968 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvianus]

Many of you have said that  someone who is a part of the Chantry was an enemy of the Mages. This means you do not believe in the possibility that there are many who are just believers, who believe in peace in spite of different beliefs about magic. To believe that the situation of the Mages would be better under the supervision of the Chantry, doesn't mean that make necessarily become someone anti-mage.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 14 août 2011 - 11:14 .

[IanPolaris]

David Gaider wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
DG, you are suggesting that Lelianna is not anti-mage now? After the quotes and reasoning that Rif ande Lob have provided? After the clear "shift" in personality after DAO? I don't wish to be too insulting but this is sort of like the best friend caught in bed with the wife who says, "Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?"

I'm not saying Leliana is anything. You guys are. It's like you had a whole other conversation with her that wasn't even in the game, an "extreme shift in personality" that she didn't even display... despite simultaneously saying you wished she had. Her motivations have somehow been discerned, her actions outside of the plot divined, and comparisons between these things and her character in DAO made and found wanting.

This kind of self-referencing speculation is headache-inducing. What enjoyment you get out of it, I'll never know. I'll leave you to it, however, and trust that when the answers finally do come you'll find it just as aggravating.

I'm sorry but Rif is right.  Too many people have independantly wondered why Lelianna is "anti-mage" (or at least anti-magic) now for this to be the imagination of a small number of people.  Whatever your intentions, that is the message the Lelianna dialog has made.  As for 'discerning' her DAO character, many of us have provided exact quotes and behavior in context that shows that Lelianna herself is extremely .... shall we say understanding ... of mages to the point of heresy in DAO even to the point of suggesting that a bloodmage should find succor in the Chantry (which Alistair....not exactly a pro-chantry figure...rightly says is never going to happen).

Again, with all due respect, please don't tell me something is my imagination when it's not.

-Polaris

[phaonica]

Sylvianus wrote...

phaonica wrote...

Can one be pro-Chantry without being anti-mage?

Well you know, that's not surprised on this hyperbolic forum. You're even labeled as" pro-Templar "  if you decided to support the Templars,( sometimes, as a murderer anti-mage who supports a genocide ) knowing that you had no choice and other reasonable considerations could have decided to choose a camp with a neutral thought.

What does anti-mage even mean? If you support a Circle-type system, are you anti-mage? Was Wynne anti-mage, because to me she seemed to be pro-Circle?

[IanPolaris]

Sylvianus wrote...

Many of you have said that  someone who is a part of the Chantry was an enemy of the Mages. This means you do not believe in the possibility that there are many who are just believers, who believe in peace in spite of different beliefs about magic. To believe that the situation of the Mages would be better under the supervision of the Chantry, doesn't mean that make necessarily become someone anti-mage.

Except that isn't the case here.  Lelianna is openly supporting an Exalted March on Kirkwall "lest it fall to magic" (not mages, not the Resolutionists, but magic) and she says it with utter contempt, which is completely unlike Lelianna's converastions with magic with Wynne or even Morrigan, and certainly a far cry from her call for mercy and a second chance in the Chantry for a bloodmage (when as I said before Alistair correctly notes that the Templars would give her 'mercy' at swordpoint just for being a bloodmage).

Its a seemingly radical shift in her personality from DAO made worse by the fact that she was a killable NPC  in DAO and was (in some cases) ressurected over the player's objections (invalidating player choice which is NOT a good thing) in DAO.

-POlaris

[IanPolaris]

phaonica wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

phaonica wrote...

Can one be pro-Chantry without being anti-mage?

Well you know, that's not surprised on this hyperbolic forum. You're even labeled as" pro-Templar "  if you decided to support the Templars,( sometimes, as a murderer anti-mage who supports a genocide ) knowing that you had no choice and other reasonable considerations could have decided to choose a camp with a neutral thought.

What does anti-mage even mean? If you support a Circle-type system, are you anti-mage? Was Wynne anti-mage, because to me she seemed to be pro-Circle?

When Lelianna supports an exalted march lest "Kirkwall fall to magic" [and if the circle was freed by the warden she adds, "especially after what happened in Fereldan"], I think it's very fair to call her "anti-mage" especially in contrast to her very understanding and accepting attitude towards magic in DAO which has been well documented.

