1072 réponses à ce sujet

[Torax]

IanPolaris wrote...

Torax wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Torax wrote...

Gaider never seemed to imply that it was excused morally. He just stated that they she had the ability to use it since the Grand Cleric and most likely the majority of the clergy were all killed. Cullen wasn't there to stand up to her if I recall. Maybe he would have stopped it earlier? Hard to say. Meredith having the ability to invoke in that scene doesn't resolve her being right morally. Gaider even implied before that the Divine would have had some pretty cruel punishments from the Divine when she found it. Granted Meredith is dead by then.

Actually he does seem to say that Meridith's position is an arguably reasonable one and thus it could be morally justified.

http://social.biowar...1321/13#6995376

-Polaris

Yes justified for some templars. You tried to imply that it was his personal belief after that. He was just saying for say Meredith and the other pricks like Alrik. They would consider themselves justified. Loghain even thought he was justified in his actions including letting the son of Maric die. It just is what it is. Painting gaider to be some mage hater gets us no where. Infact it just makes you seem more bias and petty. While you attempt to make Gaider look like a mage hater he has been neutral. You just try to make him your enemy cause he works for Bioware.

No.  What I linked to and what I am talkig about IS DG's personal beliefs.  Not that the templars are right or wrong, but that locking away people for what they might do can be considered reasonable and anyone that disasgrees is naive.  He even used that exact word when addressing me.

If I am to be called naive for calling the slaughter of people for a crime they didn't commit to be murder and genocide and that saying that it's considered evil to punish people for what they are rather than what they've done, then I will proudly bear the title of Naive.

-Polaris

I'll respond with this

David Gaider wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
However, you are suggestng as a Developer that it's legitament to lock away people for what they might do.  There is no getting around that, and that makes it a classic human rights issue.  Paint as many mages as bloodmages as you like, but that essential point doesn't go away.

Gah.

I'm suggesting the world believes it's legitimate. And I'm suggesting the templars have reasons for what they do that are not without basis. Only in your head is this the equivalent of an endorsement.

And I'm going to stop talking to you now, as it's pretty clear it doesn't matter what I say you will simply interpret anything not-white as equaling black.

[AshenEndymion]

IanPolaris wrote...

No.  What I linked to and what I am talkig about IS DG's personal beliefs.  Not that the templars are right or wrong, but that locking away people for what they might do can be considered reasonable and anyone that disasgrees is naive.  He even used that exact word when addressing me.

If I am to be called naive for calling the slaughter of people for a crime they didn't commit to be murder and genocide and that saying that it's considered evil to punish people for what they are rather than what they've done, then I will proudly bear the title of Naive.

-Polaris

So... what you're saying is that there is no reason, none whatsoever, for anyone to be locked away for something they may do in the future?  That is a tad naive.

I would think if someone threatened you with death, that you would want that person locked up... I don't think you would want to be told "locking him up for something he might do in the future is wrong."

[PantheraOnca]

Torax wrote...


The statement about banging one's head against wall is trying to apply things form the real world into Thedas. Those things have never happened in that world for all to view actions of mages in that light. So bringing them up in context to the game changes nothing. I don't see anyone really caring that Tevinter killed most of all the elves and then made the rest slaves for thousands of years. Most the world still sees them as inferior. Thedas is not a fair and kind world for the most part. Even the Chantry while it does help widows and orphans is still as harsh as so many other groups. It still has zealots and fanatics. Nothing is perfect in Thedas. Trying to pretend it is or trying to imply it is say present day europe? Pointless and goes no where.

Ok.

I am not saying that Thedas or the Chantry or whatever fair or kind. I am also not saying what Tevinter did to the elves is excusable.

I think what is being said is that a lot of what goes on in Thedas is morally reprehensible, and that it should not be that way. It doesn't matter that nothing in the real world has or hasn't happened there. Real life occurances are referred to for similarity, not for Thedasian historical precedent.

