37 réponses à ce sujet

[syllogi]

Gemini1179 wrote...

For those who lable him a terrorist for killing innnocents, wouldn't the 'Divine' herself need to be called one if she called for an Exhalted March on Kirkwall? As Elthina herself said, "were no innocents killed during the Exhalted Marches?" - which were ordered by the then Divine- so it's again about perspecitve.

Do you see governments that use military force to put down uprisings as terrorists?

Gemini1179 wrote...

Innocence is a matter of perspective as well. For all we know, the good people of the Chantry did nothing but preach and perform acts of charity. BUT, if the Chantry oversees the Templars, and the Templars commit rapes and abuses upon Mages- as Anders points out does happen- then is the Chantry not guilty of condoning these actions through their own inability to properly control the Templars?

Evil wins when good people do nothing. Elthina may be a good woman, but she keeps herself blind to injustice after injustice. Really, if it wasn't Anders, it would have been someone else.

Maybe someone else would have done something equally violent.  Or, maybe Meredith's insanity would have been exposed another way, and she could have been taken out of office and a more moderate leader put in place.  Or maybe a representative of mages could have appealed to the Divine.  There were other ways to at least try to bring about a peaceful solution.  Maybe Elthina had some ideas on how to do it, but diplomacy takes time.  Violence is never the only, or best solution.

[Gemini1179]

TeenZombie wrote...

Do you see governments that use military force to put down uprisings as terrorists?

Perspective. The families of those put down in the uprisings probably do. The Taliban originally pushed out the Russians and were hailed heroes. We know how that turned out for the people of Afghanastan, and yet, when 'liberated' there were likely those who saw the UN forces as terrorists.

Is it 'ok' to kill someone if you are a recognized 'authority'?

In DA2, would the elves have cared if it was a Mage or a City Guard that raped their sister? The only difference there would have been that more than likely, if it was a Mage, action would have been taken. Which proves my point, why does who commits the crime make it better or worse? Crime is crime. Do onto others as you would have others do onto you. The Chantry does not understand this and has brought about its own destruction.

The game exists in such a moral grey area that there are no real right or wrong choices.

TeenZombie wrote...

Maybe someone else would have done something equally violent.  Or, maybe Meredith's insanity would have been exposed another way, and she could have been taken out of office and a more moderate leader put in place.  Or maybe a representative of mages could have appealed to the Divine.  There were other ways to at least try to bring about a peaceful solution.  Maybe Elthina had some ideas on how to do it, but diplomacy takes time.  Violence is never the only, or best solution.

There are enough maybes to fill half the graves in Kirkwall. Violence is not a solution, you are correct, however it is often an inevitability. History has time and again proven this correct and still does. Until I see that changing in our 'modern' world, I can't really expect if from medival fantasy.

Modifié par Gemini1179, 29 septembre 2011 - 07:24 .

[Nimrodell]

TeenZombie wrote...

Gemini1179 wrote...

Innocence is a matter of perspective as well. For all we know, the good people of the Chantry did nothing but preach and perform acts of charity. BUT, if the Chantry oversees the Templars, and the Templars commit rapes and abuses upon Mages- as Anders points out does happen- then is the Chantry not guilty of condoning these actions through their own inability to properly control the Templars?

Evil wins when good people do nothing. Elthina may be a good woman, but she keeps herself blind to injustice after injustice. Really, if it wasn't Anders, it would have been someone else.

Maybe someone else would have done something equally violent.  Or, maybe Meredith's insanity would have been exposed another way, and she could have been taken out of office and a more moderate leader put in place.  Or maybe a representative of mages could have appealed to the Divine.  There were other ways to at least try to bring about a peaceful solution.  Maybe Elthina had some ideas on how to do it, but diplomacy takes time.  Violence is never the only, or best solution.

