1927 Antworten in diesem Thema

[The Angry One]

LobselVith8 wrote...

I guess unless everyone absolutely hates Anders for ending a thousand years of slavery, their opinion doesn't matter.

And if that "end" is ultimately the slaughter of every single mage on Thedas do you still think that praiseworthy?

[Arppis]

Anarcala wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I never find anyone acting out of a reckless impulse with no plan in mind to be justified. I give more importance to material considerations than ethics and I see nothing in Anders that would qualify him to make such a decision.

All Anders wanted was to force people to take sides.  In my opinion, job done.  There were too many people sitting on their backsides and ignoring the abuses of the Templars.

You can solve every problem in the world with violence, that doesn't mean it's the best way. He botched it up.

[LobselVith8]

And if the mages end up securing their freedom instead of being slaves for another thousand years, does that mean Anders made the right choice, Angry One?

[Rifneno]

The Angry One wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I guess unless everyone absolutely hates Anders for ending a thousand years of slavery, their opinion doesn't matter.

And if that "end" is ultimately the slaughter of every single mage on Thedas do you still think that praiseworthy?

I do.  And so does a great man by the name of Benjamin Franklin.  "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

[The Angry One]

LobselVith8 wrote...

And if the mages end up securing their freedom instead of being slaves for another thousand years, does that mean Anders made the right choice, Angry One?

No, because freedom for mages means subjigation for everyone else.
What Anders refuses to consider (or maybe he's so mage-centric he doesn't care) is that this kind of violent revolt will lead to one side utterly dominating the other, any hope of balance or compromise tossed to the winds.

[The Angry One]

Rifneno wrote...

I do.  And so does a great man by the name of Benjamin Franklin.  "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Hint: I don't think Ben Franklin included people who can fire nuclear bombs from their hands in that statement.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Anarcala wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I never find anyone acting out of a reckless impulse with no plan in mind to be justified. I give more importance to material considerations than ethics and I see nothing in Anders that would qualify him to make such a decision.

All Anders wanted was to force people to take sides.  In my opinion, job done.  There were too many people sitting on their backsides and ignoring the abuses of the Templars.

And? After that what happens?
How did he plan to combat possession of mages, knowing that they succumb easier when under stress (of course why would he care, he is a half abomination)? How does he plan to build a new society? What kind of society?
...etc etc. Many questions that I am sure he didn't even bother to think through.

That is the mark of a short sighted reckless fool.

Bearbeitet von KnightofPhoenix, 02 April 2011 - 06:29 .

[AlexXIV]

LobselVith8 wrote...

I guess unless everyone absolutely hates Anders for ending a thousand years of slavery, their opinion doesn't matter.

Opinion's are just that, someone's point of view. I don't see many people argueing reasonable on the BSN anyway.

[AlexXIV]

The Angry One wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

I do.  And so does a great man by the name of Benjamin Franklin.  "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Hint: I don't think Ben Franklin included people who can fire nuclear bombs from their hands in that statement.

He didn't exclude them either.

[Anarcala]

The Angry One wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

And if the mages end up securing their freedom instead of being slaves for another thousand years, does that mean Anders made the right choice, Angry One?

No, because freedom for mages means subjigation for everyone else.
What Anders refuses to consider (or maybe he's so mage-centric he doesn't care) is that this kind of violent revolt will lead to one side utterly dominating the other, any hope of balance or compromise tossed to the winds.

This kind of revolt?  It may not be peaceful, but that doesn't mean there will be no compromise further down the road.  There are many real world conflicts that started out in a similar fashion that have actualy ended pretty peacefully after MANY years of conflict.  Notably, without one side dominating the other.

Anders was literally blowing the top off of a slavery racket, with the Grand Cleric at the head.

[Kijin]

Rifneno wrote...

If ONE person in this game deserved to die, it was Elthina.  Everyone else that was bad had at least some mitigating factor.  She was in full control of her senses and she refused to do anything about Meredith's crimes.  She actually has the unmitigated gall to complain about the mages speaking out!  I'm only sorry that she died quick and painless.  She should've been mentally, physically, and sexually abused until she took her own life just like so many mages under her brutal knight-commander's reign.

