190 réponses à ce sujet

[Ryzaki]

Br3ad wrote...

Right. Qunari don't have families in the traditional since. Slip of the tongue. Swing and a miss.

XD Np

Yes, definitely a chat to remember. 

That it was that it was.

Still mad there's no nuke them both option. Both kingdoms need to GTFO.

[Vulpe]

 @Ieldra2
First of all, Julian is enough. I have yet to met another user that shares my name, so I don't think people would get confused.

Second: You don't have to agree with me and it's fine. Everyone is entiteled to belive what they want and to express their beliefs or disbeliefs and theories. 

I have a very strong imagination and the cynic in me makes me believe that there might be more to things that it seems.Besides that, it is fun for me to make theories (even if they prove wrong). It's a way of relaxing myself and having fun at the same time. I don't usually deal in absolutes and if my above comment sounded like it did, then it my fault for expressing myself in a way that didn't denote my intent.

Also, I don't force them on on your throught, so you can easily ignore my comments and posts if you wish to.No grudge held. We all have the right to ignore and avoid what/who we don't like because of reasons.

From what we know, things can go in all directions that might be similar to what I think, what you think, what x thinks or even something that no one imagined or at least expressed it. We're all at the writers mercy. Until then, what's wrong with making theories about x and y ?

Modifié par JulianWellpit, 10 décembre 2013 - 10:52 .

[The Elder King]

@Ieldra2: fair enough, though I think that slaves rapresents a big part of Tevinter's population. I agree that Soporati are probably the majority of the population, though I don't know how good their life is.
I understand the reason why you'd support Tevinter over qunari, or in general over the rest of Thedas, though other than the Maric thing, I'm not sure if Tevinter is pursijg a path of knowledge and research (not to mention that qunari are making technological advancement, as well in other fields like medicine).
My problem is that even if they follow a path of research and knowledge, I still can't support a system that endorse slavery in such a way (not to mention that common mages don't even have that good life compared to Circle mages, and they have to fight against each other to advance their position), not to mention that I'm against esperiments like sacrificing thousands of people and a third of the lyrium in the Empire to to directly into the Fade, or what Titus did to Maric.

[jaza]

Tevinter. Dem armoured battle mages.



Ave!

[Liamv2]

Why not kill both? 

Modifié par Liamv2, 10 décembre 2013 - 11:12 .

[Ieldra]

hhh89 wrote...
@Ieldra2: fair enough, though I think that slaves rapresents a big part of Tevinter's population. I agree that Soporati are probably the majority of the population, though I don't know how good their life is.
I understand the reason why you'd support Tevinter over qunari, or in general over the rest of Thedas, though other than the Maric thing, I'm not sure if Tevinter is pursijg a path of knowledge and research (not to mention that qunari are making technological advancement, as well in other fields like medicine).
My problem is that even if they follow a path of research and knowledge, I still can't support a system that endorse slavery in such a way (not to mention that common mages don't even have that good life compared to Circle mages, and they have to fight against each other to advance their position), not to mention that I'm against esperiments like sacrificing thousands of people and a third of the lyrium in the Empire to to directly into the Fade, or what Titus did to Maric.

I don't support the Imperium unrestrictedly, and you'd find me at the forefront of a slave rebellion should we get the opportunity, as long as that doesn't mean burning the libraries and such. However, given the three dominant cultures of Thedas (Orlais, Qunari, Tevinter), I find the Imperium has much of what I like while not being worse (or much worse, respectively) than the others in those things I don't like. An elf in Orlais is only better than a slave in Tevinter in that they're not sacrificed for magical power (and that is rare in Tevinter, if I understand the Codex correctly. It is, after all, technically illegal), the nobles in Orlais can do pretty much what they want just like the more powerful magisters in Tevinter. 

A culture I would wholeheartedly support would have an attitude to individual autonomy like Ferelden while embracing magical and technological advancement like Tevinter and the qunari, respectively. Unfortunately, we don't even have a culture combining two of those aspects. So, it's really a question of which kind of evil is easier to overcome compared with which kind of good is harder to achieve by revolution. I find the Imperial attitude towards magical knowledge would be extremely hard to transplant into other nations, given the Chantry and the Qun, while getting a successful slave rebellion underway in Tevinter may just be a little easier with outside help. Of course the qunari would have to be crushed first. I wouldn't weaken the Imperium as long as the qunari are a big threat like they are presently. 

