422 réponses à ce sujet

[Nameless2345]

I’m sorry, but you are often arguing not with what I said, Arquen, but with something…else.

1)” Saying Fenris had no means to expand his knowledge through self education is false”. Of course. He had means and time to learn to read, I think. I said that he seems to lack drive. Even such relatively simple thing as learning to read has to be suggested (and, if fact, taught) by H. So, he simply didn’t start. Saying that his words "I certainly didn't learn from books" show drive for self-education is very, very questionable. I can say that my cat “certainly didn't learn from books”, and not because he learned nothing, too. I’d say the phrase merely confirms that Fenris has eyes, ears and something that can be called a functional brain, nothing more. And without reading…see below about self-education.

2)The fact that he knows about a legendary ally of an Andraste is hardly a surprise or point in his favor. How many people in Western countries have not at least heard about Apostles? Or Spartacus?

3)” It cannot be said that he did not learn anything”. Of course it cannot be said that he learned nothing. And once again, I never said that. He learned as much as an illiterate guy with normal intellect without formal education can learn about live and world during, well, ten years of live as a fighting slave. Which is pathetically little. Would you really pay much attention to ramblings of an illiterate uneducated guy from another country about your country and its problems? Especially if this guy has just arrived?  Especially if he has amnesia on top?

4) “One doesn't need books to educate themselves on a subject…apprenticeship…” Hm. “Educate themselves” or “be educated”? Because apprenticeship isn’t a form of self-education. And no, self-education in most areas is either impossible without reading or will end up sorely lacking. At least I can’t think of examples. Hell, even martial arts can’t be self-taught effectively. “Simply listening or participating in a conversation”… Err, sorry, no, that’s not education and not equal to reading a book on the subject. Do I really have to explain why? Do I really have to explain why listening to two guys discussing “Republic”/Bible/any other book for five minutes is not the same as reading it? Keep in mind that we are not discussing his opinions on edibility of a local mushroom (although in Kirkwall his credibility here is suspect too), but on the ways society should and shouldn’t be organized and maintained. In a country foreign for Fenris.

5)” Simply because someone cannot read does not make them intellectually stunted”. You said it before. Quoting myself, “You are mixing ignorance (lack of knowledge/experience/education) and mental deficiency here. Please don’t.”.

6)” That is akin to saying that the only way someone can become a functional, mature being is by knowing how to read.” In our society – yes, by the way. What, how many illiterate people are among your colleagues?

7) “ Furthermore, the claim Fenris has the "personal memory span of a teenager" has no merit, and is not fact. If it is simply based off of years then it is completely false. To say because Fenris' spent 10 years in Danarius' service, has 10 years worth of memories and is therefore 10 years old makes no sense.” Wonderful example of substituting my argument for another in two sentences. No, physically and emotionally Fenris obviously isn’t prepubescent. Sigh. I said, however, that, using your numbers, he has “10 years worth of memories”. And no formal education. And no capability (or, it seems, interest) for real self-education. Now, again, why opinions of such a person on complex sociological and political issues should be worth, well, anything? Why someone like this feels entitled to give opinions in such a categorical tone?

8)” So, he does know a lot about himself. The argument is that because he does not know his family, his name, his past history means he cannot define himself….he cannot find a sense of identity ”. Once again, you are misreading what I said. And I said that he “doesn’t know defining facts about his live”. Like, facts that defined that live. He is in Kirkwall because he had family and because he competed for markings to free them. And yet he either doesn’t know these facts or got them wrong. If a person doesn’t know such things about himself, how can his knowledge about the world be trusted?

9)” To say he competed for the markings just makes it more tragic, but doesn't whitewash the fact that he suffered from those markings, and still does.” It makes him a guy who holds grudge and repeatedly whines about receiving something he pursued with gusto. Were it knowingly, I’d call him an idiot and hypocrite – something with a potential for tragedy, yes, but mostly for others around him. Suffered? Please, quite likely the markings are the things that gave him the power to achieve and preserve personal freedom. The only skill Fenris really has, the only skill that can provide him with bread and butter is killing, and markings make him not a good warrior, but an outstanding one. Markings gave his family freedom, too. He uses them constantly without reservations. Nothing is free, including the markings, but other than that I don’t see him as a victim in his deal with Danarius, no. Quite the opposite.

10)” and basically states that he wants mages to live as any other person, and to basically control their own population.”. Hm. I really have no interest in discussing “mage problem” and its solutions, especially in this topic. However, the statement above is clearly internally contradictive as I pointed multiple times previously. “Any other person” is “controlled”, using your term, by the police/guard/whatever force and subservient to nobility. Mage living as “any other person” is obviously supposed to follow same laws and rules. Of course, it requires some enhancement to law-enforcing forces…and here we go into “ideal solution” discussions.

11)The funny fact about Tevinter Imperium is that, as I said, it is merely an empire+slavery. Common thing IRL. Magic really has nothing to do with it. However, if you insist let’s expand this.
First question is: does slavery and non-Circle mages go hand to hand in Thedas? Like is magic necessary and/or sufficient for slavery? No. Qunary, for example, have especially disgusting institute of slavery, but they control magic tighter than anyone else. So, slavery exists without free mages. Same way, magic and even magocracy do not lead to slavery. Examples are Dalish, and, it seems, Rivainy and Chasind.
Second question is: can any correlation between magic and slavery/oppression be drawn from the lore? Again, no. In fact, Tevinter is the one and only example of not only magocracy (which in itself is not really different from an aristocracy, both being based on birthright) but slavery too. One example is not nearly enough to make even any conclusions on correlation. Of course, for Fenris, who probably knows next to nothing about the world at large, this example is all-encompassing. I already reminded you about the parable about an elephant and a company of blind people. In fact, Tevinter is a poor example too, because even according to Fenris slavery was constant in Tevinter, as well as aristocracy. Even when Circles still worked as they do in the rest of the Thedas. In fact, no matter the state of the Circles, Tevinter  was  always a country build on slavery and ruled by noble families. The only difference was whenever mages or their non-magical brothers were at the head of those families. I’m not sure that it made big difference for slaves. Such “change” wouldn’t even be viewed as a “revolution”. Fenris’ platitudes about temptation and “power-caused” corruption are banalities that can be applied to anyone in position of power. Examples in the setting are Loghain, Templars, Sofia Draiden, Howe, Branca, Petrice…. The fact that he utters such things so seriously just underlines his ignorance. 

12)” statement Fenris makes about how "he sees no oppression here.. only fear.. and danger." You quoted him before. Again, I have to repeat myself. “His estimate of an oppression in Gallows is based on a short walk it its outer ring, as opposed to Anders who actually lived in another Circle and had friends and acquaintances in Gallows. It's like someone taking short walk in a prison courtyard and immediately deciding that no, there are no abuses, wardens are fair, prisoners are treated nicely, none of appropriate laws was repeatedly broken, etc, etc. The very fact that Fenris dares to form any conclusions at all so fast is disgusting.” Care to disprove?

13)” The examples of brutality and oppression that were mentioned still revolve around Ser Alrik. Ser Kerras is a templar hunting blood mages from starkhaven…” And who later decided to visit one of the escaped mages in his room at nights. And threatened to make Alain Tranquil were he to complain. And examples “revolve around Ser Alrik” only because you chose to conveniently ignore all other examples. Like, death squads of Templars torturing Dalish and killing people on streets with relish. Or corporal punishments. So no, I would rather say that Thrask and Emerric are actually the only normal, non-abusive Templars we see at work. And Thrask has personal reasons and we never see Emerric actually dealing with mages… Maybe Cullen as well, but his speech about Tranquility was quite deranged.

14)” but even then it is at the whim of Ser Alrik, not Meredith, not the Templars as a whole, but Alrik.” “Whims” of Alric, including torturing mages to make them possessed, were indulged repeatedly and publically for several years. His superiors ignored it. Like they ignored all other examples I listed previously. One criminal is nothing. But we are talking about system here, and in such system mages have basically no rights because there are no ways to protect those rights and crimes against them are not investigated.  Also, no, "love affair" is not the  most serious. Most serious are  extra-judicial killings of non-mages in Act III. They erase all the differences between
Templars and, for example, Coteria and make me suspect that the Order in Kirkwall is completely corrupted and out of control.



15)Bethany writes nothing about “lots of respect”. She writes “Life's not perfect here, mind you. The templars are mostly polite, and I know they're just doing their jobs, but some hold extreme views.”, but she is a conformist type. Templar Carver, on the other hand, writes “Makes me glad Bethany never had to live in a place like this.”. And he is a guy who supports all anti-mage decisions in Act I just like Fenris. Also, respect and oppression are not mutually exclusive even in the setting. Saarebases treated with respect by qunary. And they are oppressed even by Chantry standards.

16) “The final thought is that Fenris' judgments do not have much value, if any at all because they come from an uneducated source. … his insights and opinions are as valid as anyone else's in the party.”. Since you repeat yourself mostly in a final paragraph, especially concerning Tevinter (see above my opinion on that issue), I’ll repeat myself as well. Fenris lacks both education and personal experience especially compared to other party members. He has got even quite important things about himself wrong. I don’t see how opinions of someone like this can be “as valid” as opinions of someone with formal education and 3x personal experience under his belt. Especially when these opinions are about the countries/systems foreign to Fenris but native to that other someone. Especially when most members of the party are either productive members of the society or strive to be such while Fenris is a guy squatting in a stolen mansion who is busy not with self-education, despite your saying that he has a drive for it, but with drinking wine and whining to H. (if only) about his live, lyrium markings and the fact that he has no idea what to do with his freedom after killing ton of people for it. Hell, even Emile is less pathetic. He at least knows what he wants and had a plan to achieve it relying only on his family, not a bunch of strangers that quite possibly is being lead by a hated mage and certainly includes 3 mages.

P.S. Currently our discussion contains 3 branches: treatment of mages in Kirkwall, Fenris, and ways of coexisting for mages and regular humans. That makes posts way too long. Also, two branches are off-topic. I’m open to suggestions.

Modifié par Nameless2345, 02 juin 2011 - 06:49 .

[Rawgrim]

I hated Fenris bigtime. Well...all the elves, to be honest. They looked so very out of place. Like something from a jrpg copied and pasted into a western rpg.

[HTTP 404]

I never hated fenris. I liked him a lot, he's a good guy and means well but never admits being a good guy. If I was a betting man, i would bet that players who love being mages probably hate fenris.

Modifié par HTTP 404, 03 juin 2011 - 02:05 .

[berelinde]

HTTP 404 wrote...

I never hated fenris. I liked him a lot, he's a good guy and means well but never admits being a good guy. If I was a betting man, i would bet that players who love being mages probably hate fenris.

You would lose. I love playing mages but I like Fenris.

Granted, that's "like," not "love." I wouldn't name children after him nor do I spend my lunch hour writing fanfic about him, but I don't detest him. He is a fun character with an interesting backstory. That's almost enough to compensate for his totally insufficient willpower score when first recruited.

[HTTP 404]

berelinde wrote...

HTTP 404 wrote...

I never hated fenris. I liked him a lot, he's a good guy and means well but never admits being a good guy. If I was a betting man, i would bet that players who love being mages probably hate fenris.

You would lose. I love playing mages but I like Fenris.

Granted, that's "like," not "love." I wouldn't name children after him nor do I spend my lunch hour writing fanfic about him, but I don't detest him. He is a fun character with an interesting backstory. That's almost enough to compensate for his totally insufficient willpower score when first recruited.

haha.  I would definitely lose in your case.   there's always an exception to the rule but I feel that you are in the minority.

