34723 réponses à ce sujet

[Br3admax]

The ending where Ciri

Spoiler

becomes Empress makes no sense within the canon, e.g. 'the law of surprise' and how Ciri has never shown intrest in the throne, or her blood father (who was going to force her to marry him at one point).

Geralt never gives up on his own belief, he simply does not want to control Ciri. He still protests, but she goes anyway. Yes I like the Witcher for Geralt's heuristic (which happens to be the general theme for the first and third game), imagine that. And yes, I don't like Cassandra's heuristic at all (this should be obvious), because there is no greater good. Cassandra lets a stupid institution, ruin a good thing that she has in her actual life because she is poisoned by her idealism, and faith in the Chantry. She is supposed to be a strong character, yet she worships a dictator who if existing, created the Dawrkspawn as this completley unreasonable punishment, because a few mages broke into his house. So the land of Thedas gets the blight, which kills basically everything that it infects, and how do Darkspawn propagate? Through brood mothers... So these poor women go through that whole ordeal because people they have no connection to broke into the Maker's house 1000 years before these women were even alive... Cassandra does not even think 'what kind of a 'being' does something so evil and grotesque?'  She gives up her love, to save an organization with those horribly masochistic teachings because she is convinced that that organization constitutes 'greater good'. Geralt would never give up Yennefer to become the guradian of such tripe; if he could, Geralt would probably have a silver sword poised to strike the Maker. Cassandra would probably make excuses, the problem of evil, courtly love blah blah etc.

Wow. An absentee father figure is now a dictator, and the ending that has almost the exact same situation happening in it is nonsensical because reasons. It's her religion, that's not going to just magically change because of your opinions, and she's no lesser for believing in her god. It's actually pretty asinine to think it is. And since Cassandra doesn't make excuses for politics when we're faced with, well, politics, I'm guessing this is all just some half-assed attempt to explain why Geralt letting Ciri go is the most amazing thing that ever happened, and the Inquisitor letting Cassandra go is a crime against humanity, just because a "god" is involved. Classic, euphoric-filled condescension. 

[Andres Hendrix]

Wow. An absentee father figure is now a dictator, and the ending that has almost the exact same situation happening in it is nonsensical because reasons. It's her religion, that's not going to just magically change because of your opinions, and she's no lesser for believing in her god. It's actually pretty asinine to think it is. And since Cassandra doesn't make excuses for politics when we're faced with, well, politics, I'm guessing this is all just some half-assed attempt to explain why Geralt letting Ciri go is the most amazing thing that ever happened, and the Inquisitor letting Cassandra go is a crime against humanity, just because a "god" is involved. Classic, euphoric-filled condescension. 

Yes, according to the Chantry the Maker put into being a divine plan which includes Andreste and Darkspawn. After years of masochism and suffering, when all the "awful" people of Thedas have learned their lesson Mr. Maker will come back and everything will become sparkly and grand!

As for the rest of what you wrote I did not say what Geralt did was the 'best thing ever', I said that Geralt's heuristic is the opposite of Cassandra's, and I much prefer Geralt's adherence to his own path, individual good. I don't much care for Cassandra's heuristic, her faith in a greater good which she thinks constitutes the Chantry, I explained why. Oh, and I completely agree that the Andrestain faith is her religion, no argument there... And such a 'realization' does not make her character seem any less a hypocrite for not questioning her religion. In fact none of the supposed righteous faithful in the series has ever asked his or herself 'how sick must the Maker be to devise and then curse us with Darkspawn, and the blight, cannibalism, rape and horror that comes with them?'

[AresKeith]

So much salt going on

[X Equestris]

1) The very foundation of the Chantry was based on Drakon war of expansions. The Chantry was used to justify the slaughter of great many people that did not wished to join this new religion.
 
2) Segregation of mages. The templars and Sekeers, groups that belonged to the Chantry killed many mages during annulments, even for foolish reasons, like in Rivain for example. Never mind isolated cases were templars were never held accountable for their murders.
 
3) In the aftermath of the exalted marches of the Qunari, ,many unarmed Rivain citizens were murdered in cold blood by Chantry fanatics because they wanted to live by the Qun rather then the Chantry.
 
4) The segregation of any groups that choose to not live by their ideology. Be it elves, dwarfs, non believers, mages, etc. You can see Chantry priests demonstrating great bigotry to anyone that doesn't agree with them. Not all of them, no, but the majority does.

On number three, let me point out that this policy was one made by the Rivaini chapter of the White Chantry without approval from above. It also wasn't exclusively done by Andrastians, as the codex mentions Rivaini "nationalists" which almost certainly includes a large number of Rivaini following their traditional religion.

[AWTEW]

So much salt going on

 

Enough to put on your fish and chips?

[AresKeith]

Enough to put on your fish and chips?

 

Terrible combination 

[Boomshakalakalakaboom]

Enough to put on your fesh and cheps?

