To jump into the defence of the Dalish account: At no point does WoT say the Dalish account is untrue. It discusses events that is only present in the Orlesian account (giving it osme validity), but it does not in any way contradict the dalish account. Since the versions are not incompatible this means that the Dalish version could still be a relatively true account despite everything.
I find some aspects of it suspect, yes. But I won't pretend there's proof it's not true.
To jump into the defence of the Dalish account: At no point does WoT say the Dalish account is untrue. It discusses events that is only present in the Orlesian account (giving it osme validity), but it does not in any way contradict the dalish account. Since the versions are not incompatible this means that the Dalish version could still be a relatively true account despite everything.
I find some aspects of it suspect, yes. But I won't pretend there's proof it's not true.
I found the entire thing suspect once i actually bothered reading the WOT account on it.
Its just that Dalish lore seemed to fall flat on the accounting of Humanity starting the war once Word of God canon literally starting stating that the war began when elves were marching on Orlais.
It doesn't have to directly say the Dalish account is untrue. All it ahs to do is show that the Dalish were the aggressors, and BAM then the Dalish Codex entry is disproven. And that is EXACTLY what WoT does.
I feel as though most of the people here are just arguing for the sake of arguing. There is no answer as to whose account is the right one or even if either of them are the right one. For all we know the correct account is made up of truths from both sides as is the case in much of our history. there are two sides to every history, the victor's and the loser's and neither is completely true.
Exactly and really does it matter who started it when those people are all long dead?Seems silly for both sides to hold a grudge against an entire race because of an ancient war and use it as justification for the eradication/subjugation of a race or nation.
I couldn't care less about who started the war. What I care about is the spreading of misinformation.
Exactly and really does it matter who started it when those people are all long dead?Seems silly for both sides to hold a grudge against an entire race because of an ancient war and use it as justification for the eradication/subjugation of a race or nation.
Because history matters, even in fictional worlds
Yet one account is given in the book the other is not
The mention of the attack on the town of Red Crossing, but not the nuances of the inception of the war, or even the fact that there is a schism between what the Andrastian humans believe took place, and what the Dalish elves believe happened.
The mention of the attack on the town of Red Crossing, but not the nuances of the inception of the war, or even the fact that there is a schism between what the Andrastian humans believe took place, and what the Dalish elves believe happened.
Why would there be? Its establishsing canon, not indulging the Dalish fans desire to absolve them of all wrongdoing
This is going in circles now.
I found the entire thing suspect once i actually bothered reading the WOT account on it.
Its just that Dalish lore seemed to fall flat on the accounting of Humanity starting the war once Word of God canon literally starting stating that the war began when elves were marching on Orlais.
That's when orlais consider the war to have started, but WoT clearsly states they started skirmishing years prior to Red Crossing. What skirmishes were these? It's entirely possible to align this to the Dalish account.
Simply, we lack enough context and lore to dismiss the dalish account even if we can find it suspect. We cannot rule it out just because it¨s vague and undetailed.
It doesn't have to directly say the Dalish account is untrue. All it ahs to do is show that the Dalish were the aggressors, and BAM then the Dalish Codex entry is disproven. And that is EXACTLY what WoT does.
The dalish account states no such thing. And as you might recall... there were skirmishing prior to 2:09. The elves could consider that to be aggressive action against them and voilá... both accounts are true.
As I mentioned above. We lack context.
This is going in circles now.
Then we shall Annul them
The dalish account states no such thing. And as you might recall... there were skirmishing prior to 2:09. The elves could consider that to be aggressive action against them and voilá... both accounts are true.
As I mentioned above. We lack context.
No, since the Dalish codex entry specifically says that it was the CHANTRY that perpetrated the war. While WoT makes it perfectly clear that the Chantry was COMPLETELY uninvovled in the war, until after the sacking of Montsimmard. So tell me, how does the Templars invading the Dales starting the war, fit with the Chantry being uninvolved in it?
Red Crossing has been confirmed as the START of the war. Whatever went on before that was SKIRMISHES at best. It doesn't matter how the Dalish felt, it doesn't matter how the Orlesian felt. The war started at Red Crossing, period.
It isn't my opinion, it is WORD OF GOD. You can fight it all you want, I do jsut so dearly wish you would stop flodding the forums with your Dalish master race propaganda. It gets extremely tiring having to shoot you down every damn time.
I haven't read a single developer state that one historical account about the fall of the Dales was true over the other. Until such time, I'm seeing little point to debating the opinion held by certain fans who favor the Chantry and the templars, or the inflammatory posts that seem more geared towards inciting a flame war than having an actual discussion. As others have pointed it, it's becoming a rather circular discussion.
