57020 réponses à ce sujet

[Dreaming-in-Shadow]

ekurian wrote...

Phenerios wrote...


At no point does he apologize or voice regret for the death of those who were neither mage, templay, or
member of the chantry, but simple citizens who were trying to find peace in the chantry.

(snipped most of it out)

He does; I think. On my last PT, my Hawke said that he'd killed all of those in the Chantry- innocent people. He said 'I know'.

I don't recall the exact wording, or how I got it, but it is there.

At the end of the day, I blame the Tevinter Imperium (until I find concrete evidence otherwise) as they:
-Enslaved the Dalish and destroyed their culture
-Are responsible for the Chantry's current treatment of mages.

Of course the Chantry is hardly all sunshine and flowers.
And if mages stopped turning to such desperate measures to escape... which they wouldn't need to if the Chantry wasn't full of self-righteous predjudice...

Pointing fingers is hard, because the debate of Kirkwall is a blurry greyscale abstract painting... with an optical illusion thrown in.

Modifié par Dreaming-in-Shadow, 22 avril 2011 - 12:39 .

[ladyofpayne]

:devil:

Inzhuna wrote...

Camilladilla wrote...

Hahaha this is awesome.

He didn't get a cat. And he began to kill!

[Camilladilla]

Phenerios wrote...

Camilladilla wrote...

YamiSnuffles wrote...

She did lie. She just said she was trying to find a relic to save her own life. She never said that she stole a Qunari relic and that was the reason they would leave the city. She caused years of tension and trouble in the city. As Miri said, she might have ended up sparking a larger war as the Arishok promised.

By your logic, Anders didn't lie either. He told you he needed to make a potion to free him and Justice. That's just what he does in your game. You kill him, and they are free. Not saying that's the way I even see it, but that your logic is really confusing if you don't think Izzy lied to you.

Not to mention, if you actually let Anders live you can make him work to help fix what he's started. You can make him fight to help the mages and protect the ones he has endangered, thus working toward some manner of redemption. Also, I don't know what game you were playing that you didn't think he showed any remorse in the end. He looks and sounds miserable after he blows up the Chantry. He feels terrible for what he's done. Unfortunately, it's something he thinks needs to be done, no matter the cost to him or others.

I guess the game just did it way too subtle? Apparently it isn't remorse unless Anders is throwing himself at Hawke's feet bawling and begging for forgiveness.

It was just my impression that Anders thought he was facing certain death and he was just trying to put on a brave face for the end.

  At no point does he apologize or voice regret for the death of those who were neither mage, templay, or member of the chantry, but simple citizens who were trying to find peace in the chantry. Isbella never stole the artifact from the Qunari. She stole it before the actually had it. Sher never lied about her what she was planning on doing. She didn't say hey come help get this book from these guys, and then walks into an ophanage and slaughters all the kids to get the book back.

   I have gone through were I went straight to the Qunari and didn't help her. They attack even before they know their relic is gone. To me that proves they had decided that it was the will of the Qun to purge the city of the unworhty. Therefore yes it is her fault that they are there, but it is the city's fault for treating them in such a manner that provoked them.
  
   The Chantry itself did not provoke Anders. It was the templars, and namely a small number of them too. Instead though he decides to nuke a building with innocent people in it. His is story sad and maybe a bit tragic, but that in no way justifies such an act. They is no way to repair the damage he caused. He knew full well the results of his actions, Isbella could not foresee that 3-4 years after she stole the relic that it would be the thing that started a chain reaction that caused the Qunari to attack. That is the key difference between them.

I really don't see why it matters whether or not she stole the relic before or after the Qunari had it... the relic was their sacred text, their holy book, the Qun's version of the bible/quran, it was theirs rightfully and she stole it for some quick cash. Also given how tensions were stewing between Kirkwall and the Qunari for over three years, she would have to be blind as a bat not to realize what would happen and in those 3-4 years this storm was brewing, she couldn't have opened up to Hawke and been like "Oh **** Hawke, I think this tome I stole might fix things!" You know why she didn't? Because Isabela doesn't care about what happens to others that's not her immediate concern.

