1927 réponses à ce sujet

[lil yonce]

Hazegurl wrote...

And before they declared their independence from the Chantry they 1) voted against it in the previous gathering and 2) the Chantry disbanned them and denied the mages the right to assembly without Templar presence. They didn't vote for independence until the things got bad -- I really suggest you read Asunder if you're interested to hear more about the last College meeting where everything went sideways, and the meeting after that when they made the decision to separate from the Chantry. Again, since they don't have any legal power or rights outside their own Mages (that I'm aware of) and since the College seems exist only as long as the Chantry allows it, I have to question how much it could have done even if Anders had questioned / allied with them.

You're right, I need to read the book. I can't really debate much on this topic except for what I was told. I do hate reading video game books cause I would actually like to see it in game but I don't think that would happen anyway. I'll definitely need to get that book.

1)They did not vote on it at all-- Fiona decided to run her mouth put forth a motion to separate from the Chantry at meeting that was held specifically to discuss Pharmond's research to reverse the rite of tranquility and nothing else-- and after finding Adrian's murder knife in Rhy's room, Lambert busted it up before a real vote could be thought about. And many of the mages were leaning towards Fiona with separation and dissing the research.

"The first enchanters appeared to accept her [Adrian] words, nodding uneasily. Wynne looked upset, perhaps because she sensed the same thing Rhys did-- the mood was swinging in the Grand Enchanter's favor. Even the ones whom Rhys assumed would speak up in Wynne's defense remained silent. First Enchanter Edmonde was an Aequitarian like her, for instance, but he simply scowled and rubbed his long beard."

A little background-- Pharamond was murdered the night before by a Libertarian named Adrian who didn't want a compromise. Lambert thought it was Rhys because of all the evidence he had and because of an ongoing investigation into several murders at the Circle Tower, but either way that showed him the mages did not want to cooperate by murdering one of their own in a defiant stand against Templar authority when this mage's research might help make compromise work-- and when he confronted them to get the suspect, what were they doing? Talking seriously about separation. From his POV, they looked real guilty and transparent listening to a known rebellious Libertarian spirit medium and very possible blood mage demon consort murderer and talking about separation. They wouldn't turn Rhys over and Fiona decided to play "if you bad, knock it off my shoulder" with Lambert by threatening him and he took her bait and attacked. Anders 2.0 sealed the deal for what would happen at the White Spire. Adrian framed her own friend to get the separation war to kick off. SMH.

2)The College of Magi had been disbanded because tensions were hot after Kirkwall and Justinia wanted to prevent exactly what Fiona was trying to do because she knew how it would end-- (badly). Fiona straight up blocked the gateway to compromise with her separation spill to open the meeting. As soon as the meeting started she said, (paraphrase)"Let's separate!" and (real quote)"F*ck the Divine" and completely blew off the research and Wynne who told her the meeting wasn't about anything other than looking into reversing the RoT, and a bunch of mages were lining up to side with the Grand Enchanter.

Wynne's plan was to get a put this research in the spotlight to convince the Magi the Chantry was taking steps to make things better and also to convince the Magi to be ready to fight in the Orlesian civil war to get favor from the Empress and look good to the public and from there she was going to go about making things better for Circle with goodwill etc.

They have rights, like we have rights, but probable cause gives the authorities the right to suspend your rights if you pose a danger to someone. Fiona tells Lambert, ."Leave us to our lawful conclave." p.345. Right there is acknowledgment of their right to hold a conclave by Chantry law or decree but the Chantry can't permit obvious BS that would blow up in their face and that's why the College was suspended in the first place, and when it was allowed it was only under some strict precautions like Templar oversight and First Enchanters only. They didn't take those measures for no reason or because they hate mages.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 13 mai 2013 - 04:01 .

[LobselVith8]

Hazegurl wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

What the mages chose was freedom over servitude.

All the suicides Anders referenced makes me doubt your viewpoint.

And what viewpoint would that be? That Anders is helping the mages replace one master with another? And if so then what does the suicides have to do with doubting that viewpoint?

Autonomy is entirely different than remaining under subjugation to the Chantry of Andraste and the Order of Templars, especially when some mages commit suicide simply to escape the tyrannical environment of the Chantry controlled Circle.

Hazegurl wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I'm pretty sure those people advocate freedom from an abusive institution where mages are subjugated by an anti-mage religious organization, which is condemned by some in-game authors and characters as slavery.

What does that have to do with the fact that certain mages are becoming the rulers over the life and death of other mages? Mages who don't want to fight or die in a war have no choice but to subjugate themselves to the majority that do. That's not freedom for them. 

