57019 réponses à ce sujet

[Arquen]

But... but... then you would have to murder Justice. I love Justice. Also, I don't think Anders would go along with that plan since Justice offered him the bargain and he took it. Recently we learned from DG that it might be possible to split Justice and Anders, but it depends on their willingness to do so. If it is the willingness to "kill" one another to become separate I don't think either one would be willing.

If it is simply willingness to want to separate than I think it still might not be possible because they are so attached to each other, but more plausible because they won't have to necessarily murder one another.

Also, what I found most interesting was that Connor and the demon were still two seperate entities in the fade. When you take Anders to the fade he is indeed one merged being, not two. Even though it is Justice who is present, he is still talking through and manipulating and living in Anders' body. That in itself shows how closely merged their consciousness already is. I think.

@Naqey -- you had it spot on. I think the same thing about literary and philosophical analysis of books and literature and generally all things media. I don't much care for the political drama coming into it. I am not totally l'art pour though, LOL. I don't mind people using political figures, quotes, and rationales as similarities to the game world. I just don't care about real world "stuff" crossing over into my fandoms. Honestly, I get enough political science and debates about real world problems in the real world. I come here to unwind with my fantasy obsessions, LOL. Plus I simply don't believe that real world examples should be taken as facts to support a fictional game mechanic or plot or person or what have you. Pointing out similarities is fine, but it doesn't need to be used as an allegory or proof. It just seems to muddle it further, as I said.

Lastly, the kiss thing -- I think it would be fantastic if it were a "Hawke" option. If we are being honest... I have never actually played the Anders romance. I have watched it all on YouTube, and seen all outcomes/dialogues/options, but I find even watching it I get that same sort of sensation that I want ... more. To me it seems if you are going to go with the "lets be apostates on the run -- alone against the world!" ending than you should have a kiss to seal the deal. I understand how hurt and angry Hawkes are, but if you don't break up with him you are essentially signing the rest of your life over to him at that point because you love him. Your agreeing to go on this wild ride for as long as it lasts and damn everything that gets in your way. So I think there should be a kiss. However, everyone plays their Hawkes differently so to make it a Hawke specific dialogue would be a great solution to the problem. Alas, I doubt it will ever happen, and that rivalry kiss is just too sad! I couldn't headcanon that. It is the kiss of death.. the kiss goodbye.. the ultimate ... "well.. this is it.." too sad...

Edit: crap -- unprepared TOP .. ummm.. digs around.. An oldie but goodie??

Edit #2: totally 'ed -- Oh well.. my post still stands, LOL.


by emmav on DA

Modifié par Arquen, 29 septembre 2011 - 05:36 .

[Melca36]

@CulturalGeekGirl

I think you're definitely right about having biases.

I am beginning to realize my hatred of the Chantry stems partly from my experience of being in a Catholic School from Grades 1-8 before going to a public school.

I am very anti religion. I think religion causes alot of problems in this world and thats why I've only done two Templar playthroughs

[CulturalGeekGirl]

I want to make it clear that I wasn't saying it's just the sociopolitical aspects that I'm most interested in discussing... but rather that there are realities in the text that a lot of people who want to participate in the discussion are fundamentally unable to process.

For example: if you argue that Elthina has absolutely no influence over Meredith and was not functionally in charge of her or responsible for her actions in any way, then you've failed to grasp a very central and important fact of the story. It would be like someone arguing that Claudius didn't try to have Hamlet killed... that plot point in the play is subtle, but if you miss it and refuse to even consider that it happened when someone quotes the text at you, then you're just fundamentally mentally incapable of participating in a debate about Hamlet.

The fact that Elthina is a sweet old lady instead of Dolores Umbridge or Granny Goodness is important, because it relates directly to the "trick" the Chantry has been pulling with its PR for centuries. The Chantry's public face is a bunch of kindly old women who really do genuinely seem to want to help the helpless and provide comfort and honesty to people... as long as those people don't happen to be "born wrong."

