1420 réponses à ce sujet

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

dragonflight288 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Don't forget that this is supposed to only be the worst case scenario. If there's any known alternative to Annulment, it's supposed to be tried.

Give Meredith a medal then, for trying to search the gallows before ordering the Annulment....wait, she didn't. Oh, how about that Seeker in Rivain who found out mages were in contact with their families, it isn't like he went...straight to the Chantry and requested an Annulment take place. Wait, he did.

Hmmm....how many other annulments happened because of such slipshod reasoning as those two examples had, I wonder....the lore doesn't make that clear.

C'mon dragonflight we know that seeing their families isn't the only reason the FE gave for why the Seekers annulled the circle. Plus i doubt the Rivaini Chantry would've been reliable.

It isn't the only reason, but it is the main one stated in World of Thedas, since it's highly unlikely the local chantry and templars didn't know about the traditions still being practiced among the Seers, a practice strongly supported by the non-mages as well as the mages of that country.

I am under the impression that the local Chantry was hand-in-glove with those practices in exchange for the Seers providing any aid said priests demanded.

[dragonflight288]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Don't forget that this is supposed to only be the worst case scenario. If there's any known alternative to Annulment, it's supposed to be tried.

Give Meredith a medal then, for trying to search the gallows before ordering the Annulment....wait, she didn't. Oh, how about that Seeker in Rivain who found out mages were in contact with their families, it isn't like he went...straight to the Chantry and requested an Annulment take place. Wait, he did.

Hmmm....how many other annulments happened because of such slipshod reasoning as those two examples had, I wonder....the lore doesn't make that clear.

C'mon dragonflight we know that seeing their families isn't the only reason the FE gave for why the Seekers annulled the circle. Plus i doubt the Rivaini Chantry would've been reliable.

It isn't the only reason, but it is the main one stated in World of Thedas, since it's highly unlikely the local chantry and templars didn't know about the traditions still being practiced among the Seers, a practice strongly supported by the non-mages as well as the mages of that country.

I am under the impression that the local Chantry was hand-in-glove with those practices in exchange for the Seers providing any aid said priests demanded.

Until a Seeker came by, called foul, and bypassed the chain-of-command for invoking a Right of Annulment.

[wright1978]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Here's my answer to the OP's question:

Because it is. It is actually no more or less "corrupt" than any other organization concerned with political power, and like other organizations it uses what it deems necessary to ensure its continued power and sovereignity of interpretation of magic and magical events, but as a religious organization people hold it to higher standards.

I think what people don't like is the hypocrisy. If the Grey Wardens use questionable means to achieve their goals, you may or may not like it, but at least they were always honest about it. Meanwhile, the Chantry presents itself as the force for good while using the same means others do.

I don't really blame them for what they do. They do what they consider necessary, and no organization concerned with power can retain clean hands. They just shouldn't act surprised if I do the same in the name of my preferred faction, and if they act self-righteously horrified, that's the moment to point to the enslavement of mages and the templars' lyrium addiction and the monopoly on the lyrium trade.

Yep agree pretty much with this. I'd just prefer to seaprate the chantry from said political power.

[Jaison1986]

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Don't forget that this is supposed to only be the worst case scenario. If there's any known alternative to Annulment, it's supposed to be tried.

Give Meredith a medal then, for trying to search the gallows before ordering the Annulment....wait, she didn't. Oh, how about that Seeker in Rivain who found out mages were in contact with their families, it isn't like he went...straight to the Chantry and requested an Annulment take place. Wait, he did.

Hmmm....how many other annulments happened because of such slipshod reasoning as those two examples had, I wonder....the lore doesn't make that clear.

C'mon dragonflight we know that seeing their families isn't the only reason the FE gave for why the Seekers annulled the circle. Plus i doubt the Rivaini Chantry would've been reliable.

It isn't the only reason, but it is the main one stated in World of Thedas, since it's highly unlikely the local chantry and templars didn't know about the traditions still being practiced among the Seers, a practice strongly supported by the non-mages as well as the mages of that country.