And Anders and remorse? Look at Miri's post, he DOES voice it during certain events and I really don't need the game to spell things out for me to realize when someone's feeling remorse when the voice acting does it alone.

Why target the chantry? Ugh this debate. Okay, because the Chantry is in fact the power behind the templars. It's what holds the templar's leash.

Modifié par Camilladilla, 22 avril 2011 - 12:42 .

[Phenerios]

kromify wrote...
that does make it completely different. <_<

also chantry > templars > mages.  the templars are the military arm of the chantry. everything they do has been condoned by them whether in actuality or by omission

  So by your logic it would be ok for someone to blow up parliment, because they didn't like something an out of control general was doing?

  And the difference is she never even had intended for her or the relic to end up in Kirkwall, and thereby starting a chain events that were well beyond her control to fix by the time they came to the fore front. Where as Anders knew how things were going to play out. He can act like "but I didn't mean for this time happen.", but no one can nuke a building and not expect chaos to follow. He does make a statement about he knows there were innocents, but he says something to the effect that they were a neccesary sacrifice.

  And how was she going to offer you an item she herself did not have. Her whole purpose there was to find it. She stole it orignally not for money, but to save her life. Sorry, but I can't fault that someone for that when it doesn't appear anyone but yourself is taking the risk in getting it. By the time they were in Kirkwall she had lost the item, and had no way of knowing where it was.

Modifié par Phenerios, 22 avril 2011 - 12:47 .

[Dreaming-in-Shadow]

Camilladilla wrote...

Why target the chantry? Ugh this debate. Okay, because the Chantry is in fact the power behind the templars. It's what holds the templar's leash.

There is no debate over that.
Chantry - Centre of power for the Andrastian religion.
Elthina is in there.

Tensions are brewing, and mages and innocent people alike are suffering (or will suffer) as the tension gets tighter. 
Orsino and Meredith keep running to Elthina, which she and Hawke pretty much do nothing to end the conflict. Just "now, now, children, play nicely". Comprimise when there can be none.

Somebody was going to snap and do something drastic to end the conflict, that somebody happened to be Anders. Removing the chance comprimise, because there is none.

[YamiSnuffles]

Phenerios wrote...

At no point does he apologize or voice regret for the death of those who were neither mage, templay, or member of the chantry, but simple citizens who were trying to find peace in the chantry. Isbella never stole the artifact from the Qunari. She stole it before the actually had it. Sher never lied about her what she was planning on doing. She didn't say hey come help get this book from these guys, and then walks into an ophanage and slaughters all the kids to get the book back.

I have gone through were I went straight to the Qunari and didn't help her. They attack even before they know their relic is gone. To me that proves they had decided that it was the will of the Qun to purge the city of the unworhty. Therefore yes it is her fault that they are there, but it is the city's fault for treating them in such a manner that provoked them.

The Chantry itself did not provoke Anders. It was the templars, and namely a small number of them too. Instead though he decides to nuke a building with innocent people in it. His is story sad and maybe a bit tragic, but that in no way justifies such an act. They is no way to repair the damage he caused. He knew full well the results of his actions, Isbella could not foresee that 3-4 years after she stole the relic that it would be the thing that started a chain reaction that caused the Qunari to attack. That is the key difference between them.

You can call him a murderer and he accepts that. I'd say that shows pretty strongly that he realizes he killed innocent people. No he doesn't say he wished he hadn't done it. It was what he needed to do to finally start freeing mages. Also, you cannot say that the Chantry is in no way provokes Anders. They are the ones in charge of the whole Templar order. Elthina can be asked repeatedly to do something. She has the authority to take Meredith out of power and she doesn't she sits on her ass and watches while things go to hell for years. The Chantry teaches that mages are cursed, evil, and need to be locked up in the Circles for their own good. If that teaching goes on, it would be pretty dang hard to have mages living in society. Mages are feared by the common man because the Chantry teaches that the Maker hates them. Parents abandon their children because they feel like giving birth to a mage child is a curse.

