Have been playing through using one of the pre-made back stories - the one in which the dalish warden sacrifices herself. When we meet with Nathaniel there is no hint of surprise at Anders being still alive, so clearly no fake death to explain away. It occurred to me then that this would tie in with the Anders short story, so I took the trouble to read it. Obviously with the hero of Ferelden dead, the Warden Commander who betrays him would have been the replacement from Orlais and therefore likely to have closer ties to the Chantry and I can understand why Anders would no longer wish to stay with the wardens. I can also see why if he killed all those in the immediate area, the Warden Commander and Nathaniel might not necessarily have connected the deaths to Anders because it would seem far beyond anything that a normal mage could do and they have no reason to suspect him of becoming an abomination.
However, the story raises a few queries which had crossed my mind even before reading it:
1) Justice is meant to have offered to help Anders achieve his aims but prior to reading the story this just seemed to be providing him with a bit more focus and ruthlessness - which made me always think of Anders under the control of the Justice/Vengence spirit and I was constantly questioning what he really gained by the deal However, the story suggests that it gives him greater power in battle - the description makes him sound awesome. Yet nowhere in DA2 does he ever really demonstrate this? The nearest he gets isn't even against a Templar but poor Ella? Surely a better boss battle at the end than the Havester would have been Anders going nuclear over the death of the mages? In fact Anders going nuclear would have been preferable to his bomb. - at least then there would have been a clear link between the destruction and the power Justice gave him because at present there is really nothing in the story (apart from his own unique class) which could not have been done by any mage with a mission and fanatical drive.
2) I had previously questioned on a post if Anders is really dead and was told that David Gaider had said that if you killed Anders he was really dead. I wonder if this is just a play on words and that if you kill him, you simply destroy any vestige of the old Anders that remains but that subsequent to you leaving the area, he gets up and leaves, having achieved his purpose - he feels no responsibility towards the Circle Mages and is going to move on to his next target, now totally the persona of Vengence. If you spare him, the same thing happens because Justice has not been served and therefore any remnant of that spirit is removed, allowing vengence to take total control.
At the end the options for Anders dead are:
Execute Anders
Keep Anders but side with the Templars, so he ends up committing suicide (rivalry)
Free Anders but side with the Templars, so you end up killing him (friendship)
The options for a living Anders are:
Keep Anders but side with the Mages, so he wishes to stay with you
Free Anders, side with the mages and tell him to leave - he will come back to you in the Gallows and ask to join again and you can again refuse.
Various permutations of this based on whether you have a romance going with him or not, are a rival or a friend.
So there are at least as many if not more options for keeping Anders alive than for killing him. Apart from pretending he never existed, it seems inconceivable that references to him will not appear in subsequent games and based on the above, I would have thought it more likely that the "canon" version will be that the entity lived on but the "real" Anders didn't. At best it will be the non committal, "Some say he died, some that he lived on to lead the mages" as part of the Anders myth. What do you think?
Anders - loose ends/questions
Débuté par
Gervaise
, sept. 28 2011 09:59
Retour en haut
#2
Posté 28 septembre 2011 - 10:22
esper
-
- Members
- 4 193 messages
I am a little bit in doubt what you question is, but I imagine that killing Anders or not is one of the choices that will be carrided over in da3 and will properly be mentioned in npc banter.
If the trend for da2 contiune we will properly get LI cameo in da3 as well - of course only if they are alive. (Zev was not supposed to turn up if killed)
As for if Anders is dead or not. I imagine that you can kill him at the point because he thinks that it is justice that you kill him and such the spirit allows it.
I also thinks him going 'nuclear' in the short story was a diect result of the merging, if that stupid templar had waited some hours before attacking the destruction might not have been so total. I think the dead warden, eiting things is because they are a stage where neither of them (Justice or Anders) is in direct control so like any other ambomination they just lash out and kill everything in sight. Afterwards it is alway Anders or Justice who is dominant and none of them is strong enought to spread that level of destruction.
Anyway if you spare him and side with mages Anders makes it very clear that he will contiune to fight for the cause of mages in fact he will allow a Hawke to break up with him if they cannot follow him in that fight (and considering how dependant Anders is of Hawke and how 'clingly' he is that says a lot). If you spare Anders he is the cause of mages.
As for Justice being Vengance, would people please stop saying that. Justice was always Vengance. He fought the Baroness to revenge the spirits of the dead that she had trapped in the Fade, he fought darkspawn to revenge Kristoff. He will side against you if spare the Archithect, not because he thinks the Architecht is dangerous, but because the death has not being aveanged. He used that phrase. What happened with his fusion with Anders is that he got all the anger which resulted in an even shorter fuse (and it was short before hand) and that he (the spirit) can no longer see beyond the cause of mages.
It irritated me to no end that people confuse Justice with revenge. And eye for an eye is not Justice it is vengance and an eye for an eye is what Justice always was. He has not changed in that regard. Killing a murder is not justice.It is revenge.
In fact I think that the bomb is a much larger act of Justice than I have ever seen Justice do beforre, because it is an act that will he and Anders hopes will ensure justice for future generation. Justice is only justice if it is aimed at the present of the future. If it is and reaction to the past it is revenge which is what Justice was in da:a.
If the trend for da2 contiune we will properly get LI cameo in da3 as well - of course only if they are alive. (Zev was not supposed to turn up if killed)
As for if Anders is dead or not. I imagine that you can kill him at the point because he thinks that it is justice that you kill him and such the spirit allows it.
