2008 réponses à ce sujet

[Plaintiff]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
No. An embassy, regardless of its role in communicating information to military targets, is not a valid military target. Do a Google search on what the Geneva Convention guarantees as embassy rights.

Spies, enemy combatants, war criminals... all can find safe haven in their home country's embassy. It is considered a protected area, free of any military reprisal. The only means of communicating are through modes of diplomacy. That's the whole point of an ambasssy - it is a safe place where diplomacy is the only option. If you go to full out war against a country, you STILL don't close down their embassy (if you still have one, they can and do close in countries during violent times) because even during war, there is still need for diplomacy (trading prisoners of war, determining terms of treaties/surrender,etc.).

I don't care what the Geneva Convention says. I was stating my opinion, and if it doesn't line up with that, then, well, I guess the Geneva Convention is stupid. I would consider an embassy a valid military target in war time. I think it's tactically stupid to declare war on a country and then let them have a patch of soil where they can establish a decent position to strike from within.

But it doesn't matter, because there is no such convention in Thedas. And however much a Chantry is like an embassy, it is not an embassy and not subject to the same laws. The comparison is moronic, especially since labelling it as an "embassy for the Maker" only holds water for people who actually believe the Maker exists, and not everyone does. We do not currently, to my knowledge, have any sort of insitution that could be said to be similar to the Chantry in any way. The medieval catholic church is the only thing that comes close, in that it was a source of poltiical and military power, and extremely oppressive.

But that aside, what makes what Anders did worse than an act of war was two things.

One, there was no war declared. Anders says himself that what he did will very well START a war, but there was not one currently going on.

Really? That's not how I read the situation at all. The Circle and the Chantry and the Templars have a long history of conflict, punctuated with rebellions and outright slaughter. It sounds to me like they've been at war for centuries. 

I hate to use the September 11 attacks as an example since it is such a highly charged issue, especially when discussing terrorism, but I feel it demonstrates my point. In a terrorist attack, members of a fringe group attacked and killed over 2000 Americans on U.S. soil. America was not at war with this group, its fundamentalist branch of Islam, the Taliban political party in control of its country or the country itself where the attacks were coordinated. It was regarded as one of the worst tragedies in American history. Now, in this war against Afghanistan, over 2000 troops have been killed, many more Afghan civilians and enemy combatants as well. This is not viewed as a larger tragedy, because it IS war. People are expected to die, even in larger numbers and killing possibly more civilians.

Oh, so if it's expected, that makes it okay.

Gotcha.

Regardless of the right/wrong/indifferent mindset of this (let alone the actual politcal ramifications of it) its a reality. When you are at war, it is expected and calculated that people will die. When you are not at war, it is not considered a viable course of action to kill, especially killing those who are civilians. You can say the mages being oppressed puts the mages at war with the Templars, but thats not true. No declaration of war was made, no offer of recourse or diplomacy was offered, it was just an attack without warning on those who only indirectly caused the injustice Anders was fighting against.

War does not have to be declared in order to occur.

It's extremely evident that there is no diplomatic recourse available. Who's Anders going to negotiate with? Meredith, who would have him killed on the spot? Elthina, who has sat around with a thumb up her ass for the last seven years with no plan to pull it out any time soon?

There is no avenue for compromise. Mages do not have that option because the Chantry denies it. In order to be able to negotiate, the mages have to be on an equal power standing with the Chantry, which they are not, not by a long shot. In order to obtain any leverage for a compromise to occur, the Chantry must be weakened.

Yes, that means attacking it directly.

The Chantry is directly responsible for the injustice Anders is fighting. It created the Circle system in the first place, it wrote the laws on which the circles operate and it founded the Templars and the Seekers. That these two branches have since slipped out from under Chantry control doesn't mean the Chantry is absolved of its share of the blame, if anything its inability to maintain authority compounds the original guilt. Their association with the Chantry is where these two factions draw their power from, and so it is the Chantry as an institution that needs to be got rid of.

My second point - he killed civilians, indiscriminately. People in the chantry were not ALL connected with the Templars, did not ALL have connections with the Divine that could request Meredith's removal, did not ALL have any stake in the Mage/Templar conflict at all. There were likely many scribes, and altar boys, and novices looking to just learn to be priests so they could go out in the world and help people. To kill these people because of some perceived threat the building and the leaders in it might pose is what is known as a "war crime." And it, even in times of war, is illegal, prosecutabel and is generally regarded as one of the most heinous acts a person can do.

When a cutscene shows me these individuals, I will believe that they exist. So far, I haven't seen one. All actual evidence points to the chantry being mostly empty. It has two floors, with no doors, unopenable or otherwise to suggest any space beyond that, and seems to serve mostly to accomodate a grotesque display of opulence in the form of a twenty-foot gold-plated statue. I certainly didn't see any chantry officials helping people.

