543 réponses à ce sujet

[Setsuken]

I wanted Anders to face justice, but I thought he should make up for his actions by assisting me with the final battle. (I needed a healer. =/)
This is important because of his line about being seen as a martyr if you kill him.

I don't remember there being an option to disapprove, but still keep him. I know it's a middle of the road choice, but it's one I would've made.

[HawXV2]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

HawXV2 wrote...

In the end, I agree with what he tried to do, but not with how he did it. I like that he forced a decision, but surely there must've been another way. Anders wasn't trying for terrorism, and it wasn't. He isn't trying to scare or rally anyone. He simply wanted the decision to be made. Or am I the only one who listened to him after the explosion?

Have you ever listened to the justifications of similar acts in the real world?  I swear that I read almost the exact same stuff Anders was saying when I was reading The Looming Tower.   Especially the parts about forcing a decision out of people who didn't want to make one and the time for negotiating or living under the present status quo being over. 

It is terrorism and that's precisely what he was going for.   How else do you think he was going to force the issue and demand people make a choice without scaring or rallying them?

It was politically motivated violence directed at noncombatants - because terrorists don't recognize that they even exist - for the purpose of escalating the conflict.  What Anders did wasn't just vaguely terrorism, it was a textbook case of it.  By targeting a civic building, he was drawing a line in the sand and saying there are no non-combatants, you're in the war and you're either on the side of the mages or the Templars.  He didn't bomb a Templar base, he didn't even bomb Meredith's office, he blew up the Chantry.  He was making a political statement, and writing it in the blood of innocent people.

That his cause may or may not be sympathetic to your character or to players personally doesn't change the nature of what he did.

By the end of the game Hawke must either implicitly (or explicitly, if they so choose) endorse terrorism or the police state.  Those are the  stakes, and Meredith and Anders are the ones who made it so.

You are right. But I still just see him trying to force a decision. He expressed it through terrorism.

[kazic284]

To be perfectly honest, the first thing I did was lean over to my friend and say, "Anders has been borrowing tech from Soverign." Which caused us both to burst into laughter and spoil the epic moment. I thought what Anders did was really short sighted.

The story of how Hawke's legend spreads shows us how can crap get blown out of proportion. Is that the type of thing Sneers wants mages powers to be associated with? Honestly I wanted to kill his butt but I needed a healer. Saw what happened to Meridith and Orisino coming from a mile away though. For me the jaw dropped was the part with Cassandra and Leliana at the end. Waaaay too much of a cliffie.

[Dave of Canada]

Setsuken wrote...

This is important because of his line about being seen as a martyr if you kill him.

Even if he lives, he's an icon to all mages who rebel throughout Thedas. He's a terrorist amongst society but a hero amongst the mages, martyrdom or no. He may be idealized when he's dead but at least I know he can't hurt anybody else, letting him live will only make him probably gather mages under his banner.

What's to say other mages won't join him in his insanity? Will Anders teach that a spirit joining with you is the only way to free themselves? What if the war finishes and mages lost, will he begin bombing innocents some more?

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 14 mars 2011 - 03:20 .

[upsettingshorts]

HawXV2 wrote...

You are right. But I still just see him trying to force a decision. He expressed it through terrorism.

Terrorism is a tactic not a way of life, of course.  Anders is a revolutionary.  He wants to force a change in the status quo.  The tactic he used was terrorism.

Revolutions can be accomplished in a number of ways.  Anders chose terrorism.   I don't really have a huge problem (maybe a small one, it depends on the reasons) with people supporting him given the circumstances, or having characters support him.  I only have an interest in seeing to it those of us who discuss his actions don't mince words about the implications of what he did.

Would anyone - not necessarily directing this at you HawXV2, but folks in general - be as eager to split hairs over the subject had Anders flown a pair of explosive dragons into the Chantry before it burst into flames and  collapsed?  Somehow I don't think so.  It's easy to lose perspective in fiction, but what he did wasn't any different.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 14 mars 2011 - 03:29 .

[Stalky24]

I was just like
"I WANTZ THAT SPELL"
...
Most badass part of it was him hitting floor with staff everytime he was about to speak.

[DistractedFool]

I killed Anders, after using my character like that. A lot of people who didn't deserve that kind of fate, I think the way the Champion kills him is to simple, Anders deserved more than just a simple stab in the back, even though I understand the symbolism in it.

