2340 réponses à ce sujet

[Melca36]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Terrorism never makes sense.

Really? I think it always makes sense. There's some sort of underlying motive for every terrorist act, and this one was made pretty obvious. I'm not even certain if "terrorist" is accurate, but as they say, one person's terrorist is another one's freedom fighter.

This word is constantly thrown at Anders every time his actions are given any criticism. Technically, the American revolutionaries could be seen as terrorists. The slaves of Saint Domonique who rebelled against slavery and oppression from France and Napoleon could be seen as terrorists. The Cuban revolutionaries fighting for democracy could be seen as terrorists. I don't understand why people who dislike Anders always throw the word around as though it should villify him when many groups we don't denigrate can be labelled with the same word.

Anders wanted to put an end to an institution that he saw as "slavery," and his opinion that it's slavery isn't dismissed by even the hardcore pro-Chantry members of Hawke's group (since even pro-mage Hawke calls it slavery). Never once does Fenris or Sebastian say that what the Chantry controlled Circles aren't slavery, even when providing their own opinion on the matter. Even Cullen seems to think that templars have "divine right" over mages. From the POV of my apostate Hawke: am I supposed to hate a man who wants to end the slavery of our people?

My mage Hawkes have been an apostate all their life. They had to endure a life on the run and when settling in Lothering with the family had to hide who they truly were.
By the time ACT 3 comes around, they're pretty much done mentally and emotionally. They would rather die fighting than have other mages had to live the way they did.

[Zanallen]

Melca36 wrote...

No.  Thats your roleplay choice...NOT everybody else's. When you get older you will understand what choice means.
What your are trying to do is convert people to your opinion...big difference.

But it wasn't my choice because I never made that choice. Don't tell me what i did and didn't do, please. It is unbecomming of someone with your level of fancy pantsness. That being said, it has been confirmed that the correct choice is murdering Anders. Letting him live causes terrible reprecussions in DA3.

[Zanallen]

Neminea wrote...

Don't forget the recistance during the second world war. They were terrorist from the german pov.

The distinction is generally based on the intended target. Military? Freedom fighter. Civilian? Terrorist.

[Neminea]

Confirmed where? I saw no such thing.
Even if that is true, which I doubt since I heard nothing about any difinitive stories for da3, maybe playing with terrible reprecussions is more interesting to some players then having everything be a rainbowy breeze

[esper]

[quote]Monica21 wrote...

[quote]esper wrote...
So basically your problem it that it comes to close to real life?[/quote]
Essentially yes. Anders doesn't need a bomb to be dangerous. He can be dangerous by doing nothing more than using magic.


[quote]I like the fact that Anders involved Hawke, all the way to the emotional blackmail.[/quote]
I don't mind the emotional blackmail part, to be honest. That's the least of my problems. I think that's interesting characterization. I didn't like why I was being blackmailed.


[quote]I don't think that is sloppy writing. It think that is an exellenct charactization of a man ready to sacrifice everything for an ideal and a cause, and I mean everything. Anders is meant to be a dangerous man, I never denied that.[/quote]
The problem with the "sacrificing everything" bit is that if a Hawke doesn't kill him and doesn't end the relationship, he hasn't sacrificed anything. I don't really care if he's ready to sacrifice either, because he made a choice that sacrificed someone else's life in the name of his cause.


[quote]Good stories have real life paralells, even fantasy stories.[/quote]
This is less a parallel and more "straight from the headlines."


[quote]Bad writng is thing like Orsino suddenly going insane when pro-mage Hawke is winning the fight.[/quote]
It's possible to have more than one instance of bad writing. Meredith was bad writing too.

[quote]And quite frankly. What does it matter what the bomb are made of?[]/quote]
It's unoriginal.


[quote]Is the problem not how many it kills and not how it kills them. I find it disturbing that some people seem to think that it would be a less unredeemable crime if Anders had... say turned everyone in the chantry to dust with a random tevinter spell that didn't blew the building up in a flashy red laser light, or if he had poisoned everyone in the chantry with magic gas or something.[/quote]
No, the problem is that I was surprised the writers couldn't think of something more original as Anders breaking point. Terrorism never makes sense. 
[/quote]

I am not quite sure how to do the breaking quote up in smaller part thing, so I will have to answer in one bit, Sorry.

