107 réponses à ce sujet

[dgcatanisiri]

Kill him and he becomes a martyr to the cause. In fact, that's what he really wants - in that moment, he wants to die, and killing him is showing him mercy because he won't have to consider what he's done. Kill him and the truth dies in the midst of the chaos and the legend. Let him live, and he has to live with what he's done.

Granted, I went off into the sunset with him at the end of my first playthrough, but in future playthroughs, I don't think that'll happen.

[SnipedByAGir1]

I absolutely love Anders and don't blame him one bit for blowing up the chantry. The chantry never wanted to take any sides and since the templars are the military order of the chantry Anders decided to take out the decision makers. Anders wanted to force the issue and finally give the mages their chance to rebel against years of opression. Children being taken away and locked up forever for no good reason other than being a mage ... I say good on you Anders but I would have liked to have known the plan beforehand!

[TexasToast712]

I kill him because we all know Bioware loves Anders just as much as they love Leliana to the point of bringing them back from the dead. This means there is a 90% chance that if you "killed" him in DAII, Justice/Vengence will have somehow kept him alive and he will appear in DAIII.

Warden: "Oh hey Anders. Long time no see. How have you been?"
Anders: "Oh some douchebag in Kirkwall stabbed me."

*Hawke shows up*

Anders/Vengence: "ASSUMING DIRECT CONTROL!"
Hawke and Warden:  "Uh oh..........RUN!"

Modifié par TexasToast712, 19 mars 2011 - 12:23 .

[Danjaru]

CRISIS1717 wrote...

Danjaru wrote...

Gisle Aune wrote...

Danjaru, it is not that simple. Anders made the chance for a somewhat peaceful end non-existant.

Exactly.. I would rather have a war than it ending with Mages being just as oppressed.. Being made Tranquil left and right, being raped, locked up, turning to desperate measures and ruining others lives as well. They were little more than slaves, and when peaceful revolution is made impossible, a violent one is inevitable (wise words from Kennedy)

I don't know what people are more butthurt about. The fact that it happened or the fact that it was out of your hands.

The mages are killing innocents and creating chaos, there is now no order and blood mages and abominations are running rampant at the same time, and the templars are trying to exterminate all of the mages, during this thousands maybe even millions of innocents will die. 

This is better than the uneasy peace of before? no matter who wins both sides lose and the mages were never capable of governing themselves in the first place. 

Blood mages and Abominations were running rampant because of Templars. Due to their fear of them, how many Mages did we see that turned into abominations due to fear? And turned to Blood Magic to try and get enough power to get away from the Templars?

And this is a war between Rogue Templars and Apostates. I don't see how innocent lives will be lost to that unless some people from either side just decide to be jerks. The mages are now fighting for their freedom, it would be incredibly counter productive to attack innocents and by that creating more enemies.

Modifié par Danjaru, 19 mars 2011 - 01:20 .

[BlackwindTheCommander]

I couldn't let him live for two reasons:

A) He ruined my chances of at least gaining some more time to figure out how to fix this. (Ends up you can't really, oh well)

I have Sebastion and his reaction was truly heart breaking.

Two compelling reasons.

[Foolsfolly]

Suron wrote...

better to kill? he's a murderer and a terrorist and his blowing up the chantry is not justified in ANY way even if you support the mages.

he dies. End of story. He commited murder of innocents in order to cause Templars world-wide to clamp down to force mages to fight and rebel.

His actions served NO PURPOSE but to prove the Templars/Chantry right.

Yes the mages should be free'd and work toward policing themselves alongside the Templars. Yes rebellion is probably the only way that could EVER come to be.

But the ends do NOT always justify the means. And he's just another murdering mage.

But then again BioWare made 99% of mages in the game EXACTLY what Meredith was trying to route out.

That's because Meredith was right!

They're all Blood Mages or Abominations. The argument that Meredith and the First Enchanter have when Hawke shows up at the finale? Meredith wants to investigate the Circle for Blood Mages. That's their JOB. The First Enchanter's against it because he has books on Blood Magic and necromancy along with corespondances with a known blood mage and mother killer!

The First Enchanter is guilt and Meredith is just doing her job.

It's like BioWare realized that they'd made the Mages completely guilty of every charge and decided to 'balance' it by making a deus ex machina so Meredith's crazy. Not even a human-level crazy like just generally paranoid, but a magic nameless idol made her go crazy.

