82 réponses à ce sujet

[Rafe34]

Retserof wrote...

Rafe34 wrote...
He just murdered about a dozen innocent people, with his only justification that he wanted to remove compromise and start a war.

Anger doesn't factor into this. Ander's execution is about justice, (semi-borrowed from a far better sequel, ). Though I would have taken his head off so that he died immediately, just because I knew him for six years. Or had someone else do it. It's obvious that whatever else is going to take place, Anders is to blame for it starting right now. Plus, again, he's a mass murderer and knows it.

Anders dies. 

You don't even know if anyone's dead, honestly. Meredith goes all "THE CLERIC IS DEAD, KILL THE MAGES," yet doesn't even take a quick glance at the rubble for corpses, let alone survivors. Sure, Anders blew up the Chantry and it's somewhat insane to suggest nobody is dead as a result (given we have a quick camera view from inside and all) but from Hawke's perspective, I don't understand how you can justify killing Anders on the spot (or at all, but that's a different argument).

- The number of people he killed is in question, and you don't know if anyone's actually dead at all
- He's just standing there. He's not a threat to anyone else (anyone whos "innocence" is certainly debatable), has professed guilt, and has not indicated he wishes to continue harming people (aside from templars).

All you've really got him on is property destruction at that point. And since when is that worth a knife in the back?

Just to clarify, I don't see the majority of Hawkes siding with the Templars. Merideth invoking the Rite of Annulment is going too far, as obivously there must be some innocent mages. It is just as bad as what Anders did.

That doesn't mean Anders doesn't deserve to die.

Also, I think your argument is a pretty silly one, made just for the sake of arguing. It's pretty obvious that everyone in the Chantry is dead, the place is blown to shreds.

The other thing is Anders wanted the war. He could easily have just assassinated the Grand Cleric, but he needed something big and flashy to start the war, that everyone would see.

I'm not saying that his decision, in the end, may not have just sped up the inevitable. That doesn't make it right, and it doesn't mean we should have tried everything we could before resorting to open war to stop the Chantry's abuses. It was far from our last option at that point, Anders got tired of waiting, and decided he wanted to have it out now- and he decided this all on his own. He is reponsible directly for the deaths of the Grand Cleric and several priests and mothers that were inside the Chantry, as well as any civilians in there praying, and indirectly responsible for the deaths of many mages and templars.

Modifié par Rafe34, 19 mars 2011 - 05:59 .

[Retserof]

Rafe34 wrote...
That doesn't mean Anders doesn't deserve to die.

Also, I think your argument is a pretty silly one, made just for the sake of arguing. It's pretty obvious that everyone in the Chantry is dead, the place is blown to shreds.

The other thing is Anders wanted the war. He could easily have just assassinated the Grand Cleric, but he needed something big and flashy to start the war, that everyone would see.

I'm not saying that his decision, in the end, may not have just sped up the inevitable. That doesn't make it right, and it doesn't mean we should have tried everything we could before resorting to open war to stop the Chantry's abuses. It was far from our last option at that point, Anders got tired of waiting, and decided he wanted to have it out now- and he decided this all on his own. He is reponsible directly for the deaths of the Grand Cleric and several priests and mothers that were inside the Chantry, as well as any civilians in there praying, and indirectly responsible for the deaths of many mages and templars.

Do you have it on good authority that the Grand Cleric does not, in fact, gleefully waltz over to the gallows on the weekends to help make a few mages tranquil? Is it not possible that the templars inside the Chantry at the time were some of Ser Alrik's men? Were there even any civilians in the building at all? You don't know. On the flip side, it could just as easily have been "let the orphans tour the chantry" day when it was blown to hell.

I'm not much of an advocate for the judicial system, but given the sheer volume of variables and lack of hard facts regarding what Anders actually did (outside of property destruction, which is the ONLY immediately obvious result), all you're doing is killing him for what you THINK hes done. Killing someone for what you think they've done, especially when they're not actively acting aggressive at the time, is irrational and foolish.

Excellent and persuasive arguments can INDEED be made regarding punishing Anders--but in my opinion, none of them merit his immediate death following the destruction of the Chantry. To do so is to kill out of passion, or to kill out of assumption--both poor reasons.

Modifié par Retserof, 19 mars 2011 - 09:10 .

[MorningBird]

Rafe34 wrote...
I'm not saying that his decision, in the end, may not have just sped up the inevitable. That doesn't make it right, and it doesn't mean we should have tried everything we could before resorting to open war to stop the Chantry's abuses. It was far from our last option at that point, Anders got tired of waiting, and decided he wanted to have it out now- and he decided this all on his own. He is reponsible directly for the deaths of the Grand Cleric and several priests and mothers that were inside the Chantry, as well as any civilians in there praying, and indirectly responsible for the deaths of many mages and templars.

I would argue that everything HAS been tried to prevent a full scale war between the templars and mages.  Using peaceful means to solve a conflict isn't exactly a new and revolutionary idea that only the brilliant and shining Hawke has thought to venture.  It's been tried and tried again (including by Anders) but fails to bare any results because the chantry is completely unwilling to change the way it runs the circles.

