1082 réponses à ce sujet

[kinderschlager]

garrusfan1 wrote...

so this thread went from the topic to anti religion and then to critizing people then to aethiesm and anti religion. look religion isn't evil but horrible people will use it to further their agenda and such as they will with anything. religion isn't evil people that use it in a bad way are evil

i don't even bother reading the back and forth anymore, it's all kinda childish

[Solmanian]

In many cases Isolde either loses her life or her son.  How much more 'accountable' do you want to make her.  As for Vaughn, he's imprisoned in Howe's estate because he had to trust Howe to put down an Elven rebellion...one that he helped fan the flames of.

That's not accountability that's karma... 

Accountability is when a figure of authority steps up and tell you: "You're wrong. What you're doing is wrong. Stop it, or I will stop you.". Like what thrall used to do to garrush before he became a skirt wearing hippy.

When in the various blights the darkspawn pillaged and raped until a grey warden shoved a sword in the archdemon gut, it wasn't karma. 

Fighting over civil rights in thedas is a mute point. Thedas isn't America (either one of them), its a feudal setting that doesn't even have a Magna Carta. Your idea of rounding up the entire population and shoving them into reeducation centers, resulting in lobotomized elves&humans, templar&mages holding hands singing is a bigger violation of human rights than any of the oppressive acts carried out in thedas, combined.

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

It's an issue of addressing how the tranquil actually are in Origins and Dragon Age II. The Rite of Tranquility seems incomperehensibly monstrous and dehumanizing in both storylines. 

No.

In DA:O it is portrayed far better.

The entire process is horrific, especially when you speak with Owain and see how inhuman Owain is as a tranquil mage, and the narrative even invites you to help Jowan to help save him from this fate.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Polaris wrote..

We DO have uncontestable cannnoical scenes that show the tranquil don't in fact have moral agency and thus don't have freewill in the moral sense.

I like it how you keep adding "in the moral sense". Coul it be that you have begun to realize that the variable of morality is the only thing affected, and that you define free will simply by it?

I consider your entire premise redicolous. A human brain is a complex, chaotic, undeterministic system. Choices are made and processed. One variable more or less does not suddenly define free will when you have hunderds of variables. 

If the removal of their emotions makes the tranquil compliant to the commands of the templars, what are you really arguing here? We already see how subservient the tranquil behave in two different games, so I don't see how Ian's assertions are ridiculous at all.

[BlueMagitek]

The narrative invites you to play the politics of the Circle and turn in Jowan to advance your own game. =D

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

DG's post which Lob just reposted does seem to conflate not believing in a god or gods (Atheism) with a hatred of religion. 

In my personal experience that is far more often true than not.

99% of atheists I met either hate all religion or Christianity.
It may be a generalization, but it's one of the more accurate ones. 

It isn't accurate. Knowing a few people who act that way doesn't condemn everyone else by default. Atheism isn't about the vilification of religion or condemning the belief in God. It's a viewpoint about how one views the world and the rest of the universe, which is why having some developers confuse atheism with a hatred of religion is something I find to be unfortunate. I find it sad that we had at least two developers confuse players wanting the return of the atheist option with a hatred of religion.

What promoted some players to seek the return of the atheist option for the protagonist was the dislike of the Andrastian Chantry, for specific reasons. The mistreatment of the elves and mages has caused some players to hate the Chantry of Andraste. It plays a part in how some players feel about the mage issue, given how templars had religious authority over mages, which is why posters like the OP want a more balanced view in the story, rather than a slanted one where mages who use blood magic or seek autonomy are vilified - which we dealt with in Dragon Age II over and over again.

[Dabrikishaw]

That thing about Gaider never intending to allow anyone to express disbelief in the Maker is unfortunate.

[Dave of Canada]

LobselVith8 wrote...

*"We don't hate religion, we hate the chantry"*

You can keep holding that position but it doesn't make it true, the majority of people hate the Chantry because of it's christian parallels and you've defended people who proclaimed loud and clear that they hate Christianity and western culture. It paints a picture.

Saying "no we don't" doesn't mean it's true.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 05 juin 2013 - 01:19 .