I also thinks him going 'nuclear' in the short story was a diect result of the merging, if that stupid templar had waited some hours before attacking the destruction might not have been so total. I think the dead warden, eiting things is because they are a stage where neither of them (Justice or Anders) is in direct control so like any other ambomination they just lash out and kill everything in sight. Afterwards it is alway Anders or Justice who is dominant and none of them is strong enought to spread that level of destruction.
Anyway if you spare him and side with mages Anders makes it very clear that he will contiune to fight for the cause of mages in fact he will allow a Hawke to break up with him if they cannot follow him in that fight (and considering how dependant Anders is of Hawke and how 'clingly' he is that says a lot). If you spare Anders he is the cause of mages.
As for Justice being Vengance, would people please stop saying that. Justice was always Vengance. He fought the Baroness to revenge the spirits of the dead that she had trapped in the Fade, he fought darkspawn to revenge Kristoff. He will side against you if spare the Archithect, not because he thinks the Architecht is dangerous, but because the death has not being aveanged. He used that phrase. What happened with his fusion with Anders is that he got all the anger which resulted in an even shorter fuse (and it was short before hand) and that he (the spirit) can no longer see beyond the cause of mages.
It irritated me to no end that people confuse Justice with revenge. And eye for an eye is not Justice it is vengance and an eye for an eye is what Justice always was. He has not changed in that regard. Killing a murder is not justice.It is revenge.
In fact I think that the bomb is a much larger act of Justice than I have ever seen Justice do beforre, because it is an act that will he and Anders hopes will ensure justice for future generation. Justice is only justice if it is aimed at the present of the future. If it is and reaction to the past it is revenge which is what Justice was in da:a.
#3
Posté 28 septembre 2011 - 11:50
Knight of Dane
-
- Members
- 7 451 messages
You say that ustice is vengance and then that they are two sepperate things?
I like to think it's the same thing no matter what, despite what you'd like to call it in a given situation.
I like to think it's the same thing no matter what, despite what you'd like to call it in a given situation.
#4
Posté 28 septembre 2011 - 12:29
berelinde
-
- Members
- 8 282 messages
Not quite the same, but not two different things. Vengeance is corrupted Justice. The potential for Vengeance was always there, but it was not realized until it was submerged in the vitriolic hatred of templars that existed in Anders's mind.
I do hope that they do something with Anders's story post-Gallows, even if I'm pretty sure they won't. It would be interesting to see what happens to Vengeance now that his mission is accomplished and the war is begun. Fighting the war, obviously, but one could argue that the hatred that fueled Vengeance might cool. Who knows?
I do hope that they do something with Anders's story post-Gallows, even if I'm pretty sure they won't. It would be interesting to see what happens to Vengeance now that his mission is accomplished and the war is begun. Fighting the war, obviously, but one could argue that the hatred that fueled Vengeance might cool. Who knows?
#5
Posté 28 septembre 2011 - 12:44
Knight of Dane
-
- Members
- 7 451 messages
Anders lives: He returns as a boss.
Anders dies in DA2: He comes back as undead posessed by Justance.
Anders dies in DA2: He comes back as undead posessed by Justance.
#6
Posté 28 septembre 2011 - 01:11
Gervaise
-
- Members
- 4 546 messages
"They will all die. Every Templar, every holy sister that stands in the way of our freedom will die in agony and their deaths will be our fuel. We will have justice. We will have vengence."
I could be wrong here but I don't think those were the sentiments of Justice before merging with Anders. Also when I did Awakening I spared the Architect with Justice in my party and all I got was the loss of a few brownie points - he must only turn on you if you haven't got your rating high enough with him.
Then we come back to the bit about the sort of power that Justice was offering. So at the beginning he is an awesome killing machine and Anders becomes apparently unkillable but by the end of the game, he can confront you in the Gallows and a few good swords swipes later he is dead.
Now at one time I thought that perhaps Anders was telling the truth and there was some sort of arrangement so that "boom, justice and I are free" meant exactly that - once the bomb went off Justice was happy to part company (although David Gaider says it is Anders hanging onto Justice as much as the other way round). But in the light of the above quote, the bomb is just a beginning. At the time it occurs there is no guarantee that even the mages of Kirkwall will achieve their freedom, much less the rest of Thedas. Granted Leliana has said that the world is watching Kirkwall so he knows it will have some outcome but nothing is certain until it does. Therefore, what is being suggested is that Vengence is willing to die without achieving his objectives, which seems unlikely.
So Anders continuing the struggle for mage freedom, even without Hawke, is totally understandable as Vengence is still driving him on and is probably quite pleased to no longer have the romantic baggage of Hawke. However, at least one of my Hawke's has told him to get lost because Hawke wishes to continue the fight for mage freedom and doesn't feel that Anders is going to help that cause and he just meekly accepts it - no enraged spirit saying he will continue the fight without me.
Perhaps I would be better off not having read the story, but then people often use information gained from it to feed their understanding of Anders in other ways - which in the past had me asking where on earth in the game did they get that information, when in fact they hadn't. Really if one of the actual developers takes the trouble to write a short back story, then it should at least be consistent with what appears in the game.