I am under the impression that the local Chantry was hand-in-glove with those practices in exchange for the Seers providing any aid said priests demanded.

And you know what is the most sad? That system actually worked. The authorities turned an blind eye and gave the mages a lot of freedoms they usually don't have, and in exchange, they help the population without causing trouble.

[Hellion Rex]

dragonflight288 wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Don't forget that this is supposed to only be the worst case scenario. If there's any known alternative to Annulment, it's supposed to be tried.

Give Meredith a medal then, for trying to search the gallows before ordering the Annulment....wait, she didn't. Oh, how about that Seeker in Rivain who found out mages were in contact with their families, it isn't like he went...straight to the Chantry and requested an Annulment take place. Wait, he did.

Hmmm....how many other annulments happened because of such slipshod reasoning as those two examples had, I wonder....the lore doesn't make that clear.

C'mon dragonflight we know that seeing their families isn't the only reason the FE gave for why the Seekers annulled the circle. Plus i doubt the Rivaini Chantry would've been reliable.

It isn't the only reason, but it is the main one stated in World of Thedas, since it's highly unlikely the local chantry and templars didn't know about the traditions still being practiced among the Seers, a practice strongly supported by the non-mages as well as the mages of that country.

I am under the impression that the local Chantry was hand-in-glove with those practices in exchange for the Seers providing any aid said priests demanded.

Until a Seeker came by, called foul, and bypassed the chain-of-command for invoking a Right of Annulment.

At this point, Lambert had already seceded (sp?) from the Chantry though, correct? So was there really any chain of command to follow at this point?

[Hellion Rex]

Jaison1986 wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Don't forget that this is supposed to only be the worst case scenario. If there's any known alternative to Annulment, it's supposed to be tried.

Give Meredith a medal then, for trying to search the gallows before ordering the Annulment....wait, she didn't. Oh, how about that Seeker in Rivain who found out mages were in contact with their families, it isn't like he went...straight to the Chantry and requested an Annulment take place. Wait, he did.

Hmmm....how many other annulments happened because of such slipshod reasoning as those two examples had, I wonder....the lore doesn't make that clear.

C'mon dragonflight we know that seeing their families isn't the only reason the FE gave for why the Seekers annulled the circle. Plus i doubt the Rivaini Chantry would've been reliable.

It isn't the only reason, but it is the main one stated in World of Thedas, since it's highly unlikely the local chantry and templars didn't know about the traditions still being practiced among the Seers, a practice strongly supported by the non-mages as well as the mages of that country.

I am under the impression that the local Chantry was hand-in-glove with those practices in exchange for the Seers providing any aid said priests demanded.

And you know what is the most sad? That system actually worked. The authorities turned an blind eye and gave the mages a lot of freedoms they usually don't have, and in exchange, they help the population without causing trouble.

Agreed. We certainly haven't heard any issues regarding a lot more abominations as a result of this Circle.

[The Hierophant]

dragonflight288 wrote...

The Hierophant wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

Don't forget that this is supposed to only be the worst case scenario. If there's any known alternative to Annulment, it's supposed to be tried.

Give Meredith a medal then, for trying to search the gallows before ordering the Annulment....wait, she didn't. Oh, how about that Seeker in Rivain who found out mages were in contact with their families, it isn't like he went...straight to the Chantry and requested an Annulment take place. Wait, he did.

Hmmm....how many other annulments happened because of such slipshod reasoning as those two examples had, I wonder....the lore doesn't make that clear.

C'mon dragonflight we know that seeing their families isn't the only reason the FE gave for why the Seekers annulled the circle. Plus i doubt the Rivaini Chantry would've been reliable.

It isn't the only reason, but it is the main one stated in World of Thedas, since it's highly unlikely the local chantry and templars didn't know about the traditions still being practiced among the Seers, a practice strongly supported by the non-mages as well as the mages of that country.

They were practicing it on Chantry property, and as representatives of the Chantry it's the Rivaini branch's and Templars's job to enforce their laws in which the practice of Seer is prohibited.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Jaison1986 wrote...

Riverdaleswhiteflash wrote...

dragonflight288 wrote...

