2008 réponses à ce sujet

[EmperorSahlertz]

I was referring more to her actual methods than her political power. During Act 1 and 2 her methods may be considered extreme, but she is in an extreme situation. That hasn't changed in Act 3, but she goes even further down the road.

[Xilizhra]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Her "reign of terror", as you so dramatically put it, lasted for three years. Before that she was simply a strict Knight-Commander, who had to deal with a Circle which was rotten to the core.

It was her reign that did at least a third of the rotting (the others being done by the city itself and Corypheus, I suspect).

[Lazy Jer]

If you distance yourself from the emotional response to the term "terrorism" then I don't see how you can doubt that Anders committed a terrorist act.

Fact 1: Anders is not a part of any officially recognized government (the City of Kirkwall, Ferelden, Orlais).

Fact 2: He was acting on his own behalf rather then on behalf of any such agency.

Fact 2: He hit the Chantry Building because he wanted to effect a political change, i.e. he wanted to end the possiblity of comprimse between The Circle of Magi and The Templar Order.  If he had only wanted to destroy the Chantry Buliding because he was in a cruddy mood then it wouldn't be terrorism, it would be arson.

Thus, if the Viscount had sent his Seneshal to blow up the Chantry it would tend away from terrorism and tend towards an official act of war because he's acting on behalf of a government.  If the Coatry had sent Becker to blow up the chantry as a distraction to allow them to rob some big governmental target it would tend towards arson rathern then terrorism because it's intend isn't to effect political or socialogical change.

But since Anders, who isn't part of any official governental organization is blowing up The Chantry Building because he's trying to effect a sociological change (create war between the Templar Order and the Circle of Magi) then tends very flippin' much towards terrorism.

Lastly, I'm pulling the definitions of terrorism from my own general assesments rather then the dictionary definition.  Judging by the dictionary definition I found on Websters Website (referenced in page 13) then knight commander meredeth is also a terrorist.

[DKJaigen]

Lazy Jer wrote...



But since Anders, who isn't part of any official governental organization is blowing up The Chantry Building because he's trying to effect a sociological change (create war between the Templar Order and the Circle of Magi) then tends very flippin' much towards terrorism.

How about that both sides used good old fashioned violence to achieve their goals? because every single war is aimed to change the sociological and political setting.

[EmperorSahlertz]

DKJaigen wrote...

Lazy Jer wrote...



But since Anders, who isn't part of any official governental organization is blowing up The Chantry Building because he's trying to effect a sociological change (create war between the Templar Order and the Circle of Magi) then tends very flippin' much towards terrorism.

How about that both sides used good old fashioned violence to achieve their goals? because every single war is aimed to change the sociological and political setting.

Wars don't specifically target civilians.

[DPSSOC]

Xilizhra wrote...
There is at least one difference between them: Anders may have started something better, while Meredith did nothing but make things worse, by and large.

You do realize there are only two options right?  Tevinter or Circle.  The Circle can be granted a bit more lenience but if you allow mages entry to a level playing field they will very quickly out distance everybody.  Even the most benevolent of starting points will become Tevinter where the mages rule, because no normal person can compete, and non-mages serve.  With a sufficiently good natured start the manner in which the mages rule might be better for about two generations, but once you have a generation of mages born to power, who's parents were born to power, they will perceive power as their right and the downward spiral begins.  Anders may have done something good for mages, but nobody else.

So those are your options, the normal majority oppresses (to a degree) the super powered minority, or the super powered minority oppresses the normal majority.

[TEWR]

The Chantry is both a place of worship as well as a military structure. It isn't one or the other. It's both.

You could argue that there is no such thing as a civilian because everything everyone does supports the military of their nation in some way. And some people have said that exact thing regarding the Qunari.

Obviously, that's just plain false. The police are a nation-preserving military structure in their own way, but they are civilians as well. Civilians that have taken a risk to protect the rest of us, but civilians nonetheless.

