4350 réponses à ce sujet

[Rifneno]

Deztyn wrote...

. . . aren't we still talking about your theoretical Circle where kids go home to see their parents and mages get let out more often? 

If so, while more people are willingly giving themselves or their children up, being allowed to leave more frequently makes even a slight increase in the abomination rate much more dangerous, not less. Since it's more likely that those Abominations will happen outside the controlled environment of the Circle and away from the Templars.

If not... I have no idea what we're talking about anymore!

Ooo. You're right, I forgot what we were talking about too, sorry. LOL. You're right, that is a concern. I guess they would only be given limited freedom until they've reasonably proved themselves. How limited... well, that'd have to be a pretty complicated and drawn out policy.

Well the running usually happens after the dealmaking. According to the lore, desire demons are top tier just below the pride demons.

Yeah, but as there's only 5 tiers... I don't mean that abominations aren't dangerous, just that it's unlikely for one to both escape the Kirkwall RoA and cause more destruction than the RoA.

And facing an army that's supposed to be able to massacre the entire Kirkwall Circle.

Supposed to be. But as we can see, they aren't as powerful as the Circle mages think. And Hawke would know, having faced dozens of them.

Just saying that if we accept that Meredith has the authority to judge and execute Anders; it's not outside the realm of possibility that she's able to defer that authority to another. If we accept that she has the authority to legally call in Hawke to do other work for the templars, like investigating dissidents and tracking down apostates, it's not completely unreasonable that she can legally invite Hawke along to help with the RoA.

That said, making Hawke join might be legal (but stupid) for Apostate Hawke, and is likely illegal (And only slightly less stupid) for Rogue/Warrior Hawke. . . but I could also imagine circumstances where it could be considered perfectly legal since we're not exactly talking about a world that embraces civil liberties.

I suppose. Really doesn't matter, the letter of the law is pretty insignificant in the scope of a siege that triggers a multinational war.

It was just the straw that broke the camel's back.

Remember, by 4:40 Black the Imperial Chantry had been led by mages for over 50 years, while elsewhere mages still lived in the Circles and the RoA had been around for centuries. Electing the Black Divine was also a stepping stone to abolishing the rules that prevented the magisters from regaining their power. Whether that was a good thing or bad thing depends on your point of view, but the tensions were there long before the Black Divine decided he wanted to bait the tiger. It's more surprising that the Orlesian Chantry allowed it for as long as they did.

A fair point. I'm still not sure that they wouldn't have called it for the celebration alone, given that they nearly marched on Orzammar over the assassination of one dwarf priest.

This is straying a bit too close to forbidden topics. But I'll say this, having any extreme beliefs usually doesn't end well. In this case, it's also a coping mechanism for people who lose their loved ones, and people who have witnessed or been the victim of horrifying crimes or accidents. That's the way Sebastian was helping Fenris cope.  I don't think this is necessarily evil or psychologically damaging, and Silfren was twisting that dialogue to promote his/her belief that the Chantry is evil. (Or misunderstood it.) Plenty of other reasons to hate the Chantry, and Sebastian too, that particular one ... isn't a good example.

Yeah it's straying a little too close for comfort, but given the nature of this game I'd think it's a bit unreasonable to expect conversations not to get into that territory. I'd imagine they just mean people shouldn't openly bicker about their religious views. When you make a game about "holy" wars, it's difficult to talk about it without skirting around real ones a little bit. Anyway, I agree with her (I think?) on it. Religious wars are bad.

Modifié par Rifneno, 14 mai 2011 - 12:08 .

[Xilizhra]

Right. Why aren't there more people who like being imprisoned and abused? Would you like some black KKK members while you're at it? Good God.

Actually...

@Xilizhra- how about the religion itself?

Anders is a reasonably devout Andrastian. I'm sure many mages are religious; it's just that "religious" and "willing to live in a mismanaged hell" don't always match.

[Knal1991]

The Angry One wrote...

The problem is the endgame makes the leaders of both sides crazy bonkers.
One is an abomination waiting to happen, the other has been turned by Soul Edge.