It's not freedom to remain in servitude to the Andrastian Chantry and the Templar Order, where they can be killed or made tranquil.

[Hazegurl]

Youth4Ever wrote...

They have rights, like we have rights, but probable cause gives the authorities the right to suspend your rights if you pose a danger to someone. Fiona tells Lambert, ."Leave us to our lawful conclave." p.345. Right there is acknowledgment of their right to it by Chantry law, but the Chantry can't permit obvious bs that would blow up in their face and that's why it was suspended in the first place, and when allowed it was only under some strict precautions like Templar oversight and First Enchanters only. They didn't take those measures for no reason or because they hate mages.

Ordered the book, can't wait to get it! I'm so gonna skip to the page references before reading the whole thing.

@Lob, at this point you are just looking for any excuse to repeat that same old tired nonsense. If you can't provide any reason why mages in the minority aren't being forced to subjugate themselves to the whims of the majority and any argument as to how mages wouldn't be trading one master for another then don't bother repsonding.

Modifié par Hazegurl, 12 mai 2013 - 09:10 .

[LobselVith8]

Hazegurl wrote...

@Lob, at this point you are just looking for any excuse to repeat that same old tired nonsense. If you can't provide any reason why mages in the minority aren't being forced to subjugate themselves to the whims of the majority and any argument as to how mages wouldn't be trading one master for another then don't bother repsonding. 

I don't see why every mage should suffer simply because the Loyalists want to bend knee to the Chantry and the templars. It's no different than arguing that Hawke shouldn't have fought the Arishok to benefit the majority who didn't want to live under the Qun because the minority of the Qunari elves wanted the Arishok to succeed. The freedom of autonomy benefits many people who don't want to remain under the shackles of the Chantry anymore (to paraphrase Irving), and I see no reason to deny them their freedom simply because a small number would prefer remaining in servitude.

[lil yonce]

It wasn't just the Loyalists. It was all of the smaller frats. that voted against separation at Andoral's Reach. I looked at the book today.

"The smaller fraternities stood in turn, and each elected to follow the Loyalist lead: submission over resistance."

So that's the Loyalists, the Lucrosians, and (to even my surprise) the Isolationists, and as an extra even half the Aequitarian frat. was against it. A mage who had just become an ex-Libertarian-- we're talking a few hours before the decision was made-- spoke for their group and voted to separate. And it appears he was wavering and unsure of what to do. It was his shaky vote that decided the Magi course.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 13 mai 2013 - 03:24 .

[Rinshikai10]

Last I checked out of the Aequitarian first enchanters, at least four of them where starting to second guess Wynne stand. These include the first enchanters of Nevarra, Antiva, possibly Irving, and even the First Enchanter of Orlais.

[LobselVith8]

Rinshikai10 wrote...

Last I checked out of the Aequitarian first enchanters, at least four of them where starting to second guess Wynne stand. These include the first enchanters of Nevarra, Antiva, possibly Irving, and even the First Enchanter of Orlais.

Wynne also says to the Warden-Commander that she argues against freeing the Circles because the Chantry would kill all the mages rather than see them free. She seems to think all the mages will die if the Circles seperate from the Chantry.

[DPSSOC]

LobselVith8 wrote...

DPSSOC wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
Anders wanted to free his people from slavery.

Debatable. Nothing I see in either of the games gives me the impression Anders actually cares about "his people." Anders goal, from Act 1 to 3 is to hurt the Templars, every one of his personal quests involves kicking down their door (figuratively speaking) and slaughtering as many of them as he can, and to hell with the consequences. He's got a chip on his shoulder, a well deserved understandable chip but a chip none the less, and he's out to bloody the people he holds responsible for everything wrong with his life.

Throughout the game he makes attempts to drag other mages into it by connecting with the Mage Underground, encouraging you to let clearly dangerous mages go, and distributing his Manifesto. None of it works, the Mage Underground is crushed, the rabid dogs he encourages you to let go are put down before accomplishing anything, and his Manifesto never gains any traction. So in Act 3 he decides he's tired of asking, he's going to drag every mage in Kirkwall into his fight whether they want to or not. They'll fight or they'll die.

I don't see how Meredith crushing the mage underground invalidates their goal to be free, or Anders' desire to see the fate of Karl prevented for any other mage.

 
Because he doesn't.  My whole point is that I don't believe Anders gives a damn about mage freedom, that's just what he tells himself and others because one can't really admit that what they really want is to do extensive bodily harm to a group of people.  I'm not saying anything about the Mage Underground one way or the other, I'm saying that I believe Anders threw his lot in with them not to help free mages but because it would give him an opportunity to hurt Templars and find other people to join his fight.

