615 réponses à ce sujet

[Bleachrude]

Er...Anders doesn't want equality.

He had no problem with Danarius enslaving Fenris (he's the only one who will get Friendship points if you do this).

[Silfren]

Bleachrude wrote...

Er...Anders doesn't want equality.

He had no problem with Danarius enslaving Fenris (he's the only one who will get Friendship points if you do this).

I think that was more a case of Anders just outright hating Fenris and welcoming any opportunity to see him gone, though I do see your point.  He certainly doesn't seem capable of rising above personal hatreds in the face of injustice, which just shows how corrupted Justice is.

[MisterJB]

Plus, there is also the fact that there is no one Anders wouldn't kill to see mages free; which means if he had to kill the entirety of Kirkwall's non-mage population, he'd do it; has considered Tevinter as an alternative, thrice; suggests killing Thrask over sending Grace to the Circle; argues against sending Idunna(the apostitute) to the Circle,etc.
Anders pays some lip service to the idea of equality (probrably for PR reasons) and can be friends with non-mages but, when push comes to shove, mages will always come first in his eyes.

Modifié par MisterJB, 28 mai 2013 - 12:48 .

[Lulupab]

MisterJB wrote...

Plus, there is also the fact that there is no one Anders wouldn't kill to see mages free; which means if he had to kill the entirety of Kirkwall's non-mage population, he'd do it.

There is no one Templars wouldn't kill to see all mages enslaved in circle which means if they had to kill everyone in their path mage or no they'd do it.

MisterJB wrote...

has considered Tevinter as an alternative, thrice; suggests killing Thrask over sending Grace to the Circle; argues against sending Idunna(the apostitute) to the Circle,etc.

Grace was not alone and there were several mages with her. If you return the mages to the Circle, ser Thrask will promise to return them unharmed and Ser Kerras implies that Ser Thrask will not survive long enough to do so. The dispute varies slightly depending on the previous choices made, but all quarrels seem to indicate that Ser Karras intends to simply execute the mages rather than return them to the Circle. And this exactly what Anders says "Better death of one Templar than death of so many innocents". He is not very wrong. And seeing how you lick the armor of templars I can see why you conisder a free apostates like idunna a wrong thing.

MisterJB wrote...

Anders pays some lip service to the idea of equality (probrably for PR reasons) and can be friends with non-mages but, when push comes to shove, mages will always come first in his eyes.

Templars imply that mages simply need to be watched and they are humans and elves just like everyone else. There have been many friendships between templars and mages inside the circles but when mages deiced to be free of circle's graps its either death or worse tranquilty.


Whatever you say about Anders easily applies to Templars as well. One of the devs, Jennifer Helper if I'm not wrong, compared Anders to Templars. Just like Anders Templars were a force of justice. To protect all the faithful and chantry. In time again very much like Anders they become a force of Vengence especialy when they gone rouge from chantry. They no longer work to bring jusitce they simply want to kill all who oppose them mage or otherwise.

Modifié par Rassler, 28 mai 2013 - 05:21 .

[Hazegurl]

Bleachrude wrote...

Er...Anders doesn't want equality.

He had no problem with Danarius enslaving Fenris (he's the only one who will get Friendship points if you do this).

I agree. Fenris has never done anything to Anders to warrent enslavement except have a different opinion than him. I thought Anders would be the first to rally the others against me when I picked the option to sell Fenris(Just wanted to see what would happen). Even Merrill cried out against it. But Anders is giddy as h*ll when it comes up. But then again Fenris isn't a mage.

[Lulupab]

Hazegurl wrote...

Bleachrude wrote...

Er...Anders doesn't want equality.

He had no problem with Danarius enslaving Fenris (he's the only one who will get Friendship points if you do this).

I agree. Fenris has never done anything to Anders to warrent enslavement except have a different opinion than him. I thought Anders would be the first to rally the others against me when I picked the option to sell Fenris(Just wanted to see what would happen). Even Merrill cried out against it. But Anders is giddy as h*ll when it comes up. But then again Fenris isn't a mage.

