523 réponses à ce sujet

[w0lfam0da1s]

Have we all forgotten that everything we see and do is the past. A story being told by Varric. The very same Varric that we consider a friend even if he doesn't side with us on everything. He tells what the important parts of the story are. Even in the end he tells us that Meredith or Orsino or Anders or the Idle is to blame. Cassandra knows he leaves out much of the story. This is pointed out when you play the DLC. So that just tells you that what is being told isn't the whole story. Not only that but the fact that when Cassandra ask if Hawke is alive and where Hawke is. Varric says he don't know and that he very much doubts that Hawke is dead. He says that with a smirk mind you when he says he don't know where Hawke is. So keeping all that in mind. Whatever we see and hear form Elthina is only tidbits of what is going on. It's like that through out the story. Only pices of the story sewn together to give Cassandra the infromation of what she seeks. Varric himself even says that he is a compulsive liar.(written on the wiki about him under trivia section)

Take that for what you will

Good day.

[Lotion Soronarr]

[quote]Silfren wrote...

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Death is irreversable.
Tranquility apprently is not.[/quote]
Neither of which anything to do with the price of tea in China, so what's your point, exactly?[/quote]

What is yours?
Little details like that matter. A reversable punishment is preferable to a non-reversable one.



[quote]
[quote]Mages are not slaves. Period.
Not by any valid definition of the word. Even the devs think so.[/quote]
Yes, they are.  I daresay I'd like to know just what your "valid" definition of slavery is, but I already know for a fact that mages fit the role quite well.  I suspect that your assertion, incorrect as it is, stems from the assumption that the model of American slavery prior to the 1860s is the only model of slavery which has ever existed, even though this assumption is factually wrong, but I don't know for certain so I'll leave it at that. 

The only reference I know of a Dev's opinion is Gaider saying something about not personally agreeing that the mages are slaves and thinking that that is an extremist opinion (just from memory), but I think that his opinion relies on a very limited understanding of slavery.  Me, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, I'd prefer to call it a duck instead of trying to whitewash it into a swan.[/quote]

Except it doesnt' quack liek a duck or walk like a duck, only look like one.
So it's not a duck.
You are of coruse free to disagree with the creator of the universe, but it would be kinda pointless. World of God trumps yours any day of the week.


[quote]
Mages within Circles have to get permission to leave their walls.   - yes, a reasonable precaution

Circle Mages are heavily discouraged from having sexual relationships, and any children that occur when said relations happen anyway, in ALL cases the children are taken away, becoming the de factor property of the Chantry. - no, not property of Chantry anymore that a child taken by social services are property of the state. Don't be redicolous. Also, it is said that the Chatnry has very good, practical reasons for instigating that policy.

Mages are supervised at all times, watched over so thoroughly that many mages feel they have to look for an opportunity to hide just to have a private conversation.  - nope again. They are supervised because they have to be, but they have plenty of freedom. As evident by the fact hat even in Kirkwall, things like searching their quarters is a big deal. Contrary to pupular oppinion, templars don't watch mages shower.


it is deemed illegal to be a mage living outside the auspices of the Circle, period, unless this permission is granted due to an individual mage's exceptional circumstances, involving fame or wealth.  All other mages are automatically considered criminals under the law.  When found, they are expected to go into the Circle, voluntarily or by force, the alternative being summary execution.  - another reasonable precaution given the dangers mages represent. Again, not slavery.

Dont' forget, that states today do similar things if they feel varranted. Immigration? You're not allowed in the country and are arrested enless given special permission.
Quarantene? Kiss your freedom of movement goodbye.[/quote]


[quote]
All these factors, and more, point toward the condition of slavery.  For that matter, several points o f the Circle system fall under the definition of genocide according to the U.N., and no, you don't get to dismiss this point as invalid on the claim of it being a modern concept inapplicable to the DA setting.  The concept is explicitly named in Dragon Age, which makes it quite valid, and that was deliberate on the part of the Devs, so clearly they DO intend for the comparison to be made.[/quote]

Not slavery. Not even close. Not even in the same general area.

And annulments are fully justified actions, even if morally.... questionable. Kill a few to save the many. No one wants to make those decisions, but sometimes you must.
I can give you a hunded hypothetical situations in which such decisions would have to be made.




[quote]
They MAY be necessary.  I clearly don't think they are, but necessary they MIGHT be.  But being necessary doesn't make them reasonable or just, and in their current form they most certainly are neither.[/quote]

They are reasonable. Very much so in fact.
And reasonably just.



[quote]
[quote]Mages are really not given a choice about joining the Circles and neither should they be given one.
Yes they should accept their lot and live in practical reality, like everyone else does.[/quote]

....If people were in the habit of accepting sh!t lots in life, within the civilized world slavery would still be legal, women would still be property, we'd have no workers' protection laws, etc.  [/qutoe]

Except those situations have nothing in common with mages.
The reasons and circumstances are completely different, and there are no other workable solutions.

[Silfren]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Death is irreversable.
Tranquility apprently is not.

Neither of which anything to do with the price of tea in China, so what's your point, exactly?

What is yours?
Little details like that matter. A reversable punishment is preferable to a non-reversable one.

