1927 réponses à ce sujet

[Conduit0]

ddv.rsa wrote...

@Conduit0: You have no information on why the templars rebelled. No one does. So what is your basis for saying it is due to the "hypocracy" of the chantry? For all we know they refused orders to stand down, and left to prosecute a war against the mages. But like your proposal that is pure conjecture.

Thats possible, but unlikely in my opinion. Don't forget that the Chantry keep nearly as short a leash on the Templar as they do the mages, afterall they use drug addiction(lyrium) to keep them inline. Sure unlike a mage a Templar can decide to quit, but as Samson demostrates, its not a pretty picture.
So it would have to be something pretty extreme for the Templar to turn against the Chantry and lose their lyrium supply, and I just don't see, "rawr we're going to kill all the mages even though you told us not to" as reason enough for the entire Order to desert.

[IanPolaris]

Conduit0 wrote...

ddv.rsa wrote...

@Conduit0: You have no information on why the templars rebelled. No one does. So what is your basis for saying it is due to the "hypocracy" of the chantry? For all we know they refused orders to stand down, and left to prosecute a war against the mages. But like your proposal that is pure conjecture.

Thats possible, but unlikely in my opinion. Don't forget that the Chantry keep nearly as short a leash on the Templar as they do the mages, afterall they use drug addiction(lyrium) to keep them inline. Sure unlike a mage a Templar can decide to quit, but as Samson demostrates, its not a pretty picture.
So it would have to be something pretty extreme for the Templar to turn against the Chantry and lose their lyrium supply, and I just don't see, "rawr we're going to kill all the mages even though you told us not to" as reason enough for the entire Order to desert.

In addition to that, I find it noteworthy when Varric asks "haven't the Seekers left the Chantry to hunt the mages?"  IF that's true and given that that was normally a Templar function, I have to wonder if the Templars looked at Kirkwall, looked at the Chantry and then saw the blood on their hands and said, "We done.  We can't do this any more."  Just asking.

-Polaris

[AshenEndymion]

Conduit0 wrote...

ddv.rsa wrote...

@Conduit0: You have no information on why the templars rebelled. No one does. So what is your basis for saying it is due to the "hypocracy" of the chantry? For all we know they refused orders to stand down, and left to prosecute a war against the mages. But like your proposal that is pure conjecture.

Thats possible, but unlikely in my opinion. Don't forget that the Chantry keep nearly as short a leash on the Templar as they do the mages, afterall they use drug addiction(lyrium) to keep them inline. Sure unlike a mage a Templar can decide to quit, but as Samson demostrates, its not a pretty picture.
So it would have to be something pretty extreme for the Templar to turn against the Chantry and lose their lyrium supply, and I just don't see, "rawr we're going to kill all the mages even though you told us not to" as reason enough for the entire Order to desert.

Meh, I think the Chantry looked at the Templars and said "You allowed this to happen.  If you had done your frakking jobs, this mess wouldn't have occurred."  And the Templars basically said "If it's so easy, you do it."

It should be noted, though, that just because the all the Circles were lost, doesn't mean that the mages took them all.  Some of the Circles may have been annulled before the Templars quit.

[Mnemnosyne]

Conduit0 wrote...

ddv.rsa wrote...

@Conduit0: You have no information on why the templars rebelled. No one does. So what is your basis for saying it is due to the "hypocracy" of the chantry? For all we know they refused orders to stand down, and left to prosecute a war against the mages. But like your proposal that is pure conjecture.

Thats possible, but unlikely in my opinion. Don't forget that the Chantry keep nearly as short a leash on the Templar as they do the mages, afterall they use drug addiction(lyrium) to keep them inline. Sure unlike a mage a Templar can decide to quit, but as Samson demostrates, its not a pretty picture.
So it would have to be something pretty extreme for the Templar to turn against the Chantry and lose their lyrium supply, and I just don't see, "rawr we're going to kill all the mages even though you told us not to" as reason enough for the entire Order to desert.

