552 réponses à ce sujet

[cglasgow]

Bolboreta wrote...

I don't think the Grand Cleric were such a nice person. I mean, she knew about Petrice and did nothing until she killed Seamus (was this his name?).

She suspected Petrice.  The instant she had proof, she told Petrice 'You're going to trial'.

She saw the templar oppression and mage's lobotomies.

You mean the Tranquil solution that she explicitly denied permission for?   Even Meredith turned down that one.

Modifié par cglasgow, 14 mars 2011 - 05:40 .

[Furtled]

I think the exact words I shouted at the laptop were 'Anders you @#$£@&! eijit' but suddenly the warnings from Flemeth, Varric and Sebastian made sense - didn't help that he was living with my PC and she'd become close friends with Sebastian - so he got stabbed, (then spared because I felt awful, then stabbed again, then sent away, and finally stabbed for good). Damn.

[Addai]

Bolboreta wrote...
Anders is maybe insane, maybe driven by Justice/Vengeance, but there was already a war and he freed tons of innocent people.

Who did he free??  The Circle mages end up mostly dead whether you fight for them or not, and I can only imagine that the backlash of his act will be terrible.  Orsino's line "why don't you just drown us as babies" might end up being predictive of what happens.

[Addai]

Miri1984 wrote...

Deztyn wrote...

Or if she had taken action the war would have started anyway. Side with the mages and Meredith rants about how blood mages have gotten to her. Side with the templars and the mages who are already close to the edge and planning to revolt finally lash out. Kirkwall was already a powder keg by Act III and only need a spark to set it off.

So of course Anders dropped a freaking nuclear bomb on it instead.

Oh, I agree totally, the war was going to happen no matter what, but she could have dictated some of the terms. As it was, Anders was the one who dictated it, and if it hadn't been him, it would have been someone else... She needed to realise that it was inevitable and take a side. But she didn't. And as a result far there were far more innocents killed than needed to be.

I don't blame her for that.  Other clerics become politicians and it completely corrupts them- here I'm thinking of the Fereldan clergy who supported the Orlesian occupation.  She wanted to remain a neutral party, and I can't blame her for that.  My PC didn't want to have to decide, either.

[Sjofn]

FadeTheAssassin wrote...

cglasgow wrote...

FadeTheAssassin wrote...
He only turned into a harvester after seeing all his students dead.

He deliberately helped Quentin the serial killer hide from the authorities because of politics.   'If Meredith had known about him, she'd have just used that as an excuse to oppress us further!'

So, Orsino, you'll actually help cover up for blood mages because you don't want the political fallout?   Well, gee, that sure helps explain why Kirkwall was up to its arse in blood mages and abominations around every corner.  I'd been wondering!

So even if you didn't use blood magic yourself up until the end, you're still accomplice to all their crimes.   **** you ****ing dickbag **** of a First Enchanter.

And its not just Mama Hawke I'm that pissed off about; every other one of Quentin's victims had family too.

Im not denying that Orsino was evil. What im saying is, he turned into a...Wait. How the **** did we go from what anders did to this whole be debate about mages?

You can't really seperate what Anders did from the mage debate, imo.

[Jennifer Brandes Hepler]

I love the range of responses everyone has to Anders's actions. We really wanted to create a situation without a clear-cut right and wrong. I wrote Anders, Sebastian, Bethany, Leandra, Elthina and Cullen, so I've certainly seen every side of the argument. Personally, my view of it is that Anders wants to blow up the Chantry AND wants to die for it -- that way he gets the revolution he/Justice believes is necessary, but still gives justice to those who died in the Chantry. Though I like the poetic justice of forcing him to live in the world his actions create.

[Chaia]

My reaction was something along the lines of: "oh jeezs what just happened?!.....ANDERS!!!! well peace just got blown literally out of the window" then suddenly had Sebastian on my back demanding for me to kill Anders, not that I did, killing him just seemed like the easy way out for him, if Anders wanted this to happen then he can stick around and see the consequences.

Out of interest, what happens at the end if Anders doesn't blow up the Chantry?