[Arquen]

I’m sorry, but you are often arguing not with what I said, Arquen, but with something…else.

 I don't like to personalize arguments on subjects, therefore in my arguments I structure them so that they are not directed at one single person. I avoid accusative phrases like "you," "I," "me," "my" because they have no place in the argument. It isn't "My" opinion that is being discussed, but an attempt to prove a premise. In this case, a few premises. At the same time it is a counter-argument to premises previously made. So, I'm not arguing with anyone, simply putting an argument on paper or internet screen in this case? Also, I do wish others would join in on this debate, LOL. It is quite fun.

     Also, I agree that the Tevinter argument, Dalish argument, and Templar/Mage arguments should be left out. Let us just concentrate on Fenris and his deficiencies and strengths. However, I only proposed and expanded those arguments because they are at the heart of Fenris' experiences and knowledge. He knows a lot about mages and magisters and oppression from being in the service of Danarius in Tevinter. That is why I used examples from Tevinter and from the Gallows. This is where Fenris' knowledge and argument about Tevinter and mage oppression is most clearly defined, and in his own words.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

     So, read this post about three times and these points presented have become regurgitation of previous statements. There is nothing new in the arguments presented here to be honest. No prooving statements, only opinion, bias, personal hyperbole, and random statistics. Consequently, only some points are worth responding to. The "nuggets of truth" that are newly presented statements. Though, there is still lack of example and proof in any of these points. Simply stating a counter-argument is wrong because of lack of understanding of the original premise does not prove or disprove anything at all really. If misunderstanding is made, please clarify the argument further. 

1) ” Saying Fenris had no means to expand his knowledge through self education is false”. Of course. He had means and time to learn to read, I think. I said that he seems to lack drive. Even such relatively simple thing as learning to read has to be suggested (and, if fact, taught) by H. So, he simply didn’t start. Saying that his words "I certainly didn't learn from books" show drive for self-education is very, very questionable.

     This is contradicting the argument that was first presented. The quote came from the premise "Together it boils down to one simple fact: he has personal memory span of a teenager (I’m being generous here) and had no means to expand his knowledge through self-education (assuming he has the drive: it seems unlikely)." Now, lets define "self-education" to make this more clear. Self-education being the ability to gain knowledge and understanding in a subject, and become informed about said subject.
     
     In this case Fenris does have the capability of self-education because one does not need books to gain knowledge, become informed, or understand a subject. This has already been argued, and still stands that his experiences alone can serve to make him very well versed in magisters, what happens when mages rule a society, and the cruelty and power mages are capable of in a place where they are free citizens. He lived in this society, and so is knowledgeable about it. Yet this has already been addressed before, and needs no regurgitating.

     The statement about Fenris being incapable of being taken seriously because he has no formal education is the foundation for all further points so it warrants further discussion apparently. Still, there is no proof to support this claim. It is repeated, but still remains very weak at best because it is based off of no proof. What proof is there that "pathetic knowledge" is gained from having less experience? What determines less physical experiences have less value? That because Fenris has less physical years of memory than other companions he is not functional, mature, educated, and therefore incompetent to make any statements regaurding his homeland and what happens there and how it could potentially happen in Kirkwall because it looks familiar? Fenris never presumes to solve the mage/templar problem. He only offers opinions and knowledge/fact gained from experience in a society of free mages. His belief is that mages should not be free because a society of free mages is the Tevinter Imperium. That doesn't mean he reguards the circle as the solution, or wishes to kill all mages or do to them as the magisters did to him. He does not take a hard stance on the side of the Templars, he only agrees that they are the better solution than to allow free mages. As stated before " the Tevinter Imperium offers no solution," meaning that a society of free mages is not better, and is, in fact, worse than Kirkwall.
     
     So, to clarify further: memory and experience is worth pathetically little unless it is in someone who 1) can read, and 2) has been alive longer? gained more memories/experiences? How can one be sure of the memories and experiences someone else gains in a set amount of time? It is very possible Fenris has experienced as much or more than Anders as far as abuses, oppression, and general slavery. How can one devalue those memories and experiences just because they come from an illiterate slave. Not a stupid person, but someone who just can't read. This is not confusing mental deficit with ignorance. It is responding to the statement that Fenris is not a functional, mature being because he cannot read. Using illiterate as an insulting term suggests mental deficiency, and the original premise did just that.

 

“Simply listening or participating in a conversation”… Err, sorry, no, that’s not education and not equal to reading a book on the subject. Do I really have to explain why? Do I really have to explain why listening to two guys discussing “Republic”/Bible/any other book for five minutes is not the same as reading it? Keep in mind that we are not discussing his opinions on edibility of a local mushroom (although in Kirkwall his credibility here is suspect too), but on the ways society should and shouldn’t be organized and maintained. In a country foreign for Fenris.

     The example of apprenticeships and participating in conversation CAN make someone versed in a subject. Not a 5 minute conversation, but think of the Ancient Greek forums where philosophy was born. They had no books, they had debates and learned a LOT from just telling stories about history, philosophy, politics etc. etc. Fenris could learn in much the same way. He even states that "Danarius spoke of [blood magic, magisters] often..."  Fenris was always there when Danarius had guests and they were discussing politics, blood magic, whatever. He was scenery to them, but that doesn't mean he didn't absorb information when it was presented. Even in a secondary fashion he still can listen and learn from others without reading anything. These are intelligent nobles and magisters, and he learned from them by listening, experiencing, and absorbing knowledge. How can one say that "pathetic knowledge" is gained from that? That is how most of apprenticeships do work. Hear something, see something, do something. All one needs to learn something is their own senses. Reading is a tool, not an end-all path to wisdom or knowledge.

7) “ Furthermore, the claim Fenris has the "personal memory span of a teenager" has no merit, and is not fact. If it is simply based off of years then it is completely false. To say because Fenris' spent 10 years in Danarius' service, has 10 years worth of memories and is therefore 10 years old makes no sense.” Wonderful example of substituting my argument for another in two sentences. No, physically and emotionally Fenris obviously isn’t prepubescent. Sigh. I said, however, that, using your numbers, he has “10 years worth of memories”. And no formal education. And no capability (or, it seems, interest) for real self-education. Now, again, why opinions of such a person on complex sociological and political issues should be worth, well, anything? Why someone like this feels entitled to give opinions in such a categorical tone?

 

     Not substituting the argument, clarifying what the argument stated. Yet again it seems to get stuck on the "self-education" argument. Now, Fenris really has no capability to teach himself to read. He is a wanted man, being chased, cannot stay in one place very long, and keeps no ties. That is, until Hawke. Hawke is his first opportunity presented to even learn how to read. When someone is running for their life, the ability to read is not something they are focusing on. Staying alive, however, is the priority. So, it was not lack of drive that did not allow Fenris to learn to read in his time after being free, but simple lack of access. It is not really possible to teach oneself how to read, no matter what drive one has to learn. Hawke says "it's never to late to learn [how to read]." Fenris replies, "Isn't it? Sometimes I wonder..." This shows discouragement perhaps, but it also shows that he has thought about learning to read before, and it is obvious from his reaction to the book that he sees his inability to read as a "deficiency." It isn't something he likes about himself, but he has not had the means to learn how to read before.

8)” So, he does know a lot about himself. The argument is that because he does not know his family, his name, his past history means he cannot define himself….he cannot find a sense of identity ”. Once again, you are misreading what I said. And I said that he “doesn’t know defining facts about his live”. Like, facts that defined that live. He is in Kirkwall because he had family and because he competed for markings to free them. And yet he either doesn’t know these facts or got them wrong. If a person doesn’t know such things about himself, how can his knowledge about the world be trusted?

 

     This is utterly false. Fenris is in Kirkwall to escape Danarius. He did not know anything about family or history or past until Hadrianna told him about his sister. Even then he thought it was a trap, but decided to reach out to his sister anyway. He took a big risk to try and figure out some of his past. A risk that did not pay off in the end because it left him with the same feeling as before. "I am utterly alone." He was perfectly content to not remember his past at all until Hawke (if romanced) and Hadrianna (told him of his sister.) The only reason to reply to this point is because it is just so horribly wrong. Based off no facts, lore, or anything really. It makes no sense at all.

9)” To say he competed for the markings just makes it more tragic, but doesn't whitewash the fact that he suffered from those markings, and still does.” It makes him a guy who holds grudge and repeatedly whines about receiving something he pursued with gusto. Were it knowingly, I’d call him an idiot and hypocrite – something with a potential for tragedy, yes, but mostly for others around him. Suffered? Please, quite likely the markings are the things that gave him the power to achieve and preserve personal freedom. The only skill Fenris really has, the only skill that can provide him with bread and butter is killing, and markings make him not a good warrior, but an outstanding one. Markings gave his family freedom, too. He uses them constantly without reservations. Nothing is free, including the markings, but other than that I don’t see him as a victim in his deal with Danarius, no. Quite the opposite.

     First of all, nobody knows how long Fenris was with Danarius. Secondly, nobody knows exactly what experiences Danarius put Fenris through as a slave other than "I was a slave, I propped up the furniture if so told."  Yet his suffering under his master is apparent, and to ignore that fact because he volunteered for the ritual (apparently with gusto) in a past he doesn't remember does not change the suffering he endured both during the ritual and after. The markings themselves are a source of pain. He states when Hawke first meets him that he intends to "do more than just talk..." to Danarius. Of course he uses the markings and power they give him, but that is not what achieved or preserved his freedom. He would have escaped long before the Fog Warriors had it been simply about the markings giving him the power. In the end it was his own conscience and willpower that finally allowed him to separate himself from the slave life. That, and opportunity left after the Fog Warrior incident. His suffering is not lessened because he volunteered. He has no memory of that life, and he is not "getting his past wrong," because he does not know anything about his past.

Good examples:
Fenris: I have no memory of my childhood.
Fenris: Danarius had no desire to teach his slaves anything that made them think they're worthy beings.
Sebastian: I'm sorry. I can't imagine how difficult your life has been.
Fenris: No, you can’t.

Also,
Sebastian: You know, Fenris, as a brother in the Chantry, I'm allowed to hear confessions.
Fenris: Why would you tell me this?
Sebastian: I know Danarius made you do things. I thought you might be more comfortable talking to a friend.
Sebastian: You should know, a murder committed under duress is a sin on the one who ordered it, not the one whose hands carried out the deed.
Fenris: Have I not spoken enough of my past? Does everyone in Kirkwall wish to hear every sordid detail?

12)” statement Fenris makes about how "he sees no oppression here.. only fear.. and danger." You quoted him before. Again, I have to repeat myself. “His estimate of an oppression in Gallows is based on a short walk it its outer ring, as opposed to Anders who actually lived in another Circle and had friends and acquaintances in Gallows. It's like someone taking short walk in a prison courtyard and immediately deciding that no, there are no abuses, wardens are fair, prisoners are treated nicely, none of appropriate laws was repeatedly broken, etc, etc. The very fact that Fenris dares to form any conclusions at all so fast is disgusting.” Care to disprove?

