2497 réponses à ce sujet

[Cainhurst Crow]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

You mean the elves didn't aid an expansionist empire that threatened their life and religious freedom.

And the Dales fought an enemy they claim invaded their kingdom, and started a war. 

Actually the elves convinently never state why they took human settlements like red crossing. They claim that because they expelled the tempalrs and missionaries did orlias declared war on them. All fine and good, but they took red crossing before orlais ever declared war on them in the first place. 

Retaliation against an enemy that was invading their kingdom with templars, and fighting a war for victory - to make sure their enemy wasn't in a position to threaten them again. I'm not certain why you think this is some sort of unfathomable mystery. 

Again, the dalish do not mention an army invading their land. They say missionaries came to their land escorted by templars, and that they expelled them and that then the orlais declared war on them.

They never mention being attacked outside of that instance, and don't mention red crossing or taking human settlements.

[cjones91]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

almostinsane99 wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

The elven Warden and Dalish history claim the war started when the Dales was invaded by templars. Claiming the Dales was expansionist is a bit ludicrous when no historian makes that claim.

Actually, human historians make that claim or at least imply it. The Dalish don't, of course. But that's only natural in both cases. 

The Chantry version claims the attack on Red Crossing was unprovoked, not that the elves were an expansionist enemy. The Chantry condemned the elves for keeping humans out of their borders, while bringing up 'rumors' of human sacrifices (which seem to contradict each other).

It's not like the dalish have any explination as to why they took the lands anyway. In fact I'm willing to bet the dalish version doesn't even mention them taking any human land or them sacking val royeaux.

They whitewash their history harder than any other people, because they have the most to lose from looking wrong in their actions when it comes to dealing with, what was the term they used, filthy shemlens?

So does the Chantry.....in fact they have a history of covering things up when it makes them look bad like with what happend in Rivain,Shartan being excluded frm their teachings and so on.

[LobselVith8]

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

You mean the elves didn't aid an expansionist empire that threatened their life and religious freedom. 

They intentionally let an entire city full of innocent humans die at the hands of darkspawn during a Blight. Orlais was not their enemy at the time, and never explicitly tried to expand into their territory at the time, especially while Zazikel was terrorizing Thedas.

No, the elves simply didn't aid an enemy that threatened them since Drakon's reign. That's it. 

Blaming them for the actions of the darkspawn is an exaggeration. All the human nations of nothing while Orzammar fights the darkspawn in the Deep Roads, but I don't see you crediting them with the deaths of the dwarves who perish while the human nations don't aid one of the last two Great Thaigs that remain.

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

There's a difference between conquering nations to expand your empire, and retaliating against an enemy that invaded your sovereign nation.

I still see no reason to think the templars were sent to the Dales before the war. Do you think that if the elves did attack first, then the Fall of the Dales would be justified? 

I see no reason to ignore that the Dalish codex and the elven Warden (even one from the Denerim Alienage or the Circle of Ferelden) provide a conflicting narrative to the one provided by the Chantry. It's really as simple as that.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 18 octobre 2013 - 11:22 .

[Senya]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

You mean the elves didn't aid an expansionist empire that threatened their life and religious freedom.

And the Dales fought an enemy they claim invaded their kingdom, and started a war. 

Actually the elves convinently never state why they took human settlements like red crossing. They claim that because they expelled the tempalrs and missionaries did orlias declared war on them. All fine and good, but they took red crossing before orlais ever declared war on them in the first place. 

Retaliation against an enemy that was invading their kingdom with templars, and fighting a war for victory - to make sure their enemy wasn't in a position to threaten them again. I'm not certain why you think this is some sort of unfathomable mystery. 

So they say. Cjones is right. We don't know for sure what happened. We only know of the points that aren't in conflict:

1. The Elves refusing to aid in the Second Blight
2. The Elves doing well in the war and besieging the capital of Orlais
3. Inferring from point 2, the war was not a defensive campaign for the Elves until the their offensive was broken.

