193 réponses à ce sujet

[upsettingshorts]

Im not up on my lore but I thought the Qunari had an armistice, not a peace treaty.

Based on what Sten's saying, the Qunari have a use for the former - not so much the latter.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 20 janvier 2011 - 02:59 .

[sevalaricgirl]

Sten does say that the Qunari will one day invade and that he doesn't want to face the warden on the battlefield.

[Malanek]

TJPags wrote...
"I agree to give you $100".  Two days later, I ask for it back.  did I break my word?

Without the faintest shadow of a doubt, if you wanted it back you needed to loan rather than give.

This bit...

* Sten: They signed a piece of paper. But only because they knew that you believed in it.
* Alistair: And what is the difference between that and negotiating?
* Sten: They stopped fighting for their own reasons. And they will resume it again, one day. The agreement means nothing to them.

...confirms that the Qunari signed something that means nothing to them despite knowing that the Humans believe it.

[TJPags]

Malanek999 wrote...

TJPags wrote...
"I agree to give you $100".  Two days later, I ask for it back.  did I break my word?

Without the faintest shadow of a doubt, if you wanted it back you needed to loan rather than give.

This bit...

* Sten: They signed a piece of paper. But only because they knew that you believed in it.
* Alistair: And what is the difference between that and negotiating?
* Sten: They stopped fighting for their own reasons. And they will resume it again, one day. The agreement means nothing to them.

...confirms that the Qunari signed something that means nothing to them despite knowing that the Humans believe it.

Without the faintest shadow of a doubt to you, perhaps.  I guarantee, I would not need to say "loan" to get it back.

They signed a paper that means nothing to them.  The humans believe it.  The humans may believe it means "forever", just like you believe my earlier statement meant "forever".  The humans - and you - might be wrong.

[Malanek]

TJPags wrote...
Without the faintest shadow of a doubt to you, perhaps.  I guarantee, I would not need to say "loan" to get it back.

Legally you would. You no longer own gifts once they are given. The person you gave it to does.

TJPags wrote...
They signed a paper that means nothing to them.  The humans believe it.  The humans may believe it means "forever", just like you believe my earlier statement meant "forever".  The humans - and you - might be wrong.

Without knowing the contents of the accord, you can deduce from what Sten says that the Qunari knew they were being deceptive.

Modifié par Malanek999, 20 janvier 2011 - 03:14 .

[HolyAvenger]

As if I wasn't looking forward to b*tchslapping some Qunari around enough already. Excellent.

[TJPags]

Malanek999 wrote...

TJPags wrote...
Without the faintest shadow of a doubt to you, perhaps.  I guarantee, I would not need to say "loan" to get it back.

Legally you would. You no longer own gifts once they are given. The person you gave it to does.

TJPags wrote...
They signed a paper that means nothing to them.  The humans believe it.  The humans may believe it means "forever", just like you believe my earlier statement meant "forever".  The humans - and you - might be wrong.

Without knowing the contents of the accord, you can deduce from what Sten says that the Qunari knew they were being deceptive.

Legally, title only transfers once I've completed giving it to you.  Even beginning to hand it to you does not transfer title, until I complete that act.  And, of course, that assumes I actually give it to you.  if I just say I will, you have no right to it.  And that only pertains to one type of legal gift.  The other kind can be revoked at any time during my lifetime.

And being deceptive does not necessarily imply a lie.  If you make an assumption that I disagree with, or do not mean, and you verbalize your assumption, and I don't correct you as to MY intent, did I lie?  or did I just allow you to mislead yourself?  Such a situation can, in fact, legally afford grounds to invalidate the agreement.

I can easily be deceptive during a negotiation without once lying.  That is, after all, the point of negotiating.

Finally, if the Qunari signed a piece of paper that said "we agree to stop fighting", and it does not specify for how long, then all they have to do is stop fighting for10 minutes, and they've honored the agreement.

Modifié par TJPags, 20 janvier 2011 - 03:23 .

[Dayshadow]

Malanek999 wrote...

Dayshadow wrote...
But to get back on track, what is the lie you are referring to? How did the Antaam lie?

By signing something they had no intention of honouring. That is lying however you twist it.

So by not valuing your cultural ideals (in this case, you are the people of Thedas) they are liars? OK.

What were the terms of the treaty?

Who signed the treaty? Are they still alive to honor it?

[silentassassin264]

Malanek999 wrote...

Dayshadow wrote...
But to get back on track, what is the lie you are referring to? How did the Antaam lie?

