134 réponses à ce sujet

[ReubenLiew]

Are we now forgetting that Daemons feed on SOULS!

Leaving that templar alone just means that you have condemned his soul to snack food. And possibly others too. They don't 'feed' off emotions, this isn't 40k, the codex mentions (including the Fade part) that Daemons revel in sensations but ultimately it's all about eating people's souls and lifeforce.

[Talieth]

I (as well as my PC) tend to think like Wildfire Darkstar : I may not "like" desire demons, but this one in particular seems more interested in experiencing the feelings of mortals than wrecking havoc. And more importantly, (s)he won't stand in my way.

My character is the exiled dwarf daughter of a king who have killed her brothers in cold blood so that he couldn't do the same to her. Now she is a grey warden with the task of stopping a Blight.
Demons are not a grey warden problem. Darkspawn are.
Beside that, it is said in the codex that not all denizen of the fade are evil ...

I understand the fact that most people feel that it is "good" to kill the desire demon, but i have no moral problem with letting her/him live.

Also, try considering things with the desire demon point of view : living its life in the fade, then some alien creature (a mage) rip you (summoning) from your reality into a new world ...

Lianaar wrote...
That demon did not lie to me. She told me clearly what she wants and what would happen to the child. If we didn't agree, she possessed the child saying: she is mine, I won't let you have her. But she didn't lie. She didn't tell me she will give up without fight should I say no. She didn't tell me she'll leave the girl alone if I say no. She was clear: I will merge with her and she will cease to exist to give room for something different.

Well, she did tell me she would leave the girl alone. And she changed her mind after i was done with the puzzle ...

[Original182]

That demon did not lie to me. She told me clearly what she wants and what would happen to the child. If we didn't agree, she possessed the child saying: she is mine, I won't let you have her. But she didn't lie. She didn't tell me she will give up without fight should I say no. She didn't tell me she'll leave the girl alone if I say no. She was clear: I will merge with her and she will cease to exist to give room for something different.

She did lie to me, when I made a deal with her saying that I would free her if she would let the girl go. But in the end, she still wanted to keep the girl. It was only due to luck that the girl broke free and ran away.

The codex in game is deliberately showing things from a given perspective. They are written by someone and the events are filtered by the writer's moral code. If you talk with people you will hear information that contradicts the information in the codex 100%. Just consider how many versions of Flemeth's tale there are and what common points they posses?

Codex is in line with what everyone thinks about demons. Everyone from the Chantry, Templars, Circle of Mages, and even Morrigan thinks they are evil. There is not one person who says demons are misunderstood.

It is grey, everything in this game is grey. You might wish to see it as black and white, but that is just a step toward realism of the game. People can see the same things and have a different reading from it because that is how the game is designed, thanks for the Marker(s) for that.

Not everything. The Blight is clearly evil, like demons. The shades of grey you're referring to are things like the Templars stance on Right of Annulment, Chantry repression of mages, etc. But just because there are shades of grey, doesn't mean everything is. Demons are obviously evil, much like how the Blight is evil.

Demon. And what gives that name to creatures? So who is the filter that calls something good or bad?

The same game developers who say that the Blight are evil that must be eradicated.

And there we go again. Codex. But the codex might easily be self contraditional. Right? Oh wait, yes, they can! Please refer to the easiest example: Flemeth.

The Codex is contradicted by Morrigan's account of Flemeth, or even Leliana's.
Show me an in-game statement from someone that demons are not all evil.
And you have yet to show me one, despite responding to 2 of my statements asking for one.

Next thing you want to tell me is that we did not land on the moon, only because it is "possible to counter" the proof with words.

If... yes if they are.
I doubt there is such thing as evil box. Evin within evil there are measures. Some are less evil or more evil. Some might be evil, but are beneficial for the great good, so some deeds seem to be quite rightous if you look at it from a larger picture. Or smaller depending on what you do. It is not a simple "it has a demon written over its head, so I must kill it or I am bad" schema.

You either end the Blight or it kills everyone. That is good enough reason to say that the Blight is evil. Like demons.

[Maria Caliban]

Lianaar wrote...
I suggest to pick in the game as the personality of the PC you play wishes it. A blood mage might have no trouble with it. A templar likely should. A devout follower of the Maker should too.

I played a devout follower of the Maker, and let them go. Spirits are the Maker's first children, and no where in the Chant does it say that demons are evil or should be killed.

ReubenLiew wrote...

Are we now forgetting that Daemons feed on SOULS!
Leaving that templar alone just means that you have condemned his soul to snack food. And possibly others too. They don't 'feed' off emotions, this isn't 40k, the codex mentions (including the Fade part) that Daemons revel in sensations but ultimately it's all about eating people's souls and lifeforce.