Edit:

There is also Drakon's profile on the wiki: http://dragonage.wik...dillus_Drakon_I

It says nothing of him threatening the Dales. It only says that the elves were unhelpful and neutral. (In a Blight!)

Modifié par almostinsane99, 18 octobre 2013 - 11:30 .

[Cainhurst Crow]

cjones91 wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

cjones91 wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Seems like someone's been listening to one too many of sarel's fairytales. The dalish began to expand after the second blight by taking the town of red crossing, than Montsimmard, than set their sights on Val Royeaux. It could be understandable why they did it, seeing as how tensions between the two sides had been mounting, but the dalish never the less began a campaign of expansion even if to try and make some form of point that the orlesians decided to opposed. Originally it was just the dales vs orlesians, but when the other nations saw their ally from the second blight being threatened by the ****s who sat by and did nothing against the darkspawn, they decided to help their ally and the dalish lost.

The elven Warden and Dalish history claim the war started when the Dales was invaded by templars. Claiming the Dales was expansionist is a bit ludicrous when no historian makes that claim.

Except all the historians of thedas claim the dalish attacking red crossing and took montsimmard, along with sacking val royeaux. Everyone but the dalish who don't even seem to aknowledge the incidents of their victories, only the part where they lost.

LobselVith8 wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

They are the losers of a war they started, and they are paying the price. Using your logic, tevinter has every right to invade thedas and take over agian, since they rightly shed their blood winning and defending those territories in the first place only for a cult to rise up and take it all away. 

I don't think it's the same when reclaiming the kingdom of the Dales can give the elves the only sanctuary in all of Thedas for them to be safe from purges, templars, intolerant Andrastian humans, and provide the elves with a homeland where they have religious freedom.

What makes the dales any safer than any other part of thedas? If anything they're now all in one single location, which menas everyone knows where to find them and can coordinate to beseige them if they should find the need to.

Except some of the historians were Chantry scholars and so you have to take into account biases when they write down their version of events.

And the dalish scholars somehow have no bias in regards to dalish histroy?

Of course not,that's why I said wait until there are other sources from unbiased groups before throwing blame around.

There are no other sources, this isn't a recent event, it happened hundreds of years ago and all involved are already long since dead. Unless you intend to raise their spirits from beyond the veil and question them, than the chantry scholars or dalish accounts are all there is to go on.

[LobselVith8]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Retaliation against an enemy that was invading their kingdom with templars, and fighting a war for victory - to make sure their enemy wasn't in a position to threaten them again. I'm not certain why you think this is some sort of unfathomable mystery. 

Again, the dalish do not mention an army invading their land. They say missionaries came to their land escorted by templars, and that they expelled them and that then the orlais declared war on them.

The elven Warden can mention the Dales was invaded by the Chantry because the elves wouldn't convert, while the Dalish account references templars invading their kingdom after the elves kicked out the missionaries of the Chantry. As much as the Chantry and templar supporters may hate it, there's more than the Chantry side of the story.

Darth Brotarian wrote...

They never mention being attacked outside of that instance, and don't mention red crossing or taking human settlements. 

Retaliating against an incursion of templars, and taking territory to cripple a centuries old enemy that invaded their sovereign nation.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

Montismmard was a "nearby city" that the elves in the Dales did nothing to save as it burned. In fact the Ages page on the wiki even mentions it was an elven army that had gathered and just watched as the city was sacked.

I figured it was similar to that scene early in the Hobbit where the elven army shows up to do nothing for the dwarves of Erebor, except worse because the darkspawn were determined to kill everyone in Montsimmard not just swim in their giant caverns of gold.

I don't think the Dalish codex entry should be ignored. I think you're interpreting it wrong. All it says is that the Chantry sent templars. Not that they were sent in first  to spark conflict in the first place. If anything it sounds like they were directly responsible for the Fall of the Dales.

