KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Why is it that I always engender talks like this?
I am innocent and pure, really
Innocent and pure my foot.
Was anyone happy over Anders decision in Act III?
Débuté par
Phoenix_Loftian
, mai 24 2011 01:23
#501
Posté 26 mai 2011 - 11:50
Ryzaki
-
- Members
- 34 423 messages
Innocent and pure my foot.
Retour en haut
#502
Posté 26 mai 2011 - 11:55
KnightofPhoenix
-
- Members
- 21 527 messages
No one believes me!
Which I have yet to determine if it's a good or bad thing.
Which I have yet to determine if it's a good or bad thing.
#503
Posté 27 mai 2011 - 01:50
Rifneno
-
- Members
- 12 076 messages
KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Why is it that I always engender talks like this?
I am innocent and pure, really
You're about as pure as the Hudson river.
So, back on topic. I heard that Meredith eats the hearts of puppies. It's her favorite dish. Discuss.
#504
Posté 27 mai 2011 - 02:08
Lucian820
-
- Members
- 38 messages
Only thing I was upset about was that I couldn't help Anders and the mage underground.
#505
Posté 27 mai 2011 - 02:11
Ryzaki
-
- Members
- 34 423 messages
Rifneno wrote...
KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Why is it that I always engender talks like this?
I am innocent and pure, really
You're about as pure as the Hudson river.
So, back on topic. I heard that Meredith eats the hearts of puppies. It's her favorite dish. Discuss.
Oi! I live near the Hudson river!
Leave it aloooone! So what if it's grey brown one minute and green the next?
#506
Posté 27 mai 2011 - 03:33
Carmen_Willow
-
- Members
- 1 637 messages
[quote]Rifneno wrote...
[quote][quote]Carmen_Willow wrote...
As horrible as that is, Anders action was just as bad. He had no right to those peoples lives. The one thing, THE ONE THING, every human being should have the right to own is his or her own life. That means that the Church, the State or a madman can't take it from them without their permission. Every human should have the right to live as they see fit provided they don't infringe on someone else's right to do the same.[/quote]
Yay, more "life is rainbows and there's always a good moral solution." Once again, war is hell. Don't think for a moment you don't owe your own lives and freedoms to people who were willing to do terrible things.
[/quote]
My apologies for the delayed response to your message.
Sir: Again, you miss the point. I am a child of a military parent and the spouse of a veteran. I understand well the hard amoral choices that must sometimes be made in war. And that "terrible things" may be enacted to win. However, THIS Was Not A War. No consensus had been reached. No pledges made. No allies sought. No militia formed. Anders had no permission to act on anyone else's behalf. No secret group of circle mages told him to that they would support his cause. His support came from the demon inside him. The "war" was in reality the culmination of his own personal vendetta against the Chantry and the Templars. Pehaps the most disgusting thing about it all is that he's perfectly willing to live -- if you allow it -- Anders believes in the cause but isn't quite ready to die for it yet. But he's most certainly willing to sacrifice others who have never given him permission to make them the scapegoats for his crimes.
MY point is this: No Person, No Leader, no Big Brother, No faction, has the right to demand that I sacrifice my life (at the point of a gun or billy club or bomb) for their cause! If you believe that the State, or the Community, or the Cause, or the Leader has the right to FORCE you at the point of a legal gun or sword to sacrifice your life for THEIR cause, then sir you believe in Slavery, because at that point you don't even own your own life. I will never concede that anyone has the moral right to turn me into a sacrifical goat for a political cause.
Make no mistake. If attacked, I will fight back. And, if I am skilled enough to win, I will gladly kick my attacker as they lay on the ground. I do not believe in leaving someone who has initiated force against me to do it again. I do not believe in appeasement. I believe that it is immoral to start a fight.....I do NOT believe it is immoral to end one. In fact, I believe one has a duty to oneself to make sure the person doesn't ever do it to you again.
[quote][quote]Carmen_Willow wrote...
As horrible as that is, Anders action was just as bad. He had no right to those peoples lives. The one thing, THE ONE THING, every human being should have the right to own is his or her own life. That means that the Church, the State or a madman can't take it from them without their permission. Every human should have the right to live as they see fit provided they don't infringe on someone else's right to do the same.[/quote]
Yay, more "life is rainbows and there's always a good moral solution." Once again, war is hell. Don't think for a moment you don't owe your own lives and freedoms to people who were willing to do terrible things.
