81 réponses à ce sujet

[esper]

I don't really want the maker to exits either, but I find it disturbing that the Andrastian wants his attention back. And the way it is formulated the fanatics have a direct line they can point to when saying that the most conquer they world - also they chantry wants to rule the world, at least the act like that.
The Chantry has an disturbing faith and is properly corrupt to the core. I don't think taking the divine out would be enough, because a new divine would just rise. The very core of their belief needs to be shaken to the point where they moderate it or I am not sure I can defend the chantry in any form.

Modifié par esper, 29 août 2011 - 02:09 .

[Gervaise]

It is the Chantry's interpretation of the Chant of Light that causes the problems and the fact that whilst people claim to follow it, the majority of those in power do not. So the Maker won't return just because you blugeon everyone into saying "We believe in the Maker and his Commandments", if this is done under coersion rather than true belief. Of course to get akk people in power to accept that they should not abuse it, is a near impossibility.

However, do remember that even Anders still believes in the Maker and Andraste, just not the Chantry. If I let him live, he actually invokes them to support our cause.

[jamesp81]

Gervaise wrote...

It is the Chantry's interpretation of the Chant of Light that causes the problems and the fact that whilst people claim to follow it, the majority of those in power do not. So the Maker won't return just because you blugeon everyone into saying "We believe in the Maker and his Commandments", if this is done under coersion rather than true belief. Of course to get akk people in power to accept that they should not abuse it, is a near impossibility.

However, do remember that even Anders still believes in the Maker and Andraste, just not the Chantry. If I let him live, he actually invokes them to support our cause.

Good point.  One should not let the message be obscured by the actions of imperfect people.

I think it's pretty telling about the sort of leaders the chantry has considering it's a religion that venerates a woman who waged war to free slaves, yet the chantry as seen ingame practically enslaves mages.

Someone needs to remind them what that book really means and that conversation will probably involve a sword.

[esper]

jamesp81 wrote...

Gervaise wrote...

It is the Chantry's interpretation of the Chant of Light that causes the problems and the fact that whilst people claim to follow it, the majority of those in power do not. So the Maker won't return just because you blugeon everyone into saying "We believe in the Maker and his Commandments", if this is done under coersion rather than true belief. Of course to get akk people in power to accept that they should not abuse it, is a near impossibility.

However, do remember that even Anders still believes in the Maker and Andraste, just not the Chantry. If I let him live, he actually invokes them to support our cause.

Good point.  One should not let the message be obscured by the actions of imperfect people.

I think it's pretty telling about the sort of leaders the chantry has considering it's a religion that venerates a woman who waged war to free slaves, yet the chantry as seen ingame practically enslaves mages.

Someone needs to remind them what that book really means and that conversation will probably involve a sword.

Anders is actually a very devout Andrastian...

I find the Maker figure himself rather eerie.
First he abonds his first children
Then He creates humans
He abandon humans
He fell in love with a human woman and worse yet he acts on it.
He abond humans again

He punish the world with the blight because some individuals steps into his city. The punishment is out of proportion with the crime.

That is not a belevoent god, that is a malevoent god. Who is to say what he will do if his attention returns and he gets angry again?

Then there is the part of the chant of light most be sung from all four corner of the world. It is not a we most all act correctly and then we will be saved - No it is all must praise our god and then he will return. Add that to military power and you have a very bad mix.

I cannot defend the chantry. I want to, but I cannot morally defend such a belief.

[Gervaise]

That's my whole point. Actually in game we have yet to be presented with the entire teaching of Andraste in its unadulterated form, which may actually be significant to future plot lines. What we are told in Origins and Awakenings is that certain passages have been dropped from the Chant because they do not fit with the way the Chantry has developed Andraste's teaching. When they authorised an Exalted March on the Dales, Shartan is conveniently dropped from the chant. So we have selections of the original chant, selections of the Chantry's doctrine based on the chant, and a small number of extracts that have been excluded from the Chant.
What my characters, as devout Andrastrian's adhere to is the basic "Commandments of the Maker", treating all mortals as the Maker's children, including mages, elves, etc., not abusing their power and helping defend those weaker than themselves from those who would oppress them.
The Chantry was founded in Orlais - where nobles rule by divine right and Chevalier can treat lesser mortals with total distain - I am quite happy to see it overthrown but not happy about the use of the bomb - it conflicts with my beliefs as an Andrastrian.