Totes had fish and chips for tea.

I also fixed the spelling for you. Gotta put your accent in your writing, neighbour.

[Merela]

 

Source: http://ohthatsjordan...5-for-the-emoji

 

 

Source: http://ohthatsjordan...63/cassandra-b9

[Siha]

I said that Geralt's heuristic is the opposite of Cassandra's, and I much prefer Geralt's adherence to his own path, individual good. I don't much care for Cassandra's heuristic, her faith in a greater good which she thinks constitutes the Chantry <snip> And such a 'realization' does not make her character seem any less a hypocrite for not questioning her religion.

 

I had to skip about 70% of what you guys talked about because of the TW3 spoilers. So maybe I'm out of touch here. But:

 

I don't understand your reasoning. How is Geralt following "his own path" and Cassandra is not? Cass starts out the right hand of the Divine, a part of the executive of the Chantry, dedicating her life to the Chantry and the Chantry only. Just like Geralt she adheres to her chosen path. The Chantry demands, the Chantry shall receive. Personal opinion hardly counts. How is she different from Geralt? Both sacrifice anything necessary to do what they set out to do. Geralt also always defines himself as his role: a witcher, accepting whatever rules this imposes on him.

The only, really only difference is that Geralt does not have an immediate boss and operates autonomously, simply for a lack of a chain of command.

 

Moreover, both act "egoistically". It does not matter if I dedicate my life to one other person, a family, a group, an organization, or a cause. Whatever they do, they do it because they think THIS is what fulfills them and what gives their life meaning. And whatever does not fit into this scheme is sacrificed and dropped along the way.

 

Besides, Geralt never questions his goals, path, or means either. He is what he is and there is no doubt about it in his mind. I have not played TW3 yet, but in TW2 he never questions anything, hardly believes in anything at all. Same side of the same coin if you ask me. If Cass is a hypocrite, so is he.

[AWTEW]

Terrible combination 

 

GO home keith, ya drunk.

 

Totes had fish and chips for tea.

I also fixed the spelling for you. Gotta put your accent in your writing, neighbour.

 

Pssh...putting accents in writing just confuses people. If I wrote 'and' like I actually say it. grammar nazi's would be on my case 24/7.

 

No wait, I forgot. Technically, the word 'and' is said more like 'Aaend'. However, the 'd' sound is so low pitch, and The A sound is over emphasised  when you say it, it comes across more like AAenn to the foreigner.

 

* shares super-secret-handshake with boom

[Boomshakalakalakaboom]

GO home keith, ya drunk.


Pssh...putting accents in writing just confuses people. If I wrote 'and' like I actually say it. grammar nazi's would be on my case 24/7.

No wait, I forgot. Technically, the word 'and' is said more like 'Aaend'. However, the 'd' sound is so low pitch, and The A sound is over emphasised when you say it, it comes across more like AAenn to the foreigner.

* shares super-secret-handshake with boom

Lol!

My parents are actually British so my kiwi accent isn't very strong due to their influence, though I was born here.

[AWTEW]

Lol!

My parents are actually British so my kiwi accent isn't very strong due to their influence, though I was born here.

 

I went to Britian once, it was weird. It took them so long to say a sentence.

 

How are you today?

 

instead of 

 

ar ow ya?

[Jaison1986]

I had to skip about 70% of what you guys talked about because of the TW3 spoilers. So maybe I'm out of touch here. But:

 

I don't understand your reasoning. How is Geralt following "his own path" and Cassandra is not? Cass starts out the right hand of the Divine, a part of the executive of the Chantry, dedicating her life to the Chantry and the Chantry only. Just like Geralt she adheres to her chosen path. The Chantry demands, the Chantry shall receive. Personal opinion hardly counts. How is she different from Geralt? Both sacrifice anything necessary to do what they set out to do. Geralt also always defines himself as his role: a witcher, accepting whatever rules this imposes on him.

The only, really only difference is that Geralt does not have an immediate boss and operates autonomously, simply for a lack of a chain of command.

 

Moreover, both act "egoistically". It does not matter if I dedicate my life to one other person, a family, a group, an organization, or a cause. Whatever they do, they do it because they think THIS is what fulfills them and what gives their life meaning. And whatever does not fit into this scheme is sacrificed and dropped along the way.

 

Besides, Geralt never questions his goals, path, or means either. He is what he is and there is no doubt about it in his mind. I have not played TW3 yet, but in TW2 he never questions anything, hardly believes in anything at all. Same side of the same coin if you ask me. If Cass is a hypocrite, so is he.

 

Well, it's kind of hard to compare, as you can roleplay as Geralt, but not as Cassandra.

 

It's true Geralt stick to his witcher lifestyle. But then again, Witchers are like grey wardens. Their role is an practical one, wereas Cassandra role is a religious one. Geralt slay monsters and witches that endanger the common folk. It's an direct role, while Cassandra serves the Chantry to enforce the word of the Maker, even if there is no proof of what his word is or if he is even real. So I find it hard to compare when their jobs are so drastically different.

