84 réponses à ce sujet

[MorningBird]

Torax wrote...
Keep in mind only how Anders considered it slavery.

Anders wasn't/isn't the only one who considers it slavery.

Torax wrote...
The chantry was keeping them in a circle to also protect them. Young mages killed because the crops didn't flourish as well as the year before. Things of that nature. Hunting down the local magic users to blame for about everything. They are feared by majority of people on thedas. Just to bring some sort of conflict you run into select few who find it wrong and evil.

That's what they're supposed to do.  It's not what they did in Act 3.

Anders was the one who blew up the chantry.  An apostate mage. The circle of magi had absolutely zero involvement in his scheme.  They should not have been held accountable for the property damage or lives lost by the chantry or templars.  Anders admitted his crimes, and could have been dealt with swiftly right then and there.

In a situation like this, it's the templars' duty to protect the circle mages from those who would use Anders' actions as justification to eliminate the circle (which, once again, wasn't involved.)

However, Meredith is completely willing to Annul the entire circle for the crimes of an apostate.  Why?

Well, this is what she says: "It doesn't matter.  Even if I wished to I could not stay my hand.  The people will demand blood."

The Knight-Commander of the templars gave in to the MOB.  The very same mob that she and her templars are supposed to protect circle mages from.  Heck, she USED the mob as justification for invoking the Right of Annulment.

That being said, do the circles really provide a safe/healthy environment for mages?  In DA:O, Cullen admits that some templars 'gleefully' anticipate cutting down mages for failing their Harrowings, and this is in Ferelden, which seems to have one of the better run circles in Thedas.  Some templars are just as prejudice towards mages as the people they're supposed to be protecting them against.

The circle in Orlais was so terrible, that Fiona (The Calling) BEGGED Commander Genevieve (also The Calling) to recruit her into the Grey Wardens.

Then there's the circle in Kirkwall.  Abuse?  Rape?  And don't even get me started on Alrik.  Anders really put it best.  The Gallow's courtyard was swelling with Tranquil, more and more appearing with each passing day.  Good men and women who had passed their Harrowing.  Did the templars launch an investigation to root out this injustice?  No, they just turned a blind eye to it.

You know, I'm actually pro circles.  I think they do a lot of good in teaching mages how to control their powers, and I even support the Harrowings.  I even agree that mages probably shouldn't be monitored by a 'panel of their peers.'  The ideal scenario (for me) would be (as Thrask suggests) a system where templars and mages work together.

However, I also see things this way.  The system, as it is, is flawed.  The Chantry has had YEARS to fix it.  Heck, they've been asked--begged--to fix it by people who wanted to prevent the situation from worsening into an all out war.  There are peaceful mage fraternities that convene to discuss mage rights, treatment, and freedoms, but the Divine simply endures them.

Basically, I believe that if the chantry wanted to reform the system, they would have done so by now.  They haven't, and I don't think they ever intended to.

Torax wrote...
Jowan didn't want to be Tranquil. Turns out they were doing it because it was believed he was a blood mage and they were right. Most of the Magi seem happy with the circle and their life there. Ulrich was an extremist who took what he thought was his chance for taking back his home circle tower while there was no king. Granted he ended up being taken over by a pride demon. But he was an extremist who killed most of the Magi in his way that fought against him.

Ignoring what you said about Jowan (not because I disagree with you, I just don't have much of an opinion on what happened one way or the other) Uldred was hardly alone in wanting 'freedom.' There were many circle mages who sided with him.  You fight them on your way to the top of the tower.  You even have the option of sparing one of them by allowing them to escape (if they can slip past the templars.)

Heck, Niall even confirms that Ulred (while the leader) had supporters and wasn't acting alone.

Niall: "It might have been a signal.  That was when a whole group of mages poured into the chamber."

That being said, Uldred didn't just return to the circle from Ostagar and commence a hostile takeover.  Loghain promised the circle that if they threw their support behind him, he would use his political power to grant them  independence.  And you know what?  The circle was going to side with him for this.

Niall: "At Uldred's suggestion, the circle was about to ally itself with Loghain."

This indicates that the mages weren't happy with the chantry's control over their lives and that they did want liberation from them.

It wasn't until Wynne returned from Ostagar--with news of Loghain's betrayal--that the circle changed their mind.