[/quote]
My apologies for the delayed response to your message.
Sir: Again, you miss the point. I am a child of a military parent and the spouse of a veteran. I understand well the hard amoral choices that must sometimes be made in war. And that "terrible things" may be enacted to win. However, THIS Was Not A War. No consensus had been reached. No pledges made. No allies sought. No militia formed. Anders had no permission to act on anyone else's behalf. No secret group of circle mages told him to that they would support his cause. His support came from the demon inside him. The "war" was in reality the culmination of his own personal vendetta against the Chantry and the Templars. Pehaps the most disgusting thing about it all is that he's perfectly willing to live -- if you allow it -- Anders believes in the cause but isn't quite ready to die for it yet. But he's most certainly willing to sacrifice others who have never given him permission to make them the scapegoats for his crimes.
MY point is this: No Person, No Leader, no Big Brother, No faction, has the right to demand that I sacrifice my life (at the point of a gun or billy club or bomb) for their cause! If you believe that the State, or the Community, or the Cause, or the Leader has the right to FORCE you at the point of a legal gun or sword to sacrifice your life for THEIR cause, then sir you believe in Slavery, because at that point you don't even own your own life. I will never concede that anyone has the moral right to turn me into a sacrifical goat for a political cause.
Make no mistake. If attacked, I will fight back. And, if I am skilled enough to win, I will gladly kick my attacker as they lay on the ground. I do not believe in leaving someone who has initiated force against me to do it again. I do not believe in appeasement. I believe that it is immoral to start a fight.....I do NOT believe it is immoral to end one. In fact, I believe one has a duty to oneself to make sure the person doesn't ever do it to you again.
#507
Posté 27 mai 2011 - 04:33
Rifneno
-
- Members
- 12 076 messages
Carmen_Willow wrote...
Sir: Again, you miss the point. I am a child of a military parent and the spouse of a veteran. I understand well the hard amoral choices that must sometimes be made in war. And that "terrible things" may be enacted to win. However, THIS Was Not A War. No consensus had been reached. No pledges made. No allies sought. No militia formed. Anders had no permission to act on anyone else's behalf. No secret group of circle mages told him to that they would support his cause. His support came from the demon inside him.
So it's okay to kill a bunch of innocent bystanders, but only if someone told you to. ... Gonna have to disagree with that one. Especially since the Chantry's system precludes mages being able to ever form a government or organization capable of making such a call.
Also keep in mind you're saying the slave revolt against Tevinter was some horrific crime. They didn't have a governing body either.
More to the point, this is semantics. We know for a fact the Circles did want war. They just didn't realize they could actually win against the templars. Once Anders showed them they could, they all rebelled. Not some, not most, all. Every last one.
Pehaps the most disgusting thing about it all is that he's perfectly willing to live
I cannot imagine any way this could make less sense.
MY point is this: No Person, No Leader, no Big Brother, No faction, has the right to demand that I sacrifice my life (at the point of a gun or billy club or bomb) for their cause! If you believe that the State, or the Community, or the Cause, or the Leader has the right to FORCE you at the point of a legal gun or sword to sacrifice your life for THEIR cause, then sir you believe in Slavery, because at that point you don't even own your own life. I will never concede that anyone has the moral right to turn me into a sacrifical goat for a political cause.
We call that a draft. Little melodramatic, don't you think? And didn't you just say his problem was that it wasn't a war and he didn't have permission? Now you're saying no one has the right to make that call?
Make no mistake. If attacked, I will fight back. And, if I am skilled enough to win, I will gladly kick my attacker as they lay on the ground. I do not believe in leaving someone who has initiated force against me to do it again. I do not believe in appeasement. I believe that it is immoral to start a fight.....I do NOT believe it is immoral to end one. In fact, I believe one has a duty to oneself to make sure the person doesn't ever do it to you again.
So the thousand years of oppression and abuse doesn't count as starting it I guess?
Modifié par Rifneno, 27 mai 2011 - 05:30 .
#508
Posté 27 mai 2011 - 05:28
GavrielKay
-
- Members
- 1 336 messages
Rifneno wrote...
So the thousand years of oppression and abuse doesn't count as starting it I guess?
