2497 réponses à ce sujet

[Bleachrude]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...


The people who hate this the most are pro-mages, because it destroys their "evil chantry uses lyrium just to control tempalrs" theory.

I think this is WHY it was retconned. The problem I think is that Bioware wanted the Chantry to be seen in both a positive AND a negative light. 

It gets ignored but we MEET the two extremes in DA:O. The "mages dominate the mundanes" angle from the Tevinters and the "mages are beasts that must be collared" angle in the quanari.

The Chantry is SUPPOSED to be the neutral position in this debate but Bioware honestly underestimated how much anti-Catholic church its audience is AND the fact that the audience doesn't actually have a good understanding of how sucky medieval life was and the positive (yes I said positve) influence the church had on a typical medieval peasant

Thus, anything that displays the chantry in a bad light gets seen as "horribly evil". and I assume this is why there's this contradiction. Now, if you WANT to actually explain the lore discrepancy, I would suggest that the stronger templar talents in DA2 require lyrium whereas the weaker ones in DA:O don't. I think the consensus was the templar talents in DALO were shall we say weak even when fighting mages (ESPECIALLY compared to mana clash) whereas the templar talents in DA2 actually seem to give a justification for how templars are so good in shutting down mages.

As an aside, Even to this day, I find it weird that people so honestly dismiss what Fenris describes Tevinter as, yet Anders word is taken as gospel. People still seem to think the effect of Tevinter is exaggerated but it gets discounted pretty much in all these debates (yet the evils of the Chantry always gets mentioned).

[Silfren]

Bleachrude wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...


The people who hate this the most are pro-mages, because it destroys their "evil chantry uses lyrium just to control tempalrs" theory.

I think this is WHY it was retconned. The problem I think is that Bioware wanted the Chantry to be seen in both a positive AND a negative light. 

It gets ignored but we MEET the two extremes in DA:O. The "mages dominate the mundanes" angle from the Tevinters and the "mages are beasts that must be collared" angle in the quanari.

The Chantry is SUPPOSED to be the neutral position in this debate but Bioware honestly underestimated how much anti-Catholic church its audience is AND the fact that the audience doesn't actually have a good understanding of how sucky medieval life was and the positive (yes I said positve) influence the church had on a typical medieval peasant

Thus, anything that displays the chantry in a bad light gets seen as "horribly evil". and I assume this is why there's this contradiction. Now, if you WANT to actually explain the lore discrepancy, I would suggest that the stronger templar talents in DA2 require lyrium whereas the weaker ones in DA:O don't. I think the consensus was the templar talents in DALO were shall we say weak even when fighting mages (ESPECIALLY compared to mana clash) whereas the templar talents in DA2 actually seem to give a justification for how templars are so good in shutting down mages.

As an aside, Even to this day, I find it weird that people so honestly dismiss what Fenris describes Tevinter as, yet Anders word is taken as gospel. People still seem to think the effect of Tevinter is exaggerated but it gets discounted pretty much in all these debates (yet the evils of the Chantry always gets mentioned).

I seriously doubt that's the reason it was retconned.  The change was made fairly early on, iirc. 

Nor do I think people's arguments against the Chantry can be dismissed as little more than bias against a real world organization.  Such bias is NOT necessary to distrust or even hate the Chantry, it's own lore-based practices are sufficient, and pretending they don't exist is pointless, because those things ARE part of the lore.  

Going further, I wouldn't say the Chantry is supposed to be the neutral position; I can't believe the writers would create such an organization, which has been the body creating and enforcing mage-centric laws all along, and which is powerful enough that other nations in Thedas are forced to cooperate with it, and somehow believe that they are writing this as the neutral body.

The closest group we have to a neutral body in Thedas is in fact the Grey Wardens, and even they tend not to live up to their own claimed standards that well.

Modifié par Silfren, 18 octobre 2013 - 02:38 .

[Xilizhra]

As an aside, Even to this day, I find it weird that people so honestly dismiss what Fenris describes Tevinter as, yet Anders word is taken as gospel. People still seem to think the effect of Tevinter is exaggerated but it gets discounted pretty much in all these debates (yet the evils of the Chantry always gets mentioned).

Because Tevinter is presented as being evil to a frankly comical level, far more blatantly and stupidly than any other faction. Even the templars. The anti-magocracy bias is rather surprising given that Gaider mentioned wanting to give the templar side legitimacy, and that's just as extreme.