Torax wrote...
In Dragon Age 2 you have a lot more conflict and it's crammed on us constantly about how abused they are so on. Anders didn't leave the circle previously out of slavery. He seemed more like he just wanted freedom. What slavery is there to be honest. You either perform the harrowing and live, become a Tranquil or death. But honestly I think besides Meredith's controlled circle, I think many circles wouldn't mind keeping an apprentice through to their elder ages as an apprentice as long as they weren't a risk to those around them.

How about being torn away from your family at the first sign of magic, with the templars instructing your parents  to simply forget you exist before dragging you away to the circle?  This is hardly a situation restricted to Anders.  The mage girl who gets cornered and threatened by Alrik was a circle escapee who just wanted to visit her parents.  Why?  Because the templars took her away without telling her family where she went or what had become of her.

How about not being able to raise your own family?  After all, the children of mages become the 'property' of the chantry.  Yes, that's right, the chantry considers human life property.

How about not being able to fall in love with someone outside of the circle?  Or needing special permission to get married?

How about having other people dictate when you can leave, where you can go, and when you have to be back?

Then there's the abuse, rape, and (as previously mentioned) the templars who display every prejudice against mages that they claim to be protecting them from.

Torax wrote...
Tranquility is basically a mercy and even then I highly doubt that is fully slavery. Truth be told in DA2 the Tranquil come across far more animated in DA2 compared to origins.

While I'm completely for 'better' circles and the practice of Harrowings, I am completely AGAINST tranquility.  The templars offer it as an alternative to death.  However, it's the equivalent of being made a zombie.

Look at Karl.  He was perfectly content with his life as a Tranquil.  That is, until Anders briefly restored his connection to the Fade.  then he tells you what being made Tranquil is really like.  All the joys of living are stolen from you when you are made tranquil.

It is not a mercy.

Modifié par MorningBird, 26 mars 2011 - 04:22 .

[DeaHamlet]

@MorningBird... wow, well written, listing everything. All the things I've noticed and thought of about the mage situation.

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

I was. I started a relationship with him thinking it was going to be like a comedy road tour across the Free Marches.

Instead it was a neverending femagist meeting across the same square block of Kirkwall.

[Maria Caliban]

I dislike Anders. I shivved him in the first game and kicked him out of the party in my second, even though that meant no healer and no Supplier achievement.

The idea that you should be able to change him with the power of love (meaning, a few flirt options, sex, and an extra conversation at the end) is nonsensical. He has a spirit of Justice in his head. Anders might love you but the spirit don't.

Merrill managed to give up her Keeper, clan, and everything she knew for the mirror. I think she can give up Hawke.

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I dislike Anders. I shivved him in the first game and kicked him out of the party in my second, even though that meant no healer and no Supplier achievement.

The idea that you should be able to change him with the power of love (meaning, a few flirt options, sex, and an extra conversation at the end) is nonsensical. He has a spirit of Justice in his head. Anders might love you but the spirit don't.

Merrill managed to give up her Keeper, clan, and everything she knew for the mirror. I think she can give up Hawke.

Apparently the power of tough love is the only way to truely help him. By being friendly with him it's like you're enabling a drug addict. Rival him and he begins to reject Justice.

Also it's fun seeing Justice getting miffed.

[Camenae]

My question is is he capable of controlling Justice? And if so can he do it, as long as he consciously tries hard enough? I ask because sometimes he says he can't tell which is which, which makes me think he can't control Justice. And sometimes, like the hidden scene where Anders sides with you with the Templars, when he says that he can feel Justice struggling like mad inside him, which makes me think he CAN override Justice when he really wants to.

So, is it like, Anders has control over Justice, it just takes a lot of effort and sometimes his grip slips. Or is it like, Justice is pretty much in control and just plays cat-and-mouse with Anders letting him (Anders) think he has control?

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

It seems if you're comforting to him he struggles less with Justice's ideals. When he starts fighting Justice that's when Justice pushes back or when they're viewing something that angers Anders that vengeance takes over and allows Justice to use Anders more readily. It's kinda like the Hulk except Anders doesn't rip through his clothes every time.

Pity...

[DeaHamlet]

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

I dislike Anders. I shivved him in the first game and kicked him out of the party in my second, even though that meant no healer and no Supplier achievement.

The idea that you should be able to change him with the power of love (meaning, a few flirt options, sex, and an extra conversation at the end) is nonsensical. He has a spirit of Justice in his head. Anders might love you but the spirit don't.

Merrill managed to give up her Keeper, clan, and everything she knew for the mirror. I think she can give up Hawke.

