4350 réponses à ce sujet

[KnightofPhoenix]

IanPolaris wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Settlers always have problems with nomads and vice versa (as well as a cordial relationship, depending on the context) and it was never one side that "started " it, so I don't see why it should be any different here.

In the case of the werewolf curse, even the werewolves (descendants of the humans) and the Lady of the Forest (who was there after all) agree that the humans started it and Zathrien's revenge was in fact justified.  Their complaint is that Zatherian went too far and punished those that weren't guilty...and wouldn't stop to talk long enough to even consider this point.

-Polaris

This was a unique case.

Nomads are a pain in the ass. Always have been. Mesopotamian history is really the best microcosm for nomad / settler relations. They often fought and I am not sure I'd place blame on any one side.

[IanPolaris]

Yes, a race or culture that looks back to the exclusion of looking and progessing forward is doomed to die, and that most definately includes the Dalish. I think eventually some (like Merrill and Feynriel) will perhaps arrest this, but IMO it will happen too late.

-Polaris

[KnightofPhoenix]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

You do need to learn from the past however, and in part they should focus solely on recovering ancient elven technology like the Eluvian. They have their gods and they have a few stories. It's time to make new stories.

I feel that it's hard to look forward in this particular scenario

The first thing they need to learn from the past is their weakness. To learn humility. Once they admit that humans surpassed them, then they can focus on the future. As long as they treat humans as upstarts, while claiming a lost paradise (probably a lie), they are going no where.

[IanPolaris]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Nomads are a pain in the ass. Always have been. Mesopotamian history is really the best microcosm for nomad / settler relations. They often fought and I am not sure I'd place blame on any one side.

In my own country, the relationship between US Settlers and the (largely) nomad plains tribes were no different except the US settlers weren't going to share and had the strength (and resolve...both good and bad) to insure they wouldn't have to.

Result:  A massive shift in the racial/cultural makeup of North American in the past 400 years and even the past 200 years or so....with the Native Americans largely extinct as a people and culture.  This unfortunately is the future I see for the Dalish (i.e. Dalish reservations where perhaps 1 part in 10 of the Dalish lore and customs are in fact genuine and most of the rest are for tourists).

-Polaris

[TEWR]

true. Humans did beat them. However unfairly, unjustified, and unprovoked it may have been; they need to realize that they are not the best warriors on Thedas. If a human offers help, they take it as a sign that the Dalish aren't good fighters in their own right.

But humanity also needs to treat the elves like people too, which rarely if ever has happened in Thedas.

[Deztyn]

IanPolaris wrote...

Deztyn wrote...

Polaris,

1) .... Orlais 'reputation' starts after the Fall of the Dales. That war happens before any of the others. Before Nevarra, before the schism with the Tevinter Chantry, before Fereldan. You're arguing a pattern of behavior that didn't even exist yet is proof of Orlais wrong.

In this case that's perfectly fair.  Orlais was and is an agressor nation and always has been.  There is no reasonable indication that Orlais prior to the fall of the Dales was much different in outlook or attitude than the Orlais afterwards.  As such, Orlais over the past 1000 years has an unfortunately pattern of behavior that makes me uninclined to give them the benefit of the doubt over the ENTIRE period.

.... I think that if Orlais has truly been imperialistic (rather than opportunistic) for 1,000 years they win the Thedas Incompetency Award.

2)The Dalish ignoring the Blight indicates they already had the "Screw you, Shems" attitude that leads me to believe they would attack human villages if it suited them.

Wrong.  Big difference between neutrality and hostility.  The Dalish have nothing to gain by trying to conquer a bunch of "Shems" that hate them.  Now if the Human villages settled IN DALISH TERRITORY or the Villagers molested Dalish (and missionaries count), then the Dalish are protecting their own territory and their own soveign rights.  If a human village is dumb enough to set up in Dalish Territory, by all Sovereign Rights of Nations, they are completely at the whim of whatever the Dalish want to do with them.  Too bad, so sad.

Who said Red Crossing was in Dalish territory? It wasn't. Not according to anything I've read. You're making up reasons for the attack on the village because you want them justified.

And neutrality in the face of an enemy that can't be reasoned with and will be at your door after dealing with your neighbor is either the very height of stupidity or malice. Neither one speaks very well of the Dalish.