That's what I was giong to say
Some players may not (or obviously don't) agree with him, but Anders almost certainly does consider the Chantry a valid target. It is filled with the people who explicitly or implicitly support the oppression of the mages. The Grand Cleric has decided to willfully neglect her duty to reign in Meredith and her abusive Templars.
Wars don't start with signed agreements to begin hostilities at an appointed hour. They start with blood.
#509
Posté 27 mai 2011 - 05:29
fightright2
-
- Members
- 773 messages
Heck no, I wasn't happy with Anders/Justice decision in Act 3. I understand that they think they needed something to make such an impact to send a ripple effect in all of Thedas.
I just think they could have used someone new instead of changing Anders into some terrorist.
I wouldn't have hated it if I actually could have stopped him from it. It also made for a disappointing romance to the degree of Sebastian's. Which had a lot of build up and for what? Nothing but a huge let down.
I just think they could have used someone new instead of changing Anders into some terrorist.
I wouldn't have hated it if I actually could have stopped him from it. It also made for a disappointing romance to the degree of Sebastian's. Which had a lot of build up and for what? Nothing but a huge let down.
#510
Posté 27 mai 2011 - 09:19
CulturalGeekGirl
-
- Members
- 3 280 messages
In terms of character development, I think it was one of the most stunning and revelatory plot developments in any RPG I've ever seen.
In DA:A we have snarky, charming Anders who wants nothing more than some small measure of freedom. Basic rights, like the ability to choose what food he eats and to maybe find a girl to settle down with. He's even willing to take up the mantle of the grey wardens to do it, content to just appreciate the smell of pies and freedom between darkspawn hunts. Then, during the bridging short story, you learn that the Chantry wouldn't even let Anders have THAT much freedom, saddling him with a Templar warden to harass and control him (I'm betting that jerk is the one who made him give away his cat.) Finally, he gets tired of waiting for the Templars to come up with a new reason to execute him, and joins with Justice, with the hope of freeing future mages from the same torment.
I think that Anders knew that joining with Justice would give him the will to fight back, rather than just running. I think he had finally realized that running wasn't ever going to actually work. Even allowing himself to be pressed into Warden service and tainted by darkspawn nightmares forever had only won him a few short months of friendship and freedom before the Templars arranged to have him crushed under their heel again. I think Anders realized he didn't have the strength to do anything but run, and that he needed Justice to do more than that... DA:A Anders was a lover, not a fighter.
Now, even inhabiting a corpse, Justice had access to some of its memories, the desires of its old life. Inhabiting Anders, Justice is hit full force with decades of memories of injustice. Anders had been able to view these memories through a veil of humor, selfishness, stubbornness and self-preservation, which had kept him remarkably well-adjusted for someone submitted to that much psychological torment. Justice has no such filters; he's hit with the wrong-ness of everything that has happened to Anders full force, and there is only one way to respond: with Vengeance.
I think that Anders knew that merging with Justice would allow him to fight back, but he didn't realize that it would prevent him from using any of his coping mechanisms that allowed him to maintain some kind of psychological distance from everything that had happened to him. His ironic detachment had prevented him from ever having to deal with the fact that he'd never have a family, never fall in love, never be able to just live, but as Justice/Anders he was incapable of ever forgetting it, incapable of laughing it away with vain hopes and daydreams of his next escape. Every waking moment, he's confronted with the reality of it, the injustice of it.
Even then, he tries to exercise self-control, maintaining some of his humanity even with Justice's constant pressure to take more direct action. Initially he restricts himself to healing people, helping mages to escape, and distributing pro-mage literature. All the while, Justice is still seeing and experiencing all the injustice Anders suffers, and obsessing over it. After seven years of trying every possible peaceful solution, nothing has improved. Even the Anders part of the personality realizes that the small, reasonable efforts mean nothing: nothing will ever change for mages as long as the Chantry is preaching that mages are proof of the Maker's hate, and no amount of clinics or manifestos are going to ever change that.
Friended Anders admits this to Justice, and agrees that they have to do something desperate, drastic. He's been living the lie that there is another way, that he is something other than the cause of mages, but now he has to admit that he can't fight against it anymore. The inability to ignore injustice against mages has stripped away all his defenses, and he finally has to admit that all his reasonable attempts have accomplished nothing. He has a choice - accept that all mages forever are doomed to be denied a normal life, love, and happiness because peaceful change will not and cannot work... or take the only action he can see that might give future mages a chance at everything he has been denied. With a spirit of Justice inside you, this choice isn't a choice at all. There is only one way to proceed, and the Chantry goes up.