I did wonder if Vengence might come back as a protagonist in DA3 - may be that would explain the disappearance of both Warden and Hawke, both killed as an act of revenge, or Hawke killed trying to stop Vengence from killing the Warden. Then ironies of ironies, mages and Templars have to work together to try and find a way of stopping the "unstoppable" Vengence, who by now has acquired a different host so no longer even looks like Anders and is attacking any target that it perceives as deserving of retribution - Orlais, Tevinter, Anderfels, Par Vollen - so even the Qunari must become part of the alliance. Then again, may be not.
I could be wrong here but I don't think those were the sentiments of Justice before merging with Anders. Also when I did Awakening I spared the Architect with Justice in my party and all I got was the loss of a few brownie points - he must only turn on you if you haven't got your rating high enough with him.
Then we come back to the bit about the sort of power that Justice was offering. So at the beginning he is an awesome killing machine and Anders becomes apparently unkillable but by the end of the game, he can confront you in the Gallows and a few good swords swipes later he is dead.
Now at one time I thought that perhaps Anders was telling the truth and there was some sort of arrangement so that "boom, justice and I are free" meant exactly that - once the bomb went off Justice was happy to part company (although David Gaider says it is Anders hanging onto Justice as much as the other way round). But in the light of the above quote, the bomb is just a beginning. At the time it occurs there is no guarantee that even the mages of Kirkwall will achieve their freedom, much less the rest of Thedas. Granted Leliana has said that the world is watching Kirkwall so he knows it will have some outcome but nothing is certain until it does. Therefore, what is being suggested is that Vengence is willing to die without achieving his objectives, which seems unlikely.
So Anders continuing the struggle for mage freedom, even without Hawke, is totally understandable as Vengence is still driving him on and is probably quite pleased to no longer have the romantic baggage of Hawke. However, at least one of my Hawke's has told him to get lost because Hawke wishes to continue the fight for mage freedom and doesn't feel that Anders is going to help that cause and he just meekly accepts it - no enraged spirit saying he will continue the fight without me.
Perhaps I would be better off not having read the story, but then people often use information gained from it to feed their understanding of Anders in other ways - which in the past had me asking where on earth in the game did they get that information, when in fact they hadn't. Really if one of the actual developers takes the trouble to write a short back story, then it should at least be consistent with what appears in the game.
I did wonder if Vengence might come back as a protagonist in DA3 - may be that would explain the disappearance of both Warden and Hawke, both killed as an act of revenge, or Hawke killed trying to stop Vengence from killing the Warden. Then ironies of ironies, mages and Templars have to work together to try and find a way of stopping the "unstoppable" Vengence, who by now has acquired a different host so no longer even looks like Anders and is attacking any target that it perceives as deserving of retribution - Orlais, Tevinter, Anderfels, Par Vollen - so even the Qunari must become part of the alliance. Then again, may be not.
#7
Posté 28 septembre 2011 - 02:49
esper
-
- Members
- 4 193 messages
Knight of Dane wrote...
You say that ustice is vengance and then that they are two sepperate things?
I like to think it's the same thing no matter what, despite what you'd like to call it in a given situation.
I am not quite sure what you are asking me. So I will try to clarify now when I am in a not so bad mood.
(By the way, sorry for ranting at you Gervaise.)
You can see a situation where persons in the present are treated injusticely. To correct that is justice.
If someone was treated in bad in the past (and is either dead now or is no longer treated bad) and you react on that it is not justice it is vengance.
The spirit of Justice we met in da:a was already thinking like Vvengance. His whole premise for joining the wardens was to avenge the wrong done to Kristoff.
Now I am not surprised that the spirit of Justice thinks as vengance because quite frankly the only justice we has encounted with in Thedas is an eye-for-an-eye which I would always argue is not justice but vengance., and since Justice has hinted that the spirits gain their belief from the dreams of human it is not strange that Justice would be Vengance in Thedas.
#8
Posté 28 septembre 2011 - 05:39
Knight of Dane
-
- Members
- 7 451 messages
Ah, i see what you mean, very well.
#9
Posté 29 septembre 2011 - 05:34
CulturalGeekGirl
-
- Members
- 3 280 messages
I also get tired of people saying vengeance is just "corrupted justice"
I mean, I checked five online dictionaries and two physical ones (yes, I own physical dictionaries) and "corrupted" is nowhere in any of the definitions of vengeance. The definitions vary substantially, but it usually boils down to revenge, or retributive punishment, or avenging things.
Vengeance is derived from the french word for revenge, which is derived from the Latin word vindicare... which means to set free, or avenge, and is the same root for vindicate. When I saw Vengeance I immediately recognized the trope: angel sees stuff on earth that makes him angry, becomes avenging angel, takes out the flaming sword and goes nuts on anyone even tangentially unjust. Sensible? No. Evil or corrupt? Not really. Extreme? Heck yeah.
Still, you've also got to view this in the context of Thedas, which is a world very much shaped by the fact that it's the setting for a video game. Half the things you do in Dragon Age are vengeance! Kill Howe or Logain (or let Alistair do it)? Vengeance! Kill Zevran or Velanna? Vengeance! Kill Hadriana, Danarius, Varania? Vengeance! Any time you get any violent or retributive revenge, it's vengeance, regardless of whether or not that person was currently posing an active threat to you: if, when you're being violent toward someone, you're doing it because of something they did wrong in the past, that counts as vengeance.
