57019 réponses à ce sujet

[Lurockia]

I was told that I should repost something that I had said in another thread concerning Anders. After viewing a few of the posts here, I felt that it would indeed be appropriate and possibly make for interesting discussion.

Lurockia wrote...

I have just finished my second playthrough of Dragon Age II and this time, rather than siding with the Templers I decided to side with the Mages. Having done this, I can't for the life of me understand why so many people hate, if not downright loathe Anders for his actions.

Please restrain your arguements and judgements until I've explained.

They say it's because he's a madman, a terrorist, an insane murderer whose actions were unjustified. Is it really the case though? Justice for the Mages. Vengeance for the Mages. It really all depends on the point of view.

If the cause doesn't concern you, it's terribly difficult to relate or even support it because you don't understand the need for it or to bother with it. Everyone's life is different and we all have had different experiences. Some of us have suffered injustices that others will never face throughout an entire lifetime.

*****SPOILERS AHEAD******

I will admit that in my first playthrough of Dragon Age II I
sided with the Templars. I had spent a good deal of the game helping
mages that were in need because I felt that they were treated unfairly.
Once Mama Hawke was taken by that blood mage though I started to hate
them. I defended them and they've all resorted to Blood Magic, even the
First Enchanter. I guess you could say I wanted Vengeance? Ha.

Then I started a playthrough in which I supported Anders.

As much as I was Pro-Templar before, siding with Anders had opened my eyes
that not all mages were to blame. If you romanced Anders, he will come
to comfort Hawke after their mother's death, I had replayed the scene a
few times just to see the different dialogue options. The one that
really made everything click was this one:

"Maybe the Templars are right.. Do you really still think mages should be free?"

To which Anders replies with..

"..He was a madman.. That's what made him do this not magic.."

When I heard that, that's when I knew. He was right. He was completely and
utterly right. It wouldn't have made a difference whether he was a mage
or a normal man. A normal man would've been just as capable to have done
what that psychopath did. It doesn't take a mage to have someone kill
someone you love or to do the horrible experiments that had transpired.

Grotesque stories happen all the time on a daily basis in our own world and we
live in a world where magic is something you can only find in stories.
Yet things like Necrophilia, murder, and far worse still happen.

*****END OF SPOILERS*****

When you think about it, locking mages up in the Circle Towers is no more different than what happened during World War II. Jewish families were taken away from everything they knew and locked away in Concentration Camps to be dealt with. Many of which had no misdeeds to their name other than having been born Jewish, homosexual, or just people who simply disagreed with the regime.

Many downright despise Anders for his beliefs, but that's because they don't feel like it concerns them. When in reality it does, more than they know. Whether they like itor not, Hawke has magic in their bloodline. It will only take them having one more mage child born of them to reconsider whether or not it might've been for the better to have had the freedom Anders always talked about. Otherwise they'll just end up like Isolde and her son Conner from Dragon Age: Origins and what will be their options then? Be on the run? Give them up to the Circle and never see them again? That's no solution.

Every revolution in our own world history has started with someone doing something controversial.

The Rise of the Protestants against the Pope.
America's Independence against the British.
The Civil Rights Movement.
And many more.

Things that have changed people's lives for the better. What really struck a chord with me though is the last thing Anders says just before the Final Battle assuming you romanced him.

"Ten Years.. A hundred years from now. Someone like me will love someone like you, and there will be no one to tear them apart."

That meant a lot to me because I can relate. A hundred years ago, my parents wouldn't have been allowed to have been together. My father is white and my mother is asian. A biracial relationship? Unacceptable. Nowadays? No one minds. Everything he stands for has already happened and is continuing to happen. At one point, someone somewhere fought for the benefits we all enjoy today in our modern society. If they win. Anders will probably be remembered as a hero. He did something rather than do nothing and sometimes that's all that matters.

One day, that same quote will apply to same-sex lovers. For now, they're persecuted for being what they are by being revoked of their rights to marry who they want, but one day it won't always be the case. Why? Because someone somewhere is fighting for them.

The elimination of the Chantry in Kirkwall had to happen. It symbolized that things need to change. Very much like the plot for the movie V for Vendetta. Innocents will always die in times of warfare, it can't be helped. We just have to look into our own history to understand the message that Anders was trying to get across.

Well. That was certainly lengthy wasn't it? I just felt like I had to share my view on here. I wonder how many people actually read to the end. Haha.

And that my friends. Is my statement as to whether or not his actions were justified. Anders had pleaded to Kirkwall's leaders for seven long years for change to happen through the Grand Cleric and his many Manifestos. His peaceful attempts of protests were not being taken into consideration and ignored for far too long. Thus triggering the Mage Revolution at the end of the story. It was inevitable. Now we'll just have to see where that will lead us in future installments of the series.

Modifié par Lurockia, 28 octobre 2012 - 06:54 .