In the magical Land of Randomville, every second child is murdered 4 days after birth. Just because this is the custom in fictional Randomville, does not mean I should accept it as good and fine and not voice my disagreement with this practice. I am not implying that Ranomdville is present day Europe or North America or Mars. I am saying that I disagree with a custom or procedure used in a fictional setting. The two are not the same thing.

[LobselVith8]

asindre wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
How was Meredith protecting Kirkwall by ignoring the guilty party standing right in front of her and attacking the population in the Gallows who were innocent of the crime?

Meredith wanted to annull the circle long before Anders blew up the chantry, but when he did, she got the power to do it.

Meredith makes reference to the attack as her reason. "The people will demand blood," she stated. That was her justification for the Right of Annulment. In doing so, she proceeded to ignore the apostate who murdered the Grand Cleric Elthina and all the occupants of the Kirkwall Chantry. She was also mentally unbalanced due to the  Idol (the McGuffin of DA2's storyline).

[IanPolaris]

Torax,

Your DG quote actually backs me up. In order for us to accept that the world accepts this is a legitamate reason, then he needs to show us why that is or we won't accept the world. Either he believes himself that it can be legit and justified to punish people for what they are (not is but can be) in which case it should be 'obvious' or he's done a very poor job explaining (not telling but SHOWING) why people in Thedas should think this. I personally think based on his quotes in this very thread think it's the former and it came as a rude shock that so many people in DAO picked the mages almost as a default.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

AshenEndemion wrote...

So... what you're saying is that there is no reason, none whatsoever, for anyone to be locked away for something they may do in the future?  That is a tad naive.

I would think if someone threatened you with death, that you would want that person locked up... I don't think you would want to be told "locking him up for something he might do in the future is wrong."

Threatening my life is a crime and thus I'd have no problem punishing (to the proper extent of the law) someone that did that.  Free speech does not include the right to shout "fire" in a crowded theatre.

Again, it's based on something that someone has DONE.

-Polaris

[PlumPaul93]

could someone basically give me the short version of what this thread is about (don't want to read wall of text, 19 pages). Thanks.

[Torax]

LobselVith8 wrote...

asindre wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
How was Meredith protecting Kirkwall by ignoring the guilty party standing right in front of her and attacking the population in the Gallows who were innocent of the crime?

Meredith wanted to annull the circle long before Anders blew up the chantry, but when he did, she got the power to do it.

Meredith makes reference to the attack as her reason. "The people will demand blood," she stated. That was her justification for the Right of Annulment. In doing so, she proceeded to ignore the apostate who murdered the Grand Cleric Elthina and all the occupants of the Kirkwall Chantry. She was also mentally unbalanced due to the  Idol (the McGuffin of DA2's storyline).

I'm thinking the Idol had to play a part just because Meredith refused to do the Tranquil Solution. That or because she feared it would cause a riot among the nobles. I think that is more the problem. If she tranquiled all the mages she could have lack of control. Even though her puppet of a viscount was still alive. She would have been held accountable not Alrik

So I figure she either was corrupted more by the idol or just feared she couldn't control the outcry for Tranquil Solution. So instead if she can paint the annulment around "i'm doing what the people would want." she may at least get the templars around her. Well and possibly the champion and their team on her side. So not sure which truly was playing here. Power or Idol. I'm thinking mostly Power with a shot of Idol.

[KnightofPhoenix]

LobselVith8 wrote...
Meredith makes reference to the attack as her reason. "The people will demand blood," she stated. That was her justification for the Right of Annulment.

More like excuse.

The entire end game is flawed and add to that idol and secret insanity (Orsino) and pretty much who is "right" or "wrong" becomes pointless, as there is a nefarious mysterious presence influecing the whole thing. 

Had there been an indication that Anders had collaborators within the Circle, then Meredith would have made more sense. And I still do not understand why she is completely oblivious to Anders, it's really idiotic.

[tmp7704]

IanPolaris wrote...

