As if he has a choice.This is not supported at all. At this point when you first meet him he says 1. "I appologize.. I did not think they would be so numerous." …he will be on his merry way without you.
Fenris apologizes often. However, apology worth absolutely nothing without genuine regret (and attempt to correct behavior, which in other situations Fenris also fails). There is no regret here: if H. asks later, after Fenris asks for help, why should H. help someone who tricked them, F.’s answer is “If Anso told you to divert an ambush of Tevinter bounty hunters, would you have done it?”. That implies that he STILL considers it was his right somehow to lie and put a group of people against far more dangerous opponents than they had reasons to expect. He doesn’t even acknowledge that they have genuine reasons to be more than a bit angry. Apology? More like BS. This confidence in his own right to screw others for his cause I call self-righteousness here.There is no suggestion of him acting self-righteous. This opinion is based on personal bias and the whole "you tried to kill me!" idea. Which he states "perhaps the deception was not necessary. If so, I am sorry. I have become too accustomed to hiding." He never acts like it was his right to do that.
Which leads to a second point here. Apology in general means very little, always. What Fenris did isn’t a matter that can be solved by an apology. No more than, say, thievery can be solved by saying “I’m sorry… kind of”. Remember Varric’s introduction? That’s how a relatively nice dwarf treats a young thief who didn’t endanger his life or lives of his friends.
No self-righteousness? The guy talks non-stop about mages succumbing to temptations, mages willing to resort to the means he doesn’t like if threatened, their weaknesses, etc. In short –passes judgments on a whole group of people which assumes moral high ground. And keep in mind that, according to you, F. never changes his beliefs, never even doubts them (despite being relatively ignorant). H. can persuade even Anders to change his stance, and the guy is a fanatic. That’s what I’d call self-righteousness. What makes it disgusting is that Fenris has absolutely no rights to look down on anyone here. He talks about temptations, yet succumbs to them himself. He talks about mages using amoral methods when cornered, yet this is how he was introduced to H. He talks about weakness (not in terms of combat skills), yet never shows strength. He talks about mages having inhuman powers, yet he himself has unusual power and never shows any restraint. He talks about cruelty yet butchers his own defenseless sister in cold blood. In short, he condemns others while being just as lacking if not more.
“I've touched on that Act 3 banter before…. “ It is a tricky thing, yes. If F/R fully maxed, F. makes it quite clear that he sides with H. out of personal loyalty. If F/R around 75 – it seemed to me that he was persuaded by the argument about slavery, but I’ve never checked sarcastic option here. You are correct, I think. Still, at that point F. has seen what the Circle in Kirkwall like. If he truly doesn’t see it as a slavery (see definition above) by another name, because in his mind slaver==mage, he is blind or foolish. If he sees it for what it is, he is a hypocrite. It is that simple.
“If he betrays you and sides with the Templars he gives VERY good reasons why he does so when he comes to kill you.
Hawke: I thought freedom from slavery meant something to you
Fenris: It does. That is why I oppose what these mages hope to become.”
It is a VERY POOR reason, if not an idiotic one. Fenris somehow decides that he knows what a group of people he had never met (most Circle mages are forbidden to leave) hopes to become and decides to kill them for it. It isn’t even preemptive execution (i.e., murder), it is madness. By that logic every single person in a world deserves to be killed. Keep in mind that there is no revolution at that time. Even mage underground was crushed. Mages in the Circle hope to survive, nothing more. There are no signs that they were trying to free themselves, even. There was no mass escape attempt before Meredith ordered the Annulment. They were not attacked because they were running away; they were running away because they were attacked. What Fenris speaks about here, I have no idea (although some dialogues at that point make me think that, perhaps, originally developers intended to include some sort of uprising). You may say here “but he believes that mages free = tevinter here”, but mages are fighting for their lives, not freedom. And truth of the matter is that his belief, just like any conclusion based on a single example, has a very weak foundation. It makes even less sense than trying to draw a straight line based on only one point. You may say that F. doesn’t realize this, but, again, my point is exactly that he is too ignorant to make life-or-death decisions, but is eager to make them. You are saying that from the in-universe point of view F’s actions and opinions make sense for someone like him. Yes, they do. I’ve agreed before that the character is well-written. What I’m saying is that for me character “like him” is completely unlikeable and I explain, why.
“You can't expect Hawke or Fenris or anyone in game to have the knowledge about Alrik, mages, the circle” I can expect Fenris to have such knowledge in the Act III, actually. And in case you STILL somehow didn’t notice, my issue with him in the Act I is precisely that he knows almost nothing yet jumps to conclusions. It is not a question of whether he is correct or not.
‘’ the history from the other games” – I don’t remember referring to other games, at least recently. I mentioned the Ferelden Circle, yes, but not as something that contradicts F.’s views (quite the opposite, in fact) and mostly in the general debate about “mages solution”. Same goes for fade, demons and blood magic, except I didn’t even mention them. What are you talking about? However, yes, I can expect a character in the setting to know its history and explored laws of, shall we say, nature. Or, if ignorant, to face his ignorance and, um, to learn. Failed that to shut up.
“I love how that one sentence is taken out of context and applied as some.. "how can you not see the oppression!" statement.” You have given a conversation, and it merely supports what I’ve said. I have to repeat myself, since you conveniently never address my real argument. Fenris knows nothing about non-Tevinter Circles and admits it even here, in the text you’ve quoted. He had never even seen one, it seems. Yet he steps in the courtyard, looks around and “I see no oppression here”. You say “Fenris sees no systematic oppression. NO mages being beaten in the streets, hung in the gallows, strewn about and sacrificed.”. I don’t think somehow that even in Tevinter the moment you land you see an abattoir on the streets. F. makes conclusion based on several minutes in the courtyard, he doesn’t even enter the building itself. That’s laughable and idiotic. “Systematic oppression” can’t be diagnosed that fast. F.’s logic is such that his statement “I see no oppression” is just as sound as “I threw a coin, it’s tails, so there is no oppression”. A brief visit to the vestibule of a prison shows very little about it, and F. doesn’t even seem to understand this obvious fact. I don’t know whether it is a monumental stupidity or a monumental bias, most likely both. I also told the same thing third time in a row using different words and have yet to see a relevant answer.
On the other hand the point is somewhat… I don’t know. Like someone above said, there is a huge gap between story and gameplay, between shown info and told info. The game was rushed.
In short: you also say that Fenris lacks knowledge about the world, Circles, forms of oppression, etc. I agree, because that was precisely my point from the very beginning of this thread. Fenris is relatively ignorant and doesn’t even understand this. Not only his conclusions are questionable at best – the way he comes to them is wrong. Yet he is willing to fight and kill for his beliefs. Realistic? Yes, ignorance, extreme self-confidence (that is, confidence in one’s world-views and beliefs) and murders go hand-to-hand. Attractive? No.
Again, what are you talking about here? Most people who posted dislike F. for several reasons, including, as you well know, me.I am just so sick of people taking one thing. ONE thing and condemning the whole character based on it because of comprehension failure.
Modifié par Nameless2345, 30 août 2011 - 04:40 .
Retour en haut
lol
