299 réponses à ce sujet

[Jugo616]

As some smart person once said - What makes peacefull revolution impossible, makes violent revolution inevitable.

[Silfren]

Porenferser wrote...

Jugo616 wrote...

I support church burnings in real life and I support them in games too.

So you support reallife terrorism (including murdering innocents), did I get that right?

You...don't realize that they were deliberately baiting you?  Trust me, the chances are good that no one who writes such a post actually means it seriously, or indeed means it as anything more than an attempt to get people riled up.

[Silfren]

Jugo616 wrote...

Porenferser wrote...

Jugo616 wrote...

I support church burnings in real life and I support them in games too.

So you support reallife terrorism (including murdering innocents), did I get that right?

Church burnings are not supposed to cause terror, therefore they are not terrorism. They are more like rioting. (To everyone and especialy administrators: This is not a suggestion to do mentioned things and is not supposed to spread religious hate, merely a statement of ones ideology.)

Um, no.  A church buring is absolutely meant to cause terror.  I assume you're referring to such as the little church down the street, rather than the Vatican Cathedral of Val Royeaux, say.  The difference is that one is generally just a house a worship, whereas the other one is a symbol and seat of actual political power and authority.

[Jugo616]

Silfren wrote...

Jugo616 wrote...

Porenferser wrote...

Jugo616 wrote...

I support church burnings in real life and I support them in games too.

So you support reallife terrorism (including murdering innocents), did I get that right?

Church burnings are not supposed to cause terror, therefore they are not terrorism. They are more like rioting. (To everyone and especialy administrators: This is not a suggestion to do mentioned things and is not supposed to spread religious hate, merely a statement of ones ideology.)

Um, no.  A church buring is absolutely meant to cause terror.  I assume you're referring to such as the little church down the street, rather than the Vatican Cathedral of Val Royeaux, say.  The difference is that one is generally just a house a worship, whereas the other one is a symbol and seat of actual political power and authority.

Ever heard about Varg Vikernes? He's quite a mad guy, but church burnings is his good side. And yes, I DO mean it.

[Silfren]

Beerfish wrote...

It ignores none of it at all.  The starkhaven circle burned down under suspicious circumstances, the hero has the ability to be sympathetic to Grace and the few survivors after Decimus decides to kill Hawke.  So Decimus and Grace both go out of their way to kill Hawke and do kill Thrask, both potentially ardent mage supporters.  The mage supporters keep wanting people to totally ignore the litany of evil, crazy, dangerous deeds of all mages because some have been mistreated.  

There are so many cases of circle and non circle mages causing havock and killing mage supporters or fellow mages  (Good old Anders kills a defensless mage girl because he is still pissed off at Alrick....even after he is dead.) not to mention other innocents and some want to lay all of that blame on acts of the templars or the chantry.  It simply doesn't wash and mages would get a heck of a lot more sympathy if their most ardent supporters would ever actually acknowledge there is a real mage problem in and around kirkwall.....but they never do.

No, it isn't that we mage supporters want to ignore the dangerous mages because some have been mistreated.  Some of us are saying that there is considerable evidence to believe that the Chantry's systemic practice of oppression and enslavement is a major factor in why so many mages are resorting to drastic measures.

Also, that thing about Anders?  Leaving aside whether what he did to Ella (ignoring of course that his murder of her is an optional outcome, not a given one) was good or bad, he didn't do it just because he felt like killing someone and she was there.  He was out of control. It was most assuredly Justice/Vengeance who was in control at that point, not Anders.  The fact that he reacts with such guilt and shame speaks volumes.  That scene could be used as an argument of mages being innately dangerous due to the potential for loss of control, but as evidence that mages are evil...it's not a valid example.  And yes, we are talking about two different things.  It may be a minor distinction, but it's a significant one nonetheless.

[Silfren]

Bowie Hawkins wrote...

SmokeyNinjas wrote...

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

Murder is worse.

Who's advocating murder?

Other than Anders and his supporters?

I don't call killing Elthina and her templar companions in the Chantry murder any more than I consider Ser Alrik's death to be murder.  Due to her inaction in the face of such egregious abuses, Elthina had it coming just as surely as Alrik and Meredith both.  But that's just me.

And before anyone brings up innocent bystanders, I do have to point out that a couple days ago, I read a post of someone stating that their first impression upon seeing Anders explode the Chantry for the first time, was that the vortex sucking up Chantry bits and expelling them outward was Anders' way of manipulating the blast so that no innocent people were killed.  At first it surprised me to read that, but upon watching that scene again, I can see where someone might get that impression.  At any rate, it does show that there's just enough room for individual player interpretation in that scene that it is not an absolute given that Anders was perfectly willing to cut down innocent passersby.

[Merela]

*moans* Oh please, not an another pro-mage/pro-templar debate, especially when it's not even what the OP was about. I think we all got that some persons disagree with the opinion of some other persons, why starting the whole debate again, except for insulting each other? It's becoming tiring at best, sickening at worst.

Until now, all my Hawkes killed Anders, for various reasons: from the will to bring justice for the death of innocents to the single fact he was a sissy wearing a dress. The last one was actually quite funny. XD
I'm planning to let him leave in my next play though.

