompted me to ask...
You seem to often take the really extreme argument in order to push your opponent to the opposite extreme and you then switch to the reasonable, moderate argument and therefore make your opponent appear incorrect and an extremist.
Is this a calculated effort? Or are you just doing it by accident?
Escalating response.
I don't force my opposition to the extreemes - I only react to their arguments.
And would you mind defining "extreeme" argument? What specifcly are you refering to?
#1338
Posté 27 septembre 2010 - 01:08
Chaulssin
-
- Members
- 5 messages
I don't quite see what the point of this argument is.
The chantry locks up mages in the tower, where they receive training and preparation for the dangers that lie ahead for them. So far, so good. What they do is wholly logical in a way: mages are one of the greatest dangers to the world, so logically, making sure they get the strength and preparation required to avoid being possessed is a good thing. It's not foolproof, but honestly, if people were "gently encouraged" to give mages to be raised as such... would it happen? Most likely not.
I mean, if you want to be ethical about it, sure, it's not nice, possibly utterly amoral. To us. But they've seen what abominations do, they know what rogue mages can do. And it's not like they're treated as animals. They live pretty well, considering the circumstances; there's no slavery involved. More like a house arrest. Sure, it could be done better, but it could be far worse.
Think of it like the Jedi Order in star wars; they took children from their parents. They didn't ASK, they didn't give a choice. They took the children because they were force sensitive and raised them in the temple. Now, granted, the Jedi didn't exactly have templars watching over them, but in Star Wars, children can't turn to the dark side. Possession can happen to ANY mage at ANY age if they are not prepared for it, know the risks etc.
Oh, and about the exalted marches, the only "unjustified" one I can think of is the one against the Tevinter Imperium for choosing a male divine. The marches against the Qunari was in retribution for their conquests, no?
Edit: right, the dalish elves too. But from what I recall, the elves started that war, didn't they?
The chantry locks up mages in the tower, where they receive training and preparation for the dangers that lie ahead for them. So far, so good. What they do is wholly logical in a way: mages are one of the greatest dangers to the world, so logically, making sure they get the strength and preparation required to avoid being possessed is a good thing. It's not foolproof, but honestly, if people were "gently encouraged" to give mages to be raised as such... would it happen? Most likely not.
I mean, if you want to be ethical about it, sure, it's not nice, possibly utterly amoral. To us. But they've seen what abominations do, they know what rogue mages can do. And it's not like they're treated as animals. They live pretty well, considering the circumstances; there's no slavery involved. More like a house arrest. Sure, it could be done better, but it could be far worse.
Think of it like the Jedi Order in star wars; they took children from their parents. They didn't ASK, they didn't give a choice. They took the children because they were force sensitive and raised them in the temple. Now, granted, the Jedi didn't exactly have templars watching over them, but in Star Wars, children can't turn to the dark side. Possession can happen to ANY mage at ANY age if they are not prepared for it, know the risks etc.
Oh, and about the exalted marches, the only "unjustified" one I can think of is the one against the Tevinter Imperium for choosing a male divine. The marches against the Qunari was in retribution for their conquests, no?
Edit: right, the dalish elves too. But from what I recall, the elves started that war, didn't they?
Modifié par Chaulssin, 27 septembre 2010 - 01:10 .
#1339
Posté 27 septembre 2010 - 02:04
Eternal Phoenix
-
- Members
- 8 471 messages
LobselVith8 wrote...
Elton John is dead wrote...
I just looked at the latest posts. Anyone would think that an argument about beliefs in this world was going on. Instead an argument over beliefs in a game world is going on.
You do realize it's a forum for discussion about a game, right?
Yes, of course I know, which is why I wrote this:
Instead an argument over beliefs in a game world is going on.
Modifié par Elton John is dead, 27 septembre 2010 - 02:05 .
#1340
Posté 27 septembre 2010 - 02:14
Mister Mida
-
- Members
- 3 239 messages
@Chaulssin: The Jedi Order doesn't take kids away from their parents. They need to have permission from the parents.
#1341
Posté 27 septembre 2010 - 03:40
Chaulssin
-
- Members
- 5 messages
Nope. They needed to be told by the parents, but once the Jedi Order was told, they picked up the child.Mister Mida wrote...
@Chaulssin: The Jedi Order doesn't take kids away from their parents. They need to have permission from the parents.
At least before the purge. Afterwards it's different
Edit: At least from what I can remember; I have read a fair amount of books on the subject, Star Wars being something of a passion of mine a few years back, but every account I've read that I can recall have made no mention of choice.
Case in point:in the book Children of the Jedi, Callista Ming tells Luke that her father wanted her to join the Jedi, while her mother did not.
They came and picked her up, despite her protests. The only way I can think this possible is that they did not ask; what mother would allow such a thing to pass if she could prevent it?
Modifié par Chaulssin, 27 septembre 2010 - 03:48 .
#1342
Posté 27 septembre 2010 - 05:05
Mister Mida
-
- Members
- 3 239 messages
Well, just because one parent doesn't want his/her child to join, it doesn't mean the other can go behind his/her back and sign the kid up?Chaulssin wrote...
Nope. They needed to be told by the parents, but once the Jedi Order was told, they picked up the child.Mister Mida wrote...
@Chaulssin: The Jedi Order doesn't take kids away from their parents. They need to have permission from the parents.
At least before the purge. Afterwards it's different
Edit: At least from what I can remember; I have read a fair amount of books on the subject, Star Wars being something of a passion of mine a few years back, but every account I've read that I can recall have made no mention of choice.
