386 réponses à ce sujet

[Sealy]

esper wrote...

As for Anders. What he did was wrong. it was murder and murder of innocenct too, but if it stopped a 1000 years of oppression and unjustified imprisoment then what he did worked and the chantry would never have let go of the mages peacefully - never.  
 

And if what he did just initiated a mass mage genocide? If you side with the Templars there are mages falling to their knees asking for mercy, saying they wanted no part in the fighting. Even Orsino is horrified, they didn't want a war, they wanted reform. Anders actions made that impossible. The mages can never just be free, they are dangerous, people with power do tend to abuse it and mages are born powerful. 

Even in HP they should bring in some Templars to keep an eye on them, the mages get up to all sorts of nonsense if left to their own devices.

That said the Templars are a huge problem, because they are given power over powerful beings they also let it go to their head and become abusive and the Chantry blames the mages for all the worlds problems so they do nothing/encourage the abuse. Did the Chantry deserve to be exploded, no, but if he was going for symbolism then he could have made sure it was empty. Did Elthina deserve to die, no, and she probably could have remained not dead and Anders still would have gotten his war, the woman would have stepped aside and let Meredith have her right of Anullment as she watched the makers house, her home crumble. So yah he could have let her live, she was a useless character and her death would have made no difference wither way, all it did was make Anders actions more black then white or grey.

Anders actions can't be justified and if ipgd is correct and most Anders fans see how he is a terrorist in the end and not a revolutionist then I have been wrong in trying to convince them of something they already know. Some terrorists are born and some are made, Anders was definatly made, it doesn't make his actions right, or just but it does make it easier to sympathize with him. I oscillate between killing him and letting him live, depending on how much Sebastian pisses my specific Hawke off. The Cleric is an easily ignorable character and I usually only really chat with her in act three. 

Modifié par Fleshdress, 11 août 2011 - 08:42 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

ipgd wrote...
I don't believe I've ever used a word like "right", because I frankly find the entire right/wrong dichotomy to be entirely useless. Whether or not Anders's actions were worth it, on the other hand, is a different concern, and if they are ultimately successful in bringing about positive change regarding mage rights, I think they would be. If they fail, of course, they wouldn't be, and then history would prop him up as boogeyman instead of a saint.

I wasn't replying to anything you said. And I reject the dichotomy as well.

But Anders' actions, at least in DA2, have no bearing on whether positive changes will happen, because they have an equal chance of making it worse (I'd argue, far more likely to make it worse).

Maybe you can say that what he did was worth it, because what he did led to a sequence of events that ultimately resulted in change. But what he did, did not directly result in something positive. So I am not sure one could say that "he was succesful in bringing change", because he isn't the one who brought the change. 

Now whether history will agree with me is a different issue (it probably won't).

It may have changed perceptions, may have exposed things that were always there that people ignored, but it did not fundamentally change anything.

It sure as hell changed airport security.

Well yea, I guess it made travelling less pleasant, especially to people like me where it not for the fact that my name can sound Jewish. But is that real a fundamental change in the world?

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 11 août 2011 - 08:44 .

[congealeddgtllvr]

ipgd wrote...

congealeddgtllvr wrote...

ipgd wrote...

Something can be appalling and still be less appalling than another thing. Sometimes doing something appalling is the only way to stop something that is much more appalling. You can recognize something as both appalling and ultimately justifiable, if it was meant to stop something more appalling and succeeded in doing so. And not everything that is appalling is exactly equivalent to other things that are appalling.

