57020 réponses à ce sujet

[Ryzaki]

Yes the templars needed to rebel. Being turned into drug addicts? Ugh. I hate the Chantry. They do it the worst way possible.

And yeah too bad all the mages/templars were crazy.


by ~kyuubifred

Modifié par Ryzaki, 08 juin 2011 - 08:40 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Ryzaki wrote...
And yeah too bad all the mages/templars were crazy.

Too bad that Meredith decided to be lenient with Grace. Why?

[Jean]

Sucks they always assume that Hawke is supporting Meredith too :|

Modifié par Batteries, 08 juin 2011 - 08:41 .

[Ryzaki]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...
And yeah too bad all the mages/templars were crazy.

Too bad that Meredith decided to be lenient with Grace. Why?

 

That I will never understand. She tranquils the other suspected bloodmages but somehow misses Grace? The girlfriend of the bloodmage? Just...what?  

That's still not as bad as everyone in Hawke's party going "oh you're not a bloodmage? Yeah right." yet somehow Hawke ignores this.  

[KnightofPhoenix]

Ryzaki wrote...

That's still not as bad as everyone in Hawke's party going "oh you're not a bloodmage? Yeah right." yet somehow Hawke ignores this.  

I miss hating on Hawke with you <3

[Patriciachr34]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Patriciachr34 wrote...
@ KOP... back to disagreeing with you.  This isn't a war that was planned (like the build up to WWII).  This is more like the snowball thrown at a British soilder that started the American revolutionary war.  It took one violent reaction to an ongoing oppression (whether percieved or real) to bring a splintered population together.  The American forefathers were visionary not becasue they planned the rebellion, but because they took the opportunity to organize the rabble.  Anders was simply the snowball.  Now we need mage visionaries to bring this together.  Maybe that is DA3.

I am not dismissing the possibily that some mages could take up the rabble and make something out of what Anders did (though this is something he couldn't have foreseen without taking a huge leap of faith).

But I will give these people credit. Not him. And it's the former I will respect, and not the latter, especially considering his mental condition (that said, I sympathize).

Fair enough.

[Ryzaki]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
I miss hating on Hawke with you <3

 

S/he does have a lot of DERP moments that are fun to pick at.  All in good fun though. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 08 juin 2011 - 08:54 .

[CulturalGeekGirl]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

How did mages do it for thousands of years? Where did you get this?

The situation was ripe in Kirkwall like no where else (and its geo-political and commercial importance doens't make it as isolated as you seem to suggest). And Orlais or the Chantry invading is counter-productive and that could have been a much more powerful symbol needed to weaken the Chantry. Because it doesn't only involve mages. It involves a sovereign popular state being aggressed for no reason.

And part of being rational, is having realistic expectations and objectives. Thinking that you can change Thedas in one swift stroke, is what's painfully naive.

If you read all the historical stuff on the Chantry and the Mages, it becomes pretty apparent that the Mages have repeatedly tried to gain more freedom over the years, with the Divine stomping them back down again and again. The notable examples are: the Inquisitors hunting and killing mages, and the Chantry incorporating them into their structure as the Templars; one of the Divines reducing all mages to Chantry lamplighters; and the corruption of the circles from cooperative houses of learning into virtual prisons. There have been many times in the past where the mages have attempted peaceful change, but as long as the Chantry is controlling their organization and communication, they have no chance of unified success.

I have no idea what you are suggesting here about the situation Kirkwall. I don't see the RoA/Exalted March scenario we were heading toward shaking out positively for Mages. Even if the Chantry calls an exalted march on them, I don't see that causing the kind of unification you seem to believe it would (In history, Exalted marches pretty much involve all of the target's potential allies stepping aside and letting it happen, because you do not want to mess with that.) I think we just have different perceptions of the current Thedas-wide political climate... and sadly that is probably a case of too little information. (Also, it is a case of good design - the political climate of Thedas is meant to seem to be up-in-the-air between the Chantry and the NotChantry, because game three will probably be all about navigating that struggle... a struggle which is currently perfectly balanced, natch.)