Case in point:in the book Children of the Jedi, Callista Ming tells Luke that her father wanted her to join the Jedi, while her mother did not.
They came and picked her up, despite her protests. The only way I can think this possible is that they did not ask; what mother would allow such a thing to pass if she could prevent it?
And why are Jedi allowed to leave the Order, like Count Dooku and Jolee Bindo did, if they are forced to join?
No intention to derail this thread - this will be the last I'll say about this issue - but I don't think the Jedi are forced into the Order.
#1343
Posté 27 septembre 2010 - 06:02
LobselVith8
-
- Members
- 16 993 messages
[quote]Elton John is dead wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
[quote]Elton John is dead wrote...
I just looked at the latest posts. Anyone would think that an argument about beliefs in this world was going on. Instead an argument over beliefs in a game world is going on. [/quote]
You do realize it's a forum for discussion about a game, right?[/quote]
Yes, of course I know, which is why I wrote this:
Instead an argument over beliefs in a game world is going on. [/quote]
You just seemed a little surprised is all.
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
This quote makes me feel that I should let this debate rest, especially since you didn't even bother to read anything I wrote but felt like debating it anyway:
[quote]Riona45 wrote...
Says the guy who all but admitted to trolling:
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Well, I get as much a kick out of taunting mage supporters as mage supporters get at hating the chantry, and come on, its not like its hard to do either. And no I don't like mages, I made that clear quite early in this thread.[/quote][/quote][/quote]
And again: The difference between taunting and trolling is: Taunting provokes but brings valid points to the debate. Something I never stopped doing in any of my posts. Trolling on the other hand is just pure derailing and name-calling.[/quote]
I didn't realize there was an academia to trolling...
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
It has NEVER been merely because of different religions. [/quote]
Let me guess, the men, women, and children of Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell had it coming?[/quote]
And how exactly is the Chantry responsible for the armies just not bothering with trying to convert the populace in those towns? The Chantry did NOT give a specific order to kill those people. It was just impatient leaders of the army who couldn't be arsed.
"Dealing with those of the local populace which had converted to the qunari religion proved difficult, especially as some of these had lived under the qun now for generations, and the response by many armies was simply to exterminate all those who had converted. Officially the Chantry denies this, claiming most converts fled north into Rivain and Par Vollen, but the mass graves at Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell attest otherwise."
Is the entry in question. The Chantry just denies what the armies did, because frankly it makes the Chantry look bad. But just because the Chantry denies it, does not make them responsible for the massacres. Quite the contrary, as if they had actually ordered it, they wouldn't bother denying it. [/quote]
Odd that you intentionally left out the beginning of Brother Genitivi's commentary that mentioned it was the Chantry that was pushing the Qunari armies back and the Chantry was leading the armies against the Qunari....
“Taking their names from the Exalted Marches of the past, the New Exalted Marches were declared by the Chantry in 7:25 Storm Age after nearly a century of internecine warfare throughout northern Thedas. The Imperial Chantry in Minrathous (the only unoccupied major Tevinter city) marched against Seheron and the occupied eastern territories of the Imperium, and the Divine in Val Royeaux commanded her templars to lead the armies of the south into Rivain. It was the grandest mobilization of martial power since the Fourth Blight. The greatest advantage that the Chantry-led forces had against the qunari was, in fact, the Circle of Magi. For all their technology, the qunari appeared to harbor a great hatred for all things magical. They possessed mages, but these were little better than animals kept on leashes… and none of the qunari mages possessed anywhere near the skill that the Circle’s mages had. Faced with cannons, the Chantry responded with lightning and balls of fire and it proved effective indeed. For all the force that the qunari armies had brought to bear on the north, they also lacked the sheer numbers of the humans. As each year passed, the Chantry pushed further and further into the qunari lines. Dealing with those of the local populace which had converted to the qunari religion proved difficult, especially as some of these had lived under the qun now for generations, and the response by many armies was simply to exterminate all those who had converted. Officially the Chantry denies this, claiming most converts fled north into Rivain and Par Vollen, but the mass graves at Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell attest otherwise. Indeed, so many were slain at Marnus Pell that the Veil is said to be permanently sundered, the ruins still plagued by restless corpses to this day."
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
In case you didn't notice: Qunari AND Dalish both had invaded Andrastian lands, in both cases the Exalted March was a defensive response. The Exalted March on Tevinter was probably in an attempt at regaining lost ground. The chantry had just lost a buckload of territory from the schism. [/quote]
I never mentioned the Qunari for this. Do you even bother reading what I write? Given your prior comment above, apparently not. The Dalish codex mentions templars were sent in after missionaries were kicked out and I'm going to make the assumption they weren't sent in to sell girl scout cookies. Your claim that they started the war is based on the claim by Orlais, who also took over the Anderfels and Ferelden, actions that were fully supported by the Chantry, based out of Orlais.
According to the Dalish, Orlais and the Chantry started the war because the Dalish refused to convert to their religion, which seems supported by the fact that the Orlesian Empire made worship of the elven gods illegal after they destroyed the Dales and forced the elves (who they sent to the alienage) to convert to their religion. After people converted to the Qunari religion in Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell, the Chantry wiped them out. Tevinter endorses slavery and Orzammar treats its casteless as less than people, but the Chantry attacked the former several times and contemplates attacking the latter as a result of issues with the Chantry religion.[/quote]
The very fact that you don't mention the Qunari while still trying to make every Exalted March sound like it was caused by religious difference instead of international politics just further shows how you try to twist and turn evidence into something its not. And again, the Templars referenced in the dalish entry is obviously about the Exalted March itself. Unless you think they wouldn't mention that in their story? The Dalish entry can't be used for anything really as it makes the whole war sound like something that happened in an afternoon instead of spanning a decade, and at the same time makes it sound like the Dalish are blameless. At least the humans have the courtesey to admit that they at least are partially to blame. [/quote]
I didn't mention the Qunari because they invaded and the other nations retaliated, that's why.
