116 réponses à ce sujet

[EmperorSahlertz]

There have been several annulments before, and not once did it result in a revolution, she had no reason to think otherwise of this one. Furthermore, an annulment always assume the Mages will fight back, or that there will be some other sort of resistance, after all, the will to survive is strong, even in those condemned to die.

[GavrielKay]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

The rioting began almost immediately in Kirkwall, Anders' execution would have achieved nothing.

Then annuling the circle won't achieve anything either. 

Meredith wants blood, plain and simple.  And not just the blood of the guilty, but that of any mage whose throat she can reach.  The idol took her from fanatical to insane.

I think we either needed more evidence that the circle mages were guilty of something, or we needed Meredith to be sane.  Either of those things would have made it more realistic to follow Meredith into battle.

[Harid]

You don't need to support Meredith to support the Templars. Ultimately when given the choice, you do not have to either.  People need to stop drawing the comparison, as it is not always the point some people argue from.  It's like saying if you don't support Marijuana being made legal, you support mexican drug wars.  It's a bad point to work from.

As I can recall, technically speaking, more kirkwall mages survive via supporting the Templars than do from supporting the mages, at least as far as our actual choices as Hawke go.

Modifié par Harid, 18 juillet 2011 - 11:40 .

[GavrielKay]

Harid wrote...

You don't need to support Meredith to support the Templars. Ultimately when given the choice, you do not have to either.  People need to stop drawing the comparison, as it is not always the point some people argue from.  It's like saying if you don't support Marijuana being made legal, you support mexican drug wars.  It's a bad point to work from.

As I can recall, technically speaking, more kirkwall mages survive via supporting the Templars than do from supporting the mages, at least as far as our actual choices as Hawke go.

I believe it's been pointed out before that Varric will say "many lived to tell the tale" if Hawke defends the mages.

I know that it is true, and I know that I'll never understand or change anyone's mind, but I still find it absolutely crazy that anyone would actually support murdering every man, woman and child in the circle for the simple crime of having been born mages and housed under the care of a paranoid zealot. 

The Right of Annulment is a crime against humanity. 

It presupposes the guilt of everyone who happens to live in a certain place by virtue of others who live in that place being guilty.  It absolves the executioner of the duty to determine whether each victim individually deserves their fate.  It forces the mages to live in fear that someone among them will call down doom upon the rest.  It puts the power of life and death into the hands of religious zealots who are predisposed to mistrust their charges.

Something this barbaric should be opposed by any capable of carrying a weapon.

[Harid]

GavrielKay wrote...

Harid wrote...

You don't need to support Meredith to support the Templars. Ultimately when given the choice, you do not have to either.  People need to stop drawing the comparison, as it is not always the point some people argue from.  It's like saying if you don't support Marijuana being made legal, you support mexican drug wars.  It's a bad point to work from.

As I can recall, technically speaking, more kirkwall mages survive via supporting the Templars than do from supporting the mages, at least as far as our actual choices as Hawke go.

I believe it's been pointed out before that Varric will say "many lived to tell the tale" if Hawke defends the mages.

I know that it is true, and I know that I'll never understand or change anyone's mind, but I still find it absolutely crazy that anyone would actually support murdering every man, woman and child in the circle for the simple crime of having been born mages and housed under the care of a paranoid zealot. 

The Right of Anullment is a crime against humanity. 

It presupposes the guilt of everyone who happens to live in a certain place by virtue of others who live in that place being guilty.  It absolves the executioner of the duty to determine whether each victim individually deserves their fate.  It forces the mages to live in fear that someone among them will call down doom upon the rest.  It puts the power of life and death into the hands of religious zealots who are predisposed to mistrust their charges.

Something this barbaric should be opposed by any capable of carrying a weapon.

Very idealistic beliefs to have in this current world we live in, but seeing as how we have nothing close to mages in this world, I like to think in terms of the character I created, and the times they are in.  I think of everyone else, the weak and the helpless, the dirt farmer that can barely keep themselves alive, the road patrol that protects the realm.  And those people cannot defend themselves against rogue mages.  What is a farmer going to do when some non anulled free blood mage decides he wants to take your wife, and sacrifice your children.  What do you do to the Road Patrolman that cannot handle a Abomination, as it kills them with ease?  What do you do to the Tavern owner who is controlled by a blood mage for his own sadistic whimsy.  What do you do to the regular people who cannot kill mages due to lack of skill, gumption or ability?  Tough ****?