[Vulpe]

Liamv2 wrote...

Why not kill both? 

Why waste your time killing them both when you could let them kill each other and then attack the survivng party ? 

Ieldra2 wrote...
A culture I would wholeheartedly support would have an attitude to individual autonomy like Ferelden while embracing magical and technological advancement like Tevinter and the qunari, respectively. 

Rivain seems to be a good candidate.

Modifié par JulianWellpit, 10 décembre 2013 - 11:30 .

[Ieldra]

JulianWellpit wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...
A culture I would wholeheartedly support would have an attitude to individual autonomy like Ferelden while embracing magical and technological advancement like Tevinter and the qunari, respectively. 

Rivain seems to be a good candidate.

Might be. We don't know enough of them. I got the impression that they're somewhat mired in tradition there. Not as restrictrive as the Chantry, but not really forward-looking either. They're not Andrastean though, which is a definite advantage.   

[The Elder King]

@Ieldra2: I don't think they use a lot of sacrifices in blood magic experiments (or fights between magister) now, but they likely use them many times and let them heal afterwards to be used later. Though I wasn't suggesting that you were in favour of this: from what I know about you I knew you'd support a slave rebellion.
I agree that Orlais's Nobles hold the same power of magisters over the common folks; I don't agree with this system either, but it's not the norm of southern Thedas: in Ferelden, the Free Marches,  and Rivain (though I have problems with the fact that they don't care if people are killed by seers that lost control of their spirit) the situation is different, and we don't know the situation in Nevarra. In which, by the way, mages seem to be treated differently, and they seem to have more freedom in magical research.

Modifié par hhh89, 10 décembre 2013 - 11:59 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

This all brings a big question on brainwashing... If you live a happy life after brainwashing...could it relaly be considered bad?
You might say "But the me of before wouldn't like it". Maybe (hard to say), but the you of now doesn't give a rats ass about the you of before. Why is the you of before more important? Why is he right?

If ones goal in life is a happy life, does the means to achieve it matter? Should they?

BEGIN DEBATE NOW.

[Ieldra]

JulianWellpit wrote...
 @Ieldra2
First of all, Julian is enough. I have yet to met another user that shares my name, so I don't think people would get confused.

Second: You don't have to agree with me and it's fine. Everyone is entiteled to belive what they want and to express their beliefs or disbeliefs and theories. 

I have a very strong imagination and the cynic in me makes me believe that there might be more to things that it seems.Besides that, it is fun for me to make theories (even if they prove wrong). It's a way of relaxing myself and having fun at the same time. I don't usually deal in absolutes and if my above comment sounded like it did, then it my fault for expressing myself in a way that didn't denote my intent.

Also, I don't force them on on your throught, so you can easily ignore my comments and posts if you wish to.No grudge held. We all have the right to ignore and avoid what/who we don't like because of reasons.

From what we know, things can go in all directions that might be similar to what I think, what you think, what x thinks or even something that no one imagined or at least expressed it. We're all at the writers mercy. Until then, what's wrong with making theories about x and y ?

Nothing of course. I make them all the time. It's just that I need more than accidental facts to see a pattern. There needs to be either in-world evidence or thematic considerations. The numbers you quoted would be meaningful in a real world, but if the most likely explanation is "the worldbuilders screwed up" (and in a minor way only, even) then I can't see a pattern. It's the same with ME3's indoctrination hypothesis. If you combine a ton of accidental facts you might be able to see a pattern, but most likely it's one you created rather than a pre-existing one you discovered. 

Of course, some conspiracies are real. Some writer may take those accidental facts, combine them and make something real from them. We'll never know the difference as long as all the evidence is as easily explained as accidental rather than intentional. That's why I tend to place importance on thematic considerations. If there's a recognizable common theme, facts are less likely to be accidentally connected. Faith is an important theme in Andrasteanism as presented through the stories, and that's why I'm convinced we'll never get to know the (ir)reality of the Maker.   

That's the reason why I can't find solid ground to speculate from on the nature of DAI's main antagonist. For all the existing hypotheses, I'd have to ascribe additional motivations or qualities I have no reason to ascribe. Who could reasonably be interested in opening the Fade and getting demons to invade Thedas? Nobody I know. That it is merely *possible* that some of the known individuals would develop a reasonable motivation is not enough to embrace a hypothesis, because any other mere possibility is just as likely. It has to be shown that it could reasonably be perceived as *likely* given certain known facts.

