I dislike how the fate of the elves dominates this debate. What about the fate of Orlais and Ferelden? And the dwarves. The mages, maybe even the templars?
We could go back to letting the fate of a romantic relationship dominate this debate of nations, if you'd like.
[/troll]
We could go back to letting the fate of a romantic relationship dominate this debate of nations, if you'd like.
[/troll]
As opposed to that, I don't consider the fate of the elves off-topic here. It's just a one-sidedness I'm observing.
This foremost military power is embroiled in a civil war, is undergoing a religious crisis as templars and mages break away from the Chantry to fight their own civil war on Orlesian soil, and Nevarra has apparantly been getting aggressive.
There may be repercussions later on, but at the moment, Orlais is in a very poor position to stop any elves that decide to get uppity
It is a tad bemusing to me that arguments for rebellion in a time of national weakness also rely on the benevolence of the same nation to tolerate gains and not seek rollback once the nation is no longer weak. It is, in effect, depending on the character of the very country you are fighting against. That works well regards to some states, but much less so in regards to others (see: Russia in the last month decade century).
Of course, the city elves are so poorly organized at the moment that talking about their goals is a fools errand. Their leadership has yet to be established. Briala would like to be a leader, but her issues (and influence) remain to be seen.
Well, isn't the thread about TME and its relation to DAI? Orlais and the elves should be the focus of it.
I personally think Orlais will survive the events of DAI regardless of the player's actions, so I'm interested in discussing which will be the elven (and dalish) plot, since I'm not sure how it'll be developed.
I honestly don't have a clue on how the dwarven and Fereldan plots will be developed (and for the former we don't even know if it'll involve Orzammar or Kal-Sharok).
For the mage-templar war, I don't think the war will end in DAI.
You see, I'm debating with myself how I'd like Orlais to continue. Between its status as the most civilized nation, a disagreeable political culture and its status as a bastion of Andrasteanism it's pretty much a love/hate relationship for me.
An interesting development, for instance, would be that mages gain political influence. The mage/templar conflict is a side issue in TME, but still pretty much present in everyone's mind.
It was probably already speculated (I haven't read all the pages), but does someone thing an arranged marriage between Gaspard and Celene will be possible?
Their made for each other. lol. I'd probably be fine with that option lol. I wonder who would actually be the ruler though because neither of those two would share power. Then again, Gaspard did propose marriage to Celene but I'm pretty sure he was expecting to be rejected.
As opposed to that, I don't consider the fate of the elves off-topic here. It's just a one-sidedness I'm observing.
In part, I think few people care about the fate of Orlais because Orlais has regularly been portrayed in a quasi-antagonisti way that doesn't appeal to western liberal sensibilities. They are, if not exceptionally evil, the unpleasant empire of imperialists. They are closely identified with an organized religion that is not only an organized religion, but tied to the suppressions of a population minority. They were foes and boogeymen of sympathetic characters from our world entry point, serving as historic foe to noble Ferelden. They have an institution that can get away with rape and murder of the weak and lower classes (clearly in contrast to what we see in Ferelden or Kirkwall or Dwarves, etc.). Plus, the encounters we have had with Orlesians have tended to be with annoying or unsympathetic figures, frequently arrogant as well.
We've had a pretty limited perspective of Orlais, much of it biased by perspective, so it doesn't surprise me that many people don't consider the fate of Orlais an important concern. In many respects, it's already reached a general consensus of being illegitimate.
It'd be interesting (kind of like how things work in Nevarra, right?), but I think the two plots will be likely isolated from each others. As it was in DAO between TBC quest and the Landsmeet quest.You see, I'm debating with myself how I'd like Orlais to continue. Between its status as the most civilized nation, a disagreeable political culture and its status as a bastion of Andrasteanism it's pretty much a love/hate relationship for me.
An interesting development, for instance, would be that mages gain political influence. The mage/templar conflict is a side issue in TME, but still pretty much present in everyone's mind.
It was probably already speculated (I haven't read all the pages), but does someone thing an arranged marriage between Gaspard and Celene will be possible?
At this point, I doubt it- but then, on the same general grounds that I don't expect Celene and Briala to get back together. I don't expect the Orlais conflict to end by re-engaging pre-conflict relationship proposals.
Their made for each other. lol. I'd probably be fine with that option lol. I wonder who would actually be the ruler though because neither of those two would share power. Then again, Gaspard did propose marriage to Celene but I'm pretty sure he was expecting to be rejected.
At this point, I doubt it- but then, on the same general grounds that I don't expect Celene and Briala to get back together. I don't expect the Orlais conflict to end by re-engaging pre-conflict relationship proposals.
