208 réponses à ce sujet

[Nefla]

I believe the Chantry's version, even more after the Legacy DLC. I can also understand why the maker would turn his back on his creations after they became so evil as to slaughter slaves by the thousands in order to kill the maker and steal his city.

[zMataxa]

Angrywolves wrote...

Some people would be accused of heresy for saying the Maker abandoned Thedas.

__________________

Now THAT would be a great subplot for the inquisition!
The whole heresy exploration - with each side being wrong and right at times.
Maybe that's what David Gaider is working on this weekend with the Uberplot (based on latest Twitterupdate thread).

[Plaintiff]

Inflicting untold horror on all the humans, elves, dwarves and qunari of the world as 'punishment' for the actions of a few individuals from one species is totally reasonable and not insane.

Modifié par Plaintiff, 01 décembre 2013 - 04:59 .

[Plaintiff]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

At the very least, a parent who abandons their children is grossly negligent and should be punished. Certainly they don't deserve to be respected.

Certainly.

I fail to see how that applies.

The people of Thedas are the Maker's "children", their dogma says as much. It's a common sentiment expressed by many religions, actually. But according to the Chantry's text, the Maker abused his children horribly for the brief time that he was supposedly present in their lives, and then he abandoned them.

He made the spirits before he made mankind and he abandoned them too, not because they did anything wrong, but essentially because he was disappointed in their lack of imagination.

So, yeah. The Maker, like most 'gods', is an awful being. If a mortal creature behaved the same way, he'd be unquestionably condemned for it. I don't see why the deity of any religion, fictional or otherwise, should be excused. After all, according to most religions, gods are also responsible for creating the codes of conduct to which all peoples are supposed to adhere. If they break their own rules, why should anyone listen to them?

Modifié par Plaintiff, 01 décembre 2013 - 05:21 .

[Vincent Laww]

I don't believe the Maker needs a definitive form. Also if the Maker was revealed that would go against Dragon Age's preference for subtlety. The Maker isn't necessarily evil; he inflicted a horrible malady of those that transgressed into his sanctum. Exceptional sentient beings emerge to counter these problems. They undertake a test and if they're successful the sentient races will improve from undergoing such a trialing and harrowing set of occurrences.

[zMataxa]

Vincent Laww wrote...

I don't believe the Maker needs a definitive form. Also if the Maker was revealed that would go against Dragon Age's preference for subtlety.

_________________

I agree.  I would prefer more inneundo to set imaginations and theories afire with enough tangible this and that to make us all question who the maker really is. 
Though if we make it to DA#6 or 7 I may be able to accept a dramatic conclusion.

[Plaintiff]

Vincent Laww wrote...

I don't believe the Maker needs a definitive form. Also if the Maker was revealed that would go against Dragon Age's preference for subtlety. The Maker isn't necessarily evil; he inflicted a horrible malady of those that transgressed into his sanctum. Exceptional sentient beings emerge to counter these problems. They undertake a test and if they're successful the sentient races will improve from undergoing such a trialing and harrowing set of occurrences.

If one of your children misbehaved, would you deliberately infect them with a hantavirus, completely disregarding the health of your other children, telling them to think of it as a "harrowing test" that would improve your family as a whole?

[Cainhurst Crow]

Plaintiff wrote...

Vincent Laww wrote...

I don't believe the Maker needs a definitive form. Also if the Maker was revealed that would go against Dragon Age's preference for subtlety. The Maker isn't necessarily evil; he inflicted a horrible malady of those that transgressed into his sanctum. Exceptional sentient beings emerge to counter these problems. They undertake a test and if they're successful the sentient races will improve from undergoing such a trialing and harrowing set of occurrences.

If one of your children misbehaved, would you deliberately infect them with a hantavirus, completely disregarding the health of your other children, telling them to think of it as a "harrowing test" that would improve your family as a whole?

Aizen would, and aizen would be correct in the survivors being stronger genetically, therefore aizen is the maker.

[Plaintiff]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

The people of Thedas are the Maker's "children", their dogma says as much. It's a common sentiment expressed by many religions, actually. But according to the Chantry's text, the Maker abused his children horribly for the brief time that he was supposedly present in their lives, and then he abandoned them.

He made the spirits before he made mankind and he abandoned them too, not because they did anything wrong, but essentially because he was disappointed in their lack of imagination.

So, yeah. The Maker, like most 'gods', is an awful being. If a mortal creature behaved the same way, he'd be unquestionably condemned for it. I don't see why the deity of any religion, fictional or otherwise, should be excused. After all, according to most religions, gods are also responsible for creating the codes of conduct to which all peoples are supposed to adhere. If they break their own rules, why should anyone listen to them?

The people of Thedas are most assuredly the Maker's children.

However, the people of Thedas are most assuredly not children. Your equivalency is not equivalent.

It's okay to abuse your children when they become adults?

[Afro_Explosion]

@ Plaintiff You want to sue the maker for child support?

[Cainhurst Crow]

mx_keep13 wrote...

@ Plaintiff You want to sue the maker for child support?

Let's add alimony while we're at it. 

Modifié par Darth Brotarian, 01 décembre 2013 - 05:44 .

[Plaintiff]

mx_keep13 wrote...

@ Plaintiff You want to sue the maker for child support?

I doubt that the Maker is real.

What I am saying is that if the Chantry's conception of the Maker is accurate, then he's definitely malevolent, no question. It's not a secret at all. The god depicted in the Chant of Light is a petty, vindictive, grossly irresponsible being.

Why anyone would think such a creature deserving of praise or worship is utterly baffling.

