2008 réponses à ce sujet

[alex90c]

GavrielKay wrote...

alex90c wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

I'm still waiting for somebody to explain what constitiutes as 'terrorism', how Anders' actions qualify, and what makes terrorism objectively worse than a 'legitimate' act of war.

"the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes"

http://dictionary.re...rowse/terrorism 

Anders followed that definition pretty much by the letter.

I don't think this is true.  Anders did not blow up the Chantry to intimidate or corerce.  He blew up the Chantry so that Elthina would no longer be able to keep the situation at just below the boiling point.  He wanted to start an all out war so that the mages would have to fight for their freedom or die in chains.  I'm sure plenty of players disagree with both his basic goal and his means of achieving it, but it isn't the "definition" of terrorism.

He was attacking what to his (somewhat clouded and possessed) mind was a valid military target.  Elthina was nominally in charge of the situation and obviously had enough power to keep something of a leash on Meredith.  Information presented later in the form of a book doesn't change my mind about what my Hawke believed when she supported Anders' interpretation of the situation.

The mages are being kept just well enough off that most aren't to the point of "I'd rather die than this."  Anders wasn't trying to intimidate or otherwise politically influence anyone, he was trying to get to the crisis point where the mages actually were better off fighting than submitting.

"valid military target"? wtf? are you insane?

if using the definition provided, he was trying to "coerce" the templars in to taking drastic action so as to break the status quo and to finally force mages to start doing something for themselves by putting their backs to the wall for them

[nightscrawl]

Vit246 wrote...

No, he is not.

He did not "punish innocent people". There's no sense for Anders to do something like that.

I have one word for you: Ella.

I have no issue with Anders fighting for mage rights, but his main problem is that he has no self control. This is dangerous in anyone, but even moreso in a mage. He is the foremost example of what the templars fear most. He even says as much during one of the dialogues.

As someone who played through DAA and recruited, and had max friendship with both Anders and Justice, I find it incredibly sad what has become of both of them. Anders, the mage-on-the-run who initially only wanted to be left alone, had his anger slowly simmer over time, eventually growing into an all-consuming bonfire. Justice, in merging with Anders was completely warped by that anger, and nothing of his original spirit remains. The Justice I know would never have responded that way in the confrontation with Ser Alrik.

Meredith on the other hand, while she became a templar because of her personal hatred of mages, was relatively decent until she got hold of the corrupted lyrium, magnifying her hatred through the lens of madness.

In the final scene, Meredith is clearly insane. On the other hand, I don't think Anders ever was. Make no mistake, Anders has no illusions about himself. He knows that his anger destroyed his friend; he knows that he is extremely dangerous, unpredictable, and should not be trusted because of it, even going so far as to manipulate Hawke's friendship (dependent on dialogue choices); and he knows that his final act on the Chantry will make him a murderer. Anders knows all of these things but persists in them anyway because he is severely goal oriented and believes that the end (mage freedom) justifies the means (war: leading to the deaths of thousands of innocents, mage, templar, and bystanders alike).


I have grown over time to severely dislike Anders. Every time I play DA2 I play it in a different way concerning him and my Hawke roleplay in my opinions/feelings toward him. Sometimes I will be totally against him, other times I will try to take the most neutral path possible, and still other times (as a mage Hawke) I try to have a strong friendship with him and be supportive, or even be understanding yet conflicted because of my father's teachings (similar to my feelings about Merrill). More than anything I wish there were many more dialogue options in the final scene with him where you can choose to kill him. I reallly would like to be able to show that I feel killing him is necessary, but strongly regret having to do it (I've played out this scenario many times in my head.)

While I understand that they have Anders and Fenris as companions to provide opposing viewpoints for the main conflict in the game, it's frequently very frustrating that they are both so very extreme. Anders even moreso, because he acts on it, whereas Fenris just stews and even occasionally shows some tolerance.

[GavrielKay]

alex90c wrote...

"valid military target"? wtf? are you insane?

if using the definition provided, he was trying to "coerce" the templars in to taking drastic action so as to break the status quo and to finally force mages to start doing something for themselves by putting their backs to the wall for them

The Templars were welcome to deny Anders the satisfaction by executing him and going back to their business. 