Your conspiracy theory aside, you still haven't proved that the templar reference is about the Exalted March. And I don't recall the Chantry ever stating that they were in any way responsible for the war with the Dalish - in fact, they took out the canticles of Shartan from the Chant.
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
You try to oversimplify all the exalted marches so you can twist them into your picture of how wretched the Chantry is. You fail at seeing the big picture of why all the Exalted Marches have really been called. Also you fail at understanding that the Chantry itself NEVER gives the order to murder innocents, that is just the armies of the participating lords. [/quote]
I guess you missed the quote above where I reference that the Chantry does exactly that: the men, women, and children of Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell were murdered by the Chantry. And this is referenced by a member of the Chantry: Brother Genitivi.[/quote]
And gain, that was NOT the Chantry's orders being carried out, but the result of impatient leaders. [/quote]
Actually, you left out the beginning passage that referenced the Chantry leading an Exalted March against the Qunari. And there's no reference to impatient leaders. Are you deliberately lying now?
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Also you conveniently refuses to mention the atrocities the elves and qunari commited to the humans prior to the Exalted Marches, as that doesn't fit into your picture.[/quote]
Yes, the elves were enslaved by humans (Tevinter) and then helped humans (under Shartan) lead a rebellion (with Andraste) that freed the elven and human slaves of the Tevinter Imperium.
And I never referenced the war with the Qunari in this debate about the Chantry's Exalted Marches - I referenced the Dales and Tevinter, as both nations were attacked when they refused to adopt the religion of the Chantry. Prior to this, I mentioned the Chantry's mistreatment of mages and their use of them as their footsoldiers against the Qunari armies and the Qunari's advanced technology. Again, you don't even bother to correctly reference what I've said.[/quote]
So because the Elves were inslaved hundreds of ears before, they are granted a free pass at mass murdering of missionaries and defenseless villagers? Nice.....
It was a case of total war. The war between Orlais and the Dales was about the utter destruction of either state. We've got no reason to believe the Dalish would have allowed any Chantry to stand if they had won. But because the Orlesians did it to the Elves they are bad men?
And no, mages aren't used as a "footsoldier" any more than a common peasant is in that war. Why is it any worse that a mage gets drafted than a peasant? Its doubtful eitehr got much choice in the matter. And some could actually have voluntiered you know (SHOCKING!!). [/quote]
The Dalish codex mentions they kicked out the missionaries. You're either misreading the codex that specifically states they threw them out or you're lying to make your point.
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
The Chantry declared war on Tevinter because it said Andraste was mortal - why they completely ignore the slavery and mistreatment of elves by Tevinter is beyond me, but that's the Chantry for you.
[/quote]
That was the trigger, but hardly the only reason. More like the last straw.Or is it so hard to belive that the Chatnry wanted to smite Tevinter for slavery and blood magic, but restrained itself up to that point? [/quote]
They declared several Exalted Marches when Tevinter declared Andraste was a mortal and not divine. If you have proof that this isn't the case, feel free to provide it.
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
You suspect a few of them may be blood mages, and have no proof any of them are abominations.[/quote]
The abominations roaming outside (we do ran into a few in the game) did not come from the tower. So there's only one place left - mages outside of the tower.
And I aks again - do you presume that free mages are immune to possesion? They are not. Thus, it stands to reason that some of them WILL become abominations... and it's the templars who will go after them, not the collective. [/quote]
Again, none of those abominations are shown to have any ties to the Collective. Again, you're wrong.
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
I figured mentioning that the Chantry treated the mages as sub-human and took away their rights to use them as slaves and foot soldiers said it all.[/quote]
I beg to differ. Mages are treated well in the tower. Again, Wynne mentions that the templars were the first to treat her like a human being.
Mages used as soldier? Shocking..as if regular citizens are exempt from that. [/quote]
From being torn from their family and now living under the tyranny of a religious dogma that stigmatized all mages and forced them under the watch of armored and armed drug addicts, and you're comparing it to civilian life?
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
A Broken Circle.[/quote]
I don't recall anything about that.
IIRC, Wynne attacks you if your are a blood mage, not for anulling the tower.
Either way, I don't see what that has got to do with anything. [/quote]
She tries to kill the Warden if he or she recommends that the Circle should be annuled, but does nothing if Greagoir will command it to be done.
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
I think what's pointless is trying to comprehend that sentence. I referenced some statements by David Gaider a few pages back - is that what you mean? Or my references to the codex? Or you using assumptions as facts and then attacking me for suggesting something?[/quote]
In order to sugegst something, you use woulds like"MAYBE" or "COULD". What I've seen from you lacks such words. You don't imply possibility, you imply absoluteness.
Again, referincing the Codex is nice, but reading too much into it - not so much. [/quote]
Is that why you referenced the codex regarding the Chantry murdering all those people in those towns and edited it to fit your "truth"?
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
No, they can't. Circle mages take the Harrowing to prevent that. Or are you suggesting that the Harrowing is a load of bull? If not, why take away a child from a mother who is a Circle mage? And Connor brought damage to Redcliffe because his mother was afraid of losing him to the Chantry - it never would have happened if mages weren't imprisoned for having magical ability. There's no reason the Circles can't teach mages without turning the Circles into dungeons lorded over by lyrium addicted soldiers.[/quote]
Harrowing is a test to see if you are capable of resisting a demon. There is no guarantee that just because you resisted one demon, you will resist another. Demons differ in their approach and power. A persons willpower and state of mind changes.
