I do not think that mages in game would want Ander's to speak for them, or act for them. He would be an outcast among them because he was not a mage like them, he was possessed by a demon, the one thing that every single person in the DA world agrees is evil and has to be stamped out. Just because it was only a partial possession does not mean he is any different.
If it was outside of the Hawke influence he would have been hunted by templars and shunned by mages as well.
At least in my opinion anyway. My opinion as well is no matter what the reason, nor people's justifications and rationalizations, Anders is a terrorist. You cannot deny that. You can believe in his cause, but you cant argue with straight up facts. He committed a terrorist act.
Although not the same in any means, 9/11 was applauded by people around the world because an organization struck back at the evil americans and our way of life. No matter what side of that fence you sit on, it was still a terrorist act.
Anders did the right thing! I was positively surprised.
Débuté par
SomeoneStoleMyName
, mars 15 2011 12:18
Retour en haut
#602
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 08:52
terdferguson123
-
- Members
- 520 messages
Reinveil wrote...
I was positively surprised by what an idiotic and pointless plot twist that ended up being. The wisecracking healer that spends the entire game prattling on and on and on about the rights of mages basically justifies all the issues people have with them (along with Orsino) with an act of murder and terrorism that forces everyone's hands. After I spent 30 hours taking endless flak from Fenris and various minor characters for sympathizing with mages.
Honestly, the last few hours of this game couldn't have been more poorly conceived if Bioware tried.
How is this NOT amazing storytelling? You spend the whole game defending mages but towards the end you see all the stupid things they do such as Anders, all the blood mages you fight who escaped the circle, and Orsino. The writers do this because they WANT you to question if you actually think its right to defend the mages. It's not poorly conceived it's damned brilliant. Any type of writing that makes you question your very beliefs is powerful.
#603
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 08:56
Sabariel
-
- Members
- 2 826 messages
Words of the day: Innocent and Terrorist/ism
Thrown around way too much.
Thrown around way too much.
#604
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 08:58
Pileyourbodies
-
- Members
- 376 messages
Sabariel wrote...
Words of the day: Innocent and Terrorist/ism
Thrown around way too much.
A case can be made that not all of the people we templar supporters are calling innocent are not innocent.
However anders as no defense he was a terrorist.
#605
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 08:58
stuboy52
-
- Members
- 173 messages
i agree with MaximusPhoenix the grand cleric could have stopped all of this but didnt which makes here worse as she stood by and watched as kirkwall decended in to chaos she should have allowed the noblility to take control of the ruling of kirkwall and replaced meredith with someone like trask who has mage support be understands what a real templar is to protect mages not murder them.
As for Anders i let him live sure what he did was wrong he had good intentions but it was wrong.however its done no changing that so might as well keep him alive to fix things like my hawke points out he didnt support that method but he understands he might as well go all the way and free mages as there is no going back.
As for Anders i let him live sure what he did was wrong he had good intentions but it was wrong.however its done no changing that so might as well keep him alive to fix things like my hawke points out he didnt support that method but he understands he might as well go all the way and free mages as there is no going back.
#606
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 08:59
KnightofPhoenix
-
- Members
- 21 527 messages
Sabariel wrote...
Words of the day: Innocent and Terrorist/ism
Thrown around way too much.
They always are.
#607
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 09:01
Vilegrim
-
- Members
- 2 403 messages
Pileyourbodies wrote...
Sabariel wrote...
Words of the day: Innocent and Terrorist/ism
Thrown around way too much.
A case can be made that not all of the people we templar supporters are calling innocent are not innocent.
However anders as no defense he was a terrorist.
are drone strikes on weddings and funerals (As have happened) terrorist actions?
#608
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 09:03
Pileyourbodies
-
- Members
- 376 messages
Vilegrim wrote...
Pileyourbodies wrote...
Sabariel wrote...
Words of the day: Innocent and Terrorist/ism
Thrown around way too much.
A case can be made that not all of the people we templar supporters are calling innocent are not innocent.
However anders as no defense he was a terrorist.
are drone strikes on weddings and funerals (As have happened) terrorist actions?
