434 réponses à ce sujet

[leaguer of one]

Sifr1449 wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Leaguer of One, you're basing a claim off of an assumption with no evidence. There's no truth to your words.

Assuming that you're always right doesn't mean that you categorically and objectively are.

Then please explain why Meredith bought the idol then.

Because it was kinda pretty?

Seriously though, someone comes up to her with a new and more powerful form of Lyrium that no-one had ever seen before? Since the Templars huff the stuff like paint to help them fight mages and more powerful lyrium would help better combat Blood Magic.... are you telling me she wouldn't buy it?

From her point of view, having a better defence against Blood Mages is always going to be a good thing. She just didn't realise how powerful the stuff really was!

While there likely were a few Blood Mages found to be in the Circle, Meredith's fear of them having infiltrated and taken over the Mages under her command, morphed from fear into outright paranoia because of the Idol.

Which is my point.  In act 1 and 2 she's show to really suspect  the circle has alot of blood mages hidden with in it. Getting a power up to deal with them is not something she would do? Getting a powerup to help with the annualment if she find that she has to do it is also something she would not do ether?

[Sifr]

leaguer of one wrote...

Which is my point.  In act 1 and 2 she's show to really suspect  the circle has alot of blood mages hidden with in it. Getting a power up to deal with them is not something she would do? Getting a powerup to help with the annualment if she find that she has to do it is also something she would not do ether?

Since we don't really meet her until the end of Act 2 and the beginning of Act 3, when she's far on the path to madness, it's hard to say about her in Act 1.

Remember, the younger Templars believe that she's sacrificing them in terrible rituals, which Cullen points out is complete and utter nonsense. I'd take most of what we hear about her in Act 1 and 2 with a grain of salt.

I suspect that she got the Red Lyrium as a deterrent, but never intended to use it. No-one builds a nuke wanting to use it, but you keep it around because your enemies know you can throw it at them anytime you want.

Red Lyrium is like the Nuclear Football of Thedas, with the corruptive influence of the One Ring.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

leaguer of one wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...



No, you can't.

Have you ever take a course on modern law or logic and reason?

You can develop a motive, and you can develop a theory, but without hard, physical evidence, you cannot establish a truth. You can skewer any person or idea to fit a motive and a theory. That's why it's not accepted in legal proceedings. That's why its not accepted as proof. 

And let me tell, you this isn't a different case. You're making a theory to fit an opinion. You're not even making a theory to fit evidence. This is akin to someone like Ptolemy claiming the Earth was the center of the Universe.

The evidince is her actions and her duty. She hunts blood mages. If she thinks blood mages are in the circle, what do you think she'll do?

You're missing the point of what I'm saying.

Drop Meredith for a second. Drop DA for a second.

I'm not talking about Dragon Age. 

I'm talking about how you're stating a claim, stating that it is objective, and I'm calling you out on the credibility of that claim based on no real evidence. You're not putting down any evidence at all to your claim. Real, tangible, physical evidence, such as a statement or explicit fact on Meredith's part explaining why she bought the idol is what is needed. 

Until you can provide that, your claim is nothing but a subjective theory: otherwise known as...

Headcanon.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

leaguer of one wrote...
This is not a head cannon. This is fallowing smoke to a fire. She's been invetigating, restricing and  voilationg the circle mages for a reason. She thinks thay are blood mages in hiding. You say it's an assuption to think she would perpare for the worse in case she is right?

That makes no sense.

So really please explain why she bought the idol.

I'm not talking about Meredith or DA.

I'm talking about you.

I'm not making a claim.

I'm explaining how your claim isn't objective. 

You're deductive reasoning. You're making your evidence fit your theory.

Until you provide hard physical proof to your claim, it is just a subjective idea.

It is headcanon.

I'm not arguing about what Meredith did or didn't do or why.

I'm telling you that your claim is not valid past you and whoever chooses to accept in light of the fact that you have no concrete proof to your claim. This can be applied to any argument based on subjective opinion. To any argument based on headcanon.

Until you provide concrete, measurable proof (not theories or explanations with no credible evidence), your idea is nothing - nothing - more than headcanon.

[leaguer of one]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...