These are very complicated and nuanced considerations indeed.  So my questions would be 

a.)Who is Anders to render the final judgement on these matters and

b.)How is concluding these considerations with a massive explosion the wise course?  

a) Who is anyone to do anything? I don't care if he had a "right" to do what he did, frankly, since it is an argument with no definite answer, and,

Anders remarks specifically that the Circles had never really risen up before, and judging by the state of Kirkwall they certainly were not getting any better. Why would anyone in Anders's position conclude that peaceful reform was possible, now or in any sort of reasonable future? The Circle could very well remain as it is for another thousands of years, and he had no reason to believe things would ever change (he tried for seven years to apparently no effect whatsoever), and he was not prepared to sit back and say "maybe later" and then just wait, generation upon generation until by chance society moved to a more fortuitous state. So he took decisive action.


god this thread is getting too fast stop making posts god

Then how is civil society supposed to function if anyone who is butthurt about something can address their issue with a huge bomb?  I'm just saying it's not the most auspicious of beginnings for the utopian future of mages and muggles skipping arm in arm through the fields.  Plus were I a circle mage I might resent an abomination telling me that I must revolt no I must.  It's actually pretty similar to Uldred except Anders still believes he is helping while Uldred has at least been disabused of that notion.  

And I think you missed my broader point which was that I don't think your orignal quote there definitively concludes that the circles are irredeemable and must be done away with in radical, violent revolution.  The same reasoning could be used to argue for keeping the circles.  

[Addai]

ipgd wrote...
No. But is allowing the appalling status quo to persist for further hundreds or possibly thousands of years while the mages wait for a social climate that is ready for peaceful reform less appalling than the confirmed deaths of the seven people in the chantry and however many hundreds die in the coming revolution? That question is not as clear cut.

All in all, mages will always be a minority and will always be dangerous to themselves and society.  So to start a war based on their complaints- even if legitimate- a war in which both mages and non-mages will die and in which there can be no outcome that will satisfy an extremist like Janders... no, that is not justified.

But Anders is diseased and can't make a rational determination.  I blame the one who could have done something more measured and didn't.  That's not just Elthina, it's also Hawke.  I don't see how anyone can hate the one and not the other.

Modifié par Addai67, 11 août 2011 - 08:47 .

[ipgd]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I know, and the outcome is irrelevent to how I would percieve him and his act. Even if his act ends up being convenient, I will still say that he was stupid and short sighted. 

I think mages probably should distance themselves from Anders as much as possible, if they actually want to build something and not just destroy. But, they could embrace him as their symbol. I'd find that highly unwise.

A keen leader could make it wise. Anders could really stand for anything the revolutionary leaders want him to; all that really matters is that Anders be high profile enough to exploit into a symbol (which I'm fairly certain Sebastian will take care of). And symbols are undoubtedly useful to the spread of movements and sentiments.

[leggywillow]

Addai67 wrote...
But Anders is diseased and can't make a rational determination.  I blame the one who could have done something more measured and didn't.  That's not just Elthina, it's also Hawke.  I don't see how anyone can hate the one and not the other.

Depends on how you characterize your Hawke.  Hawke is a civilian.  A rich civilian with a lot of martial skill, yes, but Hawke still has no official capacity to do anything.

[KnightofPhoenix]

congealeddgtllvr wrote...
These are very complicated and nuanced considerations indeed.  So my questions would be 

a.)Who is Anders to render the final judgement on these matters

To answer the question (which I find interesting), I'll need to tweak it a bit because I share igpd's sentiment that "right" is irrelevent (so I can say the same thing people read dozen times, but meh).

Is Anders qualified to do so?

By that, I mean does he possess the mental faculties, the following, the long term plan, the charisma, the endurance, the vision...etc etc. Things I believe can be, more or less, objectively quantified.  

And my answer is a resounding no.

If Anders was qualified, I would not mind him killing many more people (so long as it's necessary and not stupid and counter-productive), as a means to an end he can achieve.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 11 août 2011 - 09:00 .

[esper]

Fleshdress wrote...

esper wrote...

As for Anders. What he did was wrong. it was murder and murder of innocenct too, but if it stopped a 1000 years of oppression and unjustified imprisoment then what he did worked and the chantry would never have let go of the mages peacefully - never.  
 

And if what he did just initiated a mass mage genocide? If you side with the Templars there are mages falling to their knees asking for mercy, saying they wanted no part in the fighting. Even Orsino is horrified, they didn't want a war, they wanted reform. Anders actions made that impossible. The mages can never just be free, they are dangerous, people with power do tend to abuse it and mages are born powerful. 