The people in the Pentagon aren't all military people. Some are indeed civilians. There are approximately 23000 military and civilian employees that work there, and 3000 non-defense support personnel.

Regarding Anders' act, I don't discuss whether his act was terrorism or not. It's pointless to me. I will however say that he was justified in doing such an act.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 28 janvier 2012 - 10:45 .

[TEWR]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

Lazy Jer wrote...



But since Anders, who isn't part of any official governental organization is blowing up The Chantry Building because he's trying to effect a sociological change (create war between the Templar Order and the Circle of Magi) then tends very flippin' much towards terrorism.

How about that both sides used good old fashioned violence to achieve their goals? because every single war is aimed to change the sociological and political setting.

Wars don't specifically target civilians.

Anders didn't specifically target civilians. He targeted the priests of the Chantry, who are involved in the oversight and command of the Chantry's military arm. They are the COs of the Templars

Civilians just happened to be in that place, but they weren't his target.

Also, the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings would like to have a word with you. They were specifically aimed at the civilians of Japan as well as military personnel because America threatened Japan with "surrender or be obliterated".

[Wulfram]

The Chantry is not a military target because it's destruction does not impair the military effectiveness of the Templars.

Nor does the existance of civilian control of the military deprive those civilians of their status.

[TEWR]

Wulfram wrote...

The Chantry is not a military target because it's destruction does not impair the military effectiveness of the Templars.

Nor does the existance of civilian control of the military deprive those civilians of their status.

Actually, it kinda does. It impairs the effectiveness of the Templars to make rational, non-biased decisions on the mages. Elthina, despite barely doing anything, did at least keep Meredith from performing the RoA.

To which Meredith went over Elthina's head and sent word to the Divine about the need for an RoA*.

After Elthina and the majority if not all of the priests were killed, Meredith jumped at the opportunity to Annul the Circle.

*And really, if Bioware was going to write that Meredith was sending word to the Divine for a needed RoA, and then have the Divine's agent come in to research the situation, they should've had Hawke give his full opinion on the matter to which Leliana would respond accordingly.

Even if Leliana wasn't truly a threat to Kirkwall, Hawke doesn't know -- and neither does the player -- what she knows and where her opinion lies.

[Lazy Jer]

DKJaigen wrote...

Lazy Jer wrote...



But since Anders, who isn't part of any official governental organization is blowing up The Chantry Building because he's trying to effect a sociological change (create war between the Templar Order and the Circle of Magi) then tends very flippin' much towards terrorism.

How about that both sides used good old fashioned violence to achieve their goals? because every single war is aimed to change the sociological and political setting.

I'm not talking about war, though, I'm talking about terrorism.  The War between the Circle and the Templars is occurring, as wars often do, for a number of reasons the 900 years of oppression oft referenced in this thread being chief among them.  Terrorism has nothing to do with the type of war this is, it's the parties involved.  The Circle breaking away from the Chantry and the Templars makes it a rebellion and, depending on the outcome, perhaps a revolution.

That being said, again, I believe Anders' bomb was a terrorist act, for reasons I'll briefly restate.  First he was acting of his own volition rather then under orders from or in representation of government or like organisation.  Second the intent for the bomb was to create a sociological chang, namely that he was trying to force war the Circle Mages to rebel against the Chantry.  Thirdly, he was using voilence as a means to that end.

Thus if Anders had been hired by the Kirkwall government to blow up the chantry building, it wouldn't tend as much towards terrorism...conspiracy, yes.  If Anders had blown up the chantry buliding because he was just kind of in a bad mood it wouldn't have terrorism...mass murder yes.  Lastly Anders non-voilent actions (writing manifestos, etc.) certainly don't count as terrorism.

[DPSSOC]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

Lazy Jer wrote...



But since Anders, who isn't part of any official governental organization is blowing up The Chantry Building because he's trying to effect a sociological change (create war between the Templar Order and the Circle of Magi) then tends very flippin' much towards terrorism.