     This is again regurgitation. The counter-argument is that Fenris isn't making conclusions "so fast." He actually does know what he is talking about. He has lived through systemic oppression. Fear and danger exist in the circle, and he states that. The overt persecution and oppression of mages such as that akin to Tevinter slaves is NOT present. All the examples of brutality and Ser Alrik and Ser Kerras and Meredtith got more off topic. The point is that Fenris did not make some off-hand comment, he is not arguing that the cirlce is a good solution. He is not saying mages should be in the circle even. He is just making a statement based on fact. "This seems more like a prison. I wonder if it's more effective than the circle I know." Also, when asked directly about an alternative to deal with mages Fenris says, "that is the question, isn't it? who should deal with them?" This isn't an every mage is evil tirade or even a circle is the best solution reply. Fenris knows what oppression is, but that is not what he sees when assessing the gallows. It also isn't a wipe away all bad things that happen to mages offhand comment. The "oppression" Anders speaks of is not the same oppression of the Tevinter Imperium, and that is what Fenris' is saying. No oppression here, but this isn't good either.

16)  I don’t see how opinions of someone like this can be “as valid” as opinions of someone with formal education and 3x personal experience under his belt. Especially when these opinions are about the countries/systems foreign to Fenris but native to that other someone. Especially when most members of the party are either productive members of the society or strive to be such while Fenris is a guy squatting in a stolen mansion who is busy not with self-education, despite your saying that he has a drive for it, but with drinking wine and whining to H. (if only) about his live, lyrium markings and the fact that he has no idea what to do with his freedom after killing ton of people for it. Hell, even Emile is less pathetic. He at least knows what he wants and had a plan to achieve it relying only on his family, not a bunch of strangers that quite possibly is being lead by a hated mage and certainly includes 3 mages.

       The final paragraph is a summary or closing paragraph that sums up the arguments presented and briefly illustrates their meaning. It is not repetition it is summation. A closing argument to sum up points. The only thing worth replying to is left here.

         So, basically this is a complete misunderstanding of Fenris' character. While in his cutscenes he does enjoy Danarius' wine (he also uses it to decorate the walls and not drink) he also does mercenary jobs. Helps Aveline root out slaver rings. Gets odd jobs from Varric, and participates in wicked grace and cards with the other companions. He is hardly a reclusive drunk sitting away in his mansion until Hawke rescues him from his booze induced blearyness and self pity. This is just misinterpretation of his character completely. Also, he does spend time with Hawke learning how to read. It is apparent: "Fenris' reading has improved...." says Hawke. So, yes he may not be the revolutionary mage underground leader, the mob boss dishing out business to everyone, the captain of the guard, the blood mage fixing a mirror, the constantly spending time at the bar and searching for a relic pirate, the chantry brother doing diplomatic trips to his homeland, or even the protagonist caught in a whirlwind of everyone around him/her doing odd jobs and quests wherever. Still, he is a hired mercenary at times who takes pleasure in killing slavers as well as gives tips to Aveline and seeks help from Isabela about tax collectors and such. He has a life in Kirkwall, and it is the longest time he has ever spent in one place. As for whining, he will be the first to say that Hawke probably doesn't want to listen to him whine, and that his problems are not Hawke's and so should not bother him/her with them. He is more than willing to take care of his own problems, alone if need be.

Modifié par Arquen, 03 juin 2011 - 05:57 .

[phyreblade74]

1)” Saying Fenris had no means to expand his knowledge through self education is false”. Of course. He had means and time to learn to read, I think. I said that he seems to lack drive. Even such relatively simple thing as learning to read has to be suggested (and, if fact, taught) by H. So, he simply didn’t start. Saying that his words "I certainly didn't learn from books" show drive for self-education is very, very questionable. I can say that my cat “certainly didn't learn from books”, and not because he learned nothing, too. I’d say the phrase merely confirms that Fenris has eyes, ears and something that can be called a functional brain, nothing more. And without reading…see below about self-education

In the vast majority of societies where slavery was a legal system of commerce, slaves were deliberately and methodically denied the opportunity to learn how to read.  Reading and writing, anyway, allowed for the conveyance and spread of ideas and concepts contrary to a docile slave population.  Rebellion and insurrection became far more common when your slaves could communicate amongst varied groups throughout the country.  It's highly unlikely the Tevinter Imperium is so unusual a slave-owning society and probably has rules of some sort denying slaves "the means and time" to learn how to read.

Even assuming Fenris' escape would concur upon him a greater opportunity to learn how to read, it's unlikely he's going to stop long enough to do so when he's being actively and ruthlessly hunted by slavers and hunters.  He even says so, that he was "dogged by his former master" nonstop once he ran from Seheron.  When survival is paramount, you're not going to stop and attend school; you simply don't have time. 
So Fenris does NOT have "the means and time" until after he meets Hawke.  THAT is the first chance he really has to stop anywhere with some sense of security enough he can concentrate on an outside endeavor like learning how to read.  When offered the chance, too, he says, "I always wanted to know more."  It's obvious he's long had a desire to learn, what you call a "drive", but he's never really had the chance before meeting Hawke.

2)The fact that he knows about a legendary ally of an Andraste is hardly a surprise or point in his favor. How many people in Western countries have not at least heard about Apostles? Or Spartacus?

Hence, education and understanding is NOT dependent on book-learning.

3)” It cannot be said that he did not learn anything”. Of course it cannot be said that he learned nothing. And once again, I never said that. He learned as much as an illiterate guy with normal intellect without formal education can learn about live and world during, well, ten years of live as a fighting slave. Which is pathetically little. Would you really pay much attention to ramblings of an illiterate uneducated guy from another country about your country and its problems? Especially if this guy has just arrived?  Especially if he has amnesia on top?

Depends on what it is he's talking about, actually.  There are concepts and ideas implicit in human culture, that go beyond our mere political boundaries and encompass a common human experience, in fact.  Fenris might not be able to describe the intricate social customs and mores of Fereldan or Kirkwall society, perhaps, nor does he try.  But that doesn't mean he can't describe what a fireball slung from a mage's hand looks like.  Because he's seen such a thing and he remembers it quite well.  That makes his comparisons and the opinions he deduces from them valid and useful.

4) “One doesn't need books to educate themselves on a subject…apprenticeship…” Hm. “Educate themselves” or “be educated”? Because apprenticeship isn’t a form of self-education. And no, self-education in most areas is either impossible without reading or will end up sorely lacking. At least I can’t think of examples. Hell, even martial arts can’t be self-taught effectively. “Simply listening or participating in a conversation”… Err, sorry, no, that’s not education and not equal to reading a book on the subject. Do I really have to explain why? Do I really have to explain why listening to two guys discussing “Republic”/Bible/any other book for five minutes is not the same as reading it? Keep in mind that we are not discussing his opinions on edibility of a local mushroom (although in Kirkwall his credibility here is suspect too), but on the ways society should and shouldn’t be organized and maintained. In a country foreign for Fenris.

There are a myriad ways of learning, actually.  It's why the best teachers do not rely upon any single form of teaching but utilize a number of approaches by which to convey the ideas and lessons they're hoping to impart.  A teacher who endlessly lectures, for instance, is going to fail a number of students who learn better from exercises and activities than verbal lecture.

It's also incorrect to assume someone's lacking in awareness or understanding because they've relied heavily on observation and experience rather than reading and being taught.  Fenris is obviously someone who's travelled extensively in the company of wealthy and powerful individuals in the society of his birth, and the understandings gleaned from such an experience are probably far greater than not.  Would you discount the impressions and experiences shared by a bodyguard of a Congressman, for instance, simply because they weren't being taught or even engaged during various forays and events?

6)” That is akin to saying that the only way someone can become a functional, mature being is by knowing how to read.” In our society – yes, by the way. What, how many illiterate people are among your colleagues?

I've known people who went years into adulthood before learning how to read, actually.  They "functioned" and were, to a rule, intelligent people, using techniques to get by that ably demonstrated their capability.  Reading isn't the end-all be-all of functionality or maturity; it's just a tool and lacking it usually means you start to use different tools, rather. 

8)” So, he does know a lot about himself. The argument is that because he does not know his family, his name, his past history means he cannot define himself….he cannot find a sense of identity ”. Once again, you are misreading what I said. And I said that he “doesn’t know defining facts about his live”. Like, facts that defined that live. He is in Kirkwall because he had family and because he competed for markings to free them. And yet he either doesn’t know these facts or got them wrong. If a person doesn’t know such things about himself, how can his knowledge about the world be trusted?

Because he does know many things about himself.  He knows what it is to be a slave.  He knows what it is to be abused.  He knows what it is to be used and manipulated and forced into doing terrible things.  He knows what it looks like, when a mage kills a small child for blood enough to impress a number of guests during a party, and he knows what it is to live in a society where something like that can happen or be done and no one in authority stops it, says it's wrong, or otherwise prevents it from occurring, even applauds it.  He knows what it is to be judged worthy or not based on your ability to use magic.  He knows what it is to used to kill people he admired, to run for his life, to be hunted.  He knows what it is to be hungry, to go without, to suffer, to be afraid, to dream of different, to determine to fight even to the death for freedom, to want, to desire.  He knows all of those things, has seen all of that and more, knows all of that and more.

I would trust what he has to say about the world around him, yes, even knowing he's still learning things about himself all the time.  Who among us really knows every single thing about ourselves?  Heck, that's why shrinks make such good money in our society.

9)” To say he competed for the markings just makes it more tragic, but doesn't whitewash the fact that he suffered from those markings, and still does.” It makes him a guy who holds grudge and repeatedly whines about receiving something he pursued with gusto. Were it knowingly, I’d call him an idiot and hypocrite – something with a potential for tragedy, yes, but mostly for others around him. Suffered? Please, quite likely the markings are the things that gave him the power to achieve and preserve personal freedom. The only skill Fenris really has, the only skill that can provide him with bread and butter is killing, and markings make him not a good warrior, but an outstanding one. Markings gave his family freedom, too. He uses them constantly without reservations. Nothing is free, including the markings, but other than that I don’t see him as a victim in his deal with Danarius, no. Quite the opposite.

Because being made to lay down while intricate designs are carved into your entire body and burning liquid poured into them to adhere to your skin is just peachy an experience.  And of course Danarius comes off as someone apt to describe such details of his magic rituals to all of those targeted by them, surely.  He's obviously an honest fellow, decent and caring of those in his charge.  It shows!



Everything else is about the mage vs templar struggle, more I think, than about Fenris.  I'll only say I play pro-templar, always have.  I didn't anticipate going in that direction when I first started playing DA2 but it seemed every mage in Kirkwall I came into contact with, barring my Hawke's sibling, ended up going nuts and trying to kill her.  It eventually became too hard to support their bid for freedom when they seemed so apt to misuse it whenever they got it.  I always imagined Fenris turning to a pro-mage Hawke during the Harvester fight and going, "I told you so." And honestly he would've been right, I think.

[Critical Miss]

Fenris is a character written for female gamers that think mothering instincts have something to do with romance. Fenris was a big trap on the writer's part, IMO. If I was feeling sadistic, I'd come up with a character like Fenris.

Denarius? Take this elf away!

Modifié par Critical Miss, 04 juin 2011 - 01:54 .

[The Baconer]

I hated him, but at the same time I liked him as a foil for my Hawke. Though if I ever build a team that I like more than my Varric/Aveline/MageHawke/Fenris one, I'll probably start handing him back to Danarius on all following playthroughs.

Modifié par The Baconer, 04 juin 2011 - 02:00 .

[Taraberra]

He's like Anders to me, they both fixate on how bad their pasts were, get all angsty, and hate mages/templars because of it. All they do is whine about them. I can never romance either because I find them both more annoying than anything.