It's the same reason he leaps at Grace's suggestion to kill Thrask so you can help a group of people who just tried to kill you escape, or argues against giving Idunna (the Blood Mage in the Brothel) to the Templars.  He doesn't give a damn about whether they are free beyond them potentially hurting more Templars.

None of it pans out; the Underground is crushed so he loses that and none of the mages he asks you to spare amount to anything.

LobselVith8 wrote...
Given how the mages have been leaning towards independence since Wynne was in the City of Amaranthine, and eventually voted to break ties to the Andrastian Chantry, Anders wasn't the only one who wanted to have their freedom.

Again my entire point isn't against mages wanting freedom, I get why they want it I just don't think they should have it because really bad things can and do happen when magic is involved and I think it's unfair and unjust to force that risk upon the people with no real means of effectively defending them.  However I will repeat my point is that Anders doesn't want mages to have their freedom, he wants to hurt Templars.  He doesn't care if the mages live free or die on Templar swords as long as they take a bunch of Templars with them.  That's why he blew up the Chantry, because he was tired of trying to get the mages to strike at the Templars on their own so he'd force them to do it.

[LobselVith8]

DPSSOC wrote...

It's the same reason he leaps at Grace's suggestion to kill Thrask so you can help a group of people who just tried to kill you escape, or argues against giving Idunna (the Blood Mage in the Brothel) to the Templars.  He doesn't give a damn about whether they are free beyond them potentially hurting more Templars.

Hawke and his crew kill Decimus and the Starkhaven mages who tried to kill the protagonist, and Anders condemns Decimus for his attempted murder. The others, like Terrie, didn't try to kill Hawke. As for Indunna, Anders approves if you kill her.

As for the rest, let's agree to disagree.

[lil yonce]

Rinshikai10 wrote...

Last I checked out of the Aequitarian first enchanters, at least four of them where starting to second guess Wynne stand. These include the first enchanters of Nevarra, Antiva, possibly Irving, and even the First Enchanter of Orlais.

I counted three. Two that were rumored to be wavering from Antiva and Nevarrra and one that didn't speak up in Wynne's defense at the conclave-- but that Enchanter doesn't defend Adrian and Fiona either as the book describes him scowling in dissatisfaction-- so he was still on the fence. It doesn't say what Irving's opinion was I don't think, and I don't remember any comment from the Orlesian First Enchanter. No one knew which way the frat. would vote when it came down to it. Their leaders are split and that is an indication to me that the broader Aequitarian frat. is split and unsure.

Modifié par Youth4Ever, 13 mai 2013 - 04:02 .

[Rinshikai10]

The one that did not speak up for Wynne is First Enchanter Edmonde of the White Spire.

[Hazegurl]

LobselVith8 wrote...

I don't see why every mage should suffer simply because the Loyalists want to bend knee to the Chantry and the templars. It's no different than arguing that Hawke shouldn't have fought the Arishok to benefit the majority who didn't want to live under the Qun because the minority of the Qunari elves wanted the Arishok to succeed. The freedom of autonomy benefits many people who don't want to remain under the shackles of the Chantry anymore (to paraphrase Irving), and I see no reason to deny them their freedom simply because a small number would prefer remaining in servitude.

No one is saying they should "remain in servitude" we're talking about a war for freedom here. yet where is the freedom for mages forced to fight? Should they be given a safe place to go during the fight? Can the mages who  wish to fight provide this safe haven? Should they be free to side with the Chantry if push comes to shove? Also what are your thoughts post war when the monarchies take over the mages. Should mages have to anwser to the laws created by a Monarch?

[Divine Justinia V]

DPSSOC wrote...

Because he doesn't.  My whole point is that I don't believe Anders gives a damn about mage freedom, that's just what he tells himself and others because one can't really admit that what they really want is to do extensive bodily harm to a group of people.  I'm not saying anything about the Mage Underground one way or the other, I'm saying that I believe Anders threw his lot in with them not to help free mages but because it would give him an opportunity to hurt Templars and find other people to join his fight.

It's the same reason he leaps at Grace's suggestion to kill Thrask so you can help a group of people who just tried to kill you escape, or argues against giving Idunna (the Blood Mage in the Brothel) to the Templars.  He doesn't give a damn about whether they are free beyond them potentially hurting more Templars.

None of it pans out; the Underground is crushed so he loses that and none of the mages he asks you to spare amount to anything.

