384 réponses à ce sujet

[The Night Haunter]

MisterJB wrote...

ghostmessiah202 wrote...
Who did the Dalish attempt to culturally assassinate??

Orlais. They went so far as to sack the capital.
Just because they failed, doesn't mean they didn't try to destroy Orlais.

Orlais did in fact commit slavery, they simply call it servitude to make it sound better. It isn't straight forward slavery, but it is slavery none the less, just like the early 1900's in the American south wealthy white people had black servants who were basically slaves, because they had no other options (the african-americans, not the rich peeps)

Elves are paid, well treated and are free to leave whenever they please. The few nobles who disrespect these terms are punished by the Empress.
It's not slavery, it's social inequality which still exists today and will always exist.

The Dalish tried to destroy Orlais??? I think you are getting confused here, they tried to WIN A WAR. Notice that Germany didn't destroy French culture in WW2 after roflstomping them, they also didn't destroy norweigen culture after conquering Norway. The DID try to destroy eastern culture, but that doesnt mean every war fought means a culture is destroyed.
Other examples: Russia has periodicly expanded ever since Muscowy became Russia, it ADOPTS the cultures it conquers, it doesnt try to eliminate them.

Plus the Dalish weren't trying to conquer or Orlais, they were trying to get Orlais to surrender and acknowledge the Dales right to exist.

[The Night Haunter]

MisterJB wrote...
The dalish try kill anyone that comes close to their camps, even if it is just an harmless old man like Brother Genitivi.
The truth is that elves are an incredibly racist and hostile species and that they could have very well attacked human land over those non agressive actions I pointed out.

So you are saying that after a thousand years of persecution the elves are suspicious of outsiders venturing into their territory? That seems rather reasonable.

As to the it is their territory arguement you will doubtless make, the Native Americans didn't believe in ownership of the land, but they defended their villages. The Elves seem to parrallel this. Just because Fereldan says they own the Brecilian forest doesnt mean they do. So Dalish elves might not recognize that ownership and thus consider humans who venture close to them a threat.

As to 'harmless old man' i'd say mages can look pretty harmless while being very dangerous so that arguement holds little water.

[MisterJB]

ghostmessiah202 wrote...
Umm sure the Spanish missionaries in california who persecuted the american natives was just them sharing their culture! All good!

Many, many nations have prevented missionaries from spreading 'heretical' beliefs in their nations. This isn't bad, it just is. Russia prevented Roman Catholics from entering, Austria stopped Muslim's venturing into Europe. Japan stopped all contact with the outside world for hundreds of years.

I think you're getting too fixated on America's free religion and thinking every nation should do that because everything else is wrong. That is a very narrow point of view, and only really works for western culture. The Elves in DA are not an equivalent Western Culture they dont have the same beliefs, and you don't respect that.

Just because you think one religion is correct doesn't mean everyone should be forced to acknowledge that religion.

First of all, I'm European.
Second, like everyone else, I judge the actions of others based on my own ideals which were taught to me by the society I was born into.
There is no evidence of Andrastian missionaries or Templars harming elves in any way. They have the "right" to deny entry into their land based on whatever reason but I simply find this to be a very foolish action.
If you do not strive towards making a friend of your neighbors, do not cry fould if they become your enemy. The dwarven government understand this and it's why they go to great lengths to appease humanity through commerce and by allowing Brother Burkel to open a Chantry.
Had the elves been more willing to cooperate with humans, their nation might still exist in the Dragon Age.

And yes, I do find it morally repulsive to start a war over non agressive missionarism rather than, say, increasing border patrol.

[Fiacre]

MisterJB wrote...
Sharing your culture is a bad thing now?
Missionarism, commerce and diplomacy are not acts of agression. The elves displayed and continue to display shameful intolerance and racism.

Sharing it isn't. Pushing ot on people that don't want it is. The elves may be intolerant, but they have a lot of reason to be. They're also trying to reclaim their culture, they aren't intresested in Andrasteism. The Chantry is free to sent missionaries. If the elves make it clear they don't wnat them, the Chantry should stop, not keep sending them and start sending Templars with them.