The purpose of the thread was about my interest in seeing the Dalish protagonist being able to express points of view held by the People. The Dalish hold different views from their Andrastian counterparts on a myriad of issues, from their faith in the Creators (who are trapped in the Eternal City) to their view on spirits and the Beyond. I'm hoping that, since there has been discussion that (at least) the Dalish mage will be one optional background for the player, that their unique perspective isn't lost when the player chooses this racial option.
You really don't get it, do you?
You really don't get it, do you?
Its Lob, Its about like trying to Convince Xil the Circle isn't slavery.
Just isn't worth the time nor effort.
I wonder if the Second Volume of the World of Thedas will involve more Dalish information?
I would like to see more information about the Dalish come out. I find their mythology interesting with the Creators, the Forgotten Ones, an eternal struggle, and the Eternal City. And the concept of a people holding on to their religion and culture in the face of overwhelming odds is one I find very appealing.
Perhaps if the ruins of Arlathan are discovered (based on one of the pieces of concept artwork that seemed to elude to Arlathan), the Dalish Inquisitor might also be able to uncover some mysteries about the ancient elves.
The statements "The Chantry launched armed incursions into Dalish territory that devolved into bloody skirmishes" and "the Dalish war with Orlais began with the attack on Red Crossing" are not contradictory.
No, since the Dalish codex entry specifically says that it was the CHANTRY that perpetrated the war. While WoT makes it perfectly clear that the Chantry was COMPLETELY uninvovled in the war, until after the sacking of Montsimmard. So tell me, how does the Templars invading the Dales starting the war, fit with the Chantry being uninvolved in it?
Red Crossing has been confirmed as the START of the war. Whatever went on before that was SKIRMISHES at best. It doesn't matter how the Dalish felt, it doesn't matter how the Orlesian felt. The war started at Red Crossing, period.
Except it does when people use it to vilify one side of the conflict.
The statements "The Chantry launched armed incursions into Dalish territory that devolved into bloody skirmishes" and "the Dalish war with Orlais began with the attack on Red Crossing" are not contradictory.
The War was started by the Dalish attack, small scale skirmishes are nothing
Except it does when people use it to vilify one side of the conflict.
Vilification doesn't negate the aggression of one faction against the other though.
PC perspective aside, The Dalish began the war against Orlais, debatable Chantry incursions aside, they attacked Red Crossing and began that conflict that is stated plainly by WOT.
Well, the Dalish codex isn't necessarily "wrong". It was already super abbreviated. All it says is "First came missionaries. Then Templars. Then exile." You don't exactly have to reach World of Thedas to know there was probably a whole bunch of other stuff that also happened in between those 3 things as well. And as for the Chantry vs Orlais being behind it, elves could very easily perceive the two as being effectively the same thing. They know Chantry missionaries were sent first in and that the conflict had a religious bent by the end with the Divine calling for a Holy War and their religion being outlawed. It makes it very easy to perceive that the their religion was the true motive the humans had for fighting the war.
And while Orlais and the Chantry are not the same entity, they're related closely enough that the elves could still be partially right.
I also don't think it's fair to dismiss the opening skirmishes as the start of the conflict. Technically we also don't know that the elves' aggression against Red Crossing was a deliberate attempt to start a war either. It could have just been a raid intended to really just stick it to some nearby shems after the last border skirmish.
Except it does when people use it to vilify one side of the conflict.
And who EXACTLY is being villified in the following sentence: "The war between Orlais and the Dales started when, after years of border skirmishes and strained political relationship, the Dalish attacked the Orlesian town of Red Crossing"? Who? NO ONE! It is a simple historical fact statement. No one is being villified. It is a simple yet detailed explanation of a series of events that lead to war.
World of Thedas, page 6. Mike Laidlaw, Creative Director introduction to the book: "Races, Politics, nations, it's all here: ruthlessly fact checked, beautifully illustrated, and artfully arranged."
World of Thedas, page 7. Legend of Symbols used in the book and page layout: "Though written in-world, the volume's main text is one, objective, voice. Portions of the text are spotlighted for readers who prefer to browse."
How much more direct does the book have to be regarding the matter of objectivity?
You know fully well that the Dalish master race can do no wrong, and that the ONLY way that even the word of god can prove their ideas wrong, is if it very specifically, and with sources in the footnotes, points out EXACTLY where and how the Dalish are wrong. The Dalish will then take the Word of God up in a commitee, and vote on the matter. If rejected the Word of God is burned on a great pyre of lies from other writers and gods who dared contradict the one true master race.
Retour en haut