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
All the things you suggest "mages" do are impossible, because "mages" aren't allowed to associate or organize in any significant way. The only way to get mages to the point where they CAN do that kind of thing is to cause the leaders of the circles to simultaneously see common cause and free themselves from the Templars to the extent that they are now allowed to communicate, both with each other and the outside world.

They can, it's called Fraternities. And they can have secrecy within those fraternities. Uldred pretty much oranized a rebellion without anyone noticing with the help of Loghain, and would have been able to make the entire Circle secede and join the Crown were it not for Wynne. Not the example I have in mind exactly (less demons), but something similar. That pretty much refutes your argument that mages can't possibly organize and get in touch with political strongmen. So I won't answer similar points you've made in your post.

It is possible. If the Chantry can't manage to control its most militarized Circle, it won't have that much luck elsewhere. And they can send messengers, they don't have to be mages. Merchants can do the trick.

This is why Tranquil mages are the only ones who are allowed to openly participate in Trade outside the Circle. And you can't just use Merchants... Karl used a serving maid and got tranquiled for it.

Yes it's possible to do some of this work on the down-low, but I simply do not believe it is possible for mages to put together a powerful enough organization to be worth allying with unless you get most of the circles involved at the same time. All the examples you can cite in history can't possibly refute my argument, because they have all failed (and failed without extending beyond their native country.) My argument is that, in order to organize a rebellion that is powerful enough to succeed without using blood magic and demons, you need some kind of triggered, unified uprising.

I believe that having multiple circles involved at the same time is the only way to allow the side of mages to be powerful enough without resorting to blood magic and demons, in. If the Chantry loses control of any single circle, they annul it (or Exalted March it, if the RoA doesn't work). That's why it has to be, in my mind, at least three circles simultaneously.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
Right now there are, at maximum, four free mages we know of who are openly free and have any access to political power in Kirkwall/Ferelden/Orlais (not counting Flemeth, and outside of Tevinter). The only way the mages can do any of the things you suggest is to make
the heads of the individual circles, the most sane and moderate of all
mages, realize they need to act; while also simultaneously giving them a
means to co-ordinate with each other by causing them to rise up against
the Chantry.

They don't have to have political power. They need to get in touch with the ones who do.

Actually, I wouldn't bet that much on Enchanters. They don't get to rise through the ranks by being anti-Chantry.
What needs to be done is a group of mages to get in contact with political strongmen and get deals. Loyalty in exchange for new rights.

And I never said all the Circles in Thedas can simultaneously coordinate, that's an empty dream.
It's only the vital Circles, in key countries (like Ferelden and Nevarra), that should have a semblance of coordination, in the sense they shoudl get in touch with the local authorites. This would also be part of a Nevarran-Ferelden alliance that I think is very likely to happen to counter-balance Orlais. Mages could suggest such an alliance.

I think that, in the post-chantry situation, any Loyalist first enchanters will likely be displaced, their organizing position taken over by Aequitarians or Libertarians in their circles. The fact that all the circles rose up rather than laying down and dying (in this case, literally!) is evidence of this.

This is another case where we vehemently disagree on what Mages have the freedom to do currently. The only reason Mages were able to get in touch with the King of Ferelden was a bizzarre twist-of-fate fluke where he was a Warden and the Wardens used the Right of Conscription to put the future King in a position where he was in contact with several mages in such a way that they had the ability to speak freely (I don't know what the Mage situation is in Ferelden if Alistair is not King. Do we have any information on that?)

I don't think Mages have the ability to suggest such alliances in any way that either the mages or the leaders could productively follow through on, unless the hold on the Mages by the Chantry is disrupted temporarily.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
The hope is that, at the end of all this, the result will be something moderate, a compromise between the views of the Aequitarians and the Libertarians, a more independent circle with a cooperative relationship with the Chantry and the Templars.

That is not likely to happen at all, because it assumes that the Chantry will accept the mages holding political power (or economic and military power), enough to equalize the relationship. why would the Chantry accept it?

The only way this could be achieved is if the state comes in and imposes its power in the equation to moderate the relationship. Cooperation can only happen between quals and mages cannot become equals to the Chantry on their own. The mages need allies and that's what Anders didnt' understand.

