157 réponses à ce sujet

[Always Alice]

double post

Modifié par Always Alice, 25 mars 2012 - 04:10 .

[HiroVoid]

Darkrider296 wrote...

The current Chantry supports the alienages and forces the Elfs to abandon their old culture to be obedient followers of Andraste. Its because of the Chantry that Elfs live in those disgusting Alienages in the first place. So yeah I have a massive bone to pick with the Chantry.

What makes  you think the chantry's responsible for that?  The alienage's happened as a result of racisim with the elves which would still be around even if the Chantry was not.

[Darkrider296]

The Eleves all toke up the religion of the Chantry because their old culture was taken away from them from the Chantry. The nobles get their authority and blessing from the Chantry. That mother in the city elf origin was indeed protesting but nothing of substance was really done. The warden had to get #@!$ done.

[Darkrider296]

HiroVoid wrote...

Darkrider296 wrote...

The current Chantry supports the alienages and forces the Elfs to abandon their old culture to be obedient followers of Andraste. Its because of the Chantry that Elfs live in those disgusting Alienages in the first place. So yeah I have a massive bone to pick with the Chantry.

What makes  you think the chantry's responsible for that?  The alienage's happened as a result of racisim with the elves which would still be around even if the Chantry was not.

Lets not treat that mass racism as somthing that will never go away. Yes they'll always be some idoits but I still think its worth fighting for a world that doesn't judge based on race or group.  Instead of the wishy washy lets maintain the ugly status quo for the sake of  peace. Just beause there are no major wars that does not mean that the peace Thedas is in is worth it. Fight for the little guy to the very end

[Always Alice]

Darkrider296 wrote...

The Eleves all toke up the religion of the Chantry because their old culture was taken away from them from the Chantry. The nobles get their authority and blessing from the Chantry. That mother in the city elf origin was indeed protesting but nothing of substance was really done. The warden had to get #@!$ done.

Nothing of substance was done because she had no power. Like I said, the nobles control the alienages, not the Chantry.

Yes, the elves were forced to convert, but like I said this happened hundreds of years ago. Now the majority of elves are Andrastian, and adhere to Andrastian beliefs. If the Chantry suddenly lost all its power do you think the city elves would stop believing in the Maker and go run away in the forest to worship the elven pantheon? Like it or not, Maker-worship is now a part of their culture and the widely-believed religion of elves. Conquered people adapting the practices of those that conquered them is nothing new.

And where is it ever stated that nobles get their authority to rule from the Chantry?

[Lazy Jer]

HiroVoid wrote...

What makes  you think the chantry's responsible for that?  The alienage's happened as a result of racisim with the elves which would still be around even if the Chantry was not.

Darkrider blames everything on the Chantry.  Morrigan getting her clothes spoiled by the dog dropping things in her pack....Chantry's fault.

[Darkrider296]

Nobles can't rule if they don't support the Chantry the same way it was in Medieval Europe. I would like to see a King or Queen of any country in Thedas proclaim that any one can belief what ever religion they want. Trust me the Chantry would not allow that to happen. Just because something happened a long time ago that does not mean that its impact shouldn't be examined. Its not right that the Chantry lies about the history to justify its immoral conquests. To respond to Always Alice what I mean by no substance is that the Chantry steps back and lets abuses fly right in their face because its goal is to maintain the status quo that keeps their organization in power and prominence. Plus isn't it screwed up that the Chantry supported the Oralisean occupation of Feralden (sorry if spelled those countries names wrong). Nobles also have to make sure that political decisions fall in line with the Chantry's teachings that's very apparent throughout the games. Btw I don't blame the Chantry for everything I just think that it is an institution that has clearly abused its power like almost every other major power in Thedas. Jeez what a screwed up place. I hate Tevinter, the Crows, the Qun and any other belief system/organization that makes life difficult for the little guy. That is who I speak for at the end of the day. Not some face less organization that hides behind its dogma.