[cglasgow]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Terrorism is a tactic not a way of life

Exactly.  Terrorism is a method, not a goal.

[upsettingshorts]

cglasgow wrote...

Exactly.  Terrorism is a method, not a goal.

Right.  But we judge contemporary terrorists by their methods, not their goals.  How many people here without Googling actually know what al-Qaeda's goals are?  It's not as if they've kept them secret, it's that most people don't care because what they do is so reprehensible.  It doesn't even mean there aren't people out there who would agree with them if they weren't out there blowing up buildings - just like Anders - it's that their methods make their reasons irrelevant. 

[ThatDancingTurian]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Setsuken wrote...

This is important because of his line about being seen as a martyr if you kill him.

Even if he lives, he's an icon to all mages who rebel throughout Thedas. He's a terrorist amongst society but a hero amongst the mages, martyrdom or no. He may be idealized when he's dead but at least I know he can't hurt anybody else, letting him live will only make him probably gather mages under his banner.

What's to say other mages won't join him in his insanity? Will Anders teach that a spirit joining with you is the only way to free themselves? What if the war finishes and mages lost, will he begin bombing innocents some more?

This was another reason why I had Hawke fight for the mages. She killed Anders, and then she cleaned up his mess, but she wasn't about to let him be a hero to mages. If they're to follow any example, it should be hers. No compromises, no blood magic, no deals with "spirits". She wants to erase his entire name from existence if she can, it's the least he deserves for what he did.

[cglasgow]

Yes! Finally someone understands!

[EchoGarrote]

I killed Anders, but I sided with the Mages. But...well...the Revered Mother in some ways she's just as bad as Meredith and Orsino.

Although, now don't get me wrong the Revered Mother was a good person first and foremost. Did she deserve death? No. Was Anders wrong? Yes. Was she another responsible party for the whole damn mess? Yes.

(Personally, I wish there was an option to go a little Qunari on him. Keep him alive, but chop off his hands.)

But back to the Revered Mother and why she (and the Viscount as well regarding the Qunari) are responsible.

Here's the core of it: You can't be in a position of power and do nothing except hope that the problem will go away. Because if you make no choice, someone else will make the choice for you.

The Revered Mother was given many MANY opportunities to speak out, to make a comment, to say that Meredith had gone too far, or that Orsino needed to back down. But she didn't. She was given a chance to walk away by the Divine herself. But she didn't. Anders even gave her one last chance to say something, anything, while he was setting up his surprise. But she continued to waffle. I also bet two bucks that, had Anders not done what he did, she would have told Orsino to shut up and allow the search while scolding Meredith to tone it down and let Cullen lead it. Once more, nothing would have been resolved, nothing would have changed, and odds were good that someone else would have done something even worse than Anders.

If she had pushed it, just a little, then Meredith would have snapped or Orsino would have exposed himself for being a Blood Mage and then there would be a change, but with a FAR smaller body count.

Also, the Revered Mother was not exactly spreading the word of 'Give mages a chance' but rather 'Just don't kill them.' Anders said that the Chantry and the Templars like Meredith spend a good amount of time saying that mages are a sin against the Maker, and that they're all bound for the Void. Remember in Origins that one mage who wished that she died because she was ashamed of her magic? If the Revered Mother was so sympathetic about the mages then why didn't she go out and say something to contradict that? No. She was assured that she was doing the 'right' thing by not taking sides and she let her pride keep her there when she was told by the Divine that the situation was going to explode. So she just let the Chantry spew it's hate speech and allowed Meredith to get worse and worse and the Mages more and more desperate.

It all harkens back to Flemeth's little speech on the top of the mountain about seeing if you can fly. Orsino and Meredith already hurled themselves into the void and crashed. The Revered Mother just stood on the edge, pretending that it wasn't there, that it wasn't a problem, that she had control...and then Anders pushed her in.

Hawke, and Anders if you see it from his POV, became dragons.

[scomoletti]

One of the best moments in the game. I did have to kill him however despite the love of my life, Merril, asking for him to join us. What he did was something which can not be forgiven.

If you think about his personality from DAO already having an intense dislike for the circle/chantry and then add Justice to that mix..it's no wonder he went and nuked the place. Seriously..did no one see that coming? As soon as he asked me for help to get into the chantry all suspicions were confirmed.