This applies to most video games. Garrus, killing mercs on Omega? Vengeance! Hell, both of Garrus's loyalty missions are purely about vengeance. Garrus's entire plot arc in both Mass Effect games is largely about vengeance, and yet everybody loves him and thinks he's a great guy... but when you say the word vengeance everyone's like "oooooooh, demonic." (Personal note: I don't usually let Garrus kill those dudes, because in both those cases there is an alternative that will still result in justice being done. I see vengeance as a last resort, when the conventional structures of justice have failed.)
Now, if you want a good example of the difference between justice and vengeance, don't worry... two of the most powerful forces of pop culture have seen fit to illustrate it for you in their respective mottoes. One of them fights for truth and justice, and the other one is vengeance... you might also say he is the night.
Superman is justice. He does good because he was taught that doing good was what you should do. He can be completely fair and even handed because he's practically invulnerable. Superman can afford to trust people, because if they stab him in the back he's fairly sure he'll make it out OK. He is, after all, Superman. What makes him stand for justice is this almost impractical level of even-handedness, and the fact that he's being just for justice's sake, rather than due to some emotional drive or negative occurrence in his past.
Batman is vengeance. He fights crime because crime hurt him profoundly, and the only way he can make himself feel better is to END ALL CRIME. Every thug he punches represents, in some small part, the thug who killed his parents. Batman is profoundly angry, and that anger fuels him. He's driven by his hatred of crime, so he takes vengeance. He fights to avenge the death of his parents, rather than just for the sake of doing good... thus he's embodying vengeance rather than Justice.
I, personally, prefer Batman to Superman... but that's pretty much the oldest nerd argument in the book. The point I'm trying to make is that both Superman and Batman are good, they're just different things, and one of them is a little bit more shades of grey.
If you root for Inigo Montoya, Edmund Dantes, or the 47 Ronin, you're rooting for vengeance. Because vengeance is freaking awesome.
Vengeance is what you get when your desire to achieve justice is associated with a wrong or hurt. If you've never directly experienced the wrong or hurt yourself, you can carry out what's right impartially, and be just. If your quest for justice is motivated by pain or as a form of retaliation for an action in the past that you feel harmed someone, then it's vengeance.
I mean, I checked five online dictionaries and two physical ones (yes, I own physical dictionaries) and "corrupted" is nowhere in any of the definitions of vengeance. The definitions vary substantially, but it usually boils down to revenge, or retributive punishment, or avenging things.
Vengeance is derived from the french word for revenge, which is derived from the Latin word vindicare... which means to set free, or avenge, and is the same root for vindicate. When I saw Vengeance I immediately recognized the trope: angel sees stuff on earth that makes him angry, becomes avenging angel, takes out the flaming sword and goes nuts on anyone even tangentially unjust. Sensible? No. Evil or corrupt? Not really. Extreme? Heck yeah.
Still, you've also got to view this in the context of Thedas, which is a world very much shaped by the fact that it's the setting for a video game. Half the things you do in Dragon Age are vengeance! Kill Howe or Logain (or let Alistair do it)? Vengeance! Kill Zevran or Velanna? Vengeance! Kill Hadriana, Danarius, Varania? Vengeance! Any time you get any violent or retributive revenge, it's vengeance, regardless of whether or not that person was currently posing an active threat to you: if, when you're being violent toward someone, you're doing it because of something they did wrong in the past, that counts as vengeance.
This applies to most video games. Garrus, killing mercs on Omega? Vengeance! Hell, both of Garrus's loyalty missions are purely about vengeance. Garrus's entire plot arc in both Mass Effect games is largely about vengeance, and yet everybody loves him and thinks he's a great guy... but when you say the word vengeance everyone's like "oooooooh, demonic." (Personal note: I don't usually let Garrus kill those dudes, because in both those cases there is an alternative that will still result in justice being done. I see vengeance as a last resort, when the conventional structures of justice have failed.)
Now, if you want a good example of the difference between justice and vengeance, don't worry... two of the most powerful forces of pop culture have seen fit to illustrate it for you in their respective mottoes. One of them fights for truth and justice, and the other one is vengeance... you might also say he is the night.
Superman is justice. He does good because he was taught that doing good was what you should do. He can be completely fair and even handed because he's practically invulnerable. Superman can afford to trust people, because if they stab him in the back he's fairly sure he'll make it out OK. He is, after all, Superman. What makes him stand for justice is this almost impractical level of even-handedness, and the fact that he's being just for justice's sake, rather than due to some emotional drive or negative occurrence in his past.
Batman is vengeance. He fights crime because crime hurt him profoundly, and the only way he can make himself feel better is to END ALL CRIME. Every thug he punches represents, in some small part, the thug who killed his parents. Batman is profoundly angry, and that anger fuels him. He's driven by his hatred of crime, so he takes vengeance. He fights to avenge the death of his parents, rather than just for the sake of doing good... thus he's embodying vengeance rather than Justice.
I, personally, prefer Batman to Superman... but that's pretty much the oldest nerd argument in the book. The point I'm trying to make is that both Superman and Batman are good, they're just different things, and one of them is a little bit more shades of grey.
If you root for Inigo Montoya, Edmund Dantes, or the 47 Ronin, you're rooting for vengeance. Because vengeance is freaking awesome.
Vengeance is what you get when your desire to achieve justice is associated with a wrong or hurt. If you've never directly experienced the wrong or hurt yourself, you can carry out what's right impartially, and be just. If your quest for justice is motivated by pain or as a form of retaliation for an action in the past that you feel harmed someone, then it's vengeance.
Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 29 septembre 2011 - 05:46 .