One of the little details is that during the events of DA2, no one yet knew that Tranquility was reversible, so it's less than useless to bring that bit of meta-data into this discussion.  And since Tranquility was always inflicted on mages with the assumption and intention by Templars that it WAS a permanent solution, you have no point here. 

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

SIlfren wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Mages are not slaves. Period.
Not by any valid definition of the word. Even the devs think so.

Yes, they are.  I daresay I'd like to know just what your "valid" definition of slavery is, but I already know for a fact that mages fit the role quite well.  I suspect that your assertion, incorrect as it is, stems from the assumption that the model of American slavery prior to the 1860s is the only model of slavery which has ever existed, even though this assumption is factually wrong, but I don't know for certain so I'll leave it at that. 

The only reference I know of a Dev's opinion is Gaider saying something about not personally agreeing that the mages are slaves and thinking that that is an extremist opinion (just from memory), but I think that his opinion relies on a very limited understanding of slavery.  Me, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, I'd prefer to call it a duck instead of trying to whitewash it into a swan.

Except it doesnt' quack liek a duck or walk like a duck, only look like one.
So it's not a duck.
You are of coruse free to disagree with the creator of the universe, but it would be kinda pointless. World of God trumps yours any day of the week.

That actually depends on the context of his statement.  I recall the one I THINK you are referring to, and I reiterate that he was expressing what came across to me as a personal objection to someone else's interpretation of slavery, presumably based on Gaider's understanding of what slavery is, NOT a "within the world, mages are definitively not slaves" statement.  Nor do I give a **** about yours, because you're absolutely, totally wrong if you don't think that the conditions mages are forced into qualify as slavery under any real-world definition of such.  This is the rub, then.  When mages' lives fit real-world definitions of slavery, I've no choice but to accept that they are slaves.  This is most assuredly NOT an inappropriate application of modern Western thought to the setting, since plenty of other such concepts are, if not explicitly named, heavily implied enough to make it clear the Devs WANTED us to make the correlation.

I do realize you didn't address my question of what you call a "valid" definition of slavery, since you went out of your way to throw in the v word to make it clear that no definition of slavery offered you will past muster so long as YOU get to define what is and isn't valid.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
And annulments are fully justified actions, even if morally.... questionable. Kill a few to save the many. No one wants to make those decisions, but sometimes you must.
I can give you a hunded hypothetical situations in which such decisions would have to be made.

I didn't say a single, solitary word about annulment.  It's interesting that you automatically assume that's what I refer to with my mention of genocide, but you should know that genocidal conditions exist without it.  Rounding up mages to force them into a secluded area, restricting reproductive rights, and taking away their children, these are ALL points recognized as genocidal practice by the U.N. 

Unless of course you'd go so far as to say you don't think even the U.N.'s definition is valid, since qualifying things with that v word, again, is your means of refuting any evidence people present to you.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...They are reasonable. Very much so in fact.
And reasonably just.

No, they're not.  Necessary, MAYBE, but necessity alone doesn't make something reasonable or fair or just.  That's the very definition of necessary evil, after all, and supposedly it's the core issue of the game, that locking mages up is unfair and cruel but necessary for the greater good.  The entire story hinges on this idea.

And with this, I'm done discussing anything further with you, because you are not nor have you ever been, from my experience, interested in honest discussion.  Not when you stack the deck by insisting that concepts and definitions have to be valid by YOUR standards.

Modifié par Silfren, 05 mars 2013 - 12:39 .

[TEWR]

You are of coruse free to disagree with the creator of the universe, but it would be kinda pointless. World of God trumps yours any day of the week.

A developer's personal feelings on an issue of such magnitude isn't lore.

This is actually something I would try to find a way to deal with were I a dev. If I want to take part in such discussions, it'd be hard for people to separate what are my personal feelings on an issue from being Word of God.

To that end, I'd probably just always say "My personal feelings on X are this, so don't take this as WoG".

But I doubt that'd stop people.

Also, it is said that the Chatnry has very good, practical reasons for instigating that policy. 

The reasons for taking a child away from the parent -- assuming that if the child is there, they'd do anything to protect them when it was needed -- extend also to the opposite: that the Mage would do anything to regain their child.

Which Wynne does in Asunder in regards to Rhys. On both sides. She lost her child, regained him, and fought to both protect him and regain him.

So it's not really a valid approach. Either way, one could say, it's ****ed. But I'd rather take my chance allowing the Mage to be with their child then ripping it away from them the moment it's born.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 05 mars 2013 - 12:15 .

[dragonflight288]

Just been playing DA2 again, this time as an aggressive warrior, and I was talking to Elthina (Act 1) and asked her what Meredith was like. Elthina tried avoiding the question by stating 'gossip is a sin, my child' which I don't recall reading in the codex entry on the chant of light talking about the Maker's commandments, and when one of my companions made a comment, Elthina then went on to say it wasn't her place to judge Meredith's character.

....My reaction to that was...huh? Not your place? You're the one who put her in charge of the templars and you are Meredith's direct superior. She answers directly to you, and it isn't your place to question or judge the character of the person leading the templars and overseeing the mages? If it isn't your place Elthina, then who's place is it?