3) We can't hop down to the local library and research the events of Red Crossing, we're limited by the information the developers have chosen to give us. What we have been given at least proves that the Exalted March wasn't unprovoked.

Sure it was.  The Chantry didn't consider a war with Orlais justifcation enough for an Exalted March did they?  No.  However, they clearly considered the fact that Orlais would LOSE a war to be justification and I'd say that makes it unprovoked.

Now, had the Chantry or others tried to broker a peace and the Dalish rejected it, I might have a different viewpoint, but there is no indication that the Divine even considered a peaceful solution.

Again, we have a very limited view of events. We don't know that a peaceful solution wasn't considered. And it's irrelevant.

The Dalish were attacking Val Royeaux, a loss for Orlais there was a loss for the Chantry. You're actually proving my point, the Chantry didn't want an Exalted March until the seat of power for the Chantry itself was being threatened. Or were they just supposed to get out of the way?

4) The Origins Codex entry for the Dalish describes an unprovoked attack on a human caravan. So yes, they do that.

Look at who wrote the codex.  Dalish don't do unprovoked attacks.  Those that do are punished severely by their own keepers (see Velanna).

Brother Genitivi, I know.

That doesn't mean he's lying, it may just mean it was a different Dalish clan.

5) I never said the occupation of Nevarra was a good thing, or that Orlais would be loved by the people there. Merely that the two situations were different. (and again, Nevarra is a hundred years after the fall of the Dales.)

It shows that Orlais has a habit of stabbing nations in the back especially just after blights.  For that matter Orlais seems gearing up to do that to Fereldan while Fereldan is still weak.

It's part of an Orlesan pattern of behavior that shows that Orlais can not be trusted nor their accounts.  {That's the problem with 'playing the game'....play it too much and no one believes or trusts anything you say.}

-Polaris

It shows that Orlais is smart enough to take advantage of an opportunity handed to them on a silver platter. Going out of their way to attack the Dales while they're still weakened by the Blight is a very different situation.

Modifié par Deztyn, 17 mai 2011 - 06:28 .

[IanPolaris]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

true. Humans did beat them. However unfairly, unjustified, and unprovoked it may have been; they need to realize that they are not the best warriors on Thedas. If a human offers help, they take it as a sign that the Dalish aren't good fighters in their own right.

But humanity also needs to treat the elves like people too, which rarely if ever has happened in Thedas.

Yes, but in that (treating Elves like people) the Dalish are often their own worst enemy.  Regadless of who was at fault in the Fall of the Dales, Dalish attitudes towards humans have made it easier to treat non-Dalish elves like dirt further accelerating the Elvish decline towards extinction.

Like I said, if the Dalish were SMART, they'd accept Elf-blooded humans as part of the Tribe (Fenyriel was a good start if aborted) and allow Elf-blooded humans to be part of the Dalish.  Then the ability of the Dalish to inbreed with humans becomes a source of strength not weakeness...and it's a lot harder to look down on an Elf-blooded human than an Elf because he IS human (and might have better training and gear than you....)

Will the Dalish ever swallow their pride enough to look forward in this regard?  Not likely......

-Polaris

[TEWR]

IanPolaris wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Nomads are a pain in the ass. Always have been. Mesopotamian history is really the best microcosm for nomad / settler relations. They often fought and I am not sure I'd place blame on any one side.

In my own country, the relationship between US Settlers and the (largely) nomad plains tribes were no different except the US settlers weren't going to share and had the strength (and resolve...both good and bad) to insure they wouldn't have to.

Result:  A massive shift in the racial/cultural makeup of North American in the past 400 years and even the past 200 years or so....with the Native Americans largely extinct as a people and culture.  This unfortunately is the future I see for the Dalish (i.e. Dalish reservations where perhaps 1 part in 10 of the Dalish lore and customs are in fact genuine and most of the rest are for tourists).

-Polaris

Wait are you Native American? If so, high five! I'm Native American too!


But I thought that there were many cases of pure-blooded Native Americans still out there. I've been to pow wows before, and the culture seemed to still be alive. My house in Michigan has a bunch of Native American statues, stories, paintings, and everything.

