209 réponses à ce sujet

[AllThatJazz]

ReggarBlane wrote...

Let's start a new thread about Ander's actions. Great idea.

Anyway, as said before in the existing thread: Anders is impatient and paranoid. His actions were the same. The result was nothing unexpected of such a person and such an act. What do we call those people in the real world?

Also as said in the existing thread: There is no way to guarantee that there wasn't another way given that we discovered that Meredith was already doing things against the Chantry and many Templars' wishes and she came under the further influence of a mind-altering device. Options regarding those factors existed until Anders' paranoid and impatient action destroyed all hope.

He took it upon himself to know more than everyone else what was "right" and forced his decision on everyone. So, that adds arrogance to his impatience and paranoia. Let's reflect such a personality to someone in the real world.

Except the problem existed before Meredith. Maybe not to quite the same extent (lyrium-maddened crazy lady); but in Awakening, Anders complained of the injustices committed by Templars; If (at least in my games) the Warden hadn't intervened, innocent mages, apprentices, children, an elderly woman, would have been executed in the Rite of Annulment. The Templars can at best be described as heavy-handed in their approach to their work. And that had been going on for a while with no change, despite, presumably, expressions of discontent in that time.

And given that Meredith was already, effectively, possessed herself, and given that at least some of the Circle mages were, in fact, practising Blood Magic, do you really think a peaceful solution that promised any kind of hope for more mage freedom was on the cards, even without Anders? Because I don't.

Thinking about it, Anders may have saved more lives than he ended in the long run. He forced the situation to come to blows, but it is 99% likely that it would have happened anyway, it would just have taken longer. In that time, more mages would have turned apostate/maleficarum and been hunted down by Templars, with innocent mages and their families/friends, as well as less zealous Templars being caught in the crossfire, resulting in even more deaths on both sides. And then a war between mages and Templars anyway, maybe with an Exalted March thrown into the mix.

Modifié par AllThatJazz, 19 mars 2011 - 05:51 .

[Badpie]

LobselVith8 wrote...

ExistsAlready wrote...

Did you even listen to Anders? His little speech can be summed up as "I just killed the only person of mediating a peaceful solution, so you'll just HAVE to go and have a needlessly bloody conflict that might end up freeing all mages everywhere". His whole plan was: 1. Get mages and templars to kill each other 2. ???? 3. Pr-Freedom for All Mages.

Because the options were between freedom and subjugation. I don't think another thousand years of slavery was the appropriate option, if you want my honest opinion.

So it's okay to slaughter innocent people in an act of terrorism to achieve your goals then?  Nevermind the grand cleric.  What about the people in the chantry there to worship, or the random delivery guy or the group of Sunday school kids.  Terrorism rarely effects only those targeted.

[Darian Tylmare]

Anders was definetly tainted by Vengeance. In Awakening, he was more or less a mage Alistair wanting to life a free and peaceful life.
Over the course of Dragon Age 2, he gets more and more extreme concerning his goal to free all mages. He stops cutting people slack, saying they have to decide. But why? He was more or less laid back but Vengeance poisened his mind too much to not think in absolutes. And that's the worst way of thinking.

[AllThatJazz]

Badpie wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

ExistsAlready wrote...

Did you even listen to Anders? His little speech can be summed up as "I just killed the only person of mediating a peaceful solution, so you'll just HAVE to go and have a needlessly bloody conflict that might end up freeing all mages everywhere". His whole plan was: 1. Get mages and templars to kill each other 2. ???? 3. Pr-Freedom for All Mages.

Because the options were between freedom and subjugation. I don't think another thousand years of slavery was the appropriate option, if you want my honest opinion.

So it's okay to slaughter innocent people in an act of terrorism to achieve your goals then?  Nevermind the grand cleric.  What about the people in the chantry there to worship, or the random delivery guy or the group of Sunday school kids.  Terrorism rarely effects only those targeted.

