228 réponses à ce sujet

[Jedi Master of Orion]

Yes. And while that type of power is very profound, it comes with it's own set of limitations. The people of Thedas are not loyal to the Divine herself, they are loyal to the ideas she represents. That means even she herself is confined by them to a certain degree.

Exalted Marches are quite rare. There has only been 3 different reasons for them in the 1000 year history of the Chantry. The Divine usually calls them in response to a threat to her leadership or to Orlais, but the Chantry can't call them for any reason. There needs to be something that is perceived as a threat to the rest of the Andrastian world too. Exalted Marches weren't called just because there is a threat to Orlais or just because a nation if "heretical" to would have to be both.

[Bayz]

esper wrote...

If religion had not been mixed into the war Dales would mostly likely be a occypied Fereldan, but because the were 'heathens' the gettoization happened. The organisation calling for the crusade is responsible for what the crusaders do.

You assume the Chantry has a degree of control on how believers do and act that nobody could. They can call for an Exalted March that realms may answer. The rest of it depends on the rulers, generals, commanders, soldiers, etc to which they have absolutely no control whatsoever.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

esper wrote...

If religion had not been mixed into the war Dales would mostly likely be a occypied Fereldan, but because the were 'heathens' the gettoization happened. The organisation calling for the crusade is responsible for what the crusaders do.

You don't know that for sure. The Tevinter Imperium turned the elves into slaves before there was a Chantry and I doubt their invasion of the elves territory was especially religiously motivated. The human nations could just as easily have ghettoized the elves because they were elves. Considering the elves have been in alienages for centuries even after having the same religion as the humans I would think that their race has more to do with it than their religion.

[esper]

Bayz wrote...

esper wrote...

If religion had not been mixed into the war Dales would mostly likely be a occypied Fereldan, but because the were 'heathens' the gettoization happened. The organisation calling for the crusade is responsible for what the crusaders do.

You assume the Chantry has a degree of control on how believers do and act that nobody could. They can call for an Exalted March that realms may answer. The rest of it depends on the rulers, generals, commanders, soldiers, etc to which they have absolutely no control whatsoever.

If you call for an exalted march religion is mixed up in the war that always ends ugly. However, I would be able to forgive the current Chantry for that since it is not only the chantry holding the current elves down, human nobles are properly more responisble for that. What bothers me most is the fact that the Chantry still has a military and still is synonym with the power of Orlais. An exalted March could happen again and there are fractions within the chantry that wants it to happen again. 
If it was de-militarlized I would feel much better about the organisation as a whole.  
 

[AlexXIV]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

esper wrote...
I hope that if you are forced to be a Seeker you can still turn against the Chantry from within, personally. But I will rather not be a seeker.

And I'd rather not be a mage, yet the option is probably going to be present. I wouldn't complain about a game where I am forced to be a mage either, since I would find it interesting to see what BioWare intended with such a story. Mainly it is because I am interrested in the story of Thedas, and not so far up my own **** that I can't look past some petty internet argument, and enjoy a story being told...

Okay that came across as a bit hostile, which wasn't intended... I just get a bit frustrated at people writing off a game, based on something as silly as a that...

I don't really like to play mages either. That's why my Warden is dalish rogue and my Hawke is a warrior. Even though I don't have a dislike against mages in general, I just find them rather unsatisfying to play in DA. I probably would play a mage-warrior hybrid. They almost did that in DA2 but the melee attacks were too weak to be even useful and no combos, so blah.

I wouldn't write the game off because of something silly like the class I am (forced) to play or the backstory. Though if I can only support one side in a war it'd probably enough for me to say no. I don't even care which side, the mere fact that I am only in for the ride without being able to give directions is something I don't want in a RPG. If I had to start as a templar or mage I would at least like the option to switch sides half-way in.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 02 novembre 2011 - 10:14 .

[Bayz]

esper wrote...

If you call for an exalted march religion is mixed up in the war that always ends ugly. However, I would be able to forgive the current Chantry for that since it is not only the chantry holding the current elves down, human nobles are properly more responisble for that.