No they're accidents in a war. Bad **** happens in war and it sucks but sometimes innocents die. If we went and targeted mosques then yeah it'd be terrorist but we specifically avoid mosques and civilian structures.
#609
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 09:04
fathomless33
-
- Members
- 38 messages
Vilegrim wrote...
Pileyourbodies wrote...
Sabariel wrote...
Words of the day: Innocent and Terrorist/ism
Thrown around way too much.
A case can be made that not all of the people we templar supporters are calling innocent are not innocent.
However anders as no defense he was a terrorist.
are drone strikes on weddings and funerals (As have happened) terrorist actions?
I would say yes.
#610
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 09:06
MorningBird
-
- Members
- 1 429 messages
TobiTobsen wrote...
I remember the talk with Cullen you are refering to. But in the end i would say that we just hear about it. Never see it. The most extreme Templar we see in the Ferelden Circle is Cullen himself, after Uldred took over. Maybe there are Templars who would enjoy it to kill the mages in the Ferelden Circle but I don't think that under Greagoirs command anyone would be allowed to misuse their position of authority like the Templars in Kirkwall.
As far as I understood the situation with the Templar in Awakening it wasn't the problem that the one in charge just liked to kill mages. She thought that Anders had killed the group that had escortet him to Vigils Keep and wanted revenge for that and the fact that Anders kept mocking the Order with his escapes, iirc. So not directly the same sort of wrongdoing the "freaky" () Templars in Kirkwall show.
Yes, but she came to that conclusion because she is a 'freaky' templar.
Anders is a mage who does not like the circle, and has tried to escape it several times in the past. Ergo, obviously he's an ebil murderer (and maleficar) who would kill for his freedom, even though his past escape attempts were relatively peaceful, he's only an apostate, and there's no proof that he killed his captors.
It's irrational blame centered around Anders being a mage who does not submit to the circle, and therefore, a murderer. She is a 'freaky' templar.
I would assume that BW gave Cullen that line specifically because you don't have the opportunity to see that kind of templar behavior in Origins. The Mage origin is pretty much: "Pass Harrowing, help/foil Jowan, be recruited into the Grey Wardens." When you return to the Circle later, everyone is pretty much dead.
In a video game, just because you 'hear something' and don't 'see it' doesn't mean that it's not happening. BW has a budget, and they have to put their resources towards things that benefit the overall story which, in DA:O case, was defeating the Blight. A cutscene where a templar is abusing a hapless mage (while a good use of resources in DA2) wouldn't have been money well spent in DA:O (or it was money better spent elsewhere.)
The fact that Cullen says that line, however, implies that templar abuse is a part of the established world.
Modifié par MorningBird, 17 mars 2011 - 09:08 .
#611
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 09:09
Robhuzz
-
- Members
- 4 976 messages
I thought it was absolutely AWESOME how Anders blew up that chantry. I was amazed but pretty much laughing maniacly when it happend. As for the grand cleric... Well.. she should just have listened to Leliana. That was just a massive slap in the face to any templar. Way to go Anders! On to the next one.
#612
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 09:09
Jaulen
-
- Members
- 2 272 messages
stuboy52 wrote...
i agree with MaximusPhoenix the grand cleric could have stopped all of this but didnt which makes here worse as she stood by and watched as kirkwall decended in to chaos she should have allowed the noblility to take control of the ruling of kirkwall and replaced meredith with someone like trask who has mage support be understands what a real templar is to protect mages not murder them.
As for Anders i let him live sure what he did was wrong he had good intentions but it was wrong.however its done no changing that so might as well keep him alive to fix things like my hawke points out he didnt support that method but he understands he might as well go all the way and free mages as there is no going back.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing"
That sums up my thoughs on the Grand Cleric...I LIKED her, but I also wanted to punch her and say that it was time for her to grow a friggin' pair and DO something. She was supposed to be some sort of grand leader, well then LEAD! Mediate! Do SOMETHING, not just stand their and wring your hands. The decent into chaos was as much her fault as anyone elses, maybe even more since she had the power and authority to stop it. If she would have just used it.
