1411 réponses à ce sujet

[KnightofPhoenix]

I never said they are a race personally.

[Harid]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I never said they are a race personally.

Why the **** are we arguing!

[KnightofPhoenix]

Harid wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I never said they are a race personally.

Why the **** are we arguing!

I have no clue.
You'd think I want to relax, but no, I have to argue about something for no reason.

[Harid]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Harid wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I never said they are a race personally.

Why the **** are we arguing!

I have no clue.
You'd think I want to relax, but no, I have to argue about something for no reason.

Hah hah, fair enough, I understand the sentiment.

[River5]

Harid wrote...

Because they would not have a unique culture due to exile.  People would bring in whatever culture that they had when they thought they were normal, before they were shipped off the to Circle.  I recall the teens generally being the time most mages enter the Circle.  That is a pretty long time to have your indigenous culture stick with you.

Reservations are really not considered nations so I am not certain what you are talking about here.  Reservations are actually used by an actual race of people too, so, bad example.

And the point I was making with the final point in that mage fraternity (percentage of each) and attitudes and skill will differ in places where they are held down relative to places where they are more free compartively speaking.

For having done community health work on a Mohawk reservation, I can pretty much garantee you that we still refer to them as a nation.  The Mohawk nation is actually part of the Iroquois league.

Are you by any chance using nation as a synonym for country, or state?  While "nation" or "nationality" has traditionally been used to refer to one's country, or sovereign's state; that isn't the only definition of the word.

I've often heard people refer to Catholics as a nation...  Especially with the Vatican being its own city state.

Jews are also a nation.

I don't really see where's the problem with that.

Modifié par River5, 12 juillet 2011 - 04:10 .

[River5]

Harid wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Harid wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I never said they are a race personally.

Why the **** are we arguing!

I have no clue.
You'd think I want to relax, but no, I have to argue about something for no reason.

Hah hah, fair enough, I understand the sentiment.

Knight of Phoenix and I got married in another thread, that must be why... 

[KnightofPhoenix]

Of course dear

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 12 juillet 2011 - 04:11 .

[Harid]

River5 wrote...

Harid wrote...

Because they would not have a unique culture due to exile.  People would bring in whatever culture that they had when they thought they were normal, before they were shipped off the to Circle.  I recall the teens generally being the time most mages enter the Circle.  That is a pretty long time to have your indigenous culture stick with you.

Reservations are really not considered nations so I am not certain what you are talking about here.  Reservations are actually used by an actual race of people too, so, bad example.

And the point I was making with the final point in that mage fraternity (percentage of each) and attitudes and skill will differ in places where they are held down relative to places where they are more free compartively speaking.

For having done community health work on a Mohawk reservation, I can pretty much garantee you that we still refer to them as a nation.  The Mohawk nation is actually part of the Iroquois league.

Are you by any chance using nation as a synonym for country, or state?  While "nation" or "nationality" has traditionally been used to refer to one's country, or sovereign's state; that isn't the only definition of the word.

I've often heard people refer to Caholics as a nation...  Especially with the Vatican being its own city state.

Jews area also a nation.

I don't really see where's the problem with that.

Ugh, the board ate my post.

But generally, while the Mohawk people are considered a 'nation' they are not a separate nation from the nation that granted them that reservation through treaty, in your case, America's hat, Canada.  (I'm joking)  Those reservations have certain rules they must follow, and aren't true nations in the fact that they cannot do whatever they please in the border of their reservation.  In that sense, they are similar to mages, but generally speaking I don't like this comparison as native americans are a different ethnic group to generally white Canada.  (70% white last I checked)

While the Vatican is it's own nation, I would not consider those in the Vatican as part of a so called Vatican race, as race is bigger than the country you are in.

So sure, I can concede that mages are a nation as so far as their circles go, but having a nation doesn't make you a race.  Jews aren't all the same race, despite you consider them to be the same nation.  Catholics aren't all the same race despite they are all considered a nation by you.  Every person in the vatican aren't all the same race.  These aren't "races" because they are nations.  They just share similar cultures and beliefs (or lack there of.)

Do you consider Charlize Theron and say, Nelson Mandela to be the same race?  or Idris Elba and Russel Brand?
pro-tip (They are both respectively, each comparison) from the same nation

Modifié par Harid, 12 juillet 2011 - 04:28 .

