1411 réponses à ce sujet

[Pileyourbodies]

The chantry controls the Templars who control the Circles. thats roughly the way that the Chantry controls the Circles.

[Rafe34]

Anders went too far. Way too far.

There are arguments for both having a Circle and not having one.

For:
Exhibit A: The Circle tower in Ferelden. Imagine what would have happened had Uldred done his thing in some town in Ferelden, rather than being inside the Tower and locked in long enough for the Warden to come stop him. Merideth's statement to Hawke, though harsh, is true. "Cold corpses speak louder than abstract freedoms." The problem is that a mage that becomes an abomination can cause devastation far greater than a normal human. They can open the Fade to demons using blood magic, if they so desire. And it seems to be relatively easy to do, just extremely hard to control. All that said, there is of course, another side to things.
Exhibit B: Tevinter. This is the only *country* we know about where mages are given free reign, (yes? I'm unsure on this, perhaps somewhere in the codex there is another one.) What happened there? The more powerful a mage is, the greater his standing. Therefore blood magic's use is inevitable, (I agree with Fenris on that point.)

Against:
Exhibit A: The Daelish. As one of the hunters says to the Templar who tries to take Fehnriel away, (paraphrased): "The Daelish have known magic since before your people even knew what fire was. We can take care of abominations ourselves." The Daelish have two mages, (possible more), in each clan. Though abominations do sometimes happen, the clan can take care of itself, and destroys the abomination when it occurs. No abomination has escaped from the Daelish and wreaked havoc on the human lands that we know of, (again, there may be an entry I am missing. There is a ton of lore in this game.)
As well, mages are people. Why are we taking a group of people and locking them up merely for the gifts that the Maker/fate has given them? What Anders tells your Hawke is also true: "There will always be mages born in Thedas. Templars are made by man." (Interesting parallel to homosexuality is perhaps inbetween the lines here. Not sure.) The idea of a Circle controlled and watched by Templars, can, (Anders would argue it will, inevitably) lead to intolerance and abuse, such as Ser Alric's particular brand of twistedness.

Is this last argument, however, merely attacking the flaws of a system, rather than the system itself? Is the Circle a perfect answer? Of course not. Is there a better one? If you believe there is, then that is what should be implemented. If you do not, then the Circle must stand. Whether or not that system is the right one is a heavily grey area. (The Right of Annulment is not a part of the system that is morally grey. This part is clearly evil to me- that much power in the hands of a single person, (the commander of the Templars), is asking for abuse. In order to invoke such a right, there should AT LEAST be a council of elder Templars.)

Anders action is anything but grey. He just blew up the chantry- there were at least 4 other priests in the chantry along with the Grand Cleric, (watch the video). All of which are innocent. You cannot use the ends justify the means or you will lead yourself to using blood magic and the summoning of demons, among other horrible things.

[Fidget6]

Raygereio wrote...

Remember kids; according to the OP brutally slaughtering people who's choice of livestyle you don't agree with and murdering bystanders who have nothing to do with whatever argument is going on is a-okay.

Exactly, I find the OP's original post highly disturbing. He sounds like a radical who wants to cleanse the world of religion and thinks everyone who dares believe in a higher power should be executed. I honestly feel a bit sick if his in-game views are any indication of his real world views.

Modifié par Fidget6, 17 mars 2011 - 04:17 .

[Pileyourbodies]

Rafe if only 2 mages exist in each clan what do you think the Dales do to the rest of the magical babies? Rather unfortunate implication there.

[LobselVith8]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
We see how the Circle normally works - with the Chantry and its templars in control. I don't see why this is in dispute when David Gaider already addressed that the Chantry controls the Circles. I also find your example lacking - I never said it was illegal for Greagoir to delegate some responsibility to Irving, but if the Knight-Commander shares responsibility with the First Enchanter, how can Meredith give orders to Orsino? If she's supposed to be running the
Circle with him, why is it that even the Grand Cleric gets templars to "escort" him away to the Kirkwall Circle?

*Sigh*,

So far you provided a letter as absolute proof that mages have autonomy in the Circle when we already have examples from DA:O and DA2 that this isn't the case. If mages ran the Circle with the templars and both had equality, then Knight-Commander Greagoir wouldn't be the one making the decisions about Jowan and keeping Irving out of the loop. Meredith wouldn't be giving orders to Orsino. The Hero of Ferelden wouldn't have the option to call the Circle a "prison" or an "oppresive place," and Wynne never contests either term and says in the latter that the Warden can change that.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

because we are told from the very beginning that Meredith has more power than any Templar elsewhere and was accumulating  more and more power. We are told by Cullen that he is skeptical of her methods. At the very beginning, when Leandra mentions going to Kirkwall, Bethany and Hawke say it's a bad idea because Kirkwall in pariticular is infamous for its Templars. If this was the same everywhere, they wouldn't complain. 