[HiroVoid]

Darkrider296 wrote...
I hate Tevinter, the Crows, the Qun and any other belief system/organization that makes life difficult for the little guy. That is who I speak for at the end of the day. Not some face less organization that hides behind its dogma.

That's a noble cause.  Dwarves get ignored far more than they should.

Modifié par HiroVoid, 25 mars 2012 - 06:48 .

[Lazy Jer]

Darkrider296 wrote...

Nobles can't rule if they don't support the Chantry the same way it was in Medieval Europe. I would like to see a King or Queen of any country in Thedas proclaim that any one can belief what ever religion they want. Trust me the Chantry would not allow that to happen.

Why should we trust you, you're completely biased?  Nothing I've seen in the game leads me to believe that the Chantry has that much control over what the kings do. 

Just because something happened a long time ago that does not mean that its impact shouldn't be examined. Its not right that the Chantry lies about the history to justify its immoral conquests.

As long as you're studying what acutally happened and not just pretending it was as simple as a big bad group of evil Chantry-folks saying "Boy I sure do hate those elves...let's sack their entire land just to be mean."

To respond to Always Alice what I mean by no substance is that the Chantry steps back and lets abuses fly right in their face because its goal is to maintain the status quo that keeps their organization in power and prominence. Plus isn't it screwed up that the Chantry supported the Oralisean occupation of Feralden (sorry if spelled those countries names wrong).

I'll let  Alice answer that one, then.

Nobles also have to make sure that political decisions fall in line with the Chantry's teachings that's very apparent throughout the games.

Where?  Where is that apparent?  Citation needed.

Btw I don't blame the Chantry for everything I just think that it is an institution that has clearly abused its power like almost every other major power in Thedas. Jeez what a screwed up place. I hate Tevinter, the Crows, the Qun and any other belief system/organization that makes life difficult for the little guy. That is who I speak for at the end of the day. Not some face less organization that hides behind its dogma.

How heroic of you.  Except any of the "little guys" that happened to be praying at the Chantry probably found it difficult walking home after being blown to simereans.

[Darkrider296]

i read both codex giving both sides point of view. The Elf one seemed way more truthful and realistic than the Chantry account. Its clear that Nobles do have to follow Chantry law look during the lands meet, the Mother there will very clearly put down Loghain for stepping on the toes of Chantry law. Look at the past Viscount of Kirkwall who was ousted for trying to expel the Templars. I know its not as simple as herp de derp lets kill some elfs but it was a case of the Chantry going way to far in suppressing a perceived threat. Its wrong to take away a culture and land for hollow religious reasons. That should be clear as day. The Elfs may have been a little hostile to humans but that in no way warranted the response that the Chantry gave. It was also pretty disturbing to read about the mass graves of Qun followers who were murdered by the hands of the black and white Chantry. I still hate the Qun but i'm not into mass executions that's for sure. As for the terrorist action that deed was done to create a war that would at least get the "little guys" a chance to fight. The people in that chantry were part of a massive mainstream system. They aren't the "little guy" i speak of. Those are the folks who have been wronged by mass institutions.

[Always Alice]

[quote]Nobles can't rule if they don't support the Chantry the same way it was in Medieval Europe.[/quote]
How did you get to this conclusion?


[quote] I would like to see a King or Queen of any country in Thedas proclaim that any one can belief what ever religion they want. Trust me the Chantry would not allow that to happen. [/quote]
Why should it matter what the Chantry wants? They're not the monarchy. 


[quote]Just because something happened a long time ago that does not mean that its impact shouldn't be examined.[/quote]
True. But like I said, if we keep looking backwards then we can never move forwards.


[quote] Its not right that the Chantry lies about the history to justify its immoral conquests. [/quote]
Please give me some examples of the Chantry making up lies about history. I don't recall anyone denying that the Exalted Marches happened.


[quote]To respond to Always Alice what I mean by no substance is that the Chantry steps back and lets abuses fly right in their face because its goal is to maintain the status quo that keeps their organization in power and prominence. [/quote]
What would you suggest the Chantry mother could have done in that situation? Go to the authority? The ones who had power were the ones who were about to rape the women.