In part, I think few people care about the fate of Orlais because Orlais has regularly been portrayed in a quasi-antagonisti way that doesn't appeal to western liberal sensibilities. They are, if not exceptionally evil, the unpleasant empire of imperialists. They are closely identified with an organized religion that is not only an organized religion, but tied to the suppressions of a population minority. They were foes and boogeymen of sympathetic characters from our world entry point, serving as historic foe to noble Ferelden. They have an institution that can get away with rape and murder of the weak and lower classes (clearly in contrast to what we see in Ferelden or Kirkwall or Dwarves, etc.). Plus, the encounters we have had with Orlesians have tended to be with annoying or unsympathetic figures, frequently arrogant as well.
We've had a pretty limited perspective of Orlais, much of it biased by perspective, so it doesn't surprise me that many people don't consider the fate of Orlais an important concern. In many respects, it's already reached a general consensus of being illegitimate.
I think it's more interesting to debate Orlais' fate because everyone agrees that the City Elves deserve more than they have, but is it worth destroying a nation to get rid of its flaws?
As for the Dalish, I take issue with the people who are apparently unable to accept that they have big flaws as well, as if Zathrian never existed. The fact that they lost a war and are victim of an ally's betrayal way back in history shouldn't make people blind to their flaws. Apparently, the elvhenan empire was, if at all, only marginally better than the Orlesian one, and some of the Dalish are perfect reflections of that fact. This really shouldn't surprise anyone.
(In a more general sense, it does not matter for the moral evaluation of a political evil whether or not a class of oppressed people is defined by race or some less visible attribute)
I don't think it's worth destroying another nation, expecially because the fall of Orlais would cause massive negative consequences for both humans and elves, in my opinion.I think it's more interesting to debate Orlais' fate because everyone agrees that the City Elves deserve more than they have, but is it worth destroying a nation to get rid of its flaws?
As for the Dalish, I take issue with the people who are apparently unable to accept that they have big flaws as well, as if Zathrian never existed. The fact that they lost a war and are victim of an ally's betrayal way back in history shouldn't make people blind to their flaws.
I agree that the dalish have flaws. Though I don't know which ally betrayed the dalish.
I consider the Chantry's Exalted March against the Dales as such. That conflict was a purely political matter and no business of the Chantry.
I wonder if we'll be able to influence whether the City Elves and the Dalish Elves unite with each other. Difficult given the disdain the Dalish have for the City Elves.
I also wonder if its possible that the Orlesian Civil war will end up with Orlais losing part of their country. That one part that I'm really wondering about. I just don't know how divorced the issue with the Elves and the Civil War with Orlais really is. I think they're too entwined...
Plus, it depends on how much damage these veil tears do to the world. How many people will die because of it. Because that'll have an impact on how strong Orlais is...if they are divided between the demons/fade bs and the Civil War, how does that balance?
More than that, TME hinted that Orlais is under constant threat of other countries poaching on their territory. That could also factor in...especially if DA does what I suspect it will do, and leave threads for the next game following this one.
One of the reason Orlais has enjoyed such dominance is because Val Royeaux housed the Divine. If the Chantry no longer has the pull it does due to the Templar split, it might not be in a good position when Inquisition is through.
They weren't allies anymore though. According to the lore there were already a lot of tension between the Chantry and the Dales.I consider the Chantry's Exalted March against the Dales as such. That conflict was a purely political matter and no business of the Chantry.
They weren't allies anymore though. According to the lore there were already a lot of tension between the Chantry and the Dales.
Plus, I don't completely agree on the fact that the Chantry had necessarily no business. It depends on the context. Depending on what the elves were doing in Orlais, the Chantry might've reasons to declare a March.
A religious body shouldn't have had such power to begin with.
I don't think it's worth destroying another nation, expecially because the fall of Orlais would cause massive negative consequences for both humans and elves, in my opinion.
I agree that the dalish have flaws. Though I don't know which ally betrayed the dalish.
Physically destroying an entire nation would be a feat of logistics beyond anything the Inquisition could muster, but serious changes in its political system definitely seem warranted.
I think it's more interesting to debate Orlais' fate because everyone agrees that the City Elves deserve more than they have, but is it worth destroying a nation to get rid of its flaws?
Sometimes. But the assumption there is that destroying the nation will get rid of the flaws. There are few examples of that being successful, and those that are are when the flaws are the result of an empowered minority. Aspects with widespread cultural acceptance will exist without the state, and even survive against state attempts to remove them. It takes extreme patience over time to convince societies to change their common views peacefully (see the decline of influence of Catholicism in France), or extreme brutality and eradication to remove dissent in the short term. Neither are guaranteed successes either.
The question here is 'what do elves deserve'? Defining that will affect the appropriate courses of action.
If the elves 'deserve' their own lands away from Orlais, then yes- taking advantage of Orlesian weakness is an appropriate course of action. Especially if Briala uses the Eluvians to evacuate elves from alienages to some new elven homeland. It is risky, and in no way guaranteed to succeed, but it has less chances of failing while Orlais is temporarily weakened. Societal segregation makes sense with a strategy of prolonging and perpetuating the civil war.
