4350 réponses à ce sujet

[Ryzaki]

Rifneno wrote...
1.  It's been acknowledged by the devs that most people side with the mages.  Meaning Meredith never says that most of the time.
2.  Meredith is not "the law" in Kirkwall.  The fact she had any political power at all was illegal and only allowed to happen because Elthina refuses to enforce Chantry law.

It really is pathetic the lengths some people will go to deny the obvious so they can tell themselves comforting lies.

 It's really pathetic the lengths some poeple will go to deny the obvious just to make themselves feel superior. If you want to ignore all the evidence in game and WoG who am I to stop you? I'm just wasting my time. 

Regardless to the poster who originally asked the question. The RoA is legal. Meredith calling it is legal and by extension Anders' execution is legal only when allowed by Meredith. 

[Master Shiori]

Rifneno wrote...

You know another law many Hawkes break at that scene?  Executing Anders!  Hawke is not legally judge, jury, and executioner.  Hawke isn't even any kind of government official.  It's not self-defense, it's within the city limits of Kirkwall, and he's just sitting on a crate talking when Hawke murderknifes him.

Considering how many people you can execute for their crimes before becoming the Champion, I'd say this is a moot point.

As Champion, Hawke has a duty to defend Kirkwall against both domestic and external threats. Anders blowing up the Chantry and killing one of the city leaders definitely counts as a threat and Hawke is free to respond.
If doing so was wrong, I'd imagine Aveline would have said something.

Besides, being apostate, Anders' punishment fall under Meredith's jurisdiction and she openly tells you to do what you will.

Ideally, I'd would have liked to hand Anders over to the guards and have him stand public trial for his crime. Since the option to do so was never presented, I had to choose between accepting him back and ignoring his actions (unacceptable), letting him walk free (also unacceptable) or killing him. 

Modifié par Master Shiori, 12 mai 2011 - 08:46 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

GavrielKay wrote...
My Hawke thinks Meredith is a psychotic power tripping woman who shouldn't be making decisions involving anything more complicated than lipstick color. 

I wouldn't trust her with fashion choices personally.

[Ryzaki]

GavrielKay wrote...
I'm not convinced, but that's ok.  My Hawke thinks Meredith is a psychotic power tripping woman who shouldn't be making decisions involving anything more complicated than lipstick color.  Legal or illegal in the eyes of whatever passes for law in these circumstances doesn't matter to Hawke.

 

Indeed and that's how many of my Hawkes think. They're more concerned with people's safety and what's right than following the law to the letter. 

[Master Shiori]

Rifneno wrote...

2.  Meredith is not "the law" in Kirkwall.  The fact she had any political power at all was illegal and only allowed to happen because Elthina refuses to enforce Chantry law.

She is the Knight Commander of Kirkwall and, as such, has full authority to deal with any mages who break the Chantry's laws. Therefore, whenever a mage commits an offence it's Meredith and the templars who have the duty to deal with him/her. 

[GavrielKay]

Ryzaki wrote...

Edit: Yes it is. Meredith is the law in Kirkwall.

And here is the root of the disagreement. 

Someone who usurps a throne is not legal just because they have an army to back them up and noone else has managed to unseat them.  She had no rightful claim to the Viscount's seat.  Not trusting anyone else to do the job she wanted does not count.  She's a power hungry zealot turned genuienly crazy person.  She wants you to believe that she's in charge and rightfully so, but I don't believe her.

[Master Shiori]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...
My Hawke thinks Meredith is a psychotic power tripping woman who shouldn't be making decisions involving anything more complicated than lipstick color. 

I wouldn't trust her with fashion choices personally.

I don't know. My Hawke appears to be quite taken with her armor. 

[GavrielKay]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I wouldn't trust her with fashion choices personally.

Heh.  Fair enough

[Rifneno]

Master Shiori wrote...

Considering how many people you can execute for their crimes before becoming the Champion, I'd say this is a moot point.

Oh, I agree on that.  I was just responding to the "but it's illegal!  the letter of the law is the most important thing when we're talking about thousands of lives!" nonsense.

Ideally, I'd would have liked to hand Anders over to the guards and have him stand public trial for his crime. Since the option to do so was never presented, I had to choose between accepting him back and ignoring his actions (unacceptable), letting him walk free (also unacceptable) or killing him.

Ideally, I'd liked to have told him he won't need to wait for the templars to be wiped out before he gets a happy ending for what he just did.

Then again, if I had a choice it'd have never come to what it did.  Meredith would've been "a casuality in the qunari uprising."

