647 réponses à ce sujet

[EmperorSahlertz]

First of all, all the nubmers we see in the game is highly suspect. Remember that it is Varric spinning a tale for Cassandra. He might very well have added a bit to the numbers of enemies to spice things up.
Second of all, some of the Tal Vashoth might already have been there, before the Qunari even arrived.

[Talladarr]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Not only do we not know the numbers in DA2, we also cannot use what amounts to one isolated incident to support a hypothesis that the Qunari have massive desertion rates whenever they come into contact with other cultures, unless it's proven that this is a rule and not an exception. And not when we know that many end up converting.

Are you completely ignoring the Qunari codex entries? Two of the detail that nearly everyone in the north of Tevinter converted to the Qun within only a couple decades, and that's pretty damned significant.

[ShrinkingFish]

The main reason so many people rebel against the idea of the Qunari system of governance is because of their distinctly outsider's perspective.

Most of us live in a society that values ideals such as freedom, individuality and, most importantly, choice. We grew up being told "You can do/be anything you want to be." And many of us took this to heart and believe it even to this very day.

The Qunari, however, value none of these things. Replacing them with duty, unity, and sufferance. And, most importantly, they do not foster the illusion of choice. A Qunari does not choose what he is. He simply is. And there is no question as to his role and purpose in the world.

The differences even go so far as to say that from the Qunari perspective individuality is devalued to the point of being destructive the the fabric of society, a concept that many would (and do) rail against.

However there are some, and perhaps even many, that hold the values that the Qunari base their lives and society on to be more important and more valuable than those regarded so highly by our own society (which is, in a respect, reflected in the the anti-Qunari aspects of the Dragon Age world).

A sentiment that the OP clearly does not share as she appears to admonish and exemplify the values with which she was raised. Which is only natural.

Modifié par ShrinkingFish, 28 mars 2011 - 07:19 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

Talladarr wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Not only do we not know the numbers in DA2, we also cannot use what amounts to one isolated incident to support a hypothesis that the Qunari have massive desertion rates whenever they come into contact with other cultures, unless it's proven that this is a rule and not an exception. And not when we know that many end up converting.

Are you completely ignoring the Qunari codex entries? Two of the detail that nearly everyone in the north of Tevinter converted to the Qun within only a couple decades, and that's pretty damned significant.

He was talking about it the other way around. Qunari converting when comming into contact with other cultures.

[Kriselia]

ShrinkingFish wrote...

Most of us live in a society that values ideals such as freedom, individuality and, most importantly, choice. We grew up being told "You can do/be anything you want to be." And many of us took this to heart and believe it even to this very day.

The Qunari, however, value none of these things. Replacing them with duty, unity, and sufferance. And, most importantly, they do not foster the illusion of choice. A Qunari does not choose what he is. He simply is. And there is no question as to his role and purpose in the world.

I've actually been wondering about the kneejerk reaction a lot of people seem to have about the qunari. Is it even possible that some people do not see anything positive about the qunari society?

I thought the appeal was always obvious, there's certainty in the qunari lifestyle, you serve a greater purpose than your own - everyone is part of the whole. Your life being given meaning by someone else doesn't make that meaning invalid, being able to choose isn't the be-all and end-all of life.
The qunari ideal would be to have the community function as a whole, without selfishness, and also better them as a whole.

Like an anthill. And any given ant community is more wondrous than any single human can even aspire to be.

It's a way of life that suits a number of people just fine. And while it has it's negative sides and drawbacks, there's no reason why it would be somehow cohesively worse than a more individualistic approach.
It is a way of life no more valid or invalid than any other.

[Lithuasil]

Kriselia wrote...

 
Like an anthill. And any given ant community is more wondrous than any single human can even aspire to be.

   

No?