No, you can't.

Have you ever take a course on modern law or logic and reason?

You can develop a motive, and you can develop a theory, but without hard, physical evidence, you cannot establish a truth. You can skewer any person or idea to fit a motive and a theory. That's why it's not accepted in legal proceedings. That's why its not accepted as proof. 

And let me tell, you this isn't a different case. You're making a theory to fit an opinion. You're not even making a theory to fit evidence. This is akin to someone like Ptolemy claiming the Earth was the center of the Universe.

The evidince is her actions and her duty. She hunts blood mages. If she thinks blood mages are in the circle, what do you think she'll do?

You're missing the point of what I'm saying.

Drop Meredith for a second. Drop DA for a second.

I'm not talking about Dragon Age. 

I'm talking about how you're stating a claim, stating that it is objective, and I'm calling you out on the credibility of that claim based on no real evidence. You're not putting down any evidence at all to your claim. Real, tangible, physical evidence, such as a statement or explicit fact on Meredith's part explaining why she bought the idol is what is needed. 

Until you can provide that, your claim is nothing but a subjective theory: otherwise known as...

Headcanon.

Sorry but it's not. It fallowing smoke to fire. It not a subjective theory because it's based on the characters actions and logic.

[leaguer of one]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...
This is not a head cannon. This is fallowing smoke to a fire. She's been invetigating, restricing and  voilationg the circle mages for a reason. She thinks thay are blood mages in hiding. You say it's an assuption to think she would perpare for the worse in case she is right?

That makes no sense.

So really please explain why she bought the idol.

I'm not talking about Meredith or DA.

I'm talking about you.

I'm not making a claim.

I'm explaining how your claim isn't objective. 

You're deductive reasoning. You're making your evidence fit your theory.

Until you provide hard physical proof to your claim, it is just a subjective idea.

It is headcanon.

I'm not arguing about what Meredith did or didn't do or why.

I'm telling you that your claim is not valid past you and whoever chooses to accept in light of the fact that you have no concrete proof to your claim. This can be applied to any argument based on subjective opinion. To any argument based on headcanon.

Until you provide concrete, measurable proof (not theories or explanations with no credible evidence), your idea is nothing - nothing - more than headcanon.

Again, fallowing smoke to fire here. Not jumping to conculsions.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

leaguer of one wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...



No, you can't.

Have you ever take a course on modern law or logic and reason?

You can develop a motive, and you can develop a theory, but without hard, physical evidence, you cannot establish a truth. You can skewer any person or idea to fit a motive and a theory. That's why it's not accepted in legal proceedings. That's why its not accepted as proof. 

And let me tell, you this isn't a different case. You're making a theory to fit an opinion. You're not even making a theory to fit evidence. This is akin to someone like Ptolemy claiming the Earth was the center of the Universe.

The evidince is her actions and her duty. She hunts blood mages. If she thinks blood mages are in the circle, what do you think she'll do?

You're missing the point of what I'm saying.

Drop Meredith for a second. Drop DA for a second.

I'm not talking about Dragon Age. 

I'm talking about how you're stating a claim, stating that it is objective, and I'm calling you out on the credibility of that claim based on no real evidence. You're not putting down any evidence at all to your claim. Real, tangible, physical evidence, such as a statement or explicit fact on Meredith's part explaining why she bought the idol is what is needed. 

Until you can provide that, your claim is nothing but a subjective theory: otherwise known as...

Headcanon.

Sorry but it's not. It fallowing smoke to fire. It not a subjective theory because it's based on the characters actions and logic.

Then where is the physical proof that explicitly states why Meredith bought the idol? 

Until you show me that proof, it is not true.

That is how the scientific method works. That is how the legal system works. That is how logic and reason work.

Everything you're saying is abstract.

Everything you need is concrete.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

leaguer of one wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...
This is not a head cannon. This is fallowing smoke to a fire. She's been invetigating, restricing and  voilationg the circle mages for a reason. She thinks thay are blood mages in hiding. You say it's an assuption to think she would perpare for the worse in case she is right?

That makes no sense.

So really please explain why she bought the idol.

I'm not talking about Meredith or DA.

I'm talking about you.

