131 réponses à ce sujet

[Red Templar]

not really. The Qunari have a deep aversion towards Magic. The Banter between Sten and Shale showed that Shale would not exactly be free in the Qunari Society. It would be Control Rod all over again. And the Grey Warden, who are needed to stop Blights, are essentially Magic Creatures. The Darkspawn can sense them, and after 20-30 years, the Taint takes over. So every Qunari Grey Warden would need a Guard, not to mention that at Birth, someones role would be to be tainted. I can't really see them do that.
Plus, before Origins, the Qunari didn't even know what a Blight is.

The qunari have an aversion towards magic... but their mages are used, and even respected, so long as they conform to the social order. Everyone has a role under the Qun, and Qunari mages would be used against the Blight just as much as they were used when the Arishok got fed up with Kirkwall. Shale... can't really say how they'd deal with her, but it isn't like they would need to. Shale was hardly vital for defeating the Archdemon, and wouldn't be needed by the Qunari. The only questionable area is Qunari and Grey Wardens... but if Grey Wardens converted to the Qun, and the Qunari knew about the vital role Grey Wardens play in defeating the Blights, I'm sure the Qunari would embrace the concept and commit their own to the order out of a sense of duty.

In a Qunari Ferelden, there would have been no backstabbing, no betrayals at Ostagar, no squabbling among the nobility, no petty civil wars to claim the throne while the Blight spread unchecked. The Arishok would declare war, and all the might of qunari society would unite to crush the threat. If Ferelden was a proper Qunari nation, the Blight would have stopped at Ostagar.

Also: Forcing a Religion on a huge area would cause quite a few problems.

As a general principle, converting people by the sword is poorly received. But the people who have been so conquered and converted by the Qun seem to be happier for it - are described as pitying humans who are not similarly enlightened - and the Qunari would not need to enforce anything on a population that willingly conformed. Sure, if the Qunari had pitched up like a day before the Blight started that would have been a mess. But what I'm saying is that if the Qunari conquered Thedas tommorow, by the time the next Blight occured Thedas would be much better prepared to fight it off.

Modifié par Red Templar, 14 mars 2011 - 03:11 .

[Tleining]

@ Red Templar
yes, but that's the difference between Mages and Grey Warden. Mages are born with their abilites. They are pitied and respected for that. But using Magic outside of that, even worse, Magic that uses Blood (Darkspawn Blood) is something else. We don't know how they will react to that. Sten never learned the truth about the Ritual or the meaning of it. But he wasn't very impressed with the Grey Wardens, only your Warden can gain his respect.
Aside from that, the whole Archdemon soul thing has connections to the Chantry and the believe in the Maker. As far as i can tell, the Qunari don't believe in Souls or life after death. Would be interesting to see how that works out

The thing is, if all of Thedas is part of the Qun, where do the Tal-Vashoth go? Right now, they can become Mercs/Traders in the rest of Thedas. If that doesn't work anymore, it's a recipe for Civil War.

[QwibQwib]

@kenkenpachi(I'd quote you but I'm on my iPad, for some reason I can only type in quick reply) if it comes to that.....can I hide under your robes? TT.TT
Yea, come to think of it, they are not ignorant I misused that word, my bad. But they are just like Templars, but with different ideals, eventually people will get tired and rebel, free will always wins

[Red Templar]

Tleining wrote...

@ Red Templar
yes, but that's the difference between Mages and Grey Warden. Mages are born with their abilites. They are pitied and respected for that. But using Magic outside of that, even worse, Magic that uses Blood (Darkspawn Blood) is something else. We don't know how they will react to that. Sten never learned the truth about the Ritual or the meaning of it. But he wasn't very impressed with the Grey Wardens, only your Warden can gain his respect.
Aside from that, the whole Archdemon soul thing has connections to the Chantry and the believe in the Maker. As far as i can tell, the Qunari don't believe in Souls or life after death. Would be interesting to see how that works out

Some of what Stenn said implies that the Qunari are curious about Wardens, however, and if he returns to his people with positive impressions of the Warden, they might not dismiss the order out of hand. But even if they didn't believe in all the talk of souls and such, they would eventually recognize that their own means can't kill the Archdemon and they would look to how the Wardens did it. Even if it meant that Qqnari wardens would be chained up like their mages, they would commit their soldiers to that fate if it meant the preservation of the Qun. Their society is about serving the needs of society and social order, and an order of elite warriors who give their lives to defeat the corruption of the blights is something that would appeal to the qunari mindset.