[KnightofPhoenix]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

true. Humans did beat them. However unfairly, unjustified, and unprovoked it may have been; they need to realize that they are not the best warriors on Thedas. If a human offers help, they take it as a sign that the Dalish aren't good fighters in their own right.

But humanity also needs to treat the elves like people too, which rarely if ever has happened in Thedas.

We don't really know the circumstances of the Tevinter - Elven war, other than the basic need for expansion and the decadence of a lazy and unproductive civilization (at which point, not taking advantage of this weakness is stupid). Suffice to say they were dominated pretty badly by the Tevinters.

Humans should. But they don't need to. No one needs to treat a weak broken people as equals. You only need to do it with a people that earned its equal status, either by force or by being produtive. With a people that can impose themselves as such.

In a context of international anarchy marked by no Rule of Law, it is as the Athenians in Thucydides's History of the Peloponnesian War say: "the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must". Might be  sad, but it's true.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 17 mai 2011 - 06:36 .

[IanPolaris]

[quote]Deztyn wrote...

[quote]IanPolaris wrote...

[quote]Deztyn wrote...

Polaris,

1) .... Orlais 'reputation' starts after the Fall of the Dales. That war happens before any of the others. Before Nevarra, before the schism with the Tevinter Chantry, before Fereldan. You're arguing a pattern of behavior that didn't even exist yet is proof of Orlais wrong.

[/quote]

In this case that's perfectly fair.  Orlais was and is an agressor nation and always has been.  There is no reasonable indication that Orlais prior to the fall of the Dales was much different in outlook or attitude than the Orlais afterwards.  As such, Orlais over the past 1000 years has an unfortunately pattern of behavior that makes me uninclined to give them the benefit of the doubt over the ENTIRE period.[/quote]

.... I think that if Orlais has truly been imperialistic (rather than opportunistic) for 1,000 years they win the Thedas Incompetency Award.
[/quote]

We KNOW that Orlais is truly imperialistic in nature (just as the Fereldans!).  As for incompetant....yeah, I'd say that current Orlais is pretty incompetant.

[quote][quote]
Wrong.  Big difference between neutrality and hostility.  The Dalish have nothing to gain by trying to conquer a bunch of "Shems" that hate them.  Now if the Human villages settled IN DALISH TERRITORY or the Villagers molested Dalish (and missionaries count), then the Dalish are protecting their own territory and their own soveign rights.  If a human village is dumb enough to set up in Dalish Territory, by all Sovereign Rights of Nations, they are completely at the whim of whatever the Dalish want to do with them.  Too bad, so sad.[/quote]

Who said Red Crossing was in Dalish territory? It wasn't. Not according to anything I've read. You're making up reasons for the attack on the village because you want them justified.

And neutrality in the face of an enemy that can't be reasoned with and will be at your door after dealing with your neighbor is either the very height of stupidity or malice. Neither one speaks very well of the Dalish.
[/quote]

I never said that Red Crossing was in Dalish Territory.  The fact is we don't KNOW why there was a skirmish at Red Crossing.  However, given Orlais' history and given that it was desperate for arable land after the second blight, I am more than willing to believe that Orlais either encouraged or permitted (and turned a blind eye) to peasents willing to trespass into Dalish Lands (esp with bad feelings post blight), and the Dalish responded.  I am also VERY willing to believe that the Chantry sent missionaries against the will and request of the Dalish.  If so, the Dalish were well within their rights to return them to Val Royeaux in little boxes.

Given the difference in histories, I am inclinded to give the Dalish the benefit of the doubt and I am not inclined to give Orlais the benefit of the doubt.  Orlais did this to themselves by playing the "game" in their history once too often at least for me.


[quote][quote]
Sure it was.  The Chantry didn't consider a war with Orlais justifcation enough for an Exalted March did they?  No.  However, they clearly considered the fact that Orlais would LOSE a war to be justification and I'd say that makes it unprovoked.

Now, had the Chantry or others tried to broker a peace and the Dalish rejected it, I might have a different viewpoint, but there is no indication that the Divine even considered a peaceful solution.[/quote]

Again, we have a very limited view of events. We don't know that a peaceful solution wasn't considered. And it's irrelevant.

