229 réponses à ce sujet

[Fredward]

Angrywolves wrote...

Good for you. This isn't a forum for the books and comics however. shrugs.

And as far as I know there isn't one so go be a ****y 5 year old somewhere else kthnxbai.

Hazegurl wrote...

Yeah, but he doesn't even bother to take
the precaution that he could be one. Instead he just goes into the pit
thinking that it could either be a spirit or a clever demon.  Honestly,
by the way Cole speaks to Lambert at the very end, I wonder if he ever
lost his memory or was he just feeding on everybody's energy until he
could take action himself. The whole "I'm not helpless anymore" line
makes me wonder.

I think what he means is that up to that point he's felt like he's controlled by this need to kill people. It wasn't something he chose to do it was something he felt was absolutely necessary to his existence. He even disliked it. He felt forced. But now he realizes he can actually control it. That there's a choice, however ****ty the alternative may be he doesn't HAVE to kill. Can you imagine how exhilarating that realization must be? That your learned helplessness has been unescessary all this time?

That's why I want Cole as a companion. The way I see it he can either become a psychopath, killing people for his need or he'll stop killing and lose his cool invisibility powers. Or maybe die. I dunno. Though the writers will have to come up with some reason for why he doesn't get his fix in battle. Maybe he needs eye contact. If he's in the game.

I can really go on and on about Cole's potential mental state but I'll try and practice some self restraint.

[Bleachrude]

iakus wrote...


Sadly, Lamber's time in Tevinter tainted his outlook on mages.  Like Loghain, his paranoia got the better of him.  Tevinter should be held up as an example of what can happen, not what will happen.

Except that Tevinter PROVED that if you have mages an inch, they would take a mile....Do remember that  the Tevinter we have know is NOT an unbroken lineage from ancient tevinter.

After Andrastre, even though Tevinter had not conquered entirely, the magisters had been removed and there was restrictions on mages holding power. As Fenris points out, the Divine of the time was persuaded to believe that the mages just wanted to help their fellow Tevinters and voila, Tevinter 2.0.

This is an example of why I think Lambert and Fenris are NOT paranoid....

[Xilizhra]

Bleachrude wrote...

iakus wrote...


Sadly, Lamber's time in Tevinter tainted his outlook on mages.  Like Loghain, his paranoia got the better of him.  Tevinter should be held up as an example of what can happen, not what will happen.

Except that Tevinter PROVED that if you have mages an inch, they would take a mile....Do remember that  the Tevinter we have know is NOT an unbroken lineage from ancient tevinter.

After Andrastre, even though Tevinter had not conquered entirely, the magisters had been removed and there was restrictions on mages holding power. As Fenris points out, the Divine of the time was persuaded to believe that the mages just wanted to help their fellow Tevinters and voila, Tevinter 2.0.

This is an example of why I think Lambert and Fenris are NOT paranoid....

The point is that the culture was never really changed; Tevinter was held under the power of others, but it refused to change for them, just slowly whittling away at the chains the other nations held it in. It's still a fairly unbroken connection to older Tevinter.

[Hazegurl]

Foopydoopydoo wrote...
I think what he means is that up to that point he's felt like he's controlled by this need to kill people. It wasn't something he chose to do it was something he felt was absolutely necessary to his existence. He even disliked it. He felt forced. But now he realizes he can actually control it. That there's a choice, however ****ty the alternative may be he doesn't HAVE to kill. Can you imagine how exhilarating that realization must be? That your learned helplessness has been unescessary all this time?

That's why I want Cole as a companion. The way I see it he can either become a psychopath, killing people for his need or he'll stop killing and lose his cool invisibility powers. Or maybe die. I dunno. Though the writers will have to come up with some reason for why he doesn't get his fix in battle. Maybe he needs eye contact. If he's in the game.

I can really go on and on about Cole's potential mental state but I'll try and practice some self restraint.

So a spirit/demon is loose in the Circle killing to live like some freaking Vampire and Lambert is somehow wrong or stupid to want it dealt with? Rhys on the other hand is brilliant for wanting to protect it?  I'm not saying that is your point. But this seems to be the impression I get from people. I know Cole can inspire sympathy.  But I don't blame anyone who wants him dead and gone and perhaps inspiring sympathy was nothing but a ploy anyway.  It's that type of emotional attachment that Rhys had that made him an incompetent fool when dealing with Cole.
I admit, not a Cole fan, but he is a better character than Rhys.

As for Lambert and Fenris being paranoid, again, not seeing it. Paranoia is more of a mental disorder and having undue fear of something. First of all, it's not even undue fear, it's telling it like it is. Fenris saying that not all mages are bad or expressing his respect for Hawke or Bethany is not the act of a paranoid person. Lambert knowing that a rebellion plot is taking place under his roof and trying to stop it, along with a murderer, and trying to talk some sense into Rhys does not a paranoid person make. but maybe we all have different definitions of the word.

