1019 réponses à ce sujet

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
That would be a valid argumnet if Orlais was a single person. But Orlais is a nation and we're talking about  a LOOONG time span. Nations are prone to changes...people in pwoer and the popoulace change, as well as the worlds.
Even today, national politics can change overnight (or do you think WW2 Germany and the Germany of today are the same?) Given that nations in TheDas are kingdoms, change is even more extreeme, as the external and internal politics depends pretty much on 1 person.

In other words, a national history isn't personal.

Your argument seems to preclude the fact that despite the long time span and the change in leadership, Orlais has taken over other nations. It's done so since it was first formed by Emperor Drakon I, and it's done so after the Third Blight, and also did also under the current Empress and the previous Emperor. Despite the changes in the person leading the nation, this aspect of their history has remained consistent, even with the current Empress of Orlais.

Germany was involved in two word wars.
Get my point?

National history is IRRELEVANT when determining the current policy.
As long as the leadership is diffferent, there is no correlation to the earlier policy.

No one is determing current policy, people are evaluating how the Orlesian Empire has assumed control of other nations throughout its long history, including its recent territorial disputes with Nevarra and its multiple attempts on Ferelden. You continually ignore this fact by trying to side-track it with real world examples that don't preclude how Orlais has occupied other nations despite the changes in leadership and tactics; Celene I certainly didn't send in armed troops to force the issue like her predecessors did, she offered an alliance to a weak King Cailan that would have left her in a position of leadership over all of Ferelden. The tactics certainly changed, but the reality of the situation hasn't.

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

The oversight in NOT a problem you can solve by jsut removing the Chantry. It's a product of the time and means as much as anything else.

It's not mere oversight, it's control. Mages have no control over their lives, because they live under the control of the templars and the Chantry. Wynne and Anders voice this in Awakening when they say that the Chantry would rather cull all mages than see them free.

And? How does that imply "no control"?
That they can't go wherever they want? Well big whoopin deal.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Furthermore, why should the first Enchanter be the start and end of any overight? I told you before - Cricle security is NOT the responsibility of the first enchanter, so there no reason why he MUST be shown any evidence. Who else sees that evidence? What  are the procedures? You do not know.

Do your arguments always steam from twisting the words of other people to suit your pro-Chantry vision of DA? The fact that the First Enchanter is entirely removed from such decision-making is the problem. There's no one capable of maintaining order if the Knight-Commander has no oversight; you'd realize how much of a problem it is when you remember that an anti-mage Cullen can become the new Knight-Commander.

Again, why should the first enchanter be involved in that process?

When a detective goes to write an arrest warant, he doesn't go ask for permission from the relatives or friends of the suspect. He doesn't go and show them the gathered evidence either.

Again, we don't know the exact procedures.
And lastly, these are the friggin middle-ages.
If you want to reform everything you don't like, the whole of Thedas would have to be destroyed down to hte last atom.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
what do we know about that?
2 lines from the epilogue. "Cullen governs the circle with an Iron Fist" .. that tells us what exactly?
Again, tha'ts too little information to draw any reasonalbe conclusions from.

The same Cullen who decides to murder any mage he encounters if he has no such position is the problem, or are you arguing that the position of Knight-Commander will solve all his mental issues regarding mages?

Annulment was a a pretty logical step, something many peoplr would agree wiht.
So I fail to see your point.

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...

No one is determing current policy, people are evaluating how the Orlesian Empire has assumed control of other nations throughout its long history, including its recent territorial disputes with Nevarra and its multiple attempts on Ferelden. You continually ignore this fact by trying to side-track it with real world examples that don't preclude how Orlais has occupied other nations despite the changes in leadership and tactics; Celene I certainly didn't send in armed troops to force the issue like her predecessors did, she offered an alliance to a weak King Cailan that would have left her in a position of leadership over all of Ferelden. The tactics certainly changed, but the reality of the situation hasn't.

We ARE talking about nations and kings. If you
had any knowledge o the history of europe, you'd know just what a FUBAR
time that was. All countries, now and even more then, are always looking at opportunities.
Nations are constantly at eachother throats. That is the reality of the world.

Waht yo uwrite down is an interesting read, but that is al it remains. It doesn't make Orlais attacking the Dales any more likely than the Dales plotting to take over Orlais.

