2008 réponses à ce sujet

[Xilizhra]

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.

Actually, the Lord Seeker seems to have kindly fixed that by wrenching the templars away from the Chantry, making the institution itself less of a military target. I'm not entirely sure I favor this, because the Chantry cannot escape its immense culpability in the numerous atrocities of the Templar Order, but it might help keep people alive.

[GavrielKay]

Urzon wrote...

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".

On the other hand, we've got 900 years of mage oppression "for the greater good" to think about.  How many innocent mages would have lived in bondage to make everyone else feel safe?

If I were a member of a group of people who were systematically collected at somewhere around puberty and locked up for life under whatever gaoler was chosen by a religion that feared and despised anyone like me...  well, I'd probably be willing to blow up a few buildings and start a war too.

Seriously, given his lifetime of alternating between prisoner and fugitive, the fact that he got so far in life with most of his wits and humor is amazing.  It isn't until he bonds with a spirit of Justice that he begins to get violent.  On his own, he just wanted to be safe and free.

"For the greater good" may be a dangerous concept, but occassionally it is actually correct.

[GavrielKay]

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.

Keeping Meredith from torturing and killing mages and keeping Alrik from Tranquiling them all is the absolute bare minimum that any breathing human being could possibly have done.

For a Grand Cleric with such public support it is pathetic. 

[DKJaigen]

Gervaise wrote...

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?

And this is what i call cowardice. Because something bad may happen does not mean it should happen. Many people in the past have fought for freedom and they knew that price of failure would be high. But its better then let a rotting system continue like this. Everybody that worships the maker is not innocent.

[Heimdall]

DKJaigen wrote...

Gervaise wrote...

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?

And this is what i call cowardice. Because something bad may happen does not mean it should happen. Many people in the past have fought for freedom and they knew that price of failure would be high. But its better then let a rotting system continue like this. Everybody that worships the maker is not innocent.

Now that is simply false.  What of those who worship the Maker but disagree with the chantry's interpretation of that "Magic must serve man not rule over him" line?  Do not equate the Andrastrian religion with the actions of the chantry.

Not to mention, holding the people of an organization responsible for something their predecesors did and they disagree with (And are trying to change) is simply an overindulgence of vengeance and morally reprehensible.

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 16 janvier 2012 - 02:00 .

[Urzon]

GavrielKay wrote...

On the other hand, we've got 900 years of mage oppression "for the greater good" to think about.  How many innocent mages would have lived in bondage to make everyone else feel safe?

If I were a member of a group of people who were systematically collected at somewhere around puberty and locked up for life under whatever gaoler was chosen by a religion that feared and despised anyone like me...  well, I'd probably be willing to blow up a few buildings and start a war too.

Seriously, given his lifetime of alternating between prisoner and fugitive, the fact that he got so far in life with most of his wits and humor is amazing.  It isn't until he bonds with a spirit of Justice that he begins to get violent.  On his own, he just wanted to be safe and free.

"For the greater good" may be a dangerous concept, but occassionally it is actually correct.

Blowing up a couple of buildings to start a war is never a good solution to anything. Even more so at the cost of lives of people who don't know any better. Chantry teaching is all they know, and it has been passed down the family for centuries for them. You can't expect them to change the way they think on something at a drop of a hat.
It takes time for whole population's thoughts to change.

The Circles were repurposed into what they are today for a reason. They were needed to contain and educate mages after the Imperium fell. With the huge change of power, mage revolts were almost a given. The Chantry mistake in this was, it was (like most humans) complacent on the matter. They saw they were doing a good job protecting the people from mage threats, and they thought it worked.

What they should have done is, after a reasonable amount of time (maybe a generation or two), start to reintroduce mages into the general population to lessen the fear the people have of them. The fear people had of them comes from them never being able to actually able to get to know them. When they first show signs of magic its straight off to the Circle, and the only stories people ever hear after that on mages are usually the bad ones: blood mages, abominations, dark magics, and demons.

Mage oppression could have been solved much earlier if the Chantry thought ahead on the matter.