Modifié par Hazegurl, 21 juin 2013 - 03:32 .

[Iakus]

Xilizhra wrote...

The point is that the culture was never really changed; Tevinter was held under the power of others, but it refused to change for them, just slowly whittling away at the chains the other nations held it in. It's still a fairly unbroken connection to older Tevinter.

Actually, Archon Hessarian himself tried to change things up over a a century before the Chantry was established in Orlais.  He established what was arguably the first iteration of the Circle of Magi in the form of schools for mages. And his interpretation of "magic must serve Man" was for mages to live a life of public service to the Empire.  It was after his death that the "old guard" reestablished control and Tevinter reverted to same old, same old.  Just worshipping the Maker instead of Old Gods.

[Baelyn]

simfamSP wrote...

It's a grey area. On one hand, you can argue that Lambert is morally wrong and is driven to stop something he does not fully comprehend beyond his bias. Yet, his intentions are just, but his executions are cruel. An unnecessary precaution seeing as he willingly strikes fear into mages, when the book would have ended if he placed some trust. Lambert is a bully, but not totally wrong.

Rhys can be perceived as morally correct. He knows Cole more than anyone in the tower, he is his friend and Cole is his. (I doubt Gaider gave us his POV trust to trick the audience and break the fourth wall.) Yet, he has blood on his hands. He knows what Cole does and makes no further attempt to stop it, however, it's one of those situations where I can sympathise (albeit, I haven't had a friend who's very life depended on murder, but I think you get my meaning.) Rhys is almost a father-figure to Cole, and vice-versa, seeing Cole like this disturbs his balance, I think Rhys *knows* he's doing wrong, but can't do that to Cole. Incompetence has nothing to do with it, emotion blinds pragmatism, and Rhys is anything but pragmatic.

They're not great, they're not bastards. They're human.

Very well said.

[Silfren]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

WittingEight65 wrote...

I'll avenge Lambert's death.

If he's dead that is. While heavily implied, World of Thedas simply says he's missing in action. He could be still alive.

Personally, I'm a fan of Dave of Canada's notion on Lambert's fate. 

Given that the book makes a point of not showing Lambert's death, I'm almost certain we'll see him again.  I have my own suspicions about what will have happened to him, though.

What is Dave of Canada's notion, TEWR?

[Ieldra]

Silfren wrote...
Given that the book makes a point of not showing Lambert's death, I'm almost certain we'll see him again.  I have my own suspicions about what will have happened to him, though.

Possessed?

[Hazegurl]

simfamSP wrote...

So a spirit/demon is loose in the Circle killing to live like some freaking Vampire and Lambert is somehow wrong or stupid to want it dealt with? Rhys on the other hand is brilliant for wanting to protect it?

It's a grey area. On one hand, you can argue that Lambert is morally wrong and is driven to stop something he does not fully comprehend beyond his bias. Yet, his intentions are just, but his executions are cruel. An unnecessary precaution seeing as he willingly strikes fear into mages, when the book would have ended if he placed some trust. Lambert is a bully, but not totally wrong.

Rhys can be perceived as morally correct. He knows Cole more than anyone in the tower, he is his friend and Cole is his. (I doubt Gaider gave us his POV trust to trick the audience and break the fourth wall.) Yet, he has blood on his hands. He knows what Cole does and makes no further attempt to stop it, however, it's one of those situations where I can sympathise (albeit, I haven't had a friend who's very life depended on murder, but I think you get my meaning.) Rhys is almost a father-figure to Cole, and vice-versa, seeing Cole like this disturbs his balance, I think Rhys *knows* he's doing wrong, but can't do that to Cole. Incompetence has nothing to do with it, emotion blinds pragmatism, and Rhys is anything but pragmatic.

They're not great, they're not bastards. They're human.

Well, I like vampires but I'm not gonna befriend one and tell others they are out of line for wanting something that kills people to live to die. So I don't consider Lambert's actions to be morally wrong. As for Rhys, I don't consider him morally wrong either. Just irresponsible and foolish. He allowed himself to get far too emotional when he should have known better, he was reckless for allowing emotions to play a part in his decisions.  He placed lives in danger cause he's stupid then later claims that he knew Lambert was right all along. So he bascially fought with the man for no reason.  I'm glad these characters aren't perfect and I don't want them to be but Rhys is stupid and boring.

[Dave of Canada]

I'd like to imagine Lambert as being in a coma or vegetative state, being preserved and kept secret to prevent the Templar from defecting. The irony of the situation being that only magic could save him.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 21 juin 2013 - 07:38 .

[Silfren]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Silfren wrote...
Given that the book makes a point of not showing Lambert's death, I'm almost certain we'll see him again.  I have my own suspicions about what will have happened to him, though.

Possessed?

