120 réponses à ce sujet

[Deified Data]

shantisands wrote...


Oh, as for the OP's feeling on Anders and Fenris' sister....   I really honestly just saw it as a " OMG you big hater! You were jealous of your sister and used that hatred of her powers and your magisters to blame all magic forever!"  No matter how short-sighted he had become, to ME, at the time anyway.... it seemed more like a DING DING! I understand this now, its a sibling rivalry/fear thing.    I could be wrong, and perhaps I was wishful thinking at the time, but that is how it came across to me. 

With all due respect, he probably hates mages because he was enslaved and tortured by them for most of his life. That seems like a given to me. Anders is simply being vicious when he bring up the sibling rivalry issue - Fenris seemed genuinely surprised that his sister was a mage. If he ever knew about it, he had forgotten by the time of their meeting in the Hanged Man.

Also, in general regards to the glitch that prevents you from keeping Anders in your party if you side with the Templars, is there any sort of petition to not fix this glitch? Because it's stupidly implausible? Does anyone have any in-game dialogue from Anders about this alleged decision? How could he possibly justify it?

[Rifneno]

Deified Data wrote...

Also, in general regards to the glitch that prevents you from keeping Anders in your party if you side with the Templars, is there any sort of petition to not fix this glitch? Because it's stupidly implausible? Does anyone have any in-game dialogue from Anders about this alleged decision? How could he possibly justify it?

I'm still hoping that the employee who said it's in the game was just mistaken and it really was cut from the final release.  Because as you say, it's just completely nonsensical.  Might as well have it raining purple elephants.

[_Aine_]

Deified Data wrote...

shantisands wrote...


Oh, as for the OP's feeling on Anders and Fenris' sister....   I really honestly just saw it as a " OMG you big hater! You were jealous of your sister and used that hatred of her powers and your magisters to blame all magic forever!"  No matter how short-sighted he had become, to ME, at the time anyway.... it seemed more like a DING DING! I understand this now, its a sibling rivalry/fear thing.    I could be wrong, and perhaps I was wishful thinking at the time, but that is how it came across to me. 

With all due respect, he probably hates mages because he was enslaved and tortured by them for most of his life. That seems like a given to me. Anders is simply being vicious when he bring up the sibling rivalry issue - Fenris seemed genuinely surprised that his sister was a mage. If he ever knew about it, he had forgotten by the time of their meeting in the Hanged Man.

Also, in general regards to the glitch that prevents you from keeping Anders in your party if you side with the Templars, is there any sort of petition to not fix this glitch? Because it's stupidly implausible? Does anyone have any in-game dialogue from Anders about this alleged decision? How could he possibly justify it?

I totally agree with your first paragraph, it is why I included the Magister in my thought. I just felt, in that playthrough, that there was *more* to it than that.   In my 100% mage supporting playthrough he was not as vindictive, in my templar one, yes, I could see the vindictiveness much more.  It really seemed to depend on a) your past actions and who you have in your group at the time ( some people;s dialogues dismiss other peoples so you don't get the same back and forth all around)

As for your second one, I don't know about petition, but I have read wildly negative posts regarding it.  Do you know if it is only if you convince him he was wrong and make it a way of penance to side with the templars?  If it is an outright about-face and he just goes "ok" then that is pretty lame.  

I CAN say though, that my "templar supporting" ending actually had me supporting both the mages and the templars and BOTH ended up happy with what I had done. If that is a bug, so be it, but I didn't slaughter all the mages.  I had trouble TRYING the ending, but I am glad I did because I saw that mass slaughter wasn't the ONLY way and it could be dealt with somewhat moderately.  ( The scenes that showed slaughter of templars and mages were equal in both sidings)  

[Deified Data]

Plaintiff wrote...

 The Dalish give their mages positions of incredible responsibility and not one of them that we've seen has turned into an abomination ever. Even Merrill, who is a blood mage, has never harmed anyone except in self defense. Why? Because the Dalish treat their mages with at least a basic level of respect and they are taught to embrace their powers for the ways in which they could help people.