I think it adds in evidence that Elthina is either willfully ignorant at best, or blatantly supportive while trying to appear neutral at worst.

[IanPolaris]

I remember that as well playing an aggressive pro-templar Hawke. The more I think about it, the more I think that Elthina was perfectly OK with both Petrice's and Meredith's actions as long as she didn't have to think about them or notice them.

-Polaris

[w0lfam0da1s]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Just been playing DA2 again, this time as an aggressive warrior, and I was talking to Elthina (Act 1) and asked her what Meredith was like. Elthina tried avoiding the question by stating 'gossip is a sin, my child' which I don't recall reading in the codex entry on the chant of light talking about the Maker's commandments, and when one of my companions made a comment, Elthina then went on to say it wasn't her place to judge Meredith's character.

....My reaction to that was...huh? Not your place? You're the one who put her in charge of the templars and you are Meredith's direct superior. She answers directly to you, and it isn't your place to question or judge the character of the person leading the templars and overseeing the mages? If it isn't your place Elthina, then who's place is it?

I think it adds in evidence that Elthina is either willfully ignorant at best, or blatantly supportive while trying to appear neutral at worst.

She says that nomatter what class you play. That gossip is a sin, my child.
I don't know if you get another response or not but I've played several ways and always got that answer.
I also know you get the response that.....It isn't her place to judge Meredith's character.
when you bring Aveline with you.
I believe that the Maker's Commandments that you are looking for is.....

Those who bear false witness
And work to deceive others, know this:
All things are known to the Maker
And He shall judge their lies

So Elthina did give you a line from the commandments both times. 
The reason I say this is becauce gossip can fall under the bear false witness line
then when she says its not her place to judge
that fall under the commandmets line of He shall judge their lies.

So she's not going to tell you that Merediths a B***h or any of that.
I don't know what more to say then she has to quote the Chantry crap just to not talk about it.

but you do have a good point about hideing behind the Chantry rules in order to look like she is nutural or not nurural.

If you where to go up to a preast and ask questions about gossip they will tell you its a sin also. Or something very close to that.

Anyways

Take it for what you will

Good Day

[Silfren]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Just been playing DA2 again, this time as an aggressive warrior, and I was talking to Elthina (Act 1) and asked her what Meredith was like. Elthina tried avoiding the question by stating 'gossip is a sin, my child' which I don't recall reading in the codex entry on the chant of light talking about the Maker's commandments, and when one of my companions made a comment, Elthina then went on to say it wasn't her place to judge Meredith's character.

....My reaction to that was...huh? Not your place? You're the one who put her in charge of the templars and you are Meredith's direct superior. She answers directly to you, and it isn't your place to question or judge the character of the person leading the templars and overseeing the mages? If it isn't your place Elthina, then who's place is it?

I think it adds in evidence that Elthina is either willfully ignorant at best, or blatantly supportive while trying to appear neutral at worst.

Things like this are exactly why I think Elthina knew precisely what she was doing and that she was an up-to-no-good manipulator of everybody.

[Silfren]

IanPolaris wrote...

I remember that as well playing an aggressive pro-templar Hawke. The more I think about it, the more I think that Elthina was perfectly OK with both Petrice's and Meredith's actions as long as she didn't have to think about them or notice them.

-Polaris

There's quite an argument to be had that Elthina was in on Petrice's actions from the start.  Note how after her act of trying to get Hawke killed freeing a Saarebas (while using Elthina's seal), the woman got PROMOTED.  It certainly can't be said that Elthina was unaware of Petrice's stance against the Qunari--Petrice tells you she preaches against them from the pulpit.  And, if you later make choices that lead to Petrice's execution, when Hawke confronts Elthina, Petrice clearly expects the Grand Cleric to back her up, given how stunned she sounds when Elthina rebukes her instead. 

I'm convinced that Elthina was in on Petrice's scheme but set things up so that she'd be able to claim plausible deniability if things went badly, and when they did she kept her own hands clean while throwing Petrice under the bus.

[Silfren]

w0lfam0da1s wrote...

She says that nomatter what class you play.

They referred to the tone, not the class.  None of the responses in game change according to class, but they do change often according to whether you play sarcastic, aggressive, or diplomatic Hawkes.  That's what they meant.

Those who bear false witness
And work to deceive others, know this:
All things are known to the Maker
And He shall judge their lies

So Elthina did give you a line from the commandments both times. 
The reason I say this is becauce gossip can fall under the bear false witness line
then when she says its not her place to judge
that fall under the commandmets line of He shall judge their lies.

So she's not going to tell you that Merediths a B***h or any of that.
I don't know what more to say then she has to quote the Chantry crap just to not talk about it.

Try again.  This entire stanza has nothing to do with gossip at all, but specifically about lies.  Gossip is not synonymous with lying.  Hawke wasn't asking Elthina to lie at all, so this explanation holds no water as a defense of Elthina's response--nothing in this bit of the Chant says what you say it does.  As for it not being Elthina's place to judge Meredith, that has nothing do with this verse either.  Saying that the Maker will judge people for lying is NOT saying that Elthina doesn't have the right to make a judgment of Meredith's character.  