Or something.  At the end, the entity that called itself Cole seems to be admitting that at some point there actually was a mage by that name at some point.  Don't have the book in front of me, but it seems that somehow the spirit/demon/whatever ended up believing itself to BE Cole?  Could something similar happen with Lambert? 

I don't know what we could see in DA3, but given that in this "about to die" cliffhanger we got in Asunder, in which we don't even see Lambert going over the cliff, as it were, before the scene cuts off, I'm convinced we'll see Lambert in DA3, and there will be something very, very wrong with him.

[Silfren]

Hazegurl wrote...

simfamSP wrote...

So a spirit/demon is loose in the Circle killing to live like some freaking Vampire and Lambert is somehow wrong or stupid to want it dealt with? Rhys on the other hand is brilliant for wanting to protect it?

It's a grey area. On one hand, you can argue that Lambert is morally wrong and is driven to stop something he does not fully comprehend beyond his bias. Yet, his intentions are just, but his executions are cruel. An unnecessary precaution seeing as he willingly strikes fear into mages, when the book would have ended if he placed some trust. Lambert is a bully, but not totally wrong.

Rhys can be perceived as morally correct. He knows Cole more than anyone in the tower, he is his friend and Cole is his. (I doubt Gaider gave us his POV trust to trick the audience and break the fourth wall.) Yet, he has blood on his hands. He knows what Cole does and makes no further attempt to stop it, however, it's one of those situations where I can sympathise (albeit, I haven't had a friend who's very life depended on murder, but I think you get my meaning.) Rhys is almost a father-figure to Cole, and vice-versa, seeing Cole like this disturbs his balance, I think Rhys *knows* he's doing wrong, but can't do that to Cole. Incompetence has nothing to do with it, emotion blinds pragmatism, and Rhys is anything but pragmatic.

They're not great, they're not bastards. They're human.

Well, I like vampires but I'm not gonna befriend one and tell others they are out of line for wanting something that kills people to live to die. So I don't consider Lambert's actions to be morally wrong. As for Rhys, I don't consider him morally wrong either. Just irresponsible and foolish. He allowed himself to get far too emotional when he should have known better, he was reckless for allowing emotions to play a part in his decisions.  He placed lives in danger cause he's stupid then later claims that he knew Lambert was right all along. So he bascially fought with the man for no reason.  I'm glad these characters aren't perfect and I don't want them to be but Rhys is stupid and boring.

Wait wait wait.  Where exactly does Rhys admit that he knew all along that Lambert was right?  I could see Rhys retroactively deciding that he was wrong the whole time, but where does he say that he was just being contrary for the sake of it, and believed from the start that Lambert was right?

[Iakus]

Hazegurl wrote...

simfamSP wrote...

So a spirit/demon is loose in the Circle killing to live like some freaking Vampire and Lambert is somehow wrong or stupid to want it dealt with? Rhys on the other hand is brilliant for wanting to protect it?

It's a grey area. On one hand, you can argue that Lambert is morally wrong and is driven to stop something he does not fully comprehend beyond his bias. Yet, his intentions are just, but his executions are cruel. An unnecessary precaution seeing as he willingly strikes fear into mages, when the book would have ended if he placed some trust. Lambert is a bully, but not totally wrong.

Rhys can be perceived as morally correct. He knows Cole more than anyone in the tower, he is his friend and Cole is his. (I doubt Gaider gave us his POV trust to trick the audience and break the fourth wall.) Yet, he has blood on his hands. He knows what Cole does and makes no further attempt to stop it, however, it's one of those situations where I can sympathise (albeit, I haven't had a friend who's very life depended on murder, but I think you get my meaning.) Rhys is almost a father-figure to Cole, and vice-versa, seeing Cole like this disturbs his balance, I think Rhys *knows* he's doing wrong, but can't do that to Cole. Incompetence has nothing to do with it, emotion blinds pragmatism, and Rhys is anything but pragmatic.

They're not great, they're not bastards. They're human.

Well, I like vampires but I'm not gonna befriend one and tell others they are out of line for wanting something that kills people to live to die. So I don't consider Lambert's actions to be morally wrong. As for Rhys, I don't consider him morally wrong either. Just irresponsible and foolish. He allowed himself to get far too emotional when he should have known better, he was reckless for allowing emotions to play a part in his decisions.  He placed lives in danger cause he's stupid then later claims that he knew Lambert was right all along. So he bascially fought with the man for no reason.  I'm glad these characters aren't perfect and I don't want them to be but Rhys is stupid and boring.

Not even sparkly vampires?  

And I believe Rhys concealed Cole and tried to protect him becasue he thought he could help him, while Lambert would most likely want to destroy him.  It was, perhaps irresponsible of him, but understandable given Cole's rather pathetic nature.