If the Circle is so great, how come the vast majority of blood mages and abominations we encounter are from it?

It's perhaps fair to say that Merrill would have been possessed by the demon at the end of her questline if Merathari didn't take her place. So, respect or no, Dalish are perfectly capable of abusing blood magic and becoming abominations.

Also, most blood mages are from the Circle because most mages are from the Circle, no?

[Deztyn]

Along the rivalry romance path Anders spends years fighting Justices influence and fails. Justice takes him over in order to do what he does. Now siding with the templars might not be the nicest thing to do but there are good arguments to support it. And if Anders can be made to agree with that and stop himself from becoming under Justice's complete control, how is that an objectively bad thing?

I don't know what's more tragic, that Anders spent his whole life yearning to be free only to become a slave to the demon spirit demon in his head or the fact that so many of his FANS support it.

But hey, what's free will when compared to the ability to blow up a church, ignite a war and feel sanctimonious about it in the end.

YMMV.

[Eollodwyn]

shantisands wrote...

As for your second one, I don't know about petition, but I have read wildly negative posts regarding it.  Do you know if it is only if you convince him he was wrong and make it a way of penance to side with the templars?  If it is an outright about-face and he just goes "ok" then that is pretty lame. 

In order to get him to get him to side with the Templars you have to have full rivalry, have convinced him that merging with Justice was wrong, and then spare him and convince him that helping the Templars is a better atonement than dying. 

[Deified Data]

Eollodwyn wrote...

shantisands wrote...

As for your second one, I don't know about petition, but I have read wildly negative posts regarding it.  Do you know if it is only if you convince him he was wrong and make it a way of penance to side with the templars?  If it is an outright about-face and he just goes "ok" then that is pretty lame. 

In order to get him to get him to side with the Templars you have to have full rivalry, have convinced him that merging with Justice was wrong, and then spare him and convince him that helping the Templars is a better atonement than dying. 

I'm sorry, but if Anders is as far-gone at that point as he seems to be, I see no way that Vengeance could possibly be quelled long enough for Anders to support the people he hates more than anything in the world.

I hate Anders, truly, but I'd have even less respect for him than I do now if he suddenly sided with the Templars after what he did, realizing it's the "winning team". God, just knowing that's a possibility pisses me off. Whoever wrote Anders into a situation like that needs to take lessons in consistency - Anders's entire schtik is that he can't change, he can't see compromise. Having him aid the Templars in the end would be horribly unsatisfying.

[KnightofPhoenix]

@ OP
When meeting with Sister Nightingale, she something that magic is dangerous and he replies, with disdain, "only to you (aka non-mage)". The way he says it shows that he doesn't care (barring the fact that mages are dangerous to each other that he is blatantly ignoring).

Justice, as a universal concept is dead and was replaced by Vengeance, a personal impulse, a long time ago it seems. Also, I think he wants to keep the illusion that Tevinter is so much more awesome in his head,. hence his behavior with Danarius.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Deified Data wrote...
I hate Anders, truly, but I'd have even less respect for him than I do now if he suddenly sided with the Templars after what he did, realizing it's the "winning team". God, just knowing that's a possibility pisses me off. Whoever wrote Anders into a situation like that needs to take lessons in consistency - Anders's entire schtik is that he can't change, he can't see compromise. Having him aid the Templars in the end would be horribly unsatisfying.

I concur. You can't convince people who see no compromise and only see hatred in a few words. What could have been done is tell Anders to run away and leave, which I can see him doing, if the PC wants to spare him and side with Templars.

[Eollodwyn]

Deified Data wrote...

Eollodwyn wrote...

shantisands wrote...

As for your second one, I don't know about petition, but I have read wildly negative posts regarding it.  Do you know if it is only if you convince him he was wrong and make it a way of penance to side with the templars?  If it is an outright about-face and he just goes "ok" then that is pretty lame. 

In order to get him to get him to side with the Templars you have to have full rivalry, have convinced him that merging with Justice was wrong, and then spare him and convince him that helping the Templars is a better atonement than dying. 

