1019 réponses à ce sujet

[EmperorSahlertz]

LobselVith8 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

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.

That would be like a writer stating that Caucasians are the masters of the United States... so I don't see how you can claim it's not biased.

Not it wouldn't. It would be like a writer claiming humans are the masters of North America, which they are. There are no other species capable of contesting our claim. That is not bias. That is fact. THe same counts for Thedas. No other species is capable of contesting the humans' claim to Thedas. Yet.

That's not correct, because there are no humanoid counterparts to humans living in our world. DA does have counterparts with the elves, the dwarves, and the other races of people living in Thedas, so the comparison I made is accurate.

It is very accurate. Humans, Dwarves, Elves and Qunari are all different species. Humans are the dominant species on Thedas, hence they are the masters of Thedas.
What you claimed would pervert the original statement. The original statement is simply: Humans are the dominant species on Thedas. You try and make it into: Caucasian is the master(/dominant) race in North America. Which is not only incorrect, but also has nothing to do with the original statement. Which is why the allegory failed in the first place.
If instead the statement would be: Humans are the dominant species in North America, it would be true, and still uphold the original message in the statement from Dragon Age.

[LobselVith8]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

It is very accurate. Humans, Dwarves, Elves and Qunari are all different species. Humans are the dominant species on Thedas, hence they are the masters of Thedas.
What you claimed would pervert the original statement. The original statement is simply: Humans are the dominant species on Thedas. You try and make it into: Caucasian is the master(/dominant) race in North America. Which is not only incorrect, but also has nothing to do with the original statement. Which is why the allegory failed in the first place.
If instead the statement would be: Humans are the dominant species in North America, it would be true, and still uphold the original message in the statement from Dragon Age.

It's a bigoted statement to place his race above all others living in Thedas, pure and simple. It's not a perversion of the statement when you factor that there are other humanoid people living on Thedas as well. It's no different than saying that Caucasians are the masters of the United States; In the real world, people have seperated each other by the differences of their skin, while in Thedas, it's by whether they're human, elves, or dwarves. Genitivi's comment is in the same vein as my original statement about what he said and how biased it is.

[Augustei]

It's no different than saying that Caucasians are the masters of the United States

Well......









LOL nah Im just kidding

[LobselVith8]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Interesting tidbit for DA Legends info:

13 years have passed since a group of warriors led by the Templar Ravi
banded together to prevent an abomination from destroying the Free
Marcher city of Kaiten in a hedonistic orgy of narcissism and opulence.

So much about abominations not being really that dangerous, no more dangerouns than a single berserker and not being able to destroy anythig more than a small  undefended village.

you do realise that a normal person was possessed and not a mage right? also while its true a berserker may not kill of a whole city a suave and manipulative normal  human can cause the same effects as the abomination.

If its an Abomination, it is a mage which have been possessed. And even if it was just a normal person who got possessed, it only reinforces Lotion's posistion, as an Abomination is much more dangerous than a "simply" possessed man. And no matter how charismatic a human is, he would never be able to make an entire city destroy itself, in the same way.

Ian already disproved of Lotion's example by citing real world history where similar events transpired of one skilled person killing multiple people on the scale that's been previously discussed.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Last Vizard wrote...
P.S.  no i wouldn't be corrupted by power, I'd use it to help others and one day (i'm going to live forever due to magic) achieve the level of a God in the prime and fix the world while the Maker sits and faces a tainted wall in the ****e . Logain was an idiot and a traitor.

Yeah... Striving for immortality and godhood does not sound selfish and corrupted at all....

How does wanting to live a long time so Wizard can aid humanity throughout his lifetime make him selfish and corrupt?

[LobselVith8]

XxDeonxX wrote...

It's no different than saying that Caucasians are the masters of the United States

Well......









LOL nah Im just kidding

In Thedas terms, XxDeonxX, in Thedas terms.

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...

The History of the Circle is particularly biased in its favor of the Chantry and the templars, treating mages as little more than children. The Chantry version of the codex Sister Petrine claims that the Dalish were sacrificing humans and attacked a defenseless village of Red Crossing, placing all the blame on the Dalish. Considering how many nations Orlais has taken over, there's reason to suspect that this isn't an accurate depiction of events. Even outside of the codex entries, we have Keli, a devout Andrastian who thinks that mages are cursed for having magical ability. Knight-Commander Greagoir even refers to magic as a curse in the opening of the Magi Origin. We have Lily, an Initiate, who talks about how the Initiates are taught about the dangers those "cursed with magic pose."

Actually Gregoir said magic is a blessing AND a curse...Which it is. So he couldn't have been more accurate if he tried.
Power comes at a price.

And yaeh. The Dalish codex is a complete one-way-track. No doubt in it whatsoever.

that's the difference between schoolars and dalish story-tellers. Schollars do research, go trough old texts - they are interested in knowledge (for the most part). Story tellers hear the story and re-tell the same story.

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...
I'm explaining the issue that while nobody knows what happened between the Dales and Orlais (and the Chantry) for certain, we do know that Orlais has invaded other nations in the past (from the Exalted Marches of Emperor Drakon I to the invasion of Nevarra after the Third Blight) and is making attempts in the present (with the disputed territory Nevarra has and Empress Celene I's attempts to control Ferelden through King Cailan). I don't see why this shouldn't be addressed.

And I'm telling you there's nothing to be adressed.

That tidbit is interesting, but it is irrelevant to the discussion. Actions of Orlai in the past have no direct correlation to the present. You can like they help you predict the future. They do not.
Also, you make assumptions...assumptions that the dispute between Orlais and Navara is an orlais plan to start a new war of conquest...that their dispute is not valid.
Also you assume Celene didn't like Cailan and was jsut trying to get control of  Ferelden. You have no proof of that.

It's not useless for a discussion on what happened to the Dales when it factors into their behavior with other nations, Lotion. It's something that should be considered, that's all.

Behavior of nations in ancient history has NO bearing on their present behavior. Orlais of today is not the same as Orlais from 100 years ago, which is not the same as Orlais from 200.

