228 réponses à ce sujet

[Ryzaki]

Beating a crippled man,

(claps)

Never have I seen more valor.
 

 

He's crippled?

 

Oh fine she can beat him by stripping him of assets, appearance and power. :3 there's more than one way to skin a bear as it were.

[MisterJB]

He's crippled?

As of the end of the book, his fighting days are over.

I hope that means the Inquisitor will have the option to stand as his Champion at one point.

 

 

 

Oh fine she can beat him by stripping him of assets, appearance and power. :3 there's more than one way to skin a bear as it were.

That's true.

 

[Sylvianus]

I don't believe I've ever heard or read about medieval knights who received their knighthood for murdering some peasants. I'm pretty sure they weren't trained that way either.

 

If part of a chevalier's initiation is murdering City Elves, as Hinata Hyuuga said, then, well. I think even hardcore Nazis would be appaled by that. They didn't have their soldiers kill Jews simply to test their stomach. 

 

It's not even about racism, it's just that murdering civilians is a war crime and atrocity that doesn't even help to win a real fight in any way whatsoever. For that you train in fencing, not butchering.

 

 War crime ? You do realize that this notion didn't exist in medevial times ? Murdering civilians ? What does even mean civilian in medevial times ? There are peasants, merchants, etc, victims and that's all. And peasants were always the first ones to suffer and often for nothing. Soldiers, chevaliers and lords killed them at war or at peace at will. The point of Lady Payne is that all your notions about war crimes, human rights and conventions of Geneva didn't exist at all. Hard people for hard times. Killing a few peasants for soldiers meant nothing. I've read the whole 100 year war between france and England. Nobody gave a crap about peasants, not even to defend them. Often their own armies plundered what they had and ravaged their cities. Where were people screaming against them because of " war crimes " ? Nobody. All the soldiers moved on and nobody was upset. Some chevaliers and folks could personally feel uncomfortable but there was no global mentality that condemned this kind of hostile behavior toward what you call " civilians. ". So when chevaliers are asked to kill some peons elves, it's not so horrible as it would be considered today. There is definitely a barrier that separates our reality from theirs.That's what Lady of Payne is saying. We're not in 2014.

 

There 's no human rights, there's no second world war which happened and helped humanity to think about the horrible things we are able to do, that's something people should take into account even if it justifies nothing. I personally find it ridiculous when people aren't even able to understand that point.

 

Expansonism, racism, the thought of superiority over other people, imperialism, being a warmonger against another country, people thinking peasants worth nothing, all those things happened in the past, were common in real life in most countries and during a looooong time.

 

So when I see people saying, " i'm going to burn a whole country because its society is racist or snob ", I'm either thinking they are f*cking kidding or they know nothing about history in real life. People in medieval times in real life in most countries were racists, nationalists, homophobic, religious fanatics, intolerant, etc etc. And among them, there were still good people. it wasn't black and white.

 

Obviously, countries need times and ages to grow up, improve themself, and change their mindset.

 

Personally, when I see a racist, instead of wanting to " kill him ", sheeh,I'd rather prefer to convince him that he's wrong.

 

The Chevaliers are awesome to me if I look at Ser Michel and Gaspard. A powerful organization that can fight the darkspawn, any powerful ennemy. The obvious smart thing to do for me would be only to change the rule about kiling elves for the initiation instead of killing everyone like a fool. it will not revive the dead to kill hundreds useful warriors, the proud of the country by the way. The core problem is the system that could be easily resolved with new rules.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

Beating a crippled man,

(claps)

Never have I seen more valor.
 

 

He seemed to be able to fend off Celene just fine, so I think he meant as one of fighting at the elite level the Chevaliers are supposed to be.

[MisterJB]

Well, you know, a crippled chevalier is still worth twenty thugs.

 

Naked Ser Michel killing three armed and armored Dalish Warriors with a blanket comes to mind.

[Maraas]

 War crime ? You do realize that this notion didn't exist in medevial times ?

I do, and I didn't mean it should apply here. But the case in point was about chevalier's initiation. If it's really about killing civilians, then references to our grimdark past are misplaced. I was arguing the notion that military training requires human sacrifices in order to harden the trainee so they wouldn't flinch in a real fight. Because it really doesn't, and it never did. 

 

You don't become a better fighter by beating someone who can't fight back. Simple.