It isn't the only reason, but it is the main one stated in World of Thedas, since it's highly unlikely the local chantry and templars didn't know about the traditions still being practiced among the Seers, a practice strongly supported by the non-mages as well as the mages of that country.

I am under the impression that the local Chantry was hand-in-glove with those practices in exchange for the Seers providing any aid said priests demanded.

And you know what is the most sad? That system actually worked. The authorities turned an blind eye and gave the mages a lot of freedoms they usually don't have, and in exchange, they help the population without causing trouble.

Which also raised the possibility of a mage turning abomination in the general populace. This risk is minor enough in a Harrowed mage; Wynne, Ines, and Anders basically had the run of Amaranthine in Awakenings, and while it can't exactly be taken as read that the city is still standing that's not their doing. For that matter any Dalish mage who would even be considered for the rank of Keeper is probably safe, if Velanna's any indication. I still see the value of limited Circles, though, given that there's always some danger and that this is even more true of an apprentice. And when a Circle really goes to hell, I see the logic of an Annulment.

eluvianix wrote...

At this point, Lambert had already seceded (sp?) from the Chantry though, correct? So was there really any chain of command to follow at this point?

Really? I'd thought it was in the opposite order, and the Rivaini circle had been on the minds of the mages as they debated secession.

Modifié par Riverdaleswhiteflash, 22 octobre 2013 - 07:16 .

[MisterJB]

Jaison1986 wrote...
And you know what is the most sad? That system actually worked. The authorities turned an blind eye and gave the mages a lot of freedoms they usually don't have, and in exchange, they help the population without causing trouble.

The authorities were the Seers; The World of Thedas makes it clear Seers rule the more traditional communities of Rivain.
Were there problems? I don't know but I do not think it's possible for any system to be failproof; especially when becoming possessed is part of the curriculum; nor do I think rivaini convert to the Qun for no reason.
But, let's assume that this system actually lessened the number of Abominations. Does that mean the only way to ensure mages don't harm others is to give them positions of authority over non-mages?
Because, I don't think that is acceptable.

[leaguer of one]

wcholcombe wrote...

"Link, info, something please.  This is the first I have heard of Meredith being a plot to control Kirkwall.  I do know about the tyrant and how Meredith came to power, but I haven't seen anything about Orlais controlling kirkwall.  Plus, there was a ruler of Kirkwall in DA2 once the blight ended.  After the blight Meredith was pretty much just concentrating on the mages.  She wasn't running the city."

The ruler of Kirkwall had no real power and was a puppet. Everyone in the story stated Meredith had the real power. Why do you think everyone stated that the templars are the real power in Kirk wall.

"They sacked the Cathedral in Val Royeuax.  That is attacking the Chantry.  Thedas tends to opperate by a might makes right kind of approach and if you start a war and sack the capital city of a country and sack the cathedral for the dominant human religion and than lose said war, you are pretty much at the mercy of the victors.  Hence they have the right to do whatever they want to with your country.  You lost the war."

Please link where it's stated they sacked the Cathedral in Val Royeuax.

"Actually considering the chantry is based in Val Royeaux and their chapel was sacked in the sacking of the city, they were sacked." 
 
Please reread this.
"Wrong, read stone throne. The chantry of have a history of not letting mages fight in the war of nations. In stone throne they made sure that the Fereldin did not have the use of the circle...Byt the invading Orlishians were allowed to use as many mages as they want."

Stone throne takes place in fereldin.

" Yeah, and when people have the powers that mages have, you have to keep a tight leash on them. It has gotten worse lately, but that doesn't make it corrupt."

No one is saying it's wrong to try to control mages but the chantry clearly goes to far with it. The fact that it's allowed to get worse means it's corrupt.

[wcholcombe]

Oh yes, I read stolen throne. I am sorry, but there isn't any reason for the chantry to allow mages to fight to support a rebellion against a country that conquered them.

Were the Orlesians horrible? Sure, but they were also the recognized government of Ferelden. Why on earth would the Chantry allow mages to support a rebellion?