I'm incredibly frustrated by people's fundamental inability to process this stuff, because these themes are as important to the story as anything else.

Edit: and I'm not fundamentally anti-religion. Actually, I get so very angry because I think that preaching the hatred or oppression of a people is against the fundamental purpose of religion. I was raised in a church that I did not know at the time was the most progressive mainstream church in the U.S. (our head pastor was regularly perfoming gay weddings as early as the 90s), so I never associated religion with denying other people rights, and am very frustrated that a thing that was such an unrelentingly positive and loving force in my life is such a painful and negative force in other peoples' lives.  That's the central debate that it's impossible to have civilly, though: is it OK to forgive a religion for spreading bigotry and hatred if the rest of the religion's net effect on society is positive?

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 29 septembre 2011 - 05:56 .

[Melca36]

See thats the thing @CulturalGeekGirl ----

Look what Elthina says if a dwarf ended the Blight.

And if you don't worship the Maker...you are branded a Heathen

[CulturalGeekGirl]

That's another problem, though... the conflict ends up couched as one of religion vs. no religion, which it isn't. Nobody ever even seems to consider the possibility of a new form of Andrasteism that retains all the positive qualities while removing the hatred, bigotry, and apartheid. It's all either "well, religion is good so we have to put up with the bad things" or "religion is bad, rawrrawrrawr." Nobody seems to think you can have your cake and eat it too, but you totally can. I've eaten that cake, and I still have it. Anders mentions it early on, but he seems to lose hope as he fails to encounter anyone who is both devout and open-minded.

[phaonica]

Arquen wrote...

But... but... then you would have to murder Justice. I love Justice. Also, I don't think Anders would go along with that plan since Justice offered him the bargain and he took it. Recently we learned from DG that it might be possible to split Justice and Anders, but it depends on their willingness to do so. If it is the willingness to "kill" one another to become separate I don't think either one would be willing.

If it is simply willingness to want to separate than I think it still might not be possible because they are so attached to each other, but more plausible because they won't have to necessarily murder one another.

Even a rival Anders that seems suicidal? (I haven't rivaled Anders yet so I don't know quite how he acts.)

And correct me if I'm wrong, but can't you make Connor not-possessed-anymore even if you don't kill the demon, but make a new deal with her or send her away?

Also, what I found most interesting was that Connor and the demon were still two seperate entities in the fade. When you take Anders to the fade he is indeed one merged being, not two. Even though it is Justice who is present, he is still talking through and manipulating and living in Anders' body. That in itself shows how closely merged their consciousness already is. I think.

Maybe there is some fundamental difference between spirit possession (like Anders and Wynne) and demon possession (like Connor).

[TastesLikeTNT]

phaonica wrote...

And correct me if I'm wrong, but can't you make Connor not-possessed-anymore even if you don't kill the demon, but make a new deal with her or send her away?

Indeed! Threaten her into submission, then send her on her merry way. You can even squeeze some talent points out of her, but I think your persuasion needs to be very high.

Maybe there is some fundamental difference between spirit possession (like Anders and Wynne) and demon possession (like Connor).

According to David Gaider, there is.

Modifié par TastesLikeTNT, 29 septembre 2011 - 06:52 .

[LobselVith8]

phaonica wrote...

Even a rival Anders that seems suicidal? (I haven't rivaled Anders yet so I don't know quite how he acts.)

And correct me if I'm wrong, but can't you make Connor not-possessed-anymore even if you don't kill the demon, but make a new deal with her or send her away?

The Warden can sucessfully coerce the Desire Demon into leaving Connor alone and providing knowledge about blood magic (or another favor) in exchange for not killing her.

phaonica wrote...

Maybe there is some fundamental difference between spirit possession (like Anders and Wynne) and demon possession (like Connor).

Perhaps, since it even seems Wynne's bond with the Spirit of Faith is different than Anders' merger with the Spirit of Justice.

[Nilfalasiel]

phaonica wrote...

