2340 réponses à ce sujet

[Disco Overlord]

I spared him.
It was shocking what he did, but I don't get all the talk of the killing of innocents and the neutrality of the Chantry. The Chantry was definitely not completely neutral nor absolutely innocent. The whole mage/templar/Chantry is a tangled mess of involvement.
Because of this and the clear oppression, I don't think this is terrorism either: more revolutionary, in a Guy Fawkes kind of way.
Compromise wasn't going to happen. This mage/templar thing was going on for the entire span of Hawke's time in DA2 and even before that. That plus crazy Meredith wielding the lyrium sword controlling Kirkwall would just lead to extremity.
Might as well turn the tables rather than wait for the inevitability of a Meredith ruled prison state.

[Augustei]

LobselVith8 wrote...

cglasgow wrote...

For the same reason that he attacked the mage girl in 'Dissent' (act 2); he's a freaking nutjob.

I mean, seriously.  Anders walks into a scene where an abusive templar is about to Tranquil and rape a young mage girl.  So, he first goes berserk and wastes the templars, which makes perfect sense... and then he goes on to kill the girl, which is straight out whackjob ville.

That was Justice, not Anders. The whole point of talking Justice down is for Anders to regain control, and he doesn't kill the girl once that happens.

cglassgow wrote...

Which doesn't always happen.  I tried to talk him down; he killed her anyway.   That scene flag is very conditional, and I'm not sure of all the variables necessary.

Have you ever spoken to Anders after he actually kills her?  He flat-out admits that there are times when he simply cannot remain in control of Vengeance.  That he just wakes up and boom, there's blood on his hands and a dead body in front of him.

I've never had a problem talking him down. I remember when he discusses his difficulty in dealing with Justice after Tranquility. He references the difficulty he has maintaining control over Justice when he sees templars. The story arc isn't the same when you help Anders regain control over himself.

cglasgow wrote...

I mean, in hindsight, I should have expected the act 3 tragedy; act 2 gave me some blatant foreshadowing.  My fault for not taking it seriously enough at the time, my first playthrough.   But I'm not making that mistake again.

The lives of the mages are tragic. Anders wanted to see the mages across Thedas free. Considering no one else in a thousand years was able to accomplish what Anders did, I don't see him as the villain that some people try to portray him as.

Hawke wont be around forever to talk Vengenace down, they do go their seperate ways after all.. So letting him go or sparing him is like letting a homocidal maniac / Mass Murderer go.. Over the years Anders began to loose more and more control to Vengeance so its not like he will get any better.

[Augustei]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Nokternul wrote...

Lets not forget the presumably innocent religious people he just murdered in cold blood.

The same religious members who are part of an organization who have enslaved his people for nearly a millennia, you mean?

Not all members of the chantry are there by choice.. Like Alistair for example... Also associating the actions of an aspect of a group to the entire group / organisation is a very bad thing to do..

Modifié par XxDeonxX, 21 mars 2011 - 10:46 .

[Augustei]

ZombiePowered wrote...

I just feel bad for Ser Pounce-a-lot...

Dont worry, his friend in Amaranthine has been his owner for like 6 years now.... Whoever that friend might be is anyones guess

[Augustei]

Anyway to analyse the choice.. Its either kill Anders or let a crapload of Kirkwall Citizens die in the war with Starkhaven that will follow if you spare Anders.

I mean they have already been devistated by a Qunari Invasion and Mage Revolution... And yeah that was a devistation.. Unless you consider having pride demons run through the street not a big deal.
Kirkwall isn't exactly in the best position to defend itself right now

[sevalaricgirl]

My Hawke will be around Anders for longer than Anders will be alive probably. They went off together in the end of my first play through and will do the same in my second (second play through as a mage.) Anders only has 28 years give or take to live since he still has the taint from being a Grey Warden. I doubt I'll ever kill Anders.

Another thing, Sebastian says he's going after Anders but Anders doesn't stay in Kirkwall so Sebastian wouldn't march on Kirkwall.  I believe that Anders and my female Hawke will end up in Tevinter.  Fenryil (sp) says that the Tevinter people are talking about the champion taking down the Arishok and stopping the Qunari war.  Seems like it would be a good place for them to go.