The thing is, if all of Thedas is part of the Qun, where do the Tal-Vashoth go? Right now, they can become Mercs/Traders in the rest of Thedas. If that doesn't work anymore, it's a recipe for Civil War.

They'd go somewhere. Mountains, wilderness... it isn't like the Qunari would build cities everywhere. And I don't really see the Tal-Vashoth waging civil war. Even in rebellion, the Tal-Vashoth are dutiful. So far it seems like Tal-Vashoth don't blame their rebellion on the Qun, but on their own moral weakness - and so they conform to a very narrowly defined type of rebellion that fits perfectly into the Qunari worldview and actually vallidates that ideology. I don't think Tal-Vashoth would ever try to overthrow the Qun in civil war, they would simply conform to their place as Tal-Vashoth and distance themselves from it.

Modifié par Red Templar, 14 mars 2011 - 03:32 .

[Annarl]

Dileos wrote...

To be honest every major faction had me wishing for a "screw this, I'm going back to Ferelden" line.

Seriously, Hawke would have been much better off just moving to Denirim with the cash he got after the blight ended.

Quite simply, I agree.

[NinjaRogue]

The Arishok can go screw himself. I am running around town using his "soul" to do my will

Seriously, he chose the wrong Hawke to ****** off, for most of the game my Hawke was a charming fellow, but after that little incident all the pain in Hawke's life came gushing forth. Then when he was going to take Isabela, the only good thing left in my Hawke's, he effed up.

I got two words for the Qun....guess them

[Icy Magebane]

Humans are meant to be free, not to be enslaved, by other humans or by some socio-political system that sets you on a certain path from the day you are born. I can understand the desire for law and order, but to be told "You are a chef," and that's it? You can't learn anything else, and if you don't like being a chef, that's just too damn bad. I really don't understand how people could agree to something like that... It might be good for the people at the top, but what if you are put in some role you don't like? Just deal with it and obey the rules... again, no thanks.

[KenKenpachi]

QwibQwib wrote...

@kenkenpachi(I'd quote you but I'm on my iPad, for some reason I can only type in quick reply) if it comes to that.....can I hide under your robes? TT.TT
Yea, come to think of it, they are not ignorant I misused that word, my bad. But they are just like Templars, but with different ideals, eventually people will get tired and rebel, free will always wins

Oh you can keep the dance going for a bit, its a difficult game however. Enough control, and enough expression, while all the same, giving a threat that must always be faced over the horizion, or a new bar to reach for. So far the Qunari seem to be masters at this game, they don't finish off the humans, while at the same time attacking the Tervinter Imperium, that allows one to keep an Army fighting Fit, and at the same time goes SEE MORE ENEMIES! They also allow disrupters to leave willingly. much as Cuba has, allowing the Communist government to maintane control, even while alone, yes you can't change the system, but they seem to allow you without any harm to just leave. In many ways its like how the Internal Security of the PRC has delt with its internal issues. Its hard to gather for an event if your idea's are constantly the minority and your meeting places are cut off from the attention they seek. As I said its a difficult dance but it is doable.  Its like any Empire, it only remains great as long as it can expand.

Even "freedoms" are subjecive, simply issue enough propaganda, or allow enough basic ignorace and you can shape the minds of others. Like many North Koreans that think they live in the best nation in the world and MUST fight the South Koreans and Americas. Sure you will have those who won't buy it, but at the same time they won't be many. If I were to have taken you as a child and exposed you to nothing else than my words, and my views, no matter how flawed or insanse they would be your truths. If I were to cage a group of kids and teach them only what I wish them to know, even if they found other sources, they would not know how to handle it or what to make of it. Thats why in India you can find a Call Center for a PC company, and a village elder killing someone for Witch craft,  or steping out of caste. In fact its like in China the pro-democracy movement, is sad and just upper city rich kids shamble. If any revolution happend in China it would be Military Control, or Nationalistic, heck the Chinese have subtlely been feeding there kids nationalisim, and its starting to bust out, even to the point the Old guard is prepairing to do away with the one child policy, and religion is being allowed.