[Sylvianus]

I'd like to understand why Gaspard is a villain. He wants the throne because he thinks Celene is weak and ineffective and he wants to save his country ? Yep, that's pretty much a good goal to me. He's a patriot. And the fact is he tried to avoid the war before acting. War is a consequence of the impasse between him and celene, that's it.

 

Gaspard knowing that a war would make people suffer makes him a villain ? Please, I hope that's not argument. You don't have to be a genius to know that. I'm even surprised that Celene couldn't grasp such thing. Sometimes to save your country, you have to do what is necessary, even if winter is coming. He didn't want his people to suffer, but he felt that the country would be lost otherwise, regardless of if you think he was wrong or not.

 

He wants another war with Ferelden ? How that makes him a villain is beyond me . There are wars between countries since the beginning of humanity.

 

He simply doesn't care about elves ? How that makes him a vilain is really odd.

 

He wouldn't have hesitated to kill the elves that rebelled against the throne, like Celene did for other " political " reasons ? Nope. Still doesn't make him a villain.

 

He killed a few elves during his initiation ? So did Michel, and I'm not seeing people saying that he's a villain. He has followed the orders of an organization that is considered legitimate in his country.

 

He has killed people for the Game ? So did Celene. He wants Ferelden ? The same for Celene, and she doesn't want war because she thinks it's less effective.

 

What else ? Please, give me your arguments, so I could understand what is a " villain. "

[Sylvianus]

I do, and I didn't mean it should apply here. But the case in point was about chevalier's initiation. If it's really about killing civilians, then references to our grimdark past are misplaced. I was arguing the notion that military training requires human sacrifices in order to harden the trainee so they wouldn't flinch in a real fight. Because it really doesn't, and it never did. 

 

You don't become a better fighter by beating someone who can't fight back. Simple.

 

I agree on that specific point that it's a dumb thing to do, killing a few peasants that don't know how to fight for an organization which want to be the best. Sorry then, If that was your only point.

 

 Reading the few last pages, I still think that my post was relevant though.

[calvinien]

The definition of what constitutes a villain varies from person to person. Gaspard has not been seen defending any of the actions you hold monstruous therefore, is he guilty simply because he accepts them as natural parts of life?

Let's say that Amaranthine declared itself independent from Ferelden which would lead to the nation losing the ports closest to the Free Marchs thereby criplling the economy. Will Alistair be a monster if he orders Amaranthine taken back, knowing full well that this will result in bloodshed, rape?

 

Plus, that initiation has been going on for hundred of years before Gaspard was even born. Is every Chevalier guilty too?

 

He never mentions them. If he thought there were issues with the chevaliers, would not it have been mentioned? Everything we know about him says that he considers himself the consumate chevalier. No reason to suspect he is any different form any other. And while he is never seen raping anyone himself, his marry me or I kill you proposal to celene is certainly treading on that line. He has no problem assaulting a defenseless woman to get what he wants.

 

The arguments for gaspard point to him as an honourable man..but his honour is that of a chevalier and there are entire classes of people their code does not recognize. FFS the man retained the services of an apostate. There's nothing in the chevalier code about apostates so he's ok with breaking religious law AND the law of pretty much every nation in thedas. The chevalier code is the ONLY set of rules he holds himself to and like I said, it still allows for some massively evil things.

[The Night Haunter]

He seemed to be able to fend off Celene just fine, so I think he meant as one of fighting at the elite level the Chevaliers are supposed to be.

Celene was enraged, not thinking clearly, didn't have her handicap bonus rings on, and wasn't a trained combat fighter (she was trained as a bard, which is more assassination, not straight up fights). It doesn't take an elite warrior at 100% to fend this off. An elite warrior at 40% is fine. Notice he doesn't fight back, because he is far too wounded for that, he only defends himself because his injuries prevent anything more aggressive.

 

He isn't crippled at the end, but he is prevented from wielding a sword effectively due to Michel's stabbing him in the chest.

[The Night Haunter]

Well, you know, a crippled chevalier is still worth twenty thugs.

 

Naked Ser Michel killing three armed and armored Dalish Warriors with a blanket comes to mind.

Ser Michel was unwounded, and is arguably the most skilled chevalier alive, hence why he was chosen as the Empresses personal guard. Plus the Dalish aren't trained to fight chevaliers, the majority of their combat training focuses on human hordes (their largest concerns would be city militias being roused to attack them, only occasionally would professional armies be called in to attack them, at which point the Dalish would be hopelessly outclassed anyway and would retreat.)