Rivaled Anders has been molded to believe that his inability to ignore injustice is a weakness, a failing, and a curse. He now believes that it would have been better if he had never joined with Justice, never left the Wardens, maybe never even left the tower. He is walking evidence of the weakness of Mages, proof positive that they do not deserve the freedom he has always hoped for. Here, he is at war with himself, with the Justice-focused part determined to get vengeance for everything that has been done to mages, while the Anders-focused part believes that, by becoming an abomination, he may have retroactively justified all that he has suffered. There is nothing left for him to do but die. Justice wins the battle long enough to plant and set off the bomb, and the Chantry goes up.
Now, no matter which way he has played so far, the player has the final choice. He can choose the cause of mages or the cause of the templars, and he can kill or spare Anders. There is a reason you have to choose your side before you pull out the knife... so Anders can see the results of what he has done.
At this point he has lost any illusion that he has an existence beyond the cause of mages. If you kill him, justice is done and he both pays for his crime and dies a martyr. If you spare him and make him fight against the mages, the part of him that believes he is cursed and weak takes over, and he cooperates with you, knowing he must die soon because he cannot control the monster inside of him. If you spare him and let him join you to fight the templars, you allow him to scrabble together some hope that he may someday have an existence beyond the cause, that this was all worth it.
It's incredibly powerful, and the fact that there are all these different endings, with small changes giving Anders' story a profoundly different conclusion... it's great storytelling, and it actually serves as a perfect example of a situation where the narrative capabilities of games are greater than the narrative capabilities of other media. In any other telling of the story, we would only see one of these ends, and could only guess at the others. Here, we can see all the possibilities, and shape which one becomes reality.
Of course, if you don't care about his cause, or about Anders, I can see how it would be maddening.
In DA:A we have snarky, charming Anders who wants nothing more than some small measure of freedom. Basic rights, like the ability to choose what food he eats and to maybe find a girl to settle down with. He's even willing to take up the mantle of the grey wardens to do it, content to just appreciate the smell of pies and freedom between darkspawn hunts. Then, during the bridging short story, you learn that the Chantry wouldn't even let Anders have THAT much freedom, saddling him with a Templar warden to harass and control him (I'm betting that jerk is the one who made him give away his cat.) Finally, he gets tired of waiting for the Templars to come up with a new reason to execute him, and joins with Justice, with the hope of freeing future mages from the same torment.
I think that Anders knew that joining with Justice would give him the will to fight back, rather than just running. I think he had finally realized that running wasn't ever going to actually work. Even allowing himself to be pressed into Warden service and tainted by darkspawn nightmares forever had only won him a few short months of friendship and freedom before the Templars arranged to have him crushed under their heel again. I think Anders realized he didn't have the strength to do anything but run, and that he needed Justice to do more than that... DA:A Anders was a lover, not a fighter.
Now, even inhabiting a corpse, Justice had access to some of its memories, the desires of its old life. Inhabiting Anders, Justice is hit full force with decades of memories of injustice. Anders had been able to view these memories through a veil of humor, selfishness, stubbornness and self-preservation, which had kept him remarkably well-adjusted for someone submitted to that much psychological torment. Justice has no such filters; he's hit with the wrong-ness of everything that has happened to Anders full force, and there is only one way to respond: with Vengeance.
I think that Anders knew that merging with Justice would allow him to fight back, but he didn't realize that it would prevent him from using any of his coping mechanisms that allowed him to maintain some kind of psychological distance from everything that had happened to him. His ironic detachment had prevented him from ever having to deal with the fact that he'd never have a family, never fall in love, never be able to just live, but as Justice/Anders he was incapable of ever forgetting it, incapable of laughing it away with vain hopes and daydreams of his next escape. Every waking moment, he's confronted with the reality of it, the injustice of it.
Even then, he tries to exercise self-control, maintaining some of his humanity even with Justice's constant pressure to take more direct action. Initially he restricts himself to healing people, helping mages to escape, and distributing pro-mage literature. All the while, Justice is still seeing and experiencing all the injustice Anders suffers, and obsessing over it. After seven years of trying every possible peaceful solution, nothing has improved. Even the Anders part of the personality realizes that the small, reasonable efforts mean nothing: nothing will ever change for mages as long as the Chantry is preaching that mages are proof of the Maker's hate, and no amount of clinics or manifestos are going to ever change that.