#10
Posté 29 septembre 2011 - 08:44
mcilhany
-
- Members
- 224 messages
There are a few things I'm confused about. The ingredients you help Anders get for the Justice quest in Act Three... are those what he says they are, things that will help him get separated from Justice without killing either one of them?
Also, I cannot bear the thought of having Anders die. If the ingredients he needs in Act Three are for real, and based on some of the things he says, he implies that he does not necessarily want to die. I know that Jennifer Helper says she thinks he wants to die, but I hope that is more for if you decide you have to kill him. If we, the players, want him to want to live...is there some light at the end of the tunnel? Especially if you side with him and agree with him, and as his romance interest, are deeply in love with him?
Also, I cannot bear the thought of having Anders die. If the ingredients he needs in Act Three are for real, and based on some of the things he says, he implies that he does not necessarily want to die. I know that Jennifer Helper says she thinks he wants to die, but I hope that is more for if you decide you have to kill him. If we, the players, want him to want to live...is there some light at the end of the tunnel? Especially if you side with him and agree with him, and as his romance interest, are deeply in love with him?
#11
Posté 29 septembre 2011 - 09:06
TastesLikeTNT
-
- Members
- 134 messages
mcilhany wrote...
There are a few things I'm confused about. The ingredients you help Anders get for the Justice quest in Act Three... are those what he says they are, things that will help him get separated from Justice without killing either one of them?
Also, I cannot bear the thought of having Anders die. If the ingredients he needs in Act Three are for real, and based on some of the things he says, he implies that he does not necessarily want to die. I know that Jennifer Helper says she thinks he wants to die, but I hope that is more for if you decide you have to kill him. If we, the players, want him to want to live...is there some light at the end of the tunnel? Especially if you side with him and agree with him, and as his romance interest, are deeply in love with him?
No, he's lying to you, as he will admit when you press him on the matter. There is no potion. Those ingredients are just for bomb-making. Justice is there to stay.
Personally, I don't think he wants to die if you side with the mages and let him live. The conversations with him afterwards conveys feelings of surprise and joy that you spared his life, at least to me, and I think he'll continue fighting for his cause after the battle in the Gallows has ended. The only time I recall him saying that he doesn't want to continue living anymore is if you have him fight with you against the mages.
Modifié par TastesLikeTNT, 29 septembre 2011 - 09:07 .
#12
Posté 29 septembre 2011 - 09:21
mcilhany
-
- Members
- 224 messages
Thank you TNT. That helps and is a great relief. I thought the ingredients might have been for the bomb, but had not ventured thru all the dialog options to find out for sure. I did have my hopes a little up that he really was working on a potion, but that raises the question of what would happen to Justice if they were separated. I think Justice could live very well inside Anders if Anders is happy. I would not want Justice to die, so having him inside Anders is fine by me.
Thank you for answering me so quickly...I was worried and I feel much better now. There is one case scenario where I feel forced to kill Anders to get the ending I want with Fenris as my love interest. It disturbs me to no end to have to kill him, and yet, Anders is very needy and it's like I feel I should be in a romance with him, to lend my ultimate support, in his fight. I don't want him to be alone. I am truly having a difficult time here, because Fenris seems to need Hawke just as much even though he doesn't kill himself in despair at the end the way Anders does. I've reached a point where I clearly cannot choose between the two.
Thank you again, your answer has been most helpful and highly inspirational. :-)
Thank you for answering me so quickly...I was worried and I feel much better now. There is one case scenario where I feel forced to kill Anders to get the ending I want with Fenris as my love interest. It disturbs me to no end to have to kill him, and yet, Anders is very needy and it's like I feel I should be in a romance with him, to lend my ultimate support, in his fight. I don't want him to be alone. I am truly having a difficult time here, because Fenris seems to need Hawke just as much even though he doesn't kill himself in despair at the end the way Anders does. I've reached a point where I clearly cannot choose between the two.
Thank you again, your answer has been most helpful and highly inspirational. :-)
#13
Posté 29 septembre 2011 - 09:31
Knight of Dane
-
- Members
- 7 451 messages
Then go with Bella, the easy route 
Anyway: Apparently Justice can't die outside the fade, Anders go buh-bye, Justice goes to the fade again.
Anyway: Apparently Justice can't die outside the fade, Anders go buh-bye, Justice goes to the fade again.
#14
Posté 29 septembre 2011 - 09:45
mcilhany
-
- Members
- 224 messages
Oh, Knight of Dane, if only I could! Would make things easier for sure, and her idea of taking me away on her ship is a very romantic one indeed. I do love her quite a bit...just...not in that way.
Anders does imply that Justice would die in one of the initial conversations with him; has there been evidence that contradicts that? If not, that's fine because in theory why would Justice die? But again, he could die of loneliness because he is wandering in the Black Marsh alone. Hmmm. If only he could have stayed in Cristoffs body, without having it decay on him.
Anders does imply that Justice would die in one of the initial conversations with him; has there been evidence that contradicts that? If not, that's fine because in theory why would Justice die? But again, he could die of loneliness because he is wandering in the Black Marsh alone. Hmmm. If only he could have stayed in Cristoffs body, without having it decay on him.
#15
Posté 29 septembre 2011 - 09:45
TastesLikeTNT
-
- Members
- 134 messages
mcilhany wrote...
Thank you again, your answer has been most helpful and highly inspirational. :-)
You're welcome!