The Dalish were attacking Val Royeaux, a loss for Orlais there was a loss for the Chantry. You're actually proving my point, the Chantry didn't want an Exalted March until the seat of power for the Chantry itself was being threatened. Or were they just supposed to get out of the way?
[/quote]

The Dalish were attacking the capital of Orlais during a declared war.  The Chantry was NOT INVOLVED until the Chantry decided to abrogate both it's neutrality and Andraste's promise and involve themselves to bail out Orlais.

In short, if the Chantry wasn't willing to broker a peace (and call an exalted march only if that FAILS), then the Chantry needed to get out of the way because this wasn't the Chantry's fight.



[quote]
[quote]
Look at who wrote the codex.  Dalish don't do unprovoked attacks.  Those that do are punished severely by their own keepers (see Velanna).[/quote]

Brother Genitivi, I know.

That doesn't mean he's lying, it may just mean it was a different Dalish clan.
[/quote]

Or his sources lied/mislead him.  Given that human foresters and villagers hate and despise the Dalish, I find the later very likely.


[quote][quote]

It shows that Orlais has a habit of stabbing nations in the back especially just after blights.  For that matter Orlais seems gearing up to do that to Fereldan while Fereldan is still weak.

It's part of an Orlesan pattern of behavior that shows that Orlais can not be trusted nor their accounts.  {That's the problem with 'playing the game'....play it too much and no one believes or trusts anything you say.}
[/quote]

It shows that Orlais is smart enough to take advantage of an opportunity handed to them on a silver platter. Going out of their way to attack the Dales while they're still weakened by the Blight is a very different situation.[/quote]

Which is another way of proving that Orlais is untrustworthy.  Thank you for proving my point.

-Polaris

[TEWR]

Ah I remember that quote. There is truth to that. You know, humanity as a whole is something that is hard to be proud of because of how we treat each other. However justified we feel we are in doing so, there is no excuse for treating someone like they're less than dirt. But that's how our mindsets work, and it's one of our biggest flaws I guess.


I'm gonna brush up on my history over the summer though. There's a lot of stuff that can be applied to these types of discussions

[IanPolaris]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Nomads are a pain in the ass. Always have been. Mesopotamian history is really the best microcosm for nomad / settler relations. They often fought and I am not sure I'd place blame on any one side.

In my own country, the relationship between US Settlers and the (largely) nomad plains tribes were no different except the US settlers weren't going to share and had the strength (and resolve...both good and bad) to insure they wouldn't have to.

Result:  A massive shift in the racial/cultural makeup of North American in the past 400 years and even the past 200 years or so....with the Native Americans largely extinct as a people and culture.  This unfortunately is the future I see for the Dalish (i.e. Dalish reservations where perhaps 1 part in 10 of the Dalish lore and customs are in fact genuine and most of the rest are for tourists).

-Polaris

Wait are you Native American? If so, high five! I'm Native American too!


But I thought that there were many cases of pure-blooded Native Americans still out there. I've been to pow wows before, and the culture seemed to still be alive. My house in Michigan has a bunch of Native American statues, stories, paintings, and everything.

I am 1/8th Blackfoot, but I don't make an issue of it normally.  In terms of raw numbers, sure there are many purebloods out there, but as a percentage of the population, Native Americans are an afterthought.  That's sad but it's true.  Honestly the Native Americans (of all the tribes) have finally done (the Five Nations are most successful) what the Dalish IMHO need to do, but I also think we did it about 50 years too late...and an entire generation was lost to forced culturalization.

I probably painted it with a grimmer picture than needed, but I think a mostly honest if hard-hitting one.

-Polaris

[TEWR]

I'm not much myself. only about 1/16 Ojibwe (also called Chippewa), but it's still something I cherish and value, and learn as much about as I can when I can.

[IanPolaris]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I'm not much myself. only about 1/16 Ojibwe (also called Chippewa), but it's still something I cherish and value, and learn as much about as I can when I can.

Sure.  I find it fascinating myself, but to be totally honest, you'd never know my Native American heritage by looking at me (and that's true with a lot of card carrying tribe members).

The point being, however, is that the Dalish need to use this model and breed into human society and MAKE society care about them (by having the strength and numbers bolstered by human members if need be) BEFORE most of the culture and lore is lost.

