1927 réponses à ce sujet

[wollert]

*sigh*
I am as tired of seeing "slavery" used in the same modern loose term as "trafficing" where the word has morphed into a modern expression.

Instead of likening mages to prisoners or slaves a more fitting analogy would be asylum patients who are aware of their condition and normally fine but run the risk of loosing it, lets add in the fact that if they go wrong they happen to kill up to tripple digits innocents before being stopped.

The problems with the circle can not be solved by open war or revolution, both sides are in the wrong but you cant blame either side for the bases of their desires (mages=freedom - templars=safety). The problem is the chantrys doctrine on magic and the templars being fed righteous bull. The chantry needs to stop calling magic evil and a sin, the templars need to stop promoting from zealots and find back to their purpose, keeping people safe. The templars should switch to focus on keeping mages safe from themselves. The mind set of the templars is perfectly summarized by Cullen - "Templars have dominance over mages by divine right". - That´s no worse than justifying any religion or belief over anothers meaning you´re worth more as a person.

Anders was not justified but I understand his point of view. But I think the biggest problem with players perceptions of mages being the poor opressed victims and the templars the mean zealot criminals with a badge. Is not only the portrayal of individuals in an order differ from another and religious doctrine giving flashbacks to darker times in our history. Is the fact that abominations are not a problem gameplay wise, we never see the lore side of their destruction, we hear of it but dont see it so the topic is not taken as serious as it should.

[Lianaar]

I do not think Anders had the right to make a decision for all mages.
And I am displeased by the lack of future plans for the revolution aside from "stab stab stab win be free"
He doesn't answer questions that brought the circle to life. He doesn't give alternative answers. He is fighting a guerrila war without clear purpose, without realistic accomplishable goals.

The freedom of mages is too much a general ideology, and that is not good enough for everyday realism. Just like be nice to each other is not an accomplishable national goal.

[Wozza78]

All those of you who say he was justified... do you really believe that his act of Terrorism was the only way?

[AlexXIV]

XxDeonxX wrote...
The Viscount has no authority over the mages or templars, they aren't a means to use to get the Qunari out as far as he should be concerned

Yeah and I guess the templar's job to restore order only applies after having the worst happen. Preventing that clearly stands in the way of restoring order later.

[Deztyn]

wollert wrote...

Is the fact that abominations are not a problem gameplay wise, we never see the lore side of their destruction, we hear of it but dont see it so the topic is not taken as serious as it should.

Connor. Connor. Connor.

But it's still not taken seriously. <_<

[Sabariel]

Wozza78 wrote...

All those of you who say he was justified... do you really believe that his act of Terrorism was the only way?

I believe that if Anders hadn't gone boom the catalyst would have instead been idol-crazed Meredith changing her mind about the Tranquil Solution. I believe that the mage/templar conflict was always going to end in bloodshed and war.

Do I believe Anders was justified? Still on the fence about that one.

Modifié par Sabariel, 03 avril 2011 - 11:14 .

[Darth Krytie]

Wozza78 wrote...

All those of you who say he was justified... do you really believe that his act of Terrorism was the only way?

I believe Anders thinks it's the only way.

I believe that it's an understandable point of view given the situation we were privy to in Kirkwall.

I believe that diplomacy probably would not work as it hadn't worked as far as we are aware so far.

I believe as far as that. As for me personally believing that there were no other methods to achieve his goals? I cannot say as I do not have enough information.

Modifié par Darth Krytie, 03 avril 2011 - 11:17 .

[AlexXIV]

Wozza78 wrote...

All those of you who say he was justified... do you really believe that his act of Terrorism was the only way?

It's always hard to argue about things that happened in a 'what if' manner. People in Anders situation often feel that what they do is the only way and that time and timing is of essence. I mean if you have the comfort of looking at historical events hundrets of years later and study every piece of evidence then you might come up with a better solution. But people in that very time and situation do not have this option. It's a desperate act. He knows he deserves death for what he did. Not even Anders sees what he does as justice. But he sees it as necessary to happen that maybe one day his 'people' will recieve justice. People usually see justice as an entirely positive thing. But it can be cruel at times.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 03 avril 2011 - 11:17 .

[Lord Gremlin]

Wozza78 wrote...

All those of you who say he was justified... do you really believe that his act of Terrorism was the only way?

Another way was to enter the Chantry and assassinate the grand cleric. This way Hawke could toss her severed head, like Arishok did with viscount. A missed opportunity.

