Question : Anders said he got away 7 times right and everytime they brough him back (put him in isolation) .
Wynn student who was younger then Anders , got away once..and they tried to kill him .
Not trying to raise a flame war , but anyone know why is there a difference? do circles have different laws on mages escaping?
Anders probably got lucky with the templars they sent to catch him.
Anders probably got lucky with the templars they sent to catch him.
There's that and also the fact that Wynne's student was an elf.
Question : Anders said he got away 7 times right and everytime they brough him back (put him in isolation) .
Wynn student who was younger then Anders , got away once..and they tried to kill him .
Not trying to raise a flame war , but anyone know why is there a difference? do circles have different laws on mages escaping?
Discussed in this thread: http://forum.bioware...-his-harrowing/
Templars are heroes who use the blood of innocent mages to protect the world from demons. (or from mage "heroes")
Oh look, that made just as much sense!
Dishonorable tactics towards the betterment of others. That's the difference.
You think the line between innocent and guilty is black and white, and that it's never ok to kill innocents. I say it is if it will improve things in the long run.
That being said, I actually agree with this sentiment to a degree. You need to either kill the demon in the fade, or the innocent host to stop an abomination.
Dishonorable tactics towards the betterment of others. That's the difference.
You think the line between innocent and guilty is black and white, and that it's never ok to kill innocents. I say it is if it will improve things in the long run.
That being said, I actually agree with this sentiment to a degree. You need to either kill the demon in the fade, or the innocent host to stop an abomination.
It is never okay to kill innocents. Necessary and/or required perhaps, but never okay.
Uhm... just a question:
Why exactly is this thread in feedback&suggestions? AND in the DA:I - subforum?
It is never okay to kill innocents. Necessary and/or required perhaps, but never okay.
I disagree, and will continue to do so.
I disagree, and will continue to do so.
Then I sincerely hope you are never in a position of power.
Then I sincerely hope you are never in a position of power.
I sincerely hope your naivette will never get you killed.
I sincerely hope your naivette will never get you killed.
What naivette? I said that sacrificing innocents may be necessary. Just because something is necessary though doesn't mean it is okay.
Even Anders thought he should be punished for what he did.
Uhm... just a question:
Why exactly is this thread in feedback&suggestions? AND in the DA:I - subforum?
I see this same thread in 4 different places at the moment. I guess the people that like Anders really want you to know what a good guy he is.
What naivette? I said that sacrificing innocents may be necessary. Just because something is necessary though doesn't mean it is okay.
Even Anders thought he should be punished for what he did.
The guy is saying Anders was a hero and killing innocent people was OK. Another poster in this thread said Anders was innocent and people in the real world brand innocent people terrorists all the time so they aren't surprised Anders gets called one either and that is a very sad thing.
If that is the mentality of Anders supporters I really am glad I don't like him. The people that are OK with murdering innocent people and look at real life terrorists as innocent people that are called terrorists for no reason have a disconnect from morality and common sense so large I am at a loss for what to say.
I see this same thread in 4 different places at the moment. I guess the people that like Anders really want you to know what a good guy he is.
To be fair, its very difficult to speak louder than the sound of exploding Chantries.
It is never okay to kill innocents. Necessary and/or required perhaps, but never okay.
What's the difference between necessary and okay, really? Besides making you feel guilty for no apparent purpose, that is.
Necessary is something that while not okay has to be done. For example the Grey Wardens keeping things like the Joining secret is necessary.
Has anyone even stopped to consider how awesome it is that we're able to conduct a civil (by internet standards), thought-provoking moral debate about a character in a video game? Thank you, BioWare, for caring enough to create a story and characters with enough depth to actually prompt this kind of discussion--I sincerely appreciate your faith in the intelligence level of your players, and I hope that you never feel the need to "dumb down" future games just because the haters* yell loud enough to drown out the rest of us.