 

Exactly, glad to see we agree. In fact if you remember the City Elf Origin the Chantry people seems to genuinely try to make the elves part of the community participating in their weddings and stuff.

esper wrote...
What bothers me most is the fact that the Chantry still has a military and still is synonym with the power of Orlais. An exalted March could happen again and there are fractions within the chantry that wants it to happen again. 
If it was de-militarlized I would feel much better about the organisation as a whole.  
 

Worse than that. Not only have their own military but it is also a military army composed by people who had become addicted by the Chantry itself to a substance only the Chantry controls. The Templar Lyrium addiction is a very very very important point IMO.

I don't see it as synonym with more a synonym of. We don't know how much Orlais controls the Chantry or how much the Chantry controls Orlais, but it seems to me that the Chantry tends to support Orlesian expansionism a lot, again I might be wrong.

Modifié par Bayz, 02 novembre 2011 - 10:18 .

[AlexXIV]

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

esper wrote...

If religion had not been mixed into the war Dales would mostly likely be a occypied Fereldan, but because the were 'heathens' the gettoization happened. The organisation calling for the crusade is responsible for what the crusaders do.

You don't know that for sure. The Tevinter Imperium turned the elves into slaves before there was a Chantry and I doubt their invasion of the elves territory was especially religiously motivated. The human nations could just as easily have ghettoized the elves because they were elves. Considering the elves have been in alienages for centuries even after having the same religion as the humans I would think that their race has more to do with it than their religion.

Problem is that humans lead the Chantry. Only humans. So it is basically a human organisation. I wouldn't even know why other races flock to them. I know I wouldn't follow a religion in which my race does have sort of second class people status. Even if the Chantry does not preach racism, they neither do anything against it which is about same bad because if the Chantry would forbid racism of any form, it could be gone by now.

[esper]

Bayz wrote...

esper wrote...

If you call for an exalted march religion is mixed up in the war that always ends ugly. However, I would be able to forgive the current Chantry for that since it is not only the chantry holding the current elves down, human nobles are properly more responisble for that.

 

Exactly, glad to see we agree. In fact if you remember the City Elf Origin the Chantry people seems to genuinely try to make the elves part of the community participating in their weddings and stuff.

esper wrote...
What bothers me most is the fact that the Chantry still has a military and still is synonym with the power of Orlais. An exalted March could happen again and there are fractions within the chantry that wants it to happen again. 
If it was de-militarlized I would feel much better about the organisation as a whole.  
 

Worse than that. Not only have their own military but it is also a military army composed by people who had become addicted by the Chantry itself to a substance only the Chantry controls. The Templar Lyrium addiction is a very very very important point IMO.

I don't see it as synonym with more a synonym of. We don't know how much Orlais controls the Chantry or how much the Chantry controls Orlais, but it seems to me that the Chantry tends to support Orlais expansionism a lot, again I might be wrong.

well truth to be told they don't have the templars anymore or the mages since those to factions decided to declare war upon one another. So now it is just the Seekers that has to go. And you might be right in the difference between with and of. English is not my first langue so the subtleness of some words are a bit lost on me, but they have so far been hinted to support Orlais expansionism. 

[AlexXIV]

I still find it odd that the templars seperated from the Chantry to go to war against the mages. For centuries the templars had their justification from the Chantry and the Chant. Basically by divine right. And now they are just going to kill them because they can? I hope the explaination is better than that.

[Gervaise]

I would say that like most issues in DA2 the problem is the writers dealt with extremes of behaviour.  So we had extremist mages turning to blood magic and extremist templars torturing and raping mages and chantry zealots encouraging people to violence.     Nobody came off well in that by the end I was pretty much against every organisation that might want my support.    (I respected Elthina and Sebastian but they seemed to be swimming against the tide - Elthina was the only thing stopping the RoA and it is clear from conversations in game with Cullen and overheard between Sebastian and Averline that had she come out and supported Orsino she would have had no backing from either Templars or Guards to enforce her decision).   Occasionally if you were lucky, you overheard conversations in the Chantry that indicated they did try and help the refugee orphans but the children ran away.   Frequently in game one seemed to have to rely on random overheard snipets to find out information that actually might be important to how you viewed certain institutions, whether positive or negative.  Surely allowing you to actually talk to NPCs was not so difficult to arrange.  The Chantry itself did seem largely devoid of people, unlike in Origins.  This was a large city - where were all the worshipers during the day?