[dragonflight288]

I think the first thing that needs to be done to reform the belief and teachings of the Maker is to restore everything lost from the Chant of Light. The Canticles of Shartan and Maferath and whatever. I suspect people don't want to teach how great the elves were and how friendly they got along with Andraste because in their opinions and beliefs, elves aren't worth anything more than servants. Heck, most city elves even feel that way as a culture.

I guess they removed Maferath's because it outright says in it that the Maker blessed his betrayal and he's been forgiven. And since the Chantry teaches that Maferath's betrayal is what caused the Maker to turn on them, If he truly was forgiven, as the Chant of Light outright says, then that isn't the reason the Maker turned on mankind...again. Which would mean it wasn't Maferath that caused it....but they themselves.

Or at least that's how I interpret it, should the Maker be real. Depends on which character I'm playing as in-game.

[Ryzaki]

I half wish the Maker existed. I wanna have a conversation with him.

[dragonflight288]

Like "Why do you keep abandoning those who aren't involved with the crimes the Chantry (who claim to speak in your name) say were committed?"

[Gervaise]

I think you have to regard the Maker in the terms of the lesser spirits that he created. There is a basic nature which you adhere to. The other spirits seem attracted to human emotions and then respond to them and become a symbol of that emotion. The Maker is a creator and observer spirit but seems repelled by negative emotions because they are essentially destructive and that is contrary to his nature. He responded to Andraste's singing because that is creative and beautiful (we must assume the singing was beautiful). Using the gifts of the Maker in a kind, compassionate, caring way will attract him. Whilst war is not in itself attractive, the motives of Andraste were and provided she did not abuse her power, the Maker would continue to be attached to her. For this reason I regard the final betryal as her ultimate test of faith - she could have escaped her fate by misusing her power/restorting to dark magic (I am now firmly of the opinion that she probably was a mage) - instead she accepted death rather than betray the message she had brought. Hence she did indeed go to the Makers side and Maferath's betrayed could indeed be regarded in a positive light. Since then those in positions of power have continually betrayed her message, despite claiming to follow the Maker - individuals who have remained true have returned to his side. People have the choice to accept his teaching or reject it. If the whole world accepted it, there would be heaven on earth - the Maker would have returned. Strangely enough it is all about free will.

[esper]

Gervaise wrote...

I think you have to regard the Maker in the terms of the lesser spirits that he created. There is a basic nature which you adhere to. The other spirits seem attracted to human emotions and then respond to them and become a symbol of that emotion. The Maker is a creator and observer spirit but seems repelled by negative emotions because they are essentially destructive and that is contrary to his nature. He responded to Andraste's singing because that is creative and beautiful (we must assume the singing was beautiful). Using the gifts of the Maker in a kind, compassionate, caring way will attract him. Whilst war is not in itself attractive, the motives of Andraste were and provided she did not abuse her power, the Maker would continue to be attached to her. For this reason I regard the final betryal as her ultimate test of faith - she could have escaped her fate by misusing her power/restorting to dark magic (I am now firmly of the opinion that she probably was a mage) - instead she accepted death rather than betray the message she had brought. Hence she did indeed go to the Makers side and Maferath's betrayed could indeed be regarded in a positive light. Since then those in positions of power have continually betrayed her message, despite claiming to follow the Maker - individuals who have remained true have returned to his side. People have the choice to accept his teaching or reject it. If the whole world accepted it, there would be heaven on earth - the Maker would have returned. Strangely enough it is all about free will.

According to the chantry only spirits (not demons) were his first children. That mean that the negative emotions did not exits. Again according to the chantry the demons came into extistance when the spirits saw that the maker would rather play with his new children, the demons are 'jealous' spirits - according to the chantry.
If the chantry are right the Maker is destructive because he unleashed the blight on the world. You cannot say that that is the act of an observing spirit.

What is the Maker's teaching exactly? I have yet to see a codex or something about how people should ideally behave.