I do agree that they want to maintain the status quo. But the Chantry is hardly this cackling entity of evil you make it out to be. Like any institution it can be prone to corruption, but that does not mean that its followers gather together every night and try to come up with ways on how best to oppress people.


[quote]Plus isn't it screwed up that the Chantry supported the Oralisean occupation of Feralden (sorry if spelled those countries names wrong). [/quote]
Yes, but it's not like the Chantry is one giant hivemind. Remember Sister Allis from The Stolen Throne?


[quote]Nobles also have to make sure that political decisions fall in line with the Chantry's teachings that's very apparent throughout the games. [/quote]
Where is it "very apparent" that the nobles have to bend over backwards to make sure their decisions fallin line with the Chantry? I don't recall that happening in DA2, when Alistair is more than willing to harbor apostates.  


[quote]i read both codex giving both sides point of view. The Elf one seemed way more truthful and realistic than the Chantry account. [/quote]
What makes you think the elf one is more truthful? And please tell me the exact name of these Codex entries.


[quote]Its clear that Nobles do have to follow Chantry law look during the lands meet, the Mother there will very clearly put down Loghain for stepping on the toes of Chantry law. [/quote]
Nobles agree to Chantry law because they generally believe it will be for the benefit of their country. It's not like they want a bunch of blood mages running around. I don't believe they have to obey Chantry law, but they do so because they feel that doing so would be beneficial for both themselves and their people. 


[quote]The Elfs may have been a little hostile to humans but that in no way warranted the response that the Chantry gave. [/quote]
"A little?"


[quote]It was also pretty disturbing to read about the mass graves of Qun followers who were murdered by the hands of the black and white Chantry. I still hate the Qun but i'm not into mass executions that's for sure. As for the terrorist action that deed was done to create a war that would at least get the "little guys" a chance to fight. The people in that chantry were part of a massive mainstream system.[/quote]
Replace the words "terrorist action" with "mass execution" and "chantry" with "qun" and see the similarities between your line of thinking and the Chantry's. The Qunari weren't killed simply because they were heathens, but because they were going to forcibly convert their people because the Qun demands it. I'm not saying that behavior was right, but it's not exactly a black-and-white issue.

Modifié par Always Alice, 25 mars 2012 - 03:51 .

[Drakenken]

Thats assuming Wynne is even alive in DAIII. She was already on the old and dead side. Plus she was borrowing on the spirit's power making her life shorter.

Besides, what's the worst she could do as an abomination? Grow 8 arms and wag her fingers?

 

Wynne dies in the novel Dragon Age Asunder.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

 While there's some truth to the idea that "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom-fighter," the portrayal of Anders really does not balance out well. On one hand, his intentions -- freeing the oppressed, if taken at its face-value -- are good, and easy to get behind for most people. After that, however, literally everything else is lacking...

 

 

For one thing, if you know Justice as a character from DA:A, the fact that the spirit (corrupted or not) is influencing Anders sets off immediate red-flags. Justice decries Anders owning a cat as being slavery, and demands you to kill the Architect out of vengeance. Now, that moral compass is working through Anders, who now claims to be some authority on oppression and freedom as it relates to mages. See any problem there?

 

Second, Anders's views are pretty radical, and that only works for characters if they can back it up well. Unless you already hold similar beliefs, however, Anders's defense of his position is not convincing in the least. He goes on about how you can't treat all mages like criminals, but can't give you any good reason to believe that freeing the mages won't lead to corrupt mages rising to power, ala Tevinter. He has no good answer to what to do about possession when mages are free, while actively demonstrating the danger of it as well. He also gets worked up about blood-magic use because it hurts the image of mages, but then claims that their image doesn't matter when he blows up the Chantry because nobody was on their side in the first place, so he's basically argued against himself on the principle of blood-magic as well.