Also, what I found most interesting was that Connor and the demon were still two seperate entities in the fade. When you take Anders to the fade he is indeed one merged being, not two. Even though it is Justice who is present, he is still talking through and manipulating and living in Anders' body. That in itself shows how closely merged their consciousness already is. I think.

Maybe there is some fundamental difference between spirit possession (like Anders and Wynne) and demon possession (like Connor).

The main difference I see between Anders and Wynne on the one hand, and Connor on the other (besides the fact that it's a demon in Connor's case) is that both Anders' and Wynne's spirits no longer have a connection with the Fade. Justice has been forcibly kicked out of the Fade, and Faith (if that's what Wynne's spirit is) seems to have voluntarily left the Fade to literally uphold her vital functions. In Connor's case, I'm not sure the demon has actually crossed over into the mortal world 100%, probably because Connor wasn't entirely willing to let it take over him (he's still struggling against it).

Also, remember that Wynne and Faith are a single entity in the Fade as well.

Long story short, you can't kill either Justice or Faith in the Fade, because they no longer have a "physical" presence there.

Modifié par Nilfalasiel, 29 septembre 2011 - 06:48 .

[LobselVith8]

TastesLikeTNT wrote...

phaonica wrote...

And correct me if I'm wrong, but can't you make Connor not-possessed-anymore even if you don't kill the demon, but make a new deal with her or send her away?

Indeed! Threaten her into submission, then send her on her merry way. You can even squeeze some talent points out of her, but I think your persuation needs to be very high.

True. Three points (or levels) in coercion to get her to back down, and four points (the maximum) in coercion to get her to provide The Warden with something.

[phaonica]

Nilfalasiel wrote...

Long story short, you can't kill either Justice or Faith in the Fade, because they no longer have a "physical" presence there.

Possibly, but even though they are so intertwined, the spirits still have a physical presence in the fade, it's just attached to the person they are possessing. They don't have a *separate* presence, but they do have a presence there. Those spirits still perhaps might be separated somehow.

LobselVith8 wrote...

Perhaps, since it even seems Wynne's
bond with the Spirit of Faith is different than Anders' merger with the
Spirit of Justice.

What details are you referring to, specifically?

[erilben]

TastesLikeTNT wrote...

Maybe there is some fundamental difference between spirit possession (like Anders and Wynne) and demon possession (like Connor).

According to David Gaider, there is.

Also DG said awhile back that demons possess their hosts, but spirits meld with their hosts.

At the end of the rivalry path, you get Anders and Justisce to split, and then Justice seems to basically possess Anders. Maybe you could kill Justice in the Fade then. On the friendship path, you probably couldn't because that's when you encourage the merger, and so that's why Justice doesn't take Anders over anymore by Act 3.

[Nilfalasiel]

erilben wrote...

At the end of the rivalry path, you get Anders and Justice to split, and then Justice seems to basically possess Anders. Maybe you could kill Justice in the Fade then. On the friendship path, you probably couldn't because that's when you encourage the merger, and so that's why Justice doesn't take Anders over anymore by Act 3.

Again, considering Justice has been kicked out of the Fade and doesn't seem capable of going back there on his own, with or without a host, I don't think that's possible, whether you friend or rival Anders. If they're going to be separated, methinks it would have to be some other way.

phaonica wrote...

Possibly, but even though they are so intertwined, the spirits still have a physical presence in the fade, it's just attached to the person they are possessing. They don't have a *separate* presence, but they do have a presence there. Those spirits still perhaps might be separated somehow.

That's what I meant, sorry. They don't have a physical presence in the sense that they exist within their host, not apart from it, as in Connor's case, where the demon was physically present in the Fade separately from Connor.

But either way, Word of God has it that a separation is theoretically possible anyway. Whether Anders would be willing to is a different question. I know my Hawkes would all jump on the opportunity in a heartbeat, if he expressed such a wish.

Modifié par Nilfalasiel, 29 septembre 2011 - 07:34 .

[LT123]

Justice tells Nathaniel in Awakening that he could go back to the Fade, but is no longer sure if he wants to. So it was possible for him to leave Kristoff's dead body on his own. So I guess separating him from Anders would just kick him back to the Fade.