-Polaris

[Sylvianus]

The only ones I've seen are those who are passionately pro-mage. Including many of them who see the chantry as " the devil ", without a minimum of pragmatism and rationality, blood mage as innocent victims who have a justification for murder, because of the templars. Who said that Anders was absolutely right, kill them all etc etc.

Those who didn't support the Magi at the end are treated in the same time genocidal murderers by the same people. So no wonder that Leliana was perceived negatively for just have said something against what she perceived as a threat, regardless of its nature.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 14 août 2011 - 11:24 .

[Morroian]

IanPolaris wrote...

Except that isn't the case here.  Lelianna is openly supporting an Exalted March on Kirkwall "lest it fall to magic" (not mages, not the Resolutionists, but magic)

If it falls its due to revolution hence the resolutionists. I interpret her as supporting the status quo not being anti magic.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

"Falls to magic" is an ambiguous term so inferring a specific ideology for Leliana from a 3 second phrase seems premature. It sounds to me that it's a reference to violent maleficarum overthrowing the rule of the city or causing it to descend into chaos. Both of those things would be bad.

[TEWR]

Morroian wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Except that isn't the case here.  Lelianna is openly supporting an Exalted March on Kirkwall "lest it fall to magic" (not mages, not the Resolutionists, but magic)

If it falls its due to revolution hence the resolutionists. I interpret her as supporting the status quo not being anti magic.

There was no status quo in Kirkwall because of Meredith's tyranny and her lackies. Ser Kerras was called one of Meredith's cronies by Ser Thrask in Act 1, so it's evident that he's one of the ones closest to her. She had to have known what he was doing.

She can support the status quo all she wants, but it doesn't do a damn bit of good if the one who's actually disrupting the status quo and causing mages to take drastic measures is still in power. And it does even less good if she just pins the lack of balance on the Resolutionists without wondering why they're acting the way they are.

And yes, Resolutionists are by their very nature violent, but that doesn't mean they don't have their reasons for being violent now.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 14 août 2011 - 11:32 .

[TheJediSaint]

IanPolaris wrote...


I'm sorry but Rif is right.  Too many people have independantly wondered why Lelianna is "anti-mage" (or at least anti-magic) now for this to be the imagination of a small number of people.  Whatever your intentions, that is the message the Lelianna dialog has made.  As for 'discerning' her DAO character, many of us have provided exact quotes and behavior in context that shows that Lelianna herself is extremely .... shall we say understanding ... of mages to the point of heresy in DAO even to the point of suggesting that a bloodmage should find succor in the Chantry (which Alistair....not exactly a pro-chantry figure...rightly says is never going to happen).

Again, with all due respect, please don't tell me something is my imagination when it's not.

-Polaris

With respect,  I think that you are overstating how many people seem to hold the opinion that Lelianna is Anti-Mage.  Internet forums have a tendency to exagerate things, particuarly when it comes to finding the number of people who agree with you.

[Dave of Canada]

phaonica wrote...

What does anti-mage even mean? If you support a Circle-type system, are you anti-mage? Was Wynne anti-mage, because to me she seemed to be pro-Circle?

The definition of anti-mage changes from post to post, rarely remaining consistant. Some days, it's almost like everybody except the poster themselves are anti-mage.

[EmperorSahlertz]

IanPolaris wrote...

phaonica wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

phaonica wrote...

Can one be pro-Chantry without being anti-mage?

Well you know, that's not surprised on this hyperbolic forum. You're even labeled as" pro-Templar "  if you decided to support the Templars,( sometimes, as a murderer anti-mage who supports a genocide ) knowing that you had no choice and other reasonable considerations could have decided to choose a camp with a neutral thought.

What does anti-mage even mean? If you support a Circle-type system, are you anti-mage? Was Wynne anti-mage, because to me she seemed to be pro-Circle?

When Lelianna supports an exalted march lest "Kirkwall fall to magic" [and if the circle was freed by the warden she adds, "especially after what happened in Fereldan"], I think it's very fair to call her "anti-mage" especially in contrast to her very understanding and accepting attitude towards magic in DAO which has been well documented.

-Polaris

She supports it? Doesn't she just warn that it might be the consequence, if things don't quiet down in Kirkwall?