It probably would have been different if they made Sebastian forsake his vows and have a relationship with Hawke, but what is now is NO relationship and even then I'd probably not kill Anders but who knows.

Modifié par sevalaricgirl, 21 mars 2011 - 10:56 .

[TMJfin]

I'm just finishing my third playtrough and firts time killed Anders. It almost brought tear to my eye cause I have loved the character since Awakwening

[Nodscouter]

Ha! The guy destroyed a whole damn chantry! Even if I had absolutely hated him earlier and had been waiting all along for a chance to kill him, I would've spared him for that. And seeing as he is my favourite, well, it's impossible for me to kill him.

[Retserof]

Pandaman102 wrote...

Ah, I see where our interpretation of the game's lore diverge. You're interpreting the Chantry as the source of the rules, whereas I'm interpreting the Chantry as the the "judicial" branch of a system established by Emperor Drakon. In the former case I can see the argument for them not being neutral, but in the latter case I see them more as "our hands are tied and we're going to be holier-than-thou while we're at it because that's our coping mechanism."

Given the lore is by no means complete (and has shown to even contridict itself at times at that) this is completly understandable. Under your interpretation I would wrong indeed.

If they are the judicial branch, it begs the question of who is actually setting forth the laws then (given they operate in different countries, I'm assuming their law is not set forth by the local rulers--though... perhaps it is)

Pandaman102 wrote...
The codex entry you quoted specifically states that all three branches were created by Drakon, that seems to suggest the Circle was created for a purpose and not just something that developed later to make things easier for the Templars. I was arguing that the Circle and Templars are both branches of the same organization with the Chantry being a neutral third party that tries to balance keeping mages in check and preventing the Templars from going all Qun on them.

That seems to be a reasonable assertion, and your conclusion regarding the Chantry as a "third party" of sorts would make sense. I suppose without knowing exactly how and by whom Chantry law is made, and how it affects each group (and if it affects them each differently) we can't be sure of much, can we? Especially when you take into consideration how each nation deals with the Chantry's law, and if they're accepting it or it's universally part of all the religious nations in Thedas (and this, from what I remember, has never been discussed in the lore).

I've been assuming Chantry Law is set forth by the Divine (and some subordinates) and encompasses all--both the Templar and Circle branches. Othwise, their law would have to have been set forth in their founding and not changed since (unlikely) or is shaped by whatever government they're under (location wise).

Pandaman102 wrote...
Either way, it still doesn't change the fact that Anders broke a system that allowed Andrasteans to tolerate legal mages and effectively strengthened the rhetoric against mages by forcing them into a situation where they have to resolve to blood magic to survive (since Templar abilities are more effective against regular magic).

Ah, but is the system necessary or even doing what it was claimed to do?

Without having seen the mages interact with the "normal" citizens sans-Chantry/Templars we can't claim there would be no tolerance or an inability to do so. Hawke (if a mage), Anders and Merrill (oh, and your sister) are the only examples, but given their essential immortality, consistancy of taking justice into their own hands for around 7 years, and connection to the plotline, they're not exactly shining examples of the average mage's interaction with a citizen.

So my counter-point is: the system was never shown to be necessary... except after it was established (and that caused untold variables regarding the actions of mages, rendering the "verdict" of sorts quite a fallacy akin to: "they try to escape so we need to lock them back up"). The consequences Kirkwall is experiencing are a direct result of the system, not a representation of how mages will interact with people were it not there.

Modifié par Retserof, 21 mars 2011 - 11:28 .

[Skyline19]

I didn't kill him because he was my healer, I wanted to kill him though. I was trying to earn peace between the mages and templars, at one point Anders even admired this, and yet he decided to blow up the chantry...****!

On my second playthrough I killed him, I was a mage that sided with the templars...odd I know, but I needed to do it for the trophies haha.

[LobselVith8]

cglasgow wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

That was Justice, not Anders.

So, we're just ignoring the part where Anders says that him and Justice are one being now, after the Chantry blows.

I take it you don't remember taking Anders to the Fade and seeing Justice take over, then hearing Justice talk about how much he missed it while comparing it to the real world.

Pandaman102 wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

The lives of the mages are tragic. Anders wanted to see the mages across Thedas free. Considering no one else in a thousand years was able to accomplish what Anders did, I don't see him as the villain that some people try to portray him as.

