343 réponses à ce sujet

[robertthebard]

Original182 wrote...

edeheusch wrote...

With an elf PC I knew that the Chantry launched an Exalted March against the Dales and so the Chantry is responsible of the bad situation of my people. How could you give benefit of the doubt when you speak about know facts (that are recognized by everybody even the Chantry)?

Yet you ignore Andraste's Exalted March that freed the Dalish Elves from the Telvinter in the first place. Selective thinking.

And within the context of the medieval ages, there are many wars. Orlais invaded Ferelden. Antiva has the Crows committing assassinations wantonly. Why are you blaming only the Chantry for mistakes? At the very least, the Chantry deserves the benefit of the doubt as much as anything else. Throughout the game, you see the Chantry trying to help the general populace.

Old Gods on the other hand, do nothing but sleep underground, to be corrupted by the darkspawn and kill a lot of people. And the Chantry and templars in Lothering are the ones who have to clean up the mess.
Despite that, you still want to give Old Gods the benefit of the doubt, but not the Chantry.

My original point was that people are not giving the Chantry the benefit of the doubt, but we are supposed to give everything else some benefit of the doubt.

Old Gods do nothing but sleep underground because they were banished there by the Maker.  Please don't leave out known lore to try to validate a point.  It cheapens your arguements.  They only escape when discovered, and corrupted by the darkspawn.  This is also known in game lore.  Again, a blind follower trying to spout facts isn't dong much here, when there are facts to support what's being presented.  Half truths, such as the Old Gods doing nothing but laying asleep underground are invalid, they have no choice.  Until they are tainted and released by the darkspawn.

[Original182]

Stopped reading right here.

First you said you stopped reading right there. Then you comment on Godwin which was after "there". I seem to find more and more inconsistencies in you, my friend.

Nowhere in my post do I say that taking children into the Chantry at 10 was slavery.  I said controlling the Templars with lyrium was slavery.  You may feel free to villify this information if you wish, but since my source for this information can do no wrong any where else, why is it that he can now?  Inconsistency in the Alistair fan club?

Be that as it may, your definition of slavery practised by the Chantry is very thin. Using your definition, Grey Wardens are also a form of slavery, which you must be a walking example of since you play as one. Recruiting Loghain as a Grey Warden as slavery is acceptable now?

And please be original. I was the first to question you changing your tune towards Alistair.
And I never claimed to be part of the Alistair fan club. You however openly admitted that you are a dedicated Alistair hater.

No, it's not.  I get it now, it's just another lie told by Alistair to garner sympathy?

I never said he lied. I said he didn't know all the facts. He didn't even fully become a templar. In order to be an expert in all things templar, you need someone more experienced like Knight Commander Greagoir. You would take the words of a novice templar at face value, but not the Chantry?

However, this also gives the lie to Godwin.  You know, that guy in the mage tower that's taking advantage of the Templar's addiction to lyrium to make some money.  That's the problem with blind followers, they follow, no matter what.  Even to the point of questioning their heroes if the information doesn't fit what they want.

Then how come I don't hear you or anyone place blame on mages like Godwin for making the templar addiction even worse? How come all the hate is focused on the Chantry?

Conclusion: There is no Chantry dogma. Only Chantry haters.

Modifié par Original182, 21 décembre 2009 - 02:58 .

[robertthebard]

How do the mages make the addiction worse? Godwin does, but he's in business for himself, and you have to smuggle that lyrium to him because...wait for it...the Chantry controls the lyrium trade with the dwarves. By the way, this information is also easily obtainable in game. We're going in circles here, and it's not me with the reigns. You can choose to ignore facts as it pleases you to make a point? Your Old God thing is a classic example, and now you want to blame the mages for Templar addiction to lyrium? This knowing that the Chantry controls the lyrium on the surface? Dude, you seriously need to pay more attention in game.

[Sialater]

Actually, the Chantry does enslave by addiction it's Templars. There's no recovery for Lyrium addiction. Did you miss the Templar in Howe's dungeon raving from withdrawal? Actually, if you're addicted to a substance, wouldn't you do what you could to procure more of it, so it's not taken from you, you know, like the Chantry could do on a whim? I turned over 10 Lyrium potions to a Templar for the Mages' Collective. Does that make me an enabler? No, it means I think the Chantry's wrong and these men, these Templars, are in an untenable position.