Spirits don't feed on souls. They feed on the mortal psyche, which includes everything from desire to love to rage to mercy to pride to compassion.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 26 novembre 2009 - 02:03 .

[Rugaru]

Maria...you read the whole chant did you?

[ReubenLiew]

Wait... which part of the Chant said daemons aren't evil? I thought that was the whole point of putting the Chantry in power over Mages? You know, because they learn Blood Magic THROUGH DAEMONS?

[Lianaar]

Original182 wrote...
Codex is in line with what everyone thinks about demons. Everyone from the Chantry, Templars, Circle of Mages, and even Morrigan thinks they are evil. There is not one person who says demons are misunderstood.

Everyone you ask about. The codex might be right or might not be right. Flemeth merged with a demon, and I don't hear Morrigan say she is evil. As a matter of fact Flemeth did some good things and stopped the 'ultimate evil' of the blight.

Not everything. The Blight is clearly evil, like demons. The shades of grey you're referring to are things like the Templars stance on Right of Annulment, Chantry repression of mages, etc. But just because there are shades of grey, doesn't mean everything is. Demons are obviously evil, much like how the Blight is evil.

The Blight is clearly erradicating everything in its way and as such is for my characters highly undesirable. As for evil? I am sorry, but I don't know enough to know it was evil. Spartacus was evil fr the Roman citizens and a hero for the slaves. If the bligth is an attempt of the old gods to break free from the imprisonment of the Maker, then it can be seen as not evil. Again, not saying it is evil or not. Merely that from the point of view of my characters it is a 'MUST STOP' event.

The same game developers who say that the Blight are evil that must be eradicated.

I would again translate it to 'a must stop or life as we know it will cease to exist'. Entirely something my chars work for. They want to stop it. But my chars don't much give a damn wether darkspawn are evil or not.

The Codex is contradicted by Morrigan's account of Flemeth, or even Leliana's.
Show me an in-game statement from someone that demons are not all evil.
And you have yet to show me one, despite responding to 2 of my statements asking for one.

The case of Flemeth proved that the codex is not always correct. As I can not talk with demonologists in the game and ask about their studies and apostates and other merged creatures, I do have little chance to prove. I however proved, that the codex is not 100% true, even if canon. We still arguing about the -chance- that things are not one sided black and white, but that there are perceptions that make events have different priorities.

Next thing you want to tell me is that we did not land on the moon, only because it is "possible to counter" the proof with words.

Let us not mix IG and RL. The two things are not the same. We have first hand experience from RL things and chances to learn more either proof or counterproof is broad. The game only offers knowledge which was selected with a deliberate care in order to keep us able to experience different views.

You either end the Blight or it kills everyone. That is good enough reason to say that the Blight is evil. Like demons.

If I don't kill all demons, the world still survives. The Blight is not a moral statement. It doesn't kill just good people or only to gain money. The most terrifying thing in the blight is its neutrality. It simply taints everything. I can easily imagine a varioation where Blight isn't evil though. And I can not imagine a character I play that cares how rightous or evil the blight is as long as her living environment is endangered.

Modifié par Lianaar, 26 novembre 2009 - 02:08 .

[Original182]

Wildfire Darkstar wrote...
I guess it's really just a question of how you approach the game. If you view the codex as a unbiased, incontrovertible source of facts, then yes, there's no room for doubt. If you see it as a collection of documents that are probably not outright lies but may very well have their own perspectives and biases, there's more room for doubt and interpretation. It all depends on how you wish to engage with the game, ultimately.

I was responding to your post that claims you cannot say all Desire Demons are evil just because the one possessing Connor is evil. You compared it to saying all teryns must be like Loghain.

If your main point is that you wanted to let the Desire Demon go, just because that's how your character works, that is your choice. The comparison of Desire Demons to Loghain was not necessary.

[Maria Caliban]

Couldar wrote...

Maria...you read the whole chant did you?

I've read everything I could, yes. If you can find me a section that says demons are bad and should be killed, I'd appreciate it.

ReubenLiew wrote...

Wait... which part of the Chant said daemons aren't evil? I thought that was the whole point of putting the Chantry in power over Mages? You know, because they learn Blood Magic THROUGH DAEMONS?

The first dreamers learned magic through the old gods, who were not spirits. Spirits whispered to mortals and told them the high-dragons were gods, but the first sin is that humanity turned away from the Maker, not that some spirits lied.

Yes, demons can teach blood magic. Then again, a desire demon can offer you wealth, power, beauty, love, etc. It’s hardly the demon’s fault that some mages desire to learn blood magic.