Apparently the power of tough love is the only way to truely help him. By being friendly with him it's like you're enabling a drug addict. Rival him and he begins to reject Justice.

Also it's fun seeing Justice getting miffed.

Those are some strong words and I completely disagree with you on the "drug addict" parallel. Completely. 

[MorningBird]

Camenae wrote...

My question is is he capable of controlling Justice? And if so can he do it, as long as he consciously tries hard enough? I ask because sometimes he says he can't tell which is which, which makes me think he can't control Justice. And sometimes, like the hidden scene where Anders sides with you with the Templars, when he says that he can feel Justice struggling like mad inside him, which makes me think he CAN override Justice when he really wants to.

So, is it like, Anders has control over Justice, it just takes a lot of effort and sometimes his grip slips. Or is it like, Justice is pretty much in control and just plays cat-and-mouse with Anders letting him (Anders) think he has control?

lol, well this is how I look at it.

Think of Anders as a man on a diet.  Justice is the diet. >.>  At times, Anders agrees with his diet.  He thinks he needs a healthier lifestyle, and the diet is keeping him on track.

Hawke can either encourage Anders to stay on his diet, or take on the role of the EVIL PIECE OF CHOCOLATE that whispers sweet nothings into his ear about how TERRIBLE the diet is for him.

Sometimes Anders agrees, and sometimes that nasty diet speaks out in opposition.

"No.  YOU MUST REMAIN ON TRACK.  STOP TELLING ME TO SUCCUMB TO CHOCOLATE."

Yeah, I don't know. xD

[DeaHamlet]

*passes out laughing* MorningBird, the chocolate thing... HAHAHAHAHA.

[MorningBird]

DeaHamlet wrote...

*passes out laughing* MorningBird, the chocolate thing... HAHAHAHAHA.

*bows*

Unfortunately, it's the only analogy I have to make sense of the whole Anders/Justice thing. xD

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

DeaHamlet wrote...

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

I dislike Anders. I shivved him in the first game and kicked him out of the party in my second, even though that meant no healer and no Supplier achievement.

The idea that you should be able to change him with the power of love (meaning, a few flirt options, sex, and an extra conversation at the end) is nonsensical. He has a spirit of Justice in his head. Anders might love you but the spirit don't.

Merrill managed to give up her Keeper, clan, and everything she knew for the mirror. I think she can give up Hawke.

Apparently the power of tough love is the only way to truely help him. By being friendly with him it's like you're enabling a drug addict. Rival him and he begins to reject Justice.

Also it's fun seeing Justice getting miffed.

Those are some strong words and I completely disagree with you on the "drug addict" parallel. Completely. 

Well that's the way the chracter writter described it. You're enabling a self-destructive path. There's no happy ending for him but the ignorance one is by far the worst.

[DeaHamlet]

MorningBird wrote...

DeaHamlet wrote...

*passes out laughing* MorningBird, the chocolate thing... HAHAHAHAHA.

*bows*

Unfortunately, it's the only analogy I have to make sense of the whole Anders/Justice thing. xD

It has beauty and hilarity.  How can it go wrong?  
I mean... who minds being compared to chocolate... uhmmmm chocolate. Hawke oughta be flattered.

[DeaHamlet]

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

DeaHamlet wrote...

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

I dislike Anders. I shivved him in the first game and kicked him out of the party in my second, even though that meant no healer and no Supplier achievement.

The idea that you should be able to change him with the power of love (meaning, a few flirt options, sex, and an extra conversation at the end) is nonsensical. He has a spirit of Justice in his head. Anders might love you but the spirit don't.

Merrill managed to give up her Keeper, clan, and everything she knew for the mirror. I think she can give up Hawke.

Apparently the power of tough love is the only way to truely help him. By being friendly with him it's like you're enabling a drug addict. Rival him and he begins to reject Justice.

Also it's fun seeing Justice getting miffed.

Those are some strong words and I completely disagree with you on the "drug addict" parallel. Completely. 

Well that's the way the chracter writter described it. You're enabling a self-destructive path. There's no happy ending for him but the ignorance one is by far the worst.

That's YOUR interpretation of what she described.  It's not what she said in the least.

[Sabariel]

LobselVith8 wrote...

PurebredCorn wrote...

I have a difficult... *very* difficult, time getting past what he does in the end. I too am biased against him and still can't even think about having him in my party. I can't even look at him in game without the overwhelming urge to want to smash him in the face. I really wish I could "forget" about his actions, because I think he's an absolutely brilliant character.