I'm not making a claim.

I'm explaining how your claim isn't objective. 

You're deductive reasoning. You're making your evidence fit your theory.

Until you provide hard physical proof to your claim, it is just a subjective idea.

It is headcanon.

I'm not arguing about what Meredith did or didn't do or why.

I'm telling you that your claim is not valid past you and whoever chooses to accept in light of the fact that you have no concrete proof to your claim. This can be applied to any argument based on subjective opinion. To any argument based on headcanon.

Until you provide concrete, measurable proof (not theories or explanations with no credible evidence), your idea is nothing - nothing - more than headcanon.

Again, fallowing smoke to fire here. Not jumping to conculsions.

Yes, you are.

This entire argument has been me trying to highlight to you exactly how you're jumping to conclusions.

[leaguer of one]

Sifr1449 wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

Which is my point.  In act 1 and 2 she's show to really suspect  the circle has alot of blood mages hidden with in it. Getting a power up to deal with them is not something she would do? Getting a powerup to help with the annualment if she find that she has to do it is also something she would not do ether?

Since we don't really meet her until the end of Act 2 and the beginning of Act 3, when she's far on the path to madness, it's hard to say about her in Act 1.

Remember, the younger Templars believe that she's sacrificing them in terrible rituals, which Cullen points out is complete and utter nonsense. I'd take most of what we hear about her in Act 1 and 2 with a grain of salt.

I suspect that she got the Red Lyrium as a deterrent, but never intended to use it. No-one builds a nuke wanting to use it, but you keep it around because your enemies know you can throw it at them anytime you want.

Red Lyrium is like the Nuclear Football of Thedas, with the corruptive influence of the One Ring.

I don't think anyone one knew what red lyrium was or what it did in the story. I don't think even Meredith thought it was that dsturctive. Her getting it is most likely an act of ignorance of how dangerous it was.

On the nuclear option point, I 'm saying she planned to do the annualment as a last chase choice. Her state of mind is vastly different from the time she used it from the tiem she got it.

[leaguer of one]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...



Yes, you are.

This entire argument has been me trying to highlight to you exactly how you're jumping to conclusions.

My entire arguement is based on her personality , actions and her dudty. It's based on that logic. Anyone looking at that can see why she did the things she did. This is a pretty common way to anyllize a character. You arguement is mostly just trying to disreguard the most logical actions her character would do.

Sorry but this is just following smoke to the fire.

[Jorji Costava]

Can we please put a moratorium on the expression "following smoke to fire?"

[Sylvius the Mad]

leaguer of one wrote...

So your saying all the resrtiction she places on mage in Act 1 and 2 and buys the idol for know reason?

I'm saying nothing of the sort.  I'm saying that your explanation, while plausible, is not guaranteed to be correct.

I encourage you to follow smoke to fire, but you're not actually doing that.  You're just presuming that the fire exists, and not bothering to go check.

You show an unreasonable level of confidence in your own inferences.

[Sifr]

leaguer of one wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Yes, you are.

This entire argument has been me trying to highlight to you exactly how you're jumping to conclusions.

My entire arguement is based on her personality , actions and her dudty. It's based on that logic. Anyone looking at that can see why she did the things she did. This is a pretty common way to anyllize a character. You arguement is mostly just trying to disreguard the most logical actions her character would do.

Sorry but this is just following smoke to the fire.

Leager, I don't think anyone is disagreeing with your logic, just pointing out they are assumptions.

To use your analogy, there is a difference between following smoke to a fire and assuming it was set by someone deliberately. In the case of a wildfire, you're attributing intent to something that was utterly accidental or random.

Unless the writers give us new information that explicitly tells us how Meredith found and intended to use the Lyrium Idol, her motivations are still unknown at this time and open to speculation.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

leaguer of one wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Yes, you are.

This entire argument has been me trying to highlight to you exactly how you're jumping to conclusions.

My entire arguement is based on her personality , actions and her dudty. It's based on that logic. Anyone looking at that can see why she did the things she did. This is a pretty common way to anyllize a character. You arguement is mostly just trying to disreguard the most logical actions her character would do.

Sorry but this is just following smoke to the fire.

