236 réponses à ce sujet

[Willowhugger]

Yeah, the issue isn't whether he's a freedom fighter or a terrorist.

He's explicitly both.

[Vit246]

Trolldrool wrote...
And for that matter, most of the clergy men and women in the chantry are civilians. Regular people who have absolutely no influence on the templars' doctrine or treatment of mages. They live seeking deeper spiritual understanding of their faith and do their part to provide for the city's impoverished, homeless and disabled. The Chantry as an organization might be prone to corruption and extremism, but that doesn't make every initiate a legitimate target.

Oh. My God. This complete MISCONCEPTION absolutely rages me to no end.

Where do I even begin....

The Chantry is specifically NOT a civilian organization. And they absolutely DO have influence over the Templars' doctrine and treatment of mages.

They're the organzation that CREATED THE ENTIRE MAGE CIRCLE SYSTEM AND THE MODERN TEMPLAR ORDER IN THE FIRST PLACE.

AND THE TEMPLARS ARE SPECIFICALLY THE CHANTRY'S MILITARY BRANCH. THEY ABSOLUTELY ANSWER TO THE CHANTRY BY RELIGIOUS INDOCTRINATION AND LYRIUM DRUG ADDICTION WHICH THE CHANTRY HAS A MONOPOLY ON. THE CHANTRY CONTROLS THE LYRIUM SUPPLY.

The Chantry is not some damn local church from across the street. It's an international religious organzation with political, economic, and military power. And they officially preach fear and hatred toward all things magic.

And while the Chantry's military arm the Templars exercise immediate direct authority over the mages, the Chantry ultimately has the final authority.

Elthina was a Grand Cleric of Kirkwall, which gives her supreme authority over the Kirkwall Templars and Kirkwall Circle. She APPOINTED Meredith in the first place. And she has authority over how Kirkwall mages are treated. 

Anders killed her specifically because she IS a legitmate target. She had all the authority and power despite what the game insists she had none. And she did nothing with it. She didn't do her job which was to maintain order and take care of any abuse in the Kirkwall Circle system and reprimand the templars. And she did do was maintain the status quo.

In fact, as far the game ever tells us and as far as we know, all Anders ever killed was the Grand Cleric and some templars. None of whom are "innocent" "civilians" but entirely legitimate targets. He didn't kill some orphans or the old. The local Kirkwall Chantry was the headquarters of the Chantry authority. Attacking that doesn't make him a terrorist.

In fact, whoever wrote in the part about Elthina's "neutrality" should be fired. Chantry "neutrality" does not and has never existed. The Templars are part of the Chantry. They were never anything more than a military arm to enforce the Chantry's laws over the Circles. It's like saying the president is neutral toward the US military. Its ridiculous.

All of this being said however, DA2 is poorly written. Its so poorly written that people were and are convinced that the Chantry and Templars are two completely separate unrelated organizations and the Chantry never had any real power over them or the Mage Circle system.

It is poor writing that the Templars can so easily and successfully break away from the Chantry even though the Chantry controls the lyrium supply which it addicts the Templars on specifically so that they cannot break away so easily and successfully in the first place. 

It is poor writing that all of a sudden, there are these Seekers of Truth that can just declare separation from the Chantry just like that. 

This is all I can think of right now.

Modifié par Vit246, 29 mars 2013 - 04:27 .

[KiwiQuiche]

I thought the Seekers were the only ones still with the Chantry in DAI, they are serving the Divine?

[MissOuJ]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

I thought the Seekers were the only ones still with the Chantry in DAI, they are serving the Divine?

Well, yes... and no. It's a bit complicated.

[Spoilers for Asunder incoming!]

Since, at the end of Asunder, Seeker Lambert (who was/is basically the head of the Seekers) declares the Nevarran Accord null because he doesn't see eye to eye with the Divine, neither the Templars nor the Seekers are officially part of the Chantry anymore - althought Lambert separated from the Chantry mostly because the Divine Justinia V was way too pro-mage for his tastes, so that puts an interesting spin on things.