In order for us to accept that the world accepts this is a legitamate reason, then he needs to show us why that is or we won't accept the world.

Few hundreds years ago our own societies thought there's perfectly legitimate reasons to hold witch trials and persecute these who were thought to be witches. And that's without actual magic. What more do you need in order to accept that such world is possible?

Modifié par tmp7704, 08 avril 2011 - 11:11 .

[Sheryl Chee]

IanPolaris wrote...

No.  What I linked to and what I am talkig about IS DG's personal beliefs. Not that the templars are right or wrong, but that locking away people for what they might do can be considered reasonable and anyone that disasgrees is naive.  He even used that exact word when addressing me.

If I am to be called naive for calling the slaughter of people for a crime they didn't commit to be murder and genocide and that saying that it's considered evil to punish people for what they are rather than what they've done, then I will proudly bear the title of Naive.

Good grief.

This is what you think David is saying:

It is naive to call the slaughter of innocent people murder.

This is what David is actually saying:

It is naive to assume that absolutely no one in Thedas would find it justified to lock up a bunch of people who are, by an accident of birth, dangerous.

These two things are not the same.

[sphinxess]

IanPolaris wrote...

Torax,

Your DG quote actually backs me up. In order for us to accept that the world accepts this is a legitamate reason, then he needs to show us why that is or we won't accept the world. Either he believes himself that it can be legit and justified to punish people for what they are (not is but can be) in which case it should be 'obvious' or he's done a very poor job explaining (not telling but SHOWING) why people in Thedas should think this. I personally think based on his quotes in this very thread think it's the former and it came as a rude shock that so many people in DAO picked the mages almost as a default.

-Polaris

Why not just the reason:  That this is the religion of the world - the people are taught the dangers of mages and the Chantry who they believed in has performed this action for the good of the people. Anything else they hear is just some horrible non-believer trying to cast doubt.

[Torax]

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

could someone basically give me the short version of what this thread is about (don't want to read wall of text, 19 pages). Thanks.

IanPolaris wanted to say that meredith should have waited or not enacted the Right of Annulment because she had tried to overule the Grand Cleric with a letter to the Divine.

We don't know really know the results of that Letter to the Divine. All speculation on his and our parts.

Eventually Gaider stated that with the Grand Cleric dead and no successor evident. Meredith was the acting Grand Cleric and gave herself the permission to do Right.

Polaris disagrees and thinks Gaider hates mages I think.

That is what it was about. Just some other arguments in between.

[AshenEndymion]

IanPolaris wrote...

AshenEndemion wrote...

So... what you're saying is that there is no reason, none whatsoever, for anyone to be locked away for something they may do in the future?  That is a tad naive.

I would think if someone threatened you with death, that you would want that person locked up... I don't think you would want to be told "locking him up for something he might do in the future is wrong."

Threatening my life is a crime and thus I'd have no problem punishing (to the proper extent of the law) someone that did that.  Free speech does not include the right to shout "fire" in a crowded theatre.

Again, it's based on something that someone has DONE.

-Polaris

But threatening someone is only a crime because people are known to carry out the threats.

The threat of a mage is that they are known to be possessed, and that possession will cause the death and destruction of all around them.

The disconnect you are having is that having magic in Thedas, for all intents and purposes, is a crime.  By being born, said "person" has threatened the lives of all around them by virtue of being a mage.  Once said "person" has proven that they are no longer a threat, they are allowed to live their lives with relative impunity.

You may disagree with this, and think it is immoral.  That is fine and dandy.  The people of Thedas disagree.  And they are all that matter, isn't it?

Modifié par AshenEndemion, 08 avril 2011 - 11:15 .

[PlumPaul93]

Torax wrote...

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

could someone basically give me the short version of what this thread is about (don't want to read wall of text, 19 pages). Thanks.

IanPolaris wanted to say that meredith should have waited or not enacted the Right of Annulment because she had tried to overule the Grand Cleric with a letter to the Divine.