[Lianaar]

If my words sound as if I want to tell anyone how to play their chars, then that is not my intention. Quite on the contrary. That is in response to devout followers of Maker.

I indeed intone that a decision made by the character is not evil only because they let the demon go.

It might be, but it is not necessary.

[KalDurenik]

When you read the things in game about demons and spirits you are reading it from a "person" in the games point of view. If there is a war betwen 2 factions both factions will write bad things about eachother and call eachother evil... Who is right?

There is no proof in game saying "If thou find a demon they are all evil and shall be smited" humans are after all the ones seeking them out alot of the times and lets not forget we are entering their realm. Who is to say that they began the fights? Maybe we "invaded" them first.

Anyway just like media irl you shouldn't allways take everything serious.

Modifié par KalDurenik, 26 novembre 2009 - 02:14 .

[Rugaru]

You have lots of proof of what demons do, you fight bunches of them along the way up the tower to get to the desire demon. None of those stop you and say " hey wait I'm not bad please don't kill me", nor do any of them show themselves to be "good". From a characters perspective all you see is "bad" demons up to this point (not counting kitty demon even though it aint a good one). Why would you then stop and think "ok maybe this is a good demon"...

[ReubenLiew]

Yes the problem however the old Gods are already considered evil. And anything that can or will teach Blood Magic is also evil, in the eyes of the Chantry. So if all daemons can teach Blood Magic, ergo a devout follower of the Chantry would therefore summarize that all daemons are evil!

So, you know, devout??

[Lianaar]

Couldar wrote...
Why would you then stop and think "ok maybe this is a good demon"...

Who said I do? 
I might consider the demon wants to live more then wants to raise havok.
That the demon won't go into massacre and start to erradicate the civilasion my char lives in.
And also that the demon's interests don't contradict my characters goals.

Would you make a pact with a demon to stop the blight? (yes and no are both very justifyable in my mind)

[IronVanguard]

ReubenLiew wrote...

There can be no mercy for the Daemon, better death than false promises, for the Daemon only deals in lies, and any happiness is but fleeting and shallow compared to the joy of serving and dying in the Emperors name! In the name of the Ordo Malleus, I smite ye...

...

This is the only stance you need.
Heretics.

[Original182]

Lianaar wrote...

Everyone you ask about. The codex might be right or might not be right. Flemeth merged with a demon, and I don't hear Morrigan say she is evil. As a matter of fact Flemeth did some good things and stopped the 'ultimate evil' of the blight.

Flemeth used you for the chance that Morrigan may have an offspring containing the essence of the Old God, as what Morrigan confessed near the end. The stopping of the Blight was just a cover story.
So no, she didn't do a good thing. If there was no value for you, she would have left you to die in the tower.

The Blight is clearly erradicating everything in its way and as such is for my characters highly undesirable. As for evil? I am sorry, but I don't know enough to know it was evil. Spartacus was evil fr the Roman citizens and a hero for the slaves. If the bligth is an attempt of the old gods to break free from the imprisonment of the Maker, then it can be seen as not evil. Again, not saying it is evil or not. Merely that from the point of view of my characters it is a 'MUST STOP' event.

Unbelievable, you don't know about the Blight enough to know that it is evil? Must there be a 100-page clear-cut definition of evil before you admit that it is?

If that is your stance on evil, then I can see why you don't believe demons are evil. I don't think there is much more to discuss after this reply.

The case of Flemeth proved that the codex is not always correct. As I can not talk with demonologists in the game and ask about their studies and apostates and other merged creatures, I do have little chance to prove. I however proved, that the codex is not 100% true, even if canon. We still arguing about the -chance- that things are not one sided black and white, but that there are perceptions that make events have different priorities.

The first-hand testimonies of numerous people and organizations that demons are evil, coupled by evidence of how demons are destructive beings based on what happened to Connor and the Circle of Magi, is convincing proof that demons are evil. There is not a single demon that is neutral or good. Therefore it's a fact that demons are evil.

But I don't think I can further explain it to someone who doesn't even believe the Blight is evil.

Let us not mix IG and RL. The two things are not the same. We have first hand experience from RL things and chances to learn more either proof or counterproof is broad. The game only offers knowledge which was selected with a deliberate care in order to keep us able to experience different views.

And the first-hand [in-game] experience of how evil demons are to your character should be proof enough that demons in the game world are evil.

If I don't kill all demons, the world still survives. The Blight is not a moral statement. It doesn't kill just good people or only to gain money. The most terrifying thing in the blight is its neutrality. It simply taints everything. I can easily imagine a varioation where Blight isn't evil though. And I can not imagine a character I play that cares how rightous or evil the blight is as long as her living environment is endangered.