Saying the Grey Wardens enslave because of the blood is ridiculous. It's a one time dose. It's not turning you into a Hurlock or a Broodmother, after all. And you can say "no, thanks." You kinda can't refuse the Chantry once you're in it. Duncan had to resort to conscripting Alistair, remember?

[Original182]

robertthebard wrote...

How do the mages make the addiction worse? Godwin does, but he's in business for himself, and you have to smuggle that lyrium to him because...wait for it...the Chantry controls the lyrium trade with the dwarves.

Maybe they do that so that lyrium is adminstered in normal dosages? That would be akin to saying hospitals control medicinal marijuana, that means they are responsible for all the marijuana addiction in the country.

People like Godwin illegally supplies lyrium to templars to make them even more addicted. I though it's pretty obvious.

By the way, this information is also easily obtainable in game. We're going in circles here, and it's not me with the reigns. You can choose to ignore facts as it pleases you to make a point?

There is no proof that the Chantry supplies lyrium to templars to make them addicted. They supply them lyrium to give them templar powers. that's the sole reason to supply lyrium, but lyrium withdrawal is an unfortunate side effect. I've already stated it in my previous post, but you ignored it to continue bleating your own refuted points. And you say I ignore facts? Pure gold.

Your Old God thing is a classic example, and now you want to blame the mages for Templar addiction to lyrium? This knowing that the Chantry controls the lyrium on the surface? Dude, you seriously need to pay more attention in game.

I provided proof that mages like Godwin supply lyrium illegally for the sole purpose of profit and making templars more addicted. I provided proof that Chantry give templars lyrium to give them templar powers, not to deliberately make them addicted. You completely ignored them.

I think you are the one who needs to pay attention.

[Squiggles1334]

Original182 wrote...

robertthebard wrote...
Regarding whether the Chantry is evil or not, selling people into slavery is evil, but keeping slaves is not?  Since children are sent to the Chantry at 10 years old, and trained or brainwashed into doing what ever job they end up with, Priest or Templar, or any other jobs, if there are other jobs.  Brainwashed qualifies here because they, like any other organization will teach their dogma, to the exclusion of all else.  It could be that this is a harsh use of the term, but it's certainly applicable.

It is unfortunately a very thin argument trying to pin slavery to the Chantry. If sending children to the Chantry at 10 is slavery, then any learning institution is considered slavery. The Circle of Magi is slavery. Dalish elves teaching history to their elves in isolation is slavery, since it teaches them to hate humans and the Chantry.

It's a poor definition of slavery and is not applicable.

An example of slavery is what Loghain did to the Alienage Elves. They have no rights. They are like property.
The children in the Chantry grow up free. Brother Genetivi doesn't seem like a slave. He goes around freely doing research.
Leliana came to the Chantry out of her own free will. She wasn't sold into it. She also could leave with the Revered Mother's blessings in Lothering. Does that sound like a slave?

Seriously, corralling people at an early age in a Chantry-sponsored tower to live out the rest of their natural lives in isolation simply because they are born with a certain magical predilection that they never asked for or chose to be born with, and then later forced to undergo a potentially lethal ritual? And the only way out of risking such a ritual is to be given a sprititual lobotomy? Hmm, not to mention living out their entire lives under constant surveillance by an organization kept in line with a dependence on a Chantry-controlled substance?

Right, not slavery. Gotcha.

Modifié par Squiggles1334, 21 décembre 2009 - 03:10 .

[robertthebard]

Sialater wrote...

Actually, the Chantry does enslave by addiction it's Templars. There's no recovery for Lyrium addiction. Did you miss the Templar in Howe's dungeon raving from withdrawal? Actually, if you're addicted to a substance, wouldn't you do what you could to procure more of it, so it's not taken from you, you know, like the Chantry could do on a whim? I turned over 10 Lyrium potions to a Templar for the Mages' Collective. Does that make me an enabler? No, it means I think the Chantry's wrong and these men, these Templars, are in an untenable position.