So if I find some odd fact, the first question I ask is "is this more likely to be an accidentally odd fact or an intentionally odd fact?" For instance, Larius' and Janeka's odd behaviour at the end of DA2/Legacy is most likely intentionally odd. Connect this with some known facts about Archdemons, darkspawn and Grey Wardens and you come to see that the hypothesis that Corypheus is alive and has possessed the surviving Warden is not as outlandish as it may appear at first. On the other hand, the odd lore-breaking population numbers of some planets in the ME universe in ME2 and ME3 are more likely to be a developer screwup.    

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

This all brings a big question on brainwashing... If you live a happy life after brainwashing...could it relaly be considered bad?
You might say "But the me of before wouldn't like it". Maybe (hard to say), but the you of now doesn't give a rats ass about the you of before. Why is the you of before more important? Why is he right?

If ones goal in life is a happy life, does the means to achieve it matter? Should they?

BEGIN DEBATE NOW.

But it has never been about happiness or FREEDOM™. It's been about being meaningful and useful... *mind blows*

[Vulpe]

Ieldra2 wrote...

JulianWellpit wrote...
 @Ieldra2
First of all, Julian is enough. I have yet to met another user that shares my name, so I don't think people would get confused.

Second: You don't have to agree with me and it's fine. Everyone is entiteled to belive what they want and to express their beliefs or disbeliefs and theories. 

I have a very strong imagination and the cynic in me makes me believe that there might be more to things that it seems.Besides that, it is fun for me to make theories (even if they prove wrong). It's a way of relaxing myself and having fun at the same time. I don't usually deal in absolutes and if my above comment sounded like it did, then it my fault for expressing myself in a way that didn't denote my intent.

Also, I don't force them on on your throught, so you can easily ignore my comments and posts if you wish to.No grudge held. We all have the right to ignore and avoid what/who we don't like because of reasons.

From what we know, things can go in all directions that might be similar to what I think, what you think, what x thinks or even something that no one imagined or at least expressed it. We're all at the writers mercy. Until then, what's wrong with making theories about x and y ?

Nothing of course. I make them all the time. It's just that I need more than accidental facts to see a pattern. There needs to be either in-world evidence or thematic considerations. The numbers you quoted would be meaningful in a real world, but if the most likely explanation is "the worldbuilders screwed up" (and in a minor way only, even) then I can't see a pattern. It's the same with ME3's indoctrination hypothesis. If you combine a ton of accidental facts you might be able to see a pattern, but most likely it's one you created rather than a pre-existing one you discovered. 

Of course, some conspiracies are real. Some writer may take those accidental facts, combine them and make something real from them. We'll never know the difference as long as all the evidence is as easily explained as accidental rather than intentional. That's why I tend to place importance on thematic considerations. If there's a recognizable common theme, facts are less likely to be accidentally connected. Faith is an important theme in Andrasteanism as presented through the stories, and that's why I'm convinced we'll never get to know the (ir)reality of the Maker.   

That's the reason why I can't find solid ground to speculate from on the nature of DAI's main antagonist. For all the existing hypotheses, I'd have to ascribe additional motivations or qualities I have no reason to ascribe. Who could reasonably be interested in opening the Fade and getting demons to invade Thedas? Nobody I know. That it is merely *possible* that some of the known individuals would develop a reasonable motivation is not enough to embrace a hypothesis, because any other mere possibility is just as likely. It has to be shown that it could reasonably be perceived as *likely* given certain known facts.

So if I find some odd fact, the first question I ask is "is this more likely to be an accidentally odd fact or an intentionally odd fact?" For instance, Larius' and Janeka's odd behaviour at the end of DA2/Legacy is most likely intentionally odd. Connect this with some known facts about Archdemons, darkspawn and Grey Wardens and you come to see that the hypothesis that Corypheus is alive and has possessed the surviving Warden is not as outlandish as it may appear at first. On the other hand, the odd lore-breaking population numbers of some planets in the ME universe in ME2 and ME3 are more likely to be a developer screwup.    

In the end each is with his own style of developing and embracing a theory. I prefer to think of multiple scenarios and cut some of them down as new information arrives, in the end chosing the one with the less non-confirmend implications and suppositions. You send me the ideea that you are the type that waits for the informations to pile up, to verify their vericity and then, when you feel you have enough, to express your belief ( correct me if I'm wrong ).