[MisterJB]

He never mentions them. If he thought there were issues with the chevaliers, would not it have been mentioned? Everything we know about him says that he considers himself the consumate chevalier. No reason to suspect he is any different form any other.

 

His actions, on the other hand, paint an entirely different picture. I speak, of course, of his declaration that Ser Michel was the perfect Chevalier despite being the bastard of an elven woman.

If anything, he is a meritocrat; which is how Orlais is commonly described; he does not care about how pointed your ears are...so long as you prove your worth.

And again, his fixation with the Chevaliers was about their prowess and honor, never about the power they are granted over the common man which means he has not interested in comitting abuses.

Besides, we have not seen enough Chevaliers to assume that the majority of them are abusive assholes.

 

Ser Michel looked at his initiation with distaste but being a Chevalier was still his greatest pride. Would you call him a monster?

 

 

And while he is never seen raping anyone himself, his marry me or I kill you proposal to celene is certainly treading on that line. He has no problem assaulting a defenseless woman to get what he wants.

The Empress of Orlais a defenseless woman?

Believing that his proposal of a political marriage was about sex is absurd.

 

 

The arguments for gaspard point to him as an honourable man..but his honour is that of a chevalier and there are entire classes of people their code does not recognize. FFS the man retained the services of an apostate. There's nothing in the chevalier code about apostates so he's ok with breaking religious law AND the law of pretty much every nation in thedas. The chevalier code is the ONLY set of rules he holds himself to and like I said, it still allows for some massively evil things.

Perhaps, but the world is not a pleasant place. And there is honor within the Chevalier code.

 

[MisterJB]

Ser Michel was unwounded, and is arguably the most skilled chevalier alive, hence why he was chosen as the Empresses personal guard. Plus the Dalish aren't trained to fight chevaliers, the majority of their combat training focuses on human hordes (their largest concerns would be city militias being roused to attack them, only occasionally would professional armies be called in to attack them, at which point the Dalish would be hopelessly outclassed anyway and would retreat.)

All true, except for the fact Michel had been beaten to a pulp beforehand and being tied would also impair his fighting capabilities.

Let's not discount that feat. He started wounded and tied and managed to escape, acquire his armor and arms and kill seven Dalish plus their War Leader and the First.

Then he and Gaspard went on to kill an horde of Undead, a Revenant and an Arcane Horror; with some help from Celene. Chevaliers are beastly.

[Boss Fog]

All true, except for the fact Michel had been beaten to a pulp beforehand and being tied would also impair his fighting capabilities.

Let's not discount that feat. He started wounded and tied and managed to escape, acquire his armor and arms and kill seven Dalish plus their War Leader and the First.

Then he and Gaspard went on to kill an horde of Undead, a Revenant and an Arcane Horror; with some help from Celene. Chevaliers are beastly.

No, he wasn't.  He was smacked once in the face for insulting the Dalish war leader.  Big difference there.

[MisterJB]

No, he wasn't.  He was smacked once in the face for insulting the Dalish war leader.  Big difference there.

page 232 ""What is this?" the warleader shouted "How did he escape?" Celene looked over then, and saw Ser Michel, bruised and bloodied, being dragged into the camp by a group of scouts."

 

Evidently, he had been roughed up before being brought into the tent.

[calvinien]

His actions, on the other hand, paint an entirely different picture. I speak, of course, of his declaration that Ser Michel was the perfect Chevalier despite being the bastard of an elven woman.

If anything, he is a meritocrat; which is how Orlais is commonly described; he does not care about how pointed your ears are...so long as you prove your worth.

Yes, I'm sure not pissing off the vastly better swordsman who just wiped the floor with you even when you cheated had NOTHING to do with it. And if he had no issue with elves earning high positions for themselves then why did he specifically use Celene's trying to help them against her?

 

 

 

Besides, we have not seen enough Chevaliers to assume that the majority of them are abusive assholes.

If they went out and killed random peopel for an initiation then yes they are by defintion abusive assholes. If they believe they are entitled to anything they want form the lower classes than they are abusive assholes. And based on what we saw in Stolen throne, a whole hell of a lot of them were abusive, rapist assholes. And that is a situation which Gaspard openly wants to return to.

