87 réponses à ce sujet

[batlin]

What I want to know is why Anders decided to blow up the Chantry instead of Meredith's office. You know, the person who was actually responsible for mage oppression in Kirkwall.

It's not like he wasn't aware of this. He was around for all of Meredith's politicking over those 3 damn years. But he chooses to kill a bunch of innocent people (including tranquil mages) rather than the source of his problems?

[The Elder King]

About Elthina, is worth saying that Anders's doesn't seem to believe that she's responsoble from what happened in Kirkwall. He killed her because with her mages and templars would never arrive to fight each other.

[The Elder King]

batlin wrote...

What I want to know is why Anders decided to blow up the Chantry instead of Meredith's office. You know, the person who was actually responsible for mage oppression in Kirkwall.

It's not like he wasn't aware of this. He was around for all of Meredith's politicking over those 3 damn years. But he chooses to kill a bunch of innocent people (including tranquil mages) rather than the source of his problems?

Killing Meredith wouldn't probably trigger the events that lead to DA2's final part and in Asunder to the war. In another thread someone posted some of Gaider's posts, which implied that Cullen wouldn't have started the Annulment in DA2. If Anders killed Meredith, Cullen wouldn't ask an Annulment (and regardless Elthina wouldn't concede it).

[Vilegrim]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Vilegrim wrote...

It's called 'collateral damage'. It happens in a war, he launched a near perfect decapitation strike (and with Hawke's help) finished the job, leaving the Chantry, Templar Order and Circle leaderless and in chaos.

If he wanted that, he should have bombed Meredith. He didn't do it as a strategic target, he did it to ****** off Meredith and force a rebellion in response.

He destroyed the head of the organisation that arms, sipplies, and indoctrinates the Templars.  For context: Killing a General  is good, but killing the king  is better.

Ehrlina could have ordered Meredith to stop at any time, could have stripped her of command, but she did not, de facto if not de jure condoning her behaviour and providing moral support to the core groups of Templars, the Meredith loyalists.

Ehrlina inaction made her just as culpubable (in fact more so, as the red lyrium hadn't got to her) as Meredith.

Modifié par Vilegrim, 16 juin 2013 - 01:11 .

[Herr Uhl]

Vilegrim wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

Vilegrim wrote...

It's called 'collateral damage'. It happens in a war, he launched a near perfect decapitation strike (and with Hawke's help) finished the job, leaving the Chantry, Templar Order and Circle leaderless and in chaos.

If he wanted that, he should have bombed Meredith. He didn't do it as a strategic target, he did it to ****** off Meredith and force a rebellion in response.

He destroyed the head of the organisation that arms, sipplies, and indoctrinates the Templars.  For context: Killing a General  is good, but killing the king  is better.

He didn't destroy the chantry in general. He blew up a church. There was no weapons or templars in the church.

It is not a strategic target out of a war standpoint. It is a symbolic target.

[Vilegrim]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Vilegrim wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

Vilegrim wrote...

It's called 'collateral damage'. It happens in a war, he launched a near perfect decapitation strike (and with Hawke's help) finished the job, leaving the Chantry, Templar Order and Circle leaderless and in chaos.

If he wanted that, he should have bombed Meredith. He didn't do it as a strategic target, he did it to ****** off Meredith and force a rebellion in response.

He destroyed the head of the organisation that arms, sipplies, and indoctrinates the Templars.  For context: Killing a General  is good, but killing the king  is better.

He didn't destroy the chantry in general. He blew up a church. There was no weapons or templars in the church.

It is not a strategic target out of a war standpoint. It is a symbolic target.

Ehrlina was in that Chantry as where most of the heirachy for Kirkwall.  Queen and ministers, double points bonus.

[d-boy15]

hhh89 wrote...

About Elthina, is worth saying that Anders's doesn't seem to believe that she's responsoble from what happened in Kirkwall. He killed her because with her mages and templars would never arrive to fight each other.

Finally...