It's the port of power over eastern Thedas.  This isn't in dispute, but if mages ran the Circles with templars, then why do people refer to it in DA2 as slavery when they specifically address the Chantry controlled Circles? Why can even Hawke refer to it as slavery if your assessment is correct?

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

And no, what Gaider said is that the Circle cannot secede from Chantry supervision. This does NOT mean that the Chantry directly controls the Circle in every aspect. No one is denying that the Chantry has control, but its indirect.  

He said the Chantry controls the Circles, which is why they tell the ruler of Ferelden "no."

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I give up. You've been in the same position for months and no amount of discussion or evidence is going to change that. It's a waste of time for all involved. 

I find that to be condescending. On one hand, you provide a letter as your core argument, and on the other, I reference story examples from DA:O where Irving cleary has no authority and Greagoir does, but you completely dismiss it. You're welcome to disagree with me, but even Alistair addresses that while the Circles are supposed to "technically" be independent, this isn't the case. It's even brought up by the Grey Warden from the Circle that the Chantry would be the biggest issue in regards to getting support from the Circle because they'll do what the Chantry tells them to do.

[sylvanaerie]

For a Rite of Annulment, I think Meredith overstepped her bounds. Gregoir in the middle of a civil war and a blight, sent word to Denerim and was waiting for reinforcements to arrive before seeing to it. So, no I don't believe one templar (even a knight commander) has the authority to issue a Rite of Annulment on his/her own.
Hell, even Cullen tells Meredith she's off her rocker by the time Hawke steps out of the Gallows.
As with any system, and human beings there will be abuses. But what is the alternative? As the game clearly shows most of the mages we fight in the game turn out to be blood mages or abominations either by choice or by circumstances where they are backed into a wall.
The Circles aren't perfect even on the best terms but the alternative (Tevinter) is so much worse I don't want to contemplate what it is like. Fenris says his master drained a little boy just to show off at a party.
And this is the world Anders wants to create, where mages are 'free' to do whatever they want.
We all saw how well that worked out in Redcliffe...

[Ninja Mage]

Meredith was a loon, she would have asked for the right of annulment if she saw a mage eat a salad..

[Pileyourbodies]

But she didn't. She didn't even demand every mage be killed. Play the game side with the templars after the first fight in the Gallows the templars capture some mages who you can talk Meredith out of killing quite easily.

[MaximusPhoenix]

Fidget6 wrote...

Raygereio wrote...

Remember kids; according to the OP brutally slaughtering people who's choice of livestyle you don't agree with and murdering bystanders who have nothing to do with whatever argument is going on is a-okay.

Exactly, I find the OP's original post highly disturbing. He sounds like a radical who wants to cleanse the world of religion and thinks everyone who dares believe in a higher power should be executed. I honestly feel a bit sick if his in-game views are any indication of his real world views.

Well, I doubt OP's post is exactly 100% of his RL viwes, but he does make some VERY good points that are quite true. Even in today's day in age, the church, especially ones in less populated areas influence uneducated and weak minded people into believing and doing horrible things, you just don't see it as often, but it's there.
    Westborough Baptist Church, anyone?
    Evengelists/Missionaries going to Africa saying homosexuals should be executed cuz they are all pedophiles?
    "Holy Wars" ? or just using religion in general to justify violence.

If I could get rid of religion without hurting anyone, I totally would. I think the world would have been in a better place without it,...but, this is about Anders making the right or wrong choice.
     I think he did, given the circumstances of the story in DA2. Mages live in fear and even though a select few may live without problems, does not mean there are no serious problems going on.

Anders said I believe something along the lines of "there can be no middle gound". I agree with this. It's absolute freedom/equality, not with "strings attached".

[Sabariel]

Fidget6 wrote...

Raygereio wrote...

Remember kids; according to the OP brutally slaughtering people who's choice of livestyle you don't agree with and murdering bystanders who have nothing to do with whatever argument is going on is a-okay.

Exactly, I find the OP's original post highly disturbing. He sounds like a radical who wants to cleanse the world of religion and thinks everyone who dares believe in a higher power should be executed. I honestly feel a bit sick if his in-game views are any indication of his real world views.

I think the OP just wanted to start a fight

[Pileyourbodies]

Yes he tried but what he got was a rather well mannered debate.

