350 réponses à ce sujet

[LobselVith8]

ShrinkingFish wrote...
It was the act of a revolutionary.

I agree. The Grand Cleric was the highest ranking member of the Chantry in Kirkwall, and despite her authority, she did nothing to end the plight of the mages. Knight-Commander Meredith was in charge of the templars, who are the military arm of the Chantry, and defer to the Chantry (such as in getting authorization for the Rite of Annulment from the Grand Cleric). A compromise wouldn't have improved the lives of the mages, but continued the abuse and terror inflicted on them. Anders was willing to pay the ultimate cost for his actions, but had he done nothing, mages would have endured another thousand years of oppression and tyranny. The choice was between slavery and freedom, and Anders thought it was better to die on your feet than live on your knees.

[DarkSpiral]

Ariella wrote...

TcheQ wrote...

Anders is an **** who turned to blood magic for I don't care what reason. And i think he had sex with himself, and is schizophrenic. but enough about that nightmare. Why don't I have the option to kill this ****** I don't know

Beyond the who sexual thing, Anders hates blood magic, and never turns to it in the entire game. Ironically, enough the explosion was purely chemistry not magic at all.

Ariella, there is simply no way that explosion was purely chemical in nature.  What kind of chemical explosion hauls all (all!) of the shrapnel, chunkc of rock and so forth up intot he sky, spins it around in a circle and THEN flings it across the city?  No, there was obviously magic involved in the Chantry's destruction.  Which is not to say that a chemical explosion wasn't the origin point, but magic clearly augmented the end result.

But not blood magic.  Anders detested blood magic, and I imagine that Justice's influence had a lot to do with it.

[DarkSpiral]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Let's assume that Erlina deserved to die for inaction. Pragmatically speaking, what did blowing up the Chantry do?

Before, you had nobles, commoners and even Templars who sympathized with mages. After the destruction of the Chantry, what do you think the average noble, commoner and Templar is going to think?

Destroying the Chantry was an act of idiocy, Instead of trying to rally popular opinion that was in the mage's favor, that act removed the possibility completely. Because like any man consumed by paranoia (as we read in the codex), Anders can only see enemies and can't see potential allies.

Rallying support is a nice idea.  It just wouldn't have done any good.  Try to "rally support" against the Pope in the Catholic Church during the Dark Ages.  Lets pretend the Church did something similar, and suppressed a portion of the population for the common good.

Lets say that the suffering of that suppressed portion ganers sympathy.  The end result is...nothing.  Because even the sympathizers don't have anywhere near as much power as the Pope does, and the Pope is going to work to maintain the status quo on a large scale.  Maybe small reforms.  But never anything truly drastic.

[KnightofPhoenix]

DarkSpiral wrote...
Rallying support is a nice idea.  It just wouldn't have done any good.  Try to "rally support" against the Pope in the Catholic Church during the Dark Ages.  Lets pretend the Church did something similar, and suppressed a portion of the population for the common good.

Lets say that the suffering of that suppressed portion ganers sympathy.  The end result is...nothing.  Because even the sympathizers don't have anywhere near as much power as the Pope does, and the Pope is going to work to maintain the status quo on a large scale.  Maybe small reforms.  But never anything truly drastic.

Except Meredith is not the pope. Her own Chantry is neutral vis a vis her and her Templars are opposing her more and more. And the nobles and guards of Kirkwall have enough power to do something in Kirkwall at the very least.

Not drastic changes immediately, no and that's fine. "Drastic changes" often end up being disasters when implemented immediately with half arsed thinking and unrealistic expectations. Gradual reform however was possible if all these opposition groups were rallied around good leadership. And the Chantry is axiomatically going to weaken with the rise of nations. Patience and waiting for the oppourtune moment is a sign of genius.  Something Anders obviously lacks.

Not saying it isn't difficult. A better alternative than a chaotic total war.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 27 mars 2011 - 01:17 .

[DarkSpiral]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

DarkSpiral wrote...
Rallying support is a nice idea.  It just wouldn't have done any good.  Try to "rally support" against the Pope in the Catholic Church during the Dark Ages.  Lets pretend the Church did something similar, and suppressed a portion of the population for the common good.

Lets say that the suffering of that suppressed portion ganers sympathy.  The end result is...nothing.  Because even the sympathizers don't have anywhere near as much power as the Pope does, and the Pope is going to work to maintain the status quo on a large scale.  Maybe small reforms.  But never anything truly drastic.