So I agree with Anders blowing up the Chantry, it was time for change. Although I still killed him for it.
#613
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 09:11
Eventide
-
- Members
- 63 messages
Yes, terrorism is totally the right thing to do.
#614
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 09:12
Vilegrim
-
- Members
- 2 403 messages
Pileyourbodies wrote...
Vilegrim wrote...
Pileyourbodies wrote...
Sabariel wrote...
Words of the day: Innocent and Terrorist/ism
Thrown around way too much.
A case can be made that not all of the people we templar supporters are calling innocent are not innocent.
However anders as no defense he was a terrorist.
are drone strikes on weddings and funerals (As have happened) terrorist actions?
No they're accidents in a war. Bad **** happens in war and it sucks but sometimes innocents die. If we went and targeted mosques then yeah it'd be terrorist but we specifically avoid mosques and civilian structures.
ahh but the Chantry is NOT a civilian structure, it is a goverment building garrisoned by a military force, more like the pentagon with prayer cards.
Oh and the drone strikes on weddings? At least one was deliberate as some suspected militant where on the gues list. But this is getting to close to RL politics.
Modifié par Vilegrim, 17 mars 2011 - 09:14 .
#615
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 09:16
Jaulen
-
- Members
- 2 272 messages
Eventide wrote...
Yes, terrorism is totally the right thing to do.
Most wars for freedom start with what would be considered a terroristic act by those currently in power, and a heroic deed by those being opressed.
#616
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 09:23
Vilegrim
-
- Members
- 2 403 messages
Jaulen wrote...
Eventide wrote...
Yes, terrorism is totally the right thing to do.
Most wars for freedom start with what would be considered a terroristic act by those currently in power, and a heroic deed by those being opressed.
bingo.
#617
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 09:32
EricHVela
-
- Members
- 3 980 messages
[tl;dr version: Anders unilaterally and arrogantly made an impatient and paranoid action. The result was just as awful.]
Anders knew who was to blame in his mind: The Templars and the Circle. He even says so. The only reason he destroyed the Chantry was to prevent mediation, which he felt merely caused stagnation on the issue and no resolution. The Chantry was not his target but merely an annoying obstacle.
By that, the Chantry was being used by all -- Templars, Circle and even Anders himself. It was the victim in the scenario, but not without its own fault of allowing itself to be used (excepting Ander's purpose). Removing it did force the two opposing forces to deal with each other directly. Directness is an honest method without any meddling, but honesty can easily be brutal if not tempered by something... such as a Chantry mediating, meddling in the exchanges.
Anders was impatient and paranoid. This could be a product of Justice's binding. His actions are no better than anyone who is impatient and paranoid.
The Chantry served a purpose -- a good purpose. It was a much-needed buffer between people. It provided alternatives for people through other points of view. Like all organizations, it had its bad apples, but such individuals do not define the entire whole.
Destroying the Chantry was a bad idea. It has nothing to do with religion. It had to do with stability. The Chantry happened to be the established and respected organization for providing that. Any other organization that accomplished such wide-spread influence could possibly substitute, religious or not. Religion has shown to be a successful means of gaining influence and respect (even though there will always be those opposed to it, who often gather together, ignore all others and begin to feel that everyone they know -- and therefore in their minds, everyone -- thinks like they do).
Anders knew who was to blame in his mind: The Templars and the Circle. He even says so. The only reason he destroyed the Chantry was to prevent mediation, which he felt merely caused stagnation on the issue and no resolution. The Chantry was not his target but merely an annoying obstacle.
By that, the Chantry was being used by all -- Templars, Circle and even Anders himself. It was the victim in the scenario, but not without its own fault of allowing itself to be used (excepting Ander's purpose). Removing it did force the two opposing forces to deal with each other directly. Directness is an honest method without any meddling, but honesty can easily be brutal if not tempered by something... such as a Chantry mediating, meddling in the exchanges.
Anders was impatient and paranoid. This could be a product of Justice's binding. His actions are no better than anyone who is impatient and paranoid.