I is a magical bomb. I have never seen a bomb like that, and only the qunari knows gunpowder in Thedas so it is a magic spell through and through. (Personally I think it works, by amplifying some of the gunpowder characteristics of Salta Petra, but salt peter does not explode in that way in real world. I imagine bioware picked that specific ingredient to warn us what it was).

Being able to sacrifice everything and actually doing it isn't really Anders' call. It is Hawke's, Anders was ready to do it, but Hawke can choose to disagree. (I will take the sacrifice some else under the terroism thing).

Yeah, it is straight from the headlines, but so what? That is a sure way ensure that we notice it and think about it.   

I didn't say that Orsino was the only bad writing. He was just the most obvious example.

Not everything has to be original. I think it was a smart enough move. It should make the people well known in those sort of subject be supicious of what he was doing, thus making it more likely that they would get to the blackmail part. And it was still a magic bomb, even if it had some real components.

Terroism never makes sense? Our society is build on war and civil war and if you think that no innocenct was targted in those wars you are wrong. What is there to do if the laws doesn't work (as they don't work in Thedas)? The authority uses your people as a frigthning campaing and you have nothing to negotiate with? 
You can't peacefully solve that, diplomacy only works when both parts are ready to talk and something to lose in the war. There are no way to appeal for the mages, they can only fight. 

Anders targted the very symbol of the oppression: The Chantry. No matter what, they were resonsible for the templars. The main targets vere not the civil. It was Elthina and it was meant to be done in a way that none one would doubt that it was magic. Yes, innocenct died, and it was horrible, but how many mages would continue to die under the currenct system? How long should the mages wait? Another 1000 years? The mages under the currenct system have done nothing to be placed in the circles, and much more have died than who died in the blast. Why should the mages accept that? 
Nothing would chance peacefully, Anders' act makes perfect sense no matter which label we put on it.   
   

[Neminea]

Zanallen wrote...

Neminea wrote...

Don't forget the recistance during the second world war. They were terrorist from the german pov.

The distinction is generally based on the intended target. Military? Freedom fighter. Civilian? Terrorist.

Uhm.. do you really think no civilians were ever harmed during their actions? And the chantry is the head of the templars, so could easily be concidered military. Whatever they are, they are not civilians.

[Zanallen]

Neminea wrote...

Uhm.. do you really think no civilians were ever harmed during their actions? And the chantry is the head of the templars, so could easily be concidered military. Whatever they are, they are not civilians.

Civilians are going to be harmed in any engagement. It is difficult to prevent. The point is whether or not the target is primarily military or civilian. The Chantry can be argued as a military target, though most templars would probably be stationed near the Gallows and not in a church in the middle of the night. And I never said Anders was a terrorist. He's an idiot who really only made the situation of mages worse.

[Zanallen]

Neminea wrote...

Confirmed where? I saw no such thing.
Even if that is true, which I doubt since I heard nothing about any difinitive stories for da3, maybe playing with terrible reprecussions is more interesting to some players then having everything be a rainbowy breeze

It is rumored that you can't actually beat the game if you let Anders live. The DA3 protagonist gets killed and its game over.

[HopHazzard]

I let him live on my first play through. I had romanced him and wanted to get the achievement and knew I'd never have the stomach to let him live ever again. Even though I think war between the mages and the chantry was inevitable and that something like what Anders did was bound to happen eventually, he's still personally responsible for a lot of deaths and indirectly for every death that results from the war he started. Hell, I actually think that when the dust settles from all this the world will be a better place, but Anders himself has a lot of blood on his hands and he needs to pay for that.

[LobselVith8]

Zanallen wrote...

Neminea wrote...

Uhm.. do you really think no civilians were ever harmed during their actions? And the chantry is the head of the templars, so could easily be concidered military. Whatever they are, they are not civilians.

Civilians are going to be harmed in any engagement. It is difficult to prevent. The point is whether or not the target is primarily military or civilian. The Chantry can be argued as a military target, though most templars would probably be stationed near the Gallows and not in a church in the middle of the night. And I never said Anders was a terrorist. He's an idiot who really only made the situation of mages worse.