Even in HP they should bring in some Templars to keep an eye on them, the mages get up to all sorts of nonsense if left to their own devices.

That said the Templars are a huge problem, because they are given power over powerful beings they also let it go to their head and become abusive and the Chantry blames the mages for all the worlds problems so they do nothing/encourage the abuse. Did the Chantry deserve to be exploded, no, but if he was going for symbolism then he could have made sure it was empty. Did Elthina deserve to die, no, and she probably could have remained not dead and Anders still would have gotten his war, the woman would have stepped aside and let Meredith have her right of Anullment as she watched the makers house, her home crumble. So yah he could have let her live, she was a useless character and her death would have made no difference wither way, all it did was make Anders actions more black then white or grey.

Anders actions can't be justified and if ipgd is correct and most Anders fans see how he is a terrorist in the end and not a revolutionist then I have been wrong in trying to convince them of something they already know. Some terrorists are born and some are made, Anders was definatly made, it doesn't make his actions right, or just but it does make it easier to sympathize with him. I oscillate between killing him and letting him live, depending on how much Sebastian pisses my specific Hawke off. The Cleric is an easily ignorable character and I usually only really chat with her in act three. 

I am not talking about justifing his actions. There is a clear difference between 'right'and necessary. This is going to sound cynical, but: I don't care if the mages are mass murdered as long as they fight back. They need to do something to create future generations and new mages will always be born. The worst case scenario is that we end up with a world like Europe doing the witch hunts where the templars will be like the witch hunters - and I am leaning towars that is better than the current system. I know it is cynical. 

If Elthina had stepped aside I am not sure it would have worked. I always see the other mages' reaction in the other circle being: Kirkwall circle was annulled for an outsiders' crime, but the champion of Kirkwall protected us(m)/ and the Champion of Kirkwall helped murder us (t). The champion showed we can fight back (m)/ If that can happen in Kirkwall it can happen here we can't just wait to die (t).

[KnightofPhoenix]

ipgd wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I know, and the outcome is irrelevent to how I would percieve him and his act. Even if his act ends up being convenient, I will still say that he was stupid and short sighted. 

I think mages probably should distance themselves from Anders as much as possible, if they actually want to build something and not just destroy. But, they could embrace him as their symbol. I'd find that highly unwise.

A keen leader could make it wise. Anders could really stand for anything the revolutionary leaders want him to; all that really matters is that Anders be high profile enough to exploit into a symbol (which I'm fairly certain Sebastian will take care of). And symbols are undoubtedly useful to the spread of movements and sentiments.

Yes, but I believe it's imperative that mages seek to attract as many of the masses as possible. And making Anders a symbol would be counter-productive to that goal, because I doubt they will be able to somehow make him a hero and martyr in the eyes of common folk.

Though symbols can always be thrown aside when they outlive their usefullness. Mages could certainly use him as a symbol during the war, only to discard it later when time has come for negotiations and settlement. Octavian certainly used Caesar as a symbol when he wanted to take power, only to more or less discard it later when he became Augustus (because he wanted to be seen as the Republican nice guy of course).

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 11 août 2011 - 08:57 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

leggywillow wrote...

Addai67 wrote...
But Anders is diseased and can't make a rational determination.  I blame the one who could have done something more measured and didn't.  That's not just Elthina, it's also Hawke.  I don't see how anyone can hate the one and not the other.

Depends on how you characterize your Hawke.  Hawke is a civilian.  A rich civilian with a lot of martial skill, yes, but Hawke still has no official capacity to do anything.

He is a noble, a famous and popular one at that, and he had a lot of unofficial capacities to do a lot, if he wanted to use his brain.

But that's another topic and I don't want to open that can of worms

[Sealy]

esper wrote...
(*snip*cause I wrote it, I know what it said. )

I am not talking about justifing his actions. There is a clear difference between 'right'and necessary. This is going to sound cynical, but: I don't care if the mages are mass murdered as long as they fight back. They need to do something to create future generations and new mages will always be born. The worst case scenario is that we end up with a world like Europe doing the witch hunts where the templars will be like the witch hunters - and I am leaning towars that is better than the current system. I know it is cynical. 