It was a lesson our own ancestors sadly learned too late.  There is an old (I think Chinese) saying that in the face of an irrestistable wind, it is the reed that bends (but doesn't break) that is the path of wisdom over the old brittle tree that fights the end and is blown away.  Too much was blown away before this lesson was learned the hard way.  I see in Thedas the Dalish going much the same way.

-Polaris

[TEWR]

I'm the same way. I have more Italian in me than Native American, so when people look at me they know I'm Italian. Also I agree with your point. I think the quote you're thinking of is Confucius'

"The green reed which bends in the wind is stronger than the mighty oak which breaks in a storm"

But you never know, if we're lucky maybe future generations will become enamored with our ancestors old culture. Better late than never as they say. I prefer the way I was brought up in regards to Native American culture. I was raised both as a Christian (or Catholic. or both. I don't know) but I was also raised with knowledge of my ancestral background.


which to me I agreed with more. I have grown to dislike the religion of Christianity. But that's neither here nor there.


back on topic, the elves do need to accept anyone who has even a hint of elven blood in them. Marethari's clan took the first steps to doing this, that we know of. But otherwise they will start to dwindle slowly. If the dwarves didn't have such a low fertility rate I'd suggest they do the same, but they have good reason to stick to Dwarf only relationships.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 17 mai 2011 - 07:13 .

[RangerSG]

IanPolaris wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Settlers always have problems with nomads and vice versa (as well as a cordial relationship, depending on the context) and it was never one side that "started " it, so I don't see why it should be any different here.

In the case of the werewolf curse, even the werewolves (descendants of the humans) and the Lady of the Forest (who was there after all) agree that the humans started it and Zathrien's revenge was in fact justified.  Their complaint is that Zatherian went too far and punished those that weren't guilty...and wouldn't stop to talk long enough to even consider this point.

-Polaris

The humans 'started' it, yes. The Dalish might have been justified in avenging the murders. But no, they didn't see the CURSE as justified. Even Maranethi declares that outrageous.

[Rifneno]

IanPolaris wrote...

I will not speak for society in general. I think it's generally wrong to use deliberately insulting racial epithets towards anyone or any race, real or fictional. That's just my personal opinion on the matter.

I'm rather surprised you'd fall into that category. You were the one that posted the Alain theory, weren't you? The whole thing pretty much hinged on the understanding of the fact that people are hardwired to be racist to some degree. It's just what's done on a conscious level to actual people that matters. There are no elves. Therefor saying "knife-ear" hurts no one. Therefor it's not "wrong." It really is just that simple.

Xilizhra wrote...

Well, it's not wrong as such, but why is it wronger to be uncomfortable with it?

Not wrong, just politically correct to a ridiculous degree. Condemning a slur against a group that a) doesn't actually exist, is remarkably racist themselves, is one step shy of saying we should call darkspawn "Light-challenged Thedasians." Particularly asinine when you consider that one of the people complaining about a slur against one DA minority was earlier on defending genocide against another. So it's okay to systematically murder a fictional people, but not to insult them? I've got to right this crap down.

*rubs temples* Onto a more intelligent topic. Which would be... anything, really.

Deztyn wrote...

1) .... Orlais 'reputation' starts after the Fall of the Dales. That war happens before any of the others. Before Nevarra, before the schism with the Tevinter Chantry, before Fereldan. You're arguing a pattern of behavior that didn't even exist yet is proof of Orlais wrong.

To be fair, wouldn't you raise an eyebrow if it came to light recently that OJ Simpson's high school sweetheart mysteriously disappeared after they had a fight 30 years ago?

4) The Origins Codex entry for the Dalish describes an unprovoked attack on a human caravan. So yes, they do that.

The Dalish Origin starts with the PC holding a bow on some poor sap who made the mistake of wandering into Dalish territory. And since the Dalish are nomadic and Thedas has yet to found MapQuest, that's not exactly a mistake so much as bad luck. Oh, and Tamlen right by you wants to kill him for no more reason than "being a shem." And this is the introduction for the frickin' hero! The Dalish are innocent like the dwarves are tall.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I don't think it's wrong, I think it's pathetic. As long as it's not serious (and even then, it best avoided).

As pathetic as, say, putting video game racism and real life racism in the same boat? Let's compare them right after a Grand Theft Auto player shoots a bazooka into a real nightclub. Better pack a lunch.

IanPolaris wrote...