And while any oppression is one of the worse things people can do. I'd have to say that mages got it easier compared to some others in Thedas. Tevinter still actually got slaves, the Qunari turn any who don't convert into mindless automatons for labor, average city elf have to live in slums and the best they can be is a servent or a poor merchant, and the common folk in Orlais is at the whims of the chevalier.

Mages on the other hand have: free food, housing, clothes, and one of the (if not THE) best educations in Thedas. Not to mention, while the Qunari and chevalier oppression might be newer than the oppression of mages; the slaves in Tevinter and the elves have been oppressed ALOT longer than mages were. Yet, they don't get near as much of an outcry on the matter than the mages do on the matter.

Modifié par Urzon, 16 janvier 2012 - 05:14 .

[Xilizhra]

Mages on the other hand have: free food, housing, clothes, and one of the (if not THE) best educations in Thedas. Not to mention, while the Qunari and chevalier oppression might be newer than the oppression of mages; the slaves in Tevinter and the elves have been oppressed ALOT longer than mages were. Yet, they don't get near as much of an outcry on the matter than the mages do on the matter.

Utterly, utterly incorrect. Fenris specifically mentions about Tevinter slaves that "There are revolts all the time, actually." We just don't hear about them due to being, y'know, not in Tevinter. And elven riots are fairly common as well, with one appearing at the end of DAO among others being mentioned in the background. The reason the mage rebellion has so much emphasis is specifically because of two things magic does: it allows numerous mages from disparate locations to communicate with each other, and it gives the mages an actual chance to win the war, unlike the easily squashed slaves and elves.

[Urzon]

Xilizhra wrote...

Mages on the other hand have: free food, housing, clothes, and one of the (if not THE) best educations in Thedas. Not to mention, while the Qunari and chevalier oppression might be newer than the oppression of mages; the slaves in Tevinter and the elves have been oppressed ALOT longer than mages were. Yet, they don't get near as much of an outcry on the matter than the mages do on the matter.

Utterly, utterly incorrect. Fenris specifically mentions about Tevinter slaves that "There are revolts all the time, actually." We just don't hear about them due to being, y'know, not in Tevinter. And elven riots are fairly common as well, with one appearing at the end of DAO among others being mentioned in the background. The reason the mage rebellion has so much emphasis is specifically because of two things magic does: it allows numerous mages from disparate locations to communicate with each other, and it gives the mages an actual chance to win the war, unlike the easily squashed slaves and elves.

Was I talking about the outcry from the players and people on the forum. People on this forum are deeply divided on the issue and very vocal about the oppression of mages. Yet lorewise, the mages have it alot easier than the slaves in Tevinter and the City/Dalish elves.

It's always about how "heartless" and "evil" the Chantry and Templars are, and how the mages should have their freedom. Not so much about how the laws in place and rulers that allow the rape and abuse of elves in the slums. Even if the people are caught, they usually only get a slap on the wrist since the victims are only "knife ears". Other than being tranquilized, all the same crimes that are committed against the mages are being done to the elves as well.

The crimes against the slaves in Tevinter really need no explanation, even more so if Fenris story is true. Them sacrificing a child just for Danarius to show off a new spell for a party.

Modifié par Urzon, 16 janvier 2012 - 06:41 .

[HiroVoid]

I'm still waiting for the game that focuses on the casteless and their struggle against the nobles.

[Xilizhra]

Urzon wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Mages on the other hand have: free food, housing, clothes, and one of the (if not THE) best educations in Thedas. Not to mention, while the Qunari and chevalier oppression might be newer than the oppression of mages; the slaves in Tevinter and the elves have been oppressed ALOT longer than mages were. Yet, they don't get near as much of an outcry on the matter than the mages do on the matter.

Utterly, utterly incorrect. Fenris specifically mentions about Tevinter slaves that "There are revolts all the time, actually." We just don't hear about them due to being, y'know, not in Tevinter. And elven riots are fairly common as well, with one appearing at the end of DAO among others being mentioned in the background. The reason the mage rebellion has so much emphasis is specifically because of two things magic does: it allows numerous mages from disparate locations to communicate with each other, and it gives the mages an actual chance to win the war, unlike the easily squashed slaves and elves.