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

You'll have to excuse me for pointing out the fact that The Warden could do everything from condemn the Chantry as an institution for its actions to expressing that the Maker didn't exist. I understand that, as someone who apparently dislikes the fact that people are allowed to hold opposing views, it would be a serious issue for you.

As usual the poitn goes WAY over your head.

Your point was to be offensive, and you were trying to provoke me into an argument. That was the entire crux of your post. There was little more to it than that. I'm sure you and I can try to be civil to one another, even if we don't agree on anything.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

I dislike the fact that you don't say "the warden could do this or that", but rather say "MY SURANA WARDEN did X and Y" and only bring up the fact that the warden can do X if it suits your current agenda.

In a paragraph where I addressed multiple types of Wardens, you're offended I included what the elven mage could say as well? I address my Surana Warden specifically in that post to address that I know that such options were avaliable for The Warden from personal experience. Pro-templar players have done the same thing in other threads when they explained their actions in supporting the templars throughout the storyline, or the Right of Annulment when Meredith condemned the mages of Kirkwall, but you never seemed to take issue when people are addressing Wardens who took actions that you agreed with.

Also, acting as though the expression of a different opinion than yours is an "agenda" doesn't add much to the discussion.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Something you oh so often forget when the wardens ability of choice doesn't support your current theory.

I'm well aware there are pro-templar Wardens and Hawkes.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Obsession is more like making post after post about how Leliana couldn't possibly have died, even if the developers said she was dead and came back to life.

She is alive ain't she? She ain't dead.
And I don't recall any direct confirmation from the devs. If there is one, link it.
Because "we'll explain how she's back" and "she was dead but is now alive" are two very different things.

Either way, I'll allways attack a stupid argument like the "death animation" one. 

Death animation has nothing to do with it. It's an issue of Leliana being dead when The Warden kills her, the codex addressing her death, the game coding listing her as dead, and the developers addressing that her coming back to life would be explained in the future.

If Leliana didn't die, then there's nothing to explain; it would basically be no different than the developers handwaving Oghren's death from Origins in Awakening if that was the case, or the demise of Justice in the Dragonbone Wastes in the scenario where he never met Anders because The Warden never recruited him into the rank of the Wardens.

[In Exile]

LobselVith8 wrote...
What promoted some players to seek the return of the atheist option for the protagonist was the dislike of the Andrastian Chantry, for specific reasons. The mistreatment of the elves and mages has caused some players to hate the Chantry of Andraste. It plays a part in how some players feel about the mage issue, given how templars had religious authority over mages, which is why posters like the OP want a more balanced view in the story, rather than a slanted one where mages who use blood magic or seek autonomy are vilified - which we dealt with in Dragon Age II over and over again.

Thinking on it, I find it difficult to accept your position as being pro-atheist option, when you don't complain about the inability of the Dalish Warden to say that the Creators are a fake and that s/he doesn't believe in them.

I also find it difficult to believe that you're honestly advocating for atheism when you equate it when the express statement of non-belief. I don't "prove" that I'm an atheist by going around and telling people their religion is wrong. I think it's a ridiculous fantasy and it's like a cult around the tooth fairy, but being able to tell people or not doesn't somehow make me less of an atheist in-game. 

Modifié par In Exile, 05 juin 2013 - 01:10 .

[wolfhowwl]

LobselVith8 wrote...

What promoted some players to seek the return of the atheist option for the protagonist was the dislike of the Andrastian Chantry, for specific reasons. The mistreatment of the elves and mages has caused some players to hate the Chantry of Andraste. It plays a part in how some players feel about the mage issue, given how templars had religious authority over mages, which is why posters like the OP want a more balanced view in the story, rather than a slanted one where mages who use blood magic or seek autonomy are vilified - which we dealt with in Dragon Age II over and over again.

Speaking of vilification and balanced views.

What do you think about the Templars being hit with a hamfisted Holocaust reference and having a member raping his charges?

Yeah, we had psychotic bloodmages but we also had plenty of psychotic goosesteppinng Templars.

Modifié par wolfhowwl, 05 juin 2013 - 01:24 .