[Nilfalasiel]

LT123 wrote...

Justice tells Nathaniel in Awakening that he could go back to the Fade, but is no longer sure if he wants to. So it was possible for him to leave Kristoff's dead body on his own. So I guess separating him from Anders would just kick him back to the Fade.

Actually, that's a conversation he has with Velanna. She asks him what will happen when Kristoff's body decays completely, and he answers that he's unsure. He says it's possible that he will be "drawn back to the Fade". That's not the same as going back willingly. 

Also, some of the Awakening endings have him leaving Kristoff's body of his own volition. But since he's still around to merge with Anders afterwards, he has either decided not to go back to the Fade or can't do it on his own. In any case, separating him from Anders wouldn't automatically kick him back to the Fade, IMO, considering he was able to stay in the mortal world without a host before joining with Anders. He hasn't been drawn back.

Modifié par Nilfalasiel, 29 septembre 2011 - 09:43 .

[LT123]

Nilfalasiel wrote...

Actually, that's a conversation he has with Velanna. She asks him what will happen when Kristoff's body decays completely, and he answers that he's unsure. He says it's possible that he will be "drawn back to the Fade". That's not the same as going back willingly. 

Also, some of the Awakening endings have him leaving Kristoff's body of his own volition. But since he's still around to merge with Anders afterwards, he has either decided not to go back to the Fade or can't do it on his own. In any case, separating him from Anders wouldn't automatically kick him back to the Fade, IMO, considering he was able to stay in the mortal world without a host before joining with Anders. He hasn't been drawn back.

Gah! Sorry. Velanna.  Nate's the one who has the "maybe you could possess a living body" conversation and brings up the point about Justice possibly ending up walking around as a Kristoff skeleton. "That is incredibly disturbing."

And I didn't even remember the conversation correctly.  In that same banter, after he mentions possibly being drawn back to the Fade:

Velanna: I know less about this than you. How securely is your spirit bound to this body? Could you leave it?
Justice: I could, if I chose to.
Velanna: Do you want to leave it?
Justice: I...do not know anymore.

I wonder if the ritual used to send Jowan/party mage/the Warden into the Fade during the Redcliffe quest would work on Justice.

Modifié par LT123, 29 septembre 2011 - 10:01 .

[Naqey]

berelinde wrote...

That's another part of why my Hawke doesn't want a kiss right then. This isn't a final goodbye. The possibility that either of them will die never enters his skull. He is troubled about the honesty thing, but he is also upset that Anders didn't trust him to help. Because at that point, Iain would have handed him the match. He understands that Anders did it to avoid having others blame him, but the opinion of others meant less to him than overcoming their challenges together. Definitely friendship path, here.

There is this one sentence of Anders which I've not yet been able to figure out fully. But it suggests that maybe Iain is misunderstanding Anders' intention. When Hawke says "I might have understood if you had only told me", Anders will reply "I wanted to tell you. But what if you stopped me? Or worse, what if you wanted to help? I couldn't let you do that."

There are several things Anders might want to tell us.. One, I think, not: that Anders didn't trust Hawke to help him. Quite the opposite. Anders was actually more afraid of Hawke wanting to help than Hawke not wanting to help. But why? At this point, I have come to the conclusion that Anders' priority was not to keep Hawke from getting drawn into sometIhing as messy as blowing up a chantry. At least not primarily out of concern for Hawke's safety. If they'd planned it cleverly, Hawke could have been involved in the plan with no suspicion acutally falling back on him. If Hawke's safety alone was on Anders' mind, he would have acted royally dumb. Hawke distracting Elthina (and Sebastian knows well enough of it) while Anders planted the bomb... isn't that suspicious? So why is it so important that Hawke would not want to help? Maybe Anders is more concerned about a certain "purity of spirit", some kind of "innocence" on Hawke's side. Maybe Anders is looking for something in Hawke which he has lost in himself, after his merger with Justice. It figures in Anders' obsession for Hawke. This initial loss of innocence is a very striking element in the Anders short story, right after Anders kill his first bunch of templars: "This is not justice. This is not the spirit who was my friend, my self. What has he become? What have I become?" If Hawke had helped... Anders "idol"  would have fallen (at times it is frighting just how much Anders apotheosises Hawke)

Arquen wrote...