[In Exile]

Harid wrote...
So sure, I can concede that mages are a nation as so far as their circles go, but having a nation doesn't make you a race.  Jews aren't all the same race, despite you consider them to be the same nation.  

But we consider ourselves a people. We're united by culture, and there are genetic similarities. It's a complicated thing. 

[River5]

Harid wrote...

Ugh, the board ate my post.

But generally, while the Mohawk people are considered a 'nation' they are not a separate nation from the nation that granted them that reservation through treaty, in your case, America's hat, Canada.  (I'm joking)  Those reservations have certain rules they must follow, and aren't true nations in the fact that they cannot do whatever they please in the border of their reservation.  In that sense, they are similar to mages, but generally speaking I don't like this comparison as native americans are a different ethnic group to generally white Canada.  (70% white last I checked)

While the Vatican is it's own nation, I would not consider those in the Vatican as part of a so called Vatican race, as race is bigger than the country you are in.

So sure, I can concede that mages are a nation as so far as their circles go, but having a nation doesn't make you a race.  Jews aren't all the same race, despite you consider them to be the same nation.  Catholics aren't all the same race despite they are all considered a nation by you.  Every person in the vatican aren't all the same race.  These aren't "races" because they are nations.  They just share similar cultures and beliefs (or lack there of.)

Do you consider Charlize Theron and say, Nelson Mandela to be the same race?  or Idris Elba and Russel Brand?
pro-tip (They are both respectively, each comparison) from the same nation

In the case of Charlize Theron and Nelson Mandela, I might be tempted to say yes.

Mind you, I'm using the definition of "race" as being a "social population", not defined by physical traits or genetics.  They are both South Africans, and thus now share a common history and culture, no matter their origins.

Modifié par River5, 12 juillet 2011 - 04:54 .

[Harid]

In Exile wrote...

Harid wrote...
So sure, I can concede that mages are a nation as so far as their circles go, but having a nation doesn't make you a race.  Jews aren't all the same race, despite you consider them to be the same nation.  

But we consider ourselves a people. We're united by culture, and there are genetic similarities. It's a complicated thing. 

But every Jewish person doesn't.  And there are a large difference between American/Western Jews who, well most non white people consider to be White people, and Palestinian Jews which, one could confuse for a Palestinian Arab.

So yes, you are a "people, or a nation", I can get that.  But I would not say all Jewish people are the same race.

As for the above poster now we are talking about race as a cultural/social construct which is another argument for another day.  I am only using race as so far as most people understand the word to be, truth be told I prefer the term "Ethnic group", but that tends to confuse people on the internet.

Modifié par Harid, 12 juillet 2011 - 05:00 .

[River5]

Harid wrote...

In Exile wrote...

Harid wrote...
So sure, I can concede that mages are a nation as so far as their circles go, but having a nation doesn't make you a race.  Jews aren't all the same race, despite you consider them to be the same nation.  

But we consider ourselves a people. We're united by culture, and there are genetic similarities. It's a complicated thing. 

But every Jewish person doesn't.  And there are a large difference between American/Western Jews who, well most non white people consider to be White people, and Palestinian Jews which, one could confuse for a Palestinian Arab.

So yes, you are a "people, or a nation", I can get that.  But I would not say all Jewish people are the same race.

As for the above poster now we are talking about race as a cultural/social construct which is another argument for another day.  I am only using race as so far as most people understand the word to be, truth be told I prefer the term "Ethnic group", but that tends to confuse people on the internet.

Then no, mages do not belong to the same ethnic group, or even share a common genetic pool...

Though the ability to use magic does seem predominant in certain families...  So there may be a concept of dominant and recessive gene to it.  Like blue eyes (recessive) v.s. brown eyes (dominant). 

Mage gene (recessive) + non-mage gene (dominant) = non-mage (that still carries the mage gene). 
Mage gene + mage gene = mage. 

Or something like that...  But it has absolutely nothing to do with racial identity.

And I thought that I had made clear since the beginning of my argumentation that I only used the term "race" as a cultural/social construct.  Sorry if there was some confusion.

[In Exile]

Harid wrote...
But every Jewish person doesn't.  And there are a large difference between American/Western Jews who, well most non white people consider to be White people, and Palestinian Jews which, one could confuse for a Palestinian Arab.

You could just go with Ashke**** and Sephardic, and this is within Europe. 