Saying the Grey Wardens enslave because of the blood is ridiculous. It's a one time dose. It's not turning you into a Hurlock or a Broodmother, after all. And you can say "no, thanks." You kinda can't refuse the Chantry once you're in it. Duncan had to resort to conscripting Alistair, remember?

Don't confuse anyone with factual details, although once you accept conscription into the Grey Wardens, you're in it.  Unless you're Alistair.  Jory is proof enough that they want to keep the Joining a secret.  It is a death sentence either way, but I surely agree that it's a one time thing, unlike the Chantry's lyrium addiction strategy.  This truth will go unheeded of course, because it doesn't fit into the world view that some have.  I'm sure someone will pipe up with Templars just being weak willed or something to explain the Templar in the dungeon.  After all, there is no basis in fact for underground lyrium trade.  Wait, yes there is, in fact there's even a side quest for it.  It even states in the dialog that it takes advantage of the lyrium addiction to be profitable.  However, things presented in game cannot be believed, if they contradict one's world views of Alistair, or the Chantry...

[Sialater]

Alistair still had his Templar abilities without ever stealing one of my Lyrium potions.



I know, I counted them every night. Wynne's an addict.

[AsheraII]

Original182 wrote...There is no proof that the Chantry supplies lyrium to templars to make them addicted. They supply them lyrium to give them templar powers. that's the sole reason to supply lyrium, but lyrium withdrawal is an unfortunate side effect. I've already stated it in my previous post, but you ignored it to continue bleating your own refuted points. And you say I ignore facts? Pure gold.

Actually, a certain conversation between PC and Alistair can reveal as much. Alistair and any groupmembers who become Templar as subspec do learn the Templar abilities, yet do not require lyrium.

[Original182]

Sialater wrote...

Actually, the Chantry does enslave by addiction it's Templars. There's no recovery for Lyrium addiction. Did you miss the Templar in Howe's dungeon raving from withdrawal?

Yes lyrium causes withdrawal. But lyrium is the source of the templar's powers. I already stated that I heard they planned to add lyrium withdrawal if you become a templar, but the devs removed it. Alistair's statement could be just a way to reconcile lore vs gameplay mechanics.

Actually, if you're addicted to a substance, wouldn't you do what you could to procure more of it, so it's not taken from you, you know, like the Chantry could do on a whim?
I turned over 10 Lyrium potions to a Templar for the Mages' Collective. Does that make me an enabler? No, it means I think the Chantry's wrong and these men, these Templars, are in an untenable position.

I don't think lyrium potions qualify as lyrium addiction. Then the Circle of Mages also enslaves mages because they need to use lyrium potions.

Saying the Grey Wardens enslave because of the blood is ridiculous. It's a one time dose. It's not turning you into a Hurlock or a Broodmother, after all. And you can say "no, thanks." You kinda can't refuse the Chantry once you're in it. Duncan had to resort to conscripting Alistair, remember?

You also cannot refuse the Joining.
Grey Warden being slavery is ridiculous. It's as ridiculous as saying lyrium addiction = slavery. I was using stupid to point out stupid.

Prime example of slavery is what happened to Alienage elves. Not what the Chantry does. Not what the Grey Wardens do.

[robertthebard]

Original182 wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

How do the mages make the addiction worse? Godwin does, but he's in business for himself, and you have to smuggle that lyrium to him because...wait for it...the Chantry controls the lyrium trade with the dwarves.

Maybe they do that so that lyrium is adminstered in normal dosages? That would be akin to saying hospitals control medicinal marijuana, that means they are responsible for all the marijuana addiction in the country.

People like Godwin illegally supplies lyrium to templars to make them even more addicted. I though it's pretty obvious.

By the way, this information is also easily obtainable in game. We're going in circles here, and it's not me with the reigns. You can choose to ignore facts as it pleases you to make a point?

There is no proof that the Chantry supplies lyrium to templars to make them addicted. They supply them lyrium to give them templar powers. that's the sole reason to supply lyrium, but lyrium withdrawal is an unfortunate side effect. I've already stated it in my previous post, but you ignored it to continue bleating your own refuted points. And you say I ignore facts? Pure gold.