What would Hawke have done that hasn't already been tried several times before in the past?  Heck, even the Warden can try to grant the mages freedom (boon request) but is denied, and he/she is the Hero of Ferelden, stopper of Blights and feller of darkspawn.  He/she is one of the most influential figures in Thedas, but the Divine outright refuses to grant the boon.  She doesn't even leave the topic open for discussion or try to find a middle ground that will appease both mages and the chantry, so why would she listen to Hawke?  Just because they're Hawke?

I agree that Anders got tired of waiting, but how long was he supposed to wait before drastic and violent change became 'acceptable'?  10 years?  20?  30?  For the chantry/templars to make the first move?  Personally, I don't think 'violent measures' would ever have been viewed as 'acceptable'.  Nobody wants to trade innocent lives for war (including Anders) but when peaceful means have been thoroughly explored to no gain, there are really only two options left.  Either mages sit idly by and allow the abuse to continue, or someone does something drastic to provoke/force change.

Anders decided to go with latter, and if party banter is any indication, he fully knew that what he was doing was wrong (evil, even.)

Isabela: "You want to free the mages.  Let's say you do, but to get there, you kill a bunch of innocent people.  What about them?  Don't they deserve justice?"
Anders: "Yes."

Hawke: "I might have understood if you had only told me."
Anders: "I wanted to tell you, but what if you stopped me, or worse, what if you wanted to help?  I couldn't let you do that."

That being said, I really don't think Anders was trying to martyr himself.  He knew and accepted that destroying the chantry (and all those who dwelled within it) was a vile act, and that he deserved to die for seeing it through to completion.  It just so happens that 'the cause' was also something he felt very strongly about.

Anders: "The world needs to see this.  Then we can all stop pretending that the circle is a solution.  If I pay for that with my life, then I pay."

Granted, there's no arguing that Vengeance/Justice played a LARGE role in his decision, but I don't think the situation is so cut and dry that everything can be blamed on him.  Anders is pretty much the example of what extremes someone will go to for freedom after suffering years of oppression and abuse.  The chantry--and its methods--are as much to blame for the 'Anders' we get at the end of the game as Vengeance.

Once again, I'm not saying Anders was 'right' or that he was 'wrong'.  I really think this is up to the individual player/Hawke.  Regardless, I don't think things would have ended any differently had Hawke been given 'more time' to pretend that he/she had the influence to change the Divine's mind on how the circles should be run.

Modifié par MorningBird, 19 mars 2011 - 10:46 .

[Dante Angelo]

I think we need a mod where you can backhand carver everytime he talks. That'd be great.

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

I actually preferred Carver over Bethany. Far more entertaining. He was a jerk so I didn't have to be.

[Dante Angelo]

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

I actually preferred Carver over Bethany. Far more entertaining. He was a jerk so I didn't have to be.

I mainly wish we could backslap Carver just so he feels inferior

[Ember Song]

Entering the conversation late:

I romanced Anders, and was disappointed I couldn't communicate my obvious disapproval with his actions without downright killing him.
It was either "DIE MONSTARR" or "Is okay, let's run away forever :DD"
Only, you know, not THAT dramatic.

Anyway, even as his love, I wanted a chance to be like "Look...I'm not going to kill you, but that was SERIOUSLY NOT A SMOOTH MOVE, MY MAN. We haz some talkins to doo." Like, my Hawke suitably snaps off at him at one point, but it doesn't end up carrying over to the rest of the convo without death occuring. (I don't think anyway...I have only played through the game once, so yes.)

Or, at least, I would have liked her not to sound so cheerful about being fugitives, maybe? It would work for many Hawkes, but not mine, who kept him alive because she couldn't bear to kill him yet. More like "Well. I can't bring myself to leave you...."

At any rate, I felt the drama in those scenes. So that was cool.

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

Ember Song wrote...

Entering the conversation late:

I romanced Anders, and was disappointed I couldn't communicate my obvious disapproval with his actions without downright killing him.
It was either "DIE MONSTARR" or "Is okay, let's run away forever :DD"
Only, you know, not THAT dramatic.

Anyway, even as his love, I wanted a chance to be like "Look...I'm not going to kill you, but that was SERIOUSLY NOT A SMOOTH MOVE, MY MAN. We haz some talkins to doo." Like, my Hawke suitably snaps off at him at one point, but it doesn't end up carrying over to the rest of the convo without death occuring. (I don't think anyway...I have only played through the game once, so yes.)

Or, at least, I would have liked her not to sound so cheerful about being fugitives, maybe? It would work for many Hawkes, but not mine, who kept him alive because she couldn't bear to kill him yet. More like "Well. I can't bring myself to leave you...."

At any rate, I felt the drama in those scenes. So that was cool.

Yeah, that was my biggest problem. I'm very close to writting a fanfic of how I would have done the scene and I don't write, least of all fanfiction. It just seemed Hawke has very little options personality-wise to react to events. I romanced Anders too and aside from mild shock at the odd turn of events my Hawke was all "I'll never leave your side."

At least make her sound like she questions her poor choice in lovers.