Again, I think that termporarily destabalizing the Chantry was the only way to gain allies. You disagree. I think that is our fundamental disconnect... I believe the mages are too constrained to organize an effective movement for peaceful change without some flashpoint temporarily loosening the Chantry's control, while you believe it is perfectly possible for the mages to engineer alliances with the state while under the Chantry's control, and that it has simply never occurred to them to try to do so before now.

Part of this is that I'm Genre Savvy, [WARNING: TVTROPES] and I think that JAnders may be, too, in his way. A world like Thedas isn't a world for subtle machinations... at least not while you have some Protagonists running around. While I would play the CRAP out of a game where you subtly manipulate the political forces of several kingdoms in an attempt to keep your revolutionary boyfriend from becoming hopeless and going insane, that's not the kind of universe they're living in. That's not the game we're playing. Nobody has as much access to the various levers you would need to be able to pull in order to achieve what you are suggesting, and I very much doubt that anyone will, because I can see the kind of world we're living in.

I guess I simply cannot accept that the mages have not acted thus far because they've just never... thought of it, never put thing and thing together. When they lucked the hell out and gained the support of the King of Ferelden, the Chantry just locked that circle down, leaving no way for the King and Circle to effectively collaborate, and then making Orlais poke at the King so he can't make any real concrete advances toward freeing the circle. 

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 08 juin 2011 - 09:09 .

[berelinde]

@CulturalGeekGirl: Curse you! I just spent far too long in TV Tropes-land, thanks to you! There ought to be a law, I tell you.

[Sialater]

She's articulating everything I'd like to say.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Ryzaki wrote...

ipgd wrote...

Given that Hawke is the only variable in the friendship/rivalry dichotomy, he's clearly influenced by Hawke's opinion of his merger with Justice and his cause.

Influenced enough to start questioning Justice which is enough to make Justice flip out. If Hawke gives him no reason to question Justice he doesn't. I see Hawke as asking him questions he didn't bother to look to closely at himself. Questions that were probably discouraged by Justice.

I am speaking of them as a collective entity and specifically attempting to avoid that argument :innocent: Even strictly separately speaking, it's his own negative self-perceptions regarding his relationship with Justice that bring his depression about.

I don't see them as a collective entity. Us not agreeing on that means as a result we're probably not gonna agree on anything else. Justice is a seperate being with different thoughts and ideals. Awakening made that perfectly clear. 

This isn't a dynamic between two beings but rather three. Trying to remove Justice from the equation is doing both him and Anders a disservice in my view.  

The idea that three entities can be one entity at the same time is really important to understanding Anders, I think. Comparative religion in useful here: the same way the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost form God; Clotho, Lachesis, and Atropos form Fate; and the Id, Ego, and Superego, form the Psyche; so do Justice, Anders, and Vengeance form Anders... (or JAnders, for the sake of clarity.)

I think that all three forces equally contribute to JAnders, who is a single entity.

For me, the Codex version where Ella lives is all about the Anders part of JAnders trying to suppress the other two parts and finding that he can't. Basically, it's him trying to go back to being Awakening Anders, who had the ability to ignore injustice when he sees it. But that ship has sailed... he'll never be back to the point where he can function like a normal human, because he's three things at the same time now, and all three have equal power.

In Friendmanced version, those three forces decide they have to compromise and reach consensus. In the Rivaled version, they just compete for dominance, with different parts achieving dominance at different times. (Whether Justice still exists apart from Vengeance is questionable... and I think it's left that way deliberately. I'm just arguing the trinity thing because it's convenient.)

So yes, the human who we once knew as Anders will never be in complete control again (unless there is a way to reverse the joining), and him making any attempt to do so is futile. It'd be like Clotho saying she was in charge of all fate... the string would get spun but there would never be any connections between strings, never any end to a single thread. One component of a component entity cannot rule over the others.

JAnders will always be three (or two) things. No single aspect of those things should indiscriminately rule over the other two, and the two ways we can deal with this is consensus or timesharing. In Frienship, we've encouraged the consensus path. In Rivalry, the timesharing.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 08 juin 2011 - 09:22 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
If you read all the historical stuff on the Chantry and the Mages, it becomes pretty apparent that the Mages have repeatedly tried to gain more freedom over the years, with the Divine stomping them back down again and again.