But then DAII shows Cassandra serving the Chantry, so it's clear there are still Seekers who follow the Chantry - or  the Divine, since there's no way to know whether the Chantries and other Grand-Clerics side with her or the Templars/Lambert - so not all Seekers are following Lambert's lead.

So, basically, the whole situation is a bit messed up.

Modifié par MissOuJ, 29 mars 2013 - 11:01 .

[Sutekh]

@ Vit246

Although I agree about the effective power of the Chantry, I don't regarding the so-called poor writing being the cause of the misconception (which, btw, isn't that common).

It is made absolutely clear the Chantry holds power over mages, templars and seekers. In the vanilla game, a word from Elthina is enough to send Orsino back to the Circle and Meredith go think in her room and "be a good girl", without the latter protesting in the slightest, which would be completely out of character if Elthina didn't have authority on her. With the Sebastian DLC, you've got the Divine threatening an Exalted March, which is as much taking charge and exerting power as you get, barring acting on it.

So no, it isn't the writer's fault if some people miss those crystal clear bits of info.

(As for them being fired, you might want to consider priorities. Seriously.)

[LobselVith8]

Willowhugger wrote...

My Mage Hawke-Warden was a believer in the Maker. He also had a dire loathing of the Chantry.

Given the Chantry's view on mages, I couldn't fathom playing as a mage protagonist who believed in the Maker, especially as an elven mage. I was glad I wasn't forced to be religiously Andrastian; to be able to condemn the Chantry for invading the homeland of my people for religious reasons, to express to Leliana that I didn't share the same view of Andraste as her (which was echoed in a later conversation with Velanna where my Warden-Commander felt she used their people for her own purposes). To explicitly tell Justice that he didn't believe in the Maker made perfect sense for my Surana Warden.

I really hated how I couldn't have Hawke do the same, but being limited to one point of view was the kind of limitation that made me feel like he was someone else's character, instead of my own. Being voiced and having auto-lines outside my control didn't help, either. I simply don't get why a mage would believe in the Maker or in the teachings of the Chantry. It's simply not the kind of person I have any interest in playing as.

[Sutekh]

LobselVith8 wrote...

I really hated how I couldn't have Hawke do the same, but being limited to one point of view was the kind of limitation that made me feel like he was someone else's character, instead of my own. Being voiced and having auto-lines outside my control didn't help, either. I simply don't get why a mage would believe in the Maker or in the teachings of the Chantry. It's simply not the kind of person I have any interest in playing as.

You've been saying that a lot, and I'm not saying you're wrong, but what exactly gave you the impression that Hawke was Andrastian?

I've played my share of Hawkes, including mages, and I never got that feeling. I even remember telling Elthina off when she said the Maker is to thank for ending the Blight ("The Maker has nothing to do with that, the Warden did it" or something along the line).

On the same note, is it possible that the lack of lines allowing you to state your distaste of the Chantry be a human thing more than DA2 specific? e.g. I don't remember Cousland having any such line (never played an Amell, so I wouldn't know).

[LobselVith8]

Sutekh wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

I really hated how I couldn't have Hawke do the same, but being limited to one point of view was the kind of limitation that made me feel like he was someone else's character, instead of my own. Being voiced and having auto-lines outside my control didn't help, either. I simply don't get why a mage would believe in the Maker or in the teachings of the Chantry. It's simply not the kind of person I have any interest in playing as.

You've been saying that a lot, and I'm not saying you're wrong, but what exactly gave you the impression that Hawke was Andrastian?

I've played my share of Hawkes, including mages, and I never got that feeling. I even remember telling Elthina off when she said the Maker is to thank for ending the Blight ("The Maker has nothing to do with that, the Warden did it" or something along the line).

On the same note, is it possible that the lack of lines allowing you to state your distaste of the Chantry be a human thing more than DA2 specific? e.g. I don't remember Cousland having any such line (never played an Amell, so I wouldn't know). 