If Elthina had stepped aside I am not sure it would have worked. I always see the other mages' reaction in the other circle being: Kirkwall circle was annulled for an outsiders' crime, but the champion of Kirkwall protected us(m)/ and the Champion of Kirkwall helped murder us (t). The champion showed we can fight back (m)/ If that can happen in Kirkwall it can happen here we can't just wait to die (t).

I am aware your not justifying his actions that was actually directed elsewhere only the first little part was directed at you specifically. I guess where we disagree wtih was if it was nessecary, I don't. I think the outcome would have been the same if he had blown up an empty Chantry or a full one. Even the cleric would not have stood in Merediths path. Anders had just justified there every fear about mages.

Modifié par Fleshdress, 11 août 2011 - 09:06 .

[congealeddgtllvr]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

To answer the question (which I find interesting), I'll need to tweak it a bit because I share igpd's sentiment that "right" is irrelevent (so I can say the same thing people read dozen times, but meh).

Is Anders qualified to do so?

By that, I mean does he possess the mental faculties, the following, the long term plan, the charisma, the endurance, the vision...etc etc. Things I believe can be, more or less, objectively quantified.  

And my answer is a resounding no.

If Anders was qualified, I would not mind him killing many more people (so long as it's necessary and not stupid and counter-productive), as a means to an end he can achieve.

Agreed.  He's probably the last person I'd want to give the authority to break from that long of a stabilizing tradition, however unjust it was.  

[KnightofPhoenix]

congealeddgtllvr wrote...
 It's actually pretty similar to Uldred except Anders still believes he is helping while Uldred has at least been disabused of that notion.  

I actually sympathise A LOT more with Uldred.

Uldred had a following (which he secretly organized under Templar noses, kudos to him). He tried to convince all mages to join him and he was very nearly succesful were it not for Wynne's idiocy. And he allied himself with Loghain and a state to support him, and his assistance against the blight and Orlais would improve popular opinion.

Uldred messed up at the very end when he was pushed into a corner and resorted to demons. But I respect and sympathise with him far more than Anders. Unlike him, Uldred actively sought and had allies.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 11 août 2011 - 09:08 .

[ipgd]

congealeddgtllvr wrote...

Then how is civil society supposed to function if anyone who is butthurt about something can address their issue with a huge bomb?

Thedas isn't modern civil society, if you've noticed. Back then, violence was basically the only way anyone got **** done. If Thedas were in an age where mages could mass communicate and organize, there would be less need for violence -- but waiting around for that to happen with their thumbs up their asses is not always a satisfactory course of action, and Anders had no reason to believe that there was any chance for peaceful reform of the Circles at that time, or in his lifetime, or in the next generation's lifetime, or anyone's lifetime, given Kirkwall's steady ****-bound tragectory.

I'm just saying it's not the most auspicious of beginnings for the utopian future of mages and muggles skipping arm in arm through the fields.  Plus were I a circle mage I might resent an abomination telling me that I must revolt no I must.  It's actually pretty similar to Uldred except Anders still believes he is helping while Uldred has at least been disabused of that notion.  

And I think you missed my broader point which was that I don't think your orignal quote there definitively concludes that the circles are irredeemable and must be done away with in radical, violent revolution.  The same reasoning could be used to argue for keeping the circles.

If we're going to do HP analogies, the Circles need to be Hogwarts but they've got nothing but Azkabans. Complete with skirt-wearing dementors!

I doubt this particular revolution will lead to the complete abolition of the Circle, given that those concerns regarding mages and demons obviously still remain. But they will probably become independant of the Chantry. Whether or not they end up like Tevinter depends on the political leanings of the revolutionary leaders to come -- if it ends up primarily headed by Aequitarians and more moderate Libertarians, the doomsday Mageocracy scenario could be averted. If the bat**** Resolutionists take charge, who knows.

That's not just Elthina, it's also Hawke.  I don't see how anyone can hate the one and not the other.