As has been more or less established several times already - the qunari are arguably, like anthills really, the best possible society. For beings that do not possess sentience. For those who, reducing them to being without sentience, is arguably the worst you can possibly do to them.
(And thats provided the qunari system would actually work, which it doesn't)

[ThePasserby]

With the exception of Seamus, the converts are likely the downtrodden in Kirkwall's society. The poor, the homeless and the marginalised would find shelter, food, a purpose, and respect in the Qunari society. There are probably few downsides to converting in exchange for these. The well-off members of Kirkwall are unlikely to find Qun's way of life appealing.

Seamus is an exception. He lacks a strong father-figure in his life and has no notion of the responsibilities of being a noble.

[Kriselia]

Lithuasil wrote...

   

No?

What, you're saying someone might not find the little wonder that is an ant community that compelling? 

As has been more or less established several times already - the qunari are arguably, like anthills really, the best possible society. For beings that do not possess sentience. For those who, reducing them to being without sentience, is arguably the worst you can possibly do to them.
(And thats provided the qunari system would actually work, which it doesn't)

I don't think it would be necessary to lack sentience in order to work in such a society, you'd just need to be able to find joy and fulfillment in something other than pursuing personal betterment.
Even if your role in life has been picked for you, you're still allowed to express yourself within that role, so it's not like they're suppressing all independent thinking.

Though the way they restrict romantic relationships just seems like a timebomb, unless qunari and humans have wildly different mechanics when it comes to attraction.

[Skavau]

It's a way of life that suits a number of people just fine. And while it has it's negative sides and drawbacks, there's no reason why it would be somehow cohesively worse than a more individualistic approach.

If you disregard the individual for the purposes of making the collective better, you wade into internal inconsistency. The value of the collective means nothing to the person forced into manual labour or the mage chained and masked.

[Knal1991]

Lithuasil wrote...

So throughout various threads in this forum I've seen people uphold the misconception that the Qunari would be cool, or badass, and several people have voiced outright incentive to join them.
How can anyone? The basic Idea of the Qun is that thinking is hard, responsibility makes the brain hurt, so why not just do what you're told. As interesting antagonists as they are, how can anyone support them? Those willfully submitting to the Qun are the most spineless, most pathetic individuals possibly imaginable - worse then any servant, worse then any slave because they willfully give themselves into slavery to avoid having to find purpose themselves. They neglect the very basis of what makes any conscious individual. Even the most shoddy beggar or cutthroat in darktown, even the most weak-willed bloodmage displays more backbone then the arishok does - at some point or another, those all at least tried, where the Arishok just goes "well the qun demands, and I'm too stupid to think or care on my own". How can anyone honestly praise and support those people, seriously? 

There is alot of bad stuff regarding Qunari as there is good stuff,

For example I do agree that one should do the thing they are best suited for, especially if it let's you contribute to the greater good...

Forcing someone to join or die hoewver is one of those things I cannot agree with, the main problem with Qunari is that they see the qun as something that always is and is always right, a force of nature prehaps that cannot be ignored like gravity... which makes it impossible to reason with (And actually makes it very similiar to religion in the real world)

Also they are very logical, why do something unnecesary or make something  unnecessary hard for you to do so..

There are many people who can't find their purpose, the qun gives you one... could also be an incentive

these are just a few examples...

Shok ebasit hissra. Meraad astaarit, meraad itwasit, aban aqun. Maraas shokra. Anaan esaam Qun.

[KnightofPhoenix]

cglasgow wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

If you don't have actual evidence to support your argument, it might as well be useless.

The problem is, I do have actual evidence; its called "what we see happen in the game".  But since you're bound and determined to ignore that, there is no point in discussing anything with you.

Are you even bothering to read the entire post and not just being content with reading one sentence?

I will explain again, for the last time, my position.
First, my argument was that we have no indication that the Qunari suffer a direct major threat from Tal-Vashoth as of yet. 

Your argument is that they do, based on what we see in the game.

Problems:
- numbers are highly suspect in the game itself and are not a strong indication. It's a story told by Varric. And with game limitations, Bioware just does not focus on numbers at all or realism in this regard (how can hundreds of Qunari fit in a tiny compound?).  So the 1/10 rate that you came up with is based on weak evidence at best.