So how would you truely know freewill when I shape your mind, or the goverment, and no other source of information is out there? If the net could be pulled and enough of the elderly silenced, or killed you could make any story you wished if the information is controlled. However at some point you have to release the riens a bit to keep the mule from bucking. So in retrospect the state that rules the best rules the least, and with a well though out plan and societal manner that deals with "disruptive influances" well. If your words become truth, and the only truth, you don't need to use oppression. You win by default. If a rebelion happens it will end up being more of the same old as thats all the people know, maybe harsher, maybe softer, but the same.  Even in Western Civilization has such happend. In fact the use of "Violence is not an option" thats preached by many governments has kept many citizens in line when they feel the government is wroning them. While in the past they would have fought, that right there has been an effective subjecation of free will. A persons Will varies from person to person in anycase, and most will dance to the tune that is played.


Wow I rambled a bit didn't I? But I doubt robes will do much good versus bullets.

Modifié par KenKenpachi, 14 mars 2011 - 03:48 .

[QwibQwib]

@kenkenpachi, nah you didn't ramble, you make a good point. I remember fenris saying that the Q don't kill they rather have you alive, they don't waste anything or anyone. But still, in future games they prob will the ones that will help you to fight off the war but in exchange of something.

[Jayce]

Red Templar wrote...

Jayce F wrote...

The Qun are no better than the Templars, they ultimately want to impose rigid order and control on society. I'm not much of an anarchist but both groups made me want to buy a Guy Fawkes mask and a black chapeau and start blowing up large parts of Kirkwall.

It is substantially different though. The templars impose order on a minority of society for the greater good and for the wellbeing of the rest of the populace. The qunari don't just impose rigid order - they convert, they improve, they change society to the point where it works without the need for tyranny; what do you need heavy handed force for in a culture where everyone willingly conforms? Sure, there is precious little freedom and flexibility in it... but individualism is a small price to pay for a society that achieves perfect rule of law without corruption or abuse. People who convert to the Qun are happier for it, and their society truly seems to be about the good of the whole and unfailing honour. A society where even the lowest of the low is honoured and respected for playing his role in the Qun is more noble than the ambitious, cutthroat culture that humans have cultivated.

The Qunari culture is very stern, but there is a certain nobility of spirit and refreshing honesty in it that I find appealing.

It's appealing because order is more appealing than anarchy, but that's not a just society its a totallitarian one. At the risk of triggering Goodwin's law.... Most people find totallitarian societies opressive. It's all well and good if you find a way to be a happy cog in the machine. But what if you don't? What if circumstance prevents you from being the nice orderly little cog?  What if the Qun stated that left handedness was a sign of evil and all lefties should be killed... and you were left handed? What if you were Vaashok caste but found violence abhorent?

The Qun talk in absolute terms, there is no scope for individuality or even dissent. Violation of the Qun means one thing only: death.

[KenKenpachi]

QwibQwib wrote...

@kenkenpachi, nah you didn't ramble, you make a good point. I remember fenris saying that the Q don't kill they rather have you alive, they don't waste anything or anyone. But still, in future games they prob will the ones that will help you to fight off the war but in exchange of something.

Yeah the question is what?

What worries me is the Qun are a long term thinking people, they'll want something that benafits them, and it won't be Gold. Thats why I can hope we can side with and influance them. I like the orderly aspect of the socity much as I do that of the PRC, however it needs changes. In the Quns task, lets wait till they are a bit older like say preteens before we go HAH YOUR A FARMER! And wait and see how the develope, allow some other religions, of course requlate them so they don't pose a threat, and allow parents to raise there children. Though the Qunari had a way around that, it just doesn't set well with me.  Also the treatment of mages, though it seems not to be forced on them *face it a guy who can shoot fire will not willingly get lead like a dog* thats a bit harsh.