So yes, you are a "people, or a nation", I can get that.  But I would not say all Jewish people are the same race.

I think many of us would consider Jewish as an ethnic origin as much (or more) than a cultural one. It really, really varies. My point though is that mages could easily see themselves as "Mages" instead of "Fereldan" and to have an identity around it. 

I don't want to touch the "you're an internet racist for ragging on the mages" but let me just say that I don't think you're a racist based on the chats we've had. At least someone isn't using the minority example that really makes you clench your teeth? 

[Rifneno]

Harid wrote...

You seriously, in your heart, believe that all mages will simply stay in their tower, picking off templars that come by to visit?  Really?  Because if you do then I won't post another reply to you, as I don't argue with people who are crazy.

First of all, saying someone is crazy for believing differently than you do is levels of arrogant that words can't describe. Secondly, when the hell did I say they'd do that? Mages are people, and every large group of people has some bad apples. Anyone who says they know how mage freedom would end up is a liar (or a Bioware writer).

In Exile wrote...

The Chantry is a military target in the same way that the House of Representatives is a military target. Templars aren't station as guards in the Chantry. It's either a symbol of repression or the civilian leadership of the templars.

Do you condone attacks on government buildings? Yes or no?

What a ridiculous question. Of course. How exactly does one overthrow a government without attacking it?

Harid wrote...

They aren't a race.

Captain Dictionary strikes again! He needs a theme song.

CrimsonZephyr wrote...

Discrimination isn't limited to ethnic groups or races. Social strata (which mages are), economic groups, political groups, national groups, academic groups, etc. But, yeah, racism isn't the most accurate term, just a convenient and easily understood one. It is undue discrimination, though. The dangers of magic aside, the Templars do grossly abuse their power, which is pretty much unchecked.

Well said. That was what I meant, just poorly worded.

Harid wrote...

I claimed calling someone a racist for hating mages is like calling someone a racist for hating fat people.  It's ludicrous.

And I never called anyone a racist. I suppose I can see how it can be interpreted that way, but the intent of it was "this is the same justification racists use." And it is.

Tidra wrote...

P.S. I think Anders is just super pissed off about his cat

True story.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I have no clue.
You'd think I want to relax, but no, I have to argue about something for no reason.

Coke vs. Pepsi. Go!

[OldMan91]

The French revolution did not end that well, though. The purging of the ranks progressed toward something more and more horrible, and in the end France ended ruled by Napoleon. That was a dramatic change in Europe and in a very meaningful sense progress... but it was not the kind of progress that revolution itself envisioned. Still, it was worth revolting.

It was progress in terms of setting a precedent. Were it not for the French armies, the rise of nationalism in Italy or Germany might not have happened as quickly as it did. The ideals of the French Revolution were thankfully spread in the territories France invaded. Spain for example had the so called "Afrancesados" who supported the French invasion and the ideals it brought. In fact, thanks to the ideals, Spain had its first constitution in 1812 "La Constitución de Cádiz".

My point is that despite the fall of morality as we know it, such events have their place and are historically necessary for human progress to happen. The same could be argued for Anders and his actions in Kirkwall. You may think that he shouldn't take action individually in the name of all mages and "condemn" the mages of Kirkwall to death (despite the person directly responsible for that being Meredith), but perhaps that is a price worth paying? Think of this event as being case law for future generations to look at and use in future political and social "trials".

We're not debating the morality of the revolt - I fully support a mage uprising, even in the hopelessly idealistic "better free than dead," sense. But there's a difference between making that choice and having that choice made for you, and there's a difference between organizing as a group and electing to strike against the Chantry and having someone make that strike in the hope that enough of you die to galvanize the rest.

And i'm not arguing the morality of Anders' actions either. By modern standards it's a pretty immoral thing to do, to force others to fight and possibly die in the name of a cause they may not believe in the first place, and under normal circumstances I, nor would any one else, do the same. I am arguing though that these aren't normal circumstances and that the final outcome of his actions may be worth the price.

Modifié par OldMan91, 12 juillet 2011 - 10:04 .

[River5]

OldMan91 wrote...

We're not debating the morality of the revolt - I fully support a mage uprising, even in the hopelessly idealistic "better free than dead," sense. But there's a difference between making that choice and having that choice made for you, and there's a difference between organizing as a group and electing to strike against the Chantry and having someone make that strike in the hope that enough of you die to galvanize the rest.