As it is typically used, terrorism to "coerce" is based on getting the people scared enough that they demand their government do what the terrorists want.  When people don't feel safe going to the market or sitting in the local park, they get less fussy about pride and standing up to bullies.

So, if Anders had blown up the Hightown market at noon, or the Hanged Man tavern at night, he would clearly have been going after purely civilian targets in the hopes of forcing the populace to demand concessions from the Templars.

The Chantry is not so clearly a "civilian" target.  The Chantry houses the religion that preaches against the mages.  It houses the woman who is, at least in theory, Meredith's boss.  He sets off the explosion at night, when there are fewer bystanders.  With all the unrest in the city and Elthina herself having been encouraged to leave, it's hard to imagine too many random folks hanging out in the Chantry at that point.

So he attacked a semi-military target, at a time when as few civilians as possible would be harmed.  He couldn't have been doing it in hopes of using the resulting fear for anything, because whatever was going to happen next was far too immediate.  So, he wasn't trying to coerce or use the fear for anything.  Ergo, he doesn't fit the definition provided for "terrorist."

I think it hinges a fair bit on whether you think the Chantry and Elthina are reasonable targets for someone who is beginning a war against Templar oppression.

[Plaintiff]

alex90c wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...

alex90c wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

I'm still waiting for somebody to explain what constitiutes as 'terrorism', how Anders' actions qualify, and what makes terrorism objectively worse than a 'legitimate' act of war.

"the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes"

http://dictionary.re...rowse/terrorism 

Anders followed that definition pretty much by the letter.

I don't think this is true.  Anders did not blow up the Chantry to intimidate or corerce.  He blew up the Chantry so that Elthina would no longer be able to keep the situation at just below the boiling point.  He wanted to start an all out war so that the mages would have to fight for their freedom or die in chains.  I'm sure plenty of players disagree with both his basic goal and his means of achieving it, but it isn't the "definition" of terrorism.

He was attacking what to his (somewhat clouded and possessed) mind was a valid military target.  Elthina was nominally in charge of the situation and obviously had enough power to keep something of a leash on Meredith.  Information presented later in the form of a book doesn't change my mind about what my Hawke believed when she supported Anders' interpretation of the situation.

The mages are being kept just well enough off that most aren't to the point of "I'd rather die than this."  Anders wasn't trying to intimidate or otherwise politically influence anyone, he was trying to get to the crisis point where the mages actually were better off fighting than submitting.

"valid military target"? wtf? are you insane?

if using the definition provided, he was trying to "coerce" the templars in to taking drastic action so as to break the status quo and to finally force mages to start doing something for themselves by putting their backs to the wall for them

The Chantry has military and poltical power. The Templars and Seekers may have a certain amount of autonomy from the Divine, but they are part of the Chantry, which means the Chantry as an organization, and all of its buildings, which often serve as communcation and command centres are, yes, valid military targets, whether there are any soldiers actually in them at the time or not.

In wartime, command centres, communication towers and hospitals are often attacked, regardless of how many "innocents" may be in them (how do you define 'innocent' anyway?). These attacks are designed to break the chain of communication, demoralize troops, and intimidate and coerce the enemy into surrendering. In fact, intimidation was the sole purpose of the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

So I ask again, what makes Ander's actions any worse than a legitimate act of war?

Modifié par Plaintiff, 28 décembre 2011 - 10:56 .

[Plaintiff]

Gervaise wrote...
And I would say to the Plantiff regarding what is a terrorist - look around you in our own world - how were 9/11 and the London Underground and bus bombs the same as an act of war? There were no soldiers involved - just ordinary civilians going about their daily lives. The same is true of Anders and his bombing of the Chantry (the fact that there may have been some templars inside does not take away from this), which not only destroyed that building but many other houses adjacent to it.

The Chantry is not a civilian building and the priests are not civilians. The Chantry cannot be compared to modern churches, it's directly involved in the conflict and a source of military and political power in its own right.

And until a cutscene shows me non-chantry affiliated individuals dying as a result of what Anders did, I'm going to maintain that no civilians were killed in the explosion.

[Fast Jimmy]

Plaintiff wrote...

Gervaise wrote...
And I would say to the Plantiff regarding what is a terrorist - look around you in our own world - how were 9/11 and the London Underground and bus bombs the same as an act of war? There were no soldiers involved - just ordinary civilians going about their daily lives. The same is true of Anders and his bombing of the Chantry (the fact that there may have been some templars inside does not take away from this), which not only destroyed that building but many other houses adjacent to it.