So..for that he died. Also I couldn't see bringing him along to the final battle after what he did..I mean talk about waving red meat in front of the dogs..situation was bad enough without that. A chance for any meaningful discussion at the end of the fighting would be off the table if I was perceived as having any kind of support for his actions, and bringing him to the final battle would be just that. Especially after I sided with the Mages.. I had to show that I was looking for the common good and would not condone such actions from anyone..Meredith or Anders.

[HolyJellyfish]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

HawXV2 wrote...

You are right. But I still just see him trying to force a decision. He expressed it through terrorism.

Terrorism is a tactic not a way of life, of course.  Anders is a revolutionary.  He wants to force a change in the status quo.  The tactic he used was terrorism.

Revolutions can be accomplished in a number of ways.  Anders chose terrorism.   I don't really have a huge problem (maybe a small one, it depends on the reasons) with people supporting him given the circumstances, or having characters support him.  I only have an interest in seeing to it those of us who discuss his actions don't mince words about the implications of what he did.

It is definitely a terrorist act. No doubt about it. However, his actions are lessened when compared to Meredith who herself is also a terrorist.

He is a social revolutionary terrorist. He committed one act that would alter the course of history. Meredith, however, is a pathological terrorist. She and the templars systematically abuse their power to harm, destroy, and ultimately ruin Mage lives. Not to mention a genocidal maniac who would prefer to murder all Mages instead of attacking the one man responsible for his crime.

What it came down to me was a choice. To I go for the madness that is Meredith who is unforgiving and lacks any sense of responsibility for her actions, or Anders who takes full responsibility and doesn't even fight back when a sword is at his neck? What they both did was evil, Meredith more so because she was systematically harming an entire group of people because of their magic inclination and causing more destruction in the long run.

[upsettingshorts]

Meredith practices state terrorism, yes. I wouldn't apply the terms you used as such as I've never actually seen them used before. She is in a position of authority and abuses that power in order to accomplish her goals. To do this she uses violence to create a culture of fear to oppress a potentially dangerous minority. However, as she is an agent of the state - more or less - there are mechanisms through which she can be replaced without violence. Or in turn, simply forcibly removed from office without escalating the conflict to include everyone else everywhere. Anders forced the issue, and started the war. That being said, neither would be in the position they were without the contributions of the other, or what they each represent to each other.

My reasonable, peace loving, detente-pursuing Hawke executed Anders for mass murder, sided with the Templars to put down the revolt, and then thankfully got to kill Meredith too. He would believe in that situation that there is still hope for peace, but he'd be wrong.

Anders is a revolutionary. Supporting him at all is implicitly or explicitly endorsing terrorism.
Meredith represents the state. Supporting her, right up until she turns on you, is implicitly or explicitly endorsing the police state.

It's explicit if you agree with their actions, it's implicit if you feel compelled to join their cause because you have no other choice. To people who don't know Hawke's motivations - basically the rest of Thedas - there is no difference. He or she made his bed right there after the Chantry exploded, one way or the other.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 14 mars 2011 - 04:06 .

[Dave of Canada]

HolyJellyfish wrote...

What it came down to me was a choice. To I go for the madness that is Meredith who is unforgiving and lacks any sense of responsibility for her actions, or Anders who takes full responsibility and doesn't even fight back when a sword is at his neck? What they both did was evil, Meredith more so because she was systematically harming an entire group of people because of their magic inclination and causing more destruction in the long run.

Anders claims full responsibility and doesn't fight back because he's won, he got what he wanted. Anders was pretty much was sitting there knowing that he's started something and he's no longer necessary for the plan to continue. Even if he doesn't fight back, that doesn't mean he's suddenly better than Meredith (which we know is insane).

Regardless of how I felt about Meredith, I had to side with her because it was the only hope for peace (siding with the mages which are hated almost universally isn't that good for future peace). I tried to undermine her through Cullen earlier though and it was obvious that she wasn't fit for duty, I was pleased that you could challenge her a few times after you made the choice and motivate Cullen further.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 14 mars 2011 - 04:07 .

[jasonontko]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

cglasgow wrote...

Exactly.  Terrorism is a method, not a goal.

