55380 réponses à ce sujet

[Arcane_Solona]

I think the only ones with sanity issues are Merrill (oh, its only a harmless demon!) and Anders/Justice (lets blow up a Chantry filled with innocent lives to garner attention to our extreme cause).

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Aw, let's not start that here. It's funny how Fenris thread shows a nasty anti-Anders streak, while the Anders thread is usually fairly compassionate toward Fenris.

Also, filled with? FILLED WITH? Come on, there was one crazy old authoritarian leader and a bunch of soldiers in that cutscene. "Filled with" is entirely and solely the providence of your own imagination. There might have been a few innocents in there, sure, but that wasn't the reason it got blown up... it got blown up to kill one grossly incompetent woman who was incapable of controlling the pscyhopath she placed in power, and to reveal how truly insane the Chantry would allow its Knight Commanders to become without taking action.

Damn... I thought that had gone away. Apparently not! Apparently the old outrage was just sitting in a corner, waiting to be called out by people twisting the facts. Ah well. There can be no peace, as they say.

I'm not going to argue that Anders is sane, but the reasons you cite are nothing but nonsense. Anders is insane because nobody is helping him productively deal with what he is, what he needs, and what he can do. Imagine watching your people die by inches under the hands of a murderous regime and knowing you can do nothing, that nobody can really do anything, not even the most powerful and brilliant person you know. In the end, he is alone... in a way that Fenris never is, never can be, and cannot possibly comprehend. We are, as they say, alone with the things we have done.

What Anders needs is someone less compassionate and more manipulative to pull the trigger... reducing both collateral damage and collateral angst. I have a plan that neatly kills Elthina, a bunch of Templars, and absolutely no one else, but I'm not allowed to enact it because Hawke is a useless fool when it comes to poor, crazy Anders.

It's hilarious to me how people assume Anders motivations are analogous to things they are totally not analogous to. He wasn't killing innocents to cause outrage. That's got nothing to do with what he's doing, but because that's the motivation people's minds got to first when they see an explosion, that's what everyone assumes. But Thedas isn't the here and now, it's the There and Then. You don't need to kill innocents and cause terror, because what the people in general think doesn't matter a fig... Meredith proved that herself. Without free flow of information or the structures of participatory government, the entire game of war is changed... something 90% of the people who dislike Anders fail to notice rather spectacularly. No matter what YOU care about, what people in Thedas care about after that explosion is Elthina's death, and that death alone. It was that death that the explosion was meant to accomplish. Was there collateral damage? Oh yes, probably, a few people, and that's horribly bloodily unfortunate... but it wasn't the purpose, It wasn't the target.  I don't mind if you are angry because you think that collatoral damage is always unforgiveable in war... but it is collatoral damage in this case, rather than deliberate targeting of innocents, so call it what it bloody well IS.

Fenris is crazy too, It's just a different kind of madness, the madness of hate, and repression, and aggression, and all that unhealthy crap. It's a poison, and he continues to swallow it. The fact that he realizes that at the end gives me hope for him, but he certainly isn't Dr. Stable and his Neurotypical Band.

I'm always surprised and saddened by how few people in the Fenris thread see his hatred of mages as a bad and crazy thing. A bad and crazy thing that you certainly can't fault him for, yeah, but a bad and crazy thing nonetheless.

And now I've got myself all in a lather.

Well, it's near top, and I've got my old computer back so... time to offer a peace offering that isn't really a peace offering because it'll make half of you lot even angrier than the argument itself!


Also, why did no one tell me that gone-batty has started =a new Fenders mini-comic? It's just in the earlier stages now, but yay!

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 09 octobre 2011 - 08:48 .

[tankgirly]

@CulturalGeekGirl, whenever the argument like this start, I stay out of it. I like everyone in DAII and there is no way I pick one over the other.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

But but but but but but

[tankgirly]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

But but but but but but

:lol:

I know. Argument like that sometimes make a thread interesting. But I am the spectator rather than the participant. I usually prefer to stay out.

Modifié par tankgirly, 09 octobre 2011 - 08:56 .

[Arquen]

Wow.. CGG .. the anger in that post was almost palpable. I get it.. I do .. the whole Anders hate and Chantry being FILLED WITH PEOPLE! -- believe me.. We agree on Anders moreso than we disagree.