Without that idol, Meredith's 100% correct and in the right. Her job is to police the Circle and ferret out corruption, and the Circle is completely corrupt.

[AllThatJazz]

Ryzaki wrote...

Well I doubt it would matter either way. Anders is losing himself to Vengeance regardless so I guess killing him physically would just be the final straw.

IF BW wants to use him again they can just have Justice forcibly reanimate his body. No biggie.

This. I kind of think that Anders is one of those characters who will be really easy to bring back in future titles, without too many questions being asked. So storywise I don't think it makes a difference. 

My rogue is romancing him and is pro-mage. I still think I'm going to kill him because I can't honestly see that there's much of Anders left, and I don't want to loose an abomination on the world. 

[SkittlesKat96]

For him the end justifies the means, he didn't want the problem to keep on going and more mages be oppressed and killed, he wanted to trigger the battle faster before anyone could make a compromise (he disagrees with any sort of compromise, he's extremely pro mage) and wanted a conclusion.

What he did was wrong and I think compromise is a better thing than anything so killing him is certainly justified, but then again you might think he saved a lot of trouble and made a difference even if he had to do something dramatic.

Like I said though I think what he did was wrong, although I forgave him anyway.

[Wulfram]

Noatz wrote...

There is no "better for the story", its just a choice you have to make one way or the other. Do what you think your Hawke would do, its why this is a role playing game.

I agree with this totally.  Though personally, I'm not sure I could play a character who would let him get away with it - I personally wouldn't kill him, (edit but it's not really possible to play a pacifist Hawke).

Also I have contacted the Federal Bureau of Overreaction and they will be here shortly to take care of all the "Well they'll bring him back anyway if they want him" replies. They did that once with Leliana and one Bioware writer made the mistake of coming onto the forum and defending the action with some unfortunate turns of phrase. I highly doubt they enjoy retcons and I don't think we'll see another, especially with someone like Anders who - live or die - has fufilled their main role in the Dragon Age universe.

I'd expect the Spirit at least to still continue to exist after Anders' body is slain, and it's suggest that Anders and Justice have merged so I wouldn't consider it a retcon if he popped up again.  Either as Zombie Anders, possessing someone else or as a spirit in the Fade

Modifié par Wulfram, 19 mars 2011 - 12:19 .

[TexasToast712]

....I kill him because we all know Bioware loves Anders just as much as they love Leliana to the point of bringing them back from the dead. This means there is a 90% chance that if you "killed" him in DAII, Justice/Vengence will have somehow kept him alive and he will appear in DAIII.

Warden: "Oh hey Anders. Long time no see. How have you been?"
Anders: "Oh some douchebag in Kirkwall stabbed me."

*Hawke shows up*

Anders/Vengence: "ASSUMING DIRECT CONTROL!"
Hawke and Warden:  "Uh oh..........RUN!"

*facepalm* Nobody reads the sensible posts. My previous post above me pretty much sums up why you should kill Anders no matter what unless he is your LI in which case there is some understanding.

Modifié par TexasToast712, 19 mars 2011 - 12:23 .

[Icinix]

I will never carry over a save game where he is not dead.

Anders died at the end of Awakenings..what he was in DA2 was an abomination.

[Darian Tylmare]

I think in the long run it's better to spare Anders. From what it seems to me, your Hawke is just the point of view character, while Anders is the catalyst for everything what happened between the fight in the Gallows and when Varric tells Cassandra the Champions' story.

[Laurelinde]

Willis Macvalin wrote...

One thing i could do is make two saves one where i kill him and the other where i don't.

That's what I did.  Much like having to choose between siding with Orsino or the Templars, there really is no good option.  My gut instinct (and first save) was to kill him simply because I feared that left unchecked, he would continue to do violence and wreak havoc as an abomination in other places, too.  If he's spared, he doesn't show any kind of remorse, he's convinced it has to be all or nothing.  As someone who tends towards moderation in real life - because I feel that compromise on hard/impossible issues is not weakness or lack of conviction, but in fact conviction to a middle path, a moderate path that will preserve balance and do the least harm, I find his viewpoint hard to swallow.  That is the trouble when both sides are right and wrong on a contentious issue, and utterly refuse to consider their opponents' views.  On subjects like these, there is rarely, if ever, an opportunity to do no harm at all.  

Bah.  I have enjoyed both DA games (in varying degrees) but I miss heroic 'high' fantasy a bit.  The real world is dark enough.