The Harrowing is NOT a immunization against possesion, no more than me solving a crossword puzzle is a gurantee I will solve every crossword puzzle, every time. [/quote]
No one said it was. However, the Harrowing is meant to show that a mage can resist a demon. Otherwise, they force the mage to become tranquil. Under your line of reasoning, mages shouldn't be trusted with anything, and yet are trusted to fight against the Qunari and prevent them from taking over the Andrastian nations. And Grey Warden mages can become parents without the Chantry taking away their children because they are no longer part of the Circle.
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
Men, women, and children getting killed is blown out of proportion? And given the insurrection against the templars, I think that there are plenty mages who wanted freedom from the templars and the Chantry. Mages are either killed or turned into emotionless drones who craft runes on command. Uldred made a deal with Loghain to give the Circle more independence from the Chantry. And you're suggesting to trust Wynne? She tells her apprentice that he should return to the Circle despite the fact that the templars nearly killed him (and were trying to).[/quote]
Yes, blowing out of proportions. You turn one dead man into a mountain of corpses. [/quote]
I didn't realize that when Brother Genitivi references the mass graves at Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell that it was one man.
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
And yes, people will ALWAYS want more freedom, no matter how much freedom you give them. It's never enough. The grass is always greener on the other side.
Wynne? Why shouldn't I trust her? Why would she lie about something like that? And the same question can be asked of you - why do you trust her to be telling the truth about her apprentice? Or is this some sort of selective trust, when it suits you? [/quote]
She has bad judgement, like when she tries to kill the Warden for thinking that the Circle is too great a risk, but does nothing (not even argue the point) when Greagoir says it should be done. I thought the fact that she tells her former apprentice Aneirin to return to the Circle that nearly cost him his life was a clue to that.
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
[quote]Elton John is dead wrote...
I just looked at the latest posts. Anyone would think that an argument about beliefs in this world was going on. Instead an argument over beliefs in a game world is going on. [/quote]
You do realize it's a forum for discussion about a game, right?[/quote]
Yes, of course I know, which is why I wrote this:
Instead an argument over beliefs in a game world is going on. [/quote]
You just seemed a little surprised is all.
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
This quote makes me feel that I should let this debate rest, especially since you didn't even bother to read anything I wrote but felt like debating it anyway:
[quote]Riona45 wrote...
Says the guy who all but admitted to trolling:
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Well, I get as much a kick out of taunting mage supporters as mage supporters get at hating the chantry, and come on, its not like its hard to do either. And no I don't like mages, I made that clear quite early in this thread.[/quote][/quote][/quote]
And again: The difference between taunting and trolling is: Taunting provokes but brings valid points to the debate. Something I never stopped doing in any of my posts. Trolling on the other hand is just pure derailing and name-calling.[/quote]
I didn't realize there was an academia to trolling...
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
It has NEVER been merely because of different religions. [/quote]
Let me guess, the men, women, and children of Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell had it coming?[/quote]
And how exactly is the Chantry responsible for the armies just not bothering with trying to convert the populace in those towns? The Chantry did NOT give a specific order to kill those people. It was just impatient leaders of the army who couldn't be arsed.
"Dealing with those of the local populace which had converted to the qunari religion proved difficult, especially as some of these had lived under the qun now for generations, and the response by many armies was simply to exterminate all those who had converted. Officially the Chantry denies this, claiming most converts fled north into Rivain and Par Vollen, but the mass graves at Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell attest otherwise."
Is the entry in question. The Chantry just denies what the armies did, because frankly it makes the Chantry look bad. But just because the Chantry denies it, does not make them responsible for the massacres. Quite the contrary, as if they had actually ordered it, they wouldn't bother denying it. [/quote]
Odd that you intentionally left out the beginning of Brother Genitivi's commentary that mentioned it was the Chantry that was pushing the Qunari armies back and the Chantry was leading the armies against the Qunari....
“Taking their names from the Exalted Marches of the past, the New Exalted Marches were declared by the Chantry in 7:25 Storm Age after nearly a century of internecine warfare throughout northern Thedas. The Imperial Chantry in Minrathous (the only unoccupied major Tevinter city) marched against Seheron and the occupied eastern territories of the Imperium, and the Divine in Val Royeaux commanded her templars to lead the armies of the south into Rivain. It was the grandest mobilization of martial power since the Fourth Blight. The greatest advantage that the Chantry-led forces had against the qunari was, in fact, the Circle of Magi. For all their technology, the qunari appeared to harbor a great hatred for all things magical. They possessed mages, but these were little better than animals kept on leashes… and none of the qunari mages possessed anywhere near the skill that the Circle’s mages had. Faced with cannons, the Chantry responded with lightning and balls of fire and it proved effective indeed. For all the force that the qunari armies had brought to bear on the north, they also lacked the sheer numbers of the humans. As each year passed, the Chantry pushed further and further into the qunari lines. Dealing with those of the local populace which had converted to the qunari religion proved difficult, especially as some of these had lived under the qun now for generations, and the response by many armies was simply to exterminate all those who had converted. Officially the Chantry denies this, claiming most converts fled north into Rivain and Par Vollen, but the mass graves at Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell attest otherwise. Indeed, so many were slain at Marnus Pell that the Veil is said to be permanently sundered, the ruins still plagued by restless corpses to this day."