[LobselVith8]

[quote]Hazegurl wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Frankly, the plethora of stupid and insane mages were tiresome, so I can understand the OP's concern about how mages will be depicted this time around.[/quote]

Everyone in Kirkwall was nuts, including the Templars. Everyone will always have something to complain about when a storyline isn't going their way in an RPG. [/quote]

People have addressed the flaws with the narrative. Some of the mage antagonists didn't even make any sense - Decimus thinking Hawke and his crew were templars and Grace attacking the Champion if pro-mage in revenge because Hawke helped her escape come to mind.

I've argued that the Stormcloak and Legion schism would have been a better approach to the dichtotomy between mages and templars, where you have two flawed groups lead by well-meaning, if imperfect, leaders who don't turn into monsters simply because your protagonist becomes their nemesis.

[quote]Hazegurl wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

No one based an entire argument on one, single line of dialogue.
There were dialogue lines where The Warden could make it clear he didn't believe in the dogma of the Andrastian Chantry. My Surana Warden said the Maker wasn't his god and condemned the Chantry ....".[/quote]

I was referring to a Human Noble PC not an Elf one. I know for a fact that you can outright display nonbelief in the Chantry for a elf playthrough. Something I enjoyed. From what I read of the quotes with Gaider, is that it seems like the argument was about a line of dialouge spoken by the human noble warden. [/quote]

Gaider's comments address that he didn't remember that the option existed in the game, not simply with the Cousland protagonist. As he said in Xil's thread: "Yes, there was indeed the occasional dialogue option to express it-- something you guys obviously remember better than we do (writing something over six years will definitely do that, let me tell you). I don't know if we would consider that "supported" as I defined above, but you're correct that it definitely pops up. Probably because, at the time, such an option seemed appropriate, and I wouldn't have a problem with that even now."

[quote]Hazegurl wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

It's been brought up more than a few times because some people who don't want to be limited to playing characters who are religiously Andrastian, since some of us find the religion to be repungnant and morally bankrupt. Speaking as someone who doesn't like the Chantry of Andraste, I particularly can't understand why a mage would follow an anti-mage religion that vilified and enslaved his people. [/quote]

As a result of your metagaming. So far we have nothing much in any of the stories that outright suggests this for a human PC to go on. You can say "My Hawke hated the fact that mages were locked up by the Chantry and Templars and therefore hates the Chantry." but that's pretty much all you have to go on and  there were not many opportunities for the PC to express this over the issues in Kirkwall. No one asked Hawke what he believed in so I think it would have been stupid to have him/her randomly mentioning how evil they think the Chantry is when the topic is on the actions of the Templars. I do think you can call out the Grand Cleric for doing nothing. I'm not too sure on that. But even then what could be accomplished by squeezing in a "I hate the Chantry because of xyz" aside from letting you rant against a fictional religion at a point where it would be totally uncalled for. Overall, I just think this is a case of Atheists wanting some recognition in a world where the term doesn't exist and therefore doesn't apply. As a nonbeliever myself, I say pick your battles.  Not everything has to respresent your RL beliefs. [/quote]

Playing as an atheist in Thedas doesn't represent my RL beliefs; it represents the beliefs of the fictional character who is my protagonist. It doesn't require metagaming to call into question the validity of the Andrastian Chantry, particularly when your father and sister are mages (in the example of Hawke), and you can be an apostate yourself. Why would my apostate Hawke believe in the Maker? Why would my mage follow the teachings of a religion that brutally subjugated his people for nearly a thousand years? There are plenty of reasons why my character might be an atheist in Thedas. That's the whole point; he's supposed to be my character. And I don't have to express hatred for the Chantry for my character to express that he simply doesn't believe in the Maker, although I see no reason in railroading characters into liking the Chantry, either.

And you don't call out Grand Cleric Elthina for being lazy - the written dialogue doesn't match what Hawke verbally says, which is to belligerently scream at her to get out of your way.

[quote]Hazegurl wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

That makes absolutely no sense at all. Atheism has existed for centuries, and it isn't dependent on Christianity. [/quote]

Don't even go there with me. This has nothing at all to do with what I wrote. In the DA verse Christianity does not exist therefore Atheism can't exist. You're mixing RL with fictional lore here. [/quote]

That has everything to do with what you wrote. Thinking that "God" (or the Maker, in the case of Andrastian society humans) doesn't exist has nothing to do with Christianity. Morrigan explicitly talks about the concept of thinking that the Maker and a higher power doesn't exist in her religious discussions with Leliana. Avernus doesn't seem to think that the Maker exists. Aveline could be an atheist, when you consider her dialogue about the Maker. I'm not sure why you think atheism should be prohibited from Dragon Age.