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

If the writers intended for us to take the accusation seriously, why didn't they write the templars hunting her down for being an apostate? Why not use her shape-shifting to brand her a maleficar? Why intentionally use the word "blood mage" when we clearly know that she never performs such magic?

Morrigan knows such magic. That is canon fact. She admits so herself.

If you want to harp abotu her not using typcial blood mage abilties in the game, think about this - there is more to blood magis and all magic than we see in the game. Game mechanics and classes aside, for that is not relevant.

Morrigan never mentions the blood magic ritual that involves Isolde; she never uses blood instead of mana (and the game mechanics even allow Wynne to become a blood mage, so that doesn't count); [b] Morrigan never admits that she's capable of blood magic, only that she knows an old ritual that can be viewed as such. In that respect, she's no more of a blood mage than Finn is!

AAAGH. Do you even read????

I specificly said in the very quote you posted that game mechanics don't count.

And you underlined IS THE FRIGGIN POINT!
Morrigan doesn't get to determine what blood magic is. The Chantry does.
And Morrigan admits that the DR is something the Cahtnry would label as such.. That makes it blood magic.

And while you call it a carnal ritual, you don't know if there is more to it. The gmae cuts to the nekkid part, how do you know tehre were no spells and preparations involved? Heck, it magic and it's a ritual - there had to be preparation and there had to be more to it than judt sleeping with a warden.


So, the point is that Morrigan knows such magics, is capalbe of them and is willing - all of which gives weight to the templar claims. At least with Aenerin there was no indication of him being a blood mage, neither in his behavior nor abilities.

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

The oversight in NOT a problem you can solve by jsut removing the Chantry. It's a product of the time and means as much as anything else.

It's not mere oversight, it's control. Mages have no control over their lives, because they live under the control of the templars and the Chantry. Wynne and Anders voice this in Awakening when they say that the Chantry would rather cull all mages than see them free.

And? How does that imply "no control"?
That they can't go wherever they want? Well big whoopin deal.

Being imprisoned by an order that spreads anti-mage dogma would be the issue; mages have no basic rights and can't defend themselves against accusations of being labelled a maleficar. Irving had no say when Jowan's Rite of Tranquility came up, and we can see from Aneirin that it's not always a certainty that the templars are even correct. Who would want to live a life where they have no agency over their own lives and can lose their humanity or their lives because of baseless accusations? Living a life under oppressors is a big deal, Lotion, because it's either subjugation or death.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Do your arguments always steam from twisting the words of other people to suit your pro-Chantry vision of DA? The fact that the First Enchanter is entirely removed from such decision-making is the problem. There's no one capable of maintaining order if the Knight-Commander has no oversight; you'd realize how much of a problem it is when you remember that an anti-mage Cullen can become the new Knight-Commander.

Again, why should the first enchanter be involved in that process?

When a detective goes to write an arrest warant, he doesn't go ask for permission from the relatives or friends of the suspect. He doesn't go and show them the gathered evidence either.

Again, we don't know the exact procedures.
And lastly, these are the friggin middle-ages.
If you want to reform everything you don't like, the whole of Thedas would have to be destroyed down to hte last atom.

That's a poor analogy; the First Enchanter isn't a relative, he's supposed to preside over all the mages in the Circle. If Irving didn't see the evidence against Jowan but the Rite was already signed, then I don't see how you can dispute that the Knight-Commander has no oversight in such matters when he could turn Jowan tranquil or kill him at his discretion. While Jowan was indeed guilty, Aneirin is another matter that should be considered in such matters.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

The same Cullen who decides to murder any mage he encounters if he has no such position is the problem, or are you arguing that the position of Knight-Commander will solve all his mental issues regarding mages?

Annulment was a a pretty logical step, something many peoplr would agree wiht.
So I fail to see your point.

Cullen was clearly losing grip with reality. Affirming his paranoia would have been a big misstep. Murdering innocent people left and right is a key element of Cullen's actions if he doesn't have the position of Knight-Commander, so I fail to see how the position of Knight-Commander would have improved his mental condition.

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

No one is determing current policy, people are evaluating how the Orlesian Empire has assumed control of other nations throughout its long history, including its recent territorial disputes with Nevarra and its multiple attempts on Ferelden. You continually ignore this fact by trying to side-track it with real world examples that don't preclude how Orlais has occupied other nations despite the changes in leadership and tactics; Celene I certainly didn't send in armed troops to force the issue like her predecessors did, she offered an alliance to a weak King Cailan that would have left her in a position of leadership over all of Ferelden. The tactics certainly changed, but the reality of the situation hasn't.