Frankly the Maker, if he exits, seem very emotional and very prone to act rashly and that is not an almighty figure people should wish to return. If his attention returned what would he do the next time someone anger him?    

[Gervaise]

There are the Commandments of the Maker which you can find in the Chantry - very basic rules which quite definitely describe magic as a gift of the Maker but the abuse of which makes the user acursed. Also to mistreat others without cause, the bear false witness and to steal. It is easy to see how these ideals can be twisted by those in power, such as the Chantry, to suit their own agenda. For example, they would claim they are justified in mistreating mages because there is cause, etc. Most of the other writings you find are based on Chantry interpretation and semons given by Divines. Even what I term the basic Andrastrian teachings are based on what a follower wrote down after her death (like Jesus, Andraste never left any writings of her own - all her teachings were spoken or sung). Even if some of the Chant is true Andrastrian, there is a lot of poetic license in the description. I would paraphrase what Tolkein said about the Bible "It is history as portrayed through the eyes of poets." So all that stuff about "every footstep darkening......." is a poet/singer's way of describing the fact that when the Magisters got there, the Maker was gone and there was no Golden City. Which I understand is confirmed by Corpheus. Mortals do not physically belong in the Fade and that very fact caused some form of corruption, then they were ejected back to where they did belong and carried the corruption with them. So you could describe it as an act of the Maker if you so wish since the laws governing the Fade the the Mortal realm were set in place by him but essential the Blight was unleashed by the actions of the Magisters. The Chantry is giving the Maker the human emotions which most probably do not actually exist. This is why you have to try and sift between what may actually be and what spin the Chantry have put on it. (Of course I may be entirely wrong about all of this but this is how my characters come to terms with their faith).

All creatures of the Fade are spirits but other writers of codexes say that they do not full comprehend what they are coming into contact with and can only respond in kind. There are benign and harmful spirits just as there are benign and harmful emotions (both to the individual and those around them). In this Merrill is correct in saying there are no good and bad spirits/demons, just spirits which do not belong in the mortal realm in the same way that mortals do not belong in theirs (except in their dreams). Anders quite correctly says that it is his anger which corrupted Justice to become Vengence - what he does not admit that in so doing, Justice is now effectively a demon - if you choose to divide spirits and demons between postive and negative emotions. Essentially possession, whether voluntary or not, is not to be recommended because even the most benign spirit could be altered by contact with the host's emotions, where the host is strong minded enough to have some control over the situation - with most demon possessions it would appear that the weak minded are overwhelmed by the spirit so that it has complete control. However, we have yet to be presented with how this is dealt with by Rivaini Wise Women, so there is the possibility that a non destructive relationship can occur.

[dragonflight288]

...the Blight was unleashed by the actions of the Magisters

Only thing is, awakened darkspawn like the Architect and what Corypheus turned into cannot hear the call of archdemons. We know this from Awakening. And if you take the time frame of dwarven codex entries regarding fighting darkspawn and the timeframe of the blights by the humans, they don't add up. Darksapwn, I think, existed long before Corypheus and the others entered the Fade. I theorize that Corypheus and his goons were the first awakened darkspawn.

There are benign and harmful spirits just as there are benign and harmful emotions (both to the individual and those around them). In this Merrill is correct in saying there are no good and bad spirits/demons, just spirits which do not belong in the mortal realm in the same way that mortals do not belong in theirs (except in their dreams). Anders quite correctly says that it is his anger which corrupted Justice to become Vengence - what he does not admit that in so doing, Justice is now effectively a demon

Merrill also says that all spirits are dangerous. I happen to agree wholeheartedly. Spirits and demons both represent an entire emotion, positive or negative. Valor in the Mage Origin story only seeks out glory and honor in battle, things that can be attributed to valor. Justice, even in Awakening, is a very dangerous being to have in the world. He sees only absolutes, black and white's regarding situations. He seeks nothing more than the Justice of the victim.

When you have such a strong devotion to Justice, there is no room whatsoever for mercy.

And throughout the two games, we come in contact with 2 (potentially 3) sloth demons. And each one of them has a completely different personality. The one in the mage origin just wants to laze around and not make any more effort than absolutely required. The one in broken circle makes you feel slothful so he can enslave your soul in the fade. And the one in DA2 wants to manipulate us into doing his dirty work, no tricks, no coercion. Just a good strong deal telling us exactly what's going to happen.