What about those people the right of anullment saves?  Do those people not have the right to live without the intervention of a random crazy mage ruining their lives?  Controling their council through Blood Magic?  Dominating the weak because they can?  What rights do those people deserve to not be hindered by a mage that may feel those people are but cattle before them?  Do those people not deserve protection and justice?  Yes, not all mages believe this, but it only takes a couple, and we've met a couple that share the train of thought that they would be terrors to regular people.  I have no reason to believe that they are rarities.

Which is why I can say I don't agree with the Annullment.  I think there are clearly better ways to go about the process.  But unless you can force the Chantry to keep a Spirit Abomination around to check every mage for Blood Magic, in every circle, they are going to employ a scorched earth policy, and I can understand why they do so.

If I were a mage, I'd fight tooth and nail against an annulment, as it is in my best interest to do so. If mages existed today, I'd want some protection against mages for non mages, and I would assume I would want the same in the times of Dragon Age.  And while the system is far from perfect, and they have their own atrocities to deal with, I'll take me being alive before some mage 100 times out of 100.

So in this game, with all of the crazy blood mages around, I supported the Anullment, not because I supported Meredith, but because I support the common man that has no way to protect themselves against random mages.  I believe a circle system is needed to train mages properly, so they don't light random people on fire.  I believe mages could have tried to initiate this peacefully.  And I don't believe every mage is firmly behind this revolution that Anders created.  Mages in DA2 did not prove themselves to me as people deserving freedom, as a minority, they kill regular  people who support them, they allow demons to inhabit regular people to incite rebellion, they use blood magic to control people for fun, and even the dude in charge of the circle is weak willed enough to turn to Blood magic, they have no plan to their madness, they are simply following a Step 1: Get Freedom.  Step 2: ??? Step 3: Profit!  system, and that system is retarded.  Yes, this is due to Bioware's crappy writing, but I have to take that under advisement for the character I create.  I cannot support people who do this kind of madness.  But on the other hand, I will not annul Fereldan's circle, because the mages aren't depicted as being bat**** insane in that game.  (Well, that and I roleplay my warden as a pragmatist.)

So I don't see it as a crime against humanity.  I see it as protecting the weak majority from an overpowered minority, and those people deserve saving to me.  I see mages without plan for regular people wanting freedom from a circle system that not every mage hates.  I see crazy people that would likely not treat regular people any better than Tevinters.  I see a Black versus Black conflict that I wish I could tell both sides to go **** themselves, but under the binary of Bioware Storytelling™, I have to choose one.  And as a rogue, I would have to be a god damned fool to choose people who haven't proven to me that they are going to look out for my well being, because Bioware rushed this conflict in the first place.  Selfish, yes.  But I'm a pragmatist.  If that makes me a monster, well, as that Kanye West song goes, everybody know (I’m a mutha****ing monster).

Modifié par Harid, 19 juillet 2011 - 12:30 .

[GavrielKay]

Harid wrote...

So in this game, with all of the crazy blood mages around, I supported the Anullment, not because I supported Meredith, but because I support the common man that has no way to protect themselves against random mages.

Those mages are outside the circle and thus unaffected by the Annulment.  I don't believe protecting some innocents is more important than protecting other innocents.  Kill the guilty mages if there is truly no way around it, yes.  But the annulment isn't about guilty mages, it's about all mages.  It's about running through the circle with your sword out killing everyone who you run past.  Anyone who played Origins knows that it is possible to detect abominations and to root out the bad mages and save the good.

It is not the death of guilty mages that I have a problem with.  It is the idea that it doesn't matter if they are guilty or not if they happen to all live in the same place.  The RoA is about not bothering to distinguish between guilt and innocence.  It proclaims all mages in the circle guilty and sentences them to execution regardless.  That is the appaling part.

[Harid]

You didn't read a god damned thing I wrote.

This is why I stopped posting in this thread.

[Macropodmum]

Harid wrote...

Very idealistic beliefs to have in this current world we live in, but seeing as how we have nothing close to mages in this world, I like to think in terms of the character I created, and the times they are in.  I think of everyone else, the weak and the helpless, the dirt farmer that can barely keep themselves alive, the road patrol that protects the realm.  And those people cannot defend themselves against rogue mages.  What is a farmer going to do when some non anulled free blood mage decides he wants to take your wife, and sacrifice your children.  What do you do to the Road Patrolman that cannot handle a Abomination, as it kills them with ease?  What do you do to the Tavern owner who is controlled by a blood mage for his own sadistic whimsy.  What do you do to the regular people who cannot kill mages due to lack of skill, gumption or ability?  Tough ****?