Was I talking about the outcry from the players and people on the forum. People on this forum are deeply divided on the issue and very vocal about the oppression of mages. Yet lorewise, the mages have it alot easier than the slaves in Tevinter and the City/Dalish elves.

Tevinter slaves: there's no division. Everyone agrees Tevinter is bad and slavery is bad. There's really little to discuss.
Elves: Not much material in DA2, given its humanocentrism. Origins threads had more of that.

[dragonflight288]

Everybody that worships the maker is not innocent.

One thing that I think is sometimes overlooked is that belief in the Maker actually predates the Chantry. Andraste restored the worship of the Maker before her death, and roughly a century later an Orlesian emperor supported one of many Andrastian cults. And the two combined led a bloody crusade to spread both the Chant of Light (with a few modifications, like Shartan aiding Andraste suddenly being heretical) and Orlesian influence across Thedas. There are people like Alistair, who honestly believe in the Maker, but are incredibly skeptical when it comes to the Chantry.

Alistar: You want the Chantries version or the truth? They are usually not the same thing.

Alistair was made a borderline templar, but not through any choices made by him. He believes in the Maker and has little respect for the Chantry as far as the templars and their version of history goes. But he still believes in the Maker. He even stands up to Meredith about how mages in Ferelden should be treated...if her angry words at him in DA2 are anything to go off of.

But then you have people like Mother Petrice who are so fanatic to the Chantry, that anything that challenges it must be evil, and she will break any law or chantry creed so long as she defends the chantry because it's a lesser evil (in her mind) than to do nothing in the face of a challenge, like the Arishok not doing anything to them until she provoked him....

My personal opinion is that Elthina was incredibly popular and she had a lot of popular support. She was looking for any means for a compromise between the mages and the templars. Problem is (in my mind) was that she didn't...or wouldn't see that Meredith was losing her sanity through increased paranoia (as I saw it on my first playthrough) and the templars had absolutely no oversight or anything keeping them from abusing their power.

By the time Act 3 rolls around, Meredith is the acting Viscount and has been for three years. At the very least, Elthina SHOULD'VE stepped in and told Meredith to mind the Gallows, the mages and the templars. Leave politics to the nobles, and if they elect someone who isn't pro-templars, or at least won't let themselves be pushed around by the templars, well the templars duty is to the mages anyway.

Elthina allowed Meredith way too much political power. The templars were trying to oust Aveline and take control of the guard, they weren't allowing any noble to step up and become the new viscount, and they were way too involved with things that went beyond the duties of a templar. Even in Act 1, she had too much influence over Dumar as Hawke is told she is the power in Kirkwall before even stepping into the city.

Did Meredith need to step down? Yes. Would it mean she would be forcibly retired? Most likely. Did Elthina have the authority and responsibility? Certainly. Did she use it? No. Did she want to see there was a problem with the templar's? Not at all. It seemed to me, at times she was holding her fingers in her ears and going "la la la, can't hear you" whenever it came up that she would have to do something about the tension. Her reaction for the Qunari? Leave it to the will of the Maker (although I greatly respected her when she told off Petrice, and didn't bat an eye when the Qunari assassinated her.) Her reaction to the mages and templars? Let's look for a compromise. Orsino isn't unreasonable, he can make concessions...

Never once did she mention Meredith in that conversation.

[GavrielKay]

Urzon wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...

On the other hand, we've got 900 years of mage oppression "for the greater good" to think about.  How many innocent mages would have lived in bondage to make everyone else feel safe?

If I were a member of a group of people who were systematically collected at somewhere around puberty and locked up for life under whatever gaoler was chosen by a religion that feared and despised anyone like me...  well, I'd probably be willing to blow up a few buildings and start a war too.