[Nameless2345]

Arquen: I’m sorry for “regurgitation”, as you put it, but I’d like to note that mostly I answered to your repeated statements with my repeats and explicitly noted this fact. Let’s avoid this, indeed. “No prooving statements”? Reread, for example, Bethany part, where I correct, to put it mildly, misquote. Or my explanation of Tevinter example. But, I digress on off-topics. About directly addressing another person on board… I do not see it is a big issue (unlike personal attacks), as I’m answering a concrete person anyway, not making a kind of general statement. However, if it’ll make you more comfortable, I’m rewriting my current post in a relatively impersonal manner.
1)[quote] This is contradicting the argument that was first presented. The quote came from the premise "Together it boils down to one simple fact: he has personal memory span of a teenager (I’m being generous here) and had no means to expand his knowledge through self-education (assuming he has the drive: it seems unlikely)." [/quote] Not contradiction. Unexplained logical leap, rather. Literate person could actually fix gap in his knowledge. Fenris could also, starting with learning to read. He didn’t, so he had no decent means left in his disposal. If one didn’t make a first step, he can’t do a second.
2) [quote] Now, lets define "self-education" to make this more clear. Self-education being the ability to gain knowledge and understanding in a subject, and become informed about said subject.” [/quote]What? No, just…no. To begin with, not an "ability" but rather "activity". And such definition indeed includes my cat and probably even some invertebrates, depending on depth of “understanding” which is never 100% but asymptotic at best. Such definition certainly includes every non-comatose human being and it is telling that such broad definition was required to apply term “self-education” to Fenris. I’d suggest http://encyclopedia2.../Self-Education, namely “the independent acquisition of systematic knowledge in some area of science, engineering, culture, or political life. … The principal form of self-education is the study of scientific literature, popular science literature, educational texts, fiction, and the press.” Keywords are “systematic” and “principal form…literature, …texts, …press”. Even “broad sense”, described in the article, doesn’t really apply since there are no signs that Fenris _worked_ on some material as opposed to stealing glances or overhearing conversations. 
3) [quote] In this case Fenris does have the capability of self-education because one does not need books to gain knowledge, become informed, or understand a subject. This has already been argued, and still stands that his experiences alone can serve to make him very well versed in magisters, what happens when mages rule a society, and the cruelty and power mages are capable of in a place where they are free citizens. [/quote] I’ve already explained why ONE single example is pathetic when trying to discover any sort of law both using Thedas lore and parable. OK, another example: how many straight lines can be drawn through a single point on 2D surface? Can they even be counted? Fenris doesn’t even understand how limited his experience in political systems and history really is, due to his lack of said experience and knowledge. And I asked for an example of decent self-education in any relevant area without books/tutor. I don’t see it here, just repeating of the same old “but he can!”.
4) [quote] The statement about Fenris being incapable of being taken seriously because he has no formal education is the foundation for all further points so it warrants further discussion apparently. Still, there is no proof to support this claim. It is repeated, but still remains very weak at best because it is based off of no proof….less experience[/quote] I asked in my previous post, who would really take opinions of an illiterate amnesiac foreigner on their society/profession/anything just as seriously as opinions of educated experienced person from their country. Would someone hire such foreigner? Would someone trust him with serious issues? Of course, no answer was given. Because very few people in their right mind would say “yes”. 
5) [quote] Fenris never presumes to solve the mage/templar problem. He only offers opinions and knowledge[/quote] Very categorically and very willing to enforce these opinions with lethal force. Quoting one book, “Yet you allow yourself in the presence of two university-educated men to offer advice, …, on a cosmic scale and of quite cosmic stupidity, on the redistribution of wealth . . .” Replace “redistribution of wealth” with “mages and mundane people coexisting” and, I’d say, we have Fenris. 
6) [quote] He does not take a hard stance on the side of the Templars[/quote] Oh yes, he does in the end unless player maxes F/R scale. In fact he is willing to kill Aveline and H., his benefactors, only because Meredith says “The people will demand blood! Let's kill mages for them!” or something like this. 
7) [quote] So, to clarify further: memory and experience is worth pathetically little unless it is in someone who 1) can read, and 2) has been alive longer? [/quote] In comparison, yes. 10 years of memory worth less than 30 or 40 assuming approximately the same intellectual level (and freedom of movement). Lack of formal education/any systematical self-education (it depends on literacy)/literacy itself worth less than a formal education. Opinions of someone with lack of erudition worth less compared to well-read person. Put together these factors and it worth much less. I kind of thought it was self-evident. 
8) [quote] It is responding to the statement that Fenris is not a functional, mature being because he cannot read. Using illiterate as an insulting term suggests mental deficiency[/quote]
a) It is not insulting term, at least I didn’t find evidences of it in any dictionary at hand, although I may be unaware of nuances. It is just fact. I use “illiterate” as a short form of “person who can’t read due to lack of knowledge (as opposed to physical condition such as blindness)”.
Lack of knowledge isn’t a sin, merely deficiency (not necessarily mental), but operating outside the boundaries of your knowledge due to pride or prejudices is. Once people start dying it is a crime.

And no, it is not THAT simple as merely lack of skills at reading (although have yet to see fully “functional” illiterate person in a modern society). It is lack of experience+lack of any education+lack of drive+ past as a slave that make me doubt that Fenris is “a functional, mature being” (look at Orana/Emile for similar pasts). Not me alone, it seems. Fenris himself states that he has no idea what to do with his live…after like 10 years of freedom. And even his fans in this topic think that he requires guidance from either Isabela or romantically involved H. I told it before, yes, but never received an answer. However, it is another matter. My main point was not “functionality” of Fenris (that's his problem), but his competence, especially in comparison. 

9) [quote] Not a 5 minute conversation, but think of the Ancient Greek forums where philosophy was born. [/quote] That’s practically formal education similar to our seminars. And just like our seminars these forums on philosophy were based, if memory serves, on people who had base education, oral or not (although often it was practice in oratorical arts).
10) [quote] That is how most of apprenticeships do work. Hear something, see something, do something. [/quote] Oh, man. No, not like this. Hear not “something”, but careful explanation with an opportunity to ask questions. See not “something”, but demonstration. Do not “something”, but a planned course of tasks under supervision. That’s basically saying that someone who gained knowledge from hearsay and occasional glances is educated. Where and when did it work like this? Not in our society, for certain. Not in medieval society, hence apprenticeship, universities, private teachers. Not in Rome, even. Why do I have to explain something THIS basic?
12) [quote] Reading is a tool, not an end-all path to wisdom or knowledge. [/quote] It is an essential tool for self-education, especially in areas where experiments (try-and-error approach) are difficult or too risky. Counter-examples, please.  
13) [quote] Not substituting the argument, clarifying what the argument stated. Yet again it seems to get stuck on the "self-education" argument. Now, Fenris really has no capability to teach himself to read. He is a wanted man, being chased, cannot stay in one place very long, and keeps no ties. That is, until Hawke. Hawke is his first opportunity presented to even learn how to read. [/quote] The rest of the paragraph is a long explanation why not being able to read isn’t Fenris’ fault. I never said it was. It was his deficiency. But the quote is kind of funny. In a previous post the same author argued that Fenris “had means for self-education”. In this post I read that he had no means for the most basic of steps in it. And no, H. isn’t the first opportunity. Chantry is quite willing to teach elves reading/writing. I’m sure this service could also be purchased. By the time H. makes his/her offer Fenris already lived for at least 3(!) years in Kirkwall. He made no effort, that is all. Even H. have to actually suggest learning to read and it goes as a flirting option, which always made me wonder what was Fenris really interested in.
14) [quote] This is utterly false. Fenris is in Kirkwall to escape Danarius. [/quote]  Rest of the paragraph is irrelevant to what I said, being mostly about Fenris’ annoying angst. I’m not talking about his intentions. I’m talking about how “Fenris” persona came to be. Again I have to quote myself “Facts that defined that live”. As was said before, Fenris isn’t completely equals to “Leto (actually, it was said they were just different, but that’s too strong statement in my opinion). Would Leto end up in Kirkwall? Would he be able to escape for so long without markings? Would he escape, leaving his family behind? Putting it all together, doubtful. He is in Kirkwall because of his origins yet he knows not them or has them wrong. Popular phrase (with variants) is “First Know Yourself Then Know Others”. My point, which was never answered satisfactorily, is that Fenris has yet to make the first step, which merits pity, but thinks he completed the second, which deserves disdain. 
15) [quote] First of all, nobody knows how long Fenris was with Danarius. Secondly, nobody knows exactly what experiences Danarius put Fenris through as a slave other than "I was a slave, I propped up the furniture if so told." Yet his suffering under his master is apparent[/quote] Incorrect. We know about his suffering under Hadriana. Yet it doesn’t constitute “suffering” in my book, just petty bullying and wounded pride. It isn’t even a valid reason for murder. In our history slavery brought truly horrific abuses, yet Fenris mentions nothing of the like – at least, not applied to himself. As such no, I see no reasons to believe that he truly suffered except for physical pain of the markings (single voluntary episode). Oh, we know that he considers his markings “a curse”, yet he uses them in every violent personal cut-scene (compare to Merrill’s blood magic). Hypocritical much?  Of ocurse, in fact it was "rule of cool" or something like this, I suspect.
16) [quote] and he is not "getting his past wrong," [/quote] He IS getting his past wrong at least where markings are concerned. I thought I was pretty clear here. He believed he got them against his will and was shocked after learning otherwise.
17) [quote] This is again regurgitation. The counter-argument is that Fenris isn't making conclusions "so fast." He actually does know what he is talking about…. . Fenris knows what oppression is, but that is not what he sees when assessing the gallows. [/quote] Sigh. And I even gave an example why it was “too fast”. Overcharging my argument somewhat, Fenris announces his decision based on a slightly more than a glance and argues his point with people with infinitely more knowledge on Circles in general and Kirkwall Circle in particular. And “infinitely” is actually close to truth, since Fenris knowledge about Circles in Thedas is close to zero. Saying that he knows what oppression really like and hence can diagnose it incredibly fast requires some very good proof and I don’t see it. I know examples where well-educated, intelligent, experienced people failed to do it in months. I repeat myself here in different words, but I didn’t see a counter-argument, just not related quotes from Fenris.
18) [quote] So, basically this is a complete misunderstanding of Fenris' character. While in his cutscenes he does enjoy Danarius' wine (he also uses it to decorate the walls and not drink) [/quote] And animation clearly shows him raising it to lips and holding it for some time, which seems to be a limit for game engine, so I’d say he drinks it. [quote] He does mercenary jobs… odd jobs… helps Aveline…plays cards[/quote] . [quote] He is hardly a reclusive drunk sitting away in his mansion until Hawke rescues him from his booze induced blearyness and self pity. [/quote] I didn’t say that he is a drunk. I merely described things he does in game, and noted that they don’t command respect in my eyes at least, especially compared to other party members. Further conclusions were reached by the author of the quoted post and I like that. What I said though is that he “is not a productive member of a society compared to most of the other party members”.

a)As I’ve said before ”Mercenary jobs” in Kirkwall is the best future for Fenris, in my opinion. However, both mercenary jobs offered to H. by Red Irons in game are essentially assassinations. Flint mercenaries? Hired killers as well. Forgive me if I’m skeptical about such applications of talent. Come to think of it, such swords-for-hire are what party usually kills in CRPGs for XP along with giant rats.