My own religion tells me our faithful dead will rise on Judgment Day and live eternally. It doesn't mean it's true.

The ritual is specifically about visiting those that have entered a long period of sleeping. Our information might be wrong, but it might be true as well.

You can say "A conflict you started, I am told" and "Something you found unjust, no doubt" which is far too light.
I would have preferred "You almost destroyed an entire country, you hypocrites", "Missionarism, commerce and diplomacy are not acts of agression" and "Call me shemlen one more time and I'll break your teeth"

So you'd rather "lower yourself to their level"? And we don't know what Orlais/the Chantry did. They might have been perfectly friendly, they might have been pushy and aggressive. And when has breaking the teeth of people whose help yoz're asking for ever accomplished anything?

[Xilizhra]

And demons also leave rings when they die.
Gameplay/Lore segregation.

Ah, but nonphysical demons do not leave corpses when they die. Loot is a matter of segregation, but corpses are not.

The dalish try kill anyone that comes close to their camps, even if it is just an harmless old man like Brother Genitivi.
The truth is that elves are an incredibly racist and hostile species and that they could have very well attacked human land over those non agressive actions I pointed out.

Except... they don't? The guards at the camps in both the Brecilian Forest and Sundermount are unfriendly, but never move to attack. The only possibility of anyone getting killed just for going close to one camp was from a unilateral decision by Tamlen and possibly Mahariel... and it turns out letting them go bites the Dalish in the ass anyway. What do you know. Anyway, we only ever see this after the humans slaughtered their nation.

[The Hierophant]

ghostmessiah202 wrote...

MisterJB wrote...


Sharing your culture is a bad thing now?
Missionarism, commerce and diplomacy are not acts of agression. The elves displayed and continue to display shameful intolerance and racism.

Umm sure the Spanish missionaries in california who persecuted the american natives was just them sharing their culture! All good!

Many, many nations have prevented missionaries from spreading 'heretical' beliefs in their nations. This isn't bad, it just is. Russia prevented Roman Catholics from entering, Austria stopped Muslim's venturing into Europe. Japan stopped all contact with the outside world for hundreds of years.

I think you're getting too fixated on America's free religion and thinking every nation should do that because everything else is wrong. That is a very narrow point of view, and only really works for western culture. The Elves in DA are not an equivalent Western Culture they dont have the same beliefs, and you don't respect that.

Just because you think one religion is correct doesn't mean everyone should be forced to acknowledge that religion.

The problem is that if the elves of the Dales killed the missionaries/delegates it would be taken as an act of war, regardless of the motivations behind the action. Seeing as Orlais has a history of imperialism(Fereldan,Nevarra), I wouldn't be surprised if those in charge used the Chantry as a catalyst to conquer a rival kingdom.

[The Night Haunter]

MisterJB wrote...
First of all, I'm European.
Second, like everyone else, I judge the actions of others based on my own ideals which were taught to me by the society I was born into.
There is no evidence of Andrastian missionaries or Templars harming elves in any way. They have the "right" to deny entry into their land based on whatever reason but I simply find this to be a very foolish action.
If you do not strive towards making a friend of your neighbors, do not cry fould if they become your enemy. The dwarven government understand this and it's why they go to great lengths to appease humanity through commerce and by allowing Brother Burkel to open a Chantry.
Had the elves been more willing to cooperate with humans, their nation might still exist in the Dragon Age.

And yes, I do find it morally repulsive to start a war over non agressive missionarism rather than, say, increasing border patrol.

Interesting... Mexico is not America's friend and they have done little to endear themselves to America, so that means America can invade MExico? It fits your criterea. Closer to home for you... Greece and Turkey are bitter rivals, so since neither has been kind to the other either one would be justified in invading?

Your arguements are based on Might Makes Right. You even say the dwarves APPEASE humanity. So basically because Humans are the strongest force in Thedas (barring Qunari potentially) they have the RIGHT to do what they please, and if Elves dont APPEASE them its their own fault?