[quote]Hazegurl wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Or the Maker simply doesn't exist and, like my Surana Warden said, it's simply a "foolish superstition". [/quote]

True, or perhaps your Surana Warden is just  bitter as hell and has an opinion based on that bitterness. We won't know unless the writers go deeper into the whole Maker story etc. Until then, I see all this religion as just a backdrop to flesh out the world. As long as my PC isn't bending a knee in elief of the Maker I am satisfied. [/quote]

My character was simply an atheist. I hope that the same can be true for the Inquisitor.

[quote]Hazegurl wrote...

[quote]LobselVith8 wrote...

Some scholars address that the Old Gods are simply ancient dragons, so they don't really prove anything either way. [/quote]

It doesn't have to prove anything, just noting a RL comparisons on how the "Old Gods" are viewed vs "The Maker"
[/quote]

Comparison? They were both worshipped.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 05 juin 2013 - 01:23 .

[BlueMagitek]

I'm fairly certain DG confirmed that you could not be an atheist, merely express suspicion / not attribute things to miracles. But you're still Andrastian, it seems.

[LobselVith8]

Hazegurl wrote...

Right, disbelief in the Maker is not Atheism and I would be very reluctant to even introduce the term itself in game cause that would just open up a whole can of worms for BioWare.

Atheists have expressed they are atheist by saying they don't believe in God. It's not as though atheists always get into the explicitly nuances of their atheism. In Andrastian society, we have the Maker, and The Warden from an Andrastian background could effectively do the same thing by saying that he didn't believe in the only god that he's likely ever been exposed to.

Hazegurl wrote...

Lob keeps mentioning his Surana warden with expressing Atheist beliefs ignoring that he's an Elf and probably doesn't believe in the Maker cause he has his own Gods etc to fall back on.

The Surana Warden isn't Dalish and expresses no knowledge about the Creators.

[Hazegurl]

LobselVith8 wrote...

People have addressed the flaws with the narrative. Some of the mage antagonists didn't even make any sense - Decimus thinking Hawke and his crew were templars and Grace attacking the Champion if pro-mage in revenge because Hawke helped her escape come to mind.

I've argued that the Stormcloak and Legion...

I've never said the narrative was perfect. But that doesn't mean that all your complaints are right. Nor does it mean that you have a right to demand the narrative go the way you want it. As for Skyrim, I could careless about their "narrative". I couldn't even care enough to join either side.

Gaider's comments address that he didn't remember that the option existed in the game, not simply with the Cousland protagonist.

Now I get it. I just thought that it was only about the human noble and not any other Warden. 

Playing as an atheist in Thedas doesn't represent my RL beliefs; it represents the beliefs of the fictional character who is my protagonist.

And you don't call out Grand Cleric Elthina for being lazy - the written dialogue doesn't match what Hawke verbally says, which is to belligerently scream at her to get out of your way.

And when do you have the option to go on a rant against the Chantry? Who asks Hawke for his opinion on the Chantry where it makes sense to squeeze in some dialouge about hating the Chantry or not beliving in the Maker?

Telling her to get out my way is me calling her lazy or it's calling her useless. I don't need to literally have the words spoken to get the meaning behind my Hawke saying it. But anyway, what does that have to do with the discussion on expressing anti Chantry beliefs?

That has everything to do with what you wrote. Thinking that "God" (or the Maker, in the case of Andrastian society humans) doesn't exist has nothing to do with Christianity. Morrigan explicitly talks about the concept of thinking that the Maker and a higher power doesn't exist in her religious discussions with Leliana. Avernus doesn't seem to think that the Maker exists. Aveline could be an atheist, when you consider her dialogue about the Maker. I'm not sure why you think atheism should be prohibited from Dragon Age.

No it does not. You immediately dragged the conversation into RL just like you're doing now. Well I hate to break it to you but DA verse is a fictional make believe universe that someone made up. There is no Christianity and therefore no Atheism. These terms are strictly our world and not theres. You are confusing simple comparisons. Sure you can see how the Chantry mirrors the Catholic Church or how the "Old Gods" represent Pagan beliefs. But at the end of the day, that is all it is.  I'm against the use of real world terms and real world bs being dragged into an RPG game I play to escape real world nonsense.