The only attempt I remember was with the Cathedral and then they willingly went to the Circle towers. I do not recall any other substantial attempt being mentionned, though I could be wrong. Could you perhaps link those codices?

I have no idea what you are suggesting here about the situation Kirkwall. I don't see the RoA/Exalted March scenario we were heading toward shaking out positively for Mages. Even if the Chantry calls an exalted march on them, I don't see that causing the kind of unification you seem to believe it would (In history, Exalted marches pretty much involve all of the target's potential allies stepping aside and letting it happen, because you do not want to mess with that.) I think we just have different perceptions of the current Thedas-wide political climate... and sadly that is probably a case of too little information.

Exalted Marches never happened on Andrastrian states, save Tevinter which is considered heretical in doctrine, and which rejected the rule of the Divine. For all intents and purposes, they are not considered real Andrastrians by the Chantry. Add to that all the historical baggage Tevinter has. The Dales didn't have allies, and neither did the Qunari (except human Qun converts).

And I didn't claim it would usher in an immediate unification throughout Thedas. But more like it would send ripple effets throughotu the region, alienate political forces from the Chantry and attract the sympathy of the common folk if maghes and allies work on propaganda. Kirkwall is not a small town in the middle of nowhere. It's the most important commercial hub in the Waking Sea.

This is why Tranquil mages are the only ones who are allowed to openly participate in Trade outside the Circle. And you can't just use Merchants... Karl used a serving maid and got tranquiled for it.

Bodahn passed through the Circle. Why can't he pass a message? Kirkwall is a militarized Circle, it's not like the others.

Yes it's possible to do some of this work on the down-low, but I simply do not believe it is possible for mages to put together a powerful enough organization to be worth allying with unless you get most of the circles involved at the same time. All the examples you can cite in history can't possibly refute my argument, because they have all failed (and failed without extending beyond their native country.) My argument is that, in order to organize a rebellion that is powerful enough to succeed without using blood magic and demons, you need some kind of triggered, unified uprising.

Uldred was very close to succeeding and his failure does not lie in his failure to organize or ally with political strongmen. But rather by Wynne's idiocy. I do not see why this cannot be replicated and improved upon, and which can involve several Circles (via local authorites allying to do so). The nature of his failure does not refute my argument at all and refutes yours when you claim that can't possibly organize or find allies.

Furthermore, you keep implying that all of Thedas' mages need to rise up at the same time. Something I do nto believe is necessary. All the vital Circles need to rise up. Only once they've secured an alliance with local authorites. Those local authorities (like Ferelden or Nevarra), do nto need an all powerful continent wide mage alliance, to think mages in their own territories are worth allying to. In fact, such a thing might scare them.

A unified and triggered uprising of mages won't matter if states, nobles and common folk feel threatened by it. Especially if mages start acting like Anders, Orsino and Resolutionists.

Because one again, mages are most vulnerable to possession and temptation when under stress. And now you are sending untrained mages to war and pushing them in a corner and expect them not to succumb to madness? Mages are almost certainly going to use blood magic and many are going to fall to demons.

I believe that having multiple circles involved at the same time is the only way to allow the side of mages to be powerful enough without resorting to blood magic and demons, in. If the Chantry loses control of any single circle, they annul it (or Exalted March it, if the RoA doesn't work). That's why it has to be, in my mind, at least three circles simultaneously.

3 Circles simultaenously can be defeated if the states they are in either do not do anything or side with the Chantry. Or if the populace start denouncing mage hiding places. You cannot wage a guerilla war (mages can't do otherwise), without popular support (and how do they aim to do that exactly now?). Furthermore, the Circles are isolated from each other, it's not like they can reinforce each other on short notice. This does not, at all, gaurantee or even makes it likely that mages won't resort to blood magic and demons.

Multiple Circles can and should be involved. But with a prior arrangement with the states in question. For instance, Nevarra and Ferelden, both of which have an interest in keepign Orlais down. Mages can suggest such an alliance and take advantage of it.