By signing something they had no intention of honouring. That is lying however you twist it.

No it isn't.  Let me explain with a nice made up situation...

You and three friends are exploring some islands and find some uncharted island.  While messing around you find that it has natural tunnels leading down that are lined with rather large diamonds.  While you and your buddies are thinking about how rich you are going to be, some pygmy scouts with some weird chirping language start trying to attack you all with spears.  You and your buddies always carry an assortment of handguns and rifles so you all proceed to slaughter scores of the pygmies.  Eventually some come running out falling prostrate signifying a surrender at least to you all.  They invite you to some larger underground chamber (also lined with even more diamonds which the pygmies don't even use).  They take you to their chief of sorts and he gives you some sort of drink and they have some sort of feast and dance.  You and you buddies leave and are all prepared to comeback with some equipment and ships to take advantage of the wonderful diamond island.  

However, the libation and feast was actually the pygmies culture way of saying "lets pretend this never happened, you never saw anything, and we will celebrate by forgetting all about this. mmkay?"  You are a capitalist bastard and do not recognize that gesture as what they did...in fact it seemed more like waving the white flag and surrendering to you.  When your friends come back to loot the place, the pygmies will be outraged and think you all are dishonest for breaching their sacred rituals but in your culture that does not exist and is therefore inconsequential.  You all only left because your tiny sailboat couldn't carry all those diamonds nor could you all really extract them well.  

[Malanek]

TJPags wrote...
Legally, title only transfers once I've completed giving it to you.  Even beginning to hand it to you does not transfer title, until I complete that act.  And, of course, that assumes I actually give it to you.  if I just say I will, you have no right to it. 

You said give and then two days later ask for it back. That implies offer and acceptance or you wouldn't be "asking for it back".

TJPags wrote...
And that only pertains to one type of legal gift.  The other kind can be revoked at any time during my lifetime. 

Oh? Whats this other type of gift called? I have to be careful here because different countries have different laws, but this would completely baffle me. As far as I am aware, property law everywhere around the world works the same in this basic area, once given and accepted, a gift cannot be revoked.

TJPags wrote...
And being deceptive does not necessarily imply a lie.  If you make an assumption that I disagree with, or do not mean, and you verbalize your assumption, and I don't correct you as to MY intent, did I lie?  or did I just allow you to mislead yourself?  Such a situation can, in fact, legally afford grounds to invalidate the agreement.

I can easily be deceptive during a negotiation without once lying.  That is, after all, the point of negotiating.

Sten doesn't say, "ha, we tricked you by not stipulating a time period, but will abide by what was signed". He says they signed it knowing the humans would believe it but what they signed meant nothing to the Qunari.

[Bryy_Miller]

XxDeonxX wrote...

In Dragon Age Origins upon asking Sten whether or not I can trust him after recruiting him he told me that the Qunari are not a people of false promises and that they never go back on their word.

Ferelden, Orlais, Rivain, The Free Marches, Nevarra, Antiva, The Anderfels.. Pretty much every human nation except The Tevinter Imperium signed The Llomerryn Accord with the Qunari stating they would not invade or attack each other anymore. The Invasion of Kirkwall by the Qunari has broken The Llomerryn Accord. This can only mean that Sten is a LIAR!

Why exactly is Sten a liar? Are all muslims liars for saying they are a peaceful people? 

[Malanek]

silentassassin264 wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

Dayshadow wrote...
But to get back on track, what is the lie you are referring to? How did the Antaam lie?

By signing something they had no intention of honouring. That is lying however you twist it.

No it isn't.  Let me explain with a nice made up situation...

You and three friends are exploring some islands and find some uncharted island.  While messing around you find that it has natural tunnels leading down that are lined with rather large diamonds.  While you and your buddies are thinking about how rich you are going to be, some pygmy scouts with some weird chirping language start trying to attack you all with spears.  You and your buddies always carry an assortment of handguns and rifles so you all proceed to slaughter scores of the pygmies.  Eventually some come running out falling prostrate signifying a surrender at least to you all.  They invite you to some larger underground chamber (also lined with even more diamonds which the pygmies don't even use).  They take you to their chief of sorts and he gives you some sort of drink and they have some sort of feast and dance.  You and you buddies leave and are all prepared to comeback with some equipment and ships to take advantage of the wonderful diamond island.  