When I'm faced with that particular dilemma, I make several versions of my canon character and romance different characters with them. Now my Hawke is in an Anders-Merrill-Isabela love-square and they don't even know. Choosing which of my Hawkes I want to import into the next game might be a bit trickier, though.
Modifié par TastesLikeTNT, 29 septembre 2011 - 09:46 .
#16
Posté 29 septembre 2011 - 10:03
Knight of Dane
-
- Members
- 7 451 messages
In Awakening Justice says that he doesn't know what's gonna happen, but in DA:2 says that "The only way to seperate Justice and i is to kill me."mcilhany wrote...
Oh, Knight of Dane, if only I could! Would make things easier for sure, and her idea of taking me away on her ship is a very romantic one indeed. I do love her quite a bit...just...not in that way.
Anders does imply that Justice would die in one of the initial conversations with him; has there been evidence that contradicts that? If not, that's fine because in theory why would Justice die? But again, he could die of loneliness because he is wandering in the Black Marsh alone. Hmmm. If only he could have stayed in Cristoffs body, without having it decay on him.
He pretty much implies that Justice goes to the fade, which i think is the case too, but I'm not sure if Anders just makes a hopefull guess.
Seeing as Kristoff's body would have to be killed before he could channel over to Anders i guess he won't die from the mortal body getting slized in half.
#17
Posté 29 septembre 2011 - 10:03
mcilhany
-
- Members
- 224 messages
TNT, I know I know :-)! I guess that's a big part of it. I have different characters, and I have to admit I'm particularly attached to this particular one, Mariana. It's so funny because I made one who looks almost just like her, and with the same name, to be exclusively for Fenris. I messed up and will need to go back to the Second Act with that character, though. But with this Mariana, my very first character, I've courted Sebastian all the way to the middle of the Third Act, finished with Anders, and finished with Fenris. There are some things I didn't do with Anders in my version with him, so I've started completely over with this character, with him (I was sort of new when I played thru with him the first time and hadn't taken full advantage of the quests, resources, codexes etc., so that is what I'm doing now.)
And to Knight of Dane, I do actually have a male Hawke romancing Isabela...but I need to go back to the First Act with him as well since I missed things with him that I only found out about later. I love watching him defend the women, etc. during battle. It's so cute and I always bring a female trio to fight along-side him.
And to Knight of Dane, I do actually have a male Hawke romancing Isabela...but I need to go back to the First Act with him as well since I missed things with him that I only found out about later. I love watching him defend the women, etc. during battle. It's so cute and I always bring a female trio to fight along-side him.
#18
Posté 29 septembre 2011 - 10:37
Gervaise
-
- Members
- 4 546 messages
Mcilhany - I was a bit like you first run through. Although Anders had previously said they couldn't be separated, I really thought that perhaps he had found a way. When he said the last bit was something I wouldn't like, I was imagining it was something along the lines of poisoning him in a way that nearly killed him so the spirit left but then I was expected to revive him. I also thought the bit I might not like would be that Justice would not be able to leave without another host and I was the intended target.
So when it turned out that there was no potion and he had no intention of splitting with Justice, I felt very upset and betrayed - I didn't even do the last bit of distracting the Grand Cleric because he wouldn't tell me what he intended doing whilst I did so. Once I discovered what the ingredients were for, I felt personally very betrayed - he was my friend, but he was right, I would never have agreed to it. I also felt a bit of an idiot because he'd told me they couldn't be split without killing him. But since the last stage was meant to be "boom, Justice and I are free", I think that is why you are meant to be able to assume that he wants to die and if you wanted to, you could even think you were keeping your end of the bargain.
By the way, you don't have to kill Anders to get Fenris to stay with you - the only one who leaves on account of Anders being spared is Sebastian. Fenris' loyalty is entirely dependent on your friendship/rivalry rating - and if you romance him I think he will stay anyway.
So when it turned out that there was no potion and he had no intention of splitting with Justice, I felt very upset and betrayed - I didn't even do the last bit of distracting the Grand Cleric because he wouldn't tell me what he intended doing whilst I did so. Once I discovered what the ingredients were for, I felt personally very betrayed - he was my friend, but he was right, I would never have agreed to it. I also felt a bit of an idiot because he'd told me they couldn't be split without killing him. But since the last stage was meant to be "boom, Justice and I are free", I think that is why you are meant to be able to assume that he wants to die and if you wanted to, you could even think you were keeping your end of the bargain.
By the way, you don't have to kill Anders to get Fenris to stay with you - the only one who leaves on account of Anders being spared is Sebastian. Fenris' loyalty is entirely dependent on your friendship/rivalry rating - and if you romance him I think he will stay anyway.
#19
Posté 30 septembre 2011 - 12:00
mcilhany
-
- Members
- 224 messages
Gervaise, yes..that is a very interesting take! I like it, and was thinking along the lines that maybe after you've spared him and the game ends and you've won, that you and Anders could truly go to Tevinter and become more educated on what options might be to help Anders and Justice. I think that would be really cool. They do seem kind of stuck right now, without an idea of what they are going to do next now that they are fugitives together.
I like that Fenris will stay with you...and the climactic ending with Fenris seemed more viable to me if Hawke sides with the Templars. Also, something about the atmosphere, the lighting, when Fenris kisses you seemed much better in the Templar Courtyard than in the Gallows Prison, at least I thought. Butttt...for the sake of the story I agree with you, if this is indeed how you feel, that the fugitive path is the way to go. That way, I get this romantic picture in my mind of Hawke and all her companions (except Sebastian, unfortunately) making their escape on Isabella's boat. Then, like, she could drop Anders, Hawke and anyone else who wants to tag along (herself included :-)) and hang out in Tevinter with them.