But if these people did exist, sleeping in a big pile on the Chantry floor like hamsters, and Elthina didn't shoo them out of the building when she knew full well that the Chantry was a likely target in a conflict that the Divine had warned her to expect, then I guess that's just tough.

So... Anders did all of the above - attacked an embassy,

Except it's not one.

killed civilians

That we never saw.

and all without a formal declaration of war.

Which wouldn't have made it any better.

Trying to hold Anders to the laws and standards of a modern society he's not a part of, and relate this to situations it is nothing like is not actually going to work.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 01 janvier 2012 - 01:53 .

[Urzon]

Plaintiff wrote...

You would know this because you can read the minds of video game characters, yes? What 'other solutions' was Anders cooking up? I'm curious.

Whatever you think he was planning, all actual evidence shows that Anders spent the better part of a decade printing pamphlets and hiding them around the city. Annoying, perhaps, but no more violent or harmful than Jehoviah's Witness.

There are several fundamental differences between the Chantry of Thedas and a 'church' as the term is understood today. The comparison is false. And even if it wasn't, being a 'church' doesn't mean blowing it up is automatically a bad thing to do. If a church allowed and even endorsed the atrocities that the Kirkwall Chantry does, I would wholeheartedly support its destruction.

I never said he was thinking of different solutions. I said if  he was thinking of different solutions, given how he acts towards the Chantry and templars, none of them could be called "peaceful".

And do you really think he was just writing and leaving his manifesto everywhere for 7+ years? Anders was an active member of the Mage Underground. He was helping mages escape, and in later years the Underground was actually raiding the Gallows to release mages.

Anders didn't just stumble upon that recipe for the bomb eariler that day when Hawke came by in Act 3, and then he decided on whim "Why this looks like a good way to blow up the chantry. Let's do it!." He was obviously planning it for awhile. Since he had to: research the forumla, find where to get the ingredients, learn how to actually make the bomb, and learn the spells needed to set it up (those shiny glyphs it made in the sky don't acur naturally). That takes alot of time. So it must have been planning it for awhile.

We both agree that a church is a place of worship for the Christian faith correct? And that Andrastians call that their places of worship a chantry? So the Kirkwall Chantry isn't equivalent to a church how again? They are both places in which people gather to worship.

When it blowing up a building with people inside it even considered a good thing? Much less a building that was filled with innocent people? I agree Elthina was next to useless with controling Meredith, and i can see Anders killing her. The chantry was filled with innocent lay sisters and mothers just doing their job, and they didn't infringe on the mages rights at all.

Unless or course, you somehow believe that once you enter into a organization you are automatically guilty of any and all crime the organization has done in the past. Which is really sad.

[Fast Jimmy]

[quote]Plaintiff wrote...

I don't care what the Geneva Convention says. I was stating my opinion, and if it doesn't line up with that, then, well, I guess the Geneva Convention is stupid. I would consider an embassy a valid military target in war time. I think it's tactically stupid to declare war on a country and then let them have a patch of soil where they can establish a decent position to strike from within.

But it doesn't matter, because there is no such convention in Thedas. And however much a Chantry is like an embassy, it is not an embassy and not subject to the same laws. The comparison is moronic, especially since labelling it as an "embassy for the Maker" only holds water for people who actually believe the Maker exists, and not everyone does. We do not currently, to my knowledge, have any sort of insitution that could be said to be similar to the Chantry in any way. The medieval catholic church is the only thing that comes close, in that it was a source of poltiical and military power, and extremely oppressive.[/quote]

I've also never heard of anyone use the word "terrorist" before in Thedas. Yet you asked someone to prove that he was one. Since you asked for a reason why Anders was being a called a word that only exists in our world, I had to use parameters of the words definition in our world. If you had asked someone to prove that Merril was a Jedi, I'd be forced to use parameters set by Star Wars, since the word and concept of Jedi is never mentioned in DAO. This is the same thing, but based in reality.



[quote]Really? That's not how I read the situation at all. The Circle and the Chantry and the Templars have a long history of conflict, punctuated with rebellions and outright slaughter. It sounds to me like they've been at war for centuries. [/quote] So have the IRA. That doesn't mean when they send a car bomb into a crowded marketplace, it isn't terrorism.

[quote]Oh, so if it's expected, that makes it okay.
[/quote]It doesn't make it okay... but it distinguishes it from an act of war versus an act of terrorism.[/quote]


[quote]War does not have to be declared in order to occur.[/quote] No, but a declaration separates the first attack from an act of terrorism or a war crime versus a legal declaration of war.

[quote]It's extremely evident that there is no diplomatic recourse available. Who's Anders going to negotiate with? Meredith, who would have him killed on the spot? Elthina, who has sat around with a thumb up her ass for the last seven years with no plan to pull it out any time soon?

There is no avenue for compromise. Mages do not have that option because the Chantry denies it. In order to be able to negotiate, the mages have to be on an equal power standing with the Chantry, which they are not, not by a long shot. In order to obtain any leverage for a compromise to occur, the Chantry must be weakened.