Tevinter Imperium, anyone?

I didn't realize we were ignoring that the nations of Arlathan and the Dales were nothing like the Tevinter Imperium.

[Beerfish]

BioWare did a good job of making me despise multiple people in this game and though I think I was supposed to hate Meredith the most I took greater pleasure in dispatching the lieing, cheating, turncoat, hypocrite Anders and the smug, dumb, pompous, arrogant Arishok.

[Pandaman102]

Retserof wrote...

Ah, but is the system necessary or even doing what it was claimed to do?

Without having seen the mages interact with the "normal" citizens sans-Chantry/Templars we can't claim there would be no tolerance or an inability to do so. Hawke (if a mage), Anders and Merrill (oh, and your sister) are the only examples, but given their essential immortality, consistancy of taking justice into their own hands for around 7 years, and connection to the plotline, they're not exactly shining examples of the average mage's interaction with a citizen.

So my counter-point is: the system was never shown to be necessary... except after it was established (and that caused untold variables regarding the actions of mages, rendering the "verdict" of sorts quite a fallacy akin to: "they try to escape so we need to lock them back up"). The consequences Kirkwall is experiencing are a direct result of the system, not a representation of how mages will interact with people were it not there.

I drew my assumptions largely from Wynn's stories of her childhood, about how she was locked in a barn until the Templars came but realized later it was as much for her protection as it was to protect the villagers from her. The Amell family history also revealed generations of shame regarding the magic in their blood, and though Leandra's parents eventually forgave her for eloping with an apostate it was still something that broke their family apart. Also one of the NPCs (or companions, Sebastian, maybe?) commented that magic was the mark of the Maker that he did not forgive humanity for their greed (although I thought that was what the darkspawn were supposed to be).

But again those are all just assumptions, too small a sampling to really reflect the attitudes of every Andrastean.  They're not quite as monolithic or predictable as the Qunari... though the revolutions do mean that Ferelden and the Free Marches (and anywhere else with the Chantry/Templar/Circle system) effectively have no standing mage and anti-mage forces in their army to fight the Tevinters or Qunari. Bad situation all around.

[LobselVith8]

XxDeonxX wrote...

Hawke wont be around forever to talk Vengenace down, they do go their seperate ways after all.. So letting him go or sparing him is like letting a homocidal maniac / Mass Murderer go.. Over the years Anders began to loose more and more control to Vengeance so its not like he will get any better.

Before Anders and Hawke met, he was healing the sick and the infirm, delivering babies, saving lives, so I don't see the problem. The people we know he killed was a Chantry spy in the Wardens and his cohorts who were trying to murder him in the short story. It was self-defense.

XxDeonxX wrote...

Not all members of the chantry are there by choice.. Like Alistair for example... Also associating the actions of an aspect of a group to the entire group / organisation is a very bad thing to do..

Who is keeping them there? We see in the cut scene no civilians during Anders attack, only templars, the Grand Cleric, and a few Chantry members. We have multiple characters referring to the Chantry controlled Circles as slavery, and the events in Kirkwall are seen as a sign by the mages since the "Champion's name became a rallying cry, a reminder that the mighty templars could be defied. He had defended the mages against a brutal injustice, and many lived to tell the tale. The Circles rose up and set the world on fire." Varric mentions to Cassandra that she "already lost all the Circles. In fact, haven't the templars rebelled as well? I thought you abandoned the Chantry to hunt the mages." Anders actions clearly lead to the seperation of the Circles from Chantry control, with the Order of Templars defecting as well, and even the Seekers apparently seperated to "hunt the mages" as Varric said. Due to Anders actions, the Circles finally have a chance at freedom after a millennia of subjugation.

XxDeonxX wrote...

Anyway to analyse the choice.. Its either kill Anders or let a crapload of Kirkwall Citizens die in the war with Starkhaven that will follow if you spare Anders.

I disagree. It's either spare Anders or let Sebastian make hollow threats that he'll never enforce because he continually waivers, as the Grand Cleric called him on. Unless Sebastian is going to hire Hawke to get the throne for him like he did to fight the mercenaries and deal with his political enemies, I don't see him gaining power in Starkhaven anytime soon.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 21 mars 2011 - 02:27 .