Look at who wrote the codex.  Dalish don't do unprovoked attacks.  Those that do are punished severely by their own keepers (see Velanna).

Velanna was not severely punished.

Deztyn wrote...

.... I think that if Orlais has truly been imperialistic (rather than opportunistic) for 1,000 years they win the Thedas Incompetency Award.

They call their leader an Emperor/Empress, so it's a pretty safe bet. Kirkwall's a lock on the Thedas Incompetency Award though.

IanPolaris wrote...

Yes, but in that (treating Elves like people) the Dalish are often their own worst enemy.  Regadless of who was at fault in the Fall of the Dales, Dalish attitudes towards humans have made it easier to treat non-Dalish elves like dirt further accelerating the Elvish decline towards extinction.

Indeed, another reason the Dalish are made of failure. The fact they even hate city elves shows the lengths of their superiority complex.

[Xilizhra]

Not wrong, just politically correct to a ridiculous degree. Condemning a slur against a group that a) doesn't actually exist, is remarkably racist themselves, is one step shy of saying we should call darkspawn "Light-challenged Thedasians." Particularly asinine when you consider that one of the people complaining about a slur against one DA minority was earlier on defending genocide against another. So it's okay to systematically murder a fictional people, but not to insult them? I've got to right this crap down.

How is the first part relevant? Although if I start making IRL comparisons, that'll help nothing... I agree with you on the second one, though.

[Rifneno]

Xilizhra wrote...

How is the first part relevant? Although if I start making IRL comparisons, that'll help nothing... I agree with you on the second one, though.

Depends, what do you mean by the first part? About it being over the top PC? I don't see any other explanation for the objections. It's a fictional race; no one is hurt by it. So I can only conclude the objections are because our society pounds "RACISM BAD!" into your heads constantly. Which is a valid point when it effects how people are being treated, but when there's no people to be treated poorly then it's just daft.

Really, I only said it because none of the phrases I *really* use to describe Fenris would make it past the profanity filter. So I just grabbed an in-game insult. I can't believe people are actually offended by it. 

[Xilizhra]

About elves being racist towards humans.

Why is it that you hate Fenris that much, by the way?

[Rifneno]

Xilizhra wrote...

About elves being racist towards humans.

Why is it that you hate Fenris that much, by the way?

How isn't it relevant?  Elves come across worse than the mages of Kirkwall.  As for Fenris, you can be good to him the whole game and save his hide on multiple occasions and sometimes he'll still try to kill you for refusing to help Annul a Circle with Bethany in it.  My own fault I guess, should've learned from the Fog Warrior's mistake of trusting that scum.

[Xilizhra]

Given the massive human/elf power discrepancy, I find it easy to forgive the elves.
And Fenris... hm, what do you think about Aveline?

[TEWR]

I blame the city elves just as much. If they left the alienages and sought out the Dalish they'd have a much better life. Pol did, until his brain turned to goo due to the Keeper's poisonous words and he thought he'd be safer with a mad Varterral than around Merrill.

[Rifneno]

Xilizhra wrote...

Given the massive human/elf power discrepancy, I find it easy to forgive the elves.
And Fenris... hm, what do you think about Aveline?

We meet 2 Dalish tribes.  One of them has the Keeper being responsible for an ancient curse and half the clan members are complete asses to you even if you're nothing but nice to them.  Their...  whatever the storyteller is called, uses a children's story to railroad you for the great crime of offering to help his clan.  After all, what arrogant gasbag would think they could POSSIBLY succeed where the "mighty" Dalish have failed?  An attitude shared by both Dalish tribes we meet, along with "don't forget we've got a bunch of archers ready to murder you for looking at us funny."  Which the second one actually tries to do for something their own damn keeper did.  the Dalish can go to hell.

Aveline's a lot harder to turn than Fenris, but I'm definitely not a fan.  She reminds me of Wynne: no matter how much good you do, it's never enough to save you from her damn self-righteous lecturing.  Yeah that's right, I'm a d-bag for giving you a shield because clearly I'm trying to make you forget your dead husband.  Nevermind, I'll keep the shield, I want to see you get stabbed by the next gang we encounter anyway.

[Plaintiff]

I feel sorry for the Dalish. Really, I do.

But ****ing hell, their passive-aggressive bull**** sure makes it difficult.