Yes, your argument is based on her personality, her prior actions, and her duty.

And I'm telling you that this is not proof to your claim.

Your claim is not about analyzing a character. Your claim is that Meredith has a specific goal in mind when she purchased the idol.

This would not hold up in a scientific challenge or debate.

This would not hold up in a court of law or political session.

This would not hold up in a rational, logical debate.

Your conclusion absolutely requires hard, physical, credible evidence.

That hard, physical, credible evidence would have to be an explicit statement as to why she bought the idol, what her motives for buying the idol were, and what she planned on doing with the idol. In writing, from her own mouth, or from someone in the know with her to who she has informed her purpose is.

Thus far, you have not shown any of the above evidence.

That means that your explanation, while theoretically sound, cannot be categorically proven or disproved.

Therefore, your claim can not be held objectively. It is not real. It is an abstraction. It is not concrete. 

As it is not concrete or objective, it is completely subjective.

And since it is completely subjective, it is not measurable.

Since it is not measurable, it is headcanon.

Headcanon.

A guess.

An assumption.

I'm sorry, I'm not doing this to be a jerkass. I'm telling you how you are not any more or less correct than anyone else. I'm sorry if that's a problem for you. 

And to clarify:

The burden of proof is on you to prove your claim. The burden of proof always lies with the claimant(s). The burden of proof is not on others to disprove your claim. 

We don't prove you wrong. 

You prove yourself right.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 20 décembre 2013 - 01:20 .

[leaguer of one]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

So your saying all the resrtiction she places on mage in Act 1 and 2 and buys the idol for know reason?

I'm saying nothing of the sort.  I'm saying that your explanation, while plausible, is not guaranteed to be correct.

I encourage you to follow smoke to fire, but you're not actually doing that.  You're just presuming that the fire exists, and not bothering to go check.

You show an unreasonable level of confidence in your own inferences.

But the fire does exists. The thing your argueing is on a case of semantcs. She never actually says she is preparing to annual the circle but her actions illustate that she is. In all cases when the  templars  suspect a circle is filled with blood mages they annual it.

Since Meredith is that paraniod of a templar, how is it a presumption to think she would prepare to annual the circle?

This like seeing smoke, seeing animals run away from the smoke, and here people cry "fire" as they pass you by. You're only arguement is that because you don't directly see the fire, it may not be a fire.

[leaguer of one]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Yes, you are.

This entire argument has been me trying to highlight to you exactly how you're jumping to conclusions.

My entire arguement is based on her personality , actions and her dudty. It's based on that logic. Anyone looking at that can see why she did the things she did. This is a pretty common way to anyllize a character. You arguement is mostly just trying to disreguard the most logical actions her character would do.

Sorry but this is just following smoke to the fire.

Yes, your argument is based on her personality, her prior actions, and her duty.

And I'm telling you that this is not proof to your claim.

Your claim is not about analyzing a character. Your claim is that Meredith has a specific goal in mind when she purchased the idol.

This would not hold up in a scientific challenge or debate.

This would not hold up in a court of law or political session.

This would not hold up in a rational, logical debate.

Your conclusion absolutely requires hard, physical, credible evidence.

That hard, physical, credible evidence would have to be an explicit statement as to why she bought the idol, what her motives for buying the idol were, and what she planned on doing with the idol. In writing, from her own mouth, or from someone in the know with her to who she has informed her purpose is.

Thus far, you have not shown any of the above evidence.

That means that your explanation, while theoretically sound, cannot be categorically proven or disproved.

Therefore, your claim can not be held objectively. It is not real. It is an abstraction. It is not concrete. 

As it is not concrete or objective, it is completely subjective.

And since it is completely subjective, it is not measurable.

Since it is not measurable, it is headcanon.

Headcanon.

A guess.

An assumption.

I'm sorry, I'm not doing this to be a jerkass. I'm telling you how you are not any more or less correct than anyone else. I'm sorry if that's a problem for you. 

And to clarify:

The burden of proof is on you to prove your claim. The burden of proof always lies with the claimant(s). The burden of proof is not on others to disprove your claim. 

We don't prove you wrong. 

You prove yourself right.