Many people, like Anders, will not both distinguishing such things because it would mean that the Dalish may have the right of it more than them. And that would be heretical.

In my opinion that is.

[Satyricon331]

Gervaise wrote...
The Maker is a creator and observer spirit but seems repelled by negative emotions because they are essentially destructive and that is contrary to his nature. *snip snip*

Without going into it too much, I'd have to disagree that there's such a tight correlation between positive/negative emotions and creativity/destructiveness.  For instance, happiness can lead to complacency (the classic example of Switzerland's centuries of peace producing relatively little by way of art or architecture comes to mind) and jealousy can lead to hard work.  In fact, I might go so far as to say that much or even most of human productivity comes from jealousy, rivalry, or selfishness/greed (not that I'm saying it's a good or bad thing or anything like that).  (The markets would look very different if people worked just enough to provide themselves basics and didn't indulge in materialism!)  Actually, this point fits nicely into my view of the Maker as being very cruel.

It would be nice to live in a species where good emotions prompted better behavior, though.

So all that stuff about "every footstep darkening......." is a poet/singer's way of describing the fact that when the Magisters got there, the Maker was gone and there was no Golden City. Which I understand is confirmed by Corpheus.

If you take what Corypheus says as true at face value, then it poses a huge problem for the literal interpretation of Threnodies 8 (which iirc is what the Chantry claims to teach, although I'm not finding a source atm).  I agree it'd have to be poetic metaphor or something like that.

[esper]

Gervaise wrote...

There are the Commandments of the Maker which you can find in the Chantry - very basic rules which quite definitely describe magic as a gift of the Maker but the abuse of which makes the user acursed. Also to mistreat others without cause, the bear false witness and to steal. It is easy to see how these ideals can be twisted by those in power, such as the Chantry, to suit their own agenda. For example, they would claim they are justified in mistreating mages because there is cause, etc. Most of the other writings you find are based on Chantry interpretation and semons given by Divines. Even what I term the basic Andrastrian teachings are based on what a follower wrote down after her death (like Jesus, Andraste never left any writings of her own - all her teachings were spoken or sung). Even if some of the Chant is true Andrastrian, there is a lot of poetic license in the description. I would paraphrase what Tolkein said about the Bible "It is history as portrayed through the eyes of poets." So all that stuff about "every footstep darkening......." is a poet/singer's way of describing the fact that when the Magisters got there, the Maker was gone and there was no Golden City. Which I understand is confirmed by Corpheus. Mortals do not physically belong in the Fade and that very fact caused some form of corruption, then they were ejected back to where they did belong and carried the corruption with them. So you could describe it as an act of the Maker if you so wish since the laws governing the Fade the the Mortal realm were set in place by him but essential the Blight was unleashed by the actions of the Magisters. The Chantry is giving the Maker the human emotions which most probably do not actually exist. This is why you have to try and sift between what may actually be and what spin the Chantry have put on it. (Of course I may be entirely wrong about all of this but this is how my characters come to terms with their faith).

All creatures of the Fade are spirits but other writers of codexes say that they do not full comprehend what they are coming into contact with and can only respond in kind. There are benign and harmful spirits just as there are benign and harmful emotions (both to the individual and those around them). In this Merrill is correct in saying there are no good and bad spirits/demons, just spirits which do not belong in the mortal realm in the same way that mortals do not belong in theirs (except in their dreams). Anders quite correctly says that it is his anger which corrupted Justice to become Vengence - what he does not admit that in so doing, Justice is now effectively a demon - if you choose to divide spirits and demons between postive and negative emotions. Essentially possession, whether voluntary or not, is not to be recommended because even the most benign spirit could be altered by contact with the host's emotions, where the host is strong minded enough to have some control over the situation - with most demon possessions it would appear that the weak minded are overwhelmed by the spirit so that it has complete control. However, we have yet to be presented with how this is dealt with by Rivaini Wise Women, so there is the possibility that a non destructive relationship can occur.

