57020 réponses à ce sujet

[Rinji the Bearded]

ElleMullineux wrote...

Hawke is the catalyst in whatever path you choose.
1. Anders would most likely have been killed/recaptured when he went for Karl otherwise.
2. Hawke finds crazy lyrium idol in the deep roads, followed by a lyrium sword on the secondary quest.
3. Hawke exudes hero aura which means that people that would have left town a lot earlier stick around, and plans begin to fester.

Edit
And it's my perception that the seekers think that Hawke did it/ masterminded it all, they weren't aware of Ander's involvement.

Cassandra spits his name out with venom, so I'm sure many people know of his involvement.  Also, Varric seems to be sorry for introducing the two of them.

EDIT FOR TOP:  Anders is a little surprised by the serious and civil discussion going on!

Modifié par RinjiRenee, 05 mai 2011 - 05:43 .

[dpMeggers]

[quote]Patriciachr34 wrote...

I know there is a case to be made for Anders the terrorist, but it is my impression that Anders was not trying to terrorize and intimidiate a population.  Nor was he trying to destroy and rebuild all of the moires of a society.  He was trying to escalate a conflict by removing the one thing that was keeping "the lid on the pot", that being Althena and the Chantry (the Chantry being a symbol of opression for mages).  In essence, he was trying bring about change for one group of people within a society and not destroy that society as a whole.  I beleive that this distinction is important here. [/quote]

[/quote]

From the Oxford English Dictionary:
terrorism: the unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.

The Chantry explosion was unofficial/unauthorized insofar as no governing body gave the command for it to happen. Violence was most certainly used - the building was obliterated. The intent of the action was to kickstart a war between the Chantry in the form of templars and mages so that the mages finally fight for their rights, which can be deemed a political aim, given that the Chantry does sort of govern most of southern Thedas from the background.

From the Oxford English Dictionary: 
terrorist: a person who uses terrorism in the pursuit of political aims.

Anders certainly used terrorism (see above) in the pursuit of political aims - mage freedom. I would say that what he did certainly is a textbook case of an act of terrorism. Thus Anders is a terrorist.

Modifié par dpMeggers, 05 mai 2011 - 05:45 .

[Dunizel]

Dreaming-in-Shadow wrote...


At the root of the issue, there are several people to blame:
*snip*

I may have forgotten some.

Velanna too.

Meh, Hawke should have really locked him up with the excuse of the templars and stalk him wherever he went. So that he could see less "inujustice" and in case it happene, Hawke could help him fix it on the spot. 
Especially if Anders lives with you, Hawke is way too much easygoing, he/she should have checked on him more...and probably Anders wouldn't even have minded.

I don't care if Anders doesn't want to get me involved, I would have liked A LOT to know what this mage underground activity was about. This game doesn't show us enough, we are here arguing on assumption and opinions...I would like to know what renewed Anders' interest in the cause, and why he decided that was the time for action, Justice/Vengeance impulse aside.

[Dreaming-in-Shadow]

Dunizel wrote...

Dreaming-in-Shadow wrote...


At the root of the issue, there are several people to blame:
*snip*

I may have forgotten some.

Velanna too.

Meh, Hawke should have really locked him up with the excuse of the templars and stalk him wherever he went. So that he could see less "inujustice" and in case it happene, Hawke could help him fix it on the spot. 
Especially if Anders lives with you, Hawke is way too much easygoing, he/she should have checked on him more...and probably Anders wouldn't even have minded.

I don't care if Anders doesn't want to get me involved, I would have liked A LOT to know what this mage underground activity was about. This game doesn't show us enough, we are here arguing on assumption and opinions...I would like to know what renewed Anders' interest in the cause, and why he decided that was the time for action, Justice/Vengeance impulse aside.

Damn straight!
We were barely allowed to see any of the two sides.
Templar!Carver and Circle!Bethany got to see them, but Hawke is a hedge-mage or a non-mage, and has never experienced the circle.

Meredith's attempts at showing us what her recruits go through explained nothing.

We were forced to take a side, without really knowing the side we'd taken.

[dpMeggers]

RinjiRenee wrote...

ElleMullineux wrote...

Hawke is the catalyst in whatever path you choose.
1. Anders would most likely have been killed/recaptured when he went for Karl otherwise.
2. Hawke finds crazy lyrium idol in the deep roads, followed by a lyrium sword on the secondary quest.
3. Hawke exudes hero aura which means that people that would have left town a lot earlier stick around, and plans begin to fester.

Edit
And it's my perception that the seekers think that Hawke did it/ masterminded it all, they weren't aware of Ander's involvement.