[Sable Rhapsody]

Lurockia wrote...
And that my friends. Is my statement as to whether or not his actions were justified. Anders had pleaded to Kirkwall's leaders for seven long years for change to happen through the Grand Cleric and his many Manifestos. His peaceful attempts of protests were not being taken into consideration and ignored for far too long. Thus triggering the Mage Revolution at the end of the story. It was inevitable. Now we'll just have to see where that will lead us in future installments of the series.

I'd say Anders' actions were understandable, but justified is IMO a bit more up in the air.  

It boils down to the rights of the few vs. safety of the many, and it's a balance that every governance system struggles to find.  Yes, the templars pushed the mages to desperate measures.  Yes, a lot of the blame lies at Meredith's feet.  But this last playthrough, I could count on one hand the number of mages in Act 3 who weren't a danger to themselves and everyone around them.  I wasn't even pro-templar--I was playing a balanced Hawke who was trying for peaceful change.  That went well 

I was very pro-mage in my first playthrough, but subsequent ones have tempered that somewhat.  I still think the oppression of mages is wrong, and Meredith is undoubtedly a loony.  But WWI pretty much disavowed any notion (at least in Western cultures) of war being glorious.  War is always ugly, brutal, catastrophic, and it's always the defenseless who suffer first and worst.

The war will have other repercussions--economic chaos, political instability, disease, famine.  In a pre-industrial society like Thedas, even one with magic, the things that surround war claim more lives than the fighting itself. Are the deaths of so many a fair price to pay for the rights of the few, especially people who have proven themselves capable of great harm in the past?  I can't say I have a good answer to that question, and while I'm sure freedom for mages will improve their lot, it's still up for debate whether the lives of the general populace will be improved at all, or just ruined by all the devastation.

On the rivalry path, Anders says there's no one in Kirkwall he wouldn't kill to see mages free.  He's no less ruthless on the friendship path.  That kind of "with me or against me" attitude leads to total war, a complete breakdown of the distinction between civilian and combatant.  It doesn't matter how many innocent people die so long as he gets what he wants.  And he feels guilt for his actions, even on the friendship path, but he does them anyway.  I tend to have a more utilitarian view on morality.  I can admire Anders' conviction and ideals, but I have a harder time calling what he did justice.

Modifié par Sable Rhapsody, 28 octobre 2012 - 09:16 .

[Gyrefalcon]

Thanks for the effort, Smallwhippet!  Hope the event was fun as well.

Cantina wrote...

hobbit_of_the_shire wrote...

Gyrefalcon wrote...
     Does anyone know if we get to play on the mage side of the conflict yet or is Inquisition a templar sided game.  (Don't start panicking, I am just asking as I have not heard.  I do know that they are promising segments of the game to be as long as the entire DA2.)

I do not know, but I would be MOST disappointed if it is a templar-sided game.  I would think they'd have to have the protagonist somewhere in the middle, or one that is able to switch sides due to what he/she experiences in the game.  The only way I could see myself, say, playing a templar is that he/she is rather innocent of what goes on in the Order/Circle.  Perhaps they were raised in the Chantry, like Alistair.  After taking vows, he/she goes out into the world and soon realizes, nope, all that he/she had learned was 1-sided and the injustices stack up until he/she becomes at least mage-sympathetic, if not pro-mage.  Or, perhaps the templar started developing some affinity to magic and is like, WTH, am I suppose to fear/suppress myself?

As far as I am aware the third game the only race you will be allowed to play is a human. As for classes, same as before, mage, warrior or rogue.





*******************

I take what was said in the "Legacy" expansion with a grain of salt. It MAY be true that Mages DID try infiltrate The Golden City. However who is to say The Chantry was not behind it or even more of the story needs to be told.

That however does not excuse the fact Mages have been mistreated for far too long and what makes it worse is The Chantry did not seem to care. Sure the Divine tried to step in, but it was too little too late.

In my opinion it boils down to:if they lose the Mages they lose a massive source of revenue. In order to keep that going, they use the whole "Mages are dangerous." When you find a mine filled with gold, you tell lies to keep your source hidden.

Wow, there is an idea I had not considered!  It would allow the Chantry to keep ahold of the mage resources that give it wealth.  How did they ever create the Tranquility Rite and brand I wonder?  And since it does not actually work as they think, will they abandon it in favor of dwarven lyrium crafters?

Edit:  I found a video comparing the Frostbite 2 engine with...Cryo-somthing-3.   Anyway, if you want a sneak peek at what the new engine can do, have a look. 

Modifié par Gyrefalcon, 29 octobre 2012 - 03:52 .

[Sable Rhapsody]

Gyrefalcon wrote...
Wow, there is an idea I had not considered!  It would allow the Chantry to keep ahold of the mage resources that give it wealth.  How did they ever create the Tranquility Rite and brand I wonder?  And since it does not actually work as they think, will they abandon it in favor of dwarven lyrium crafters?