Friended Anders admits this to Justice, and agrees that they have to do something desperate, drastic. He's been living the lie that there is another way, that he is something other than the cause of mages, but now he has to admit that he can't fight against it anymore. The inability to ignore injustice against mages has stripped away all his defenses, and he finally has to admit that all his reasonable attempts have accomplished nothing. He has a choice - accept that all mages forever are doomed to be denied a normal life, love, and happiness because peaceful change will not and cannot work... or take the only action he can see that might give future mages a chance at everything he has been denied. With a spirit of Justice inside you, this choice isn't a choice at all. There is only one way to proceed, and the Chantry goes up.
Rivaled Anders has been molded to believe that his inability to ignore injustice is a weakness, a failing, and a curse. He now believes that it would have been better if he had never joined with Justice, never left the Wardens, maybe never even left the tower. He is walking evidence of the weakness of Mages, proof positive that they do not deserve the freedom he has always hoped for. Here, he is at war with himself, with the Justice-focused part determined to get vengeance for everything that has been done to mages, while the Anders-focused part believes that, by becoming an abomination, he may have retroactively justified all that he has suffered. There is nothing left for him to do but die. Justice wins the battle long enough to plant and set off the bomb, and the Chantry goes up.
Now, no matter which way he has played so far, the player has the final choice. He can choose the cause of mages or the cause of the templars, and he can kill or spare Anders. There is a reason you have to choose your side before you pull out the knife... so Anders can see the results of what he has done.
At this point he has lost any illusion that he has an existence beyond the cause of mages. If you kill him, justice is done and he both pays for his crime and dies a martyr. If you spare him and make him fight against the mages, the part of him that believes he is cursed and weak takes over, and he cooperates with you, knowing he must die soon because he cannot control the monster inside of him. If you spare him and let him join you to fight the templars, you allow him to scrabble together some hope that he may someday have an existence beyond the cause, that this was all worth it.
It's incredibly powerful, and the fact that there are all these different endings, with small changes giving Anders' story a profoundly different conclusion... it's great storytelling, and it actually serves as a perfect example of a situation where the narrative capabilities of games are greater than the narrative capabilities of other media. In any other telling of the story, we would only see one of these ends, and could only guess at the others. Here, we can see all the possibilities, and shape which one becomes reality.
Of course, if you don't care about his cause, or about Anders, I can see how it would be maddening.
Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 27 mai 2011 - 10:30 .
#511
Posté 27 mai 2011 - 04:39
Addai
-
- Members
- 25 850 messages
I'm glad some people liked the story and even passionately so. I just don't find it compelling. Anders' delusions of being the fulcrum on which thousands of years of conflict over mages turns gets an ironclad plot confirmation and that cheapens it, both as plot development and character development. I was intrigued at the idea of his and Justice's merging at first, but maybe it's just the execution I found so clumsy that I couldn't enjoy it. As you say, it doesn't help that I really dislike DA2 Anders. As I said upthread, I also would have liked the mage-templar conflict plot a lot more if it had been something more subtle and political. Kirkwall is cartoon-land and so I find it hard to take it seriously that a Thedas-wide war started there.CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
Of course, if you don't care about his cause, or about Anders, I can see how it would be maddening.
#512
Posté 27 mai 2011 - 04:48
SurelyForth
-
- Members
- 6 817 messages
CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
In terms of character development, I think it was one of the most stunning and revelatory plot developments in any RPG I've ever seen...
*snipped awesome*
So I have nothing to add to the discussion, really, besides my awe for and wholehearteed agreement with everything in this post. Thank you for saying what my mental lethargy won't allow me to put into words!
#513
Posté 27 mai 2011 - 04:53
KnightofPhoenix
-
- Members
- 21 527 messages
I thought and I still do that Anders was the only redeeming thing about Act 3. So as a character he fascinates me. But I still think he is a reckless insane fool, whatever it is he's become.
#514
Guest_Queen-Of-Stuff_*
Posté 27 mai 2011 - 05:13
Guest_Queen-Of-Stuff_*
Guest_Queen-Of-Stuff_*
-
- Guests
SurelyForth wrote...
CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
In terms of character development, I think it was one of the most stunning and revelatory plot developments in any RPG I've ever seen...