He wanted to see his people free and put an end to their subjugation. Considering that it worked - since the Circles broke free from Chantry and templar control - I'm not certain what the alternative would have been, besides another thousand years of slavery.

The alternative would have been idol-crazed Meredith changing her mind about the Tranquil Solution and that would've been the catalyst instead of Anders' "boom".

As for Anders, he's fine with me. I just wish he'd emptied the Chantry out first. Dingus

[bztang]

 @ MorningBird: I agree that many Templars have indeed abused their power while the Chantry stood still. However, granting the mages freedom or self-governance may not be the best solution, especially when DA history has clearly shown what mages without limitations can do: the Tevinter Imperium and the origins of the Blight/Darkspawn. Of course, that was long ago, but it just shows what can happen when mages are left without any supervision. 

Moreover, giving mages their freedom does not solve the problem that a few of them will inevitably use blood magic and/or demons, either out of curiosity or out of desperation, as seen time and again in both DA:O and DA2. Mages need supervision and protection, whether under Chantry rule or not. Without it, be it years or centuries, cataclysmic incidents have a chance to occur, causing irreparable damages to many.

An analogy to this is if there was no non-proliferation treaty and any country was able to build/purchase nuclear weapons without any restrictions; a single incident, whether accident or from provocation could cause worldwide devastation. The only solutions are elimination or strict control.

Hopefully, as a result of the Kirkwall Chantry's destruction and the Circle+Templar rebellions at the end of DA2, a co-operative organization will be formed between these two groups, independent of the Chantry, where a clear set of rules and laws can be forged in order to promote safety and prevent abuse and corruption, all the while catering to the human aspect of mages (i.e. make sure they see family, etc), not just dealing with their powers.

I also believe that reform of the Circle by the Chantry would have been the best way to resolve the mage issue, albeit at a very slow pace. Unfortunately, the Chantry was deemed too inactive in this matter and this ultimately led to Anders' act of destruction, which was terrible but it forced change. 

My opinion of Anders: I liked Anders as a character and understood his plight which is why I fought for the mages in my 1st playthrough, but due to bias against blood mages and at the mages' reccuring use of demons, I chose to side with the Templars in my 2nd and 3rd.

Modifié par bztang, 26 mars 2011 - 06:42 .

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

DeaHamlet wrote...

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

DeaHamlet wrote...

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

I dislike Anders. I shivved him in the first game and kicked him out of the party in my second, even though that meant no healer and no Supplier achievement.

The idea that you should be able to change him with the power of love (meaning, a few flirt options, sex, and an extra conversation at the end) is nonsensical. He has a spirit of Justice in his head. Anders might love you but the spirit don't.

Merrill managed to give up her Keeper, clan, and everything she knew for the mirror. I think she can give up Hawke.

Apparently the power of tough love is the only way to truely help him. By being friendly with him it's like you're enabling a drug addict. Rival him and he begins to reject Justice.

Also it's fun seeing Justice getting miffed.

Those are some strong words and I completely disagree with you on the "drug addict" parallel. Completely. 

Well that's the way the chracter writter described it. You're enabling a self-destructive path. There's no happy ending for him but the ignorance one is by far the worst.

That's YOUR interpretation of what she described.  It's not what she said in the least.

Not interpreted at all. Wanna fight about it?

[Sabariel]

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

DeaHamlet wrote...

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

DeaHamlet wrote...

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

I dislike Anders. I shivved him in the first game and kicked him out of the party in my second, even though that meant no healer and no Supplier achievement.

The idea that you should be able to change him with the power of love (meaning, a few flirt options, sex, and an extra conversation at the end) is nonsensical. He has a spirit of Justice in his head. Anders might love you but the spirit don't.

Merrill managed to give up her Keeper, clan, and everything she knew for the mirror. I think she can give up Hawke.

Apparently the power of tough love is the only way to truely help him. By being friendly with him it's like you're enabling a drug addict. Rival him and he begins to reject Justice.

Also it's fun seeing Justice getting miffed.

Those are some strong words and I completely disagree with you on the "drug addict" parallel. Completely. 

Well that's the way the chracter writter described it. You're enabling a self-destructive path. There's no happy ending for him but the ignorance one is by far the worst.

That's YOUR interpretation of what she described.  It's not what she said in the least.

Not interpreted at all. Wanna fight about it?