The thing is that the statements "Mages are dangerous" and "enchanters provide the Chantry's wealth" are both true.  So there's an undeniable element of greed, but also one of public safety.  The problem is that we just don't have a lot of demographic data for Thedas in general, not just mages.  It'd be much easier to make an informed judgment on the Chantry's actions if we actually had more numbers, but I get the impression that the DA devs aren't the best with numbers.

[Gyrefalcon]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...

Gyrefalcon wrote...
Wow, there is an idea I had not considered!  It would allow the Chantry to keep ahold of the mage resources that give it wealth.  How did they ever create the Tranquility Rite and brand I wonder?  And since it does not actually work as they think, will they abandon it in favor of dwarven lyrium crafters?

The thing is that the statements "Mages are dangerous" and "enchanters provide the Chantry's wealth" are both true.  So there's an undeniable element of greed, but also one of public safety.  The problem is that we just don't have a lot of demographic data for Thedas in general, not just mages.  It'd be much easier to make an informed judgment on the Chantry's actions if we actually had more numbers, but I get the impression that the DA devs aren't the best with numbers.

You mean, "how many people does it take to have a stable population"?  The line "have you no concern for your own safety" really haunts me.  Waves of utterly loyal opponents that keep throwing their lives away even as various threats drop the number of non-tainted beings to all time lows seems ridiculous.  We should get points for diplomacy/intimidation more.  There should be a moral break point where additional enemies run for the hills.

[Sable Rhapsody]

Gyrefalcon wrote...
You mean, "how many people does it take to have a stable population"?  

Pretty much.  How many mages are there in the Circles compared to estimates of apostates?  What are the relative populations of each major country in Thedas?  How many templars are there?  That sort of information would be really interesting to know.

Then again, they're just gonna kill each other anyway, so I suppose it's a moot point <_<

[Gyrefalcon]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...

Gyrefalcon wrote...
You mean, "how many people does it take to have a stable population"?  

Pretty much.  How many mages are there in the Circles compared to estimates of apostates?  What are the relative populations of each major country in Thedas?  How many templars are there?  That sort of information would be really interesting to know.

Then again, they're just gonna kill each other anyway, so I suppose it's a moot point <_<

   Well, you might be able to track their numbers in the number of kills you have in DA3, ha ha ha!

   Do you think it would help if we did a vigil dressed as mages with chantry candles and sang "o/`  All we are saying, is bring Anders back  o/`" ?

[Cantina]

I tend not to use real life past or present actions in history as a comparison in the game simply because one is imaginary and the other is, well real. While it may be a good idea in some people’s point of view to do so, it makes it look as if those people cannot discern reality and imaginary or have a hard time doing so.

Sure, writers may use the base of real events to create a story, but they end up twisting it around into something they want to be, but in the end, you have to use what has happened in that story in order to come up with your own conclusion. My choice of sparing Anders came from my own over view of the story, not from real life events.

If you played a Mage in Dragon Age Origins, you get a good idea of what their life is like. Even Duncan views the place as a prison. IF the story of Dragon Age were real, I currently would not want to be in a prison for the rest of my life of just how I was born. I would in fact take every opportunity to try to escape.

The Circle does in fact do one good thing; it teaches a mage how to use magic. However forcing a mage do to something as idiotic as the Harrowing seems more like The Chantry and Templars own personal game. Just because a mage does pass his or her Harrowing does not mean that later in life they cannot succumb to a demon.

During the quest “Repentance (?)”, you go inside the Harrowmonts home and you learn that within here you do not need to be a mage or a Templar in order to succumb to a demon. You see this as well in Origins when you go off to reclaim the Wardens Keep, were the Warden Commander Sophia was possessed by a demon.

Therefore, it comes down to twisting what Andraste said to be something the opposite of what she meant.”Magic should serve man, never rule over him.” The Chantry takes this to the extremes, they have Mages (literally) serving the Chantry for whatever they need or done. The Chantry also says, “Magic should not be abused” but that is exactly what The Chantry is doing to the Mages. They are abusing the magic to gain whatever they need, if it were for war or just some enchantments to sell. Let us not forget the fact the Chantry controls the Lyrium Market, which they no doubt get a good share of the profits.


Then of course, you have the Templars who in fact need to use magic in order to even disable a mage and use blood to track them down, which is a form of blood magic. However, it goes beyond that considering a large number of Templars get away with a large amount of abuses, Meredith was one who took this to the extremes. When a Templar crosses over into the realm of politics, this should be a clear sign him or her has gone too far. Orsino pointed this out at the beginning of Act 3.

If you are going to look at Anders actions, you need to back track and understand the why of it all. If you simply look at it and decide The Chantry is just like this or this in real life, then in my opinion, your comments on such an action have no merit. If you disagree with what Anders did, gone over all the game lore evidence, then I shall value whatever opinion that maybe.


