4350 réponses à ce sujet

[IanPolaris]

Beerfish wrote...

"Elthina may be well loved by the common folk, but her job involves more than that. She is responsible for the mages that her order keeps under lock and key. She fails in that utterly regardless of whatever reasons help her sleep at night."

Not one mention of the first enchanter in your post who is in charge of the mages in his keeping. There was utter failure all around in this situation. She could have easily told Leliana, yeah go get the divine to come on down and bring an army. She actually was trying to stem things, she was crappy at it no doubt about that.

How?  Orsino was confined to the Gallows at the time.  He couldn't leave without KC Meredith taking his disobeyal of her orders (and unauthorized absence) as proof of blood magic and justification for the Right of Annulment.  That's even assuming that Orsino (who is cut off from the city) would know where to go.

Lelianna is a Seeker of the Chantry.  She is acting with the DIRECT authority of the DIVINE herself.  Lelianna is granted enough authority to do pretty much whatever she pleased INCLUDING the arrest and execution of both Meredith and Elthina (read the entries on Seekers).  It was up to Lelianna to go see Orsino if she really wanted to actually do her damned job and investigate the situation.  She doesn't.  The new Lelianna hates mages and is willing (apparently) to take Meredith's word for it.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

I appoligize if this has been answered, but I missed it -- I've seen the above statement about Alain several times, and I haven't seen where anyone points out the basis of the statement.

It's been mentioned a few times that he'll claim Karras comes to his room every night and threatens him with harm if he reports it.  Also he'll make a more generic statement about Templars coming to his room at night at the end of Best Served Cold, even if Karras is dead

Kerras or Alrik?

Kerras...my mistake (see my edit).  Alrik is a monster all on his own without this.

-Polaris

[Silfren]

Ryzaki wrote...

Silfren wrote...
Sorry, but it's not as straightforward as you think.  What constitutes murder varies from one legal definition to the next.  There's also an argument to be made that the word murder carries an emotional quality.  This is why a person may consider a loved one's death to have been murder while someone else--including someone with legal backing--may call it execution.  

Connotation and popular usage matter as much as denotation for a great many terms we use.  But again, what qualifies as "murder" usually hinges on the legal definition of murder in the nation you're standing in.  It's not quite as simple a matter of "this is what the dictionary calls it."

There have been a number of stories I've read where I would call a character's death murder, but the laws of the world in the story say call it property destruction.  My emotional response doesn't matter.  In vice versa, there's a few cases where I've read about the death of a character that I would call self-defense, but the laws of that world call it murder.  The law tends to trump the personal opinion of individuals.

Actually it is. If you want to use the "It's invidiual country!" excuse Hawke says Anders murdered the grand cleric and not once is it proven wrong. 

So yeah. He murdered her according to the laws in Thedas. Case closed. 

And yeah killing religious leaders with political power tends to count as murder in most ficitional stories I read. Assassination to be exact.

Anders murdered the Grand Cleric. Nothing in the narrative says otherwise. 

I did say that I considered what Anders did to not be murder.  I'm well aware that the law of Thedas may say otherwise.  I was addressing why I do not consider Grand Cleric Elthina's death to be murder, and do consider what Anders did to her to be justified.

[Ryzaki]

Silfren wrote...
I did say that I considered what Anders did to not be murder.  I'm well aware that the law of Thedas may say otherwise.  I was addressing why I do not consider Grand Cleric Elthina's death to be murder, and do consider what Anders did to her to be justified.

But if it's just your personal opinion okay then. 

She was murdered though even Anders admits it. 

[IanPolaris]

Ryzaki wrote...
But if it's just your personal opinion okay then. 

She was murdered though even Anders admits it. 

By the laws as they are currently written in Kirkwall, yes.  However, if the mages evetually are freed from the Chantry (and I think this will happen for a lot of reasons I don't want to get into here because it's involved and off-topic), I suspect history may look at it differently.  Anders certainly believes that, and even though I kill him everytime for the terrorist that he is, I have a strong suspicion he's basically correct about that.

-Polaris

[Ryzaki]

IanPolaris wrote...
By the laws as they are currently written in Kirkwall, yes.  However, if the mages evetually are freed from the Chantry (and I think this will happen for a lot of reasons I don't want to get into here because it's involved and off-topic), I suspect history may look at it differently.  Anders certainly believes that, and even though I kill him everytime for the terrorist that he is, I have a strong suspicion he's basically correct about that.
-Polaris

It won't change it from being murder no matter how they look at it. There are plenty of people who I would rejoice if they were murdered. Wouldn't change it from being murder though. 