However, to say that the Anders thread is oh so tolerant of Fenris and the Fenris thread spews hate and malice at Anders is just.. incorrect. Many times I have had to bite my tongue (or tie my hands..) to not go on some kneejerk reaction post to a "Fenris is a mage-hating, emo, whiny, bastard" type post. I simply.. do not mix the threads. People feel about who they feel. I dislike reading an Anders defense force post in this thread. As much as I dislike when the Anders thread goes on a Fenris bashing tirade and I feel like I *should* be the Fenris defense force.

As I said though.. I'm so done coming to the defense of characters. Haters gonna hate and all that. I'm seriously not going to debate Anders here. Not the place.

That being said, I found this:

Fenris is crazy too, It's just a different kind of madness, the madness of hate, and repression, and aggression, and all that unhealthy crap. It's a poison, and he continues to swallow it. The fact that he realizes that at the end gives me hope for him, but he certainly isn't Dr. Stable and his Neurotypical Band.

I'm always surprised and saddened by how few people in the Fenris thread see his hatred of mages as a bad and crazy thing. A bad and crazy thing that you certainly can't fault him for, yeah, but a bad and crazy thing nonetheless.

to be interesting. Mostly because I fundamentally disagree that Fenris's hate is at mages. Without going into the whole debate again, but there is plenty of evidence to suggest Fenris is quite tolerant of mages. Magic and Magisters.. not so much. This I don't particularly see as a bad thing, but I tend to agree with him on most points about magic being bad, but having its uses, and magisters definitely being a bad thing. Not to the point where I personally hate magic or magisters, but I don't disagree with Fenris much on his reasoning about them. Of course I've also seen the "delusional self justification -- Fenris has no fault! Fangirl" argument thrown at me because "OMG how can I not see his anger and rage and bigotry and agree with him!? He's so WRONG!" Seriously.. he is not wrong. He just says things people don't want to hear. Believe me I take Fenris as a whole person, faults and all. People just shut him down because they don't agree with him, and they want to change him. His changes are slow, minute, and self-actualizing. There are some things about him that will never change.

Also, I disagree that his hatred, rage, and aggression are a type of "madness." They are actually quite normal reactions and emotions for someone who has been through what he has. The fact he is AWARE of these shortcomings, even before act 3's "poison" statement makes him even more mentally healthy than most would be. He is amazingly resilient like that. His hate isn't going to go away. There are only two paths for Fenris to take -- change the hatred and focus it and use it to better himself or let it consume him and lead to the whole "dig two graves" cliche. Fenris has this amazing strength of will to where he can actually focus his hatred on the people who have wronged him. The magic and the magisters is spillover - he projects onto those things as a defense mechanism and a diffusion tool. There isn't anyone in this world who has not used projection at one time or another as a defense mechanism. Fenris even apologizes for it every time he does do this which is more than most people do. So, no.. I don't see it as madness. If anything Fenris has more mental soundness and self awareness than anyone else. He is not "mr. stable," but he is not "unhinged" or "crazy" either. He has his issues, but he constantly re-evaluates himself and is more head than heart. He buries his feelings and emotions and is maladaptive at times in his repression and isolationism, but again these are normal side effects of people who go through the types of things he did. If he were truly mad and maladaptive than he would go on some murderous rampage tirade against all the mages.

The problem is people argue and get disgruntled and find Fenris insufferable because they don't agree with him. Agree or disagree, he believes what he believes, and it isn't wrong to do so. To say he is wrong simply because he isn't cohesive to personal opinions and views is maddening to me. That "with me or against me" attitude is precisely why I get irked at Anders a lot of times. It is too unyielding the - "Your wrong, I'm right.. get on the badwagon alright?" Fenris is not going to change completely around to be a magic loving, magister supporting, free all the mages! guy. He also isn't a leader who comes up with grand theories or ideas on how to change the world. He is barely figuring out where he belongs in the world. All he knows is he doesn't want the world to be like Tevinter. He asks for an alternative -- he doesn't come up with the alternative himself. Yet, he doesn't like the mages being Tranquilled or beaten or abused or locked away any more than anyone else. He just isn't presented an alternative, and he isn't going to try to find one because he is not that leadership, wanting to change the world, kind of person.