[Last Vizard]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Last Vizard wrote...
P.S.  no i wouldn't be corrupted by power, I'd use it to help others and one day (i'm going to live forever due to magic) achieve the level of a God in the prime and fix the world while the Maker sits and faces a tainted wall in the ****e . Logain was an idiot and a traitor.

Yeah... Striving for immortality and godhood does not sound selfish and corrupted at all....

EmperorSahlertz, it would be selfish if the plan was to take over the world and not fix the situation or worse still make the living conditions even worse.

[Lotion Soronarr]

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
I don't ignore what you write, you simply twist facts to suit your vision of how the world of DA should be. You make claims that are debunked, and then get angry over it. I don't see why, though. I've asked questions about what may be possible, and when people addressed that they couldn't happen, I didn't throw a tantrum over it. I don't see why you should, either.[/quote]

YOUR claims are debunked. YOUR facts are twisted.


[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

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. [/quote]

It's important because the templars placed a bounty on her for being a blood mage, Lotion.[/quote]

It's not important, because nobody was claiming the DR was the Cahntry's proof. NO ONE.
Also nobody was brining gameply mechanics/specilizations into hte discussion, because we are all smart enough to know tehy are a gameplay mechanic, and not an accurate representation of lore and cannon.
Well...all of us except you apparently.



[quote]
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. [/quote]

1) Morrigan states this
2) It's carnal contact
3) So can Finn's ritual to find the Eluvian, so are you saying he's a blood mage, too?[/quote]

1) She sez it's old. I don't recall her saying it predates the Cirlce specificly, but that is not importnat.

2) Proof. You just say it's a carnal contract, but magic doesn't seem to work like that. SPELLS are cast. We dont' see what happens between the agreemenet to DR and cuting to the nekkid sex scene. Morrigan could have cast several spells on her and the warden in the meantime. Some magic IS at work.
So..proof that it's ONLY a carnal contract and nothing else.

3) Blood magic is what the Chantry defines as such. As the creators of the definition (or the law in termas of magic), they determine what is and is not blood magic. Your oppinion, or Morrigans, is irrelevant.



[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
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. [/quote]

Despite the merits of what the dark ritual is, it doesn't make her any more a blood mage than Finn is for using Dalish blood to find the Eluvian. There's nothing to suggest that Morrigan is a blood mage, there's no evidence to support such a claim, Lotion. She doesn't provide a means to do the blood magic ritual with Isolde, she never uses blood as mana (not even in the deleted scene where the Warden gives her up to the templars as an apostate), and she doesn't even use blood magic to save her life at the end of Witch Hunt if she's stabbed. You're jumping through hoops trying to rationalize the templars placing a bounty on her for being a blood mage when there's no evidence to support this claim.[/quote]

And I'm telling yo uagain, weather you think she is or is not a blood mage is IRRELEVANT. Nobody is askign for YOUR defintion of blood magic. Understand that already.

Morrigna doesn't give a rat's ass about Isolde, and using blood for mana is only ONE aspect of blood magic. And Morrigna doesn't use regualr healign after beign stabbed either. It's a dramatic cutscene. They tend to ignore such pesky things like armor and reason.
And again, Morrigna got hte Grimorise at hte end of hte game. She could have learned blood magic late..or she could could haev learend it after Origins.
There's plenty to suggest Morrigan might be a blood mage - you just don't want to see it, and ignore it.


[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
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. [/quote]

So does Finn, and he seems pretty pro-Chantry and pro-Circle from all appearances.[/quote]

And how does that counter anything I said? It doesn't.
I don't know what the chantry would think about Finns rituals ( do they even know). May that is nto something they would classify as blood magic. Maybe it is.

But the point is that the Chantry's definition is what's important, not mine or yours.
The Chantry is going after morrigan according to THEIR definition after all...not yours.


[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
In other words, Morrigan is suspiscous based on her own words, personality and behavior. Her being a blood mage would not surprise anyone. [/quote]

Given that she performs other magic that isn't sanctioned by the Chantry, but never uses blood instead of mana, I don't see why I should give the templars the benefit of the doubt here, especially when it wouldn't be the first time they've gone after someone for the wrong reasons.[/quote]

Again, why should I give Morrigan the benefit of the doubt?

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

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?

I've used codex entries to support my position, Lotion. History of the Circle, History of the Chantry Part Four, and even the heresay mentioned on the Abomination codex to support my stand about the mages and the Chantry controlled Circles. There's also no evidence to support the claims about Morrigan being a blood mage, so why should I give the templars the benefit of the doubt when they also killed D'Sims because they heard he was "healing people" when he was merely a charlatan and the scenes with Aneirin the Healer and Wynne strongly imply that he was not a maleficar when the templars tried to kill him at fourteen?

You use fantasies to support your position. IUnfered meanings. You got no HARD or DIRECT evidence. You got indirect, inferred, "evidence" that stems from your interpretation.

All the codexes I mentioned/referenced before support my side of the argument.
And we had hte discussion about Aenerin and D'Sims before. I won't go into that again.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
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.

She's pragmatic and recommends courses of action that enpower the Warden against the Blight, not herself. The Anvil and the blood magicl ritual Caladrius recommends strength the Warden, not her. She suggests focusing on the Blight and getting the treaties over helping a teenager get laid and solving a dispute with the local merchant. As for her abilities, she never hides that she can perform magic that isn't sanctioned by the Chantry, so there's no reason she would hide having blood magic abilities when she doesn't hide her other non-sanctioned abilities.

Again, you've made an accusation that has no merit.

She gets the OGB from it. Keeping the Warden alive is in her interest.
She had her reasons. And she has her secrets. And she perfectly villing to kill innocents..and performs/use/learn forbidden magics.

Again, why should I trust her?