I don't see how the templars turning against the Chantry would cost them their lyrium supply.  Simply because, how is the Chantry going to enforce their ban on lyrium trading without, y'know, the templars to do it?  The whole 'get them addicted and then prohibit lyrium trade' always seemed like a stupid plan in the first place, cause if the templars take control then they have the lyrium anyway.  I see no reason why the dwarves wouldn't sell directly to the templars if the situation allows, such as the Chantry not having the might to enforce their rule.

[Conduit0]

@AshenEndemion: Since the Chantry has gotten desperate enough to look to the Champion for help, I would say enough Mages rebelled to put to them in a very bad spot.

@Koyasha: Few people have ever accused religion of being intelligent, so you may be right, the Chantry may never have came up with a plan incase the Templars rebelled. On the other hand though, do you really think the Templars would be thinking, "Gee, this would make a good time for us the grab the lyrium and run"?

[TEWR]

I'm a bit  extremely late to this party, but I'll share my thoughts that I posted on a similar thread about a week ago. Forgive me if this thread, like so many other threads of varying topics before it, has spiraled and derailed into nonsensical off topic stuff If it has, I'll gladly partake

I wrote somewhere else, in a galaxy far, far away... nah there's no need for that


Anders is right, plain and simple. But I'll give my reasons on that so I'm just not sticking with the plain and simple part.

• 1st: Mages have been treated horribly for thousands of years by people who claim to know what Andraste's words meant when, really, only Andraste herself knew what she meant. And you can't say this is false, Anders says that Templars will beat and rape mages. And they have to take it. If they fight back, whose word would be taken? The Mage's or the Templar's? Answer: The Templar's. And then that mage who only wanted it to stop is most likely made Tranquil, if not killed.

• 2nd: There is a self-policing force of mages. The Mages' Collective. Here, mages live the freedom they deserve, if a bit on the cautious side, while the actions of them are still kept under watch (you're given a mission by the Collective to kill Maleficar).

• 3rd let's look at how Anders handled the situation. At first, it was just about him being a part of a Mage Resistance that escorted mages out of the Gallows. There was no open war. Rather the war was a very sealed off one only known to a scant few dozen people. But the Templars actions grew more and more ruthless, and this inevitably pushed Anders hands into action. Most of these actions happened under Meredith's command, but others like Ser Alrik were doing things of their own volition. Mages being made Tranquil when they've passed their Harrowing. Why? Because they maybe hit their foot on a Templar, questioned something, etc. Was Anders supposed to sit idly by and let this continue? No he couldn't.

• 4th: Let's examine Justice. We are told that he is a spirit of Justice who, due to Anders' hatred of the Templars, has been warped into a demon of Vengeance. Yet, for those who play the Dissent quest in Act 2, Justice himself proclaims to Ella the Mage that he is no demon. Maybe he is both a demon and spirit, intertwined as one. Or maybe Vengeance is the darker side of the virtue of Justice, not rendering him a demon, but twisting his sense of self so that Justice cannot know what justice truly is. It's hard to say, but Justice and Anders are now one being. How many things that Anders said were actually Justice speaking without the obvious changes we don't know.

• 5th: We shall examine Anders' attack on the Chantry. Now yes he blew up the Chantry into little tiny masonry bits and killed Maker knows how many innocent people, but look at it this way:

Meredith would've invoked the Rite of Tranquility at some point in her term as an insane Knight Commander, and would the mages have fought back? Most likely not. Anders however pushed that moment to come sooner, forcing Orsino to fight back against Meredith. And he was right. As long as the Chantry exists, mages will know no freedom, no love, and will always be persecuted for what they were born with. Man sees it as a curse. Qunari see it as coming from demons. But the truth is it's something that they are born with. They can't help that they are what they are. Should they be ripped from their families because of that? No. Were Anders' actions extreme? Yes, but extremity is sometimes needed for the right things to come into existence. Could there have been another way to force the mages to fight back against Meredith? Maker only knows.

[/list]
edit: ignore the plain and simple part. In retrospect it sounds like I'm stating it as fact when really it is opinion. This is my view on how he is right.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 05 avril 2011 - 07:29 .