Well Fenris insists that you kill Anders too after what he does to chantry but doesn't abandon you for not doing it provided his approval is high enough. Although I agree Anders shouldn't approve of giving Fenris to Tevinters but don't forget that Fenris is simply a hypocrite who will do everything to become a mage and magister himself. I liked Fenris myself but he had his flaws like everyone else. As a pro mage I should have hated him but I didn't and acutally liked him and never gave him to slavers and always raised his approval so he wouldn't turn on me for siding with mages. Besides rival romance between a male mage Hawke and Fenris is hot as hell. god the hate sex!

Anders simply wishes on Fenris what Fenris wishes on all mages, Enslavement. unfair but understandable of Anders to think that way.

Modifié par Rassler, 28 mai 2013 - 06:33 .

[Hazegurl]

Rassler wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...

Bleachrude wrote...

Er...Anders doesn't want equality.

He had no problem with Danarius enslaving Fenris (he's the only one who will get Friendship points if you do this).

I agree. Fenris has never done anything to Anders to warrent enslavement except have a different opinion than him. I thought Anders would be the first to rally the others against me when I picked the option to sell Fenris(Just wanted to see what would happen). Even Merrill cried out against it. But Anders is giddy as h*ll when it comes up. But then again Fenris isn't a mage.

Well Fenris insists that you kill Anders too after what he does to chantry but doesn't abandon you for not doing it provided his approval is high enough. Although I agree Anders shouldn't approve of giving Fenris to Tevinters but don't forget that Fenris is simply a hypocrite who will do everything to become a mage and magister himself. I liked Fenris myself but he had his flaws like everyone else. As a pro mage I should have hated him but I didn't and acutally liked him and never gave him to slavers and always raised his approval so he wouldn't turn on me for siding with mages. Besides rival romance between a male mage Hawke and Fenris is hot as hell. god the hate sex!

Anders simply wishes on Fenris what Fenris wishes on all mages, Enslavement. unfair but understandable of Anders to think that way.

After blowing up the Chantry and murdering innocent people. Calling for Ander's execution was a very reasonable response and in no way the same as Anders calling for Fenris' enslavement based on a simple disagreement.  Fenris is not enslaving mages so to actually actively seek out or willingly engage in the enslavement of someone makes Anders way more of a hypocrite than anyone.

Actually, Fenris could have turned him in when Sebastian was whispering in his ear about turning Anders over to the Templars. Fenris declined to do so.

Fenris may have his flaws but becoming a mage and magister is certainly not one of them. If you're referring to the fade encounter, he gave in for power so that he could take on the magisters not to become a mage or magister himself. What makes him a hypocrite is the fact that he was willing to give himself to a demon for it but then again he isn't a mage and doesn't know how to combat the influences like I believe Merrill should have and like Anders  should have (not talking about the fade encounter but the fact that he allowed a spirit to possess him in the first place).

I do agree that the male mage Hawke and Fenris have the hottest rival sex! Oh man you make me wanna play again!!

[Lulupab]

Fenris is innocent enough in my opinion but I kinda connected myself to Anders and why he acts that way due to personal experience in real life. My brother is gay and his boyfriend was killed in a hate crime done by homophobes. After several months he attempted to murder people who gathered to oppose same sex marriage, those people are innocent cause they simply represent a community and an opinion but because a group of homophobes killed his boyfriend he thinks everyone who oppose gay rights should answer for what has been done to his boyfriend. Luckily he was not successful in killing those people and only wounded one. After a year of therapy and help he is normal now. This all happened 5 years ago...

Anyway what I mean is you don't need a spirit to go vengeful. Anders is a pretty OK character in Act 1 and beginning of the game. He doesn't whine and is not bitter at all. He does everything to help the refuges etc... but after witnessing Karl becoming a tranquil and potentially killing Karl himself cause Karl asks him to do it when he becomes free of tranquility for a brief time Anders changes majorly. In act 2 when Justice takes over Anders when we deal with "the tranquil solution" Justice swears he will kill every Templar for making innocent mags tranquil. I believe Anders needs help and keeping him alive is actually poetic Justice as Jennifer Helper says cause he has to live and see what he has done and potentially change and become a better person.