But if you can't side with them, and have to give them something, sooner or later it will be used against you, or rather Thedas. Though the Qunari may want nothing in exchange and use it as a good will mission to improve its relations and be seen as less than a threat. Many nations do this.

Hmm Bioware if you make a spinoff can we have an RTS? I think the Dragon Age world would provide a great setting.

Modifié par KenKenpachi, 14 mars 2011 - 04:07 .

[Red Templar]

Icy Magebane wrote...

Humans are meant to be free, not to be enslaved, by other humans or by some socio-political system that sets you on a certain path from the day you are born. I can understand the desire for law and order, but to be told "You are a chef," and that's it? You can't learn anything else, and if you don't like being a chef, that's just too damn bad. I really don't understand how people could agree to something like that... It might be good for the people at the top, but what if you are put in some role you don't like? Just deal with it and obey the rules... again, no thanks.

Well, not from birth. They are assigned their roles when they are 12, based on their aptitudes. It isn't like randomly telling someone they are a chef without knowing if they care for cooking. More physical qunari will be put in physical roles, intellectual qunari into intellectual roles, as best suits their own abiltity and personality. After that it is set in stone. Culture plays a huge role. We, as modern human beings in progressive, liberal societies - most of us who play video games probably being middle class - are raised to value our individualism and freedom, and are told by our parents how special we are and that we can be whatever we want. Qunari are raised to value mastery - instead of our human emphasis on love and freedom and family, they qunari are taught that the greatest thing for them to aspire to in their lives is the very achievable goal of devoting themselves to their calling and excelling at it. A person raised in such a culture is unlikely to find it morally objectionable, but rather appreciate the direction and sense of purpose that has been given to them.

[QwibQwib]

@kenkenpachi, I know, that why I'm nice to them, I try to pick reasonable dialog options, they don't seem like "I want gold" but rather..."everyone has to summit to the Qun" xD. I wish we could influence them a bit.

[cglasgow]

Doesn't change the part where the Qun is the single strictest totalitarian society on the face of Thedas. Sure, it works, but functionality isn't a moral defense.

'Qun vs. human culture' is an extension of the age-old debate between what's better; locking into a static ideal of perfection, or being a living growing entity, warts and all. Or, even better, its predestination vs. free will.

[KenKenpachi]

Red Templar wrote...

Icy Magebane wrote...

Humans are meant to be free, not to be enslaved, by other humans or by some socio-political system that sets you on a certain path from the day you are born. I can understand the desire for law and order, but to be told "You are a chef," and that's it? You can't learn anything else, and if you don't like being a chef, that's just too damn bad. I really don't understand how people could agree to something like that... It might be good for the people at the top, but what if you are put in some role you don't like? Just deal with it and obey the rules... again, no thanks.

Well, not from birth. They are assigned their roles when they are 12, based on their aptitudes. It isn't like randomly telling someone they are a chef without knowing if they care for cooking. More physical qunari will be put in physical roles, intellectual qunari into intellectual roles, as best suits their own abiltity and personality. After that it is set in stone. Culture plays a huge role. We, as modern human beings in progressive, liberal societies - most of us who play video games probably being middle class - are raised to value our individualism and freedom, and are told by our parents how special we are and that we can be whatever we want. Qunari are raised to value mastery - instead of our human emphasis on love and freedom and family, they qunari are taught that the greatest thing for them to aspire to in their lives is the very achievable goal of devoting themselves to their calling and excelling at it. A person raised in such a culture is unlikely to find it morally objectionable, but rather appreciate the direction and sense of purpose that has been given to them.

Actully this post hits a good number of things right on the head. Most of the World is not Liberal or even progressive. And even among gamers in the US most noteably the huge numbers open to the public, allow the low class to play and post. In Europe it is not really the case, as I've said in countless posts, Human "freedoms" and to an extent Socialism are a luxury of the well off and more fortunate. I myself being from a poor family, had to find purpose and a dirve and I constantly scoff at any notion of "it takes a village to raise a child" or you can be whatever you want if you have faith as your special. So even in Western Countries you have a varrying of views.