Anders actions against The Chantry were indeed the “Last Straw.” Sometimes such actions as horrific as some people may view them are justified actions. The Grand Cleric did not seem to care, Meredith was just making things worse and Orsino was trying but not hard enough. The Templars and The Chantry have abused Mages for over a thousand years, adding all their actions against one single action Anders did it is small in comparison. People did die when The Chantry exploded in Kirkwall, but how many Mages have died do to the actions of The Chantry. Probably far more than those who did die in the Chantry.

Did Anders do the right thing, by destroying The Chantry? In my opinion, absolutely. Yes, it is a terrible thing, but the cost of freedom is not a cheap price to pay. If the system were not as corrupted as it is, perhaps it would not have gone as far as it did. However, the system was corrupted and no doubt, it was bound to get far worse over the next thousands of years. Taking a stand is hard but it’s even harder believing that stand should be taken, sometimes a person like Anders, just needs to come along and give you that push to do so.

Modifié par Cantina, 30 octobre 2012 - 03:33 .

[Gyrefalcon]

Wow Cantina, did you just do a new play-though after a long break? Sounds like the long post I did after I completed the game the first time! ^-^

Although the events of Thedas are not those of real-life, even the creators are drawing on historical examples and ideas from real life to fuel this fantasy world and give it that ring of being true. Same kind of effort goes into space stories. So I feel that to ignore any reference to real-life events as comparisons is rather throwing out the baby with the bath water. I don't think people discussing trends in history in broad strokes and comparing or contrasting it with the writing in the game means someone has trouble separating fantasy and reality. More like they have had to do papers on the symbolism in stories for professors.

If you are referring to comments somewhere early in the thread where there is speculation that Dragon Age or Anders was based directly off of real life events or people whole-cloth, well, then I would agree with you. This is just a game, strong parallels are more chance than design.

Or is this about us wondering about stable populations vs number of Darkspawn?  Sorry, that is my biology background giving me trouble with the suspension of disbelief.  However, statistical analysis of game points is a time honored tradition.  May I introduce you to the book series called "Murphy's Rules" by Steve Jackson Games?  I am not certain if there is a current edition in print, but it is chock full of amusing ancedotes of weird rules and whatnot.  For example:  "In TSR's AD&D a fighter specializing in DARTS can do more damage per round than one specializing in BROADSWORD!"  Our discussion here is in that line.  I rank the loss of life of the faceless hordes in the Dragon Age series up there with adult humans popping out of the fountain in town square in Age of Empires.  They both seem oddly amusing for silliness and make you go hmm!

Modifié par Gyrefalcon, 30 octobre 2012 - 04:20 .

[Sable Rhapsody]

Cantina wrote...
Did Anders do the right thing, by destroying The Chantry? In my opinion, absolutely. Yes, it is a terrible thing, but the cost of freedom is not a cheap price to pay. If the system were not as corrupted as it is, perhaps it would not have gone as far as it did. However, the system was corrupted and no doubt, it was bound to get far worse over the next thousands of years. Taking a stand is hard but it’s even harder believing that stand should be taken, sometimes a person like Anders, just needs to come along and give you that push to do so.

See, here's the thing--freedom for who?  For the mages, yes.  But Chantry progaganda or no, Fenris is living, breathing proof that just giving mages freedom willy-nilly doesn't always work.  Sometimes it produces a system as brutal and oppressive as the one you ditch.  I'm not saying the mages don't deserve freedom.  They absolutely do, and more power to Anders and possibly Hawke for being willing to lay down their lives for it. 

But who's really going to pay for the mages' freedom?  Mages, yes, and templars, and the Chantry structure.  Arguably the Chantry and templars deserve what's getting to them (though I think that's an oversimplification).  But the heaviest cost in any war is always paid for by the innocent, and it was no different in Kirkwall.  Anders, Anders-allied Hawke, and their ilk are willing to drown all of Thedas in blood to get what they want.  The currency of war is not ideals or freedom or whatever--it's lives, and I doubt more mages will die than civilians.

It's clear from Cassandra's dialogue that neither the mages or templars are interested in peaceful resolution.  They're interested in killing each other until one or both sides are completely annihilated, and a lot of the people spearheading either side have no interest in preserving lives.  IMO it's hard to call either side just.

Modifié par Sable Rhapsody, 30 octobre 2012 - 04:43 .

[Cantina]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...

Cantina wrote...
Did Anders do the right thing, by destroying The Chantry? In my opinion, absolutely. Yes, it is a terrible thing, but the cost of freedom is not a cheap price to pay. If the system were not as corrupted as it is, perhaps it would not have gone as far as it did. However, the system was corrupted and no doubt, it was bound to get far worse over the next thousands of years. Taking a stand is hard but it’s even harder believing that stand should be taken, sometimes a person like Anders, just needs to come along and give you that push to do so.