[Hazegurl]

Rassler wrote...
Anyway what I mean is you don't need a spirit to go vengeful. Anders is a pretty OK character in Act 1 and beginning of the game. He doesn't whine and is not bitter at all. He does everything to help the refuges etc... but after witnessing Karl becoming a tranquil and potentially killing Karl himself cause Karl asks him to do it when he becomes free of tranquility for a brief time Anders changes majorly. In act 2 when Justice takes over Anders when we deal with "the tranquil solution" Justice swears he will kill every Templar for making innocent mags tranquil. I believe Anders needs help and keeping him alive is actually poetic Justice as Jennifer Helper says cause he has to live and see what he has done and potentially change and become a better person.

Sorry about your brother but I'm gonna stick to the DA verse.  I do understand that you don't need a spirit to go vengeful but wanting to kill everyone when they've done nothing to you, actively wanting to enslave those who don't agree with you, and then actually kill people because of your problems or because you were hurt are the very reasons why I cannot identify with nor condone Anders' behavior. Fenris was enslaved, possibly raped, and tortured. He went after the people who were gunning for him and he went after slavers. He may have hated mages but he was able to look at a mage Hawke or Bethany and go "Not all mages are bad." He's able to get to the root of his issues with mages and say "people are weak and will fall prey to temptations and mages are tempted all the time therefore weak mages are something to fear."(not direct quotes but that is the jist of his opinions).

I find Fenris to be far more reasonable in both actions and words as opposed to Anders.

Since therapy doesn't exist in the DA verse, imo, putting a knife in Anders' back is the only thing that can save him. He allowed himself to be corrupted by a demon and has grown to be a danger to both mages and non mages alike. I have seen nothing in game that suggests this great change once he sees the devestation that he had caused, not even when I did keep him alive and sided with the mages. He seemed darn proud of himself to me.

[Lulupab]

Hazegurl wrote...

Rassler wrote...
Anyway what I mean is you don't need a spirit to go vengeful. Anders is a pretty OK character in Act 1 and beginning of the game. He doesn't whine and is not bitter at all. He does everything to help the refuges etc... but after witnessing Karl becoming a tranquil and potentially killing Karl himself cause Karl asks him to do it when he becomes free of tranquility for a brief time Anders changes majorly. In act 2 when Justice takes over Anders when we deal with "the tranquil solution" Justice swears he will kill every Templar for making innocent mags tranquil. I believe Anders needs help and keeping him alive is actually poetic Justice as Jennifer Helper says cause he has to live and see what he has done and potentially change and become a better person.

Sorry about your brother but I'm gonna stick to the DA verse.  I do understand that you don't need a spirit to go vengeful but wanting to kill everyone when they've done nothing to you, actively wanting to enslave those who don't agree with you, and then actually kill people because of your problems or because you were hurt are the very reasons why I cannot identify with nor condone Anders' behavior. Fenris was enslaved, possibly raped, and tortured. He went after the people who were gunning for him and he went after slavers. He may have hated mages but he was able to look at a mage Hawke or Bethany and go "Not all mages are bad." He's able to get to the root of his issues with mages and say "people are weak and will fall prey to temptations and mages are tempted all the time therefore weak mages are something to fear."(not direct quotes but that is the jist of his opinions).

I find Fenris to be far more reasonable in both actions and words as opposed to Anders.

Since therapy doesn't exist in the DA verse, imo, putting a knife in Anders' back is the only thing that can save him. He allowed himself to be corrupted by a demon and has grown to be a danger to both mages and non mages alike. I have seen nothing in game that suggests this great change once he sees the devestation that he had caused, not even when I did keep him alive and sided with the mages. He seemed darn proud of himself to me.

Well Anders is not the first character I didn't kill in DA games. I simply will not kill anyone when I'm given a choice not to. Anyway as I said in this thread several times already Anders and his actions are not so different than Templars. Just like Anders Templars were a force to bring justice and protect the chantry and the faithful. Very much like Anders they have become a force of Vengeance now especially when they gone rouge from chantry which was the only reason they were considered "holy" and "ritghteous". Please refer to my post I made in answer to MisterJB:

MisterJB wrote...