And i'm not arguing the morality of Anders' actions either. By modern standards it's a pretty immoral thing to do, to force others to fight and possibly die in the name of a cause they may not believe in the first place, and under normal circumstances I, nor would any one else, do the same. I am arguing though that these aren't normal circumstances and that the final outcome of his actions may be worth the price.

Except that before mages can vote whether they want to be part of a rebellion, or not; they would need to be given the opportunity to do so.  A way to gather, or to effectively communicate among themselves.

By the end of Act 3, I think that most mages are restrained to their rooms; and passing notes among themselves would probably be incredibly risky!  I mean, wasn't Samson kicked out of the Templar order for delivering love notes between a mage and his romantic partner?

Now, imagine if said notes carried informations about some attempt to rebel against the Chantry.  These mages would be probably be made Tranquil, and their accomplices executed.  Not to mention that their plans about the rebellion would be revealed to their enemies.

The fact that all the Circles rebelled gives me hope that the choice Anders made did follow the wish of the many (or, at the very least, majority).  But, of course, so far there's no way to know for sure.

Modifié par River5, 13 juillet 2011 - 01:14 .

[In Exile]

Rifneno wrote...
What a ridiculous question. Of course. How exactly does one overthrow a government without attacking it?

So then you consider the people who work there military targets?

OldMan91 wrote...
It was progress in terms of setting a precedent. Were it not for the French armies, the rise of nationalism in Italy or Germany might not have happened as quickly as it did. The ideals of the French Revolution were thankfully spread in the territories France invaded. Spain for example had the so called "Afrancesados" who supported the French invasion and the ideals it brought. In fact, thanks to the ideals, Spain had its first constitution in 1812 "La Constitución de Cádiz".

Oh, I agree with you on the impact to Europe as a whole. It's why I said it was worth it (or so we think; it's not like we can see an alternative history).

OldMan91 wrote...
My point is that despite the fall of morality as we know it, such events have their place and are historically necessary for human progress to happen. The same could be argued for Anders and his actions in Kirkwall. You may think that he shouldn't take action individually in the name of all mages and "condemn" the mages of Kirkwall to death (despite the person directly responsible for that being Meredith), but perhaps that is a price worth paying? Think of this event as being case law for future generations to look at and use in future political and social "trials".

I think Anders is a lot like Gavrillo Princip, only a lot worse. In the same way that WWI was essentially a geopolitical inevitability, I think a Kirkwall uprising was just as inevitable. Here is the thing: if what made the revolt happen in Thedas was a Right of Anulment in Kirkwall, that would have happened no matter what (IMO) in the end. Elthina wouldn't have pushed out Meredith, the Resolutionists would have continued to harras the Chantry, and Orsino would have eventually tried to do something. He was close to inciting a popular revolt before Elthina calmed things down. 

I think what Anders did made things worse, not better. 

OldMan91 wrote...
And i'm not arguing the morality of Anders' actions either. By modern standards it's a pretty immoral thing to do, to force others to fight and possibly die in the name of a cause they may not believe in the first place, and under normal circumstances I, nor would any one else, do the same. I am arguing though that these aren't normal circumstances and that the final outcome of his actions may be worth the price.

Like I said: that only really works if you believe the mages wouldn't have risen up on their own.

[In Exile]

River5 wrote...
Except that before mages can vote whether they want to be part of a rebellion, or not; they would need to be given the opportunity to do so.  A way to gather, or to effectively communicate among themselves.

By the end of Act 3, I think that most mages are restrained to their rooms; and passing notes among themselves would probably be incredibly risky!  I mean, wasn't Samson kicked out of the Templar order for delivering love notes between a mage and his romantic partner?

At the same time. Orsino was ready to raise a riot. The mages clearly weren't restrained enough to get fight back during the Right of Annulment, and some escaped with Orsino.

Now, imagine if said notes carried informations about some attempt to rebel against the Chantry.  These mages would be probably be made Tranquil, and their accomplices executed.  Not to mention that their plans about the rebellion would be revealed to their enemies.

But that might be the event that sets off the whole powderkeg. We can't know. 

The fact that all the Circles rebelled gives me hope that the choice Anders made did follow the wish of the many (or, at the very least, majority).  But, of course, so far there's no way to know for sure.