See, here's the thing--freedom for who?  For the mages, yes.  But Chantry progaganda or no, Fenris is living, breathing proof that just giving mages freedom willy-nilly doesn't always work.  Sometimes it produces a system as brutal and oppressive as the one you ditch.  I'm not saying the mages don't deserve freedom.  They absolutely do, and more power to Anders and possibly Hawke for being willing to lay down their lives for it. 

But who's really going to pay for the mages' freedom?  Mages, yes, and templars, and the Chantry structure.  Arguably the Chantry and templars deserve what's getting to them (though I think that's an oversimplification).  But the heaviest cost in any war is always paid for by the innocent, and it was no different in Kirkwall.  Anders, Anders-allied Hawke, and their ilk are willing to drown all of Thedas in blood to get what they want.  The currency of war is not ideals or freedom or whatever--it's lives, and I doubt more mages will die than civilians.

It's clear from Cassandra's dialogue that neither the mages or templars are interested in peaceful resolution.  They're interested in killing each other until one or both sides are completely annihilated, and a lot of the people spearheading either side have no interest in preserving lives.  IMO it's hard to call either side just.

And once again, how many so called "innocents" were killed when King Maric and Lohgian drove out the Orelisans from Fereldan. No doubt a lot. They wanted freedom too. How many so called "innocents" were killed during the last Blight. Again no doubt a lot.

I for one would love to see every last Templar dead. And if Thedas turns into another Tevintar Imperium, well, its better then being locked in a cage and doing tricks whenever someone snaps their fingers.

[mmachvz]

I'm just wondering, what if all this Mage-Templar war really ends in DA:I, and let's just say there are no middle grounds (just as an example) if you side with the mages they gain their freedom if templars they annihilate (or whatever it is they want to do to) the mages. Anyway my question is if mages win, what would happen to them? I mean even if the templars are defeated there are still those mundane folks that fears them and I doubt they'd be welcoming mages back (I mean with the war and everything, I'm sure there are some who would blame them for the trouble, just like the darkspawn thing; there seem a higher degree of prejudice in Thedas, I noticed) Will they be like the Dalish then? Nomads, shunned and feared?

[Renmiri1]

Nilfalasiel wrote...

berelinde wrote...

Edit: Ngah, ToP. *rummages*



Dat nose.

Yummm 

Oh God, so many pages to read! Any breaking news about inquisition this past month ? Been tied up on WoW and looking for work, no time to post or read stuff 

But Anders is the background on my PC so I see my sweet magey every day 

Modifié par Renmiri1, 30 octobre 2012 - 03:57 .

[ValliLilli]

mmachvz wrote...

I'm just wondering, what if all this Mage-Templar war really ends in DA:I, and let's just say there are no middle grounds (just as an example) if you side with the mages they gain their freedom if templars they annihilate (or whatever it is they want to do to) the mages. Anyway my question is if mages win, what would happen to them? I mean even if the templars are defeated there are still those mundane folks that fears them and I doubt they'd be welcoming mages back (I mean with the war and everything, I'm sure there are some who would blame them for the trouble, just like the darkspawn thing; there seem a higher degree of prejudice in Thedas, I noticed) Will they be like the Dalish then? Nomads, shunned and feared?

Mages may not be welcomed back now, but sooner or later somone will have to this with this problem .Like Anders said there will alway be mages born across Thedas, you can't get rid of them all. This simply isn't possible, unless one prefers, constant war between mages and non-mages. Since the current system proved to be unefficient, they will have to find a new solution and there will be many different opinions how their new future should look like . Some mages may flee to Tevinter seeing it as only alternative to getting slaughtered, further cementing their magocracy. Some may try to isolate themselves - but I don't really believe it will work - people can't exist in a vocum. If the Chantry survives with the current Divine, they may start propaging a new relationship with mages, one that let them cooexist with the society and feel part of it e.g. as healers. However, to change anything first mages have to actually win (or agree to compromise) and then it will take many years for a new system to be established.

[Sable Rhapsody]

Cantina wrote...
And once again, how many so called "innocents" were killed when King Maric and Lohgian drove out the Orelisans from Fereldan. No doubt a lot. They wanted freedom too. How many so called "innocents" were killed during the last Blight. Again no doubt a lot.

I for one would love to see every last Templar dead. And if Thedas turns into another Tevintar Imperium, well, its better then being locked in a cage and doing tricks whenever someone snaps their fingers.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I fail to see how the brutality of previous wars in any way justifies the violence in the current mage/templar war.  If anything, the inevitablity of noncombatant casualities, especially in a low fantasy setting, makes war even less desirable as a course of action.  

Just to be clear, I absolutely think mages deserve their freedom, and the very system put in place to control them breeds the fear and resentment that drives them into the arms of demons.  In Kirkwall, the situation had deteriorated enough where violence was probably inevitable, but there is no indication things were as bad for mages in the rest of Thedas.  IMO there was no reason to drag the rest of the world down into the pit with Kirkwall.  