How about that both sides used good old fashioned violence to achieve their goals? because every single war is aimed to change the sociological and political setting.

Wars don't specifically target civilians.

Anders didn't specifically target civilians. He targeted the priests of the Chantry, who are involved in the oversight and command of the Chantry's military arm. They are the COs of the Templars

One.  One, one, one, one, I can't stress this enough, one of those priests was involved in the oversight and command of the Templars.  Templar chain of command goes GC, KCom, KCap, KLieu that's why Meredith was able to take over because with the GC dead command went to her until a new GC could be appointed, not the senior-most priest.

They are two separate hiearchies that share a single point of intersection at the very top.

[TEWR]

DPSSOC wrote...


One.  One, one, one, one, I can't stress this enough, one of those priests was involved in the oversight and command of the Templars.  Templar chain of command goes GC, KCom, KCap, KLieu that's why Meredith was able to take over because with the GC dead command went to her until a new GC could be appointed, not the senior-most priest.

They are two separate hiearchies that share a single point of intersection at the very top.

Wrong. You kill Elthina, her subordinate takes over. You kill that subordinate, and her subordinate takes over. And so on and so forth.

They are all involved in the oversight and command of the Templars.

[EmperorSahlertz]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

Lazy Jer wrote...



But since Anders, who isn't part of any official governental organization is blowing up The Chantry Building because he's trying to effect a sociological change (create war between the Templar Order and the Circle of Magi) then tends very flippin' much towards terrorism.

How about that both sides used good old fashioned violence to achieve their goals? because every single war is aimed to change the sociological and political setting.

Wars don't specifically target civilians.

Anders didn't specifically target civilians. He targeted the priests of the Chantry, who are involved in the oversight and command of the Chantry's military arm. They are the COs of the Templars

Civilians just happened to be in that place, but they weren't his target.

Also, the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings would like to have a word with you. They were specifically aimed at the civilians of Japan as well as military personnel because America threatened Japan with "surrender or be obliterated".

The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are two of the greatest and most vile crimes of war to ever have disgraced the history of mankind. People are quick to write them off as "neccesary" or even worse, "deserved". But make no mistake, they were war crimes of the highest caliber, and the only reason USA don't have to pay for them, is because no one can make them.

Elthina was Anders' target, not the Chantry, yet he chose to blow up the entire building and half a city block, which is bound to contain civilians. This was a concious dicission of his, ergo, he chose to involve civilian casualties, ergo he calculated them as acceptable loses to his goal.

And killing a Grand Cleric would probably have even less effect on the combat readiness of the Templars, as killing a secretary of defense. Which have absolutely no effect whatsoever on the combat effectiveness of an army. The actual COs arenthe real targets, the Knight-Commanders and Generals. Killing a poster boy does NOTHING but give you a morale victory.

[TEWR]

Elthina was Anders' target, not the Chantry, yet he chose to blow up the entire building and half a city block, which is bound to contain civilians. This was a concious dicission of his, ergo, he chose to involve civilian casualties, ergo he calculated them as acceptable loses to his goal.

Elthina wasn't his target. All of the priests in the Chantry were.

And killing a Grand Cleric would probably have even less effect on the combat readiness of the Templars, as killing a secretary of defense. Which have absolutely no effect whatsoever on the combat effectiveness of an army. The actual COs arenthe real targets, the Knight-Commanders and Generals. Killing a poster boy does NOTHING but give you a morale victory.

Haven't you argued before that the Chantry was the only thing keeping the mages from being slaughtered by the Templars? Because this is exactly what Anders did. He eliminated the Chantry's presence in Kirkwall so that the Templars would act on their prejudice against the mages and their military effectiveness would be lost.

Because at that point, they became Rogue Templars acting on their whim, just like what happened in Asunder later on. The only difference is the Kirkwall events restricted the Rogue Templars to only being within the city itself, while Asunder shows that the Templars as a whole -- or at least those that hate mages -- went rogue.