- This is an isolated incident. Qunari don't happen to shipwreck often. There is no indication that what happened, even if it was 1/10, was the rule and not an exception.  Furthermore, the Qunari were also attracting a lot of converts and the Tal Vashoth were not embracing another culture.

- A stronger piece of evidence would be to see what happened in the Qunari wars. We have no mention at all of desertions, even though you'd think Chantry scholars would love that piece of propaganda if it actually happened, at least at the huge rate you are suggesting. And we know that many converted to the Qun, were sincere about it and preferred to die than come back ot the Chantry.  

Hence why your argument is based on weak evidence at best and can only be seen as speculation until further information is revealed that either adds credit to your argument, or makes it even weaker. "Qunari suffer 1/10 desertion rates everytime they come into contact with other cultures" is not a definitive fact at all, no matter how hard you try to make it so.

Further clarification: I think the Tal Vashoth are indicative that the Qun is not as perfect as they would like to believe. And I think the Qunari should re-evaluate their position and be more flexible (and invest in diplomacy). However, as of yet, we have no real strong indication that the Tal Vashoth represent a major threat to the Qunari, hence why it's easier for them to just dimiss them. Do I think that dismissing them completely is a reasonable policy? No. But I don't think the Tal Vashoth are an apocaliptic threat that deserves too much attention either.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 28 mars 2011 - 04:10 .

[cglasgow]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Are you even bothering to read the entire post and not just being content with reading one sentence?

Yes, I am reading your entire post; however, if you're unwilling to do so little as acknowledge that the game canon is valid information, meaningful discussion is impossible.

First, my argument was that we have no indication that the Qunari suffer a direct major threat from Tal-Vashoth as of yet. 

Your argument is that they do, based on what we see in the game.

... and, now its doubly ironic that you complained about my alleged lack of reading comprehension, seeing as how you've entirely missed what my argument was.

My argument was something much more simple; the Qun cannot be as wholly satisfying as some people claim if so relatively high a percentage of the Arishok's own personal detachment are willing to leave it, even for as relatively crappy an existence as 'wilderness bandits', the first time they get an actual opportunity to.

This is not the same thing as saying 'The qunari society is in danger of collapsing from Tal-Vashoth'. 

PS: The game is always very careful to let us know when Varric is actually lying; that's Cassandra's job.  So yet again, your argument boils down to nothing more than 'I reject the evidence because its not telling me what I want to hear'.   I have no patience and less respect for that kind of attitude, so again, your argument goes in the bit bucket, and it will stay there until you actually face up to what's in the game.

[KnightofPhoenix]

cglasgow wrote...
... and, now its doubly ironic that you complained about my alleged lack of reading comprehension, seeing as how you've entirely missed what my argument was.

You said that the Qunari cannot survive contact with other cultures without losing many people to it. That is a major threat.

the Qun cannot be as wholly satisfying as some people claim if so relatively high a percentage of the Arishok's own personal detachment are willing to leave it, even for as relatively crappy an existence as 'wilderness bandits', the first time they get an actual opportunity to.

Which is not really relevent to my initial argument at all, nor was it related to my point. So I don't know why you even addressed me in the first place.

PS: The game is always very careful to let us know when Varric is actually lying; that's Cassandra's job.  So yet again, your argument boils down to nothing more than 'I reject the evidence because its not telling me what I want to hear'. 

She only intervenes when Varric is avoiding the subject. And the first time when he was way too exagerrating. That still does not remove the possibility that he is still embellishing the story, as I have yet to see any realistic explanation as to how hundreds of bandits can drop from the sky and fit in small buildings.

But that was not the main gist of the argument. As I said, even if we are assuming that it was 1/10 desertion rate, for the sake of argument, nothing indicates that this isn't an exception as opposed to the rule. Which is why I will not support any vague speculation until more information is revealed, particularily about the century old Qunari occupation.  Until then, your speculation is just that, speculation.

And keep your respect, it's meaningless to me.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 28 mars 2011 - 04:34 .