Modifié par Sable Rhapsody, 30 octobre 2012 - 09:03 .

[Cantina]

Gyrefalcon wrote...

Wow Cantina, did you just do a new play-though after a long break? Sounds like the long post I did after I completed the game the first time! ^-^

LOL! No, but I have played the game numerous times. I just have a strong opinion when it comes to what Anders did and Mage freedom. I sometimes end up rambling on and on about it.

Sable Rhapsody wrote...


Just to be clear, I absolutely think mages deserve their freedom, and the very system put in place to control them breeds the fear and resentment that drives them into the arms of demons. In Kirkwall, the situation had deteriorated enough where violence was probably inevitable, but there is no indication things were as bad for mages in the rest of Thedas. IMO there was no reason to drag the rest of the world down into the pit with Kirkwall.

Does not matter how the other Circles were at the time, the fact is Kirkwall was proof of how bad it can be and how corrupted the system can become. How long until another Circle follows the same path, then another and another.

I certainly would not just sit idly by, twiddle my thumbs and assume it will get better after a conversation over a cup of tea and cookies. Meredith and The Grand Cleric are to blame for dragging the rest of the world down into the mess it is now, not Anders.

Modifié par Cantina, 30 octobre 2012 - 10:38 .

[Sable Rhapsody]

Cantina wrote...
Does not matter how the other Circles were at the time, the fact is Kirkwall was proof of how bad it can be and how corrupted the system can become. How long until another Circle follows the same path, then another and another.

Well, the Right of Annulment was performed 17 times in 900 years, so a little less than twice per century on average, one of the Circles goes bonkers.  Unfortunately we have no more information than that--I'm sure that there are cases of entire Circles being actually possessed as well as cases more like Kirkwall where the templars are largely to blame.  And there is a very large difference between sitting on your butt vs. blowing up a church vs. working for less violent change.

We'll just agree to disagree on this one.  If anything, looking at the DA3 forums has taught me opinions that DON'T favor killing a bunch of people are greatly in the minority 

Modifié par Sable Rhapsody, 31 octobre 2012 - 12:15 .

[Gyrefalcon]

Cantina wrote...

Sable Rhapsody wrote...

Cantina wrote...
Did Anders do the right thing, by destroying The Chantry? In my opinion, absolutely. Yes, it is a terrible thing, but the cost of freedom is not a cheap price to pay. If the system were not as corrupted as it is, perhaps it would not have gone as far as it did. However, the system was corrupted and no doubt, it was bound to get far worse over the next thousands of years. Taking a stand is hard but it’s even harder believing that stand should be taken, sometimes a person like Anders, just needs to come along and give you that push to do so.

See, here's the thing--freedom for who?  For the mages, yes.  But Chantry progaganda or no, Fenris is living, breathing proof that just giving mages freedom willy-nilly doesn't always work.  Sometimes it produces a system as brutal and oppressive as the one you ditch.  I'm not saying the mages don't deserve freedom.  They absolutely do, and more power to Anders and possibly Hawke for being willing to lay down their lives for it. 

But who's really going to pay for the mages' freedom?  Mages, yes, and templars, and the Chantry structure.  Arguably the Chantry and templars deserve what's getting to them (though I think that's an oversimplification).  But the heaviest cost in any war is always paid for by the innocent, and it was no different in Kirkwall.  Anders, Anders-allied Hawke, and their ilk are willing to drown all of Thedas in blood to get what they want.  The currency of war is not ideals or freedom or whatever--it's lives, and I doubt more mages will die than civilians.

It's clear from Cassandra's dialogue that neither the mages or templars are interested in peaceful resolution.  They're interested in killing each other until one or both sides are completely annihilated, and a lot of the people spearheading either side have no interest in preserving lives.  IMO it's hard to call either side just.

And once again, how many so called "innocents" were killed when King Maric and Lohgian drove out the Orelisans from Fereldan. No doubt a lot. They wanted freedom too. How many so called "innocents" were killed during the last Blight. Again no doubt a lot.

I for one would love to see every last Templar dead. And if Thedas turns into another Tevintar Imperium, well, its better then being locked in a cage and doing tricks whenever someone snaps their fingers.

Every last one?  Even Alistair?  I'm playing through the first one again, and the chantry and templars there are much more reasonable.  Even Gregor was glad to see some of the mages survive.  He knew what was necessary if they were all monsters but he did not want to have to kill them.  DA2 was supposed to add in some moderate blood mages at least and some less all-or-nothing viewpoints but they ran out of time.


Edit:

Gee, seems I should look at Wikipedia for information once in awhile.  Did any of you hear about this?

"Creative Director Mike Laidlaw tweeted that they were finished working on content for Dragon Age II.
Executive Producer Mark Darrah mentioned that BioWare originally had
plans for an expansion pack, entitled "Exalted March", to mark the first
anniversary of Dragon Age II but canceled it in favor of developing other opportunities for the series."