As much as you have a kneejerk reaction to "Anders blew up millions of innocent people in the chantry!" -- I have a kneejerk reaction to "Fenris is a violent, crazy, mage hating, bastard!"

Then Fenders.. really? CGG -- your more like Anders than you know it sometimes I think, LOL.

[jlb524]

I think that Fenris is a good 'bro' character (for my Hawke at least).

They hang out in his estate...spar...swing their weapons at each other and then end the night with some wine drinking and talking about their hopes and dreams.

I admit that I didn't like Fenris at first (b/c I never completed his friend or rival path in my first couple of playthroughs) but after doing such, I find him to be a very interesting character and a 'bro' to my Hawke.

I also like Anders if that means anything XD

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Ah, a good, old-fashioned Arquen/CGG argument. There's the old mustard!

See, I'll defend Fenris in the Anders thread... will and do. I can deal with it if someone dislikes Anders or uses derogatory terms when talking about him, but I just get upset with the factual inaccuracies and miscategoirzations.

If someone says "I don't like Anders because of the scene where he refuses to tell Hawke about his plans and basically emotionally blackmails her into helping him" I'll say "Ok fair enough, that does indeed suck and it makes him kind of a jerk. It would be nobler if he pulled an Alistair and just left you rather than pulling that ultimatum crap." Similarly, I don't fault someone who dislikes Fenris because he "abandons Hawke after one night." In both cases the person is, at least, just talking about their personal reaction to things that actually happened. They're reacting to those things in a way that I don't agree with, but they're not miscategorizing the events themselves, It's the difference between people who complain about the things I outlined above and the people who say that Fenris "is a player who uses Hawke for sex" or people say that the entire duration of Anders' relationship with Hawke was an elaborate ruse designed to trick her. Those are not valid interpretations... they're nonsense.

I know we're not meant to mix threads, but to me so much about these boys is tied up in their interactions, and their contrasts. They serve as each others' dramatic foils in many ways, and you have to understand one to understand the other. But that's all kind of nonsense, and my honest, somewhat petty reasoning is this: you don't want to see an Anders defense post in this thread... don't attack Anders in this thread. I try hard to never actually raise the subject, but when it's raised, I'll participate.

But anyway, onward to Fenris's madness.

First: come on, you didn't even like the line about Dr. Stable and his Neurotypical Band? I'm totally going to use that in the future. It is comedy GOLD.

Secondly, I think that Fenris's reaction is perfectly natural. It can be that and also be insane. I don't see "insane" as a blanket condemnation, instead it's a funny, exaggerated way of saying that something isn't healthy.

You can argue all you like that Fenris is "tolerant" of mages, but he openly and explicitly supports their continued internment, and refuses to even admit that it is unjust internment. If you can legitimately walk into the gallows and see "no oppression there," then yes, I think there is something wrong with you. He thinks this even after we talk to a mage there who says that they might be whipped for even speaking to us. Fenris is "tolerant" of mages, but he still doesn't want them to have the same rights and freedoms as everyone else. It's like someone who says "It's sad when [MEMBER OF GROUP] commits suicide, too bad their deviant lifestyle causes them to be more prone to it." In fact, that's pretty much precisely what he says about mages all the time.

That's what makes my Fenris-mancing mage Esk want to punch him right in his face. But his history is what makes her... not punch him in his face. Because she thinks that the history has earned him some slack.

Fenris legitimately believes that it's OK that almost all mages are forcibly imprisoned for their entire lives. I don't think that's OK. I don't think he should be cool with it.

THAT is not a "tough truth" that people "need to hear." Do they need to hear about how bad Tevinter is? Heck yes. Do they need to hear about the dangers of blood magic? Also heck yes. Do they need to be wary about one powerful group having the potential to seize control of the government and create a system of oppression. Of Course! Fenris has a lot of valuable feedback to offer... pity it's all undercut by his repeated insistence that the Circle does not constitute actual oppression.

Fenris also refuses to admit and is never properly confronted with the fact that allowing this system to persist means that one day a mage Hawke might be taken from him, because the system doesn't normally allow for exceptions. That's what I really wish rival Hawke could bring up... but of course you can't, because the game sometimes seems to actively discourage mage Hawke from understanding or speaking about what mages legitimately go through.