[Sad Dragon]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

• 1st: Mages have been treated horribly for thousands of years by people who claim to know what Andraste's words meant when, really, only Andraste herself knew what she meant. And you can't say this is false, Anders says that Templars will beat and rape mages. And they have to take it. If they fight back, whose word would be taken? The Mage's or the Templar's? Answer: The Templar's. And then that mage who only wanted it to stop is most likely made Tranquil, if not killed.

If I am correct you are saying that we are going on the word of an obvious mad-man here -- and that's all we have to go on. There are no facts -- as far as I know -- that support this claim.

From what we learn in Dragon Age 2 -- it is 'illegal' or against the rules that governs the circle to make any mage undergo the Rite of Tranquility if they have passed the Harrowing.  Going by that I think we can say that they have some rules in place so that the Templars cant abuse their possition too much.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

• 2nd: There is a self-policing force of mages. The Mages' Collective. Here, mages live the freedom they deserve, if a bit on the cautious side, while the actions of them are still kept under watch (you're given a mission by the Collective to kill Maleficar).

You could argue that they are only policing themselves due to the Templars. If there where no templars around this group of appostates might not even exist. Just some food for thought.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

• 3rd let's look at how Anders handled the situation. At first, it was just about him being a part of a Mage Resistance that escorted mages out of the Gallows. There was no open war. Rather the war was a very sealed off one only known to a scant few dozen people. But the Templars actions grew more and more ruthless, and this inevitably pushed Anders hands into action. Most of these actions happened under Meredith's command, but others like Ser Alrik were doing things of their own volition. Mages being made Tranquil when they've passed their Harrowing. Why? Because they maybe hit their foot on a Templar, questioned something, etc. Was Anders supposed to sit idly by and let this continue? No he couldn't.

Where are the evidence of this? And just how much of the templars action can be put town to Meredith getting a hold of the Idol? We can't say, and we really don't have any real evidence that the templars became more and more ruthless either. Though if I have missed something pleace correct me cause I would like to know.

Now I'm not going to argue that Meredith wasn't anti-mage (even before she went nuts) nor that Ser Alrik was a beacon of light, but if you are going to judge all by the account of two really bad eggs, I can think of quite a few circle mages that where bad eggs as well -- infact I can think of more then two.

As for the making mages who have passed the Harrowing tranquil: I would say we only know of maybe one -- Anders friend. The only other information we get are seconed hand via Anders who are just as paranoid about Templars as Meredith seems to be about mages -- so I'm not sure the source is nessecaraly credible.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

• 4th: Let's examine Justice. We are told that he is a spirit of Justice who, due to Anders' hatred of the Templars, has been warped into a demon of Vengeance. Yet, for those who play the Dissent quest in Act 2, Justice himself proclaims to Ella the Mage that he is no demon. Maybe he is both a demon and spirit, intertwined as one. Or maybe Vengeance is the darker side of the virtue of Justice, not rendering him a demon, but twisting his sense of self so that Justice cannot know what justice truly is. It's hard to say, but Justice and Anders are now one being. How many things that Anders said were actually Justice speaking without the obvious changes we don't know.

While I'm not sure if Vengeance should be called a spirit, demon or something else entierly one thing is sertain, even in Dragon Age: Origins: Awakening he was as zealous about black and white justice as the most zealous templar are about mages being evil. The fact that he, himself proclaims I am no demon rings a bit hollow to me. He could simply not see the monster he has become -- or if he has compleetly lost it he could outright lie.
Either way, he might not be the best source of information on this topic.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

• 5th: We shall examine Anders' attack on the Chantry. Now yes he blew up the Chantry into little tiny masonry bits and killed Maker knows how many innocent people, but look at it this way:

Meredith would've invoked the Rite of Tranquility at some point in her term as an insane Knight Commander, and would the mages have fought back? Most likely not. Anders however pushed that moment to come sooner, forcing Orsino to fight back against Meredith. And he was right. As long as the Chantry exists, mages will know no freedom, no love, and will always be persecuted for what they were born with. Man sees it as a curse. Qunari see it as coming from demons. But the truth is it's something that they are born with. They can't help that they are what they are. Should they be ripped from their families because of that? No. Were Anders' actions extreme? Yes, but extremity is sometimes needed for the right things to come into existence. Could there have been another way to force the mages to fight back against Meredith? Maker only knows.