The Chantry is not a civilian building and the priests are not civilians. The Chantry cannot be compared to modern churches, it's directly involved in the conflict and a source of military and political power in its own right.

And until a cutscene shows me non-chantry affiliated individuals dying as a result of what Anders did, I'm going to maintain that no civilians were killed in the explosion.

Are you serious?

Bombing the Chantry building and saying that it is a valid military target because it is connected with the Templars and the wars the Divine has conducted is like saying bombing an embassy isn't terrorism because it is connected with that government's military and the acts of war it has commited.

While very loosely true, it ignores the fact that there would be many in the embassy (and many in the Chantry) who were not associated with the military, whose jobs were in no way connected to the mages plight, who were working to help people and ONLY help people, and who are not military targets.


What is the Chantry building, other than an embassy for the Divine? And if you believe bombing an embassy isn't an act of terrorism, then I'm sure some people in Interpol might have some opinions that would disagree with you.

[Joey Coco]

The Grey Nayr wrote...


I am a mage supporter.

I'm just not an Anders supporter.

Same.  I actually find Anders worse than Meredith.  You can blame Meredith's insanity on the idol's power.  Anders is just a self-righteous zealot.  He thought too highly of himself and threw a tantrum whenever you disagreed with him.

This clearly isn't canon, but I find the last panel to be a pretty accurate portrayal of his character.
http://browse.devian...et=144#/d3frfi4 
Not canon as in connecting one event to the other, not that both didn't happen.

[Plaintiff]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Gervaise wrote...
And I would say to the Plantiff regarding what is a terrorist - look around you in our own world - how were 9/11 and the London Underground and bus bombs the same as an act of war? There were no soldiers involved - just ordinary civilians going about their daily lives. The same is true of Anders and his bombing of the Chantry (the fact that there may have been some templars inside does not take away from this), which not only destroyed that building but many other houses adjacent to it.

The Chantry is not a civilian building and the priests are not civilians. The Chantry cannot be compared to modern churches, it's directly involved in the conflict and a source of military and political power in its own right.

And until a cutscene shows me non-chantry affiliated individuals dying as a result of what Anders did, I'm going to maintain that no civilians were killed in the explosion.

Are you serious?

Bombing the Chantry building and saying that it is a valid military target because it is connected with the Templars and the wars the Divine has conducted is like saying bombing an embassy isn't terrorism because it is connected with that government's military and the acts of war it has commited.

While very loosely true, it ignores the fact that there would be many in the embassy (and many in the Chantry) who were not associated with the military, whose jobs were in no way connected to the mages plight, who were working to help people and ONLY help people, and who are not military targets.


What is the Chantry building, other than an embassy for the Divine? And if you believe bombing an embassy isn't an act of terrorism, then I'm sure some people in Interpol might have some opinions that would disagree with you.

If an embassy acts as a command and or communication centre for military troops in a time of war, then yes, I would say that during such a war, it would be a valid military target. But a Chantry is more than a embassy, it is a direct source of oppression and, in concept, wields a great deal of political and military power in its own right. The Chantry spreads the dogma that causes people to fear mages, it makes the laws that govern how mages are treated and it recruits the violent zealots that 'protect' them. It's not 'connected' to the conflict, it is directly involved, so no, it's not a civilian building.

But I'm not just asking if Anders actions qualify as terrorism (although given the varied definitions I'm getting, I'm still not convinced that they are), I'm asking why his actions are morally worse than a legitimate act of war, where the exact same atrocity may be committed by a government or an organization, as opposed to an individual, and those responsible will get a free pass.

[BTG_01]

Kind of odd how extremists never target one another, but always someone in the middle. Anders goes after the Chantry and the Grand Cleric, rather than the Templars and Meredith's first reaction is to purge the Circle instead of dealing with Anders. I guess the fact that Meredith and Anders confirm one another's world view makes them valuable to each other.

[Maria Caliban]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

A dangerous zealot who likes to punish innocent people for his ideals who is driven bonkers by a powerful entity.(Meredith = Idol, Anders = Justice)

Wrong.

You can't have gay sex with Meredith.

[tmp7704]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Wrong.