The other mages using it as motivation and Kirkwall mages wanting to die for the cause aren't the same thing.

[SpiderFan1217]

SomeoneStoleMyName wrote...

*snip*

I mean religion is purposly spreading lies to deceive and control people in the false pretense of bringing hope and peace. Disinformation and lies are evils that goes hand in hand with religion. There is no empirical evidence that the maker is real, therefore brainwashing and manipulating children and weak minded grown ups into this web of lies is evil in nature.

*snip* 

Allowing the chantry to spread fairytales is a crime, and falling for them is also a crime.

*snip*

Such a blow to superstition is a great victory for Thedas`s future. If this future first needs to be cleansed in a tidal wave of blood to remove the parasites that believes in the maker, then it is totally fine.

Funny thing about the Dragon Age Universe, The existence of the Maker is never disproven. If anything the story points to the Maker actually existing. I may be wrong, but I feel your prejudices against real life religions may be effecting your opinion of the Chantry and Anders' actions.

[OldMan91]

In Exile wrote...

Oh, I agree with you on the impact to Europe as a whole. It's why I said it was worth it (or so we think; it's not like we can see an alternative history).

Alternative history is the stuff commoners like you and me like to brainstorm about. The "What If?" historical scenarios are always the most interesting (Hearts of Iron game series are awesome for this reason)... and the most fruitless unfortunately, though you seem like a rather civil internet gentleman.

I think Anders is a lot like Gavrillo Princip, only a lot worse. In the same way that WWI was essentially a geopolitical inevitability, I think a Kirkwall uprising was just as inevitable. Here is the thing: if what made the revolt happen in Thedas was a Right of Anulment in Kirkwall, that would have happened no matter what (IMO) in the end. Elthina wouldn't have pushed out Meredith, the Resolutionists would have continued to harras the Chantry, and Orsino would have eventually tried to do something. He was close to inciting a popular revolt before Elthina calmed things down. 

I think what Anders did made things worse, not better.

Anders like a Serbian nationalist? Now that's an interesting comparison. Though i'd argue that their ends differ, and if I were to measure on a scale which ideal was better (self-determination vs the rights of a minority + the political precedent of "unjust laws must be resisted"), i'd say gaining rights is more favorable and progressive.

Like I said: that only really works if you believe the mages wouldn't have risen up on their own.

That may very well have happened, considering the material conditions of Kirkwall. I would say that revolutions usually happen when a single event incites the general populace to revolt. The equivalent of that in Kirkwall is Anders blowing up the Chantry and creating a conflict where mages are forced to defend themselves from the templars. Is it an ideal way of inciting revolts across Thedas? Of course not. Then again, revolutions aren't perfect or ideal in the sense that there is no prescribed formula applicaple to all pre-revolutionary circumstances. Queue obligatory Che quote on the subject (I like quotes if you couldn't tell): "The revolution is not an apple that falls when it is ripe. You have to make it fall."

Modifié par OldMan91, 13 juillet 2011 - 02:51 .

[Plaintiff]

SpiderFan1217 wrote...

SomeoneStoleMyName wrote...

*snip*

I mean religion is purposly spreading lies to deceive and control people in the false pretense of bringing hope and peace. Disinformation and lies are evils that goes hand in hand with religion. There is no empirical evidence that the maker is real, therefore brainwashing and manipulating children and weak minded grown ups into this web of lies is evil in nature.

*snip* 

Allowing the chantry to spread fairytales is a crime, and falling for them is also a crime.

*snip*

Such a blow to superstition is a great victory for Thedas`s future. If this future first needs to be cleansed in a tidal wave of blood to remove the parasites that believes in the maker, then it is totally fine.

Funny thing about the Dragon Age Universe, The existence of the Maker is never disproven. If anything the story points to the Maker actually existing. I may be wrong, but I feel your prejudices against real life religions may be effecting your opinion of the Chantry and Anders' actions.

Exactly what in-game evidence is there to indicate the Maker's existence? Even the healing properties of Andraste's ashes have an alternate explanation, and that's about as concrete as it's gonna get. The existence of magic already handwaves anything that would be otherwise explainable. As Morrigan herself says, nothing in Thedas presupposes intelligent design by some absentee father figure.

[Rifneno]

In Exile wrote...

So then you consider the people who work there military targets?

God am I sick of explaining to people that war isn't a trial where only the guilty are punished and only according to what they did and everyone rides off into the sunset...