Yes, that means attacking it directly.

The Chantry is directly responsible for the injustice Anders is fighting. It created the Circle system in the first place, it wrote the laws on which the circles operate and it founded the Templars and the Seekers. That these two branches have since slipped out from under Chantry control doesn't mean the Chantry is absolved of its share of the blame, if anything its inability to maintain authority compounds the original guilt. Their association with the Chantry is where these two factions draw their power from, and so it is the Chantry as an institution that needs to be got rid of.[/quote] Since when did this become a conversation about right or wrong? You stated you did not believe Anders was a terrorist and had never seen anyone prove anything to the contrary.

I have now, in my mind, proven that Anders is a terrorist. You are now trying to argue if him being a terrorist is right or wrong.

[quote]When a cutscene shows me these individuals, I will believe that they exist. So far, I haven't seen one. All actual evidence points to the chantry being mostly empty. It has two floors, with no doors, unopenable or otherwise to suggest any space beyond that, and seems to serve mostly to accomodate a grotesque display of opulence in the form of a twenty-foot gold-plated statue. I certainly didn't see any chantry officials helping people.

But if these people did exist, sleeping in a big pile on the Chantry floor like hamsters, and Elthina didn't shoo them out of the building when she knew full well that the Chantry was a likely target in a conflict that the Divine had warned her to expect, then I guess that's just tough.[/quote] Elthina was a civilian. Being a civilian doesn't mean you aren't in power or that you don't do bad things... it just means you are not a member of the active military. Most kings and queens are technically civilians, unless they are on the field of battle. A corrupt CEO of a corporation can be a bad person and totally deserving to die... it still makes them a civilian. Which means killing them is illegal, which makes Anders an assassin or a terrorist. Since he took out multiple targets in a public and destructive way, I'm leaning more towards terrorist.

So Anders did kill civilans. Innocent as the driven snow civilians? Maybe, maybe not. But it still makes his actions criminal and makes him a terrorist. Again, you are trying to argue that he is right or wrong... being a terrorist doesn't immediately make your right or wrong. But it does mean you are a terrorist, despite how valid your cause may be.


[quote]Except it's not one.[/quote]So... if a Chantry is not a church, and its not an embassy, but it doesn't house any soldiers, weapons or other instruments of battle... I'm confused about what you think it is.


[quote]That we never saw.[/quote] Again, Elthina was a civilian. Good, evil, indifrrent... she was a civilian.

[quote]Which wouldn't have made it any better.[/quote] It would have made it legal. Which makes it not a crime, which would make him not a terrorist. Right or wrong has no place in this argument. I am proving Anders is a terrorist, by the very definition of the word.

[quote]Trying to hold Anders to the laws and standards of a modern society he's not a part of, and relate this to situations it is nothing like is not actually going to work.[/quote] You are the one who said Anders is not a terrorist and you've never seen anyone prove otherwise. If you had said "Anders is not a geo-physicist and I've never seen anyone prove otherwise" I would have no choice but to use definitions from geology, science and agreed upon parameters from our world to answer that claim. Since no one has ever used the word terrorist in Thedas, I have to use our definitions alone. You could make a case that Anders suffers from Multiple Personalites Disorder, despite it never being used in Thedas. But it would require me using terms, defnitions and examples from reality because psychology doesn't exist in Thedas.

Stating that you've never seen anyone prove to you that someone fits a definition, then saying you are unable to use any of the criteria of the very definition you are asking them to prove is a straw man argument.

You're making the jump in logic that terrorist is immediately evil or bad. People who are not a sovereign government and still commit acts of aggression on behalf of a cause can be called many things: Freedom Fighters, Revolutionaries, Radical Militia, Terrorists, Fringe Elements... its how these groups conduct themselves that defines if they are terrorist or not. America's Revolutionaries signed a Declaration of Independence, formalizing their arguments and how they had been ignored and that they had no choice but to fight. They mailed this to the king before the war lines were drawn. Al-Queda had seen many injustices that the American government and military had inflicted upon the MIddle East and other parts of the world and sought to collapse the economy by crashing planes into buildings without any notice or declaration. They were branded terrorists for it.

Could Anders have chosen other routes? Maybe. Were his actions valid given the scale of abuse he and other mages had suffered? Maybe. Is it possible the people he killed did in fact have some blood on their hands? Maybe.

But none of that preempts the fact that he is a terrorist.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 01 janvier 2012 - 03:22 .

[MichaelFinnegan]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I misspoke, I meant the Vienna Convention, not the Geneva.

Silly European cities and their conventions.

Aye, you're right. A couple of treaties do deal with the matter at hand.

Oftentimes, the embassy gives notice to evacuate all residents within the country, then begins evacuating its own staff once was is officially declared. However, in my example, no declaration of war was given, unless you count the bombing itself, so it is a bit of a moot point for this conversation.