[Kriselia]

cglasgow wrote...

Yes, I am reading your entire post; however, if you're unwilling to do so little as acknowledge that the game canon is valid information, meaningful discussion is impossible.

Not to butt in or anything but KnightofPhoenix is right, you're mixing up gameplay mechanics with lore information. Devs have said gameplay mechanics are just that (particularly, being able to use lyrium veins for a mana boost) and just part of the willing suspension of disbelief.

If we take game mechanics for lore we can also assume that the average Thedasian can survive several arrows to the face.

[cglasgow]

Kriselia wrote...

Not to butt in or anything but KnightofPhoenix is right, you're mixing up gameplay mechanics with lore information.

Nice try to distract people by talking about lyrium veins and arrows in the face, when the only thing I'm talking about is that if the screen shows five enemies, we're actually fighting five people.  I think it stretches the dev's statement a little far to claim that most of the people we're fighting are actually optical illusions.  If anything, the # of enemies shown on the screen is often too few to join up with the lore, not too many, unless we really want to believe that the Arishok took the Viscount's palace with only a dozen or so troops.  But that's neither here nor there.

You want to go with 'only the lore information counts'?  All right, we'll try that for the sake of argument, and see if it looks any better.

Oh wait.  If we go with the lore, then the DA2 codex entry for Tal-Vashoth explicitly states that the Tal-Vashoth are a continuing guerrilla insurgency problem even in Qun-dominated lands.   They do not exist in numbers numerous enough to threaten the qunari military, but they are a regular scourge on isolated villages, farms, and travellers.

I guess my first post was wrong!  It doesn't take travelling far away from qunari lands to get a nontrivial desertion rate from the qunari military; even back home, it still happens.

So much for 'satisfaction is greater under the Qun'.  The best you can say about it is that their bandit and rebel problem is similarily sized to humanity's... which, given that the Qun is supposed to be far more orderly, and definitely is far more totalitarian, is still a knock on the Qun.

Modifié par cglasgow, 28 mars 2011 - 05:30 .

[cglasgow]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

You said that [snip]

Not satisfied with rewriting the game canon in your head until you get the reality you want, you now have to rewrite what I said?  And what I thought?  *rolleyes*

She only intervenes when Varric is avoiding the subject. And the first
time when he was way too exagerrating. That still does not remove the
possibility that he is still embellishing the story [snip]

In other words, you want an excuse to ignore anything in the game that doesn't agree with what you want to hear, and will only uncritically accept those parts of the game canon that already jibe with your preconceptions.

Protip: When trying to analyze a work of fiction, you generally start with the meta-knowledge that the author's intent is to communicate the details of his fictional world to you, the viewer, with at least reasonable accuracy.  While there are known storytelling devices for fooling the reader (the unreliable narrator, the ambiguous statement, the retcon, etc.), these generally fall into known tropes and patterns, and are clearly lampshaded as to being untrue by the end of the narrative, with the denouement's purpose to tell you 'No, this is how it really went down'.   (Note that every time Varric lays a big pile of bull**** on Cassandra, she then goes back and makes him tell the true version again.)

Or to put it more simply; expository text and dialogue is generally innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent.  

Or even more simply; it's your job to prove that Varric is lying, it ain't my job to prove that he's not.

Modifié par cglasgow, 28 mars 2011 - 05:34 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Something I already mentioned, and we already knew this from Origins. Furthermore, the codex in DA2 was talking about a Tal Vashoth attack in Rivain. We don't know if they are as efficient in Qunari lands, which they could be. They only strike at locations outside Qunari protection.

That seems more like a nuisance than a direct major threat.

[KnightofPhoenix]

cglasgow wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

You said that [snip]

Not satisfied with rewriting the game canon in your head until you get the reality you want, you now have to rewrite what I said?  And what I thought?  *rolleyes*

cglasgow wrote...
If the qunari
culture cannot survive communication with outside ideas without a
significant plurality going Tal-Vashoth, then maybe its not as ideal as
it seems.