There was also the problem that Cole was imperceptible to the templars.  If Rhys had gone to them earlier, he'd likely have been seen as delusional at best, a crazed killer or an abomination (or at least one who consorted with demons) at worst. "It wasn't me, it's this invisible Fade spirit named Cole!"

Modifié par iakus, 21 juin 2013 - 07:55 .

[Ieldra]

Silfren wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Silfren wrote...
Given that the book makes a point of not showing Lambert's death, I'm almost certain we'll see him again.  I have my own suspicions about what will have happened to him, though.

Possessed?

Or something.  At the end, the entity that called itself Cole seems to be admitting that at some point there actually was a mage by that name at some point.  Don't have the book in front of me, but it seems that somehow the spirit/demon/whatever ended up believing itself to BE Cole?  Could something similar happen with Lambert? 

I don't know what we could see in DA3, but given that in this "about to die" cliffhanger we got in Asunder, in which we don't even see Lambert going over the cliff, as it were, before the scene cuts off, I'm convinced we'll see Lambert in DA3, and there will be something very, very wrong with him.

Yeah, I'm afraid that appears rather likely.

Great. Another insane antagonist. Can't we just have a *sane* evil bastard for a change? Killing people because they've gone too far off the deep end is getting old. I miss Loghain.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Wasn't impressed.

Also didn't like Cole.. another mysterious, unique entity.
Thedas is overflowing with them.

[Beerfish]

Lambert and the red haired mage gal were the only truly sensible characters in the story. They had their views. They had good reasons for their views. The acted proactively on their views. They stayed consistent in their views. They did what they thought right for a higher calling than just themselves.

[Baelyn]

Beerfish wrote...

Lambert and the red haired mage gal were the only truly sensible characters in the story. They had their views. They had good reasons for their views. The acted proactively on their views. They stayed consistent in their views. They did what they thought right for a higher calling than just themselves.

I think you missed "were blinded by their views causing them to be unable to see reason."

[MWImexico]

Beerfish wrote...

Lambert and the red haired mage gal were the only truly sensible characters in the story. They had their views. They had good reasons for their views. The acted proactively on their views. They stayed consistent in their views. They did what they thought right for a higher calling than just themselves.

Seriously? They seem more the type of people who impose their views on others, by all means necessary. 

[Beerfish]

Baelyn wrote...

Beerfish wrote...

Lambert and the red haired mage gal were the only truly sensible characters in the story. They had their views. They had good reasons for their views. The acted proactively on their views. They stayed consistent in their views. They did what they thought right for a higher calling than just themselves.

I think you missed "were blinded by their views causing them to be unable to see reason."

Both were very reasonable ni my mind.  However that is a matter of opinion.  In any case at least they held their views higher than personal gain which is something that just about every other character did in the book.  They dropped long held beliefs or were just plain wishy washy at the drop of a hat and and when it was convenient for them.

Rhys, Wynne, Evangeline, Cole, Leliana were all amongst this group.  At least Cole might be forgiven because of who he was.  The rest were all trailtors to a cause one way or the other or just plain stupid and selfish.

[Beerfish]

MWImexico wrote...

Beerfish wrote...

Lambert and the red haired mage gal were the only truly sensible characters in the story. They had their views. They had good reasons for their views. The acted proactively on their views. They stayed consistent in their views. They did what they thought right for a higher calling than just themselves.

Seriously? They seem more the type of people who impose their views on others, by all means necessary. 

Yes of course they did, in a consistent manner thoughout.  They both had a very strong conviciton on the way things should be, both had good reasons for thinking that way and both moved throught the book in a consistent manner to try to imrpove things they felt were important.

[MWImexico]

Beerfish wrote...

Yes of course they did, in a consistent manner thoughout.  They both had a very strong conviciton on the way things should be, both had good reasons for thinking that way and both moved throught the book in a consistent manner to try to imrpove things they felt were important.

Well, if it's done in a consistent manner, I guess it's all right

[Ieldra]

Beerfish wrote...

MWImexico wrote...

Beerfish wrote...
Lambert and the red haired mage gal were the only truly sensible characters in the story. They had their views. They had good reasons for their views. The acted proactively on their views. They stayed consistent in their views. They did what they thought right for a higher calling than just themselves.

Seriously? They seem more the type of people who impose their views on others, by all means necessary. 

Yes of course they did, in a consistent manner thoughout.  They both had a very strong conviciton on the way things should be, both had good reasons for thinking that way and both moved throught the book in a consistent manner to try to imrpove things they felt were important.

I should mention again, that ideological certainty is not a virtue and not painted as one in this book. Both Lambert and Adrian exemplify the fact that It makes you blind to alternatives and unnecessarily confrontational. I think that message is very clear.

And that you justify imposing views on others if you're consistent about it just proves my point about blindness.

[Hazegurl]

iakus wrote...


Not even sparkly vampires?  

There should be a 100% totally bias kill order on all sparkly vampires.