Modifié par Chaia, 14 mars 2011 - 07:10 .

[Milana_Saros]

Jennifer Brandes Hepler wrote...

Personally, my view of it is that Anders wants to blow up the Chantry AND wants to die for it -- that way he gets the revolution he/Justice believes is necessary, but still gives justice to those who died in the Chantry.

Thank you for this statement. Perhaps people could calm down with their Al-Qaida talk now after reading this. Reading all that stuff is totally ruining the game and the story for me, easier to just stay away from the forums alltogether.

Perhaps you might have future plans for Anders redeeming himself, no? One can always hope. I find putting him out of his misery to be the easy way out.

[tallon1982]

I actually don't think killing Anders would bring justice but making him repent by living is a better solution in my opinion. If you kill him he becomes a martyr and thus an easy way out for him. I think his punishment is more fitting if he lives to see the results of his actions. I find that to be the fitting punishment. Sort of reminds me a quote at the moment.. "Dark and difficult times lie ahead. Soon we must all face the choice between what is right and what is easy."

[Sable Rhapsody]

tallon1982 wrote...

I actually don't think killing Anders would bring justice but making him repent by living is a better solution in my opinion. If you kill him he becomes a martyr and thus an easy way out for him. I think his punishment is more fitting if he lives to see the results of his actions. I find that to be the fitting punishment. Sort of reminds me a quote at the moment.. "Dark and difficult times lie ahead. Soon we must all face the choice between what is right and what is easy."

First, Dumbledore is win.

Secondly, I think Anders realizes perfectly well the magnitude of what he's done, but it never seems to occur to him to make it up by living through the war and helping mitigate the fallout.  He seems to think that the only way he can pay for it is with his life.

Though TBH, my mage Hawke didn't spare him as a punishment.  She spared him because she actually agreed with him.  That's kinda scary.

[LeVaughnX]

1.) I was with the mages from the beginning. I don't think the mages are all to blame where as the Templar are fricking ****s. I mean its relatable to WW2 - just because there were ****s doesn't mean every German was bad - so protect the innocent ya know?

2.) I liked Anders a little from the start - he was alright, and I was hoping to help him with his "Justice" problem so to speak.

3.) Come end game I glared at the TV - screamed ""WHAT THE F*** YOU ******!"" then proceeded to kill him though I STILL protected the magi because I'm a firm believer!

[Milana_Saros]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...

tallon1982 wrote...

I actually don't think killing Anders would bring justice but making him repent by living is a better solution in my opinion. If you kill him he becomes a martyr and thus an easy way out for him. I think his punishment is more fitting if he lives to see the results of his actions. I find that to be the fitting punishment. Sort of reminds me a quote at the moment.. "Dark and difficult times lie ahead. Soon we must all face the choice between what is right and what is easy."

First, Dumbledore is win.

Secondly, I think Anders realizes perfectly well the magnitude of what he's done, but it never seems to occur to him to make it up by living through the war and helping mitigate the fallout.  He seems to think that the only way he can pay for it is with his life.

Though TBH, my mage Hawke didn't spare him as a punishment.  She spared him because she actually agreed with him.  That's kinda scary.

Indeed. My Hawke will let him live and even continue their tragic relationship. Desperately trying to make him regain control over vengeance and perhaps, some day, find a way to rip that spirit out of him. Doubt that will ever happen though, officially that is...I've yet to see the chance to continue my romance with a character excactly the way I would like. Alistair wasn't in Awakening, ME2 had only a lousy cameo for Kaidan and now DA2 was a completely new story...people want Warden back more that Hawke I would imagine and DLC's or expansions would be hard to make just to give Anders this chance.

It's a bit ironic really. When there were all these threads about "What kind of LI would you like?", I mentioned a male mage LI and based the sexiness and power example on Kael'Thas from Warcraft 3...think I owned myself a bit there D:

Modifié par Milana_Saros, 14 mars 2011 - 07:49 .

[theradicalpunk]

"Sweet Andraste's ******!"

"Andraste's flaming ass what was that!?"

"Maker no..."