Some reading comprehension is in order here. Your verses here have nothing whatsoever to do with Elthina's comments about gossip and it not being her place to judge.  It is specifically about what the Maker will do to liars and nothing else.

And it's ridiculous for you to respond with "she's not going to tell you that Meredith is a b*tch" because that's NOT what Hawke was doing in that scene, and it's not what dragonflight was expecting Elthina to say. 

If you where to go up to a preast and ask questions about gossip they will tell you its a sin also. Or something very close to that.

Hawke wasn't looking for gossip.  Nor are a lot of people when they ask a simple question about what someone's like.   How about focusing on the actual point, which is that it absolutely IS Elthina's place to make a judgment call about Meredith's character?  Meredith is Elthina's employee, essentially, but Meredith is also a commander of troops.  It's highly, HIGHLY important Meredith's direct superior to have a solid understanding of Meredith's personality, so Elthina's response here is total b*ll****.  There isn't anything in the Chant of Light in the verses you refer to that provide an excuse for her answer, weak or not.

Modifié par Silfren, 06 mars 2013 - 09:30 .

[dragonflight288]

w0lfam0da1s wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Just been playing DA2 again, this time as an aggressive warrior, and I was talking to Elthina (Act 1) and asked her what Meredith was like. Elthina tried avoiding the question by stating 'gossip is a sin, my child' which I don't recall reading in the codex entry on the chant of light talking about the Maker's commandments, and when one of my companions made a comment, Elthina then went on to say it wasn't her place to judge Meredith's character.

....My reaction to that was...huh? Not your place? You're the one who put her in charge of the templars and you are Meredith's direct superior. She answers directly to you, and it isn't your place to question or judge the character of the person leading the templars and overseeing the mages? If it isn't your place Elthina, then who's place is it?

I think it adds in evidence that Elthina is either willfully ignorant at best, or blatantly supportive while trying to appear neutral at worst.

She says that nomatter what class you play. That gossip is a sin, my child.
I don't know if you get another response or not but I've played several ways and always got that answer.
I also know you get the response that.....It isn't her place to judge Meredith's character.
when you bring Aveline with you.
I believe that the Maker's Commandments that you are looking for is.....

Those who bear false witness
And work to deceive others, know this:
All things are known to the Maker
And He shall judge their lies

So Elthina did give you a line from the commandments both times. 
The reason I say this is becauce gossip can fall under the bear false witness line
then when she says its not her place to judge
that fall under the commandmets line of He shall judge their lies.

So she's not going to tell you that Merediths a B***h or any of that.
I don't know what more to say then she has to quote the Chantry crap just to not talk about it.

but you do have a good point about hideing behind the Chantry rules in order to look like she is nutural or not nurural.

If you where to go up to a preast and ask questions about gossip they will tell you its a sin also. Or something very close to that.

Anyways

Take it for what you will

Good Day

well thank you.

But that talks about lying, not gossip, nor does it refer to seeking simple information. My Hawke was simply seeking the opinion from the person who gave Meredith power factual information about Meredith, as Elthina is directly responsible for giving Meredith that power, having been the one to appoint her as Knight-Commander.

I'm still trying to decide whether to have Bethany live in the Circle, the Wardens, or die, per the way I'm roleplaying my Hawke, but I don't see anything in the Maker's Commandments that talk about seeking factual information from a supposedly reliable source. Elthina is the Grand Cleric, she should be the most reliable source concerning Meredith's character. It's not gossip to try and learn whether or not Bethany would be in good hands (from my Hawke's perspective) should she end up in the Circle after talking about whether it would be better for her to be in the Circle so she didn't have to worry her family over getting caught all the time.

From my personal perspective, it looks like Elthina is trying to avoid looking at the problems themselves, she doesn't want to deal with them, and every time something happens, Petrice using the Grand Cleric's seal, openly preaching against the Qunari and causing a diplomatic incident by killing the Qunari, or Meredith's blatant abuse of power, Elthina is conveniently has her hands clean of any thing they do, despite being the one who put them into those positions in the first place.

[Silfren]

dragonflight288 wrote...

w0lfam0da1s wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Just been playing DA2 again, this time as an aggressive warrior, and I was talking to Elthina (Act 1) and asked her what Meredith was like. Elthina tried avoiding the question by stating 'gossip is a sin, my child' which I don't recall reading in the codex entry on the chant of light talking about the Maker's commandments, and when one of my companions made a comment, Elthina then went on to say it wasn't her place to judge Meredith's character.

....My reaction to that was...huh? Not your place? You're the one who put her in charge of the templars and you are Meredith's direct superior. She answers directly to you, and it isn't your place to question or judge the character of the person leading the templars and overseeing the mages? If it isn't your place Elthina, then who's place is it?

I think it adds in evidence that Elthina is either willfully ignorant at best, or blatantly supportive while trying to appear neutral at worst.

She says that nomatter what class you play. That gossip is a sin, my child.
I don't know if you get another response or not but I've played several ways and always got that answer.
I also know you get the response that.....It isn't her place to judge Meredith's character.
when you bring Aveline with you.
I believe that the Maker's Commandments that you are looking for is.....