I'm sorry, but if Anders is as far-gone at that point as he seems to be, I see no way that Vengeance could possibly be quelled long enough for Anders to support the people he hates more than anything in the world.

I hate Anders, truly, but I'd have even less respect for him than I do now if he suddenly sided with the Templars after what he did, realizing it's the "winning team". God, just knowing that's a possibility pisses me off. Whoever wrote Anders into a situation like that needs to take lessons in consistency - Anders's entire schtik is that he can't change, he can't see compromise. Having him aid the Templars in the end would be horribly unsatisfying.

Actually, this dialogue kind of clears that up:

www.youtube.com/watch

His inability to see compromise comes from Justice, and if you rival him you can split the two of them enough that he (Anders apart from Justice) wants to find that compromise that Justice won't acknowledge.  He believes destroying the Chantry was wrong, but he's sharing a body with an entity that thinks it was right.  Unfortunately for him, that entity can hijack his body...

Modifié par Eollodwyn, 09 avril 2011 - 04:54 .

[Deified Data]

Eollodwyn wrote...

Deified Data wrote...

Eollodwyn wrote...

shantisands wrote...

As for your second one, I don't know about petition, but I have read wildly negative posts regarding it.  Do you know if it is only if you convince him he was wrong and make it a way of penance to side with the templars?  If it is an outright about-face and he just goes "ok" then that is pretty lame. 

In order to get him to get him to side with the Templars you have to have full rivalry, have convinced him that merging with Justice was wrong, and then spare him and convince him that helping the Templars is a better atonement than dying. 

I'm sorry, but if Anders is as far-gone at that point as he seems to be, I see no way that Vengeance could possibly be quelled long enough for Anders to support the people he hates more than anything in the world.

I hate Anders, truly, but I'd have even less respect for him than I do now if he suddenly sided with the Templars after what he did, realizing it's the "winning team". God, just knowing that's a possibility pisses me off. Whoever wrote Anders into a situation like that needs to take lessons in consistency - Anders's entire schtik is that he can't change, he can't see compromise. Having him aid the Templars in the end would be horribly unsatisfying.

Actually, this dialogue kind of clears that up:

www.youtube.com/watch

His inability to see compromise comes from Justice, and if you rival him you can split the two of them enough that he (Anders apart from Justice) wants to find that compromise that Justice won't acknowledge.  He believes destroying the Chantry was wrong, but he's sharing a body with an entity that thinks it was right.  Unfortunately for him, that entity can hijack his body...

That would seem like too much of a Redcliffe scenario, where a perfect compromise can be reached without any real sacrifice. I was of the impression that the writing team was intentionally avoiding situations like that because of all the complaints.

[stobie]

sassperella wrote...

Deified Data wrote...

FYI, this is the quest where Fenris is led into an ambush in the Hanged Man by his sister, who is revealed to be a magister-apprentice and a servant of Denarius. There are multiple paths through this quest, with the two biggest choices being whether to sell Fenris back into slavery, or whether to spare the life of Fenris's sister. This thread concerns Anders's reactions to a couple of the choices you can make, and their implications.

First, you are given the opportunity to sell Fenris back to Denarius. If you decide to do so, Anders will respond with something along the lines of "I'm glad I wasn't the only one thinking that" - after the scene, you will gain +5 friendship with Anders for selling Fenris back into slavery.

Second, you are given the choice to spare Fenris's sister, who betrayed him by leading him into Denarius's trap. Fenris's first inclination is to kill her for betraying him and sympathizing Denarius - whether he is "right" in this I will not argue here. However, once it is revealed that Fenris's sister is a mage, Anders calls Fenris a hypocrite for wanting to kill her, and says, and I quote: "You're just jealous (of her)". Killing this betrayer only becomes a bad thing to Anders once it is revealed she's a mage, as though that changes everything.

For someone who's spent his entire life under oppression (and being possessed by a spirit of justice, besides), Anders displays a remarkable lack of respect for human life and freedom. He fights for the freedom of mages while virtually cheering you on as you sell a non-mage into slavery. Is it "justice" to sell a man into slavery just because he doesn't agree with your political opinions? Is someone instantly forgiven of all trespasses just because they're a mage?