That's my whole point. Murder isn't a judgement call on something being right or not. It just is. It's like calling something blue. 

Doesn't mean you hate or like it. It's just blue. 

[Silfren]

Ryzaki wrote...

Silfren wrote...
I did say that I considered what Anders did to not be murder.  I'm well aware that the law of Thedas may say otherwise.  I was addressing why I do not consider Grand Cleric Elthina's death to be murder, and do consider what Anders did to her to be justified.

But if it's just your personal opinion okay then. 

She was murdered though even Anders admits it. 

Which is also YOUR opinion.  But nice little try at the whole ninja "Well, okay, so it's just your opinion BUT BY THE WAY YOU'RE DEAD WRONG" bit attached at the end.  LOL

Your position is not as set in stone as you think.  Murder is as much a legal term as it is anything else and you aren't going to find its full and total and complete definition in a singular expression. 

Or do I have to get started on a thesis-long discussion that starts with an in-depth exploration of that old Biblical nugget of "Thou shalt not kill"?

Modifié par Silfren, 06 mai 2011 - 09:12 .

[GavrielKay]

Beerfish wrote...

Not one mention of the first enchanter in your post who is in charge of the mages in his keeping. There was utter failure all around in this situation. She could have easily told Leliana, yeah go get the divine to come on down and bring an army. She actually was trying to stem things, she was crappy at it no doubt about that.

I'm not sure why it keeps coming up that there was failure on both sides.  Or that not all Templars were bad. 

I happen to believe that Orsino didn't have enough authority to propect the mages.  He couldn't fireball a Templar for raping one of his charges without getting killed or giving Meredith more ammunition to use against the mages.  So, what should he have done?  He was willing to stand in the public square and denounce Meredith to her face - with the useless result of getting sent to his room by Elthina.  Maybe I'm wrong, but show me your evidence.

Not all the Templars were evil.  There, I've admitted it.  Feel better?  Thing is, I'm not asked to perform a wholesale extermination of the Templars on account of I know there are some evil ones in the group.

Let's be clear:  the biggest problem that I (and a number of others seemingly) have with the Right of Annulment is that the Right is a wholesale slaughter of EVERY mage.  Man, woman and child.  Every mage is meant to die.  The circle is declared totally unsalvageable.  They cheat in the game and allow you to feel a little better about yourself by saving 3 mages.  The definition of the Right however is to kill everyone.  Down to the last terrified child.

This is completely different from going through the circle looking for Abominations and killing the ones we find.  We did that in Origins and it was totally satisfying.  The Right says no mage is considered innocent.  Every mage is declared beyond saving and must be killed.

So, some mages are guilty, some Templars are guilty.  But I've not seen anyone advocate exterminating every Templar in Kirkwall regardless of who did what.  I've not seen the call to ignore any evidence for any given Templar's inocence - just kill 'em all!

The basic problem for me is that the Right assumes guilt of EVERY single freaking mage no matter if they're 12 years old and just got abducted from their parents yesterday.  The idea that it isn't even worth sorting through the mages to save the innocent ones is just beyond me.

On both sides - the evil ones should be dealt with individually.  You have the in-game ability to be selective with killing certain evil Templars.  That's good.  Deal with the bad apples as you find them. 

Save the innocents.

[Ryzaki]

Silfren wrote...
Which is also YOUR opinion.  But nice little try at the whole ninja "Well, okay, so it's just your opinion BUT BY THE WAY YOU'RE DEAD WRONG" bit attached at the end.  LOL

Your position is not as set in stone as you think.  Murder is as legal term as it is anything else and you aren't going to find it's full and total and complete definition in a singular expression. 

Or do I have to get started on a thesis-long discussion that starts with an in-depth exploration of that old Biblical nugget of "Thou shalt not kill"?

According to the law of the land the Grand Cleric was murdered. See my opinion is backed up by actual fact. But do prove how exactly the Grand Cleric wasn't murdered by Anders. That's how it is. You can say you don't think she was murdered until the cows come home. According to Thedas law. She was murdered. Anders admits that he murdered her. 
     
Heck according to several countries laws she was murdered. 