 

Incidentally, if Michel went out and killed innocent civilians just to join a prestigious club then yes, he's a monster. He's a self hating, racist twerp anyway. Not going to shed any tears when I loot the directions to the optional Imshael boss encounter off his corpse.

 

 

The Empress of Orlais a defenseless woman?
Believing that his proposal of a political marriage was about sex is absurd.
 

 

The whole point of him honourably contacting a bard to honourably take out Michel so he could honourably kill celene o her own was that she wouldn't be able to offer effective resistance. The fact that she famn near sets him on fire is a surprise. He expected it to go easier. And nom his proposition was not about sex. Neither is rape. They are both about power. Point is he got a woman alone, was confident he could physically dominate her and gave her the choice between marrying him or death. Defend that all you want.

 

If your last line of defense for a character is that the world they are in is a crappy place so it doesn't matter when they do vad things, I think you kindof need to surrender any claims of them being a good person.

 

Honour is useless. it is a set of rules people give to themselves to make them feel better when they do what they were already going to do. The chevalier code doesn't stop gaspard from lying, cheating, attacking defenceless opponents, attacking with numerical superiority, or breaking the law. It is at best a set of dueling guidelines. and even those can be worked around when it suits him. the best thing you can say about gaspard is that there are some horrible things he won't do....as long as they are to a fellow soldier.

[Boss Fog]

page 232 ""What is this?" the warleader shouted "How did he escape?" Celene looked over then, and saw Ser Michel, bruised and bloodied, being dragged into the camp by a group of scouts."

 

Evidently, he had been roughed up before being brought into the tent.

You're right.  I forgot about after he was summoned by Imshael.  However I highly doubt all Chevaliers are as 'beastly' (lol) as you paint them to be.  If we're talking strictly Michel and Gaspard then yes, they are both very competent.  The fact however that they were driven out of Ferelden by Loghain and Maric; and Hawke & co. slaughtered a private army comprised of them speaks otherwise.  They're good, but not nearly as good as they paint themselves to be. 

[Mistic]

I'd like to understand why Gaspard is a villain. He wants the throne because he thinks Celene is weak and ineffective and he wants to save his country ? Yep, that's pretty much a good goal to me. He's a patriot. And the fact is he tried to avoid the war before acting. War is a consequence of the impasse between him and celene, that's it.

 

War is not a natural cataclysm. Gaspard didn't find a civil war when he woke up one day, he created it. That makes Gaspard a villain. And despite some claims on the contrary, Gaspard is honest enough to acknowledge it, without trying to sweeten his grab for power with hollow ideals.

 

Celene: "Is that why you must plot against me, Gaspard? Because I'm not a man?"

Gaspard: "No, the real problem is that you aren't me".

 

Gaspard to Michel: "I went against Celene because I thought I was the man to guide Orlais through it..." He paused, then smiled faintly. "...and because I wanted the throne, if we're being honest".

 

That he is a likeable character with many positive valors doesn't mean he isn't a villain. Of course, it depends on the point of view, but he would be a villain for every country that is not Orlais because of his rampant imperialism, and even among Orlesians he would be a villain for the pro-Celene faction.

[MisterJB]

You're right.  I forgot about after he was summoned by Imshael.  However I highly doubt all Chevaliers are as 'beastly' (lol) as you paint them to be.  If we're talking strictly Michel and Gaspard then yes, they are both very competent.  The fact however that they were driven out of Ferelden by Loghain and Maric; and Hawke & co. slaughtered a private army comprised of them speaks otherwise.  They're good, but not nearly as good as they paint themselves to be. 

No one is invincible and there will, of course, be varying degrees of competence within the ranks but Michel's and Gaspard's feats plus the description the book provides of their training; scaling with heavy armor on, being taught to recognize wounds that won't even hurt because of their resilience, taught how to fight when outnumbered 10-to-1 or when against mages or demons; indicate they'll likely be considered elite figthers through ahd through by every standard in Thedas.

 

Also, I do not recall a single enemy being named "Chevalier" in "Mark of the Assasin". Certainly, Talis claimed they'd be there and you'd expect so but there is that.

[Sylvianus]

1 Yes, I'm sure not pissing off the vastly better swordsman who just wiped the floor with you even when you cheated had NOTHING to do with it. And if he had no issue with elves earning high positions for themselves then why did he specifically use Celene's trying to help them against her?