Except Meredith is not the pope. Her own Chantry is neutral vis a vis her and her Templars are opposing her more and more. And the nobles and guards of Kirkwall have enough power to do something in Kirkwall at the very least.

No, Divine Justina is the Pope.  And her agent (Leliana) makes it very clear what her stance is on the mage's breaking free of the Circle.

I don't even completely disagree. SOME kind of limitaion is necessary in order to ensure mages don't wreak havoc, even purely on accident (like Connor in DA:O).  But removing Meredith would have prolonged the problem, not fixed it.  You seem to be operating under the assumption that the common people and the nobles would have stood side by side with the mages in removing Meredtih, and given the abuses of power she's guilty of, maybe they would have acted against her at the same time, but I highly doubt they would have actually counted the mages as allies.  The general populace is scared of mages, recall?  And, again, that fear isn't completely unjustified.

I just can't see a peaceful solution to the problem.  Both of the power players within the Circle organization (Meredith and Orsino) are extremists that refuse to bend, and the one person in the city that actually has authority over the worst offender (Elthina) is determined to stay neutral.  Anders actions were wrongheaded and short-sighted, but the situation was headed in that direction anyway.

[Statulos]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Tevinter is too busy fighting the Qunari, or a very small portion of the Qunari according to Fenris. I don't think Tevinter would be able to help anyone beyond symbolic help and maybe some financial help.

Shelthering mages is more than enough. Getting supporters on the war against the Qunari is simply great, and supporters that can be used as howitzers.

[PlumPaul93]

Like I said earlier the only justification for him is a knife in the back

[KnightofPhoenix]

DarkSpiral wrote...
No, Divine Justina is the Pope.  And her agent (Leliana) makes it very clear what her stance is on the mage's breaking free of the Circle.

And mages should not want to break free form the Circle now and they don't until Meredith pushes it at the end with the rite of annulment. Only a minority do, the Resolutionists.
Instead, they should strive to reform it.

 You seem to be operating under the assumption that the common people and the nobles would have stood side by side with the mages in removing Meredtih, and given the abuses of power she's guilty of, maybe they would have acted against her at the same time, but I highly doubt they would have actually counted the mages as allies.  The general populace is scared of mages, recall?  And, again, that fear isn't completely unjustified.

Except we know from Cullen's letter to Meredith that many within the populace are actively assiting mages in escaping, which never happened before as the populace always support Templars.  This we also know with people not being welcoming of Templar investigations.

"Enemy of my enemy?" Yes people might fear mages but they hated Meredith. Yes, I can see them allying with mages to fight a common enemy, if under the right leadership. If there is no leadership, then this would be very difficult to pull off. The Champion of Kikwall should have tried to be active but he / she was a lazy idiot for 3 years.

Furthermore, we have Templars assisting mages and rejecting Meredith or being skepitcal of her. If Templars were brought into a coalition, then people have less reason to fear as they know that Templars are going to stay after Meredith is ousted. They would simply change some of their methods.

Add to that either Erlina's blessings or her inaction, and a coalition was very possible. If someone had any sense in the game to actually think properly and act.

I just can't see a peaceful solution to the problem.  Both of the power players within the Circle organization (Meredith and Orsino) are extremists that refuse to bend, and the one person in the city that actually has authority over the worst offender (Elthina) is determined to stay neutral.  Anders actions were wrongheaded and short-sighted, but the situation was headed in that direction anyway.

Except Orsino was a moderate who thought what Anders did was foolish and who at the end also allows Meredith to search the Circle if she would stop her onslaught, so he does bend. Was he compeltely reasonable, especially considering the end? No, but until that last moment of desperation, he was a moderate. He didn't oppose the system, he opposed Meredith. 

And let's assume that the situation was inevitably headed that way (I strongly disagree with the assumption). It does not justify Ander's foolishness.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 27 mars 2011 - 01:38 .

[Deztyn]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Good thread op. Anders can be justifiable.

Not for me, for simple yet crucial reasons:
- On what basis does he think he is qualified to make that choice for all mages, being an abomination with no leadership abilities (he admits it)?

- What are his plans to bring about a new society? Other than blowing stuff up? How does he plan to gain the trust and support of 99% of people who are non-mages? Or are the mages destined to fight and wipe them all out? Are mage children all over Thedas destined to be murdered because he didn't bother to think?

- How does he plan to defend Kirkwall from the inevitable Exalted Marches had the mages won?