Modifié par Merela, 19 mai 2011 - 10:06 .

[Silfren]

Jugo616 wrote...


Ever heard about Varg Vikernes? He's quite a mad guy, but church burnings is his good side. And yes, I DO mean it.

Reading about him now.  I'm unsure why you're claiming that his burning of churches is his good side, however.  But getting into that discussion will run us headlong into forbidden topics, so let's not.

[Silfren]

Merela wrote...

*moans* Oh please, not an another pro-mage/pro-templar debate, especially when it's not even what the OP was about. I think we all got that some persons disagree with the opinion of some other persons, why starting the whole debate again, except for insulting each other? It's becoming tiring at best, sickening at worst.

Until now, all my Hawkes killed Anders, for various reasons: from the will to bring justice for the death of innocents to the single fact he was a sissy wearing a dress. The last one was actually quite funny. XD
I'm planning to let him leave in my next play though.

I think it's a bit inevitable to get into that debate, given that our viewpoint on the mage/templar debate usually at least informs our reason for killing or not killing Anders.  It's part and parcel of the OP, at least to an extent. Otherwise, this thread would be nothing more than a string of "me," and "not me" posts.

[Merela]

I'm totally fine with the "me/not me" posts without extends for my part, it limits the risk of posts claiming that "my opinion is the only one, so STFU" who tend to appears in every debates. But if everybody is okay for remembering to stay polite and reasonable...oh well. Personally, I'm done.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Don't expect people to stay polite on the internet. It is a pipedream.

[Silfren]

Merela wrote...

I'm totally fine with the "me/not me" posts without extends for my part, it limits the risk of posts claiming that "my opinion is the only one, so STFU" who tend to appears in every debates. But if everybody is okay for remembering to stay polite and reasonable...oh well. Personally, I'm done.

I don't understand what the point would be of a string of "me," or "not me" posts.  It defeats the purpose of a discussion thread.

[Darc_Requiem]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Darc_Requiem wrote...

Some times violence is necessary, that doesn't mean you go with as the first option.

It wasn't Anders' first option. He was part of the underground, helping mages escape Meredith's grasp, and when he found out the Grand Cleric said no to the "Tranquil Solution," he advocated to Hawke that they should turn to her (as the highest ranking member of the Chantry in the southern Free Marches (everything south of Starkhaven and the Minanter River) and Meredith's superior (according to her own codex entry). However, Elthina doesn't do anything to resolve the dichotomy between the templars and the mages for seven years.

Darc_Requiem wrote...

You don't want to do some foolish terror attack that causes people that were on your side to go over to opposition. The situation with Thrask shows that were Templars and Mages willing to work together for Mage rights.

If Ser Thrask was alive, that would be a viable option, but the renegade movement of templars and mages working to remove Meredith as dictator of Kirkwall was destroyed by Hawke.

Darc_Requiem wrote...

How many Templars with a similar view point will change their minds because of Ander's flat out stupid plan.

I'm guessing Hawke killed most of them on his way to Ser Thrask. Keran, for instance, actually quits being a templar because he can't tolerate Meredith as the acting Knight-Commander.

Darc_Requiem wrote...

I mean if he would have blown up Meredith, he would had the full support of the mages and half the Templars.

None of the templars turn against Meredith when she invokes the Right of Annulment against the Circle for the actions of one apostate, and even Cullen doesn't until she threatens Hawke specifically - even if the Champion has been killing his way through a horde of templars (which makes little sense if Hawke is a mage since Cullen has said that mages can't be treated like people and are weapons).

1. You make great points. I didn't take the "time jumps" in account. Anders did try other things. Unfortunately he gets further off the rails the further he goes along. The situation with Ella did Anders in with me. The Chantry situation was just the final nail in his coffin. Elthina is complete waste of space. She's my least favorite character in the game. Nothing short of the Maker appearing before her and demanding a decision would have gotten her to do something.

2. The Mage/Templar rebellion wasn't necessarily caused by Hawke. Orsino accidentally sets Hawke on the path. The group attacks Hawke no matter what your stance on mages is. They kidnap someone important to Hawke which really makes no sense if you've been pro mage. Ultimately Grace is the one that doomed it. She wanted to kill Hawke and she used Thrask's blood to fuel her attempt.

3. Meredith wasn't popular. Kirkwallers just seemed too scared to do anything about it. When Orsino gives his speech they seem to agree with him, but they don't want to face Meredith. The ambient dialog in Kirkwall seems to show Meredith wasn't liked by at least half the population. I wish we would have been given at least the illusion of choice in DA2 but that's another topic.

4. The Templars, like everyone else seem to be afraid of Meredith. I don't get how one woman can be so feared. I mean Templars actively pursued Morrigan and Flemeth and they are far more dangerous than Meredith. Even with her "idol" sword.

You've given me a lot to think about. Ultimately my final view of Anders hasn't changed but you are right about him trying more things before his "no comprise" decision. He disregard for innocent life is unforgiveable for me and it's compounded by his hypocrisy. Telling Alrik that "he won't allow him to harm an innocent mage", and then killing that innocent mage 5 minutes later immediately comes to mind.