Modifié par Jedi Master of Orion, 18 octobre 2013 - 11:40 .

[Senya]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Retaliation against an enemy that was invading their kingdom with templars, and fighting a war for victory - to make sure their enemy wasn't in a position to threaten them again. I'm not certain why you think this is some sort of unfathomable mystery.

Again, the dalish do not mention an army invading their land. They say missionaries came to their land escorted by templars, and that they expelled them and that then the orlais declared war on them.

The elven Warden can mention the Dales was invaded by the Chantry because the elves wouldn't convert, while the Dalish account references templars invading their kingdom after the elves kicked out the missionaries of the Chantry. As much as the Chantry and templar supporters may hate it, there's more than the Chantry side of the story.

Darth Brotarian wrote...

They never mention being attacked outside of that instance, and don't mention red crossing or taking human settlements.

Retaliating against an incursion of templars, and taking territory to cripple a centuries old enemy that invaded their sovereign nation.

There is also more than the Dalish version too. And the Chantry version is written down. {smilie}

Just because the Dalish say it happened like you said doesn't mean it did. See above for the points that aren't denied by the Elven entry.

[Cainhurst Crow]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...

Retaliation against an enemy that was invading their kingdom with templars, and fighting a war for victory - to make sure their enemy wasn't in a position to threaten them again. I'm not certain why you think this is some sort of unfathomable mystery. 

Again, the dalish do not mention an army invading their land. They say missionaries came to their land escorted by templars, and that they expelled them and that then the orlais declared war on them.

The elven Warden can mention the Dales was invaded by the Chantry because the elves wouldn't convert, while the Dalish account references templars invading their kingdom after the elves kicked out the missionaries of the Chantry. As much as the Chantry and templar supporters may hate it, there's more than the Chantry side of the story.

Darth Brotarian wrote...

They never mention being attacked outside of that instance, and don't mention red crossing or taking human settlements. 

Retaliating against an incursion of templars, and taking territory to cripple a centuries old enemy that invaded their sovereign nation.

So again, why do the dalish ignore their part in forcibly conquering human territory in military campaigns?

Modifié par Darth Brotarian, 18 octobre 2013 - 11:34 .

[LobselVith8]

almostinsane99 wrote...

So they say. Cjones is right. We don't know for sure what happened. We only know of the points that aren't in conflict:

1. The Elves refusing to aid in the Second Blight
2. The Elves doing well in the war and besieging the capital of Orlais
3. Inferring from point 2, the war was not a defensive campaign for the Elves until the their offensive was broken.

It inferred nothing of the kind. Refusing to aid an expansionist empire and victories against the Chantry and Orlais doesn't discredit the Dalish historical account.

almostinsane99 wrote...

There is also Drakon's profile on the wiki: http://dragonage.wik...dillus_Drakon_I

It says nothing of him threatening the Dales. It only says that the elves were unhelpful and neutral. (In a Blight!)

Humanity is often unhelpful in a Blight, and the nations need to be coerced into helping. Also, Drakon conquered his neighbors in a series of Exalted Marches, and his attempt to conquer the Free Marches was prevented due to the issues with the Dales.

[LobselVith8]

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

Montismmard was a "nearby city" that the elves in the Dales did nothing to save as it burned. In fact the Ages page on the wiki even mentions it was an elven army that had gathered and just watched as the city was sacked.

I figured it was similar to that scene early in the Hobbit where the elven army shows up to do nothing for the dwarves of Erebor, except worse because the darkspawn were determined to kill everyone in Montsimmard not just swim in their giant caverns of gold.

I don't think the Dalish codex entry should be ignored. I think you're interpreting it wrong.

Considering the elven Warden explicitly says otherwise, I don't see the point in your insistence on acting as though only the Chantry version of the fall of the Dales has any merit.

[BlueMagitek]

cjones91 wrote...
So does the Chantry.....in fact they have a history of covering things up when it makes them look bad like with what happend in Rivain,Shartan being excluded frm their teachings and so on.