In place of looking at the game, or the real world, and asking why those people arn't like you, or don't see they same, ask why you don't see the same as them.

@ Qwib Qwib, hmm true enough, nice to see someone with a differing view that I can talk with no "lets have a throw down" going on.

Modifié par KenKenpachi, 14 mars 2011 - 04:21 .

[Red Templar]

cglasgow wrote...

Doesn't change the part where the Qun is the single strictest totalitarian society on the face of Thedas. Sure, it works, but functionality isn't a moral defense.

Functionality is a great moral defense; at least if you are being utilitarian. Idealistic dreams and flowery talk about inalienable rights is great, but it is practicality an imposibility to accomplish for everyone. But if a culture is able to funtion in such a way that crime and corruption are largely non-issues, goods are freely distributed to where they are needed, the people live in perfect security, suffering is minimized, and even your criminals and rebels conform to your cultural ideology and remove themselves from society so as not to burden it... it might not be moral to a rights-based theorist sitting comfy in a university, but it certainly has a certain moral validity to it as a system. As someone living in a characteristically disordered part of the world, the idea of how the qunari live is not all that unappealing to me.

[cglasgow]

Red Templar wrote...

Functionality is a great moral defense; at least if you are being utilitarian.

In my personal opinion, utiliarianism is a bunch of pretty excuses for screwing other people over for your benefit.  I wonder how many people thinking about how cool Qunari society is imagine themselves as being the Arishok or a Sten when they're living in it, and don't devote as much time to thinking about what their life would be like if they drew the low card and ended up as a Saarebas or some laborer peon.

But if a culture is able to funtion in such a way that crime and
corruption are largely non-issues, goods are freely distributed to where
they are needed, the people live in perfect security, suffering is
minimized, and even your criminals and rebels conform to your cultural
ideology and remove themselves from society so as not to burden it... it
might not be moral to a rights-based theorist sitting comfy in a
university, but it certainly has a certain moral validity to it as a
system.

Yes, yes, the same old utilarian argument: 'you just disagree with me because you've never lived in the real world!'.   Never mind that I'm a 40+ year-old disabled veteran who's never gotten out of the working class tax bracket in his life, and is from a family where circa 6 people out of the last three entire generations have ever been to college at all.   I don't agree that freedom and upward mobility is worth selling out in the name of three squares a day and trains that run on time, therefore I must be some ivory-tower fairy story.



Come back when you can get an argument that isn't just namecalling.

Short version: Having experienced life at near the bottom of my current society, I still prefer it to the alternative, because in this one I at least have the hope of improving my lot someday.   Caste systems suck; they turn 'screwed once' into 'screwed forever'.

Modifié par cglasgow, 14 mars 2011 - 05:56 .

[Red Templar]

cglasgow wrote...
In my personal opinion, utiliarianism is a bunch of pretty excuses for screwing other people over for your benefit.

Sure, that's a perspective. But considering how ethical philsophy is no nearer to a universal consensus today than it has ever been, you can't casually dismiss utilitarianism as a valid perspective either. I'm not much for it myself, but it can answer questions that rights-based theory cannot. It has valid pillars that support it.

I wonder how many people thinking about how cool Qunari society is imagine themselves as being the Arishok or a Sten when they're living in it, and don't devote as much time to thinking about what their life would be like if they drew the low card and ended up as a Saarebas or some laborer peon.

I am, for one. I don't want to overplay the "I live in Africa, it sucks here" card, but given the sheer prevalence of disorder and corruption here I can't help but think that a honest life of labour, with all my earthly needs met and the prevalence of justice and order in my society, would be a vast improvement on the lives that many "free" people live. I'm not saying it is perfect, or that it is a moral utupia, but that a working society is a nicer place to be on the bottom of the barrel than an idealistic society that is less functional.