So yes, eliminating the Chantry damages the military effectiveness of the Templars.


EDIT: Regarding Nagasaki and Hiroshima, I know they're war crimes. But you said that wars don't target civilians specifically. The use of the bombs on those two cities shows that wars do target civilians at times, even if they turn out to be deemed war crimes.

That said, Anders didn't target the civilians at all.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 26 janvier 2012 - 02:14 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Elthina was Anders' target, not the Chantry, yet he chose to blow up the entire building and half a city block, which is bound to contain civilians. This was a concious dicission of his, ergo, he chose to involve civilian casualties, ergo he calculated them as acceptable loses to his goal.

Elthina wasn't his target. All of the priests in the Chantry were. 

 
All of which are civilian targets. They are not part of the armed forces of an enemy, hence they are civilian. I'd even wager that the amount of actual control the Grand Clerics exhibit over the Knight-Commadner during an actual battle-scenario is limited, or even more likely: non-existent.
Also, the structure of the Chantry itself, held absolutely no military value, and was not the base of operations for the Templars (which would've been a legitimate military target), which was actually at the Gallows in Kirkwall. The Chantry structure was entriely civilian in purpose.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote... 

And killing a Grand Cleric would probably have even less effect on the combat readiness of the Templars, as killing a secretary of defense. Which have absolutely no effect whatsoever on the combat effectiveness of an army. The actual COs arenthe real targets, the Knight-Commanders and Generals. Killing a poster boy does NOTHING but give you a morale victory.

Haven't you argued before that the Chantry was the only thing keeping the mages from being slaughtered by the Templars? Because this is exactly what Anders did. He eliminated the Chantry's presence in Kirkwall so that the Templars would act on their prejudice against the mages and their military effectiveness would be lost.

Because at that point, they became Rogue Templars acting on their whim, just like what happened in Asunder later on. The only difference is the Kirkwall events restricted the Rogue Templars to only being within the city itself, while Asunder shows that the Templars as a whole -- or at least those that hate mages -- went rogue.

So yes, eliminating the Chantry damages the military effectiveness of the Templars.

 
All killing the Grand Cleric achieved was unleashing the Templars. And the Templars in Kirkwall did not go rogue, since legal authority was passed to Meredith with Elthina's death. Which also pretty much proves that killing the Grand Cleric achieves nothing when it comes to limiting the Templar's combat effectiveness, quite the contrary actually, since now they will take orders directly and only from within their Order.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote... 
EDIT: Regarding Nagasaki and Hiroshima, I know they're war crimes. But you said that wars don't target civilians specifically. The use of the bombs on those two cities shows that wars do target civilians at times, even if they turn out to be deemed war crimes.

 
World War 2 was not waged with the singular purpose of hitting the Japanese civilians. I your point is that civilians sometimes get caught in the crossfire of war, then yes. Of course they do. If memory serves, one of the first buildings to be levelled in the Afghan war during an Artillery Strike was a kindergarten. That is collateral damage, which is terrible, but sadly unavoidable. It however, isn't targeted strikes against the population.
And since the nuclear bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima was crimes of the worst calibre, and had nothing to do with warfare, my point still stands: War does not specifically target civilian populations.

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote... 
That said, Anders didn't target the civilians at all.

Yes he did.

[TEWR]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

All of which are civilian targets. They are not part of the armed forces of an enemy, hence they are civilian. I'd even wager that the amount of actual control the Grand Clerics exhibit over the Knight-Commadner during an actual battle-scenario is limited, or even more likely: non-existent.

Considering the Grand Cleric is the one with the authority over the Templars, they are military targets.

And if I recall correctly, some of the Chantry priests are experienced in combat, through either their past or what the Chantry taught them. There's Leliana, Lily, and the Chantry priests fought in the Fade, imprisoned there by the Sloth Demon.