I'm not saying I condone what Anders did. I'm just saying, the Chantry is part of what he sees as the problem. He wants a new system. The Chantry wants to keep things just the way they are. She'll even say as much to you. That she feels bad for the mages but they are cursed and need to be treated the way they are.

As for Isabela, she does nothing to make up for what the Qunari did. As someone else pointed out, she comes back for Hawke. Isabela and Anders even have a conversation in Act 3 where Anders asks why she isn't doing anything to help the people of Kirkwall that she nearly doomed. She essentially just says what she did is in the past and she sees absolutely no reason to do anything about it. So, no, she doesn't work to repair the wrongs she caused.

Furthermore, when it comes to actually getting the relic, you can call her out on the fact that the Qunari would have left and still might leave if they get the book. All she's thinking about is saving her life. She likely never would have told Hawke what the relic was if she hadn't been forced to. She tells you at the start of the quest that it might help with the Qunari problem because it's the only reason you'll help hr first instead of helping Aveline. Then she finally admits everything after you fight off a group of Qunari who are trying to get the book. She never tells anyone about it earlier than that. Things are really obviously falling apart with the Qunari around (the poison gas, Seamus' death, etc.) but she does nothing. The only times she acts is when the book is practically in her grasp and she can leave the problem behind.

Finally, she knew the book was trouble. If she didn't she wouldn't lie to Hawke and all your companions about what it is. The Qunari also only attack after you kill the ones who are trying to get the book and in turn let Isabela run off with it. The Arishok stresses the book thing just before he attacks. If Isabela cared so very much about innocent lives, she wouldn't have run off at all. She would have gone with Hawke to the compound with it. Instead she lets Hawke and Aveline walk in to what could have very well been their deaths.

[Inzhuna]

Dreaming-in-Shadow wrote...

Camilladilla wrote...

Why target the chantry? Ugh this debate. Okay, because the Chantry is in fact the power behind the templars. It's what holds the templar's leash.

There is no debate over that.
Chantry - Centre of power for the Andrastian religion.
Elthina is in there.

Tensions are brewing, and mages and innocent people alike are suffering (or will suffer) as the tension gets tighter. 
Orsino and Meredith keep running to Elthina, which she and Hawke pretty much do nothing to end the conflict. Just "now, now, children, play nicely". Comprimise when there can be none.

Somebody was going to snap and do something drastic to end the conflict, that somebody happened to be Anders. Removing the chance comprimise, because there is none.

There is debate over everything. Always.

I am of opinion there there could and should be a compromise, but I get why Anders targeted the chantry. It was actually very clever, in a horrible way.

[kromify]

one renegade general is a bit different to the systemic cruelty which is accepted as norm. and our governments at least will drop all knowledge of said general like a hot potato and find a few scapegoats to boot.

no she didn't know what would happen, but if she hadn't run off with the tome and only returned later, the viscount and countless others would still be alive. they only attacked when isabella took the tome out of their immediate reach again

[TheComfyCat]

Phenerios wrote...

Camilladilla wrote...

YamiSnuffles wrote...

She did lie. She just said she was trying to find a relic to save her own life. She never said that she stole a Qunari relic and that was the reason they would leave the city. She caused years of tension and trouble in the city. As Miri said, she might have ended up sparking a larger war as the Arishok promised.

By your logic, Anders didn't lie either. He told you he needed to make a potion to free him and Justice. That's just what he does in your game. You kill him, and they are free. Not saying that's the way I even see it, but that your logic is really confusing if you don't think Izzy lied to you.

Not to mention, if you actually let Anders live you can make him work to help fix what he's started. You can make him fight to help the mages and protect the ones he has endangered, thus working toward some manner of redemption. Also, I don't know what game you were playing that you didn't think he showed any remorse in the end. He looks and sounds miserable after he blows up the Chantry. He feels terrible for what he's done. Unfortunately, it's something he thinks needs to be done, no matter the cost to him or others.