 

And what's this hypocrisy everyone is talking about anyway? The only time I saw Cassandra being hypocrital was at Mythal's temple.

[Andres Hendrix]

I had to skip about 70% of what you guys talked about because of the TW3 spoilers. So maybe I'm out of touch here. But:

 

I don't understand your reasoning. How is Geralt following "his own path" and Cassandra is not? Cass starts out the right hand of the Divine, a part of the executive of the Chantry, dedicating her life to the Chantry and the Chantry only. Just like Geralt she adheres to her chosen path. The Chantry demands, the Chantry shall receive. Personal opinion hardly counts. How is she different from Geralt? Both sacrifice anything necessary to do what they set out to do. Geralt also always defines himself as his role: a witcher, accepting whatever rules this imposes on him.

The only, really only difference is that Geralt does not have an immediate boss and operates autonomously, simply for a lack of a chain of command.

 

Moreover, both act "egoistically". It does not matter if I dedicate my life to one other person, a family, a group, an organization, or a cause. Whatever they do, they do it because they think THIS is what fulfills them and what gives their life meaning. And whatever does not fit into this scheme is sacrificed and dropped along the way.

 

Besides, Geralt never questions his goals, path, or means either. He is what he is and there is no doubt about it in his mind. I have not played TW3 yet, but in TW2 he never questions anything, hardly believes in anything at all. Same side of the same coin if you ask me. If Cass is a hypocrite, so is he.

I see no point in me re-explaining all this; you are the one skipping "70 percent" of what I write.

[Merela]

 

 

Source: http://felasil.tumbl.../cassandra-u-ok

 

Also I want to thank everyone who spoiled one of TW3's ending. Very classy of you guys.

[Siha]

I see no point in me re-explaining all this; you are the one skipping "70 percent" of what I write.

 

Yes, I haven't played TW3 yet, so I have to. From what I skimmed through I already learned that there is a woman named Ciri, obviously a witcher, and Geralt has some sort of something with her, letting her go at the end (or even her dying). This is already much more spoiler than I would have liked.

But, sure, you can also simply feel offended, have it your way.

[o Ventus]

Totes had fish and chips for tea.

 

 

 

fish and chips for tea.

 

That syntax though. I'm so happy I'm not from the UK or anywhere else this kind of phrase is used.

[Boomshakalakalakaboom]

I went to Britian once, it was weird. It took them so long to say a sentence.

How are you today?

instead of

ar ow ya?

Ahaha.

Just depends on what part you go to, but yeah, my parents have the snooty kind of accent. Very proper. Only ever heard my father swear once my entire life so I don't know why I have such a foul mouth.

[Boomshakalakalakaboom]

That syntax though. I'm so happy I'm not from the UK or anywhere else this kind of phrase is used.

Haha, how does that not make sense to you?

[Andres Hendrix]

Yes, I haven't played TW3 yet, so I have to. From what I skimmed through I already learned that there is a woman named Ciri, obviously a witcher, and Geralt has some sort of something with her, letting her go at the end (or even her dying). This is already much more spoiler than I would have liked.

But, sure, you can also simply feel offended, have it your way.

Then why did you get involved in this conversation in the first place?

[o Ventus]

Haha, how does that not make sense to you?

 

Because "fish and chips for tea" to anyone who isn't British (or any other country that doesn't use that term) sounds like one is making tea using fish and chips. I'm not a fish and chips connoisseur, but I think a tea derived from fish and chips would taste f****g terrible.

 

I never said it doesn't make sense (I know what you're saying when you say it), I'm just glad my country's English doesn't have phrases like that. That doesn't mean much though, because American English is still full of phrases that sound stupid when taken at face value

[Boomshakalakalakaboom]

It's just a synonym.

And I'm from New Zealand. I alternate between saying dinner and tea. I just go with whatever pops out first.

Edit: and yes, a cup of tea derived from fish and chips would most likely be ghastly. I don't want it near me.

[Merela]

 

Source: http://friendlypapay...st/120629446171

 

 

 

Source: http://incorrectdrag...ritersramblings

 

 

Source: http://wardensofgrey...ish-downloading

[AWTEW]

It's just a synonym.

And I'm from New Zealand. I alternate between saying dinner and tea. I just go with whatever pops out first.

Edit: and yes, a cup of tea derived from fish and chips would most likely be ghastly. I don't want it near me.

eh I drink tea with fish and chips. It doesn't taste that bad.

I was told, that the reason people here began using tea an dinner interchangeably, is because the sun sets a lot earlier. So people here have there dinner when it is tea time in uk.

Makes sense to me.

[Merela]

 

 

 

 

Source: http://goatspawn.tum...ween-look-at-my