My character was simply an atheist. I hope that the same can be true for the Inquisitor.

There's nothing wrong with that. My Wardens were too and so was all my Hawkes. I didn't need to shout it in every npc's face to do it.

Comparison? They were both worshipped.

...Yes, the Pagan Gods and the Christian God were/are both worshipped. That's not the comparison I was talking about. I just noted that the Chantry's views of the Old Gods mirror how the Christian faith view the Pagan Gods. it is a simple observation I posted in my rambling on. Not an argument with you. 

[LobselVith8]

Dave of Canada wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

*"We don't hate religion, we hate the chantry"* 

You can keep holding that position but it doesn't make it true, the majority of people hate the Chantry because of it's christian parallels and you've defended people who proclaimed loud and clear that they hate Christianity and western culture. It paints a picture.

The majority of people who have expressed their opinions about why they hate the Chantry of Andraste have said it's because of what the religious organization did to the elves in the Dales and their oppression of the mages in the Chantry controlled Circles. It's the same condemnation that comes up time and again in elven threads and mage threads. Trying to pretend as though people only hate the Chantry because it's a religious organization is incredibly disingenious of you.

And I don't defend hatred of Christianity - or any real life religion - at all; I've pointed out time and again that the Chantry of Andraste isn't like Christianity to the few people who brought up the comparisons. The Chantry of Andraste is a fictional religious organization that I condemn because of what the Andrastian Chantry has done over the centuries to the elves and the mages. I don't even know where you're getting the condemnation of western culture from. 

Dave of Canada wrote...

Saying "no we don't" doesn't mean it's true. 

When those people have expressed the actual reasons why they hate the Chantry of Andraste, then it's certainly true that they hate the Chantry for the monstrous crimes it has committed over the centuries.

[BlueMagitek]

Yeah, like preventing the genocide of the elven race, brokering a peace between the Inquisition and the Hedge/Wild Mages and helping bolster Thedas against the Qunari.

Wretches, the lot of them.

[Hazegurl]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Atheists have expressed they are atheist by saying they don't believe in God.

The Maker is not God nor is it a God. Is the Maker even a deity? I see where The Maker is described as an entity which is not the same as a deity. The Chantry has given The Maker deity like qualities, such as "goodness".  But an entity is just something that exists with no form.  We already know that the "Old Gods" are just Dragons. Something that exists in material form. I see why Gaider makes the claim that you can't be an Atheist even if you express disbelief in the Maker, but maybe I'm wrong. But I don't even think there is a word for it in the DA verse. If one is created then we can properly call our characters that.

The Surana Warden isn't Dalish and expresses no knowledge about the Creators.

Then it's whatever you head canon.

[LobselVith8]

Hazegurl wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

People have addressed the flaws with the narrative. Some of the mage antagonists didn't even make any sense - Decimus thinking Hawke and his crew were templars and Grace attacking the Champion if pro-mage in revenge because Hawke helped her escape come to mind.

I've argued that the Stormcloak and Legion...

I've never said the narrative was perfect. But that doesn't mean that all your complaints are right. Nor does it mean that you have a right to demand the narrative go the way you want it. As for Skyrim, I could careless about their "narrative". I couldn't even care enough to join either side.

You don't have to share my concerns or views about the problem with the narrative. I think it's safe to say that you and I want entirely different things from a new Dragon Age game. I want to see three-dimensional characters in the narrative, which is why I express my view on the matter. I'd like to see mages written as flawed and interesting people, rather than caricatures who make little sense in the context of the narrative or my choices. I'm simply sharing my thoughts here in a forum that is intended for the exchange of ideas.

The developers are ultimately going to do whatever they want, and the fans can respond with their wallets - purchasing a game that suits their interests, or leaving the game on the shelf for something else that sparks their interest.

Hazegurl wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Playing as an atheist in Thedas doesn't represent my RL beliefs; it represents the beliefs of the fictional character who is my protagonist.

And you don't call out Grand Cleric Elthina for being lazy - the written dialogue doesn't match what Hawke verbally says, which is to belligerently scream at her to get out of your way.