Personally I don't think Justice is any more a demon than he was before (Justice always reprensented an eye for an eye justive which is vengance. We just got 'lucky' and saw the dark side of it, basically Justice was removed from justice for all to justice only for the mages - which is dangerous.), but that is not a point of debate right now. If we have to discuss demon and spirits I don't see how all of the demons are only negative emotions: What is wrong with rightfully earned pride, normal desires? And hunger is really just a warning signal that you need to eat - to name a few.

However, listen to Anders and Merrills debate. Anders who believes in Andraste (if not the chantry) quite clearly states that spirits are virtues and demons are vices (or sins). Merrill on the other hand believe on the other hand that demons are also spirits - she does not separate them in the virtue - vice category.

I am not saying the chantry is right about spirits and demons. I don't think it is. I am saying that the chantry belives that spirits are the Makers first children and demons are spirits corrupted by jealosy of the human.  Given that belief how can spreading of the chantry of light by equal to all people most learn to act good and we will have heaven on Thedas. The Maker abondoded the creatures who were fully virtoues (again according to the chantry) so by that logic he will not return if we all act good - no he will return when we all wordship him. There is a huge difference.

As for the chantry not having the correct version of the chant of light. I agree. Obviously some part of it has been altered - we have concrete proof of that. But I must assume that the basic is not alted - The basic being the Maker's abandonment of his children. Add that to the fact that most ordinary persons believe that the Maker punished the world with the blight (again we are not debating if this is the truth or not), and the believe that the Maker fell in love with a married human woman and acted on it, and we have a deity who by no mean are benevoulent and in fact is best left in that corner of his extistence where he (according to his own followers) is sulking. I do not see why any Andrastian wants that deity back. He is clearly are very rash and emotional creature who can do a lot more damage than good. 

[Sepewrath]

Well I would say the problem this series faces when it comes to moral conundrums is not so much how they present it, because the reality is, if your thrown into a situation, your not going to have the time to fact check and information gather. Then of course the way the quest system works, person A gives you the quest, you fight your way to B who tells you something different. Its not like with Orsino and Meredith, where both were there at the same time arguing their points. So the usual half truths system that is the status quo in RPG's didn't apply there, because A wont let B tell half the story and vice versa. I would like to see more of that.

But the biggest problem comes from the choices they give you; there's a choice that makes sense and the rest don't. This was especially the case in Origins, no reason to kill the Dalish or the Wolves, no reason to Annul the Circle mages, no reason to abandon Redcliffe, giving Fenris to Danarius, killing Merrill's clan. So many of the choices, there is a right choice and several wrong choices, that exist only for the sake of metagaming. I abandon Redcliffe, because I'm playing an evil character, otherwise, its completely senseless to do so.

And I think this happens, because people aren't impressed by choices that aren't about deciding which side of the Earth the sun comes up. So the choices become, do these million people live or die, the choices are so far above the characters head, that they just become silly and are filled with ridiculous options. Tell the Lady of the Forest "Lets just kill all the Dalish" why? What value did that outcome have for anyone involved? It wasn't practical for the Warden or Wolves, it wasn't an emotional choice of "I feel bad for you, so I'll help you" It was a large choice, that existed just to be large. They need to keep the choices on the PC's level, so that way they can give value to every choice and not blow them up so big, that they just become right and wrong.

[esper]

Sepewrath wrote...

Well I would say the problem this series faces when it comes to moral conundrums is not so much how they present it, because the reality is, if your thrown into a situation, your not going to have the time to fact check and information gather. Then of course the way the quest system works, person A gives you the quest, you fight your way to B who tells you something different. Its not like with Orsino and Meredith, where both were there at the same time arguing their points. So the usual half truths system that is the status quo in RPG's didn't apply there, because A wont let B tell half the story and vice versa. I would like to see more of that.

But the biggest problem comes from the choices they give you; there's a choice that makes sense and the rest don't. This was especially the case in Origins, no reason to kill the Dalish or the Wolves, no reason to Annul the Circle mages, no reason to abandon Redcliffe, giving Fenris to Danarius, killing Merrill's clan. So many of the choices, there is a right choice and several wrong choices, that exist only for the sake of metagaming. I abandon Redcliffe, because I'm playing an evil character, otherwise, its completely senseless to do so.