[Suron]

those who let him live are guilty by association. Made WORSE by the fact that you helped him murder INNOCENT PEOPLE.

while I realize the choices we justify in a game may not naturally reflect what we would actually do in such a situation in real life..the justification for letting him live honestly makes me think maybe the world should "end" in 2012 if you actually think what he did is justified in ANY WAY.  Because there is no hope for such poeple.

Modifié par Suron, 19 mars 2011 - 01:41 .

[RPGmom28]

It depends on the character I'm playing. I've killed him and not killed him. The first run my character romanced him, and although she was thoroughly horrified and pissed at what he did, I couldn't see her killing him. So I let him live. The second run, I was playing a character who WAS a mage apostate, but still couldn't get past that horrifying act of his and killed him. This run I'm playing a templar-spec'd mage hater that's in love with Fenris and agrees with his mage-fearing ideology. Anders will be skewered. It all depends on what the character would do. That's my favorite way to play.

[Wintermist]

TexasToast712 wrote...

Warden: "Oh hey Anders. Long time no see. How have you been?"
Anders: "Oh some douchebag in Kirkwall stabbed me."

*Hawke shows up*

Anders/Vengence: "ASSUMING DIRECT CONTROL!"
Hawke and Warden:  "Uh oh..........RUN!"

Hahaha, this made me lol...

[Akileija]

I played a mage, but sided with templars because I didn't want any part in Anders' idiocy and respected Cullen. Oddly enough, Varric told Cassandra that Anders stayed with my Hawke, even though Anders can't be seen in the post-game character menu and my Hawke basically told him to GTFO.

Either way, I definitely wouldn't mind seeing Anders in future installments, even if it seems unlikely that my Hawke would want to continue their relationship without a second thought.

Modifié par Akileija, 19 mars 2011 - 03:02 .

[Darkshore]

GuiltySource wrote...

Well I ended up siding with my friends in most matters, so even though I ****ed at him for using me and called him a murderer. I figured his death was letting him off easy, and he could be of better use defending the innocent mage's he's just condemned to being slaughtered.

30 seconds later... blood mage's and abominations everywhere and I realised both sides were bat**** crazy and not worth defending. At this point, I really wished there'd been an option to just collect Bethany and walk away with my companions.

I hated this also but I can see how it actually makes sense. These mages have been locked up, told they were monsterous ticking time bombs just because of their "curse" or gift", and have never actually experienced a real life. Then Meredith comes along going insane and starts making more and more of them Tranquil and locking them down even tighter. They are all thought of as Blood Mages already like Orsino said. So I can see why many of them turned to it as their last option out of either fear, anger, or a pure desire to strike back against the templars.

[JulianoV]

Foolsfolly wrote...

Suron wrote...

better to kill? he's a murderer and a terrorist and his blowing up the chantry is not justified in ANY way even if you support the mages.

he dies. End of story. He commited murder of innocents in order to cause Templars world-wide to clamp down to force mages to fight and rebel.

His actions served NO PURPOSE but to prove the Templars/Chantry right.

Yes the mages should be free'd and work toward policing themselves alongside the Templars. Yes rebellion is probably the only way that could EVER come to be.

But the ends do NOT always justify the means. And he's just another murdering mage.

But then again BioWare made 99% of mages in the game EXACTLY what Meredith was trying to route out.

That's because Meredith was right!

They're all Blood Mages or Abominations. The argument that Meredith and the First Enchanter have when Hawke shows up at the finale? Meredith wants to investigate the Circle for Blood Mages. That's their JOB. The First Enchanter's against it because he has books on Blood Magic and necromancy along with corespondances with a known blood mage and mother killer!

The First Enchanter is guilt and Meredith is just doing her job.

It's like BioWare realized that they'd made the Mages completely guilty of every charge and decided to 'balance' it by making a deus ex machina so Meredith's crazy. Not even a human-level crazy like just generally paranoid, but a magic nameless idol made her go crazy.

Without that idol, Meredith's 100% correct and in the right. Her job is to police the Circle and ferret out corruption, and the Circle is completely corrupt.

Nobody IS a blood mage. They may TURN to it and therefore become one. When you side with the mages you realize nobody there is spewing their guts out in an effort to contain the templar attack. They turn to it when things get REALLY screwed up. Orsino himself, realizing the death of so many, resorted to it, himself saying he had never used it before and was obligated to terminate Quentin's research back in the day.