I think that, in the post-chantry situation, any Loyalist first enchanters will likely be displaced, their organizing position taken over by Aequitarians or Libertarians in their circles. The fact that all the circles rose up rather than laying down and dieing (in this case, literally!) is evidence of this.

How do you kow they are not being taking over by Resolutionists, who are the ones who wanted a violent uprising all along?

I don't think Mages have the ability to suggest such alliances in any way that either the mages or the leaders could productively follow through on, unless the hold on the Mages by the Chantry is disrupted temporarily.

Uldred and Loghain, and yes, it could have been productively followed on (the Circle agreed to secede and join Loghain, if Wynne didn't appear out of nowhere and that's the fluke of luck). And yes, I see no reason why it can't be replicated on a large scale, if it's the states in question making the rapprochement (with the Circles behind them as allies).

 Nobody has as much access to the various levers you would need to be able to pull in order to achieve what you are suggesting, and I very much doubt that anyone will, because I can see the kind of world we're living in.

If you're basing it on the incompetent PC we got to play in DA2, then yea it may seem as such. But I do not see any evidence that DA is not supposed to be as "political" as our world.  

EDIT: And it doens't have to be one person having all the levers. It could be one person allying with people who have those levers.

I guess I simply cannot accept that the mages have not acted thus far because they've just never... thought of it, never put thing and thing together.

Because maybe, like Anders, you don't want to believe that most mages are fine with the Circle or dont' want to violently force change before what happened in Kirkwall (and I believe they only revolted after the Templars cracked down on them). Aequitarians are pro-status quo and they have always been the majority. Lucrosians also want to work within the status quo. Loyalists are obviously pro-Chantry. Isolationists are mostly irrlevent. Only Libertarians had a semblance of anti-status quo and not all of them wanted violence (hence the rise of Resolutionists).

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 08 juin 2011 - 09:34 .

[kromify]

wow. that's not a wall of text; that's a mountain

[Ryzaki]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
The idea that three entities can be one entity at the same time is really important to understanding Anders, I think. Comparative religion in useful here: the same way the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost form God; Clotho, Lachesis, and Atropos form Fate; and the Id, Ego, and Superego, form the Psyche; so do Justice, Anders, and Vengeance form Anders... (or JAnders, for the sake of clarity.)

I think that all three forces equally contribute to JAnders, who is a single entity.

Yeah Janders fits more because Anders was an entity that didn't have (or in my view needed) Justice or Vengeance. 

I personally don't feel all three forced equally contribute. It's more of a case of vying for control over the body. What does Anders really need from Justice?  Drive? Ambition? Those things could've been achieved on his own. Extra power? Unless he intends on battling the templars on his own...not really necessary. And could've been achieved as a GW. (Which really begs the question why on earth was Fereldan letting the templars screw around with their Wardens in the first place?) 

For me, the Codex version where Ella lives is all about the Anders part of JAnders trying to suppress the other two parts and finding that he can't. Basically, it's him trying to go back to being Awakening Anders, who had the ability to ignore injustice when he sees it. But that ship has sailed... he'll never be back to the point where he can function like a normal human, because he's three things at the same time now, and all three have equal power.

I don't see all three having equal power. In my view Justice is gone. He's not there anymore. There's a good chance he'll never be back.There's just Vengeance(who thinks he's Justice) and Anders. The game is about them deciding to fight or merge and which direction Hawke helps Anders move in. The codex with Ella dying is all about them fighting each other for control. The templar ending where Anders shoves off Vengeance (I use Vengeance and Justice interchangeably) long enough to annull the circle and still comments on them fighting for control. The two of them don't have equal power (I see Vengeance as being the stronger. Anders only has a slight advantage because he's the host so he can push back Vengeance for a time.) Maybe with time and effort Anders can get to be Vengeance's equal. 

In Friendmanced version, those three forces decide they have to compromise and reach consensus. In the Rivaled version, they just compete for dominance, with different parts achieving dominance at different times. (Whether Justice still exists apart from Vengeance is questionable... and I think it's left that way deliberately. I'm just arguing the trinity thing because it's convenient.)