Those who bear false witness
And work to deceive others, know this:
All things are known to the Maker
And He shall judge their lies

So Elthina did give you a line from the commandments both times. 
The reason I say this is becauce gossip can fall under the bear false witness line
then when she says its not her place to judge
that fall under the commandmets line of He shall judge their lies.

So she's not going to tell you that Merediths a B***h or any of that.
I don't know what more to say then she has to quote the Chantry crap just to not talk about it.

but you do have a good point about hideing behind the Chantry rules in order to look like she is nutural or not nurural.

If you where to go up to a preast and ask questions about gossip they will tell you its a sin also. Or something very close to that.

Anyways

Take it for what you will

Good Day

well thank you.

But that talks about lying, not gossip, nor does it refer to seeking simple information. My Hawke was simply seeking the opinion from the person who gave Meredith power factual information about Meredith, as Elthina is directly responsible for giving Meredith that power, having been the one to appoint her as Knight-Commander.

I'm still trying to decide whether to have Bethany live in the Circle, the Wardens, or die, per the way I'm roleplaying my Hawke, but I don't see anything in the Maker's Commandments that talk about seeking factual information from a supposedly reliable source. Elthina is the Grand Cleric, she should be the most reliable source concerning Meredith's character. It's not gossip to try and learn whether or not Bethany would be in good hands (from my Hawke's perspective) should she end up in the Circle after talking about whether it would be better for her to be in the Circle so she didn't have to worry her family over getting caught all the time.

From my personal perspective, it looks like Elthina is trying to avoid looking at the problems themselves, she doesn't want to deal with them, and every time something happens, Petrice using the Grand Cleric's seal, openly preaching against the Qunari and causing a diplomatic incident by killing the Qunari, or Meredith's blatant abuse of power, Elthina is conveniently has her hands clean of any thing they do, despite being the one who put them into those positions in the first place.

Don't know if you've ever played a Bethany-in-the-Circle game before, and this is meta-gamey, but if you go that route, Bethany tends to be happier overall.

[dragonflight288]

Silfren wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

w0lfam0da1s wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Just been playing DA2 again, this time as an aggressive warrior, and I was talking to Elthina (Act 1) and asked her what Meredith was like. Elthina tried avoiding the question by stating 'gossip is a sin, my child' which I don't recall reading in the codex entry on the chant of light talking about the Maker's commandments, and when one of my companions made a comment, Elthina then went on to say it wasn't her place to judge Meredith's character.

....My reaction to that was...huh? Not your place? You're the one who put her in charge of the templars and you are Meredith's direct superior. She answers directly to you, and it isn't your place to question or judge the character of the person leading the templars and overseeing the mages? If it isn't your place Elthina, then who's place is it?

I think it adds in evidence that Elthina is either willfully ignorant at best, or blatantly supportive while trying to appear neutral at worst.

She says that nomatter what class you play. That gossip is a sin, my child.
I don't know if you get another response or not but I've played several ways and always got that answer.
I also know you get the response that.....It isn't her place to judge Meredith's character.
when you bring Aveline with you.
I believe that the Maker's Commandments that you are looking for is.....

Those who bear false witness
And work to deceive others, know this:
All things are known to the Maker
And He shall judge their lies

So Elthina did give you a line from the commandments both times. 
The reason I say this is becauce gossip can fall under the bear false witness line
then when she says its not her place to judge
that fall under the commandmets line of He shall judge their lies.

So she's not going to tell you that Merediths a B***h or any of that.
I don't know what more to say then she has to quote the Chantry crap just to not talk about it.

but you do have a good point about hideing behind the Chantry rules in order to look like she is nutural or not nurural.

If you where to go up to a preast and ask questions about gossip they will tell you its a sin also. Or something very close to that.

Anyways

Take it for what you will

Good Day

well thank you.

But that talks about lying, not gossip, nor does it refer to seeking simple information. My Hawke was simply seeking the opinion from the person who gave Meredith power factual information about Meredith, as Elthina is directly responsible for giving Meredith that power, having been the one to appoint her as Knight-Commander.

I'm still trying to decide whether to have Bethany live in the Circle, the Wardens, or die, per the way I'm roleplaying my Hawke, but I don't see anything in the Maker's Commandments that talk about seeking factual information from a supposedly reliable source. Elthina is the Grand Cleric, she should be the most reliable source concerning Meredith's character. It's not gossip to try and learn whether or not Bethany would be in good hands (from my Hawke's perspective) should she end up in the Circle after talking about whether it would be better for her to be in the Circle so she didn't have to worry her family over getting caught all the time.

From my personal perspective, it looks like Elthina is trying to avoid looking at the problems themselves, she doesn't want to deal with them, and every time something happens, Petrice using the Grand Cleric's seal, openly preaching against the Qunari and causing a diplomatic incident by killing the Qunari, or Meredith's blatant abuse of power, Elthina is conveniently has her hands clean of any thing they do, despite being the one who put them into those positions in the first place.

Don't know if you've ever played a Bethany-in-the-Circle game before, and this is meta-gamey, but if you go that route, Bethany tends to be happier overall.