Bear in mind that I think Anders is just as bad at conceding points as Fenris is. There are so many times in game where I just want to grab him by those ridiculous shoulders and say "Damnit man, admit that Tevinter is awful so we can have a productive. farking. conversation for one time in our short, miserable lives."

When I say Fenris is crazy, I also say Anders is crazy. I'm not calling him a rabid dog, rather I'm calling him someone suffering from a mental illness as the result of years of abuse... in the same way that Anders is. A far less severe mental illness, but I think there are some clear signs that Fenris is dealing with some bad stuff in his head, and the fact that he admits that he's dealing with things doesn't mean he's not still... well... dealing with them.

I mean do you seriously think that, if you were to take the entire cast to shrinks and get them diagnosed, Fenris would come up as clean as Varric? VARRIC? That dude is like the most well-adjusted sentient being in the history of video games.

So yes, I'm saying that Fenris's willingness to make excuses for the Chantry system is bad and unhealthy. I'm saying that some of his reactions in certain situations might be indicative of mild mental illness. And the fact that, at one point he says that Meredith is what's keeping the city from descending completely into madness is just plain... well... stupid. It's a brand of stupidity I don't expect from him. And I actually think I'm being charitable if I attribute it to mental scarring and the resulting disorders rather than attributing it to him being an uncompassionate bastard.

I'd rather see Fenris as a bigot who really dislikes mages rather than see him as one of those people who claim "tolerance" but support systems that deny people human rights. The first one is usually a result of poor education and bad circumstances, the latter is usually an indication of stupidity and evil.

I'm not expecting Fenris to be all Gung-ho free-the-mages at the end. I am expecting him to be more reasonable than the guy who has an angry ghost living in his soul. Maybe that's too much to ask.

[Nilfalasiel]

Arquen wrote...

Fenris is not going to change completely around to be a magic loving, magister supporting, free all the mages! guy. He also isn't a leader who comes up with grand theories or ideas on how to change the world. He is barely figuring out where he belongs in the world. All he knows is he doesn't want the world to be like Tevinter. He asks for an alternative -- he doesn't come up with the alternative himself. Yet, he doesn't like the mages being Tranquilled or beaten or abused or locked away any more than anyone else.

Nooot so sure I agree there. Fenris insists strongly on "Tevinter is bad, and giving unlimited powers to mages is bad"...even when that's not really the topic of the discussion. His first time in the Gallows comes to mind. It's really strange how him and Anders (and/or a pro-mage Hawke) essentially argue circles round each other in that scene. You have one side saying that all-powerful mages are bad...when that's not what the opposition is promoting. It kind of sounds like this:

"Magisters are terrible."
"Yes, we know, but we're saying that locking mages up isn't the answer either."
"Yes, but Tevinter is horrible."
"...ok, yes, but oppression isn't going to solve this."

And Fenris' answer that "I see no oppression here" actually irks me quite a bit. Uh...it's an actual prison? Filled with statues of slaves crying in pain? I mean, they're not even trying to disguise its purpose.

Yes, this scene would happen at the beginning of the game, and maybe this is Fenris being wilfully stubborn on the topic after having yet another run-in with his former mage master, and he may mellow out somewhat later, but the "I see no oppression here" was a bit much to stomach, especially after actually hearing him hesitate when he first enters the courtyard. On the other hand, maybe he really is taking things that literally, and unless he sees a mage being forcibly tranquilled in front of his eyes, he won't be "seeing" oppression. (Speaking of oppression, why does he say that the guard barracks in the Viscount's Keep are the seat of oppression...? Is it meant to be sarcastic? And if yes, why does he bring it up?)

That being said, I completely agree with him that a magocracy à la Tevinter is a disastrous solution to the mage problem. But there's quite a margin between not wanting mages to be oppressed and wanting to give them absolute power. I understand that it's a good thing to always keep in mind where you don't want to end up, and I'm not saying that Anders' "you're with me or you're against me" mentality is any more conducive to constructive debate, but there are instances where discussions involving Fenris simply run laps around themselves because of this. I just don't think that he's quite as tolerant of mages while being opposed to magic and magisters as you imply. I don't remember him ever saying anything against Tranquility, and he's quite happy with sending various mages back to the Circle (ie. having them locked away). It's also quite easy to say "well, I'm happy to accept alternatives" and then vehemently speak out against them without offering one in return. I understand it's not in his nature to want to change the world...but there are times when you wonder whether he really thinks an alternative besides "mages rule the world" is possible. If he does think so, then boy, is he kicking and dragging his heels about it.