I guess the game just did it way too subtle? Apparently it isn't remorse unless Anders is throwing himself at Hawke's feet bawling and begging for forgiveness.

It was just my impression that Anders thought he was facing certain death and he was just trying to put on a brave face for the end.

  At no point does he apologize or voice regret for the death of those who were neither mage, templay, or member of the chantry, but simple citizens who were trying to find peace in the chantry. Isbella never stole the artifact from the Qunari. She stole it before the actually had it. Sher never lied about her what she was planning on doing. She didn't say hey come help get this book from these guys, and then walks into an ophanage and slaughters all the kids to get the book back.

   I have gone through were I went straight to the Qunari and didn't help her. They attack even before they know their relic is gone. To me that proves they had decided that it was the will of the Qun to purge the city of the unworhty. Therefore yes it is her fault that they are there, but it is the city's fault for treating them in such a manner that provoked them.
  
   The Chantry itself did not provoke Anders. It was the templars, and namely a small number of them too. Instead though he decides to nuke a building with innocent people in it. His is story sad and maybe a bit tragic, but that in no way justifies such an act. They is no way to repair the damage he caused. He knew full well the results of his actions, Isbella could not foresee that 3-4 years after she stole the relic that it would be the thing that started a chain reaction that caused the Qunari to attack. That is the key difference between them.

Before they know their relic is gone? The only reason they're in Kirkwall is because Isabela stole their relic and they have to stay until they've retrieved it. They attack after three years, when the Arishok can't bear to wallow in Kirkwall a moment longer. She may not have been able to forsee that the Qunari would attack, but instead of returning the relic once she had it, she decided to RUN OFF WITH IT to save her own @ss. I love Izzy, but don't try to claim the situation isn't her fault.

As for your argument about the Chantry, well, you clearly misunderstand the hierarchy of the Templars if you think blowing up the chantry wasn't a shot at the Templars. As someone else mentioned, the Chantry ultimately controls the Templars. Mother Elthina isn't an innocent.

But your opinion of Anders isn't going to change, so I'm not sure why I'm bothering. Feel free to hate him to your heart's content. You won't change our opinions either. Why not go gush in one of the Anders hate threads rather than make bad arguments here?

[Camilladilla]

Phenerios wrote...

kromify wrote...
that does make it completely different. <_<

also chantry > templars > mages.  the templars are the military arm of the chantry. everything they do has been condoned by them whether in actuality or by omission

  So by your logic it would be ok for someone to blow up parliment, because they didn't like something an out of control general was doing?

No, she was pointing out the reasons why the chantry was Anders' target since you completely missed the reason why he chose to blow it up instead of the templar hall. No where did she say she agreed or said that what Anders did was okay.

But given how Anders is trying to start a revolution here and revolutions are generally not about unicorns farting rainbows, blowing up the chantry was the logical choice.

  And the difference is she never even had intended for her or the relic to end up in Kirkwall, and thereby starting a chain events that were well beyond her control to fix by the time they came to the fore front. Where as Anders knew how things were going to play out. He can act like "but I didn't mean for this time happen.", but no one can nuke a building and not expect chaos to follow. He does make a statement about he knows there were innocents, but he says something to the effect that they were a neccesary sacrifice.

Well beyond her control to fix...? So in year 1 when the Qunari were just chillaxing and all the Arishok was doing was grumbling she couldn't have told Hawke about the relic? 

[Dreaming-in-Shadow]

Phenerios wrote...

  So by your logic it would be ok for someone to blow up parliment, because they didn't like something an out of control general was doing?

  And the difference is she never even had intended for her or the relic to end up in Kirkwall, and thereby starting a chain events that were well beyond her control to fix by the time they came to the fore front. Where as Anders knew how things were going to play out. He can act like "but I didn't mean for this time happen.", but no one can nuke a building and not expect chaos to follow. He does make a statement about he knows there were innocents, but he says something to the effect that they were a neccesary sacrifice.