[Rifneno]

Bowie Hawkins wrote...

Other than Anders the Chantry and his its supporters?

Fixed that typo for you.

Silfren wrote...

Eh, she was old.  How dare you hold her responsible for not doing her job.:innocent:

Ohhh yeah. I forgot about that. Silly me. Hey, maybe that's why the Chantry isn't held responsible for its crimes by so many people. A thousand years is ancient! They wouldn't be responsible for any atrocity anymore.

Merela wrote...

*moans* Oh please, not an another pro-mage/pro-templar debate, especially when it's not even what the OP was about. I think we all got that some persons disagree with the opinion of some other persons, why starting the whole debate again, except for insulting each other? It's becoming tiring at best, sickening at worst.

It's so hard to believe that a discussion about the execution of someone for attacking the Chantry would lead to a discussion of the Chantry's guilt. What next, a discussion about Windows leading to a discussion about bugs? Where does it stop?! It's madness I say! Cats and dogs living together, MASS HYSTERIA!

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Don't expect people to stay polite on the internet. It is a pipedream.

I agree with Emp. Someone check the weather in Florida, did Hell freeze over?

Darc_Requiem wrote...

He disregard for innocent life is unforgiveable for me and it's compounded by his hypocrisy.

How do you figure it was a disregard for innocent life? His reaction afterwards was sitting on a crate looking like a kicked puppy and saying "there's nothing you can say to me that I haven't already said to myself" followed by basically offering himself up for execution if Hawke decides that's the right thing to do. He clearly cared about innocent life, a great deal. He just knew that taking a few innocent lives now has a chance of saving countless ones in the future. He finally stopped being naive and thinking there was a peaceful solution to the Chantry's tyranny.

This is a guy who spent 6 years in a sewer healing strangers for free, knowing full well that doing so puts him at a much higher risk of being caught the most brutal templars in Thedas. It's simply ridiculous to claim he doesn't care about people.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Actually, Anders wanted to be killed so that the innocent lives he had just taken would be avenged. Just saying.

[Darc_Requiem]

@Rifneno

If you follow the friendship path, He knowingly commits an act that will kill numerous innocent people. That's disregard for human life. Feeling "sorry" for it after the fact doesn't change that. If he truly felt bad about it, he wouldn't have done.

Now, If you were talking about Rivaled Anders, you'd have a point. He blacks out often and Justice takes over. Justice/Vengeance blew up the Chantry on the rivaled path. Friendship Anders and Justice reached consensus.

BTW Running a free clinic doesn't give him license to kill innocent people.

[Xilizhra]

He felt sorrow for his actions, but not guilt. It was an unfortunate necessity, like all just death.

[Exicuren]

Hr needed to die, too extremist and naive. With my fem hawke, I first slept with him then killed him

[Abispa]

Three of my Hawkes killed him, and two let him live. It depends on what kind of Hawke I was playing.

[Rifneno]

Darc_Requiem wrote...

@Rifneno

If you follow the friendship path, He knowingly commits an act that will kill numerous innocent people. That's disregard for human life. Feeling "sorry" for it after the fact doesn't change that. If he truly felt bad about it, he wouldn't have done.

Now, If you were talking about Rivaled Anders, you'd have a point. He blacks out often and Justice takes over. Justice/Vengeance blew up the Chantry on the rivaled path. Friendship Anders and Justice reached consensus.

BTW Running a free clinic doesn't give him license to kill innocent people.

I notice you conveniently ignore the part about the fact he's doing it because he realizes it's a good chance to save countless times those lives in the future by ending a thousand year reign of oppression. Nice.

[Nashiktal]

I didn't kill Anders. I wanted him to see the full consequence of his actions. May he look on in horror as mage, templar, and innocent civilians alike all die in horrible ways because of him.

[LyndseyCousland]

I let him live because of what Merrill says. "Bring him with us and have him help with the mess he made" or something like that. I've saved it and turned of the Xbox because I'm trying to make my Hawke break up with him but I caaaaan't.

I don't know if she can justify this one. Gah.

[v_ware]

*Murder knife*

[Darc_Requiem]

Rifneno wrote...

Darc_Requiem wrote...

@Rifneno

If you follow the friendship path, He knowingly commits an act that will kill numerous innocent people. That's disregard for human life. Feeling "sorry" for it after the fact doesn't change that. If he truly felt bad about it, he wouldn't have done.

Now, If you were talking about Rivaled Anders, you'd have a point. He blacks out often and Justice takes over. Justice/Vengeance blew up the Chantry on the rivaled path. Friendship Anders and Justice reached consensus.

BTW Running a free clinic doesn't give him license to kill innocent people.

I notice you conveniently ignore the part about the fact he's doing it because he realizes it's a good chance to save countless times those lives in the future by ending a thousand year reign of oppression. Nice.

You know what you are right. Kirkwallers. I know several of you have lost your husbands, wives, mothers, fathers, and children but Anders thinks it a good idea so it's okay <_<

Modifié par Darc_Requiem, 20 mai 2011 - 10:22 .

[Xilizhra]

As will all those saved in the future because of it.