Cassandra spits his name out with venom, so I'm sure many people know of his involvement.  Also, Varric seems to be sorry for introducing the two of them.

EDIT FOR TOP:  Anders is a little surprised by the serious and civil discussion going on!
*Snip Anders Shock*

I don't know why he should be. Even if this is the internet, this thread sort of has a record for calm debates with people stepping out when things get heated.

As for the Seekers, my impression seems to be that Cassandra thinks that Hawke (or Hawke and Bethany) came to Kirkwall with Anders (at some point she says something to the effect of I thought they all came from Ferelden together) to spread subversion against the Chantry, and when that didn't work, just blew stuff up.

Presumably on a pro-templar path they figure Anders blew stuff up to start the war and Hawke joined the templars to make the rest of the world see how brutal they can be?

[Ryzaki]

Dreaming-in-Shadow wrote...
Damn straight!
We were barely allowed to see any of the two sides.
Templar!Carver and Circle!Bethany got to see them, but Hawke is a hedge-mage or a non-mage, and has never experienced the circle.

Meredith's attempts at showing us what her recruits go through explained nothing.

We were forced to take a side, without really knowing the side we'd taken.

This is my biggest issue with the game. 

[Dreaming-in-Shadow]

Ryzaki wrote...

Dreaming-in-Shadow wrote...
Damn straight!
We were barely allowed to see any of the two sides.
Templar!Carver and Circle!Bethany got to see them, but Hawke is a hedge-mage or a non-mage, and has never experienced the circle.

Meredith's attempts at showing us what her recruits go through explained nothing.

We were forced to take a side, without really knowing the side we'd taken.

This is my biggest issue with the game. 

Maybe DA3 will continue Hawke's story (with imported LIs! Shutup I can dream!) and depending on your choices in DA2, it'll show you more depth as to the side you've taken?

Yeaaaah. That's totally going to happen. <_<

[Skithus]

I fight this out with my boyfriend all the time...he will never kill Anders, and has a solid Bromance going on with him.  I can never NOT kill Anders.  That being said, I can also never side with the Templars, because I agree with Anders' cause- I believe that the templars are oppressive, that mages need to be treated like human beings, and that you can't punish an entire group for the actions of a few.
That's the problem with what Anders did- his whole argument has always been that they were treating every single mage as a blood mage and an abomination.  They locked up the guilty and the innocent alike, because they would rather punish the innocent than risk letting the guilty walk free.  He understands, and indeed devotes his life, to the idea that it is unjust to punish the innocent for the actions of others, just because of association or proximity.  His personal fight is for the freedom of mages, because that is close to home for him, but the principles on which he bases his ideals are pretty basic- It's wrong to punish someone for what they MIGHT do, and it's wrong to punish someone for something that someone else did.  He wanted each mage judged individually- he had just as harsh a view of blood mages and abominations as the chantry did. 

When he blew up the chantry, you're standing in lowtown, and there is still debris and rubble in the streets from the explosion.  If you look on a map...that's half the city that got littered with flaming chunks of stone.  And in the cut scene, you can see all of the surrounding buildings catch fire.  How many people do you think died who had nothing to do with the chantry- how many kids were playing in the streets when the debris came raining down?  How many normal citizens- workmen, housewives, merchants- who have no concern other than just surviving every day were killed to force this war?

So- is it ok to kill or opress innocents for the greater good, or is it not? If it is ok, then he has no argument against the Templars because they're adhering to HIS standards in how they deal with the mages.  If it's not ok, then he's violating everything he stands for by blowing up the chantry and killing who knows how many people in the surrounding town.  The only way that it makes sense is if he believes that it's wrong to opress innocent mages, but everyone else is fair game if it means helping mages.

The problem with his idea of justice, is that he is so focused on attaining it for one particular group, that he has blinders on to the rest of the world.  He doesn't care how many injustices need to happen to other people, as long as it brings about justice for HIS people.

[Dunizel]

My only side was : I don't want to kill people who didn't blow the Chantry.
They might have done something else, I don't know, but still I don't want to punish them.
I just wanted to stop Meredith, I can't even honestly say I was against every templar...I wasn't. I was with Thrask for example and let's not talk about Grance, please.

But still, the game thinks I sided with mages or templars...meh.

[nekhbet]

dpMeggers wrote...

Patriciachr34 wrote...

I know there is a case to be made for Anders the terrorist, but it is my impression that Anders was not trying to terrorize and intimidiate a population.  Nor was he trying to destroy and rebuild all of the moires of a society.  He was trying to escalate a conflict by removing the one thing that was keeping "the lid on the pot", that being Althena and the Chantry (the Chantry being a symbol of opression for mages).  In essence, he was trying bring about change for one group of people within a society and not destroy that society as a whole.  I beleive that this distinction is important here.