That's what you said. That implies a major threat, if you are saying that the Qunari are literally decimated everytime they come into contact with other cultures. 

Since I can't know what you think, I'll have to rely on what you write.

Or even more simply; it's your job to prove that Varric is lying, it ain't my job to prove that he's not.

Explain to me how thugs can jump on you from thin air and how they can all fit in small HQs.

But that's a game I won't waste my time on for a simple reason. Lore =/= game mechanics.

And you are still ignoring the  main gist of the argument. That an incident cannot be considered as a rule and not an exception until proven than it is.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 28 mars 2011 - 05:37 .

[cglasgow]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Something I already mentioned, and we already knew this from Origins. Furthermore, the codex in DA2 was talking about a Tal Vashoth attack in Rivain. We don't know if they are as efficient in Qunari lands, which they could be. They only strike at locations outside Qunari protection.

That seems more like a nuisance than a direct major threat.

And, right on schedule, the spin-doctoring.  I am utterly not surprised.

And by the way, you may have 'already mentioned' it, but you refuse to actually acknowledge the implications of it; that even in lands ruled by the Qun (which that portion of Rivain is as well, a fact you're being creatively oblivious to), the Tal-Vashoth are at least as much a problem as any bandit-plagued region of Ferelden.

Given that one of the Qun's claims is that their lands are so much more free of the chaos than human society, even so little as a 'well, actually, we're about as equally ****ed up as you are' is a major indictment of the Qun; it means the Qun is failing to deliver on one of its significant claims.

Really, if the Qun can't do so much as eliminate banditry, what the hell is it good for?  The only remotely possible justification for the Qun's seizing near total control of everybody's life would be if it actually could eliminate crime, war, and greed.

But it hasn't.  It's just pulled a society-wide version of the 'No True Scotsman' fallacy; the qunari have just as much rebellion and general ****ing-up as any human society does, the Qun merely claims perfection by going 'Well, all of those aren't true qunari or part of our society' and then glossing over all the rural banditry.

While 'redefining' all of your internal security problems as an external attack by elements not of your society does allow you to claim a 0% internal problem rate, its just statistical manipulation, of the 'lies, damned lies, and statistics' variety.

So, again,  utterly unimpressed by qunari society, am I.

Modifié par cglasgow, 28 mars 2011 - 05:39 .

[cglasgow]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Since I can't know what you think, I'll have to rely on what you write.

Gee, I seem to remember writing 'You have entirely mistaken the intent of what I said', and yet you're completely ignoring that.

As with your attention to the canon and the lore, your attention to me is very selective; you acknowledge only what you want to hear and/or can twist to your own purposes, and if anything actually contradicts your arguments, you pretend you never saw it.

[KnightofPhoenix]

cglasgow wrote...
And by the way, you may have 'already mentioned' it, but you refuse to actually acknowledge the implications of it; that even in lands ruled by the Qun, the Tal-Vashoth are at least as much a problem as any bandit-plagued region of Ferelden.

And when did I claim otherwise? Where did I claim that the Qunari society is utterly devoid of rebellion or crime?
Where did I say that the Qun is perfect?

What I said and I stand by it, is that the Qunari are probably more functional than Kirkwall, that's a compelte and utter mess. Or Antiva, which we know is also a mess.

As for Ferelden. They have noble infighting over wool and apple trees.

(which that portion of Rivain is as well, a fact you're being creatively oblivious to)

Nope. If you read the codex, Rivain is an indepedent kingdom. With their own religion. The majority of human Qunari are in Kont-aar (which Rivaini Chantry forces tried to root out and they exterminated many Qun converts). They have a peaceful relationship with the Qunari, but they are independent.
At most, they are within Qunari sphere of influence.

EDIT: they are not even that peaceful as Rivain violated the accord twice. The people that are allied to the Qunari are the Rivaini human Qunari.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 28 mars 2011 - 05:52 .

[cglasgow]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

And when did I claim otherwise? Where did I claim that the Qunari society is utterly devoid of rebellion or crime?  Where did I say that the Qun is perfect?