[Rockpopple]

Retserof wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...
Extremists in all walks of life bug the **** out of me.

Ah, but is justice in moderation justice at all? Rhetorical food for thought.

Rockpopple wrote...
So then he had to do suck a dick move...

Freudian slip, by the way?

...sorry, I couldn't help myself.

lol!!! Oh man. To be fair, it was 2:30 in the morning when I wrote that. 

[Pandaman102]

[quote]Pandaman102 wrote...

Tevinter Imperium, anyone?
[/quote]

I didn't realize we were ignoring that the nations of Arlathan and the Dales were nothing like the Tevinter Imperium.[/quote]
Neither of which were human empires, the former only bordering on legend because all recorded history of what it was like is gone (so we can't comment on how benevolent the mages were in it) and the latter didn't have "magic is evil, remember the Black City" ingrained into its culture.

To be fair neither of us have a foot to stand on until Bioware reveals whatever they're trying to do with the story in subsequent installments. Personally I'm still not convinced that freed mages will be greeted with milk any honey by the average person, or that mages won't lose their empathy for said average person after several months or years of hostility, or that the Chantry's warnings against magic being used to rule over man hasn't created a self-fulfilling prohphecy in the zeal.

[Haseeo]

I let him live and gave him a chance to atone for what he done

[Pandaman102]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Who is keeping them there? We see in the cut scene no civilians during Anders attack, only templars, the Grand Cleric, and a few Chantry members.

You've objected to people ignoring certain elements while disagreeing with you, but now you're ignoring that both DA:O and DA2 have numerous moments where you meet people who join the Chantry out of desperation (at least one of the girls you save), pledged into service (Sebastian and Alistair), or simply there to start a new life (Leliana)? Be fair, they're not all slavers in priests' robes.

LobselVith8 wrote...
We have multiple characters referring to the Chantry controlled Circles as slavery, and the events in Kirkwall are seen as a sign by the mages since the "Champion's name became a rallying cry, a reminder that the mighty templars could be defied. He had defended the mages against a brutal injustice, and many lived to tell the tale. The Circles rose up and set the world on fire." Varric mentions to Cassandra that she "already lost all the Circles. In fact, haven't the templars rebelled as well? I thought you abandoned the Chantry to hunt the mages." Anders actions clearly lead to the seperation of the Circles from Chantry control, with the Order of Templars defecting as well, and even the Seekers apparently seperated to "hunt the mages" as Varric said. Due to Anders actions, the Circles finally have a chance at freedom after a  millennia of subjugation.

Wasn't Varric referring to the Templars rebelling from Chantry control to hunt mages? Either way, that still suggests the Chantry is trying to prevent outright war and the Templars (or Seekers) are the ones who can't tolerate mages.

Modifié par Pandaman102, 21 mars 2011 - 02:55 .

[LobselVith8]

Pandaman102 wrote...

Neither of which were human empires, the former only bordering on legend because all recorded history of what it was like is gone (so we can't comment on how benevolent the mages were in it) and the latter didn't have "magic is evil, remember the Black City" ingrained into its culture.

To be fair neither of us have a foot to stand on until Bioware reveals whatever they're trying to do with the story in subsequent installments. Personally I'm still not convinced that freed mages will be greeted with milk any honey by the average person, or that mages won't lose their empathy for said average person after several months or years of hostility, or that the Chantry's warnings against magic being used to rule over man hasn't created a self-fulfilling prohphecy in the zeal.

We know there are free mages in the Chasind tribes, in the town of Haven, and we know about the witches of Rivain, and none of those societies are another Tevinter Imperium. I don't think free mages = Tevinter Imperium when we have examples where this isn't so.

Pandaman102 wrote...

You've objected to people ignoring certain elements while disagreeing with you, but now you're ignoring that both DA:O and DA2 have numerous moments where you meet people who join the Chantry out of desperation (at least one of the girls you save), pledged into service (Sebastian and Alistair), or simply there to start a new life (Leliana)? Be fair, they're not all slavers in priests' robes.