From the Oxford English Dictionary:
terrorism: the unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.

The Chantry explosion was unofficial/unauthorized insofar as no governing body gave the command for it to happen. Violence was most certainly used - the building was obliterated. The intent of the action was to kickstart a war between the Chantry in the form of templars and mages so that the mages finally fight for their rights, which can be deemed a political aim, given that the Chantry does sort of govern most of southern Thedas from the background.

From the Oxford English Dictionary: 
terrorist: a person who uses terrorism in the pursuit of political aims.

Anders certainly used terrorism (see above) in the pursuit of political aims - mage freedom. I would say that what he did certainly is a textbook case of an act of terrorism. Thus Anders is a terrorist.

Yups. Should also add that it says nothing about the morality of terrorism. It's a tool, used by both revered revolutionaries and freedom fighters as well as those considered enemies. Gosh, the word has suffered quite a devaluation in the past years...

But me, I'm a terroirist. *Corks another bottle of Burgundy pinot noir*

Oh damn, the Fenris thread is the right place for this kind of jokes...

Modifié par nekhbet, 05 mai 2011 - 06:02 .

[Ryzaki]

Dreaming-in-Shadow wrote...
Maybe DA3 will continue Hawke's story (with imported LIs! Shutup I can dream!) and depending on your choices in DA2, it'll show you more depth as to the side you've taken?

Yeaaaah. That's totally going to happen. <_<

 

Would be nice. 

Especially the imported LIs bit.

[Dreaming-in-Shadow]

Skithus wrote...

I fight this out with my boyfriend all the time...he will never kill Anders, and has a solid Bromance going on with him.  I can never NOT kill Anders.  That being said, I can also never side with the Templars, because I agree with Anders' cause- I believe that the templars are oppressive, that mages need to be treated like human beings, and that you can't punish an entire group for the actions of a few.
That's the problem with what Anders did- his whole argument has always been that they were treating every single mage as a blood mage and an abomination.  They locked up the guilty and the innocent alike, because they would rather punish the innocent than risk letting the guilty walk free.  He understands, and indeed devotes his life, to the idea that it is unjust to punish the innocent for the actions of others, just because of association or proximity.  His personal fight is for the freedom of mages, because that is close to home for him, but the principles on which he bases his ideals are pretty basic- It's wrong to punish someone for what they MIGHT do, and it's wrong to punish someone for something that someone else did.  He wanted each mage judged individually- he had just as harsh a view of blood mages and abominations as the chantry did. 

When he blew up the chantry, you're standing in lowtown, and there is still debris and rubble in the streets from the explosion.  If you look on a map...that's half the city that got littered with flaming chunks of stone.  And in the cut scene, you can see all of the surrounding buildings catch fire.  How many people do you think died who had nothing to do with the chantry- how many kids were playing in the streets when the debris came raining down?  How many normal citizens- workmen, housewives, merchants- who have no concern other than just surviving every day were killed to force this war?

So- is it ok to kill or opress innocents for the greater good, or is it not? If it is ok, then he has no argument against the Templars because they're adhering to HIS standards in how they deal with the mages.  If it's not ok, then he's violating everything he stands for by blowing up the chantry and killing who knows how many people in the surrounding town.  The only way that it makes sense is if he believes that it's wrong to opress innocent mages, but everyone else is fair game if it means helping mages.

The problem with his idea of justice, is that he is so focused on attaining it for one particular group, that he has blinders on to the rest of the world.  He doesn't care how many injustices need to happen to other people, as long as it brings about justice for HIS people.

He did say that there was not a single person in Kirkwall he wouldn't kill to see mages free.

Of course, he also said that those innocent people would also deserve justice.
I think allowing Hawke to kill him - the one responsible for those deaths - was Justice and Anders' way of giving Justice to those he'd sacrificed in the name of his cause.

[Rinji the Bearded]

Ryzaki wrote...

Dreaming-in-Shadow wrote...

We were forced to take a side, without really knowing the side we'd taken.

This is my biggest issue with the game. 

Because Hawke was always all-knowing and omniscient, right...

[SidheKate]

Skithus wrote...
So- is it ok to kill or opress innocents for the greater good, or is it not? If it is ok, then he has no argument against the Templars because they're adhering to HIS standards in how they deal with the mages.  If it's not ok, then he's violating everything he stands for by blowing up the chantry and killing who knows how many people in the surrounding town.  The only way that it makes sense is if he believes that it's wrong to opress innocent mages, but everyone else is fair game if it means helping mages.

Actually, he expects to die for his crime. His author even indicated that Anders would find his death to be a just outcome - giving peace to the families of the victims knowing that their loved-one's killer had been appropriately punished.