Edit: Lol, I clearly took too long to craft this post, I got partially 'd by CGG there.

Modifié par Nilfalasiel, 09 octobre 2011 - 11:49 .

[jlb524]

But Fenris allowed his body to become a magical vessel.

He obviously understands the power and survive-ability that comes with magic.

[Nilfalasiel]

jlb524 wrote...

But Fenris allowed his body to become a magical vessel.

He obviously understands the power and survive-ability that comes with magic.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Gaider say that Fenris didn't know what the ritual would involve?

[Arcane_Solona]

Oh my God. I cannot believe that one little sentence of mine has caused such an uproar! I really, really don't understand it when people get so fired up over fictional characters!!

First of all, I meant the Anders/Justice sanity issues thing as a JOKE. And I don't blame you, CGG for not grasping that, I blame the internet, because clearly, the way you read things is different from the way the author intended them to be read.

Second of all, I happen to really like Anders, believe it or not. He was my absolute favourite in Awakening, and I love him like a brother. I'm not some Anders basher who just wants to insult him all the time just to make Fenris look good. Quite frankly, he is a fictional character and I am not prepared to spend time hating or bashing a fictional character. Thedas is fictional, so are the people within it. I was really surprised by the anger in your post and I had no idea such an explosion of heated words would occur. I am sorry if I angered you (which I clearly did), but I assure you, that was not my intention.

And I wasn't twisting the facts. It was just my way of saying just how drastic his actions were. No matter what, he blew up a Chantry and killed innocents, may they be 1 or a 100. There's no denying that. Also, one person's interpretation of a character's actions differs from another's, but that doesn't make one person's interpretation right. You may interpret Anders' actions one way, and I the other, but we didn't write Anders and we didn't write the story so neither of us will really know what his motivations were and what was really going on in his head. To claim otherwise is silly.

Again, I'd like to stress the fact that these are fictional characters, and as much as I adore them and adore this game, I would never take them too seriously and start hating on them like you have implied I do. There is no hatred, there is no outrage and there is no bashing. There's only discussion, debate, opinions and enjoyment of a truly great and wonderful game. Please don't let such discussions get to you. Its not worth it. We all come here to share the love we have for Dragon Age, not to fight and bicker about it.

There. I've said my piece.

Modifié par Arcane_Solona, 09 octobre 2011 - 12:41 .

[jlb524]

Nilfalasiel wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

But Fenris allowed his body to become a magical vessel.

He obviously understands the power and survive-ability that comes with magic.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Gaider say that Fenris didn't know what the ritual would involve?

I don't know what Gaider said...but from the game...it seems that Fenris knew that he was augmenting his own abilities through magic.  He probalbly didn't realize the full extent of the consequences (memory loss and all that) but he still choose to do it.

[Nilfalasiel]

jlb524 wrote...

I don't know what Gaider said...but from the game...it seems that Fenris knew that he was augmenting his own abilities through magic.  He probalbly didn't realize the full extent of the consequences (memory loss and all that) but he still choose to do it.

Actually, I'm pretty sure Fenris states that he had the markings against his will. This is the part that he's forgotten: he did agree to have the ritual, but he didn't know what it would involve specifically. I'd have to go delve quite far back in the thread to find this discussion, but I seem to remember Gaider popping in and confirming this.

[Ramante]

Nilfalasiel wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

I don't know what Gaider said...but from the game...it seems that Fenris knew that he was augmenting his own abilities through magic.  He probalbly didn't realize the full extent of the consequences (memory loss and all that) but he still choose to do it.

Actually, I'm pretty sure Fenris states that he had the markings against his will. This is the part that he's forgotten: he did agree to have the ritual, but he didn't know what it would involve specifically. I'd have to go delve quite far back in the thread to find this discussion, but I seem to remember Gaider popping in and confirming this.

To answer your question:

David Gaider wrote...
"Did Fenris know about the ritual? Or just the boon?"

Just the boon. Even if he'd known about what was going to be done to him, he wouldn't have known what that meant.

[jlb524]

I honestly haven't been following this thread at all (these are my only posts in it).