In Origins they seemed to show a better contrast between the political ambitions and ties of the Chantry headquarters in Orlais and the ordinary village and towns chantries, where they did well needed and largely good job of looking after refugees, orphans and other unfortunates.  Whenever there was danger in the area, the place people looked to for sanctuary was the Chantry and Templars, clergy and lay people seemed genuinely concerned for their welfare.  As someone else posted above, in Lothering it was the members of the Chantry who were still there looking after people fleeing the Blight, when the rulers who should have been helping the evacuation were long gone.    The treatment of mages was something that was touched on, and brought out in greater depth if you took that origin story.  Other aspects were brought out that might make you start to question the Chantry's teaching and role in certain historical events.  For example, my Dalish elf discovered on talking with the Chanters in Denerim that Shartan had been deliberately removed from the Chant after the Exalted March on the Dales.   Whilst the quest for the Sacred Ashes may have confirmed certain aspects of the Chantry's claims, other parts of it did not, like the spirit of Shartan.   So the seeds were there to question how beneficial the Chantry is as a Thedas wide organisation.   That is reasonable enough as it would not be realistic for it to be portrayed as perfect, particularly when it has such strong political ties at its inception. 

I hope in DA3 we get back to this more balanced approach, rather than the way issues were dealt with in DA2.   Quite a lot of posters seem just anti religion generally - fair enough but some of us aren't and would like to approach the subject of religious faith in the game in a way that allows us to have one.    At the moment I still feel that individuals in the Chantry are genuinely devout and do try to follow the teaching of the Chant of Light - as do my own characters - but the organisations as a whole needs a massive overhaul and perhaps being broken away from its political links with Orlais.   If my character sees someone, particularly in a positon of power, acting in a manner that is directly contrary to the Chant of Light, I would like to be able to challenge them on this - something we were not allowed to do with Meredith, Cullen and the hardline Templars.   We were allowed to criticise them over the mage issue but not the overall "Divine Right" belief, or the lack of morality in a lot of their actions.  The same would hold true over certain nobles we have encountered in both games and the general attitude towards elves which very few non elves ever seem to question.      

So I don't believe that Bioware is pushing vilification of the chantry but I hope they will be less extreme in their portrayal in the future and allow Chantry moderates and reformers to have a more effective voice.

[Bayz]

I thought they just separated as a "**** this **** I'm out of this" kind of thing more than "to fight the mages". But I wouldn't say until I play DA3 or get more info.

[The dead fish]

AlexXIV wrote...

I still find it odd that the templars seperated from the Chantry to go to war against the mages. For centuries the templars had their justification from the Chantry and the Chant. Basically by divine right. And now they are just going to kill them because they can? I hope the explaination is better than that.

I find it odd too.

" Yes - we - can. " The voice of an Obama templar must be the reason behind their behavior.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 02 novembre 2011 - 10:30 .

[esper]

AlexXIV wrote...

I still find it odd that the templars seperated from the Chantry to go to war against the mages. For centuries the templars had their justification from the Chantry and the Chant. Basically by divine right. And now they are just going to kill them because they can? I hope the explaination is better than that.

The ironic part is that the Templars apperently think that the Chantry is preventing them from fullfilling their Divine giving right. The Chantry is also a political Organisation which means that some off the higher ups properly would be willing to do some compromise with the mages in order to keep some leash on them and not loose 1/3 of their army, but for the most radical Templars that is inexcuseable since it is the Chantry themself that has sanctioned their zeal and granted them divine right. The more moderate templars are properly not seen as 'templars' anymore by the rebelling one.