Well thanks for that. Already knew it, but what I'm doing is trying for less meta-gaming (which I know I'll subcouscously do anyway) and more of a role-playing experience, trying to give Hawke motivations and a personality beyond diplomatic, sarcastic or aggressive. An example, when he talks to Bethany he's nothing but diplomatic and friendly, but when he talks to Fenris or Cullen, he's far more aggressive when it comes to how his sister may be treated or not. He's abrasive, but not heartless, and can make the occassional joke, but is a warrior first and foremost, and has a love of battle.

Trying to figure out whether he wants to bring Bethany into the Deep Roads so the templars won't find her, or whether or not he'll respect Leandra's wishes and have her stay.

[Silfren]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Silfren wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

w0lfam0da1s wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Just been playing DA2 again, this time as an aggressive warrior, and I was talking to Elthina (Act 1) and asked her what Meredith was like. Elthina tried avoiding the question by stating 'gossip is a sin, my child' which I don't recall reading in the codex entry on the chant of light talking about the Maker's commandments, and when one of my companions made a comment, Elthina then went on to say it wasn't her place to judge Meredith's character.

....My reaction to that was...huh? Not your place? You're the one who put her in charge of the templars and you are Meredith's direct superior. She answers directly to you, and it isn't your place to question or judge the character of the person leading the templars and overseeing the mages? If it isn't your place Elthina, then who's place is it?

I think it adds in evidence that Elthina is either willfully ignorant at best, or blatantly supportive while trying to appear neutral at worst.

She says that nomatter what class you play. That gossip is a sin, my child.
I don't know if you get another response or not but I've played several ways and always got that answer.
I also know you get the response that.....It isn't her place to judge Meredith's character.
when you bring Aveline with you.
I believe that the Maker's Commandments that you are looking for is.....

Those who bear false witness
And work to deceive others, know this:
All things are known to the Maker
And He shall judge their lies

So Elthina did give you a line from the commandments both times. 
The reason I say this is becauce gossip can fall under the bear false witness line
then when she says its not her place to judge
that fall under the commandmets line of He shall judge their lies.

So she's not going to tell you that Merediths a B***h or any of that.
I don't know what more to say then she has to quote the Chantry crap just to not talk about it.

but you do have a good point about hideing behind the Chantry rules in order to look like she is nutural or not nurural.

If you where to go up to a preast and ask questions about gossip they will tell you its a sin also. Or something very close to that.

Anyways

Take it for what you will

Good Day

well thank you.

But that talks about lying, not gossip, nor does it refer to seeking simple information. My Hawke was simply seeking the opinion from the person who gave Meredith power factual information about Meredith, as Elthina is directly responsible for giving Meredith that power, having been the one to appoint her as Knight-Commander.

I'm still trying to decide whether to have Bethany live in the Circle, the Wardens, or die, per the way I'm roleplaying my Hawke, but I don't see anything in the Maker's Commandments that talk about seeking factual information from a supposedly reliable source. Elthina is the Grand Cleric, she should be the most reliable source concerning Meredith's character. It's not gossip to try and learn whether or not Bethany would be in good hands (from my Hawke's perspective) should she end up in the Circle after talking about whether it would be better for her to be in the Circle so she didn't have to worry her family over getting caught all the time.

From my personal perspective, it looks like Elthina is trying to avoid looking at the problems themselves, she doesn't want to deal with them, and every time something happens, Petrice using the Grand Cleric's seal, openly preaching against the Qunari and causing a diplomatic incident by killing the Qunari, or Meredith's blatant abuse of power, Elthina is conveniently has her hands clean of any thing they do, despite being the one who put them into those positions in the first place.

Don't know if you've ever played a Bethany-in-the-Circle game before, and this is meta-gamey, but if you go that route, Bethany tends to be happier overall.

Well thanks for that. Already knew it, but what I'm doing is trying for less meta-gaming (which I know I'll subcouscously do anyway) and more of a role-playing experience, trying to give Hawke motivations and a personality beyond diplomatic, sarcastic or aggressive. An example, when he talks to Bethany he's nothing but diplomatic and friendly, but when he talks to Fenris or Cullen, he's far more aggressive when it comes to how his sister may be treated or not. He's abrasive, but not heartless, and can make the occassional joke, but is a warrior first and foremost, and has a love of battle.

Trying to figure out whether he wants to bring Bethany into the Deep Roads so the templars won't find her, or whether or not he'll respect Leandra's wishes and have her stay.

You know, that decision is one of the hardest in the game for me, but mostly because I never can make up my mind whether I want my Hawke to protect Bethany's life or defend her right to self-agency. First time I played with her, I thought throughout the first act that Bethany didn't want anything to do with the Deep Roads but was just sort of going along with her sister.  So when Bethany responds to Leandra's objection with, "Mother, I want to go," instead of what I expected.  I'd thought Bethany was just trying to be helpful and loyal, going with what she thought her sister wanted her to do.  So I had to sit there gawping at my screen and work out what I could live with.  I like Bethany and hate to see her killed, but personally I absolutely cannot stand seeing a person's freely made choice get denied, roleplaying be damned.  I try to let my meta-gaming enhance my roleplay (i.e. I pick choices based on the consequences I want my character to deal with and try to work out what sort of character would make the decisions that lead to those particular outcomes) rather than dictate it, like not letting Bethany into the Deep Roads because I don't want to see her killed despite what sort of person my Hawke is.  But that point catches me up every time. 