My impression from playing the game is that he chose to to undergo some ritual in order to become more powerful and this resulted in the markings. He obviously wasn't aware of all the consequences...but the desire for more power through magic seems evident to me from what his sister says in Act 3.

He always claimed that they were against his will (b/c he didn't remember anything prior to getting them) but it seems that he wanted them from what Varania says in Act 3.

Ramante wrote...

David Gaider wrote...
"Did Fenris know about the ritual? Or just the boon?"

Just the boon. Even if he'd known about what was going to be done to him, he wouldn't have known what that meant.

I think the fact that he seeked a 'boon' from mages (blood mages)....well...he had to do it to achieve more power.

Modifié par jlb524, 09 octobre 2011 - 01:17 .

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Hey Solana, I'm sorry if I came off as super angry. I was slightly irritated, but not actually angry at you. After I puked out that word-vomit, I should have gone in and edited in some things that were obviously jokes.

A few years ago, I decided to not actually discuss real things on the internet, so I switched to fictional stuff. Still, every once in a while I see a kind of thinking that was endemic to political discussions rear its head in literary ones, and it sparks the old adrenal glands. It doesn't spark 'em quite as bad (you should see me talk about McCarthyism sometime. Boy oh boy), but I get echoes... and those echoes fuel some nice tidy little rants.

Actually, whether or not Anders killed innocents IS up for interpretation. I mean technically,based solely on the information we have from the in-game cutscene, he may have only killed Elthina and Templars... do you consider them innocents? No matter what, Anders blew up the Chantry and killed soldiers and their leader. He might have killed some other people who may or may not have been innocent... who do you count as an innocent?

I'm serious when I ask that question. If someone orders deaths but never lifts a knife themselves, are they an innocent? If they never order a death, but they report their friends and neighbors to the secret police, are they an innocent? If they simply do not object when people are forced into internment, are they an innocent? Where does it start or stop?

Or, to phrase it in a way that's more thread appropriate... is a man who sells slaves an innocent, even if he never captures or kills them himself? What about the man who sails a ship he knows carries slaves? What about the guy who supplies the ship he knows is going to be used to carry slaves? 

Regardless of "innocence" or "guilt," Anders kills people. In general, I'm not in favor of that. But this is a video game, and a lot of people get killed in a video game. Whether you're stabbing them, blowing them up, or ripping their hearts out with your bare hands, all those deaths should be viewed in a similar way. So when it comes to the medium of games, my philosophies are wildly divergent from where they'd be in real life: to game, I have to be a lot more accepting of killing in general. And based on that fundamental paradigm shift, wherein I admit that sometimes you just gotta kill some Carta members, or slavers, or blood mages... well, I start looking at everything a little differently.

That's when people trot out the word innocent, and that makes me ask that question: in the context of a game where I routinely murder dozens of humans in a day... all moral definitions become considerably muddier.

Which is actually, in a way, good. It means I'm starting from the ground up... it means I have to take everything in the world as what it is, rather than what it looks like.

So I'm not angry.

But Hawke? She's pissed. And Meredith is so much worse than anything I've had to deal with in my lifetime. So consider my rants as coming from Hawke, from Mahariel, from Amell, from Tabris.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 09 octobre 2011 - 01:36 .

[Collider]

Carver could have been one of those templars. In that event, Anders would have killed Hawke's brother.

It's very evident that some people join the templars out of genuine faith, morality, or the desire to serve and protect. There's no "must want to kill innocent mage" requirement.
Elthina may have been rather useless, but I would still consider her an innocent.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Collider wrote...

Carver could have been one of those templars. In that event, Anders would have killed Hawke's brother.

It's very evident that some people join the templars out of genuine faith, morality, or the desire to serve and protect. There's no "must want to kill innocent mage" requirement.
Elthina may have been rather useless, but I would still consider her an innocent.

So you consider the commanding officer of a solider who abuses their power to be innocent, even if they fail to take appropriate action against those abuses. You consider a cleric who refuses to take action against those who commit abuses under their watch an innocent. You consider a sympathizer to an authoritarian government an innocent. I just need you to admit those things... that someone who would turn a fellow human being over to the government for being part of an undesireable group is an innocent, in your estimation.

If you say the templars and Elthina are innocents well... they are all those things I've listed above. There's no debating it either, those are things they solidly do throughout the game.