BTW there was also a Chantry Reverend Mother with the camp of outlaws that Logain's father ran. She was there helping them as a member of the chantry.

[leaguer of one]

MisterJB wrote...

Jaison1986 wrote...
And you know what is the most sad? That system actually worked. The authorities turned an blind eye and gave the mages a lot of freedoms they usually don't have, and in exchange, they help the population without causing trouble.

The authorities were the Seers; The World of Thedas makes it clear Seers rule the more traditional communities of Rivain.
Were there problems? I don't know but I do not think it's possible for any system to be failproof; especially when becoming possessed is part of the curriculum; nor do I think rivaini convert to the Qun for no reason.
But, let's assume that this system actually lessened the number of Abominations. Does that mean the only way to ensure mages don't harm others is to give them positions of authority over non-mages?
Because, I don't think that is acceptable.

First you need to reread the details about there culture. Nothing is implied that the seers are in control of governing any one.
Added, if it works for them with out harm why change it?

[Ieldra]

wright1978 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Here's my answer to the OP's question:

Because it is. It is actually no more or less "corrupt" than any other organization concerned with political power, and like other organizations it uses what it deems necessary to ensure its continued power and sovereignity of interpretation of magic and magical events, but as a religious organization people hold it to higher standards.

I think what people don't like is the hypocrisy. If the Grey Wardens use questionable means to achieve their goals, you may or may not like it, but at least they were always honest about it. Meanwhile, the Chantry presents itself as the force for good while using the same means others do.

I don't really blame them for what they do. They do what they consider necessary, and no organization concerned with power can retain clean hands. They just shouldn't act surprised if I do the same in the name of my preferred faction, and if they act self-righteously horrified, that's the moment to point to the enslavement of mages and the templars' lyrium addiction and the monopoly on the lyrium trade.

Yep agree pretty much with this. I'd just prefer to seaprate the chantry from said political power.

You may divest it of some power, but any group - religious or otherwise - will not survive as a group with a defined identity without engaging in politics. There will never be a non-political religious organization. Only groups totally unconcerned with influence beyond their own members can afford to stay out of politics, and sometimes not even those, for instance if they have to defend themselves from public accusations.  

[Trikormadenadon]

wcholcombe wrote...

Trikormadenadon wrote...

wcholcombe wrote...

Trikormadenadon wrote...

cor·rup·tion [kuh-ruhp-shuhn] noun
1. the act of corrupting or state of being corrupt.
2. moral perversion; depravity.
3. perversion of integrity.
4. corrupt or dishonest proceedings.
5. bribery.

The Templars certainly fit into #2 & 3 based on their actions throughout the two games, especially DA2.

The Chantry itself has had many members that fit one or more of the definitions of corruption but the Chantry as a whole may not fit the bill.

2 and 3 aren't rampant among Templars.  You can't say they are being depraved if they are killing apostates if that is what they are trained to do.  Templar behaviour fits with the morals of the time.  You can't look at Thedas with our 21st century world view of right and wrong.  Hell, in Ferelden you can murder people and no one will say anything as long as it doesn't occur in Denerim where the guards are more concerned with just keeping peace than they are enforcing laws.

Right and wrong is not limited by a date stamp. Just becasue a society thinks it is ok to take certain actions does not make those actions right. This is true in real life today, real life 2000 years ago and/or Thedas. If it is right, it is right, if it is wrong, it is wrong. Thus, Templar behaviour fitting with the morals of the time in not relevent to anything. The fact of the matter is that much of what we have been shown as the typical behaviour of Templars fit  #2 & 3 of the definition of corruption. The very concept of the Templars is both a moral perversion and perversion of integrity, as there is no integrity in isloating people based on what they MIGHT do some time in the future. That is basically the same as putting everyone in the world in prison because everyone is capable of murder.

lol sorry let me catch my breath.  You are honestly arguing that right and wrong isn't a Social concept?  Seriously?  The very idea of right and wrong is a social construct.  It is a product of social interaction.  It is why we as humans have a moral idea of right and wrong and wolves killing each other over a recent kill don't.  Seriously?  Right and wrong doesn't have a date stamp.......  2000 years ago, they had a myriad of different ideas of right and wrong dependent upon what culture of the world you found yourself in.  Hell, 50 years ago they had a seriously different idea of right and wrong.  It is seriously pointless to judge the actions of a group or person outside of the context of their time.