After have reading the Anders short story by Jennifer Hepler this morning, I almost 100% agree with this.
I think in the beginning his purpose he set for himself was being some type of magi activist that would free every mage he came into contact with. I feel as time went on he became more and more engrossed with his rage towards templars/the chantry that he was eventually consumed by it--turning him into purely vengeance and not so much 'justice'.
He was taken away from his parents at 12 by these people, his friend was just turned tranquil and got killed, his own father feared him because of what the chantry taught him and I think with all of that anger and emotion built up he couldn't handle the power Justice provided. I feel for the guy, and I couldn't kill him for what he did. While I don't think it was justifiable I can certainly see where it came from. It wasn't the most surprising thing if you knew his entire story.

[MissOuJ]

DPSSOC wrote...
 
Because he doesn't.  My whole point is that I don't believe Anders gives a damn about mage freedom, that's just what he tells himself and others because one can't really admit that what they really want is to do extensive bodily harm to a group of people.  I'm not saying anything about the Mage Underground one way or the other, I'm saying that I believe Anders threw his lot in with them not to help free mages but because it would give him an opportunity to hurt Templars and find other people to join his fight.

It's the same reason he leaps at Grace's suggestion to kill Thrask so you can help a group of people who just tried to kill you escape, or argues against giving Idunna (the Blood Mage in the Brothel) to the Templars.  He doesn't give a damn about whether they are free beyond them potentially hurting more Templars.

None of it pans out; the Underground is crushed so he loses that and none of the mages he asks you to spare amount to anything.

I'm curious - how have you come to this conclusion? I'm not saying Anders isn't extremely callous about Templar lives lost (his conversation with Aveline, his comments on the Act of Mercy quest, his introduction in Awakening) but I haven't seen any indication his commitment to mage freedom isn't true and real. His reaction to killing/almost killing Ella makes it clear. Also, just pointing out that (according to his codex entry) he left the Underground after that happened in Dissent because he thought he would be a liability -- he did not leave because he lost his templar-killing organization.

Also, if he didn't care what happened to the mages and if he only wanted to see templars hurt, wouldn't he have bombed the Gallows? Also wouldn't he give you rivalry points for letting Karras live after AoM? He does neither.

He certainly doesn't shed tears over killed templars (before or after Justice, as his Awakening dialogue makes clear) but I wouldn't say his only goal in life is to kill as many of them as possible. He carries a huge, huge grudge -- and to be honest, I would too after being forced to leave my family at the age of twelwe, and particularly after spending a whole year in solitary confinement -- but he used to just run away from it. He even says this outright to Justice in Awakening: "I avoid my oppression". It is Justice who tells him he has responsibility to his fellow mages, and Justice who tells him to "strike a blow against [Anders'] oppressors". It's not like either of them only care about killing templars.

Modifié par MissOuJ, 14 mai 2013 - 12:52 .

[DKJaigen]

Hazegurl wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I don't see why every mage should suffer simply because the Loyalists want to bend knee to the Chantry and the templars. It's no different than arguing that Hawke shouldn't have fought the Arishok to benefit the majority who didn't want to live under the Qun because the minority of the Qunari elves wanted the Arishok to succeed. The freedom of autonomy benefits many people who don't want to remain under the shackles of the Chantry anymore (to paraphrase Irving), and I see no reason to deny them their freedom simply because a small number would prefer remaining in servitude.

No one is saying they should "remain in servitude" we're talking about a war for freedom here. yet where is the freedom for mages forced to fight? Should they be given a safe place to go during the fight? Can the mages who  wish to fight provide this safe haven? Should they be free to side with the Chantry if push comes to shove? Also what are your thoughts post war when the monarchies take over the mages. Should mages have to anwser to the laws created by a Monarch?

Their rights are not relevant as the democracy has spoken. And they will have to answer the call to battle and if they refuse they should be killed because they are a liability. The majority has voted for war so they have to deal with it. They loyalist have chosen to be part of the cirle of mages now they have to face the consequences of it.

[DPSSOC]

MissOuJ wrote...

DPSSOC wrote...
 
Because he doesn't.  My whole point is that I don't believe Anders gives a damn about mage freedom, that's just what he tells himself and others because one can't really admit that what they really want is to do extensive bodily harm to a group of people.  I'm not saying anything about the Mage Underground one way or the other, I'm saying that I believe Anders threw his lot in with them not to help free mages but because it would give him an opportunity to hurt Templars and find other people to join his fight.

It's the same reason he leaps at Grace's suggestion to kill Thrask so you can help a group of people who just tried to kill you escape, or argues against giving Idunna (the Blood Mage in the Brothel) to the Templars.  He doesn't give a damn about whether they are free beyond them potentially hurting more Templars.