Or in other words: The chantry is too soft for the most radical templars - a mindset that the chantry itself created.

[The dead fish]

Bayz wrote...

esper wrote...

If you call for an exalted march religion is mixed up in the war that always ends ugly. However, I would be able to forgive the current Chantry for that since it is not only the chantry holding the current elves down, human nobles are properly more responisble for that.

 

Exactly, glad to see we agree. In fact if you remember the City Elf Origin the Chantry people seems to genuinely try to make the elves part of the community participating in their weddings and stuff.

esper wrote...
What bothers me most is the fact that the Chantry still has a military and still is synonym with the power of Orlais. An exalted March could happen again and there are fractions within the chantry that wants it to happen again. 
If it was de-militarlized I would feel much better about the organisation as a whole.  
 

Worse than that. Not only have their own military but it is also a military army composed by people who had become addicted by the Chantry itself to a substance only the Chantry controls. The Templar Lyrium addiction is a very very very important point IMO.

I don't see it as synonym with more a synonym of. We don't know how much Orlais controls the Chantry or how much the Chantry controls Orlais, but it seems to me that the Chantry tends to support Orlesian expansionism a lot, again I might be wrong.

I agree. That is one of the most interesting question I ask myself.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 02 novembre 2011 - 10:32 .

[Herr Uhl]

AlexXIV wrote...

I still find it odd that the templars seperated from the Chantry to go to war against the mages. For centuries the templars had their justification from the Chantry and the Chant. Basically by divine right. And now they are just going to kill them because they can? I hope the explaination is better than that.

Or that the chantry has strayed from the chant in their opinion most likely. They'll do "what needs to be done".

And I agree with posters saying that it was worse in DA2 than DAO, where you at least had a balanced approach to factions. I was saddened that tehy went the Witcher 1 route (as I experienced it) of making everyone despicable.

[esper]

Gervaise wrote...

I would say that like most issues in DA2 the problem is the writers dealt with extremes of behaviour.  So we had extremist mages turning to blood magic and extremist templars torturing and raping mages and chantry zealots encouraging people to violence.     Nobody came off well in that by the end I was pretty much against every organisation that might want my support.    (I respected Elthina and Sebastian but they seemed to be swimming against the tide - Elthina was the only thing stopping the RoA and it is clear from conversations in game with Cullen and overheard between Sebastian and Averline that had she come out and supported Orsino she would have had no backing from either Templars or Guards to enforce her decision).   Occasionally if you were lucky, you overheard conversations in the Chantry that indicated they did try and help the refugee orphans but the children ran away.   Frequently in game one seemed to have to rely on random overheard snipets to find out information that actually might be important to how you viewed certain institutions, whether positive or negative.  Surely allowing you to actually talk to NPCs was not so difficult to arrange.  The Chantry itself did seem largely devoid of people, unlike in Origins.  This was a large city - where were all the worshipers during the day?

In Origins they seemed to show a better contrast between the political ambitions and ties of the Chantry headquarters in Orlais and the ordinary village and towns chantries, where they did well needed and largely good job of looking after refugees, orphans and other unfortunates.  Whenever there was danger in the area, the place people looked to for sanctuary was the Chantry and Templars, clergy and lay people seemed genuinely concerned for their welfare.  As someone else posted above, in Lothering it was the members of the Chantry who were still there looking after people fleeing the Blight, when the rulers who should have been helping the evacuation were long gone.    The treatment of mages was something that was touched on, and brought out in greater depth if you took that origin story.  Other aspects were brought out that might make you start to question the Chantry's teaching and role in certain historical events.  For example, my Dalish elf discovered on talking with the Chanters in Denerim that Shartan had been deliberately removed from the Chant after the Exalted March on the Dales.   Whilst the quest for the Sacred Ashes may have confirmed certain aspects of the Chantry's claims, other parts of it did not, like the spirit of Shartan.   So the seeds were there to question how beneficial the Chantry is as a Thedas wide organisation.   That is reasonable enough as it would not be realistic for it to be portrayed as perfect, particularly when it has such strong political ties at its inception. 