Umm how do these same people protect themselves against darkspawn, qunari, bandits, coterie, raiders, slavers (did I forget anyone?).  To say that mages are the only threat they face is nothing short of idealistic and as Gavriel pointed out , the rogue mages that are supposedly attacking these people are apostates anyway and not within the circle system (and yes I read your entire post). RoA does kill everyone, innocents included (and not once did I witness Bethany become an abomination), I would put RoA right up there with ethnic cleansing, exterminating people based on what they were born rather than what they did is a crime....

[Harid]

Macropodmum wrote...

Harid wrote...

Very idealistic beliefs to have in this current world we live in, but seeing as how we have nothing close to mages in this world, I like to think in terms of the character I created, and the times they are in.  I think of everyone else, the weak and the helpless, the dirt farmer that can barely keep themselves alive, the road patrol that protects the realm.  And those people cannot defend themselves against rogue mages.  What is a farmer going to do when some non anulled free blood mage decides he wants to take your wife, and sacrifice your children.  What do you do to the Road Patrolman that cannot handle a Abomination, as it kills them with ease?  What do you do to the Tavern owner who is controlled by a blood mage for his own sadistic whimsy.  What do you do to the regular people who cannot kill mages due to lack of skill, gumption or ability?  Tough ****?

Umm how do these same people protect themselves against darkspawn, qunari, bandits, coterie, raiders, slavers (did I forget anyone?).  To say that mages are the only threat they face is nothing short of idealistic and as Gavriel pointed out , the rogue mages that are supposedly attacking these people are apostates anyway and not within the circle system (and yes I read your entire post). RoA does kill everyone, innocents included (and not once did I witness Bethany become an abomination), I would put RoA right up there with ethnic cleansing, exterminating people based on what they were born rather than what they did is a crime....

I postulated my argument on escaped circle blood mages, (because sure, they would wait around for Templars to come and kill them, sure.)  You made an argument I never did due to apostates as a cover.  Generally speaking, when anullments are called, a large number of mages have fallen to demons or Blood Magic.

Those other arguments are not my concern.  Regular guards can handle everything you posted with the exception of things that do not regularly attack anyone.  They also cannot do the widespread destruction by comparison that mages can do.  They are small potatoes.

Scorched earth policy is done because they have no way of detecting who is and who is not a Blood Mage; look at Jowan, after months of study they only believed  he was a Blood Mage.  How are they supposed to resolve this issue when it takes them months to tell an apprentice mage is a Blood Mage?  Portable Abominations under circle control?  Hoping every Blood Mage is dumb enough to attack you on sight like Origins?

Bethany joins the Wardens in my playthrough (and can also die), and like I stated, If i have to choose between me and random mages I don't know, I choose me.

Modifié par Harid, 19 juillet 2011 - 01:43 .

[Macropodmum]

Thing is the annulment does not encompass escaped circle mages due to the fact that they have escaped...what is left behind are innocents who are happy to abide by the circle and children (as witnessed in origins when retaking the circle)

[Harid]

Macropodmum wrote...

Thing is the annulment does not encompass escaped circle mages due to the fact that they have escaped...what is left behind are innocents who are happy to abide by the circle and children (as witnessed in origins when retaking the circle)

We found mages that did not escape (and would be anulled) during the possible anullment in Dragon Age Origins.  That is incorrect.

Waiting the months it would take to prove a mage is or is not an abomination would allow more Blood Mages to infiltate the Circle and eliminate Templars, which would lead to more maleficarum and thralls of demons being lead free to ravage the innocent people the circle was created to protect.

They scorch earth precisely because it's difficult to determine who and who is not a blood mage, difficult for mages, difficult for Templars, not so difficult for Abominations.

However people like Wynne and Anders are rare.

Modifié par Harid, 19 juillet 2011 - 01:56 .

[blaidfiste]

Cut the "Letter from the Circle" signed by O in the killer's lair. Hawke picks this up and does NOTHING. He doesn't take it to Meredith nor does he confront Orsino with it in act 3.

[GavrielKay]

Harid wrote...