Aside from Gaider acknowledging that disbelief in the Maker wasn't intended for Dragon Age II since he forgot about its inclusion in Origins and Awakening? Or Hawke being limited to a religiously Andrastian point of view when his mother died, with no alternative point of view avaliable? Or the similarly limited point of view options with Sebastian? Or Hawke telling non-Andrastian Feynriel that he hopes the Maker guides him?

The Cousland protagonist could say he didn't believe in the Maker. The Surana Warden could condemn the Chantry and made it clear the Maker wasn't a god he believed in. The Warden could tell Leliana he didn't think Andraste was divine. The Warden-Commander could tell Justice that belief in the Maker was a "foolish superstition". There were options to define who your protagonist was, and their views.

A lot of people expressed the same dissatisfaction, which is why multiple threads by a myriad of people were made on the issue, and why Gaider relented and said the option would be avaliable in Inquisition when he originally opposed its inclusion post-Origins.

[andy6915]

Well, Hawke is more of a defined character then the Warden was, significantly so. That's probably why I wasn't bothered by that even though my Wardens are almost always atheist. Hawke's character was written to be Andrastian just as Hawke was written to not be a bigot towards elves and dwarves. A more defined character means you have less control over specific details like the character's religion.

[karushna5]

I think...

That a realistic religion opens a lot of worms, and worst of all the fantasy world parrellells the real one so much that real hatred toward establishments has colored our view of what actually happened in game.

My opinion is any realistic religion in the game world is going to be a vessle for peoples wants and fears. Any consolidated group is going to use their ability and function for se4lfish ends depending on the power involved. What I mean is, The Chantry isnt evil, but the people behind it that have shaped and even admittedly changed it are selfish. I think this is true of political groups and any time a group has power this will happen.

People will find a way to do cruel things with the methods available to them, because faith, like love, is passionate this is a common ground. Andraste never says lock up mages, she never says to kill the elves. People changed the ideas associated to mean that...

So The Chantry isn't evil in and of itself, but overtime people will corrupt meanings or even start it to have meanings that are very negative or bad.

I believe Anders did a horrible, horrible thing, and once more he admits it. His own selfish and drives caused him to kill several people, and he was corrupted, as any idea can be when subjected to human desires.

[TheJediSaint]

karushna5 wrote...
*snip*

The problem is that there are people who get offended when they can't express their real world prejudices in the game world.  

And this is not just an issue with religion, but any time the PC can't excactly express the opinions of the player.

[Trolldrool]

Vit246 wrote...

Trolldrool wrote...
And for that matter, most of the clergy men and women in the chantry are civilians. Regular people who have absolutely no influence on the templars' doctrine or treatment of mages. They live seeking deeper spiritual understanding of their faith and do their part to provide for the city's impoverished, homeless and disabled. The Chantry as an organization might be prone to corruption and extremism, but that doesn't make every initiate a legitimate target.

Oh. My God. This complete MISCONCEPTION absolutely rages me to no end.

Where do I even begin....

The Chantry is specifically NOT a civilian organization. And they absolutely DO have influence over the Templars' doctrine and treatment of mages.

They're the organzation that CREATED THE ENTIRE MAGE CIRCLE SYSTEM AND THE MODERN TEMPLAR ORDER IN THE FIRST PLACE.

AND THE TEMPLARS ARE SPECIFICALLY THE CHANTRY'S MILITARY BRANCH. THEY ABSOLUTELY ANSWER TO THE CHANTRY BY RELIGIOUS INDOCTRINATION AND LYRIUM DRUG ADDICTION WHICH THE CHANTRY HAS A MONOPOLY ON. THE CHANTRY CONTROLS THE LYRIUM SUPPLY.

The Chantry is not some damn local church from across the street. It's an international religious organzation with political, economic, and military power. And they officially preach fear and hatred toward all things magic.

And while the Chantry's military arm the Templars exercise immediate direct authority over the mages, the Chantry ultimately has the final authority.

Elthina was a Grand Cleric of Kirkwall, which gives her supreme authority over the Kirkwall Templars and Kirkwall Circle. She APPOINTED Meredith in the first place. And she has authority over how Kirkwall mages are treated. 