I hope in DA3 we get back to this more balanced approach, rather than the way issues were dealt with in DA2.   Quite a lot of posters seem just anti religion generally - fair enough but some of us aren't and would like to approach the subject of religious faith in the game in a way that allows us to have one.    At the moment I still feel that individuals in the Chantry are genuinely devout and do try to follow the teaching of the Chant of Light - as do my own characters - but the organisations as a whole needs a massive overhaul and perhaps being broken away from its political links with Orlais.   If my character sees someone, particularly in a positon of power, acting in a manner that is directly contrary to the Chant of Light, I would like to be able to challenge them on this - something we were not allowed to do with Meredith, Cullen and the hardline Templars.   We were allowed to criticise them over the mage issue but not the overall "Divine Right" belief, or the lack of morality in a lot of their actions.  The same would hold true over certain nobles we have encountered in both games and the general attitude towards elves which very few non elves ever seem to question.      

So I don't believe that Bioware is pushing vilification of the chantry but I hope they will be less extreme in their portrayal in the future and allow Chantry moderates and reformers to have a more effective voice.

Just to clarify Gervaise I am not anti-religion. But I don't thin that religious organisation should have a military - escpially not if the military is also tied with a empire that currently have expansionisme as a goal.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

esper wrote...


If you call for an exalted march religion is mixed up in the war that always ends ugly. However, I would be able to forgive the current Chantry for that since it is not only the chantry holding the current elves down, human nobles are properly more responisble for that. What bothers me most is the fact that the Chantry still has a military and still is synonym with the power of Orlais. An exalted March could happen again and there are fractions within the chantry that wants it to happen again. 
If it was de-militarlized I would feel much better about the organisation as a whole.  
 

I never got the impression that templars by themselves constituted an army powerful enough to form an Exalted March, if the Divine wanted to call one she'd need to rely on the rest of the nations of Thedas to help her. It was never really the templars' primary role to wage wars. And the Chantry's powr over the general population of the world is much more diluted than the more direct authority they are suppoed to have over the templars.

Modifié par Jedi Master of Orion, 02 novembre 2011 - 10:37 .

[Bayz]

I don't think the Templars get themselves involved on the Exalted Marchs. They have to be in the Towers with the mages after all...

[The dead fish]

esper wrote...

Gervaise wrote...Snip.

Just to clarify Gervaise I am not anti-religion. But I don't thin that religious organisation should have a military - escpially not if the military is also tied with a empire that currently have expansionisme as a goal.

I don't think the chantry would be so silly to help Orlais conquer the others Andrastian Nations, knowing that its influence in these countries is what matters most to it. How to win the hearts of your people in all andrastian kingdoms, when you need them, - for example for an exalted march - if you betray them ?

War between andrastian kingdoms decreases the influence of the chantry.

Also in the stolen throne, the chantry has done everything to reduce the suffering of Ferelden, to stop war between the mad king and the rebels. Orlais and Ferelden. For peace between factions. We could argue its action, but the motivation was there. The chantry didn't want the war, that was the will of Orlais against their own will.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 02 novembre 2011 - 11:03 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

Bayz wrote...

I don't think the Templars get themselves involved on the Exalted Marchs. They have to be in the Towers with the mages after all...

There are more Templars than just the ones stationed in the Circles.

[Bayz]

Sylvianus wrote...
I don't think the chantry would be so silly to help Orlais conquer the others Andrastian Nations, knowing that its influence in these countries is what matters most to it. How to win the hearts of your people in all andrastian kingdoms, when you need them, - for example for an exalted march - if you betray them ?

War between andrastian kingdoms decreases the influence of the chantry.

Also in the stolen throne, the chantry has done everything to reduce the suffering of Ferelden, to stop the war between the mad king and the rebels. Orlais and Ferelden. For peace between factions. We could argue its action, but the motivation was there.