We don't know really know the results of that Letter to the Divine. All speculation on his and our parts.

Eventually Gaider stated that with the Grand Cleric dead and no successor evident. Meredith was the acting Grand Cleric and gave herself the permission to do Right.

Polaris disagrees and thinks Gaider hates mages I think.

That is what it was about. Just some other arguments in between.

Ooh I see thanks! Also lol at this polaris thinking gaider hates mages

[IanPolaris]

Torax wrote...

So I figure she either was corrupted more by the idol or just feared she couldn't control the outcry for Tranquil Solution. So instead if she can paint the annulment around "i'm doing what the people would want." she may at least get the templars around her. Well and possibly the champion and their team on her side. So not sure which truly was playing here. Power or Idol. I'm thinking mostly Power with a shot of Idol.

I'd say more than a touch of idol.  If she wanted power in this way, then she clearly wasn't thinking it through (which is why I say more than a touch of idol).  If the Champion does side with her and is not a mage, then the Champion will not only be seen as a hero to the Templars (and the Seneschal already indicated the Templars have veto power over the next Viscount) but as a Nobel (Amell House) of Kirkwall is legally entitled to be nominated by his (or her) fellow nobles for the job.

Great job Meridith.  You now get a STRONG Viscount who has shown he's not afraid of you.....not even Meridith could stop the Champion from becoming the new Viscount after he (or she) helps her.

-Polaris

[asindre]

LobselVith8 wrote...
Meredith makes reference to the attack as her reason. "The people will demand blood," she stated.

Yes she used that as a reason, and if it was enough is for the divine to decide, but that was not her only reason. The mages rebelled and turned to blood magic long before Anders blew up the chantry, apparently that was not a good enough reason so she had too use Anders attack.

That was her justification for the Right of Annulment. In doing so, she proceeded to ignore the apostate who murdered the Grand Cleric Elthina and all the occupants of the Kirkwall Chantry.

Because she didn't care about Anders, she wanted to annull the circle and needed him as an excuse.

She was also mentally unbalanced due to the  Idol (the McGuffin of DA2's storyline).

No one knew she had the idol, or that she was mentally unstable so why does this matter?

[TEWR]

Sheryl Chee wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

No.  What I linked to and what I am talkig about IS DG's personal beliefs. Not that the templars are right or wrong, but that locking away people for what they might do can be considered reasonable and anyone that disasgrees is naive.  He even used that exact word when addressing me.

If I am to be called naive for calling the slaughter of people for a crime they didn't commit to be murder and genocide and that saying that it's considered evil to punish people for what they are rather than what they've done, then I will proudly bear the title of Naive.

Good grief.

This is what you think David is saying:

It is naive to call the slaughter of innocent people murder.

This is what David is actually saying:

It is naive to assume that absolutely no one in Thedas would find it justified to lock up a bunch of people who are, by an accident of birth, dangerous.

These two things are not the same.

How can the idea of being born with magic within the genetic construct of a person be considered an accident? A gift and a curse I can see, but to call it an accident.

Either way, the current version of the Circle and additionally the Chantry are not the answer. A reformed version might serve the world better.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 08 avril 2011 - 11:18 .

[LobselVith8]

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

could someone basically give me the short version of what this thread is about (don't want to read wall of text, 19 pages). Thanks.

It started out as an inquiry into whether Knight-Commander Meredith's request from the Divine of Orlais to give her the right to perform the Right of Annulment made it illegal for her to later execute the mages of the Circle of Kirkwall, but Gaider said she was within her legal right to do so. The discussion changed when its nature as an act of genocide came into the picture even as a legal act, and people have also been interpretating Gaider's comments about the Right and the mages since then.

[Wulfram]

Sheryl Chee wrote...

This is what David is actually saying:

It is naive to assume that absolutely no one in Thedas would find it justified to lock up a bunch of people who are, by an accident of birth, dangerous.