[Wulfram]

Tevinter is presented as ludicrously over the top evil in DA2, probably a reaction to people's tendency to idealise it as a home for free mages after DA:O. It's also mostly seen through the eyes of Fenris, which makes it easy enough to write it off as an unreliable narrator - not that he's lying, but that the experience of the personal slave of someone like Danarius isn't necessarily representative.

It'll be interesting to see what happens if we get the Good Tevinter Magister that was in the leaked survey. He might end up being a lot more convincing a critic of Tevinter society than Fenris was.

Most of the things alleged by Anders to be wrong with the Templars/Chantry are pretty much experienced in the games, the dispute isn't whether these things are happening but whether they're necessary or justified

[dragonflight288]

Also, some of us would prefer to go to Tevinter and see it how works as a society beyond hearsay.

I have no doubt that Fenris is telling the truth, but his opinion is rather biased.

Take a real-life city. A person's opinion of that city may change based on what part of it they live in. Upper middleclass people may find it perfectly acceptable. Taxes aren't too high, property values are good, they have good neighbors, they live in a relatively low crime-rate area. Their view of that city would be more positive compared to a kid who grew up without a father/mother, comes from a dysfunctional family and ended up joining a gang for lack of acceptance anywhere else.

With the Chantry, we have seen plenty of its goods (Chanter's Board helping out people who need it) Charity, templars putting their lives on the line to help refugees (Lothering) or elves (Ser Otto.) But we have also seen the bad, almost all of it centered around the so-called heathens and their treatment of mages.

Are there worse organizations? Yup. Are there better ones, I believe this is true, or at least my Inquisition will be.

The difference between Anders' words and Fenris' is that with Anders, many of his complaints are in the games, seen or made clear to the players, while Fenris's is in a land far away that gamers haven't seen.

Again, I have no doubt he's telling the truth, but I do doubt we are getting [b]all[b/] of it because he simply was never in a position to see the good.

[Medhia Nox]

@dragonflight288: You have met Tevinter citizens though. Magisters actually. Magister slavers actually. Two of them.

To think Tevinter is an evil candy shell with a heart of gold filling.. I dunno, doesn't seem the most likely of events.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 18 octobre 2013 - 03:43 .

[Hellion Rex]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@dragonflight288: You have met Tevinter citizens though. Magisters actually. Magister slavers actually. Two of them.

To think Tevinter is an evil candy shell with a heart of gold filling.. I dunno, doesn't seem the most likely of events.

And of course having met TWO magisters means that we have a perfect view of their whole entire society.

Also, Varric's magister cousin says hello.

Modifié par eluvianix, 18 octobre 2013 - 03:47 .

[dragonflight288]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@dragonflight288: You have met Tevinter citizens though. Magisters actually. Magister slavers actually. Two of them.

To think Tevinter is an evil candy shell with a heart of gold filling.. I dunno, doesn't seem the most likely of events.

We have.

I was thinking meeting a citizen of Tevinter who isn't a mage and isn't a slave, and getting their perspective. That's all.

And I never said Tevinter has a heart of gold, or what have you. I did say that I believe Fenris was telling the truth. All I said, was that I think it would be interesting to see another perspective of Tevinter that isn't "blood magic and slaves."

It's a nation that has existed for thousands of years. It has to have a lot more to it than that. Not all of it will be good, but it can't all be magic and slavery.

[Hellion Rex]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

@dragonflight288: You have met Tevinter citizens though. Magisters actually. Magister slavers actually. Two of them.

To think Tevinter is an evil candy shell with a heart of gold filling.. I dunno, doesn't seem the most likely of events.

We have.

I was thinking meeting a citizen of Tevinter who isn't a mage and isn't a slave, and getting their perspective. That's all.

And I never said Tevinter has a heart of gold, or what have you. I did say that I believe Fenris was telling the truth. All I said, was that I think it would be interesting to see another perspective of Tevinter that isn't "blood magic and slaves."

It's a nation that has existed for thousands of years. It has to have a lot more to it than that. Not all of it will be good, but it can't all be magic and slavery.

And not all magisters are slavers either. Varric's cousin Mae didn't strike me as the type to be a big slaver.

[Medhia Nox]

You don't have to be a slaver to own slaves.