You're arguing on the detail that because we don't see the fire it may not be a fire. But you're missing the smoke, the animals running past away from the fire and the people passing by crying "fire".

Seriously, you're arguing on pointless semantics.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

leaguer of one wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Yes, you are.

This entire argument has been me trying to highlight to you exactly how you're jumping to conclusions.

My entire arguement is based on her personality , actions and her dudty. It's based on that logic. Anyone looking at that can see why she did the things she did. This is a pretty common way to anyllize a character. You arguement is mostly just trying to disreguard the most logical actions her character would do.

Sorry but this is just following smoke to the fire.

Yes, your argument is based on her personality, her prior actions, and her duty.

And I'm telling you that this is not proof to your claim.

Your claim is not about analyzing a character. Your claim is that Meredith has a specific goal in mind when she purchased the idol.

This would not hold up in a scientific challenge or debate.

This would not hold up in a court of law or political session.

This would not hold up in a rational, logical debate.

Your conclusion absolutely requires hard, physical, credible evidence.

That hard, physical, credible evidence would have to be an explicit statement as to why she bought the idol, what her motives for buying the idol were, and what she planned on doing with the idol. In writing, from her own mouth, or from someone in the know with her to who she has informed her purpose is.

Thus far, you have not shown any of the above evidence.

That means that your explanation, while theoretically sound, cannot be categorically proven or disproved.

Therefore, your claim can not be held objectively. It is not real. It is an abstraction. It is not concrete. 

As it is not concrete or objective, it is completely subjective.

And since it is completely subjective, it is not measurable.

Since it is not measurable, it is headcanon.

Headcanon.

A guess.

An assumption.

I'm sorry, I'm not doing this to be a jerkass. I'm telling you how you are not any more or less correct than anyone else. I'm sorry if that's a problem for you. 

And to clarify:

The burden of proof is on you to prove your claim. The burden of proof always lies with the claimant(s). The burden of proof is not on others to disprove your claim. 

We don't prove you wrong. 

You prove yourself right.

You're arguing on the detail that because we don't see the fire it may not be a fire. But you're missing the smoke, the animals running past away from the fire and the people passing by crying "fire".

Seriously, you're arguing on pointless semantics.

I think you're done using the 'fire' analogy, especially since you've demonstrated how you're not understanding the actual argument. There is no smoke. There are no running animals, and no one is crying 'fire' here, all used in context of your claim.

Concrete evidence is not semantics. It's not interpretation. You've just misused that too.

This is an inductive fallacy on your part. You're assuming a conclusion about Meredith because certain traits of hers happen to be true.

"Because she holds certain views and perspectives, and based on her prior actions, Meredith must be trying to use the idol against the Kirkwall Circle."

You're rejecting physical evidence based on prior actions. 

You're argument is akin to a man with a past of harsh ideas and opinions and with a history of violent crimes (without conviction) must be buying a weapon or tool for the purpose of intentionally causing further mayhem.

While it is relatively sound reasoning, it would never hold up in any analytical system that he is buying the weapon or tool for the express purpose of causing damage. Not without physical facts to support the premise, such as a threat, an expressed intended usage, or another expressed factor that the man says will occur due to him buying said weapon. 

You cannot say for exact certainty why he is buying a weapon or a tool.

That is your argument.

You cannot say for certain what Meredith was planning (if she was planning anything at all) when she got the idol. Not without actual physical evidence of such.

'Probably's' and 'I thinks' don't substitute for proof.

[Augustei]

tickle267 wrote...

What the hell are you two even arguing about?

leaguer insists Meredith was going to Annul the circle since act 1 and he has all this "evidence" (his opinions)  to support his claims
I gave up last night since the discussion was going nowhere.

Modifié par XxDeonxX, 20 décembre 2013 - 02:55 .

[leaguer of one]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Yes, you are.

This entire argument has been me trying to highlight to you exactly how you're jumping to conclusions.

My entire arguement is based on her personality , actions and her dudty. It's based on that logic. Anyone looking at that can see why she did the things she did. This is a pretty common way to anyllize a character. You arguement is mostly just trying to disreguard the most logical actions her character would do.

Sorry but this is just following smoke to the fire.

