2008 réponses à ce sujet

[TEWR]

DKJaigen wrote...

Lazy Jer wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

To be honest the mages are justified to commit genocide against all followers of the maker.

Please say you're joking.

Dont be naive .Why dont you give me a reason why the mages should not commit genocide vs the followers of the chantry.

How about what I said? Infighting amongst themselves.

I mean, it's not all that complicated. You want them to kill all followers of the Chantry and the Maker. That includes the other mages that believe in the Maker, even if they're fighting on the side of the mages.

That includes the friends and family of those mages.

This would severely weaken whatever support they do have from the populus. Of which Ferelden is one such nation that supports the mages.

Xilizhra wrote...


Also, it'd take too long.

Indeed.

The concept of monotheism is, I believe, inherently flawed when it rejects other interpretations of the divine.

Right. That's partially why I despise the four corners thing the Chantry preaches. It's one thing to believe your religion may be right. It's another to believe your religion is the only religion that's right.

The other reason is because I think the Chantry just wants political clout all over the world.


EDIT: put my last post here since I'm at the top of the page.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 15 février 2012 - 05:53 .

[LyriumWarden]

You know, Ethina could've avoided dieing in the Chantry if she had left when Hawke warned her after Anders wanted Hawke to help with his 'plan'. Even Sebastian tells her it's probably not a save idea to stay, but Ethina is an idiot and knows there's something wrong and stays anyway. So honestly, I think she brought it on herself. Now the others, probably not so much.

Meredithe's reasoning for a grudge against all mages is that her sister was a mage and killed a bunch of people, so. I understood her whole hate process, however that doesn't excuse her for going nuts. And if she was against magic, why the heck did she buy a magical idol which obviously was evil. So she goes against everything she believes in with buying that damn idol which over time turns her crazy. Even when you side with the Templars at the end and help her through all the crap, she still hates you. Just like Orsino when you side with the mages. You fight off half of the Templars and then he decides "Oh no! It's hopeless, we're all going to die! Oh, by the way, I helped kill your mother." (Slit wrists)............ REALLY?

Anders' whole problem was that the character was written completely different. Basically he was a whole new person in DA2. I enjoyed him up until he decided to blow up the Chantry. He goes on and on about not all mages shouldn't be treated like criminals, and it's wrong to rip a child away from their mother because they're a mage. Okay, yeah I feel for ya, but the Templars DO have a reasoning for it. But he then to spite the Templars, blows up the Chantry! Also him being taken when he was 6 to the Circle, I could understand his grudge for the Templars, as Meredithe's was for losing her sister and the people she killed (I don't remember if her family was killed or not. It's been awhile since I've played.) but for Anders to start out as this soft-hearted man who helps others with his magic, and doesn't care for anything in return, then to a crazy manic-depressant is beyond me. And Anders used to be a blood mage as well, and he was able to control it and instead used his abilities to heal aid others.

Personally I am not 100% against the Circle because some mages do become dangerous because they could resort to blood magic and harm others. Now the Circle in Kirkwall was obviously messed up and ran by evil Templars. But I think in general Kirkwall was messed up to begin with. I could see the Circle as a school for young mages to help them with their abilities so that they don't become scared or confused and end up turning to blood magic because it's an easier method to power to control others.

So to sum it up, I guess Anders and Meredith do have a slight similar motive due to their personal quarrels in their pasts, and they're both hypocrits.

I always tend to side with the Templars only because at least in Kirkwall, all the mages you help during the whole story, they betray you and are all blood mages. So I really didn't feel as if the mages deserved anything as far as Kirkwall goes. And my favourite class is a mage as well.

Modifié par LyriumWarden, 15 février 2012 - 05:54 .

[Xilizhra]

I always tend to side with the Templars only because at least in Kirkwall, all the mages you help during the whole story, they betray you and are all blood mages. So I really didn't feel as if the mages deserved anything as far as Kirkwall goes. And my favourite class is a mage as well.

Then you haven't been paying attention in the slightest.

[CrimsonZephyr]

DKJaigen wrote...

Lazy Jer wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

To be honest the mages are justified to commit genocide against all followers of the maker.

Please say you're joking.

Dont be naive .Why dont you give me a reason why the mages should not commit genocide vs the followers of the chantry.

Because to do so would remove any chance of seeing a resolution. Because literally every person on Thedas would want mages dead. Because the mages would never be able to stop fighting, eventually lose, and likely be - and justifiably - enslaved like Saarebas at the end of the whole thing.

PR matters. You're the naive one if you think it doesn't.

