8640 réponses à ce sujet

[Master Warder Z_]

Why?

 

Because its nonsensical, non mentioned and completely turns Anders into a possessed invincible baby eating cannibal?

[Lulupab]

Because its nonsensical, non mentioned and completely turns Anders into a possessed invincible baby eating cannibal?

 

The baby was too much tbh.

 

Its not too far fetched from might of an abomination but there had to be more details, more relevance to the game and more information in general. "my arm lashed out and flesh exploded" is... you know. :|

[The Elder King]

Because its godawful?

Anyhow in the story its pretty much self defense really. They were going to kill Anders in cold blood so he killed them first.

Because its nonsensical, non mentioned and completely turns Anders into a possessed invincible baby eating cannibal?

He didn't eat baby . Anders is possessed, and lorewise it is stated that abominations are pretty powerful. Not to mention that based on Asunder it seems spirit-based possession are more powerful than the demon counterparts.
I understand the problem with cannibalism and how the events are narrated, but unless Bioware will state that it's not canon I'll consider it as such. I wouldn't care if they cancel it from the canon though.
As for the self-defence, I agree that he was defending himself. The fact that proves the corruption to Justice is the way he decided to deal with them.

[wcholcombe]

Except we don't know pharamond is andrastian.

[Cat Lance]

Wrong thread

[dragonflight288]

I don't even believe in such thing as evil so.. 

 

Does this mean you don't believe in the concept of 'good'?

[AresKeith]

Does this mean you don't believe in the concept of 'good'?

 

Don't get him started please

[Grieving Natashina]

Wrong thread

The Hide button will cover that post.  

 

 

Don't get him started please

 

This as well.  If you do, be prepared for the next 5 pages or so of debate of "good" versus "evil."

[dragonflight288]

Don't get him started please

 

lol.

 

okay. 

 

@KainD. We can have a philosophical discussion via PM. 

[Iron Fist]

Mage good. Templar bad.

[dragonflight288]

Mage good. Templar bad.

 

Umm....that's rather simplistic. 

[Iron Fist]

Umm....that's rather simplistic. 

 

Indeed, but at least it's on-topic.

 

Mages, Circle and apostate, are victims of an oppressive system. Templars oversee that system, on behalf of a transnational religious body.

[dragonflight288]

Indeed, but at least it's on-topic.

 

Mages, Circle and apostate, are victims of an oppressive system. Templars oversee that system, on behalf of a transnational religious body.

 

Or at least they used to until the Circle declared independence, the Chantry decided to let the matter be rather than force a conflict, and many templars and seekers decided they'd rather leave the chantry and have that conflict rather than respect the chantry's wishes. 

[Iron Fist]

Or at least they used to until the Circle declared independence, the Chantry decided to let the matter be rather than force a conflict, and many templars and seekers decided they'd rather leave the chantry and have that conflict rather than respect the chantry's wishes. 

 

Yep. And overzealous, vigilante templars are worse than loyalist templars. Anyone can be a potential target of their actions.

[Lulupab]

Yep. And overzealous, vigilante templars are worse than loyalist templars. Anyone can be a potential target of their actions.

 

The DD comparison works good here. Templars are evil in the name of Law. And mages represent chaotic good.

[ShadowLordXII]

The DD comparison works good here. Templars are evil in the name of Law. And mages represent chaotic good.

 

Most interpretations of Knight Templars has them being Lawful Neutral at best or Lawful Evil at best. So templars going against the Chantry would then downgrade from lawful territory into Chaotic/Neutral?

 

What those who believe that Chantry Law was wrong from the start (Again, structural flaws and institutional dirt)?

[Lulupab]

Most interpretations of Knight Templars has them being Lawful Neutral at best or Lawful Evil at best. So templars going against the Chantry would then downgrade from lawful territory into Chaotic/Neutral?

 

What those who believe that Chantry Law was wrong from the start (Again, structural flaws and institutional dirt)?

 

Yeah "neutral" does not work when you force people to face demons or lobotomize them. Templars were never Neutral.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

The DD comparison works good here. Templars are evil in the name of Law. And mages represent chaotic good.

I don't think I'd call the mages as a whole as Chaotic Good. 

[Lulupab]

I don't think I'd call the mages as a whole as Chaotic Good. 

 

Freedom is always a good notion. But since its mages we are talking about and potentially dangerous when free that's the part chaotic comes to play. 

[wcholcombe]

Freedom is always a good notion. But since its mages we are talking about and potentially dangerous when free that's the part chaotic comes to play.

Yeah sorry, you can't just wave a wand and say the rogue circle mages are good. The fact that you disagree personally with the circle system doesn't make supporting it evil. Are the mages who still support the circles evil? Was Wynne evil?

Sorry, it isn't as simplistic as that when it is basically a greater good argument with two opposing view points. Especially when allowing for the idea that the mages in their freedom independent of templar pursuit are just as capable of evil pursuits as anyone else.

[TK514]

Freedom is always a good notion.

I'm sure there are many felons who would agree.

[Lulupab]

Yeah sorry, you can't just wave a wand and say the rogue circle mages are good. The fact that you disagree personally with the circle system doesn't make supporting it evil. Are the mages who still support the circles evil? Was Wynne evil?

Sorry, it isn't as simplistic as that when it is basically a greater good argument with two opposing view points. Especially when allowing for the idea that the mages in their freedom independent of templar pursuit are just as capable of evil pursuits as anyone else.

 

Based on DD aspects mages are chaotic good. They represent both chaos and good. Freedom is always a good notion, especially if you are judging all of the said people because of actions of felons of that people who happen to be minority. Liberty is always good but it can also represent chaos. Matters of security on the other hand almost always include evil because law demands it.

 

If DD is any judge Mages are chaotic good and Templars are Lawful evil there really isn't any argument. Both chaotic good and lawful evil are the most grey of all alignments and have always portrayed to be best possible rivals. For example do you think Sheriff of Nottingham was pure evil? England was in war and he needed a lot of money to keep the peace and run the city. Robin hood represent chaotic good as he wanted freedom and stole from the rich, damaging the economy and weakening the state but the poor did not slept hungry because of him. 

[Dean_the_Young]

I'm sure there are many felons who would agree.

Somalia is the free-est place on Earth, a libertarian paradise really.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Yeah "neutral" does not work when you force people to face demons or lobotomize them. Templars were never Neutral.

 

Indeed. They are Lawful Good, and mages are Chaotic Whiny.

 

 

Freedom is always a good notion, especially if you are judging all of the said people because of actions of felons of that people who happen to be minority. Liberty is always good but it can also represent chaos. Matters of security on the other hand almost always include evil because law demands it.

 

To whom? If your freedom results in my death, then I'd say no.

 

The whole "liberty  =always pure and good, security or anything contrary = evil" is hogwash.

[Lulupab]

Indeed. They are Lawful Good, and mages are Chaotic Whiny.

 

 

 

 

To whom? If your freedom results in my death, then I'd say no.

 

The whole "liberty  =always pure and good, security or anything contrary = evil" is hogwash.

 

I did not claim liberty is pure good. Its just good and can also represent chaos which is not good. Hence the term Chaotic Good?

 

Security is lawful but also represents evil in many cases as the law itself demands it hence the term Lawful Evil. 

 

The alignments are quite clear in DD if mages and templars from DA were present in DD they would get the said alignments without any question. I suggest you check exact description of those alignments in DD wiki.