 

Third, he's extreme, in just about every way. There's even a Codex on the people of the Anderfels (Anders) which calls them extreme people by nature. As discussed above, his views are radical. His position on the Templars is extreme. He insists that they're all rotten, when we've seen there are plenty of upstanding individuals among them as well. His paranoia is extreme. He feared some grand scheme was in the works to turn all mages Tranquil. Once the reality of it is revealed to be predictably ridiculous -- just the delusion of one man and some sheep that followed -- he still expresses fear over it happening afterwards (in a talk with Sebastian). He calls Aveline a "despot" for handing a few mages back to the Templars. He has trouble grasping anything short of the extreme. It blows his mind that mages and Templars were working together in Best Served Cold. He was also clearly bothered by Bethany accepting her place in the 'Circle. It's all black-and-white to him.

 

Fourth, he's not very likable anymore. His humor has fallen off a cliff. I think he may even be the least funny companion in the game, even while the game tries to push him as a funny man. His new voice-actor also has the whiniest voice ever. It sounds like he's whining even when he is speaking normally. And then, he actually does whine a lot anyway. One literally dreads bringing him along in the party, useful though he may be, for his reactions to things against his beliefs.

 

 

I get that the writers wouldn't want to make him perfect -- he's not the hero in this tale, after all -- and prefer to save the strongest arguments on the issue of mages for the players to reach those conclusions themselves. However, even the flawed-hero designation doesn't work with him because the flaws are just so overwhelming compared to the relatively few heroic qualities of his. So, unless the intent was for Anders to secretly be the main villain of the story, I would flunk the person who wrote his character in this iteration of the series. I mean, it was bad.

[Cobra's_back]

Anders: Crazed abomination, or martyr for the free mage cause?

 

He didn't free them. Just got a whole bunch of them killed and Circles ended up having more restrictions. Three years later the circle in White Spire hears a crazy guy blew up the Chantry in Kirkwall.

 

In Orlais the Circle breaks away because of Rhy. Rhy makes it happen.

[Jaison1986]

Anders: Crazed abomination, or martyr for the free mage cause?

 

He didn't free them. Just got a whole bunch of them killed and Circles ended up having more restrictions. Three years later the circle in White Spire hears a crazy guy blew up the Chantry in Kirkwall.

 

In Orlais the Circle breaks away because of Rhy. Rhy makes it happen.

 

Interesting how this thread just came, as I was contemplating about the issue for quite an while now. In the begining I just went with Anders friendship and supported him. But now that I contemplate about it, I might have been wrong all along. While I still hate the Chantry and the templars and care nothing about them, it doesn't mean I should support him blindly. Change does not come without death in the DA setting, but Anders, he just threw all the mages in the circle to the fire, with no preparation nor warning how many of this deaths could at least be migtated if we were allowed at least some preparation? 

[Cobra's_back]

Interesting how this thread just came, as I was contemplating about the issue for quite an while now. In the begining I just went with Anders friendship and supported him. But now that I contemplate about it, I might have been wrong all along. While I still hate the Chantry and the templars and care nothing about them, it doesn't mean I should support him blindly. Change does not come without death in the DA setting, but Anders, he just threw all the mages in the circle to the fire, with no preparation nor warning how many of this deaths could at least be migtated if we were allowed at least some preparation? 

 

I agree with you. I felt the same way. He didn't prepare them at all. I also supported him blindly and really felt angry about what he did. He solved nothing just got a much of people killed. Three years later Wynne's son finally takes charge.

[Dean_the_Young]

After he butchered so many of the mage defenders he condemned to a hopeless battle, I'd be amazed if anyone in my Rivalry!Hawke playthrough sees him as a martyr. Especially since he may or may not actually be dead.

 

'Crazed abomination' is how I imagine history will remember him in that playthrough. Then again, that Hawke chose to spare Anders and make him side with the Templars in large part to encourage maximum discrediting of his ideology as possible.