So yes, the human who we once knew as Anders will never be in complete control again (unless there is a way to reverse the joining), and him making any attempt to do so is futile. It'd be like Clotho saying she was in charge of all fate... the string would get spun but there would never be any connections between strings, never any end to a single thread. One component of a component entity cannot rule over the others.

JAnders will always be three (or two) things. No single aspect of those things should indiscriminately rule over the other two, and the two ways we can deal with this is consensus or timesharing. In Frienship, we've encouraged the consensus path. In Rivalry, the timesharing.

 

Yeah it's more of a duality in my view than a trinity. Justice IS Vengeance now. He might be able to be reverted but it's not likely. (The above is all of course my opinion. I shouldn't have to say it but yeah) 

That said Anders might never be in complete control again (he'll always be fighting Vengeance until there's someway to split the two of them) like you said. My issue is they aren't in my view a component entity. They're two seperate beings being forced to be one. It in my view is possible for Anders to rule over Justice. They don't require each other to function. (Justice/Vengeance require Anders to make their plans possible not the other way around). Trying to force them to split maybe a futile effort but for Anders humanity it is something worth trying.I view Justice/Vengeance as a parasite Anders let in thinking it was something beneficial. (Frankly I don't know why anyone would let any thinking creature fully merge with them and give that creature access to all their secrets and body. I find that to be monmenutally foolish. There are things about you (not you in specific but you in a general sense) that no one else should ever know, things that you might not even be ready to learn about yourself why would anyone let someone else see that? I just...I can't comprehend. It's a recipe for disaster. That's just me though.)   

As for Janders always being two things yes there's a good chance Vengeance will always be inside of him. I however diagree about a single aspect indiscriminately ruling over the other two. The original Anders should rule over Justice because frankly Justice is too narrowminded and one note to function well in the real world. He's a spirit not a human being. His views are tempered by the Fade and not how things work in Thedas. The inability to ignore Justice isn't a virtue in my view there will always be injustice and attempting to end all the injustice in the world at one time is a futile effort. You'll cause more problems than you'll solve. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 08 juin 2011 - 09:54 .

[kromify]

good night elle :-) i am feeling quite sleepy too

[KnightofPhoenix]

ElleMullineux wrote...

Just a quick note before bedtime here in the UK, re the number of circles needed for an effective revolution.

As I see it from the codicies, you're not trying to swing individual circles, Anders is aiming to sway the balance of power at the College of Magi (the parliment/government for all circles). The loyalists/Aequtarians have control at the moment, and due to Anders actions and the subsequent actions of the circles it would seem that balance shifted to the Aequtarians/Libertarians. Thus achieving what he set out to do.

Each circle would then react I imagine depending on what their dominant fraternity is/was. Those with strong loyalists tendancies being late comers/ reluctantantly to the revolution.

It's not clear. It's equally possible that the Circles all became resolutionists or sympathetic with resolutionists.

And I do not believe that all mage circles rising up at the same time have that much chance of winning. If they do not get allies, they will lose. If all states decide to band with the Chantry and deal with mages, they will lose. Will they cause a lot of damage and blood? Yea. Imo, not enough to win and more importantly, nto enough to build something after winning.

If DA2 is any indication, the circle mages are completely and utterly idiotic when it comes to war (and very vulnerable to demons). And they cannot hope to fight a guerilla war without allies in the populace. 

And goodnight

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 08 juin 2011 - 09:48 .

[elenilote]

@elle - *Mwah* good night mah dear

[esper]

It doesn't really matter whereever the mages win or lose the war because the mage/templar system no longer is. (The circles burned and the the templars rebelleded). The worst case scenerio is that the mages lose the war and is all killed and all children with magic will be hunted by the templars in the future, but the templars is apperently a rouge organization and thus I doubt that the circles will ever be rebuild. So even if mages are hated and hunted forever some will always even in the worst case scenerio survive (because there will always be a mother not ready to hand her child over to certain death), and even if the apostates curses Anders and Hawke to the Void, they would be free - perhaps not happy or secure, but free which I guess was Anders' goal. (Sorry for my spelling it is late here too)

[KnightofPhoenix]

ElleMullineux wrote...
No, the codices are not clear, and probably intentionally so - however the majority IS an Aequtarian/loyalist coalition. (In UK politics at least the need for a coalition suggests the main opposition have enough strength to seriously threaten the main party - therefore Libertarians could already be a real force to reckon with at the College of Magi). The reason for them not acting previously in any coherent form is getting the level of agreement required at their own government.  And they do suggest that the Libertarians are gaining power. The Resolutionists are a more militarised arm of the Libertarians who could be said to be acting without the approval of the main body of the Libertarians. If the mages want to gain realistic support, and support within their own people it'll be the Libertarian stance that will gain that for them.