Scorched earth policy is done because they have no way of detecting who is and who is not a Blood Mage; look at Jowan, after months of study they only believed  he was a Blood Mage.  How are they supposed to resolve this issue when it takes them months to tell an apprentice mage is a Blood Mage?  Portable Abominations under circle control?  Hoping every Blood Mage is dumb enough to attack you on sight like Origins?

We know from gameplay in Origins that it is possible to cleanse a circle without killing everyone.  We know from Anders or Bethany that if you endanger an abomination, they will always act to defend themselves.  It is possible to tell an abomination from a mage who is still in control of themselves.

The annulment is supposed to protect the populace from immediate danger from circle mages.  The mages that have been terrorizing the populace are not in the circle, so an annulment won't do anything about them.  Mages who happen to know blood magic don't pose an immediate threat to the civilians and can be dealt with individually.  There is no danger from the circle to the populace until Meredith starts attacking them and causes them to fight or die.

The only immediate threat to Kirkwall is riots started by people who freaked out over the Chantry explosion. While this is understandable, annuling the circle won't protect anyone from that.  Sending the Templars out to assist the city guard in calming things down would have saved more lives.

[DRTJR]

I could understand the Annulment of the Ferelden circle, s*** went south fast. and it was getting worse by the minuet. Kirkwall was Meredith going off the deep end into the deep roads,

[Harid]

GavrielKay wrote...

Harid wrote...

Scorched earth policy is done because they have no way of detecting who is and who is not a Blood Mage; look at Jowan, after months of study they only believed  he was a Blood Mage.  How are they supposed to resolve this issue when it takes them months to tell an apprentice mage is a Blood Mage?  Portable Abominations under circle control?  Hoping every Blood Mage is dumb enough to attack you on sight like Origins?

We know from gameplay in Origins that it is possible to cleanse a circle without killing everyone.  We know from Anders or Bethany that if you endanger an abomination, they will always act to defend themselves.  It is possible to tell an abomination from a mage who is still in control of themselves.

The annulment is supposed to protect the populace from immediate danger from circle mages.  The mages that have been terrorizing the populace are not in the circle, so an annulment won't do anything about them.  Mages who happen to know blood magic don't pose an immediate threat to the civilians and can be dealt with individually.  There is no danger from the circle to the populace until Meredith starts attacking them and causes them to fight or die.

The only immediate threat to Kirkwall is riots started by people who freaked out over the Chantry explosion. While this is understandable, annuling the circle won't protect anyone from that.  Sending the Templars out to assist the city guard in calming things down would have saved more lives.

Blood Mage, not abomination.  There is no way to tell who is a blood mage or not one without spirit intervention if that person decides to obfuscate their blood magic.

We know it's possible for our awesome Warden in times of Blight to cleanse a circle without killing innocents, because every Blood mage in the circle blindly attack you like idiots.

My argument has been postulated on the resultant effect of not cleansing a circle and taking your time rooting out Blood Mages which is what would be neccessary because there is no test to see if you are a Blood mage or not that I can remember seeing in game.  Not doing an anullment puts more people at risk than doing one.  I assume that is the argument the circle has had for their scorched earth policy.  The only reason that the Fereldan circle wasn't cleansed was because our hero warden saved the game through plot armor and plot strength, and until someone else does it that we cannot control, I have no reason believing that the Blight didn't make it an isolated incident.

As for Kirkwall itself, well, Meredith was full out idol crazy at that point, but given the Blood mages we ourselves run into in the circle, I have trouble believing that the Gallows was Blood Mage free, their bloody first enchanter was one.  As for the Blood mages not being an 'immediate threat', well, I can't agree with that.  We have yet to see any practioners of Blood Magic from characters we do not control that use it benevolently.

[GavrielKay]

Harid wrote...

As for Kirkwall itself, well, Meredith was full out idol crazy at that point, but given the Blood mages we ourselves run into in the circle, I have trouble believing that the Gallows was Blood Mage free, their bloody first enchanter was one.  As for the Blood mages not being an 'immediate threat', well, I can't agree with that.  We have yet to see any practioners of Blood Magic from characters we do not control that use it benevolently.

I'm not saying a circle full of blood mages would be a good thing, but I don't think there were so many, or the situation so dire that an annulment was called for.  The most pressing problems are the fallout from the explosion and the rioting civilians.  I maintain that more people could be saved by sending the Templars to help the city guard.  The blood mages could be dealt with later. 