The citizens of Rome weren't all slobbering horribeasts.... nor were the plantation owners of the American south (or any other slave owner).

I wasn't really saying that it was proof of any sort - but, if you're "just a slave owner" and not a slaver - and you treat your slaves well, maybe even educate them, and certainly NOT sacrifice them for your blood magic (you do that with the "lesser" slaves) - does that make you "good" though?

It's a nation that practices slavery as policy... also human sacrifice. And not because they genuinely believe it keeps the sun rising in the morning.

Just because maybe they have excellent hospitals for "real" Tevinter citizens - or wonderful education where mages get to live free - or food for everyone... doesn't really erase those "other" things does it?

I'm not making statements about what Tevinter is... or isn't. Not telling anyone they're wrong - or that I'm right.

Just asking questions.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 18 octobre 2013 - 03:55 .

[Maria Caliban]

dragonflight288 wrote...

I have no doubt that Fenris is telling the truth, but his opinion is rather biased.

I doubt his opinion is more biased than anyone else's.

That said, yes, if you asked a slave living in ancient Rome, medieval North Africa, or pre-Abolition Americas what life is like, you could very likely hear horror stories. Slaves tend to see the worst a society offers.

Wulfram wrote...

Tevinter is presented as ludicrously over the top evil in DA2...

I'd say the problem is that players have no problem accepting some injustices and so act like they don't exist. Darktown and below is stuffed with poor, sick, and hungry people who have no way to escape their situation while the rest of Kirkwall is perfectly happy to let them live in squalor and misery.

This is presented as 'sad' but never an indication that Kirkwall is evil.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 18 octobre 2013 - 04:23 .

[dragonflight288]

Maria Caliban wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

I have no doubt that Fenris is telling the truth, but his opinion is rather biased.

I doubt his opinion is more biased than anyone else's.

That said, yes, if you asked a slave living in ancient Rome, medieval North Africa, or pre-Abolition Americas what life is like, you could very likely hear horror stories. Slaves tend to see the worst a society offers.

That's what I meant. I think it would be fascinating to talk to someone from Tevinter who is neither a slave nor a mage, and maybe runs a successful business or something. A person who can experience many aspects of Tevinter society, but isn't one of the elite mages or a slave.

For example...what does the average person in Tevinter do in the free-time? Are there theaters and plays to attend, or does Tevinter do as ancient Rome did with gladiator arenas? What sort of doctrine does the Black Chantry live by, outside of its interpretation of magic serving? Do they have their own charities or chanter boards or whatever? What do their scholars write?

We don't have knowledge on any of these things. Only first or second hand accounts on the actions of the magisters themselves, and how they are in a state of constant war with the Qunari.

[Star fury]

Bleachrude wrote...
Thus, anything that displays the chantry in a bad light gets seen as "horribly evil". and I assume this is why there's this contradiction. Now, if you WANT to actually explain the lore discrepancy, I would suggest that the stronger templar talents in DA2 require lyrium whereas the weaker ones in DA:O don't. I think the consensus was the templar talents in DALO were shall we say weak even when fighting mages (ESPECIALLY compared to mana clash) whereas the templar talents in DA2 actually seem to give a justification for how templars are so good in shutting down mages.

Sorry but it's plain wrong. Holy smite is a nightmare for any mage character on insanity. Go to the Tower of Magi with a high level character and templars will ensure quick death.

[Xilizhra]

Morocco Mole wrote...

Because Tevinter is presented as being evil to a frankly comical level, far more blatantly and stupidly than any other faction. Even the templars.

Ah yes. The templars who are portrayed as evil, maniacal rapists in DA2.

There's like two who fit that description that we actually get to meet.

[Senya]

Wow... Xil treating Templars fairly... I was going to post the same thing. If only I could rep people on here.

[Xilizhra]

almostinsane99 wrote...

Wow... Xil treating Templars fairly... I was going to post the same thing. If only I could rep people on here.

The fun thing is that templars don't have to be personally fiendish to be on the wrong side and supporting a malevolent system.

[LobselVith8]

Bleachrude wrote...

The Chantry is SUPPOSED to be the neutral position in this debate but Bioware honestly underestimated how much anti-Catholic church its audience is AND the fact that the audience doesn't actually have a good understanding of how sucky medieval life was and the positive (yes I said positve) influence the church had on a typical medieval peasant

The Chantry controls the templars and the Circles; it isn't neutral. I'm also not sure why you conflate Catholicism with a fictional religion that some people despise because it engages in monstrous and deplorable behavior against elves and mages.

