1019 réponses à ce sujet

[Augustei]

So I take it majority of people here will be getting rid of the chantry first chance they get aye?

[Vit246]

Getting rid of the Chantry in mage affairs? Then yes.

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
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.

I'm not dismising it.
I just consider a report from a serious schoolar far more likely to be accurate than camp stories.

LobselVith8 wrote...

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.

Again, irrelevant.
You don't know what Celene wanted. You don't know what would happen if Cailan lived.
And Celene has nothing to do with Orlais of the past.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
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.

No, it doesn't.
You speak of repeating past actions, but know nothing.
Let's aven assume that all other conflicts Orlais had were invasions/conquests. Does that mean the dales were alos one? No, it doesn't.
Nations are not people.  Past behavior is irrelevant to the current one, and vice-versa.

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
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.

Oh?
Had hte Orlesian Warden arrived, she could have done the ritual with one of them.
Alianage elven slaves...she consider killing them to fuel the Wardens power a good thing.

LobselVith8 wrote...
None of the codex entries support your side of the story.

They all do.

[Derax]

The parallelism to the real church: because most of the folks here seem to be atheistic and that is way they hate it!

[Mordaedil]

I dislike that the Chantry gives Atheist elitists an easy link to compare to real life religions, rather have it actually be a bit deeper and actually be something that is uniquely beneficial for people while not forcing it down peoples throat.

[Xaln]

Derax wrote...

The parallelism to the real church: because most of the folks here seem to be atheistic and that is way they hate it!

Honestly, I don't like the term atheistic, I, myself am a naturalist. (Which is atheist, but atheist is kind of a derogatory term.)

I do admire how religion facilitates faith. There are only 2 things in this world that can tear down the walls of intolerance: faith and trust.

Trust is a eucharist of time a light, it has the power to stop xenophobia, narrow-minded bigotry, and I guess intolerance in general.

But there isn't exactly much of a parallelism to a religion IRL with the chantry. I mean in DA:O universe, there exists magic, and miracles, as well as dragons and such. In our realm, there is not.

That being said, while I can understand that the chantry is trying to create a utopia (having the maker rebuild the golden city), I still don't like the way they run it, and their general methods of dealing with issues. F the chantry. lol

[LobselVith8]

I thought this discussion was dead already.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

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.

I'm not dismising it.
I just consider a report from a serious schoolar far more likely to be accurate than camp stories.

You mean a possible first-hand account of the actual events that transpired over an account from an institution that's known to show bias? Considering the Dalish claim the war was over conversion, and that's precisely what happened with the elves who were moved into the Alienages, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss their account over a nation that has a long history of conquering other nations.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

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.

Again, irrelevant.
You don't know what Celene wanted. You don't know what would happen if Cailan lived.
And Celene has nothing to do with Orlais of the past.

Empress Celene I's actions are an example that despite the change in leadership, Orlais maintains a habit of taking over other nations. The methods change, but the goals remain the same. Therefore, I don't see how it's irrelevent when it illustrates what Orlais has done in the past and is doing in the present.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

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.

No, it doesn't.
You speak of repeating past actions, but know nothing.
Let's aven assume that all other conflicts Orlais had were invasions/conquests. Does that mean the dales were alos one? No, it doesn't.
Nations are not people.  Past behavior is irrelevant to the current one, and vice-versa.

I never claimed the situation with the Dales was known, but it's something to consider that Orlais has a history of invading other nations. If they engaged in something in the past and in the present, there's no reason I shouldn't take it into account for a particular incident that took place in their history.

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

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.

Oh?
Had hte Orlesian Warden arrived, she could have done the ritual with one of them.

Feel free to refrain from once again putting forth your own fan fiction as fact.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Alianage elven slaves...she consider killing them to fuel the Wardens power a good thing.

You mean the example of enpowering the Warden against the Blight that doesn't involve her personally killing anyone?

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

None of the codex entries support your side of the story.

They all do.

Just as much as your claim that Morrigan is murdering innocent villagers, eh?

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
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. 

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.