I am assuming you are refering to the Right of Annulment and not Tranquility.
Meredith could not invoke the Rite of Annulment even if she wanted to if not for the extreme situation that Vengence forced. Normaly she would not have to power to do so. And what does fighting back against Meredith have to do with Templars vs Mages -- should all Templars fight against the Mages due to the actions of Uldred in Dragon Age: Origins?

While I will not argue that they will have no true freedom as long as the current templar system is in place -- or well it's nor really current anymore -- there is no evidence to say they will never be able to have love or stop from being persecuted for what they where born with (unless you count the overseeing of the templar as they where prior to the end of Dragon Age 2). Things change overtime -- it happened in our world, it can happen in the dragon age world.


Now all that said: Was Vengence Justified in his actions? I would say no as I feel there where still other options to try. However if the outcome turns out to be the greater good then his actions may have been for the good in the long run, but he himself have no way to know how the world would look after the dust settles -- thus I can never see his actions as justified.

I would also like to appologiseto The Ethereal Writer Redux if my post seems hostile -- which i hope it doesn't -- I do respect your opinion that Vengence actions where justified and I can even understand your viewpoint, even if I don't agree. I just wanted to point out some more grey areas in your list of reasons. ^^;

Edit: Fixed a missing end of quote.

- The Sad Dragon

Modifié par Sad Dragon, 05 avril 2011 - 02:44 .

[Wulfram]

IanPolaris wrote...

In addition to that, I find it noteworthy when Varric asks "haven't the Seekers left the Chantry to hunt the mages?"  IF that's true and given that that was normally a Templar function, I have to wonder if the Templars looked at Kirkwall, looked at the Chantry and then saw the blood on their hands and said, "We done.  We can't do this any more."  Just asking.

-Polaris

I thought it was the Templars who had left chantry to hunt the mages, while the Seekers remained loyal to the Chantry

[Eollodwyn]

Wulfram wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

In addition to that, I find it noteworthy when Varric asks "haven't the Seekers left the Chantry to hunt the mages?"  IF that's true and given that that was normally a Templar function, I have to wonder if the Templars looked at Kirkwall, looked at the Chantry and then saw the blood on their hands and said, "We done.  We can't do this any more."  Just asking.

-Polaris

I thought it was the Templars who had left chantry to hunt the mages, while the Seekers remained loyal to the Chantry

I kind of thought Seekers were Templars, just a specialized branch...    At the end when Varric says "Haven't the Templars rebelled as well?  I thought you left the Chantry to hunt mages,"  he seems to include the Seeker in that group of Templars.

Modifié par Eollodwyn, 05 avril 2011 - 03:46 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

I asked Mr. Gaider for clarification here. Some are saying that the Templars are rebelling to join mages. Others say the Templars rebelled to hunt mages harder.

I lean towards the latter but it's unclear.

[Wulfram]

Eollodwyn wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

I thought it was the Templars who had left chantry to hunt the mages, while the Seekers remained loyal to the Chantry

I kind of thought Seekers were Templars, just a specialized branch...    At the end when Varric says "Haven't the Templars rebelled as well?  I thought you left the Chantry to hunt mages,"  he seems to include the Seeker in that group of Templars.

Yes, that's my understanding too - they're the Internal Affairs branch of the Templars.  But they still seem to be loyal to the chantry and the Divine, unlike the bulk of the Templars.

[AlexXIV]

http://dragonage.wik...iki/The_Seekers

[Deztyn]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...


4th: Let's examine Justice. We are told that he is a spirit of Justice who, due to Anders' hatred of the Templars, has been warped into a demon of Vengeance. Yet, for those who play the Dissent quest in Act 2, Justice himself proclaims to Ella the Mage that he is no demon. Maybe he is both a demon and spirit, intertwined as one. Or maybe Vengeance is the darker side of the virtue of Justice, not rendering him a demon, but twisting his sense of self so that Justice cannot know what justice truly is. It's hard to say, but Justice and Anders are now one being. How many things that Anders said were actually Justice speaking without the obvious changes we don't know.

Yes.

Justice did say that.

Right before he MURDERED her.