Yes you can judge a society and their actions based on their moral values in their time frame compared to the current trend. You can understand why they did what they did, but this does not make their actions right in any sense of the word. It isn't right now, and wasn't right back then. They just didn't know any better. This is why there is an evolution of society, as we strive evermore to be more morally correct. We then look back at previous eras and say "Yeah, I see why they did that, but they were wrong."

[wcholcombe]

And there was also was Wilhelm in the rebel army. A member of the circle of Magi. Who btw didn't live in the circle. This indicates that until recently mages in Thedas enjoyed more freedoms than they do sense the mess in Kirkwall went down.

Wilhelm was married and lived in a town with his wife and daughter. He was by no means a prisoner of the tower.

[leaguer of one]

wcholcombe wrote...

Oh yes, I read stolen throne. I am sorry, but there isn't any reason for the chantry to allow mages to fight to support a rebellion against a country that conquered them.

Were the Orlesians horrible? Sure, but they were also the recognized government of Ferelden. Why on earth would the Chantry allow mages to support a rebellion?

BTW there was also a Chantry Reverend Mother with the camp of outlaws that Logain's father ran. She was there helping them as a member of the chantry.

1. The orlisians were not the reconized government of the people of fereldien. They clearly wanted them out. The fact that the chantry turned there back on ferelden and saw Orlas as the offical government reguardlessto what the ferelden people felt prove that they are currupt. It's a case that they are giving favoritism to the hand that feeds them.

2.Added, the issue here is that they allowed the orlisians to use mages to subjegate the fereldens. They allow Orlais to keep an advantage in that war  out of bias.

3. The fereldens had a right to rebel. They were being invaded.

[Sir DeLoria]

Oh man, these Templar v Mage threads are more extreme than the usual Quarian v Geth fights.

[wcholcombe]

Trikormadenadon wrote...

wcholcombe wrote...

Trikormadenadon wrote...

wcholcombe wrote...

Trikormadenadon wrote...

cor·rup·tion [kuh-ruhp-shuhn] noun
1. the act of corrupting or state of being corrupt.
2. moral perversion; depravity.
3. perversion of integrity.
4. corrupt or dishonest proceedings.
5. bribery.

The Templars certainly fit into #2 & 3 based on their actions throughout the two games, especially DA2.

The Chantry itself has had many members that fit one or more of the definitions of corruption but the Chantry as a whole may not fit the bill.

2 and 3 aren't rampant among Templars.  You can't say they are being depraved if they are killing apostates if that is what they are trained to do.  Templar behaviour fits with the morals of the time.  You can't look at Thedas with our 21st century world view of right and wrong.  Hell, in Ferelden you can murder people and no one will say anything as long as it doesn't occur in Denerim where the guards are more concerned with just keeping peace than they are enforcing laws.

Right and wrong is not limited by a date stamp. Just becasue a society thinks it is ok to take certain actions does not make those actions right. This is true in real life today, real life 2000 years ago and/or Thedas. If it is right, it is right, if it is wrong, it is wrong. Thus, Templar behaviour fitting with the morals of the time in not relevent to anything. The fact of the matter is that much of what we have been shown as the typical behaviour of Templars fit  #2 & 3 of the definition of corruption. The very concept of the Templars is both a moral perversion and perversion of integrity, as there is no integrity in isloating people based on what they MIGHT do some time in the future. That is basically the same as putting everyone in the world in prison because everyone is capable of murder.

lol sorry let me catch my breath.  You are honestly arguing that right and wrong isn't a Social concept?  Seriously?  The very idea of right and wrong is a social construct.  It is a product of social interaction.  It is why we as humans have a moral idea of right and wrong and wolves killing each other over a recent kill don't.  Seriously?  Right and wrong doesn't have a date stamp.......  2000 years ago, they had a myriad of different ideas of right and wrong dependent upon what culture of the world you found yourself in.  Hell, 50 years ago they had a seriously different idea of right and wrong.  It is seriously pointless to judge the actions of a group or person outside of the context of their time.