Ah dear, tis nice to see that idealists still exist, so refreshing, but you keep seeing Anders in those 10 years - for you, it has been one playthrough, or seven or ten years... for Anders, it has been his entire life. Well, almost his entire life 'cause he was taken to the Circle in his childhood. Before giving big speeches on diplomacy, alternative pathways, you always have to at least try to be in someone else's shoes... I mean Magna Carta was great document, but did it really change something? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for diplomacy and trying the better way, but still I can't justify your exclusive point of view... not 'cause tis wrong, but for the fact that it is preparing you for even bigger fall. You haven't been in Anders' shoes (and I hope you never do) and big statements are just that big statements. Though I must admit, tis nice that idealists still exist. Listen to Isabela, if nothing else, take her with Anders, listen to those conversations but with full understanding of Anders too and then judge. It is so easy to play 'righteous' role, especially when it is selective - and that's where games like DA fail - they present huge 'moral' choices, but they also forget how people are forgetful and prone to judge only by current events or one side perception. Anders is the person who did much good for many people and yet he's a villain too - but the villain and good doer close to player... a friend or someone who actually followed, healing and helping others in the mean time... really, is his case so simple, so simple murder knife? Ah, I'm not sure u'll understand or try to understand, 'cause usually that's the case with forum debates.
I do understand what you're saying and I just implore you to try to understand the other side or at least remember all those 'years before' - point is, nothing is that simple, nothing is black and white.

[Gemini1179]

Nimrodell wrote...

TeenZombie wrote...

Gemini1179 wrote...

Innocence is a matter of perspective as well. For all we know, the good people of the Chantry did nothing but preach and perform acts of charity. BUT, if the Chantry oversees the Templars, and the Templars commit rapes and abuses upon Mages- as Anders points out does happen- then is the Chantry not guilty of condoning these actions through their own inability to properly control the Templars?

Evil wins when good people do nothing. Elthina may be a good woman, but she keeps herself blind to injustice after injustice. Really, if it wasn't Anders, it would have been someone else.

Maybe someone else would have done something equally violent.  Or, maybe Meredith's insanity would have been exposed another way, and she could have been taken out of office and a more moderate leader put in place.  Or maybe a representative of mages could have appealed to the Divine.  There were other ways to at least try to bring about a peaceful solution.  Maybe Elthina had some ideas on how to do it, but diplomacy takes time.  Violence is never the only, or best solution.

Ah dear, tis nice to see that idealists still exist, so refreshing, but you keep seeing Anders in those 10 years - for you, it has been one playthrough, or seven or ten years... for Anders, it has been his entire life. Well, almost his entire life 'cause he was taken to the Circle in his childhood. Before giving big speeches on diplomacy, alternative pathways, you always have to at least try to be in someone else's shoes... I mean Magna Carta was great document, but did it really change something? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for diplomacy and trying the better way, but still I can't justify your exclusive point of view... not 'cause tis wrong, but for the fact that it is preparing you for even bigger fall. You haven't been in Anders' shoes (and I hope you never do) and big statements are just that big statements. Though I must admit, tis nice that idealists still exist. Listen to Isabela, if nothing else, take her with Anders, listen to those conversations but with full understanding of Anders too and then judge. It is so easy to play 'righteous' role, especially when it is selective - and that's where games like DA fail - they present huge 'moral' choices, but they also forget how people are forgetful and prone to judge only by current events or one side perception. Anders is the person who did much good for many people and yet he's a villain too - but the villain and good doer close to player... a friend or someone who actually followed, healing and helping others in the mean time... really, is his case so simple, so simple murder knife? Ah, I'm not sure u'll understand or try to understand, 'cause usually that's the case with forum debates.
I do understand what you're saying and I just implore you to try to understand the other side or at least remember all those 'years before' - point is, nothing is that simple, nothing is black and white.