Plus I simply don't believe that real world examples should be taken as facts to support a fictional game mechanic or plot or person or what have you. Pointing out similarities is fine, but it doesn't need to be used as an allegory or proof. It just seems to muddle it further, as I said.

THIS! Call me a postmodern freak who is losing contact to real life, but I rather have insights gained from literature colour real world experiences, than real world mush spoil the holy realms of fictionality! xD

Arquen wrote...

If we are being honest... I have never actually played the Anders romance. I have watched it all on YouTube

Is there a *term* for that? Like "lurker romance"? Fandoms just love to creatively come up with new words, there should be a word for this! It's totally the same thing with me and the Fenris romance. I just love to lurk in the Fenris thread, watch youtube videos, fanart, but never *actually*... xD

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

That's another problem, though... the conflict ends up couched as one of religion vs. no religion, which it isn't. Nobody ever even seems to consider the possibility of a new form of Andrasteism that retains all the positive qualities while removing the hatred, bigotry, and apartheid. It's all either "well, religion is good so we have to put up with the bad things" or "religion is bad, rawrrawrrawr." Nobody seems to think you can have your cake and eat it too, but you totally can. I've eaten that cake, and I still have it. Anders mentions it early on, but he seems to lose hope as he fails to encounter anyone who is both devoutand open-minded.

CGG, I couldn't possibly agree more! Even though I generally like the DA forums here, I cannot help but be *amazed* again and again how people will frame the mage - templar conflict exactly along the lines that you have set out. How often have I had to read something like "the chantry must go because the Maker religion in its entirety is evil". But that's just not the problem at all... it should become obvious in the fact that Anders himself keeps referring to the Maker even when he argues why mages should be free (Mages' gifts are granted by the Maker). The greater part of his manifesto actually argues why the Maker would not want this injustice to go on. He obviously doesn't think of the Makers as the problem, but of the present form of the Andrastian religion.

Concerning the "splitting up Anders and Justice" thing: People always seem to jump at the chance of separating Anders and Justice, because their Hawkes love Anders and want to help him. But seriously, why is it always assumed that the person Hawke falls in love with equals Anders? For all we know, they are one person now. Hawke never got to know "Anders" only "Janders" (I HATE that name). It's obvious, and people have been complaining about this, that Awakening Anders is so different from DA2 Anders. Thus, quite some part of that entity Hawke loves is... Justice. This never seems to get acknowledged.To quote Anders "I've always believed that you fall in love with a whole person". Or do I have some flaw in my reasoning here? 

Arquen wrote...

But... but... then you would have to murder Justice. I love Justice.

Haha, you are right! Some 50percent of what my Hawke loves is Justice

Modifié par Naqey, 29 septembre 2011 - 10:17 .

[berelinde]

@Naqey: No, I am not misunderstanding that phrase. I know that 1) Anders figured that this would be the last thing he ever did and did not want Hawke to destroy himself (spiritually or politically) in helping him, 2) Anders did not want the blame to fall on Hawke, and 3) Hawke may still be disappointed that Anders did not tell him. When something big happens, rational thought and rational behavior come later. The way Iain sees it, Anders just concealed the most important thing in his world from the person who loves him most. They're going to have a lot of talking to do.

Edit: Anyway, sorry for the semi-derail. I know we're talking about big picture here, not individual Hawkes. Just wanted to clarify that.

Modifié par berelinde, 29 septembre 2011 - 10:18 .

[Naqey]

berelinde wrote...