Grey Warden propoganda rubbing off? Kidding.
What was he supposed to do? Sit back while tensions get higher to the point where every living person in Kirkwall suffers in silence? (They can't speak out against the templars, the templars near enough rule Kirkwall.)

He can't do that anyway, not with Justice so closely tied to his soul.

As I pointed out several times: Kirkwall was going to turn into a warzone. If Anders hadn't acted, then perhaps the Right of Annulment would have been called and the mages would never have had a chance to fight back. Innocent people (including children) would die...

[kromify]

senorfuzzylips wrote...

But your opinion of Anders isn't going to change, so I'm not sure why I'm bothering. Feel free to hate him to your heart's content. You won't change our opinions either. Why not go gush in one of the Anders hate threads rather than make bad arguments here?

there's no hating; just trying to start a discussion. every post has been very unflamey 

[SidheKate]

Inzhuna wrote...

That's a good point, but he still was no demon.

Interesting, I like that interpretation. I also wonder how he views Anders/Hawke with regards to his opinion of Aura and Kristoff. He was afraid of being envious, because that was a demonic thing. I wonder if he was so against Anders being with Hawke because on some level he wanted it too and it scared him? Guh, I wish we could have more interacton with Justice in the game than that one scene on rivalry. Night terrors had so  much potential in this regard but nooo. <_<

I know this is from a few pages back, but I wanted to throw out another option for people to think about.  Anders doesn't say that Justice disapproves of Hawke.  Anders says that Justice does not approve of his obsession with Hawke, because it is a distraction. 

In the most literal sense, that is a fair assessment.  Obsessions are distractions.  If Anders is busy daydreaming about being with Hawke, he is not focusing on the important mission that he agreed to before the two of them merged. 

On the rival path, Hawke spends a lot of time telling Anders that he's possessed by a demon and that he was wrong for making that decision.  At the end of that (in the justice quest), the spirit comes out and has his say in rather pointed terms.  But on the friendship path, Justice expresses no such disapproval because Hawke has effectively signed on to the mission (of helping mages, at least).

So I'm not sure that Justice disapproves of Anders being in love, or of Hawke particularly, just the obessing between Acts 1 and 2. 

[Shmeep Shmee]

Phenerios wrote...

kromify wrote...
that does make it completely different. <_<

also chantry > templars > mages.  the templars are the military arm of the chantry. everything they do has been condoned by them whether in actuality or by omission

  So by your logic it would be ok for someone to blow up parliment, because they didn't like something an out of control general was doing?

Ander's beef was not specifically with Meridith and the Kirkwall Circle, but with how all mages were treated under the Chantry.  So while Meridith may have been insane (although he did not know that at the time), all the Templars who forced children from their families and imprisoned mages were acting just as the Chantry ordered them.  A better analogy would be would it have been okay for an Indian blowing up British Parliment back when the British occupied India.

[0o-Constance-o0]

Oh my gaaaaaaawd not again

[Camilladilla]

Dreaming-in-Shadow wrote...

Phenerios wrote...

  So by your logic it would be ok for someone to blow up parliment, because they didn't like something an out of control general was doing?

  And the difference is she never even had intended for her or the relic to end up in Kirkwall, and thereby starting a chain events that were well beyond her control to fix by the time they came to the fore front. Where as Anders knew how things were going to play out. He can act like "but I didn't mean for this time happen.", but no one can nuke a building and not expect chaos to follow. He does make a statement about he knows there were innocents, but he says something to the effect that they were a neccesary sacrifice.

Grey Warden propoganda rubbing off? Kidding.
What was he supposed to do? Sit back while tensions get higher to the point where every living person in Kirkwall suffers in silence? (They can't speak out against the templars, the templars near enough rule Kirkwall.)

He can't do that anyway, not with Justice so closely tied to his soul.