*snipped awesome*
So I have nothing to add to the discussion, really, besides my awe for and wholehearteed agreement with everything in this post. Thank you for saying what my mental lethargy won't allow me to put into words!
Agreed! Really awesome post, wow. If I'd only been half as eloquent.
#515
Posté 27 mai 2011 - 06:05
LobselVith8
-
- Members
- 16 993 messages
KnightofPhoenix wrote...
I thought and I still do that Anders was the only redeeming thing about Act 3. So as a character he fascinates me. But I still think he is a reckless insane fool, whatever it is he's become.
Wasn't everyone a fool in Act III?
#516
Posté 27 mai 2011 - 11:15
Carmen_Willow
-
- Members
- 1 637 messages
[quote]Rifneno wrote...
[quote]Carmen_Willow wrote...
Sir: Again, you miss the point. I am a child of a military parent and the spouse of a veteran. I understand well the hard amoral choices that must sometimes be made in war. And that "terrible things" may be enacted to win. However, THIS Was Not A War. No consensus had been reached. No pledges made. No allies sought. No militia formed. Anders had no permission to act on anyone else's behalf. No secret group of circle mages told him to that they would support his cause. His support came from the demon inside him.[/quote]
So it's okay to kill a bunch of innocent bystanders, but only if someone told you to. ... Gonna have to disagree with that one. Especially since the Chantry's system precludes mages being able to ever form a government or organization capable of making such a call. [/quote]
Saying that I understand something does not mean that I condone it. In the American Revolution a bunch of folks got together in a series of highly illegal meetings and drafted a Declaration. Dangerous, but not impossible.
[quote]Also keep in mind you're saying the slave revolt against Tevinter was some horrific crime. They didn't have a governing body either.[/quote]
Can't speak to this one. Haven't read that codex.
[quote]More to the point, this is semantics. We know for a fact the Circles did want war. [/quote]
How do we know this for a fact? - reference, please.
[quote]
[quote]
Perhaps the most disgusting thing about it all is that he's perfectly willing to live[/quote]I cannot imagine any way this could make less sense. [/quote]
Particularly when you do not use my entire statement.
[quote]
[quote]MY point is this: No Person, No Leader, no Big Brother, No faction, has the right to demand that I sacrifice my life (at the point of a gun or billy club or bomb) for their cause! If you believe that the State, or the Community, or the Cause, or the Leader has the right to FORCE you at the point of a legal gun or sword to sacrifice your life for THEIR cause, then sir you believe in Slavery, because at that point you don't even own your own life. I will never concede that anyone has the moral right to turn me into a sacrifical goat for a political cause.[/quote]
We call that a draft. Little melodramatic, don't you think? [/quote]
One man's melodrama is another's basic premise. Drafts, Impressment of Englishmen to serve on His Majesty's ships, forcing children to serve in some dictator's military in Africa, pretty much the same thing. People who are unwilling to go into the Military or serve on the HMS whatever are forced to do so. Sounds like slavery to me.
[quote] And didn't you just say his problem was that it wasn't a war and he didn't have permission? Now you're saying no one has the right to make that call? [/quote]
What I said was that everyone should have the right to decide for themselves whether or not they wish to fight for a cause and that no one else should make that decision for them. I believe this was one of the basic issues of the Viet Nam protests and one of the reasons that USA, at present, has an all volunteer Military.
[quote]
Make no mistake. If attacked, I will fight back. And, if I am skilled enough to win, I will gladly kick my attacker as they lay on the ground. I do not believe in leaving someone who has initiated force against me to do it again. I do not believe in appeasement. I believe that it is immoral to start a fight.....I do NOT believe it is immoral to end one. In fact, I believe one has a duty to oneself to make sure the person doesn't ever do it to you again.
[/quote]
So the thousand years of oppression and abuse doesn't count as starting it I guess?[/quote]
The baker bringing bread to the Chantry didn't "start it." The novice priest who believes in the Maker and just wants to do some good, didn't "start it." The nobleman passing by on the street when the Chantry blew up didn't "start it."
No, blowing up one of the Chantries to start the war (and never mind the innocent bystanders who were collateral damage) counts as "starting it."
We have many real life examples of how to take on a superior power and win with a minimum amount of collateral damage. (India and Alabama come immediately to mind) Too bad Anders couldn't think of any.
[quote]Carmen_Willow wrote...