I think is more of a difference between the national Chantry and the Chantry propper itself, and again, people from Thedas is...well. Let us say that the guys from Antiva might not give a **** about what happens with the nations that are at war with Orlais or would think less from the Chantry until Orlais frontier starts to get closer.

A war between andrastian kingdoms decreases the influence of the Chantry, but it might actually increase the influence of the Divine herself in the area in a more direct way if they are under Orlesian ocupation. Again it depends on who effects more power over the other, Orlais on the Chantry or the Chantry  over Orlais.

Most of the time the Chantry seems to conveniently look away. Of course not the Chantry from the invaded countries but the Chantry of the divine itself. But it is not because the Divine is stupid, it is because she actually is not, keeping in mind the customs of sending assassins and plots that Orlais have.

I think Orlais is in fact the very first nation interested in the templars been reduced in numbers.

[esper]

Bayz wrote...

I don't think the Templars get themselves involved on the Exalted Marchs. They have to be in the Towers with the mages after all...

The mages participated in the Qunari wars, I assumme the templars followed them. I assumed that until now the templars follows in the wars where the chantry allows the mages to participate.

[Bayz]

True! Forgot that they used mages for the EM as well...

[The dead fish]

Bayz wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...
I don't think the chantry would be so silly to help Orlais conquer the others Andrastian Nations, knowing that its influence in these countries is what matters most to it. How to win the hearts of your people in all andrastian kingdoms, when you need them, - for example for an exalted march - if you betray them ?

War between andrastian kingdoms decreases the influence of the chantry.

Also in the stolen throne, the chantry has done everything to reduce the suffering of Ferelden, to stop the war between the mad king and the rebels. Orlais and Ferelden. For peace between factions. We could argue its action, but the motivation was there.

I think is more of a difference between the national Chantry and the Chantry propper itself, and again, people from Thedas is...well. Let us say that the guys from Antiva might not give a **** about what happens with the nations that are at war with Orlais or would think less from the Chantry until Orlais frontier starts to get closer.

A war between andrastian kingdoms decreases the influence of the Chantry, but it might actually increase the influence of the Divine herself in the area in a more direct way if they are under Orlesian ocupation. Again it depends on who effects more power over the other, Orlais on the Chantry or the Chantry  over Orlais.

Most of the time the Chantry seems to conveniently look away. Of course not the Chantry from the invaded countries but the Chantry of the divine itself. But it is not because the Divine is stupid, it is because she actually is not, keeping in mind the customs of sending assassins and plots that Orlais have.

I think Orlais is in fact the very first nation interested in the templars been reduced in numbers.

Well you're right. But I think it would be wrong to believe that the Chantry would advocate absolutely an expansionist itself on andrastian people. That's quite risky, and I do not think the chantry likes risk, precisely everything that could threaten its power in a way or another.

But as you said, may be more of resignation, to look away, accepting reality, just  like a wealth prisoner in his ivory tower, in Orlais.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 02 novembre 2011 - 11:20 .

[esper]

Sylvianus wrote...

esper wrote...

Gervaise wrote...Snip.

Just to clarify Gervaise I am not anti-religion. But I don't thin that religious organisation should have a military - escpially not if the military is also tied with a empire that currently have expansionisme as a goal.

I don't think the chantry would be so silly to help Orlais conquer the others Andrastian Nations, knowing that its influence in these countries is what matters most to it. How to win the hearts of your people in all andrastian kingdoms, when you need them, - for example for an exalted march - if you betray them ?

War between andrastian kingdoms decreases the influence of the chantry.

Also in the stolen throne, the chantry has done everything to reduce the suffering of Ferelden, to stop war between the mad king and the rebels. Orlais and Ferelden. For peace between factions. We could argue its action, but the motivation was there. The chantry didn't want the war, that was the will of Orlais against their own will.

we could also argue the motivation for wanting to reconsole them, but less not.
The problem is that the 'top' of the ´chantry is tied to Orlais and that the chantry 'looks' away. Also there is a difference between national chantries and the top of the chantry.
but let's see how Orlais actually works it might be different than anyone of us imagine, but so far it not looking good.