I wasn't trying to deal with the analogy, actually. I was merely debating against the point that embassies (because of the nature of priviliges granted to its consulars) are necessarily safe havens for fellow-national spies, criminals, and so on. I'd imagine that, though one of the roles of the embassy of a particular country is to look after the well-being of its countrymen (i.e protect them from harm), it need not automatically include providing protection for criminals. Again, I'm not sure what the protocol would be to deal with such circumstances; but it very much might involve the handing over of the criminal for prosecution to the host country.

I wouldn't say that the Chantry participated in any active hostilities. They supported the Templars, but the Chantry itself did not commit any atrocities. I maintain that what Anders did is more akin to blowing up an embassy (the Chantry) instead of blowing up a military base (Templar headquarters).

Now a little bit against the analogy. I'd maintain that the Chantry isn't exactly like an embassy. The purpose of a Chantry isn't merely to mediate between mages and templars - it is first and foremost a center of Andrastian faith. That it also mediates is a different question. Although, I agree with your sentiment.

A little bit of the role of the Grand Cleric (GC) deserves scrutiny. It is true that the Chantry leaves the management of the mages more or less to the templars - so the templars seem to have a more direct involvment in what happens to the mages on a day to day basis. Although, as I understand it, the relationship is a bit more complicated, in that the GC has a direct say in things, such as the RoA. From what we see in DA2, the GC could also intervene when there are hostilities/disagreements brewing between the First Enchanter and the Knight Commander, but Elthina seemed powerless to prevent Meredith's taking over the affairs of Kirkwall. Even Orsino toward the end speaks about taking up the matter of Meredith's raids on the Circle mages with the GC. So I'm not entirely sure to what extent the GC can decide matters, and therefore to what extent he/she is responsible for whatever happened. But I very much doubt anybody other than the GC in the Chantry has any direct say.

Now, coming back to Anders' actions, by his own admission we learn that he regrets bombing the Chantry, and killing the Elthina in the process and more or less putting a death sentence over all the Circle mages, but he contends that it was a necessary course of action, to remove the element of compromise, to force a state of conflict between mages and templars. It is almost as if he is acting out of desperation than anything else, as if what he considers to be practical (and an easy route) to trump the moral elements within him. His idea of the "practical" is also debatable because at once he's made not only the templars but more or less whoever practices the Andrastian faith hostile toward what he represent: viz. the mages. All in all, what his action did was perhaps merely to kick start a war, but put the mages at a significant amount of disadvantage at the very outset.

As to your mention about his not targeting a templar base but the Chantry, I think it's because the unguarded Chantry is an easier target to accomplish his ends, than an outright assault/bombing of the all-powerful templars. But perhaps he disregards other consequences of his actions.

Hmm. I seem to have gone off on more tangents.

[Plaintiff]

I asked people to explain how Anders is a terrorist, because that is what they were calling him before I posted. My point in making this argument in the first place was that we can't apply our contemporary standards to the situation. It simply doesn't gel.

It's ridiculous to expect Anders, or really any mage, to make an official declaration of war against the Chantry. The Chantry would never recognise it as a legitimate declaration of war, even if one was attempted. It would label the mages as 'heretics' and 'rebels', and then slaughter them outright. The fact that they label anyone outside their beliefs as 'apostate' (a person who renounces a religious or political belief or principle) is telling enough.

They consider everyone Andrastian by default, and anyone outside of that is considered to be actively rejecting the religion, whether or not they were ever even part of that religion to begin with. When you think about it, referring to mages like Morrigan, Velanna and Merrill as 'apostates' is deeply offensive, particularly for the latter two because it not only imposes on them a set of cultural and religious standards that they do not and never claimed to follow, but totally disreagards their own, totally separate religious culture in the process. Dalish elves have their own faith and their own protocol regarding magic, which the Chantry just ignores. The Chantry's general attitude to anyone outside their religion is a pretty good indicator of how they'd respond to any attempt to declare 'war'.

An oppressed, disenfranchised group like the mages doesn't have the avenues required for what you're asking. It's just not possible. They aren't a country with an army and the ability to march into war. They're a subjugated, imprisoned minority who wouldn't be taken seriously to begin with, because they're subject to religious laws that paint them as villains and heretics.

As for the attack on the Chantry being 'terrorism' because it doesn't house weapons or soldiers: well the White House isn't used as an army barracks but it's hardly what one would call a 'civilian target'. The Pentagon is most assuredly a government/military structure, but the attack against it was labelled as 'terrorism'. It's even called 'terrorism' when a US battleship gets bombed.

'Terrorism' is a media and political buzzword that has lost all real meaning because it is now used indiscriminately to label any act that is done to oppose authority, regardless of whether that authority is a democracy or, as in the case of the Chantry, a fascist theocratic dictatorship. If you don't have a country, if you don't have an army, if you don't have the means or the authority to declare war, then everything you do to oppose authority is now 'terrorism'.