[AlexXIV]

Lord Gremlin wrote...

Wozza78 wrote...

All those of you who say he was justified... do you really believe that his act of Terrorism was the only way?

Another way was to enter the Chantry and assassinate the grand cleric. This way Hawke could toss her severed head, like Arishok did with viscount. A missed opportunity.

That wouldn't have been half as impressive as blowing up the chantry.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 03 avril 2011 - 11:18 .

[Darth Krytie]

AlexXIV wrote...

Lord Gremlin wrote...

Wozza78 wrote...

All those of you who say he was justified... do you really believe that his act of Terrorism was the only way?

Another way was to enter the Chantry and assassinate the grand cleric. This way Hawke could toss her severed head, like Arishok did with viscount. A missed opportunity.

That's wouldn't have been half as impressive as blowing up the chantry.

And the act only has power if everyone can see what you did and why you did it. Some quiet assassignation of the Grand Cleric would not achieve this.

[Augustei]

Idk if Anders is really the one who blew up the chantry, I mean he mentions how Justice has been becoming more dominant and if you go rivalry with him he shows much regret for planting explosives in the chantry and doesn't want to go through with it,The guy seems like he can barely live with himself doing it and even completely stops joking around with varric and stuff "please...stop" and saying other such things.

You can actually try to talk him out of it at which point Justice comes out and gets pissed and says how "You have fallen prey to sloth" and Anders says he will try to fix things.. Im starting to think blowing up the chantry was pretty much all Justice.

[Wozza78]

I think what Im getting at is do we believe acts of terrorism are justified in todays day and age. I know it's only a game and that we were very cleverly presented with a sympathetic point of view in the favour of the mages, but ultimately what Anders did for the conviction of his beliefs, even if we are sympathetic was an act of terror akin to the twin towers. Very clever Bioware... where do we draw the line between tolerance and complacency?

[Sabariel]

Wozza78 wrote...

I think what Im getting at is do we believe acts of terrorism are justified in todays day and age. I know it's only a game and that we were very cleverly presented with a sympathetic point of view in the favour of the mages, but ultimately what Anders did for the conviction of his beliefs, even if we are sympathetic was an act of terror akin to the twin towers. Very clever Bioware... where do we draw the line between tolerance and complacency?

9/11 = The New Godwin's Law

Seriously.

[AlexXIV]

Wozza78 wrote...

I think what Im getting at is do we believe acts of terrorism are justified in todays day and age. I know it's only a game and that we were very cleverly presented with a sympathetic point of view in the favour of the mages, but ultimately what Anders did for the conviction of his beliefs, even if we are sympathetic was an act of terror akin to the twin towers. Very clever Bioware... where do we draw the line between tolerance and complacency?

If you're being pushed enough you're going to be ready to take desperate measures. Most people will see you as a terrorist then, especially if you are part of a minority. Asking if terrorism is justified is like asking if violence is justified. Sometimes it's just about choosing the lesser evil.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 03 avril 2011 - 11:25 .

[Wozza78]

XxDeonxX wrote...

Idk if Anders is really the one who blew up the chantry, I mean he mentions how Justice has been becoming more dominant and if you go rivalry with him he shows much regret for planting explosives in the chantry and doesn't want to go through with it,The guy seems like he can barely live with himself doing it and even completely stops joking around with varric and stuff "please...stop" and saying other such things.

You can actually try to talk him out of it at which point Justice comes out and gets pissed and says how "You have fallen prey to sloth" and Anders says he will try to fix things.. Im starting to think blowing up the chantry was pretty much all Justice.

I think I agree. At some point Anders human emotions have tainted Justice and in a way turned him into a demon of vengeance. I think Anders is therefore a new kind of abomination.

[IanPolaris]

[quote]Lianaar wrote...

[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
I am talking about the mage's perception of the Chantry and Templars post-Kirwall, and I believe I've hit on that perception dead centre.  [/quote]
This is exactly what I meant by saying you presume an awful lot.
Sorry, but you can not validly speak for all mages' perception. There are mages (not sure how many) who agree with this. And there are mages (not sure how many) who totally disagree with this. Bethany specifically.
[/quote]

I am not presuming anything.  We have Varic's direct word that this is exactly how the Circles as a whole (not talking about all mages just the controling elments of the circles) view the post-Kirkwall chantry.  Varic says specifically that the Champion becomes a symbol of just how far the Templars are willing to go and that they could be defied.  Orisino in his last speech makes this point explicit.  Fight or die....and tells mages to tell that to the other circles....or did you think they rose up because they didn't get their required sugar shipments?