”odd jobs” to make ends meet are just that, odd jobs.

c)His so-called “help” to Aveline shows in just one banter and she names this help “a tip”. Basically, he gave a piece of information on a slaver base and that’s all. If he didn’t inform about a crime in process, that would constitute a crime itself, at least in my country.

d)”Playing cards” is not a productive activity. Merely a sign that he becomes somewhat capable of socializing in Act III. And, according to Varric, he tends to lose more money than he actually has, so I wouldn't really list gambling as a point in Fenris' favor. 

Nothing of it constitutes being productive or striving to be, in short. Nothing constitutes as a normal, stable life too, more on this later.
19) [quote] . So, yes he may not be the revolutionary mage underground leader[/quote]   Yes. Fenris is not a selfless healer attending to poor refugees at a great personal risk. He is not a member of a Merchant guild (mob boss? That’s Athenril here, not Varric). He is not an elf doing her duty as a Dalish and Keeper apprentice by restoring lost knowledge at, again, a great personal risk. I’ll skip Aveline, Champion of Kirkwall and Sebastian because it is somewhat obvious. Fenris is… just a sword for hire at best. Even H./Carver, not exactly a paragon here, at least strives to become something more in Act I. And in banters it’s noticeable that, for example, Varric (“mob boss”, heh) aids Merrill and Anders selflessly. Aveline covers Fenris for all these years (probably Anders too, alas). Sebastian at least offers to help Fenris. Anders heals Isabella (ugh). Yet Fenris himself never helps anyone. I don’t remember a single act of compassion (except condolences to H. after “All that remains”), mercy, altruism or honor. I may be wrong here, if so I’d really like to hear examples. I honestly don’t get what people see in him. 
20) [quote] He has a life in Kirkwall[/quote]   Aveline, Varric and Fenris himself disagree that squatting in a “falling apart” mansion is a life (assuming the term refers not to a physical survival). Whenever H. and Fenris are friends or rivals, Fenris asks H. what should he do. 
21) [quote] As for whining, he will be the first to say that Hawke probably doesn't want to listen to him whine, and that his problems are not Hawke's and so should not bother him/her with them. He is more than willing to take care of his own problems, alone if need be. [/quote] He says something like this, but most of his personal dialogue is whining nevertheless. Large part of his banter with other party members in Act I is whining about the markings, which gets quite annoying in the hindsight. And he constantly asks for help. Alone? Alone he doesn’t even try to fight or escape Danarius if H. removes his/her protection in the final quest. Reasons for that are another matter. Alone he would get kicked from the mansion, if not imprisoned, long ago. Only Aveline protects him, presumably due to a good word from H.
22) [quote] Also, he does spend time with Hawke learning how to read. [/quote] Only if H. suggests learning to read and even volunteers to teach the guy who insults either her or Bethany. In two playthroughs I saw no reasons why anyone would be willing to take this burden when Fenris could probably hire a scribe/dedicated tutor. It is not Fenris’ initiative. Leave him alone and he is …what, exactly? 

As a summary, my point was (and is) that Fenris’ opinions, due to him having little personal experience due to amnesia, little knowledge due to lack of a formal education, very limited means to expand this knowledge/experience due to illiteracy (assuming he wishes to learn, which I didn’t see) and being from a quite different country, can’t be considered having equal weight with opinions of any other party member, including protagonist or any educated adult for that matter.
I didn’t see any really strong counter-arguments. Most counter-arguments were designed to prove that Fenris knowledge is greater than zero and that he had to learn at least something in his life, which is kind of obvious, because otherwise he’d be an elfroot, not an elf. The issue is comparison.
Some other, more valid, were essentially about Fenris having unique experience/knowledge in crucial areas, unavailable to other party members, which makes their respective knowledge on related topics incomparable directly.
Since Tevinter Imperium and slavery and mage tyranny in it are common Chantry scarecrows I disagree here. Everyone knows these basic facts about Tevinter. Fenris can offer just minor corrections and examples here and he is hardly an impartial observer.
His only truly unique area of expertise are Qunary (and I’m surprised that no one said it before), but it is mostly irrelevant to his opinions.
Some arguments explain in length why lack of knowledge isn’t Fenris fault. I actually agree, it isn’t. His fault is extreme, unshakable and unfounded confidence in his opinions, which in my experience is more often than not is a mark of an ignorant person. Given how easily he kills people I see it as a very dangerous trait, not merely unappealing. I also fail to see any respectable spiritual/moral qualities (hm, not sure how to put it correctly) in him except maybe a will to be free. The only seemingly good thing about him is that he suffered (not all that much in my opinion, even his sister envies him, for example), but it is a common misconception: suffering doesn't make someone a better person, usually merely a bitter one.

To phyreblade74: 



1) [quote]   It's highly unlikely the Tevinter Imperium is so unusual a slave-owning society and probably has rules of some sort denying slaves "the means and time" to learn how to read. [/quote]  
Of course. According to Fenris, slaves are not educated. However, in Act II he had spent 3 years in Kirkwall already.  

2) [quote]    Hence, education and understanding is NOT dependent on book-learning. [/quote] 
A very, very strange leap of logic. More on education in replies to Arquen, but let me put it way: I know who Spartacus was. I know most broad details of his rebellion. Yet I’m not educated on this topic and wouldn’t even think of arguing with someone who actually has historical education or recently read some books on topic. Knowing a name from hearsay is NOT education/understanding.  

3) [quote]    Depends on what it is he's talking about, actually.  There are concepts and ideas implicit in human culture, that go beyond our mere political boundaries and encompass a common human experience...That makes his comparisons and the opinions he deduces from them valid and useful. [/quote]   
That’s a good point, in fact. I could be petty and say that mage still knows much more fireballs than Fenris, but that
wouldn’t be relevant. Fenris opinions, the ones based on his  personal experiences (he has no means to expand his knowledge beyond that),  have worth. But less so than opinions of someone with more experiences/[self]-education. That’s why I’m kind of disappointed in a character. His role was to provide a counterbalance to mages in group, I think, but an experienced former Templar (like Samson, but without addiction)/exiled Tevinter citizen (non-mage, not amnesiac, educated, with less of a personal grudge) would work so much better. I’m also kind of tired of “tragic pasts due to abuses”, “broken birds”, “romance as a healing” things. What I'd like to see for a change is a tragic past were tragedy is partially based on mistakes/personal flaws of the person in question, not on irresistible outside force. Latter is just a cheap overused cliche to invoke compassion. Sorry, rant.

4) [quote]    There are a myriad ways of learning, actually.  It's why the best teachers…[/quote] 
See answer to Arquen about principal forms of a self-education. Teachers are irrelevant – Fenris had none.

5)   [quote]   Would you discount the impressions and experiences shared by a bodyguard of a Congressman? [/quote]  Depends on the topic. I won’t believe that he got functional economical/sociological education this way. And if he didn’t have one to begin with, I’ll put some doubt even in his impressions, yes, because quite likely he didn’t understand even the terms being used and how conclusions were made. At best he will be able to function as a sound-recorder. Faulty one.

6) [quote]  Because being made to lay down while intricate designs are carved into your entire body 
and burning liquid poured into them to adhere to your skin is just peachy an experience.  And of course Danarius comes off as someone apt to describe such details of his magic rituals to all of those targeted by them, surely.  He's obviously an honest fellow, decent and caring of those in his charge.  It shows! [/quote]  
Since ritual was an experimental/rare one (not sure here, but I have this impression from somewhere) even Danarius himself couldn’t really know what it would feel like. Leto knew something about the ritual, had to expect something painful (even normal tattoos are ) and also knew that his knowledge wasn’t complete. He agreed. That’s a fair deal in my book and Danarius fulfilled his part of the bargain. Compared to what some slavers in our history did he wasn’t really all that bad to Fenris or his family. Compared to how easily Fenris kills his sister… I’d say they deserve each other. 

P.S. Oh, damn. Inability to be laconic was always my problem, but I kinda shocked myself here. It seems longer than my damn fan-review on DA2. And on a character which, along with Isabela, I consider just poorly crafted in the first place. I'm starting to suspect that I underestimated Mr. Gaider.

Modifié par Nameless2345, 04 juin 2011 - 06:19 .

[themonty72]

Players have got deep on this topic I cant even response.

[phyreblade74]

Of course. According to Fenris, slaves are not educated. However, in Act II he had spent 3 years in Kirkwall already.  

Doing what?  It's only by Act II that he can finally consider the slim chance Danarius has given up the pursuit, which presumes he's been intent upon that chance before then.  To equate his taking the time to ensure he's secure before embarking on some other opportunity to a lack of impulse and drive to obtain it isn't accurate. 

Bottom line is he SAYS he's always wanted to learn.  Are you saying he's lying?
 
A very, very strange leap of logic. More on education in replies to Arquen, but let me put it way: I know who Spartacus was. I know most broad details of his rebellion. Yet I’m not educated on this topic and wouldn’t even think of arguing with someone who actually has historical education or recently read some books on topic. Knowing a name from hearsay is NOT education/understanding.  

Leap of logic, how?  Perhaps you and I are defining "to learn" in different ways.  I'll continue to argue, however, that learning is the gaining of knowledge or understanding, which isn't at all limited to reading a book on some subject.  In fact, I think there's a huge huge difference between reading up on a subject and actually seeing it or experiencing it.  It's the difference I consider when I think of reading a book on Michelangelo's paintings in the Sistine Chapel and then standing there and looking up at them.  Both encompass learning, and it's not particularly wise to discount the value of the latter.

Consider that Fenris is perfectly capable of qouting the Qun to the Arishok, enough the Qunari leader respects his knowledge and understanding of the subject.  His ability to do so didn't come from reading a book on Qunari culture and religion, because he can't read, but he is still able to convey not only the words but also the social and cultural nuances the Qunari offer to them.  His drive and capability to learn are clear enough in those exchanges he has with the Qunari, especially as he isn't a follower of the Qun personally; it's just a subject he's learned upon.
   
I could be petty and say that mage still knows much more fireballs than Fenris, but that wouldn’t be relevant.

Fenris isn't ever trying to say he knows more about fireballs than a mage.  He's saying he knows what it's like, rather, to be on the receiving end of a mage's fireballs, no pun intended.  And that perspective is perfectly valid in any argument over the danger (or not) of mage freedom.

Fenris opinions, the ones based on his  personal experiences (he has no means to expand his knowledge beyond that),  have worth. But less so than opinions of someone with more experiences/[self]-education. 

I think opinions based on personal experience and insight are MORE valuable than those of someone who's only read a book but never seen it or known it for themself.  And Fenris has seen and experienced a great deal of the world beyond the confines of Kirkwall and Fereldan, is perhaps the most well-travelled member of Hawke's group.  Anders describing what Tevinter mages must be like is of far less value, imo, than Fenris'.

I’m also kind of tired of “tragic pasts due to abuses”, “broken birds”, “romance as a healing” things. What I'd like to see for a change is a tragic past were tragedy is partially based on mistakes/personal flaws of the person in question, not on irresistible outside force. Latter is just a cheap overused cliche to invoke compassion. Sorry, rant.

No reason to apologize.  But I can't help what you're tired of, either.  I enjoy a romance where two people help each other through life's pains and upsets, rather.  It's appealing, perhaps, in the way it mirrors my own life and experience.  So it's probably just personal, and that's why I'm not offended in the least when others' don't share the feeling.  
 

Teachers are irrelevant – Fenris had none.

Utterly false.  He just doesn't put a name to them.  But his skills came from somewhere, his understanding is based upon something.  He wasn't hatched from an egg being able to do and say and know what he does.