 

 

2 The whole point of him honourably contacting a bard to honourably take out Michel so he could honourably kill celene o her own was that she wouldn't be able to offer effective resistance. The fact that she famn near sets him on fire is a surprise. He expected it to go easier. And nom his proposition was not about sex. Neither is rape. They are both about power. Point is he got a woman alone, was confident he could physically dominate her and gave her the choice between marrying him or death. Defend that all you want.

 

1 -  Because he knew the country would be easily upset, especially the nobles. It was an asset to turn against her so Celene can make the move he expected. At this point, he was clearly at war with Celene and nothing else mattered, it was all about the victory. He lied about Briala as her lover to amplify the phenomenon, based precisely a bit on facts ( celene helping the elves ) and that's why people would believe his lies about briala . Also, the city elves didn't prove anything to Gaspard as citizens at this point, so, the point of MisterJb still stand.

 

2 - Omg, that is absurd. She is a woman, so he can marry her to rule with her, that's why he asks. He couldn't simply ask with a man... isn't that obvious ? ... So, I'm not sure what you are arguing there, about assaulting a defensless woman and rape. He expected it to go easier, because Celene is not supposed to be a warrior, should be easy to kill, and she was alone without any guard at her side as usual, simple. The fact that she is a woman doesn't matter when it's about killing the ruler of the empire that doesn't want to cooperate. An effective way to avoid the civil war by the way. Not sure why the gender matters so much. Honestly, it seems like you are building your own fantasy on this point.

[Boss Fog]

No one is invincible and there will, of course, be varying degrees of competence within the ranks but Michel's and Gaspard's feats plus the description the book provides of their training; scaling with heavy armor on, being taught to recognize wounds that won't even hurt because of their resilience, taught how to fight when outnumbered 10-to-1 or when against mages or demons; indicate they'll likely be considered elite figthers through ahd through by every standard in Thedas.

 

Also, I do not recall a single enemy being named "Chevalier" in "Mark of the Assasin". Certainly, Talis claimed they'd be there and you'd expect so but there is that.

There are elite fighters from every country but we don't have detailed accounts of the training they undergo.  The only people that claim that Chevaliers are the best warriors Thedas has to offer are native Orlesians.  Also considering Par Vollen fought the entirety of Thedas to a standstill and only were stopped when Tevinter and the Circle got involved leads me to believe that the Qunari have the most skilled and physically superior warriors.  Although I suppose they shouldn't count since they aren't technically part of Thedas.

 

Regarding the point about MOTA; why would a Duke not surround himself with Chevaliers?  I don't think it's entirely accurate to discredit Talis' assertion that the keep is guarded by a private army of Chevaliers simply because they aren't labeled as such during combat.  As far as I'm concerned, story and exposition takes precedence over combat labels.

[MisterJB]

Yes, I'm sure not pissing off the vastly better swordsman who just wiped the floor with you even when you cheated had NOTHING to do with it. And if he had no issue with elves earning high positions for themselves then why did he specifically use Celene's trying to help them against her?

Gaspard was not afraid of being murdered in cold blood for two reasons which are actually one: Honor.

Honor is everything to a true chevalier which we know Gaspard is; he did kill an ally that he recognized as invaluable because he broke a truce; if he truly felt Michel was a dishonor to the Chevaliers, he'd be honor bound to say so and even attempt to kill him on the spot at the expense of his life. And two, because Michel just refused to kill Gaspard even after Celene ordered him to do so.

 

And he took advantage of society's views of elves in order to get what he wanted; that doesn't necessarely mean those are views he shares.

By Gaspard's own admission, he believe in burning an elven rebellion to the ground but then he turns around and accepts the human son of an elven woman into the Chevaliers. Clearly, he is a meritocrat. MIchel earned his place as far as Gaspard is concerned; the elves were crushed thus they didn't.
 

 

If they went out and killed random peopel for an initiation then yes they are by defintion abusive assholes. If they believe they are entitled to anything they want form the lower classes than they are abusive assholes. And based on what we saw in Stolen throne, a whole hell of a lot of them were abusive, rapist assholes. And that is a situation which Gaspard openly wants to return to.

You are equating consequences with results for both the Chevaliers in general and Gaspard in particular which is unfair.