Your Old God thing is a classic example, and now you want to blame the mages for Templar addiction to lyrium? This knowing that the Chantry controls the lyrium on the surface? Dude, you seriously need to pay more attention in game.

I provided proof that mages like Godwin supply lyrium illegally for the sole purpose of profit and making templars more addicted. I provided proof that Chantry give templars lyrium to give them templar powers, not to deliberately make them addicted. You completely ignored them.

I think you are the one who needs to pay attention.

Wait.  On one hand you state that they aren't addicted.  Now you say they are?  You state that there is no proof of their addiction, but state that Godwin profits off of that by making them more addicted?  The problem isn't that I'm not paying attention, the problem is that you can't make up your mind.  You blamed all the mages initially, then waffled back to Godwin when confronted with Godwin.  It's your Old Gods laying underground doing nothing argument again.  The Chantry creates a situation, and Godwin profits from it.  Yet, it's Godwin's fault?  If they weren't already addicted to it, Godwin couldn't make any money.  I know this doesn't fit you squeaky clean image of the Chantry, but since you did bring up the Exalted March that Andraste led, before there was a Chantry to free the elves, who is it that led the Exalted March to destroy the Dales?  Wait for it...you sitll with me???....It was the Chantry, and they did so because, as we can learn in game, the elves went back to the worship of their own Gods, and forbid the building of a Chantry in their lands.  "Follow our God, or die"...

[Original182]

Alistair still had his Templar abilities without ever stealing one of my Lyrium potions.

I know, I counted them every night. Wynne's an addict.

And you can also make Wynne a Blood Mage with no consequences. Once again, gameplay mechanics != lore sometimes. Raw lyrium is supposed to be poisonous, yet you can use them to heal in the game.

Lorewise, templars do need lyrium to have their powers.

Actually, a certain conversation between PC and Alistair can reveal as much. Alistair and any groupmembers who become Templar as subspec do learn the Templar abilities, yet do not require lyrium.

See above.

[Squiggles1334]

Original182 wrote...
Lorewise, templars do need lyrium to have their powers.

Yes, lorewise, which in this case means it is lore filtered through Chantry sources, which turns this into somewhat of a circular argument to say templars need lyrium for their powers.

[Original182]

Squiggles1334 wrote...

Seriously, corralling people at an early age in a Chantry-sponsored tower to live out the rest of their natural lives in isolation simply because they are born with a certain magical predilection that they never asked for or chose to be born with, and then later forced to undergo a potentially lethal ritual? And the only way out of risking such a ritual is to be given a sprititual lobotomy? Hmm, not to mention living out their entire lives under constant surveillance by an organization kept in line with a dependence on a Chantry-controlled substance?
Right, not slavery. Gotcha.

Thanks, glad to see someone sees my point.

Modifié par Original182, 21 décembre 2009 - 03:23 .

[Asylumer]

Original182 wrote...

Yes lyrium causes withdrawal. But lyrium is the source of the templar's powers. I already stated that I heard they planned to add lyrium withdrawal if you become a templar, but the devs removed it. Alistair's statement could be just a way to reconcile lore vs gameplay mechanics.

Were you even paying attention? Alistair gets full use of his powers despite never touching lyrium. That's the lore -- Templars don't need Lyrium.

And you can also make Wynne a Blood Mage with no consequences. Once
again, gameplay mechanics != lore sometimes. Raw lyrium is supposed to
be poisonous, yet you can use them to heal in the game.

Lorewise, templars do need lyrium to have their powers.

Are you being deliberately obtuse? Alistair comes out and tells you that he never began taking Lyrium. Again, never began taking Lyrium.

Modifié par Asylumer, 21 décembre 2009 - 03:25 .

[Squiggles1334]

Laughing Out Loud

[Original182]

Squiggles1334 wrote...

Original182 wrote...
Lorewise, templars do need lyrium to have their powers.

Yes, lorewise, which in this case means it is lore filtered through Chantry sources, which turns this into somewhat of a circular argument to say templars need lyrium for their powers.