Anders killed her specifically because she IS a legitmate target. She had all the authority and power despite what the game insists she had none. And she did nothing with it. She didn't do her job which was to maintain order and take care of any abuse in the Kirkwall Circle system and reprimand the templars. And she did do was maintain the status quo.

In fact, as far the game ever tells us and as far as we know, all Anders ever killed was the Grand Cleric and some templars. None of whom are "innocent" "civilians" but entirely legitimate targets. He didn't kill some orphans or the old. The local Kirkwall Chantry was the headquarters of the Chantry authority. Attacking that doesn't make him a terrorist.

In fact, whoever wrote in the part about Elthina's "neutrality" should be fired. Chantry "neutrality" does not and has never existed. The Templars are part of the Chantry. They were never anything more than a military arm to enforce the Chantry's laws over the Circles. It's like saying the president is neutral toward the US military. Its ridiculous.

All of this being said however, DA2 is poorly written. Its so poorly written that people were and are convinced that the Chantry and Templars are two completely separate unrelated organizations and the Chantry never had any real power over them or the Mage Circle system.

It is poor writing that the Templars can so easily and successfully break away from the Chantry even though the Chantry controls the lyrium supply which it addicts the Templars on specifically so that they cannot break away so easily and successfully in the first place. 

It is poor writing that all of a sudden, there are these Seekers of Truth that can just declare separation from the Chantry just like that. 

This is all I can think of right now.

I never said that the Chantry is a civilian organization. Maybe I picked the wrong words.

As I said, the Chantry as an organization is prone to corruption and extremism. I never denied that. They created the Circle and the templars which is the military branch of the Chantry. I agree. I never denied that. The Chantry control the templars. I never disagreed with that. I learned that much from Alistair in Origins or watching the lyrium addled templar outside the Chantry in Denerim. What I disagreed with is the notion that anyone in the Chantry hierarchy are important enough to have any influence on templar doctrine.

You mention Grand Cleric Elthina? Yes. She is an example of the few within the Chantry in a high enough position to influence the Knight Commander. I said 'most'. Revered mothers and grand clerics are exceptional individuals who have reached a position of authority through decades of service. I'm speaking of the people who do for the Chantry what the Tranquil do for the Circle. Initiates and affirmed and to some extent clerics. Keeping the brazier alive, singing the Chant of Light, holding or assisting sermons, keep records, manage archives, collect alms, tend to the gardens, purchase supplies. Those people have no authority on matters of lyrium control or templar dogma or treatment of mages.

They may not be civilians, but they have no direct part in the conflict like the Grand Cleric or a Revered Mother.

Anyway, I've already been made aware of that none of these people were in the Chantry during the explosion cinematic, so I'm no longer accusing Anders of blowing up a building full of innocent Chantry initiates and sisters.

[LobselVith8]

TheJediSaint wrote...

karushna5 wrote...

*snip* 

The problem is that there are people who get offended when they can't express their real world prejudices in the game world.  

And this is not just an issue with religion, but any time the PC can't excactly express the opinions of the player. 

The protagonist is supposed to be a creation of the player. The player chooses the gender, appearance, race (in Origins), and even views (from the view of the casteless in the Dwarven Noble Origin story to which Fraternity the mage protagonist identifies with in the Magi Origin story). Some people want to play as their character - their created protagonist - not Bioware's character.

You're making asinine comments about people who want to RP their character in an RPG, which is simply ludicrous. Some people simply want the same freedom we had in Origins.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 30 mars 2013 - 12:00 .

[Rodia Driftwood]

All I know is that I appreciate the chance to reject whatever bull**** fairytale they shove down my throat.

[Goneaviking]

LobselVith8 wrote...

The protagonist is supposed to be a creation of the player. The player chooses the gender, appearance, race (in Origins), and even views (from the view of the casteless in the Dwarven Noble Origin story to which Fraternity the mage protagonist identifies with in the Magi Origin story). Some people want to play as their character - their created protagonist - not Bioware's character.