I think what Anders did made things worse, not better.

Indeed, how dare he not have all your metagaming knowledge?

SpiderFan1217 wrote...

Funny thing about the Dragon Age Universe, The existence of the Maker is never disproven. If anything the story points to the Maker actually existing. I may be wrong, but I feel your prejudices against real life religions may be effecting your opinion of the Chantry and Anders' actions.

The Maker's existence or non-existence really has very little to do with the topic at hand. The Maker has supposedly abandoned Thedas, for a second time, a thousand years ago. If he exists, he has nothing to do with the evil his children (of the corn) are doing to each other on a world whose calls he stopped returning eons ago.

Plaintiff wrote...

Exactly what in-game evidence is there to indicate the Maker's existence? Even the healing properties of Andraste's ashes have an alternate explanation, and that's about as concrete as it's gonna get. The existence of magic already handwaves anything that would be otherwise explainable. As Morrigan herself says, nothing in Thedas presupposes intelligent design by some absentee father figure.

I don't think intelligent anything could be used an explanation for anything relating to Kirkwall.

Modifié par Rifneno, 13 juillet 2011 - 10:52 .

[Chiramu]

I don't think it was right at all.

I wasn't upset with Anders for what he did either; but if he only talked with Hawke about what's going on in his head, there could've been a better solution.

[River5]

SpiderFan1217 wrote...

Funny thing about the Dragon Age Universe, The existence of the Maker is never disproven. If anything the story points to the Maker actually existing. I may be wrong, but I feel your prejudices against real life religions may be effecting your opinion of the Chantry and Anders' actions.

The existance of the Creators (Dalish) are not disproven either...

And the existance of the Ancestors (Dwarves) aren't disproven either...

Even the will of the Qun has never been disproven...

As for the spirits' own beliefs, they are influenced by the dreams of men, that shape their whole universe (the Fade)...  So they may not be the best reference in order to know if these stories about the Maker are true, or not.  None of them have ever claimed to have met with the Maker, his bride, or something like that so far.

So who is right in their religious beliefs?  The Dalish, the dwarves, the Qunaris, the Andrastians, the black Chantry (still Andrastians, technically, although they think that Andraste was some kind of prophet, not the bride of the Maker)?

Or even that cult of Andraste that you meet in Haven that revered a dragon (perhaps "dragon Andraste" has now come back to her faithfuls choosing another form...  Bronto Andraste?  )?  Oh, and there's that whole story about Old Gods too...

There's no big religious concensus between all the races in the Dragon Age Universe.  And as a player, I don't feel comfortable saying that one belief is right, and one is wrong.

Not saying that we need to go all "believing in Andraste and the Maker is the biggest of evils"!

The problem isn't the Chantry as a place of religious worship, per say.  The problem is the Chantry as a socio-political and military power in Thedas, and the way that their religious leaders abuse their powers, and twist their sacred scriptures.

"Magic exists to serve mankind.  Not to rule over him".  What does that mean?  Perhaps something just as simple as "With great power comes great responsibility".  Or "magic should never be used in order to enslave other people".

But no, let's transform these sayings to tell the people that magic is a curse from the Maker; that mages are all little "magisters-to-be" that must continue to be rightgeously feared; that the Chantry have some holy mission to watch over all of them, control their coming and goings, etc.

And, of course, this has absolutely nothing to do with the Chantry having access to a huge military advantage (since mages are only allowed to come out to do their biddings, or fight in "Chantry approved" conflicts) by seeking to control all the magic available in Thedas.

Religious beliefs should be a matter of personal choice, not something that if forced upon people.  When religion is allowed to become more powerful than the state, you have a huge problem.

When people are so concerned with "earning a place at the Maker's side", that they stop looking at the suffering they impose on others in order to get there, you also have problem.

So it's not so much "religion" that must be feared and hated, as what people are willing to do with it.

[In Exile]

Rifneno wrote...
God am I sick of explaining to people that war isn't a trial where only the guilty are punished and only according to what they did and everyone rides off into the sunset... 

So, then, if the mages had to do very unsavory things to win, like torture or imprison templars, that would be okay? Even if it took years?

Indeed, how dare he not have all your metagaming knowledge?

He's clearly insane. But what we're debating is whether he did the right thing. It has nothing to do with how right the insane abomination thinks he is.