We ARE talking about nations and kings. If you
had any knowledge o the history of europe, you'd know just what a FUBAR
time that was. All countries, now and even more then, are always looking at opportunities.
Nations are constantly at eachother throats. That is the reality of the world.

Waht yo uwrite down is an interesting read, but that is al it remains. It doesn't make Orlais attacking the Dales any more likely than the Dales plotting to take over Orlais.

We're talking about the people who have taken the position of Emperor or Empress of Orlais here, who have used different tactics to achieve the same end. You seem eager to dismiss the canon in favor of your own ideals about Orlais and the Chantry, but I don't. If we examine their history and see that multiple leaders of the empire have occupied other nations throughout its long history, I don't see why it should be dismissed when they are repeating such actions in present day Thedas.

[Mlaar]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Mlaar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
I do indeed have the facts.

I did not say you had no facts I said you do not have all the facts! thierfore all you can do is speculate.

Speculate means to reason with inconclusive evidence

The way you base your argument comes across as saying your view is the correct one! whereas thier can be no correct conclusion to this argument until all facts hidden or unhidden come to light maybe in DA2 thier will be more codex entries you can use to push your case forward but even then I personally doubt enough information will be given to prove guilty or not guilty.

If the writers intended for us to take the accusation seriously, why didn't they write the templars hunting her down for being an apostate? Why not use her shape-shifting to brand her a maleficar? Why intentionally use the word "blood mage" when we clearly know that she never performs such magic?

Same reason any writer leaves things unsaid, it allows the reader (gamer in this case) to use thier imagination to speculate on things that could be.
Also DA is an on going story so leaving things unknown allows openings and avenues for them to explore later down the line something a good writer will always do when planning on sequals, if they suddenly declare Morrigan is a blood mage then she would forever be a blood mage but by leaving it unsaid they leave room to branch their story

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Morrigan never mentions the blood magic ritual that involves Isolde; she never uses blood instead of mana (and the game mechanics even allow Wynne to become a blood mage, so that doesn't count); Morrigan never admits that she's capable of blood magic, only that she knows an old ritual that can be viewed as such. In that respect, she's no more of a blood mage than Finn is!

AAAGH. Do you even read????

That she knows one old ritual that predates the Circle of Magi and clearly doesn't exhibit any abilities that could be viewed as blood magic (no using blood instead of mana, no blood ritual to use Isolde's life essence to bring forth the mage into the Fade, none of that).

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

And you underlined IS THE FRIGGIN POINT!

That Morrigan knows one old ritual, and that doesn't make her a blood mage any more than it makes Finn or the templars blood mages.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Morrigan doesn't get to determine what blood magic is. The Chantry does.
And Morrigan admits that the DR is something the Cahtnry would label as such.. That makes it blood magic.

And if the Chantry labelled Wynne an abomination, would that also be accurate? Considering that the devs have stated such a label would be incorrect.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

And while you call it a carnal ritual, you don't know if there is more to it. The gmae cuts to the nekkid part, how do you know tehre were no spells and preparations involved? Heck, it magic and it's a ritual - there had to be preparation and there had to be more to it than judt sleeping with a warden.

An old ritual that predates the Chantry and the Circle of Magi (as both were formed at the same time by Drakon) and which Morrigan never said with 100% certainty was blood magic. You've continually failed to explain how this makes Morrigan a blood mage when she demonstrates no other abilities (and has no problem using unsanctioned magic to change her shape) or how anyone would even is privy to such an act (if it even happened with the Orlesian Warden timeline given the absense of the Hero of Ferelden).

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

So, the point is that Morrigan knows such magics, is capalbe of them and is willing - all of which gives weight to the templar claims. At least with Aenerin there was no indication of him being a blood mage, neither in his behavior nor abilities.

No, the point is you've failed to demonstrate how Morrigan is a blood mage in the same vein as Jowan or Caldrius and not merely a mage who knows a particular magic involving blood like Finn. So far you expect everyone to buy into your epic fanwanking to explain why the templars are justified in going after Morrigan for blood magic when she never demonstrates the abilities we see with blood mages.