You're right. But is it any more okay to enslave, or be complicit in the enslavement, abuse, even execution of a large group of people, purely because of an accident of birth?

[fathomless33]

A not so intelligent, immature mage, possessed by a demon.

/threadclose

[Badpie]

AllThatJazz wrote...

Badpie wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

ExistsAlready wrote...

Did you even listen to Anders? His little speech can be summed up as "I just killed the only person of mediating a peaceful solution, so you'll just HAVE to go and have a needlessly bloody conflict that might end up freeing all mages everywhere". His whole plan was: 1. Get mages and templars to kill each other 2. ???? 3. Pr-Freedom for All Mages.

Because the options were between freedom and subjugation. I don't think another thousand years of slavery was the appropriate option, if you want my honest opinion.

So it's okay to slaughter innocent people in an act of terrorism to achieve your goals then?  Nevermind the grand cleric.  What about the people in the chantry there to worship, or the random delivery guy or the group of Sunday school kids.  Terrorism rarely effects only those targeted.

You're right. But is it any more okay to enslave, or be complicit in the enslavement, abuse, even execution of a large group of people, purely because of an accident of birth?

It's not right, but it doesn't excuse what Anders does....which was break my heart into a million pieces by becoming a monster.  

[LobselVith8]

Badpie wrote...

So it's okay to slaughter innocent people in an act of terrorism to achieve your goals then?  Nevermind the grand cleric.  What about the people in the chantry there to worship, or the random delivery guy or the group of Sunday school kids.  Terrorism rarely effects only those targeted.

Emancipating the enslaved certainly isn't easy. Considering it hasn't been accomplished in a thousand years, Anders certainly didn't see another way. He was dealing with an organization that's made tranquil or killed his people for subversion. Should be have rested on his laurels and done nothing in the face of mages being raped, murdered, getting their humanity stripped from them, or killed in the tyranny Knight-Commander Meredith was turning Kirkwall into? You make it seem like Anders should have done nothing and let slavery continue to flourish in Thedas. He attacked an institution that supported slavery for a millennia in the middle of the night, when people were sleeping. He didn't want a peaceful solution that would have continued the slavery of the mages, he wanted to see his people finally free after centuries of subjugation.

[fathomless33]

He attacked the civilian arm of the organization.

Do you think that MLK would have supported killing white children to obtain his goals of emancipation.

[fathomless33]

He was a shell of his former self, he was not even a man, he was a husk that was inhabited by a demon. To say that you agree with what he did would be the same as being on the side off all the demons in the game.

How can you side with a rabid dog? I know he used to be your cuddly puppy, but still....

[LobselVith8]

fathomless33 wrote...

He attacked the civilian arm of the organization.

Do you think that MLK would have supported killing white children to obtain his goals of emancipation.

Anders didn't kill children, he targetted the head of the Chantry in Kirkwall. The Order of Templars are the military arm of the Chantry, actually. The Chantry is the organization in charge, and the arbiter that shut down the Magi boon from happening in Ferelden as well as the responsible party for enslaving mages for centuries in the name of religion.

[Icy Magebane]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Badpie wrote...

So it's okay to slaughter innocent people in an act of terrorism to achieve your goals then?  Nevermind the grand cleric.  What about the people in the chantry there to worship, or the random delivery guy or the group of Sunday school kids.  Terrorism rarely effects only those targeted.

Emancipating the enslaved certainly isn't easy. Considering it hasn't been accomplished in a thousand years, Anders certainly didn't see another way. He was dealing with an organization that's made tranquil or killed his people for subversion. Should be have rested on his laurels and done nothing in the face of mages being raped, murdered, getting their humanity stripped from them, or killed in the tyranny Knight-Commander Meredith was turning Kirkwall into? You make it seem like Anders should have done nothing and let slavery continue to flourish in Thedas. He attacked an institution that supported slavery for a millennia in the middle of the night, when people were sleeping. He didn't want a peaceful solution that would have continued the slavery of the mages, he wanted to see his people finally free after centuries of subjugation.

