1256 réponses à ce sujet

[Dean_the_Young]

In Exile wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

As I said before, since the Dalish entry skips directly from "templars" to "exiled from Halmshiral." I strongly believe the templars it mentions are supposed to be the Exalted March itself.

The elven Warden can also say that the Chantry invaded the Dales because the elves wouldn't convert.

There's more than simply the Orlesian version to the fall of the Dales, no matter how much the Chantry supporters in this thread detest it.

The dwarf and human warden can say that too, because it's just a random piece of dialogue that allows the player to express an opinion. The idea that protagonist dialogue options somehow count as evidence at all - in any case ad any way - is silIy. 

In case you haven't noticed it after months (years?) of advocating and defending genocide and ethnic cleansing as a moral policy imperative, LobselVith8 is silly.

To put it extremely nicely.

[Lotion Soronarr]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

Yet researched by people (genitivi amongst others) by people who have in the past and future had no problem calling out the Chantry and the rest of Thedas when they had been doing wrong. It is all in the detail, and the fact that the Dalish refuses to even accept part of the blame for the war, simply serves to prove how utterly useless it is.

Lets not forget the Dalish account is not written. It's passed down orally, as a story.
A book, once written, remains unchanged for generations to come.
Stories passing from man to man, tend to change with each telling. A single word change or a change of tone can also change the whole meaning.
And this is absolutely true. Make up a story, tell it to one of your friends and let it circle around among people. When it gets back to you it will NOT be the exact same story.

[TTTX]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

A book, once written, remains unchanged for generations to come.

True, but just because it's written doesn't mean it's true or hasn't been added or erazsed some of the facts to suit a certain need.
Like if the Templars annulled a circle out of fear or on the orders of the chantry  even though the circle wasn't a threat, I can imagine they probably isn't going to writ in a book they made a mistake.

A book is only as truthfull as the author and if the facts/evidence support the claims it makes. Just saying:whistle: 

[Lotion Soronarr]

Xilizhra wrote...

The land was stolen, their ancestral claim means jack****. The only problem is the suffering that would be caused to the current population; the land isn't theirs, but hurting them isn't the objective. What might work as a compromise if the Dales are necessary to retake is to put them under elven political dominance and see whether the humans want to continue living there.

Who's land is it? Who decides ownership?
Claims are subjective, but only the strength to enfore the claim matters.

Appealing to emotion (It was the elves land before!) is meaningless.
Entire generations of humans were born and lived on that land. It is all they know. They love it as much as the old dalish did. To them it IS their land, and they rightfully think so. Because what makes a person think that? Living their for generations.

Trough history, lands have changed ownership. "But X lived here before", while sounding attractive, it not a method that can solve disputes. It's not "fair" either. Plus, tryingto apply it in places like europe, would lead to a global clusterf****.

[ianvillan]

BlueMagitek wrote...

cjones91 wrote...

It's funny how they think the Chantry's version is complete and utter gospel while ignoring Orlais' reputation of invading other countries.

Not so much utter gospel, but it doesn't make sense for a country still in recovery from the damage dealt by the Second Blight (Orlais) to purposefully antagonize a nation that had sat out the Second Blight (and was therefore more or less pristine). 

Orlais' reputation of invasion went along the lines of "Oh, you need help in a blight? Sure thing!" and then not leaving.

It does if your country needs the land and feels threatened by the Heathen Elves who don't follow your religion, and you know that you have the ability to call an exulted march to bring in lots of reinforcements from across Thedas to help you. 

[ianvillan]

In Exile wrote...

ianvillan wrote...

A new Elven homeland in the Dales that welcomes all the mages from Thedas and guaranteeing them freedom and a voice would be a force to be reckoned with especially if they could also make treaty's with Feralden and other nations.

So after the elves forcibly eject every human from the Dales they ... invite every human mage back? To be equal participants in a political system made up of humans and elves? If the goal is a secular human-elf state in the Dales, there's no need for an actual conflict. And if the Dales are taken by force through the horrific massacres of the humans living there, the idea that human mages would want to live there - or even that the elves would let them live there as something other than second class citizens - is pretty ridiculous. 