Elthina is the leader of the Chantry presence in Kirkwall. She has actual responsibilities. Hawke is a celebrity playboy who is certainly not warming the chair of an incredibly important political, religious and military position.

Modifié par ipgd, 11 août 2011 - 09:08 .

[leggywillow]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

leggywillow wrote...
Depends on how you characterize your Hawke.  Hawke is a civilian.  A rich civilian with a lot of martial skill, yes, but Hawke still has no official capacity to do anything.

He is a noble, a famous and popular one at that, and he had a lot of unofficial capacities to do a lot, if he wanted to use his brain.

But that's another topic and I don't want to open that can of worms

But in terms of having a right to shove herself into politics... well, it reminds me of celebrities who think simply because they have money and the public eye on them means they should start spouting their political opinions as though they are more informed than anyone else.  Again, I guess it comes down to how you RP your Hawkes, and I do agree that the ability to RP a Hawke who wants to bring about change is sadly lacking.

EDIT: My Hawkes approach the events of the game with a very civilian attitude.  They do the Thedas equivalent of writing to their Senators, aka badgering the hell out of Elthina to do something.

Modifié par leggywillow, 11 août 2011 - 09:10 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

leggywillow wrote...

But in terms of having a right to shove herself into politics... well, it reminds me of celebrities who think simply because they have money and the public eye on them means they should start spouting their political opinions as though they are more informed than anyone else.  Again, I guess it comes down to how you RP your Hawkes, and I do agree that the ability to RP a Hawke who wants to bring about change is sadly lacking.

While my views on Hawke is that he ends up being famous but with no actual power (becaues he didn't actively seek it), he's more than just a celebrity in the modern meaning of the term. He could have rallied people under him, many of whom were looking for an alternative to Meredith and a new Viscount. Many were not pleased with Dumar anyways, so he could have started as early as Act 2. Of course, we have no option to do so and are forced to play what you call a civilian Hawke (I call him lazy and useless).

[esper]

Fleshdress wrote...

esper wrote...
(*snip*cause I wrote it, I know what it said. )

).

I am aware your not justifying his actions that was actually directed elsewhere only the first little part was directed at you specifically. I guess where we disagree wtih was if it was nessecary, I don't. I think the outcome would have been the same if he had blown up an empty Chantry or a full one. Even the cleric would not have stood in Merediths path. Anders had just justified there every fear about mages.

As long as we can agree on what I have said and haven't said. we can certainly agree to disagree.  
Yesterday I was accussed of saying stuff about Rivain when I hadn't even wroten the word down yet, so I am a little on the edge.

[KnightofPhoenix]

ipgd wrote...
Whether or not they end up like Tevinter depends on the political leanings of the revolutionary leaders to come -- if it ends up primarily headed by Aequitarians and more moderate Libertarians, the doomsday Mageocracy scenario could be averted. If the bat**** Resolutionists take charge, who knows.

It will also depend on how they handle internal frictions. I think it's very likely that radical sentiments will intensify in the war, especially if it's prolonged and brutal.

The ideal scenario for me would be a leader like Abu Ja'far al Mansur, who would eradicate all revolutionary leaders once he / she obtains power, and impose a new order.

The thing aobut revolutionaries is that many of them if not most don't know that a revolution is supposed to end for something new to be built. Many indeed believe in "perpetual revolution". People like need to be removed if you want to build a new system. 

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 11 août 2011 - 09:27 .

[Sealy]

esper wrote...

Fleshdress wrote...

esper wrote...
(*snip*cause I wrote it, I know what it said. )

).

I am aware your not justifying his actions that was actually directed elsewhere only the first little part was directed at you specifically. I guess where we disagree wtih was if it was nessecary, I don't. I think the outcome would have been the same if he had blown up an empty Chantry or a full one. Even the cleric would not have stood in Merediths path. Anders had just justified there every fear about mages.

As long as we can agree on what I have said and haven't said. we can certainly agree to disagree.  
Yesterday I was accussed of saying stuff about Rivain when I hadn't even wroten the word down yet, so I am a little on the edge.