I'll be honest - Anders earned alot of flack from me when he blew up the Chantry, but this blatant hypocracy and sadism on his part puts him over the edge between "mild nuisance" and "inhuman monster". Can any Anders fans justify what he did, here? Why would justice manifest itself in such an injust way? Is there absolutely nothing left but vengeance inside Anders by Act III?

To get the comment about selling Fenris back into slavery Hawke has to be an even bigger douche and hand Fenris over. I never had that dialog because my Hawke wasn't a douche....

So moral Is if Hawke is a douche then Anders can be too. How can players be appalled at Anders' reactions to a heinous action they themselves took in the first place?  

I guess they could just say, "I was just TESTING you! Reload!"  But I couldn't do it, either.  The etheric stain would be a blot on my soul forever after.    The fact that Fenris is then basically made Tranquil makes it even darker.  Though it's already utlimate-dark.

[Eollodwyn]

Deified Data wrote...

Eollodwyn wrote...

Snip.

That would seem like too much of a Redcliffe scenario, where a perfect compromise can be reached without any real sacrifice. I was of the impression that the writing team was intentionally avoiding situations like that because of all the complaints.

Hmm, I wouldn't see the situation as being a perfect compromise.  You still have to decide between Templars and mages while knowing full well that both sides are somewhat right and somewhat wrong, and you're still forcing some of your companions to go against their beliefs (Anders, Merril, and, arguably, Isabela or Fenris, Sebastian, and Aveline).  There's no "good" choice because no matter what you do innocent people are going to die, some of them by your hand.  In Redcliffe you had the option of saving everyone and their dog, but there's no option like that here. 

[stobie]

Rifneno wrote...

Sesshomaru47 wrote...

He accused my mage of being a mage hater, well turning against my "own kind". To be honest she wasn't all that pro-mage anyway.
Just do the quest it makes killing him in the end all the more worth while. That is if you plan to kill him I guess.

How was he wrong again?  I've read your posts, you DID turn against your own kind.

Asdara wrote...

I do think that it is telling that Fenris won't betray YOU though - when Sebastian recommends turning Merill and Anders (the mages) in as apostates to Fenris he says something like "you clear it with Hawke if you want that to happen." Unlike Anders, who blows people up and involves you if you let him, unknowningly.

Yes he will.  If you don't have enough approval with him at the final mission, he'll side with Meredith's crew.  There are dialogue options to get him to rejoin, something about pointing out the Circle is similar to slavery.  But if you tell him "I'm not going to just let you just kill us all" he'll respond with "I'd be disappointed if you did" and attack Hawke.  It's very easy to avoid his betrayal, but yes, he WILL betray Hawke under some circumstances.

As for turning in the apostates in the group, the templars know Anders and Merrill are mages.  They just won't attempt to capture them with Hawke because... plot armor I guess.  Anders snaps at Cullen over something he says in Act II and Cullen shoots back "think what you want, mage."  In Act III when he backtalks Meredith, Meredith threatens him, "Your association with the Champion will only protect you so much, mage."  This isn't to say he'd turn them in given the chance, it's clear from that conversation he won't.  But I doubt it'd do much good if he did.

Sebastian?  Yeah, someone should murderknife him.

Mayorin wrote...

Well, to be fair, if there was a quest to sell out Anders to templars to make him tranquil, Fenris would be the first in line to give Hawke friendship points for this.

True story guys.  Excellent, excellent point.  These two just bitterly, bitterly hate each other.

I don't understand that first bit.   Why is 'my own kind' determined solely by being a mage?  Clearly, all mages don't think alike, or Morrigan & Wynne would be twins. It seems more reasonable that my mage Hawke thinks for herself, being raised to do so, and therefore, will at least try to see right and wrong from both perspectives.  She might be emotionally lured to one side or other (as am I) but she's not beholden to mages simply because she can cast a fireball.  Anders isn't talking about 'our kind' - he's talking about his own political agenda and his own beliefs. That's hardly conclusive.  By stopping him, you could arguably helping the Wynne-pacifist mages, too.