You're making asinine comments about people who want to RP their character in an RPG, which is simply ludicrous. Some people simply want the same freedom we had in Origins.

With a more defined character, such as Hawke, you can't have the same freedom you had with the blank slate characters in Origins. It's really not more complicated than that.

Tossing around insults doesn't strengthen your case, it just illuminates how weak it is.

[LobselVith8]

Goneaviking wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

The protagonist is supposed to be a creation of the player. The player chooses the gender, appearance, race (in Origins), and even views (from the view of the casteless in the Dwarven Noble Origin story to which Fraternity the mage protagonist identifies with in the Magi Origin story). Some people want to play as their character - their created protagonist - not Bioware's character.

You're making asinine comments about people who want to RP their character in an RPG, which is simply ludicrous. Some people simply want the same freedom we had in Origins.

With a more defined character, such as Hawke, you can't have the same freedom you had with the blank slate characters in Origins. It's really not more complicated than that.

Tossing around insults doesn't strengthen your case, it just illuminates how weak it is. 

Ridiculing people in multiple threads for wanting to roleplay a fictional character a certain way (which was avaliable in Origins) is insulting. And I find the particular remarks asinine because of that.

[sarnokh]

I really thought about this over and over. Early on I was dead sure the Maker was an evil entity. It would make the ultimate plot twist. The Dragons were benevolent Gods, but the Maker was some sort of evil uber-dood, like the Guardian from Ultima.

I always recalled Ultima VIII Pagan. The Guardian, an evil entity with god-like powers, appeared as benevolent helper to the Pagans, telling them of impending doom, and told them, the only way to escape doom was by calling the Titans of the Elements. In the end, it was a double game. He himself was the evil entity to bring doom, so he was behind the Titans. I alwas had this feeling the Maker was sorta the same, and the Demons/Dragon are either his servants or Gods tricked by him and corrupted. I just don't see how an otherwise all powerful God could create a city which can be invaded and tainted by mortal mages. Unless that was the PLAN.


But recently, I am not so sure, maybe it is all as the Chantry said. My reason is Mass Effect 3. The ending didn't show any surpising twists about the Reapers. They were what they were. There wasn't ANY double meaning, and maybe that's not what Bioware does.

To be honest, I would be most disappointed if all would just be plain and clear as the Chantry said it was. The Maker was good, the mages and Dragons are evil, end of story. I am not fond of such simplistic ideas, but I have this gut feeling that is what we may get.


Hmm. As I said I used to turn up every stone in DA and DA2. Nothing confirms one way or the other and worse yet, DA2 gave me this feeling Bioware themselves did not have one finite idea about what was what. In DA:O I was dead sure the Dragons/Maker story was THE plot to be gradually revealed. But when DA2 told us almost nothing new about the Dragons and stuff (only some in DLC), I realized that Bioware's focus never was on the Maker/Dragon issue, only the players were so fascinated about it. So maybe the entire idea isn't at all on Bioware's radar. Or they changed it, because they were surprised how much people reacted to that story and speculated, and THEN Bioware began to make a backstory.

What do we know...



EDIT: A few additional notes:

- I DO want a finite answer in the end. Who is the Maker, what is the Chantry really about, who are the Dragons really asf. I want the puzzle solved.

- I do think the Chantry is a very dubious organization, felt more like Scientology to me than a Church. So I am quite biased towards Anders. As it was, there was no realistic chance for debates, diplomacy and peaceful solutions. I agree that the Church was by and large responsible. They have the power, or had it.

- What really irritates me is, that nobody ever questions the fact, why circle mages go "insane" and transform into demonic entities, and other magic users like Morrigan and Flemeth don't. It is so *obviously* a lie, that magic itself always makes people transform into Darkspawn or such creatures. Nobody seems to be interested to actively research WHY some mages transform, or WHAT is REALLY going on with the Maker/Demons/Dragons. That already irritated me about the Wardens. They just want to fight the Darkspawn, they don't care the heck to research why the Darkspawn even exists. They all just accept what the Chantry says. Or some say, it's a lie, but leave it with that. Why is nobody actively trying to find out all about it?? I mean, it is THE most important question of the world, and all just accept it as it is?!