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
In case you didn't notice: Qunari AND Dalish both had invaded Andrastian lands, in both cases the Exalted March was a defensive response. The Exalted March on Tevinter was probably in an attempt at regaining lost ground. The chantry had just lost a buckload of territory from the schism. [/quote]
I never mentioned the Qunari for this. Do you even bother reading what I write? Given your prior comment above, apparently not. The Dalish codex mentions templars were sent in after missionaries were kicked out and I'm going to make the assumption they weren't sent in to sell girl scout cookies. Your claim that they started the war is based on the claim by Orlais, who also took over the Anderfels and Ferelden, actions that were fully supported by the Chantry, based out of Orlais.
According to the Dalish, Orlais and the Chantry started the war because the Dalish refused to convert to their religion, which seems supported by the fact that the Orlesian Empire made worship of the elven gods illegal after they destroyed the Dales and forced the elves (who they sent to the alienage) to convert to their religion. After people converted to the Qunari religion in Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell, the Chantry wiped them out. Tevinter endorses slavery and Orzammar treats its casteless as less than people, but the Chantry attacked the former several times and contemplates attacking the latter as a result of issues with the Chantry religion.[/quote]
The very fact that you don't mention the Qunari while still trying to make every Exalted March sound like it was caused by religious difference instead of international politics just further shows how you try to twist and turn evidence into something its not. And again, the Templars referenced in the dalish entry is obviously about the Exalted March itself. Unless you think they wouldn't mention that in their story? The Dalish entry can't be used for anything really as it makes the whole war sound like something that happened in an afternoon instead of spanning a decade, and at the same time makes it sound like the Dalish are blameless. At least the humans have the courtesey to admit that they at least are partially to blame. [/quote]
I didn't mention the Qunari because they invaded and the other nations retaliated, that's why.
Your conspiracy theory aside, you still haven't proved that the templar reference is about the Exalted March. And I don't recall the Chantry ever stating that they were in any way responsible for the war with the Dalish - in fact, they took out the canticles of Shartan from the Chant.
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
You try to oversimplify all the exalted marches so you can twist them into your picture of how wretched the Chantry is. You fail at seeing the big picture of why all the Exalted Marches have really been called. Also you fail at understanding that the Chantry itself NEVER gives the order to murder innocents, that is just the armies of the participating lords. [/quote]
I guess you missed the quote above where I reference that the Chantry does exactly that: the men, women, and children of Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell were murdered by the Chantry. And this is referenced by a member of the Chantry: Brother Genitivi.[/quote]
And gain, that was NOT the Chantry's orders being carried out, but the result of impatient leaders. [/quote]
Actually, you left out the beginning passage that referenced the Chantry leading an Exalted March against the Qunari. And there's no reference to impatient leaders. Are you deliberately lying now?
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...
Also you conveniently refuses to mention the atrocities the elves and qunari commited to the humans prior to the Exalted Marches, as that doesn't fit into your picture.[/quote]
Yes, the elves were enslaved by humans (Tevinter) and then helped humans (under Shartan) lead a rebellion (with Andraste) that freed the elven and human slaves of the Tevinter Imperium.
And I never referenced the war with the Qunari in this debate about the Chantry's Exalted Marches - I referenced the Dales and Tevinter, as both nations were attacked when they refused to adopt the religion of the Chantry. Prior to this, I mentioned the Chantry's mistreatment of mages and their use of them as their footsoldiers against the Qunari armies and the Qunari's advanced technology. Again, you don't even bother to correctly reference what I've said.[/quote]
So because the Elves were inslaved hundreds of ears before, they are granted a free pass at mass murdering of missionaries and defenseless villagers? Nice.....
It was a case of total war. The war between Orlais and the Dales was about the utter destruction of either state. We've got no reason to believe the Dalish would have allowed any Chantry to stand if they had won. But because the Orlesians did it to the Elves they are bad men?
And no, mages aren't used as a "footsoldier" any more than a common peasant is in that war. Why is it any worse that a mage gets drafted than a peasant? Its doubtful eitehr got much choice in the matter. And some could actually have voluntiered you know (SHOCKING!!). [/quote]
The Dalish codex mentions they kicked out the missionaries. You're either misreading the codex that specifically states they threw them out or you're lying to make your point.
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
The Chantry declared war on Tevinter because it said Andraste was mortal - why they completely ignore the slavery and mistreatment of elves by Tevinter is beyond me, but that's the Chantry for you.
[/quote]
That was the trigger, but hardly the only reason. More like the last straw.Or is it so hard to belive that the Chatnry wanted to smite Tevinter for slavery and blood magic, but restrained itself up to that point? [/quote]
They declared several Exalted Marches when Tevinter declared Andraste was a mortal and not divine. If you have proof that this isn't the case, feel free to provide it.
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
You suspect a few of them may be blood mages, and have no proof any of them are abominations.[/quote]
The abominations roaming outside (we do ran into a few in the game) did not come from the tower. So there's only one place left - mages outside of the tower.
And I aks again - do you presume that free mages are immune to possesion? They are not. Thus, it stands to reason that some of them WILL become abominations... and it's the templars who will go after them, not the collective. [/quote]
Again, none of those abominations are shown to have any ties to the Collective. Again, you're wrong.
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
I figured mentioning that the Chantry treated the mages as sub-human and took away their rights to use them as slaves and foot soldiers said it all.[/quote]
I beg to differ. Mages are treated well in the tower. Again, Wynne mentions that the templars were the first to treat her like a human being.