Fenris has reasonable prejudice - he doesn't appear to have insane prejudice, and if you haven't worked with him or earned his trust, I wouldn't consider it a 'betrayal' for him to side with the templars.    Anders can lure you in as a friend, even as a lover, then perform a heinous act that will mark you and your friends forever.  I don't see the balance between them.  If Fenris gave you a +point for getting rid of Anders, which he does not, it wouldn't be because he hates Anders, but because he considers him a menace.  (which he is, like him or not)  Fenris isn't a particular menace - no more than the rest of us, & he's in control of his mind.  (unless you act in epic vileness & send him back to his snivelling master)

[Rifneno]

stobie wrote...

I don't understand that first bit.   Why is 'my own kind' determined solely by being a mage?  Clearly, all mages don't think alike, or Morrigan & Wynne would be twins. It seems more reasonable that my mage Hawke thinks for herself, being raised to do so, and therefore, will at least try to see right and wrong from both perspectives.  She might be emotionally lured to one side or other (as am I) but she's not beholden to mages simply because she can cast a fireball.  Anders isn't talking about 'our kind' - he's talking about his own political agenda and his own beliefs. That's hardly conclusive.  By stopping him, you could arguably helping the Wynne-pacifist mages, too.

Why would Hawke be part of the Chantry apologist group like Wynne?  He/she is an apostate.  If Hawke wasn't against their solution to mages then he/she would've turned themselves in to the Circle.

Fenris has reasonable prejudice - he doesn't appear to have insane prejudice, and if you haven't worked with him or earned his trust, I wouldn't consider it a 'betrayal' for him to side with the templars.    Anders can lure you in as a friend, even as a lover, then perform a heinous act that will mark you and your friends forever.  I don't see the balance between them.  If Fenris gave you a +point for getting rid of Anders, which he does not, it wouldn't be because he hates Anders, but because he considers him a menace.  (which he is, like him or not)  Fenris isn't a particular menace - no more than the rest of us, & he's in control of his mind.  (unless you act in epic vileness & send him back to his snivelling master)

How is it not a betrayal for him to attempt to kill the person who fought off Danarius' slavehunters for him?  If he's in Hawke's party, Hawke saved him from slavehunters.  It's as simple as that.

Fenris isn't a menace?  The Fog Warriors beg to differ.

[stobie]

But I don't see Wynne as a Circle Mage. She's just a sensible woman who has respect for law, as long as it doesn't go too far. Anders doesn't seem to care much for apostates or Dalish mages - he cares for rebel Circle mages. All mages are not defined by Anders. My mage might have no respect for the Chantry, nor, like Morrigan, allow it to have any control over her, without considering it an evil, and without assuming their underlying point is completely wrong.

As for Fenris, it's perspective. For one thing, Hawke can be seen as betraying Fenris by siding with the same insanity he considers responsible for the situation in Tevinter. (and I don't see that he'd be wrong) Yes, my Hawke saved him. He probably taunted off my Hawke, too. If you haven't convinced him of the other side's merits, then you are betraying him just as much as he is betraying you.

As for Fog Warrior death, that's still at the behest/order of a mage. He was a menace when controlled by a mage, even if that control was just in his own mind. Killing them doesn't equate with starting a war, forcing neutral parties into war, & blowing up a bunch of people who just happened to be in the Chantry. If Anders gets to the point where he, like Fenris, regrets what he did, fine. I didn't see any evidence of it.

Modifié par stobie, 09 avril 2011 - 05:38 .

[RavenB]

I think Fenris and Anders were both hypocritical in the way they treated each others' plights in comparison to their own. I found them to be fairly similar in their one-mindedness. But that issue, I think is more tied up in Anders hatred of Fenris. I didn't notice him supporting slavery as a general state of being. Just supporting sending Fenris away as an individual. "Fenris deserves it," and, "slavery is alright in general," aren't necessarily the same idea.