... it's not always about you, KoP.

The Qun claims to be perfect and contain all necessary truth for living.  The Qun claims to have eliminated weakness and disorder in its society.   This we get straight from Sten and the Arishok, in-game.

But then we find out about the Tal-Vashoth.  And we ask the Arishok about them.  And his only rejoinder is 'They are not of the Qun'.  

So, the Qun's "perfection" is simply a statistical sleight-of-hand; every time a qunari ****s up and 'rejects his role', they simply move him to the category of 'not-Qun'.   And so the Qun can continue to claim its 0% error rate... but that's merely because they're screwing with the scorekeeping, not because the Qun is actually delivering on its implied promise of finding satisfaction and order for all those who submit to it.

We go from there to the more general principle that the argument over the Qun is, basically, the philosophical conundrum of which is more important; freedom or security.   The pro-security position generally takes the tack that, natch, freedom is an acceptable sacrifice if it means actually being able to eliminate freedom's downside, to wit, chaos.

But in addition to the general question of 'Is it proper to trade freedom for security?', there is another question that can be asked; 'Even if we accept that it is proper to trade lessened freedom in return for greater security, is the Qun actually delivering on the trade?'   And while there can be no doubt that there is lesser individual freedom under the Qun, there can be -- and that's what I've been focusing on here -- a reasonable doubt as to whether or not the Qun is even holding up its half of the implied bargain re: greater security/eliminating chaos.

PS: The actual text of the Tal-Vashoth codex entry in DA2.

Being lost in an ancient Tevinter ruin in northern Rivain is highly overrated.

And then I found myself beset by several bands of Qunari, apparently working in concert. I fled and managed to hide in a little village by the name of Vindaar. The people there, mostly humans and a few elves, were devout followers of the Qun.

It was the most organized village I ever laid eyes on. The houses were identical and arranged along perfectly orthogonal lines. The fields were well tended and apparently communal. But there were signs of damage everywhere, as if the town had suffered repeated sieges: buildings shattered, fields burned, and a great many empty houses. I spent the night in the home of Vindaar’s matriarch, who introduced herself only as, “Seer.” When I tried to regale my hostess with the tale of my Qunari assailants, I discovered something.

Qunari, Seer said, are people who follow the Qun. Her people. Those born into Qunari society who reject the Qun are called Vashoth, which means “gray ones.” These gray ones must leave their homes, for they have no place among the Qunari. Sadly, many turn against the society that cast them out.

These outcasts call themselves Tal-Vashoth, “the true gray ones.” Often, they have no skills to make an honest living, so they sell themselves into service, usually becoming mercenaries. Even the most inept fighter among the Qunari race possesses prodigious size and an intimidating visage. These, she informed me, were my attackers in the countryside, the same band that wreaked such havoc on Vindaar.

The Tal-Vashoth wage a bitter war against the Qun, the Qunari, and sometimes against order itself. They are no match for the Qunari army, so they generally strike at farms, travelers, and those who stray too far from Qunari protection. I was lucky to escape with my life.

—From In Pursuit of Knowledge: The Travels of a Chantry Scholar, by Brother Genitivi

Genitivi is in Rivain at the time,  yes, as were the particular Tal-Vashoth that attacked him.  However, 'Seer' is telling him about the Tal-Vashoth in general... including those in lands actually ruled by the qunari.  Because otherwise the information of how the Tal-Vashoth interact with the Qunari army is utterly superfluous, as with the exception of the Kirkwall detachment, the Qunari army isn't in non-Qunari lands!

Add: Not to mention, of course, the explicit statement that they make war against the Qun and the qunari.

Modifié par cglasgow, 28 mars 2011 - 06:14 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

cglasgow wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

And when did I claim otherwise? Where did I claim that the Qunari society is utterly devoid of rebellion or crime?  Where did I say that the Qun is perfect?

... it's not always about you, KoP.

I got the impression that you were addressing me as you quoted me.

If you didn't, then I apologize.