I never claimed they were all slavers, but it's fact that they're members of an organization involved in the slavery of mages. I make no assumptions about the content of their character, but I simply don't t seperate the fact that they are members of the Chantry and that the Chantry is enslaving mages, especially when looking at why Anders did what he did. Anders is trying to abolish the slavery of his people, and he targetted the local head of the very organization that's enslaving his people. The Grand Cleric has done nothing, and Anders sees this as his opportunity to force the issue so mages can rise up and emancipate themselves from both the Chantry and the Order of Templars. It's exactly what ensues because of his actions - the Circles break free from the Chantry and the templars.

Pandaman102 wrote...

Wasn't Varric referring to the Templars rebelling from Chantry control to hunt mages? Either way, that still suggests the Chantry is trying to prevent outright war and the Templars (or Seekers) are the ones who can't tolerate mages.

No, Varric was referring to Cassandra, a Seeker. I used quotes because they're precisely what Varric says at the end of DA2. Cassandra is the one who says that not everyone wants a war.

[speedy111280]

I kill him every single time and probably always will. Killing the Grand Cleric was the stupidest move he could have made. She was the one trying to keep the peace between Meredith and Orsino. The Grand Cleric in Kirkwall had no control over the Templars at all. From the moment you reach Kirkwall it's obvious the real power in the city is Meredith. Meredith is the one taking the dictates of the Order way too far. If he had blown her up I would fully support him.

I dislike the way mages are handled throughout Thedas, including in the Imperium where they have a ton of power. The Tevinter Imperium of old is the reason why such a large portion of society fears mages. The system needs to change but that can only happen when you get a lot of non-mages on your side and killing the Grand Cleric is not the way to do it. All it does it turn the people even more against the mages. They can point to Kirkwall and say, "see, this is why you can't trust mages." Terrorist acts don't get you any sympathy from those you need it from and a lot of times not even from those you do the terrorist act for.

[Lirea Dragonage]

I spared him the first time round because my mage was in love with him.
I was going to kill him on my second playthrough but that line about becoming a martyr peed me off so I reloaded and spared him. No way am I letting Anders become a hero; he can stick around and see the chaos he's caused and hopefully one day he'll feel remorse.

[cglasgow]

LobselVith8 wrote...

We know there are free mages in the Chasind tribes, in the town of Haven, and we know about the witches of Rivain, and none of those societies are another Tevinter Imperium.

So, the barbarians that are squeezed between Ferelden and Flemeth, the town of freaky blood magic cultists, and the place we have absolutely no knowledge of except that part of it is ruled by the Raiders of the Waking Sea and the other part by the qunari, and you're still using that as examples that mages don't need monitoring?

Please.  We can all figure out who kills Chasind abominations; the rest of their tribe, much as how Dalish clans shoot the Keeper if she gets possessed.   This works if you are a small group, all adults of which traditionally travel armed, and live in communal living quarters; it carries the same amount of 'no real privacy and everybody around you is trained at head-bashing' atmosphere as a Circle of Magi.   There are differences, but there's also that core similarity; you are watched.  (And, of course, while this works great for small tribes, it doesn't scale up well to human cities.)

Not to mention, of course, that if anything ever gets really out of hand in Chasind territory, Flemeth will eventually come along and go 'All right, that's enough of that.'  *chomp*

As for Haven... yes, Father Kolgrim is exactly the sort of kind, benevolent mage ruler we want.   /sarcasm  Let me see... ruled with an iron hand, blood magic, human sacrifice, unrepentant murder, wants to ****** on Andraste's ashes... really, the main difference between him and Tevinter was scale; he only had one village, not an army of slaves.  He even worshipped a dragon, just like them! 

And like I've said before, you can talk about how nice a place Rivain is when we actually get an exploration of Rivain.   Even Tevinter was largely a topic of speculation until we finally had an eyewitness show up in DA2.

Modifié par cglasgow, 21 mars 2011 - 04:52 .

[Minmon]

I killed Anders once I saw what he did, and I only reloaded to an earlier save so I could stock up on health pots so I wouldn't need him afterwards.

While the Chantry may be partly to blame for all the stuff that went down (a stance I disagree with), people have to remember that the Chantry House is still a church. Go back to DA:O and check out the Chantry houses in Redcliffe and Lothering and you'll see that Chantries aren't just offices where the clergy work, they're also places where the regular folk come to pray, ask for help, receive guidance, meet up, etc. Regardless of how you may feel about the involvement of the clergy in the subjugation of the mages, Anders certainly killed more than a few innocents who were just there.He wasn't even remorseful about it, and he had ample opportunity to plant the bomb in Templar HQ when I was wandering around doing stuff for Meredith.