To me, they're as bad as any slaver. As bad as any carta member. As bad as any of the hundreds upon hundreds of people Hawke kills in alleys and on streets.

A person who is willing to turn someone who has never harmed someone over to the government to be subjected to internment and possibly torture is more innocent to you than someone who uses violence to try to prevent them from doing so. Every single one of those templars took a vow promsing to do just that... but you consider cooperating with authoritarian regimes to enforce systems of apartheid and to prevent people from escaping from internment camps to be the act of an innocent person. As long as someone joins an authoritarian group and is "just following orders," everything they do is ok... so long as they joined for "the right reasons."

I'm just saying that there are times, in history, where the soldier who joined up simply because they loved their country turned out to be on the wrong side, whereas the people in the resistance blowing crap up were pretty darn innocent. Also, awesome.

What makes those Templars innocent, but the people Hawke kills on a daily basis not innocent? Is the only thing that defines guilt or innocence whether that person in general is attacking you right at that second? That seems to be all anyone seems willing to consider.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 09 octobre 2011 - 01:56 .

[Heidenreich]

jlb524 wrote...

I honestly haven't been following this thread at all (these are my only posts in it).

My impression from playing the game is that he chose to to undergo some ritual in order to become more powerful and this resulted in the markings. He obviously wasn't aware of all the consequences...but the desire for more power through magic seems evident to me from what his sister says in Act 3.

He always claimed that they were against his will (b/c he didn't remember anything prior to getting them) but it seems that he wanted them from what Varania says in Act 3.

Ramante wrote...

David Gaider wrote...
"Did Fenris know about the ritual? Or just the boon?"

Just the boon. Even if he'd known about what was going to be done to him, he wouldn't have known what that meant.

I think the fact that he seeked a 'boon' from mages (blood mages)....well...he had to do it to achieve more power.

He was a slave to these mages anyways. The 'boon' was the freedom of his mother and sister. It was a selfess act to protect his family, not a selfish one to gain power. He had no idea of the Ritual, nor what it intailed.

Modifié par Heidenreich, 09 octobre 2011 - 01:54 .

[Collider]

Nevermind.

Modifié par Collider, 09 octobre 2011 - 02:14 .

[sagefic]

so, i've been following this discussion for the past few pages...

yeah.

i'm working my way through the da2 possibilities/romances, etc. i've even spoilerfied the fenrismance a bit by looking it up on youtube and then thought, no, bad girl! wait until you get there with this char.

anyhow, it seems to me that if you friend fenris, he mellows out a bit, is more content, seems to have a friend and is able to move on a bit more. however, i've also heard this path tends to leave fenris enabled to go on hating magic/mages without seeing how the evils of slavery/imprisonment applies to them, too.

on the other hand, i've also heard that isn't the case. i've also heard that rivalry is 'better' for changing his mind. i like the idea of 'we respect each other's differences' on the rivalry, i don't like the 'agree to disagree' that comes with it (i.e., fenris goes on being angry, hawke comes off being disregarding of the dangers of magic.)

anyhow, i'm trying to make a 'fair' mage: willing to see the circle has it's place, down on oppression where it really exists, though. honestly, i'm inclined to support the templars in some key things (like grace and her 'act of mercy' friends - may end up sending them back to the circle, the crazy lot of them; anti blood magic and why are we letting keran become a templar again?) i'm sure i can easily manage a friendship with fenris, since i half agree with him. still, not sure if i want to, because i would love to see him open his mind a little here (just a little).

anyhow, your thoughts? if you did both friend and rivalmance, which did you feel ended up making the two of them appear to meet on a middle ground (or is that impossible?)

Modifié par sagequeen, 09 octobre 2011 - 02:06 .

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Collider wrote...

So you consider the commanding officer of a solider who slaughters innocent people to be innocent. You consider a cleric who refuses to take action against those who commit sexual abuse under their watch an innocent. You consider a sympathizer to an authoritarian government an innocent. I just need you to say those things... that someone who would turn a fellow human being over to the government for being part of an undesireable group is an innocent, in your estimation.

No.
Real life examples are always dangerous to use when discussing video games. Because they are not going to be the same in most circumstances. Like this one.