Modifié par sarnokh, 31 mars 2013 - 05:41 .

[Urzon]

Like a reoccurring nightmare, the atheism thread has returned to torment the minds of all those who witness it. The never-ending recycled rants against a fantasy religion, never ceasing to enrage those who have read them many, many, times before.

And people wonder why these forums are a place even the Devs fear to tread...

For what is dead, does not stay dead...

Modifié par Urzon, 31 mars 2013 - 06:27 .

[Goneaviking]

sarnokh wrote...
[snip]
- What really irritates me is, that nobody ever questions the fact, why circle mages go "insane" and transform into demonic entities, and other magic users like Morrigan and Flemeth don't. It is so *obviously* a lie, that magic itself always makes people transform into Darkspawn or such creatures. Nobody seems to be interested to actively research WHY some mages transform, or WHAT is REALLY going on with the Maker/Demons/Dragons. That already irritated me about the Wardens. They just want to fight the Darkspawn, they don't care the heck to research why the Darkspawn even exists. They all just accept what the Chantry says. Or some say, it's a lie, but leave it with that. Why is nobody actively trying to find out all about it?? I mean, it is THE most important question of the world, and all just accept it as it is?!

What really irritates me is, that nobody ever questions the fact, why circle mages go "insane" and transform into demonic entities, and other magic users like Morrigan and Flemeth don't.
I'm guessing that most people don't knowingly have any contact with mages, and have very little contact the Circles or Templars who guard them. I also suspect that the number of Circles that have fallen into bloodmagic and rebellion are unfortunately exaggerated by have such events occur in two successive games.

It is so *obviously* a lie, that magic itself always makes people transform into Darkspawn or such creatures.
That's not a part of the lore, nor common rumour that I'm aware of within Dragon Age. Perhaps you meant to type Abomination rather than Darkspawn? In which case I'd argue that the only time we've seen a non-mage become and Abomination it was the end result of a blood magic ritual.

Nobody seems to be interested to actively research WHY some mages transform, or WHAT is REALLY going on with the Maker/Demons/Dragons. 
The study of mages going crazy seems like a dangerous subject for research, both because of the scrutiny it would provoke the authorities to place you under, and the proximity one would find themselves in with at risk mages. As far as the latter question... how would one go about studying an omniscient being? aside from mages who has the ability to willingly interact with demons? why would they do that for simple research knowing that discovery would make their lives forfeit? Why should anyone think there's anything going on with dragons at all? So far as I can tell they're just aggressive flying lizards.

That already irritated me about the Wardens. They just want to fight the Darkspawn, they don't care the heck to research why the Darkspawn even exists. They all just accept what the Chantry says. Or some say, it's a lie, but leave it with that.
Based on what do you say they don't research the darkspawn? The only times we've played Wardens it was in Ferelden where we're raw recruits with the rest of the organisation destroyed, how would we know what research has been done in Orlais or the Anderfels? You seem to be assuming much, particularly given we see at least one Warden researching the Taint in Soldier's Peak in the most nasty ways he can think of.

I mean, it is THE most important question of the world, and all just accept it as it is?!
Who says it's the most important question of the world? It's centuries between blights, there've only been a handful of them in total and mostly the Darkspawn are regarded as a dwarven problem that has little to do with the surface.

[sarnokh]

Goneaviking wrote...

sarnokh wrote...
[snip]
- What really irritates me is, that nobody ever questions the fact, why circle mages go "insane" and transform into demonic entities, and other magic users like Morrigan and Flemeth don't. It is so *obviously* a lie, that magic itself always makes people transform into Darkspawn or such creatures. Nobody seems to be interested to actively research WHY some mages transform, or WHAT is REALLY going on with the Maker/Demons/Dragons. That already irritated me about the Wardens. They just want to fight the Darkspawn, they don't care the heck to research why the Darkspawn even exists. They all just accept what the Chantry says. Or some say, it's a lie, but leave it with that. Why is nobody actively trying to find out all about it?? I mean, it is THE most important question of the world, and all just accept it as it is?!