Also, the structure of the Chantry itself, held absolutely no military value, and was not the base of operations for the Templars (which would've been a legitimate military target), which was actually at the Gallows in Kirkwall. The Chantry structure was entriely civilian in purpose.

That would've been the worst move Anders could've done, as the Templar Headquarters is also the Gallows.

There wouldn't have been an example to show the other mages if he had done that and destroyed the Templar HQ.

The Templars punished the mages for an act they didn't commit. If Anders had taken the Gallows out, there wouldn't have been any mages left to Annul except for a few dozen scattered throughout Lowtown, and thus no example would've been able to be shown to the rest of the mages and Templars.

 
All killing the Grand Cleric achieved was unleashing the Templars. And the Templars in Kirkwall did not go rogue, since legal authority was passed to Meredith with Elthina's death. Which also pretty much proves that killing the Grand Cleric achieves nothing when it comes to limiting the Templar's combat effectiveness, quite the contrary actually, since now they will take orders directly and only from within their Order.

Yes they did go rogue. Instead of taking Anders into custody, they Annuled the Circle with no justified basis. While Meredith had the legal authority to do so now that she was in command, that doesn't mean she wasn't going rogue.

No, had the mages actually done something that would've presented the Circle as needing to be Annuled, then she wouldn't have gone rogue. She would've been doing her duty.

World War 2 was not waged with the singular purpose of hitting the Japanese civilians.

Yes, I know that. I said that America specifically targeted the civilians as well as the military personnel of those two cities in the bombings.

I never said they were focused only on fighting Japan. 

Yes he did.

no he didn't.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 26 janvier 2012 - 02:47 .

[Fast Jimmy]

I'm of the mind of Morrigan... if the mages didn't allow themselves into being cowed into a life of submissiveness and control, then they would not have to endure the Templars' brutality.

A team of Templars is sent to hunt down one apostate. A group of mages could overwhelm a few Templars if abuse was being carried out.

This isn't a matter of soldiers with guns keeping unarmed civilians in concentration camps. A single Templar cannot effectively neutralize one mage. Five mages could stand up to five Templars, easily. Especially if they resorted to blood magic, as seems to be the preferred thing to do in Kirkwall.

The mages let themselves be brutalized by Meredith. And Anders forced the mages hand, where they literally did not have the option of being weak anymore.

[Lazy Jer]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Wrong. You kill Elthina, her subordinate takes over. You kill that subordinate, and her subordinate takes over. And so on and so forth.

They are all involved in the oversight and command of the Templars.

What makes you jump to that conclusion?  Is it in the codex somewhere in a section of which I am unaware?  Where does one logically draw the conclusion that the head of the Templar Order is going to take orders from some Chantry Sister that's three weeks into her vows if everyone else in the Chantry was dead?

[TEWR]

Lazy Jer wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Wrong. You kill Elthina, her subordinate takes over. You kill that subordinate, and her subordinate takes over. And so on and so forth.

They are all involved in the oversight and command of the Templars.

What makes you jump to that conclusion?  Is it in the codex somewhere in a section of which I am unaware?  Where does one logically draw the conclusion that the head of the Templar Order is going to take orders from some Chantry Sister that's three weeks into her vows if everyone else in the Chantry was dead?

Because that's what DG said on the forums a few months back. In the event of a GC dying, her subordinate takes over.

He also said that with Anders' act, no Chantry priest could be found -- either through being dead or somewhere else -- and thus Meredith had the authority passed to her.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 26 janvier 2012 - 02:55 .

[Lazy Jer]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Because that's what DG said on the forums a few months back. In the event of a GC dying, her subordinate takes over.

He also said that with Anders' act, no Chantry priest could be found -- either through being dead or somewhere else -- and thus Meredith had the authority passed to her.

Who is DG?

[TEWR]

David Gaider.

[MichaelFinnegan]

GavrielKay wrote...

MichaelFinnegan wrote...
I'd be severely limited to pursue any dream or aspiration, without someone helping me out; and similarly that somebody somewhere would be left to himself without hope for any kind of progress in life.