[LobselVith8]

Mlaar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

If the writers intended for us to take the accusation seriously, why didn't they write the templars hunting her down for being an apostate? Why not use her shape-shifting to brand her a maleficar? Why intentionally use the word "blood mage" when we clearly know that she never performs such magic?

Same reason any writer leaves things unsaid, it allows the reader (gamer in this case) to use thier imagination to speculate on things that could be.

Or it's to explain the obvious. Rather than having the templars go after Morrigan for unsanctioned magic, the writers had the templars label her a blood mage, when Morrigan isn't a blood mage in DA:O.

Mlaar wrote...

Also DA is an on going story so leaving things unknown allows openings and avenues for them to explore later down the line something a good writer will always do when planning on sequals, if they suddenly declare Morrigan is a blood mage then she would forever be a blood mage but by leaving it unsaid they leave room to branch their story

Considering Morrigan never uses such magic in the year the Warden spends with her and has no problem using other unsanctioned magic (like the ability to alter her shape into various animals), I don't see the validity of the templars claims that she's a blood mage.

[Mlaar]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Mlaar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

If the writers intended for us to take the accusation seriously, why didn't they write the templars hunting her down for being an apostate? Why not use her shape-shifting to brand her a maleficar? Why intentionally use the word "blood mage" when we clearly know that she never performs such magic?

Same reason any writer leaves things unsaid, it allows the reader (gamer in this case) to use thier imagination to speculate on things that could be.

Or it's to explain the obvious. Rather than having the templars go after Morrigan for unsanctioned magic, the writers had the templars label her a blood mage, when Morrigan isn't a blood mage in DA:O.

Mlaar wrote...

Also DA is an on going story so leaving things unknown allows openings and avenues for them to explore later down the line something a good writer will always do when planning on sequals, if they suddenly declare Morrigan is a blood mage then she would forever be a blood mage but by leaving it unsaid they leave room to branch their story

Considering Morrigan never uses such magic in the year the Warden spends with her and has no problem using other unsanctioned magic (like the ability to alter her shape into various animals), I don't see the validity of the templars claims that she's a blood mage.

You are like a greyhound chasing the hare!! focused soley on your goal you dont see the surroundings. Just because you havnt been drip fed information does not mean it dosnt exist!
Seeing that Morrigan is player controlled they limited themselves on how much they could show. They cant make her a devout blood mage as the player may not choose to spec her in that way all they could do is hint that she has knowledge of it. You claim she Never uses it but due to the fact she was player controlled, in my world she actually did use it on a constant basis in one play through with enough witnesses you could house a small city with em.
You have no proof that she is/isnt a blood mage, You have no proof that Templars & Chantry have/have not any information withheld from your eyes, All you have is what you (and i'll say it again) Speculate to be true

[LobselVith8]

Mlaar wrote...

You are like a greyhound chasing the hare!! focused soley on your goal you dont see the surroundings. Just because you havnt been drip fed information does not mean it dosnt exist!

I don't see the reason to make baseless claims to support a view, that's all.

Mlaar wrote...

Seeing that Morrigan is player controlled they limited themselves on how much they could show. They cant make her a devout blood mage as the player may not choose to spec her in that way all they could do is hint that she has knowledge of it. You claim she Never uses it but due to the fact she was player controlled, in my world she actually did use it on a constant basis in one play through with enough witnesses you could house a small city with em.

Wynne can be spec'd to be a blood mage, too. Are you telling me that's supposed to be canon?

Mlaar wrote...

You have no proof that she is/isnt a blood mage, You have no proof that Templars & Chantry have/have not any information withheld from your eyes, All you have is what you (and i'll say it again) Speculate to be true

It's not an issue of speculation, it's a matter of Morrigan never performing such magic, so why should I give the templars the benefit of the doubt on this issue when there are other cases that indicate that it wouldn't be the first time the templars have gone after someone based on heresay and suspicion alone?

[IanPolaris]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

As for caring about mages, the Chantry very much cares about mages!  That's why the lock them up and throw away the key!!

And why they save them from themselves and the angry masses?
The Chantry does care...but the local populace doesn't. Not in a overall sense, but in the sense that the fate of a single mage every now and then doesn't really phase them. They live in a dangerous world, where every day people like Joe Farmer die.