And afterwards 2.0 can still go on about how Justice is righteous and wonderful and a good influence on him. Anything Justice/Anders has to say on the subject is suspect to say the least.

Seriously, if you're willing to acknowledge that his very existance is twisted and wrong, how can you then say the actions he took as a direct result of that twisting are righteous?

[Camenae]

lol. I like how if Anders/Justice killed that girl Ella, after he comes back out he says he is planning to go to the girl's funeral and that HE HOPES THE GIRL'S PARENTS THINK A TEMPLAR KILLED HER.

Very classy...

[Foryou]

Okay been looking at this forum (as it is my forum) but saying good job people for keeping this on topic. so uuummm KEEP IT ON TOPIC

[IanPolaris]

Camenae wrote...

lol. I like how if Anders/Justice killed that girl Ella, after he comes back out he says he is planning to go to the girl's funeral and that HE HOPES THE GIRL'S PARENTS THINK A TEMPLAR KILLED HER.

Very classy...

It's a regular Hallmark moment.  Seriously, why don't they let me Murder-Knife Anders the moment I find out he's an abomination, especially as a fellow mage?!  Anders is walking/talking proof that the Templar abuses are justified.  If mages are going to be trusted to police themeselves, then mages have to kill idiots like Anders BEFORE the Templars can.

-Polaris

[Deztyn]

IanPolaris wrote...

Camenae wrote...

lol. I like how if Anders/Justice killed that girl Ella, after he comes back out he says he is planning to go to the girl's funeral and that HE HOPES THE GIRL'S PARENTS THINK A TEMPLAR KILLED HER.

Very classy...

It's a regular Hallmark moment.  Seriously, why don't they let me Murder-Knife Anders the moment I find out he's an abomination, especially as a fellow mage?!  Anders is walking/talking proof that the Templar abuses are justified.  If mages are going to be trusted to police themeselves, then mages have to kill idiots like Anders BEFORE the Templars can.

-Polaris

I agree.

One of the most bizarre choices the developers made was to force us to run around with an abomination and a blood mage for seven years. Even if the player chooses not to use them the game still treats them as our companions.

[Conduit0]

Deztyn wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Camenae wrote...

lol. I like how if Anders/Justice killed that girl Ella, after he comes back out he says he is planning to go to the girl's funeral and that HE HOPES THE GIRL'S PARENTS THINK A TEMPLAR KILLED HER.

Very classy...

It's a regular Hallmark moment.  Seriously, why don't they let me Murder-Knife Anders the moment I find out he's an abomination, especially as a fellow mage?!  Anders is walking/talking proof that the Templar abuses are justified.  If mages are going to be trusted to police themeselves, then mages have to kill idiots like Anders BEFORE the Templars can.

-Polaris

I agree.

One of the most bizarre choices the developers made was to force us to run around with an abomination and a blood mage for seven years. Even if the player chooses not to use them the game still treats them as our companions.

You had an abomination and a blasphemous apostate in DA:O and a ghoul and two apostates in Awakening. Why choose to complain now?

[tiernanls]

my short and sweet answer is no.  there is no justification for any act of terrorism.  everything is perspective and im sure anders felt justified, but im also certain al queda felt justified in the attack on the twin towers.  the very moment you are willing to take an innocent life you lose the moral high ground.  period.  doesnt matter what has been done to you. 

my long response?

anders in general is wrong.  his viewpoint is skewed by heresay and some bad personal experiences.  he is every bit as guilty as meredith of painting all members of the order with the same brush.  in origins i got the impression that the knight commander in fereldon trusted the first enchanter with his life.  that the relationship between templar and mage was deemed necessary, and that while they often debated amongst each other behind closed doors, they had a great deal of respect for each other and never tried to rule either with an iron fist.  this to my understanding is the circle anders came from.  if he coudnt find justice under their combined leadership, it sounds more and more to me that he was the one being unreasonable.  he himself didnt like the fact that he was a mage, and as a mage he was told what he could or couldnt do.  he channeled that frustration into the complete arrogance of presuming to speak for all mages.  there is no way in hell wynn for example would ever support his idea of mage freedom, or any of the actions he took in kirkwall.  