Again, you simply assume the Chatnry has no evidence...you assume she has no basis.
It's Morrigan. There's plenty of things to be suspicious about when around her.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
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.

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.

This again? Your redicolous accusations are boring me.

There's only one fanfic around here..And that's you fanficing you have a case in this discussion...adn some semblance of reason.

LobselVith8 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
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.

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.

1) after re-watching the scene, you are right. It does predate the Cricle. But that means nothing. Not all old things are forgoten, and everything can still be classified.

2) you say yourself it's a spell. Not jsut a carnal contract. And if both of us know so ittle about it, then how can oyu be so sure it's not blood magic? Especially when Morrigan sez it would be called (recongnized as) blood magic by some?

3) No. But I don't need proof. I'm not the one charging her.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
And I'm telling you again, 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.

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.

Reading comprehension again....is this a sort of a running gag with you? Cause it's ain't funny.
Look up...the bolded quote of mine.

[Kharn-ivor]

Well I dont hate them per say, they mostly try and help people. And who else would protect the layman from Maleficarum? And yes they go to far in hunting every apostate but like most things they started out with good intentions.

Plus its too easy to just like or hate it, as people have said they are necessary. The best parrell I can draw would be when Henry VIII desolved the monasteries in England, beggers and the poor in general no longer had anyone to help them.

Religion has served a purpous in creating civilisations around the world, most if not all civiliation have had some form of religion. So it probably has a beneficial role to play, balance of power is the issue to me rather than just getting rid of them.

EDIT:Btw Im an Atheist, so I dont belive in any of it, but still religions was necessary in mediveal times.

Modifié par Kharn-ivor, 21 février 2011 - 01:43 .

[LobselVith8]

Derax wrote...

The parallelism to the real church: because most of the folks here seem to be atheistic and that is way they hate it!

That's an oversimplification of the reasons why people take issue with the Chantry. Many take umbrage at the Chantry because the mages are bereft of freedom, dignity, and worth by a docturine that promotes oppression and imprisonment.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

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.

Again, you simply assume the Chatnry has no evidence...you assume she has no basis.
It's Morrigan. There's plenty of things to be suspicious about when around her.

If there's nothing to suggest Morrigan is a blood mage, I don't see why we should assume she is one any more than Finn is.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

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.

This again? Your redicolous accusations are boring me.

There's only one fanfic around here..And that's you fanficing you have a case in this discussion...adn some semblance of reason.

I back up my stand with codex entries: the History of the Circle, the History of the Chantry Part Four, the heresay section of the Abomination codex, and the Rite of Anulment codex. I've provided examples to support where I stand with this issue. You're the one going through leaps and bounds to justify what the Chantry does and their actions against the Magnfiicent D'Sims, the mages of the Circles, and now putting a bounty on Morrigan for being a blood mage when there's nothing to even suggest she's one. I'm asking for evidence to support the claim that Morrigan is a blood mage, or anything supporting the claim that the templars have made.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

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.

1) after re-watching the scene, you are right. It does predate the Cricle. But that means nothing. Not all old things are forgoten, and everything can still be classified.

2) you say yourself it's a spell. Not jsut a carnal contract. And if both of us know so ittle about it, then how can oyu be so sure it's not blood magic? Especially when Morrigan sez it would be called (recongnized as) blood magic by some?

3) No. But I don't need proof. I'm not the one charging her.

It doesn't matter whether it's blood magic or not, because it doesn't make her any more of a blood mage than Finn's ritual to find the Eluvian makes him one.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

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.

Reading comprehension again....is this a sort of a running gag with you? Cause it's ain't funny.
Look up...the bolded quote of mine.

You mean when I disprove one of your ridiculous claims and all you have to retort is "reading comprehension?" Maybe if you stopped making inaccurate claims about Morrigan I wouldn't keep proving that you're incorrect.

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...

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.

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.

The comments are accurate. You're just too stubborn to notice.

And if Gaider's comments can't be taken directly, why should Hammiltons be?  He doesn't really say the Chantry are tyranical dictators, if you read carefully. Again, hypocrisy at work. Either treat all dev quotes qith the same weight, or don't bring them up at all.