Sir: Again, you miss the point. I am a child of a military parent and the spouse of a veteran. I understand well the hard amoral choices that must sometimes be made in war. And that "terrible things" may be enacted to win. However, THIS Was Not A War. No consensus had been reached. No pledges made. No allies sought. No militia formed. Anders had no permission to act on anyone else's behalf. No secret group of circle mages told him to that they would support his cause. His support came from the demon inside him.[/quote]
So it's okay to kill a bunch of innocent bystanders, but only if someone told you to. ... Gonna have to disagree with that one. Especially since the Chantry's system precludes mages being able to ever form a government or organization capable of making such a call. [/quote]
Saying that I understand something does not mean that I condone it. In the American Revolution a bunch of folks got together in a series of highly illegal meetings and drafted a Declaration. Dangerous, but not impossible.
[quote]Also keep in mind you're saying the slave revolt against Tevinter was some horrific crime. They didn't have a governing body either.[/quote]
Can't speak to this one. Haven't read that codex.
[quote]More to the point, this is semantics. We know for a fact the Circles did want war. [/quote]
How do we know this for a fact? - reference, please.
[quote]
[quote]
Perhaps the most disgusting thing about it all is that he's perfectly willing to live[/quote]I cannot imagine any way this could make less sense. [/quote]
Particularly when you do not use my entire statement.
[quote]
[quote]MY point is this: No Person, No Leader, no Big Brother, No faction, has the right to demand that I sacrifice my life (at the point of a gun or billy club or bomb) for their cause! If you believe that the State, or the Community, or the Cause, or the Leader has the right to FORCE you at the point of a legal gun or sword to sacrifice your life for THEIR cause, then sir you believe in Slavery, because at that point you don't even own your own life. I will never concede that anyone has the moral right to turn me into a sacrifical goat for a political cause.[/quote]
We call that a draft. Little melodramatic, don't you think? [/quote]
One man's melodrama is another's basic premise. Drafts, Impressment of Englishmen to serve on His Majesty's ships, forcing children to serve in some dictator's military in Africa, pretty much the same thing. People who are unwilling to go into the Military or serve on the HMS whatever are forced to do so. Sounds like slavery to me.
[quote] And didn't you just say his problem was that it wasn't a war and he didn't have permission? Now you're saying no one has the right to make that call? [/quote]
What I said was that everyone should have the right to decide for themselves whether or not they wish to fight for a cause and that no one else should make that decision for them. I believe this was one of the basic issues of the Viet Nam protests and one of the reasons that USA, at present, has an all volunteer Military.
[quote]
Make no mistake. If attacked, I will fight back. And, if I am skilled enough to win, I will gladly kick my attacker as they lay on the ground. I do not believe in leaving someone who has initiated force against me to do it again. I do not believe in appeasement. I believe that it is immoral to start a fight.....I do NOT believe it is immoral to end one. In fact, I believe one has a duty to oneself to make sure the person doesn't ever do it to you again.
[/quote]
So the thousand years of oppression and abuse doesn't count as starting it I guess?[/quote]
The baker bringing bread to the Chantry didn't "start it." The novice priest who believes in the Maker and just wants to do some good, didn't "start it." The nobleman passing by on the street when the Chantry blew up didn't "start it."
No, blowing up one of the Chantries to start the war (and never mind the innocent bystanders who were collateral damage) counts as "starting it."
We have many real life examples of how to take on a superior power and win with a minimum amount of collateral damage. (India and Alabama come immediately to mind) Too bad Anders couldn't think of any.
#517
Posté 28 mai 2011 - 12:30
Hurbster
-
- Members
- 773 messages
If the death of many, many innocents is what it takes for me to finally kill that whining abomination Anders well then, so be it.
#518
Posté 28 mai 2011 - 01:06
LobselVith8
-
- Members
- 16 993 messages
Carmen_Willow wrote...
Rifneno wrote...
More to the point, this is semantics. We know for a fact the Circles did want war.
How do we know this for a fact? - reference, please.
I believe Rifneno is referencing the fact that all the remaining Circles of Magi rose up to emancipate themselves from Chantry and templar subjugation. It's the reason why the templars left the Chantry to hunt the mages. And Varric has said that the world is on the brink of war.
Carmen_Willow wrote...