It's just propoganda.

I dare say if such a word existed in Thedas, Anders would indeed be labelled a 'terrorist', and his actions as 'terrorism'. But just because the Chantry has the power to make the laws and write history doesn't make them right.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 01 janvier 2012 - 04:29 .

[DKJaigen]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Destroying the Chantry building did nothing to weaken the Templars for the attack that was to follow. Hawke and all of the mages still had to fight the entire Templar force, even after Anders attack. Meanwhile, Anders' attack let Meredith enact the Right of Annulment and kill many mages, who would have otherwise been useful allies in the fight against the Templars.

Oh it does those templars will not be as easily replaced. And that is why the bombing the chantry was so effective. Your plan simply kills a bunch of templars who will get replaced.

So... you're telling me that Sun Tzu would have suggested a suprise attack that does nothing at all to injure the force you are opposing, diminish your own forces and ruin any sort of element of surprise? How would any of that cause war to be done more quickly?

No the principals of Tzun Tsu is about forcing the enemy to surrender. To do that cripple the machine behind the army. Do you think the templars will be able to keep up this war if they are cut of from their lyrium? their places of recruitment? their training centers.

If Anders was to destroy the headquarters of the Divine in Orlais, I could maybe buy this defense, as this would effectively cripple many lines of communication and order. But bombing the Chantry building, with limited military significance, when you knew the Right of Annulment would be enacted right afterwards and the mages would be called into battle, is idiocy.

Define Limited military significance. i already posted what the chantry is responisble for. Its hardly limited.

If you're going to quote The Art of War, please make sure you understand its principles. Attacking a weak target immediately prior to a large battle and reveal the nature of your intent is act of foolishness. If this wasn't a video game, the mages would have been slaughtered to a man for Anders' actions.

Well you certaintly dont thats a given. Or you dont seem to understand the significance of the chantry in matters of logistics and recruitment. either way your arguments are flawed.

[Silfren]

PrinceLionheart wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

PrinceLionheart wrote...

Sons of Horus wrote...

PrinceLionheart wrote...

Dalira Montanti wrote...

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)

Have you played the dao expansion?
Anders is hardly to blame its the spirit with in him in awkening's he sees the "injustice" the mages face and he asked Anders why he wont fight back

Anders never wanted to fight he was laied back and worried about the little things in life

And it was Anders anger that corrupted Justice turning him into Vengeance. Anders admits as much in the first conversation with him.

How Reliable Is Anders when you meet him though ? I think he was well on his way to going out of his mind at the time Hawke meets him . Anders kind of reminds me of an addict who's either understating his conditon or Is truly unaware of how much hes lost control by then .

That's why I don't support Anders, no matter how sympathetic he may or may not be. Even if it wasn't really "Anders fault" he's going to keep killing again regardless. He's Morinth 2.0.

So true. Just look at that godless monster. Squatting in the sewer, healing refugees and writing manifesto after manifesto for seven years. What an inhuman beast, he makes me sick.

Heal people and then blow up a church just to make a statement such a saint. 

Please.  For starters, the Chantry is a political institution as much as a religious body, and one that provides backing for said religion's military arm. 

The Chantry is NOT the little corner church down the block on Main Street, U.S.A, home to a country bumpkin pastor and a hundred or so adherents who visit weekly for gossip, communion, and lunch. 

Did you notice the relationship between the Chantry and the government of Orlais, and, gee, certain real-world historical parallels?   Or the importance of Chantry support for the monarchy of Ferelden, also having real-world historical parallels?  Did you notice that even though the MONARCH of Ferelden can push for freeing its Circles, the Chantry has the authority--and the power--to refuse?   That alone should make it clear that the Chantry isn't merely a religious body, but a political institution, and a powerful one at that.  One that commands its own army, such that even Kings have to take the Chantry's viewpoint under consideration.  How about the significance of the Chantry's power to engage in Exalted Marches?  Hell yes, it's a valid military target.

The templars are not an independent body that arose separately from the Chantry.  Not only does the Chantry provide the templars support, both practical and political, it is Chantry doctrine, as the religion of the land, that lends legitimacy to the existence of the Templars in the eyes of the general population.  And remember, locking mages within Circle towers is specifically a Chantry law, not a secular one, but one which is supported and enforced by the various governments of Thedas.  The mere fact that the Chantry has that power, to create its own laws that secular governments are obliged to enforce, thanks again to the inherent military power that the Chantry commands, should also drive home the point that the Chantry most assuredly is a valid military target.

And Anders was hardly "just trying to make a statement."  This is a strawman, as there is absolutely no question what Anders was trying to do--start a war and force the mages into an either/or scenario of fight or die, and the game makes that abundantly clear.  Just making a statement my arse.

Modifié par Silfren, 01 janvier 2012 - 05:53 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Oh it does those templars will not be as easily replaced. And that is why the bombing the chantry was so effective. Your plan simply kills a bunch of templars who will get replaced.