None of it pans out; the Underground is crushed so he loses that and none of the mages he asks you to spare amount to anything.

I'm curious - how have you come to this conclusion? I'm not saying Anders isn't extremely callous about Templar lives lost (his conversation with Aveline, his comments on the Act of Mercy quest, his introduction in Awakening) but I haven't seen any indication his commitment to mage freedom isn't true and real.

 
We get a lot of talk from Anders but no action.  We never actually see him doing anything to work towards mage freedom.  We do however see him use the cause to put himself in a position to hurt Templars (his personal quests).  Does he take in a few of the mages the Underground manages to slip out and put them to work in his clinic not only allowing him to help more people (if that were really why he was set up in Darktown) as well as improve the public view of mages (it's not just one mage offerring healing for free it's a few)?  No.  We do see him arrange a meeting with a mage he intends to sneak out in the Chantry though.  Cause when breaking somebody out of a prison the best place to meet up is the police station on the opposite side of town.

MissOuJ wrote...
His reaction to killing/almost killing Ella makes it clear. Also, just pointing out that (according to his codex entry) he left the Underground after that happened in Dissent because he thought he would be a liability -- he did not leave because he lost his templar-killing organization.

And yet he doesn't change anything you notice that?  He doesn't go, "Hey I was in a fight with Templars, lost my cool and (nearly) killed an innocent, maybe I should stop looking for fights," he just continues with business as usual.

MissOuJ wrote...
Also, if he didn't care what happened to the mages and if he only wanted to see templars hurt, wouldn't he have bombed the Gallows?

 
As I mentioned in an earlier post because that was more about drawing other mages into his fight.  He'd tried other methods in the past but none of them amounted to anything so now he was just going to force them to join the fight or die.  Actually if Anders main concern was freeing mages the Gallows would have been the much better target.  Set the bomb near the barracks, wait for Meredith and Orisino to leave for another shouting match, blow it, and slip as many mages out as possible in the confusion.

DKJaigen wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I don't see why every mage should suffer simply because the Loyalists want to bend knee to the Chantry and the templars. It's no different than arguing that Hawke shouldn't have fought the Arishok to benefit the majority who didn't want to live under the Qun because the minority of the Qunari elves wanted the Arishok to succeed. The freedom of autonomy benefits many people who don't want to remain under the shackles of the Chantry anymore (to paraphrase Irving), and I see no reason to deny them their freedom simply because a small number would prefer remaining in servitude.

No one is saying they should "remain in servitude" we're talking about a war for freedom here. yet where is the freedom for mages forced to fight? Should they be given a safe place to go during the fight? Can the mages who wish to fight provide this safe haven? Should they be free to side with the Chantry if push comes to shove? Also what are your thoughts post war when the monarchies take over the mages. Should mages have to anwser to the laws created by a Monarch?

Their rights are not relevant as the democracy has spoken. And they will have to answer the call to battle and if they refuse they should be killed because they are a liability. The majority has voted for war so they have to deal with it. They loyalist have chosen to be part of the cirle of mages now they have to face the consequences of it.

#1) Democracy hasn't spoken, the Circle Fraternities are not a democracy. Even if they were the First Enchanters certainly aren't. The situation in Asunder is no different than any other aristocracy in which power is shared.

#2) The mages aren't soldiers they have no more obligation to take up arms in the conflict than I would if my country declared war. Now if the Mages institute some kind of draft there is still room for conscientious objectors.

#3) The majority has not voted on anything. As I said before neither the Fraternities nor the Enchanters are democratic institiutions. A very small unelected minority made the decision.

#4) Nobody chose to be part of the Circle, it's kinda something you're forced into.

[Hazegurl]

DKJaigen wrote...

Their rights are not relevant as the democracy has spoken. And they will have to answer the call to battle and if they refuse they should be killed because they are a liability. The majority has voted for war so they have to deal with it. They loyalist have chosen to be part of the cirle of mages now they have to face the consequences of it.

Well at least you're honest in your opinion. lol! But you can't really call it a fight for freedom when you pretty much enslave or kill anyone who doesn't follow your orders. But why do you think mages who don't want a war are obligated to fight simply because the "majority" voted? That's like saying that everyone within a country is obligated to fight and die for their country simply because the leaders have chosen to go to war. The mages who wish to fight don't own the mages who don't anymore than the Templars did. And I thought the whole point of them fighting was because the mages didn't choose to be a part of the Circle.

[DKJaigen]

Hazegurl wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

Their rights are not relevant as the democracy has spoken. And they will have to answer the call to battle and if they refuse they should be killed because they are a liability. The majority has voted for war so they have to deal with it. They loyalist have chosen to be part of the cirle of mages now they have to face the consequences of it.