One man's melodrama is another's basic premise. Drafts, Impressment of Englishmen to serve on His Majesty's ships, forcing children to serve in some dictator's military in Africa, pretty much the same thing. People who are unwilling to go into the Military or serve on the HMS whatever are forced to do so. Sounds like slavery to me.
Isn't that what happens when The Warden uses the treaties to call people to war?
Carmen_Willow wrote...
Rifneno wrote...
So the thousand years of oppression and abuse doesn't count as starting it I guess?
The baker bringing bread to the Chantry didn't "start it." The novice priest who believes in the Maker and just wants to do some good, didn't "start it." The nobleman passing by on the street when the Chantry blew up didn't "start it."
No, blowing up one of the Chantries to start the war (and never mind the innocent bystanders who were collateral damage) counts as "starting it."
We have many real life examples of how to take on a superior power and win with a minimum amount of collateral damage. (India and Alabama come immediately to mind) Too bad Anders couldn't think of any.
Couldn't one argue that, for Anders, it started the moment Karl was illegally made tranquil on orders from Ser Alrik? And Anders, being Andrastian, was probably thinking of the slave revolt lead by Andraste and Shartan.
#519
Posté 28 mai 2011 - 01:09
Ryzaki
-
- Members
- 34 423 messages
LobselVith8 wrote...
KnightofPhoenix wrote...
I thought and I still do that Anders was the only redeeming thing about Act 3. So as a character he fascinates me. But I still think he is a reckless insane fool, whatever it is he's become.
Wasn't everyone a fool in Act III?
Cullen managed to drop the idiot ball.
#520
Posté 28 mai 2011 - 01:11
KnightofPhoenix
-
- Members
- 21 527 messages
Ryzaki wrote...
LobselVith8 wrote...
KnightofPhoenix wrote...
I thought and I still do that Anders was the only redeeming thing about Act 3. So as a character he fascinates me. But I still think he is a reckless insane fool, whatever it is he's become.
Wasn't everyone a fool in Act III?
Cullen managed to drop the idiot ball.
Allowing Hawke to become Viscount.
That pretty much makes him the biggest fool.
#521
Posté 28 mai 2011 - 01:12
Ryzaki
-
- Members
- 34 423 messages
KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Ryzaki wrote...
LobselVith8 wrote...
KnightofPhoenix wrote...
I thought and I still do that Anders was the only redeeming thing about Act 3. So as a character he fascinates me. But I still think he is a reckless insane fool, whatever it is he's become.
Wasn't everyone a fool in Act III?
Cullen managed to drop the idiot ball.
Allowing Hawke to become Viscount.
That pretty much makes him the biggest fool.
It's not really Cullen's fault Kirkwall's nobility are morons.
Besides Hawke might've dropped the idiot ball offscreen. :innocent:
Modifié par Ryzaki, 28 mai 2011 - 01:13 .
#522
Posté 28 mai 2011 - 01:13
KnightofPhoenix
-
- Members
- 21 527 messages
Or maybe one was smart enough to think he can manipulate Hawke as Viscount...
Naah, too much intelligence required, Kirkwall taxes that.
Naah, too much intelligence required, Kirkwall taxes that.
#523
Posté 28 mai 2011 - 01:13
Ryzaki
-
- Members
- 34 423 messages
KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Or maybe one was smart enough to think he can manipulate Hawke as Viscount...
Naah, too much intelligence required, Kirkwall taxes that.
Nah Cullen's not a manipulator.
Its more likely everyone *finally* dropped their idiot balls once Anders little poop bomb was deployed. (Well more like once that lightsaber sword exploded into little bitty pieces).
Modifié par Ryzaki, 28 mai 2011 - 01:14 .
#524
Posté 28 mai 2011 - 01:15
KnightofPhoenix
-
- Members
- 21 527 messages
Ryzaki wrote...
KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Or maybe one was smart enough to think he can manipulate Hawke as Viscount...
Naah, too much intelligence required, Kirkwall taxes that.
Nah Cullen's not a manipulator.
Its more likely everyone *finally* dropped their idiot balls once Anders little poop bomb was deployed. (Well more like once that lightsaber sword exploded into little bitty pieces).
So the source of all idiocy was...the Chantry?
That might actually be a pertinent observation.
#525
Posté 28 mai 2011 - 01:19
Ryzaki
-
- Members
- 34 423 messages
KnightofPhoenix wrote...
So the source of all idiocy was...the Chantry?
That might actually be a pertinent observation.
I do my best.