As I pointed out several times: Kirkwall was going to turn into a warzone. If Anders hadn't acted, then perhaps the Right of Annulment would have been called and the mages would never have had a chance to fight back. Innocent people (including children) would die...

Pretty much this. If you speak with Karras right at the beginning of Act 3, he pretty much says that Meredith sent to the Divine for permission for the Right of Annulment. So, at the very start of Act 3, Meredith was planning on the wholesale slaughter of all the mages of the Gallows for...? 

[0o-Constance-o0]

Can we not all just hug and admit that everyone has a different opinion and stop making these ridiculous comparisons that hold little to no weight in the context of the story.

[Dreaming-in-Shadow]

0o-Constance-o0 wrote...

Oh my gaaaaaaawd not again

Good reaction. XD

[Camilladilla]

0o-Constance-o0 wrote...

Can we not all just hug and admit that everyone has a different opinion and stop making these ridiculous comparisons that hold little to no weight in the context of the story.

Why? It's more fun this way? 

[Mxcl]

Phenerios wrote...

  At no point does he apologize or voice regret for the death of those who were neither mage, templay, or member of the chantry, but simple citizens who were trying to find peace in the chantry. Isbella never stole the artifact from the Qunari. She stole it before the actually had it. Sher never lied about her what she was planning on doing. She didn't say hey come help get this book from these guys, and then walks into an ophanage and slaughters all the kids to get the book back.

   I have gone through were I went straight to the Qunari and didn't help her. They attack even before they know their relic is gone. To me that proves they had decided that it was the will of the Qun to purge the city of the unworhty. Therefore yes it is her fault that they are there, but it is the city's fault for treating them in such a manner that provoked them.
  
   The Chantry itself did not provoke Anders. It was the templars, and namely a small number of them too. Instead though he decides to nuke a building with innocent people in it. His is story sad and maybe a bit tragic, but that in no way justifies such an act. They is no way to repair the damage he caused. He knew full well the results of his actions, Isbella could not foresee that 3-4 years after she stole the relic that it would be the thing that started a chain reaction that caused the Qunari to attack. That is the key difference between them.

1) At no point does Isabela voice regret for causing the Qunari to become stranded in Kirkwall for years, causing the Tal-Vasoth to traipse about the wounded Coast as well as the death of Samaus, the Viscount the people who died from the poison in low town and any other indirect casualties she caused by stealing the relic.

[*]Isabela: This is about the Qunari thing, isn't it? I'm not ignoring it. I just recognize that it happened years ago.[*]Isabela: There's this fantastic thing called "moving on." You should try it sometime.
[/list]She does apologize and thank Hawke for their help and then proceeds to pretty much disregard the issue. She also lied repeatedly about why she was in Kirkwall and the nature of the relic.

[*]Anders: So, this relic you lost... how is it you don't know what it is?[*]Isabela: It was in a box.[*]Anders: And you didn't open it? You managed to resist the urge?[*]Isabela: It was locked. It was a locked box![/list]Then, pre Demands of the Qun, she admits that this was a fabrication (read:lie) on her part, and that she had stolen the relic with full knowledge of what it was, got shipwrecked  and proceeded to spend the following years blithely ignoring the consequences of her actions while looking for the relic with your help. Mind you, up until the Demands of the Qun she doesn't actually tell you what it iis your looking for or becoming an accessory to.

tl;dr She knew full well what she was doing and simply did not care about the consequences so long as they did not come back to her, and if you built a good relation ship with her, back onto Hawke. She also lied/told Hawke just enough information to get their aid in the search for the relic.

2) Yes. It is Isabelas fault they're there. No, the chantry and the general populace did nothing to help the situation they had thrust upon them. The Arishok makes his intentions quite clear in conversations about the "will of the Qun" and bringing the city into line and I can not argue this paragraph.