Yes, the same lore you get from Alistair regarding you don't need lyrium to be a templar. The same Alistair who was raised by the same Chantry.

But yeah no problem accepting Alistair's "unbiased" views of course.

[Sidney]

Squiggles1334 wrote...
Seriously, corralling people at an early age in a Chantry-sponsored tower to live out the rest of their natural lives in isolation simply because they are born with a certain magical predilection that they never asked for or chose to be born with, and then later forced to undergo a potentially lethal ritual? And the only way out of risking such a ritual is to be given a sprititual lobotomy? Hmm, not to mention living out their entire lives under constant surveillance by an organization kept in line with a dependence on a Chantry-controlled substance?

Right, not slavery. Gotcha.

It ain't good and that is why I get Morrigan's hostility BUT there is a big downside to free roaming mages - abominations. That issue does rather make mages an trickier issue. We don't know what the "infection" rate is for untrained mages getting abominations but we know that the one untrained mage we see in game is infected and all the texts and dialog in the game supports the notion that this is a very real threat not just some Chantry dreamed up excuse to lock 'em away. You could argue that training <> isolation and imprisonment but
then again that lacks a certainity that people might want.

To try and carry this further, mages are people who have a genetic glitch. That glitch is, in and of itself largely benign (yes mages can toss fireballs around and kill a lot of people but normal folks can grab a sword and go bonkers as well). That's not a problem, the problem is that their genetic glitch makes them suspectible to a disease that makes then a lethal threat to the community and they appear to have a high probability of catching this disease. 

Imagine what the modern world would try and do if some people developed a mutation in their DNA that meant if they caught the Flu they would go on an uncontrollable homicidal rampage. Treatment, sure we'd try and find a cure but let's say like magic it is an uncurable problem. You can leave them in the general population and you might call it a hospital but if they can't leave it sounds a lot like a prison to me.

[Sialater]

Actually, no, it's not game mechanics trumping lore. Alistair SAYS it's a mental discipline, not the Lyrium. Since he was about to take his vows before Duncan conscripted him, I think he's a pretty good authority on the matter. (I'm actually leaning toward a theory where they could have BEEN mages, just not strong enough to do anything or be a threat.)



But yet, mages have lyrium in their blood and still live. Odd that. And dwarves, still supposedly immune to Lyrium, can get poisoned from it. I think the real reason is that it's also said Lyrium is a mysterious substance. (Hmmmm.... secreted from the Old Gods, perhaps? Which may actually be an argument for Morrigan's ritual, all the Archdemons die, magic leaves the world.)



Also, it's a matter of amounts. Lesser Lyrium Potions are small doses because it's unaltered. The other potions use more lyrium plus something else. And Lyrium isn't used to heal, that's elfroot.

[Original182]

Asylumer wrote...

Original182 wrote...

Yes lyrium causes withdrawal. But lyrium is the source of the templar's powers. I already stated that I heard they planned to add lyrium withdrawal if you become a templar, but the devs removed it. Alistair's statement could be just a way to reconcile lore vs gameplay mechanics.

Were you even paying attention? Alistair gets full use of his powers despite never touching lyrium. That's the lore -- Templars don't need Lyrium.

Lorewise raw lyrium is poisonous and deadly. Yet you can use them to heal and recharge your mana.
Lorewise blood magic is illegal, yet you can make Wynne a blood mage with no consequences.

I've already explained that what Alistair said could have been the devs' attempt to reconcile lore and gameplay mechanics.
I've already explained gameplay mechanics != lore.

Are you being deliberately obtuse? Alistair comes out and tells you that he never began taking Lyrium. Again, never began taking Lyrium.

Are you deliberately being blind? See above, bolded for convenience.

[Asylumer]

Original182 wrote...
Lorewise raw lyrium is poisonous and deadly. Yet you can use them to heal and recharge your mana.
Lorewise blood magic is illegal, yet you can make Wynne a blood mage with no consequences.

I've already explained that what Alistair said could have been the devs' attempt to reconcile lore and gameplay mechanics.
I've already explained gameplay mechanics != lore.

Look at what you're saying real closely. You're saying that the lore that's in the game... is NOT the lore for the game, and your reason for that is because you think the devs rewrote the lore of the game.