Given that two Sisters are more than happy to discuss him on the street, they aren't covering up Shartan, just removing his verses from the Chant of Light.

[LobselVith8]

almostinsane99 wrote...


There is also more than the Dalish version too. And the Chantry version is written down. {smilie}

The Dalish write down their lore and history as well. 

almostinsane99 wrote...

Just because the Dalish say it happened like you said doesn't mean it did. See above for the points that aren't denied by the Elven entry.

Just because you favor the Chantry doesn't mean your opinion discredits the Dalish version.

[MisterJB]

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...
I figured it was similar to that scene early in the Hobbit where the elven army shows up to do nothing for the dwarves of Erebor, except worse because the darkspawn were determined to kill everyone in Montsimmard not just swim in their giant caverns of gold.

When the darkspawn gain the upper hand, the living envy the dead.
Thankfully, Drakon saved the city.

Modifié par MisterJB, 18 octobre 2013 - 11:42 .

[Jedi Master of Orion]

The elven warden's opinion has no special authority. You're inferring too much from one line in the codex that says the Chantry sent templars. All it says is that they were sent. It doesn't say they sent them in first and sparked the war in the first place. If anything, from the context of paragraph, it implies the Templars were directly responsible for the Fall of the Dales and exile of the elves.

[Senya]

LobselVith8 wrote...

almostinsane99 wrote...


There is also more than the Dalish version too. And the Chantry version is written down. {smilie}

The Dalish write down their lore and history as well. 

almostinsane99 wrote...

Just because the Dalish say it happened like you said doesn't mean it did. See above for the points that aren't denied by the Elven entry.

Just because you favor the Chantry doesn't mean your opinion discredits the Dalish version.

The same can be said to you. And I've seen many of the Dalish codexes. The Dales, for example, is inscribed "as told by Gisharel, keeper of the Ralaferin clan of the Dalish elves". That along with the storyteller in Origins seems to point to a culture that is more oral storytelling when it comes to history than writing down firsthand accounts.

Modifié par almostinsane99, 19 octobre 2013 - 12:07 .

[Bleachrude]

BlueMagitek wrote...

cjones91 wrote...
So does the Chantry.....in fact they have a history of covering things up when it makes them look bad like with what happend in Rivain,Shartan being excluded frm their teachings and so on.

Given that two Sisters are more than happy to discuss him on the street, they aren't covering up Shartan, just removing his verses from the Chant of Light.

Nobody in the Chantry seems to be covering up Shartan OR Maferath for that matter. I think people are equating "no longer part of the Chant" with "cover-up" but nowhere in the game do we have even the SLIGHTEST indication of that.

Not sure WHY people keep euating the two given the game goes out of its way to tell you otherwise.

[Shadow Fox]

Lobs you keep pointing out that the Dalish Warden can say the Chantry was sorely at fault like it means something while ignoring that the Warden even Elven Wardens can also state the Dalish shared the blame for what happened.

[Br3admax]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

Lobs you keep pointing out that the Dalish Warden can say the Chantry was sorely at fault like it means something while ignoring that the Warden even Elven Wardens can also state the Dalish shared the blame for what happened.

Those Warden's are obviously indoctrinated and evil, even if they lived solely among the Dalish. The Chantry got to them in the few months between the Origin and Ostagar. Obviously. 

[Shadow Fox]

Br3ad wrote...

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

Lobs you keep pointing out that the Dalish Warden can say the Chantry was sorely at fault like it means something while ignoring that the Warden even Elven Wardens can also state the Dalish shared the blame for what happened.

Those Warden's are obviously indoctrinated and evil, even if they lived solely among the Dalish. The Chantry got to them in the few months between the Origin and Ostagar. Obviously. 

Even Dwarves underground?!?:blink:Damn those guys are good.