Thanks for all the lolz

Orsino was more out of desperation though (Which was kind of idiotic, considering you were able to fend of everything that came at you till that point and him turning only created yet another to be killed...

[Lewie]

@Silfren.. I think im getting to emotionally involved in this, iv been thinking about why and its things iv seen in Rl that makes me hate what anders does. Iv also seen 2 sides agreeing to a peaceful solution and it working. Im living it. I was abrupt and i apologise, its stupid taking it seriously i think ill play fallout for a bit lol.

[Rifneno]

louise101 wrote...

@Silfren.. I think im getting to emotionally involved in this, iv been thinking about why and its things iv seen in Rl that makes me hate what anders does. Iv also seen 2 sides agreeing to a peaceful solution and it working. Im living it. I was abrupt and i apologise, its stupid taking it seriously i think ill play fallout for a bit lol.

Shouldn't let it get you very upset, but what's the point in RPG's if you don't take them seriously enough to invoke emotion?  I'm a bit in a similar boat.  I wasn't totally in support of Anders until his line that "for all the talk of demons, the death I saw most for a mage was suicide."  Having spent my younger years on that edge myself, I have nothing but contempt for any organization that would make people endure that.  That's pretty much the root of my "burn the Chantry" philosophy.  And no offense, but whatever peaceful solution you saw didn't involve a religious government giving lots of new rights to a minority with no leverage that they've successfully oppressed for a thousand years.  That kind of change has only ever come by force.

[KnightofPhoenix]

moilami wrote...
I don't know who you are talking about but to suppose that talented people should go for similar goals as lesser people do is simply foolish. Talented people do research on what they find /interesting/ because they can. The achievement lies in intellectual challenge.

So...Orsino dabbled in blood magic, risked his life and more importantly the life of every single mage that he is responsible for as First Enchanter, collaborated with an insane psychopath because of...the intellectual challenge?

And that is supposed to make it sound like he is less idiotic?
Well I wish that moron was more like a "lesser" person.

Rifneno wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

No but seriously, I have yet to understand the purpose of the Harvester and what Orsino was thinking.

I
think it's fair to say that no one was thinking anything during Act
III. But I think the point of the Harvester was a suicide attack. He
knew he wasn't going to be able to control it. It's made of corpses; he
wouldn't even be alive. He was just hoping it would take out a lot of
templars. And considering the original is so scary Branka wouldn't go
near it to get an anvil of the void... it'd probably actually be a good
plan if he wasn't standing next to a demigod that's on his side.

Again, I meant the entire plan from the start. Why was he researching about the Harvester for years in the first place? What was he possibly hoping it would do?

[Lewie]

Rifneno wrote...

louise101 wrote...

@Silfren.. I think im getting to emotionally involved in this, iv been thinking about why and its things iv seen in Rl that makes me hate what anders does. Iv also seen 2 sides agreeing to a peaceful solution and it working. Im living it. I was abrupt and i apologise, its stupid taking it seriously i think ill play fallout for a bit lol.

Shouldn't let it get you very upset, but what's the point in RPG's if you don't take them seriously enough to invoke emotion?  I'm a bit in a similar boat.  I wasn't totally in support of Anders until his line that "for all the talk of demons, the death I saw most for a mage was suicide."  Having spent my younger years on that edge myself, I have nothing but contempt for any organization that would make people endure that.  That's pretty much the root of my "burn the Chantry" philosophy.  And no offense, but whatever peaceful solution you saw didn't involve a religious government giving lots of new rights to a minority with no leverage that they've successfully oppressed for a thousand years.  That kind of change has only ever come by force.

I can understand where your coming from, its maybe just ingrained in me to abhor those type of actions, no matter how noble their cause or what the cause is. I can't help it, my reasons are valid as are yours. 

[TEWR]

Am I the only one who thinks they look like freaks that lived too close a nuclear waste dumping site?

Yes.

You lose a point for not pointing out that it has 3 heads.

But I wasn't talking about the actual staff! I meant his "staff" =P. Ah well....