LobselVith8 wrote...

LotionSoronnar wrote...
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.

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."

No, you didn't read. Ians examples  were debunked and are worth nothin...which is slightly more than yours.
Ian was rediculed for his "a warrior can destroy a town" idea, and you are just too happy to jump on the train to failtown.
Come back to me when you learn to read...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
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?

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.

Consent is not a "word" thing. It's a will thing.
Kitty didn't have consent  - if she did, Amelia would have been possesed from the start. A human child body is far better than a cat one.

LobselVith8 wrote...
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?

Ian proved NOTHING. You are a moron who doesn't know how to read. Sicne when does an army sacking a town equal a SINGLE WARRIOR destroying a city.
Even to your broken mind it should be obvious that that just doesn't happen.

[AstraDrakkar]

Phaffner wrote...

Its not the chantry that is evil, its the people that use it to further their own corrupt ways that are evil.

^ this

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...

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?

THEY can't mind control me. THEY won't turn into abominations. THEY won't suck my life force from me. THEY are of no direct danger to me.
The Chantry has power, but it's a different kind of power.

Trusting a templar over a mage? Any day of the week, 24/7.

LobselVith8 wrote...
It's bigoted when it asserts that one race of people are superior to all others in an entire continent.

Nope...

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

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.

The comments are accurate. You're just too stubborn to notice.

And if Gaider's comments can't be taken directly, why should Hammiltons be?  He doesn't really say the Chantry are tyranical dictators, if you read carefully. Again, hypocrisy at work. Either treat all dev quotes qith the same weight, or don't bring them up at all.

Greagoir and Lily's comments aren't accurate, they're indocturinated to think of mages as cursed because that's what they were taught. Mages should be properly instructed on the use of their abilities, but they aren't cursed and they shouldn't be imprisoned because of their powers.

As for the Hamilton quote, how can you say it doesn't relate to the Chantry when the quote has him saying its a dictatorship in direct reference to the Magi boon being turned down and the mages not being freed?

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

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."

No, you didn't read. Ians examples  were debunked and are worth nothin...which is slightly more than yours.
Ian was rediculed for his "a warrior can destroy a town" idea, and you are just too happy to jump on the train to failtown.
Come back to me when you learn to read...

I'm getting tired of your baseless claims of providing Ian wrong when nothing is further from the truth. You never proved him wrong about his arguments and flip-flopped between saying the Chantry was the best system in place and saying Ian couldn't even disagree with you because the story was "morally grey."

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
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.

Consent is not a "word" thing. It's a will thing.
Kitty didn't have consent  - if she did, Amelia would have been possesed from the start. A human child body is far better than a cat one.

If she gave consent in the first place, that's the entire problem. It's likely why she can be possessed unless she "breaks the contract" and says she won't possess her.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

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?

Ian proved NOTHING. You are a moron who doesn't know how to read. Sicne when does an army sacking a town equal a SINGLE WARRIOR destroying a city.
Even to your broken mind it should be obvious that that just doesn't happen.

Why do you have to resort to name-calling when people disagree with you? Why can't you engage me in discussion without resorting to such tactics?

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...
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.

Abominations can be stopped....but at what price?
Just because I can stop an avalanche when it's lost most of it's speed (by destroying half a town), doesn't make avalanches a non-issue. Half hte town is still destroyed. People still died.

No knight, serial killer or berserker can be compared to an abomination. Not even close. they very idea that you and Ian are trying to, lead me to question your sanity.

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

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

THEY can't mind control me. THEY won't turn into abominations. THEY won't suck my life force from me. THEY are of no direct danger to me.
The Chantry has power, but it's a different kind of power.

Trusting a templar over a mage? Any day of the week, 24/7.

It's not as simple as that, Lotion. You're talking about an armored and armed drug addict who is only as good as his daily dose of lyrium permits him to be. I don't think all templars are evil or bad, but I don't see the need to smear the mages simply because you favor the Chantry and its templars.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

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

Nope...