[Thrillian]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

Lobs you keep pointing out that the Dalish Warden can say the Chantry was sorely at fault like it means something while ignoring that the Warden even Elven Wardens can also state the Dalish shared the blame for what happened.

Yes, I very recently played the Dalish origin (after having played it years ago) and noticed that the character can state that the war did not go entirely according to (name esapes me, the storyteller elf).  Honestly, perhaps if I had played through the Dalish elf's origin before any other, I would feel more of a kinship and sympathy toward them, but I did not.  I initially played through as a human and found the Dalish to be unecessarily antagonistic towards my character.  Understandably this could be because of my characters ignorance to the history between the Dalish and humans, but I still felt them hostile beyond degree. 

Even during the Dalish origin you are offered the opportunity to slaughter some humans without any player knowledge of the history between elves and humans.

Anyhow, I can honestly say that while I did initially feel some empathy for the Elven point of view, I am sad to say that after becoming a member of the BSN and reading of many of the militant views of the Dalish supporters, my view has been soured and I feel less for them than originally.

[Br3admax]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

Lobs you keep pointing out that the Dalish Warden can say the Chantry was sorely at fault like it means something while ignoring that the Warden even Elven Wardens can also state the Dalish shared the blame for what happened.

Those Warden's are obviously indoctrinated and evil, even if they lived solely among the Dalish. The Chantry got to them in the few months between the Origin and Ostagar. Obviously. 

Even Dwarves underground?!?:blink:Damn those guys are good.

You should've known when you saw that priest. It's like an infection. 

[LobselVith8]

almostinsane99 wrote...

The same can be said to you.

Pointing out that there's more than the Chantry version to the fall of the Dales is what I did. It's more than a little ludicrous at how far Chantry supporters will go to try to act as though there's only the Chantry version to the fall of the Dales.

almostinsane99 wrote...

And I've seen many of the Dalish codexes. The Dales, for example, is inscribed "as told by Gisharel, keeper of the Ralaferin clan of the Dalish elves". That along with the storyteller in Origins seems to point to a culture that is more oral storytelling when it comes to history than writing down firsthand accounts. 

The Dalish tell stories about their history and have written accounts about their gods, their history, and their lore. Even WoT has Gisharel has an author. Merrill even researched lore on the Eluvian when she was constructing an Eluvian - it's not as though the Dalish only have oral history.

[Shadow Fox]

Thrillho_82 wrote...

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

Lobs you keep pointing out that the Dalish Warden can say the Chantry was sorely at fault like it means something while ignoring that the Warden even Elven Wardens can also state the Dalish shared the blame for what happened.

Yes, I very recently played the Dalish origin (after having played it years ago) and noticed that the character can state that the war did not go entirely according to (name esapes me, the storyteller elf).  Honestly, perhaps if I had played through the Dalish elf's origin before any other, I would feel more of a kinship and sympathy toward them, but I did not.  I initially played through as a human and found the Dalish to be unecessarily antagonistic towards my character.  Understandably this could be because of my characters ignorance to the history between the Dalish and humans, but I still felt them hostile beyond degree. 

Even during the Dalish origin you are offered the opportunity to slaughter some humans without any player knowledge of the history between elves and humans.

Anyhow, I can honestly say that while I did initially feel some empathy for the Elven point of view, I am sad to say that after becoming a member of the BSN and reading of many of the militant views of the Dalish supporters, my view has been soured and I feel less for them than originally.

Dalish aren't the only Elves;)

#CityElf4life<3

[LobselVith8]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

Lobs you keep pointing out that the Dalish Warden can say the Chantry was sorely at fault like it means something while ignoring that the Warden even Elven Wardens can also state the Dalish shared the blame for what happened.

You don't seem to have even read my posts. I pointed out that the elven Warden can condemn the Chantry for invading the Dales because the elves wouldn't convert. Despite the attempts by some pro-Chantry posters to act as though only the Chantry version exists, that simply isn't true.