[quote]
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
The Mages apparently believe (true or not it no longer matters), that if they submit to the Chantry ever again, they will be sumarily killed just as soon as they stop being useful against the Qunari....and based on what Meridith has done there is real substance to those fears.[/quote]
You believe, that I can accept. All mages believe? Uhm, no!
Kirkwall was a single spot in Thedas. While many people were watching, Kirkwall never will be Thedas. You can not expect that a Fereldan circle mage reacts the same way as Kirkwall mage or an Orlais mage (as you indicated this too). Their circumstances are so much different. Just like a Kirkwall mage will react different to Qunary, because of the past they had.
[/quote]

You are missing the point.  Sure until now the mages could accept that Kirwall was a wart on the rump of Thedas, but the KC went gonzo and openly committed genocide (and happily) against the advice of her own knight captain, openly defied what few rights mages had for years, and the chantry did absolutely nothing about it before or after.  Varic when talking to Cassandra makes that point brutally clear.  The champion saved the circle (or tried) from a gross injustice and even the Templars there knew it.  It's why he was permitted to leave (and I think in this thread there is even a DG post that by and large agrees with this assessement).

Given that, the mages have zero incentive to deal with the chantry except on the business end of battlemagic.

[quote]
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
Given that, and given that the mages expect to die anyway, why should they help the Chantry who has abused them for a thousand years?  They wouldn't!  Especially not when hatreds have built up in that same thousand years and in a war, the radicals are likely to be in command. 
[/quote]
Many mages believe in the necessity of Circles (again Bethany? ) Many mages do not agree that if they need to die, then to the hell with everyone else. Why they would help? Uhm, because the life of other people, non mages, non templars, non chantry sisters, mothers is at stake? For quite a few it is enough. For quite a few it matters not.
[/quote]

Most reasonable mages feel regulation is needed, but the Templars proved (as did the Chantry by their criminal lack of oversight) that the Chantry doesn't care about mages or anyone else if they can't be in control....and they would kill everyone to retain that control.  Wynne believed that was so and she was a borderline loyalist.  Meridith hammered that point home.  If you side with the Templars, Bethany bitterly predicts that she will be killed next because Meridith wants all mages to die no matter what....and Bethany is right.  When such a fruitcake is permitted (and even lauded) by the Chantry for years, no negotiation is possible.  Even Bethany admits to that.

[quote]
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
but the mages will forever view the Chantry and Templars as negotiators in bad faith.  Meridith is to blame for much of that and justifiably so.
[/quote]
You sure of that? Why? Because you presume? What of people who actually believe in Chantry? Who believe the Chantry represent the will of the Maker and Andastre? Those mages would accept the rle of the Chantry because of their faith. And quite a large section of Thedas (and the mages) believe in the Maker and his will.
[/quote]

Mages have saved the Chantry's bacon in their exalted marches against the Dales and Qunari at least twice before and got nothing from it except imprisonment and condemation.  Given the awful example of Meridith, why should the mages believe ANYTHING the Chantry says now?  They shouldn't and Varic seems to make it brutally clear that they don't.....and interestingly neither do the Templars.

[quote]
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
Why should we (mages) help you so you can imprison and kill us at you whim again?  
[/quote]
Because the price will not be paid by those who lied and mistreated the mages, but everyone. Because some see beyond their own borders and consider the fate of a whole nation, land. Some don't care, but some do.
[/quote]

Let them burn.  They would do it to us.  Seriously, that IS going to be the overall answer at least to the Chantry.  The King of Fereldan might win points with such an argument (and I think he would) and so would the Hero of Fereldan and/or pro-mage Champion of Kirkwall, but the Chantry itself?  No way.  That's why (IMHO) the Chantry needs to find the Champion so desperately.

[quote]
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
Go away and I hope the Qunari put you on a spit like you deserve. 
[/quote]
Again, not everyone is consumed by vengence, not everyone has a reason to be vengeful and not everyone is bloodthirsty. Some are. (Thank you Anders for proving that.)
[/quote]

This is a war for mages survival.  The most uncompromising and radical elements will almost certainly be in command.  It's so common it's almost trite in a revolution esp in it's early stages.