Elthina was not angry that Orsino was speaking out - she was angry that he was being unnecessarily antagonistic. She was trying to calm tensions, but Orsino was only making the situation worse. She also condemned Meredith as well. At the beginning of Act 3, when Orsino and Meredith have that confrontation in public, Elthina condemns both individuals. Elthina could have ran away - the Divine gave Elthina permission to leave, but Elthina refused, as she felt that her duty to the Maker compelled her to stay. Regardless of whether you side with the Templars or the Mages, you cannot deny that innocent people suffered and died. Not all mages were crazy abominations, and not all Templars were fantaics whose sole interest was killing mages. Both of these groups suffered greatly as a result of the combined insanity of Orsino and Meredith. Not to mention the countless number of innocent Kirkwall citizens that died in the crossfire at the end of the game.

[Pzykozis]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I never find anyone acting out of a reckless impulse with no plan in mind to be justified. I give more importance to material considerations than ethics and I see nothing in Anders that would qualify him to make such a decision.

I'd say that he's the only one of the three that has a plan, if Orsino had managed to get Elthina to force a compromise from Meredith (bearing in mind the chantry is in charge of the Templars) then all that would happen is that for the short time being everything would have been boiling beneath the surface waiting to erupt again, Anders forced the cycle to end, regardless if you agree with him or not.

The other two were just promoting non violent conflict between the mages and Templar Orsino's active attempts at underminding Meredith (regardless of the fact that she's insane) serves to provoke her when he should have been sorting things out with Elthina instead and Merediths brutal rule over the mages only forces them to resist further reductions of their freedoms for not really doing anything, they didn't really have much of a plan that I could see.

As for whether Anders is justified.. perhaps. Elthina is maybe worse than either Orsino or Meredith because she has the power to stop it at any point, but refuses to do so, her passivity only allows things to get worse and she seems perfectly happy to let things burn so that everyone can learn from it (as if that ever worked) so many times Hawke should have just shook the woman and told her to lay down the law on both sides.

[Rifneno]

The Angry One wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

I do.  And so does a great man by the name of Benjamin Franklin.  "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Hint: I don't think Ben Franklin included people who can fire nuclear bombs from their hands in that statement.

You should probably look up what a nuclear bomb is capable of.  You clearly have no idea.

[Anarcala]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Anarcala wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I never find anyone acting out of a reckless impulse with no plan in mind to be justified. I give more importance to material considerations than ethics and I see nothing in Anders that would qualify him to make such a decision.

All Anders wanted was to force people to take sides.  In my opinion, job done.  There were too many people sitting on their backsides and ignoring the abuses of the Templars.

And? After that what happens?
How did he plan to combat possession of mages, knowing that they succumb easier when under stress (of course why would he care, he is a half abomination)? How does he plan to build a new society? What kind of society?
...etc etc. Many questions that I am sure he didn't even bother to think through.

That is the mark of a short sighted reckless fool.

He cannot be held personally responsible for people who sucumb to their own terrors.  Without Anders there still would have been an 'incident' that would have been nothing short of a massacre.  The only difference would be that the Chantry would be honour bound to take sides with the Templars and once again the Mages would be led to a life of slavery.

We know he does have a plan.  It's laid out in his manifesto...which we unfortuinately never get to see. Part of his plan was making sure there were people around to take over when he died.  I believe there's a part of the game that indicates Anders isn't the only member of his 'underground' rebellion.

[LobselVith8]

The Angry One wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I suppose the mages who broke free from the Chantry and the templars, and no longer have to live a life of servitude and subjugation, probably don't see Anders the same way that the Chantry or the templars do. I'm certain he's a hero to some, and a villain to others. He wanted to bring an end to the slavery of his people, and made a deal with a spirit to do it. He stands as one of the more complex and conflicted characters of the sequel. Whether it was the correct course of action or not has been debated many times, with no consensus reached.

Oh you mean the ones who'll soon die in the war whether by Templar or being sacrificed by their blood mage leaders?

Why do mages who don't want to be enslaved to the Chantry have to be blood mages? Many people adhor slavery.

The Angry One wrote...

Those ones? Yeah I'm sure they're praising Anders' name.

