69 réponses à ce sujet

[Gamer Ftw]

I really just don't think religious guys with swords should be in charge of them.
fanatics are apt to think anything is justified.
like cullen said "you can't treat mages like humans".
Well If you don't think of them as human and feel you have a divine right to control them there is going to be abuse.
They even take the children of mages for the chantry could you imagine some poor boy not knowing the mage he just killied was his mom or dad?
Religion should Never be in charge of anyone IMO.

Modifié par Gamer Ftw, 18 avril 2011 - 08:39 .

[Knightly_BW]

I think for me "Exalted March" term is where I would cross the line.

Circle is needed and untill someone comes up with a better solution I would support chantry on this one.

On the other hand killing other races or make them live like slaves (city elves more or less like slaves to me) because they believe in other gods or which ever holy cause you stick to it, is wrong.

[TEWR]

XxDeonxX wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

I think the Chantry should be torn down when they let an insane knight commander whom enjoys ancient lyrium enchanted greatswords call a Rite of Annulment on a Circle who was entirely innocent of any action taken against a Chantry that was blown to smithereens by an apostate. When that happens, I want the Chantry to burn

Oh wait...

You seen what lyrium exposure does to templars? remember the guy outside the chantry in denerim? Its like a poison the guy was nutty as. And that was from blue non "Pure lyrium" this stuff has clearly poisoned her mind. Before act 3 her actions weren't really unjustified and wrong. And as for the whole insistance on rooting out blood mages and orsinos protest.. Well she was right, and there was a bloody lot of them.. AND ORSINO WAS ONE

well there's no telling when she actually bought the idol. It was definitely sometime in Act 2, as Bartrand says he "shouldn't have sold it to her. It was a mistake! A mistake...". So in Act 2 how many of her actions were really justified and how many were based off of insane paranoia overriding rational thinking?

As for Orsino and the other mages, calling a Right of Annulment because there are blood mages in the tower after discovering concrete proof is one thing. That I can agree with, even if she later betrays me because her lightsaber lyrium sword was telling her to and I start to question whether her proof was really legitimate. But calling a Right of Annulment based on the actions of a man outside of the Circle with the only reason she can justify it for is "the people will demand blood."

That is something I can never get behind, and will blame the Chantry for. The Divine sends her agent to Kirkwall, and couldn't have told Leliana that should the situation actually be out of control, to tell KC Meredith to report immediately to the Divine. Oh wait that would've made too much sense....

Now if that did happen and KC Meredith said "No! My duty is to remain KC of this Circle, and remain vigilant!" then I'd probably just blame Meredith and not want the Chantry to burn for that reason. Though I've always wanted the Chantry to burn for the Exalted March on the Dales.

[Sabariel]

The Chantry went too far when they gave a highly addictive and dangerous substance to their templars IMO

[Gnoster]

I compare the Chantry's exalted march with the Catholic Church's crusades. They were responsible for one of the worst (if not the worst) examples of genocide in human history, and they did it believing it was God's will. Not that I know if th Chantry is written with our own history in mind, but I can see the likeness.
However I doubt anyone today want to eradicate the Catholic church because of it. So basically I take these viewpoints into my own thoughts of the Chantry. The main difference of course being that the Chantry still has no problem starting a new exalted march; in DAO against the dwarves, and in DA2 against Kirkwall.

Problem is however that no matter how unjustifiable the Chantry's way of dealing with "problems" is, both the Templars and the mages in Kirkwall needs to be stopped. A huge problem because you have all three sides fighting at the end og DA2 according to Varric and Cassandra's talk. No one is in the right, and innocent people will suffer for it.

Modifié par Gnoster, 18 avril 2011 - 12:25 .

[Gamer Ftw]

Gnoster wrote...

I compare the Chantry's exalted march with the Catholic Church's crusades. They were responsible for one of the worst (if not the worst) examples of genocide in human history, and they did it believing it was God's will. Not that I know if th Chantry is written with our own history in mind, but I can see the likeness.
However I doubt anyone today want to eradicate the Catholic church because of it. So basically I take these viewpoints into my own thoughts of the Chantry. The main difference of course being that the Chantry still has no problem starting a new exalted march; in DAO against the dwarves, and in DA2 against Kirkwall.