And I think this happens, because people aren't impressed by choices that aren't about deciding which side of the Earth the sun comes up. So the choices become, do these million people live or die, the choices are so far above the characters head, that they just become silly and are filled with ridiculous options. Tell the Lady of the Forest "Lets just kill all the Dalish" why? What value did that outcome have for anyone involved? It wasn't practical for the Warden or Wolves, it wasn't an emotional choice of "I feel bad for you, so I'll help you" It was a large choice, that existed just to be large. They need to keep the choices on the PC's level, so that way they can give value to every choice and not blow them up so big, that they just become right and wrong.

I disliked many of the 'god' choices the warden had to make for two reasons: One being that there often was a cheap persaude optimal way out, the other being why should my warden make the choice and the third being why doesn these people even listen to me on that levet.
I think the should keep the choices on the personal more internal level. It felt better, but alas not many players likes not being mr/miss Awsome, can choose everything in the world.

[Sepewrath]

Yep, Thedas is a big place and I would love the idea of 4 or 5 games covering different people, doing what they can for their own reasons and that just shapes the world. But the whole, set out to save the universe, choosing what species goes extinct, what kingdoms fall etc. BW already has one of those going, must every game they make be like that?

[Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]

esper wrote...

I don't really want the maker to exits either, but I find it disturbing that the Andrastian wants his attention back. And the way it is formulated the fanatics have a direct line they can point to when saying that the most conquer they world - also they chantry wants to rule the world, at least the act like that.
The Chantry has an disturbing faith and is properly corrupt to the core. I don't think taking the divine out would be enough, because a new divine would just rise. The very core of their belief needs to be shaken to the point where they moderate it or I am not sure I can defend the chantry in any form.

I agree on the Maker, at least the Chantry's vision of him, not really being a diety whose approval or attention I'd really want to bring back to Thedas. In fact, Thedas sounds like it would be better off without him, since he likes to turn his back on or collectively punish humanity for the idocy and sins of the few.

Hell, just that fact that he turned his back of the fade spirits because he didn't make them awesome enough makes him seem more like a petty, spoiled child than anything. It is one thing that I don't get, about the Chantry. Why anyone would want to worship such a ****** is beyond me.

I mean, even the most dominant and prevailant real world religions are centered around dieties who actively watch and sometimes intervene, who actually send prophets or messiahs to the world and such. Whether one agree or not is immaterial, it is the fact that at least, from a theological view, they are not centered around trying to regain the attention of an uncaring, apathetic diety, or getting them to notice mortal existance in the first place. Which is what orthodox Chantry doctrine pretty much supports.

there are of course, people like leliana and others who might hold different views or beliefs on the Maker. But as far as the offical Chantry version goes, the Maker is currently pouting and refuses to aknowledge the world until everyone is chanting the same gibberish all over the world.

Which is why I find it hard to play an actual Orthodox, party line Andrastian, because the belief seems so very ridiculous. If I play an Andrastian, it is someone whose beliefs might be considered imious or even heretical.

[dragonflight288]

As far as the Official Chantry position should be, in my opinion is "We were created by a conquering empire 100 years after Andraste died so all we have are her writings, and since we don't agree with some of it, we'll edit or omit it as we see fit because she honestly couldn't have meant that right?"

Modifié par dragonflight288, 01 septembre 2011 - 04:02 .

[esper]

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf wrote...

esper wrote...

I don't really want the maker to exits either, but I find it disturbing that the Andrastian wants his attention back. And the way it is formulated the fanatics have a direct line they can point to when saying that the most conquer they world - also they chantry wants to rule the world, at least the act like that.
The Chantry has an disturbing faith and is properly corrupt to the core. I don't think taking the divine out would be enough, because a new divine would just rise. The very core of their belief needs to be shaken to the point where they moderate it or I am not sure I can defend the chantry in any form.

I agree on the Maker, at least the Chantry's vision of him, not really being a diety whose approval or attention I'd really want to bring back to Thedas. In fact, Thedas sounds like it would be better off without him, since he likes to turn his back on or collectively punish humanity for the idocy and sins of the few.