- How does he plan to prevent or alleviate the mages from succumbing to possession in the frenzy of revolution? We know that possession becomes a lot easier when mages are under heavy stress and true enough, even when siding with mages we end up fighting demons and abominations.

The general gist: did he think at all?

I am not concerned about ethics, morality and whatever. I prefer to focus on more objective factors, here vis a vis long term planning. If Anders had the qualifications necessary to lead a revolution, already had a big following, had some sort of a plan, both immediate and long term, in mind, then I wouldn't mind that much. I'd still mind because I believe that an alternative was obvious, everyone hated Meredith. What we have in the game however is Anders acting like a complete and utter fool. That is why he is not justified in my eyes.

Do I think he is "evil"? No. Do I understand him? Yes. Do I even sympathise a little? Yes. Is Anders still my 2nd favorite DA2 companion? Yes. But he's a reckless fool.

I think I may love you.

Anders believing he was right does not make it so. Understanding and even sympathizing with his reasons does not make him right. And trying to simplify the situation to "Templars are evil tools of the Chantry, Elthina didn't do anything so she needed to die and now mages will be free for ever and ever!" is incredibly shortsighted.

TobiTobsen wrote...


/sign

Thanks KoP. Exactly my thoughts. Especially the first point.
Nice
one Anders. Because of your libertarian views the four other
fraterneties have to fight too, no matter if they want it or not, or
they will be slaughtered for an idea that they don't even support.
Loyalist? You want to belong to the circle/chantry? Fight or die.
Aequitarian? You're not sure if revolution is the right thing? Fight or die.
Lucrosian? You just want to make some coin? Fight or die.
Isolationist? You just want to be left alone? Fight or die.

And you too! [smilie]../../../../images/forum/emoticons/love.png[/smilie]

This
is what Anders wants and what so many ignore when they go on about Elthina's mistakes. It wasn't about the Chantry and religion being evil,It was about removing any possibility of a middle ground. He says so himself. No compromise. And this is not unique to Act III, it's part of Anders 2.0's character, take an aggressive stance in your first conversation with him in Act II and you get "One day everyone in Kirkwall will have to choose a side."

It's all or nothing. He won't accept anything less than total freedom or destruction for the mages.

And damn what they actually want for themselves.

Modifié par Deztyn, 27 mars 2011 - 02:18 .

[Ingu]

So it seems to be the general consensus that yes, the mage situation is bad and should be fixed, but no, Anders should never have involved 'innocent' lives?

Though that begs the question, how is this situation supposed to be fixed in a way where no innocent blood is shed? You are one mage, tethered to Kirkwall and faced with the likes of Meredith.

And how do we define innocents? By letting things continue aren't we silently condoning the suffering of mages? The suffering of parents who have their children taken away and will never see them again? The suffering of innocent children who are loathed by their parents for being nothing more than just who they're born as? Then we will be just like the Grand Cleric, just like the chantry.

Sure, the rest of us may get on with our lives happily without fuss, but does that make us all innocent? Are we guiltless because we were never involved in the conflict? Or are we not innocent because by not taking action, we're letting the suffering continue?

And the biggest question of all, is it even our responsibility? If not, then who is? The chantry? The templars? The mages themselves for being what they are?

because in the same vein, no one is truly guiltless. He wanted to force the 'blindly obedient' to fight. It wasn't those happy with the regime he was fighting for, they were part of the third party who wanted things to continue. The people he cared about were those he percieved to be supressed, and though it may not be every single mage, or every single templar who's evil, they're not the ones who matter in the end.

For Justice/Anders, everything is black and white, you are or you're not, though it seems to be where he draws the line which has all of us riled. Lady Justice is blind with a sword in one hand and scales in another, it makes sense.

As for his right to speak for all mages, my impression is that others' didn't matter to him in the end,
What of necessity? Was there really a viable alternative which would effectively FORCE a revolution, and not prolong what's already there?

The bottom line is that Anders is operating on an idealogy which is one none of us would have ever developed or have supported by ourselves. He represents the opposite extreme, the mage-equivilant of Meredith, the only thing which differentiated him from the Knight-Commander is that he didn't have the beaurocratic limitations of what he can and can't do at his own discretion.

Modifié par Ingu, 27 mars 2011 - 02:36 .

[cleosilver]

Camenae wrote...