Plus, there is also the fact that there is no one Anders wouldn't kill to see mages free; which means if he had to kill the entirety of Kirkwall's non-mage population, he'd do it.

There is no one Templars wouldn't kill to see all mages enslaved in circle which means if they had to kill everyone in their path mage or no they'd do it.

MisterJB wrote...

has considered Tevinter as an alternative, thrice; suggests killing Thrask over sending Grace to the Circle; argues against sending Idunna(the apostitute) to the Circle,etc.

Grace was not alone and there were several mages with her. If you return the mages to the Circle, ser Thrask will promise to return them unharmed and Ser Kerras implies that Ser Thrask will not survive long enough to do so. The dispute varies slightly depending on the previous choices made, but all quarrels seem to indicate that Ser Karras intends to simply execute the mages rather than return them to the Circle. And this exactly what Anders says "Better death of one Templar than death of so many innocents". He is not very wrong. And seeing how you lick the armor of templars I can see why you conisder a free apostates like idunna a wrongthing.

MisterJB wrote...

Anders pays some lip service to the idea of equality (probrably for PR reasons) and can be friends with non-mages but, when push comes to shove, mages will always come first in his eyes.

Templars imply that mages simply need to be watched and they are humans and elves just like everyone
else. There have been many friendships between templars and mages insidethe circles but when mages deicedto be free of circle's graps its either death or worse tranquilty.


Whatever you say about Anders easily applies to Templars as well. One of the devs, Jennifer Helper if I'm not wrong, compared Anders to Templars. Just like Anders Templars were a force of justice. To protect all the faithful and chantry. In time again very much like Anders they become a force of Vengence especialy when they gone rouge from chantry. They no longer work to bring jusitce they simply want to kill all who oppose them mage or otherwise.

Modifié par Rassler, 28 mai 2013 - 11:03 .

[Lulupab]

I reloaded my saves to be sure. Friend Anders will be proud of what he did and a rival Anders will regret it. Blame bioware or whoever you want this is the case.

The real question here is; Lets say its known if Anders kept alive he will work to redeem himself in DA3. Will you keep him alive then?

[Lotion Soronarr]

Rassler wrote...
Whatever you say about Anders easily applies to Templars as well. One of the devs, Jennifer Helper if I'm not wrong, compared Anders to Templars. Just like Anders Templars were a force of justice. To protect all the faithful and chantry. In time again very much like Anders they become a force of Vengence especialy when they gone rouge from chantry. They no longer work to bring jusitce they simply want to kill all who oppose them mage or otherwise.

No matter how many times you repeat it or how much you bold it, this remains nothing but your oppinion....which also happens to be wrong.

Templars want nothing but to kill anyone who opposes them? Yeah right.



Also, there's no comparison between mages and gay people - personal experience of a hate crime aside.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 29 mai 2013 - 09:32 .

[Lulupab]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Rassler wrote...
Whatever you say about Anders easily applies to Templars as well. One of the devs, Jennifer Helper if I'm not wrong, compared Anders to Templars. Just like Anders Templars were a force of justice. To protect all the faithful and chantry. In time again very much like Anders they become a force of Vengence especialy when they gone rouge from chantry. They no longer work to bring jusitce they simply want to kill all who oppose them mage or otherwise.

No matter how many times you repeat it or how much you bold it, this remains nothing but your oppinion....which also happens to be wrong.

Templars want nothing but to kill anyone who opposes them? Yeah right.



Also, there's no comparison between mages and gay people - personal experience of a hate crime aside.

So what happens to a none-mage mother who says "fcuk you" to Templars who want take away or even kill his mage child? What if she draws a sword to defend her family? What will templars do then? Templars after going rouge want to kill every single mage and will not hesitate to kill none-mage supporters as well. Templars are indeed a force of Vengeance. Anders is not different than any extreme Templar.

The bad guys in this fight:

Blood mages & Templars

The good guys in this fight:

The normal mages & chantry and its seekers.

Btw gay people are not  dangerous as mages can be (lol obviously) but homophobes conisder them as such since they think gay peole create "bad enviroment" for their children. Gay people are not treated any different than apostates in countris like Iran. They have to hide or face prison and lashes or even death.