I'm not sure what you are trying to say here.


No the principals of Tzun Tsu is about forcing the enemy to surrender. To do that cripple the machine behind the army. Do you think the templars will be able to keep up this war if they are cut of from their lyrium? their places of recruitment? their training centers.

Agreed, but this is a long-term strategy that would seem neglicible results unless it was done in many cities, over the course of many years. Then it would hurt things like revenue, recruitment and strategy. However, anyone could tell as soon as that bomb went off, then a battle would have to be fought immediately afterward. How much training, recruitment or lyrium would they need in just a few hours? None at all. Which makes the Templar building a much better target if a battle was to follow immediately after the bombing, which is the case here.

Define Limited military significance. i already posted what the chantry is responisble for. Its hardly limited.

Sure it is. It houses no military forces, no weapons or insturments of war. It has political and long-term logistic strengths, but during an immediate battle, it holds no value.


Well you certaintly dont thats a given. Or you dont seem to understand the significance of the chantry in matters of logistics and recruitment. either way your arguments are flawed.

Having control of a river is a huge strategic advantage during war. However, if you focus your efforts to capture a coastline area rather than attack your enemy's stronghold, you will lose the war. Because what may have long-term value does not trump what is used to take down an enemy quickly.

[GavrielKay]

Blowing up the Hanged Man tavern so that a bunch of scared Kirkwallers march on the Gallows and demand that the Templars free the mages so that they can go back to being safe citizens is the "definition of terrorism."

What Anders did was very different.

[DKJaigen]

Agreed, but this is a long-term strategy that would seem neglicible results unless it was done in many cities, over the course of many years.

Care to back this bull**** up? As we can see, Anders managed to put together a bomb in a short time and infiltrate the chantry. Mages can perform the same tactic. by dividing in small groups they can hit a large number of spots in a very short time. It doesnt take years.

However, anyone could tell as soon as that bomb went off, then a battle would have to be fought immediately afterward.

Yeah and the war after this take years. furthermore it was not anders goal to cripple the templars. But that doesnt mean the chantry is not a viable military target

How much training, recruitment or lyrium would they need in just a few hours? None at all.
Which makes the Templar building a much better target if a battle was to follow immediately after the bombing, which is the case here.

You think in short terms. Also a bomb in the templar HQ(is their even a HQ?) could mean that the call for annulment would not be made and as such destroying anders plans for a mage-templar war.

Modifié par DKJaigen, 02 janvier 2012 - 06:40 .

[dragonflight288]

Both DKJaigen and Fast Jimmy make good points. I happen to have the Art of War by Sun Tzu, and have read it extensively. Sun Tzu was all about destroying the long-term targets and obliterating the will to fight. Historically (based on the history channel at least) he fought armies many times larger than his own to a standstill and ultimately defeated them because he

a. attacked targets that destroyed, or crippled any advantage his enemies may have had. Recruitment centers, training facilities, and yes, even buildings meant to affect the moral of enemy troops.

b. fought defensively with a well-trained army and a knowledge of the terrain. He would lure thousands of soldiers into a dry field which had (previous to the battle) been prepared with flammable oil and set the field ablaze. Aphexiation and the environment were his greatest weapons in such circumstances.

c. Short-term tactics were used to give him an edge immediately (giving the enemy dysentery, poisoning stocks of food, or stealing weapons and supplies.) Long-term targets were hit to give him an edge almost indefinitely (again, training facilities, weapon and supply manufactures, moral boosting targets.)

I find Anders targeting the Chantry quite reckless, but the end result created a climate where Mages may gain their freedom from the Chantry and that the common man throughout Thedas, not just in Kirkwall, will see that Templars are just as capable as being evil as maleficar are. I have listed several reasons on other threads that explain the longer the war goes on, the worse off the Templars will be throughout Thedas, whereas Mages will always have to suffer through the bigotry of being a mage.

In my mind, what he did at the time was reckless, but it both proved a point, and forced an ultimatum Meredith was all too willing to take up. Meredith makes herself a monster by her eagerness to annul a circle that had nothing to do with the criminal. It was both a symbol of destroying any hope of compromise and a form of psychological warfare, because by the end of the evening, no matter who Hawke supports, Meredith lost all her supporters because of her zeal in destroying the Circle, Hawke, and accusing her templars of being influenced by the blood mages.

[skb1958]

soccerchick wrote...

I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you over the sound of that explosion.
Anders is the same as Meredith? Anders is far worse than Meredith. Both hide behind great causes to promote their own agendas. But Meredith doesn't blow the **** out places full of mages.