Anders murdered her. He knew what he was doing and he thought it was the right thing to do. That terrorist attack was him targeting her so he could start  war. If that's not a textbook example of an assassination I don't know what is. 

Oh but please do get into the whole thou shalt not kill having a hold on a ficitional countries laws and beliefs and how that somehow makes murder not murder because you don't agree that it's murder.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 06 mai 2011 - 09:18 .

[Sylvianus]

Merela wrote...

Silfren wrote...

It does NOT matter if she's well-loved by the people.  If you are not capable, or are not willing, to do your job, you are not fit to be in that job and you should either step down, or be forcibly removed.  This is not complicated.  It's how things work in real life in every situation.  For the life of my I don't understand how you can not get this.  If you can't do your job, or refuse to do your job, you get fired. It really is that simple. 

I respectfully disagree. Elthina being well-loved is important for the Chantry, especially since she's the one leading the faith of thousand of people in Kirkwall. You're far less receptive to someone you don't like or don't know very well, and it's important for the Chantry to have its believers under control. The emotional link shouldn't be ignored.

Now, why they don't nominate someone else more capable for...assisting her in the Templar matter...I guess they just don't care, sadly for the mages.

Yes it's not complicated. You're with us or against us. this is the kind of absolutism that is in question precisely. And that's what ultimately condemned the Magi.

And it is indeed a murder, no more no less.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 06 mai 2011 - 09:21 .

[LobselVith8]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

It establishes how she met the current Divine Justina V.

that much I knew already


But, how do we know she wasa playing the Warden the whole time?

It's something I inferred from how Leliana acts about the mages in "Faith" despite what she tells Wynne when they discuss mages in Ferelden, and how the item she has in Origins is called "Seeker's Circle." It's merely my opinion for where the writers are going with the character.

[Silfren]

Ryzaki wrote...

Silfren wrote...
Which is also YOUR opinion.  But nice little try at the whole ninja "Well, okay, so it's just your opinion BUT BY THE WAY YOU'RE DEAD WRONG" bit attached at the end.  LOL

Your position is not as set in stone as you think.  Murder is as legal term as it is anything else and you aren't going to find it's full and total and complete definition in a singular expression. 

Or do I have to get started on a thesis-long discussion that starts with an in-depth exploration of that old Biblical nugget of "Thou shalt not kill"?

According to the law of the land the Grand Cleric was murdered. See my opinion is backed up by actual fact. But do prove how exactly the Grand Cleric wasn't murdered by Anders. That's how it is. You can say you don't think she was murdered until the cows come home. According to Thedas law. She was murdered. Anders admits that he murdered her. 
     
Heck accordding to several countries laws she was murdered. 

Anders murdered her. He knew what he was doing and he thought it was the right thing to do. 

Oh but please do get into the whole thou shalt not kill having a hold on a ficitional countries laws and beliefs and how that somehow makes murder not murder because you don't agree that it's murder.

There's no need for the veiled hostility.  I already pointed out that I'm well aware that my belief that it was not murder is simply my viewpoint, based on the fact that I believe she deserved to die.  I didn't feel the need to go into a hugely elaborate post expressing each and every nuance of both my opinion and my understanding of legal definitions of murder.  This is also why I may respond to other people's assertions that she was unfairly murdered by saying that I feel differently, feel that her killing was entirely justified and therefore not murder, but you don't see me going "OMGWTFBBQ HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT OMG?!"

The fact remains that there IS an emotional component to the term, not wholly unlike the fact that there is an emotional component to the term "terrorist."  

[Ryzaki]

Silfren wrote...
There's no need for the veiled hostility.  I already pointed out that I'm well aware that my belief that it was not murder is simply my viewpoint, based on the fact that I believe she deserved to die.  I didn't feel the need to go into a hugely elaborate post expressing each and every nuance of both my opinion and my understanding of legal definitions of murder.  This is also why I may respond to other people's assertions that she was unfairly murdered by saying that I feel differently, feel that her killing was entirely justified and therefore not murder, but you don't see me going "OMGWTFBBQ HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT OMG?!"

The fact remains that there IS an emotional component to the term, not wholly unlike the fact that there is an emotional component to the term "terrorist."  

And Anders is a murderer and a terrorist. Liking what he did doesn't change those facts. 

And again you're not proving your case by saying "well I don't want to get into it but its subjective." when it's not. 

Emotional term or not it's still true. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 06 mai 2011 - 09:26 .