Well if he insists on arguing against a position no one holds, then it's hardly surprising if people get confused.

[IanPolaris]

AshenEndemion wrote...

But threatening someone is only a crime because people are known to carry out the threats.

It's still based on what someone has DONE.  If you don't think that verbally threatening soemone is a crime because you don' intend to carry through, then go ahead and (hypothetically for all the secret service people reading) threaten Obama's life on the 'net, phone, and even tell your closest friends.

Be sure to say hello to the beefy hunks in the secret service who obviously are not there to arrest you for any crime.

-Polaris

[Torax]

IanPolaris wrote...

Torax wrote...

So I figure she either was corrupted more by the idol or just feared she couldn't control the outcry for Tranquil Solution. So instead if she can paint the annulment around "i'm doing what the people would want." she may at least get the templars around her. Well and possibly the champion and their team on her side. So not sure which truly was playing here. Power or Idol. I'm thinking mostly Power with a shot of Idol.

I'd say more than a touch of idol.  If she wanted power in this way, then she clearly wasn't thinking it through (which is why I say more than a touch of idol).  If the Champion does side with her and is not a mage, then the Champion will not only be seen as a hero to the Templars (and the Seneschal already indicated the Templars have veto power over the next Viscount) but as a Nobel (Amell House) of Kirkwall is legally entitled to be nominated by his (or her) fellow nobles for the job.

Great job Meridith.  You now get a STRONG Viscount who has shown he's not afraid of you.....not even Meridith could stop the Champion from becoming the new Viscount after he (or she) helps her.

-Polaris

The sad part being no matter what you do she will fight you and die. My favorite thing about meredith is that angry brow she gives before calling you the Champion in Act 2. That kind of told me from the start I'd have to kill her.

[KnightofPhoenix]

asindre wrote...

Because she didn't care about Anders, she wanted to annull the circle and needed him as an excuse.

She doesn't need him alive. It doesn't make sense for her to ignore him. Not only did he prove to be very dangerous and radical, but he has shown that there is a spirit inside of him, aka very likely to be an abomination.

As KC, she thinks it's smart to ignore him?

I get that she wants to annull the Circle (idol), but she can at least make some effort to get Anders first.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 08 avril 2011 - 11:19 .

[AshenEndymion]

LobselVith8 wrote...

PlumPaul82393 wrote...

could someone basically give me the short version of what this thread is about (don't want to read wall of text, 19 pages). Thanks.

It started out as an inquiry into whether Knight-Commander Meredith's request from the Divine of Orlais to give her the right to perform the Right of Annulment made it illegal for her to later execute the mages of the Circle of Kirkwall, but Gaider said she was within her legal right to do so. The discussion changed when its nature as an act of disarmament came into the picture even as a legal act, and people have also been interpretating Gaider's comments about the Right and the mages since then.

Fixed.

I thought we had a truce?  Do we not?

[LobselVith8]

asindre wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Meredith makes reference to the attack as her reason. "The people will demand blood," she stated.

Yes she used that as a reason, and if it was enough is for the divine to decide, but that was not her only reason. The mages rebelled and turned to blood magic long before Anders blew up the chantry, apparently that was not a good enough reason so she had too use Anders attack.

Not all the mages practiced blood magic or became abominations.

asindre wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

That was her justification for the Right of Annulment. In doing so, she proceeded to ignore the apostate who murdered the Grand Cleric Elthina and all the occupants of the Kirkwall Chantry.

Because she didn't care about Anders, she wanted to annull the circle and needed him as an excuse.

In which the entire Circle is condemned for the actions of a man who isn't a member of the Kirkwall Circle, which many people take issue with (including me).

asindre wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

She was also mentally unbalanced due to the  Idol (the McGuffin of DA2's storyline).

No one knew she had the idol, or that she was mentally unstable so why does this matter?

It calls into question the validity of her claims if she wasn't mentally capable of making rational decisions.