[Xilizhra]

Of course, we could try to kill absolutely everyone who isn't a mage, and if the bloodlines hold true, may be able to create a populace consisting solely of mages, thus giving a level playing field. But that seems impractical.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

If you killed everyone, everywhere, Thedas could finally get some peace and quiet.

[Lazy Jer]

DKJaigen wrote...

Dont be naive .Why dont you give me a reason why the mages should not commit genocide vs the followers of the chantry.

How about we start with the fact that it's wrong.  Morrally represhensible and wrong.  So wrong, in fact, that until now, I'd never seen anyone argue for it, even the most militant anti-chantry Anders supporters in this argument haven't suggested a full out genocide on anyone who believes in the maker/follows the Chant of Light.  There have been those who have argued that the leaders of the chantry leaders are viable military targets given that they were technically the head of the Templar Order, but to suggest that every man, woman and child who's ever believed in the Maker should be killed because the mages were oppressed?  That's going a bit too darn far.  And by a bit I of course mean way too flippin' far.

Second let's bring up the fact that some of the mages are followers of the chantry.

[EmperorSahlertz]

DKJaigen wrote...

Lazy Jer wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

To be honest the mages are justified to commit genocide against all followers of the maker.

Please say you're joking.

Dont be naive .Why dont you give me a reason why the mages should not commit genocide vs the followers of the chantry.

 

[TEWR]

That gif is making me lol

[DKJaigen]

Lazy Jer wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

Dont be naive .Why dont you give me a reason why the mages should not commit genocide vs the followers of the chantry.

How about we start with the fact that it's wrong.  Morrally represhensible and wrong.  So wrong, in fact, that until now, I'd never seen anyone argue for it, even the most militant anti-chantry Anders supporters in this argument haven't suggested a full out genocide on anyone who believes in the maker/follows the Chant of Light.  There have been those who have argued that the leaders of the chantry leaders are viable military targets given that they were technically the head of the Templar Order, but to suggest that every man, woman and child who's ever believed in the Maker should be killed because the mages were oppressed?  That's going a bit too darn far.  And by a bit I of course mean way too flippin' far.

Second let's bring up the fact that some of the mages are followers of the chantry.

The mages have to deal with religious idiots that want them either dead enslaved or lobotomized. This is because of their religous believes. So the mages have every right completely destroy this religion and all those participate in it. Even pro-mage supporters as they are only temporary.How the destruction of the chantry  is achieved isnt relevant only that this is achieved. Perhaps the destruction of all chantry priests is sufficient. If not other measures must be taken.

[DKJaigen]

CrimsonZephyr wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

Lazy Jer wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

To be honest the mages are justified to commit genocide against all followers of the maker.

Please say you're joking.

Dont be naive .Why dont you give me a reason why the mages should not commit genocide vs the followers of the chantry.

Because to do so would remove any chance of seeing a resolution. Because literally every person on Thedas would want mages dead. Because the mages would never be able to stop fighting, eventually lose, and likely be - and justifiably - enslaved like Saarebas at the end of the whole thing.

PR matters. You're the naive one if you think it doesn't.

Its more beneficial for the mages to be feared then loved. And its time to turn the chantry´s own hate spewing text against them. The chantry has long made mages to be horrific monsters. Let that become a reality. Its time that you learned from the greatest conquerors in history -the mongols. And more importantly you need to understand their greatest weapon- terror. When the common people are to terrified to fight the mages then they have won.

[EmperorSahlertz]

You of course realize that the Mongols only ever killed civilian populations when the cities they lived in refused their offer of surrender..... Right? 
And that the resistance towards the mongols never ceased. The mongols were universally feared, but resistance was always present. 
Not to mention that it has nothing to do with the genocide that you support.....

Modifié par EmperorSahlertz, 15 février 2012 - 09:09 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

damn quote... thought it was edit.

Modifié par EmperorSahlertz, 15 février 2012 - 09:09 .

[Lazy Jer]

DKJaigen wrote...

The mages have to deal with religious idiots that want them either dead enslaved or lobotomized. This is because of their religous believes. So the mages have every right completely destroy this religion and all those participate in it. Even pro-mage supporters as they are only temporary.  How the destruction of the chantry  is achieved isnt relevant only that this is achieved. Perhaps the destruction of all chantry priests is sufficient. If not other measures must be taken.

Well regular folk have to deal with abominations and blood mage idiots that want all non-magic users either enslaved or used has blood magic fuel.  This is because magic attracts demons.  So the regular folk have every right to completely destroy magic and all those who show any aptitude for it.  Even Pro-Templar supporters as they are only temporary.  How the destruction of magic is achieved isn't relevant only that this is achieved.  Perhaps the destruction of all of circle mages is sufficient.  If not other measures must be taken.