[Last Vizard]

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

[quote]Last Vizard wrote...
P.S.  no i wouldn't be corrupted by power, I'd use it to help others and one day (i'm going to live forever due to magic) achieve the level of a God in the prime and fix the world while the Maker sits and faces a tainted wall in the ****e . Logain was an idiot and a traitor.[/quote]
Yeah... Striving for immortality and godhood does not sound selfish and corrupted at all....[/quote]

How does wanting to live a long time so Wizard can aid humanity throughout his lifetime make him selfish and corrupt?[/quote]

Thanks mate, yes its not only selfless it would be pretty annoying aswell however i'm sure after three or four hundred years of punishing criminals and Tyrant Kings the others would either have a change of heart or reframe from violent crime and open casinos or something. lol

[Lotion Soronarr]

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]IanPolaris wrote...

Angry masses generated by the Chantry's hate-filled anti-mage propoganda! [/quote]

I don't see that institutionalized propaganda.
Nowhere in the game do I find any proof to support your claims. [/quote]

That isn't accurate. We have Knight-Commander Greagoir's comments about mages being cursed with magic, Keli's comments to the mage protagonist in the Magi Origin, and Lily's comments about initiate's being warned about the dangers "those cursed with magic pose." Not to mention what the Reverand Mother of the Redcliffe Chantry says to a human mage. We can also see the differences between how mages are treated in Andrastian societies with those living in mage tolerant, non-Andrastian societies.[/quote]

All wrong.

Gregoir an Liliys comments are the truth. Magic is a blessing and a curse. Mages are dangerous. That's no anti-mage propaganda.
We also have Davids commetns, about fear and mistrust of mages being a normal/logical reaction to mages.




[quote]
[quote]
Loads and loads of BS.

I already debunked your "social footprint" theory. I ask for proof, you've got none.

So no, not apples and oranges.
You can determine nothing. You know nothing. Plenty of epopel on these ofrusm proved that much.

But lack of any evidence can hardly stop your crusade....
[/quote]

Actually, you didn't debunk the social footprint theory, you argued that Ian couldn't disagree with you because the story is "morally grey." Ian also provided codex entries and used Gaider quotes to provide why he takes the stand that he does, so I don't see why you claim he has never provided proof for his views.[/quote]

And thank you for proving to me that you really don't bother to read. If you did, you'd notice that I indeed DID debunk the social footpring theeory, by presenting plausible scenarios that would case such footprint to not be seen.
And if there are circumstances that lead themselves to not having an obvious footprint, then the whole theory as proof does not stand.


[quote]
[quote]
She also says that if you let Kitty possess her IIRC.[/quote]

But if she gave consent in the first place, how is it proof of forced possession?[/qutoe]

She doesn't give that consent if you try to fight kitty. In fact, Kitty scares her. Amalia tries to run fro mher. Where do you see consent in someone whos' afraid of you and doesn't want you?


[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Interesting tidbit for DA Legends info:

[quote]13 years have passed since a group of warriors led by the Templar Ravi
banded together to prevent an abomination from destroying the Free
Marcher city of Kaiten in a hedonistic orgy of narcissism and opulence. [/quote]

So much about abominations not being really that dangerous, no more dangerouns than a single berserker and not being able to destroy anythig more than a small  undefended village.
[/quote]

I suppose Ian's comments about knights and beserkers having killed towns and villages of people is not going to be addressed?[/quote]

Ians comments are bollocks and I've seen no reason to adress such an obviously wrong claim. But just for you.
It's wrong, because a reaver can't kill a whole town. It cna't even kill a vilalge. It's also wrong because it relies on gameplay mechnics and balance, which are NOT part of the lore.
A power that is great in-game is mediocre in the lore..and vice versa. TRying to establish lore trough gameplay mechanics is jsut stupid and doomed to faliure.

We heard and SEEN abominatins destroying villages. And now we haer about one almost destroying a town.
Show me one ..just ONE codex entry of a warrior destroying a entire village alone.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Last Vizard wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Last Vizard wrote...
P.S.  no i wouldn't be corrupted by power, I'd use it to help others and one day (i'm going to live forever due to magic) achieve the level of a God in the prime and fix the world while the Maker sits and faces a tainted wall in the ****e . Logain was an idiot and a traitor.

Yeah... Striving for immortality and godhood does not sound selfish and corrupted at all....

How does wanting to live a long time so Wizard can aid humanity throughout his lifetime make him selfish and corrupt?

Thanks mate, yes its not only selfless it would be pretty annoying aswell however i'm sure after three or four hundred years of punishing criminals and Tyrant Kings the others would either have a change of heart or reframe from violent crime and open casinos or something. lol

The last person I'd EVER trust with power..is the one who claims he would never be corrupted by it.

"Oh, I can mind control, but I'd ENVER abuse that power...trust me."   Yeah, right.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 17 février 2011 - 08:32 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

[quote]DKJaigen wrote...

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Interesting tidbit for DA Legends info:

[quote]13 years have passed since a group of warriors led by the Templar Ravi
banded together to prevent an abomination from destroying the Free
Marcher city of Kaiten in a hedonistic orgy of narcissism and opulence. [/quote]

So much about abominations not being really that dangerous, no more dangerouns than a single berserker and not being able to destroy anythig more than a small  undefended village.
[/quote]

you do realise that a normal person was possessed and not a mage right? also while its true a berserker may not kill of a whole city a suave and manipulative normal  human can cause the same effects as the abomination.

[/quote]
If its an Abomination, it is a mage which have been possessed. And even if it was just a normal person who got possessed, it only reinforces Lotion's posistion, as an Abomination is much more dangerous than a "simply" possessed man. And no matter how charismatic a human is, he would never be able to make an entire city destroy itself, in the same way.[/quote]

Ian already disproved of Lotion's example by citing real world history where similar events transpired of one skilled person killing multiple people on the scale that's been previously discussed.[/quote]
Give me one example of a person being able to make an entire citystate almost destroy itself in an orgy.....