Angry masses generated by the Chantry's hate-filled anti-mage propoganda!  The Rev Mother in Redcliff even admits this if you are a mage!  I have never advocated closing the circle towers immediately because the social damage the chantry has done will take time to heal and be reversed,but unfortunately the time for the gradual approach is gone.......

Yeah, the chantry cares alright....about it's own power.

No, you cannot reasonably conclude that.
That has nothing to do with reason. It doesn't come even close.

I have already debunked this redicolous claim of yours and Lob's. Perhaps it is you who should try something new?

And I see you avoided actually answering the question, but attempt to deflect the issue..as usual. Every time you cannot come up with a satisfactory asnwer, you just try to defelct it.

I aks again - Rivain has been there for hunderds of years. You honestly telling me not a single abomination ever happened there? If it did, wouldn't we have heard about it?

I don't have to.  You have to show me that Rivain has a worse abomination problem without a Circle Tower system than nations with a Circle Tower system.  You haven't even come close to showing that or for that matter debunking anything except maybe in your own mind.

What we do know leads us to reasonably conclude that if there were abominations in Rivain, they must be so rare and/or handled so efficiently that society doesn't consider the mage-abomination threat to be much of a concern.  That's enough to completely cut any moral justification for the Chantry system off at the knees.

-Polaris

Yes you do. You have to, because oy udemand the same from me.

You claim - we seen no proof of templar overight - therefore no templar overight exist.
I coutner - we seen no proof of X (in the exmaple abominations in Rivain) - therefore X doesn't exist.

Apples and Oranges.  In the case of Rivain, not only do we not see any evidence for abominatikons in Rivain, but we also fail to see the impact that said abominations should have had in such a society.  The same applies to the Dalish, Chansind, and many others.  In short, we can determine how common or rare (or in this case virtually nonexistance) a phenomena is by the impact on those systems we do see.  Such things are done all the time in science.  For example, it is physically impossible to detect a quark, but we can using meson steam analysis, get very good data on how quarks actually behave in physics.

In the case of the Templars, however, we have an organization that is not only public but proudly public, and puts itsself in front of all of society.  It takes on the functions (and very openly so) of magical police and detectives under the Aegis of the Circle.  We know that knights are disciplined (we see at least one example of that in the tower and the two sisters at denerim at least hint of more), but never when it comes to hunting mages.  Over the course of 900 years, if in fact Templars were under oversight when it comes to mages (as we KNOW they are under oversight in other matters), then we should see some evidence of that if only second hand.  We don't.

It is clear that your line of reasoning doesn't work, since we do know at least a few happen over the history of that country.
So called "infered or deduced" "rational" conclusion doesn't work.

And thus, your conclusions fall flat on their face. They just don't hold water under scrutiny - scrutiny you never apply.
so no..you don't know. you cna't reasonably conclude what you proclaim.

Actually my rational works just fine.  You simply don't like what the conclusions of it are.  It works just as well (as I just expalin) with the Templars as it does with Mages.

-Polaris

[Augustei]

IanPolaris wrote...
You wouldn't agree with me if I said water is wet, so why should this be any different?
-Polaris

Are you saying every single thing you have added to this discussion is correct?

not putting words in your mouth here, not saying you did say that.. But are you suggesting it?

Modifié par XxDeonxX, 14 février 2011 - 08:20 .

[IanPolaris]

XxDeonxX wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
You wouldn't agree with me if I said water is wet, so why should this be any different?
-Polaris

Are you saying every single thing you have added to this discussion is correct?

not putting words in your mouth here, not saying you did say that.. But are you suggesting it?

What exactly are you trying to pull here?  If you have something to say that's topical, either say it or stuff it please.

What *I* was pointing out that Lotion doesn't agree with anything I say regardless of how obviously correct it is and that has nothing to do with what you posted unless you are tying to say that nothing I post here is correct?

Is that it?  I am tired of your games.

-Polaris

[Augustei]

LobselVith8 wrote...
I'm not saying the Emperor
commands the Chantry, I'm pointing out that the Chantry and the Orlesian
Empire have an interwoven relationship with one another because they
were created at the same time by Drakon. The fact that the Chantry named
an entire age to support the Orlesian Empire (the Dragon Age) should be
more than sufficient to reflect this (and it's not the first time in
history this as happened). I'm also not claiming to know what actually
happened, but I think Orlais' history makes them suspect in the Exalted
March on the Dales.