I wish I had the option to give Anders some money. How can my Hawke sit in her big fancy mansion all day with her fancy manservants and never contribute a SINGLE CENT to her boyfriend's clinic! If anything Anders did should be encouraged, it's that. I never loved Anders more than I did during the scene when you first meet him, and he's stumbling back with exhaustion having just healed a peasant boy for free.

My magehawke was a healer and as far as I'm concerned she spent a lot of time in the years between acts helping in the clinic.

[dreadpiratesnugglecakes]

ShrinkingFish wrote...

He doesn't need to be justified. His actions were necessary. Horrible. But necessary.

No, they were not necessary.  They were the work of a madman and a coward.  He wanted to start a war?  the Templars were already crushing the mages; it was already a powder keg.  A barroom brawl with some templars could have set it off; he could have gotten together with some hotheads in the mage council.  The murdering innocents was a barbaric act of a sociopath.  The people he wanted to save were handed a death sentence and a war whether they wanted it or not.  And to think, he actually lectured Merrill on using blood magic.  Nice.  Blood magic bad; blowing up a Sunday school..ok because Templars are mean!
A Warden, a mage, a veteran of a blight that killed thousands of people; a healer would not do that.  Any other number of ways could have been found to start the conflict he wanted; this was another drive by plot to device to create havoc; and it took out the credibility of the writing team as well as a good character. 

And some of you guys are defending this..wow.  Ok, let's do some math.  How many mages were suffering?  Being made tranquil?  How many innocents should die for that practice?  Maybe Anders should have blown up some more stuff.  I mean, could killing a bunch of church goers be enough?  What about a orphanage run by the chantry?  Since some of you seem comfortable justifying a body count, why don't you put a hard number too it?  How many innocent uninvolved people should Anders be allowed to murder because Meredith is a big fat meanie?  I mean, do you  think Meredith will stop hurting mages if you kill 100 people?  A thousand?  What if Meredith is a really bad student?  Or maybe..just maybe, killing people that have nothing to do with the conflict isn't going to change what Meredith is.  I doubt she'll notice.  Maybe, it's just going to give her the justification to do what she wanted to do anyway..oh..and now a bunch of people are dead.  Pity.  At least it wasn't anyone you know, right?  So, why give a cr*p?  You can sit around and justify butchery because it doesn't affect you at all.  The man that Anders should have been would have known this and would have found another way.  But, his character was murdered by a writer looking for something flashy to throw up in the story.  Throw up..yeah...that's appropriate for what was done to Anders, and what was done by someone using his name. 

[Ariella]

Ingu wrote...

0o-Constance-o0 wrote...
I was wondering through the whole game too, Anders still has SOME control over himself so technically he's not a complete abomination, though through the game it seems to be veering towards that fact.

If you can travel to the Fade in DA:O to help Connor (Arl Eammon's son) by destroying the Desire Demon, surely you can go to the Fade and convince Justice to let go of Anders. Anders is still a living host after all so hopefully it won't kill him, and he's pretty much achieved what he wanted to do by inspiring mages to stand up against their opressors. Just how much more does Justice need before Anders is gone completely? Hopefully in the next DA or in some delicious dowloadable content we can see more.

Oooh, that is interesting. But I'm thinking that for Connor the reason it worked was because they were connected for a relatively short time. (A few months at most?) But for Anders it's been ten years at least. D= I don't know what level of... incorporation would have happened in that time...

And as for his self-control... I think towards the end it was a self-preservation tactic to actually follow Justice's demands. If he resisted he might have truly become a full-blown abomination (or whatever the spirit equivilant is)? (Not sure on the technicalities there...). He seemed more like a brain-washed soldier than a true believer... Or maybe it was just his desperation... I really don't know. It's part of what makes his character so interesting!

Thing is, the desire demon was never outside the Fade, which is why you could deal with her. In Awakings, Justice gets stuck in a dead body and can't get back to the Fade period, that's the difference.

[3SG Sage]

How can one not link blowing up the Chantry with a huge magic bomb with a terrorist act? By Anders' own admission he did it to force a the Templars to attack the mages because the people would fear the mages after the explosion. The mages would be forced to fight back and the Circle system would fall as a result.

Using public violence against innocents to insite fear and instigate rebellion of politcial action is pretty much the definintion of terrorism. Even in a fantasy world of swords and sorcerers. 

So they wrote Anders/Justice into becoming a terrorist as a plot point. Can't see how anyone could view it any other way.