Wow, is all I have to say to that.

[The Night Haunter]

The Hierophant wrote...

The problem is that if the elves of the Dales killed the missionaries/delegates it would be taken as an act of war, regardless of the motivations behind the action. Seeing as Orlais has a history of imperialism(Fereldan,Nevarra), I wouldn't be surprised if those in charge used the Chantry as a catalyst to conquer a rival kingdom.

True, except the elves DIDNT kill the missionaries, they turned them away at the border. Maybe they drove them out with curses, insults and thrown rocks, but that isnt a casus belli for a genocidal war.

[Fiacre]

MisterJB wrote...

First of all, I'm European.
Second, like everyone else, I judge the actions of others based on my own ideals which were taught to me by the society I was born into.
There is no evidence of Andrastian missionaries or Templars harming elves in any way. They have the "right" to deny entry into their land based on whatever reason but I simply find this to be a very foolish action.
If you do not strive towards making a friend of your neighbors, do not cry fould if they become your enemy. The dwarven government understand this and it's why they go to great lengths to appease humanity through commerce and by allowing Brother Burkel to open a Chantry.
Had the elves been more willing to cooperate with humans, their nation might still exist in the Dragon Age.

And yes, I do find it morally repulsive to start a war over non agressive missionarism rather than, say, increasing border patrol.

The dwarves don't do that. They need the commerce themselves. I think it is even called Orzammar's life line in game. It's not appeasement to the surface. They've also done fine without a (successful?) Chantry for the last 900 years and continue to do fine if you tell Burkel to shut the hell up. It doesn't whose fault it is that burkel fails if the Chantry is built, fact of the matter is that the dwarves have done just fine without having to convert to Andrasteism at all.

And we don't know that happened and we certainly don't know if the missionarism was non agressive. Templars imply something different. Perhaps you're right, perhaps they were just there to protect the missionaies, but that wouldn't be necessary if the Chantry didn't insist on pushing and i think my opinion on that is clear, though I do agree that it'd be wrong to start a war over that.

[MisterJB]

ghostmessiah202 wrote...
The Dalish tried to destroy Orlais??? I think you are getting confused here, they tried to WIN A WAR. Notice that Germany didn't destroy French culture in WW2 after roflstomping them, they also didn't destroy norweigen culture after conquering Norway. The DID try to destroy eastern culture, but that doesnt mean every war fought means a culture is destroyed.
Other examples: Russia has periodicly expanded ever since Muscowy became Russia, it ADOPTS the cultures it conquers, it doesnt try to eliminate them.

Plus the Dalish weren't trying to conquer or Orlais, they were trying to get Orlais to surrender and acknowledge the Dales right to exist.

We do not know for sure the intentions of the elves in this war.
The historical facts are that elves pushed well into human lands and evens sacked Val Royeaux. Where they trying to conquer or destroy? What did they do the population who lived in these areas?
I can't say for sure but most elves do tend to view humans as a blight and Orlais went against its modus operandi when it destroyed the Dales rather than occupying. This leads me to believe they were moved by a rigtheous fury and did to the elves what they had tried to do to Orlais.
Let's not forget, for 300 years Orlais had acknowlege the right of the Dales to exist. The Dales were the ones who were more interested in isolationism than coexistence. They could have very well decided that the best way to stop the missionaries was to destroy that bothersome "Chantry" thing.
Where is the seat of the Chantry? Val Royeaux.

[The Hierophant]

ghostmessiah202 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

The problem is that if the elves of the Dales killed the missionaries/delegates it would be taken as an act of war, regardless of the motivations behind the action. Seeing as Orlais has a history of imperialism(Fereldan,Nevarra), I wouldn't be surprised if those in charge used the Chantry as a catalyst to conquer a rival kingdom.

True, except the elves DIDNT kill the missionaries, they turned them away at the border. Maybe they drove them out with curses, insults and thrown rocks, but that isnt a casus belli for a genocidal war.