Well at least you're honest in your opinion. lol! But you can't really call it a fight for freedom when you pretty much enslave or kill anyone who doesn't follow your orders. But why do you think mages who don't want a war are obligated to fight simply because the "majority" voted? That's like saying that everyone within a country is obligated to fight and die for their country simply because the leaders have chosen to go to war. The mages who wish to fight don't own the mages who don't anymore than the Templars did. And I thought the whole point of them fighting was because the mages didn't choose to be a part of the Circle.

Oh but you are obligated. Your are given a voice a vote and rights in return your democratic elected leaders may demand war. Dont like it? Then leave if you find the morals of your fellows aberrent . Plenty of germans left germany when Hitler was elected and those germans bear no blame for ww2. The loyalist fraternity decided to come (most likely out of cowardice) to andorhals reach and participate  with the vote. They got overruled now they have to deal with it.

Also i dont believe in freedom because thats anarchy. The mages fight for so they can control themselves.

[MissOuJ]

DPSSOC wrote...

We get a lot of talk from Anders but no action.  We never actually see him doing anything to work towards mage freedom.

He blew up the Chantry! That's plenty of action. Also: wrote a manifesto about mage rights (which you keep finding everywhere in your mansion). We don't see him working for the Mage Underground, that's correct (and a lost sidequesting possibility) but he explicitly tells you why: Hawke is way too far up in the aristocracy of Kirkwall to be roped up in the Undeground activities, and s/he would be a liability -- plus if Hawke is romancing Anders he tells Hawke including him/her would risk his/her safety, which Anders doesn't want. Whether or not you believe his explanation is another matter entirely, but again, there is proof he does something other than kills Templars left and right.

DPSSOC wrote...

And yet he doesn't change anything you notice that?  He doesn't go, "Hey I was in a fight with Templars, lost my cool and (nearly) killed an innocent, maybe I should stop looking for fights," he just continues with business as usual.

... except that according to his codex entry he does just that if Ella is saved: he gives up on the Underground and the mage cause for the better part of three years, until Meredith's rule becomes unbearable, which is when he again takes action.

DPSSOC wrote...
 
As I mentioned in an earlier post because that was more about drawing other mages into his fight.  He'd tried other methods in the past but none of them amounted to anything so now he was just going to force them to join the fight or die.  Actually if Anders main concern was freeing mages the Gallows would have been the much better target.  Set the bomb near the barracks, wait for Meredith and Orisino to leave for another shouting match, blow it, and slip as many mages out as possible in the confusion.

Except that slipping away a bunch of mages (possibly hundreds) from an island would be a bit tricky, if not outright logistically impossible. And mass breakouts don't always mean freedom: see the Act of Mercy quest in Act 1 -- their Circle of Magi destroyed by a fire and their phylactries destroyed, and most(?) of them still got caught by the Templars and taken to another Circle. Add to that the way Templars sometimes treat Apostates they capture (Wynne's dialogue with mage Warden, Anders' comments in Awakening about him being eventually branded a Maleficar "true or not" and being executed) and that plan kinda falls appart. Being free mage under the Chantry rule (aka Apostate) isn't being truly free; it's being a fugitive. And that's the problem: this isn't about one Circle and its problems and liberation, but the system itself -- which is why Anders took on the higher end of that political food chain, aka the Chantry.

And or course Anders' point is to draw the other mages into the fight, because as far as he (and Justice) see it, he's dead after the explosion: it is pretty clear (at least for me) that he expects to be killed in the beginning of Final Straw (which again makes romancing him so much more heartbreaking): giving away his beloved posessions (his pillow); telling Hawke (if s/he helped him out in Justice) that Hawke is important to him / that he appreciates the support / that he loves Hawke whatever happends... My rambling aside, the point is that Anders is trying to wake the mages up to realise that the whole system is rigged against them: Heads -- the Templars win; Tails -- the Mages loose. The Templars have the power of life and death over the mages, the Right of Annulment being the most obvious one. The Circle as an institution passivises (see: Emile) and dehumanizes (Keili from the Mage Origin, anyone?) mages and it has been going on for almost a thousand years.

Anders recognizes that this needs to change. And that is why he draws the other mages into the fight: no one can take on this system on their own. There needs to be a full-scale war... or at least so Anders sees it. Remember what that one mage in the Circle Tower said during the Broken Circle quest? "Change rarely comes peacefully. Andraste waged war on the Imperium; she didn't write them a strongly worded letter." She's kinda right.