As for Anders' motive, I can definitely understand where he's coming from, but let's look at another in-game example. In Act 2 when you wander around lowtown at night you get hit up by "Dog Lords" who want to kill you and take your stuff. Are they a member of a repressed minority? For sure they are! Time and time again it is shown that Ferelden refugees are treated like 3rd class citizens, with most just trying to eke out a living in the slums. Do those Dog Lords have a motive? Sure they do! Do I cut them down like the filthy thieves and murderes they are? You bet I do!

Anders specifically set it up so that there would be no compromise. What's worse, he wasn't even a blood mage so that mages could say it was the blood magic that did it. If you play a Hawke that has any empathy for the death of innocents, I can't imagine letting Anders live.

[LobselVith8]

cglasgow wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

We know there are free mages in the Chasind tribes, in the town of Haven, and we know about the witches of Rivain, and none of those societies are another Tevinter Imperium.

So, the barbarians that are squeezed between Ferelden and Flemeth, the town of freaky blood magic cultists, and the place we have absolutely no knowledge of except that part of it is ruled by the Raiders of the Waking Sea and the other part by the qunari, and you're still using that as examples that mages don't need monitoring?

I included Haven in examples that illustrate that free mages don't equal another Tevinter Imperium, and I'm rather tired of people always making such a claim when these societies illustrate that this isn't the case. As for whether the Chantry is following the correct course of action, as Hawke can tell Anders, "Forcing mages into servitude isn't going to prevent the rise of another Imperium."

cglasgow wrote...

Please.  We can all figure out who kills Chasind abominations; the rest of their tribe, much as how Dalish clans shoot the Keeper if she gets possessed.   

You seem to have misread the intent of my post. I didn't use them as examples of societies superior to the Andrastian model, I addressed their existance to show that societies with free mages doesn't mean they'll necessarily emulate the Tevinter Imperium.

cglasgow wrote...

As for Haven... yes, Father Kolgrim is exactly the sort of kind, benevolent mage ruler we want.   /sarcasm  Let me see... ruled with an iron hand, blood magic, human sacrifice, unrepentant murder, wants to ****** on Andraste's ashes... really, the main difference between him and Tevinter was scale; he only had one village, not an army of slaves.  He even worshipped a dragon, just like them! 

This isn't a discussion of morality, it's addressing that free mages don't equal another Tevinter Imperium. To address your first point, Kolgrim isn't a mage. He's a Reaver warrior. He never uses magic when we fight him, and he never addresses himself as a mage. Second, Haven isn't a magocracy when it's not governed entirely by mages. The person in charge of the Disciples of Andraste is Kolgrim, a Reaver warrior.

Furthermore, I don't dispute that it's a morally bankrupt society, but it's been around for 900 years and the mages moralities aren't in question here - the fact that the people don't inherently hate mages or magic, and none of the mages who we encounter are abominations are points that I think should be addressed in a society with free mages like Haven; furthermore, Haven wasn't a repeat of the Tevinter Imperium despite the presence of free mages.

cglasgow wrote...

And like I've said before, you can talk about how nice a place Rivain is when we actually get an exploration of Rivain.   Even Tevinter was largely a topic of speculation until we finally had an eyewitness show up in DA2.

Why are you addressing the social conditions of Rivain when it wasn't even brought up? I addressed that there are free mages in Rivain and it's not another Tevinter Imperium, not that it was a utopia.

[Curlain]

Yep, I killed Vengeance-Anders, the guy killed one of the two only semi-reasonable people (the other being Orsino(sp?), at least until he decided he had to turn into an mega-abomination just because) heading the various factions in the game, and forced my Hawke to engage in a battle he didn't want, fighting the templars to protect his sister. And throughout the ending a whole load of mages kept turning into abominations or were conduits for demons to come forth, which kinda ruined their whole position that mages are fine to be allowed to wonder free in society without any supervision.  *sigh*, sorry the execution of the finale just didn't feel right to me and Anders being such an idiot in the final scene and forcing a rather contrived ending didn't help.  Oh well, he paid the price

Modifié par Curlain, 21 mars 2011 - 05:34 .