The Chantry served a purpose -- a good purpose. It was a much-needed buffer between people. It provided alternatives for people through other points of view. Like all organizations, it had its bad apples, but such individuals do not define the entire whole.
Destroying the Chantry was a bad idea. It has nothing to do with religion. It had to do with stability. The Chantry happened to be the established and respected organization for providing that. Any other organization that accomplished such wide-spread influence could possibly substitute, religious or not. Religion has shown to be a successful means of gaining influence and respect (even though there will always be those opposed to it, who often gather together, ignore all others and begin to feel that everyone they know -- and therefore in their minds, everyone -- thinks like they do).
#618
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 09:32
eye basher
-
- Members
- 1 822 messages
You know i don't know why mages in thedas complain so much they should see what the qunari do to there mages and then complain about oppresion.
#619
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 09:33
Maelora
-
- Members
- 608 messages
I cheered when the temple of that disgusting cult blew up. My Hawke's gay but she could have kissed him.
Death to the Chantry!
Death to the Chantry!
#620
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 09:35
Vilegrim
-
- Members
- 2 403 messages
eye basher wrote...
You know i don't know why mages in thedas complain so much they should see what the qunari do to there mages and then complain about oppresion.
so Soviet Citizens should not have complained because North Korea was worse?
#621
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 09:44
EricHVela
-
- Members
- 3 980 messages
The problem with this statement:Jaulen wrote...
Most wars for freedom start with what would be considered a terroristic act by those currently in power, and a heroic deed by those being opressed.
Freedom
Far too many people think freedom means to control everything. Some think that it is different when they just want to control their own lives. To control one's own life requires one to control everything.
There's no freedom. There is only compromise. People willinging submit to others while extracting the same submission from those others for the purpose coexisting peacefully. Oppression happens when it only goes one way.
Fighting for freedom is an excuse to try to oppress others. Fighting for coexistence is noble.
The Chantry was trying to help the two sides coexist as best as they would let it. Anders took that away knowing full well that the two wouldn't coexist. He wanted one side to die, and he didn't seem to really care which side that was. The time that could have been used to find a solution without so much death (getting rid of the sword and, if still necessary, Meredith) was taken away.
Was that really a good thing he did?
#622
Guest_I.AM.DUNCAN_*
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 09:49
Guest_I.AM.DUNCAN_*
Guest_I.AM.DUNCAN_*
-
- Guests
So you're saying the maker isn't real. Have you payed any attention at all during these games? The way the characters talk (all of them), implies that the maker extists. I'm not talking just about the chantry, there is no one in the game that implies the opposite (even if they do believe the opposite) meaning that bioware is implying that the maker exists in this game. So the maker is real.
#623
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 09:55
EricHVela
-
- Members
- 3 980 messages
This is flawed.I.AM.DUNCAN wrote...
So you're saying the maker isn't real. Have you payed any attention at all during these games? The way the characters talk (all of them), implies that the maker extists. I'm not talking just about the chantry, there is no one in the game that implies the opposite (even if they do believe the opposite) meaning that bioware is implying that the maker exists in this game. So the maker is real.
The known world was flat at one time.
I'm inclined to think that their Maker is real in the game, but it's still a leap of faith. Nothing wrong with that. It takes a leap of Faith just to plan a nice weekend getaway, much less expecting that one won't fall when putting one foot in front of the other while balancing on one at a time (and even then, faith can be misplaced, or else those bruised and skinned knees wouldn't exist).
#624
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 09:55
OldMan91
-
- Members
- 626 messages
It is, when coexistence favours one side over the other and there is no alternative to achieving coexistence on equal terms.Was that really a good thing he did?
#625
Posté 17 mars 2011 - 09:57
TheCreeper
-
- Members
- 1 291 messages
What drives me nuts about Anders is if you side with the mages and kill him his death likely gets blamed on the templars and he becomes a martyr figure for the Mages to rally around, EXACTLY what he wanted. If you keep him alive you got a guy who is willing to go to extremes to win this war.