What really irritates me is, that nobody ever questions the fact, why circle mages go "insane" and transform into demonic entities, and other magic users like Morrigan and Flemeth don't.
I'm guessing that most people don't knowingly have any contact with mages, and have very little contact the Circles or Templars who guard them. I also suspect that the number of Circles that have fallen into bloodmagic and rebellion are unfortunately exaggerated by have such events occur in two successive games.

It is so *obviously* a lie, that magic itself always makes people transform into Darkspawn or such creatures.
That's not a part of the lore, nor common rumour that I'm aware of within Dragon Age. Perhaps you meant to type Abomination rather than Darkspawn? In which case I'd argue that the only time we've seen a non-mage become and Abomination it was the end result of a blood magic ritual.

Nobody seems to be interested to actively research WHY some mages transform, or WHAT is REALLY going on with the Maker/Demons/Dragons. 
The study of mages going crazy seems like a dangerous subject for research, both because of the scrutiny it would provoke the authorities to place you under, and the proximity one would find themselves in with at risk mages. As far as the latter question... how would one go about studying an omniscient being? aside from mages who has the ability to willingly interact with demons? why would they do that for simple research knowing that discovery would make their lives forfeit? Why should anyone think there's anything going on with dragons at all? So far as I can tell they're just aggressive flying lizards.

That already irritated me about the Wardens. They just want to fight the Darkspawn, they don't care the heck to research why the Darkspawn even exists. They all just accept what the Chantry says. Or some say, it's a lie, but leave it with that.
Based on what do you say they don't research the darkspawn? The only times we've played Wardens it was in Ferelden where we're raw recruits with the rest of the organisation destroyed, how would we know what research has been done in Orlais or the Anderfels? You seem to be assuming much, particularly given we see at least one Warden researching the Taint in Soldier's Peak in the most nasty ways he can think of.

I mean, it is THE most important question of the world, and all just accept it as it is?!
Who says it's the most important question of the world? It's centuries between blights, there've only been a handful of them in total and mostly the Darkspawn are regarded as a dwarven problem that has little to do with the surface.

Ah yes, I meant Abomination.

Soz, I play the game in German, and have to back-translate the terms always. ^^;


Yes, researching the entire Darkspawn/Abomination stuff would be dangerous. But finding a vaccine for pox was dangerous, finding any vaccine or cure is dangerous. But then, that is what makes progress.

Also, I don't see Darkspawn and Abomination as two totally different things, but related. So it is way more important than "just a Darkspawn event every few centuries."


Still, I have this nagging feeling Bioware didn't *really* make a backstory, and it's just we imaginging there was one.

Modifié par sarnokh, 31 mars 2013 - 05:47 .

[Xiltas]

Sarnokh, they have a backstory. Otherwise there'd be no content for the upcoming book "World of Thedas".
Also, if you play the DLC Warden's Keep (Im Deutschen heißt der Ort Soldatengipfel... weiß gerade nicht wie der DLC auf Deutsch heist), you meet Avernus, a centuries old Warden experimenting with their tainted blood, unlocking special powers. Besides, the Grey Wardens don't believe the Chantry version about the Blight completely. At the beginning of Origins, if you talk to Duncan (or was it Alistair?), he'll ask you whether you wish to hear the Chantry version or what the Wardens know.

[sarnokh]

Xiltas wrote...

Sarnokh, they have a backstory. Otherwise there'd be no content for the upcoming book "World of Thedas".
Also, if you play the DLC Warden's Keep (Im Deutschen heißt der Ort Soldatengipfel... weiß gerade nicht wie der DLC auf Deutsch heist), you meet Avernus, a centuries old Warden experimenting with their tainted blood, unlocking special powers. Besides, the Grey Wardens don't believe the Chantry version about the Blight completely. At the beginning of Origins, if you talk to Duncan (or was it Alistair?), he'll ask you whether you wish to hear the Chantry version or what the Wardens know.