Fenris wouldn't want to go there, though, so Isabella perhaps could drop Hawke and Anders off, maybe Merrill too...Aveline and her Husband might be curious about the place, and Varric is up for anything. But Isabella would have to take Fenris elsewhere, and I wouldn't want Fenris to be alone so maybe she could take him with her to Rivain or something. Just thoughts I've been having.
I like that Fenris will stay with you...and the climactic ending with Fenris seemed more viable to me if Hawke sides with the Templars. Also, something about the atmosphere, the lighting, when Fenris kisses you seemed much better in the Templar Courtyard than in the Gallows Prison, at least I thought. Butttt...for the sake of the story I agree with you, if this is indeed how you feel, that the fugitive path is the way to go. That way, I get this romantic picture in my mind of Hawke and all her companions (except Sebastian, unfortunately) making their escape on Isabella's boat. Then, like, she could drop Anders, Hawke and anyone else who wants to tag along (herself included :-)) and hang out in Tevinter with them.
Fenris wouldn't want to go there, though, so Isabella perhaps could drop Hawke and Anders off, maybe Merrill too...Aveline and her Husband might be curious about the place, and Varric is up for anything. But Isabella would have to take Fenris elsewhere, and I wouldn't want Fenris to be alone so maybe she could take him with her to Rivain or something. Just thoughts I've been having.
#20
Posté 30 septembre 2011 - 04:19
mcilhany
-
- Members
- 224 messages
You know, Knight of Dane, that isn't such a bad idea. I wasn't looking at it that way. I had been stuck on the idea of importing one of my female characters into the next game, like this character, but I may just go ahead and use my guy that is courting Isabella. That way I'll feel ok about both Fenris and Anders, and we'll all just take off on her boat.
I used to make male characters all the time in games until romance interests became an option. It was just more fun for me because, well, I guess the same reasons guys like to make female characters. But with the romance options I've been playing women because, well, I am one. Gets me going much more emotionally though. Because it's like it's happening to me personally whereas if I'm playing a guy, I'm not nearly as inclined to take it so personally.
I used to make male characters all the time in games until romance interests became an option. It was just more fun for me because, well, I guess the same reasons guys like to make female characters. But with the romance options I've been playing women because, well, I am one. Gets me going much more emotionally though. Because it's like it's happening to me personally whereas if I'm playing a guy, I'm not nearly as inclined to take it so personally.
#21
Posté 30 septembre 2011 - 04:45
Knight of Dane
-
- Members
- 7 451 messages
I prefer to make female characters, i just like women i guess. They romance the women too, most of the time.
I have had two playthroughs each comitted to Fenris and Anders for import and reference's sake in DA:2 expansion/DA:3
I have had two playthroughs each comitted to Fenris and Anders for import and reference's sake in DA:2 expansion/DA:3
#22
Posté 30 septembre 2011 - 07:44
Gervaise
-
- Members
- 4 546 messages
Mcilhany - I have yet to rival Fenris - the closest I came to it was first run through with my female mage who romanced him but in the end it was friendship as well as love, even though it took to nigh on the end of Act 3 to get all the way to total friendship. It is worth hearing his expression of loyalty as just a pure friend but as a lover I find the most romantic declaration of devotion is always if you are a mage because of the sheer irony of the situation, which is accentuated if you side with the mages. That first run through when he says "Promise me you won't die" to my mage and then the kiss - definitely worth the wait.
I have wondered if now that Danarius is dead we could risk a little trip back to Tevinter or if those tattoos would make him too much of a target. Not that I want to get cosy with the Magisters but it would be helpful to see what the place is like first hand and with someone who knew their way around.
I have wondered if now that Danarius is dead we could risk a little trip back to Tevinter or if those tattoos would make him too much of a target. Not that I want to get cosy with the Magisters but it would be helpful to see what the place is like first hand and with someone who knew their way around.
#23
Posté 03 novembre 2011 - 08:37
Gyrefalcon
-
- Members
- 299 messages
esper wrote...
Knight of Dane wrote...
You say that justice is vengance and then that they are two sepperate things?
I like to think it's the same thing no matter what, despite what you'd like to call it in a given situation.
I am not quite sure what you are asking me. So I will try to clarify now when I am in a not so bad mood.
(By the way, sorry for ranting at you Gervaise.)
You can see a situation where persons in the present are treated injusticely. To correct that is justice.
If someone was treated in bad in the past (and is either dead now or is no longer treated bad) and you react on that it is not justice it is vengance.
The spirit of Justice we met in da:a was already thinking like Vengance. His whole premise for joining the wardens was to avenge the wrong done to Kristoff.
Now I am not surprised that the spirit of Justice thinks as vengance because quite frankly the only justice we has encounted with in Thedas is an eye-for-an-eye which I would always argue is not justice but vengance., and since Justice has hinted that the spirits gain their belief from the dreams of human it is not strange that Justice would be Vengance in Thedas.
Interesting idea. I would like to clarify the distinction more.
Vengence is reactionary, visceral, emotional. A wrong was done to you or to those you care about and you seek them out because of how you feel, that is vengence.
Justice is a cool, measured response that is based on rules. How do we determine the proper sentence for a crime? We have laws set in place that determine what our actions are.