Hell, just that fact that he turned his back of the fade spirits because he didn't make them awesome enough makes him seem more like a petty, spoiled child than anything. It is one thing that I don't get, about the Chantry. Why anyone would want to worship such a ****** is beyond me.

I mean, even the most dominant and prevailant real world religions are centered around dieties who actively watch and sometimes intervene, who actually send prophets or messiahs to the world and such. Whether one agree or not is immaterial, it is the fact that at least, from a theological view, they are not centered around trying to regain the attention of an uncaring, apathetic diety, or getting them to notice mortal existance in the first place. Which is what orthodox Chantry doctrine pretty much supports.

there are of course, people like leliana and others who might hold different views or beliefs on the Maker. But as far as the offical Chantry version goes, the Maker is currently pouting and refuses to aknowledge the world until everyone is chanting the same gibberish all over the world.

Which is why I find it hard to play an actual Orthodox, party line Andrastian, because the belief seems so very ridiculous. If I play an Andrastian, it is someone whose beliefs might be considered imious or even heretical.

It is the bolded quete that I have tried to say. (Why isn't english my first langue). I cannot morally defend a chantry who pray to such a deity.

I think that the reason I had a more positive view of the chantry in da:o. Was that I wasn't paying attention so much so I just let Leliana handle the religious stuff, but now where I listen and paied attention to what the belief actually says I can't defend the chantry, I simply can't

[Gervaise]

I would definitely be regarded as a heretic by the Chantry. In Origins the version of the Maker I liked was Lelianna's - "the Chantry say the Maker has abandoned us but I disagree, he is there in the wind, etc". Not a totally accurate quote but gives the general gist. And even Sebastian seems to suggest that his idea of the Maker is some sort of inspirational force who can motivate you to action - which is not really the impression that the Chantry gives you where you just go with the flow and trust that is what he wants. Some of the best debates about the Maker come from your various companions. There is Averline who was married to a Templar, yet has doubts about the Chantry's teaching. Ander's questioning Sebastian about his response to the situation of the mages - to which he gets a totally non commital answer. And the interplay between Sebastian and Fenris is also great because it does give both sides of the argument and it is clear that Fenris wants to believe in the Maker but his life experience causes him to doubt.
The problem is that people do have a need to believe in something - when the blight caused them to doubt their previous belief system, they embraced Andraste's teaching even though ultimately it would appear that the Maker let her down. It was the archon of the Tevinter Imperium who first adopted the Chant of Light in order to quell rebellion because so many of his subject now believed in it. Then 100 years later, the rival ruling monarch to the Tevinter in Orlais decided to hijack the faith.

Currently there are 4 belief systems in Thedas that we know of that command large enough followings to be considered Thedas wide - Dalish (worship of gods that can no longer talk to them), White and Black Divines (worship of Maker who has abandoned mankind), Qun - no deity but adherance to a philosophical system that gives certainty but lacks individual expression.

In fact, with the exception of the Dalish - all the systems endorse the status quo of the ruling elite and allow very little social mobility. In the case of the Chantries this is only to be expected because there is no evidence to the contrary that the Maker doesn't approve of their stance. To be honest none of them appeal to me which is why I have come up with my own interpretation of Andrastrian which my characters can live by. However, since they also stand for freedom, to force that system of belief on others would also go against their principles. Hence they tend to be fairly tolerant of the diverse beliefs of their companions. If some new piece of information came to light that categorically proved or disproved what has been taught up to now, this would be helpful because currently I am under no illusions that the majority of the inhabitants of Thedas are still firmly in the grip of the Chantries. Even in Ferelden, whatever the individual monarch may believe, they are still bound by Chantry law to a large extent or risk an Exalted March.

[Gervaise]

Sorry I left out the dwarves with their worship of paragons - also a totally rigid system for the majority with only a select few able to elevate themselves - although this at least does appear to be on merit.

[esper]

Leliana version of the Maker is better as a belief and much easier to folliw, but it is not the offical one... Sebastian seems to belief in the offical version - sort of. He had the it is the Maker when something good happens, but not the Maker when something bad happens attitude.

I do believe that a religion should have no military power and no political power. That it should simply exits to bring people comfort and faith, but that is not the discussion for a thread about morals I think.