3) The Chantry controls the Templars. That is to say, the Grand Cleric has power over the Templar order in their respective region. I'm not going to defend what Anders did as, yes, he did know full well what his actions would do. I disagree however that Isabella did not have the foresight to imagine what would happen. She simply DID NOT CARE. Not until **** hit the fan and it looked like it might be time to save her own skin, and if Hawke's relation ship with her was adequate, return to save his as well.

The difference between them was that one was a mentally ill abomination, the other was a self serving pirate wench and I loved them both.



(back to lurking I go)

Modifié par Mxcl, 22 avril 2011 - 12:58 .

[TheComfyCat]

kromify wrote...

senorfuzzylips wrote...

But your opinion of Anders isn't going to change, so I'm not sure why I'm bothering. Feel free to hate him to your heart's content. You won't change our opinions either. Why not go gush in one of the Anders hate threads rather than make bad arguments here?

there's no hating; just trying to start a discussion. every post has been very unflamey 

Uh, his opener was:

Phenerios wrote...

Anders is such a tool. He thinks blowing up a bunch of innocent people makes his cause just. The truth of the matter is even the seeker says that the Champion's name becomes the rallying cry for the mage revolt not his. He ends up just being another fool I had to put down for being stupid.

And then he proceeded to say he didn't want provide insight, just express distaste for DA2 Anders. Sounds pretty hateful to me. I'll just bow out until the thread is back to kittens and shameboners.

Modifié par senorfuzzylips, 22 avril 2011 - 12:58 .

[ekurian]

0o-Constance-o0 wrote...

Oh my gaaaaaaawd not again

I no rite?

[Tyrium]

Anders certainly "regrets" it - he hates that he "had" to do it, and that innocent people died. Regrets is probably the wrong word, since he'd definitely do it again in the same circumstances, but he's not happy about it. He hates that he had to do what he did.

As for his lying to Hawke being backstabby - honestly, that was one of the things that bothered me most in the romance. But I think his motives depend greatly on your relationship with him - rivalry, he's stopping you interfering, and that is very betrayaly. Friendship, and he is protecting you from that guilt - not so much. I always go friendship, the whole relationship feels much less unhealthy that way.

+1 vote for kittens

Modifié par Tyrium, 22 avril 2011 - 12:59 .

[Dreaming-in-Shadow]

Camilladilla wrote...

Dreaming-in-Shadow wrote...

Phenerios wrote...

  So by your logic it would be ok for someone to blow up parliment, because they didn't like something an out of control general was doing?

  And the difference is she never even had intended for her or the relic to end up in Kirkwall, and thereby starting a chain events that were well beyond her control to fix by the time they came to the fore front. Where as Anders knew how things were going to play out. He can act like "but I didn't mean for this time happen.", but no one can nuke a building and not expect chaos to follow. He does make a statement about he knows there were innocents, but he says something to the effect that they were a neccesary sacrifice.

Grey Warden propoganda rubbing off? Kidding.
What was he supposed to do? Sit back while tensions get higher to the point where every living person in Kirkwall suffers in silence? (They can't speak out against the templars, the templars near enough rule Kirkwall.)

He can't do that anyway, not with Justice so closely tied to his soul.

As I pointed out several times: Kirkwall was going to turn into a warzone. If Anders hadn't acted, then perhaps the Right of Annulment would have been called and the mages would never have had a chance to fight back. Innocent people (including children) would die...

Pretty much this. If you speak with Karras right at the beginning of Act 3, he pretty much says that Meredith sent to the Divine for permission for the Right of Annulment. So, at the very start of Act 3, Meredith was planning on the wholesale slaughter of all the mages of the Gallows for...? 

Paranoia.

Meredith's take on the world is: "Blood magic! Blood magic everywhere!!!"

She's as damaged as Anders, if not more so.

[0o-Constance-o0]

Camilladilla wrote...

0o-Constance-o0 wrote...

Can we not all just hug and admit that everyone has a different opinion and stop making these ridiculous comparisons that hold little to no weight in the context of the story.

Why? It's more fun this way? 

Flame war will scare all the kittens away!

WONT SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE KITTENS