Who says the Elves are the ones to forcibly eject every human from the dales they could in a treaty with Orlais get the dales back and make it Orlais responsibility to remove the humans who are there.

Do you believe that the Chantry and Orlais will just let all the mages and Elves peacefully set up a new state in the Dales without there being a conflict.

You seem to believe the Elves will go on a murderous rampage killing all Humans, but as others have said the Elves would know it would be foolish to try to commit genocide on the Humans, Plus if the Dales want the city Elves to join them they must also listen to them and I doubt a lot of city Elves will be up for that.

The Elves don't view mages as cursed or walking abominations the Dalish Elves actually respect mages and put them in a position of leadership, the Elves also believe that magic is the cure to give them back their immortality so would be willing to have more mages to help them find their lost heritage.

[EmperorSahlertz]

TTTX wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

A book, once written, remains unchanged for generations to come.

True, but just because it's written doesn't mean it's true or hasn't been added or erazsed some of the facts to suit a certain need.
Like if the Templars annulled a circle out of fear or on the orders of the chantry  even though the circle wasn't a threat, I can imagine they probably isn't going to writ in a book they made a mistake.

A book is only as truthfull as the author and if the facts/evidence support the claims it makes. Just saying:whistle: 

Of course. Which is something you have to take into consideration, when you analyze your historical sources.
Taking such measures, we can conclude, that the Dalish entry is utterly worthless as a historical source, since it glosses over details, skips entire decades of history and leaves out major important parts.
When we analyze the human entry, we have to take into consideration the human bias. But taking apart the entry word for word, it does seem that the entry actually acknowledge a shared guilt, or even admits that what started the war, is a grey area. It also offers way more historical context, which help adds a world view of the era it happened in. Lastly it is also just a small part of a larger work, the rest of book would presumably handle the rest of the events with more detail.
So while the human entry is not the naked truth, it does offer an obviously more truthful take on the series of events that lead to the fall of the Dales.

[ianvillan]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

TTTX wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

A book, once written, remains unchanged for generations to come.

True, but just because it's written doesn't mean it's true or hasn't been added or erazsed some of the facts to suit a certain need.
Like if the Templars annulled a circle out of fear or on the orders of the chantry  even though the circle wasn't a threat, I can imagine they probably isn't going to writ in a book they made a mistake.

A book is only as truthfull as the author and if the facts/evidence support the claims it makes. Just saying:whistle: 

Of course. Which is something you have to take into consideration, when you analyze your historical sources.
Taking such measures, we can conclude, that the Dalish entry is utterly worthless as a historical source, since it glosses over details, skips entire decades of history and leaves out major important parts.
When we analyze the human entry, we have to take into consideration the human bias. But taking apart the entry word for word, it does seem that the entry actually acknowledge a shared guilt, or even admits that what started the war, is a grey area. It also offers way more historical context, which help adds a world view of the era it happened in. Lastly it is also just a small part of a larger work, the rest of book would presumably handle the rest of the events with more detail.
So while the human entry is not the naked truth, it does offer an obviously more truthful take on the series of events that lead to the fall of the Dales.

Historical context that was written by them and any opposing historical context from the loosing side was destroyed by the victors, so the only historical context you have is the one they want you to have that follows their view of what happened.

[EmperorSahlertz]

At which parts do you claim the human entry to be either incorrect or outright lying? Which parts exactly is it that you doubt?

[TTTX]

Just to return back to topic.

The events of Asunder was basically the last drop in a cop that already was full.

The war already underway since extremist on both sides (Chantry, Templars, Seekers of truth and Mages) wants the other side dead or enslaved and Kirkwall just make things go quicker.

[ianvillan]

EmperorSahlertz wrote...

At which parts do you claim the human entry to be either incorrect or outright lying? Which parts exactly is it that you doubt?