[shelly1978us]

Well I for one was glad the chantry got blown up. The Grand cleric had ample opportunity to talk sense into both Meredith and Orsino, but she refused too. She wanted to leave it up to the maker; which means she didn't want to get involved.
If she had stepped in and tried to resolve the issue then it would not have lead to this. Seeing as both sides looked up to the chantry and counted on them to advise them. So I can see why Anders destroyed it. To me he was saying the chantry did not want to help matters so take them out of the picture and let people make their own decisions without thinking a maker is going to decide for them.

[Vilegrim]

Pileyourbodies wrote...

Kyle that was a wonderful explanation. You should have pointed out that first enchanter orsino, the highest ranked mage in kirkwall is an Elf.

one of the pet elves from the alienages? The same alienages that nobles raid for rape targets?  Rapes that the chantry does nothing about?  

[Vilegrim]

Rafe34 wrote...

Anders action is anything but grey. He just blew up the chantry- there were at least 4 other priests in the chantry along with the Grand Cleric, (watch the video). All of which are innocent. You cannot use the ends justify the means or you will lead yourself to using blood magic and the summoning of demons, among other horrible things.

No chantry priest is innocent.  Anyone who is a member of the maker cult is part of the command and control apparatus of  the templars and is a legitimate target.  Same way sttate owned TV stations are a legitimate target in a RL war.

Modifié par Vilegrim, 17 mars 2011 - 09:36 .

[AlexXIV]

Ninja Mage wrote...

Meredith was a loon, she would have asked for the right of annulment if she saw a mage eat a salad..

Well she didn't even like the Grand Cleric much, so she probably didn't mind her death. And she calls the right of annulment on ALL mages even though the culprit is right before her nose and she isn't doing anything to Anders. Not even a bad word. Speaks for itself.

[Vilegrim]

Pileyourbodies wrote...

Rafe if only 2 mages exist in each clan what do you think the Dales do to the rest of the magical babies? Rather unfortunate implication there.

depends how common mages are, it is mentioned that any child with potential in a clan with 2 keepers is sent to a clan that doesn't for instruction, implying that they are not that common.

[SgtElias]

sylvanaerie wrote...

As with any system, and human beings there will be abuses. But what is the alternative? As the game clearly shows most of the mages we fight in the game turn out to be blood mages or abominations either by choice or by circumstances where they are backed into a wall.

I would argue that humans (or, in this case, sentient beings) do drastic, violent things when backed into walls. They take hostages, they kill innocents, they commit atrocities and justify it to themselves by saying that they're doing it for survival, or for the greater good, but that doesn't change the fact that they did it. And this isn't something that's specific to mages; it's something that's common to everyone. It's just that during the course of DA2, mages get placed into positions of desperation enough that it really comes to the fore. So I suppose the argument becomes, "does the damage they can do justify the human rights violation that occurs when you lock an entire sub-set of the population away?" To some people this is an emphatic "yes". To others, not so much.

As a side note, I never really thought "what is the alternative?" is a valid argument. Just because a system is better than the one that came before it does not mean it doesn't need to be reexamine or replaced.

sylvanaerie wrote...

The Circles aren't perfect even on the best terms but the alternative (Tevinter) is so much worse I don't want to contemplate what it is like. Fenris says his master drained a little boy just to show off at a party.
And this is the world Anders wants to create, where mages are 'free' to do whatever they want.
We all saw how well that worked out in Redcliffe...

I'm not sure how mages being free, or at least not under Chantry/templar supervision, will automatically re-create a New Tevinter. I've only played through DA2 twice, but I don't ever remember Anders saying anything, at all, about mages being superior, or worthy of rule, or that he wants to overthrow anyone and put mages in power. I guess to some, one automatically equals the other, but they never did to me.



Edited to say: I totally ignored the original discussion point, so I'll address it now!

I don't think what Anders did was particularly wise, and I wish he'd found himself a different target, but I understand why he did it. Was it right?

Well, is killing people to prove a point ever right?

Modifié par SgtElias, 17 mars 2011 - 11:58 .

[TheRevanchist]

Yes...lets all just totaly ignore the fact that Mages used to be free...and hated it because the masses hated and mistrusted them...and demanded they be given a place all to themselves so the masses can't attack them in the street. Which is exactly what the Chantry gave them, but since the Mages can't make up their mind they just decide to make everyones blood explode in their veins until they get what they want. and indeed KoP apparently the word "exception" does not exsist to some people.

[MisterJB]

SgtElias wrote...


I don't think what Anders did was particularly wise, and I wish he'd found himself a different target, but I understand why he did it. Was it right?

Well, is killing people to prove a point ever right?