Yes, your argument is based on her personality, her prior actions, and her duty.

And I'm telling you that this is not proof to your claim.

Your claim is not about analyzing a character. Your claim is that Meredith has a specific goal in mind when she purchased the idol.

This would not hold up in a scientific challenge or debate.

This would not hold up in a court of law or political session.

This would not hold up in a rational, logical debate.

Your conclusion absolutely requires hard, physical, credible evidence.

That hard, physical, credible evidence would have to be an explicit statement as to why she bought the idol, what her motives for buying the idol were, and what she planned on doing with the idol. In writing, from her own mouth, or from someone in the know with her to who she has informed her purpose is.

Thus far, you have not shown any of the above evidence.

That means that your explanation, while theoretically sound, cannot be categorically proven or disproved.

Therefore, your claim can not be held objectively. It is not real. It is an abstraction. It is not concrete. 

As it is not concrete or objective, it is completely subjective.

And since it is completely subjective, it is not measurable.

Since it is not measurable, it is headcanon.

Headcanon.

A guess.

An assumption.

I'm sorry, I'm not doing this to be a jerkass. I'm telling you how you are not any more or less correct than anyone else. I'm sorry if that's a problem for you. 

And to clarify:

The burden of proof is on you to prove your claim. The burden of proof always lies with the claimant(s). The burden of proof is not on others to disprove your claim. 

We don't prove you wrong. 

You prove yourself right.

You're arguing on the detail that because we don't see the fire it may not be a fire. But you're missing the smoke, the animals running past away from the fire and the people passing by crying "fire".

Seriously, you're arguing on pointless semantics.

I think you're done using the 'fire' analogy, especially since you've demonstrated how you're not understanding the actual argument. There is no smoke. There are no running animals, and no one is crying 'fire' here, all used in context of your claim.

Concrete evidence is not semantics. It's not interpretation. You've just misused that too.

This is an inductive fallacy on your part. You're assuming a conclusion about Meredith because certain traits of hers happen to be true.

"Because she holds certain views and perspectives, and based on her prior actions, Meredith must be trying to use the idol against the Kirkwall Circle."

You're rejecting physical evidence based on prior actions. 

You're argument is akin to a man with a past of harsh ideas and opinions and with a history of violent crimes (without conviction) must be buying a weapon or tool for the purpose of intentionally causing further mayhem.

While it is relatively sound reasoning, it would never hold up in any analytical system that he is buying the weapon or tool for the express purpose of causing damage. Not without physical facts to support the premise, such as a threat, an expressed intended usage, or another expressed factor that the man says will occur due to him buying said weapon. 

You cannot say for exact certainty why he is buying a weapon or a tool.

That is your argument.

You cannot say for certain what Meredith was planning (if she was planning anything at all) when she got the idol. Not without actual physical evidence of such.

'Probably's' and 'I thinks' don't substitute for proof.

Again, You arguing that it has to be literally stated for it to be going true. That not always the case. The way Meredith is persenteed is that you have to judge her by her actions not  by how she is define in the story.

My arguement is  not..

"Because she holds certain views and perspectives, and based on her prior actions, Meredith must be trying to use the idol against the Kirkwall Circle."

My arguement is that is in a state were she in preparing to act on the circle as a last effort. The Idol is part of that being that is  made of the product that is a source of power for templars. 

Red lyrium is a power up for her.  It would make sense she would get a power up to help so what she thinks is her duty in a case of extremes.

My arguement is not in  a case of you example. It's a case where if a child in kiddnaped or missing  in an area, local pedifiles are investagated to see if they are the culprits.

We know for certin Meredith thinks blood mages are hiding in th circle and she feels the majority may be blood mages. Based on that we can see she would  prepare of the worse case.

If she abilities came from lyrium and red lyrium is seen as a power up, what other reason would she be interested in getting th idol?

[leaguer of one]

XxDeonxX wrote...

tickle267 wrote...

What the hell are you two even arguing about?

leaguer insists Meredith was going to Annul the circle since act 1 and he has all this "evidence" (his opinions)  to support his claims
I gave up last night since the discussion was going nowhere.

