256 réponses à ce sujet

[David Gaider]

Generic Guy wrote...
You know this topic makes me think. Why is it whenever the chantry does anything that in anyway might negatively effect a mage it is decried as more proof of the Chantry as an evil institution that should be destroyed, but when the Qunari do things to mages, that by an sane definition are much worse, people cant help but fall over themselves trying to make excuses for the Qunari?

I think there's a bit of a bias against organized religion in these parts (bad organized religion! bad!) which leads some to look on anything the Chantry does with suspicion. No doubt it doesn't help that the Chantry is a big organization with political power, and thus given to corruption much like in our own Middle Ages. The fact that it's mostly benevolent in its nature and sees what it does as necessary if unfortunate is compared to the fact that they are taking freedom away from those poor mages-- and anything that deprives freedom is also automatically bad (we're a comfy, democratic lot here on the internet, I suppose).

The Qunari, meanwhile, are a friendly bunch. Like Sten. And they kick ass better than a bunch of priests, so who wouldn't want to join that (realities of the Qun notwithstanding)?

[Dave of Canada]

David Gaider wrote...


I think there's a bit of a bias against organized religion in these parts (bad organized religion! bad!) which leads some to look on anything the Chantry does with suspicion.

I think it's because the Qunari have horns. You don't want to mess with the horned Qunari. Give the Chantry mothers / sisters gigantic horns and I'm sure we'd be fine with them.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 29 septembre 2010 - 05:27 .

[Inquisitor Recon]

I for one would rather deal with that "glorified cage" and be able to rise to a position of power within that institution rather than be on a leash and possibly in an actual cage.

[silentassassin264]

Yay, Mr. Gaider returned!
By the way, can you tell us what the qunari mages are actually allowed to do? If my mage can research weapons while still on a leash, she still would love to join the qunari.  Being, stuck in a kennel would however be a deal breaker.

Modifié par silentassassin264, 29 septembre 2010 - 05:27 .

[ShrinkingFish]

Generic Guy wrote...

You know this topic makes me think. Why is it whenever the chantry does anything that in anyway might negatively effect a mage it is decried as more proof of the Chantry as an evil institution that should be destroyed, but when the Qunari do things to mages, that by an sane definition are much worse, people cant help but fall over themselves trying to make excuses for the Qunari?

You ever think that some of the Qunari mages might actually like being on leashes?

Perhaps they understand the danger they pose to those around them and submit willingly in order to protect their society. Perhaps for them this is just their duty, that which they must do to serve their people, their place in the Qun. Perhaps they find some sort of satisfaction in this. Perhaps they do not view their leashes and handlers as their prisons and wardens, but their protectors and safeguards against doing unwillful harm...

Plus... I have known a few people in my day who get their jollys out of being led around on leashes. To each his own, I say.

Modifié par ShrinkingFish, 29 septembre 2010 - 06:13 .

[Generic Guy]

ShrinkingFish wrote...

Generic Guy wrote...

You know this topic makes me think. Why is it whenever the chantry does anything that in anyway might negatively effect a mage it is decried as more proof of the Chantry as an evil institution that should be destroyed, but when the Qunari do things to mages, that by an sane definition are much worse, people cant help but fall over themselves trying to make excuses for the Qunari?

You ever think that some of the Qunari mages might actually like being on leashes?

Perhaps they understand the danger they pose to those around them and submit willingly in order to protect their society. Perhaps for them this is just their duty, that which they must do to serve their people, their place in the Qun. Perhaps they find some sort of satisfaction in this. Perhaps they do not view their leashes and handlers as their prisons and wardens, but their protectors and safeguards against doing unwillful harm...

Plus... I have known a few people in my day who get their jollys out of being led around on leashes. To each his own, I say.

 
And Chantry Mages cant also feel this way?

My comment was more on the double standard a lot people seem to have with regards to the two organizations, the Qun and Chantry. Both do what they feel is necessary for the protection of all, yet the Chantry is constantly vilified while the Qunari are not. Why? 
It seems its either what Mr. Gaider says or a ZOMG cool fantasy guys with horns are awesome!!!!

Modifié par Generic Guy, 29 septembre 2010 - 06:28 .

[ShrinkingFish]

Generic Guy wrote...

ShrinkingFish wrote...

Generic Guy wrote...