[quote]
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
Seriously, that is fully what I expect the mages to say to the Chantry (which is WHY they need the Champion so badly).  The Free nations/nobles of Thedas (esp Fereldan and Orzammar....very different matter).
[/quote]
If that's an opinion, nothing to argue there. You are entitled to your opinion.
I do expect the Qunary to launch an attack. I believe that the nations will (just like they di before) unite against the Qunary. I am not sure the agreement will come in time. I can even imagine a new mage state to be established by revolutionarists, something different then Tevinter (since power alone doesn't necessarily need to corrupt).
[/quote]

I am almost certain the Qunari are going to attack.  The Arishok almost tells us it's going to happen.  However, if you feel your options are submit or die, a lot of mages (and  I think enough) will say (at least to the Chantry):  Fine.  If we're going to die, we'll enjoy watching the Qunari kill you as well you dummies....please pass the popcorn.

Now, I do think the nations of Thedas will unite and I do think the mages will eventually join and help turn the tide, but only on the mages' terms and only by dealing with the secular rulers directly bypassing the Chantry altogether.

[quote]
There are very few things I see as facts in this game's universe: 
- a war is comming (parties are forming, and questionable)
- the world is being rearranged, so Thedas as we know it will be shaped differently.
and that's it.
[/quote]

True, but we also know what people say and how people react and we can infer from that.

[quote]
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
The Qun gives pupose and honor.  I can see that as appealing to some mages who have known nothing but rejection and hatred.  I don't agree with it, but I can see the point.
[/quote]
The Qun takes away your life as a mage, you can not have children, you can not speak, you will endure physical pain and humiliation. If you are concirned for the better of the society as a whole (the one you live at) this can give you a purpose that makes your personal suffering worth going through with it. If you are individualistic and do not wish to sacrifice your self and individuum at this manner, then no, it is not appealing.
(I do find the Quen appealing to many aspects. It is a very controversial set of believes, alas not topic of this conversation, there are other threads discussing the Qun).
[/quote]

Yes, but within those very hard restrictions, Sarabas is a respected part of the Qun and can gain honor and respect.  That is suprisingly more important for some than physical comfort.  I personally find it obnoxious,but given the Templar alternative, I can see the appeal for some mages since at least the Qunari HONOR their own laws and rather brutally.  Sarabas is not raped by their Araval handlers or their fellow Qunari. That seems quite clear.


[quote]
[quote]IanPolaris wrote...
The Mages are in a war for their very survival against very bad odds and they know it.  That means the radical resolutionists will almost certainly be calling the shots.
-Polaris[/quote]

There is a war, however the mages might unite against the revolutionists too. Quite a few wars were lost by the "backcountry" stepping out from behind the front people. Especially if the backcountry never was asked about the war.

Many mages were unhappy with Anders decision. Considering that the faith in Maker is still ruling faith over Thedas (or that was my reading of Thedas) and the Maker being attacked directly.

I think it is wrong to speak for all mages in Thedas, they are too varried to make such calls. Alas, I do love diversity.
[/quote]

If it was just Anders I'd agree with you, but Meridith's own actions proved that Anders for all his Terrorism was basically right.  The Templars and Chantry really would like to see all mages dead.  True or not, that IS the lesson of Kirkwall if you're a mage and the mages will act on that lesson.

-Polaris

[sphinxess]

Wozza78 wrote...

All those of you who say he was justified... do you really believe that his act of Terrorism was the only way?

A appeal could have been made to the Divine herself - or to a Seeker if any could be found but there is a lot of evidence Orlais knew Kirkwall had serious problems yet did no investigation
 
As far as what he struck against - I think that was the correct target - the highest representative of the Chantry in Kirkwall.

[Wozza78]

AlexXIV wrote...

Wozza78 wrote...

I think what Im getting at is do we believe acts of terrorism are justified in todays day and age. I know it's only a game and that we were very cleverly presented with a sympathetic point of view in the favour of the mages, but ultimately what Anders did for the conviction of his beliefs, even if we are sympathetic was an act of terror akin to the twin towers. Very clever Bioware... where do we draw the line between tolerance and complacency?

If you're being pushed enough you're going to be ready to take desperate measures. Most people will see you as a terrorist then, especially if you are part of a minority. Asking if terrorism is justified is like asking if violence is justified. Sometimes it's just about choosing the lesser evil.

Is it a lesser evil to murdere innocent people to get what you want though? Anders was also misinformed as Knight-Commander Merredith was making the Templars abuse the Mages under the effects of the artifact. She wasn't really being commanded by the chantry from Act II onwards which is when Anders begins formulating his misguided plans.