Very good points. If you're interested, or TeenZombie, a fanfic that helped me understand the position of Anders (not specifically- but of the 'I cannot stand by any longer' variety) is The Last Year by DSK7723 on fanfiction.net. Phenominial work.

www.fanfiction.net/s/6310881/1/The_Last_Year

[Gervaise]

The truth of the matter is that if the plot had just had Meredith calling for a Right of Anulment all on her own initiative, then we would have been saved all these arguements about Anders and whether terrorism is justified. And really the bomb was unnecessary. By this point in time you should have been able to work out where you sympathies and ambitions lie. If you just follow the plot line of the main plot and ignore all the side diversions, including Anders making his bomb, you move from initial confrontation between Meredith and Orsino, to hunting down renagade mages, two of which are downright dangerous, to the mage/templar coalition attempting to overthrow Meredith, where the mages are openly using blood magic and the templars involved are turning a blind eye. After you uncover this, Cullen turns up and takes any survivors back to the Gallows, where one assumes they are at least interogated(tortured) into revealing exactly what went on, or in the case of Alain, probably just spilled the beans out of fear, since he he allowed to live whether you ask for it or not. So at this point Meredith will know how deep the plot ran in the ranks of her own Templars and that mages from within the tower were using blood magic. When you turn up at the confrontation, she is insisting on searching the tower for evidence of blood magic, which is hardly paranoia given previous events. Actually, when you look at it from this point of view, you can see why she is so insistent and why she didn't really need a bomb to set her off on the RoA course. What the bomb does is actually stop Orsino getting the grand cleric to intervene, which probably would not have stopped the search but at least might have persuaded her to give some assurance that if evidence was discovered, only the perpetrators would be brought to account, not the whole Circle. So in some way the writers wanted it left open if Elthina would have actually defended Orsino or approved the RoA or simply sat on the fence once again, plus make you have some sort of moral dilemma over Anders, because otherwise there seemed no need for the bomb at all.

I actually think the extent of the bomb was totally over the top - when all is said and done you did only need a Grand Cleric sized explosion for the moral diliemma to occur. But Anders always has to make a big statement.

[Gemini1179]

Gervaise wrote...

The truth of the matter is that if the plot had just had Meredith calling for a Right of Anulment all on her own initiative, then we would have been saved all these arguements about Anders and whether terrorism is justified. And really the bomb was unnecessary. By this point in time you should have been able to work out where you sympathies and ambitions lie. If you just follow the plot line of the main plot and ignore all the side diversions, including Anders making his bomb, you move from initial confrontation between Meredith and Orsino, to hunting down renagade mages, two of which are downright dangerous, to the mage/templar coalition attempting to overthrow Meredith, where the mages are openly using blood magic and the templars involved are turning a blind eye. After you uncover this, Cullen turns up and takes any survivors back to the Gallows, where one assumes they are at least interogated(tortured) into revealing exactly what went on, or in the case of Alain, probably just spilled the beans out of fear, since he he allowed to live whether you ask for it or not. So at this point Meredith will know how deep the plot ran in the ranks of her own Templars and that mages from within the tower were using blood magic. When you turn up at the confrontation, she is insisting on searching the tower for evidence of blood magic, which is hardly paranoia given previous events. Actually, when you look at it from this point of view, you can see why she is so insistent and why she didn't really need a bomb to set her off on the RoA course. What the bomb does is actually stop Orsino getting the grand cleric to intervene, which probably would not have stopped the search but at least might have persuaded her to give some assurance that if evidence was discovered, only the perpetrators would be brought to account, not the whole Circle. So in some way the writers wanted it left open if Elthina would have actually defended Orsino or approved the RoA or simply sat on the fence once again, plus make you have some sort of moral dilemma over Anders, because otherwise there seemed no need for the bomb at all.

I actually think the extent of the bomb was totally over the top - when all is said and done you did only need a Grand Cleric sized explosion for the moral diliemma to occur. But Anders always has to make a big statement.

So it's ok to kill everyone if only a few are guilty?

[Cutlass Jack]

Nimrodell wrote...