Yes, he didn't kill her because she is responsible for mage oppression but he want to remove the chance
of compromise because he didn't want a peace. Anders want all out war between Mage and Templar.

Elthina is well respected by both Templar and Circle (in Kirkwall), Anders even try to had her as Mage side
but she refuse to favor anyside and instead try to appease everyone.

[KENNY4753]

Anders explains it quite well in-game. "I removed the chance of comprimise because there is no comprimise."

If Anders didnt blow up the chantry Meredith and Orsinio would go to Elthina and she would tell them to go back to the Gallows just like the start of Act 3. But honestly its just delaying the inevitatable. Sooner or later the Divine would send soldiers to Kirkwall and annul the Circle herself.

[ashesandwine]

Xilizhra wrote...

Actually, the Chantry gave up without a fight, so now we're up against only templars. Whom we might as well have been at war with for the past thousand years, so no problems there. As for how mages should be governed... that's a valid question, but not immediately relevant to crushing the templars.

Ooh shoot, I forgot that they did indeed give up. I have not yet read Asunder, but that was what I heard. 

Lathrim wrote...

Killing Meredith wouldn't have had the same impact. She is the source of most of the problems mages have in Kirkwall, yes, but who is deemed responsible for the mages' imprisonment across Thedas?

The Chantry. Templars prevent magical beings from leaving their Circle of Magi, yes, but under whose orders? The Chantry's.

Anders' goal was to free mages everywhere, not just Kirkwall. Due to that, attacking the Chantry directly (through the church in Kirkwall) proved out to be much more effective in providing him what he wanted - war.

Wasn't it confirmed in Asunder that the mages are now at war with The Templars and that The Chantry have withdrew?

[d-boy15]

KENNY4753 wrote...

Anders explains it quite well in-game. "I removed the chance of comprimise because there is no comprimise."

If Anders didnt blow up the chantry Meredith and Orsinio would go to Elthina and she would tell them to go back to the Gallows just like the start of Act 3. But honestly its just delaying the inevitatable. Sooner or later the Divine would send soldiers to Kirkwall and annul the Circle herself.

Except in Asuder (Davide Gaider novel)

The divine seem to favor mages over templar and also hint about support freedom for mages.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm all for mage freedom but not with Anders idea. What he do is drag everyone to war with him willingly or not.
If you ask who give Templar right to imprison mages then who gives Anders right to choose for Mages?

At least in Asunder the decision to go rebellion is come from voted and the one who deliver the final die is wise
mage who understand the conflict.

Modifié par d-boy15, 16 juin 2013 - 01:27 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Xilizhra wrote...

Also, FYI, aside from Elthina, we only see templars die in that cutscene.

So I guess that the massive building that is the Chatnry has only that ONE room in it? So definatley there was no one else in the building?
Also, the fires and falling debris didn't hurt/kill anyone?

Yeah right. Wishfull thinking.
Even Anders admits he killed innocents.

[Herr Uhl]

Vilegrim wrote...

Ehrlina was in that Chantry as where most of the heirachy for Kirkwall.  Queen and ministers, double points bonus.

I'm just wondering, are you really serious about the church being the supply line and that he struck a big blow against the chantry by blowing up Elthina?

[Xilizhra]

So I guess that the massive building that is the Chatnry has only that ONE room in it? So definatley there was no one else in the building?
Also, the fires and falling debris didn't hurt/kill anyone?

There were corpses strewn all over the place in Demands of the Qun, none here.

Yeah right. Wishfull thinking.
Even Anders admits he killed innocents.

Yes. Innocent mages, indirectly.

[DPSSOC]

batlin wrote...

What I want to know is why Anders decided to blow up the Chantry instead of Meredith's office. You know, the person who was actually responsible for mage oppression in Kirkwall.

It's not like he wasn't aware of this. He was around for all of Meredith's politicking over those 3 damn years. But he chooses to kill a bunch of innocent people (including tranquil mages) rather than the source of his problems?