[cglasgow]

tallon1982 wrote...

I actually don't think killing Anders would bring justice but making him repent by living is a better solution in my opinion. If you kill him he becomes a martyr and thus an easy way out for him. I think his punishment is more fitting if he lives to see the results of his actions.

I might have gotten behind that, if it wasn't for the problem that Anders isn't going to stop killing people.  I let him walk, more buildings will be exploding somewhere else.   No thanks.   One was more than enough.

[Dan-mac RI]

I was thinking about the definition of terrorism. What Anders did doesn't qualify. Terrorism seeks to control through fear and violence. Anders sees the Chantry and templars as the reason everyone is afraid of mages and he's fairly right in that, they almost always use the twin forces of fear and guilt to control people, especially the mages who live with both everyday.

cglasgow wrote...

tallon1982 wrote...

I actually don't think killing Anders would bring justice but making him repent by living is a better solution in my opinion. If you kill him he becomes a martyr and thus an easy way out for him. I think his punishment is more fitting if he lives to see the results of his actions.

I might have gotten behind that, if it wasn't for the problem that Anders isn't going to stop killing people.  I let him walk, more buildings will be exploding somewhere else.   No thanks.   One was more than enough.

That's part of the reason I stuck with him. I'm not just going to let him go, he's staying with me as long as possible so I can keep an eye on him. He'd already done enough for his revolution, it would be up to others to continue it, he merely light the fuse. I'm also not going to kill him, well, because he made it possible for my sister to be free again, but this time, free without fear or even hate of her own talents which she seems to express sometimes.

[cglasgow]

Again, I might get behind that, except that Anders being in my party didn't stop him from doing this the first time. Even when I entirely refused to help him with any of it, he just went around behind my back and did it anyway.

So, yeah, that having already been tried and failed... Anders, meet Murder Knife. Murder Knife, Anders. Let's get you two better acquainted.

[tallon1982]

cglasgow wrote...

tallon1982 wrote...

I actually don't think killing Anders would bring justice but making him repent by living is a better solution in my opinion. If you kill him he becomes a martyr and thus an easy way out for him. I think his punishment is more fitting if he lives to see the results of his actions.

I might have gotten behind that, if it wasn't for the problem that Anders isn't going to stop killing people.  I let him walk, more buildings will be exploding somewhere else.   No thanks.   One was more than enough.

There's a bit of a flaw in that because Hawke is a killer too as is the Warden. It has to do with the point of view. Fact is no matter what side is chosen innocent people will die. It's a fact in every war.  Anders  was doing what he assumed was right though I think it was more of the spirit's influence than his own thinking. I think Anders says he wishes he could be more selfish again before he fused with Justice. That should give you some insight to his personality. Killing Anders would have set him free rather than punish him for his actions. Justice/Vengeance should be dealt with somehow without killing Anders in some DLC or expansion because I don't buy that you have to kill the host to get rid of the spirit. I think it's time for a road trip to Tevinter.

[cglasgow]

tallon1982 wrote...

There's a bit of a flaw in that because Hawke is a killer too as is the Warden. It has to do with the point of view.

Killer, yes.  Murderer, no.   There's a difference; the difference is 'target selection criteria'.  Justifiable homicide and murder are separate categories in both law and common morality for a reason.

Fact is no matter what side is chosen innocent people will die. It's a fact in every war.

Yes it is, and a tragic one.   This is why whenever the terrorism debate comes up, people use the phrase "deliberately targeting innocents" instead of just 'targeting innocents'.   The 'deliberately' is the key part.

While both events involve tragic loss of innocent life, there's still a distinct jump in moral culpability between 'Accidentally hitting a bystander with a stray shot' and 'Consciously and with malice aforethought blowing the bystander to chunky salsa'.   Which is why the former doesn't result in a war crimes trial and the latter does.

Modifié par cglasgow, 14 mars 2011 - 08:35 .