Well considering that Orlais was directly involved in The War long before the Chantry was then thats something to include in the point that they aren't as Interwoven as some would think. They only support whichever side has the upper hand and appears as if it will win in said conflict. They did it in the Ferelden Rebellion. The reason it would appear to be that they support mainly Orlais is because Orlais is the world superpower.. As soon as it seems that not to be the case, then they wont be getting any Chantry support.

Orlais's History... Which the Ferelden incident not being history because it happened 600 years from the event we are discussing  cannot be compaired to Chantry history. Because the Chantry did not directly get involved in the war until the elves were at Val Royeux's doorsteps after (Possibly) the elves sacked red crossing and murdered everyone there.

Why did I skip straight to this point of yours? Well if i took into account the other two.. then I would just be repeating myself, then you would probably repeat yourself and it would continue in a loop. Im just going to Agree to disagree or something.. lol

Modifié par XxDeonxX, 14 février 2011 - 08:32 .

[Augustei]

IanPolaris wrote...

XxDeonxX wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
You wouldn't agree with me if I said water is wet, so why should this be any different?
-Polaris

Are you saying every single thing you have added to this discussion is correct?

not putting words in your mouth here, not saying you did say that.. But are you suggesting it?

What exactly are you trying to pull here?  If you have something to say that's topical, either say it or stuff it please.

What *I* was pointing out that Lotion doesn't agree with anything I say regardless of how obviously correct it is and that has nothing to do with what you posted unless you are tying to say that nothing I post here is correct?

Is that it?  I am tired of your games.

-Polaris

Tired of my games? what the hell are you talking about? I was just asking that question because thats what it sounded like you were saying. I guess I was reading it wrong.. Im not saying nothing you have posted here is correct.. i agree with some of stuff you say.

Modifié par XxDeonxX, 14 février 2011 - 08:38 .

[LobselVith8]

XxDeonxX wrote...

Well considering that Orlais was directly involved in The War long before the Chantry was then thats something to include in the point that they aren't as Interwoven as some would think.

If you mean the war between the Dales and Orlais, the Dalish codex claims it started because they kicked out the missionaries and templars were sent in afterwards.

XxDeonxX wrote...

They only support whichever side has the upper hand and appears as if it will win in said conflict. They did it in the Ferelden Rebellion. The reason it would appear to be that they support mainly Orlais is because Orlais is the world superpower.. As soon as it seems that not to be the case, then they wont be getting any Chantry support.

If that were true, the Chantry would have sided with the Qunari.

XxDeonxX wrote...

Orlais's History... Which the Ferelden incident not being history because it happened 600 years from the event we are discussing  cannot be compaired to Chantry history. Because the Chantry did not directly get involved in the war until the elves were at Val Royeux's doorsteps after (Possibly) the elves sacked red crossing and murdered everyone there.

If it's an account of the past, then it's history. And you're incorrect in claiming that the Chantry didn't get involved until the very end - because the Dalish claim otherwise. The storytellers even made it adamant that their refusal to convert was the key issue involving the fall of the Dales and the human nations growing cold towards them.

[Augustei]

LobselVith8 wrote...

XxDeonxX wrote...

Well considering that Orlais was directly involved in The War long before the Chantry was then thats something to include in the point that they aren't as Interwoven as some would think.

If you mean the war between the Dales and Orlais, the Dalish codex claims it started because they kicked out the missionaries and templars were sent in afterwards.

XxDeonxX wrote...

They only support whichever side has the upper hand and appears as if it will win in said conflict. They did it in the Ferelden Rebellion. The reason it would appear to be that they support mainly Orlais is because Orlais is the world superpower.. As soon as it seems that not to be the case, then they wont be getting any Chantry support.

If that were true, the Chantry would have sided with the Qunari.

XxDeonxX wrote...

Orlais's History... Which the Ferelden incident not being history because it happened 600 years from the event we are discussing  cannot be compaired to Chantry history. Because the Chantry did not directly get involved in the war until the elves were at Val Royeux's doorsteps after (Possibly) the elves sacked red crossing and murdered everyone there.