Bleachrude wrote...

As an aside, Even to this day, I find it weird that people so honestly dismiss what Fenris describes Tevinter as, yet Anders word is taken as gospel. People still seem to think the effect of Tevinter is exaggerated but it gets discounted pretty much in all these debates (yet the evils of the Chantry always gets mentioned). 

I think people assume there's simply more to Tevinter society, but I doubt anyone dismisses the brutality of Danarius, or people like him, as well as the enslavement of mages and non-mages in the Imperium.

[Gwydden]

LobselVith8 wrote...

The Chantry controls the templars and the Circles; it isn't neutral. I'm also not sure why you conflate Catholicism with a fictional religion that some people despise because it engages in monstrous and deplorable behavior against elves and mages.

I'd say the Chantry has done little to mages and nothing to elves. I am curious as to where did you draw these conclusions from.

[Hellion Rex]

Gwydden wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

The Chantry controls the templars and the Circles; it isn't neutral. I'm also not sure why you conflate Catholicism with a fictional religion that some people despise because it engages in monstrous and deplorable behavior against elves and mages.

I'd say the Chantry has done little to mages and nothing to elves. I am curious as to where did you draw these conclusions from.

As for the elves bit, I think Lobsel is referring specifically to the Exalted March on the Dales. 

Edit: As for the mages bit, I am of the mind that the Chantry has allowed some very zealous people to remain in control of Templar Order, which in turn has affected the mages negatively.

Modifié par eluvianix, 18 octobre 2013 - 05:26 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

The people who hate this the most are pro-mages, because it destroys their "evil chantry uses lyrium just to control tempalrs" theory.

The mechanism of their oppression does not change the fact that they are oppressors.

[Gwydden]

eluvianix wrote...

As for the elves bit, I think Lobsel is referring specifically to the Exalted March on the Dales. 

Ancient history. I would insist it is arguable whether the Chantry should be blamed for that, but I don't even want to get into the dalish versus human accounts debate again.

As for the mages, we already know the templars don't always do what the Chantry says.

Modifié par Gwydden, 18 octobre 2013 - 05:28 .

[LobselVith8]

Gwydden wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

The Chantry controls the templars and the Circles; it isn't neutral. I'm also not sure why you conflate Catholicism with a fictional religion that some people despise because it engages in monstrous and deplorable behavior against elves and mages. 

I'd say the Chantry has done little to mages and nothing to elves. I am curious as to where did you draw these conclusions from. 

The Chantry controlled Circles that existed for nearly a millennia prove otherwise, which are condemned by some as slavery, and have lead to suicide, escapes, murders, rapes, genocides, and rebellions. The Chantry is responsible for spreading it's anti-mage gospel to the people, and instructing their templars that they have dominion over mages by "divine right".

As for the elves, their treatment as being distant from the Maker, corralling them in ghettos, and the vilification of the Dalish as heathens (as well threatening them to convert and having their templars hunt them down), illustrates why I strongly disagree with your assessment. Also, Dalish history teaching that the war with the Chantry started when templars invaded after the elves kicked out human missionaries. Whether you believe it or not, there's history between the Chantry and the People.

[Hellion Rex]

Gwydden wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

As for the elves bit, I think Lobsel is referring specifically to the Exalted March on the Dales. 

Ancient history. I would insist it is arguable whether the Chantry should be blamed for that, but I don't even want to get into the dalish versus human accounts debate again.

As for the mages, we already know the templars don't always do what the Chantry says.

For the elves bit, yes, I agree. It is ancient history, and bringing it up now is going to cause another BSN shootout. 
And for the mages, I used the word "some" because I know that the Templar Order itslef is not the problem. It is just a few of the ones in power that I take issue with.

[Xilizhra]

Gwydden wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

As for the elves bit, I think Lobsel is referring specifically to the Exalted March on the Dales. 

Ancient history. I would insist it is arguable whether the Chantry should be blamed for that, but I don't even want to get into the dalish versus human accounts debate again.

As for the mages, we already know the templars don't always do what the Chantry says.

I don't think stealing something a long time ago makes what you stole not be stolen, if you're still keeping it.