Think about it.

[Sialater]

Sidney wrote...

Squiggles1334 wrote...
Seriously, corralling people at an early age in a Chantry-sponsored tower to live out the rest of their natural lives in isolation simply because they are born with a certain magical predilection that they never asked for or chose to be born with, and then later forced to undergo a potentially lethal ritual? And the only way out of risking such a ritual is to be given a sprititual lobotomy? Hmm, not to mention living out their entire lives under constant surveillance by an organization kept in line with a dependence on a Chantry-controlled substance?

Right, not slavery. Gotcha.

It ain't good and that is why I get Morrigan's hostility BUT there is a big downside to free roaming mages - abominations. That issue does rather make mages an trickier issue. We don't know what the "infection" rate is for untrained mages getting abominations but we know that the one untrained mage we see in game is infected and all the texts and dialog in the game supports the notion that this is a very real threat not just some Chantry dreamed up excuse to lock 'em away. You could argue that training isolation and imprisonment but
then again that lacks a certainity that people might want.

To try and carry this further, mages are people who have a genetic glitch. That glitch is, in and of itself largely benign (yes mages can toss fireballs around and kill a lot of people but normal folks can grab a sword and go bonkers as well). That's not a problem, the problem is that their genetic glitch makes them suspectible to a disease that makes then a lethal threat to the community and they appear to have a high probability of catching this disease. 

Imagine what the modern world would try and do if some people developed a mutation in their DNA that meant if they caught the Flu they would go on an uncontrollable homicidal rampage. Treatment, sure we'd try and find a cure but let's say like magic it is an uncurable problem. You can leave them in the general population and you might call it a hospital but if they can't leave it sounds a lot like a prison to me.

Metagaming, I know, but I keep thinking back to Carth's statement in KOTOR about  "Normal people can do evil things, but with Jedi, it's like there's something out there WAITING for you to screw up and corrupt you." I paraphrase, of course, since it's been ages since I've played KOTOR, but I think it fits here.

[Original182]

Sialater wrote...

Actually, no, it's not game mechanics trumping lore. Alistair SAYS it's a mental discipline, not the Lyrium. Since he was about to take his vows before Duncan conscripted him, I think he's a pretty good authority on the matter. (I'm actually leaning toward a theory where they could have BEEN mages, just not strong enough to do anything or be a threat.)

As I've stated, I've read rumors that they did plan to make you have lyrium addiction of you become a templar. But they took it out, so they added Alistair's line to explain why Alistair, and anyone else who specs Templar, don't need lyrium and don't suffer lyrium addiction.

So this is the point of contention. If templars need lyrium for their powers, then how can you blame the Chantry for lyrium addiction? That's like blaming the Grey Wardens for killing people by giving them darkspawn blood.

And Lyrium isn't used to heal, that's elfroot.

I meant raw lyrium, like the ones in the Anvil of the Void, and the Fade.

[Squiggles1334]

You say attempt to reconcile gameplay mechanics with lore, we say Chantry conspiracy. There's a lot of trees out here, can we call it a forest yet?

[Sialater]

Original182 wrote...

Sialater wrote...

Actually, no, it's not game mechanics trumping lore. Alistair SAYS it's a mental discipline, not the Lyrium. Since he was about to take his vows before Duncan conscripted him, I think he's a pretty good authority on the matter. (I'm actually leaning toward a theory where they could have BEEN mages, just not strong enough to do anything or be a threat.)

As I've stated, I've read rumors that they did plan to make you have lyrium addiction of you become a templar. But they took it out, so they added Alistair's line to explain why Alistair, and anyone else who specs Templar, don't need lyrium and don't suffer lyrium addiction.

So this is the point of contention. If templars need lyrium for their powers, then how can you blame the Chantry for lyrium addiction? That's like blaming the Grey Wardens for killing people by giving them darkspawn blood.

And Lyrium isn't used to heal, that's elfroot.

I meant raw lyrium, like the ones in the Anvil of the Void, and the Fade.

Whether they took it out or not, doesn't matter.  If they took it out, it's not part of the lore.