Modifié par Gyrefalcon, 31 octobre 2012 - 04:58 .

[ValliLilli]

I for one would love to see every last Templar dead. And if Thedas turns into another Tevintar Imperium, well, its better then being locked in a cage and doing tricks whenever someone snaps their fingers.

Why some people keep saying that the moment mages are granted freedom they will start another Tevinter empire? Even Fernis admits that most mages in Tevinter are a little better than slaves and only a small number of them become magisters. These are the most ruthless ones, ready to use dirty tricks like blood magic and demon summoning. People ready to do everything for power pop up all the time and they don't have to be mages for this.

It's not all-or-nothing situation. It's not: a total magocracy or imprisonment for life. Some sort of safety system have to be in place - mages are dangerous if they snap, but abusing them only makes them more desperate and dangerous. Not all templars are crazy. Even in Kirkwall there were templars like Karen and Thrask who believed their main task is to protect mages.

[Sable Rhapsody]

Gyrefalcon wrote...

"Creative Director Mike Laidlaw tweeted that they were finished working on content for Dragon Age II.
Executive Producer Mark Darrah mentioned that BioWare originally had
plans for an expansion pack, entitled "Exalted March", to mark the first
anniversary of Dragon Age II but canceled it in favor of developing other opportunities for the series."

Yeah, I heard about that.  And despite all its problems with polish and level design, I loved DAII and was disappointed with no expansion.  Besides, "Exalted March" just sounds plain awesome.

[berelinde]

ValliLilli wrote...

I for one would love to see every last Templar dead. And if Thedas turns into another Tevintar Imperium, well, its better then being locked in a cage and doing tricks whenever someone snaps their fingers.

Why some people keep saying that the moment mages are granted freedom they will start another Tevinter empire? Even Fernis admits that most mages in Tevinter are a little better than slaves and only a small number of them become magisters. These are the most ruthless ones, ready to use dirty tricks like blood magic and demon summoning. People ready to do everything for power pop up all the time and they don't have to be mages for this.

It's not all-or-nothing situation. It's not: a total magocracy or imprisonment for life. Some sort of safety system have to be in place - mages are dangerous if they snap, but abusing them only makes them more desperate and dangerous. Not all templars are crazy. Even in Kirkwall there were templars like Karen and Thrask who believed their main task is to protect mages.

Everyone always says that freedom for mages will inevitably lead to another Tevinter Imperium, but there is a rather glaring reason why that won't happen.

Tevinter has a historical predisposition toward magocracy. Every element of their culture is directly derived from the concept of magister rule. When the Chantry came in and imposed their own system of governance, this was disrupted for a time, but when left to their own devices, they reverted to the system of government that is bred into their society.

Ferelden has no historical precident toward a magocracy. Their cultural antecedant was loosely organized barbarian tribes with mages integrated into their society in suppport roles. Think about the Chasind, the Ash Warriors, and the historical Avvars. That's what Ferelden was like before Andraste. Once the Tevinter incursion was halted, they reverted to their traditional form of government - a confederacy of banns uniting under a hereditary monarch. Societal values don't change all that quickly. If anyone, mage or otherwise, tried to institute another Imperium, the people would never stand for it. If mages were free, it would be easier for them to revert to their traditional roles in society as healers, protectors, or wizened advisors, perhaps, than it would be for them to attempt to overthrow the existing secular government and claim authority for themselves. No mage alive remembers the imperium. They do remember their pre-Circle childhoods growing up in villages and towns and expecting to join that society once they were adults. That's what most of them want: the chance at the future that was taken away when they were forced to join the Circle. I'm not suggesting that mages be turned loose with no training. Mages need an apprenticeship just as templars need to be squires before they are knighted. They are trained to advance their skill, but they are also trained to learn restraint. To that end, the templars need a revision to their curriculum, too. They need to be taught that mages are people, not property, and that a shield with a sword on it confers responsibility as well as privilege. In DA:O, a lot more templars seemed to have that part figured out. But the templars in the Free Marches had a lot more secular power than they do elsewhere in Thedas.

Sure, there are probably some mages with more ambition than sense. You will run across the occasional Uldred who wants power for his own benefit. But you will also encounter the occasional Meredith, who also wants power for her own benefit. In both cases, they professed to be working toward a cause (mage freedom or public safety), but ultimately, the one thing both of them wanted above all else was to be top banana. The "cause" was just an excuse. In both cases, the way to restore order was the same: kill them with fire. Because that much ambition is always destructive, whether the owner's power is magical or martial, secular or religious.

[CrimsonZephyr]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...