Until Meredith attacks the circle, it is relatively stable - as much as the Kirkwall circle ever is anyway, which isn't much - and she sends them into a frenzy.  I think more people end up dead, including innocent mages, than would have if she hadn't acted so violently.  Now I know she was nuts, and had been nuts and had zero self control to see her way out of the mess, but Hawke should be able to see alternatives. 

Of course, the game gives you none, so it's just about a moot point.  The best argument I've heard in support of the annulment is just that it is that or set the mages free willy nilly.  Personally, I'd opt for that over killing innocents, but I can understand the argument.

I would rather have played out a story that showed the good points of the two factions than painting them both black so you end up feeling dirty either way.

[Skydiver8888]

I'm totally grunching here and skipping all the great discussion later in the thread to answer the OP.

pretty much the only thing i agree with you on is the random items.  Though, they did serve to give me more xp  

All the other things needed to be shown somehow.  Remember, DA is Bioware, Bioware is writing and story, especially David Gaider.  If you don't believe that they already have the overarching DA plot already set down, at least in an outline if not already written, then you have no idea how writing fiction works.  All of it, from Stolen Throne to DA2 to the comics, all of it ties into the story.  Most players probably understand this on some intrinsic level, but take issue with the way these plot items are handled from "tactical" story perspective.  It's like saying the Jon Snow chapters in A Song of Ice and Fire are unnecessary.  Just because we can't see the bigger picture now doesn't mean it isn't there.

While I understand from a game dev point of view that each DA game has to be able to stand on its own, really, DA2 is a very typical "middle episode" in a trilogy, or several chapters of exposition setting up the big conflict/drama/climax later on.  It's The Two Towers of the DA franchise.  Or actually, with all the questions it raised, maybe a better comparison are the middle seasons of LOST.  You get snippets of info but still are left wondering wtf is going on.  Heck, just go read the lore posts and you'll see how much all the things you listed really are necessary from a lore point of view. SOMETHING BIG is coming.

The trouble with a game like this isn't necessarily the writing or story itself.  Taken as it is, much of the overarching DA2 story is exactly what it needs to be to fit into this larger coming conflict.  The trouble is we, as gamers, have come to expect our fantasy RPGs to be of the epic poem style, NOT the slice-of-life style.  We want a MC who rises from *wherever* to become the savior of the world by taking down the big bad *whatever*.  And that is GREAT.  it is the formula by which thousands of successful games (and books and movies) have been made.  It's also a big hindrance to the success of games like DA2, NOT because it's a bad story, but because it's not what we expect it to be on a fundamental level.

That doesn't mean, however, that a slice-of-life type game/story cannot ever be good nor fit into the fantasy RPG genre.  But such a game cannot be marketed as a sequel.  This, i believe, was Bio/EA's biggest mistake with DA2.  If anything, I would have called it DA: Origin of Hawke or something like that.  It would tie it to DAO in the way it should have been tied.  Not as a sequel, but as ANOTHER ORIGIN story, one that's more fully fleshed out.  

If I'm reading the lore writing on the wall correctly, this would have been a much better fit and marketing scheme, because really, I think the real story, the true big bad, the apocalyptic-sized conflict set to be unleashed on Thedas, is coming in DA3 (or later, who knows).  If that's correct, then Flemeth, red lyrium that sings to people (hrm, archdemon, anyone?), Sandal's strange prophecy, more mages in the world, the fall of the chantry, etc, it ALL ties together, and the exposition of DA2 had to happen to move us along to the meat of things.

It's kind of like a war.  DA's strategic story is one thing, and DA2 fits into that strategy.  But on the tactical level, there are definitely some issues that could have been handled better.  If you look at the plot points as tools used to demonstrate certain strategic elements, then many things could have been done differently.  For example, I see Meredith's corruption as a way to demonstrate the power of red lyrium, not only to sing someone insane, but also to grant them near-godlike powers.  Obviously, this could have been shown any number of ways.  Or expounded on more thoroughly.  Or whatever. 

Sorry, long post, but i've thought for a while that DA2's problems lay more in marketing and expectations than in flaws in story/gameplay.  I'm not saying the story and gameplay are flawless.  I'm saying that taken for what it is, DA2 isn't really the evil IP-killing mess that people on this board and elsewhere seem to make it out to be.

Modifié par Skydiver8888, 19 juillet 2011 - 01:08 .