[Ryzaki]

GavrielKay wrote...
And here is the root of the disagreement.  

Someone who usurps a throne is not legal just because they have an army to back them up and noone else has managed to unseat them.  She had no rightful claim to the Viscount's seat.  Not trusting anyone else to do the job she wanted does not count.  She's a power hungry zealot turned genuienly crazy person.  She wants you to believe that she's in charge and rightfully so, but I don't believe her.

 

She wasn't in the Vicount's seat though. She just kept anyone else from getting it. Small distinction but an important one. She's the KC and in the absence of a Vicount she holds all the strings. She always did. Even when the old vicount ruled. It's not strictly legal but when it come to apostates and the Circle (like Anders) she is defintely the final law (once the Grand Cleric is murdered). So yes her telling Hawke to do whatever they wanted with Anders is legal. Her annulling the circle is also legal. Someone finding it distasteful doesn't make it any less legal. Plenty of legal crap is distasteful. Hell there's laws against people have sex in certain positions! Doesn't make the law right. Just means its a law. 

And she was in charge. The only one who really stood any chance against her was the Grand Cleric. And we all know what happened to her. If you tried to stand against her you'd be blocked. I don't know about you but if someone breaks in my house and has a machine gun they're in charge. I can't do anything to stop them. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 12 mai 2011 - 08:52 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Master Shiori wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...
My Hawke thinks Meredith is a psychotic power tripping woman who shouldn't be making decisions involving anything more complicated than lipstick color. 

I wouldn't trust her with fashion choices personally.

I don't know. My Hawke appears to be quite taken with her armor. 

I thought it was dull when compared to average Templar armor.

[Dave of Canada]

 Meredith was unofficially in charge of Kirkwall even before the Viscount was slain by the Arishok, almost everybody in Kirkwall keeps talking about how useless the Viscount is. Templar have always had ties to the politics and safety of Kirkwall.

In Act 3, it just becomes obvious because with the Viscount dead and no heir she becomes officially in charge only kept only in check by Elthina who wants to keep the peace. This is also probably what happened when the previous Viscount was removed from power by the templar, she just didn't have the idol.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 12 mai 2011 - 08:53 .

[Rifneno]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I thought it was dull when compared to average Templar armor.

All templar armor is stupid when you think about it.  Why do they sword and board?  How does a shield help you against a mage?  On that note, why don't any of them use a bow?  One of mages' biggest advantages is the ability to attack a range.  Not only does a templar have to get into melee range, they have to do it while wearing a suit of platemail.  You know how much platemail weighs?  No wonder they keep mages in little cells.  If their leg muscles aren't atrophied then a mage could speedwalk faster than a templar could sprint.  *sigh*  Another dump truck of stupid, sign here please.

[GavrielKay]

Ryzaki wrote...

She wasn't in the Vicount's seat though. She just kept anyone else from getting it. Small distinction but an important one. She's the KC and in the absence of a Vicount she holds all the strings. She always did. Even when the old vicount ruled. It's not strictly legal but when it come to apostates and the Circle (like Anders) she is defintely the final law (once the Grand Cleric is murdered). So yes her telling Hawke to do whatever they wanted with Anders is legally. Her annulling the circle is also legal. 

And she was in charge. The only one who really stood any chance against her was the Grand Cleric. And we all know what happened to her. If you tried to stand against her you'd be blocked. I don't know about you but if someone breaks in my house and has a machine gun they're in charge. I can't do anything to stop them. 

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...  if she does the job and prevents anyone else from rightfully taking it, it is different only in semantics from holding the seat herself.  And that doesn't make it legal or any action she takes stemming from the original illegal action legal either.

As far as the Right, if WoG is that she has that authority in the absence a Grand Cleric etc then ok, I think it's a terrible law, but there are lots of those.  Hawke doesn't have to respect her authority however, given it's quite arguable that she's a raving lunatic who only holds authority because Elthina was too incompetent to take her toys away.

[Brockololly]

Master Shiori wrote...
Ideally, I'd would have liked to hand Anders over to the guards and have him stand public trial for his crime. Since the option to do so was never presented, I had to choose between accepting him back and ignoring his actions (unacceptable), letting him walk free (also unacceptable) or killing him. 

Yeah- the same problem as Origins really in not being able to lock up Loghain at the Landsmeet but being forced to go with the black and white, spare/kill type option.

Ryzaki wrote...
Edit: Yes
it is. Meredith is the law in Kirkwall.