@Naqey: No, I am not misunderstanding that phrase. I know that 1) Anders figured that this would be the last thing he ever did and did not want Hawke to destroy himself (spiritually or politically) in helping him, 2) Anders did not want the blame to fall on Hawke, and 3) Hawke may still be disappointed that Anders did not tell him. When something big happens, rational thought and rational behavior come later. The way Iain sees it, Anders just concealed the most important thing in his world from the person who loves him most. They're going to have a lot of talking to do.

Edit: Anyway, sorry for the semi-derail. I know we're talking about big picture here, not individual Hawkes. Just wanted to clarify that.

That anyway, independant of whether we are talking about "individual Hawkes" or the general... Hawkedom? The talking part, I mean.

[Nilfalasiel]

Naqey wrote...

Concerning the "splitting up Anders and Justice" thing: People always seem to jump at the chance of separating Anders and Justice, because their Hawkes love Anders and want to help him. But seriously, why is it always assumed that the person Hawke falls in love with equals Anders? For all we know, they are one person now. Hawke never got to know "Anders" only "Janders" (I HATE that name). It's obvious, and people have been complaining about this, that Awakening Anders is so different from DA2 Anders. Thus, quite some part of that entity Hawke loves is... Justice. This never seems to get acknowledged.To quote Anders "I've always believed that you fall in love with a whole person". Or do I have some flaw in my reasoning here? 

Maybe it's a side-effect of metagaming, maybe I'm just in a weird minority of my own, but my reasoning is that I feel the merger hurts both of them, even if they eventually learn to coexist. I think my instinct would have been to rivalmance Anders: if I hadn't known beforehand that it would have such bad psychological repercussions on him, and that Hawke, in the rivalmance, is apparently very harsh. I always sense Justice as a separate entity, and while my Hawkes would never kill Anders, they disagree with his methods and think that separating Justice from him would have been (and still could be) better for both of them. He was a whole person before Justice (granted, a person that a Warden would've been familiar with, not a Hawke), and before act 3, they can still be at odds, even in a friendmance. Ie. they can still be differentiated.

I guess I perceive Justice as an unnecessary addition to an already whole person. It's not a very nice way to put it, but again, I'm probably somewhat less charitable to Justice than most people here. I do pity him, and I do think he suffers from the merger as well, but I can't help seeing him as the instigator of the whole fiasco (since the offer to join originated from him), and that's not something I can overlook.

Edit: The best comparison I can come up with is removing Valen's demonic taint in NWN. Of course, it didn't have a personality of its own, but 1) it did affect him, made him moody and irascible, ie. affected his personality, and 2) it did actually compel him to want to fight devils, much as Justice compels Anders to defend mages. So you could argue that it was part of who he was. And yet, he clearly suffered because of it, even if, as far as he knew, there was no way to get rid of it. So when my protagonist got the possibility of removing his taint, she went for it, because she felt he'd be happier without it. Even if it essentially removed what made him a tiefling (ie. part of his identity) and only left a human with horns and a tail.

I guess what I'm trying to say that, in both Valen's and Anders' case, I feel that the procedure would be better for them, even if it's a lot more unequivocal in Valen's case. Take the bad with the good, yes, but if there's a possibility to remove the bad without irreparable damage, then why not? Again, bad is not only bad for Anders, here, but bad for Justice as well.

But, as I've said before, Anders would have to express the wish for a separation. Hawke wouldn't simply force him to do it.

Modifié par Nilfalasiel, 29 septembre 2011 - 10:51 .

[ForgeDark]

Naqey wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

That's another problem, though... the conflict ends up couched as one of religion vs. no religion, which it isn't. Nobody ever even seems to consider the possibility of a new form of Andrasteism that retains all the positive qualities while removing the hatred, bigotry, and apartheid. It's all either "well, religion is good so we have to put up with the bad things" or "religion is bad, rawrrawrrawr." Nobody seems to think you can have your cake and eat it too, but you totally can. I've eaten that cake, and I still have it. Anders mentions it early on, but he seems to lose hope as he fails to encounter anyone who is both devoutand open-minded.