my other big anti-anders stance is he let his own emotional turmoil and wants very clearly blind himself as to what he deemed as wrong.  he very often assumed that any mage in kirkwall resorted to blood magic only out of desperation.  this was obviously not the case as many blood mages were doing it for research and power more than for any kind of freedom.  this is doubly wrong when you see a small number of mages even in the final assault on templar hall NOT resorting to blood magic.  the real root of the problem was the overall condoning of blood magic to begin with throughout kirkwall which went to the very top of the circle in orsino himself.  its no different than saying that in some scenarios terrorism is ok, when its not.  if you have any scenario in which you would resort to blood magic, you are in the wrong.  you have made a deal with a demon.  had anders himself ever resorted to blood magic justice himself would have demanded that anders lop his own head off.   

my absolute favorite thing about this game so far is the way subsequent playthroughs change your opinion.  in my first playthrough i very often supported the mages.  anytime i felt they were being overly oppressed i woudl have their back right down to fighting against the right of annulment.  but as i came to the close of my third playthrough it became very clear to me that while meredith had gone a bit mad, she was much more right than anders or orsino.  she suspected blood magic was running rampant within the circle and thats when all the squeezing began.  the truth of it is that she was right.  even before she had the idol and began to go loopy, orsino was silently condoning the research of a blood mage in act one.  that research lead to your mothers death in act 2.  whos to say he wasnt doing the same within the circle itself?  i know that it certainly seemed that during the final fight against the mages when i was on the side of the templars i was killing more npc's labled "blood mage" than i was killing "circle mage".  right down to the creepy room with the desire demon where there is a circle of mages and templar together at the behest of a desire demon.  it was just crazy.  as much as i wanted to believe that freedom was an inherent right for all, the more i opend my eyes the more i saw of what meredith saw.  friggin blood mages everywhere.  

at the end of the day i see anders and orsino as the ones who ruined everything.  orsino for not coming down hard on the side of meredith from the get go.  disagreement behind closed doors is fine.  but when blood mages are running amuck your first enchanter should be standing right next to his/her knight commander in the apprehension and elimination of any blood mage threat.  and im sorry, but that confrontation that orsino and meredith were having on their way to the chantry seemed very much able to reach a compromise.  and anders himself insisted for no compromise.  he didnt want one.  he wanted them to kill each other.  he wanted what he wanted regardless of what the other mages wanted.  even orsino himself didnt want mage freedom.  he wanted meredith to step down.  and then anders ups and kills the most respected individual in the city and prolly the only one who could have negotiated a compromise.  boo on anders.  may he rot in hell. 

[Deztyn]

Conduit0 wrote...

Deztyn wrote...

I agree.

One of the most bizarre choices the developers made was to force us to run around with an abomination and a blood mage for seven years. Even if the player chooses not to use them the game still treats them as our companions.

You had an abomination and a blasphemous apostate in DA:O and a ghoul and two apostates in Awakening. Why choose to complain now?

See the bolded.

Origins and Awakening let you kill, boot or not recruit the other characters. The other games also gave you a much stronger RP reason for keeping them around even if you had a problem with them. Fate of the world and all that.

Modifié par Deztyn, 06 avril 2011 - 04:18 .

[TEWR]

Deztyn wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...


4th: Let's examine Justice. We are told that he is a spirit of Justice who, due to Anders' hatred of the Templars, has been warped into a demon of Vengeance. Yet, for those who play the Dissent quest in Act 2, Justice himself proclaims to Ella the Mage that he is no demon. Maybe he is both a demon and spirit, intertwined as one. Or maybe Vengeance is the darker side of the virtue of Justice, not rendering him a demon, but twisting his sense of self so that Justice cannot know what justice truly is. It's hard to say, but Justice and Anders are now one being. How many things that Anders said were actually Justice speaking without the obvious changes we don't know.

Yes.

Justice did say that.

Right before he MURDERED her.

And afterwards 2.0 can still go on about how Justice is righteous and wonderful and a good influence on him. Anything Justice/Anders has to say on the subject is suspect to say the least.

Seriously, if you're willing to acknowledge that his very existance is twisted and wrong, how can you then say the actions he took as a direct result of that twisting are righteous?