You know this topic makes me think. Why is it whenever the chantry does anything that in anyway might negatively effect a mage it is decried as more proof of the Chantry as an evil institution that should be destroyed, but when the Qunari do things to mages, that by an sane definition are much worse, people cant help but fall over themselves trying to make excuses for the Qunari?

You ever think that some of the Qunari mages might actually like being on leashes?

Perhaps they understand the danger they pose to those around them and submit willingly in order to protect their society. Perhaps for them this is just their duty, that which they must do to serve their people, their place in the Qun. Perhaps they find some sort of satisfaction in this. Perhaps they do not view their leashes and handlers as their prisons and wardens, but their protectors and safeguards against doing unwillful harm...

Plus... I have known a few people in my day who get their jollys out of being led around on leashes. To each his own, I say.

 
And Chantry Mages cant also feel this way?

No, there are plenty of mages in the Circle who view their position
as necessary... in fact, I remember one young lady mage who was hoping
very much to have the Right of Annulment passed on the circle so that
she could be purified by the swords of the holy Templars. She's standing
with Wynne and the others right after you recruit Wynne during the
Broken Circle quest, and she very much believes that she and all the
other mages are evil and deserve purification by fire. So it takes all sorts.

My comment was more on the double slandered a lot people seem to have with regards to the two organizations, the Qun and Chantry. Both do what they feel is necessary for the protection of all, yet the Chantry is constantly vilified while the Qunari are not. Why?

And I'm not sure the Qunari are not vilified... there are plenty of people who make them out to be absolute monsters, or at the very least totalitarian, militant, religious extremists who will strip away your every right to freedom. As true or untrue as any of this may be.

But yes, I agree that most people host a double standard when speaking of the two groups. Either largely siding with  the Chantry  or the Qunari advocating that their chosen group can do no wrong when in fact both groups are fallible and capable of evil deeds.

And yes, there do seem to be an abundance of people willing and poised to jump down the Chantry's throat at any provocation as opposed to the smaller numbers of people as eager to do the same to the Qunari. And I think the one-sidedness of this is mostly due to exposure. We don't know a whole lot about the Qunari or the Qun, so people just have less to critisize. The main hot issue for them is the whole mages thing, and people jump all over that all the time. Meanwhile the Chantry has made plenty of mistakes that the player base is aware of as they have witnessed the Chantry's workings from a privileged position.

[LobselVith8]

David Gaider wrote...

I think there's a bit of a bias against organized religion in these parts (bad organized religion! bad!) which leads some to look on anything the Chantry does with suspicion. No doubt it doesn't help that the Chantry is a big organization with political power, and thus given to corruption much like in our own Middle Ages. The fact that it's mostly benevolent in its nature and sees what it does as necessary if unfortunate is compared to the fact that they are taking freedom away from those poor mages-- and anything that deprives freedom is also automatically bad (we're a comfy, democratic lot here on the internet, I suppose).

Wasn't that the purpose of the Warden asking the ruler of Ferelden for the Magi boon, to rectify that issue?

[nightcobra]

LobselVith8 wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

I think there's a bit of a bias against organized religion in these parts (bad organized religion! bad!) which leads some to look on anything the Chantry does with suspicion. No doubt it doesn't help that the Chantry is a big organization with political power, and thus given to corruption much like in our own Middle Ages. The fact that it's mostly benevolent in its nature and sees what it does as necessary if unfortunate is compared to the fact that they are taking freedom away from those poor mages-- and anything that deprives freedom is also automatically bad (we're a comfy, democratic lot here on the internet, I suppose).

Wasn't that the purpose of the Warden asking the ruler of Ferelden for the Magi boon, to rectify that issue?

even though the chantry says no to that decision, i can see the ferelden monarchy supporting the mages without the chantry's knowledge like giving them a little more freedom, bribing a few corrupt templars, enlisting mages into high ranking jobs like a royal councellor.

[Reaverwind]

David Gaider wrote...

Generic Guy wrote...
You know this topic makes me think. Why is it whenever the chantry does anything that in anyway might negatively effect a mage it is decried as more proof of the Chantry as an evil institution that should be destroyed, but when the Qunari do things to mages, that by an sane definition are much worse, people cant help but fall over themselves trying to make excuses for the Qunari?