I am not sure that the dwarves belief is a religion as we know it, To me it is seems to be more reverence of skilled person and upholding tradition - and yes, it doesn't sound so bad in theory, but if that is the reason they still have the caste system it is not good.

As for my roleplay. My three wardens was Surana, Maheriel and Cousland of them only Cousland believed in the Maker and she didn't really give it any thought other than she was an Andrastian because that was what 'everyone' was so that had to be right.
My cannon Hawke lost faith when her little sister was chrused by an Ogre. She simply couldn't comphrehend why that had to happen and found it easier to believe in nothing. My two other Hawke had very much my Cousland's belief.

[Gervaise]

I was talking more my human characters - so Cousland and Hawkes. In Origins my dalish elf followed his traditions, was rude to the Chantry priestess in the camp, outraged to discover the Chant had been altered to omit the reference to Shartan but following the Urn of Sacred Ashes quest, had a certain respect for Andraste but not the Chantry - not bothered about Maker since apparently like the elf gods, he was no longer in communication with mortals. My mage elf became increasingly anti-chantry and would have been only too happy to help Anders with his campaign. My city elf had been prepared to follow the Chantry and believe in their teaching until the priestess let her and her friends be dragged off to be raped on her wedding day - after that she had no time for them at all.
On the whole, none of my characters expect the Maker to do anything for them - the Maker helps those who help themselves. But they do adhere to the general morality of the Chant of Light.
I find Sebastian's faith rather amusing - he is apparently waiting for the Maker to give him a sign as to what he should do, which is odd considering the Chantry teaches that the Maker no longer involves himself with mankind and will not do so untl there is a universal change of heart. Also can't understand why Maker didn't protect Elthina. I wonder if bomb sending Chantry sky high counts as a sign from the Maker?

[dragonflight288]

I have three main characters in Origins. Thorin Aeducan is what I consider my canon character. He scoffs at any ideas of there being gods and honestly believes anyone who puts faith in what can't be seen are idiots. He openly mocks the chantry any chance he gets, and interrupts funerals by saying "may their ancestors accept them" according to Dwarven tradition. (He can do that at Redcliff after defending the village)

Then there is my human mage. Started off as an Andrastian, but his thirst for knowledge and history has led him to become skeptic about what the Chantry teaches, and eventually settles on a belief similar to Alistair's There is a Maker and historical fact, and then there's what the Chantry teaches. And they're quite often different. He also has mastered spirit magic, and sees templars capable of performing a lesser magic because all their abilities are essentially a weaker school of spirit. Only they can't animate the dead.

And finally my cousland. Hardcore Andrastian, believer in the Chantry. General goody-two shoes and a pain in the butt for Thorin (and me).

I find Sebastian's faith rather amusing - he is apparently waiting for the Maker to give him a sign as to what he should do, which is odd considering the Chantry teaches that the Maker no longer involves himself with mankind and will not do so untl there is a universal change of heart. Also can't understand why Maker didn't protect Elthina. I wonder if bomb sending Chantry sky high counts as a sign from the Maker?

I also find Sebastian an amusing character. And he's incredibly impusive. Switching priorities and what he wants on a whim. First with his parent's deaths, which make sense since he's the last of his line. Then when a desire demon tells him what he already knows about himself, and suddenly he's all "Oh know, I have been tempted by a demon! I must stay away from Starkhaven!"

As for Elthina....well her neutrality is both necessary and pointless in my opinion. It's necessary because she isn't a politician. She was raised in the Chantry from childhood. She's a priestess. Nothing more. I would hardly call her a great leader of people, more of a spiritual adviser to them as per her role.

But her neutrality is also pointless because she has direct command of Meredith. She appointed Meredith to the position of Knight-Commander, and if she payed attention to the people, had plenty of reason to remove Meredith entirely from Kirkwall. and replace her with someone more sane.

In fact, she has the obligation to do so as it becomes increasingly obvious that Meredith is not disciplining her own templars or enforcing the Chantries laws.

Did she deserve to get blown up? As a priest, no. As the leader of the militant arm of the Chantry, from a militaristic point of view that made her a prime target.

Which is why the Chantry shouldn't have an active military force and the templars need to serve the crown of their country.