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

It is very accurate. Humans, Dwarves, Elves and Qunari are all different species. Humans are the dominant species on Thedas, hence they are the masters of Thedas.
What you claimed would pervert the original statement. The original statement is simply: Humans are the dominant species on Thedas. You try and make it into: Caucasian is the master(/dominant) race in North America. Which is not only incorrect, but also has nothing to do with the original statement. Which is why the allegory failed in the first place.
If instead the statement would be: Humans are the dominant species in North America, it would be true, and still uphold the original message in the statement from Dragon Age.[/quote]

It's a bigoted statement to place his race above all others living in Thedas, pure and simple. It's not a perversion of the statement when you factor that there are other humanoid people living on Thedas as well. It's no different than saying that Caucasians are the masters of the United States; In the real world, people have seperated each other by the differences of their skin, while in Thedas, it's by whether they're human, elves, or dwarves. Genitivi's comment is in the same vein as my original statement about what he said and how biased it is.[/quote]
Except it is not biased OR bigoted, when it is true. Dwarves, Elves and Qunari all pale in comparison to the amount of power the Humans wield in Thedas (The Qunari are rising though).
And there is a world of a difference between seperating races, and seperating species.

[quote]Last Vizard wrote...

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

[quote]Last Vizard wrote...
P.S.  no i wouldn't be corrupted by power, I'd use it to help others and one day (i'm going to live forever due to magic) achieve the level of a God in the prime and fix the world while the Maker sits and faces a tainted wall in the ****e . Logain was an idiot and a traitor.[/quote]
Yeah... Striving for immortality and godhood does not sound selfish and corrupted at all....[/quote]

How does wanting to live a long time so Wizard can aid humanity throughout his lifetime make him selfish and corrupt?[/quote]

Thanks mate, yes its not only selfless it would be pretty annoying aswell however i'm sure after three or four hundred years of punishing criminals and Tyrant Kings the others would either have a change of heart or reframe from violent crime and open casinos or something. lol[/quote]
And who would decide who were the criminals and the tyrant kings? You? Who should decide their punishment? You again? And if suddenly it is you being accused, would you be willing to give up that power? I doubt it.

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

The History of the Circle is particularly biased in its favor of the Chantry and the templars, treating mages as little more than children. The Chantry version of the codex Sister Petrine claims that the Dalish were sacrificing humans and attacked a defenseless village of Red Crossing, placing all the blame on the Dalish. Considering how many nations Orlais has taken over, there's reason to suspect that this isn't an accurate depiction of events. Even outside of the codex entries, we have Keli, a devout Andrastian who thinks that mages are cursed for having magical ability. Knight-Commander Greagoir even refers to magic as a curse in the opening of the Magi Origin. We have Lily, an Initiate, who talks about how the Initiates are taught about the dangers those "cursed with magic pose."

Actually Gregoir said magic is a blessing AND a curse...Which it is. So he couldn't have been more accurate if he tried.
Power comes at a price.

And yaeh. The Dalish codex is a complete one-way-track. No doubt in it whatsoever.

that's the difference between schoolars and dalish story-tellers. Schollars do research, go trough old texts - they are interested in knowledge (for the most part). Story tellers hear the story and re-tell the same story.

Scholars can be just as biased, Lotion. Just look at how biographies about Thomas Jefferson leave out how the revolution in Haiti (Saint Dominique at the time) played a role in the Louisiana Purchase and instead rewrite the history to make it seem as if Jefferson accomplished the impossible. The Chantry codex entries are no different, being written from a particular POV. If it's a re-telling of events that were witnessed first-hand, I don't see reason to dismiss it. Stating that the templars were sent into the Dales by the Chantry because the elves refused to convert isn't a one-trick pony, it's a real possibility on what transpired, especially given that's exactly what the Chantry forced on the elves who were moved into the ghettos.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I'm explaining the issue that while nobody knows what happened between the Dales and Orlais (and the Chantry) for certain, we do know that Orlais has invaded other nations in the past (from the Exalted Marches of Emperor Drakon I to the invasion of Nevarra after the Third Blight) and is making attempts in the present (with the disputed territory Nevarra has and Empress Celene I's attempts to control Ferelden through King Cailan). I don't see why this shouldn't be addressed.

And I'm telling you there's nothing to be adressed.

That tidbit is interesting, but it is irrelevant to the discussion. Actions of Orlai in the past have no direct correlation to the present. You can like they help you predict the future. They do not.
Also, you make assumptions...assumptions that the dispute between Orlais and Navara is an orlais plan to start a new war of conquest...that their dispute is not valid.
Also you assume Celene didn't like Cailan and was jsut trying to get control of  Ferelden. You have no proof of that.

You're mistaken. I point out the territorial dispute between Nevarra and Orlais, as well as the history Orlais has of invading other nations (including Nevarra and Ferelden). And I pointed out the obvious: Celene would have controlled Ferelden through her marriage to Cailan. Anora was the one leading Ferelden as Queen, after all, not Cailan.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

It's not useless for a discussion on what happened to the Dales when it factors into their behavior with other nations, Lotion. It's something that should be considered, that's all.

Behavior of nations in ancient history has NO bearing on their present behavior. Orlais of today is not the same as Orlais from 100 years ago, which is not the same as Orlais from 200.

Orlais is repeating past actions, which factors into how Orlais in present day having territorial disputes with a nation they once conquered and is trying to take over another nation they previously invaded in the past. It has a great deal of bearing on the issue of the Exalted March on the Dales, Lotion.

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

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.

She's pragmatic and recommends courses of action that enpower the Warden against the Blight, not herself. The Anvil and the blood magicl ritual Caladrius recommends strength the Warden, not her. She suggests focusing on the Blight and getting the treaties over helping a teenager get laid and solving a dispute with the local merchant. As for her abilities, she never hides that she can perform magic that isn't sanctioned by the Chantry, so there's no reason she would hide having blood magic abilities when she doesn't hide her other non-sanctioned abilities.

Again, you've made an accusation that has no merit.

She gets the OGB from it. Keeping the Warden alive is in her interest.
She had her reasons. And she has her secrets. And she perfectly villing to kill innocents..and performs/use/learn forbidden magics.

Again, why should I trust her?

The Aimo/Gaider scenes and David Gaider himself revealed she never even thought she'd have to go through with it because she assumed the Orlesian Wardens would have arrived. She never kills innocent villagers and you're once again putting forth incorrect information as fact.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I don't ignore what you write, you simply twist facts to suit your vision of how the world of DA should be. You make claims that are debunked, and then get angry over it. I don't see why, though. I've asked questions about what may be possible, and when people addressed that they couldn't happen, I didn't throw a tantrum over it. I don't see why you should, either.