And that is part of the trade we make by living in a society.  Outside of society I can scream hate speech all I like, I can cut down any tree I like or blare loud music at all hours.  But I probably don't have much time to actually do those things.

Indeed. As a moral perhaps the notion that freedom has some sort of rigid definition is exactly what we need to question.

I saw a documentary once about one of the poorer countries in the world (I'm failing to remember which now) but basically, as they had no native domesticated animals to help with farming, they were never able to have any kind of renaissance.  They had to put so much effort into finding enough food to survive, they never got to do anytihng else.

I was never really convinced by all the self-sufficiency arguments that sometimes some nations or perhaps even states make. In some senses, progress and self-sufficiency seem to work in opposition to each other, although proponents of self-sufficiency would have you imagine otherwise.

So mages probably don't want to become hermits able to exert blood magic control on the local deer population

Well, you never know. Those pesky little mages and all their infatuation with blood magic mind control. Maybe the Chantry, in all its insight and foresight and eternal wisdom, should send out emissaries, maybe the eminent Lord Seeker himself!, to train those deer to hum the Litany, just in case. :happy:

[MichaelFinnegan]

dragonflight288 wrote...

My question wasn't necessarily about how one learns blood magic, but about whether or not a demon is required to do blood magic. It may be something such as a mage offers her blood and the demon gives the magic in return - a sort of a deal, a favor for a favor.

Merrill uses blood magic very carefully for roughly a decade, and the only negative consequences that occur are the ones enacted by those around her. The Keeper warned her clan that Merrill may bring back the darkspawn taint and told them she was a bloodmage. Pol, having been raised in Denerim and it is implied he still is an Andrastian (Thank the Ma...creators!) he vastly overreacts to someone who only wished him health and good will. He let fear and preconceptions cloud everything he knew about her.

That example illustrates a point I had tacitly (and probably incorrectly) assumed - that dealing with a demon should always end badly for the mage; and in all fairness we also need to consider this point. Regardless of that, though, does all of what you say preclude a demon's involvement? Doesn't Merrill openly admit to having had dealings with a demon? Asked another way, why was she dabbling in blood magic if not for the reason that she wanted the demon's help to fix the mirror?

In Awakening, Anders can become a blood mage and comment on it. He never mentions a demon. Just the irony he's become what the templars feared he already was.

Zathrian uses blood magic to bind a forest spirit, not a demon, into the body of Witherfang.

The answer to your question would be that demons are not required to use blood magic, it just makes Demons more aware of the mage in question, and much more likely to strike a deal that ends in a bloodbath.

None of these examples conclusively tell me that a demon's involement isn't there - just that the involvement is not explicitly mentioned. Perhaps Zathrian's example comes close - in that it doesn't make sense if I go by my assumption: how could he have used a demon to bind a spirit into a body?

Perhaps the way it works is simply that blood is used to power spells, and using blood magic makes one susceptible to the temptations of demons, as you more or less said. At the moment, though, I don't know for sure.

[TEWR]

That example illustrates a point I had tacitly (and probably incorrectly) assumed - that dealing with a demon should always end badly for the mage; and in all fairness we also need to consider this point. Regardless of that, though, does all of what you say preclude a demon's involvement? Doesn't Merrill openly admit to having had dealings with a demon? Asked another way, why was she dabbling in blood magic if not for the reason that she wanted the demon's help to fix the mirror?

During her second meeting with the demon -- first was with Marethari in the short story -- she learned blood magic so as to amplify the healing magic Marethari had already taught her -- as established in DAO.

After that, she cut off all contact with Audacity as she basically had what she needed. It isn't until she hit an impasse seven years later and couldn't find any more notes or lore that she said "My only other option is to start talking with him again."

EDIT: It's my belief that the reason why mages get possessed is because they let their guard down due to becoming arrogant with power, and the games support this belief of mine.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 26 janvier 2012 - 06:23 .