You can't have gay sex with Meredith.

Sure you can.

It just happens during the time skips, like everything else that's interesting in Hawke's life.

[Mr.House]

tmp7704 wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

Wrong.

You can't have gay sex with Meredith.

Sure you can.

It just happens during the time skips, like everything else that's interesting in Hawke's life.

Making out with Izzy was not skipped

Modifié par Mr.House, 29 décembre 2011 - 07:33 .

[GavrielKay]

BTG_01 wrote...

Kind of odd how extremists never target one another, but always someone in the middle. Anders goes after the Chantry and the Grand Cleric, rather than the Templars and Meredith's first reaction is to purge the Circle instead of dealing with Anders. I guess the fact that Meredith and Anders confirm one another's world view makes them valuable to each other.

Well, Meredith did want to annul the circle even before Anders blew up the Chantry.  She was waiting for permission from the Divine, having been denied by Elthina already.  Meredith even says she is eager to begin, which is totally sickening.  Any sane person in her position should at the very least regret the necessity.

And in my playthrough, Anders tried non-violence first.  We talked to Elthina and to Meredith.  We hunted down blood mages and escaped apostates.  But none of that mattered in the end, the abuse continued and Meredith continued to crack down.  Meanwhile, Anders is healing the poor (and embarassed) in his clinic.

Taking the hard line was Meredith's first choice and Anders' last.

[Gervaise]

Meredith did not necessarily want to Annul the Circle before Anders blew up the Chantry. You only have the word of that hardline templar (if still alive) that this is the case. So leaving aside hearsay, what Meredith is demanding is to make a thorough search of the mage quarters for evidence of blood mages. Apparently she does not have the automatic right to do this, which is why Orsino wants to appeal to Elthina - possibly to get her assurance that if Meredith does find any evidence (as he knows she is likely to) she will not simply use this as an excuse to purge the Circle. In fact, even my pro-Mage Hawke thought the desire to thoroughly search the Circle for blood mages was not exactly unreasonable given the number of blood mages we had encountered in Act 3 who had been living inside the Gallows. However, everyone is aware that Meredith is teetering on the edge of madness and it is only going to take something small to push her over. Plus if you earlier told her to get lost when she wanted you to hunt down blood mages and Bethany is in the Circle, she actually says that innocent mages like her could suffer as a result of the actions of others. If Anders is with you he hears this too and disparagingly calls Bethany a "dog on a leash", whilst he is a wolf. So he is well aware of the consequences of his action. Orsino also quite clearly states "you have condemned us all", after the bomb, so he certainly feels it is Anders' action that has caused the Anulment. In that case, the death of every innocent mage within the Circle is actually the responsibility of Anders, as he acknowledges he is well aware of and seems to feel is a justified cost for advancing his agenda. Thus he is no more concerned for them than Meredith is and equally willing to sacrifice innocents to achieve his goal. This includes Hawke's own sister. So far as I was aware, the majority of mages within the Circle did not know they were part of a war.

The Chantry is home to orphans and other unfortunates that take refuge there. It would appear to have an open door policy so even at night there may be civilians visiting it. Then there are all the lay brothers and sisters who live there. As Sebastian points out, had he not been with Hawke, he could have been one of them. Meredith is also right that the population as a whole will not see it as an attack on a military target but the murder of a much loved grand cleric. However much certain nobles were working against Meredith, it is noticeable that no support is forthcoming from them during the final battle. May be the writers simply forgot about them or may be this was meant to show that Anders' bomb had turned popular opinion against the mages' cause.

The story had been building towards the events of Act 3 and each side had been getting progressively more extreme. Thus to say that taking the hard line was Meredith's first choice and Anders' last is not taking into account all the facts. After all you could argue that there were plenty of other options that Anders' could have taken before resorting to the bomb. That the writers did not allow this again would seem to point to the fact that Anders' wasn't considering matters rationally but only from one very narrow perspective that started and ended in the bomb.

Like the Grey Nayr I too am a mage supporter but not an Anders supporter. I profoundly regret that the writers saw fit to introduce the bomb into the storyline and thus allow some people to present a murdering terrorist as some form of hero. It wasn't necessary since they could have had Meredith search the Gallows, find evidence of blood magic and call for an Anulment and thus still leave Hawke with the choice of whom to support. I bitterly resent the fact that when I support the mages it is seen as supporting a mage rebellion, and by implication the bomb, instead of supporting innocent mages against the injustice of the anulment. The bomb was wrong - end of story and Anders is just as bad a Meredith in his disregard for the rights and lives of others.