/feels
*To clarify: I mean the people in the media who complained about sex scenes IN AN M-RATED GAME and the ones who sent Jennifer Hepler death threats, not people who dislike Anders.
Modifié par whanzephruseke, 03 octobre 2014 - 11:31 .
Has anyone even stopped to consider how awesome it is that we're able to conduct a civil (by internet standards), thought-provoking moral debate about a character in a video game? Thank you, BioWare, for caring enough to create a story and characters with enough depth to actually prompt this kind of discussion--I sincerely appreciate your faith in the intelligence level of your players, and I hope that you never feel the need to "dumb down" future games just because the haters yell loud enough to drown out the rest of us.
/feels
Another game I know that provokes a moral debate is the ending to the Last of Us. 
That can get intense too...
What naivette? I said that sacrificing innocents may be necessary. Just because something is necessary though doesn't mean it is okay.
Even Anders thought he should be punished for what he did.
Your naivette stems from your ironclad belief that there is such a thing as black and white innocence. There is no such thing, and never will be. Human nature makes it impossible.
Your naivette stems from your ironclad belief that there is such a thing as black and white innocence. There is no such thing, and never will be. Human nature makes it impossible.
When people say 'innocent victims' they aren't talking about if they are morally pure. Like if a guy gets hit by an out of control car while he was sitting in his living room watching TV. That is an innocent person. i.e. someone that didn't contribute to the situation that caused him injury or death. That guy in his living room could have been cheating on his taxes and stealing office supplies, morally questionable behavior, but still 'innocent' in that he didn't cut the guys breaks to make a random strangers car go out of control.
The notion that 'human nature' makes everyone guilty of something is a cop out excuse to try and justify taking innocent people's lives
Has anyone even stopped to consider how awesome it is that we're able to conduct a civil (by internet standards), thought-provoking moral debate about a character in a video game? Thank you, BioWare, for caring enough to create a story and characters with enough depth to actually prompt this kind of discussion--I sincerely appreciate your faith in the intelligence level of your players, and I hope that you never feel the need to "dumb down" future games just because the haters* yell loud enough to drown out the rest of us.
/feels
*To clarify: I mean the people in the media who complained about sex scenes IN AN M-RATED GAME and the ones who sent Jennifer Hepler death threats, not people who dislike Anders.
I think it's fair to say I hated the majority of DA2 and never once did I want to cause physical harm to anyone over it. The nut jobs that sent in death threats over a video game are a special kind of disgusting. And yeah that Fox News story about how Mass Effect was pornographic because it had 2 seconds worth of cartoon butt was really stupid.
Your naivette stems from your ironclad belief that there is such a thing as black and white innocence. There is no such thing, and never will be. Human nature makes it impossible.
The people Anders killed, minus maybe Elthina, had nothing to do with the Mage/Templar situation. They were just priests and townsfolk.
So they were innocent of any involvement and yet were killed by Anders. Thus he killed innocent people.
But if you really think no person is innocent, go turn yourself into the police right now. After all you are guilty, right?
I love Anders, but I hate Anders threads. I really do. Because all they will ever be is passive aggressive flame wars. OP if you want my advice as an Anders fan I can give it to you: Don't let other people's opinions upset you, they have a right to have those opinions and we're all different. Not everyone has to like Anders. Not everyone has to hate him either. Of course we can give our views and defend him, but that will never work at swaying people. We must learn to respect eachother's views. If someone tries to corner you/ be rude to you for liking a fictional character they hate, just look the other way because the back and forth will never end.
The people Anders killed, minus maybe Elthina, had nothing to do with the Mage/Templar situation. They were just priests and townsfolk.
So they were innocent of any involvement and yet were killed by Anders. Thus he killed innocent people.
But if you really think no person is innocent, go turn yourself into the police right now. After all you are guilty, right?
The police are about guilty of a crime within their laws that they can prove, not about reading human nature.
That being said, Chantry personnel as a whole support the Chantry, which are far from being innocent.
Retour en haut