[Cody]

IanPolaris wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
DG, you are suggesting that Lelianna is not anti-mage now? After the quotes and reasoning that Rif ande Lob have provided? After the clear "shift" in personality after DAO? I don't wish to be too insulting but this is sort of like the best friend caught in bed with the wife who says, "Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?"

I'm not saying Leliana is anything. You guys are. It's like you had a whole other conversation with her that wasn't even in the game, an "extreme shift in personality" that she didn't even display... despite simultaneously saying you wished she had. Her motivations have somehow been discerned, her actions outside of the plot divined, and comparisons between these things and her character in DAO made and found wanting.

This kind of self-referencing speculation is headache-inducing. What enjoyment you get out of it, I'll never know. I'll leave you to it, however, and trust that when the answers finally do come you'll find it just as aggravating.

I'm sorry but Rif is right.  Too many people have independantly wondered why Lelianna is "anti-mage" (or at least anti-magic) now for this to be the imagination of a small number of people.  Whatever your intentions, that is the message the Lelianna dialog has made.  As for 'discerning' her DAO character, many of us have provided exact quotes and behavior in context that shows that Lelianna herself is extremely .... shall we say understanding ... of mages to the point of heresy in DAO even to the point of suggesting that a bloodmage should find succor in the Chantry (which Alistair....not exactly a pro-chantry figure...rightly says is never going to happen).

Again, with all due respect, please don't tell me something is my imagination when it's not.

-Polaris

What do you expect? It is typical Bioware Arrogance. It can never be there failing with telling a story, but the fans imagination, or poor taste, or not being pleased with an innovation of theirs. Don't expect a dev on the DA forums to actually take something like this to heart, they are too stuck up otherwise.

Kinda a different story on the ME forums though. Less arrogance by far. Probably because it is a different dev team.

[mesmerizedish]

Dave of Canada wrote...

phaonica wrote...

What does anti-mage even mean? If you support a Circle-type system, are you anti-mage? Was Wynne anti-mage, because to me she seemed to be pro-Circle?

The definition of anti-mage changes from post to post, rarely remaining consistant. Some days, it's almost like everybody except the poster themselves are anti-mage.

All I know for sure is that Mr. Gaider is anti-mage, because Ian Polaris says it often enough and loudly enough that objective reality has molded itself around the idea of Mr. Gaider as a pro-slavery bigot.

Modifié par ishmaeltheforsaken, 14 août 2011 - 11:43 .

[Apollo Starflare]

Not entirely connected to the OP but related to some posts I'm reading:

Could definitely have done with some more Magi in their who weren't off their rocker, insane, and were in fact quite stable and hard done by under the current system.

A likably understudy to Orsino, and opposite of Cullen, would have been a good start.

Looking at the state of the Magi in Kirkwall I can't blame Leli for being against magic, it's a right mess.

[IanPolaris]

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

"Falls to magic" is an ambiguous term so inferring a specific ideology for Leliana from a 3 second phrase seems premature. It sounds to me that it's a reference to violent maleficarum overthrowing the rule of the city or causing it to descend into chaos. Both of those things would be bad.

Was there combat going on during the coversation?  No.  Was Lelianna supposed to take her time and gather intelligence for the divine?  Yes.  Was Hawke supposed to diplomatically express Elthina's wish for peace to the Divine via Lelianna?  Yes.

Given all that, there was no need to be coy or generic.  If Lelianna had wanted to refer to a specific group of mages or type of magical power, she had the ability to do so and could have.  She didn't.  She lumped ALL mages and magic into one lump catagory with the Resolutionists and called it bad (bad enough to justify an exalted march even).

I'm sorry guys, but if that doesn't qualify as anti-mage, then I don't know what does (short of being a Meredith style fruitcake...and I hope everyone agrees that Meredith was a fruitcake by this time...something ELSE Lelianna apparenlty fails to notice or do anything about even as a Seeker).

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...
She supports it? Doesn't she just warn that it might be the consequence, if things don't quiet down in Kirkwall?

She sure doesn't oppose it even when both you and Sebastian (at the Grand Cleric's behest) pleade for understanding and at the very least a hands-off policy.   Instead she tells Elthina to get out of town (and both you and Sebastian conclude that indeed the Divine is planning an Exalted March).  Seems like she supports it to me.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

phaonica wrote...