It is apparent that the word "evil" doesn't exist in your vocabulary. I believe further discussion is futile.

[Maria Caliban]

Lianaar wrote...

If my words sound as if I want to tell anyone how to play their chars, then that is not my intention. Quite on the contrary. That is in response to devout followers of Maker.
I indeed intone that a decision made by the character is not evil only because they let the demon go.
It might be, but it is not necessary.

I didn't read it that way. However, a number of people seem to conflate the Chantry with Christianity and Chantry demons with Christian demons.

I think it’s very possible to play a pious Andrestian without needing to immediately smite every demon you meet. As others have mentioned, the most devout member of your group gains approval when you let the desire demon and the Templar go.

[Rugaru]

What I was suggesting was that during the course of all this, you are killing demons and moving kill demons and move. This one says something so you stop, you talk to it and then decide whether or not to kill it. Why, if you are killing demons to free Irving and the tower would you not just smack this one and keep going? Is it just because it talks to you?

[Maria Caliban]

Couldar wrote...

You have lots of proof of what demons do, you fight bunches of them along the way up the tower to get to the desire demon. None of those stop you and say " hey wait I'm not bad please don't kill me", nor do any of them show themselves to be "good". From a characters perspective all you see is "bad" demons up to this point (not counting kitty demon even though it aint a good one). Why would you then stop and think "ok maybe this is a good demon"...

I never said it was a good demon. I said that a devout believer in the Maker wouldn't nessarily see a demon as evil and feel the need to kill them. In fact, the Chant doesn't seem to say much about being a 'good' person. To sin is to misuse magic or not believe in Andreste or the Maker.

Killing? Stealing? Lying? We don't read anything in the Chant about that. It might be there, but we're not shown it.

In fact, the Chant says that there's to be balance in all things, and that for every creature and thing created, the Maker has created an opposite. This would suggest that moderation is considered more important than good/evil.

[Maria Caliban]

ReubenLiew wrote...

Yes the problem however the old Gods are already considered evil. And anything that can or will teach Blood Magic is also evil, in the eyes of the Chantry. So if all daemons can teach Blood Magic, ergo a devout follower of the Chantry would therefore summarize that all daemons are evil!
So, you know, devout??

You're just making this up as you go along, aren't you?

The Chant says that blood mages are malificarium and are to be hunted down and killed. At no point does it say that every creature in creation or the Fade that can teach blood magic is evil or should be killed. If that were the case, then spirits of knowledge, compassion, and faith would be considered evil.

[Rugaru]

My point in regards to the chant is that "we" don't have the whole thing so you can't really use it for a guide. If you can't or don't have the whole then don't use it as a reference. Unless you are specifically quoting parts of it.

[Maria Caliban]

Couldar wrote...

My point in regards to the chant is that "we" don't have the whole thing so you can't really use it for a guide. If you can't or don't have the whole then don't use it as a reference. Unless you are specifically quoting parts of it.

There are Christians that have never sat down and read the entire Bible from cover to cover. Comprehensive religous study for a Hindu would likely fill a small den.

We're talking about role-playing a devout follower of the Maker would do. This might be a human noble who's studied and memorized the Chant or an illiterate city elf that only knows what he's heard during services.

We don't need the entire thing, when the game makes it clear that the most important bits are worshiping the Maker (and only the maker) and keeping mages in line.

[Rugaru]

For christians that is one of the reasons I don't listen to them...



But what I'm saying is that saying something is or isn't in the chant is not possible without knowing the whole thing. You can't really be a devout anything without knowing the full extent of it, otherwise you are just a blind follower.

[Maria Caliban]

Couldar wrote...

For christians that is one of the reasons I don't listen to them...

But what I'm saying is that saying something is or isn't in the chant is not possible without knowing the whole thing. You can't really be a devout anything without knowing the full extent of it, otherwise you are just a blind follower.

1. We actually can know this by asking one of the writers that worked on the Chant.

2. I don't see devolution as being contrary to blind obedience. One can be devout and ignorant or devout and knowledgeable. One can be devout and skeptical or devout and fanatical. It would be nice if everyone who was devout took the time to study their religion. It would also be nice if birds would stop pooping on my car, but I’d never suggest that because a bird pooped on my car it wasn’t a bird.

Edit: That last metaphor was truly bizarre. Please forgive me, I’ve been up all night working on something.

[Rugaru]

lol same here Maria



To me though you can't truly be devoted to something while being oblivious to it, that is how cults work. Would love to get one of the writers in here but alas I think it will never happen