We'll just agree to disagree on this one.  If anything, looking at the DA3 forums has taught me opinions that DON'T favor killing a bunch of people are greatly in the minority 

I'm more of the opinion that killing people needlessly is bad, but freedoms only are granted when elites are too frightened to deny them. Pretty much all of European democracy was built from the legacy of the French Revolution (or the English Civil Wars) - the original Reign of Terror. The constitutional monarchies and increasingly liberalized government were not built out of a desire to see the downtrodden uplifted or given new rights, but out of a desire to avoid lighting a powder keg.

[Deviant Ingredient]

berelinde wrote...

ValliLilli wrote...

I for one would love to see every last Templar dead. And if Thedas turns into another Tevintar Imperium, well, its better then being locked in a cage and doing tricks whenever someone snaps their fingers.

Why some people keep saying that the moment mages are granted freedom they will start another Tevinter empire? Even Fernis admits that most mages in Tevinter are a little better than slaves and only a small number of them become magisters. These are the most ruthless ones, ready to use dirty tricks like blood magic and demon summoning. People ready to do everything for power pop up all the time and they don't have to be mages for this.

It's not all-or-nothing situation. It's not: a total magocracy or imprisonment for life. Some sort of safety system have to be in place - mages are dangerous if they snap, but abusing them only makes them more desperate and dangerous. Not all templars are crazy. Even in Kirkwall there were templars like Karen and Thrask who believed their main task is to protect mages.

Everyone always says that freedom for mages will inevitably lead to another Tevinter Imperium, but there is a rather glaring reason why that won't happen.

Tevinter has a historical predisposition toward magocracy. Every element of their culture is directly derived from the concept of magister rule. When the Chantry came in and imposed their own system of governance, this was disrupted for a time, but when left to their own devices, they reverted to the system of government that is bred into their society.

Ferelden has no historical precident toward a magocracy. Their cultural antecedant was loosely organized barbarian tribes with mages integrated into their society in suppport roles. Think about the Chasind, the Ash Warriors, and the historical Avvars. That's what Ferelden was like before Andraste. Once the Tevinter incursion was halted, they reverted to their traditional form of government - a confederacy of banns uniting under a hereditary monarch. Societal values don't change all that quickly. If anyone, mage or otherwise, tried to institute another Imperium, the people would never stand for it. If mages were free, it would be easier for them to revert to their traditional roles in society as healers, protectors, or wizened advisors, perhaps, than it would be for them to attempt to overthrow the existing secular government and claim authority for themselves. No mage alive remembers the imperium. They do remember their pre-Circle childhoods growing up in villages and towns and expecting to join that society once they were adults. That's what most of them want: the chance at the future that was taken away when they were forced to join the Circle. I'm not suggesting that mages be turned loose with no training. Mages need an apprenticeship just as templars need to be squires before they are knighted. They are trained to advance their skill, but they are also trained to learn restraint. To that end, the templars need a revision to their curriculum, too. They need to be taught that mages are people, not property, and that a shield with a sword on it confers responsibility as well as privilege. In DA:O, a lot more templars seemed to have that part figured out. But the templars in the Free Marches had a lot more secular power than they do elsewhere in Thedas.

Sure, there are probably some mages with more ambition than sense. You will run across the occasional Uldred who wants power for his own benefit. But you will also encounter the occasional Meredith, who also wants power for her own benefit. In both cases, they professed to be working toward a cause (mage freedom or public safety), but ultimately, the one thing both of them wanted above all else was to be top banana. The "cause" was just an excuse. In both cases, the way to restore order was the same: kill them with fire. Because that much ambition is always destructive, whether the owner's power is magical or martial, secular or religious.

This.^ So much. I always wanted the option to argue with Fenris this very point. That because Tevinter was never conquered their society never had a chance to change. I really hope we can find a balance between the mages and templars in DA3.

[CrimsonZephyr]

"Sure, there are probably some mages with more ambition than sense. You will run across the occasional Uldred who wants power for his own benefit. But you will also encounter the occasional Meredith, who also wants power for her own benefit. In both cases, they professed to be working toward a cause (mage freedom or public safety), but ultimately, the one thing both of them wanted above all else was to be top banana. The "cause" was just an excuse. In both cases, the way to restore order was the same: kill them with fire. Because that much ambition is always destructive, whether the owner's power is magical or martial, secular or religious."

That said, if a mage can become a ruler, and a good ruler, then being a mage in itself should not be an obstacle. A mage leader of a secular government is not exactly the same thing as a magister. Mages set themselves too small a goal if they simply want to be farmers and healers. At the very least, highborn mages should not be disinherited unless they commit magical-related crimes.

Modifié par CrimsonZephyr, 01 novembre 2012 - 06:50 .

[Sable Rhapsody]

Deviant Ingredient wrote...
I really hope we can find a balance between the mages and templars in DA3.

That's my hope too.  Or barring that, I do get frustrated enough with both mages and templars during Act 3 of DA2 where I wonder if we can't just pack them all off to Aeonar so they can kill each other off 

Modifié par Sable Rhapsody, 01 novembre 2012 - 09:05 .