[GhostlyMaiden]

Gervaise wrote...

I agree with the poster that each is as bad as the other and that neither is actually "excused" on the grounds that they are under a bad influence. Anders admits when challenged that it was his own decision to do what he did - for all we know Justice may have actually been against it. 

Rival Anders. After the bombing, Anders says Vengeance took control of him and he wants you to kill him to keep him from doing something like that again. Further proof comes from his last Questioning Beliefs where you can try to convince Anders not to go through with it only for Vengeance to pop out when he actually considers it. Afterwards, Anders admits to having frequent "blackouts", obviously implying Vengeance is taking control more often.

In friendship, the idea is that you're supporting Anders's views so he and Justice are merging together cohesively while in rivalry, you are challenging his views so he and Justice develop a greater schism with their conflicting mindsets. Rivaling Anders really shows how much Justice is influencing him, not the other way around.

As far as personal opinions go, I support more freedoms for mages, but I do not agree with Anders bombing the Chantry. Most of the reasons have been cited already by other posters, so that's all I have to say about that.

[tmp7704]

Mr.House wrote...
Making out with Izzy was not skipped

I said everything that was interesting

(besides, even that had the time skips...)

[Mr.House]

tmp7704 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...
Making out with Izzy was not skipped

I said everything that was interesting

(besides, even that had the time skips...)

THAT WAS INTRESTING

[jlb524]

Mr.House wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...
Making out with Izzy was not skipped

I said everything that was interesting

(besides, even that had the time skips...)

THAT WAS INTRESTING

But she had clothes on!

Immersion ruined!

[GavrielKay]

Gervaise wrote...

Meredith did not necessarily want to Annul the Circle before Anders blew up the Chantry. You only have the word of that hardline templar (if still alive) that this is the case. So leaving aside hearsay, what Meredith is demanding is to make a thorough search of the mage quarters for evidence of blood mages.

I don't thnk the word of a high level Templar is just hearsay.  I believe it is totally within character for Meredith to send to the Divine, so I find no reason to declare Kerras a liar.  He sounds too happy about it for one thing.

So he is well aware of the consequences of his action. Orsino also quite clearly states "you have condemned us all", after the bomb, so he certainly feels it is Anders' action that has caused the Anulment.

Anders' action caused the annulment to happen right at that moment.  Orsino may not have known that Meredith was trying to get permission already.

The Chantry is home to orphans and other unfortunates that take refuge there. It would appear to have an open door policy so even at night there may be civilians visiting it. Then there are all the lay brothers and sisters who live there.

If Elthina has allowed masses of innocents to remain in the Chantry after she herself had been encouraged to leave for safety, then I guess that's too bad.

Thus to say that taking the hard line was Meredith's first choice and Anders' last is not taking into account all the facts.

When we arrive in Kirkwall we find out pretty quickly that Meredith has managed to turn the populace against the Templars in a way that is almost unheard of.  We hear someone being beaten in the Gallows.  We see mages who've passed their harrowing Tranquiled.  Sounds pretty hard-line to me.  By contrast, when we first meet Anders, he's running a clinic in Darktown treating the sick and helpless.

[Silfren]

I'm not going to get into the Anders vs. Meredith comparison/contrast debate, or the question of the definition of terrorism (though I will point out that there is NO official de facto once-and-for-all definition of terrorism, because it's a deeply politicized term that necessarily changes according to the needs of the political regime in power, because otherwise various government bodies would be guilty of terrorism by their own interpretation of the word). But for the love of the Maker, could we dispense with the b.s. notion that Elthina was a poor, put-upon, overwhelmed soul who just COULDN'T have done anything to resolve the situation in Kirkwall?

She wasn't some neophyte priest or random lay sister. She was the freakin' Grand Cleric. Dealing with an out-of-control Knight Commander was part of her job.  And she didn't even TRY.