The mages don't want to be under the heel of the Chantry and the templars anymore. Wynne made this clear in Amaranthine. A large portion of the mages wanted freedom, and Wynne resisted because she thought that it would lead to genocide across the continent. However, Kirkwall shows the mages that the "templars can be defied." It's the reason why every Circle in Thedas rebelled from Chantry and templar rule.

[Oneiropolos]

I've debated this topic a lot. No. I don't think Anders was justified in blowing up the Chantry. For everyone who wants to go "Those in the chantry weren't innocent'... what about all the debris from the explosion we saw all over the city? Guess no children or innocents were hit by the falling, flaming rocks, right? And saying Elthina deserved to die just because she didn't do what Anders wanted and he admitted his only reason for doing it was to -destroy compromise- is rather heartless. It's one thing for Anders to be set on that destructive path, but people assume because the mage circles 'rise up' afterwards that he actually accomplished his goals. But all we know is that mage circles rose up and the world is currently engulfed in a great war. Saying the circles rose up does NOT mean that every mage in the circle rose up. Uldred's actions did not speak for all of the Fereldan circle. Instead, it was probably something they HAD to raise up because people are suddenly MORE afraid of mages and more oppressive and the backlash had to be incredible. Varric doesn't tell us, and Cassandra doesn't comment, so we do not know the details of the other circles or why they did what they did. But never does Varric state that ANDERS was seen as a hero...he says the CHAMPION was seen as a sign that you could defy the way things were. And Anders and Varric were pretty close at one point, so he has no real reason to slight his friend unless he really didn't side with Anders on that situation either.

But, I'm just going to end with a quote from the Great Dragon from Merlin:

"Your choice is a hard one, young warlock, but you, like I, must hold hope that Arthur will bring about a new age, an age where the likes of you and I are respected once again. If he sees his father killed through the use of magic, it will harden his mind forever."

The regular people saw their Grand cleric and perhaps even family members killed through the use of magic...do you really think it made them sympathetic towards the plight of mages? Especially with such blatant proof that magic could be so completely and utterly unpredictable and destructive?

[AlexXIV]

I am not against mage circles, and also not against templars guarding them. Just if we have a society in which such things exist then all the bad stuff can't happen. No tranquilization, no rape, no torture, etc. Also no kidnapping or seperating mages from their family in the fashion that they can never see them again. Also they must have the chance to live a relatively normal life, have a girl or guy, have children etc.

If the Chantry or templars can't provide that they have to be removed. Simple as that. I don't favor mages ruling the world. But there simply must be something better than the circles the way we saw them so far.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Pzykozis wrote...
I'd say that he's the only one of the three that has a plan, if Orsino had managed to get Elthina to force a compromise from Meredith (bearing in mind the chantry is in charge of the Templars) then all that would happen is that for the short time being everything would have been boiling beneath the surface waiting to erupt again, Anders forced the cycle to end, regardless if you agree with him or not.

I never said either of them had a plan. But neither forced the issue yet and if they did, they would be just as unjustified.

Meredith was losing more and more power and could have been ousted if Anders bothered to think. But like any paranoid man (see codex) he saw only enemies and dismissed potential allies. Allies that mages end up killing because of their idiocy. 

Bearbeitet von KnightofPhoenix, 02 April 2011 - 06:38 .

[Rifneno]

Kijin wrote...

Elthina was not angry that Orsino was speaking out - she was angry that he was being unnecessarily antagonistic. She was trying to calm tensions, but Orsino was only making the situation worse. She also condemned Meredith as well. At the beginning of Act 3, when Orsino and Meredith have that confrontation in public, Elthina condemns both individuals. Elthina could have ran away - the Divine gave Elthina permission to leave, but Elthina refused, as she felt that her duty to the Maker compelled her to stay. Regardless of whether you side with the Templars or the Mages, you cannot deny that innocent people suffered and died. Not all mages were crazy abominations, and not all Templars were fantaics whose sole interest was killing mages. Both of these groups suffered greatly as a result of the combined insanity of Orsino and Meredith. Not to mention the countless number of innocent Kirkwall citizens that died in the crossfire at the end of the game.

Unnecessarily?  Exactly how much murdering, raping, and soul stealing do the templars need to do before the First Enchanter is allowed to say "this sucks" in public?