I think there's a bit of a bias against organized religion in these parts (bad organized religion! bad!) which leads some to look on anything the Chantry does with suspicion. No doubt it doesn't help that the Chantry is a big organization with political power, and thus given to corruption much like in our own Middle Ages. The fact that it's mostly benevolent in its nature and sees what it does as necessary if unfortunate is compared to the fact that they are taking freedom away from those poor mages-- and anything that deprives freedom is also automatically bad (we're a comfy, democratic lot here on the internet, I suppose).

The Qunari, meanwhile, are a friendly bunch. Like Sten. And they kick ass better than a bunch of priests, so who wouldn't want to join that (realities of the Qun notwithstanding)?

Wrong. Leashes are cooler, especially if they come with choke-collars. Everyone knows that.

[LobselVith8]

nightcobra8928 wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

I think there's a bit of a bias against organized religion in these parts (bad organized religion! bad!) which leads some to look on anything the Chantry does with suspicion. No doubt it doesn't help that the Chantry is a big organization with political power, and thus given to corruption much like in our own Middle Ages. The fact that it's mostly benevolent in its nature and sees what it does as necessary if unfortunate is compared to the fact that they are taking freedom away from those poor mages-- and anything that deprives freedom is also automatically bad (we're a comfy, democratic lot here on the internet, I suppose).

Wasn't that the purpose of the Warden asking the ruler of Ferelden for the Magi boon, to rectify that issue?

even though the chantry says no to that decision, i can see the ferelden monarchy supporting the mages without the chantry's knowledge like giving them a little more freedom, bribing a few corrupt templars, enlisting mages into high ranking jobs like a royal councellor.

Considering that in Witch Hunt, the templars are still around and so is Greagoir, I don't think canon has the ruler of Ferelden doing anything to help the mages.

Generic Guy wrote...

You know this topic makes me think. Why is it whenever the chantry does anything that in anyway might negatively effect a mage it is decried as more proof of the Chantry as an evil institution that should be destroyed, but when the Qunari do things to mages, that by an sane definition are much worse, people cant help but fall over themselves trying to make excuses for the Qunari?

I think it's an issue that people only see Sten as a representative of the Qunari, and we get to see many members of the Chantry, including in the Magi Origin. Alistair talks with distain about the Chantry, and he was nearly a templar. The mages revolted with Uldred for a chance at freedom. From the POV of a mage of the Circle, living under the iron grip of the Chantry can be viewed as evil, which is why the Warden can ask for the ruler of Ferelden to grant the Circle of Ferelden their independence (that apparently doesn't happen). The Qunari, on the other hand, aren't really seen, except for mercenaries who look similar to Sten. Perhaps DA2 will allow us to see what the Qunari do, and it's likely people will react the same way they do to the Chantry.

ReconTeam wrote...

A mage that unintelligent to try to join the qunari would probably have been fooled and possessed by a demon anyway.

I agree with Generic Guy. Seems too many here have a natural bias against the Chantry when they are largely a necessary institution. It would be quite amusing if the more radical mages did get their wish to break free of the Chantry, only to have their tongues cut off and be kept on leashes by the quanari.

Necessary? The Dalish don't have templars, and neither do the Disciples of Andraste. The Chantry supported the invasion of Ferelden by Orlais. The Dalish claim the war with Orlais started because the Chantry sent templars in after they kicked out the missionaries who tried to convert them. I don't see what's necessary about them. If the mages who wanted independence were able to gain it, what makes you assume they would fall to the Qunari, when the main reason the Chantry was able to repell them in the New Exalted March was because of the power of the mages? According to “Tales of the Destruction of Thedas” by Brother Genitivi, Chantry Scholar, “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.”

[tool_bot]

David Gaider wrote...

The Qunari, meanwhile, are a friendly bunch. Like Sten. And they kick ass better than a bunch of priests, so who wouldn't want to join that (realities of the Qun notwithstanding)?

Anyone who's ever actually dealt with such people and has some level of foresight.

[Inquisitor Recon]

LobselVith8 wrote...
Necessary? The Dalish don't have templars, and neither do the Disciples of Andraste. The Chantry supported the invasion of Ferelden by Orlais. The Dalish claim the war with Orlais started because the Chantry sent templars in after they kicked out the missionaries who tried to convert them. I don't see what's necessary about them. If the mages who wanted independence were able to gain it, what makes you assume they would fall to the Qunari, when the main reason the Chantry was able to repell them in the New Exalted March was because of the power of the mages? According to “Tales of the Destruction of Thedas” by Brother Genitivi, Chantry Scholar, “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.”