Problem is however that no matter how unjustifiable the Chantry's way of dealing with "problems" is, both the Templars and the mages in Kirkwall needs to be stopped. A huge problem because you have all three sides fighting at the end og DA2 according to Varric and Cassandra's talk. No one is in the right, and innocent people will suffer for it.

Valid comparison but should a church be able to have that much power over the people?
I believe the chantry or any church " should serve man not rule over him."
And with real world religions people have protested the same thing.


Mages need to be watched? ok but why must the chantry train Templar's one would almost suspect they want an army ready to crush anyone who doesn't bow to their maker oh wait they already do that don't they?

[rma2110]

Maybe it's best to have mages make sure magic is never abused. I can imagine a magical order that educates young mages and makes sure that they know the dangers of the fade and demons. Loyalty to the chantry is optional.

At least that way you'd have an order that is more understanding and sympathetic as well as being free of illyrium addiction.

[draken-heart]

 lets look at it this way:

the templars claim to be the arm of the chantry, but are they really? like we have seen in kirkwall, the templars do not need the "legal" lyrium from the chantry, it just makes senst to side with the organization that created yours anyways. and do not bring up the crows, they had no real reason to stay with the chantry.

Hey, for all we know the templars in kirkwall may have already broken from the chantry and just said they were still working for them as a disguise to kill the mages. at last thatis what i think meredith calling rite of anullment on the circle was, a diusguise used to kill the mages.

Modifié par draken-heart, 19 avril 2011 - 04:15 .

[Gamer Ftw]

What do the crows have to do with anything?

[draken-heart]

 i was saying they had nothing to do with the templars sticking with the chantry.

and im serious the templars in kirkwall had other ways of getting lyrium so why did they appear to stick with the chantry, they practically rebelled in act 3 anyways.

@ gamer: did you know the antivan crows has its roots in the chantry:
The truth, however, is one few accept: the Crows started as an arm of the Chantry.

Modifié par draken-heart, 19 avril 2011 - 04:18 .

[thebrute7]

What basis are we working off for "how far must the chantry go"?

Am I supposed to be applying real-world morality to the Chantry? Thedas human morality? Qunari? Dalish? Dwarven? Frankly how far the chantry would go depends entirely on your character.

I.E My Surana doesn't give a **** about the chantry because she is a Warden and doesn't really care about anything but her job. If the chantry tried to stop her doing her job, then they went too far.
My Cousland was a firm believer in the Chantry, and thus they'd have to go pretty dang far for her to believe they went to far.
My Aeducan doesn't care about the chantry unless they were to mess with the dwarves.
Same for my Dalish warden.
My Hawke (F!Mage) hates the Chantry for their abuse of the mages...

So take your pick. It all depends on my character. If I had to choose though I'll side with my hawke everytime. Mages FTW!

[lockdown51]

The Chantry must go as far as it must to keep babysitting the mages. Clearly the mages, at least in Kikwall, are too stupid to be let outside without some kind of supervision. Proof is found in game and detailed in my signature. I'd take some hard measures if I had to baby sit someone that could potentially burn or freeze me with a thought.

[Serelir]

draken-heart wrote...

@ gamer: did you know the antivan crows has its roots in the chantry:
The truth, however, is one few accept: the Crows started as an arm of the Chantry.

Zevran does say he prays to the Maker for forgiveness every time he kills someone 

[Gamer Ftw]

could you please show me where it says crow have thier roots in the chantry?
I didn't know about that.

[ramenbito]

How far?
I thought that what they were planning was world domination. ^^
I hate the chantry.

[draken-heart]

Gamer Ftw wrote...

could you please show me where it says crow have thier roots in the chantry?
I didn't know about that.

check thegeneral assassin infotmation on the wiki, and until i see a dev say the crows were never part of the chantry i am going by it.

Modifié par draken-heart, 20 avril 2011 - 03:43 .

[Gamer Ftw]

omg ....

[draken-heart]

 um shouldn't this be in another forum section?

[Huntress]

Gamer Ftw wrote...

So if you were a human in Thedas maybe you would say I won't stop them from killing the elves because I'm not a elf.
I won't stop them from killing apostate mages because I'm not a mage.
Which might result in "Hey look they just murdered my entire village and there was no one left to help bummer".
So at what point do you feel enough is enough?

Why will you side with them?, you are neither a templar nor a priest. actually for the way you think, you and everyone who think like you should be made tranquils.

[Gamer Ftw]

Huntress , I think you misunderstood my post.