Modifié par Rassler, 29 mai 2013 - 09:56 .

[MisterJB]

And two other things that came to mind:
When Hawke encounters the magistrate's son, does Anders focus on the fact this guy has been killing young girls? No, Anders focus on the fact that Kelder thinks he is possessed because, according to Anders, "mages have enough problems already."
Oh yeah, just forget about the murdered young girls. WON'T SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE MAGES!? Clearly, they are the issue here.

And then, after Hawke's mother dies, Anders says "I couldn't believe a mage would do such a thing. Because if a non-mage does something wrong, he is a sadist. But if a mage does something wrong, he was insane and it was totally not his fault. The actions of a templar can reflect on the Order as a whole but apparently, the actions of a mage can't reflect on the mages as a whole.

F*ck you Anders! You are the living proof that mages can't be trusted to police themselves because if they were and someone suggested a mage had been commiting these crimes, you would have said "How can you imagine a mage could do such a thing?"
Hope you like the Void, Anders.

Modifié par MisterJB, 29 mai 2013 - 11:11 .

[Lulupab]

lol @ MisterJB. I could bring zillions of evidence of wrongs Templars have done but I won't bother anymore since you've been ignoring the ones I mentioned. The only difference between Anders and extreme Templars is the side they fight for.

I wonder, are you underage or simply immature? Cause I don't see other pro templar players trying too hard to convince everyone of how Angelic Templars are. At the very last half of dragon age players don't agree with your views. Deal with it.

[MisterJB]

Rassler wrote...
There is no one Templars wouldn't kill to see all mages enslaved in circle which means if they had to kill everyone in their path mage or no they'd do it.

Three things:
First, mages are not slaves.
Second, that is blatantly untrue. Templars control mages not just for its own sake but for the safety of the people. Killing the entire population of Kirkwall to control the mages defeats this purpose. And while some templars were killing non-mages, others were stopping them like Ser Agatha. Which brings me to my third point.
Third, there are thousands of templars in Thedas and you should not generalize how they would act. I'm not generalizing; I'm not saying every mage in Kirkwall would kill every non-mage to be free. I'm saying Anders would at his own admission.

Grace was not alone and there were several mages with her. If you return the mages to the Circle, ser Thrask will promise to return them unharmed and Ser Kerras implies that Ser Thrask will not survive long enough to do so. The dispute varies slightly depending on the previous choices made, but all quarrels seem to indicate that Ser Karras intends to simply execute the mages rather than return them to the Circle. And this exactly what Anders says "Better death of one Templar than death of so many innocents". He is not very wrong.

Anders himself was brough back seven times to the tower, he as no reason to assume Grace's group is in any deadly danger never mind their leader was guilty of arson, blood magic and necromancy and they are likely dangerous as well. Anders just wants to kill templars.

And seeing how you lick the armor of templars I can see why you conisder a free apostates like idunna a wrong thing.

Yes, I do have an issue with blood mages who tried to kill Hawke and were associated with a mage supremacist group guilty of forcing demons into the bodies of young men being just allowed to go free.
Seriously, if we can't imprision mages like Idunna and Tahrone without someone having a problem with it, just what mages can we imprision?
You've already suggested we should not kill a mage terrorist.

Templars imply that mages simply need to be watched and they are humans and elves just like everyone else. There have been many friendships between templars and mages inside the circles but when mages deiced to be free of circle's graps its either death or worse tranquilty.

How is that relevant? Not only is death or Tranquility not the sentence for Apostates 100% of the time; Anders was brough back seven times, Alain was allowed to return despite being a confirmed blood mage; people place boundaries in their relationships. There are good reasons to oppose mages who want to be free of the Circle.

Whatever you say about Anders easily applies to Templars as well. One of the devs, Jennifer Helper if I'm not wrong, compared Anders to Templars. Just like Anders Templars were a force of justice. To protect all the faithful and chantry. In time again very much like Anders they become a force of Vengence especialy when they gone rouge from chantry. They no longer work to bring jusitce they simply want to kill all who oppose them mage or otherwise.