YOUR claims are debunked. YOUR facts are twisted.

In what manner have you debunked anything I said? If your "debunking" was as accurate as the comment about Morrigan killing innocent villagers, then I'm not going to take that accusation seriously.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

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?

I've used codex entries to support my position, Lotion. History of the Circle, History of the Chantry Part Four, and even the heresay mentioned on the Abomination codex to support my stand about the mages and the Chantry controlled Circles. There's also no evidence to support the claims about Morrigan being a blood mage, so why should I give the templars the benefit of the doubt when they also killed D'Sims because they heard he was "healing people" when he was merely a charlatan and the scenes with Aneirin the Healer and Wynne strongly imply that he was not a maleficar when the templars tried to kill him at fourteen?

You use fantasies to support your position. IUnfered meanings. You got no HARD or DIRECT evidence. You got indirect, inferred, "evidence" that stems from your interpretation.

All the codexes I mentioned/referenced before support my side of the argument.
And we had hte discussion about Aenerin and D'Sims before. I won't go into that again.

None of the codex entries support your side of the story. The History of the Chantry Part Four and the History of the Circle provide nothing to support your doom scenerios about blood mages and abominations when mages were imprisoned for a peaceful protest and had their rights denied to them for religious reasons.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 17 février 2011 - 04:21 .

[LobselVith8]

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
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. [/quote]

So does Finn, and he seems pretty pro-Chantry and pro-Circle from all appearances.[/quote]

And how does that counter anything I said? It doesn't.
I don't know what the chantry would think about Finns rituals ( do they even know). May that is nto something they would classify as blood magic. Maybe it is.

But the point is that the Chantry's definition is what's important, not mine or yours.
The Chantry is going after morrigan according to THEIR definition after all...not yours.  [/quote]

If the Chantry has no basis for even believing that Morrigan is a blood mage, and if there's nothing to even suggest that she is one, I don't see why their actions should be condoned. We already have Finn as an example of a mage knowing magic that can be construed of as blood magic without being a blood mage, so I don't see why Morrigan should be treated any differently.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

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. [/quote]

It's important because the templars placed a bounty on her for being a blood mage, Lotion.[/quote]

It's not important, because nobody was claiming the DR was the Cahntry's proof. NO ONE.
Also nobody was brining gameply mechanics/specilizations into hte discussion, because we are all smart enough to know tehy are a gameplay mechanic, and not an accurate representation of lore and cannon.
Well...all of us except you apparently. [/quote]

Coming from the person who likes to fan fic why Alistair was recruited by Duncan and putting abominations in the Mages Collective, and now saying Morrigan murdered innocent villagers, you're going to have to excuse me if I don't buy your alleged claims of intellectual superiority.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

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. [/quote]

1) Morrigan states this
2) It's carnal contact
3) So can Finn's ritual to find the Eluvian, so are you saying he's a blood mage, too?[/quote]

1) She sez it's old. I don't recall her saying it predates the Cirlce specificly, but that is not importnat.

2) Proof. You just say it's a carnal contract, but magic doesn't seem to work like that. SPELLS are cast. We dont' see what happens between the agreemenet to DR and cuting to the nekkid sex scene. Morrigan could have cast several spells on her and the warden in the meantime. Some magic IS at work.
So..proof that it's ONLY a carnal contract and nothing else.

3) Blood magic is what the Chantry defines as such. As the creators of the definition (or the law in termas of magic), they determine what is and is not blood magic. Your oppinion, or Morrigans, is irrelevant. [/quote]
1) She specifically states it predates the Circle of Magi. I don't see why she would lie about this.
2) You don't know anything about the spell, so why are you making assumptions? Morrigan clearly says it's about carnal contact, so why disagree with her to fan fic your own explanation instead? You don't know anything about the ritual. The spell is about having the unborn child retain the taint for a time so the soul of the Old God will go into it rather than the Warden.

3) In other words, you have no proof that Morrigan is any more of a blood mage than Finn is.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

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. [/quote]

Despite the merits of what the dark ritual is, it doesn't make her any more a blood mage than Finn is for using Dalish blood to find the Eluvian. There's nothing to suggest that Morrigan is a blood mage, there's no evidence to support such a claim, Lotion. She doesn't provide a means to do the blood magic ritual with Isolde, she never uses blood as mana (not even in the deleted scene where the Warden gives her up to the templars as an apostate), and she doesn't even use blood magic to save her life at the end of Witch Hunt if she's stabbed. You're jumping through hoops trying to rationalize the templars placing a bounty on her for being a blood mage when there's no evidence to support this claim.[/quote]

And I'm telling yo uagain, weather you think she is or is not a blood mage is IRRELEVANT. Nobody is askign for YOUR defintion of blood magic. Understand that already.

Morrigna doesn't give a rat's ass about Isolde, and using blood for mana is only ONE aspect of blood magic. And Morrigna doesn't use regualr healign after beign stabbed either. It's a dramatic cutscene. They tend to ignore such pesky things like armor and reason.
And again, Morrigna got hte Grimorise at hte end of hte game. She could have learned blood magic late..or she could could haev learend it after Origins.
There's plenty to suggest Morrigan might be a blood mage - you just don't want to see it, and ignore it. [/quote]

She reveals the possibility of going into the Fade to save Connor, so you're mistaken once again since she'll actively provide the information to aid the Warden in resolving the matter with the abomination. And you have provided no explanation for how the Chantry would even be privy to the issue of the dark ritual, if it even happened for the Orlesian Warden version. Basically, you have nothing to support the Chantry going after Morrigan for blood magic.

[Taleroth]

Morrigan probably knows Blood Magic. I would make that concession. But Irving knows Blood Magic, too. Knowing it is not the same as using it and being a Blood Mage.



She never uses it.