Depends on the topic. I won’t believe that he got functional economical/sociological education this way. And if he didn’t have one to begin with, I’ll put some doubt even in his impressions, yes, because quite likely he didn’t understand even the terms being used and how conclusions were made. At best he will be able to function as a sound-recorder. Faulty one.

Yea, I'm sure Fenris can't possibly deduce much meaning from watching Danarius sacrifice a child during a party so he might impress his guests. 

Since ritual was an experimental/rare one (not sure here, but I have this impression from somewhere) even Danarius himself couldn’t really know what it would feel like. Leto knew something about the ritual, had to expect something painful (even normal tattoos are ) and also knew that his knowledge wasn’t complete. He agreed. That’s a fair deal in my book and Danarius fulfilled his part of the bargain. Compared to what some slavers in our history did he wasn’t really all that bad to Fenris or his family. Compared to how easily Fenris kills his sister… I’d say they deserve each other. 

Bear in mind the loss of memory Fenris suffers is completely distinct from the ritual.  We know this because Danarius wipes his memory once again if you choose to return Fenris to the mage during the "Alone" quest.  So it was a deliberate and methodical effort, to remove from Fenris any ability to know family and origin.  Why, becomes the question.

I only think the memory wipe that Danarius inflicts on Fenris makes it highly unlikely Leto knew much at all about what was going to happen beforehand.  Danarius wanted Fenris' sole loyalty so he deliberately stripped from Fenris every bit and nuance of care and feeling, anything that would've allowed Fenris self-regard or respect for anyone else, ever.  He left Fenris with nothing but a first memory of excrutiating agony and terror, not even an understanding enough why it was happening.  Fenris was never allowed the chance to know he'd endured that out of love for others.

There's a horrible quality to what Danarius did that's particularly profound, at a similar level to what was done in our own history, where Africans were taken from their homeland, stripped of their name, their children taken from their arms and sold without regard for familial feelings and bonds.  Danarius is just as bad, saying otherwise is just...<shaking my head in disbelief> 

[phyreblade74]

Critical Miss wrote...

Fenris is a character written for female gamers that think mothering instincts have something to do with romance. Fenris was a big trap on the writer's part, IMO. If I was feeling sadistic, I'd come up with a character like Fenris.

Denarius? Take this elf away!

I'd wager you yourself wouldn't find much value in being involved with a woman who said she didn't particularly need you for much of anything, nothing.  To be told you're unneeded tends to be hurtful in a romance, actually.

I'm only assuming, of course, you're not a female gamer. 

[Teh Blasta]

Critical Miss wrote...
Fenris is a character written for female gamers

Not to continue this thread into the abyss of just mind-numbingly minuscule details to the point of pure speculation into the character but I'm going to have to disagree.

I at first was dead sure Fenris would have been the token eye candy for the female gamers. I was wrong. The stereotypical insecure badass only works if the character has a sudden split in personality because of the heroic female's love. However if you keep Fenris with you at the end you'll see that he really doesn't change, at all, in personality. Token characters for the female gamers in my eyes will be stubborn, cynical and act tough, when inside they are really a big bowl of insecure jello. The compassionate female (Diplomatic/Helpful) Hawke can be as nice, caring, loving, understanding Hawke possible and Fenris will not accept it. Why? Because he is not that stereotype.

When I had the realization that Fenris is a legitimately well written character and that I could not have been more wrong it felt like the heavens had opened. BioWare managed to produce a deep character with emotional issues that wasn't insecure and didn't have a personality change on a ****ing dime. If fans can't recognize Fenis than they should at least recognize the ****ing planet sized gap the writers managed to leap in gaming development.

In terms of characters, Dragon Age 2 will go down as one of the most unappreciated focal points in gaming.<_<

Modifié par Teh Blasta, 04 juin 2011 - 10:55 .

[Arquen]

At work so will get back to serious face later, but blasta is exactly correct about how people stereotype Fenris based on looks, past characters, and personal bias. It is so blinding that they completely miss out on the depth of the character.

[autumnyte]

Arquen wrote...

At work so will get back to serious face later, but blasta is exactly correct about how people stereotype Fenris based on looks, past characters, and personal bias. It is so blinding that they completely miss out on the depth of the character.

Thirding this. Actually, I was prepared to hate Fenris based on my assumptions about what his character was going to be. I was shocked that he ended up being my favorite character in the game.

[Teh Blasta]

Honestly I don't blame the ignoramuses out there for the mistake. In my eyes fault lies with the awful continuation of such stereotypical copy paste characters in modern games. So much so it is easy to overlook actual meaningful characters. As I said a page back, just toss a few of these characters into a party and play one semi-controversial mission. The amount of constant infighting is just so ripe with humor from afar. It makes me smile every time I imagine Hawke as Viscount and the absurdity of how coercive everyone in his/her party would be because of it.

[Nameless2345]

To phyreblade74

[quote] Doing what? It's only by Act II that he can finally consider the slim chance Danarius has given up the pursuit, which presumes he's been intent upon that chance before then. To equate his taking the time to ensure he's secure before embarking on some other opportunity to a lack of impulse and drive to obtain it isn't accurate.[/quote]
Doing nothing, apparently. Mostly, I assume, laying in waiting for Danarius to come. I’d say he had 3 years worth of free time, and I didn’t notice any heavy efforts to “secure” the mansion or anything on his parts. Aveline did more in this respect than Fenris, I think.
[quote] Bottom line is he SAYS he's always wanted to learn. Are you saying he's lying?[/quote] Deeds talk more convincingly than words. Wanted and did nothing to achieve it in 3 years of squatting in a mansion? Sorry, not buying.
[quote] Leap of logic, how? [/quote] Lets restore previous discussion, shall we? It went approximately like this.
Your point: Fenris knows the name of Shartan, hence, he is educated.
My point: That’s probably the most famous elf in modern history, and certainly in top 5. That’s like saying that knowing the name “Spartacus” makes someone knowledgeable.
Your point: Hence, education doesn’t depend on reading.
My point: Um, what? Knowing name of a famous person!=educated.
[quote] In fact, I think there's a huge huge difference between reading up on a subject and actually seeing it or experiencing it. It's the difference I consider when I think of reading a book on Michelangelo's paintings in the Sistine Chapel and then standing there and looking up at them. Both encompass learning, and it's not particularly wise to discount the value of the latter. [/quote] Looking at them won’t tell you what technique was used (unless you have prior education in this area), what evolution of painting lead to them, how Michelangelo came to be (what manner of training and education he received to become, well, Michelangelo), how did Michelangelo influence painting. In fact, even to write valuable review on a picture you will need to have more knowledge than what comes from just looking at it. You will need frame of reference. Will you learn nothing at all? No, you will receive valuable _personal_ experience. At the very least you will be able to tell that the paintings were great. But… how to reproduce them? How should education of painters be, perhaps, corrected using Michelangelo’s personal history? How to restore and maintain paintings? No, no and no.
Let’s give a more relevant example, here. Imagine that we have a slave (black) from USA, say, year 1800, who lived in a South for seven years (and was amnesiac, so had no prior knowledge even on Africa/his family). Will his information on local customs and laws be valuable for his contemporaries from other countries? Somewhat. I’d say that educated people probably knew more about USA, its history, political institutions and economics anyway. Will his depictions of slavery be horrifying? Depends on a country, but yes. Would his opinions like “USA must be destroyed!”, “Most white people are monsters!”, “Protestantism is all about subjugating my people!” (or, assuming Uncle Tom mentality, “Slavery is the way of things, we must obey the masters”) be taken seriously? No. Should they be taken seriously? No. He would be like a thin book, useful to get some minor facts, but not an advisor, not a person who should make decisions.
Same with Fenris. He can tell that slavery is very bad (not a newsflash, here). He can tell that there is indeed slavery in Tevinter (again, common knowledge). He can give some sordid details. That’s greater than zero knowledge, but as I said to Arquen, he lacks perspective to make any large-scale judgments. Were he educated, or at least literate, I could believe that he gained such perspective on history and politics from books and tutors. As he is in game, I see that he knows just one single place and time in history. His knowledge can be used by someone, but Fenris himself lacks frame of reference. He doesn’t even bring anything new about Tevinter. Blood magic, slavery, magocracy were known both to DA:O player and to H., latter due to Chantry propaganda.
[quote] Consider that Fenris is perfectly capable of qouting the Qun to the Arishok[/quote]. As I said myself, that is his only unique area of expertise. Since he offers no opinions or advices on the Qun, to my knowledge, it is mostly irrelevant. Although I was somewhat unpleasantly surprised when Fenris, immediately after demonstrating this knowledge, offered to kill an innocent dwarf for removing bandits from the area.
[quote] I think opinions based on personal experience and insight are MORE valuable than those of someone who's only read a book but never seen it or known it for themself. And Fenris has seen and experienced a great deal of the world beyond the confines of Kirkwall and Fereldan, is perhaps the most well-travelled member of Hawke's group.[/quote]. As I pointed before, depends on the area of knowledge. Surviving soldier of WW II can tell a lot about fighting conditions, but preciously little about how the war started, why did it start when it did, what plans different nations had, etc. Opinions of Fenris on Tevinter, banal though they are, are valid. Opinions on the rest of Thedas, excluding Qunary, on Kirkwall, on regular Circles? Worth nothing. And being constantly on the run is not conductive to learning about the world. First you are saying that he was on the run, so had no time to learn to read before Kirkwall, next you say that he managed to gain a lot of knowledge during that time (of course, Fenris himself shows only some knowledge on Qunary customs).
[quote] . I enjoy a romance where two people help each other[/quote]. Ah, but that’s my problem with the things I’ve listed. I don’t remember Fenris (or similarly ‘tragic’ characters like Anomen or Viconia) helping anyone. In fact, he is a self-centered ass most of time (i.e. until the end), especially if H. is a mage. I don’t view such relationships as normal or healthy. Hell, what sort of relationship is it when the guy runs away after a single night without any normal explanation? What self-respecting woman of a high social standing would not only forgive such behavior, but wait for three years? Although I should admit that I never finished or even started his romance. Information is based on a walkthrough/recently read wiki.
[quote] Utterly false. He just doesn't put a name to them. But his skills came from somewhere[/quote]. Hm. The only skill he demonstrates is fighting. Yes, in this area he had teachers. Since even such thing OBVIOUSLY CANNOT be self-educated. But we were not talking about it, did we? We were talking about his ideas and opinions on history, politics and the world. Who were his teachers here? What skills does he possess? And even in fighting it is quite possible that mostly he has instinct, if training took place before the ritual (his body remembers the moves, but he cannot explain them or act as a good teacher in turn). We don’t know.
[quote] Yea, I'm sure Fenris can't possibly deduce much meaning from watching Danarius sacrifice a child during a party so he might impress his guests.[/quote]. All he gains, all he can gain from it is a single traumatic memory, and, I pointed before, idea that slavery is bad. Nothing more. Although even this fact he fails to get straight, mixing slavery and magic and not even wondering whether or not they are tied that closely as it seemed to him (for RL examples see Coliseum, for example, or some peculiar Neron’s ways to have fun, although, to be fair, we have mostly his enemies’ words about the guy). He doesn’t question his experiences. He doesn’t try to see broad picture because his knowledge is too limited to even realize that it exists. I can’t even consider him an expert on Tevinter, because he had spent relatively little remembered time in it. Around 7 years as a slave, if Arquen numbers are correct. Had he a chance to learn country history? Only from hearsay, so just broad terms and common knowledge. Had he a chance to visit its Sistine Chapels? Only if his master did. I’m not sure about Anders, but even on Tevinter I’d rather hear the words and opinions of someone like bother Genitivy, even if he never was in Tevinter. On Kirkwall? On Thedas in general? On Circles? On the problem of magic in large? Anyone but Fenris.
[quote] Bear in mind the loss of memory Fenris suffers is completely distinct from the ritual. [/quote] I wrote nothing at all about loss of memory. It is a different issue entirely, yes. Whether or not Leto knew about this part is unknown.
[quote] Danarius is just as bad[/quote]. He is a slaver, yes. As with knowledge, the issue is comparison (I wrote like a ton to Arquen about this, so won’t repeat). When I look at the fate of Fenris family I see that Fenris himself was elevated to the status of a prized possession while other elves were sacrificed for blood. I see that Danarius honored his deal with a slave from a lesser (Thedas perception, not mine) race and freed his family, while he could safely break his word (Fenris certainly have no problems with the latter, mind you). I see that Danarius promised to elevate a common elf to a ruling class, and I’m even shocked that such sort of social mobility exists in Tevinter. If such thing is indeed not unique, Tevinter seems to be more progressive than Ferelden/Kirkwall in some regards. So, for a slaver, Danarius doesn’t seem to be that bad to me. Could have been much worse. 