I disagree with Miss Helper. Not only did Lambert, the leader of the rogue templars, not even suggest he wished to kill all mages and anyone who opposed him; I see no reason to believe templars have ceased to protect non-mages from magic just because they are no longer affiliated with the Chantry.
Rather, I believe that when Justinia helped several mages start a war, she forgot about her role in protecting non-mages.

[Lulupab]

MisterJB wrote...

Three things:
First, mages are not slaves.
Second, that is blatantly untrue. Templars control mages not just for its own sake but for the safety of the people. Killing the entire population of Kirkwall to control the mages defeats this purpose. And while some templars were killing non-mages, others were stopping them like Ser Agatha. Which brings me to my third point.
Third, there are thousands of templars in Thedas and you should not generalize how they would act. I'm not generalizing; I'm not saying every mage in Kirkwall would kill every non-mage to be free. I'm saying Anders would at his own admission.

So answer this. What Templars do when a none-mage mother draws her sword to resist Templars taking away her less than 10 mage child? Would they smile and walk away? No they either kill the mother or even kill the mother and child both. You only hate Anders because of his magic. If a Templar did a similar thing like Anders perhaps somehow killing a group of mages in a house you'd most likely forgive him and give him a second chance.

MisterJB wrote...

Anders himself was brough back seven times to the tower, he as no reason to assume Grace's group is in any deadly danger never mind their leader was guilty of arson, blood magic and necromancy and they are likely dangerous as well. Anders just wants to kill templars.

First of all Templars in Kirkwall are much harsher than the ones in Ferelden. Kirkwall was like a Tevinter for Templars. They had full power in kirkwall. Even the viscount cannot do anything Templars don't approve whereas in Ferelden the king or queen can easily ignore Templar order and do whatever he/she wishes. Also they only imprison mages again when they don't resist arrest. Resisting arrest usually means tranquilty in Kirkwall or sometimes death. By laws of chantry No mage under ANY circumstance should made tranquil if they pass their harrowing. This rule has been broken in Kirkwall far so many times. Everytime they caught Anders in Ferelden they made more Templars watch him or as he said impriosnd him in solo rooms which he escaped again.

MisterJB wrote...

You've already suggested we should not kill a mage terrorist.

As you have already ignored crimes some Templars have done that can easily named Terrorism.

MisterJB wrote...

How is that relevant? Not only is death or Tranquility not the sentence for Apostates 100% of the time; Anders was brough back seven times, Alain was allowed to return despite being a confirmed blood mage; people place boundaries in their relationships. There are good reasons to oppose mages who want to be free of the Circle.

Without Thrask other Templars would have surely killed or made Alain Tranquil. As I said the circle in Ferelden is not as harsh is the one in Kirkwall. They can't tranquil anyone who has passed his harrowing and can't kill any mage who is not branded maleficar. But both can happen in kirkwall. In Ferelden the harshest punishment for an apostate is imprisoning them in solo rooms for some time.

MisterJB wrote...


I disagree with Miss Helper. Not only did Lambert, the leader of the rogue templars, not even suggest he wished to kill all mages and anyone who opposed him; I see no reason to believe templars have ceased to protect non-mages from magic just because they are no longer affiliated with the Chantry.
Rather, I believe that when Justinia helped several mages start a war, she forgot about her role in protecting non-mages.

A leader never speaks for all individuals of a group. The Templars are no longer welcome in Chantries and most cities they are now fugitives like mages. Right now they can only get lyrium by smuggling it and are not so very different than mages. Most importantly most of the rouge Templars have even gone rouge from their so called leader Lambert as well. These Templars are EXACTLY like Anders, except his Templar Version. I repeat I'm quite sure if a Templar instead of Anders blowed a place with mages inside you'd easily could bring yourself to forgive him/her and give second chances. The mages and magic is clearly clouding your judgement, not that you had any judgement because death is never jusitce and you are so easily embracing it. Anders can be made to see it too but I doubt you ever kept him alive once to see what happens so meh.. And I assure you there will be a noticable difference between playthroughs that Anders is alive with those that he isn't.