If it's an account of the past, then it's history. And you're incorrect in claiming that the Chantry didn't get involved until the very end - because the Dalish claim otherwise. The storytellers even made it adamant that their refusal to convert was the key issue involving the fall of the Dales and the human nations growing cold towards them.

Yes they were involved.. But not Directly Involved until Val Royeux... Does that mean they were just getting Orlais to do their dirty work? Perhaps.. That would certainly proove your other point.

If that were true, the Chantry would have sided with the Qunari.

What I meant was, they will go with whichever way the wind is blowing.. Pick the side that has the upper hand.... As long as it benefits them. Which siding with the Qunari certainly wouldn't Benefit them at all.

But I mean, Nevarra could invade Orlais and have a unified Free Marches with them or something... and decide they will still remain Andrastian afterwards. The Chantry would support them

[EmperorSahlertz]

LobselVith8 wrote...

XxDeonxX wrote...

Well considering that Orlais was directly involved in The War long before the Chantry was then thats something to include in the point that they aren't as Interwoven as some would think.

If you mean the war between the Dales and Orlais, the Dalish codex claims it started because they kicked out the missionaries and templars were sent in afterwards.

XxDeonxX wrote...

They only support whichever side has the upper hand and appears as if it will win in said conflict. They did it in the Ferelden Rebellion. The reason it would appear to be that they support mainly Orlais is because Orlais is the world superpower.. As soon as it seems that not to be the case, then they wont be getting any Chantry support.

If that were true, the Chantry would have sided with the Qunari.

XxDeonxX wrote...

Orlais's History... Which the Ferelden incident not being history because it happened 600 years from the event we are discussing  cannot be compaired to Chantry history. Because the Chantry did not directly get involved in the war until the elves were at Val Royeux's doorsteps after (Possibly) the elves sacked red crossing and murdered everyone there.

If it's an account of the past, then it's history. And you're incorrect in claiming that the Chantry didn't get involved until the very end - because the Dalish claim otherwise. The storytellers even made it adamant that their refusal to convert was the key issue involving the fall of the Dales and the human nations growing cold towards them.

How many times must I point out, that the Dalish codex entry is an extremly weak source of information? It is extremely biased, unspecific, and undetailed to ever be used in any sort of historical debate, as anything else than a footnote.

Modifié par EmperorSahlertz, 15 février 2011 - 01:21 .

[LobselVith8]

XxDeonxX wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

If it's an account of the past, then it's history. And you're incorrect in claiming that the Chantry didn't get involved until the very end - because the Dalish claim otherwise. The storytellers even made it adamant that their refusal to convert was the key issue involving the fall of the Dales and the human nations growing cold towards them.

Yes they were involved.. But not Directly Involved until Val Royeux...

Not according to the Dalish codex.

XxDeonxX wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

If that were true, the Chantry would have sided with the Qunari.

What I meant was, they will go with whichever way the wind is blowing.. Pick the side that has the upper hand.... As long as it benefits them. Which siding with the Qunari certainly wouldn't Benefit them at all.

But I mean, Nevarra could invade Orlais and have a unified Free Marches with them or something... and decide they will still remain Andrastian afterwards. The Chantry would support them.

In an effort to maintain their religious hold, that's true, but to dismiss the Chantry's symbiotic relationship with Orlais wouldn't be accurate, either.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

How many times must I point out, that the Dalish codex entry is an extremly weak source of information? It is extremely biased, unspecific, and undetailed to ever be used in any sort of historical debate, as anything else than a footnote.

All the codex entries are biased, so it isn't valid to say we should dismiss it because it's biased like every other codex entry we read about. You have the pro-Chantry writings of the History of the Circle and even Genitivi calling humans the "masters of Thedas," after all. With the Dalish codex, you have an account of the Dalish saying the war started because of their refusal to convert, and I see no reason not to take it into consideration when examining what happened to the Dales.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Humans ARE the master of Thedas though. They are by far the greatest current power in Thedas. In a few generations, the Masters of Thedas may be the Qunari though.

Many of the Chantry Scholars, Genitivi in particular, are not half as biased as that particular Dalish entry. The Chantry scholars at least speculate on the true events, even going as far as to admiting that the Chantry probably spread false rumors about the Dalish. I am not saying the Dalish entry should be disregarded completely, but to use it as proof is foolish. It would be the equivalent of using some old Nordic saga as proof of some event. The Dalish entry simply not detailed enough, nor objective enough, to get any sort of accurate historical record out of it.