We just have different ways of thinking and that's a good thing. If everyone thought the same way I doubt that our world woud have ben the same.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

This all brings a big question on brainwashing... If you live a happy life after brainwashing...could it relaly be considered bad?
You might say "But the me of before wouldn't like it". Maybe (hard to say), but the you of now doesn't give a rats ass about the you of before. Why is the you of before more important? Why is he right?

If ones goal in life is a happy life, does the means to achieve it matter? Should they?

BEGIN DEBATE NOW.

As long as it is by the respective own accord, I don't see a problem with it. If it is forced...well, it's like killing the person that you were and replacing it with another one that lives in your body.

Also, some people might not have the goal in life to be happy.I mean yes, they would like to be happy, but they don't think of it as their goal in life.They would think of other things and other goals and let happiness come on its own without putting too much accent on being happy, just feeling those moments of happiness and letting them pass when it's the time.

Modifié par JulianWellpit, 10 décembre 2013 - 12:50 .

[wright1978]

I'd side with Tevinter personally. Find the Qun abhorrent.

[Wulfram]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

This all brings a big question on brainwashing... If you live a happy life after brainwashing...could it relaly be considered bad?
You might say "But the me of before wouldn't like it". Maybe (hard to say), but the you of now doesn't give a rats ass about the you of before. Why is the you of before more important? Why is he right?

Because the me of before has been murdered to create the me of now.

If ones goal in life is a happy life, does the means to achieve it matter? Should they?

BEGIN DEBATE NOW.

If I'm going to live in brainwashed happiness, I'd rather do it in a Brave New World type society.  They seem to have more fun.

[jtav]

Both are almost unbearable extremes, but I prefer the qun. No matter who you are, you're a part of the collective and have something to contribute. I'm terrified of being treated as disposable in real life. Telvinter is that up to eleven. Since I know I will never have power, I might at least find purpose.

[dragonflight288]

jtav wrote...

Both are almost unbearable extremes, but I prefer the qun. No matter who you are, you're a part of the collective and have something to contribute. I'm terrified of being treated as disposable in real life. Telvinter is that up to eleven. Since I know I will never have power, I might at least find purpose.

And so long as you're not a mage, you will be treated exactly the same as everyone else, unless you decide you're not satisfied with your role.

[Iakus]

Depends.

I'd support whichever side is losing the war, and support them just enough so that once the other side was crushed, I could crush them in turn.

[Ieldra]

iakus wrote...
Depends.

I'd support whichever side is losing the war, and support them just enough so that once the other side was crushed, I could crush them in turn.

The difference is that in the case I could defeat either, I would do the utmost to preserve the Imperium's magical knowledge, while I'd destroy all copies of the Tome of Koslun I could find...

...well, not really, since I'm not into destroying books, but with the qunari it's the philosophy their society is built on I object to, while of the Imperium it's only certain practices. You can have a magocracy without slavery and blood sacrifice after all.

[themageguy]

Not all the tevinter magisters are blood mages or crazy dragn cultists.
Maevaris from the comics is a perfect example.
My Mage would prefer tevinter than the qunari.
Also, spoiler for those who haven't read the comics...



......


Interesting that Aurelius (whilst roasting some qunari with some awesome fire magic) mentions that
'Dragonfire. It might have been their birthright. Instead it kills.'
Were the qunari supposed to have been powerful mages in their own right?

Modifié par themageguy, 10 décembre 2013 - 02:46 .

[themageguy]

Whoops double post

Modifié par themageguy, 10 décembre 2013 - 02:47 .

[The Elder King]

COMICS SPOILER:




It's Titus, not Aurelius. People speculate that he's referring the fact that qunari are related to dragons. The ability Titus used (if I understand rights) are based on the fact that he was powering himself with Maric's blood (Therins have dragon blood in their vein since Calenhad).
Anyway, I don't believe that every magister are evil. That doesn't change the fact that the slavery system they endorse is horrible. Even the common mages don't live a life that better in comparison o the Chantry Circles, since they still live in it and they have to fight against each ther to upgrade their situation.

Modifié par hhh89, 10 décembre 2013 - 02:58 .

[Medhia Nox]

@Ieldra2: Would you at least read it first?

[Ieldra]

Medhia Nox wrote...
@Ieldra2: Would you at least read it first?

Of course. And as I said, I wouldn't really destroy it. Destroying books is as close to a sacrilege as things could get to in my personal philosophy.