[Silfren]

LobselVith8 wrote...

It's something I inferred from how Leliana acts about the mages in "Faith" despite what she tells Wynne when they discuss mages in Ferelden, and how the item she has in Origins is called "Seeker's Circle." It's merely my opinion for where the writers are going with the character.

Seeker's Circle?  Crap, I'd forgotten all about that.  Yes, it does give one pause to wonder.

[Sylvianus]

Anders used the Chantry and murder of Eltina for political purposes.
Anders has targeted civilians and terrorized an entire city.
Anders has used people as objects for his cause.
Anders also has this kind of simplification as terrorists: there is no compromise, you're with us or against us.
Anders wanted to send a strong signal by spreading fear.
Anders wanted to cause emotional distress to crossing the world, launched a crusade, to prevent the dialog, and force his brother to engage in combat against their will for some.

Like bin Laden. This is terrorism.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 06 mai 2011 - 09:36 .

[Ryzaki]

Sylvianus wrote...

Anders used the Chanterie and murder of Eltin for political purposes.
Anders has targeted civilians and terrorized an entire city.
Anders has used people as objects for his cause.
Anders also has this kind of simplification as terrorists: there is no compromise, you're with us or against us.
Anders wanted to send a strong signal by spreading fear.
Anders wanted to cause emotional distress to crossing the world, launched a crusade to prevent the dialog, and force his brother to engage in combat against their will for some.

Like bin Laden;


This is terrorism

It is. People are denying he's a terrorist? 

[Silfren]

Ryzaki wrote...

And Anders is a murderer and a terrorist. Liking what he did doesn't change those facts. 

And again you're not proving your case by saying "well I don't want to get into it but its subjective." when it's not. 

Emotional term or not it's still true. 

Like I said, it isn't quite so cut-and-dried straightforward as you think.  You are correct insofar as murder is a legal definition and I'm certain Chantry law would call Elthina's death murder.  I gathered from your original post, however, that you call it murder on the basis that you personally think her killing was not justified. 

-Interjection.  Perhaps it's more accurate to say that murder has a legal definition as well as a more colloquial one.  I'm not nearly as knowledgeable on this subject as I would actually like to be.  But before you try to use this to tell me I don't know what I'm talking about, it remains a fact that there is a legal basis behind whether a killing is classed as murder, and that depends on the laws of the state you're in.  (not state as in U.S. state, just so we're clear).-

What are we discussing?  Our opinion on what the law will say about Elthina's death?  Or whether we, the players, consider her death to be justified homicide or murder?

If her killing was justified, it was not murder.  That is the position I take.  There are quite a few real-life situations I've seen that I would say were not murder because I hold that murder implies that the killing was undeserved.  I'm well aware that the law does not always agree with me, and "he needed killing" is no longer a valid legal defense in most areas.   That doesn't mean I like that, and there are plenty of cases where I've advocated for changing the legal definition, or adding to it or whatever, for certain situations where I believe the legal understanding leads to unjust punishment or lack thereof.

Modifié par Silfren, 06 mai 2011 - 09:44 .

[Silfren]

Ryzaki wrote...

It is. People are denying he's a terrorist? 

Some of us say he's a freedom fighter.

*slams the lid back down on the can of worms she just opened*

[Ryzaki]

Silfren wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

It is. People are denying he's a terrorist? 

Some of us say he's a freedom fighter.

*slams the lid back down on the can of worms she just opened*

He's a terrorist. He may be a FF to you as well but he still counts as a terrorist. 

[LobselVith8]

Silfren wrote...

What are we discussing?  Our opinion on what the law will say about Elthina's death?  Or whether we, the players, consider her death to be justified homicide or murder?

There's also the issue that if Grand Cleric Elthina's death ultimately means the liberation of the mages across Thedas from the Chantry and the Order of Templars, it might historically be favored as the first steps in the emancipation of the Circles of Magi. It's not like Andraste wrote the Imperium a strongly worded letter when she wanted to free her people, after all.

[Ryzaki]

Silfren wrote...
Like I said, it isn't quite so cut-and-dried straightforward as you think.  You are correct insofar as murder is a legal definition and I'm certain Chantry law would call Elthina's death murder.  I gathered from your original post, however, that you call it murder on the basis that you personally think her killing was not justified. 

No. I call it murder because that's the law. 