What does anti-mage even mean? If you support a Circle-type system, are you anti-mage? Was Wynne anti-mage, because to me she seemed to be pro-Circle?

The definition of anti-mage changes from post to post, rarely remaining consistant. Some days, it's almost like everybody except the poster themselves are anti-mage.

All I know for sure is that Mr. Gaider is anti-mage, because Ian Polaris says it often enough and loudly enough that objective reality has molded itself around the idea of Mr. Gaider as a pro-slavery bigot.

You are attacking the messenger and not the message.  Not a good idea.

-Polaris

[mesmerizedish]

IanPolaris wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

phaonica wrote...

What does anti-mage even mean? If you support a Circle-type system, are you anti-mage? Was Wynne anti-mage, because to me she seemed to be pro-Circle?

The definition of anti-mage changes from post to post, rarely remaining consistant. Some days, it's almost like everybody except the poster themselves are anti-mage.

All I know for sure is that Mr. Gaider is anti-mage, because Ian Polaris says it often enough and loudly enough that objective reality has molded itself around the idea of Mr. Gaider as a pro-slavery bigot.

You are attacking the messenger and not the message.  Not a good idea.

-Polaris

What? I'm not attacking anyone. You've won. Reality has submitted to your assault and now you're right. Be proud of this moment.

[IanPolaris]

Filament wrote...

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

"Falls to magic" is an ambiguous term so inferring a specific ideology for Leliana from a 3 second phrase seems premature. It sounds to me that it's a reference to violent maleficarum overthrowing the rule of the city or causing it to descend into chaos. Both of those things would be bad.

Yes.

Also, "what happened in Ferelden" is that abominations damn near overran the Circle and started rampaging the countryside.

Except you don't get that quote every time.  The only time I've seen (or remember it) is when the Fereldan circle is freed which makes me conclude (and I haven't been told I'm wrong on this anyway...and prior conversations with DG and others incline me to believe I am largely correct) that it's the Fereldan pro-magic stance that's bothering the "new" Lelianna, not the fact the circle was almost overrun.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

phaonica wrote...

What does anti-mage even mean? If you support a Circle-type system, are you anti-mage? Was Wynne anti-mage, because to me she seemed to be pro-Circle?

The definition of anti-mage changes from post to post, rarely remaining consistant. Some days, it's almost like everybody except the poster themselves are anti-mage.

All I know for sure is that Mr. Gaider is anti-mage, because Ian Polaris says it often enough and loudly enough that objective reality has molded itself around the idea of Mr. Gaider as a pro-slavery bigot.

You are attacking the messenger and not the message.  Not a good idea.

-Polaris

What? I'm not attacking anyone. You've won. Reality has submitted to your assault and now you're right. Be proud of this moment.

Yes you are.  Again.

-Polaris

[Dhiro]

Well... considering tht the Blight ended little before Act 1 (I think)... I'd say that she changed. I didn't saw that as her not being in-character, only as a different side of Leliana, build by years doing Maker-knows-what.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

IanPolaris wrote...

Given all that, there was no need to be coy or generic.  If Lelianna had wanted to refer to a specific group of mages or type of magical power, she had the ability to do so and could have.  She didn't.  She lumped ALL mages and magic into one lump catagory with the Resolutionists and called it bad (bad enough to justify an exalted march even).

-Polaris

I think You're attaching more weight to her words than is warranted. It was unnesseary to speak of all the individual types of bad things mages could do to Krikwall.

[phaonica]

IanPolaris wrote...

When Lelianna supports an exalted march lest "Kirkwall fall to magic" [and if the circle was freed by the warden she adds, "especially after what happened in Fereldan"], I think it's very fair to call her "anti-mage" especially in contrast to her very understanding and accepting attitude towards magic in DAO which has been well documented.

-Polaris

Her very understanding and accepting attitude towards *individual mages* in DAO.  I don't remember her taking a stance on mages as a whole in DAO. Plus, we don't even know "what happened in Ferelden" after the mages were freed. You're assuming that the dismantling of the Circle is what she's referring to when all we know there might have been some kind of unmentioned riot.