Mages used as soldier? Shocking..as if regular citizens are exempt from that. [/quote]
From being torn from their family and now living under the tyranny of a religious dogma that stigmatized all mages and forced them under the watch of armored and armed drug addicts, and you're comparing it to civilian life?
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
A Broken Circle.[/quote]
I don't recall anything about that.
IIRC, Wynne attacks you if your are a blood mage, not for anulling the tower.
Either way, I don't see what that has got to do with anything. [/quote]
She tries to kill the Warden if he or she recommends that the Circle should be annuled, but does nothing if Greagoir will command it to be done.
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
I think what's pointless is trying to comprehend that sentence. I referenced some statements by David Gaider a few pages back - is that what you mean? Or my references to the codex? Or you using assumptions as facts and then attacking me for suggesting something?[/quote]
In order to sugegst something, you use woulds like"MAYBE" or "COULD". What I've seen from you lacks such words. You don't imply possibility, you imply absoluteness.
Again, referincing the Codex is nice, but reading too much into it - not so much. [/quote]
Is that why you referenced the codex regarding the Chantry murdering all those people in those towns and edited it to fit your "truth"?
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
No, they can't. Circle mages take the Harrowing to prevent that. Or are you suggesting that the Harrowing is a load of bull? If not, why take away a child from a mother who is a Circle mage? And Connor brought damage to Redcliffe because his mother was afraid of losing him to the Chantry - it never would have happened if mages weren't imprisoned for having magical ability. There's no reason the Circles can't teach mages without turning the Circles into dungeons lorded over by lyrium addicted soldiers.[/quote]
Harrowing is a test to see if you are capable of resisting a demon. There is no guarantee that just because you resisted one demon, you will resist another. Demons differ in their approach and power. A persons willpower and state of mind changes.
The Harrowing is NOT a immunization against possesion, no more than me solving a crossword puzzle is a gurantee I will solve every crossword puzzle, every time. [/quote]
No one said it was. However, the Harrowing is meant to show that a mage can resist a demon. Otherwise, they force the mage to become tranquil. Under your line of reasoning, mages shouldn't be trusted with anything, and yet are trusted to fight against the Qunari and prevent them from taking over the Andrastian nations. And Grey Warden mages can become parents without the Chantry taking away their children because they are no longer part of the Circle.
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
Men, women, and children getting killed is blown out of proportion? And given the insurrection against the templars, I think that there are plenty mages who wanted freedom from the templars and the Chantry. Mages are either killed or turned into emotionless drones who craft runes on command. Uldred made a deal with Loghain to give the Circle more independence from the Chantry. And you're suggesting to trust Wynne? She tells her apprentice that he should return to the Circle despite the fact that the templars nearly killed him (and were trying to).[/quote]
Yes, blowing out of proportions. You turn one dead man into a mountain of corpses. [/quote]
I didn't realize that when Brother Genitivi references the mass graves at Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell that it was one man.
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
And yes, people will ALWAYS want more freedom, no matter how much freedom you give them. It's never enough. The grass is always greener on the other side.
Wynne? Why shouldn't I trust her? Why would she lie about something like that? And the same question can be asked of you - why do you trust her to be telling the truth about her apprentice? Or is this some sort of selective trust, when it suits you? [/quote]
She has bad judgement, like when she tries to kill the Warden for thinking that the Circle is too great a risk, but does nothing (not even argue the point) when Greagoir says it should be done. I thought the fact that she tells her former apprentice Aneirin to return to the Circle that nearly cost him his life was a clue to that.
Modifié par LobselVith8, 27 septembre 2010 - 06:08 .
#1344
Posté 28 septembre 2010 - 07:03
Lotion Soronarr
-
- Members
- 14 481 messages
LobselVith8 wrote...
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
That was the trigger, but hardly the only reason. More like the last straw.Or is it so hard to belive that the Chatnry wanted to smite Tevinter for slavery and blood magic, but restrained itself up to that point?
They declared several Exalted Marches when Tevinter declared Andraste was a mortal and not divine. If you have proof that this isn't the case, feel free to provide it.
You realise we are talking about motivation here?
Can you prove the Chantry didn't care about the blood magic and slavery in Tevinter? No, you can't.
Again, none of those abominations are shown to have any ties to the Collective. Again, you're wrong.
Again, you seem impervious to logic.
I ask again - are the mages in the collective immune to possesion? No, we know they are not.
Hence, abominations among the Collective WILL happen and HAVE happened. It is undeniable...and they have no effective way of containing/stopping them.
This isn't really a point you can argue against.
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
I beg to differ. Mages are treated well in the tower. Again, Wynne mentions that the templars were the first to treat her like a human being.
Mages used as soldier? Shocking..as if regular citizens are exempt from that.
From being torn from their family and now living under the tyranny of a religious dogma that stigmatized all mages and forced them under the watch of armored and armed drug addicts, and you're comparing it to civilian life?
Not really. It is worse some ways, better in others.
She tries to kill the Warden if he or she recommends that the Circle should be annuled, but does nothing if Greagoir will command it to be done.
Strange..I don't recall that happening in my playtrough, and I did recommend the Circle to be anulled.
Is that why you referenced the codex regarding the Chantry murdering all those people in those towns and edited it to fit your "truth"?
I'm not editing anything.
Merely stating that things written in Codexes are written from specific points of view by specific people, and are open to interpretation in some cases. You, for example, take the Dalish codex about the Exhalted Marches as a unfallible, objective gospel - and at the same time scoff at an codex that contradicts that.
I didn't realize that when Brother Genitivi references the mass graves at Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell that it was one man.