But Dragon Age characters are pretty frequent for obvious bias without what seems like logical connection to their entire personality. Shale never has a moral thought in the whole time you know her until you meet Cairidin and it doesn't appear to happen a lot after. Zevran is all about gaining power and racking up a body count, unless it involves killing caged elves in a ritual. Doesn't Merrill approve if you let a demon possess Feynriel? These aren't exactly choices I thought seemed in line with the actual characters, but it fell into their situational bias.

[Deified Data]

Rifneno wrote...

How is it not a betrayal for him to attempt to kill the person who fought off Danarius' slavehunters for him?  If he's in Hawke's party, Hawke saved him from slavehunters.  It's as simple as that.

Fenris isn't a menace?  The Fog Warriors beg to differ.

Why would Fenris side with mage-sympathizers if you don't give him any reason to do so? Anders just blew up the Chantry - a line has been drawn, and he picked his side. If you failed to gain his loyalty, one way or the other, that's your own problem. Otherwise, he sees reason and sticks with his allies.

The same cannot be said of Anders, who knows no loyalty outside of his singular cause. Anders has proven that he is often unable to control the threat he poses, to templars and mages alike.

[stobie]

That much seems to accurately reflect humanity in general. And not without reason - you'd have more sympathy for what you know & have experienced.

With Fenris, I think he purely distrusts mages, & hates what they can do. That your mage Hawke can win him over, as a friend and lover, means he doesn't hate all mages. Anders seems to particularly hate Fenris - not elves or slaves or warriors. I guess that makes him seem petty in comparison.

Modifié par stobie, 09 avril 2011 - 05:55 .

[Rifneno]

Pretty flimsy rationale for Fenris' betrayal.  If I save someone from a bunch of slavehunters and then he tries to kill me because I refuse to be part of genocide, that is betrayal.  PERIOD.  I didn't try to defend Anders endorsing selling Fenris back to slavery. I don't see why Fenris fans can't admit a wrong he does.

[stobie]

I don't expect blind loyalty. I expect reasonable, earned loyalty.

[Rifneno]

stobie wrote...

I don't expect blind loyalty. I expect reasonable, earned loyalty.

I expect people I saved from life as a slave to a sadistic blood mage to not try to kill me.

[RavenB]

I think the issue of Fenris' "betrayal" is that it's tied up in game mechanics. You may have done all his quests and not used him otherwise, or made commentary on mages that you feel is perfectly justified, but that brought his approval down. This would give a fairly good argument that you believe what you've done for him is enough to deserve loyalty. The problem is that the game requires fairly black and white requirements for approval to be won.

[IanPolaris]

Rifneno wrote...

stobie wrote...

I don't expect blind loyalty. I expect reasonable, earned loyalty.

I expect people I saved from life as a slave to a sadistic blood mage to not try to kill me.

The problem is when it comes to magic (and you see this very much if you Rivalmance him), Fenris is simply not rational.  It's understandable why that would be so, but it still is what it is.  It would probably take decades (and probably never) for Fenris to soften his attitude any.  For Fenris the only good mage is a dead one.  You CAN soften that with regard to Bethany and/or yourself, but he'll use your strength (or hers) as evidence that the other mages can't be trusted.

He's just not rational on this topic.  He can't be.  His hate runs too deep.

-Polaris

[Rifneno]

IanPolaris wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

stobie wrote...

I don't expect blind loyalty. I expect reasonable, earned loyalty.

I expect people I saved from life as a slave to a sadistic blood mage to not try to kill me.

The problem is when it comes to magic (and you see this very much if you Rivalmance him), Fenris is simply not rational.  It's understandable why that would be so, but it still is what it is.  It would probably take decades (and probably never) for Fenris to soften his attitude any.  For Fenris the only good mage is a dead one.  You CAN soften that with regard to Bethany and/or yourself, but he'll use your strength (or hers) as evidence that the other mages can't be trusted.

He's just not rational on this topic.  He can't be.  His hate runs too deep.

-Polaris

I'm not saying it doesn't make some sense in the story, I just mean that the notion Anders betrays you and Fenris never would, is ludicrous.