No, she just gleefully uses the  "guilt by association"  excuse to slaughter a group of innocent mages.
 The people blown up in chantry  were supportive of long standing abuses against a group of people imprisoned just for being  feared for being born different. ( and as for innocent citisens being killed did you see any in that clip because I sure didn't)

[Gervaise]

At the end of the day both Anders and Meredith were willing to sacrifice the lives of the Circle Mages on a matter of principle and also to achieve their respective goals. Anders wanted a catalyst for war, Meredith wanted to eradicate all blood mages from the area. The Circle mages were considered expendable by both sides even though Meredith is meant to protect mages as well as police them and Anders claims to have their best interests at heart. The destruction of the Chantry meant that there was no possibility for Elthina to intervene and stop the bloodshed.

To anyone outside Kirkwall it was apparently viewed as a mage rebellion that was violently suppressed. Strangely enough this is even the view that Varric takes at the time. If Hawke takes templar side we are "defending our way of life", but if Hawke takes mages side we are "helping dangerous people to run amock."

So far as I was aware, the dangerous people were already running amock, since apostate mages had been wrecking havoc right from Act 1, but on the whole (leaving aside Orsino) this had nothing to do with the Circle mages. At the end they weren't rebelling, they were simply trying to avoid death. They were only apostates because both Anders and Meredith had forced them into that status.

Oddly enough pretty much what happens in Asunder - a few major characters provoked a situation and no matter what the majority do they are pretty much stuck with it, want it or not.

[Xilizhra]

The Circle mages were considered expendable by both sides even though Meredith is meant to protect mages as well as police them and Anders claims to have their best interests at heart.

The best interests of all mages, not just the ones in Kirkwall. It's quite arguable that those who died here were necessary for the greater good. Meredith, being driven nuts by the sword, has no real similar justification.

The destruction of the Chantry meant that there was no possibility for Elthina to intervene and stop the bloodshed.

With something favorable to the templars. She was never a possible solution, and has for her whole career been worse than useless to the mage problem.

[Quething]

Gervaise wrote...

So far as I was aware, the dangerous people were already running amock

Varric's two lines there are indeed among the strangest in the game. I think the funniest thing about Kirkwall is that the mages there are probably the most pro-Circle of mages anywhere in Thedas. I mean, by the end of Act III, I can see no possible way for a mage to still be in the Circle rather than having fled to the Underground or been Tranquilled for being uppity other than being really, really passionate about the party line (dammit, Beth). I mean, you've got guys like Emile de Launcet and little Elle willing to take their chances as apostates. The people Meredith wanted dead were, by that point, the few mages in Thedas the very closest to her own ideals, the ones who were actually on her side.

Not particularly surprising Anders is so willing to see them dead...

[bleetman]

Xilizhra wrote...
She was never a possible solution, and has for her whole career been worse than useless to the mage problem.

Other than reining in the various nutjobs which later came to include act three Meredith, who were looking to wipe them out completely, that is. Meredith was rooting to annul the Circle for quite some time before she was finally able. One guess why she doesn't.

Not that I'm saying she couldn't have done a whole lot more. But that's not quite the same as saying she did absolutely nothing. If that was the case, Anders wouldn't have had to bother blowing up the Chantry to remove the chance for any further compromise between the two factions. He could've just put his feet up and waited.

Modifié par bleetman, 14 janvier 2012 - 05:10 .

[Xilizhra]

bleetman wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
She was never a possible solution, and has for her whole career been worse than useless to the mage problem.

Other than reining in the various nutjobs which later came to include act three Meredith, who were looking to wipe them out completely, that is. Meredith was rooting to annul the Circle for quite some time before she was finally able. One guess why she doesn't.

Not that I'm saying she couldn't have done a whole lot more. But that's not quite the same as saying she did absolutely nothing. If that was the case, Anders wouldn't have had to bother blowing up the Chantry to remove the chance for any further compromise between the two factions. He could've just put his feet up and waited.

That's why she was worse than useless, not just useless. It's not that she did nothing, it's that she actually hurt the mage cause by doing nothing to rein in the templars while facilitating the templars' reign of terror.

[bleetman]

I'm not entirely sure how keeping Meredith in check so she can't slaughter them all and rejecting the 'tranquil solution' equates with not reining in the Templars, but sure.

[vixvicco]

I disagree with anyone who wants to defend Anders's actions. He is a self-righteous hypocrite who thinks he deserves to be a hero or maytr for what he's done. I actually wrote a blog about this, but I wont bother linking it. I will put in my basic points:

Hypocrite: He bashes Merrill about her Blood Magic yet he's got a demon "infused" in his mind.
He bombs the Chantry and tries to justify it, despite the fact that there is NO DOUBT he killed some innocent people. He is willing to die not only to be a maytr, but even acknowledges that he's gone to far himself and that he never should have merged with Justice.

If any of you replay it, check a lot of his dialogue, especially with Aveline. You'll see what I mean. He's crazy, like mentally ill. No matter you think about religion in real life or in the game (lets face it, we've all had the debates about the Vatican), that does not justify any sort of violence to people of that religion. Yes, Elthina was an idiot, she probably deserved to die, but everyone else in that building''s only crime was being inside it.