There WERE blood mages in the midst, but I believe it's safe to assume most of them were not. Suffice to see that in Lowtown the first group that turns to blood magic is obviously going to die. It's like the old western trope, going down shooting. They were dead already, might as well do something to hamper or outright screw up whoever's responsible.

I found the templar ending much more satisfying when it comes to results. You are crowned, nobody has to run through the hills to escape retaliation and the templars love you. But I couldn't help but feel like a lombrosian fascist.

When I sided with the mages I felt that bitter taste in my mouth that came with the fact that everything had just crumbled around me, pretty much all mages dead and the templars fearing and hating me. However, there was a certain peace of mind that came from the fact that I stood agains summary aprehension, judgement and execution.

Meredith was no angel. Why would anyone have a lyrium sword forged, for starters??? Bertrand obviously offered it on the underground, since he pretty much disappeared even from VArric's sights. Meredith had connections with the not-so-shiny of Kirkwall if she managed to get a hold of that thing. Not to mention the money she must have sidetracked to afford for it, Bertrand being able to buy an Estate and travel all over for it.

Mages are an obvious threat and potential mass murderes, while the templars are fascist, genocidal murderers. Due given proportions they behave not unlike ****sts, killing those that they believe taint society, regardless of what they have objectively and individually done, in order to save and preserve their own kind. Of course, the paralel is weak, but there is some semblance.

[JulianoV]

And I've both killed and spared Anders. I honestly believe the Templar solution, as it stands, is a terrible one. You can't expect the aprehender of an individual to properly judge him, specially when he even has the execution in mind. Thedas needed a Montesquieu of their own.

You must divide those responsibilities, else we get a balls to the walls wacko psycho like Meredith, who people tend to defend without even questioning how she got a hold of the Lyrium piece and why, in the first place. The only way you can attempt to cerceate corruption is to dillute power.

Anders knew that having a pro-active, participative chantry would lead to humanity in mage contention matters, and Elthina stood by idly. She ignored an obviously dictatorial effort of Meredith because it suited her, the Templars being subordinated to the Chantry. People forget Meredith did not only perform a disservice to her own responsibilities towards the Templar Order, she was also offending the City's nobility autonomy "in the name of God". To hell with this and Elthina's passiveness.

Anders was wrong, but when people say he was an idiot to attack the wrong target, I can't help but feel he did exactly what he should had done to get what he wanted in the first place.

[AllThatJazz]

Whether you agree with what Anders did or not, it was a great illustration of how people behave when they are desperate. I hated what he did, but I could also see that in his mind, he was out of options. There was no way the Templars were going to soften their approach, no way that Mages were going to be free of Templar control. Talking hadn't achieved anything up to this point, why would more talk suddenly make a difference now? Forcing the issue to come to a head, forcing people to stop dithering and take sides was the only way that he could see stood any chance of changing the status quo.

[theradicalpunk]

I think canon would have Anders somewhere down the road if not by Hawke's hand dead in a ditch once the story gets out.

Anders has a history with my Hawke but not with the world. A friend can let something slide and may even want you to repent if you truly wish that. But this was just to much. Anyone can argue the Chantry wasn't just some soft target. IN fact the chantry controls the Templars a par-military. Should have beefed up Andraste's teets and made the Maker's home fort knox.

But that's neither here no there. My Hawke lives by morals and isn't judge. jury, and executioner. Anders can be tried by his peers. So he lived. That was my Robin Hood Rogue Hawke.

Now my Warrior for Andraste and the Maker over the top zealot who believes mages should be ruled with an Iron fist... Well that's another story all together.

[durasteel]

I am starting to think that it doesn't much matter, for the simple reason that the Dragon Age team doesn't seem to be able to get their crap together with regard to importing game saves.

I killed the damn architect, but rumor has it he's still alive and well and being weird in the deep roads somewhere. I hardened Leliana against the chantry and made the unf unf unf with her, and my Warden Commander returned to his red headed bard after Awakening, but here she's a religious fruitcake again and I'm getting the "many years ago" line instead of "very dear to me."

Until and unless the saves carry over correctly, our choices in one game can't be relied upon to make any difference whatsoever in sequels.

[Edge2177]

Death is letting him off easy, force him to suffer by making him live.

Killing him just makes him a martyr to inspire others.

[Kaiser Shepard]

"There can be no half-measures, there can be no turning back."

He chose for his own death; allowing him to live after what he did would be true injustice.