I can tell you put a lot of effort into that retort, but it doesn't change what I said or how Genitivi's comment reads.

[Urazz]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
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.

Oh?
Had hte Orlesian Warden arrived, she could have done the ritual with one of them.
Alianage elven slaves...she consider killing them to fuel the Wardens power a good thing.

Actually her reasons for supporting the killing the alienage elves was to make the warden stronger.  She lacks in more civilised view because who she was raised by and as a result believes in survival of the fittest than anything else.  She won't go slaughtering innocent villagers for no reason but she won't go helping them survive dangers that would get them killed either.

Almost all her preferred choices in game tend to be tied to making the Warden stronger to face the blight or avoid unecessary actions in face of the blight.  The only exception would be in the mage tower on her opinion to not help the mages and we all know that she pretty much views templars and tower mages with disdain.

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...

I thought this discussion was dead already.

It will die with you.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
I'm not dismising it.
I just consider a report from a serious schoolar far more likely to be accurate than camp stories.

You mean a possible first-hand account of the actual events that transpired over an account from an institution that's known to show bias? Considering the Dalish claim the war was over conversion, and that's precisely what happened with the elves who were moved into the Alienages, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss their account over a nation that has a long history of conquering other nations.

A story that's not written down, but re-told? From a group with persecution complexes and clear bias?
Ever heard of fishermans tales? Words on paper beat memory and re-telling.

Words written on paper by a schoolar are far more credible.
Genitivy is not "The Chantry", he is a singular person. A schoolar shown to be looking for the truth, willing to risk his life for it.

LobselVith8 wrote...
Again, irrelevant.
You don't know what Celene wanted. You don't know what would happen if Cailan lived.
And Celene has nothing to do with Orlais of the past.

Empress Celene I's actions are an example that despite the change in leadership, Orlais maintains a habit of taking over other nations. The methods change, but the goals remain the same. Therefore, I don't see how it's irrelevent when it illustrates what Orlais has done in the past and is doing in the present.[/quote ]

Nope. It doesn't follow.
You're saiyng "Orlias is conquering now, therefore it must have conquered the Dales".
That logic doesn't follow. There is no direct correlation.

I never claimed the situation with the Dales was known, but it's something to consider that Orlais has a history of invading other nations. If they engaged in something in the past and in the present, there's no reason I shouldn't take it into account for a particular incident that took place in their history.

All nations have a history.

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
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.

Abominations can be stopped....but at what price?
Just because I can stop an avalanche when it's lost most of it's speed (by destroying half a town), doesn't make avalanches a non-issue. Half hte town is still destroyed. People still died.

You're making a vague inquiry into an issue and then putting forth assumptions as fact. Considering the Grey Warden can defeat the abominations in the Circle Tower with his entourage, it can clearly be done by skilled individuals.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

No knight, serial killer or berserker can be compared to an abomination. Not even close. they very idea that you and Ian are trying to, lead me to question your sanity.

I wish you could debate the issues like an adult instead of resorting to such tactics, Lotion. I don't mind discussing an opposing view with you as long as you didn't resort to name-calling and making condescending remarks like this.

[Lotion Soronarr]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Oh?
Had hte Orlesian Warden arrived, she could have done the ritual with one of them.

Feel free to refrain from once again putting forth your own fan fiction as fact.

If it's a God baby she wanted, then any Grey Warden would do. If you see a hole in this reasoning, feel free to point it out.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Alianage elven slaves...she consider killing them to fuel the Wardens power a good thing.

You mean the example of enpowering the Warden against the Blight that doesn't involve her personally killing anyone?

So saying OK to the murder of innocents is OK as long as you're not hte one doing it? It doesn't show somones weak moral fiber?
Mind you,that was blood magic and she was perfectly OK with it's usage to drain innocents.

LobselVith8 wrote...
Just as much as your claim that Morrigan is murdering innocent villagers, eh?

That's not what I claim. You fail to read and thing...for the N'th time.
But hey..why should actual FACTS get in the way of your imagination?

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

If it's a God baby she wanted, then any Grey Warden would do. If you see a hole in this reasoning, feel free to point it out.