[LobselVith8]

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

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. [/quote]

She's pragmatic and recommends courses of action that enpower the Warden against the Blight, not herself. The Anvil and the blood magicl ritual Caladrius recommends strength the Warden, not her. She suggests focusing on the Blight and getting the treaties over helping a teenager get laid and solving a dispute with the local merchant. As for her abilities, she never hides that she can perform magic that isn't sanctioned by the Chantry, so there's no reason she would hide having blood magic abilities when she doesn't hide her other non-sanctioned abilities.
Again, you've made an accusation that has no merit.[/quote]

She gets the OGB from it. Keeping the Warden alive is in her interest.
She had her reasons. And she has her secrets. And she perfectly villing to kill innocents..and performs/use/learn forbidden magics.

Again, why should I trust her?
[/quote]

I guess pointing out that she can help stop the Blight and the Aimo/Gaider scenes depict that she does the dark ritual out of caring for the Warden are out of the question?

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]IanPolaris wrote...

Angry masses generated by the Chantry's hate-filled anti-mage propoganda! [/quote]
I don't see that institutionalized propaganda.
Nowhere in the game do I find any proof to support your claims. [/quote]

That isn't accurate. We have Knight-Commander Greagoir's comments about mages being cursed with magic, Keli's comments to the mage protagonist in the Magi Origin, and Lily's comments about initiate's being warned about the dangers "those cursed with magic pose." Not to mention what the Reverand Mother of the Redcliffe Chantry says to a human mage. We can also see the differences between how mages are treated in Andrastian societies with those living in mage tolerant, non-Andrastian societies.[/quote]

All wrong.
Gregoir an Liliys comments are the truth. Magic is a blessing and a curse. Mages are dangerous. That's no anti-mage propaganda.
We also have Davids commetns, about fear and mistrust of mages being a normal/logical reaction to mages. [/quote]

Greagoir and Lily's comments aren't accurate. Mages aren't cursed. Mages should be properly traned, not imprisoned for life under a tyranny. We also have Michael Hamilton's comments that the relationship between the mages and the Chantry is a dictatorship.

In regards to what Michael Hamilton said about the Magi boon being turned down:

[quote]Michael Hamilton wrote...

Since when has any dictatorship ever been turned over by asking politely?

Really think about what you're saying.

"I asked and they said no!" [/quote]

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]LotionSoronnar wrote...

Loads and loads of BS.
I already debunked your "social footprint" theory. I ask for proof, you've got none.
So no, not apples and oranges.
You can determine nothing. You know nothing. Plenty of epopel on these ofrusm proved that much.
But lack of any evidence can hardly stop your crusade....
[/quote]

Actually, you didn't debunk the social footprint theory, you argued that Ian couldn't disagree with you because the story is "morally grey." Ian also provided codex entries and used Gaider quotes to provide why he takes the stand that he does, so I don't see why you claim he has never provided proof for his views.[/quote]

And thank you for proving to me that you really don't bother to read. If you did, you'd notice that I indeed DID debunk the social footpring theeory, by presenting plausible scenarios that would case such footprint to not be seen.
And if there are circumstances that lead themselves to not having an obvious footprint, then the whole theory as proof does not stand. [/quote]

I did read, but you never disproved Ian's arguments and you didn't debunk anything that Ian stated. Ian provided you real world examples of warriors doing precisely what you claimed couldn't be performed. Besides Ian disproving your assertions about the Chantry controlled Circles, you went from loudly proclaiming the Chantry controlled Circles as the option to take to stating Ian couldn't disagree with your claims because it was all "morally grey."

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

But if she gave consent in the first place, how is it proof of forced possession?[/quote]

She doesn't give that consent if you try to fight kitty. In fact, Kitty scares her. Amalia tries to run fro mher. Where do you see consent in someone whos' afraid of you and doesn't want you? [/quote]

If she gave consent in the first place, Lotion, that's the entire point. She loses it when she vocally states she won't go after the girl if freed, which seems to break the "contract" in question.

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Interesting tidbit for DA Legends info:
[quote]13 years have passed since a group of warriors led by the Templar Ravi
banded together to prevent an abomination from destroying the Free
Marcher city of Kaiten in a hedonistic orgy of narcissism and opulence. [/quote]

So much about abominations not being really that dangerous, no more dangerouns than a single berserker and not being able to destroy anythig more than a small undefended village.
[/quote]

I suppose Ian's comments about knights and beserkers having killed towns and villages of people is not going to be addressed?[/quote]

Ians comments are bollocks and I've seen no reason to adress such an obviously wrong claim. But just for you.
It's wrong, because a reaver can't kill a whole town. It cna't even kill a vilalge. It's also wrong because it relies on gameplay mechnics and balance, which are NOT part of the lore.
A power that is great in-game is mediocre in the lore..and vice versa. TRying to establish lore trough gameplay mechanics is jsut stupid and doomed to faliure.
We heard and SEEN abominatins destroying villages. And now we haer about one almost destroying a town.
Show me one ..just ONE codex entry of a warrior destroying a entire village alone.
[/quote]

Ian provided real world examples of warriors doing precisely that. Why do you keep harping on an issue that's already been disproven to be false by real world history?

Modifié par LobselVith8, 17 février 2011 - 04:58 .

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

The last person I'd EVER trust with power..is the one who claims he would never be corrupted by it.

"Oh, I can mind control, but I'd ENVER abuse that power...trust me."   Yeah, right.

Coming from the person who trusts the Chantry and its templars entirely with their power over the mages?

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Ian already disproved of Lotion's example by citing real world history where similar events transpired of one skilled person killing multiple people on the scale that's been previously discussed.

Give me one example of a person being able to make an entire citystate almost destroy itself in an orgy.....

Ian provided numerous examples of towns and villages being killed by people, sometimes individual warriors. Is there a purpose to revisiting an issue that's been disproven roughly fifty pages back?

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

It's a bigoted statement to place his race above all others living in Thedas, pure and simple. It's not a perversion of the statement when you factor that there are other humanoid people living on Thedas as well. It's no different than saying that Caucasians are the masters of the United States; In the real world, people have seperated each other by the differences of their skin, while in Thedas, it's by whether they're human, elves, or dwarves. Genitivi's comment is in the same vein as my original statement about what he said and how biased it is.