Then you not understanding point. I'm not saying she was going to do it from act 1. I'm saying she was planning to do so just in case she has to. That planning clearly started in act 2 any ways.

Think of it like the us making nukes just in case thing become so dire they have to use them.

[Augustei]

leaguer of one wrote...
Then you not understanding point. I'm not saying she was going to do it from act 1. I'm saying she was planning to do so just in case she has to. That planning clearly started in act 2 any ways.

Think of it like the us making nukes just in case thing become so dire they have to use them.

If anyone here is not understanding the point its you, and what you just said is clear evidence of this discussion going in Circles.. I already mentioned it's possible she had a contingency plan in place a few pages back. You continued arguing with me however

But you weren't even talking of contingency plans, you stated that the reason she bought the lyrium idol is because she wanted to make a sword because she was going to bring down the circle.
Then you started pointing to all this "evidence" in Act 1 & 2 to support your claims

Modifié par XxDeonxX, 20 décembre 2013 - 03:08 .

[leaguer of one]

XxDeonxX wrote...

leaguer of one wrote...
Then you not understanding point. I'm not saying she was going to do it from act 1. I'm saying she was planning to do so just in case she has to. That planning clearly started in act 2 any ways.

Think of it like the us making nukes just in case thing become so dire they have to use them.

If anyone here is not understanding the point its you, and what you just said is clear evidence of this discussion going in Circles.. I already mentioned it's possible she had a contingency plan in place a few pages back. You continued arguing with me however

But you weren't even talking of contingency plans, you stated that the reason she bought the lyrium idol is because she wanted to make a sword because she was going to bring down the circle.

You don't understand that the idol would be part of that contingency plan?

You clearly though I mean she was planning to take down the circle no matter what . You clearly miss understood me. With the divine and the grand clearic keeping her at bay, it understandable taking down the circle is not her first choice. She still made the sword just in case. Remember, for an annualment to even happen the grand clearic must ok it first.

[Lotion Soronarr]

[quote]leaguer of one wrote...

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...
"No, they flat out LIED.

Tehy said he was not indoctrinated. But it turns out he was  -ever since he got his eyes (which was logn before shep met him, thus he was under Reaper influence in ME2)
And they clearly said they wont' make him into Saren 2.0. And yet the did. The same bloody thing. Powerfull agents who go by "at all cost" mentality, that end up being indoctrinated. And they can both be talked into suicide at the very end."

You still don't get that he became indoctrinated only after he brought the proto reaper on to the base? He's a hint, you put a reaper corpe on your base, you're going to get indoctrinated. Before he did that he was not indoctrinated, after he brought it on to his base he became indoctrinated... Do you not get that?[/quote]

His eyes are repaer tech. He was under influence from the begining. Read the comics.


[quote][quote]
"There is nothing consistent. Cerberus has been described by the devs as brutally efficient and dangerous. And yet the organization they show us is incompetent as hell, and realisticly shouldn't have survived  minutes, let alone decades.
Everything is incosistent. TIM too. He goes from pragmatists to racists to incompetent depending on which mission or DLC you're doing."

That not an inconsistancy. So time cerberus succeed in ther mission and some time they fail. If you read the time line for cerberus in LOTSB, you'll see that. And how can a charcter like TIM who is not showing all his card or prosonality to you because he wants to manipulate you going to show you how he really is?

How can you tell the straight persona of a person who trying to show a poker face all the time?
[/quote]

Nope.

Cerberus has been shown as laghaubly incopetent, which is the complete opposite of the other lore bits (like reports and the devs own claims)
Same goes for everything. The entire ME 2 is a inconsistent mess. ME3 is even worse.

Period.
Save your breath.

[Lotion Soronarr]

leaguer of one wrote...
My opinion is based on her action.

And so is everyone elses.

So your saying all the resrtiction she places on mage in Act 1 and 2 and buys the idol for no reason?

It's not "no reason".

"I like the idea of a lyrium sword" is a reason.

" A red sword goes with my dress" is a reason.

"It's powerfull ang magical" is a reason.

"It might help me do my job better" is a reason.


Your reasoning on the other hand is broken. "I want to kill all mages - therefore, I must buy a lyrium sowrd!"
?????