Hehe...I half expected Meredith to pull a Judge Dredd at some point or another. That level of quality would have fit in nicely with Act 3

[Ryzaki]

GavrielKay wrote...
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...  if she does the job and prevents anyone else from rightfully taking it, it is different only in semantics from holding the seat herself.  And that doesn't make it legal or any action she takes stemming from the original illegal action legal either.

Politics and loopholes. And no the RoA was her original job. Her judgement of Anders is also her original job. All of that is legal without her requiring power from the Vicount. 

As for blocking someone from taking the Vicount's seat. I'm pretty sure that wasn't legal (especially not when Hawke tries to make himself Vicount) but sadly Hawke has no way of making her go along with it. In some places you can't make people do squat unless you have enough force to make them do something. Meredith was the same way. Like the dude who busts in my house with a machine gun. I can't stop him so he's in control legal or not. 

As far as the Right, if WoG is that she has that authority in the absence a Grand Cleric etc then ok, I think it's a terrible law, but there are lots of those.  Hawke doesn't have to respect her authority however, given it's quite arguable that she's a raving lunatic who only holds authority because Elthina was too incompetent to take her toys away.

 

Yes she does. And indeed I'm not arguing that all Hawkes have to respect her authority. But some do and like those who don't they're perfectly justified in doing so. It was a horrible thing that she did. But it was legal. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 12 mai 2011 - 09:02 .

[Ryzaki]

Brockololly wrote...
Hehe...I half expected Meredith to pull a Judge Dredd at some point or another. That level of quality would have fit in nicely with Act 3

 

I wanted a Cartman "You will respect my authority!" alas. It never came up. 

[Master Shiori]

Rifneno wrote...

On that note, why don't any of them use a bow?
 

They do. 

My mage Hawke came out of many a templar fight looking like a pin cushion. 

Thank the Maker for rock armor..

[Rifneno]

Master Shiori wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

On that note, why don't any of them use a bow?
 

They do. 

My mage Hawke came out of many a templar fight looking like a pin cushion. 

Thank the Maker for rock armor..

Damn, you're right.  I forgot about those.  Oh well.  

P.S. Take note of how the whole "admitting to being wrong when you are" thing works, Ryzaki.

[Ryzaki]

Oh? So somehow just because someone illegally holds power and influence somehow means that power and influence they do have is invisible? News to me! Also since Meredith is the Knight Commander what to do with rogue apostates who threaten the Chantry is completely part of jurisifdiction. So you're not right either buddy. 
I mean it's not like several NPCs state time and time again that she's the "law" in kirkwall. But obviously that doesn't matter because you don't like it.  

• 
  a a rule enacted or customary in a community and
  recognized as enjoining
  or prohibiting certain actions and enforced by the imposition of penalties.
  b a body of such rules
  (the law of the land; forbidden under Canadian law).
• The controlling influence of laws; a state of respect for laws (law and order).
• Laws collectively as a
  social system or subject of study.
• (with defining word) any of
  the specific branches or applications of law (commercial law; law of contract).
• Binding force or effect (their word is
  law).
• [prec. by the]
  a the legal profession.
  b informal the police.
• The statute and common
  law (opp. equity 2).
• Jurisprudence.
• 
  a the judicial remedy; litigation.
  b the law courts as providing this (go to law).
• A rule of action or procedure, e.g. in a game, social context, form of art, etc.
• A regularity in natural
  occurrences, esp. as formulated or propounded in particular instances
  (the laws of nature;
  the law of gravity; Parkinson's law).
• 
  a the body of divine commandments as expressed
  in the Bible or other sources.
  b (Law of Moses)
  the precepts of the Pentateuch.
  c (the Law) the
  Pentateuch as distinguished from the other
  parts of the Hebrew Bible
  (the Prophets and the Writings) (compare Torah). 
  
  Canadian Oxford Dictionary © Oxford Unversity Press 1998, 2004

Modifié par Ryzaki, 12 mai 2011 - 09:15 .

[IanPolaris]

Well wrote...

Wrong.Leaders have been held to account for the action of their personnel,troops,people or whoever is in their command structure..

Point. Missing it.  Just because you give an illegal order does NOT mean your troops have to obey it.  If they do then BOTH the people that gave the order AND the troops the followed it are liable.  This has been settled since 1946 (Nuremburg).

You are responsible for siding with the mages.  Techinically this is in violation of the law since per DG's WoG, the RoA is legal.  Defending the mages is also the MORALLY right thing to do, legal or not.

Carver can choose to follow an order or he can make the moral choice and disobey a legal order, but that choice is HIS and not YOURS.  The only part you are accountable for is presenting Carver with that choice and that is ALL.