Because he wasn't looking to resolve his, or anyone's, problems.  He was looking to make his problem (the Templars) everyone else's problem, and then die.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Plaintiff wrote...
Innocents were already being killed. Why does everyone except Anders get a free pass?

Nobody gets a free pass.
Innocents die either way, but less die if you keep the mages locked up.
The Lesser evil.

No it's not. All manner of evil is committed by people "fighting for what they believed in". Meredith fought for what she believed in, but that's not "good enough" for me to support her, because I don't consider her cause to be just in the first place.

Funny, because many people don't consider mages (and especially Anders) to be just at all in their little war.

Morality is relative. Moral correctness is what I say it is.

No, it's what I say it is.

And I say every single word uttered form your mouth is morraly repugnant.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Vilegrim wrote...

It's called 'collateral damage'. It happens in a war, he launched a near perfect decapitation strike (and with Hawke's help) finished the job, leaving the Chantry, Templar Order and Circle leaderless and in chaos.

Allowing the rebellion to start against disorganised foes and win.

Text book.

It had been made clear that  the Templars where never going to stop, that sooner rather than later the mages would be annihilated.  As a first strike it was near perfect.

One could call everything that happens in the circles - every death, tranqulization or rape "colalteral damage" in the war against abominations and misuse of magic.

[KainD]

Anders actions were justified for his cause. I doubt there were people in the chantry that supported mage freedom, and if there were some, they are martyrs.

Modifié par KainD, 16 juin 2013 - 01:37 .

[Nightdragon8]

The problem is that blowing up a chantry isn't a way to get them to change there ways... it has the opiste effect. The only way to change there ways is go aroud killing ALL belivers, and even then that wont work cause it will go underground.

Granted, the biggest issue is that, the religion is bad. It's clearly anti-mage. And the stories they tell are of how "evil mages" created the darkspawn and made the Maker everyone.

The society they created was a fear of what the mages "did" and what they will do again.

So what needed to change was the religion, and the only way to do that is change the hearts and minds of people who worship that religion.

Creating an act of Terrorism by a Mage no less is completely counter productive, and in fact Hurts the mages cause. And only increases the fear of mages, which again doesn't help the cause AT ALL.

Don't get me wrong Meridth's little band needed to be stopped, but there was probably better ways to do it, than to blow up a third party That too was having issues.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Bollcoks. Religion isn't evil.

[Xilizhra]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Bollcoks. Religion isn't evil.

Religion is not inherently evil, but it's used for evil purposes quite often.

[KainD]

Nightdragon8 wrote...

Creating an act of Terrorism by a Mage no less is completely counter productive, and in fact Hurts the mages cause. And only increases the fear of mages, which again doesn't help the cause AT ALL.

Better to be feared and free than be feared and be imprisoned. 

But really mages need to wake up and stop these silly atempts at reasoning with mundanes. War is good, what every supporter of the circle system needs is not a good argument but a fireball in the face. 

Modifié par KainD, 16 juin 2013 - 01:41 .

[The Elder King]

Xilizhra wrote...


Yes. Innocent mages, indirectly.

If you're talking about the conversation before Hawke decides to kill or spare Anders, I remember that he was talking about those who died in the Chantry.

[Ageless Face]

batlin wrote...

What I want to know is why Anders decided to blow up the Chantry instead of Meredith's office. You know, the person who was actually responsible for mage oppression in Kirkwall.It's not like he wasn't aware of this. He was around for all of Meredith's politicking over those 3 damn years. But he chooses to kill a bunch of innocent people (including tranquil mages) rather than the source of his problems?

Because killing Meredith will only prospone the war between the mages and tamplers, during which the mages will c
ontinue to suffer under the Templars, so nothing will change. Anders wanted the war to start already, so the mages will have no choice but to try and free themselves. And a mage destroying the Chantry was probably the best way there was to "encourage" Meredith to start the war.

Modifié par HagarIshay, 16 juin 2013 - 01:56 .