Modifié par Rassler, 29 mai 2013 - 12:16 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Rassler wrote...
So what happens to a none-mage mother who says "fcuk you" to Templars who want take away or even kill his mage child? What if she draws a sword to defend her family? What will templars do then? Templars after going rouge want to kill every single mage and will not hesitate to kill none-mage supporters as well.

She will be subdued..or killed.
Depending on circumstances.

Templars have a job to do. If someone attacks them in their line of duty, they have a right to defend themselves.
That doesn't make them butchers who go on slaughtering people.
I've yet to see templars who don't go to great lengths to try and avoid any harm to civilians.

Templars are indeed a force of Vengeance. Anders is not different than any extreme Templar.

Tempalrs are a force of order.
Mages and their supporters are a force of chaos

The bad guys in this fight:
Blood mages & Templars

The good guys in this fight:
The normal mages & chantry and its seekers.

nah.


Also,
Not even close. I will reject comparisons between gays and mages.

[Lulupab]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Rassler wrote...
So what happens to a none-mage mother who says "fcuk you" to Templars who want take away or even kill his mage child? What if she draws a sword to defend her family? What will templars do then? Templars after going rouge want to kill every single mage and will not hesitate to kill none-mage supporters as well.

She will be subdued..or killed.
Depending on circumstances.

Templars have a job to do. If someone attacks them in their line of duty, they have a right to defend themselves.
That doesn't make them butchers who go on slaughtering people.
I've yet to see templars who don't go to great lengths to try and avoid any harm to civilians.

Templars are indeed a force of Vengeance. Anders is not different than any extreme Templar.

Tempalrs are a force of order.
Mages and their supporters are a force of chaos

The bad guys in this fight:
Blood mages & Templars

The good guys in this fight:
The normal mages & chantry and its seekers.

nah.


Also,
Not even close. I will reject comparisons between gays and mages.

You can't just go nah, no, not going to happen on me without any evidence or argument to back them up.  Templars have a job to do? Who gave them their jobs? The chantry. Now they are heretics, a force of Vengeance, not so different than the qunari even. They will pillage just to get lyrium since the chantry won't give it with hugs anymore. So no Templars no longer have a line of duty, they are manicas with sword who actually think maker is on their side which he clearly isn't at least not anymore after they gone rouge from the chantry.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Yes I can. Because you didn't bring in any evidence for your claim (and you can't really).

You say "Templars are evil"
What kind of answer were you honestly expecting? My agreement?



And the templars have a duty - protecting civilians from mages - regardless of Chantry.
Templars are an order. Their duty is not determined only by the Chantry.
As it is they are now autonomous, but they have a structure, they still follow their wovs and they still have a goal and purpose.

[Hazegurl]

Rassler wrote...
 Anyway as I said in this thread several times already Anders and his actions are not so different than Templars. Just like Anders Templars were a force to bring justice and protect the chantry and the faithful. Very much like Anders they have become a force of Vengeance now especially when they gone rouge from chantry which was the only reason they were considered "holy" and "ritghteous". Please refer to my post I made in answer to MisterJB:

I don't see what the Templars' actions have to do with Anders condoning the enslavement of Fenris or our discussion about the comparison between Fenris and Anders' actions.

However, I disagree with you about your opinion on the Templars. You can't turn your back on someone who has turned theirs first and that is what the Divine did. Her position would have been better served to enforce changes that grant Mages and Templars joint rule and change how the circle is run. Not condone a rebellion that places Templar lives in danger.  I would only consider the Templars going rogue is if they bring in a new Divine and they still refuse to return. Other than that I see no reason why they should be loyal to the current one.

[Lulupab]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Yes I can. Because you didn't bring in any evidence for your claim (and you can't really).

You say "Templars are evil"
What kind of answer were you honestly expecting? My agreement?



And the templars have a duty - protecting civilians from mages - regardless of Chantry.
Templars are an order. Their duty is not determined only by the Chantry.
As it is they are now autonomous, but they have a structure, they still follow their wovs and they still have a goal and purpose.

Not all Templars are evil but certainly many of them have turned away from their so called "duty" long ago. If you actually think DA:I will favor Templars like the way you want them to know that you will be majorly disappointed. The bias here is most amusing. Go order yourself a Templar suit from ebay.