Right.  But we judge contemporary terrorists by their methods, not their goals.  How many people here without Googling actually know what al-Qaeda's goals are?  It's not as if they've kept them secret, it's that most people don't care because what they do is so reprehensible.  It doesn't even mean there aren't people out there who would agree with them if they weren't out there blowing up buildings - just like Anders - it's that their methods make their reasons irrelevant. 

 
Al-Qaeda's goal is to kill westerns out of hate, they provide justifications for their hatred but they are all just fig leafs.  I mean please, they killed 3,000 Americans because America had a small amount troops stationed in Saudi Arabia held up in half dozen buildings doing nothing more than enforcing a UN ordered no-fly zone.  Does that make any sense at all.  No it does not.  They were not oppressing the Muslim world like templar’s were oppressing mages.   They used it as justification to murder people they hate.  If America had packed up that small number troops and brought them home, they would have just came up with another reason to do it.  I don’t think you can make a perfect Anders/Al-Qaeda analogy.

[upsettingshorts]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Anders claims full responsibility and doesn't fight back because he's won, he got what he wanted. Anders was pretty much was sitting there knowing that he's started something and he's no longer necessary for the plan to continue.

Yup, Anders succeeds.  This is canon.  How?  Because of the way Cassandra describes the state of Thedas in the present tense.

My Hawke, since he didn't want either side to "succeed" failed.  That's one of the reasons I love the game.  There is no way to fail DA:O without quitting.  I failed DA2 and it was great.

[upsettingshorts]

jasonontko wrote...
 
Al-Qaeda's goal is to kill westerns out of hate, they provide justifications for their hatred but they are all just fig leafs.

Not really.  That is their goal like Anders' goal was to kill the Grand Cleric.  "Killing Westerners out of hate" is a means to an end, and that is global revolution.  The end is hopelessly unrealistic and few ever talk about it - even them.  But odds of success aren't terribly important if you believe you are fighting a Holy War.  To understand them you kind of have to study the history of the Egyptian Islamist movement as well as the Soviet-Afghan War, and a bunch of other things.  It's a fairly complex history of failure to inspire revolutions, and a broadening of potential targets. It's hard to explain without writing - or reading - a book.

jasonontko wrote...

I don’t think you can make a perfect Anders/Al-Qaeda analogy.

I don't either.  There are dozens and dozens of better examples of terrorism in history that better fit Anders' actions.  The reason I use al-Qaeda and 9/11 imagery and comparisons is because they're familiar to people.   Not that they're the best.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 14 mars 2011 - 04:18 .

[jasonontko]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

jasonontko wrote...
 
Al-Qaeda's goal is to kill westerns out of hate, they provide justifications for their hatred but they are all just fig leafs.

Not really.  That is their goal like Anders' goal was to kill the Grand Cleric.  "Killing Westerners out of hate" is a means to an end, and that is global revolution.  The end is hopelessly unrealistic and few ever talk about it - even them.  But odds of success aren't terribly important if you believe you are fighting a Holy War.

jasonontko wrote...

I don’t think you can make a perfect Anders/Al-Qaeda analogy.

I don't either.  There are dozens and dozens of better examples of terrorism in history that better fit Anders' actions.  The reason I use al-Qaeda and 9/11 imagery and comparisons is because they're familiar to people.   Not that they're the best.

No I think their political motivation are a means to a hate filled end just like Nzi's with the Jews.

[Zyphone]

Can anyone tell me why he waited 7 years to bomb the Chantry?

[upsettingshorts]

jasonontko wrote...

No I think their political motivation are a means to a hate filled end just like Nzi's with the Jews.

Your grasp of the complexities of history is clearly beyond question.

[loveassassin]

 In all honest, I shouted "HOLY ****, ANDERS WHAT HAVE YOU DONE!" after that I understood and had him join me, I probably would have helped him if he told me what he was doing in the first place anyway.....

[ThatDancingTurian]

Zyphone wrote...

Can anyone tell me why he waited 7 years to bomb the Chantry?

No clue. There were occasional mentions of him fighting against Justice and eventually losing (I think mostly in his Codex entry), but I never saw anything of the sort play out in the actual game. He acted exactly the same from start to finish, he was just as much a radical in the beginning as he was later on.

[TJPags]

Zyphone wrote...

Can anyone tell me why he waited 7 years to bomb the Chantry?

The game is 10 years long . . .can't do that if you have the final battle in year 4.