However, the libation and feast was actually the pygmies culture way of saying "lets pretend this never happened, you never saw anything, and we will celebrate by forgetting all about this. mmkay?"  You are a capitalist bastard and do not recognize that gesture as what they did...in fact it seemed more like waving the white flag and surrendering to you.  When your friends come back to loot the place, the pygmies will be outraged and think you all are dishonest for breaching their sacred rituals but in your culture that does not exist and is therefore inconsequential.  You all only left because your tiny sailboat couldn't carry all those diamonds nor could you all really extract them well.  

What you have written is creative... but completely irrelevent. The dialogue between Alistair and Sten indicates the Qunari were fully aware of what they were doing and never had any intention of honouring what they signed.

[David Gaider]

Ploppy wrote...
Gaider also claims that Isabela may not be a romance option. He's usually dishonest when talking to his fans.

I can hedge plenty, when I choose to. If I am careful with my words, it's because people like to read confirmation even into my lack of confirmation. They also like to interpret things I've said and then present them as fact.

In this case, I'm just not sure how we got to "the Qunari have invaded Kirkwall". There's plenty of reason to think they could, based on what Sten said, but no reason to think that they do outside of the fact that you certainly see Hawke fighting some in the trailer... and by all means no reason to think that they have.

It's speculation. Recognize it as such and you're fine.

[NKKKK]

David Gaider wrote...

XxDeonxX wrote...
The Invasion of Kirkwall by the Qunari has broken The Llomerryn Accord.

The Qunari have invaded Kirkwall? Holy crap! Someone alert the--

--wait, when did this happen? I'm confused.

Your pal, Priestly, said in a post one or two months ago when they started revealing some info. He said something to the like of "More on the Qunari invasion" that coupled with some pics and all we can say is...

Derp

Modifié par NKKKK, 20 janvier 2011 - 03:40 .

[Jaduggar]

Bryy_Miller wrote...
Why exactly is Sten a liar? Are all muslims liars for saying they are a peaceful people? 

At the very least, this is destined to lead to peaceful places.

[Beerfish]

Malanek999 wrote...


What you have written is creative... but completely irrelevent. The dialogue between Alistair and Sten indicates the Qunari were fully aware of what they were doing and never had any intention of honouring what they signed.

Agreed 100%

[NKKKK]

Also, once again, Priestly confirmed in, maybe accidentally, maybe not, in a post some time ago about the "Qunari Invasion"



So yes people, Garrus isn't a rumored party member any more and Tali is a love interest.

[silentassassin264]

Malanek999 wrote...

silentassassin264 wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

Dayshadow wrote...
But to get back on track, what is the lie you are referring to? How did the Antaam lie?

By signing something they had no intention of honouring. That is lying however you twist it.

No it isn't.  Let me explain with a nice made up situation...

You and three friends are exploring some islands and find some uncharted island.  While messing around you find that it has natural tunnels leading down that are lined with rather large diamonds.  While you and your buddies are thinking about how rich you are going to be, some pygmy scouts with some weird chirping language start trying to attack you all with spears.  You and your buddies always carry an assortment of handguns and rifles so you all proceed to slaughter scores of the pygmies.  Eventually some come running out falling prostrate signifying a surrender at least to you all.  They invite you to some larger underground chamber (also lined with even more diamonds which the pygmies don't even use).  They take you to their chief of sorts and he gives you some sort of drink and they have some sort of feast and dance.  You and you buddies leave and are all prepared to comeback with some equipment and ships to take advantage of the wonderful diamond island.  

However, the libation and feast was actually the pygmies culture way of saying "lets pretend this never happened, you never saw anything, and we will celebrate by forgetting all about this. mmkay?"  You are a capitalist bastard and do not recognize that gesture as what they did...in fact it seemed more like waving the white flag and surrendering to you.  When your friends come back to loot the place, the pygmies will be outraged and think you all are dishonest for breaching their sacred rituals but in your culture that does not exist and is therefore inconsequential.  You all only left because your tiny sailboat couldn't carry all those diamonds nor could you all really extract them well.  

What you have written is creative... but completely irrelevent. The dialogue between Alistair and Sten indicates the Qunari were fully aware of what they were doing and never had any intention of honouring what they signed.

Not really.  The point remains the same.  The pygmies' ritual and the human's contract was completely irrelevant to those beholding it.  The Qunari nor the treasure hunter (you) had already made up your mind of what you were going to do when the Qunari knew about the human lands to the south and treasure hunter saw the diamonds.  Both of them had setbacks of some sort, the Qunari needing to regroup and the treasure hunters needing some equipment.  The Qunari never had no intention of having peace with the humans at the end...it was the Qun or you are working in the mines.  As a treasure hunter, the ritual was irrelevant, you and your buddies were coming back for those diamonds.  The Qunari do not have the concept of a peace treaty.  It is the Qun or the mines.  Therefore engaging in this "peace treaty" was engaging in some awkward alien cultural thing just because.