The things I have learned since joining BSN is agreeing to diagree is an act of maturity rarely seen, and not to use sarcasm... ever. Someone eventually finds it and is sarcasm intolerant so they get spazzy. And yah I too am really mad about that stuff you said about Rivain, aweful really.

Oops, there I go breaking my own rule, whateves. This thread moves to fast to keep up with but my opinion on Anders and Elthina is pretty much set.

Elthina is annoying and often acts like a chicken with her head cut off, except without the running which would even make her kinda useful. I don't hate her or like her and I don't think her death was deserved or nessecary.

I am sympathetic of Anders, I do not think his actions are redeemable and I do think it will kill off the mages and if that is what most people were looking to happen then Huzzah. My circle friendly Warden and Champion do not want to be attacked by an army of Templars, off their asses or not. 

[congealeddgtllvr]

ipgd wrote...

Thedas isn't modern civil society, if you've noticed. Back then, violence was basically the only way anyone got **** done. 

Thedas has some elements of a civil society.  And if everyone tried to solve their grievances the way Anders does everyone would be living under the Qun by now. 

If we're going to do HP analogies, the Circles need to be Hogwarts but they've got nothing but Azkabans. Complete with skirt-wearing dementors!

I won't disagree with that sentiment, though I might disagree that the circles outside Kirkwall are that bad.  

Whether or not they end up like Tevinter depends on the political leanings of the revolutionary leaders to come 

It also depends on how clever the magisters are at helping out their cornered brothers and sisters throughout Thedas. 

Modifié par congealeddgtllvr, 11 août 2011 - 09:37 .

[Addai]

ipgd wrote...
Elthina is the leader of the Chantry presence in Kirkwall. She has actual responsibilities. Hawke is a celebrity playboy who is certainly not warming the chair of an incredibly important political, religious and military position.

And yet, has "risen to power."  I agreed upthread that Elthina is incompetent.  In taking up space without doing much of anything, though, she and Hawke are kindred spirits.  The only way this story makes sense to me, in fact, is to assume that both of them were either clueless or both wanted the status quo.  It's Meredith and Anders who are the change agents, and since they're both violently insane, a pox on the both of them.

Modifié par Addai67, 11 août 2011 - 09:50 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

I probably would have been much more sympathetic to Anders, if his bomb took out Elthina, Meredith, Orsino, Hawke, the Divine (somehow she would find her way there), Cassandra and himself.

[Sabariel]

Elthina was a crap-leader, but I don't think she deserved to die.

[Sealy]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I probably would have been much more sympathetic to Anders, if his bomb took out Elthina, Meredith, Orsino, Hawke, the Divine (somehow she would find her way there), Cassandra and himself.

You would be more sympathetic if he killed more people? Twisted. Tsk tsk.

I am sympathetic because of the corner he felt backed into. The Chantry/circles made him what he is in DA 2. I mean in DAA he feared Templars and the circles and his loss of freedom, but he was a lone mage and no extremist.  Merging with Justice made him powerful enough to take that fear and turn it into insanity. Justice just made him crazy zealot guy when it came to his actions. But the Chantry can be blamed for giving him something to be crazy about. 

Edit: I think insanity may be the wrong word I am going for but I can't think of the right one so... eh. Cut me some slack my schooling stopped at grade 6.

Modifié par Fleshdress, 11 août 2011 - 10:03 .

[congealeddgtllvr]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I actually sympathise A LOT more with Uldred.

Uldred had a following (which he secretly organized under Templar noses, kudos to him). He tried to convince all mages to join him and he was very nearly succesful were it not for Wynne's idiocy. And he allied himself with Loghain and a state to support him, and his assistance against the blight and Orlais would improve popular opinion.

Uldred messed up at the very end when he was pushed into a corner and resorted to demons. But I respect and sympathise with him far more than Anders. Unlike him, Uldred actively sought and had allies.

I've never thought about it this way but it really is true.  Heh it's pretty sad when you look bad compared to Uldred.

Those damn demons!  Every mage thinks they can handle 'em!