If that sounds atrocious to you then you're right, it is.  And so is your genocide possition.

Modifié par Lazy Jer, 15 février 2012 - 09:20 .

[DKJaigen]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

You of course realize that the Mongols only ever killed civilian populations when the cities they lived in refused their offer of surrender..... Right? 
And that the resistance towards the mongols never ceased. The mongols were universally feared, but resistance was always present. 
Not to mention that it has nothing to do with the genocide that you support.....

Leave military history to me Emperor. Mongols first make an example of those they try to conquer. When they invaded europa nearly 2/3 of the population of both hungary and poland where killed of in a way that was usally horrific. We call that national genocide.

Remember that genocide means the destrucion of a way of life that can be accomplished through many means. it usually  involves much bloodshed. For the mages they simply at another condition to surrender: give up your faith. Otherwise we will torch your city to ashes.

[Cody]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

The other reason is because I think the Chantry just wants political clout all over the world.

So in other words they just want to take over the world.

Modifié par CodyMelch, 15 février 2012 - 09:29 .

[EmperorSahlertz]

DKJaigen wrote...

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

You of course realize that the Mongols only ever killed civilian populations when the cities they lived in refused their offer of surrender..... Right? 
And that the resistance towards the mongols never ceased. The mongols were universally feared, but resistance was always present. 
Not to mention that it has nothing to do with the genocide that you support.....

Leave military history to me Emperor. Mongols first make an example of those they try to conquer. When they invaded europa nearly 2/3 of the population of both hungary and poland where killed of in a way that was usally horrific. We call that national genocide.

Remember that genocide means the destrucion of a way of life that can be accomplished through many means. it usually  involves much bloodshed. For the mages they simply at another condition to surrender: give up your faith. Otherwise we will torch your city to ashes.

Do you even know why so many of the Hungarian and Polish died? Not because of the bloodthirst of the Mongols. But because they refused to surrender. The Mongols found conquest by surrender far more desirable, than conquest by destruction. But the Mongols always made the offer: "Surrender or die", and they had to keep their promises to actually keep their reputation. And while true that the Mongols made extensive use of terror tactics, genocide was never their goal, since a country with a working infrastructure was far more valuable than a depopulated wasteland.

I will leave military history to you, ocne you prove yourself capable of providing an objective view of past events, and then also provide the entire context of those events, instead of jsut little tidbits that you may fit into whatever point you are trying to make.

[DKJaigen]

Lazy Jer wrote...


Well regular folk have to deal with abominations and blood mage idiots that want all non-magic users either enslaved or used has blood magic fuel.  This is because magic attracts demons.  So the regular folk have every right to completely destroy magic and all those who show any aptitude for it.

This is what we call etnical genocide. You are now a hypocryte, congratulations are in order. Why are you screaming murder and death when the chantry wishes to commit genocide. But when the mages turn the table it is suddenly horrible and aweful? 

[Lazy Jer]

DKJaigen wrote...

Leave military history to me Emperor. 

Why?

[Lazy Jer]

DKJaigen wrote...

This is what we call etnical genocide. You are now a hypocryte, congratulations are in order. Why are you screaming murder and death when the chantry wishes to commit genocide. But when the mages turn the table it is suddenly horrible and aweful? 

Leave sarcasm to me, DK.  I am well aware that my statement was immoral garbage.  It was my way of illustrating to you how wrong your possition was.  I had thought that was obvious.  Furthermore the chantry doesn't wish to commit genocide.  If they did, there wouldn't be a Circle of Magi.  There'd be a pile of mage bones.

Edit:  Nice touch leaving out the part that clearly illustrated that I was being sarcastic in your quote, by the way.  Very sneaky.  Didn't work though.

Modifié par Lazy Jer, 15 février 2012 - 10:03 .

[esper]

CodyMelch wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

The other reason is because I think the Chantry just wants political clout all over the world.

So in other words they just want to take over the world.

You forgot, take over the world and bring an evil god's attention back to the world. Double bonus.

[TEWR]

CodyMelch wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

The other reason is because I think the Chantry just wants political clout all over the world.

So in other words they just want to take over the world.

Yes!

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 15 février 2012 - 10:06 .

[Lazy Jer]

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

If you killed everyone, everywhere, Thedas could finally get some peace and quiet.

Knowing Thedas if all the people were dead then the plants would start killing each other.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

CodyMelch wrote...

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

The other reason is because I think the Chantry just wants political clout all over the world.

So in other words they just want to take over the world.

Yes!

I don't believe I've seen both M Bison memes used at the same time before.

Modifié par Jedi Master of Orion, 15 février 2012 - 10:28 .