CGG, I couldn't possibly agree more! Even though I generally like the DA forums here, I cannot help but be *amazed* again and again how people will frame the mage - templar conflict exactly along the lines that you have set out. How often have I had to read something like "the chantry must go because the Maker religion in its entirety is evil". But that's just not the problem at all... it should become obvious in the fact that Anders himself keeps referring to the Maker even when he argues why mages should be free (Mages' gifts are granted by the Maker). The greater part of his manifesto actually argues why the Maker would not want this injustice to go on. He obviously doesn't think of the Makers as the problem, but of the present form of the Andrastian religion.

I have spent far too long trying to type my thoughs in a coherent manner!  I guess, I agree and disagree with what you both are saying. 

To disagree: I don't think it is possible to 'have your cake and eat it' in the DA2 universe. It's great that both of you think in today's world you can have your cake and eat it when it comes to religion (which is definitely something we should strive for, I'm not someone who would ever presume to tell someone what to believe) but end of the day we still haven't lost our grip on the bad side of religion in today's world.  Thedas is no where near doing that, and I would say no one in Thedas believing in the Maker is in that situation. If you follow a religion that is doing terrible things, whether you are aware of that or not, you are not following a religion without the hatred. In fact, it is exactly that that is the problem with the Chantry. The masses follow it thinking it does good, and by that complete blind faith they allow that religion to do terrible things. If the Chantry says it is morally good to lock up a mage, it is good to lock up a mage. Some of the mages even think that they shoudl be kept in the Circle. Are those mages following a religion that is good? They certainly believe so, and by thinking that they are allowing themselves to be oppressed. Without any belief in the Maker, people would have to decide their own morales, instead of falling back on this divine authority. 

To agree: On the other hand, If I thought stopping people believing in the Maker would solve the problems in Thedas, I'd say yes, destroy the Chantry. Things aren't that simplistic though, people are not just suspicious of mages because the Chantry tells them to be. The Chantry just takes advantage of that.

[phaonica]

Nilfalasiel wrote...

phaonica wrote...

Possibly, but even though they are so intertwined, the spirits still have a physical presence in the fade, it's just attached to the person they are possessing. They don't have a *separate* presence, but they do have a presence there. Those spirits still perhaps might be separated somehow.

That's what I meant, sorry. They don't have a physical presence in the sense that they exist within their host, not apart from it, as in Connor's case, where the demon was physically present in the Fade separately from Connor.

Even so, they do have a physical presense in the Fade, so they can still be interacted with in the Fade, and there might still be a way to separate them. Until we're told definitively no, I think there could still be a way.

[Nilfalasiel]

phaonica wrote...

Even so, they do have a physical presense in the Fade, so they can still be interacted with in the Fade, and there might still be a way to separate them. Until we're told definitively no, I think there could still be a way.

Gaider said that the separation was possible. That's what I was referring to by "Word of God" in my post...

[Chernaya]

Melca36 wrote...

See thats the thing @CulturalGeekGirl ----

Look what Elthina says if a dwarf ended the Blight.

And if you don't worship the Maker...you are branded a Heathen

What does she say, exactly? D: I'm curious...

I was never that fond of Elthina simply because she was so apathetic about everything. I'm not a religious person, so to speak, but I hated how everyone respected her so much yet she didn't use any of her influence to help with either side of the horrible fueding that was going on. It had gotten to a point that was so obvious something bad would happen, yet she still just played the mother and sent them to  their rooms instead of actually ever saying anything.  

[hobbit of the shire]

While I am appauled at what Anders did at the end of the game, I still feel pity for him and sort of understand him. Without his hatred being twisted into an ugly thing, his original goal to free all mages is IMO an honourable one. On the flip side, I don't know if I can EVER play a Templar or fully side with them. The whole concept of them, along with its heavily Chantry-influenced actions, is a total turn-off for me. I'm sure personal biases play into my thinking (not religious and anti-military). To basically go mage-hunting just because he/she is a mage totally does not jive with me. I need reasons. Did the mage commit a crime? Or is it just an order from a senior officer, or simply done in the name of the Maker?