No, but it wasn't "The Chantry" either. As our own history shows, commanders in the Crusades occasionaly went against direct orders of the pope and their superiors and killed people.
People will be people. Terrible mistakes happen, douches can sometimes lead armies.
To throw all the blame at the feet of the Chantry, like it's some kind of all-seeing, all-powerfull monolith, is quite simply a fallacy.
But here, since you love that codex entry so much:
"Dealing with those of the local
populace which had converted to the qunari religion proved difficult,
especially as some of these had lived under the qun now for
generations, and the response by many armies was simply to exterminate
all those who had converted."
See the marked part? It doesn't say anywhere that the Chantry ordered anything.
She has bad judgement, like when she tries to kill the Warden for thinking that the Circle is too great a risk, but does nothing (not even argue the point) when Greagoir says it should be done. I thought the fact that she tells her former apprentice Aneirin to return to the Circle that nearly cost him his life was a clue to that.
You still avoid the question - why do you trust her that she speaks the truth about her apprentice and hte templars attacking him at all? Again, selective trust. Wynne is fine as a source when she sez somethnig you agree with.
And bad judgment? Not really. She can hold you more responsbile than Gregoir on several grounds.
#1345
Posté 28 septembre 2010 - 07:28
ShrinkingFish
-
- Members
- 1 214 messages
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
ShrinkingFish wrote...
This is to Lotion Soronnar...
I've been reading through a lot of your arguments with others and I noticed a pattern... so it prompted me to ask...
You seem to often take the really extreme argument in order to push your opponent to the opposite extreme and you then switch to the reasonable, moderate argument and therefore make your opponent appear incorrect and an extremist.
Is this a calculated effort? Or are you just doing it by accident?
Escalating response.
I don't force my opposition to the extreemes - I only react to their arguments.
And would you mind defining "extreeme" argument? What specifcly are you refering to?
Ah. Alright then. Understandable in that case. I get caught up in these discussions sometimes too.
An extreme argument being one that takes the position of good over evil between what are only two differing political groups, allowing no room for negotiation or mutual cooperation, essentially forcing the opposition to the opposing extreme in order to combat the claims.
And it is just that every once in a while you end up stating arguments in huge generalities that stigmatize your opponent as your language use does not imply any shades of grey, just black and white, casting the "black" area all over one side of the arguments that isn't necessarily as bad as you make it out to be. Your opponents are doing it too, I just noticed throughout this thread that you are constantly getting embroiled in these arguments, so I was wondering if you were instigating them on purpose or were just prone to getting pulled into them.
And as far as specifics there are just a few cases were you dismiss certain evils that exist within the Chantry and the Templars and highlight the evils of Apostate groups to make them seem entirely like maleficar. A few posts later you often return to your moderate position though, so clearly your view isn't necessarily as dramatically inclined as some of your arguments would suggest.
#1346
Posté 28 septembre 2010 - 07:44
ShrinkingFish
-
- Members
- 1 214 messages
EmperorSahlertz wrote...
"Dealing with those of the local populace which had converted to the qunari religion proved difficult, especially as some of these had lived under the qun now for generations, and the response by many armies was simply to exterminate all those who had converted. Officially the Chantry denies this, claiming most converts fled north into Rivain and Par Vollen, but the mass graves at Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell attest otherwise."
Is the entry in question. The Chantry just denies what the armies did, because frankly it makes the Chantry look bad. But just because the Chantry denies it, does not make them responsible for the massacres. Quite the contrary, as if they had actually ordered it, they wouldn't bother denying it.
Sorry. Don't want to get embroiled in this argument as well... I was just reading this and had to clarify a point...
If the Chantry did order the slaughters, and I am not saying they did necessarily but it is a possibility, they certainly would not publicly announce the deed and would, absolutely and without a doubt, deny it completely. Condoning the mass slaughter of unarmed civilians in any case, no matter the circumstances, is extremely bad for an organization's public image. If they had ordered the slaughters and did not deny it then there would be a massive public backlash against the Chantry.
The mere fact that the Chantry claims that many of the refugees fled to Rivian and Par Vollen instead of ackowledging the slaughter at all, denying that the massacres ever even occured, and the fact that they do not actively condemn those generals that took said actions suggests that the Chantry itself was, at the very least, privy to the events and approved of them if they did not directly order them themselves. Otherwise why not ackownledge the events, condemn them as evil, and serve the offending generals up on a platter to the outraged public?
The Chantry is by no means infallible in any case and are indeed capable of terrible deeds. And that is not to say they are an evil organization. Just a human organization and therefore capable of both great deeds of good and of evil.
#1347
Posté 28 septembre 2010 - 07:58
Lotion Soronarr
-
- Members
- 14 481 messages
ShrinkingFish wrote...
An extreme argument being one that takes the position of good over evil between what are only two differing political groups, allowing no room for negotiation or mutual cooperation, essentially forcing the opposition to the opposing extreme in order to combat the claims.
Since when do I do that?
You must be mistaking me with someone else, because I'm not a mage-hater nor a Chantry-fanboy. Nor vice-versa.
At least in this instance, I'm a realist - my stance in grounded in the reality of Thedas and common sense. Nothing more, nothing else.
And it is just that every once in a while you end up stating arguments in huge generalities that stigmatize your opponent as your language use does not imply any shades of grey, just black and white, casting the "black" area all over one side of the arguments that isn't necessarily as bad as you make it out to be. Your opponents are doing it too, I just noticed throughout this thread that you are constantly getting embroiled in these arguments, so I was wondering if you were instigating them on purpose or were just prone to getting pulled into them.