Except it is not biased OR bigoted, when it is true. Dwarves, Elves and Qunari all pale in comparison to the amount of power the Humans wield in Thedas (The Qunari are rising though).
And there is a world of a difference between seperating races, and seperating species.

It's bigoted when it asserts that one race of people are superior to all others in an entire continent.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Last Vizard wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Last Vizard wrote...
P.S.  no i wouldn't be corrupted by power, I'd use it to help others and one day (i'm going to live forever due to magic) achieve the level of a God in the prime and fix the world while the Maker sits and faces a tainted wall in the ****e . Logain was an idiot and a traitor.

Yeah... Striving for immortality and godhood does not sound selfish and corrupted at all....

How does wanting to live a long time so Wizard can aid humanity throughout his lifetime make him selfish and corrupt?

Thanks mate, yes its not only selfless it would be pretty annoying aswell however i'm sure after three or four hundred years of punishing criminals and Tyrant Kings the others would either have a change of heart or reframe from violent crime and open casinos or something. lol

And who would decide who were the criminals and the tyrant kings? You? Who should decide their punishment? You again? And if suddenly it is you being accused, would you be willing to give up that power? I doubt it.

You're making assumptions about Last Wizard's conduct of character, which I find to be baseless. I certainly didn't see the Guardian turning evil because he lived a long life as the protector of the Ashes, after all.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 17 février 2011 - 04:51 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Ian already disproved of Lotion's example by citing real world history where similar events transpired of one skilled person killing multiple people on the scale that's been previously discussed.[/quote]

Give me one example of a person being able to make an entire citystate almost destroy itself in an orgy..... [/quote]

Ian provided numerous examples of towns and villages being killed by people, sometimes individual warriors. Is there a purpose to revisiting an issue that's been disproven roughly fifty pages back?[/quote]
No, he didn't disprove anything at all. He claimed a berserker would be able to sow the same kind of destruction an abomination would. A baseless claim. Logic actually says that a berserker would never be able to kill an entire village on his own, if the villagers has a speck of bravery.
And now we have a new source clearly stating that a single Pride Abomination, was able to (almost) destroy an entire city state. Clearly an Abomination is far more dangerous than any lone berserker.
Yes. There is reason to bring this topic back up, if you actually think that a berserker is as dangerous as an Abomination.

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

It's a bigoted statement to place his race above all others living in Thedas, pure and simple. It's not a perversion of the statement when you factor that there are other humanoid people living on Thedas as well. It's no different than saying that Caucasians are the masters of the United States; In the real world, people have seperated each other by the differences of their skin, while in Thedas, it's by whether they're human, elves, or dwarves. Genitivi's comment is in the same vein as my original statement about what he said and how biased it is.[/quote]

Except it is not biased OR bigoted, when it is true. Dwarves, Elves and Qunari all pale in comparison to the amount of power the Humans wield in Thedas (The Qunari are rising though).
And there is a world of a difference between seperating races, and seperating species.[/quote]

It's bigoted when it asserts that one race of people are superior to all others in an entire continent.[/quote]
Except it is not bigotry, because what he says is true.

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

[quote]Last Vizard wrote...

[quote]EmperorSahlertz wrote...

[quote]Last Vizard wrote...
P.S.  no i wouldn't be corrupted by power, I'd use it to help others and one day (i'm going to live forever due to magic) achieve the level of a God in the prime and fix the world while the Maker sits and faces a tainted wall in the ****e . Logain was an idiot and a traitor.[/quote]
Yeah... Striving for immortality and godhood does not sound selfish and corrupted at all....[/quote]

How does wanting to live a long time so Wizard can aid humanity throughout his lifetime make him selfish and corrupt?[/quote]

Thanks mate, yes its not only selfless it would be pretty annoying aswell however i'm sure after three or four hundred years of punishing criminals and Tyrant Kings the others would either have a change of heart or reframe from violent crime and open casinos or something. lol

And who would decide who were the criminals and the tyrant kings? You? Who should decide their punishment? You again? And if suddenly it is you being accused, would you be willing to give up that power? I doubt it.[/quote]

You're making assumptions about Last Wizard's conduct of character, which I find to be baseless. I certainly didn't see the Guardian turning evil because he lived a long life as the protector of the Ashes, after all.[/quote]
Who is talking about evil? I'm talking about being corrupted by ones desires. While the Guardians purpose is simple, defend the Ashes. Last Wizard, apparently, wanted to defend mankind, or some such grandoise dream. From criminals and from "tyrants". A glorified vigilante. And what entitles him to make the decisions about who to "punish" on his own? What if someone disaggree with him? No. The kind of power he wants, is bound to corrupt.

[LobselVith8]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Ian provided numerous examples of towns and villages being killed by people, sometimes individual warriors. Is there a purpose to revisiting an issue that's been disproven roughly fifty pages back?

No, he didn't disprove anything at all. He claimed a berserker would be able to sow the same kind of destruction an abomination would. A baseless claim. Logic actually says that a berserker would never be able to kill an entire village on his own, if the villagers has a speck of bravery.
And now we have a new source clearly stating that a single Pride Abomination, was able to (almost) destroy an entire city state. Clearly an Abomination is far more dangerous than any lone berserker.
Yes. There is reason to bring this topic back up, if you actually think that a berserker is as dangerous as an Abomination.

There's little reason to bring this topic up since abominations of all variations have been killed long before the Order of Templars and the Chantry were ever created.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

It's bigoted when it asserts that one race of people are superior to all others in an entire continent.

Except it is not bigotry, because what he says is true.

It's bigotry because he's asserting the superiority of one group of people over all others. It's as bigoted as saying that Caucasians are the masters of the United States.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

You're making assumptions about Last Wizard's conduct of character, which I find to be baseless. I certainly didn't see the Guardian turning evil because he lived a long life as the protector of the Ashes, after all.

Who is talking about evil? I'm talking about being corrupted by ones desires. While the Guardians purpose is simple, defend the Ashes. Last Wizard, apparently, wanted to defend mankind, or some such grandoise dream. From criminals and from "tyrants". A glorified vigilante. And what entitles him to make the decisions about who to "punish" on his own? What if someone disaggree with him? No. The kind of power he wants, is bound to corrupt.