If the elves 'deserve' equality and integration into Orlais and broad respect from humans, however, then perpetuating the civil war and making an enemy of both factions along racial lines is a Bad Idea. No matter who loses, the winner is still 'the humans' who will turn their attention towards reasserting influence over the elves in Orlais. The elves who have spent the time fighting humans and not helping. The elves would be far better making a bargain and embracing one side or the other as a relatively autonomous ally- there is the risk of choosing the wrong side if they jump in too early, but the later they hold off the greater their chance of missing on the chance to be an integrated and indebted ally and more about being an eleventh hour opportunist. The later is better than being an enemy, to be sure, but it does less for integration and respect.
Destroying a nation to get rid of its flaws is just part of the nation building conceit.
As for the Dalish, I take issue with the people who are apparently unable to accept that they have big flaws as well, as if Zathrian never existed. The fact that they lost a war and are victim of an ally's betrayal way back in history shouldn't make people blind to their flaws. Apparently, the elvhenan empire was, if at all, only marginally better than the Orlesian one, and some of the Dalish are perfect reflections of that fact. This really shouldn't surprise anyone.
I wouldn't even call the Dalish conflict a betrayal. Not until we get something that can credibly justify the sacking of major Orlesian settlements.
(In a more general sense, it does not matter for the moral evaluation of a political evil whether or not a class of oppressed people is defined by race or some less visible attribute)
I'd disagree. The moral evoluation of political evil should factor in the nature of differences, visible or not. One of the reasons racism is stupid-evil is because it rested so much on pseudo-science to invent differences that weren't there (or at least mis-attributed).
If a class distinction is made on the basis of a generally non-visible but real attribute, the nature of that attribute will effect the morality of it. Being an violent insurgent, for example, is generally not a visible attribute, but it is significantly different from a peaceful dissident. Even if you can't tell the difference between the two visibly.
1)That's another matter. I wasn't saying that the Chantry should have that power, I was saying that based on what happened their intervention might've been justified.A religious body shouldn't have had such power to begin with.
Physically destroying an entire nation would be a feat of logistics beyond anything the Inquisition could muster, but serious changes in its political system definitely seem warranted.
If the elves 'deserve' their own lands away from Orlais, then yes- taking advantage of Orlesian weakness is an appropriate course of action. Especially if Briala uses the Eluvians to evacuate elves from alienages to some new elven homeland. It is risky, and in no way guaranteed to succeed, but it has less chances of failing while Orlais is temporarily weakened. Societal segregation makes sense with a strategy of prolonging and perpetuating the civil war.
If the elves 'deserve' equality and integration into Orlais and broad respect from humans, however, then perpetuating the civil war and making an enemy of both factions along racial lines is a Bad Idea. No matter who loses, the winner is still 'the humans' who will turn their attention towards reasserting influence over the elves in Orlais. The elves who have spent the time fighting humans and not helping. The elves would be far better making a bargain and embracing one side or the other as a relatively autonomous ally- there is the risk of choosing the wrong side if they jump in too early, but the later they hold off the greater their chance of missing on the chance to be an integrated and indebted ally and more about being an eleventh hour opportunist. The later is better than being an enemy, to be sure, but it does less for integration and respect.
I think that everyone knows that trying to win any sort of freely given respect from Orlais soon enough for it to matter for the current generation is a fool's errand. Establishing the Dales as an independent nation, with Orlais too weakened to take it back (at least for a period of time long enough for the Dales to gather its own strength) would seem to be the optimal solution; if it can be done with Celene's backing, so much the better.
1)That's another matter. I wasn't saying that the Chantry should have that power, I was saying that based on what happened their intervention might've been justified.
2)Changes in the political system might be possible, I agree.
If they're to help anything, they might have to be rather serious ones.
I don't understand what you mean. Is this about the Exalted March or the changes in Orlais?
If they're to help anything, they might have to be rather serious ones.
I don't understand what you mean. Is this about the Exalted March or the changes in Orlais?
Changes in Orlais. But given that actually creating cultural change would be hard, ensuring the independence of the Dales is a better bet in my mind.
I think that everyone knows that trying to win any sort of freely given respect from Orlais soon enough for it to matter for the current generation is a fool's errand. Establishing the Dales as an independent nation, with Orlais too weakened to take it back (at least for a period of time long enough for the Dales to gather its own strength) would seem to be the optimal solution; if it can be done with Celene's backing, so much the better.
Then let's not pretend this is a struggle for civil reform. This is a racial secessionist conflict, and should be evaluated as such.
Then let's not pretend this is a struggle for civil reform. This is a racial secessionist conflict, and should be evaluated as such.
Indeed. If Orlais is going to ignore elven welfare and equality, let the elves handle it themselves. There may be a day later on when such divisions will be unnecessary, but given the lack of things like "Western liberalism," that day is not today.
Changes in Orlais. But given that actually creating cultural change would be hard, ensuring the independence of the Dales is a better bet in my mind.
I think both would be hard.
It does not, however, count as much on Orlesian charity.
Retour en haut