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Irrelevant. Even if Anders just did  perfect, a Grand Cleric sized explosion, he's still a terrorist. And  for the record, I'm sympathetic and like the guy.

Ah Jack, I expected some witty post from you, the one full of laughter and Lo! Suddenly, you're serious . To be honest, dear, I don't know how much of it was Anders and how much it was Justice - being from Fade, that still doesn't grasp the concept of gray areas. To be honest, I don't think that writers executed that whole Chantry explosion idea very well... it seemed to me that they actually understand the entire 'desperate fighting for freedom' concept, but with that explosion they delivered something else. It takes wisdom and being on both sides in order to understand how desperate fight for beliefs and freedom can get and I'm talking from personal experience of many years. Anders is terrorist and not in the same time. Luckily, he's fictional character, so people ar entitled to self-righteous or narrow or wide points of view on him without real thought on such problems, and that's good, this is a game, leisure time...  Now, keep posting witty comments, 'cause you and Mr. Kusy from ME forums always make my day - and to be honest, I could use some good laugh - selfish I know .

What? You didn't like 'grand cleric sized explosion?'

And yes I should clarify that I was talking about the composite Anders, rather than the pre-justice one. They both were incredibly bad for each other. Anders' personality perverted Justice just as much as the reverse. And if you go Rivalmance with him, it makes Anders more of an unwilling participant. I like that route.

So like I said, I'm very sympathetic. And if he had blown up Meredith's office, or parts of the gallows to give his fellow mages a chance to escape, I'd have taken a less harsh view of his actions.

I do end up ending him regardless, because even he knows at that point he crossed a line he can't come back from. And justice (pun intended) would demand he pay for his act. That even comes up during one of the walkaround party conversations with him.

Okay I'm going back to witty mode now. I wish Anders could have gone back to witty mode too. I miss that Anders.

[Augustei]

Its funny because I actually hated Isabela and Merrill kind of irritated me but it was bearable. Sebastian on the other hand was probably my favorite character of the companions tied with Carver. Besides when they try to fit him into scenes where it doesn't really work to well as already stated. He seems to be one of the more interesting characters with his conflict having some depth.So does Isabela though but I dont like her personality I find it immersion breaking, to much jokes and idiocy on her part - Twas good with Varric, to far with her.

His conflict is genuine unlike some others that seem to lack it. I think the reason people truly don't like him is the preaching bit.. Which is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be anyway.

Sebastian is awesome

[Nimrodell]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Nimrodell wrote...

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Irrelevant. Even if Anders just did  perfect, a Grand Cleric sized explosion, he's still a terrorist. And  for the record, I'm sympathetic and like the guy.

Ah Jack, I expected some witty post from you, the one full of laughter and Lo! Suddenly, you're serious . To be honest, dear, I don't know how much of it was Anders and how much it was Justice - being from Fade, that still doesn't grasp the concept of gray areas. To be honest, I don't think that writers executed that whole Chantry explosion idea very well... it seemed to me that they actually understand the entire 'desperate fighting for freedom' concept, but with that explosion they delivered something else. It takes wisdom and being on both sides in order to understand how desperate fight for beliefs and freedom can get and I'm talking from personal experience of many years. Anders is terrorist and not in the same time. Luckily, he's fictional character, so people ar entitled to self-righteous or narrow or wide points of view on him without real thought on such problems, and that's good, this is a game, leisure time...  Now, keep posting witty comments, 'cause you and Mr. Kusy from ME forums always make my day - and to be honest, I could use some good laugh - selfish I know .

What? You didn't like 'grand cleric sized explosion?'

And yes I should clarify that I was talking about the composite Anders, rather than the pre-justice one. They both were incredibly bad for each other. Anders' personality perverted Justice just as much as the reverse. And if you go Rivalmance with him, it makes Anders more of an unwilling participant. I like that route.

So like I said, I'm very sympathetic. And if he had blown up Meredith's office, or parts of the gallows to give his fellow mages a chance to escape, I'd have taken a less harsh view of his actions.