[tallon1982]

I still don't believe making him a martyr is the best choice. It just spurs others to copy him. Sure it could happen anyway but at least he's not the one doing it as he'd be watched by Hawke especially if he was romanced by Hawke he never leaves his/her side. And the Chantry isn't all that innocent. Their inaction to stop this is also what lead to this end as well. While it doesn't justify what happened I do think Meredith would have done something equally extreme thanks to her own power hunger due to the mix of her own desires and that damned relic. This is why I quoted Dumbledore. I think killing Anders is the easy way rather than keeping him alive which would be right to do. Make him suffer. And just an fyi I do like Anders so I'm not a hater of the character at all.

[cglasgow]

If I could keep Anders alive without running an unacceptable risk of him deading up more victims on the line, then I would. But I can't see how I would manage that, therefore I whack him. 'How other people will react to this' is a concern, but its lower on my priority list than 'keeping Anders from hurting anyone else ever again'. The former is something entirely outside my control and rises or falls on the moral choices that other people make; the latter is not, its a problem that I'm legitimately stuck with.  I can't just wash my hands of it and pretend he's someone else's problem; that's still making a decision, and not a good one.  (Although I wish that Meredith had friggin' taken him and cut his head off; would've saved us all a ton of trouble.)

As for Dumbledore, while his saying re: right vs. easy is extremely profound and one of my favorites, even Dumbledore didn't live up to his own ideal in the end. (How many easy choices did he make, sitting on his hands like people criticize Elthina for doing, for how many years? How many free passes did Tom get before the series started?) So while he's great to quote as a source of advice, I wouldn't use him as an example.

Also, inaction is sometimes bad, but its still not a death penalty offense.

Modifié par cglasgow, 14 mars 2011 - 08:47 .

[Miri1984]

Jennifer Brandes Hepler wrote...

I love the range of responses everyone has to Anders's actions. We really wanted to create a situation without a clear-cut right and wrong. I wrote Anders, Sebastian, Bethany, Leandra, Elthina and Cullen, so I've certainly seen every side of the argument. Personally, my view of it is that Anders wants to blow up the Chantry AND wants to die for it -- that way he gets the revolution he/Justice believes is necessary, but still gives justice to those who died in the Chantry. Though I like the poetic justice of forcing him to live in the world his actions create.

Oh I absolutely agree that Anders wants to die. You wrote that beautifully - the giving away of his possessions made me cry. I was dead certain he was going to martyr himself and was desperately trying to think of a way to stop it. But I think my Hawke, apart from wanting him to live for her own personal reasons, also wanted him to SEE what he'd done. Even though she essentially agreed with him.

Gah, I knew you guys were going to put him through the wringer. Poor, cheerful, funny, flirty Anders. I mourn you. And your cat. :crying:

[Addai]

Dan-mac RI wrote...

I was thinking about the definition of terrorism. What Anders did doesn't qualify. Terrorism seeks to control through fear and violence. Anders sees the Chantry and templars as the reason everyone is afraid of mages and he's fairly right in that, they almost always use the twin forces of fear and guilt to control people, especially the mages who live with both everyday.

But the Chantry also sees itself as protecting the innocent from the unbridled power of mages.

Regardless, blowing up a civilian landmark, a place with no military significance, where ordinary people come to pray and seek charity, and in a square where there might simply be passers-by doing their thing- in order to further a political cause- I don't see how that can't be called terrorism.

[bloodtallow]

I was totally in line with Anders at the end of the game. Hey, my mage was wondering why he didn't let her help him blow up the chantry in the first place!

[Miri1984]

@Addai it IS terrorism, absolutely. But Anders doesn't see it that way - it's an act of war. I suppose all terrorists see it that way. Elthina was always going to be a target - that's why Sebastian is so desperate to get her out of the city.
It wasn't just Elthina he wanted dead though, the Chantry building ITSELF...He's targeting the symbol of power that controls the circles and the mages and the templars, making the statement that it has failed the people it needed to protect. And he wasn't randomly killing civilians left right and centre through the entire game, he knows it's wrong, and that's why he wants to die once it's done.

[cglasgow]

Miri1984 wrote...

And he wasn't randomly killing civilians left right and centre through the entire game

Even though we had to restrain him once from doing precisely that...