But like Anders himself says, he didn't do it to prove a point. He magically destroyed the Chantry and killed the Grand Cleric in order to start an all out war between Mages and Templars without any possibility for peace. He forced all mages to an "Win or Die" situation.
He pretty much created the Sixt Bligth and this time there's not even an Archdemon to slain, you have to kill or Tranquilize (is that even a word?) every single "darkspawn".
So, it seems to me that he was damn wrong.

Modifié par MisterJB, 17 mars 2011 - 12:37 .

[Vilegrim]

MisterJB wrote...

SgtElias wrote...


I don't think what Anders did was particularly wise, and I wish he'd found himself a different target, but I understand why he did it. Was it right?

Well, is killing people to prove a point ever right?

But like Anders himself says, he didn't do it to prove a point. He magically destroyed the Chantry and killed the Grand Cleric in order to start an all out war between Mages and Templars without any possibility for peace. He forced all mages to an "Win or Die" situation.
He pretty much created the Sixt Bligth and this time there's not even an Archdemon to slain, you have to kill or Tranquilize (is that even a word?) every single "darkspawn".
So, it seems to me that he was damn wrong.

he changed it from slow eradication by  increasingly fanatical Templars (and Meredith was unique only in timing, in DAO the same arguements where being made and gaining ground)  to a fight in which the mages at least stood a slim chance.   Could he have chosen a better way? Yes, for a decapitation strike it was poorly executed. 

Was in inevitable? Yes, well that or all mages ever quietly going to tranquility or death.

[LobselVith8]

Pileyourbodies, there's nothing to suggest the Dalish allow only two mages per clan when we know Velanna addresses who the next Keeper likely was from her own clan, and despite being stranded on Sundermount, Merrill assumes there's a new First. We also know elven mages have escaped the Circle to join the Dalish per Witch Hunt, and regarding the Dales, it's said the Keepera are typically descended from the nobility that ruled the Dales, and many Keepers so far have been mages, which makes sense since the Dalish believe all elves had the gift of magic during the time of Arlathan.

[Badpie]

Anders is a terrorist. Nothing more.

[LobselVith8]

Kyle, mages weren't free under Andrastian societies, their powers were restricted by the Chantry because of Emperor Drakon's religious views in History of the Chantry Part Four, and then mages held a peaceful protest against this that Divine Ambrosia II wanted to respond with by declaring an Exalted March against the protesting mages who were holding up in her cathedral in History of the Circle. It's not quite as one-sided as you tried to make it out to be.

[MisterJB]

Vilegrim wrote...

he changed it from slow eradication by  increasingly fanatical Templars (and Meredith was unique only in timing, in DAO the same arguements where being made and gaining ground)  to a fight in which the mages at least stood a slim chance.   Could he have chosen a better way? Yes, for a decapitation strike it was poorly executed. 

Was in inevitable? Yes, well that or all mages ever quietly going to tranquility or death.

Meredith is quite unique, as a matter of fact. Or do you forget the Lyrium Idol? The rest of the templars seemed very reasonable, Thrask, Greagoir, even Cullen.
Naturally, there will always be sick bastards like the Tranquil Solution Templar but the Divine herself refused his request. Of course, that was before a certain mage blew up a chantry and killed a Grand Cleric.

A war with the Templars was certainly avoidable and it will benefit no one because the mages don't stand a chance of winning without turning to Blood Magic or Demons, thus justifying the Rigth of Annulment and turning the common people against them when even the nobles of Kirkwall were already starting to sympathize with the pligth of the Mages.

And the timing couldn't be worse. Orlais seems determined to start a war with Ferelden and the Grey Wardens are apparently preparing for the Sixth Bligth or something even worse.

Modifié par MisterJB, 17 mars 2011 - 01:21 .

[Dangerfoot]

MaximusPhoenix wrote...

Well, I doubt OP's post is exactly 100% of his RL viwes, but he does make some VERY good points that are quite true. Even in today's day in age, the church, especially ones in less populated areas influence uneducated and weak minded people into believing and doing horrible things, you just don't see it as often, but it's there.
    Westborough Baptist Church, anyone?
    Evengelists/Missionaries going to Africa saying homosexuals should be executed cuz they are all pedophiles?
    "Holy Wars" ? or just using religion in general to justify violence.

If I could get rid of religion without hurting anyone, I totally would. I think the world would have been in a better place without it,...but, this is about Anders making the right or wrong choice.
     I think he did, given the circumstances of the story in DA2. Mages live in fear and even though a select few may live without problems, does not mean there are no serious problems going on.

Anders said I believe something along the lines of "there can be no middle gound". I agree with this. It's absolute freedom/equality, not with "strings attached".

Well obviously he didn't get rid of religion OR do it without hurting people. What he did was the equivilent of firebombing a peaceful church because he didn't like the way the Pope was acting.