Seriously, given his lifetime of alternating between prisoner and fugitive, the fact that he got so far in life with most of his wits and humor is amazing.  It isn't until he bonds with a spirit of Justice that he begins to get violent.  On his own, he just wanted to be safe and free.

"For the greater good" may be a dangerous concept, but occassionally it is actually correct.

Blowing up a couple of buildings to start a war is never a good solution to anything.

Let's rather say "almost never" a good solution.  Moral absolutes are hard to come by.

The fact is that people have a right to fight for their freedom.  That the Chantry owns the hearts, minds, and at least where mages are concerned, the politics of most of the game world gives precious few alternatives.  Extreme pacifism (a la Ghandi) only works when the group on the other side of the bargaining table cares to let it work.  Violence is the right answer when there are no peaceful alternatives.

You can't expect them to change the way they think on something at a drop of a hat.  It takes time for whole population's thoughts to change.

Change requires pressure.  Either peaceful or violent.  As 900 years of the peaceful sort wasn't working, I think it's fair to say violence might be required.

I do not believe that when no peaceful solution is possible, that the oppressed party must simply give up and suffer so that no collateral damage is inflicted.

Mage oppression could have been solved much earlier if the Chantry thought ahead on the matter.

Those who feel they have divine authority and mandate to do something rarely stop and think about quitting.  The Chantry derives much of its power and influence from control of the mages, they were unlikely to walk away from that.

Mages on the other hand have: free food, housing, clothes, and one of the (if not THE) best educations in Thedas.

A gilded cage is still a cage.

Not to mention, while the Qunari and chevalier oppression might be newer than the oppression of mages; the slaves in Tevinter and the elves have been oppressed ALOT longer than mages were. Yet, they don't get near as much of an outcry on the matter than the mages do on the matter.

Well, they were only tangential to the main plot of the game, so I guess most people don't write about it.  I think the way elves are treated is horrible too.  And don't get me started on the Qunari.  This thread wasn't really about them though.

Modifié par GavrielKay, 16 janvier 2012 - 07:04 .

[Lazy Jer]

Note:  I haven't read all the posts in this thread before dropping in my two cents.  If you wonder why...look at the name.

The OP has a point in my opinion. 

Anders had a goal, the eradication of the Circle of Magi.  He allowed innocents to suffer in the implementation of that goal.  Who were the innocents?  They were the people who had gone to the Chantry or worked in the Chantry at Kirkwall.  It's all well and good to claim that the Chantry isn't innocent because of the things people have done in the name of Andraste and/or the Maker (The Exalted March on the Dales for example).  But the Grand Cleric didn't march on the dales or opress mages, nor did many of the young sisters or chanters who worked there, nor the woman downstairs praying for her family or the man upstairs praying for...different reasons.  These people were innocents.  They died to further Anders goal.

Meredeth had a goal, the eradication of blood magic.  She allowed innocents to suffer in the implementation of that goal.  Who were the innocents?  They were the mages under her care that weren't blood mages, or who weren't blood mages before she started putting her foot down.  It should be noted that the game doesn't show this a lot personally but does make clear reference to what's happening.  Varric at the begining of Act 3 makes reference to her tightening her grip.  Take for example the practice of making mages Tranquil against their will.  Meredeth may have disallowed the so-called Tranquil Solution, but it's fairly certain that enough mages were made Tranquil against their will for Anders, and even Fanriel to have heard that mages are made Tranquil under the slightest provication.  It's hard to believe this could happen without Meredeth's knowledge.  Most importantly, though, she calls for the Right of Annulment inspite of First Enchanter Osino's decision to give Meredeth whatever she wanted, saying that she "Cannot stay (her) hand.", but giving no further explanation.  Any attempt to use "the people" as an excuse rings hollow, to my ears at least, given that she had the actual perpetrator of the crime directly in front of her.

So there you have it.  Two sides, one coin.

BTW...I am a mage supporter inspite of Anders not because of him.

[Lazy Jer]

HiroVoid wrote...

I'm still waiting for the game that focuses on the casteless and their struggle against the nobles.

Good point, if any group of people gets f-ed over on a regular basis it's them.