Modifié par Nameless2345, 05 juin 2011 - 07:19 .

[Arquen]

 ------------------- These long posts are killing me. We need to chop this down farther! Open to suggestions about the "functional member of society" argument and the "self educated" argument. It is becoming circular. ------------[quote]Not contradiction. Unexplained logical leap, rather. Literate person could actually fix gap in his knowledge. Fenris could also, starting with learning to read. He didn’t, so he had no decent means left in his disposal. If one didn’t make a first step, he can’t do a second.I’d suggest http://encyclopedia2.../Self-Education, namely “the independent acquisition of systematic knowledge in some area of science, engineering, culture, or political life. … The principal form of self-education is the study of scientific literature, popular science literature, educational texts, fiction, and the press.” Keywords are “systematic” and “principal form…literature, …texts, …press”. Even “broad sense”, described in the article, doesn’t really apply since there are no signs that Fenris _worked_ on some material as opposed to stealing glances or overhearing conversations. [/quote]That particular definition is based off of a website encyclopedia with a header "Warning: the following article is from The Great Soviet Encyclopedia (1979). It might be outdated or ideologically biased." Therefore, it cannot be entered as a solid definition. So, without delving into the never-ending abyss that is philosophy on learning theory and informal education (see Knowles, Dewey, Hayes, and learning theories (TIP)).

Here is another definition of self-education or self-direction by Knowles. That is: "a process in which individuals take the initiative, with or without the help of others, in diagnosing their learning needs, formulating learning goals, identifying human and material resources for learning, and choosing and implementing appropriate learning strategies, and evaluating learning outcomes."

As far as Fenris is concerned the drive for self education comes from his non-formal education as a slave through experiences. Also, from the knowledge and experience he gains after he becomes free for 3 years while running from Danarius. He learned about Thedas, he traveled, he met different kinds of people, he never stayed in the same place very long. He was autonomous and learning from the world and culture around him. He does not have the capability to recieve a "formal education" at any time because he is constantly being hunted by his former master. Not arguing this at all.

Surviving is Fenris' top priority after fleeing his master. This hardly allows him time for institutionalization in a formal setting such as the Chantry, Circle or Templar order. These are, also, the only formal institutions of learning in Thedas. This means that neither Hawke nor Bethany have a formal education and therefore, what.. their opinions are invalid as well? Or is it that everyone who can read has a formal education, but because Fenris can't he is excluded? 

There are valid learning theories such as the conversation theory by Pask, the Information processing theory by Miller, the Modes of Learning by Rumelhart and Norman and many others that explicitly state that learning is not necessarily or exclusively found from the use of books.  

Some learning theories argue that books are not required for learning at all. Especially the argument for self-direction and informal education. People can learn by experiences, observations, cognitive exercise, reflection, etc. etc. This has been proven time and again by many a philosopher and theorist. To state someone needs a formal education to be able to participate in a discussion is simply false. Also, the argument has changed from "mental span of a teenager and illiterate" to "lacks a formal education and is illiterate with no drive for education." So, the original argument premise dispatched then? Revised?

To quote the social learning theory "most human behavior is learned observationally through modeling: from observing others one forms an idea of how new behaviors are performed, and on later occasions this coded information serves as a guide for action." Books, as stated are a tool, they do not provide an end-all to wisdom. They are a learning tool plain and simple. As stated there is massive amount of literature and philosophy on the study of informal education and how people learn. This should have been self evident, and so the premise that Fenris has no capacity for self-education because he is illiterate is still false. Books are not needed for education. Perhaps for formal education, but definitely not self education.

So the question becomes does he have the drive for self education. Well, yes, arguably he does. Not "because he can," but because he does educate himself through observation of others, problem solving, and critical thinking. Whether this is voluntary education or as a result of learning from what has been inflicted, surrounding him is questionable. The drive to learn is inherent in every autonomous being. If one needs further proof of this then here is a quote by Carl Rogers "At one extreme lie those unintentional and usually accidental learning events which occur continuously as we walk through life. Next comes incidental learning - unconscious learning through acquisition methods which occurs in the course of some other activity... Then there are various activities in which we are somewhat more more conscious of learning, experiential activities arising from immediate life-related concerns, though even here the focus is still on the task... Then come more purposeful activities - occasions where we set out to learn something in a more systematic way, using whatever comes to hand for that purpose, but often deliberately disregarding engagement with teachers and formal institutions of learning." A perfectly valid way of gaining knowledge, according to this and many other learning theories. These theories have always been evident, but apparently it warrants further "real world" proof as was asked.[quote]I’ve already explained why ONE single example is pathetic when trying to discover any sort of law both using Thedas lore and parable. OK, another example: how many straight lines can be drawn through a single point on 2D surface? Can they even be counted?[/quote] Parables mean nothing. They are Red Herring fallacies that divert attention away from proving anything. They do not warrant answers, because they are off topic. Hence, they are not responded to. Also, parables in themselves have many interpretations depending on how they are read. The parable of the boy who breaks the shopkeeper's window. It could be related to Fenris' situation, knowledge, education, etc. etc., but in the end it does not prove anything because it is off topic, abstract, and should not be entered as a proof or example of anything. [quote]I asked in my previous post, who would really take opinions of an illiterate amnesiac foreigner on their society/profession/anything just as seriously as opinions of educated experienced person from their country. Would someone hire such foreigner? Would someone trust him with serious issues? Of course, no answer was given. Because very few people in their right mind would say “yes”.[/quote]This is again off topic. One, it compares Fenris' and Thedas to the modern world. This is the world of Dragon Age. Fenris' isn't in Kirkwall to give advice about anything. He isn't looking for a job as an advisor, and he isn't being "hired" for his skill in argumentation, oration, or opinions. To say one cannot take the opinions of an illiterate amnesiac is making an implied insult that because Fenris' is illiterate and has amnesia he should not be listened to at all. As already stated before, his opinions are valid because they are based off of informal education and experiences as well as indirect learning. Literacy has nothing to do with validation of opinion.

Facts are facts, and Fenris knows facts about the Tevinter Imperium. He offers them freely, moreso than his opinions on the mages. As Phyre stated living through an experience often times leads to gaining more valuable knowledge than reading a book about it. If Anders were to read a book about Tevinter Slavery and then offer his opinions about how slavery works and the society of Tevinter it would be less valid, poignant, and true than Fenris' story from first hand experience. Likewise, Fenris does not belittle Anders' time in the circle, and never does he say the circle is the answer as stated many times before. He offers facts and opinions about a world of free mages. A world he knows intimately. Mages should not be free because in a society where mages are free there is X, Y, Z where XYZ = first hand experiences Fenris' has gone through and learned about. Valid learning, valid opinion.