Yes, she was an old woman. Yes, she probably had little _actual_ power. But that disregards the fact that actual power aside, she had the FULL AUTHORITY to deal with Meredith. If Elthina genuinely believed that she could do little on her own to either rein Meredith in or remove her from power altogether, than she could have, and should have, sought help from the Divine at the very least. And whatever Asunder says, well before that book came out the in-game lore from Origins and DA2, unless I'm sorely mistaken, indicates that she outranked Meredith in the templars' chain of command, just as the Divine outranks her. Meaning she had the authority to step in and override any order the KC gave her templars. They were obligated to obey her over Meredith, if it came to it, as I recall.

Someone who is incapable of performing their stated duties and responsibilities doesn't get to just hand-wring and bemoan their inability to take action. What do you do if your job requires you to make sure that people under you are following the law? You find someone higher up who DOES have the ability to back up your authority with actual power, or else you step down in favor of someone who actually IS capable of fulfilling the job requirements of your position.

Elthina did none of those things. There is evidence that she knew the extent of the templars' and Meredith's abuses, not just against mages but against Kirkwall as a whole, and she didn't do anything but whine that Hawke overestimated her capability.

Why didn't she seek assistance from the Divine? Why didn't she do SOMETHING against Meredith? Since we now see that the Divine was sympathetic to mages all along and wanted to reform the Circle system, I don't believe for a minute that Elthina had any reason to believe that if she sent word to the Divine about the situation in Kirkwall, that Justinia's response would be "OMG, Meredith roxxors!"

Modifié par Silfren, 29 décembre 2011 - 08:47 .

[Plaintiff]

Silfren wrote...

I'm not going to get into the Anders vs. Meredith comparison/contrast debate, or the question of the definition of terrorism (though I will point out that there is NO official de facto once-and-for-all definition of terrorism, because it's a deeply politicized term that necessarily changes according to the needs of the political regime in power, because otherwise various government bodies would be guilty of terrorism by their own interpretation of the word). But for the love of the Maker, could we dispense with the b.s. notion that Elthina was a poor, put-upon, overwhelmed soul who just COULDN'T have done anything to resolve the situation in Kirkwall?

She wasn't some neophyte priest or random lay sister. She was the freakin' Grand Cleric. Dealing with an out-of-control Knight Commander was part of her job.  And she didn't even TRY.

Yes, she was an old woman. Yes, she probably had little _actual_ power. But that disregards the fact that actual power aside, she had the FULL AUTHORITY to deal with Meredith. If Elthina genuinely believed that she could do little on her own to either rein Meredith in or remove her from power altogether, than she could have, and should have, sought help from the Divine at the very least. And whatever Asunder says, well before that book came out the in-game lore from Origins and DA2, unless I'm sorely mistaken, indicates that she outranked Meredith in the templars' chain of command, just as the Divine outranks her. Meaning she had the authority to step in and override any order the KC gave her templars. They were obligated to obey her over Meredith, if it came to it, as I recall.

Someone who is incapable of performing their stated duties and responsibilities doesn't get to just hand-wring and bemoan their inability to take action. What do you do if your job requires you to make sure that people under you are following the law? You find someone higher up who DOES have the ability to back up your authority with actual power, or else you step down in favor of someone who actually IS capable of fulfilling the job requirements of your position.

Elthina did none of those things. There is evidence that she knew the extent of the templars' and Meredith's abuses, not just against mages but against Kirkwall as a whole, and she didn't do anything but whine that Hawke overestimated her capability.

Why didn't she seek assistance from the Divine? Why didn't she do SOMETHING against Meredith? Since we now see that the Divine was sympathetic to mages all along and wanted to reform the Circle system, I don't believe for a minute that Elthina had any reason to believe that if she sent word to the Divine about the situation in Kirkwall, that Justinia's response would be "OMG, Meredith roxxors!"

Thank you!

[levi.porphyrogenitus]

I'd like to throw in the Enigma of Kirkwall here. The city itself was pretty clearly designed to promote the thinning of the veil to enable mages more easily to contact spirits. This manifested in rather extreme numbers of abominations and blood mages arising, both within and without the circle. The sheer volume of such incidents would suggest that Meredith was more right than not in her mistrust of local mages, since the very environment of the city was working to corrupt them.

Also, keep in mind that Orsino, the one charged with running the circle itself, was not only a blood mage himself but was knowingly aiding and abetting a rogue blood mage serial killer in his obscene experiments. If the First Enchanter is so utterly corrupted, then how can you trust any of the mages under his care? Really, it's a wonder that Meredith and the templars didn't wake up one day to find themselves all dead or mind controlled.