Because one action cannot relate to another?

If I kicked a puppy that's not housetrained because I felt like it, and then a couple days later that puppy pissed on a woman's shoe, are you going to blame the pissing on me because I kicked a puppy?

*NOTE: I would NEVER kick a puppy.

I'm saying that it's hard to tell what Justice is/has truly become. We don't have enough information regarding it. Personally, I see Anders' actions not so much as an act against the Kirkwall Chantry and Circle, but against the entirety of the Chantry and Circle. There are strong points that Anders has made regarding the Mages. Just because he's insane to you (which is opinion, insanity is very rarely easily discerned as fact, as it manifests in differing ways), that doesn't mean that anything he says should be tossed out the window and forgotten. Even insane people make strong cases that are right.

Look at Edgar Allen Poe and two of my favorite quotes by him:

“Science has not yet taught us if madness is or is not the sublimity of the intelligence.”

as well as this one.

"All religion, my friend, is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination, and poetry."



The man was insane, no question. He himself knew he was. Does that mean that anything he said is wrong, simply because he was insane?

EDIT: While I don't justify the act of killing Ella, it could be said that should she have lived after seeing Justice and Anders as one, she would've ratted him out. Justice was probably afraid of that happening. That's why I'm glad you can make her see reason if she lives, by telling her that Anders is a very  troubled person.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 06 avril 2011 - 05:15 .

[TEWR]

**** I've been quoted a lot. Time to get to work!

Sad Dragon wrote...


If I am correct you are saying that we are going on the word of an obvious mad-man here -- and that's all we have to go on. There are no facts -- as far as I know -- that support this claim.

From what we learn in Dragon Age 2 -- it is 'illegal' or against the rules that governs the circle to make any mage undergo the Rite of Tranquility if they have passed the Harrowing.  Going by that I think we can say that they have some rules in place so that the Templars cant abuse their possition too much.

Isn't Ser Alrik's wanting to have sex with a potential Tranquil Mage proof enough that there are some Templars who abuse their power by doing that? I'm not saying all, but the corruption that power does to people exists everywhere it is given.

You could argue that they are only policing themselves due to the Templars. If there where no templars around this group of appostates might not even exist. Just some food for thought.

While I won't rule it out, that doesn't make it so. But it is a good point, my thoughts are feasting on this food you have provided them.

Where are the evidence of this? And just how much of the templars action can be put town to Meredith getting a hold of the Idol? We can't say, and we really don't have any real evidence that the templars became more and more ruthless either. Though if I have missed something pleace correct me cause I would like to know.

Now I'm not going to argue that Meredith wasn't anti-mage (even before she went nuts) nor that Ser Alrik was a beacon of light, but if you are going to judge all by the account of two really bad eggs, I can think of quite a few circle mages that where bad eggs as well -- infact I can think of more then two.

As for the making mages who have passed the Harrowing tranquil: I would say we only know of maybe one -- Anders friend. The only other information we get are seconed hand via Anders who are just as paranoid about Templars as Meredith seems to be about mages -- so I'm not sure the source is nessecaraly credible.

I'm not currently playing DA2 right now, so I can't give off the appropriate information to correct you, but more Tranquil mages were popping up everyday. Most of the Templars were agreeing with Meredith actually, either out of fear or because they do hate mages. And this all happened prior to the bombing of the Chantry. There are three bad Templars that come to mind:

• Meredith
  
• Ser Alrik
  
• Ser Karras

But you're right, it's not right to condemn all for the actions of a few. The same can be said for mages though. A few dozen blood mages doesn't mean that it's ok to assume every mage is practicing blood magic.

While I'm not sure if Vengeance should be called a spirit, demon or something else entierly one thing is sertain, even in Dragon Age: Origins: Awakening he was as zealous about black and white justice as the most zealous templar are about mages being evil. The fact that he, himself proclaims I am no demon rings a bit hollow to me. He could simply not see the monster he has become -- or if he has compleetly lost it he could outright lie.
Either way, he might not be the best source of information on this topic.

Vengeance/Justice is a grey area. That was really my point in there. Back then though, Justice was easier to make see reason.