[GavrielKay]

Lazy Jer wrote...

Note:  I haven't read all the posts in this thread before dropping in my two cents.  If you wonder why...look at the name.

The OP has a point in my opinion. 

So there you have it.  Two sides, one coin.

BTW...I am a mage supporter inspite of Anders not because of him.

Do you think that it matters that Meredith is willing to kill to maintain an oppressive regime and Anders kills to overthrow it?

[CrimsonZephyr]

GavrielKay wrote...

Lazy Jer wrote...

Note:  I haven't read all the posts in this thread before dropping in my two cents.  If you wonder why...look at the name.

The OP has a point in my opinion. 

So there you have it.  Two sides, one coin.

BTW...I am a mage supporter inspite of Anders not because of him.

Do you think that it matters that Meredith is willing to kill to maintain an oppressive regime and Anders kills to overthrow it?

And what would be built on top of the ruins? A new Tevinter?

[GavrielKay]

CrimsonZephyr wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...

Lazy Jer wrote...

Note:  I haven't read all the posts in this thread before dropping in my two cents.  If you wonder why...look at the name.

The OP has a point in my opinion. 

So there you have it.  Two sides, one coin.

BTW...I am a mage supporter inspite of Anders not because of him.

Do you think that it matters that Meredith is willing to kill to maintain an oppressive regime and Anders kills to overthrow it?

And what would be built on top of the ruins? A new Tevinter?

No, clearly that is not a good system. 

Any number of threads have posts with any number of possible better ways to train mages and safeguard the populace.

For me, the main point is that if something is as glaringly wrong as the Circle system, then it is ok to fight against it.  Even if there is collateral damage and even if there are possible outcomes that aren't good either.

[CrimsonZephyr]

GavrielKay wrote...

CrimsonZephyr wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...

Lazy Jer wrote...

Note:  I haven't read all the posts in this thread before dropping in my two cents.  If you wonder why...look at the name.

The OP has a point in my opinion. 

So there you have it.  Two sides, one coin.

BTW...I am a mage supporter inspite of Anders not because of him.

Do you think that it matters that Meredith is willing to kill to maintain an oppressive regime and Anders kills to overthrow it?

And what would be built on top of the ruins? A new Tevinter?

No, clearly that is not a good system. 

Any number of threads have posts with any number of possible better ways to train mages and safeguard the populace.

For me, the main point is that if something is as glaringly wrong as the Circle system, then it is ok to fight against it.  Even if there is collateral damage and even if there are possible outcomes that aren't good either.

So if mages became slave lords, yo'd just shrug and say, "well, what can ya do? All those people deserve it!"

[Heimdall]

GavrielKay wrote...

Lazy Jer wrote...

Note:  I haven't read all the posts in this thread before dropping in my two cents.  If you wonder why...look at the name.

The OP has a point in my opinion. 

So there you have it.  Two sides, one coin.

BTW...I am a mage supporter inspite of Anders not because of him.

Do you think that it matters that Meredith is willing to kill to maintain an oppressive regime and Anders kills to overthrow it?

Both believe their cause to be righteous.  What you or I think on that point doesn't matter to the question of whether Meredith and Anders are alike.

[HiroVoid]

GavrielKay wrote...

CrimsonZephyr wrote...

GavrielKay wrote...

Lazy Jer wrote...

Note:  I haven't read all the posts in this thread before dropping in my two cents.  If you wonder why...look at the name.

The OP has a point in my opinion. 

So there you have it.  Two sides, one coin.

BTW...I am a mage supporter inspite of Anders not because of him.

Do you think that it matters that Meredith is willing to kill to maintain an oppressive regime and Anders kills to overthrow it?

And what would be built on top of the ruins? A new Tevinter?

No, clearly that is not a good system. 

Any number of threads have posts with any number of possible better ways to train mages and safeguard the populace.

For me, the main point is that if something is as glaringly wrong as the Circle system, then it is ok to fight against it.  Even if there is collateral damage and even if there are possible outcomes that aren't good either.