Yes you can judge a society and their actions based on their moral values in their time frame compared to the current trend. You can understand why they did what they did, but this does not make their actions right in any sense of the word. It isn't right now, and wasn't right back then. They just didn't know any better. This is why there is an evolution of society, as we strive evermore to be more morally correct. We then look back at previous eras and say "Yeah, I see why they did that, but they were wrong."

Dude, right and wrong is a social convention. It isn't something written in stone.  If someone did something that was right by the beliefs and attitudes of the time, you can't say it was wrong because we have a different belief system today. 

[Vilegrim]

wcholcombe wrote...

Jedi Master of Orion wrote...

I don't think the bribe to get into the city was something that ever reached Meredith's level. Most people probably consider her corrupt because the Kirkwall Circle was being filled with increasing abuses at various levels and she was overstepping her bounds of Templar authority by influencing how the city was ruled.

As for the Chantry as a whole, I suspect a lot of people prefer to think of powerful organized religion as the bad guys. Especially with things like the Circle Mages or any of the human rights problems the Andrastian nations have.

True but that is more being a dictator or hard liner, it isn't actually being corrupt.  The mages aren't being put in the circle in order to increase the power of the Chantry or of the Divine.

Meredith was being a fascist dictator in many ways, but she wasn't being corrupt.

having the only  mages locked up to rent out gives a lot of power.  Just a thought.

[leaguer of one]

wcholcombe wrote...

And there was also was Wilhelm in the rebel army. A member of the circle of Magi. Who btw didn't live in the circle. This indicates that until recently mages in Thedas enjoyed more freedoms than they do sense the mess in Kirkwall went down.

Wilhelm was married and lived in a town with his wife and daughter. He was by no means a prisoner of the tower.

Wilhelm was a court mage who disobayed what the chantry decread. After the war he was untouchable because of is support by the king and givernement of fereldin. They can't call him an apostate, any other mage that left they could...Added, the orlisian also could of pressered the chantry to annual the ferelden circle if the circle sided with there country.

[wcholcombe]

leaguer of one wrote...

wcholcombe wrote...

Oh yes, I read stolen throne. I am sorry, but there isn't any reason for the chantry to allow mages to fight to support a rebellion against a country that conquered them.

Were the Orlesians horrible? Sure, but they were also the recognized government of Ferelden. Why on earth would the Chantry allow mages to support a rebellion?

BTW there was also a Chantry Reverend Mother with the camp of outlaws that Logain's father ran. She was there helping them as a member of the chantry.

1. The orlisians were not the reconized government of the people of fereldien. They clearly wanted them out. The fact that the chantry turned there back on ferelden and saw Orlas as the offical government reguardlessto what the ferelden people felt prove that they are currupt. It's a case that they are giving favoritism to the hand that feeds them. Orlais was the recognized ruler by all the other countries in Thedas.  Ferelden was conquered.  It isn't the Chantry's responsibility to make sure the Ferelden's are governed by who they want after they lost a war.

2.Added, the issue here is that they allowed the orlisians to use mages to subjegate the fereldens. They allow Orlais to keep an advantage in that war  out of bias. Wilhelm was with the rebels along with Shale.  Wilhelm is  circle mage and Shale is technically property of the circle.  The mages used may have been acting on their own just like Wilhelm.  

3. The fereldens had a right to rebel. They were being invaded.  No they were conquered.

[leaguer of one]

Necanor wrote...

Oh man, these Templar v Mage threads are more extreme than the usual Quarian v Geth fights.

The Quarian v Geth were stupid because both Quarianand  Geth were right and wrong and the people arguing did not see that. The only ones at fault were only the leaders of the Quarians.

[leaguer of one]

wcholcombe wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

wcholcombe wrote...

Oh yes, I read stolen throne. I am sorry, but there isn't any reason for the chantry to allow mages to fight to support a rebellion against a country that conquered them.