[CrimsonZephyr]

DKJaigen wrote...

CrimsonZephyr wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

Lazy Jer wrote...

DKJaigen wrote...

To be honest the mages are justified to commit genocide against all followers of the maker.

Please say you're joking.

Dont be naive .Why dont you give me a reason why the mages should not commit genocide vs the followers of the chantry.

Because to do so would remove any chance of seeing a resolution. Because literally every person on Thedas would want mages dead. Because the mages would never be able to stop fighting, eventually lose, and likely be - and justifiably - enslaved like Saarebas at the end of the whole thing.

PR matters. You're the naive one if you think it doesn't.

Its more beneficial for the mages to be feared then loved. And its time to turn the chantry´s own hate spewing text against them. The chantry has long made mages to be horrific monsters. Let that become a reality. Its time that you learned from the greatest conquerors in history -the mongols. And more importantly you need to understand their greatest weapon- terror. When the common people are to terrified to fight the mages then they have won.

Read Machiavelli again, and this time, do so while sober.

"Upon this a question arises: whether it be better to be loved
than feared or feared than loved? It may be answered that one should
wish to be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one
person, is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either
must be dispensed with. Because this is to be asserted in general of
men, that they are ungrateful, fickle, false, cowardly, covetous, and
as long as you succeed they are yours entirely; they will offer you
their blood, property, life and children, as is said above, when the
need is far distant; but when it approaches they turn against you. And
that prince who, relying entirely on their promises, has neglected
other precautions, is ruined; because friendships that are obtained by
payments, and not by greatness or nobility of mind, may indeed be
earned, but they are not secured, and in time of need cannot be relied
upon; and men have less scruple in offending one who is beloved than
one who is feared, for love is preserved by the link of obligation
which, owing to the baseness of men, is broken at every opportunity for
their advantage; but fear preserves you by a dread of punishment which
never fails.

Nevertheless a prince ought to inspire fear in such a way
that, if he does not win love, he avoids hatred; because he can endure
very well being feared whilst he is not hated, which will always be as
long as he abstains from the property of his citizens and subjects and
from their women. But when it is necessary for him to proceed against
the life of someone, he must do it on proper justification and for
manifest cause, but above all things he must keep his hands off the
property of others, because men more quickly forget the death of their
father than the loss of their patrimony. Besides, pretexts for taking
away the property are never wanting; for he who has once begun to live
by robbery will always find pretexts for seizing what belongs to
others; but reasons for taking life, on the contrary, are more
difficult to find and sooner lapse. But when a prince is with his army,
and has under control a multitude of soldiers, then it is quite
necessary for him to disregard the reputation of cruelty, for without
it he would never hold his army united or disposed to its duties" The Prince, Chapter XVII

Let me break down what this passage says in a way different from your Nietzsche wannabe inclinations:

First paragraph

• In the question of whether one should be feared or loved, Machiavelli first states, as a beginning point, that one should be both - a leader that the people love and admire, but also a man who the people would not dare cross in fear of punishment.
• However, ideal conditions are rarely fulfilled, therefore, if a leader should forgo either, he should forgo being loved. The people might not love him, but if they still fear him, then he is left with a peaceful land, and a quiet people.
• Why should this be the case? Because people are fundamentally self-interested. They will make promises of friendship - promises of blood, honor, and sacrifice - when there is no immediate need. But mere friendship is not enough to enforce these promises in times of duress. A leader needs a way to make his people fulfill their agreements. Being feared is one way to do so.

Second paragraph

• It may be safer to be feared, but a leader must never be hated. A people may b docile in fear, but if they hate the leader, resentment and eventually rebellion will be the result.
• If you want to avoid hatred, do not seize the property, the family, or take the lives of the people without a solid justification.
• You will likely have to disregard a reputation for cruelty in a military campaign, when you're with soldiers. But with the people, keeping an eye on public approval is essential, so that you are not hated and therefore, the people do not rise against you.
• Bottom line: shoot the dog only when necessary. Don't be a sadistic, complete monster and an ideal target for your subject to rebel against.

Burning down chantries, killing worshippers, and destroying cities for no other reason than to be a dick will not win the mages the war. On the contrary, they will never be free of the war. They will behave exactly as the Chantry fears, and they will face a never ending wave of people ready to kill every last one of them.

And let's say they do, somehow manage to win. Win what? They would likely have to kill everyone, because no one would surrender against that kind of single-minded butchery, and they would inherit a scorched earth and shattered cities. In other words, they would be ruined. Don't forget that the Mongols, for all of their conquests, could barely hold onto that empire, built so quickly, for a generation.

Modifié par CrimsonZephyr, 16 février 2012 - 12:05 .