How the Chantry version say they tried to go into the Elven lands for trade and discourse but no mention of them trying to send missionaries even thought the whole chantry faith is based on the maker only returning if there is no worship of false gods. They say the Elves became isolationist and guarded their borders with jealousy, and how the Elves captured Humans and sacrificed them to there gods. (the same things they say about Tevinter to get their exulted march against them).

They say how the Elves attacked a defenceless city of red crossing which caused the chantry to declare an exulted march, no word of boarder disputes or rising tensions and small skirmishes, just that the Elves did an attack on defenceless Humans.

Take in to account the written information from the chantry about the city elves. It starts of by talking about the holy exulted march on the dales that resulted in the dissolution of the elven kingdom, not destruction or the wiping out of elven history and culture just a dissolution.

Then it goes on to say how the divine declared that all lands loyal to the chantry must take give the elves refuge in its walls and this wasa testament to the chantrys charity considering the atrocity the elves committed at red crossing. 

It says how some elves refused the chantrys goodwill and banded together in hatred of humans and to this day still terrorise humans who stray too close to camp yet most elves saw it wisest to stay under Human protection.

It then goes on to say that they took the elves into there city's and tried to integrate them how they invited them into their homes and gave them jobs as servants and farm hands. how most have proven to be productive members of society but a small segment remains dissatisfied and these trouble makers and malcontents roam the streets and cause mayhem and rebelling against authority.

So it is how the chantry was innocent and did no wrong and in there charity took the elves who were the only ones to commit atrocities and gave them places to live and a job as servants but they are still not happy.

These two were written by the same person so how can you say the first account is neutral when the second shows bias against the elves and sees the chantry as doing no wrong.

[LobselVith8]

In Exile wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

The elven Warden can also say that the Chantry invaded the Dales because the elves wouldn't convert.

There's more than simply the Orlesian version to the fall of the Dales, no matter how much the Chantry supporters in this thread detest it.

The dwarf and human warden can say that too, because it's just a random piece of dialogue that allows the player to express an opinion. The idea that protagonist dialogue options somehow count as evidence at all - in any case ad any way - is silIy. 

Neither one comments on the Dales but the elven Warden; their comments can focus on not following the Maker or wanting a blessing. You also missed the point - again. My retort was that blaming the Chantry for invading the Dales is an in-game perspective, contradicting the claim that only the Orlesian version exists.

[Lotion Soronarr]

TTTX wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

A book, once written, remains unchanged for generations to come.

True, but just because it's written doesn't mean it's true or hasn't been added or erazsed some of the facts to suit a certain need.
Like if the Templars annulled a circle out of fear or on the orders of the chantry  even though the circle wasn't a threat, I can imagine they probably isn't going to writ in a book they made a mistake.
A book is only as truthfull as the author and if the facts/evidence support the claims it makes. Just saying:whistle: 

True, but the book is harder to change (especially if you have the original) and ins't prone to such fast tonal changes as passing down information orally.

Also Genitivi seemed pretty dedicated to research and truth.

[TTTX]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

True, but the book is harder to change (especially if you have the original) and ins't prone to such fast tonal changes as passing down information orally.

Also Genitivi seemed pretty dedicated to research and truth.

True.

Of course finding the truth is pretty hard to find out since Orlais (or at least some Orlaisiens) and perhaps some members of the Chantry doesn't want the truth to come out and probably made books disappear the concerens the truth about the fall of the Dales.
Because I really doubt it has happened as Orlais and the Chantry claims.

And Genitivi could also writ a book without having all the facts (which probably have been written by the victors, Orlais and Chantry.)

but unless we see some sort of movie or a game that happens when the Dales fell we have no way of knowing how or why the Dales fell.

[ianvillan]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

TTTX wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

A book, once written, remains unchanged for generations to come.

True, but just because it's written doesn't mean it's true or hasn't been added or erazsed some of the facts to suit a certain need.
Like if the Templars annulled a circle out of fear or on the orders of the chantry  even though the circle wasn't a threat, I can imagine they probably isn't going to writ in a book they made a mistake.
A book is only as truthfull as the author and if the facts/evidence support the claims it makes. Just saying:whistle: 

True, but the book is harder to change (especially if you have the original) and ins't prone to such fast tonal changes as passing down information orally.