Then that means the Orlesians instead fabricated the Dalish attack on Red Crossing so that they can use religious persecution as a justification for taking land.(Orlesians are greedy)

[MisterJB]

ghostmessiah202 wrote...
Interesting... Mexico is not America's friend and they have done little to endear themselves to America, so that means America can invade MExico? It fits your criterea. Closer to home for you... Greece and Turkey are bitter rivals, so since neither has been kind to the other either one would be justified in invading?

Your arguements are based on Might Makes Right. You even say the dwarves APPEASE humanity. So basically because Humans are the strongest force in Thedas (barring Qunari potentially) they have the RIGHT to do what they please, and if Elves dont APPEASE them its their own fault?

Wow, is all I have to say to that.

Diplomacy and trading of resources are standard peacekeeping tools. There is a reason for that. If you refuse all offers of friendship, then it is obvious you are going to make enemies.
Also, the Dales invaded. Not Orlais.

[The Night Haunter]

MisterJB wrote...

ghostmessiah202 wrote...
The Dalish tried to destroy Orlais??? I think you are getting confused here, they tried to WIN A WAR. Notice that Germany didn't destroy French culture in WW2 after roflstomping them, they also didn't destroy norweigen culture after conquering Norway. The DID try to destroy eastern culture, but that doesnt mean every war fought means a culture is destroyed.
Other examples: Russia has periodicly expanded ever since Muscowy became Russia, it ADOPTS the cultures it conquers, it doesnt try to eliminate them.

Plus the Dalish weren't trying to conquer or Orlais, they were trying to get Orlais to surrender and acknowledge the Dales right to exist.

We do not know for sure the intentions of the elves in this war.
The historical facts are that elves pushed well into human lands and evens sacked Val Royeaux. Where they trying to conquer or destroy? What did they do the population who lived in these areas?
I can't say for sure but most elves do tend to view humans as a blight and Orlais went against its modus operandi when it destroyed the Dales rather than occupying. This leads me to believe they were moved by a rigtheous fury and did to the elves what they had tried to do to Orlais.
Let's not forget, for 300 years Orlais had acknowlege the right of the Dales to exist. The Dales were the ones who were more interested in isolationism than coexistence. They could have very well decided that the best way to stop the missionaries was to destroy that bothersome "Chantry" thing.
Where is the seat of the Chantry? Val Royeaux.

Right, so because America sacked Mexico city in the Mexican-American war we wanted to destroy Mexico.... America did conquer California, New Mexico, and other territories (Not Texas, that was independent before and joined America willingly so we would come to their defense), but we didn't conquer Mexico and we didn't try to destroy Mexican culture. I could say in WW2 Germany bombed and conquered Paris without destroying French culture, and the Italians didn't try to destroy Rome despite the fact that Facism was secular.

So this arguement is basically the elves might have been trying to destroy the chantry.... despite the fact that every other nation in Thedas worshipped the Maker and would destroy them should they burn the White Spire. Note: If the elves did sack Val Royeaux (and they did) then why didn't they destroy the WHite Spire? Because that wasn't their goal.

Sounds iffy to me.

[MisterJB]

Fiacre wrote...
The dwarves don't do that. They need the commerce themselves. I think it is even called Orzammar's life line in game. It's not appeasement to the surface.

The lyrium trade is exclusive to the Chantry, that is appeasement. Not to mention when the dwarves murdered the elven refugees to avoid angering Tevinter.

And we don't know that happened and we certainly don't know if the missionarism was non agressive. Templars imply something different. Perhaps you're right, perhaps they were just there to protect the missionaies, but that wouldn't be necessary if the Chantry didn't insist on pushing and i think my opinion on that is clear, though I do agree that it'd be wrong to start a war over that.

We're in agreement then.

[The Night Haunter]

MisterJB wrote...

ghostmessiah202 wrote...
Interesting... Mexico is not America's friend and they have done little to endear themselves to America, so that means America can invade MExico? It fits your criterea. Closer to home for you... Greece and Turkey are bitter rivals, so since neither has been kind to the other either one would be justified in invading?

