Xilizhra wrote...
Pleasantly, it won't happen, for out-of-game reasons (more people want to help the mages than the templars) if nothing else.
Modifié par Dave of Canada, 24 octobre 2012 - 04:26 .
Adrian won't go against Fiona, who's not an extremist (not that Adrian is either, really; extremists are people like Tarohne). And it wouldn't break the lore to find a new way for the mage solution to work without the Chantry.Dave of Canada wrote...
Xilizhra wrote...
Pleasantly, it won't happen, for out-of-game reasons (more people want to help the mages than the templars) if nothing else.
Perhaps the writers will remain consistent with the approach they've portrayed, rather than dismissing it to make some players feel warm and fuzzy inside for siding with an extremist.
Modifié par Xilizhra, 24 octobre 2012 - 04:29 .
Hah. Marital rape was societally accepted once, too; it didn't make the practitioners of that vanguards of the future either. You're committing a horrible mental violation on a helpless prisoner for your own sick religious extremism. You're basically a rapist. Deal with it.MisterJB wrote...
I take offence to that. DA is a game where the players must kill others routinelly. Some mages are dangerous and the Rite of Tranquility serves as a way to neutralize the dangers these people represent without being forced to execute them.
Rape is just pointless and cruel. It makes no one safer.
Modifié par Xilizhra, 24 octobre 2012 - 04:33 .
Xilizhra wrote...
Adrian won't go against Fiona, who's not an extremist (not that Adrian is either, really; extremists are people like Tarohne). And it wouldn't break the lore to find a new way for the mage solution to work without the Chantry.
Then they can be enemies as well, if they're opposed to Fiona's and my side.hhh89 wrote...
Xilizhra wrote...
Adrian won't go against Fiona, who's not an extremist (not that Adrian is either, really; extremists are people like Tarohne). And it wouldn't break the lore to find a new way for the mage solution to work without the Chantry.
Even if she didn't, I think that there'll be extremist mages who might be against Fiona, and there'll be mages that will commit crimes (rape, torture, pillage). As it'll happen on the templar side. There are both extremist and bad people in the mage side.
Xilizhra wrote...
Hah. Marital rape was societally accepted once, too; it didn't make the practitioners of that vanguards of the future either. You're committing a horrible mental violation on a helpless prisoner for your own sick religious extremism. You're basically a rapist. Deal with it.MisterJB wrote...
I take offence to that. DA is a game where the players must kill others routinelly. Some mages are dangerous and the Rite of Tranquility serves as a way to neutralize the dangers these people represent without being forced to execute them.
Rape is just pointless and cruel. It makes no one safer.
Modifié par hhh89, 24 octobre 2012 - 04:34 .
The girl who asked the man she claimed to love to die for the cause?Xilizhra wrote...
Adrian won't go against Fiona, who's not an extremist.
No but if all the mages turn to a magister in the making like Adrian for leadership, they are likely to lose what little allies they can gather.And it wouldn't break the lore to find a new way for the mage solution to work without the Chantry.
hhh89 wrote...
Why the protagonist wouldn't have the choice of fighting for the side he/she prefers?
Xilizhra wrote...
Hah. Marital rape was societally accepted once, too; it didn't make the practitioners of that vanguards of the future either. You're committing a horrible mental violation on a helpless prisoner for your own sick religious extremism. You're basically a rapist. Deal with it.MisterJB wrote...
I take offence to that. DA is a game where the players must kill others routinelly. Some mages are dangerous and the Rite of Tranquility serves as a way to neutralize the dangers these people represent without being forced to execute them.
Rape is just pointless and cruel. It makes no one safer.
It doesn't really matter anymore now that I know what he's willing to do and his pathetic justifications for it, does it?hhh89 wrote...
Xilizhra wrote...
Hah. Marital rape was societally accepted once, too; it didn't make the practitioners of that vanguards of the future either. You're committing a horrible mental violation on a helpless prisoner for your own sick religious extremism. You're basically a rapist. Deal with it.MisterJB wrote...
I take offence to that. DA is a game where the players must kill others routinelly. Some mages are dangerous and the Rite of Tranquility serves as a way to neutralize the dangers these people represent without being forced to execute them.
Rape is just pointless and cruel. It makes no one safer.
Will you be fine if he said that he'll kill Fiona?
Xilizhra wrote...
It doesn't really matter anymore now that I know what he's willing to do and his pathetic justifications for it, does it?