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
We ARE talking about nations and kings. If you
had any knowledge o the history of europe, you'd know just what a FUBAR
time that was. All countries, now and even more then, are always looking at opportunities.
Nations are constantly at eachother throats. That is the reality of the world.

Waht yo uwrite down is an interesting read, but that is al it remains. It doesn't make Orlais attacking the Dales any more likely than the Dales plotting to take over Orlais.

We're talking about the people who have taken the position of Emperor or Empress of Orlais here, who have used different tactics to achieve the same end. You seem eager to dismiss the canon in favor of your own ideals about Orlais and the Chantry, but I don't. If we examine their history and see that multiple leaders of the empire have occupied other nations throughout its long history, I don't see why it should be dismissed when they are repeating such actions in present day Thedas.

No one is dismissing canon. You're crazy.

If anyone here is pushing their own ideas like it's the holy gospel, it would be you.

Your utter  and compeltel faliure to realsie that the poitns you are brining up are utterly irrelevant and add NOTHING to any argument of yours.
The history of Orlais is interesting, but completely and utterly useless for the current debate.

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...
That she knows one old ritual that predates the Circle of Magi and clearly doesn't exhibit any abilities that could be viewed as blood magic (no using blood instead of mana, no blood ritual to use Isolde's life essence to bring forth the mage into the Fade, none of that).

1) where does it say it predates the Circle?
2) where are the specifics of the ritual mentioned? We havn't actually seen the ritual.
3) it can be views as blood magic, Morrigan sez so herself.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Morrigan doesn't get to determine what blood magic is. The Chantry does.
And Morrigan admits that the DR is something the Cahtnry would label as such.. That makes it blood magic.

And if the Chantry labelled Wynne an abomination, would that also be accurate? Considering that the devs have stated such a label would be incorrect.

Useless argument. Hypothetical what-if's that don't exist.
The Chantry DOESN'T label Wynne as abomination. If that was THEIR definition of abomination, they would.
You are arguing definitions instead of action.

What you or Morrigna choose to call it is irrelevant. The police won't debate the definition of theft with you, they're going to arrest you based on their definition.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
So, the point is that Morrigan knows such magics, is capalbe of them and is willing - all of which gives weight to the templar claims. At least with Aenerin there was no indication of him being a blood mage, neither in his behavior nor abilities.

No, the point is you've failed to demonstrate how Morrigan is a blood mage in the same vein as Jowan or Caldrius and not merely a mage who knows a particular magic involving blood like Finn. So far you expect everyone to buy into your epic fanwanking to explain why the templars are justified in going after Morrigan for blood magic when she never demonstrates the abilities we see with blood mages.

You are a moron. There's no going about it. After several pages you still utterly ignore everything I write. You dont' even bother reading oto trying to understand.

You're fixated on Morrigan not being a blood mage mechanicly, when that is no important.
You're fixated on noboy witnesing hte DR, when that's not important.

I swear, debating with you is torture..reading your posts is like dousing your brain in acid!

Get it into your think skull - the DR is not any proof for the templars or Chantry (I doubt they would know) - nor have  Iever said so!
It's proof ot US that Morrigan knows magics that the Chantry would label as blood magic (by her own adimission). If she knows, it's not hard to imagine she knows more.

In other words, Morrigan is suspiscous based on her own words, personality and behavior. Her being a blood mage would not surprise anyone.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 15 février 2011 - 01:23 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Mlaar wrote...

You are like a greyhound chasing the hare!! focused soley on your goal you dont see the surroundings. Just because you havnt been drip fed information does not mean it dosnt exist!

I don't see the reason to make baseless claims to support a view, that's all.

And what do you call what you're doing?

Understand, nobody is saying that Morrigan IS a blood mage. We're saying that she very well MIGHT be one, and she did things that cuased the templars to go after here. Perfectly plausible.

It's not an issue of speculation, it's a matter of Morrigan never performing such magic, so why should I give the templars the benefit of the doubt on this issue when there are other cases that indicate that it wouldn't be the first time the templars have gone after someone based on heresay and suspicion alone?

Why should we give Morrigan the benefit of the doubt, we we clearly see she is immoral, power-houngry and admits herself she knows magics the Chantry fobids?

You're a massive hypocrite.