This also implies that nobody would hire such a foreigner for... what? As a mercenary? As an advisor? As an extra warrior to go into the deep roads with? It is clearly not based on his skill as a warrior to say "nobody would hire an illiterate amnesiac." If one needed a warrior who had Fenris' skill then literacy and amnesia would have nothing to do with it. To confuse one argument for another is yet another fallacy of begging the question. Hence, it was not answerd. To say Fenris' is an illiterate amnesiac and because nobody would hire an illiterate amnesiac as thier (blank?) that means he is not suitable to be hired as anything? Furthermore, he is also not qualified to give opinions on society/profession/anything because he is a foreigner. That is also a slippery slope fallacy. To say because one person is not from the same country as someone else, therefore his opinons are not valid, therefore nobody would hire such a person because of this. Talk about logical leaps. [quote]Very categorically and very willing to enforce these opinions with lethal force. Quoting one book, “Yet you allow yourself in the presence of two university-educated men to offer advice, …, on a cosmic scale and of quite cosmic stupidity, on the redistribution of wealth . . .” Replace “redistribution of wealth” with “mages and mundane people coexisting” and, I’d say, we have Fenris.[/quote]That means to accept that Anders, Hawke, and all other companions are the "university-educated men," and Fenris is left out why? Again because of formal education? Illiteracy? Memories of childhood? This suggests one needs a formal education in what.. the circle? The chantry? Read Anders' manifestos? To be able to participate in discussion about mages and templars. Once again a slippery slope fallacy. To say one is of "quite cosmic stupidity" because they are not "university educated" is to say that only someone like Orsino and Meredith have the right to debate Templar/Mage problem in Kirkwall. Again, not arguing Fenris has or needs a formal education, but he can speak opinions and facts he knows about Tevinter. He never even states that Templars are the solution, but only that a society of free mages is not a good solution. Not kill all mages, not brutalize all mages, not even oppress mages, but do not let mages become a free faction or they will become the Imperium. The fact that people make Fenris out to be a mage hating kill them all character is just wrong. It is missing the point. He hates magisters, magic, and what it can do. He hates the potential in each mage for absolute power controlled by a demon. That is what he argues, and it is because he has seen it first hand in Tevinter.  It is not false.[quote]He does not take a hard stance on the side of the Templars. Oh yes, he does in the end unless player maxes F/R scale. In fact he is willing to kill Aveline and H., his benefactors, only because Meredith says “The people will demand blood! Let's kill mages for them!” or something like this.[/quote]Lets clarify this statement: "hard stance on the side of the Templars in discussion/opinion." In the end game Fenris will side with the Templars because he believes mages should not be free beings. He realizes the mages will turn to blood magic. He has seen mage rebellions before, and he can guess what will happen here. The right of annullment is a last resort of the Templars but it has been used twice in Thedas' history now. That is not to say it is right or to argue the mage/templar debate, but only that Fenris if not max friend or rival will choose survival over Hawke. Therefore, he will choose the side of the Templars because he feels this is the only way to regain order. He isn't close to Hawke in this case, and he even says "I should have known, first rule of survival..." when he comes back to attempt to kill Hawke. That means he is just going with his own instincts and knowledge, regaurdless of Hawke. An autonomous action that shows he has deep rooted personal beliefs and experiences that he believes in despite Hawke and the others. Anders does the same. He would never side with the Templars because he has deep rooted personal beliefs and experiences against Templars.[quote]So, to clarify further: memory and experience is worth pathetically little unless it is in someone who 1) can read, and 2) has been alive longer? In comparison, yes. 10 years of memory worth less than 30 or 40 assuming approximately the same intellectual level (and freedom of movement). Lack of formal education/any systematical self-education (it depends on literacy)/literacy itself worth less than a formal education. Opinions of someone with lack of erudition worth less compared to well-read person. Put together these factors and it worth much less. I kind of thought it was self-evident. [/quote]Once again, slippery slope. 10 years of memory is worth less than 30 or 40? So, Orsino should be the expert on the mage/templar problem based on his experience and education, yet look how well that turned out. Once again lack of formal education. Not denying Fenris has no formal education. Do deny that Fenris needs formal education to be taken seriously. See above about learning theory, etc. See how this goes? Someone who has less physical memory is worth less than someone with 30 - 40 years of memory. Therefore, someone with lack of formal education and literacy is worth less than someone with these things. Therefore, compared to a well read person this person is worthless? It degenerates into conclusion based on nothing. Age and experience do not determine maturity, worth, or education. Physical memory does not equal experience. One can have many experiences in a short amount of time. Also, Fenris' memories are all related to his time in Tevinter, with the Fog Warriors, and his life as a free slave on the run from his former master. Someone who has not had these experiences could not hope to understand what it is like for Fenris and if they were to offer opinions about the experiences of a Tevinter slave they would be considered worth less than Fenris' opinions and descriptions by far. Educated or not.[quote]And no, it is not THAT simple as merely lack of skills at reading (although have yet to see fully “functional” illiterate person in a modern society). It is lack of experience+lack of any education+lack of drive+ past as a slave that make me doubt that Fenris is “a functional, mature being” (look at Orana/Emile for similar pasts). Fenris himself states that he has no idea what to do with his life…after like 10 years of freedom. And even his fans in this topic think that he requires guidance from either Isabela or romantically involved H. I told it before, yes, but never received an answer. However, it is another matter. My main point was not “functionality” of Fenris (that's his problem), but his competence, especially in comparison. [/quote]Appeal to popularity fallacy. That is why it is not worth answering. Because "his fans agree" does not make the statement true. Personal bias is rampant here as well, and the statement about seeing a functional illiterate person in modern society is off topic. As well as the statement about his functionality - off topic. Okay, so that leaves the point of competence. He is not competent in what? Compared to what? to who? Mentally competent? Educationally competent? Not sure this point actually means anything. Why is there a comparison of Fenris to anyone? Fenris is quite competent in his own autonomy. He is quite competent in being a warrior. He is quite competent in speaking Tevinter lore and even Qunari lore. Therefore, he is quite competent in many things.[quote]Oh, man. No, not like this. Hear not “something”, but careful explanation with an opportunity to ask questions. See not “something”, but demonstration. Do not “something”, but a planned course of tasks under supervision. That’s basically saying that someone who gained knowledge from hearsay and occasional glances is educated. Where and when did it work like this? Not in our society, for certain. Not in medieval society, hence apprenticeship, universities, private teachers. Not in Rome, even. Why do I have to explain something THIS basic?[/quote]Allow clarification further, since the point was missed. The point is that learning can take place from more than just books, and that some of the most learned minds in history learned from forums and seminars and conversation. NOT books. The old saying "hear something, see something, do something" is what an instructor does for an apprentice. That is, there are no books involved there. Apprenticeship is simply "learning by doing," and practicing. Fenris never was an apprentice, not arguing that, but he did learn in much the same way. He observed, experienced, and reflected. If he were to actually attempt to gain knowledge as a slave he would have been killed. However, his time with the Fog Warriors was much like an apprenticeship, and his time beyond that was autonomous self-directed learning through living life as a hunted slave. [quote]I’m talking about how “Fenris” persona came to be. Again I have to quote myself “Facts that defined that life”. As was said before, Fenris isn’t completely equal to “Leto (actually, it was said they were just different, but that’s too strong statement in my opinion). Would Leto end up in Kirkwall? Would he be able to escape for so long without markings? Would he escape, leaving his family behind? Putting it all together, doubtful. He is in Kirkwall because of his origins yet he knows not them or has them wrong. My point, which was never answered satisfactorily, is that Fenris has yet to make the first step, which merits pity, but thinks he completed the second, which deserves disdain.[/quote]Fenris' persona came to be because Danarius gave him a name, a future, and training. Leto is irrelevant. Leto died and is not known to Fenris until Varania walks into his life many, many, many years later. To imagine and play "what if" with Leto and Fenris is just leading away from the point. Fenris is not in Kirkwall because of Leto. This is akin to the butterfly effect or something. That if he wasn't turned over to Danarius in the first place he would not have left his family? Irrelevant. He was turned over to Danarius. He suffered under Danarius. He remembers a ritual for pain and agony and that is his first memory. Of course he never thought he volunteered for the ritual. Fenris cannot make the first step to get his past right. Someone without a knowledge of a person cannot expect to be or know that person. As stated, he did not get his past wrong, because it is impossible to get something wrong that one doesn't remember. It is wrong to an outsider perhaps, but Fenris cannot become someone who he is not. It does not make anything better by saying he competed for the markings. It is not known in what circumstances he competed, and if it was really something he wanted or his only choice to do something for his family. There can be no doubt, however, that the ritual was not something he wanted, and nobody in their right mind would.[quote] Incorrect. We know about his suffering under Hadriana. Yet it doesn’t constitute “suffering” in my book, just petty bullying and wounded pride. It isn’t even a valid reason for murder. In our history slavery brought truly horrific abuses, yet Fenris mentions nothing of the like – at least, not applied to himself.[/quote]Okay, so personal opinion here is what is being argued. That Hadrianna was a bully. There are plenty of examples of Fenris' suffering under Danarius. Plenty of implied examples of abuses akin to those suffered by slaves in any setting. From Egypt to Rome to America. Fenris suffered slavery. "Hadrianna denied him meals, hounded his sleep." In prisons this is how people torture prisoners. It is a psychological and physical torture that has been used for many years as a torture technique. Oh yes, simple bullying indeed. A person without food and no sleep is forced to work day in and day out under the hand of a master who forces him to kill and makes sure he feels he has no worth. All the while Fenris "does not dream of freedom," but only exists day by day. Right, simple bullying there. There is enough evidence to support true suffering done to Fenris. Personal opinion just makes one blind to these examples.[quote]I didn’t say that he is a drunk. I merely described things he does in game, and noted that they don’t command respect in my eyes at least, especially compared to other party members. Further conclusions were reached by the author of the quoted post and I like that. What I said though is that he “is not a productive member of a society compared to most of the other party members."[/quote]Humor and sarcasm was clearly wasted. The response was (half heartedly) to the statement "Fenris is a guy squatting in a stolen mansion who is busy not with self-education, despite your saying that he has a drive for it, but with drinking wine and whining to H. (if only) about his live, lyrium markings and the fact that he has no idea what to do with his freedom after killing ton of people for it. Hell, even Emile is less pathetic." Makes him sound like some useless character wasting his time drinking away - hence the drunk. A conclusion based on information presented. 

So, the argument then becomes that Fenris is not a productive member of society. Mercenary jobs would probably be the best future for Fenris, not disagreeing there. He would make an excellent assassin. Even one to make Zevran jealous (wait... Zevran fangirls don't beat me!)

To say one cannot see anything in someone like Fenris because he isn't a paragon, saint, saving kittens from trees and orphans from burning buildings is just once again misreading his character. Fenris is a loyal and dedicated companion. He knows killing. He is a trained warrior. To equate him with Flint mercenaries or CRPG "fodder" is insulting to his skill as a warrior. As said before he could make one heck of an assassin. He's good at it. That doesn't mean he doesn't have the capacity to care about other things. In fact he stays in Kirkwall because he does care about Hawke and is loyal to him/her. He is a protectorate and always looking out for Hawke's well-being. He is probably the least selfish companion of the bunch because he has no alterior motives. He simply wishes to repay a debt to Hawke by being a companion. He does not ask for help "all the time." In fact, he almost regretably asks for help with Danarius the first time Hawke meets him. Saying "Please. I... am not used to asking for help, but I am asking now. Danarius will never stop hunting me. This is my only chance. I cannot do it without you." The other time is when he asks Hawke to go and help him deal with Hadrianna. The third time is (only if friend) to help him confront Varania in the Hanged man. That is hardly someone "begging" for help all the time. As far as whining, Fenris does not whine about his markings, arguably. He responds to people who constantly ask him about them in the party banter. As far as his cutscenes he mentions the markings as relevance to the conversation. Don't see whining about them. He uses them. He hates them for what they did to him and how Danarius used him for them, but he does not really whine about them. As far as what he does if left alone. If Fenris is never recruited the codex pretty much suggests he solves his own problems. If someone does not do his quests he goes and kills Hadrianna by himself. As far as when he is given back to Danarius and doesn't fight, that is a separate issue and his "crisis moment."

[ReiSilver]

I didn't comment before but I'd like to jump in on the 'OMG all Hadriana did was bully him' Nameless talks about.
Have you tried imagining a slave's life as a reality? The physical and psychological affects of it? As a bodyguard and slave Fenris would not have control over when he sleeps or eats, if he doesn't sleep he can't just sleep in to make up for it, if he misses a meal he can't go to the kitchen and get more. This would cause sleep deprivation and malnutrition. That is not bullying, that is torture. These things would affect his performance in his duties (sleep deprivation/starving) and if he were to mess up because of this -he- would be punished. This is something Hadrianna did, not just once, but made a habit/game of, knowing what would happen and that Fenris could not stop her. Her mentality may have been that of a bully but the effects of her behaviour were far larger then calling someone names and stealing their lunch money as you seem to be implying.

I'd also like to say I find Nameless' dismissal of anyone's opinion who doesn't have formal education despite first hand experience on the subject at hand to be borderline offensive. You may want to check your privilege and look up articles on classism, as your posts on Fenris' education reek of it.

[kreite]

At first I hated him but as time went on I came to hold a general respect for him despite his narrow view of magic

[Arquen]

I just want to point out that of all the threads on all the other characters out there this one is by far the most in-depth, philosophical, and the more I go into the argument (on both sides) The more I realize that the character David Gaider created is a magnificent piece of work. There is so much depth and conversation to be had about one character. Haven't seen that in a long time. My philosophy professors are either clapping at me or facepalming at me for these posts.

More respect for Fenris and Gaider after this, for sure.

[Heidenreich]

Arquen wrote...

I just want to point out that of all the threads on all the other characters out there this one is by far the most in-depth, philosophical, and the more I go into the argument (on both sides) The more I realize that the character David Gaider created is a magnificent piece of work. There is so much depth and conversation to be had about one character. Haven't seen that in a long time. My philosophy professors are either clapping at me or facepalming at me for these posts.

More respect for Fenris and Gaider after this, for sure.

I said that like 3 pages back ;p

At the end of the day, the only conclusion anyone can come to is that THE CHARACTER IS WRITTEN WELL. All of the DA2 charactes are written well. They're three dimentional, living, breathing people. It's absolutly wonderful thing.

You can love them, and you can love to hate them.

So, so long as you don't hate the characters for their superficial bits (like thir hair styles or their man-chins), and take the time to learn WHY you love, or love to hate, these characters... then everyone wins. Especially WoG. <3

[Arquen]

I know it's been said before, but I just had to reiterate it because I realized how much time I was spending writing those posts, LOL. Never done that on a forum before. I reread where this all started and the thread has taken on a life of its own. It's great.

Dragon Age 2 is akin to a great work of literature as far as character complexity goes. I can play it again and again and see something different in each character. Not just cutscenes and rivalry/friendship stuff but different depths to their characters. Hence I like it so much. My analytical brain eats this stuff up. To bad it probably will go down as just another RPG game.