Yes, yes, the same old utilarian argument: 'you just disagree with me because you've never lived in the real world!'.   Never mind that I'm a 40+ year-old disabled veteran who's never gotten out of the working class tax bracket in his life, and is from a family where circa 6 people out of the last three entire generations have ever been to college at all.   I don't agree that freedom and upward mobility is worth selling out in the name of three squares a day and trains that run on time, therefore I must be some ivory-tower fairy story.



Come back when you can get an argument that isn't just namecalling.

Wow, awesome hyper-defensive retaliation against casual discussion buddy. Clearly, when I was talking about a rights-based theorist in a university, I was making a personal attack against you as a human being I've never met, instead of being theoretical. I also notice your impassioned reply conveniently side steps any actual issues. Rock on man, way to debate on the internet.

More seriously... chill. We're having a discussion here, and if you are going to roll in like Che Guevara you're more likely to stress yourself out than you are to humble me into meek agreement. I've not even made an effort to make this personal, no need to take this there.

So far I've found your points in other threads to be intelligent and well constructed. Spare me your fight face and behave like that person, if you'd be so kind.

Short version: Having experienced life at near the bottom of my current society, I still prefer it to the alternative, because in this one I at least have the hope of improving my lot someday.   Caste systems suck; they turn 'screwed once' into 'screwed forever'.

Sure. But then, real life caste systems suck because they aren't functional. Real life communism sucks, because that isn't functional either. The inability of people to conform, accept their lot in life, and work for the common good makes these things fail, as does the fundamental corruptability of the people on the top.

With the Qunari, we are talking about a fictional culture where communism, totalitarianism, and a caste system all actually work together. We are talking about a culture where even the rebels have no problem conforming in one way or another. If such a culture exists... and the earthly needs of the people are all met, even the lowest peon is respected for playing a vital role in the body of the Qun, and crime and corruption are virtual non-issues... is that not better than some rural dunghole in some feudal kingdom or democratic republic where all the people are living in hardship at the same time as contending against the deprevation of their fellow man? If not "better", is it not at least a valid alternative?

Modifié par Red Templar, 14 mars 2011 - 06:34 .

[LeaveMeAlone9009]

TobiTobsen wrote...

Am I the only one who thinks that the Arishok was right all along?

Everyone in the city seems to be paranoid, selfish or corrupt and whatever side I took in the end, it didn't felt right for me. The templars are a bunch of maniacs who tranquil everybody that looks funny at them and 3/4 of the mages seem to be bloodmages that use the phrase "I had to defend myself!" as an excuse.
Maybe the Qun would've given the city some kind of stability instead of a major crisis every year.

The Arishok was a bad ass, I killed him and all I got was a stupid sword he used to impale me.... yet I still survived...

[cglasgow]

Red Templar wrote...

I am, for one. I don't want to overplay the "I live in Africa, it sucks here" card, but given the sheer prevalence of disorder and corruption here I can't help but think that a honest life of labour, with all my earthly needs met and the prevalence of justice and order in my society, would be a vast improvement on the lives that many "free" people live. I'm not saying it is perfect, or that it is a moral utupia, but that a working society is a nicer place to be on the bottom of the barrel than an idealistic society that is less functional.

The error in your logic is that you presume that Africa is an 'idealistic society'.

No, Africa is just chaos and lawlessness.   Freedom != chaos.  Freedom is where rights are balanced against responsibilities.   Chaos is where everyone does whatever they want (i.e., all rights, although more accurately it would be all license) and no one feels any responsibility to anything other than themselves.

The Qun, otoh, is all responsibility and no rights. 

BTW, there is another word for a condition in which all of your basic material needs are met, and your assigned labors are consistent and nearly invariable, and all you give up in return is any freedom of choice re: how you live, where you live, or what you do.  It's called 'slavery'.

No thank you.

Wow, awesome hyper-defensive retaliation against casual discussion buddy.

Insults are never casual.

Clearly, when I was talking about a rights-based theorist in a university, I was making a personal attack against you as a human being I've never met, instead of being theoretical.

Yes, how silly of me to assume that simply because I was the person you were talking to, your insult was directed at me. 

For a guy who admires the Qun so much, you sure don't seem to grasp its basic tenet; which is, natch, never equivocate, never waffle, and never lie.