All that isn't to say that I support Meredith unreservedly, but even from my mage play-through it seemed that she was more right than not up until her final bout of real insanity.

Anders on the other hand knowingly attacked the only sympathetic ear with any real chance of shielding the mages from purgation, targeting her expressly so that he would force everyone's hand. He did it with calculation and full knowledge of what he was doing, and he did it despite all the evidence that he had (and potentially all the arguments of an anti-blood-magic Hawke) that the mages of Kirkwall were dangerous (even moreso than mages everywhere already are).

[alex90c]

Plaintiff wrote...

alex90c wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...

alex90c wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

I'm still waiting for somebody to explain what constitiutes as 'terrorism', how Anders' actions qualify, and what makes terrorism objectively worse than a 'legitimate' act of war.

"the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes"

http://dictionary.re...rowse/terrorism 

Anders followed that definition pretty much by the letter.

I don't think this is true.  Anders did not blow up the Chantry to intimidate or corerce.  He blew up the Chantry so that Elthina would no longer be able to keep the situation at just below the boiling point.  He wanted to start an all out war so that the mages would have to fight for their freedom or die in chains.  I'm sure plenty of players disagree with both his basic goal and his means of achieving it, but it isn't the "definition" of terrorism.

He was attacking what to his (somewhat clouded and possessed) mind was a valid military target.  Elthina was nominally in charge of the situation and obviously had enough power to keep something of a leash on Meredith.  Information presented later in the form of a book doesn't change my mind about what my Hawke believed when she supported Anders' interpretation of the situation.

The mages are being kept just well enough off that most aren't to the point of "I'd rather die than this."  Anders wasn't trying to intimidate or otherwise politically influence anyone, he was trying to get to the crisis point where the mages actually were better off fighting than submitting.

"valid military target"? wtf? are you insane?

if using the definition provided, he was trying to "coerce" the templars in to taking drastic action so as to break the status quo and to finally force mages to start doing something for themselves by putting their backs to the wall for them

The Chantry has military and poltical power. The Templars and Seekers may have a certain amount of autonomy from the Divine, but they are part of the Chantry, which means the Chantry as an organization, and all of its buildings, which often serve as communcation and command centres are, yes, valid military targets, whether there are any soldiers actually in them at the time or not.

In wartime, command centres, communication towers and hospitals are often attacked, regardless of how many "innocents" may be in them (how do you define 'innocent' anyway?). These attacks are designed to break the chain of communication, demoralize troops, and intimidate and coerce the enemy into surrendering. In fact, intimidation was the sole purpose of the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

So I ask again, what makes Ander's actions any worse than a legitimate act of war?

i never actually even responded to the "what makes Anders actions any worse than a legitimate act of war" bit, lol. chill out man 

[DKJaigen]

levi.porphyrogenitus wrote...


Anders on the other hand knowingly attacked the only sympathetic ear with any real chance of shielding the mages from purgation, targeting her expressly so that he would force everyone's hand. He did it with calculation and full knowledge of what he was doing, and he did it despite all the evidence that he had (and potentially all the arguments of an anti-blood-magic Hawke) that the mages of Kirkwall were dangerous (even moreso than mages everywhere already are).

The mages in kirkwall had 2 options. to live in captivity and be treated worse then animals or die standing on their feet. in my opinion the latter is far more appealing then the former. And that was the only choice, because after so many years i dont believe the templars or the chantry where willing to change. This has become even more clear in dragon age: asunder. That ages are dangerous is irrelevant. That the chantry allows such backward methods is far more dangerous then the mages.

[Urzon]

I'm a mage supporter. I just don't agree with Anders on 75% of his plans after the whole "Lets kill the nice templar outside to free all these mages" plan.

And yes, Anders is a terrorist after he bombed the Chantry. You can argue against it all you want, saying it was a military center and whatnot, but the Chantry was still a public gathering place and center. After he bombed it, it caused civil unrest and dare i say it.... terror in the general population.

What was that definition again...

Oh yes! The use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.

That fits Anders to a T after Act 3.

Modifié par Urzon, 30 décembre 2011 - 12:44 .