[Xilizhra]

bleetman wrote...

I'm not entirely sure how keeping Meredith in check so she can't slaughter them all and rejecting the 'tranquil solution' equates with not reining in the Templars, but sure.

She's still allowing them to maintain a tyrannical rule over both the mages and, to a lesser extent, the entire city. It's grossly inadequate.

[Gervaise]

To my mind it was not just blowing up Elthina or that innocents in the Chantry may have be killed but the fact that he did it knowing full well the Circle mages would die as well. Then he just sits there and invites you to kill him because he wants to be a martyr. To make matters worse, if you spare him because you think he owes it to the poor suckers in the Circle to help you defend them, when you get to the Gallows, he thanks you for still supporting him. First run through I was tearing my hair out because I didn't do it for him, or his cause, but because I seemed the only person who thought that people shouldn't die for something they didn't want and didn't do. (I didn't have Sebastian in those days). And then to cap it all, when ruddy Orsino turns into the Harvester, Anders excuses him on the grounds that he is desperate. I was really disappointed that I didn't have an option to lock him in a deep dark dungeon and throw away the key.

[Urzon]

Xilizhra wrote...
The best interests of all mages, not just the ones in Kirkwall. It's quite arguable that those who died here were necessary for the greater good. Meredith, being driven nuts by the sword, has no real similar justification.

By far, the most dangerous words ever said in history. Because, it is always the innocents and common folk that suffer the most when it comes to the "greater good".

Modifié par Urzon, 15 janvier 2012 - 01:08 .

[Xilizhra]

Then he just sits there and invites you to kill him because he wants to be a martyr

Well, he does prefer to live.

And then to cap it all, when ruddy Orsino turns into the Harvester, Anders excuses him on the grounds that he is desperate. I was really disappointed that I didn't have an option to lock him in a deep dark dungeon and throw away the key.

Well, really, he was also going crazy at the time. I have nothing by sympathy for Orsino.

By far, the most dangerous words ever said in history. Because, it is always the innocents and common folk that suffer the most when it comes to the "greater good".

Maybe so, but that's because it's such a vital thing that many people will take the concept to abuse it. It doesn't invalidate the concept itself.

[Gervaise]

My sympathy for Osino sort of ended when I realised he'd helped the necromancer and also when he transformed into the Harvester to serve Meredith right, when she was nowhere in sight, we had just soundly defeated the first wave of templars and I was his ally.

However, the one I wanted to lock in the dungeon was Anders, not Orsino. Since he never liked being locked up that seemed the only fitting way to not reward him for what he did. Kill him - he wants to be a martyr. Spare him - he gets away with murder and may do more of the same. Make him tranquil - then he won't have any emotions to mind that you've done it.

You see that is my main objection to the bomb plot being undertaken by a romancable companion - naturally they have to allow for the possibility of him getting off scott free and to my mind the Anders that was left at the end of my first run through seemed neither overly guilt ridden or repentent about what he'd done. If they'd left out the bomb and just had Meredith ordering the Rite of Anulment because of, say, her suspicions of blood mages or even because the Grand Cleric had been found murdered, and then Anders leading a call to arms to defend the mages, I'd be fine. You could still support the templars because you think Meredith is right, or support Anders because you think he is right but you wouldn't have to condone planting a bomb.

Planting a bomb that kills innocent targets and leads the the death of more innocent targets is morally indefensible. Planting a bomb with a view to starting a war that will lead to countless more deaths is also morally indefensible. It also is not justice and if it is vengence then it is being committed for things done in the past, not for the greater good of those in the future. Anders cannot foresee precisely what his actions will do - it could result in the extermination of every senior mage in Thedas (outside of Tevinter) and even greater restrictions on the surviving apprentices of the future.. He has no idea of what he will put in place of the institution that he is tearing down. He could be setting up just another Tevinter, which isn't actually in the best interests of the majority of ordinary mages. How is any of that serving the greater good?

[bleetman]

Xilizhra wrote...

bleetman wrote...

I'm not entirely sure how keeping Meredith in check so she can't slaughter them all and rejecting the 'tranquil solution' equates with not reining in the Templars, but sure.

She's still allowing them to maintain a tyrannical rule over both the mages and, to a lesser extent, the entire city. It's grossly inadequate.

Which is why I said she obviously could've done more. That is not, however, the same thing as saying she did nothing whatsoever.

Xilizhra wrote...
The best interests of all mages, not just the ones in Kirkwall. It's quite arguable that those who died here were necessary for the greater good.

Given that the new Divine of the Chantry is, it would seem, highly sympathetic to mages and was rooting for a change to the way Circles run, I'm not entirely convinced of what "greater good" has apparently been accomplished here. All Anders has achieved is making any chance of a resolution considerably less likely, short of the mages annihilating the Chantry as an organisation down to the last follower. Some "greater good" that would be.

Modifié par bleetman, 15 janvier 2012 - 04:55 .