You keep calling it slavery, which clearly it was not.  The mages were contained and monitored because of their potential to harbor and bond with demons.  Demonic possession doubles, if not triples a mage's potential for destruction, and once they become an abomination, they no longer have the ability to control their actions.  At that point, the demon who enslaves them is in charge.  It is in the best interest of all the people of Thedas to ensure that abominations are not popping up all over the place because mages lack training, responsibility of power, or the necessary willpower to maintain their own mental freedom.

The Templars in Kirkwall were out of control.  That much I'd dare anyone to question.  But that does not mean that Circles are a bad idea... I don't remember any abuses at the Ferelden Circle.  If anything, they rob you of some personal freedom but allow you to live a relatively peaceful life apart from regular people.  It's not a bad compromise.  Sure, being made tranquil is horrific, but it's a better solution than allowing mages to bond with demons simply because it is within their right to exercise their free will, regardless of the cost to humanity.

On topic - I agree with the people who have said that the DA:A Anders is not the same man as the one in DA2.  He simply does not exist anymore.  Justice and Anders are a single entity, so it's unfair to blame anything on a person who is now, at most, 1/2 of a shared consciousness. 

Also, I am in direct opposition to the murder of non-combatants to further political goals.  If that coward had targeted the Templars, I'd have had his back.  Instead, he attacked civilians, and the murder knife had his back instead.

[fathomless33]

Oh so its cool that it is a civilian church, with children and families gathering for prayer. Its not like that was the clerical office for the templars. He could have done the same thing and attacked the problem, he did not. He attacked innocent civilians. Unforgivable.

If your sister, or mother, or brother was in that church praying or attending class, would you honestly feel that Anders was correct?

[LobselVith8]

Icy Magebane wrote...

You keep calling it slavery, which clearly it was not. 

That must explain why multiple characters, including Hawke, can specifically call the Chantry controlled Circles slavery.

[LobselVith8]

Icy Magebane wrote...

The mages were contained and monitored because of their potential to harbor and bond with demons. 

Read History of the Circle. Mages were imprisoned because they protested their lack of rights in an Orlesian cathedral. The Circles themselves were created because of Emperor Drakon's religious views, as you can read in History of the Chantry Part Four.

Icy Magebane wrote...

The Templars in Kirkwall were out of control.  That much I'd dare anyone to question.  But that does not mean that Circles are a bad idea... I don't remember any abuses at the Ferelden Circle. 

Let's ask Aneirin the Healer if getting stabbed and left for dead was a form of abuse. Let's ask Cullen to remind us about how some templars talk about killing mages with glee...

Icy Magebane wrote...

If anything, they rob you of some personal freedom but allow you to live a relatively peaceful life apart from regular people.  It's not a bad compromise. 

Which is easy to say coming from someone who doesn't have to personally endure such treatment.

Icy Magebane wrote...

Also, I am in direct opposition to the murder of non-combatants to further political goals.  If that coward had targeted the Templars, I'd have had his back.  Instead, he attacked civilians, and the murder knife had his back instead.

Having the power to put an end to slavery and doing nothing instead doesn't make the Grand Cleric innocent. And Anders attacked members of the Chantry, the very institution that's enslaved his people for nearly a thousand years.

[Badpie]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Icy Magebane wrote...

You keep calling it slavery, which clearly it was not. 

That must explain why multiple characters, including Hawke, can specifically call the Chantry controlled Circles slavery.

Just because you can call it that, doesn't mean it is.  I can call your mom a ho, doesn't mean she is.


In the end it doesn't matter.  The bottom line is that Anders was wrong and in the end only served to do more damage than good.  That's exactly what terrorism is.  A set of ideals and a desire for revolution to change the world manifested in a violent inexcusable manner.

[fathomless33]

Having the power to put an end to slavery and doing nothing instead doesn't make the Grand Cleric innocent. And Anders attacked members of the Chantry, the very institution that's enslaved his people for nearly a thousand years.