And yes, I think that this was an unneccessary writing ploy. Heck, in Batman the Dark knight series (a dark and violent look at an older batman) they redid a few pages of the book where a flying Batwing crafts crashes into a building. The reason was they felt it was not very respectful following the 9/11 attacks. Didn't affect their story or sales and having the trigger of the templar/mage war being something different would not have worsened this story either.

Modifié par 3SG Sage, 27 mars 2011 - 04:25 .

[LobselVith8]

They don't link it to terrorism because Anders was focused on freeing the mages from slavery, so he attacked an institution that condoned terrorism and oppression against mages for a thousand years.

[Pileyourbodies]

I read over this it was interesting...but you never justify him you don't up hold his reason for terrorism.

Your justification only works if you come at this from the standpoint that mages need to have their rights reexamined. You mentioned european colonialism. A system that arguably made the world a better place, brought industry and european liberalism throughout the world.

[Deztyn]

Sage, because some people agree with it. They don't want to admit to agreeing with a terrorist because hey, terrorists are bad, so they'll go out of their way to avoid using the 'T' word. Even though Anders actions meet the definition perfectly.

[LobselVith8]

Deztyn, people don't condone slavery. There's a difference.

[Pileyourbodies]

The mages are not slaves. They're prisoners, and yes they do commit a crime, they use magic.

[Deztyn]

Whether you think the Templars are slavers or not . . .
Whether you think Anders is right or not . . .
Whether you think Elthina is evil or not . . .
Whether you think the Maker is real or not . . .
. . . What Anders did still meets the definition of terrorism.

Dictionary.com says...

1  :  the unlawful use or threat of violence esp. against the state or the public as a politically motivated means of attack or coercion

It has nothing to do with morals or perception. Anders, by his own admission blew up the Chantry to "remove the chance for compromise" and provoke a war between mages and templars.

(Edited to include a definition)

Modifié par Deztyn, 27 mars 2011 - 05:20 .

[TcheQ]

Lianaar wrote...

TcheQ wrote...

Abispa wrote...

@ TcheQ -- Um, you DID have the option to "kill this ******."

When I wanted him to bleed from his eyes the moment i met him and his self reighteous douchebaggery, and he turns out to be nothing but a simple terrorist.  When in Da2 > WHEN >

After his act, it was either kill him, or send him away, or tell him to stay.

No point in killing him after it's done >

Sigh I just want BG rules back where i could kill as many peasants, children and companions as i liked

[Ingu]

Pileyourbodies wrote...

The mages are not slaves. They're prisoners, and yes they do commit a crime, they use magic.

So magic is a crime now? You realise that people are born with magic? It's not something that they actually commit? You're basically implying that their crime is being born to begin with. In that vein, 'racist' mich?

Emprisonment is an element of slavery. They do what the circle/templars tell them to, and though they may appear to have more freedom compared to slavery in the traditional sense, they're still lack many basic rights.

[LobselVith8]

People address it as slavery in DA2, and even Hawke can address it as such, pileyourbodies. You're welcome to take the issue up with the creators of DA2 if you disagree.

Deztyn, making the claim that people who support Anders support terrorism is inaccurate; he attacked an organization that has its own military, not a civilian complex. Under your definition, the former slaves of Saint Dominique would be terrorists for freeing themselves from France. The colonists of the thirteen colonies would be terrorists for attacking the forces of England. The Cuban revolutionaries would be terrorists for overthrowing the dictatorship of Batista. Trying to put an end to slavery is a very different goal than what you're trying to ascribe to him.

[Ingu]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Deztyn, making the claim that people who support Anders support terrorism is inaccurate;

Agreed, you can support a cause, but it doesn't necessarily mean you support every person's actions designed to further said cause.

Modifié par Ingu, 27 mars 2011 - 06:01 .

[TcheQ]

Ingu wrote...

Pileyourbodies wrote...

The mages are not slaves. They're prisoners, and yes they do commit a crime, they use magic.

So magic is a crime now? You realise that people are born with magic? It's not something that they actually commit? You're basically implying that their crime is being born to begin with. In that vein, 'racist' mich?

Emprisonment is an element of slavery. They do what the circle/templars tell them to, and though they may appear to have more freedom compared to slavery in the traditional sense, they're still lack many basic rights.

Using magic is not a crime.  Using magic unsanctioned by the chantry is.  What do you think apostate means?  Mages are not slaves.  They are allowed out of the circle when they come of age (as in DAO). 

Being made tranquil is another issue entirely.