There are templars in the Kirkwall Chantry, as we see in the scene when the Kirkwall Chantry is destroyed. And how is freedom worse than living a life that some view as slavery?

[Monica21]

Xilizhra wrote...

Terrorism never makes sense.

Really? I think it always makes sense. There's some sort of underlying motive for every terrorist act, and this one was made pretty obvious. I'm not even certain if "terrorist" is accurate, but as they say, one person's terrorist is another one's freedom fighter.

Motive is not the same as sense. It doesn't make sense because it's always a negative move toward reaching whatever goal you desire. It's an attempt to intimidate through fear.

[Herr Uhl]

Monica21 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Really? I think it always makes sense. There's some sort of underlying motive for every terrorist act, and this one was made pretty obvious. I'm not even certain if "terrorist" is accurate, but as they say, one person's terrorist is another one's freedom fighter.

Motive is not the same as sense. It doesn't make sense because it's always a negative move toward reaching whatever goal you desire. It's an attempt to intimidate through fear.

Isn't intimidation always through fear?

[Neminea]

Zanallen wrote...

Neminea wrote...

Confirmed where? I saw no such thing.
Even if that is true, which I doubt since I heard nothing about any difinitive stories for da3, maybe playing with terrible reprecussions is more interesting to some players then having everything be a rainbowy breeze

It is rumored that you can't actually beat the game if you let Anders live. The DA3 protagonist gets killed and its game over.

Rumours are for nursemaids to be honest.
I would honestly applaud that though, finally a choice in da2 that has a real concequence. I'll let him live just for that.

Zanallen wrote...

Neminea wrote...

Uhm.. do you really think no civilians were ever harmed during their actions? And the chantry is the head of the templars, so could easily be concidered military. Whatever they are, they are not civilians.

Civilians are going to be harmed in any engagement. It is difficult to prevent. The point is whether or not the target is primarily military or civilian. The Chantry can be argued as a military target, though most templars would probably be stationed near the Gallows and not in a church in the middle of the night. And I never said Anders was a terrorist. He's an idiot who really only made the situation of mages worse.

But it didn't, doesn't it say in the end that his action made the circles stand up and fight?

Modifié par Neminea, 21 août 2011 - 05:04 .

[Zanallen]

LobselVith8 wrote...

There are templars in the Kirkwall Chantry, as we see in the scene when the Kirkwall Chantry is destroyed. And how is freedom worse than living a life that some view as slavery?

You are assuming that the mages are going to survive their war with the templars, something that is not at all certain. Either way, a lot of mages are going to be dead. No freedom, no "slavery", just dead. Anders set off a powder keg and I honestly don't think he was prepared for the consequences. Ah well, demon possession will do that to you.

[Zanallen]

Neminea wrote...

Rumours are for nursemaids to be honest.
I would honestly applaud that though, finally a choice in da2 that has a real concequence. I'll let him live just for that.

But DA4 is going to be super duper cool and you won't have a character to import anymore.

[AngryFrozenWater]

Zanallen wrote...

Neminea wrote...

Confirmed where? I saw no such thing.
Even if that is true, which I doubt since I heard nothing about any difinitive stories for da3, maybe playing with terrible reprecussions is more interesting to some players then having everything be a rainbowy breeze

It is rumored that you can't actually beat the game if you let Anders live. The DA3 protagonist gets killed and its game over.

Ghehe. That would be really funny. If that turns out to be true then people's playhoughs of about 40 hours or so will be rendered useless. I would love to see how they would respond in the forums. Nah. I can't believe BW forces options like that to further railroad the story. I think. Ghehe.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 21 août 2011 - 05:05 .

[Neminea]

Zanallen wrote...

Neminea wrote...

Rumours are for nursemaids to be honest.
I would honestly applaud that though, finally a choice in da2 that has a real concequence. I'll let him live just for that.

But DA4 is going to be super duper cool and you won't have a character to import anymore.

I can live with that, plenty of people made the warden do the sacrifice thing and went through awakening fine.

[LobselVith8]

Zanallen wrote...