Were the Orlesians horrible? Sure, but they were also the recognized government of Ferelden. Why on earth would the Chantry allow mages to support a rebellion?

BTW there was also a Chantry Reverend Mother with the camp of outlaws that Logain's father ran. She was there helping them as a member of the chantry.

1. The orlisians were not the reconized government of the people of fereldien. They clearly wanted them out. The fact that the chantry turned there back on ferelden and saw Orlas as the offical government reguardlessto what the ferelden people felt prove that they are currupt. It's a case that they are giving favoritism to the hand that feeds them. Orlais was the recognized ruler by all the other countries in Thedas.  Ferelden was conquered.  It isn't the Chantry's responsibility to make sure the Ferelden's are governed by who they want after they lost a war.

2.Added, the issue here is that they allowed the orlisians to use mages to subjegate the fereldens. They allow Orlais to keep an advantage in that war  out of bias. Wilhelm was with the rebels along with Shale.  Wilhelm is  circle mage and Shale is technically property of the circle.  The mages used may have been acting on their own just like Wilhelm.  

3. The fereldens had a right to rebel. They were being invaded.  No they were conquered.

1." Orlais was the recognized ruler by all the other countries in Thedas.  Ferelden was conquered.  It isn't the Chantry's responsibility to make sure the Ferelden's are governed by who they want after they lost a war."
That does nto matter. The ruler is decided by there people not the other countries of thedus. If the people call foul then it's foul. That still does not justify  allowing Orlais to use mages in there inavation.

2."Wilhelm was with the rebels along with Shale.  Wilhelm is  circle mage and Shale is technically property of the circle.  The mages used may have been acting on their own just like Wilhelm.  "
If the mages acted on there own and gave support to ferelden the orlais would of pressered the chantry to have the ferelden circle annuled. Even the book states this.


3.  "No they were conquered."
That does not mean thay had no right to rebel. That's like saying slave have no right to fight for their freedom.

Modifié par leaguer of one, 22 octobre 2013 - 08:08 .

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

wcholcombe wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

wcholcombe wrote...

Oh yes, I read stolen throne. I am sorry, but there isn't any reason for the chantry to allow mages to fight to support a rebellion against a country that conquered them.

Were the Orlesians horrible? Sure, but they were also the recognized government of Ferelden. Why on earth would the Chantry allow mages to support a rebellion?

BTW there was also a Chantry Reverend Mother with the camp of outlaws that Logain's father ran. She was there helping them as a member of the chantry.

1. The orlisians were not the reconized government of the people of fereldien. They clearly wanted them out. The fact that the chantry turned there back on ferelden and saw Orlas as the offical government reguardlessto what the ferelden people felt prove that they are currupt. It's a case that they are giving favoritism to the hand that feeds them. Orlais was the recognized ruler by all the other countries in Thedas.  Ferelden was conquered.  It isn't the Chantry's responsibility to make sure the Ferelden's are governed by who they want after they lost a war.

2.Added, the issue here is that they allowed the orlisians to use mages to subjegate the fereldens. They allow Orlais to keep an advantage in that war  out of bias. Wilhelm was with the rebels along with Shale.  Wilhelm is  circle mage and Shale is technically property of the circle.  The mages used may have been acting on their own just like Wilhelm.  

3. The fereldens had a right to rebel. They were being invaded.  No they were conquered.

There are usually Circle mages on both sides, I thought. So that neither takes a dim view of the Circle. As for the rest of it, what you have to understand is that the Chantry and the Orlesian government have a cozy relationship. The Chantry represents the Orlesian government as appointed by the Maker, pretty much no matter what.

[Sir DeLoria]

leaguer of one wrote...

Necanor wrote...

Oh man, these Templar v Mage threads are more extreme than the usual Quarian v Geth fights.

The Quarian v Geth were stupid because both Quarianand  Geth were right and wrong and the people arguing did not see that. The only ones at fault were only the leaders of the Quarians.

Isn't that the same situation as here? Two sides of moral ambiguity, each with good points on their behalf.