The kind of power to protect the innocent and punish the guilty. I don't think Wizard claimed he would be perfection personified, but he voiced a desire to defend the defenseless for all time. I suppose your alternative is to do nothing and simply let people die instead?

[Falmung]

I'm against the Chantry. It uses its beliefs to do whatever it wants. Its full of good people but never the less they justify doing anything in their power even though it might be right for the sake of religion. Even though mages can be dangerous so can any living being be. Locking them up as prisoners because they have a chance of becoming a abomination isn't the correct thing of doing this. I could understand with mages having schools to teach the proper ways of magic and the dangers of abominations but locking a person for how they were born is no different than being a racist.



How mages are treated by the Chantry are my primary concern for hating them. I am someone who believes in freedom even if that freedom might lead to chaos. There will be good people and bad people no matter with what sort of power they are born. They treat mages as monsters. The poor children that were just born that way are separated from their families.



I have three wardens on my DAO campaign. My Noble Human is a warrior that favors honor and faith as long as they are well justified. He respects the teachings of the Chantry but is neutral to any cause of conflict. My mage is just as anyone would expect in complete contrast of the Chantry. She sees the chantry as the person who made her family hate her and doomed her to a life of imprisonment just for the way she was born. The third is an assassin with no emotion always doing the choice that most benefits the situation whether its evil or good as long as it resolves the situation. She would care less about mages or chantry. Her only concern is defeating the blight in any way. Rightful or not.

[EmperorSahlertz]

LobselVith8 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Ian provided numerous examples of towns and villages being killed by people, sometimes individual warriors. Is there a purpose to revisiting an issue that's been disproven roughly fifty pages back?

No, he didn't disprove anything at all. He claimed a berserker would be able to sow the same kind of destruction an abomination would. A baseless claim. Logic actually says that a berserker would never be able to kill an entire village on his own, if the villagers has a speck of bravery.
And now we have a new source clearly stating that a single Pride Abomination, was able to (almost) destroy an entire city state. Clearly an Abomination is far more dangerous than any lone berserker.
Yes. There is reason to bring this topic back up, if you actually think that a berserker is as dangerous as an Abomination.

There's little reason to bring this topic up since abominations of all variations have been killed long before the Order of Templars and the Chantry were ever created.

What does how long Abominations have existed have to do with anything? We are discussing how dangerous an Abomination is. And with the data provided by DA:Legends, we can now see that Abominations are far more dangerous than we presumed at first. Actually they are as dangerous as a natural disaster. And a lot more than Polaris' berserker theory suggests.

LobselVith8 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

It's bigoted when it asserts that one race of people are superior to all others in an entire continent.

Except it is not bigotry, because what he says is true.

It's bigotry because he's asserting the superiority of one group of people over all others. It's as bigoted as saying that Caucasians are the masters of the United States.

You don't get it. Saying the caucasians are the masters of the united states is bigoted because it isn't true. Saying that humans are the masters of Thedas is not bigoted, because it is true.

LobselVith8 wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

You're making assumptions about Last Wizard's conduct of character, which I find to be baseless. I certainly didn't see the Guardian turning evil because he lived a long life as the protector of the Ashes, after all.

Who is talking about evil? I'm talking about being corrupted by ones desires. While the Guardians purpose is simple, defend the Ashes. Last Wizard, apparently, wanted to defend mankind, or some such grandoise dream. From criminals and from "tyrants". A glorified vigilante. And what entitles him to make the decisions about who to "punish" on his own? What if someone disaggree with him? No. The kind of power he wants, is bound to corrupt.

The kind of power to protect the innocent and punish the guilty. I don't think Wizard claimed he would be perfection personified, but he voiced a desire to defend the defenseless for all time. I suppose your alternative is to do nothing and simply let people die instead?

Who said anything about apathy? I'm saying that instead of wanting immortality, you should just make do with the time you have.

[LobselVith8]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

There's little reason to bring this topic up since abominations of all variations have been killed long before the Order of Templars and the Chantry were ever created.

What does how long Abominations have existed have to do with anything? We are discussing how dangerous an Abomination is. And with the data provided by DA:Legends, we can now see that Abominations are far more dangerous than we presumed at first. Actually they are as dangerous as a natural disaster. And a lot more than Polaris' berserker theory suggests.

It has to do with the capacity for one person to kill multiple people, whether they're serial killers, knights, or berserkers. You seem to want to label abominations as the reason we should enslave mages to an oppressive system, but all I see is that capable individuals can defeat abominations of all variations and power. It doesn't stand as a valid reason to strip away the rights of innocent people.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

It's bigotry because he's asserting the superiority of one group of people over all others. It's as bigoted as saying that Caucasians are the masters of the United States.

You don't get it. Saying the caucasians are the masters of the united states is bigoted because it isn't true. Saying that humans are the masters of Thedas is not bigoted, because it is true.

You completely miss the entire point. A person thinking his race should be the masters of an entire race isn't unbiased or refraining from bigotry when you consider there are multiple races of people on Thedas. We are honestly privy to a small portion of the continent, and have no idea what lays beyond the Uncharted Territories or the Anderfes, so you can't say humans are the masters of Thedas when we don't know what other races may be inhabiting the continent. Genitivi's assertion about how his people should be the masters reads as bigoted. His assertion of one race of people over all others is entirely bigoted. There's no difference in the comparison I made. You're welcome to side with Gentivi's POV, but it makes it no less bigoted.

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

The kind of power to protect the innocent and punish the guilty. I don't think Wizard claimed he would be perfection personified, but he voiced a desire to defend the defenseless for all time. I suppose your alternative is to do nothing and simply let people die instead?

Who said anything about apathy? I'm saying that instead of wanting immortality, you should just make do with the time you have.

I see no reason Wizard should be content with what he has and not want more. Humans would still be living in caves if we followed that logic. No reason Wizard shouldn't want to do more to help humanity (humans, elves, dwarves, ect.) with more time.