And when do you have the option to go on a rant against the Chantry? Who asks Hawke for his opinion on the Chantry where it makes sense to squeeze in some dialouge about hating the Chantry or not beliving in the Maker?

Telling her to get out my way is me calling her lazy or it's calling her useless. I don't need to literally have the words spoken to get the meaning behind my Hawke saying it. But anyway, what does that have to do with the discussion on expressing anti Chantry beliefs?  

I'm talking about how Hawke is limited to a singular point of view when his mother dies: that Leandra is with the Maker. He can't express an opposing line of thought, for example. We also have Hawke telling Feynriel that he hopes the Maker guides him, despite Feynriel following the Creators. There's also the religious discussions with Sebastian, where Hawke is again limited to having the perspective of being religiously Andrastian, but not allowed to express that he simply doesn't believe in the Maker. This limitation doesn't help when it removes my agency over the character.

Hazegurl wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

That has everything to do with what you wrote. Thinking that "God" (or the Maker, in the case of Andrastian society humans) doesn't exist has nothing to do with Christianity. Morrigan explicitly talks about the concept of thinking that the Maker and a higher power doesn't exist in her religious discussions with Leliana. Avernus doesn't seem to think that the Maker exists. Aveline could be an atheist, when you consider her dialogue about the Maker. I'm not sure why you think atheism should be prohibited from Dragon Age.

No it does not. You immediately dragged the conversation into RL just like you're doing now. Well I hate to break it to you but DA verse is a fictional make believe universe that someone made up. There is no Christianity and therefore no Atheism. These terms are strictly our world and not theres. You are confusing simple comparisons. Sure you can see how the Chantry mirrors the Catholic Church or how the "Old Gods" represent Pagan beliefs. But at the end of the day, that is all it is.  I'm against the use of real world terms and real world bs being dragged into an RPG game I play to escape real world nonsense.

Don't compare the Chantry of Andraste to Christianity or the Catholic Church. They aren't the same.

Also, in a world where gods are a matter of faith, rather than reality, then I don't see how you can claim atheism shouldn't exist. It's not a matter of certainty that everyone will believe in a god. The Warden can express that he doesn't believe in the Maker, Morrigan can talk about not believing in the Maker or a higher power, Avernus doesn't seem to believe in a god, and Aveline might not believe in the Maker. If these people don't believe in gods or a higher power, then I don't see how you can claim that atheism shouldn't exist. And I don't see why you object to the term when it can be applicable for the fictional realm of Thedas.

[Hazegurl]

LobselVith8 wrote...

You don't have to share my concerns or views about the problem with the narrative. I think it's safe to say that you and I want entirely different things from a new Dragon Age game. I want to see three-dimensional characters in the narrative.....

If I said the sky was gray would you argue that the sky was black? Did I say I didn't want three dimensional characters, did I say I wanted caricatures? It takes more than expressing belief or disbelief in a religion to make a character three dimensional. There is nothing wrong with expressing your views. All I did was disagree.

I'm talking about how Hawke is limited to a singular point of view when his mother dies: that Leandra is with the Maker. He can't express an opposing line of thought, for example. We also have Hawke telling Feynriel that he hopes the Maker guides him, despite Feynriel following the Creators. There's also the religious discussions with Sebastian, where Hawke is again limited to having the perspective of being religiously Andrastian, but not allowed to express that he simply doesn't believe in the Maker. This limitation doesn't help when it removes my agency over the character.

I admit my own head canon may have caused me to see it differently here. Like I just view the whole Leandra being with the Maker as just something comforting said in grief and nothing more. I don't see it thrown in my face. telling Feynriel he hopes the Makers guides him, I saw it as a Hawke just giving him some parting words, once again comfort not belief. With Sebby, I stick to sarcastic responses like joking about using his family as arrows. But I do understand your pov on that. It's like being forced to hug Liara in ME2  They can remedy that by making Chantry belief dialouge optional.  

Don't compare the Chantry of Andraste to Christianity or the Catholic Church. They aren't the same.

And I didn't and no I won't get into a whole argument explaining something so simple to you. Consider any reply ignored.

And I've already explained in another post why I don't think the term atheist applies, but do whatever you want. Whocares in the end. *shrug*

[LobselVith8]

BlueMagitek wrote...