Also Genitivi seemed pretty dedicated to research and truth.

You are right in what your saying and I do believe brother Genitivi genuinely wants to write the truth but he can only research what is available to him  and what was written before has no guarantee of being true.

[LobselVith8]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

In case you haven't noticed it after months (years?) of advocating and defending genocide and ethnic cleansing as a moral policy imperative, LobselVith8 is silly. 

To put it extremely nicely. 

I don't support genocide; I abhor the Right of Annulment, actually. I support mage autonomy from a religious organization that gave templars dominion over mages by divine right and vilified mages as religious instruction; I condemn slavery.

'Ethnic cleansing' seems to be the buzzword for people who want to vilify the concept of the elves getting back their homeland from the Orlesian Empire; a restored homeland where elven men, women, and children won't be killed in purges en mass, since real cleansings happen in the Alienages across the continent. Elves are seen as less than people by Andrastians (via Duncan), and they are limited to roles of servitude, being confined to impoverished areas of destitution; a homeland can give them do much more than centuries of human oppression ever allowed.

I don't think it's silly to overthrow the Orlesian Empire from the Dales and give the elves a place where they can freely follow their religion, and be something more than slaves or servants to humans.

[cjones91]

I wonder how strong a Mage-Elven alliance would be?Both groups were mistreated by the Chantry so I can see them teaming up with the Inquisitor if the player decided to work against the Chantry.

[BlueMagitek]

ianvillan wrote...

BlueMagitek wrote...

cjones91 wrote...

It's funny how they think the Chantry's version is complete and utter gospel while ignoring Orlais' reputation of invading other countries.

Not so much utter gospel, but it doesn't make sense for a country still in recovery from the damage dealt by the Second Blight (Orlais) to purposefully antagonize a nation that had sat out the Second Blight (and was therefore more or less pristine). 

Orlais' reputation of invasion went along the lines of "Oh, you need help in a blight? Sure thing!" and then not leaving.

It does if your country needs the land and feels threatened by the Heathen Elves who don't follow your religion, and you know that you have the ability to call an exulted march to bring in lots of reinforcements from across Thedas to help you. 

You're making all sorts of assumptions, sweetie.  Where was it stated that Orlais needed land or felt threatened by the Dales on the matter of religion?

Now, an Exalted March was called after the Capitol was sacked (as that was more or less the Vatican City of the Chantry), but that was after the war was in full swing, not a reason for it.

[ianvillan]

cjones91 wrote...

I wonder how strong a Mage-Elven alliance would be?Both groups were mistreated by the Chantry so I can see them teaming up with the Inquisitor if the player decided to work against the Chantry.

Both groups want freedom to be themselves away from persecution both can teach each other lots about magic. The Elves were the main reason the Qunari were driven off so it show there strength witch if given a homeland can make them even more determined to fight. Then have some treatise with the Dwarves for Lyrium and other non military assistance, they could then go for separate treatise with Ferelden and Rivain etc. An alliance between both groups could make a strong faction that Orlais and the Chantry will be hesitant to attack.

[ianvillan]

BlueMagitek wrote...

ianvillan wrote...

BlueMagitek wrote...

cjones91 wrote...

It's funny how they think the Chantry's version is complete and utter gospel while ignoring Orlais' reputation of invading other countries.

Not so much utter gospel, but it doesn't make sense for a country still in recovery from the damage dealt by the Second Blight (Orlais) to purposefully antagonize a nation that had sat out the Second Blight (and was therefore more or less pristine). 

Orlais' reputation of invasion went along the lines of "Oh, you need help in a blight? Sure thing!" and then not leaving.

It does if your country needs the land and feels threatened by the Heathen Elves who don't follow your religion, and you know that you have the ability to call an exulted march to bring in lots of reinforcements from across Thedas to help you. 