[Cobra's_back]

If the below is true then the answer is no. Asunder three years later saw him as a crazy person. If you rival him 100%, he really looks as if he cracked up. He will actually kill mages and then the mages will all become tranquil. I really don't think the Justice/Anders union was healthy at all.

 

HYR2.0 is right on the mark as far as I'm concern. Justice was the reason Anders was unstable. 

 

Common features of stereotypical martyrdoms

 

1.A hero- A person of some renown who is devoted to a cause believed to be admirable.

2. Opposition People - who oppose that cause.

3.Foreseeable risk - The hero foresees action by opponents to harm him or her, because of his or her commitment to the cause.

4.Courage and Commitment - The hero continues, despite knowing the risk, out of commitment to the cause.

5.Death - The opponents kill the hero because of his or her commitment to the cause.

6.Audience response - The hero's death is commemorated. People may label the hero explicitly as a martyr. Other people may in turn be inspired to pursue the same cause.

 

 

Per 1: I don't see Mages in general seeing him as admirable, he was an abomination. Kirkwall mages didn't see him as a savior. Per 5: The opponents may not even kill him. They leave this to Hawk. Per 6: Asunder didn't paint him in a very good light for a good reason. If you rival this character, he goes bonkers and he is an abomination. 

 

In the end the decision to save the mages is Hawk's. 

[Cobra's_back]

 While there's some truth to the idea that "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom-fighter," the portrayal of Anders really does not balance out well. On one hand, his intentions -- freeing the oppressed, if taken at its face-value -- are good, and easy to get behind for most people. After that, however, literally everything else is lacking...

 

 

For one thing, if you know Justice as a character from DA:A, the fact that the spirit (corrupted or not) is influencing Anders sets off immediate red-flags. Justice decries Anders owning a cat as being slavery, and demands you to kill the Architect out of vengeance. Now, that moral compass is working through Anders, who now claims to be some authority on oppression and freedom as it relates to mages. See any problem there?

 

Second, Anders's views are pretty radical, and that only works for characters if they can back it up well. Unless you already hold similar beliefs, however, Anders's defense of his position is not convincing in the least. He goes on about how you can't treat all mages like criminals, but can't give you any good reason to believe that freeing the mages won't lead to corrupt mages rising to power, ala Tevinter. He has no good answer to what to do about possession when mages are free, while actively demonstrating the danger of it as well. He also gets worked up about blood-magic use because it hurts the image of mages, but then claims that their image doesn't matter when he blows up the Chantry because nobody was on their side in the first place, so he's basically argued against himself on the principle of blood-magic as well.

 

Third, he's extreme, in just about every way. There's even a Codex on the people of the Anderfels (Anders) which calls them extreme people by nature. As discussed above, his views are radical. His position on the Templars is extreme. He insists that they're all rotten, when we've seen there are plenty of upstanding individuals among them as well. His paranoia is extreme. He feared some grand scheme was in the works to turn all mages Tranquil. Once the reality of it is revealed to be predictably ridiculous -- just the delusion of one man and some sheep that followed -- he still expresses fear over it happening afterwards (in a talk with Sebastian). He calls Aveline a "despot" for handing a few mages back to the Templars. He has trouble grasping anything short of the extreme. It blows his mind that mages and Templars were working together in Best Served Cold. He was also clearly bothered by Bethany accepting her place in the 'Circle. It's all black-and-white to him.

 

Fourth, he's not very likable anymore. His humor has fallen off a cliff. I think he may even be the least funny companion in the game, even while the game tries to push him as a funny man. His new voice-actor also has the whiniest voice ever. It sounds like he's whining even when he is speaking normally. And then, he actually does whine a lot anyway. One literally dreads bringing him along in the party, useful though he may be, for his reactions to things against his beliefs.

 

 

I get that the writers wouldn't want to make him perfect -- he's not the hero in this tale, after all -- and prefer to save the strongest arguments on the issue of mages for the players to reach those conclusions themselves. However, even the flawed-hero designation doesn't work with him because the flaws are just so overwhelming compared to the relatively few heroic qualities of his. So, unless the intent was for Anders to secretly be the main villain of the story, I would flunk the person who wrote his character in this iteration of the series. I mean, it was bad.