Ach, it was so long ago. It began to get foggy now who said what. I remember the dude, because I commanded him to continue the research, despite usually deciding good, because I felt it was WAY too important. The need of the many exceed the need of the few. I mean, that guy had found a way to overcome the fate that Wardens usually befall! That much I remember. I would have given him almost every ressource, I mean, the man was unto something.

But what his explanation of the backstory was, I don't recall.

[LobselVith8]

sarnokh wrote...

- I DO want a finite answer in the end. Who is the Maker, what is the Chantry really about, who are the Dragons really asf. I want the puzzle solved.

Personally, I find the Dalish pantheon more interesting than Andrastian lore. According to the mythology of the Chantry, the Maker is a horrible entity (in my opinion).

sarnokh wrote...

- I do think the Chantry is a very dubious organization, felt more like Scientology to me than a Church. So I am quite biased towards Anders. As it was, there was no realistic chance for debates, diplomacy and peaceful solutions. I agree that the Church was by and large responsible. They have the power, or had it.

It's the basis for many arguments about the Chantry.

sarnokh wrote...

What really irritates me is, that nobody ever questions the fact, why circle mages go "insane" and transform into demonic entities, and other magic users like Morrigan and Flemeth don't. It is so *obviously* a lie, that magic itself always makes people transform into Darkspawn or such creatures. Nobody seems to be interested to actively research WHY some mages transform, or WHAT is REALLY going on with the Maker/Demons/Dragons.

Some mages transform because they make deals with demons. Virtually all the mage antagonists in Kirkwall were simply stupid and insane, however. Not that the templars were depicted any better.

sarnokh wrote...

That already irritated me about the Wardens. They just want to fight the Darkspawn, they don't care the heck to research why the Darkspawn even exists. They all just accept what the Chantry says. Or some say, it's a lie, but leave it with that. Why is nobody actively trying to find out all about it?? I mean, it is THE most important question of the world, and all just accept it as it is?! 

The Wardens are focused on stopping the darkspawn, who threaten all of Thedas. The mystery of their inception isn't as important.

[hazarkazra]

Vit246 wrote...
It is poor writing that the Templars can so easily and successfully break away from the Chantry even though the Chantry controls the lyrium supply which it addicts the Templars on specifically so that they cannot break away so easily and successfully in the first place. 

It is poor writing that all of a sudden, there are these Seekers of Truth that can just declare separation from the Chantry just like that. 

So you are saying it would be good writing if the Templar Order just does what it is told all the time, just because somewhere it says that the Chantry is technically in charge of the Templar Order? There really isn't one example in history where a big organisation has been able to keep tabs on all their individual branches, especially if its the militairy branch. Most of history is filled with different branches disagreeing with eachother with bloody consequences. It would be truly poor writing if the different branches inside a gigantic organisation as the Chantry didn't disagree on Chantry policy now and then.

I also think it's weird you condemn an entire storyline that you have heard nothing about. You have not been given a single reason explaining how the Rogue Templars get their lyrium now. All the information given so far is that the Order uses Lyrium with the handy side-effect of being addictive and that the Chantry holds the Lyrium trade monopoly. I personaly feel it's not been discussed by the writers yet, because it's an issue we are going to deal with in DA3. I've seen others suggest the same. Yet, let me give just one of the many possibilities how it could work.

It's not clear who in the Chantry deals with the Lyrium trade specifically, but wouldn't it make sense that it's being dealt with by the only branch that has the weapons to enforce it's monopoly: The Templar Order itself? There is talk about the lyrium being used as a means to control, but I feel we have to see this in the Allistair perspective: that of the individual templar. It's used to control the Templars within the Order, not the Order within the Chantry.

But lastly: I feel it's especially poor reasoning that you suggest that your understanding of Templars, based soley on two games worth of material, is somehow superior to that of the writers who wrote them.