Now, now ladies... or gentlemen... or lady and gentleman. No need to fight

[DeaHamlet]

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

DeaHamlet wrote...

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

DeaHamlet wrote...

MelfinaofOutlawStar wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

I dislike Anders. I shivved him in the first game and kicked him out of the party in my second, even though that meant no healer and no Supplier achievement.

The idea that you should be able to change him with the power of love (meaning, a few flirt options, sex, and an extra conversation at the end) is nonsensical. He has a spirit of Justice in his head. Anders might love you but the spirit don't.

Merrill managed to give up her Keeper, clan, and everything she knew for the mirror. I think she can give up Hawke.

Apparently the power of tough love is the only way to truely help him. By being friendly with him it's like you're enabling a drug addict. Rival him and he begins to reject Justice.

Also it's fun seeing Justice getting miffed.

Those are some strong words and I completely disagree with you on the "drug addict" parallel. Completely. 

Well that's the way the chracter writter described it. You're enabling a self-destructive path. There's no happy ending for him but the ignorance one is by far the worst.

That's YOUR interpretation of what she described.  It's not what she said in the least.

Not interpreted at all. Wanna fight about it?

What would be the point? I said I disagree, I said that I don't see it that way, you are unlikely to change your tune and I'm unlikely to agree with your perspective.  It's fine enough to leave it at that.  

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

Well that is no fun at all.

[Amondra]

Adynata wrote...

I have to agree with some of what I've read here. I'm bothered most by the fact that you can't stop Anders (or Merrill for that matter) from going forward with their respecitvely stupid plans even if you are in a relationship with them. It sort of devalues the prupose of develop LI's in the game. I'm not upset he blew up a chantry or that Merrill made me kill the whole Dalish clan, what bothers me is that neither event seemed to make sense for the character causing it. I want to blame Justice for the change in Anders, but that seems silly, since I don't remember Justice being all that angry (mostly confused and kind of naive). I guess we are to accept that he changed once inside Anders, but I never got the impression in Awakening that Anders was filled with rage and vengeance. Afterall, he didn't say that he took Justice in so that he could be more powerful to stop the templars, but to "help a friend".

I love you forever! That said.  That was feelings mostly on the whole thing, I didn't like that made most our choices(I mean all of them) not mean a damn thing in the end.  I was like "Really Anders...really really?"
It seemed so out of character, even with Justice/Vegeance in there.  Why? Because despite that Anders was a good person hell in both games he was like healer-o-matic and you meet him running a free clinic?  I just feel like if he really was going to do that he would have done some distraction to get everyone out(minus the Grand Cleric, I really think next to Merideth he wanted her dead, because she refused to do anything...lazy bad word here) and I really thought he was willed enough to do so.  however, if the argument was a surpise he might have had a chance to have it all go off like he wanted.  But this is more then likely me reading into it to much(I do that)

As for the was what he did right or wrong, in the game world of Dragon Age, yes.  Why? Because it was a show that mages no longer have to be taken away from their homes and locked up, that they are humans and elves...mortal and know love and hate like any other (I am such a damn romantic I know!)  and when you keep a person down for so long, when they finally lash out it is normally violent.  I guess what I mean it is a game where people find true love, redeem themselves and it isn't lip service, and heroes are real; that when to finally stand for what you believe in, it becomes a rallying cry and people answer with hope and passion that burn brighter then a sun, because thats where games like this want to take us, if we wanted the real world, and real terror we could just watch the news.

But as for doing it in the real world, no I would be like "What ****?!" Why? because in this world people are not held in towers and torn away from familes never to be heard of again.  Now this might be happening less appealing countries, but are we not there fighting so it doesn't happen?

[Camenae]

I too wish that we can stop our companions from doing things that are so drastic.

That being said, I was really surprised to find that I DID have an option to turn Anders into the authorities, only nothing happens as a result. It was after turning in the Best Served Cold quest and I was walking back across the Gallows Courtyard and figured I'd talk to Cullen one more time.

There was a special dialogue option that appeared with the description "Someone has plans to overthrow the Chantry" or something. And Cullen responds: "I don't think I need to ask you which one of your apostate friends you're referring to.". And Anders says something like "what on earth are you doing??"

So yeah, I'm glad I had the chance to warn SOMEONE about Anders, but why did Cullen disregard my warning?? : (

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

By the end of the game I would have preferred to run off with Aveline and Varric on a Mabari steed.