[David Gaider]

NKKKK wrote...
Also, once again, Priestly confirmed in, maybe accidentally, maybe not, in a post some time ago about the "Qunari Invasion"

Is that so? Well clearly that must be the case, then.

Whatever. Carry on.

[Dayshadow]

Malanek999 wrote...

What you have written is creative... but completely irrelevent. The dialogue between Alistair and Sten indicates the Qunari were fully aware of what they were doing and never had any intention of honouring what they signed.

What did they sign? What does the treaty state?

This is very important and the foundaton of your argument.

You're saying they are lying, but you don't even know what it is they are supposedly lying about.

[TJPags]

Malanek999 wrote...

TJPags wrote...
Legally, title only transfers once I've completed giving it to you.  Even beginning to hand it to you does not transfer title, until I complete that act.  And, of course, that assumes I actually give it to you.  if I just say I will, you have no right to it. 

You said give and then two days later ask for it back. That implies offer and acceptance or you wouldn't be "asking for it back".

TJPags wrote...
And that only pertains to one type of legal gift.  The other kind can be revoked at any time during my lifetime. 

Oh? Whats this other type of gift called? I have to be careful here because different countries have different laws, but this would completely baffle me. As far as I am aware, property law everywhere around the world works the same in this basic area, once given and accepted, a gift cannot be revoked.

TJPags wrote...
And being deceptive does not necessarily imply a lie.  If you make an assumption that I disagree with, or do not mean, and you verbalize your assumption, and I don't correct you as to MY intent, did I lie?  or did I just allow you to mislead yourself?  Such a situation can, in fact, legally afford grounds to invalidate the agreement.

I can easily be deceptive during a negotiation without once lying.  That is, after all, the point of negotiating.

Sten doesn't say, "ha, we tricked you by not stipulating a time period, but will abide by what was signed". He says they signed it knowing the humans would believe it but what they signed meant nothing to the Qunari.

1 and 2.  Gifts made in contemplation of death, for one.  GIfts made in contemplation of marriage, for another.  There are others.

3.  Assume the agreement said, as I've said many times, "we will now stop fighting".  The Qunari planned to stop fighting at that point, and resume doing so 150 years later (for some reason, I think this agreement was made 150 years ago.  I could be wrong - but that's why I chose 150 years.  Choose any number you like).  They signed a paper saying "we will now stop fighting".  It means nothing to them - they were going to do so anyway.  The humans think it means forever.  That's the humans problem.

Hell, even if they had no set time to resume fighting in mind, if they intended to stop fighting at that point anyway, signing the treaty was completely meaningless to them.

[Malanek]

Dayshadow wrote...

Malanek999 wrote...

What you have written is creative... but completely irrelevent. The dialogue between Alistair and Sten indicates the Qunari were fully aware of what they were doing and never had any intention of honouring what they signed.

What did they sign? What does the treaty state?

This is very important and the foundaton of your argument.

You're saying they are lying, but you don't even know what it is they are supposedly lying about.

It's not the foundation of my argument at all. Sten and Alsiatir know what was signed. I am deducing that the Quanri lied on the basis of what Sten and Alistair said.

[Malanek]

David Gaider wrote...

NKKKK wrote...
Also, once again, Priestly confirmed in, maybe accidentally, maybe not, in a post some time ago about the "Qunari Invasion"

Is that so? Well clearly that must be the case, then.

Whatever. Carry on.

Why do I get the feeling this thread is going to get necroed in a couple of months.

[Felfenix]

Darth Gaider is just covering for the Qunari. He's part of the Qun, you know. You can't trust those Qunari. I hear they're all LIARS.

Modifié par Felfenix, 20 janvier 2011 - 04:06 .

[Piecake]

Malanek999 wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

NKKKK wrote...
Also, once again, Priestly confirmed in, maybe accidentally, maybe not, in a post some time ago about the "Qunari Invasion"

Is that so? Well clearly that must be the case, then.

Whatever. Carry on.

Why do I get the feeling this thread is going to get necroed in a couple of months.

I think what he is trying to say is that there could or could not be a Qunari invasion based on the choices you make, and just doesnt want to spoil the amazingly awesome news