Sure, there are templars that mean well.  But I'm sure every evil empire had soldiers that were well meaning.  It doesn't mean they don't need to be fought.

[LobselVith8]

TJPags wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I suppose the mages who broke free from the Chantry and the templars, and no longer have to live a life of servitude and subjugation, probably don't see Anders the same way that the Chantry or the templars do. I'm certain he's a hero to some, and a villain to others. He wanted to bring an end to the slavery of his people, and made a deal with a spirit to do it. He stands as one of the more complex and conflicted characters of the sequel. Whether it was the correct course of action or not has been debated many times, with no consensus reached.

I wonder if every single mage felt that way?

What about the ones who didn't want to revolt? Ooopps, too bad for them I guess . . .

Enough mages felt that way ten years prior to Cassandra meeting Varric, when Wynne expressed concern that the Circles would decide to break free from the Chantry, since she said that the Chantry would rather kill all the mages than see them free. Considering the Chantry lost control over all the Circles, it's clear that a majority of the mages preferred freedom to servitude.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Anarcala wrote...
He cannot be held personally responsible for people who sucumb to their own terrors. 

When he thinks he is qualified to make such a choice for all them, then he is responsable and he should man up to it.

We know he does have a plan.  It's laid out in his manifesto...which we unfortuinately never get to see. Part of his plan was making sure there were people around to take over when he died.  I believe there's a part of the game that indicates Anders isn't the only member of his 'underground' rebellion.

That was in Act 2, before he becomes paranoid and loses control in Act 3. And I doubt it has anything valuable in it except common rethoric. The  underground resistance movement in Act 2 was dismantled as Meredith tightened her grip.

Bearbeitet von KnightofPhoenix, 02 April 2011 - 06:41 .

[The Angry One]

Rifneno wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

I do.  And so does a great man by the name of Benjamin Franklin.  "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Hint: I don't think Ben Franklin included people who can fire nuclear bombs from their hands in that statement.

You should probably look up what a nuclear bomb is capable of.  You clearly have no idea.

Maybe you should look up levity and stop making irrelevant, useless posts that serve only to annoy.

LobselVith8 wrote...

The mages don't want to be under the
heel of the Chantry and the templars anymore. Wynne made this clear in
Amaranthine. A large portion of the mages wanted freedom, and Wynne
resisted because she thought that it would lead to genocide across the
continent. However, Kirkwall shows the mages that the "templars can be
defied." It's the reason why every Circle in Thedas rebelled from Chantry and templar rule.

I don't see how the representatives Wynne met with speak for every single mage in Thedas.
Especially when the likes of Uldred and Orsino prove that many senior circle mages are in fact off their damn rockers.

And how did Kirkwall show that Templars can be defied?
An abomination kills innocents, most of the circle is killed, the First Enchanter is outed as a blood mage and turns into a monster and Meredith is ousted with the help of Templars who turn against her.

Bearbeitet von The Angry One, 02 April 2011 - 06:42 .

[LobselVith8]

The Angry One wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

And if the mages end up securing their freedom instead of being slaves for another thousand years, does that mean Anders made the right choice, Angry One?

No, because freedom for mages means subjigation for everyone else.

I don't take that thinking seriously, because I don't recall the mages in the Chasind tribes, the nation of Rivain, or the Dalish clans enslaving everyone. I remember that even in the morally bankrupt town of Haven, there were mages and non-mages living together, with a non-mage as their leader.

The Angry One wrote...

What Anders refuses to consider (or maybe he's so mage-centric he doesn't care) is that this kind of violent revolt will lead to one side utterly dominating the other, any hope of balance or compromise tossed to the winds.

Anders considered that it was better to be free than to continue another thousand years of slavery.

Bearbeitet von LobselVith8, 02 April 2011 - 06:43 .

[The Angry One]

LobselVith8 wrote...


I don't take that thinking seriously, because I don't recall the mages in the Chasind tribes, the nation of Rivain, or the Dalish clans enslaving everyone. I remember that even in the morally bankrupt town of Haven, there were mages and non-mages living together, with a non-mage as their leader.

Again you're comparing tribes and villages to whole societies.
And I remind you that among the Dalish, mages are the leaders.

[upsettingshorts]

Anders doesn't have the right to make that choice for everyone.