Once Carver has a choice, your moral culpality ends.  You are NOT RESPONSIBLE for siding against Carver.  You are responsible for siding with the mages against the Templars.  It's Carver's choice (not yours) to side with the Templars or not.  You are not responsible or accountable for that choice,.

Period.  To say otherwise would be to espouse a negative responsibility that has been rejected in the entire history of Western Civilization since at least the Ancient Greeks.

-Polaris

[Deztyn]

The Baconer wrote...

Deztyn wrote...
Whether Carver makes the right choice, or the wrong choice, it doesn't change the fact that you also have a choice. And your choice is to side with the mages and fight the people that your baby brother has lived with and trained with for years.

So?

So choosing the mages sucks for Carver, why does it have to be more complicated than that?

[Rifneno]

Deztyn wrote...

The Baconer wrote...

Deztyn wrote...
Whether Carver makes the right choice, or the wrong choice, it doesn't change the fact that you also have a choice. And your choice is to side with the mages and fight the people that your baby brother has lived with and trained with for years.

So?

So choosing the mages sucks for Carver, why does it have to be more complicated than that?

I think he joined the templars as a giant "**** you" to Hawke for not taking him on the expedition (since giving him Malcolm's letters doesn't effect his joining them), I have a hard time caring really.  He joined the templars to inflict some emotional damage, and instead it gets inflicted on him.  Pretty fitting really.

[IanPolaris]

Deztyn wrote...

The Baconer wrote...

Deztyn wrote...
Whether Carver makes the right choice, or the wrong choice, it doesn't change the fact that you also have a choice. And your choice is to side with the mages and fight the people that your baby brother has lived with and trained with for years.

So?

So choosing the mages sucks for Carver, why does it have to be more complicated than that?

Too damn bad.  Carver makes lots of bad choices.  Doesn't make me responsible for them in the slightest....a point that Carver himself (if a Warden) finally grows up enough to admit.

-Polaris

[Deztyn]

Rifneno wrote...

Sorry, I ramble sometimes. My point is, suffering beyond imagination has been caused by this system. What if it continues another 1,000 years? The effect of a major overhaul is short term, but the effect of a minor overhaul is extremely long term.

I don't think anyone denies that it's caused suffering. The main question is how much suffering has it prevented? And is completely destroying the existing system worthwhile if there's no guarantee that something worse isn't going to take it's place?

Heck, in universe there doesn't seem to be a plan by anyone for anything to take the place of the Circles. At the very least since the writers have designed the game around making both choices valid, it's niave to think that the mage side will be proven completely right in the short term.

Getting whipped for stealing is bad. Getting your hand cut off for stealing is worse. Getting executed for stealing is unconscionable. If it's accepted that within the larger society people can be maimed or killed for stealing than a lashing shouldn't be used an example of templar abuse. It's an example of problems within the society as a whole.

Agreed. But that's not exactly what was said. As I understood it, the tranquil was saying that he/she would be whipped because other people stole and the tranquil just didn't catch them.

Eh, semantics, it's still stuff going missing from the shop that can't be accounted for. It's not nice either way.

Even if it's not true it's still fun to think about!

Indeed. Discussing theories is why I came to these forums. Never intended to keep getting drawn into these Chantry morality debates. Ahh well.

I always come into these threads with the intention of sitting back and enjoying the show, but somehow I always wind up posting.

Who cares about the law? The law sucks. If this game was in Tevinter, would you be helping an escaped slave trying to escape to a better nation? Because that'd be a crime too.

That would depend -- does he look and sound like Fenris?

If so, maybe. Maybe not. That wouldn't change the fact that it's still illegal and I'd still be responsible for the crimes committed while doing it.

TJPags wrote...

Really? I saw a lot more abominations and evidence of blood magic in the pre-mage ending than I did "innocent" mages. Who was animating those skeletons I fought? Where did those abominations filling the courtyard come from?

I still can't believe how many people don't understand the logical fallacy with condemning people for things done to aggressors in self-defense. If a man shoots a known serial killer that's charging at him with a butcher knife, do you want him tried for murder?

Well if he was also possessed and could never ever put away his gun, which got stronger for his being possessed I know I wouldn't want him running around free. That's the point the pro-magers continually seem to miss. Whatever the cause, there are abominations and demons running around all over the Circle... and you're helping them escape into the larger population.

Is saving fifty genuinely innocent mages worth it if the result is one Connor or Amelia style abomination escaping with them?