 

What an excellent summary. Good Read.

 

My two least favorite characters were Justice and Anders. As soon as they united Anders was an accident waiting to happen and clearly unstable. 

[Exaltation]

Things in Kirkwall would go bad anyway even without Anders/Justice,lots of crazy Templars and blood Mages,and red lyrium.

[Cobra's_back]

Things in Kirkwall would go bad anyway even without Anders/Justice,lots of crazy Templars and blood Mages,and red lyrium.

Kirkwall was sitting on Hell Mouth. The veil was about to tear open there from the millions of slaves used to fuel blood mages. Not the best place for mages.

[DesstinyMaker]

The biggest difference between a bold revolutionary and a crazy terrorist is whether or not they win. History is written by the winners. The Chantry's treatment of the mages was entirely unacceptable, and there was no peaceable way to get them to relent. We are talking of a country in which "the Tranquil solution" was being discussed and implemented, and the parallel to the Holocaust was very clearly, pointedly made. Meredith wanted to murder a poor slob mage because he pretended to be a blood mage to impress girls, and after Anders blew up the Chantry, her solution was to murder every single innocent, well-behaved Circle Mage.

 

That being said, Anders was also clearly an abomination. He kept blacking out and losing control of his own behavior, in a way that scared him as much as it did everybody else. I believe he fully expected to die for his crimes, and may even have welcomed it as a way to release himself from Justice's control.  In my most recent playthrough, I played a mage who hated the Chantry every inch as much as he did, supported his struggle and ran off with him after the battle was over, but I have no illusions. Anders is still possessed, and mages are still not free; eventually, if released, he will end up doing other acts of terrorism. Killing him is probably the wisest and most merciful option for him as well as everybody else, - and oh, hell yes, it will make him a huge martyr.  If mages ended up getting their freedom, some would revere him as a hero and sweep the fact that he really couldn't control Justice under the rug.

 

He was easily my favorite character in Awakenings, and at the beginning of Dragon Age II it's clear he's still a very good man, dedicated to healing and serving others. However, nobody can survive becoming an abomination without losing the best of themselves, except possibly Wynne, and even she was only saved because the spirit who joined with her was ultimately very gentle.

[KaiserShep]

Just about the only character trait that I really identified with in Anders was his love of cats, lol. Other than that, I didn't really consider him to be all that likeable even in Awakening, especially not when compared to characters like Nathaniel and Sigrun. It's curious to see him object to the notion of the Libertarians' vying to cut ties with the Chantry entirely, should you have him in the party when you talk to Wynne in the city of Amaranthine.

 

Anyway, I think it's safe to say that Justice within Anders is pretty much a demon in its own right. It clearly puts the rage of its host over the welfare of others, like when Ella can possibly be slain for her simply calling him a demon. On top of that, its indignation is very specific, and really won't address any other injustice. It's just unfortunate that this doesn't really show itself unless Hawke is being an evil dick and hands Fenris over to his sinister slave master. I typically kept Anders in the group for as long as I could for metagaming reasons, but nowadays, after Dissent, I always dismiss him from the group entirely (I make sure he's not using any of my valuable stuff). The whole avatar-state freakout in the Chantry and everywhere else is bad enough, but his possible murder of an innocent person for simply speaking out in fear is an indelible mark against him. Another interesting case of Anders being a serious hazard is if you have him in the party when playing Legacy. Out of curiosity, I wanted to see what his contribution was, considering that he's a Grey Warden, and I was surprised to see him freak out, go full Justice-glow, and summon demons to attack Hawke's group.

 

What I find really ironic is that even Merrill, a blood mage, will not summon demons to attack you should she turn on you at the end of the game.

 

As for the question in the title, no, I don't think he's a martyr for the free mage cause, because a cause is meaningless without some alternative to aspire to. He's a corrupted, possessed abomination.