What I meant is that even if they were a majority Aequitarian / loyalist coalition prior to these events, what happened might have caused mages, specifically the youth, to leave their fraternities and join the Resolutionists.
Or the Aequitarians became Resolutionist sympathizers. Anders wants mages to radicalize and that could be precisely what happened.

Fraternities are not set in stone. Their members can leave for another group or become sympathizer to another group.

Ultimately, Anders hopes the mages will win, but is okay (at least abstractly) with the idea that they would be wiped out fighting for their freedom.

I would have preferred Anders hoping and actively tryng his best to make sure mages stand a chance at winning.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

By the way, thanks to everyone who has told me they enjoy reading my stuff. I worry sometimes that I'm just pointlessly pointificating here. (I'm hoping to start blogging about ME and DA2 properly again soon, rather than just posting here because it's easy, hehe.)

Ryzaki wrote...

As for Janders always being two things yes there's a good chance Vengeance will always be inside of him. I however diagree about a single aspect indiscriminately ruling over the other two. The original Anders should rule over Justice because frankly Justice is too narrowminded and one note to function well in the real world. He's a spirit not a human being. His views are tempered by the Fade and not how things work in Thedas. The inability to ignore Justice isn't a virtue in my view there will always be injustice and attempting to end all the injustice in the world at one time is a futile effort. You'll cause more problems than you'll solve. 

I'll just respond to this quickly while I contemplate climbing KoP's mountain.

I agree that Anders should have more pull over JAnders' decisions than Vengeance, I just don't think pissing Vengeance off is the way to do this. I think that getting Anders to calm down, stop hating Vengeance, and let go of his own anger is the way to go. A lot of the problem here is that Hawke doesn't know pre-Justice Anders. Anders can say that his own anger and hate twisted Justice, but there's no real way for Hawke to grasp what this means (well, I'm not saying it's impossible, more that it's understandable that he fails to grasp it in the context of the story.) Anders and Justice both have problems, and Anders needs to deal with his own to give Vengeance a chance to morph back into Justice.

My big facepalm-worthy, too-cute solution to all of this is convincing Justice that he isn't being fair to Anders. He's asking too much of him, destroying him with guilt, and it isn't fair to do that to a mortal man and a friend. I'm not sure if this is still possible. I think the Warden and Hawke could do it working together, but I don't think the shape of the story required for a video game will offer that opportunity.

I do think that Justice was "necessary," for some very weird values of necessary. Justice gave Anders agency, both the ability to act and the will to act. Without either Justice or the Warden's active support, Anders would never have been able to make the kind of differences he did... he would always have been more motivated by his own freedom and survival than the injustice of the world. It was in his fundamental nature.

I don't think that joining in the way they did was a good idea, especially not given what they became. But all my arguments today hinge on the idea that something that can be a very, very bad idea for some people may be a good idea in the long run for most people. Basically, without knowing it, Anders sold his identity, his stability, and any chance of future happiness for the chance that someday, in the future, someone like him would have a chance to end up with the pretty girl, good meal, and right to shoot lightning at fools. I view him as a Sydney Carton figure, essentially.  It is a far, far better thing he does than he has ever done.

[KnightofPhoenix]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
I'll just respond to this quickly while I contemplate climbing KoP's mountain.

....

eherm..nothing...no, my mind didn't go anywhere at all.

[SurelyForth]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
I'll just respond to this quickly while I contemplate climbing KoP's mountain.

....

eherm..nothing...no, my mind didn't go anywhere at all.

For you...

Modifié par SurelyForth, 08 juin 2011 - 10:24 .