With the Qunari, we are talking about a fictional culture where communism, totalitarianism, and a caste system all actually work together.

We have never actually seen Qunari society on-stage; merely one of its military expeditionary forces.    You can't make this statement until we actually have canon on how the qunari peons live, and whether or not they're actually any better off than Tevinter slaves.

Edit: I might point out however that Fenris is actually familiar with qunari culture from his time on Seheron, and that the qunari accept human and elven converts... and yet he felt no real urge to stay there.  If the guy with the 'I HATE SLAVERY' obsession seems leery of qunari, it makes me wonder.

Modifié par cglasgow, 14 mars 2011 - 08:04 .

[Augustei]

TobiTobsen wrote...

Am I the only one who thinks that the Arishok was right all along?

Everyone in the city seems to be paranoid, selfish or corrupt and whatever side I took in the end, it didn't felt right for me. The templars are a bunch of maniacs who tranquil everybody that looks funny at them and 3/4 of the mages seem to be bloodmages that use the phrase "I had to defend myself!" as an excuse.
Maybe the Qun would've given the city some kind of stability instead of a major crisis every year.

I definitly felt he was right, thats why next game im giving him Isabela and letting him leave. He didn't break the Llomeryn (Spelling?) Accord not once prior to the attack.. And yet the chantry and people of Kirkwall were breaking it heaps, his soldiers were slowly dying out more and more every day while he was stuck in a foreign land powerless (Well not really powerless as we saw, but restricted to do so) He got a convert who was killed by the chantry, another two who the guards demanded because they broke the law because the law didn't help them.

Arishok was awesome as well, but yeah I hated having to side against him

[cglasgow]

Wasn't part of the Llomerryn Accords that the qunari would not attempt to settle or proselytize in human lands? (Except Rivaini.) Because the Arishok was doing both from act 1 onwards.

[Red Templar]

cglasgow wrote...
The error in your logic is that you presume that Africa is an 'idealistic society'.

No, Africa is just chaos and lawlessness.   Freedom != chaos.  Freedom is where rights are balanced against responsibilities.   Chaos is where everyone does whatever they want (i.e., all rights, although more accurately it would be all license) and no one feels any responsibility to anything other than themselves.

Not entirely. In my particular corner of the place, the appearance of law, fairness, and human rights is paramount, and everyone struts around like they've won the nobel peace prize. But practically, it doesn't function. The laws are there, but they aren't obeyed. The freedoms and rights are protected by law, but they are meaningless to a clear two thirds of the population. The country has tremendous wealth, but it is all mismanaged by corruption. We have one of the most progressive constitutions in the world, but it accomplishes little for the common man who lives without safety, security, food, work, or wealth. So the entire system is there - and on paper it really is a brilliant system - but it doesn't work. Now, if it were traded for a less idealistic system that did, in fact, work in such a way that everyone was fed, everyone had a home, everyone had a job, and everyone was free from violence and crime... if such a society worked, as we are led to believe the Qun works, then it would be a legitimate improvement over a place such as where I live for at least two thirds of the population. Whether or not it would be moral is a matter for debate - but better to debate with a full stomach, a steady job, and a roof over your head than to debate in squalor and fear with nothing in your mouth but the word "freedom".

The Qun, otoh, is all responsibility and no rights.

There are rights, just basic ones. They keep their people fed, they keep their people safe, and they keep their people fulfilled with work which they can master (which their culture values). All the rights that are missing are rights that their culture doesn't care for anyway. We can't project the freedoms we value onto a fictional culture and assume they must rationally value the same thing.

BTW, there is another word for a condition in which all of your basic material needs are met, and your assigned labors are consistent and nearly invariable, and all you give up in return is any freedom of choice re: how you live, where you live, or what you do.  It's called 'slavery'.

And if the qunari were buying and selling their own people to each other, slavery might hold up as a comparison. But they do not own personal property, they distribute their wealth and resources practically, and everyone works for the common good. They are no more slaves than ants in a hive are slaves. And if you choose to call it slavery, that is your perspective. But associating it to real world slavery that functioned completely different won't carry an argument with the force of misplaced negative associations.