[KnightofPhoenix]

Deztyn wrote...
My biggest issue with DA2 (aside from everyone important to the story being ineffective, crazypants or both) was that we don't get to see much variety to the mages we meet, they're nearly all Libertarians/Resolutionists. I'd have loved to see the other fraternities get their due. I also think Bethany was a missed opportunity for a solid Aequitarian or Loyalist point of view. I could easily see her as a reformer who sees the point of the Circles, but recognizes that Kirkwall's is broken and in need of repair. It wouldn't even require much change in her character, she's already half-way there. (But we'd need to be able to actually talk to her.)

Yep. If I hadn't played Origins and was introduced to the issue in DA2, I'd be tempted to conclude that the vast majority of mages are insane freaks.

Thankfully, Origins had a more balanced view (and more expanded, we actually can go to a Circle or start in one) so I was not affected much by what the writers did, which they admit was to make people see the other side more. A worthy goal, but the execution was ridiculous, lacked maturity and nuance.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 14 mai 2011 - 02:49 .

[LobselVith8]

Knight of Phoenix wrote...

Yep. If I hadn't played Origins and was introduced to the issue in DA2, I'd be tempted to conclude that the vast majority of mages are insane freaks.

You also might be tempted to conclude that everyone in Thedas was an idiot.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Yes.

Speaking of mages and elves, I find it interesting that Hawke's status as Champion protected Anders (and I imagine Merrill as well) from the templars. Anders seems to be well liked among the refugees, but I'd imagine the Andrastians might have reservations about a Dalish mage because she isn't Andrastian (or a heathen, as Cullen called Oghren). I wonder what the Kirkwallers make of an apostate Hawke romantically linked with Merrill.

[Rifneno]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Again, I meant the entire plan from the start. Why was he researching about the Harvester for years in the first place? What was he possibly hoping it would do? 

Oh, sorry.  I just assumed you meant the usual question about why he made a moron decision.  Why he learned it... um...  huh.  That's actually a damn good question.  

louise101 wrote...

I can understand where your coming from, its maybe just ingrained in me to abhor those type of actions, no matter how noble their cause or what the cause is. I can't help it, my reasons are valid as are yours. 

Fair enough.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

But I wasn't talking about the actual staff! I meant his "staff" =P. Ah well....

Still... you can't make dirty jokes about Orsino's "staff" when his staff has 3 heads on it and not mention them. It's like Meredith told that frightened mage. You've got to work it in there somehow.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Yep. If I hadn't played Origins and was introduced to the issue in DA2, I'd be tempted to conclude that the vast majority of mages are insane freaks.

Thankfully, Origins had a more balanced view (and more expanded, we actually can go to a Circle or start in one) so I was not affected much by what the writers did, which they admit was to make people see the other side more. A worthy goal, but the execution was ridiculous, lacked maturity and nuance.

It was just ridiculous, because they made one extremist example, a Circle being tormented by templars that flout the law and live in the house from Poltergeist, and we're expected to judge mages by that. It's like showing someone scenes of riots for 30 hours and then giving them the option to drop aerial bombardments on a bunch of slums.

Another part that bothers me is the inequality of the crimes. By which I mean, we constantly see mages do bad things. We only hear about almost everything the templars do. We walk in and see Leandra's head sewn onto a zombie. Horrifying. Do we visit Bethany in the gallows and find her a sobbing mess only barely able to get out "that templar raped me" between bouts of hyperventilation? No, we hear Alrik threaten some girl we don't know. And he doesn't even do it clearly, some poor naive soul probably thinks he was going to have her cleaning the windows.

[TobiTobsen]

Rifneno wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Again, I meant the entire plan from the start. Why was he researching about the Harvester for years in the first place? What was he possibly hoping it would do? 

Oh, sorry.  I just assumed you meant the usual question about why he made a moron decision.  Why he learned it... um...  huh.  That's actually a damn good question.  

He never learned it. He just did what BioWare told him to do. He pressed A for AWESOME!

[moilami]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Knight of Phoenix wrote...

Yep. If I hadn't played Origins and was introduced to the issue in DA2, I'd be tempted to conclude that the vast majority of mages are insane freaks.

You also might be tempted to conclude that everyone in Thedas was an idiot.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA, or that everyone have pixelised heads and they stay right in the same place year after year.

[moilami]

moilami wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Knight of Phoenix wrote...