You're making all sorts of assumptions, sweetie.  Where was it stated that Orlais needed land or felt threatened by the Dales on the matter of religion?

Now, an Exalted March was called after the Capitol was sacked (as that was more or less the Vatican City of the Chantry), but that was after the war was in full swing, not a reason for it.

Most of the Chantry history states that it was called after the elves attacked Red Crossing no mention of it being the Elves sacking the capital and Orlais being in danger of being defeted. Now It is assumption on my part but is it not possible that after the second blight had damaged Orlais that causing a war with the Elves who Orlais made sure everyone knew never helped in the blight and are different to Humans and viewed as a newish Tevinter could get an Exulted march called witch would gain Orlais new land and even get financial monies poring into Orlais from the other Chantry nation which Orlais could use to rebuild. 

[The Elder King]

Am I the only one who thinks that the dalish might not be that willing on ally with the mages, or even worse letting human mages stay in their lands? The magisters were the ones who destroyed the the first elven homeland and enslaved their race. While magister =/= human mages, I'd still be wary of mages. The fact that the dalish/elven plot seems to be related directly to the OCW and not the M-TW might mean that the dalish choose to be neutral.

[Reaverwind]

hhh89 wrote...

Am I the only one who thinks that the dalish might not be that willing on ally with the mages, or even worse letting human mages stay in their lands? The magisters were the ones who destroyed the the first elven homeland and enslaved their race. While magister =/= human mages, I'd still be wary of mages. The fact that the dalish/elven plot seems to be related directly to the OCW and not the M-TW might mean that the dalish choose to be neutral.

Nope. The Dalish have proven to be islolationists. It also occurs to me that the heart of the conflict between the Dales and Orlais goes back further than some think. I couldn't help but notice where it's located and wonder if Maferath hadn't given away land he had no right to give. While it wasn't heavily populated, there were other people there first.

[Rolling Flame]

ianvillan wrote...

A new Elven homeland in the Dales that welcomes all the mages from Thedas and guaranteeing them freedom and a voice would be a force to be reckoned with especially if they could also make treaty's with Feralden and other nations.

It would be strong, yes, but given the views of Thedas on both mages and the Dalish, it would be hated. I can't see such a nation being able to form alliances with any other, with the possible exception of Ferelden.

[BlueMagitek]

ianvillan wrote...

Most of the Chantry history states that it was called after the elves attacked Red Crossing no mention of it being the Elves sacking the capital and Orlais being in danger of being defeted. Now It is assumption on my part but is it not possible that after the second blight had damaged Orlais that causing a war with the Elves who Orlais made sure everyone knew never helped in the blight and are different to Humans and viewed as a newish Tevinter could get an Exulted march called witch would gain Orlais new land and even get financial monies poring into Orlais from the other Chantry nation which Orlais could use to rebuild. 

http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Dales

After the sacking of the Capital.

And it wasn't necessary for Orlais to spread information, the Second Blight lasted almosted a century.  Everyone knew how unhelpful the Dalish were.

You're assuming that, after 90 years of a war against an enemy that literally taints everything it touches, with about an eighty year rest period in between, Orlais, still licking its wounds, is going to start a fight against the Dales, for the purpose of getting their kingdom sacked so other countries, some of whom are most likely not taking kindly to the Chantry's missionaries themselves, are going to all join together to help rebuild Orlais.

That is worthy of a conspiracy theorist, but it takes far, far too many leaps of faith to consider as something viable.

[ianvillan]

hhh89 wrote...

Am I the only one who thinks that the dalish might not be that willing on ally with the mages, or even worse letting human mages stay in their lands? The magisters were the ones who destroyed the the first elven homeland and enslaved their race. While magister =/= human mages, I'd still be wary of mages. The fact that the dalish/elven plot seems to be related directly to the OCW and not the M-TW might mean that the dalish choose to be neutral.

You probably are right in what you say and the chances are very thin that both sides would even want too, but if it is a chance for both groups to get the freedom they want then they seem to be likely the only groups who would work with each other and have a chance of getting along.