Yes, how silly of me to assume that simply because I was the person you were talking to, your insult was directed at me. 

For a guy who admires the Qun so much, you sure don't seem to grasp its basic tenet; which is, natch, never equivocate, never waffle, and never lie.

Sure thing man. Be petty and confrontational, and nitpick all you like. This is me not caring, and this is the last time I'll ask you to take a step back and put your fight face away. I think you're an intelligent bloke and it is unfortunate that you have to scowl at me so. I prefer my discourse to be unemotional. I'll be playing my invisible violin if you want to further involve all sorts of squishy feelings in a debate. I honestly didn't mean to insult you, but whatevs.

We have never actually seen Qunari society on-stage; merely one of its military expeditionary forces.    You can't make this statement until we actually have canon on how the qunari peons live, and whether or not they're actually any better off than Tevinter slaves.

Fair point, and if it turns out the Qunari way of life is just a house of cards, obviously my statements here won't be valid. But the Qunari that we've met and what we have read of their culture in codex entries, as well as all the converts to their religion that we've read about, think of it as the perfect, ordered society that I'm defending here. Until we know what their problems and failings are in more detail, I'm going to take their culture to be exactly what it appears to be. Maybe that isn't the case, I'll happily admit that. But theoretically, if it is exactly what the Qunari hold it up to be, then then that is a valid, working system that provides clear improvements on certain aspects of life, even if it arguably worse in certain others. Can you agree that in such theoretical Qunari society, if it existed, would be preferable in certain, objective ways over the crime and squalor and depravation that plagues the human societies of Thedas? Can you agree that such a society would be better poised to deal with issues like the Blight? Because that is all I'm advocating, really. People's moral opinions are like their sport teams; odds are there is one side that is legitimately better, but folks are all so invested in their own opinions and preferences that it will never be universally accepted. I'm talking about about the rule of law and a life of saftey and security for the everyman, and on those terms the Qun seems to be a clear improvement.

cglasgow wrote...

Wasn't part of the Llomerryn Accords
that the qunari would not attempt to settle or proselytize in human
lands? (Except Rivaini.) Because the Arishok was doing both from act
1 onwards.

Technically, they didn't. They didn't settle, because their compound was given to them as a loan by the Viscount. Nor did the proselytize; the Arishok even says he is not equiped to teach the Qun and it isn't his place. They didn't preach their religion from street corners and try to take converts, they just took in those who came forward of their initiative.

Modifié par Red Templar, 14 mars 2011 - 08:19 .

[Nathan Redgrave]

The Arishok was only right insofar as the uncertainty of the non-Qunari society goes. That doesn't make the Qun "right," it just makes it less prone to producing undesirable characters, and even that's a farce, because those undesirable characters just run off and become Tal-Vashoth, which would happen whether the Qunari ruled the world or not.

The Qun isn't so different from Meredith's idea--it deals in cold, hard certainty. If there's a "maybe" that worries you, it has to die. Not a friendly way to view the world. The difference is that it seeks to reign in all people, not just mages. At least it's equal rights for everyone, but come on...

EDIT: My view of the Qun is this... it's well-intentioned, really it is, but people don't always respond well to fates they didn't choose themselves, and eventually someone is going to act against that. The Qun attempts to eliminate suffering by forcing societal cohesion on the world, and in turn just replaces suffering with another kind of suffering. This is what happens when you try to solve all of the world's problems: you may solve some, maybe even all if you're lucky, but you just create more. There's no be-all end-all, whether proponents of the Qun think they have one or not.

Modifié par Nathan Redgrave, 14 mars 2011 - 08:19 .

[Arppis]

Dileos wrote...

To be honest every major faction had me wishing for a "screw this, I'm going back to Ferelden" line.

Seriously, Hawke would have been much better off just moving to Denirim with the cash he got after the blight ended.

Aye, after he became Champion, Alistair even asked him to return. He could have just as well. There was nothing real to make him stay there to be honest. But I guess Hawke didn't want to leave the city in shambles.