The Dalish mostly consist of relatively small clans that regulate their own matters. They train and watch over their mages. This is not the norm among the general population of Ferelden for example. There isn't such community oversight among such a large and independent-minded population. Chances are that without the Chantry, demonic problems would be all too common an occurance. The Disciples of Andraste avoided the problem because they followed her teachings which were the basis for much of the Chantry. Your common farmer isn't going to be as devout and knowledgable as these individuals and if for example his son was born a mage, he would probably have no idea what to do.

I assume those mages could easily fall to the quanari for various reasons. In such an attempt to break away from the Chantry, there would be heavy casualites on both sides. The templars are themselves are a capable force that you would certainly want on your side in battle. Plus the Chantry would undoubtably have allies among local governments. Those forces would also be weakened if defeated. All of this makes it easier for the quanari, and I'm sure the mages would have to deal with many internal conflicts besides for external threats.

Modifié par ReconTeam, 29 septembre 2010 - 09:17 .

[LobselVith8]

ReconTeam wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
Necessary? The Dalish don't have templars, and neither do the Disciples of Andraste. The Chantry supported the invasion of Ferelden by Orlais. The Dalish claim the war with Orlais started because the Chantry sent templars in after they kicked out the missionaries who tried to convert them. I don't see what's necessary about them. If the mages who wanted independence were able to gain it, what makes you assume they would fall to the Qunari, when the main reason the Chantry was able to repell them in the New Exalted March was because of the power of the mages? According to “Tales of the Destruction of Thedas” by Brother Genitivi, Chantry Scholar, “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.”

The Dalish mostly consist of relatively small clans that regulate their own matters. They train and watch over their mages. This is not the norm among the general population of Ferelden for example. There isn't such community oversight among such a large and independent-minded population. Chances are that without the Chantry, demonic problems would be all too common an occurance. The Disciples of Andraste avoided the problem because they followed her teachings which were the basis for much of the Chantry. Your common farmer isn't going to be as devout and knowledgable as these individuals and if for example his son was born a mage, he would probably have no idea what to do.

Or the results of blood mages and abominations are because the Chantry conditions mages to gather as much power as they can to survive against the templars who are trying to kill them. Considering that mages existed in the Dales and among the current Dalish clans without abominations destroying entire nations, and Kolgrim's Disciples of Andraste have been around for hundreds of years without abominations destroying Haven, I see the Chantry and the templars as entirely unnecessary. I'm not saying mages shouldn't be properly trained, but there's a difference between training a person to use their abilities and forcing them to live under the tyranny of armored and armed drug addicts.

ReconTeam wrote...

I assume those mages could easily fall to the quanari for various reasons. In such an attempt to break away from the Chantry, there would be heavy casualites on both sides. The templars are themselves are a capable force that you would certainly want on your side in battle. Plus the Chantry would undoubtably have allies among local governments. Those forces would also be weakened if defeated. All of this makes it easier for the quanari, and I'm sure the mages would have to deal with many internal conflicts besides for external threats.

Except for the templars in A Broken Circle who need outside help to deal with Uldred and the abominations, and the possibility that help could come in the form of a Mage Warden illustrates why the ruler of Ferelden says that the mages have earned the right to govern themselves. And considering how many mages there are, and the vital role they played against the Qunari in the New Exalted Marches, it's possible they could deal with the templars and the Qunari. There are Circles all across Thedas, after all. And Orzammar can get an independent Circle with no Chantry interference. With the right leader, anything is possible.

[Inquisitor Recon]

LobselVith8 wrote...
Or the results of blood mages and abominations are because the Chantry conditions mages to gather as much power as they can to survive against the templars who are trying to kill them. Considering that mages existed in the Dales and among the current Dalish clans without abominations destroying entire nations, and Kolgrim's Disciples of Andraste have been around for hundreds of years without abominations destroying Haven, I see the Chantry and the templars as entirely unnecessary. I'm not saying mages shouldn't be properly trained, but there's a difference between training a person to use their abilities and forcing them to live under the tyranny of armored and armed drug addicts.