Yep. If I hadn't played Origins and was introduced to the issue in DA2, I'd be tempted to conclude that the vast majority of mages are insane freaks.

You also might be tempted to conclude that everyone in Thedas was an idiot.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA, or that everyone have pixelised heads and they stay right in the same place year after year.

Oh, but that explains terrible well how some believe so eagerly what they are fed.

[moilami]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

moilami wrote...
I don't know who you are talking about but to suppose that talented people should go for similar goals as lesser people do is simply foolish. Talented people do research on what they find /interesting/ because they can. The achievement lies in intellectual challenge.

So...Orsino dabbled in blood magic, risked his life and more importantly the life of every single mage that he is responsible for as First Enchanter, collaborated with an insane psychopath because of...the intellectual challenge?

And that is supposed to make it sound like he is less idiotic?
Well I wish that moron was more like a "lesser" person.

I did not mean Orsano, if he was the mage in mage tower. He was also more about "power for me" person than one looking for knowledge. He could had been freedom fighter, but I doubt that. I think he used freedom as high horse for power. Or maybe he was freedom fighter who went "Anders". That is for revenge.

Anyway, nothing but chantry is to blame of what happened in the circle.


Edit: Speaking about high horse it is good to remember how chantry uses religion and "public safety" as high horse for power.

Modifié par moilami, 14 mai 2011 - 04:52 .

[Xilizhra]

So...Orsino dabbled in blood magic, risked his life and more importantly the life of every single mage that he is responsible for as First Enchanter, collaborated with an insane psychopath because of...the intellectual challenge?

I believe that Quentin only went insane when his wife died, and that that was when Orsino stopped collaborating with him.

[IanPolaris]

PureMethodActor wrote...

@IanPolaris- I know he never explicitly states that he agrees with the Chantry, but Finn does say at times that either escape is a foolish idea and he does openly question why anyone would want to leave. True, there's his own personality quirks (such as his fear of dirt), and very true that the Circle he belongs to is a very progressive one which no doubt helped shape his loyalty, but overall I see him as someone who doesn't like to take heavy risks, and having been (and still am to a small degree) someone who believes in safety, myself, I can respect that. Again, I wish we saw more of this side.

I am going to bold the key part of your statement regarding Finn.  He is risk adverse.  What that means along with the fact he's seen the absolute best of the circle system is you don't really know how loyal and how supportive Finn actually is towards the Chantry.  Push come to shove, I rather think that Finn would be an Aequitarian rather than a Loyalist...if not an Aequitarian, my second choice would be Isololationist.  Remember that Anders (yes THAT Anders) himself once spoke loudly and passionantly against the emancipation of the circles.  Was that because he suddenly had a Templar lover on the side?  No.  It was because (this was in DAA), he felt that the Chantry would try to destroy them all if the circles tried it and it wasn't worth it.  Wynne actually expressed in words at Cumberland the same argument that carried the day.

Given what has happened in Kirkwall, and given that Finn is risk adverse, I don't see Finn actually objecting to the tower running itself.....just as long as he isn't on the Front lines.

In short there is a big difference between supporting the Chanty and thinking revolution is a good idea...at least pre-Kirkwall.

-Polaris

[LobselVith8]

PureMethodActor wrote...

@Deztyn- Exactly! There were too many libertarians and not nearly enough mages in the other fraternities to truly represent a balanced, reasonable point of view on their end. With the Templars (Act 3 Meredith aside), I saw a myriad of personalities, from those who were there to do a civic duty, to those who were earning their keep and providing for families, and then you have the truly vigilant like Cullen. With the Templars, you had a variety of viewpoints that supported or were against Chantry/Templar policy. It was balanced, reasonable, and therefore much more sympathetic of a viewpoint. Unless I'm playing an evil dick bloodmage, I can't ever see myself taking the option of murdering Thrask in "An Act of Mercy". Its too extreme of an option and only condoned by someone truly malevolent.