Modifié par Silfren, 07 mars 2013 - 01:11 .

[dragonflight288]

Silfren said.....

snip

I agree. That choice always hits me hard. I've played three times as a mage (first time was my first playthrough) and I brought Carver to the Deep Roads because he insisted on it, and didn't bring Anders because he said he hated the Deep Roads. Suffice to say, I was bashing my head against a wall at the end of the quest. I had him as a Warden the second time and a Templar the third time.

I thought that Carver was happier as a Warden, but plotwise I felt there was a lot more tension with him as a templar, and I actually enjoyed that playthough a little bit more because of the increased tension.

I try to roleplay my Hawke to get the desired outcome, but I have actually never used the largely aggressive Hawke before, and it's actually kind of fun. But quite frankly, I don't want to disrespect Bethany's wishes either, but I don't want to see her "merely endure" as a Warden, and I most certainly don't want her dead.

Makes me almost wish that Hawke had a choice on whether to save one sibling and his mother in Lothering, both siblings but lose Leandra and have the kids go to their only relative left who could offer them some form of shelter and a home, Gamlen (as the Hawke's go out of their way to avoid the Circle and if Amell is the Warden...he probably would only be able to grant them shelter if they became grey wardens.) I think that Hawke's choices directly or indirectly affecting which family members live or die, rather than the first death being a result of which class we play as, would be a lot more dramatic.

[Silfren]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Silfren said.....

snip

I agree. That choice always hits me hard. I've played three times as a mage (first time was my first playthrough) and I brought Carver to the Deep Roads because he insisted on it, and didn't bring Anders because he said he hated the Deep Roads. Suffice to say, I was bashing my head against a wall at the end of the quest. I had him as a Warden the second time and a Templar the third time.

I thought that Carver was happier as a Warden, but plotwise I felt there was a lot more tension with him as a templar, and I actually enjoyed that playthough a little bit more because of the increased tension.

I try to roleplay my Hawke to get the desired outcome, but I have actually never used the largely aggressive Hawke before, and it's actually kind of fun. But quite frankly, I don't want to disrespect Bethany's wishes either, but I don't want to see her "merely endure" as a Warden, and I most certainly don't want her dead.

Makes me almost wish that Hawke had a choice on whether to save one sibling and his mother in Lothering, both siblings but lose Leandra and have the kids go to their only relative left who could offer them some form of shelter and a home, Gamlen (as the Hawke's go out of their way to avoid the Circle and if Amell is the Warden...he probably would only be able to grant them shelter if they became grey wardens.) I think that Hawke's choices directly or indirectly affecting which family members live or die, rather than the first death being a result of which class we play as, would be a lot more dramatic.

Your *snip* sounds an awful lot like Sten's "No."  Just sayin'.

But yeah, I totally understand Bioware's purpose in basing the dead sibling on Hawke's class, but rather than trying to keep you from having an excess of one class available, I'd have preferred they simply left that issue alone and made the outcome dependent on your choice.  It would have made the entire prologue much more poignant and meaningful.

[Plaintiff]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
You are of coruse free to disagree with the creator of the universe, but it would be kinda pointless. World of God trumps yours any day of the week.

David Gaider may have written the world of Thedas, but he did not write the definition of slavery.

There are, in fact, several different definitons for slavery. One, from Merriam-Webster is "submission to a dominating influence". Sounds like the Circle system fits that criteria just fine.

[MisterJB]

So does any system of government ever.

[Plaintiff]

Well, I didn't write it. Complain to Merriam-Webster.

[dragonflight288]

Silfren wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Silfren said.....

snip

I agree. That choice always hits me hard. I've played three times as a mage (first time was my first playthrough) and I brought Carver to the Deep Roads because he insisted on it, and didn't bring Anders because he said he hated the Deep Roads. Suffice to say, I was bashing my head against a wall at the end of the quest. I had him as a Warden the second time and a Templar the third time.

I thought that Carver was happier as a Warden, but plotwise I felt there was a lot more tension with him as a templar, and I actually enjoyed that playthough a little bit more because of the increased tension.

I try to roleplay my Hawke to get the desired outcome, but I have actually never used the largely aggressive Hawke before, and it's actually kind of fun. But quite frankly, I don't want to disrespect Bethany's wishes either, but I don't want to see her "merely endure" as a Warden, and I most certainly don't want her dead.

Makes me almost wish that Hawke had a choice on whether to save one sibling and his mother in Lothering, both siblings but lose Leandra and have the kids go to their only relative left who could offer them some form of shelter and a home, Gamlen (as the Hawke's go out of their way to avoid the Circle and if Amell is the Warden...he probably would only be able to grant them shelter if they became grey wardens.) I think that Hawke's choices directly or indirectly affecting which family members live or die, rather than the first death being a result of which class we play as, would be a lot more dramatic.