That's....a horrible train of thought actually.  There have been plenty of revolutions where after everything was said and done, another dictator just took its place and nothing changed in the overall scheme because all they wanted to do was fight that current system.  By the time everything's said and done, all that changed was a war happened that killed a bunch of people. 

I understand that the mages didn't start the war if what I'm hearing about Asunder is right, but they need to figure out what they're going to do after all is said and done if they want to be able to organize a new structure for the mages.  If they can't come up with a clear plan for mages to follow by, the outcome could end up being worse or just as bad as the previous institution.  And that's only taking account if they win the war.

So what system can they make that the majority would agree by?  Complete freedom for every mage?  Well, a lot of mage seems to agree that there needs to be a place for every mage to go to learn how to use their power.  But what about those who don't want to do that?  Then, once a mage goes a long the world to do as he pleases, how do people keep in check those who use blood magic to manipulate people?  There are a lot of questions that mages need to ask themselves before this is all over when a lot of mages will probably desire revenge, and to take everything they can possibly get and dam* those who get in their way.  Those mages will need to be held accounted for.

[Xilizhra]

Both believe their cause to be righteous. What you or I think on that point doesn't matter to the question of whether Meredith and Anders are alike.

Does that count? Everyone believes their cause to be righteous.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 17 janvier 2012 - 04:26 .

[Heimdall]

Xilizhra wrote...

Both believe their cause to be righteous. What you or I think on that point doesn't matter to the question of whether Meredith and Anders are alike.

Does that count? Everyone believes their cause to be righteous.

Not everyone believes it is acceptable to kill innocents in the name of that cause.  That, they share.

[Xilizhra]

One difference: Meredith doesn't believe anyone standing in her way is in fact innocent. Anders acknowledges innocence, even if he has to attack it.

[Heimdall]

Xilizhra wrote...

One difference: Meredith doesn't believe anyone standing in her way is in fact innocent. Anders acknowledges innocence, even if he has to attack it.

Meredith believed her killings where preventatory, at least when she called the right of annulment.  It was not until a little later the lyrium took her and she started claiming each and every one of them was a blood mage.  She even commends Orsino for his offer.  She just believed the killing the innocent was acceptable as long as the threat of magic was eliminated.  Anders too believed the killing of innocents was accetable as long as his purposes were achieved.

[TEWR]

Lord Aesir wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

One difference: Meredith doesn't believe anyone standing in her way is in fact innocent. Anders acknowledges innocence, even if he has to attack it.

Meredith believed her killings where preventatory, at least when she called the right of annulment.  It was not until a little later the lyrium took her and she started claiming each and every one of them was a blood mage.  She even commends Orsino for his offer.  She just believed the killing the innocent was acceptable as long as the threat of magic was eliminated.  Anders too believed the killing of innocents was accetable as long as his purposes were achieved.

She accuses a pro-Templar Hawke of being a blood mage thrall when he/she informs Meredith of the fact that Orsino had absolutely nothing to do with the Mage-Templar rebellion.

Not to mention the Lyrium idol managed to begin infecting Bartrand immediately as it glowed when he got his hands on it -- something it also did when Hawke grabbed it. Luckily, Hawke wasn't in prolonged contact with it.

And since the player can see her with the lyriumsaber in the beginning of Act III and hear how she's been talking to people that aren't really there -- at least to anyone other than Meredith -- she had been cuckoo for cocoa puffs for a long time now.

Meredith had also been going behind Elthina's back to try and get the Right of Annulment sanctioned from the Divine, after Elthina point-blank told her no.

That she calls them "preventable" doesn't mean she didn't want to kill them all.

EDIT: Also, the Mage-Templar war has been going on longer than people think. It was just going on in secret, sometimes in the Circles themselves. Anders -- and subsequently Meredith and the events in Asunder -- just happened to bring the war to the knowledge of the public.

"We're fed up, and we're no longer fighting in secret."

So they never really started a war. They just exacerbated the war.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 17 janvier 2012 - 05:51 .