Anders' rationalisation for his actions (as in: how his actions can be justified when he ropes other mages into this conflict which will get some or even most of them killed) is probably that since his revolution will guarantee better quality of life for all mages, he must fight (and die) for it, and try to convince the as many other mages as possible to do the same, because the future lives saved far outweight their own. His reasoning is certainly not without its own problems, but in the context of Thedas and its institutions, its history and Anders' own personal history, it kinda makes sense.

Whether or not he would've done what he did if he had known about how the Divine felt about mage rights or if he knew what Wynne was trying to accomplish is an interesting question, and maybe in that case the story might've turned out different. But seeing how bad things were in the Gallows in particular... that's kinda unlikely. Kirkwall at least was already a lost cause. Add to that the growing political pressure within the circles which saw Libertarian support growing and threatening the coalition of Aequitarians and Loyalists (as is evident from this codex entry from DA:O) so it looks like the war was going to be inevitable anyway.

DKJaigen wrote...

Oh but you are obligated. Your are given a voice a vote and rights in return your democratic elected leaders may demand war. Dont like it? Then leave if you find the morals of your fellows aberrent . Plenty of germans left germany when Hitler was elected and those germans bear no blame for ww2. The loyalist fraternity decided to come (most likely out of cowardice) to andorhals reach and participate  with the vote. They got overruled now they have to deal with it.

Could we keep real-world analogies out of the discussion about fictional people, worlds and situations? That never end well... particularly when the analogy in question is a Godwin.

I don't believe all mages are obliged to fight -- not all of them even probably can (not all mages can be powerful battle mages). They might try, since it's entirely possible the Templars won't just accept any and all mages who surrender to them, but I doubt they'll be obliged to do so. But all the mages did agree on before the vote was that they'd act as a group -- so to honour that agreement the Loyalists and the other smaller fraternities don't need to do anything but not return to the Circle, or that's how I see it at least. They would probably be free to do as they wish otherwise, but it's not like they're spoiled for choice: stay and fight and maybe live (safety in numbers), leave and probably die (Orlesian civil war, Templars, wildlife...).

Modifié par MissOuJ, 15 mai 2013 - 08:31 .

[Hazegurl]

DKJaigen wrote...

Oh but you are obligated. Your are given a voice a vote and rights in return your democratic elected leaders may demand war. Dont like it? Then leave if you find the morals of your fellows aberrent . Plenty of germans left germany when Hitler was elected and those germans bear no blame for ww2.

The loyalist fraternity decided to come (most likely out of cowardice) to andorhals reach and participate  with the vote. They got overruled now they have to deal with it.

Also i dont believe in freedom because thats anarchy. The mages fight for so they can control themselves.

You pretty much contradict yourself there. On one hand you say that if I don't like the fact that my leaders have declared war then I should just leave the country. Then you claim that if loyalists don't like the fact that they have been out voted then they should just deal with it.

If anything your point should be that if the loyalists don't like it they can high tail it out of there or back to the Chantry et al if they like. They still (according to your first statement) shouldn't have to just deal with it.

Further more, from what I'm reading so far, they didn't even attend the conclave to vote for independance. It was sprung on them by Fiona tapping her staff and demanding separation. I haven't read further so I don't know if there was a second meeting on the actual topic of separation. Hopefully I'll finish up soon.

And controlling themselves is something that should never happen so I'm with the Templars on that.

[LobselVith8]

Hazegurl wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

Oh but you are obligated. Your are given a voice a vote and rights in return your democratic elected leaders may demand war. Dont like it? Then leave if you find the morals of your fellows aberrent . Plenty of germans left germany when Hitler was elected and those germans bear no blame for ww2.

The loyalist fraternity decided to come (most likely out of cowardice) to andorhals reach and participate  with the vote. They got overruled now they have to deal with it.

Also i dont believe in freedom because thats anarchy. The mages fight for so they can control themselves.

You pretty much contradict yourself there. On one hand you say that if I don't like the fact that my leaders have declared war then I should just leave the country. Then you claim that if loyalists don't like the fact that they have been out voted then they should just deal with it.

If anything your point should be that if the loyalists don't like it they can high tail it out of there or back to the Chantry et al if they like. They still (according to your first statement) shouldn't have to just deal with it.

A country where you have the freedom to leave if you disagree with the direction the leaders are taking the nation in is a little different than the Chantry controlled Circles, where any mage who tried to leave would be captured, killed, or made tranquil.

Hazegurl wrote...

Further more, from what I'm reading so far, they didn't even attend the conclave to vote for independance. It was sprung on them by Fiona tapping her staff and demanding separation. I haven't read further so I don't know if there was a second meeting on the actual topic of separation. Hopefully I'll finish up soon.