Your arguements are based on Might Makes Right. You even say the dwarves APPEASE humanity. So basically because Humans are the strongest force in Thedas (barring Qunari potentially) they have the RIGHT to do what they please, and if Elves dont APPEASE them its their own fault?

Wow, is all I have to say to that.

Diplomacy and trading of resources are standard peacekeeping tools. There is a reason for that. If you refuse all offers of friendship, then it is obvious you are going to make enemies.
Also, the Dales invaded. Not Orlais.

So since Japan cut off all contact with the outside world China or America or Britian could have up and invaded them and that would have been ok just because they were isolationists?

You have no evidence the Dales invaded. The elves say Orlais attacked first, Orlais says the Dales attacked first. Red Crossing might have occured, it also might not have been first. Maybe first was an attack on the Dalish by humans in Red Crossing, then the elves defended themselves.

You still seem to think Might Makes Right. Because Orlais won you believe their version of the story.

[MisterJB]

ghostmessiah202 wrote...
Right, so because America sacked Mexico city in the Mexican-American war we wanted to destroy Mexico.... America did conquer California, New Mexico, and other territories (Not Texas, that was independent before and joined America willingly so we would come to their defense), but we didn't conquer Mexico and we didn't try to destroy Mexican culture. I could say in WW2 Germany bombed and conquered Paris without destroying French culture, and the Italians didn't try to destroy Rome despite the fact that Facism was secular.

Pointing out situations where something didn't happen, doesn't mean that something can never happen.

So this arguement is basically the elves might have been trying to destroy the chantry.... despite the fact that every other nation in Thedas worshipped the Maker and would destroy them should they burn the White Spire. Note: If the elves did sack Val Royeaux (and they did) then why didn't they destroy the WHite Spire? Because that wasn't their goal.

Sounds iffy to me.

Except they were destroyed. And the March was only called once they threatened Val Royeaux.

[The Night Haunter]

MisterJB wrote...

[The lyrium trade is exclusive to the Chantry, that is appeasement. Not to mention when the dwarves murdered the elven refugees to avoid angering Tevinter.

Again with the Appeasement. So you believe because Orlais is the most powerful empire if it's neighbors don't appease them it is their own fault when they are invaded?

[The Night Haunter]

MisterJB wrote...

ghostmessiah202 wrote...
Right, so because America sacked Mexico city in the Mexican-American war we wanted to destroy Mexico.... America did conquer California, New Mexico, and other territories (Not Texas, that was independent before and joined America willingly so we would come to their defense), but we didn't conquer Mexico and we didn't try to destroy Mexican culture. I could say in WW2 Germany bombed and conquered Paris without destroying French culture, and the Italians didn't try to destroy Rome despite the fact that Facism was secular.

Pointing out situations where something didn't happen, doesn't mean that something can never happen.

So this arguement is basically the elves might have been trying to destroy the chantry.... despite the fact that every other nation in Thedas worshipped the Maker and would destroy them should they burn the White Spire. Note: If the elves did sack Val Royeaux (and they did) then why didn't they destroy the WHite Spire? Because that wasn't their goal.

Sounds iffy to me.

Except they were destroyed. And the March was only called once they threatened Val Royeaux.

The March was called when Orlais realized they were losing.

So despite the fact there is no evidence saying the elves wanted to destroy the white tower, and given that they DIDNT destroy it, you still believe that was their goal? If they'd sacked Val Royeoux then nothing stood between them and the white tower, yet there is no mention, even by the Orliesans, of elves attacking the white tower. You say they were stopped? Who stopped them? They conquered Val Royeoux, there was no-one to stop them.

You want to argue that the elves wanted to destroy the white city but couldnt, while at the same time argueing that they conquered val royeaux in that attempt. Kinda seems like you want a cake and want to eat it too.