[AresKeith]

Plaintiff wrote...

Inflicting untold horror on all the humans, elves, dwarves and qunari of the world as 'punishment' for the actions of a few individuals from one species is totally reasonable and not insane.

>implying all evidence points to the Maker starting the Blight

[Cainhurst Crow]

Plaintiff wrote...

mx_keep13 wrote...

@ Plaintiff You want to sue the maker for child support?

I doubt that the Maker is real.

What I am saying is that if the Chantry's conception of the Maker is accurate, then he's definitely malevolent, no question. It's not a secret at all. The god depicted in the Chant of Light is a petty, vindictive, grossly irresponsible being.

Why anyone would think such a creature deserving of praise or worship is utterly baffling.

Show them a flash of the old zanpakuto and boom, instant worship.

[Plaintiff]

AresKeith wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Inflicting untold horror on all the humans, elves, dwarves and qunari of the world as 'punishment' for the actions of a few individuals from one species is totally reasonable and not insane.

>implying all evidence points to the Maker starting the Blight

I'm not implying anything of the kind. I don't believe there is a Maker. I'm specifically pointing out the kind of deity the Chantry is asking people to worship.

[Cainhurst Crow]

They should just welcome aizen as their god and get it over with already. He who controls all 5 of a persons senses controls reality itself.

[Lebanese Dude]

Plaintiff wrote...

Why anyone would think such a creature deserving of praise or worship is utterly baffling.

Deities like the Maker are believed to have a hand in one's afterlife and eternal salvation.

At least that's what they say.

It's a powerful motive to ignore the deity's wrathful nature.

Modifié par Lebdood, 01 décembre 2013 - 06:05 .

[Plaintiff]

Lebdood wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Why anyone would think such a creature deserving of praise or worship is utterly baffling.

Deities like the Maker are believed to have a hand in one's afterlife and eternal salvation.

At least that's what they say.

Well, that's where the incongruity lies.

"Here's a list of all the terrible things the Maker did to people who didn't deserve it! Now wouldn't you like to spend eternity by his side, singing his praises?"

"Um, no. **** off."

Modifié par Plaintiff, 01 décembre 2013 - 06:07 .

[Cainhurst Crow]

"Well that's the benefit of bad things happening to them, and to us. It's always easier when things don't happen to us, and always happens to them." - Average Thedasian

Us being the faithful, and them being everyone else, just so there's an understanding of terms.

[Nohvarr]

I’ve read a few fantasy novels where the deity is benevolent but prevented from helping. In one case the deity was able to create the world with the aid of a brother, but the deal was the brother would later be allowed to destroy the world…a deal the benevolent deity then went back on, and more or less sacrificed itself to contain it’s twin and allow the world to continue. In another, the big bad of the series straight up killed said deity, but only after he was able to leave behind clues to aid it’s people in preventing the destruction of their world, encouraging them to find champions to oppose said dark monstrosity, something about the dark god having to play by certain rules.

Anyways, something I noticed in the legacy DLC was that Corphyeus mentions invading the makers city, but that it was already black when they got there. Which makes me think that ‘the children’ of the maker essentially got caught in a supernatural crossfire between ‘the old gods’ and ‘the maker’. I like this interpretation because it implies that the ‘old gods’ used the Tevinter mages to inflict pain upon there enemy.

Maker: Why did you do that? Now they will carry the taint back to Thedas and cause untold suffering!

Old gods: Because you can do nothing to help them so long as we attack you, because it will cause you pain to see them suffer so, and that pain my distract you enough to ensure our victory.

Of course, as with so many things in DA, that’s just one possible interpretation.

[Silcron]

I don't want him to be malevolant. In a book in DA:O, in the library in the dwarf city if I remember correctly, was argued that Andraste was just one of the most powerful mages of history. There was no maker performing miracles but a mage that was either insane or acting to create a cult around her.

I love the irony of all the chantry people, including the templars adoring a mage and being as we know not exactly friendly towards them.

But being honest I don't think they'll ever reveal it, they'll just leave clues to all these interpretations, which is fine by me.

[Vincent Laww]

The Maker is most likely some kind of omnipotent being which has experimented with creating sentient beings. Whether or not he approves of his creations is purely opened to interpretation. However, I don't believe we'll ever see any tangible evidence about the existence of the Maker. That would be far too crude. The writers behind Dragon Age use a light touch and half the fun stems from the myriad different interpretations that people come up with. I like how this game provokes a host of memorable topics.

[TK514]

I like how, to some posters, if a parent and their adult children are estranged, it's child abuse.

I also like how, if a parent works with dangerous materials and keeps them in a secure facility in an inaccessible part of the world, it's the parent's fault when the child goes to extraordinary lengths to find the facility and break in.

I would also debate the Maker's omnipotence and omniscience. An unimaginably powerful creator deity, yes. But one who has been explicitly shown to be fallible in creating, and who has shown no ability to modify or repair.

He created his first children, the spirits, and was disappointed in what he made. That means he didn't foresee how they would turn out, and was incapable of making them perfectly the first time. He then, rather than modify his creation, started over from scratch. And, further reenforcing the idea that the Maker is neither infallible nor all powerful, his second project also failed. And, again, he showed no inclination or potential to modify or repair.

Nothing the Maker has or hasn't done is in the slightest an indication of malevolence, or even neglect. According to some posters, the only way the Maker could possibly be a benevolent deity is if he completely stripped away free will and created puppets that he constantly manipulated.

Modifié par TK514, 01 décembre 2013 - 05:25 .