I do end up ending him regardless, because even he knows at that point he crossed a line he can't come back from. And justice (pun intended) would demand he pay for his act. That even comes up during one of the walkaround party conversations with him.

Okay I'm going back to witty mode now. I wish Anders could have gone back to witty mode too. I miss that Anders.

Same here, my friend, same here... but what can one do now? Anyways, I'm glad u'll be back in your witty mode now, as you should . Keep being that way, Cutlass Jack .

[Nimrodell]

XxDeonxX wrote...

Its funny because I actually hated Isabela and Merrill kind of irritated me but it was bearable. Sebastian on the other hand was probably my favorite character of the companions tied with Carver. Besides when they try to fit him into scenes where it doesn't really work to well as already stated. He seems to be one of the more interesting characters with his conflict having some depth.So does Isabela though but I dont like her personality I find it immersion breaking, to much jokes and idiocy on her part - Twas good with Varric, to far with her.

His conflict is genuine unlike some others that seem to lack it. I think the reason people truly don't like him is the preaching bit.. Which is nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be anyway.

Sebastian is awesome

He's not awesome, he meant to be different and thus awesome old/new perspective on the world, but his DLC character status failed to deliver that awesomeness, 'cause that's not the way how modern men think - it would be good if they made him 'more present, more in touch', but they didn't. Tis like having medieval man living now... in Las Vegas. It could work if he got more space, better personal quests - but he didn't - and that's why he seems so preachy even though he's not actually. He feels the pulse of the world itself, but he's too alien for modern man majority. He can be seen as zealot or even worse, just as a pretty face, and that's exactly what happened to his character.

[Gervaise]

Gemini119 - I know I ramble on a bit but how did my missive equate to:
"So it's ok to kill everyone if only a few are guilty?"
I was just saying that Meredith would have called for a RoA eventually, bomb or no bomb. As for the extent of the bomb, it was enormous, it didn't just take out the Chantry and it was actually unbelieveable, presumably to justify Meredith's statement that the Grand Cleric had been killed with magic because there was no way that was a normal bomb.
And to think there was all that trouble with the Qunari, who do have gunpowder and they never used it. Anders should really have gone to Tevinter with that knowledge, they'd have welcomed him with open arms. I suppose we should be grateful for small mercies.

[Foolsfolly]

For those who lable him a terrorist for killing innnocents, wouldn't the 'Divine' herself need to be called one if she called for an Exhalted March on Kirkwall? As Elthina herself said, "were no innocents killed during the Exhalted Marches?" - which were ordered by the then Divine- so it's again about perspecitve.

Act of war and thus not terrorism.

The Exalted March would kill innocents because innocents always die in war. But they'd have a target (likely Mages but also anyone who harbored them and any lord or city that was a safe haven). There's a target and there's collateral damage.

Anders did not have a military target (that would have been against the Templars themselves) he was simply to cause as much death as possible to make compromise impossible. Thus a terrorist action. He hit civilians just to hit civilians.

You are right though there's a lot of murky ground in war. Like the fire bombing of Dresden and Tokyo were not military targets. It was to demoralize the people of those nations, targeting civilians to target civilians.

War's ugly, brutal, and monstrous like that.

But I still call an Exalted March against the Mages war and Anders unprovoked attack of a civilian target in a time of peace a terrorist action. If Anders lives, stays sane, and the mages win (this is a long shot condition) then history will see him as a revolutionary. History's fickle like that.

[Foolsfolly]

So like I said, I'm very sympathetic. And if he had blown up Meredith's office, or parts of the gallows to give his fellow mages a chance to escape, I'd have taken a less harsh view of his actions.

If he did that I would think of him as a revolutionary who was gathering strength and standing against Meredith and the treatment of his people. Blowing up the Chantry made him a terrorist and did nothing to better the plight of mages in Kirkwall or Thedas. It seems to have made things much much worse.