Ok so you are ok with that. He attacked a civilian facility but its ok because they fly under the same flag as the Chantry.

So since a group of people in the middle east are fighting a war against Western powers, attacking a civilian facility that flys under the same flag as our military arm was completely justified. Thats what you are saying. Does not matter that there were kids, and families there, what he died was justified in your eyes....

[AllThatJazz]

Badpie wrote...

AllThatJazz wrote...

Badpie wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

ExistsAlready wrote...

Did you even listen to Anders? His little speech can be summed up as "I just killed the only person of mediating a peaceful solution, so you'll just HAVE to go and have a needlessly bloody conflict that might end up freeing all mages everywhere". His whole plan was: 1. Get mages and templars to kill each other 2. ???? 3. Pr-Freedom for All Mages.

Because the options were between freedom and subjugation. I don't think another thousand years of slavery was the appropriate option, if you want my honest opinion.

So it's okay to slaughter innocent people in an act of terrorism to achieve your goals then?  Nevermind the grand cleric.  What about the people in the chantry there to worship, or the random delivery guy or the group of Sunday school kids.  Terrorism rarely effects only those targeted.

You're right. But is it any more okay to enslave, or be complicit in the enslavement, abuse, even execution of a large group of people, purely because of an accident of birth?

It's not right, but it doesn't excuse what Anders does....which was break my heart into a million pieces by becoming a monster.  

He does, but he becomes a monster in response to monstrous acts committed against 'his' people for a millennia. Nothing can ever justify the deliberate killing of civilians, as I believe Anders/Justice himself accepts. But the reasons behind what he did are difficult to condemn.

[Icy Magebane]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Icy Magebane wrote...

The mages were contained and monitored because of their potential to harbor and bond with demons. 

Read History of the Circle. Mages were imprisoned because they protested their lack of rights in an Orlesian cathedral. The Circles themselves were created because of Emperor Drakon's religious views, as you can read in History of the Chantry Part Four.

This doesn't change the facts.  Mages are a danger to themselves and the world if they are not properly trained and raised with morality that allows them to understand that personal sacrifice is necessary to protect the majority of people (it's okay if you want to call that "indoctrination."  I still see it as acceptable).

LobselVith8 wrote...

Icy Magebane wrote...

The Templars in Kirkwall were out of control.  That much I'd dare anyone to question.  But that does not mean that Circles are a bad idea... I don't remember any abuses at the Ferelden Circle. 

Let's ask Aneirin the Healer if getting stabbed and left for dead was a form of abuse. Let's ask Cullen to remind us about how some templars talk about killing mages with glee...

And many police officers enjoy apprehending and killing criminals.  Does that make their jobs any less necessary?  No.  Whether a person enjoys grim business is not the issue.  We are discussing the necessity of that work, not the personality of those involved.  The Ferelden Circle had Templars that liked their jobs... they were not rapists and they did not kill indescriminately (as far as we know).

LobselVith8 wrote...

Icy Magebane wrote...

If anything, they rob you of some personal freedom but allow you to live a relatively peaceful life apart from regular people.  It's not a bad compromise. 

Which is easy to say coming from someone who doesn't have to personally endure such treatment.

You've only indicated by that comment that you are too selfish to accept that society is more important than the individual.  While I would agree that I would not like being controlled, I can understand the need for such safeguards.  But we are not good examples of impartiality.  Look at Wynne and Irving if you want examples of Mages who don't mind being subjected to scrutiny.  (I apologize if calling you selfish is insulting... I don't mean it that way, it is merely an assessment of the situation.  Nothing personal, I promise!)

LobselVith8 wrote...

Icy Magebane wrote...

Also, I am in direct opposition to the murder of non-combatants to further political goals.  If that coward had targeted the Templars, I'd have had his back.  Instead, he attacked civilians, and the murder knife had his back instead.

Having the power to put an end to slavery and doing nothing instead doesn't make the Grand Cleric innocent. And Anders attacked members of the Chantry, the very institution that's enslaved his people for nearly a thousand years.