I am assuming you are refering to the Right of Annulment and not Tranquility.
Meredith could not invoke the Rite of Annulment even if she wanted to if not for the extreme situation that Vengence forced. Normaly she would not have to power to do so. And what does fighting back against Meredith have to do with Templars vs Mages -- should all Templars fight against the Mages due to the actions of Uldred in Dragon Age: Origins?

While I will not argue that they will have no true freedom as long as the current templar system is in place -- or well it's nor really current anymore -- there is no evidence to say they will never be able to have love or stop from being persecuted for what they where born with (unless you count the overseeing of the templar as they where prior to the end of Dragon Age 2). Things change overtime -- it happened in our world, it can happen in the dragon age world.

Yep sorry, meant the Rite of Annulment. I think I typed that at like 3 in the morning on whatever thread I originally posted it lol.

Where I bolded, I'm not sure what you mean (well, I know what you mean. I just don't see the relevance to my post). I originally said that the Mages wouldn't have fought back should she have invoked the Rite of Annulment (which she would've done. She was power mad.) However, noone knows when she actually obtained the idol, because game time and real time do not relate to one another.

And they aren't able to love in the Circles. I mean, it's not prohibited outright, but it is frowned upon greatly because Demons can use it to wield influence over the mage. Which makes sense, but it's like a synthetic version of the Rite of Tranquility.

Basically, I'm a mage sympathizer.

Now all that said: Was Vengence Justified in his actions? I would say no as I feel there where still other options to try. However if the outcome turns out to be the greater good then his actions may have been for the good in the long run, but he himself have no way to know how the world would look after the dust settles -- thus I can never see his actions as justified.

That's what it boils down to really. Justifying Anders/Justice/Vengeance/Ser Pounce-A-Lot/Mr. Wiggums is really just opinion as there is no right or wrong answer. Sorry but I just wanted to mention both those cats somewhere in here.

I would also like to appologiseto The Ethereal Writer Redux if my post seems hostile -- which i hope it doesn't -- I do respect your opinion that Vengence actions where justified and I can even understand your viewpoint, even if I don't agree. I just wanted to point out some more grey areas in your list of reasons. ^^;

Edit: Fixed a missing end of quote.

- The Sad Dragon

nah no hostility was shown here. You're fine.

[EmperorSahlertz]

One should never take anything Anders say, at face value. All he ever tries to is manipulate Hawke into helping him with his mage rebellion. He is the opposite of Meredith. He is ever bit as fanatic and insane as her. He is a zealot, and as such he will always exaggerate his own plight to manipulate others to his cause.

[Mnemnosyne]

Something to keep in mind for those of you who talk about Anders presuming to speak for all mages: I don't think there's any revolution in history (and certainly not many, if there are any at all) which was actually started by the majority of the people. In the American revolution, which I believe was one of the ones with extremely high levels of popular support, about 40 to 45% of the people were supporting the revolutionaries. Somewhere near 15-20% were loyalists to England. And the remainder wanted to stay the hell out of it.

So keep in mind that pretty much every revolution in history was essentially done by a minority. That doesn't mean they were wrong. Similarly, it doesn't mean Anders is wrong in forcing mages into a revolution.

I do take issue with how he did it and his lack of planning, for pretty much the same reasons KnightofPhoenix has articulated earlier though.

[sphinxess]

Wulfram wrote...

Eollodwyn wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

I thought it was the Templars who had left chantry to hunt the mages, while the Seekers remained loyal to the Chantry

I kind of thought Seekers were Templars, just a specialized branch...    At the end when Varric says "Haven't the Templars rebelled as well?  I thought you left the Chantry to hunt mages,"  he seems to include the Seeker in that group of Templars.

Yes, that's my understanding too - they're the Internal Affairs branch of the Templars.  But they still seem to be loyal to the chantry and the Divine, unlike the bulk of the Templars.

Varriic and Cassandra end game:

"You've already lost all the circles"

"In fact haven't the templars rebelled as well"

"I thought you decided to abandon the chantry to hunt the mages'"

 I see a lot of conjecture on what the templars are doing - hunting mages - helping mages - giving up the fight - let me toss one more idea into the mix - they have gone back to their original roots and have started a inquisition