You are assuming that the mages are going to survive their war with the templars, something that is not at all certain. Either way, a lot of mages are going to be dead. No freedom, no "slavery", just dead. Anders set off a powder keg and I honestly don't think he was prepared for the consequences. Ah well, demon possession will do that to you.

So far, the mages have emancipated themselves from the Chantry, and Anders keeps referring to a pro-mage apostate Hawke as the leader the mages have been waiting for. If Hawke is leading the mages against the templars, I don't see victory as impossible.

[Monica21]

LobselVith8 wrote...
This word is constantly thrown at Anders every time his actions are given any criticism. Technically, the American revolutionaries could be seen as terrorists.

No, not technically at all. The revolutionaries were revolutionaries. They weren't even technically revolutionaries, they were secessionists. They didn't want to overthrow a government, they just wanted to rule themselves. They didn't blow up buildings with their own citizens inside. They fought the guys in the red coats. They didn't harm their own people, and the closest they came to harming property was throwing a bunch of tea that no one had bought anyway into a harbor.

Your other examples I can't comment on because I don't know enough about them.

Anders wanted to put an end to an institution that he saw as "slavery," and his opinion that it's slavery isn't dismissed by even the hardcore pro-Chantry members of Hawke's group (since even pro-mage Hawke calls it slavery). Never once does Fenris or Sebastian say that what the Chantry controlled Circles aren't slavery, even when providing their own opinion on the matter. Even Cullen seems to think that templars have "divine right" over mages. From the POV of my apostate Hawke: am I supposed to hate a man who wants to end the slavery of our people?

I largely disagree with the term "slave" and I think it's thrown around too loosely. Prisoner would be a much more accurate description. And Cullen thinks templars have divine right because he's an Andrastian. What else is he supposed to think? 

I never said anyone should hate Anders, but I think his methods are simply stupid.

[Neminea]

Zanallen wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

There are templars in the Kirkwall Chantry, as we see in the scene when the Kirkwall Chantry is destroyed. And how is freedom worse than living a life that some view as slavery?

You are assuming that the mages are going to survive their war with the templars, something that is not at all certain. Either way, a lot of mages are going to be dead. No freedom, no "slavery", just dead. Anders set off a powder keg and I honestly don't think he was prepared for the consequences. Ah well, demon possession will do that to you.

Ahum
They make take our lives, but they will never take... our freeeeeedooooooooooooooooooom!

I've been waiting for an excuse to use that since I started posting on this forum

[Xilizhra]

Motive is not the same as sense. It doesn't make sense because it's always a negative move toward reaching whatever goal you desire. It's an attempt to intimidate through fear.

I think it was more an attempt to inspire via applied force. Which it totally succeeded in doing.

[Zanallen]

LobselVith8 wrote...

So far, the mages have emancipated themselves from the Chantry, and Anders keeps referring to a pro-mage apostate Hawke as the leader the mages have been waiting for. If Hawke is leading the mages against the templars, I don't see victory as impossible.

But Hawke disappears. So, no, the mages don't have their leader. And how many allies do you think the mages actually have? Tevinter is the only one I can think of and they don't have the forces to join the mages. Maybe Fereldan, but it was devestated by a Blight, so I wouldn't imagine it having much military might. Most of the countries in Thedas are populated by Andrastians and would most likely support the Chantry in whatever it plans to do. Plus, templars are specifically trained to counter and kill mages.

[Zanallen]

Neminea wrote...

I can live with that, plenty of people made the warden do the sacrifice thing and went through awakening fine.

Nah, they are pulling a ME3 and not allowing dead protagonists to be imported anymore.

[Monica21]

Xilizhra wrote...

Motive is not the same as sense. It doesn't make sense because it's always a negative move toward reaching whatever goal you desire. It's an attempt to intimidate through fear.

I think it was more an attempt to inspire via applied force. Which it totally succeeded in doing.

And then you end up with freaked out non-mages who do things like waterboa... er, torture mages when they find them because one guy blew up a Chantry. Short term and long term I don't see him succeeding in making people less afraid of mages.

[Wulfram]

Xilizhra wrote...
I think it was more an attempt to inspire via applied force. Which it totally succeeded in doing.

Not inspire, so much as provoke.  His objective was the destruction of the Circle at Chantry hands.