[MisterJB]

Fiacre wrote...
So you'd rather "lower yourself to their level"? And we don't know what Orlais/the Chantry did. They might have been perfectly friendly, they might have been pushy and aggressive. And when has breaking the teeth of people whose help yoz're asking for ever accomplished anything?

My Human Noble should be allowed to defend the human version of the conflict just as the Dalish are allowed to defend theirs.
And there is a friendly tribe of werewolves nearby that doesn't spout so many racial slurs.

[Fiacre]

MisterJB wrote...

The lyrium trade is exclusive to the Chantry, that is appeasement. Not to mention when the dwarves murdered the elven refugees to avoid angering Tevinter.

But the trade isn't. And the Chantry needs the lyrium the most -- apart from Tevinter, I suppose -- so I'd say a deal with them for exclusive rights on the lyrium trade is a lot more profitable and less hassle than haggling with the Circles and the Chantry and everyone and random apostates that might decide that a bit of lyrium can never do harm. And Tevinter was inccredibly powerful, murdering the refugees -- something that the dwarves decided to cover up when they found out because it was kind of horrible -- was smart, but not right and not something that one should approe off.

We're in agreement then.

Only that if the missionaries were peaceful thn starting a war only over them is wrong (and foolish). Since I very much doubt both the peaceful intentions of the Chantry and that that was all there was to the start of the war...

[The Night Haunter]

MisterJB wrote...

Fiacre wrote...
So you'd rather "lower yourself to their level"? And we don't know what Orlais/the Chantry did. They might have been perfectly friendly, they might have been pushy and aggressive. And when has breaking the teeth of people whose help yoz're asking for ever accomplished anything?

My Human Noble should be allowed to defend the human version of the conflict just as the Dalish are allowed to defend theirs.
And there is a friendly tribe of werewolves nearby that doesn't spout so many racial slurs.

I'll agree that you should be able to make a racist character if you so desire, it's part of roleplaying. It should come with consequences of course, like Merril slapping you, or Zevran killing you in your sleep. (Although Zev doesnt seem to care he is an elf so maybe he wouldnt)

[Fiacre]

MisterJB wrote...

My Human Noble should be allowed to defend the human version of the conflict just as the Dalish are allowed to defend theirs.
And there is a friendly tribe of werewolves nearby that doesn't spout so many racial slurs.

Sure, you can, just a lot more diplomatically. I thought we liked diplomacy? And you don't know abut that "friendly" tribe of werewolves at the time. As far as you know they're either mindless creatures or -- if you've already met them -- can't be certain that they would be interested in and capable of joining you.

[MisterJB]

ghostmessiah202 wrote...
So since Japan cut off all contact with the outside world China or America or Britian could have up and invaded them and that would have been ok just because they were isolationists?

You have no evidence the Dales invaded. The elves say Orlais attacked first, Orlais says the Dales attacked first. Red Crossing might have occured, it also might not have been first. Maybe first was an attack on the Dalish by humans in Red Crossing, then the elves defended themselves.

You still seem to think Might Makes Right. Because Orlais won you believe their version of the story.

I'm speaking of practical matters rather than moral ones. The elves practice a violent isolationism, refuse all offers of friendship and acts as if humans are a disease. Obviously, animosity is going to grow.
Morally, does that make it right for a human nation to invade them? No but the elves shouldn't be surprised they make enemies.

The elves themselves claim the Chantry started the conflict by sending templars. Even if they did, it could have been simply to protect the missionaries and enforce their wishes of crossing the border.
The proper reaction to this is increasing border patrol or stop being so intolerant and just let them in. If the elves attacked Red Crossing over this, they weren't right either.

[MisterJB]

Fiacre wrote...
And Tevinter was inccredibly powerful, murdering the refugees -- something that the dwarves decided to cover up when they found out because it was kind of horrible -- was smart, but not right and not something that one should approe off.

It's the "smart" part I'm interested in. The elven isolationism has lead to nothing but pain and misery and the current Dalish still insist on it.
Dwarves are smart, elves aren't.