If we consider the Gaider/Aimo comic, there's more to it than that.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

You mean the example of enpowering the Warden against the Blight that doesn't involve her personally killing anyone?

So saying OK to the murder of innocents is OK as long as you're not hte one doing it? It doesn't show somones weak moral fiber?
Mind you,that was blood magic and she was perfectly OK with it's usage to drain innocents.

I didn't say that, I pointed out you were wrong in claiming Morrigan is vying to kill innocent villagers with absolutely no context for the situation - which you are. It's not the truth when you leave out the truth of the situation simply to suit your version of DA.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
Just as much as your claim that Morrigan is murdering innocent villagers, eh?

That's not what I claim. You fail to read and thing...for the N'th time.
But hey..why should actual FACTS get in the way of your imagination?

Considering you don't let facts get in the way of the actual truth of the scenerio, and instead make remarks that are inaccurate without context, I don't see where you claim any factual superiority on this issue.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 21 février 2011 - 02:20 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Again, you simply assume the Chatnry has no evidence...you assume she has no basis.
It's Morrigan. There's plenty of things to be suspicious about when around her. [/quote]

If there's nothing to suggest Morrigan is a blood mage, I don't see why we should assume she is one any more than Finn is.[/quote]

Finn might be one. How the hell should I know?
But again, why do you then assume the opposite? And again, why do you expect the Chantry to assume everything you do?
Moreso, why would the Chantry claim she's a blood mage if she's not? What do they gain from it? If she's a maleficar (and she is), they can just as easily hunt her for that.



[quote]
I back up my stand with codex entries: the History of the Circle, the History of the Chantry Part Four, the heresay section of the Abomination codex, and the Rite of Anulment codex. I've provided examples to support where I stand with this issue. You're the one going through leaps and bounds to justify what the Chantry does and their actions against the Magnfiicent D'Sims, the mages of the Circles, and now putting a bounty on Morrigan for being a blood mage when there's nothing to even suggest she's one. I'm asking for evidence to support the claim that Morrigan is a blood mage, or anything supporting the claim that the templars have made.[/quote]

Leaps and bound? It goes by another name..."common sense" .. or "reason". Look it up.
You can list the names of codexes all the day, but for the most part, they don't prove what you think they do. I cna use those very same codexes as arguments for the other side of this debate.

So no. You really havn't proven anything to anyone.




[quote]
It doesn't matter whether it's blood magic or not, because it doesn't make her any more of a blood mage than Finn's ritual to find the Eluvian makes him one.[/qutoe]

In your eyes.
But what she is in your eyes is not what's important for this discussion.




[quote]
[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Reading comprehension again....is this a sort of a running gag with you? Cause it's ain't funny.
Look up...the bolded quote of mine. [/quote]

You mean when I disprove one of your ridiculous claims and all you have to retort is "reading comprehension?" Maybe if you stopped making inaccurate claims about Morrigan I wouldn't keep proving that you're incorrect.[/quote]

Oh brother. You're hopeless.

What I meant by that bolded quote was that oyu keep contesting that the Dark Ritual is not blood magic adn the Cahtnry can't use it as evidence...and yet nobody was claiming that the Cahntry is using it as evidence or has any knowledge of it whatsoever.
Yet here we are, several pages after that has been clarified for you - twice - and you stil lkeep fighting an argument NO ONE EVER MADE.:D:D:lol::lol:

[MageAdept353]

I play mages first, no matter what game I am playing so my first day in Ferelden set the tone for my view of the chantry.



Time to try my hand at some Roleplaying...



They claim my powers are a curse.

They lock me up against my will, if I refuse and flee then I am an apostate and if i defend myself against those who try to hunt me then I am a Maleficar.

They have an army of goons who are specially trained to kill me if they feel I am dangerous.

They waste alot of time condemning mages and shackling our powers while their towns are being overrun with darkspawn, which we could more effectively fight were we not confined to a prison in the middle of a lake!



In short, I have no reason to like the chantry, any good they may do is far outweighed by their evils and the good they prevent me and my kind from doing.