All the Circles of Magi broke free from the Andrastian Chantry and the Templar Order. Clearly, enough men and women wanted freedom that we have all the Circles independent.

Hazegurl wrote...

And controlling themselves is something that should never happen so I'm with the Templars on that.

I don't share that view. I'm quite glad that my Hero of Ferelden can champion mage autonomy, with the new ruler of Ferelden publicly declaring that mages have earned the right to govern themselves (if the Hero of Ferelden asks for his people to be given their independence).

[Hazegurl]

LobselVith8 wrote...

A country where you have the freedom to leave if you disagree with the direction the leaders are taking the nation in is a little different than the Chantry controlled Circles, where any mage who tried to leave would be captured, killed, or made tranquil.

Pay attention to people's posts before posting Lob. We're not talking about leaving the Chantry here but the freedom to leave the side of the mages who want to fight.

All the Circles of Magi broke free from the Andrastian Chantry and the Templar Order. Clearly, enough men and women wanted freedom that we have all the Circles independent.

What happened is that the two largest fraternties made the choice for everyone else.

I don't share that view. I'm quite glad that my Hero of Ferelden can champion mage autonomy, with the new ruler of Ferelden publicly declaring that mages have earned the right to govern themselves (if the Hero of Ferelden asks for his people to be given their independence).

And my mage warden asked for land and riches

[Ryzaki]

Honestly I started asking for lands and riches too after that whole "well the Chantry ignored the boon anyway" crap.

If its gonna get nullified anyway my warden might as well live like a noble for a few years.

[LobselVith8]

Hazegurl wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

A country where you have the freedom to leave if you disagree with the direction the leaders are taking the nation in is a little different than the Chantry controlled Circles, where any mage who tried to leave would be captured, killed, or made tranquil.

Pay attention to people's posts before posting Lob. We're not talking about leaving the Chantry here but the freedom to leave the side of the mages who want to fight.

You made the comparison to a hypothetical country and the Loyalists' reaction to the democratic vote that took place. The entire reason the democratic vote took place was because of the Chantry controlled Circles where mages were forced to live by law, under the authority of the Templar Order and the Andrastian Chantry, who had divine right over them. The compulsion to seek freedom from this tyranny is what spured mages like Fiona to seek autonomy from the Chantry of Andraste and the Order of Templars.

Thinking that the Loyalists' feelings shouldn't override the independence of the others who seek independence from a cruel and brutal system where they are relatively powerless makes it entirely different than your comparison to a country (more specifically, DKJaigen's point about leaving said country when you dislike the direction the country is going in).

Hazegurl wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

All the Circles of Magi broke free from the Andrastian Chantry and the Templar Order. Clearly, enough men and women wanted freedom that we have all the Circles independent.

What happened is that the two largest fraternties made the choice for everyone else.

With all the Circles across the continent in the Andrastian kingdoms following suit.

Hazegurl wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I don't share that view. I'm quite glad that my Hero of Ferelden can champion mage autonomy, with the new ruler of Ferelden publicly declaring that mages have earned the right to govern themselves (if the Hero of Ferelden asks for his people to be given their independence). 

And my mage warden asked for land and riches

Which would be illegal if it wasn't given to your Warden as a royal boon by the new ruler of the kingdom, as we know from the example of Connor.

[Hazegurl]

LobselVith8 wrote...

You made the comparison to a hypothetical country and the Loyalists' reaction to the democratic vote that took place. The entire reason the democratic vote took place was because of the Chantry controlled Circles where mages were...

Thinking that the Loyalists' feelings shouldn't override the independence of the others who seek independence from a cruel and brutal system where they are relatively powerless makes it entirely different than your comparison to a country (more specifically, DKJaigen's point about leaving said country when you dislike the direction the country is going in).

With all the Circles across the continent in the Andrastian kingdoms following suit.

Which would be illegal if it wasn't given to your Warden as a royal boon by the new ruler of the kingdom, as we know from the example of Connor.

Once again, the comparison was made based on whether or not the loyalists (as well as the other smaller fraternities) have a right to part ways from the Libertarians and Aequitarians. Separation from the Chantry and Templars at this point is a non issue considering that that desicion has already been made and it is done. 

Now I have a feeling this will fly over your head so here is a question. Do you think the loyalists and other smaller factions should be forced to fight even if they don't want to or should they be free to do whatever they want whether its return to the Circle or go off in hiding?

Still doesn't change the fact that it's the two largest groups making that choice for everyone.

Still doesn't change the fact that I got it while you got nothing.