It is exactly the place. These parallels are deliberate, and this sort of thinking on the part of the opposition is what we must find and crush. Also, I speak out very strongly in general against any notion of being able to use Tranquility in-game.Woah! Not the kind of place for language like that, or serious topics like that.
Then they're being foolish and vengeful at the very least, vile and depraved if they're JB.My point was if you'll be fine if a pro-templar says that he want to kill Adrian (yeah, I wrote the wrong person), considering that she's one of his/her enemy side's leaders.
Xilizhra wrote...
Hah. Marital rape was societally accepted once, too; it didn't make the practitioners of that vanguards of the future either. You're committing a horrible mental violation on a helpless prisoner for your own sick religious extremism. You're basically a rapist. Deal with it.
Ooh, and it's even better with Adrian being a woman with your PC being a man, too. That certainly won't have any unfortunate implications the way it's presented in-game.
LobselVith8 wrote...
hhh89 wrote...
Why the protagonist wouldn't have the choice of fighting for the side he/she prefers?
You mean different factions of mages and templars? I suppose it's possible that this might be the case. I'm sure it won't change most people from supporting either the templars or the mages when the choice is between one or the other; I certainly advocate mage autonomy over restoring the status quo of subjugation.
As for Adrian, the DA Wiki can provide the synopsis for Asunder, but people see the character very differently in regards to her actions (as you can probably tell from this thread).
Killing in combat can be acceptable. Tranquility cannot be used in combat, it has to be used on a helpless prisoner. And if you were just executing people Taliban-style, then yes, I'd be severely opposed to you there as well.Because an horrible physical violation like murder is so much more acceptable?Hypocrite.
Tranquility can't be enacted on anyone who isn't a helpless prisoner.Adrian is not an helpless prisioner. She is a radical extremist whose actions have caused the deaths of thousands.
Xilizhra wrote...
Then they're being foolish and vengeful at the very least, vile and depraved if they're JB.
The only parallel that exists is to lobotomy. Tranquility has nothing to do with sexual assault.Xilizhra wrote...
It is exactly the place. These parallels are deliberate, and this sort of thinking on the part of the opposition is what we must find and crush. Also, I speak out very strongly in general against any notion of being able to use Tranquility in-game.
From you, maybe I should take this as a compliment.Then they're being foolish and vengeful at the very least, vile and depraved if they're JB.
If it's in combat, they might die. If they're captured, I'd prefer prison of some variety.If the templars's leader will refuse to surrender to you, what will you do? Will you put them in prison or execute them? Plus, if you'll fighting them in a battle, isn't logical to try to kill the leader, to weaken you enemies?
So clearly you never played DA2, I imagine?The only parallel that exists is to lobotomy. Tranquility has nothing to do with sexual assault.
And I'm sure Elthina and Pharamond were killed in combat.Xilizhra wrote...
Killing in combat can be acceptable. Tranquility cannot be used in combat, it has to be used on a helpless prisoner. And if you were just executing people Taliban-style, then yes, I'd be severely opposed to you there as well.
Tranquility can't be enacted on anyone who isn't a helpless prisoner.
I did and there is nothing in DA2 which connects Tranquility with sexual assault.Xilizhra wrote...
So clearly you never played DA2, I imagine?
Some people are beyond redemption. It's better than outright executing them.Of course, forcibly lobotomizing people in a mundane way would be horrific as well, and I'd be equally opposed to the game allowing for that.
Pharamond begged for death. Elthina was not a case I would have done.MisterJB wrote...
And I'm sure Elthina and Pharamond were killed in combat.Xilizhra wrote...
Killing in combat can be acceptable. Tranquility cannot be used in combat, it has to be used on a helpless prisoner. And if you were just executing people Taliban-style, then yes, I'd be severely opposed to you there as well.
Tranquility can't be enacted on anyone who isn't a helpless prisoner.
Sure it can. Killing mages in the Fade results in tranquility.
Xilizhra wrote...
Adrian won't go against Fiona
Tranquility is a hideous and permanent torment. All Tranquil who left that state begged to be killed before their connection to the Fade was lost again.Some people are beyond redemption. It's better than outright executing them.
The fact that someone begs for death doesn't give someone the right to muder that person to incite a world war.Xilizhra wrote...
Pharamond begged for death. Elthina was not a case I would have done.
Slaves? Any intelligent mage would realize Adrian is just making it worse for everyone and be more than happy to help stop her.And what you're saying is that you'd have a battalion of enslaved mages and lyrium around so you could hop into the Fade there?
Retour en haut