"Commanding officer of a solider who slaughters innocent people to be innocent" is not even close to Elthina or anyone else in the chantry that we know of. Elthina is a sympathizer, yes. That's just sympathizing. And above all, she believes in the chantry. She agrees neither with Meredith nor Orsino competely.

In the DA universe, the mage issue is really more complex than just handing over innocents to the government. There's a practical use. It's not just bigotry. Mages are dangerous, the most easily dangerous of all people. They have special powers that the rest of the populace does not have and most of those people have little to no defense against such power.
I don't happen to agree with the mages being imprisoned in their towers, but invoking real life examples doesn't work because Dragon Age is a fantasy setting and is more complex than sweeping statements. You can't really discredit people being against Anders' actions (or specifically, in relation to innocents) using real world examples because magic does not exist in the real world, people can't be mind controlled, the fade doesn't exist, people can't be possessed by demons, etc. It's inherently different.

I am implying little to nothing on my real world perspectives because I am judging Anders on Dragon Age terms. One HAS to do consider magic and everything in it's context to make a reasonable judgement in regards to Anders and what he does. It's extremely important. One can't take that out of the equation as the "commanding officer" examples you've put forth have done.

I'm not using real life examples. I haven't mentioned a single real life thing. I'm talking only and exclusively about ideas here. That's why I said "authoritarian" and didn't mention a specific group.

Before I saw this post, I did edit my description of Elthina a bit, because Meredith only starts murdering innocent people after she's dead. She knows beforehand that Meredith WANTS to do it, sure, but she hasn't done it yet.

And now you're saying that your definition of innocent does not include people with special powers. Are those people uniquely "born guilty?"

I've gone to great pains to divorce this from anything in the real world, and to just describe what is happening literally. There is an organization. It is authoritarian. It is imprisoning people who are part of a minority group. You agree with the policy of doing that.  You keep agreeing with the policy of imprisoning a minority while saying you aren't .

And yes, mages are dangerous. That doesn't change the fact that you keep insisting that a policy of internment aginst a minority group is OK.

And you still haven't defined innocent. You keep using it in weird, weird ways that make no sense and don't clarify your position at all. Right now all  I know is that you consider Elthina and the Templars innocent, and all mages are, in your estimation, born guilty (because imprisoning them is not considered, in your mind, imprisoning innocents.)

Edit again: OT discussion moved here. Sorry, folks!

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 09 octobre 2011 - 03:10 .

[ejoslin]

sagequeen wrote...

so, i've been following this discussion for the past few pages...

yeah.

i'm working my way through the da2 possibilities/romances, etc. i've even spoilerfied the fenrismance a bit by looking it up on youtube and then thought, no, bad girl! wait until you get there with this char.

anyhow, it seems to me that if you friend fenris, he mellows out a bit, is more content, seems to have a friend and is able to move on a bit more. however, i've also heard this path tends to leave fenris enabled to go on hating magic/mages without seeing how the evils of slavery/imprisonment applies to them, too.

on the other hand, i've also heard that isn't the case. i've also heard that rivalry is 'better' for changing his mind. i like the idea of 'we respect each other's differences' on the rivalry, i don't like the 'agree to disagree' that comes with it (i.e., fenris goes on being angry, hawke comes off being disregarding of the dangers of magic.)

anyhow, i'm trying to make a 'fair' mage: willing to see the circle has it's place, down on oppression where it really exists, though. honestly, i'm inclined to support the templars in some key things (like grace and her 'act of mercy' friends - may end up sending them back to the circle, the crazy lot of them; anti blood magic and why are we letting keran become a templar again?) i'm sure i can easily manage a friendship with fenris, since i half agree with him. still, not sure if i want to, because i would love to see him open his mind a little here (just a little).

anyhow, your thoughts? if you did both friend and rivalmance, which did you feel ended up making the two of them appear to meet on a middle ground (or is that impossible?)

I did both.  I find not only does the rivalmance just make more sense for me, but he actually does seem to both recognize AND realize it's time to let go of the anger and hate in a rivalmance, where in a friendmance I don't remember it being discussed in act 3.

[Sir Edric]

Ramante wrote...

David Gaider wrote...
"Did Fenris know about the ritual? Or just the boon?"

Just the boon. Even if he'd known about what was going to be done to him, he wouldn't have known what that meant.

That's interesting. I always thought differently about this. Nice to find out.