The narrative invites you to play the politics of the Circle and turn in Jowan to advance your own game. =D

I don't think anyone would dispute that Origins afforded you the opportunity to take different forks in the road, such as the example of aiding Jowan to spare him from the Rite of Tranquility, or betraying him to First Enchanter Irving in a clandestine move.

BlueMagitek wrote...

I'm fairly certain DG confirmed that you could not be an atheist, merely express suspicion / not attribute things to miracles. But you're still Andrastian, it seems.

Gaider did seem to phrase it that way for the new protagonist of Inquisition. That's a concern of mine. I suppose it remains to be seen how much control we will have over this new protagonist and his views. It'll be a factor for me in deciding whether I purchase Inquisition or not. I prefer silent protagonists to voiced protagonists in RPGs, and I'm not a fan of Andrastian human protagonists so far. To be fair, the alleged reactivity to our choices and our magic protagonist's use of blood magic is interesting, but I'm not at the point where my choice is definitive. I'll wait and see.

BlueMagitek wrote...

Yeah, like preventing the genocide of the elven race, brokering a peace between the Inquisition and the Hedge/Wild Mages and helping bolster Thedas against the Qunari.

Wretches, the lot of them.

The Chantry of Andraste is said to have invaded the Dales with templars when the elves refused to convert, so they didn't prevent the genocide of the elves if that's the case. The Chantry didn't broker peace with the mages; they forced them to submit to servitude for nearly a millennia. And I see many similarities between the Qunari and the Chantry of Andraste; I dislike both of them.

I'm sure you know by now how I feel about the Chantry of Andraste.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

LobselVith8 wrote...
The Chantry of Andraste is said to have invaded the Dales with templars when the elves refused to convert, so they didn't prevent the genocide of the elves if that's the case.

What the Chantry did was order the creation of the Alienages, where elves would be allowed to live in exchange for converting. While being forced to give up large bits of their culture is arguably a form of genocide (I don't remember exactly what definition we're using here) the fact remains that had the Chantry not done this there would be many fewer living elves. 

The Chantry didn't broker peace with the mages; they forced them to submit to servitude for nearly a millennia.

I think what Magitek is saying is that mages were no longer killed. (Whether or not the mages were universally killed before the Chantry got involved is something else again. I personally think that unless the Inquisition was a lot more pragmatic than that, they would have been wiped out. If not by the hedge mages, then by the Wardens.)

And I see many similarities between the Qunari and the Chantry of Andraste; I dislike both of them.

There are similarites to be seen. The difference, though is that the Chantry doesn't go nearly as far.

I'm sure you know by now how I feel about the Chantry of Andraste.

Vaguely amicable?

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 05 juin 2013 - 04:17 .

[kinderschlager]

having created my arguably perfected playthrews as a dalish in DA:O iif there's no option to rip the chantry completly apart, i am SO not going to be happy (ignoring DA2 on purpose, don't feal like choices in it mattered, too scripted IMO)


some men/women like to watch the world burn, and i'm one of them

[Fallstar]

Dave of Canada wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

*"We don't hate religion, we hate the chantry"*

You can keep holding that position but it doesn't make it true, the majority of people hate the Chantry because of it's christian parallels and you've defended people who proclaimed loud and clear that they hate Christianity and western culture. It paints a picture.

Saying "no we don't" doesn't mean it's true.

There is no need to bring in real world parallels. All you're doing is unecessarily complicating things. The chantry does plenty by itself to cause people to believe it is a negative influence on Thedas.

How do you know that the majority of people hate the chantry because of christian parallels? Compared to the chantry, Christianity is a tolerant and reasonable religion! (I'm not Christian) 

We've already got them for treating some humans as a sub-species, enforcing servitude through the rite of tranquility, using blood magic to 'keep tabs' on mages all the time, interfering in politics (especially in Orlais) and enforcing their beliefs about how the world should function using a paramilitary organisation. 

You don't need to bring Christianity or any real world religion into it to see why the Chantry has a negative influence in the grand scheme of things in Thedas.

Modifié par DuskWarden, 05 juin 2013 - 07:43 .

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

Lt_Riley wrote...
snip

But Templers are heroes that protect us from the blight of mages.