Anders HATES rules. And that is what I suspect really turned Justice into Vengence. Anders was all about his emotions and feelings, he did not care for the laws in place, he did not have a personal code of honor, he probably couldn't even give you a code of conduct! So Justice had little in common to work from. Anders probably thought that Justice would temper him. Instead, Anders altered Justice. And thus, the confusion sank into instability.
#24
Posté 03 novembre 2011 - 09:00
esper
-
- Members
- 4 193 messages
Gyrefalcon wrote...
esper wrote...
Knight of Dane wrote...
You say that justice is vengance and then that they are two sepperate things?
I like to think it's the same thing no matter what, despite what you'd like to call it in a given situation.
I am not quite sure what you are asking me. So I will try to clarify now when I am in a not so bad mood.
(By the way, sorry for ranting at you Gervaise.)
You can see a situation where persons in the present are treated injusticely. To correct that is justice.
If someone was treated in bad in the past (and is either dead now or is no longer treated bad) and you react on that it is not justice it is vengance.
The spirit of Justice we met in da:a was already thinking like Vengance. His whole premise for joining the wardens was to avenge the wrong done to Kristoff.
Now I am not surprised that the spirit of Justice thinks as vengance because quite frankly the only justice we has encounted with in Thedas is an eye-for-an-eye which I would always argue is not justice but vengance., and since Justice has hinted that the spirits gain their belief from the dreams of human it is not strange that Justice would be Vengance in Thedas.
Interesting idea. I would like to clarify the distinction more.
Vengence is reactionary, visceral, emotional. A wrong was done to you or to those you care about and you seek them out because of how you feel, that is vengence.
Justice is a cool, measured response that is based on rules. How do we determine the proper sentence for a crime? We have laws set in place that determine what our actions are.
Anders HATES rules. And that is what I suspect really turned Justice into Vengence. Anders was all about his emotions and feelings, he did not care for the laws in place, he did not have a personal code of honor, he probably couldn't even give you a code of conduct! So Justice had little in common to work from. Anders probably thought that Justice would temper him. Instead, Anders altered Justice. And thus, the confusion sank into instability.
I philosfical disagree with your distinction as well. A lot of laws (all those based on punishement of deeds that has already be done) is vengance as well. That does not mean that those laws should be removed because it is human nature to want vengance and if society doesn't punish them people we'll get emotional and we would end in family fueds and what is worse it is, however, not justice (or speaking in legally terms, the law doesn't differ between justice and vengance - it does both and call both aspect of it justice).
Speaking in terms of dragon age let's take Alrik.
Killing Alrik for Ella is Justice, because she is being opressed in the moment and we cannot prevent that and correct the injustice of her being opressed and ensure that she can meet her family again from whom she was very unjustily removed - that is justice.
Killing Alrik for Karl is Vengance, because what has been done to him cannot be undone and any reaction to that would simply be to saitfy our own need for vengance.
In my opion what warped Justice inside Anders was Anders bitterness or his latent anger - not his disregards for rules. I don't know how aware Anders was that he felt that way and properly thought that he could still hide his anger behind his humor as he had always done. He failed to see that justice was already vengance as well and that it is the vengance aspect and not the justice apsect that thrives on anger and bittneres which Anders had too much of.
#25
Posté 03 novembre 2011 - 10:11
Gyrefalcon
-
- Members
- 299 messages
I agree with you that it was probably the latent anger that did the warping.
But even in DA2 during "Prime Suspect" you are chasing down the murderer and you come across Gascard DuPruis and you can ask, "why don't you take this to the city guards?" And he replies that he wants revenge not justice.
Aveline also states close to the end that she wants to see "The laws of the land. Fairly applied to everyone." And Anders replies "That...is actually something I'd very much like to see." Hence, it is actual justice instead of vengeance.
Laws may or may not involve a sense of vengeance. And people may or may not feel satisfied with the outcome of a case. But having "your day in court" to contest something is supposed to bring justice and an end to the matter. Vengeance can lead to blood feuds like the Hatfields and the McCoys. It is also seen in Greek Mythology where the Furies were hunting a man for killing someone else and he made the argument that such actions have no ending.
But if justice and vengeance weren't tightly tied it would not have worked in the game and we wouldn't be trying to hash out the fine details here.
I like some of your points, and I like some of mine. Go check out my "Anders-why it stings so much" thread. I will be quite interested in your viewpoint.
But even in DA2 during "Prime Suspect" you are chasing down the murderer and you come across Gascard DuPruis and you can ask, "why don't you take this to the city guards?" And he replies that he wants revenge not justice.
Aveline also states close to the end that she wants to see "The laws of the land. Fairly applied to everyone." And Anders replies "That...is actually something I'd very much like to see." Hence, it is actual justice instead of vengeance.
Laws may or may not involve a sense of vengeance. And people may or may not feel satisfied with the outcome of a case. But having "your day in court" to contest something is supposed to bring justice and an end to the matter. Vengeance can lead to blood feuds like the Hatfields and the McCoys. It is also seen in Greek Mythology where the Furies were hunting a man for killing someone else and he made the argument that such actions have no ending.
But if justice and vengeance weren't tightly tied it would not have worked in the game and we wouldn't be trying to hash out the fine details here.
I like some of your points, and I like some of mine. Go check out my "Anders-why it stings so much" thread. I will be quite interested in your viewpoint.