Your *snip* sounds an awful lot like Sten's "No."  Just sayin'.

But yeah, I totally understand Bioware's purpose in basing the dead sibling on Hawke's class, but rather than trying to keep you from having an excess of one class available, I'd have preferred they simply left that issue alone and made the outcome dependent on your choice.  It would have made the entire prologue much more poignant and meaningful.

https://encrypted-tb...AaOHumtUMkVx4N4

NO.

Sorry. Had to input it.

EDIT: But yeah, more family input would've been nice. Ah well, we'll see how much improves or degrades come Inquisition.

Modifié par dragonflight288, 08 mars 2013 - 09:14 .

[Silfren]

MisterJB,

Question for you: You say that you've never seen a proposed alternative to the present Circle system that you agreed was workable.

So, challenge for you. Let's say that the Circles in their present state are gone, and that's the final answer. You have to come up with another solution for regulating magic that allows mages and mundanes to live together.

Key point, NO, you can't give an answer like "okay, so the Chantry passes a law saying that mages are all to be killed on sight, and turns it Templars loose to carry out this edict.

[MisterJB]

I can't. I'm not trying to be evasive, it realistically can't be done. Human nature prevents coexistance. You might as well ask me to make fire drinkable.
Mundanes and mages live together in Tevinter. Is that acceptable? I hope not.

I can propose a more lenient Circle system but it would still involve segregation.

[dragonflight288]

MisterJB wrote...

I can't. I'm not trying to be evasive, it realistically can't be done. Human nature prevents coexistance. You might as well ask me to make fire drinkable.
Mundanes and mages live together in Tevinter. Is that acceptable? I hope not.

I can propose a more lenient Circle system but it would still involve segregation.

Yet Thrask was able to do it. He got mages and templars to work together.

There are multiple societies throughout Thedas that have mundanes and mages living together, and not just Tevinter. Dalish, Chasind and Rivaini being examples.

Are they examples of human nature being wrong?

And what is it about human nature that would prevent people from living and working together if some are mages and most are not?

Modifié par dragonflight288, 09 mars 2013 - 07:49 .

[MisterJB]

Common enemies have a way of uniting people but such alliances don't last long. Humans and elves fought together to free themselves from the Imperium and three centuries later, one side had destroyed the other. Orlais has aided Nevarra to defend its land from the Darkspawn, proceeding to occupy said land after the Archdemon had been destroyed.
Thrask's little group is unique only in that they weren't even able to cooperate long enough to take down the common enemy.

Dalish: Mage supremacist and authoritarian society.

Chasind: We know little of. We are told they have shamans but so have we and there is no magic in our world. "Mark of the Assassin" implies they break their mages to make them innofensive.

Rivain: Another land we know little of. They have a Circle and a strong Qunari presence which leads me to believe it is no haven for mages.
We have been told they revere hedge witches but I actually find that concerning because we have also been told they see abominations as "natural accidents". Abominations are not natural accidents, they are the conscient acts of sentient creatures who should be held responsible for their actions and against who should be taken precautions. Not simply "accept it as a fact of life."

Modifié par MisterJB, 09 mars 2013 - 07:55 .

[dragonflight288]

MisterJB wrote...

Common enemies have a way of uniting people but such alliances don't last long. Humans and elves fought together to free themselves from the Imperium and three centuries later, one side had destroyed the other. Orlais has aided Nevarra to defend its land from the Darkspawn, proceeding to occupy said land after the Archdemon had been destroyed.
Thrask's little group is unique only in that they weren't even able to cooperate long enough to take down the common enemy.

Dalish: Mage supremacist and authoritarian society.

Chasind: We know little of. We are told they have shamans but so have we and there is no magic in our world. "Mark of the Assassin" implies they break their mages to make them innofensive.

Rivain: Another land we know little of. They have a Circle and a strong Qunari presence which leads me to believe it is no haven for mages.
We have been told they revere hedge witches but I actually find that concerning because we have also been told they see abominations as "natural accidents". Abominations are not natural accidents, they are the conscient acts of sentient creatures who should be held responsible for their actions and against who should be taken precautions. Not simply "accept it as a fact of life."

I still don't see how the Dalish are mage supremacists in any way. They believed that at one point they once were all mages, and while their Keepers are guides and leaders, that doesn't mean it's because magic in and of itself gives them the right to rule. It's the belief that Keepers are descended from their nobles.

I have to play Mark of the Assassin again to see if that's truly implied or not....maybe you could point out where in the DLC it's in?

Rivain also allow their seers to be willingly possessed by a variety of spirits, the codex doesn't say demons, and the mundanes believed in those traditions so strongly that they resisted the Chantry when the seers were to be locked up. Until we actually meet one of these seers (hopefully as a companion in Inquisition) I can't say if they're possessed by demons or by a spirit of whatever virtue.

But when you say all abominations need to be held accountable for their actions, do you also refer to Connor, the untrained mage who desperately wanted to save his father? Or mages like Wynne who don't hurt anyone?

I have to quote Morrigan when it comes to abominations and them being insane horrors.

Morrigan: How often is this usually? Is it always? If it's not alwalys then when it is it not so?