That doesn't change his opinion of what he believes he has to do.  After years of struggling, nothing else stopped the situation.  Since he could not prevent it from spiraling out of control, he pushed it over the edge.  His acceptance of a punishment also implies he might do the same in Hawke’s position.

Edit for font badness.

Modifié par SidheKate, 05 mai 2011 - 06:07 .

[Ryzaki]

RinjiRenee wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Dreaming-in-Shadow wrote...

We were forced to take a side, without really knowing the side we'd taken.

This is my biggest issue with the game. 

Because Hawke was always all-knowing and omniscient, right...

...And did I say Hawke had to be?  

Oh noes. I'd prefer more background information before making a choice. Ra forbid. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 05 mai 2011 - 06:07 .

[Dreaming-in-Shadow]

RinjiRenee wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Dreaming-in-Shadow wrote...

We were forced to take a side, without really knowing the side we'd taken.

This is my biggest issue with the game. 

Because Hawke was always all-knowing and omniscient, right...

Just a little insight into the mages proclaimed suffering would be nice! (Insight that is not coming from a biased fruit-cake like Anders (love you sweetie) or Psycho-b*ch-Grace.)

[Rinji the Bearded]

Ryzaki wrote...

RinjiRenee wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Dreaming-in-Shadow wrote...

We were forced to take a side, without really knowing the side we'd taken.

This is my biggest issue with the game. 

Because Hawke was always all-knowing and omniscient, right...

...And did I say Hawke had to be?  

You said you took issue with Hawke not knowing the side they'd taken.  How could he/she really have?

[Dreaming-in-Shadow]

On a quick unrelated post (yet still on topic according to my signature) DA2 has left me subconsiously spelling justice with a capital "J".

[Ryzaki]

RinjiRenee wrote...

You said you took issue with Hawke not knowing the side they'd taken.  How could he/she really have?

I would've simply preferred more background information. That's all I meant. This is a game. If  the devs wanted us to have additional background information they could've given it to us in a way that made sense in the narrative. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 05 mai 2011 - 06:10 .

[SmilingDeceit]

Dreaming-in-Shadow wrote...

At the root of the issue, there are several people to blame:

Anders
Justice
Hawke - Through encouragement or grating on Justice's nerves.
Nathaniel - for giving them that bloody stupid idea.
The Warden - Caused their meeting
Elthina - Through inaction
Meredith - Through her own extreme actions.
The bastard who took Pounce away

I may have forgotten some.

And, right at the very heart of the matter:
The Chantry/Circle and the Tevinter Imperium mess (or so we're lead to believe).

The Warden deserves more blame.

Yes, though the WC they meet. But the discussions the Warden has with Justice really just drives home my belief that Awakening was more about convincing Justice to merge, and not about the Architect/Mother problem.

Heck, one of the conversations you can have with Justice at the Keep starts off with Justice stating "This world is nothing like I thought it would be." To which your Warden can tell him "Perhaps you should help us, instead."

Thanks a lot Warden. <_<

[Dreaming-in-Shadow]

SmilingDeceit wrote...

The Warden deserves more blame.

Yes, though the WC they meet. But the discussions the Warden has with Justice really just drives home my belief that Awakening was more about convincing Justice to merge, and not about the Architect/Mother problem.

Heck, one of the conversations you can have with Justice at the Keep starts off with Justice stating "This world is nothing like I thought it would be." To which your Warden can tell him "Perhaps you should help us, instead."

Thanks a lot Warden. <_<

It's a bit like Hawke again I suppose. How was the Warden to know he/she'd start this?

Over in Amaranthine come act III, two Wardens were facepalming.

[Rinji the Bearded]

Ryzaki wrote...

RinjiRenee wrote...

You said you took issue with Hawke not knowing the side they'd taken.  How could he/she really have?

I would've simply preferred more background information. That's all I meant. This is a game. If  the devs wanted us to have additional background information they could've given it to us in a way that made sense in the narrative. 

I had no problem inferring the situation for my Hawke.  Choosing mages means revolution.  Choosing templars means choosing the status quo.

[Dreaming-in-Shadow]

RinjiRenee wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

RinjiRenee wrote...

You said you took issue with Hawke not knowing the side they'd taken.  How could he/she really have?

I would've simply preferred more background information. That's all I meant. This is a game. If  the devs wanted us to have additional background information they could've given it to us in a way that made sense in the narrative. 

I had no problem inferring the situation for my Hawke.  Choosing mages means revolution.  Choosing templars means choosing the status quo.

Garrett would like an option to grab Anders and run like hell for Izzy's boat.