Hmm.. I do not follow the black/white mindset when it comes to Chantry/templars/mages. My responses provide alternate explnations to specific events, NOT the only explanatipons (and I never claimed they were the only ones)
I do NOT absolve the Chantry or the templars of guilt when they do something wrong - providing the guilt is proven and well-founded.
#1348
Posté 28 septembre 2010 - 07:59
Daerog
-
- Members
- 4 857 messages
ShrinkingFish wrote...
Sorry. Don't want to get embroiled in this argument as well... I was just reading this and had to clarify a point...
If the Chantry did order the slaughters, and I am not saying they did necessarily but it is a possibility, they certainly would not publicly announce the deed and would, absolutely and without a doubt, deny it completely. Condoning the mass slaughter of unarmed civilians in any case, no matter the circumstances, is extremely bad for an organization's public image. If they had ordered the slaughters and did not deny it then there would be a massive public backlash against the Chantry.
The mere fact that the Chantry claims that many of the refugees fled to Rivian and Par Vollen instead of ackowledging the slaughter at all, denying that the massacres ever even occured, and the fact that they do not actively condemn those generals that took said actions suggests that the Chantry itself was, at the very least, privy to the events and approved of them if they did not directly order them themselves. Otherwise why not ackownledge the events, condemn them as evil, and serve the offending generals up on a platter to the outraged public?
The Chantry is by no means infallible in any case and are indeed capable of terrible deeds. And that is not to say they are an evil organization. Just a human organization and therefore capable of both great deeds of good and of evil.
Whether they did it or not, if they openly condemned the acts and acknowledged them, then they would be expected to act on it. If it were people in power who did such things, it wouldn't be in the Chantry's best interest to cause internal conflict just after they were almost conquered by a foreign invader. Those generals may not help out again if they were internationally insulted by the Chantry just after throwing out the foreign invaders. Then what would the Chantry do if they needed those generals again and the soldiers loyal to those generals? And what if nobles and royalty was involved? Certainly the Chantry should take the moral high road, but as a political power, it wouldn't be a smart move, as the victory was barely won and who knew when the qunari would be back?
#1349
Posté 28 septembre 2010 - 08:04
ShrinkingFish
-
- Members
- 1 214 messages
Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Since when do I do that?
You must be mistaking me with someone else, because I'm not a mage-hater nor a Chantry-fanboy. Nor vice-versa.
At least in this instance, I'm a realist - my stance in grounded in the reality of Thedas and common sense. Nothing more, nothing else.
Hmm.. I do not follow the black/white mindset when it comes to Chantry/templars/mages. My responses provide alternate explnations to specific events, NOT the only explanatipons (and I never claimed they were the only ones)
I do NOT absolve the Chantry or the templars of guilt when they do something wrong - providing the guilt is proven and well-founded.
I acknowledge that you do not mean to do any of these things and that you do, most often, take a moderate position. But it has become clear to me in several of your argumentswith others, through either your opponents push or your own, that you end up stating things that are inflamatory in their one-sidedness.
I am not accusing you of anything. Not trying to start and argument. And never implied to call you any names or assign any insults to you.
Just something I noticed and was curious if it was intentional or otherwise. And clearly it is the latter of the two.
#1350
Posté 28 septembre 2010 - 08:10
ShrinkingFish
-
- Members
- 1 214 messages
DaerogTheDhampir wrote...
ShrinkingFish wrote...
Sorry. Don't want to get embroiled in this argument as well... I was just reading this and had to clarify a point...
If the Chantry did order the slaughters, and I am not saying they did necessarily but it is a possibility, they certainly would not publicly announce the deed and would, absolutely and without a doubt, deny it completely. Condoning the mass slaughter of unarmed civilians in any case, no matter the circumstances, is extremely bad for an organization's public image. If they had ordered the slaughters and did not deny it then there would be a massive public backlash against the Chantry.
The mere fact that the Chantry claims that many of the refugees fled to Rivian and Par Vollen instead of ackowledging the slaughter at all, denying that the massacres ever even occured, and the fact that they do not actively condemn those generals that took said actions suggests that the Chantry itself was, at the very least, privy to the events and approved of them if they did not directly order them themselves. Otherwise why not ackownledge the events, condemn them as evil, and serve the offending generals up on a platter to the outraged public?
The Chantry is by no means infallible in any case and are indeed capable of terrible deeds. And that is not to say they are an evil organization. Just a human organization and therefore capable of both great deeds of good and of evil.
Whether they did it or not, if they openly condemned the acts and acknowledged them, then they would be expected to act on it. If it were people in power who did such things, it wouldn't be in the Chantry's best interest to cause internal conflict just after they were almost conquered by a foreign invader. Those generals may not help out again if they were internationally insulted by the Chantry just after throwing out the foreign invaders. Then what would the Chantry do if they needed those generals again and the soldiers loyal to those generals? And what if nobles and royalty was involved? Certainly the Chantry should take the moral high road, but as a political power, it wouldn't be a smart move, as the victory was barely won and who knew when the qunari would be back?
Exactly.
In any case, the Chantry could not afford to acknowledge the massacres, and therefore, in the case that the order did not come from the Chantry and it was just the individual actions of their generals, had to condon this evil in order to survive. And in condoning it, became a party to the deed. It was a self-preserving, calculated response. And where the order came from is entirely a mystery and is really unimpotant in actual fact. The core result of these massacres was that the good name of the Chantry was irrevocably besmirched, their denial implicating them in the deed regardless of concious involvement.