Seriously we were the three sanest people in the Free Marches. All Anders did was ruin it for other mages(namely mage Hawke). Now I have to go off and prove we aren't all ****s.

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

Camenae wrote...

I too wish that we can stop our companions from doing things that are so drastic.

That being said, I was really surprised to find that I DID have an option to turn Anders into the authorities, only nothing happens as a result. It was after turning in the Best Served Cold quest and I was walking back across the Gallows Courtyard and figured I'd talk to Cullen one more time.

There was a special dialogue option that appeared with the description "Someone has plans to overthrow the Chantry" or something. And Cullen responds: "I don't think I need to ask you which one of your apostate friends you're referring to.". And Anders says something like "what on earth are you doing??"

So yeah, I'm glad I had the chance to warn SOMEONE about Anders, but why did Cullen disregard my warning?? : (

Because like everyone else in Kirkwal Cullen is a moron.XD

[MorningBird]

bztang wrote...
 @ MorningBird: I agree that many Templars have indeed abused their power while the Chantry stood still. However, granting the mages freedom or self-governance may not be the best solution, especially when DA history has clearly shown what mages without limitations can do: the Tevinter Imperium and the origins of the Blight/Darkspawn. Of course, that was long ago, but it just shows what can happen when mages are left without any supervision.

And if you read my post, you'll notice that I'm actually pro-circles, and against mage's self-governing themselves.

Not that I think mages + freedom = Tevinter Imperium 2.0, mind you.  I just think it's the best solution to appease both parties.

Also note that the position I actually support is, well, the same position that Templar Thrask took.  Mages and templars should work together instead of being mortal enemies.  Unfortunately, this is probably easier said than done.

bztang wrote...
Moreover, giving mages their freedom does not solve the problem that a few of them will inevitably use blood magic and/or demons, either out of curiosity or out of desperation, as seen time and again in both DA:O and DA2. Mages need supervision and protection, whether under Chantry rule or not. Without it, be it years or centuries, cataclysmic incidents have a chance to occur, causing irreparable damages to many.

I never suggested that it would?  In fact, in my last post I specifically stated that I have no opinion on blood magic (mainly, what drives people to use it, is it inherently evil, re: Jowan.)

bztang wrote...
Hopefully, as a result of the Kirkwall Chantry's destruction and the Circle+Templar rebellions at the end of DA2, a co-operative organization will be formed between these two groups, independent of the Chantry, where a clear set of rules and laws can be forged in order to promote safety and prevent abuse and corruption, all the while catering to the human aspect of mages (i.e. make sure they see family, etc), not just dealing with their powers.

This is actually what I would like to see as well.

bztang wrote...
I also believe that reform of the Circle by the Chantry would have been the best way to resolve the mage issue, albeit at a very slow pace. Unfortunately, the Chantry was deemed too inactive in this matter and this ultimately led to Anders' act of destruction, which was terrible but it forced change.

Agreed.

bztang wrote...
My opinion of Anders: I liked Anders as a character and understood his plight which is why I fought for the mages in my 1st playthrough, but due to bias against blood mages and at the mages' reccuring use of demons, I chose to side with the Templars in my 2nd and 3rd.

My opinion of Anders... is maybe a bit complicated.  As a player, I was at first shocked by what he did.  I too wanted a middle-ground, and was appalled by his extreme actions.  However, the more I thought about it, the more I agreed with him that there was no middle-ground.  I just desperately wanted there to be one.

I believe Elthina was telling the truth when she confessed that she simply did not possess the power people seemed to believe she had.  Could she bring Meredith to heel?  Yes.  Could she change the chantry's circle policies on a wide-spread scale across Thedas?  No.

Basically, the chantry refused to budge on the matter.  They didn't want to compromise because they didn't see a problem with the way things were being run.  Instead, they allowed their templars to continuously use their power over mages to abuse them and--to a degree--their families.

Ultimately, I think what Anders did gave the chantry a much needed wakeup call.

As for the sudden wave of abominations and blood mages... well, there's a reason I have yet to develop an opinion on this.  Some people attribute the high risk of becoming an abomination in Kirkwall to the torn veil.  Anders attributes the surplus in blood mages to the situation of mages growing increasingly more desperate.

Is there any truth to this?  I honestly don't know, but I can't just dismiss it.  That's why I (as a player) will always side with the mages and Anders.

Modifié par MorningBird, 26 mars 2011 - 07:25 .