Yet a mages skills doesn't always mean the demon will be more powerful. Weaker mages are just more vulnerable. Look at the events at Redcliff. That demon was quite powerful despite how it only possessed a kid. The templars only kill apostates, not every random mage they stumble across. In their glory days the dalish clearly had methods of preventing such things, and some of this has likely passed down to the clans. But how does this apply to the human kingdomes and city states? Their cultures are not anything alike. Kolgrim's disciples of Andraste still followed her teachings regarding magic no doubt, while they clearly became misdirected, their relatively small community knew to keep mages in check. Despite how harshly mages are treated, the templars are largely neccesary. And the Chantry still does pleny of good despite their "reputation."

Except for the templars in A Broken Circle who need outside help to deal with Uldred and the abominations, and the possibility that help could come in the form of a Mage Warden illustrates why the ruler of Ferelden says that the mages have earned the right to govern themselves. And considering how many mages there are, and the vital role they played against the Qunari in the New Exalted Marches, it's possible they could deal with the templars and the Qunari. There are Circles all across Thedas, after all. And Orzammar can get an independent Circle with no Chantry interference. With the right leader, anything is possible.

It is unneeded internal conflict that only benefits the enemy. The right leader could do a lot of things, but if the endings DA1 show anything, it is that not everything turns out as planned.

Modifié par ReconTeam, 30 septembre 2010 - 03:37 .

[Alikain]

I can we trust what sten told as about his people (qun) to be true because their qunari in awakening said it was a lie

[silentassassin264]

I never played Awakening. What did they say?

[Daerog]

silentassassin264 wrote...

I never played Awakening. What did they say?

On the qunari? Nothing really. There was a merchant named Armaas or something, who was a Tal'Vashoth and said "The Qun is a lie."

Well, it is also told that the qunari invented the spy glass and the secrets of gunpowder are closely guarded. So when a dwarf makes some explosives with lyrium sand, the qunari actually try to assassinate him.

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Wasn't that the purpose of the Warden asking the ruler of Ferelden for the Magi boon, to rectify that issue?

There is nothing to rectify. Taking away someone freedom is sometimes necessary.


And for the love of all that is holy, don't de-rail this topic with your chantry/templar hate!
We have the other thread for you to vent.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 30 septembre 2010 - 08:46 .

[SirShreK]

Reality will always win. There is no way to be idealistic in real life. Compromises need to be made and those who don't make them will perish.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Nicely said..the mage Circles ARE the compromise.

[nightcobra]

SirShreK wrote...

Reality will always win. There is no way to be idealistic in real life. Compromises need to be made and those who don't make them will perish.

that's the beauty of a fantasy game, in which idealism can sometimes prevail...at least more times than in the real world.

[SirShreK]

David Gaider wrote...

Generic Guy wrote...
You know this topic makes me think. Why is it whenever the chantry does anything that in anyway might negatively effect a mage it is decried as more proof of the Chantry as an evil institution that should be destroyed, but when the Qunari do things to mages, that by an sane definition are much worse, people cant help but fall over themselves trying to make excuses for the Qunari?

I think there's a bit of a bias against organized religion in these parts (bad organized religion! bad!) which leads some to look on anything the Chantry does with suspicion. No doubt it doesn't help that the Chantry is a big organization with political power, and thus given to corruption much like in our own Middle Ages. The fact that it's mostly benevolent in its nature and sees what it does as necessary if unfortunate is compared to the fact that they are taking freedom away from those poor mages-- and anything that deprives freedom is also automatically bad (we're a comfy, democratic lot here on the internet, I suppose).

The Qunari, meanwhile, are a friendly bunch. Like Sten. And they kick ass better than a bunch of priests, so who wouldn't want to join that (realities of the Qun notwithstanding)?

You are 100 pages too late for many threads on this forum. But better late than never.. eh? Thanks!

[SirShreK]

nightcobra8928 wrote...

SirShreK wrote...

Reality will always win. There is no way to be idealistic in real life. Compromises need to be made and those who don't make them will perish.

that's the beauty of a fantasy game, in which idealism can sometimes prevail...at least more times than in the real world.

That was before they put the Dark into it...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Nicely said..the mage Circles ARE the compromise.

I agree whole-heartedly.

Modifié par SirShreK, 30 septembre 2010 - 08:57 .