-Interjection.  Perhaps it's more accurate to say that murder has a legal definition as well as a more colloquial one.  I'm not nearly as knowledgeable on this subject as I would actually like to be.  But before you try to use this to tell me I don't know what I'm talking about, it remains a fact that there is a legal basis behind whether a killing is classed as murder, and that depends on the laws of the state you're in.  (not state as in U.S. state, just so we're clear).-

What are we discussing?  Our opinion on what the law will say about Elthina's death?  Or whether we, the players, consider her death to be justified homicide or murder?

If her killing was justified, it was not murder.  That is the position I take.  There are quite a few real-life situations I've seen that I would say were not murder because I hold that murder implies that the killing was undeserved.  I'm well aware that the law does not always agree with me, and "he needed killing" is no longer a valid legal defense in most areas.   That doesn't mean I like that, and there are plenty of cases where I've advocated for changing the legal definition, or adding to it or whatever, for certain situations where I believe the legal understanding leads to injust punishment or lack thereof.

No. The fact that no matter how you think it's justified it does still count as murder in the eyes of the law. It's that simple. It's like me not liking the name "blue" so everything's blue I call "pink". It's not. It'll alway be blue no matter how much I say it's not. 

You're making a judgement call on this not me. I'm not saying Murder is inherently good or evil. It just is. And that's exactly what Anders did. He assassinated the Grand Cleric in a terrorist attack. Those are facts. 

It may be for the greater good but that's what he did. 

Just like those who fulfill the RoA may end up murdering innocent mages. That's just the way it is. For good or ill. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 06 mai 2011 - 09:48 .

[LobselVith8]

Ryzaki wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Some of us say he's a freedom fighter.

*slams the lid back down on the can of worms she just opened*

He's a terrorist. He may be a FF to you as well but he still counts as a terrorist.

I'm certain the Chantry and the templars would view him as such, and I can imagine more than a few mages would see him as a freedom fighter. Just like many people see the Right of Annulment as an act of genocide.

[Sylvianus]

Ryzaki wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

It is. People are denying he's a terrorist? 

Some of us say he's a freedom fighter.

*slams the lid back down on the can of worms she just opened*

He's a terrorist. He may be a FF to you as well but he still counts as a terrorist. 

Agreed.

[Ryzaki]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Some of us say he's a freedom fighter.

*slams the lid back down on the can of worms she just opened*

He's a terrorist. He may be a FF to you as well but he still counts as a terrorist.

I'm certain the Chantry and the templars would view him as such, and I can imagine more than a few mages would see him as a freedom fighter. Just like many people see the Right of Annulment as an act of genocide.

And I can imagine more than a few mages will see him as a terrorist as well. 

The Chantry blowing up was an act of terrorism. He's a terrroist. It doesn't matter how noble his goals were .

Osama Bin Laden may have had noble goals to his followers. That didn't make him any less of a terrorist. 

[Silfren]

Ryzaki wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

It is. People are denying he's a terrorist? 

Some of us say he's a freedom fighter.

*slams the lid back down on the can of worms she just opened*

He's a terrorist. He may be a FF to you as well but he still counts as a terrorist. 

According to whom?  You?  You are not the final authority.  

I could just as easily say he may be a terrorist to you, but he still counts as a freedom fighter.  There's an argument to be had that he qualifies as both, because the terms are not necessarily mutually exclusive.  But it is also a fact that "terrorism", far more than "murder", is an emotionally-laden term that depends a great, great deal on a person's perspective.  That is the reason why many people throughout history whose actions more or less fall under most standard definitions of terrorism...are very pointedly never once referred to as terrorists, especially not by the people who are the cultural inheritors of the history those people created.  Ahem.

I hold that Anders' actions were necessary to topple an oppressive institution that has historically done far more harm than good, and quite beyond the question of mages.  So as far as I'm concerned, he's not a terrorist, but a liberating hero.  Of course, I'm capable of understanding that my opinion is not the end of the discussion, and that it's more complicated than my assessment.  That's just the side I happen to agree with. 

I also think that John Brown, to reference someone I've brought up several times on threads such as this, was not a terrorist either.  But my perspective of Brown doesn't change that that's not how he was seen by the people whose institution he was trying to abolish, nor by the state that executed him for treason.  And technically his actions do fall under the definition of terrorism.  But one man's terrorist is another man's revolutionary, and terrorism is a highly loaded term for that reason.

Modifié par Silfren, 06 mai 2011 - 10:07 .