Too many Libertarians? Uldred is a Libertarian, but we only really get any interaction with him long after the demons he summoned overwhelmed him and consumed him. We meet quite a few Aequitarians. Senior Enchanters Torrin, Wynne, and First Enchanter Irving. Niall is an Isolationist. The mage protagonist can voice support for the Libertarian position in conversation with Enchanter Torrin, and we have the unnamed blood mage we meet for a few minutes during "A Broken Circle" I suppose, but that's all I can recall. Even DAA Anders didn't support breaking free from the Chantry (like for the same reason Wynne doesn't - she thought the death of all mages would follow).

I think Origins had a better showcase of the templars - Ser Bryant and the templars stationed at Lothering, Ser Otto, and Knight-Commander Greagoir. In DA2, we have Cullen saying mages shouldn't be treated like people and are weapons, while we had implications of rape with Ser Alrik and Ser Kerras, and Meredith ordered the Right of Annulment against all mages for something Anders did. The exception was Ser Thrask, and I hate that this character was wasted on such an insipid story like "Best Served Cold."

[Xilizhra]

@Xilizhra- Whether Anders is actually a devout Andrastian or not will really depend on whether there's a Second-Coming of Andraste or not in future DA's and she, herself, tells us what she meant by her verses (cause like the Bible), the Chant (in written form) was most likely written by man, and therefore, open to interpretation or bias towards a viewpoint. I personally don't see Anders as a devout Andrastian at all, and rather see his attitude as spitting in the face of her ideas, but that's just my take on it based on his personality.

He'd say exactly the same thing about the Chantry.

In DA2, we have Cullen saying mages shouldn't be treated like people and are weapons, while we had implications of rape with Ser Alrik and Ser Kerras, and Meredith ordered the Right of Annulment against all mages for something Anders did. The exception was Ser Thrask, and I hate that this character was wasted on such an insipid story like "Best Served Cold."

Also Keran, who had pretty much the same opinions as Thrask, but lived to tell about it. I wonder what happens to him in the mage ending?
Though, I disagree with you about Greagoir. He's pretty hardliner, just not fanatical about it like Cullen is initially. Cullen by Act 3 actually seems more moderate than Greagoir (not a hugely impressive accomplishment).

[LobselVith8]

Xilizhra wrote...

Also Keran, who had pretty much the same opinions as Thrask, but lived to tell about it. I wonder what happens to him in the mage ending?

Keran did side with Ser Thrask, so that's a fair point. I heard he leaves the templars because he can't tolerate the fact that Meredith is the Knight-Commander (and from what I heard, he's supposed to be in the Hanged Man after "Best Served Cold" is finished).

Xilizhra wrote...

Though, I disagree with you about Greagoir. He's pretty hardliner, just not fanatical about it like Cullen is initially. Cullen by Act 3 actually seems more moderate than Greagoir (not a hugely impressive accomplishment).

I don't know about that. Greagoir delegates a lot more responsibility to Irving than I imagine most Knight-Commanders would, he's willing to take Irving's word about the mages, and in the disabled scene he's even willing to arrest a blood mage Warden instead of killing him (despite the fact that it's legal for Greagoir to kill blood mages) and he says he'll speak on your behalf. I don't deny that he's pro-Chantry, but he's on the other side of the spectrum than Cullen or Meredith are.

[Xilizhra]

Keran did side with Ser Thrask, so that's a fair point. I heard he leaves the templars because he can't tolerate the fact that Meredith is the Knight-Commander (and from what I heard, he's supposed to be in the Hanged Man after "Best Served Cold" is finished).

I always did Best Served Cold last, so went into The Last Straw immediately thereafter. I do hope he survives.

I don't know about that. Greagoir delegates a lot more responsibility to Irving than I imagine most Knight-Commanders would, he's willing to take Irving's word about the mages, and in the disabled scene he's even willing to arrest a blood mage Warden instead of killing him (despite the fact that it's legal for Greagoir to kill blood mages) and he says he'll speak on your behalf. I don't deny that he's pro-Chantry, but he's on the other side of the spectrum than Cullen or Meredith are.

But he also Tranquilizes (or attempts to) Jowan and throws Lily into Aeonar. He trusts Irving, but that seems to be the extent of his tolerance toward mages. And quite frankly, I don't know if I think much of Irving either; Orsino seemed far more loyal to his own people.