[AlexXIV]

Wozza78 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Wozza78 wrote...

I think what Im getting at is do we believe acts of terrorism are justified in todays day and age. I know it's only a game and that we were very cleverly presented with a sympathetic point of view in the favour of the mages, but ultimately what Anders did for the conviction of his beliefs, even if we are sympathetic was an act of terror akin to the twin towers. Very clever Bioware... where do we draw the line between tolerance and complacency?

If you're being pushed enough you're going to be ready to take desperate measures. Most people will see you as a terrorist then, especially if you are part of a minority. Asking if terrorism is justified is like asking if violence is justified. Sometimes it's just about choosing the lesser evil.

Is it a lesser evil to murdere innocent people to get what you want though? Anders was also misinformed as Knight-Commander Merredith was making the Templars abuse the Mages under the effects of the artifact. She wasn't really being commanded by the chantry from Act II onwards which is when Anders begins formulating his misguided plans.

Is it the lesser evil to kill 100 people to save 1000? I wouldn't want to get into a situation where I have to answer this question and bear the consequences.

[Sabariel]

Wozza78 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Wozza78 wrote...

I think what Im getting at is do we believe acts of terrorism are justified in todays day and age. I know it's only a game and that we were very cleverly presented with a sympathetic point of view in the favour of the mages, but ultimately what Anders did for the conviction of his beliefs, even if we are sympathetic was an act of terror akin to the twin towers. Very clever Bioware... where do we draw the line between tolerance and complacency?

If you're being pushed enough you're going to be ready to take desperate measures. Most people will see you as a terrorist then, especially if you are part of a minority. Asking if terrorism is justified is like asking if violence is justified. Sometimes it's just about choosing the lesser evil.

Is it a lesser evil to murdere innocent people to get what you want though? Anders was also misinformed as Knight-Commander Merredith was making the Templars abuse the Mages under the effects of the artifact. She wasn't really being commanded by the chantry from Act II onwards which is when Anders begins formulating his misguided plans.

Templars have been abusing mages long before Meredith or Kirkwall. The abuse didn't just start magically (pun not intended) happening when Meredith came around.

[Wozza78]

Just one last thought... A spirit that is the embodiment of Justice should be incapable of performing an action which is unjustified and would therefore require justice to be taken against it. That is why I believe that Justice became a demon of Vengence and turned Anders into a kind of abomination.

[IanPolaris]

sphinxess wrote...

Wozza78 wrote...

All those of you who say he was justified... do you really believe that his act of Terrorism was the only way?

A appeal could have been made to the Divine herself - or to a Seeker if any could be found but there is a lot of evidence Orlais knew Kirkwall had serious problems yet did no investigation

This is what Meridith should have done (legality or no legality).  There wasn't a pressing emergency with the circle itself and the guilty party was right there in front of her, but Meridith didn't care.  She got her excuse to slaughter all mages and was almost gleeful at the opportunity to do so.

And just where were these mythical seekers that are supposed to keep fruitcakes like Meridith in line? 

As far as what he struck against - I think that was the correct target - the highest representative of the Chantry in Kirkwall.

Absolutely.  From  Terrorists PoV, it was the perfect target and I hate to say it but the Grand Cleric deserved what she got.  The innocents that died with her did not and it's for their lives that I have no hesitation in killing Anders even if I am staunchly pro-mage.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

Wozza78 wrote...

Just one last thought... A spirit that is the embodiment of Justice should be incapable of performing an action which is unjustified and would therefore require justice to be taken against it. That is why I believe that Justice became a demon of Vengence and turned Anders into a kind of abomination.

Absolutely.  Almost from the start and certainly since that incident with Ella where he kills or nearly kills an innocent victim (a mage no less), Anders is clearly an abomination of Vengeance.  I wish I had the opporunity to kill him as an abomination then and there or at minimum haul him before KC Meridith as an abomination and let her deal with him.  Even my most pro-mage Hawke's would have zero problems with that.....even if it meant giving Meridith what she wanted.  I am dissapointed we were never given that option.

-Polaris

[Wozza78]

So we live in a world where being the victims of terrorism is an everyday possibility for millions of people and what I'm getting is that if we believe in something then acts of terrorism that put our points accross even though innocent people may be hurt or killed, then its ok? I know its just a game but the questions raised are very pertinent to todays real world. Im actually kind of on the fence here, because if I was in a heavily persecuted minority I dont know what I'd be capable of to protect those I love, and improve our way of life.