Seriously though. Templars are indeed a order where mages are a people born with magic. Templars can stop being a Templar but mages can't stop being mages. They kill the civilians they are suppose to protect in order to kill mages.

[Lulupab]

Hazegurl wrote...

Rassler wrote...
 Anyway as I said in this thread several times already Anders and his actions are not so different than Templars. Just like Anders Templars were a force to bring justice and protect the chantry and the faithful. Very much like Anders they have become a force of Vengeance now especially when they gone rouge from chantry which was the only reason they were considered "holy" and "ritghteous". Please refer to my post I made in answer to MisterJB:

I don't see what the Templars' actions have to do with Anders condoning the enslavement of Fenris or our discussion about the comparison between Fenris and Anders' actions.

However, I disagree with you about your opinion on the Templars. You can't turn your back on someone who has turned theirs first and that is what the Divine did. Her position would have been better served to enforce changes that grant Mages and Templars joint rule and change how the circle is run. Not condone a rebellion that places Templar lives in danger.  I would only consider the Templars going rogue is if they bring in a new Divine and they still refuse to return. Other than that I see no reason why they should be loyal to the current one.

What do you expect me to say, I already admitted Anders shouldn't apporove of enslaving Fenris but he never forces the issue therefore I don't care.

The divine didn't turn on Templars. She didn't count them anymore rightful than mages just because they are Templars. In her eyes mages and Templars and all people deserve the same right.

[Hazegurl]

Rassler wrote...

I reloaded my saves to be sure. Friend Anders will be proud of what he did and a rival Anders will regret it. Blame bioware or whoever you want this is the case.

The real question here is; Lets say its known if Anders kept alive he will work to redeem himself in DA3. Will you keep him alive then?

I have rivaled Anders a lot and I see nothing out of him that truly regrets what he has done. He thinks he is going to be some martyr who will light the way for mages everywhere.  That's not regret to me.

No. Anders is still carrying a demon inside of him. He has proven more than once to endanger the lives of mages and nonmages. He can't control himself and I highly doubt blowing up the Chantry helped. It just proves that he got away with using Hawke and murdering people for his cause. My Hawke has killed people for less crimes than that so I see no reason why Anders should get a free pass.

I don't care about him or his so called redemption. I want a mage with some common sense on my team in DA3 not some fool who allowed a demon/spirit to possess him and became a walking contradiction of himself and the very reason Templars exist in the first place. If Mages and Templars are to come to any sort of compromise then mages like Anders must go.

[Hazegurl]

Rassler wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...

Rassler wrote...
 Anyway as I said in this thread several times already Anders and his actions are not so different than Templars. Just like Anders Templars were a force to bring justice and protect the chantry and the faithful. Very much like Anders they have become a force of Vengeance now especially when they gone rouge from chantry which was the only reason they were considered "holy" and "ritghteous". Please refer to my post I made in answer to MisterJB:

I don't see what the Templars' actions have to do with Anders condoning the enslavement of Fenris or our discussion about the comparison between Fenris and Anders' actions.

However, I disagree with you about your opinion on the Templars. You can't turn your back on someone who has turned theirs first and that is what the Divine did. Her position would have been better served to enforce changes that grant Mages and Templars joint rule and change how the circle is run. Not condone a rebellion that places Templar lives in danger.  I would only consider the Templars going rogue is if they bring in a new Divine and they still refuse to return. Other than that I see no reason why they should be loyal to the current one.

What do you expect me to say, I already admitted Anders shouldn't apporove of enslaving Fenris but he never forces the issue therefore I don't care.

The divine didn't turn on Templars. She didn't count them anymore rightful than mages just because they are Templars. In her eyes mages and Templars and all people deserve the same right.

What I am saying is that you brought up a point that had nothing to do with our discussion. 

Yes she did turn on the Templars. She knows they can't just allow the mages to incite a rebellion against them. She gives Lambert no reason to believe that this isn't Tevinter all over again. She gives him zero incentive to trust her by enforcing laws slowly to ensure mage freedom peacefully while maintaining Templar power to protect nonmages.  Instead she takes the most exterme actions and expect the Templars to mindlessly follow along.