Again, we disagree on the most basic issue.  Mage Circles =/= slavery.  They are not forced to do anything other than stay far away from demons.  They don't get to travel around freely because of the potential disasters that can occur, and those disasters are real, regardless of the Chantry's self-interested motivations.  Does the Chantry gain a lot by remaining in power at the cost of perpetuating the myth of Andraste?  Most likely, yes.  Does that mean that mages are not dangerous and prone to demonic possession?  No.

Wow... formatting this is more complicated than I expected... lol

Modifié par Icy Magebane, 19 mars 2011 - 06:36 .

[LobselVith8]

Badpie wrote...

Just because you can call it that, doesn't mean it is.  I can call your mom a ho, doesn't mean she is.

Because the writers writing multiple characters to refer to the Chantry controlled Circles as slavery, slaves, or oppression should clearly be ignored since you personally don't like it.

Badpie wrote...

In the end it doesn't matter.  

It does when you factor in that it's the reason Anders attacked the institution that's subjugated his people.

Badpie wrote...

The bottom line is that Anders was wrong and in the end only served to do more damage than good.  That's exactly what terrorism is.  A set of ideals and a desire for revolution to change the world manifested in a violent inexcusable manner.

He wanted the emancipation of his people. He wanted to free the slaves. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

[Icy Magebane]

People in the game who refer to it as "slavery" are personally biased or using hyperbole. We all know what true slavery is, and this isn't it. Mages are not forced to work, they are not mistreated, they are not kept in shackles, etc... Kirkwall is the extreme.

Modifié par Icy Magebane, 19 mars 2011 - 06:37 .

[Badpie]

I'm not saying his cause isn't justified. There are many causes out there that deserve support, but the actions to achieve them are what matter. And what Anders did was inexcusable.

[NinjaRogue]

*facepalm* Okay, The Templars are not controlled by the Chantry as Knight Commander Meridith illustrates. Finn was a slave?!?!?!?! Wynne was a slave?!?!?!?!?! Kirkwal had some insane Templars, and if you read anything about the Templars you learn that they are not always the nicest people. But if you meet Sir Oto he changes the mold. Grand Cleric Ethena even said that she did not have near enough power.

Mereidith is the equivalant of Fred Phelps

Modifié par NinjaRogue, 19 mars 2011 - 06:42 .

[Badpie]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Badpie wrote...

The bottom line is that Anders was wrong and in the end only served to do more damage than good.  That's exactly what terrorism is.  A set of ideals and a desire for revolution to change the world manifested in a violent inexcusable manner.

He wanted the emancipation of his people. He wanted to free the slaves. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Which would have been fine if he'd attacked the Templars - or at least more excusable.  But he didn't.  He attacked civilians.

That's like saying in America, when the slaves wanted freedom, instead of going to war to fight for it they should just kill every white person they see no matter what because those white people - whether they are or not - are clearly a PART of the institution that was holding them down.  It doesn't make sense.  Terrorism rarely does.

[KJandrew]

I believe Vengeance was to blame. Old Anders would not have been so extreme and Justice would not have killed Elthina.

[Icy Magebane]

NinjaRogue wrote...

*facepalm* Okay, The Templars are not controlled by the Chantry as Knight Commander Meridith illustrates. Finn was a slave?!?!?!?! Wynne was a slave?!?!?!?!?! Kirkwal had some insane Templars, and if you read anything about the Templars you learn that they are not always the nicest people. But if you meet Sir Oto he changes the mold. Grand Cleric Ethena even said that she did not have near enough power.

Mereidith is the equivalant of Fred Phelps

Thank you.  It's easy to take the most extreme examples of misbehavior into account and forget about the decent folks.  He wasn't the only nice Templar.  There was also the leader in the Lothering Chantry, Griegor, the idiot boatman who tries to keep you out of the Circle, and many others.  Templars, like police, cannot be judged by a few bad seeds.