 

First, any Chevalier that did not join that order of knighthood to be abusive but was, in fact, coerced into commiting one abusive action; and yes, "coerced" is the correct word because the Chevaliers motto is "Death before dishonor", disobeying a direct order from your superios is dishonorable which suggests any recruit that refuses to undergot the initiation will be killed; is not an abusive *******.

 

Likewise, what Gaspard seeks is not for Orlais to rape Ferelden. His intentions are to distract the Templars and Mages and, yes, to increase Orlesian power. Abuses are a side effect of the conflict, not Gaspard's purpose.

 

Now, you don't need to believe that this excuses his actions but it is important to make this distinction or no leader ever will pass your moral test.

 

 

The whole point of him honourably contacting a bard to honourably take out Michel so he could honourably kill celene o her own was that she wouldn't be able to offer effective resistance. The fact that she famn near sets him on fire is a surprise. He expected it to go easier. And nom his proposition was not about sex. Neither is rape. They are both about power. Point is he got a woman alone, was confident he could physically dominate her and gave her the choice between marrying him or death. Defend that all you want.

Celene is the leader of the most powerful empire on Thedas, not a defenseless child who was attracted away from her parents with candy. Let's not simplify Gaspard's actions to the point where a third party who knows nothing about the story would think we're just talking about some horny bastard.

 

Otherwise, I could just say that "Return of the Jedi" is about a bunch of criminals trying to get an old man alone so they can kill him and destroy the ship he is building.

 

 

If your last line of defense for a character is that the world they are in is a crappy place so it doesn't matter when they do vad things, I think you kindof need to surrender any claims of them being a good person.

 

Honour is useless. it is a set of rules people give to themselves to make them feel better when they do what they were already going to do. The chevalier code doesn't stop gaspard from lying, cheating, attacking defenceless opponents, attacking with numerical superiority, or breaking the law. It is at best a set of dueling guidelines. and even those can be worked around when it suits him. the best thing you can say about gaspard is that there are some horrible things he won't do....as long as they are to a fellow soldier.

 

I never said he was a good person, only that he is not a monster. The world is not divided between good people and monsters.

 

And if we accept that Thedas is a crappy world, then honour is, in fact, one of the only things preventing people like Gaspard who have a ridiculous amount of power from doing whatever they please.
 

 

[Sylvianus]

War is not a natural cataclysm. Gaspard didn't find a civil war when he woke up one day, he created it. That makes Gaspard a villain. And despite some claims on the contrary, Gaspard is honest enough to acknowledge it, without trying to sweeten his grab for power with hollow ideals.

 

Celene: "Is that why you must plot against me, Gaspard? Because I'm not a man?"

Gaspard: "No, the real problem is that you aren't me".

 

Gaspard to Michel: "I went against Celene because I thought I was the man to guide Orlais through it..." He paused, then smiled faintly. "...and because I wanted the throne, if we're being honest".

 

That he is a likeable character with many positive valors doesn't mean he isn't a villain. Of course, it depends on the point of view, but he would be a villain for every country that is not Orlais because of his rampant imperialism, and even among Orlesians he would be a villain for the pro-Celene faction.

 

The evil and villains are two words that I can't take seriously when it's about judging characters on this board. I avoid saying such things except if we really have another Hitler or Beria. I don't see how Celene couldn't be considered a villain and gaspard could be, if we are dismissing the " it was necessary " card, and their motivations. They are both murderers and both fighted for power with the game. That seems pretty weak to me. Gaspard is responsible of the civil war, that's all I'm going to agree with.

[MisterJB]

There are elite fighters from every country but we don't have detailed accounts of the training they undergo.  The only people that claim that Chevaliers are the best warriors Thedas has to offer are native Orlesians.  Also considering Par Vollen fought the entirety of Thedas to a standstill and only were stopped when Tevinter and the Circle got involved leads me to believe that the Qunari have the most skilled and physically superior warriors.  Although I suppose they shouldn't count since they aren't technically part of Thedas.

The Qunari have superior technology like cannons; that, most likely, played a large part in the war.

 

 

Regarding the point about MOTA; why would a Duke not surround himself with Chevaliers?  I don't think it's entirely accurate to discredit Talis' assertion that the keep is guarded by a private army of Chevaliers simply because they aren't labeled as such during combat.  As far as I'm concerned, story and exposition takes precedence over combat labels.

I understand your point. In fact, I acknowledged it in my previous post.

It only makes sense for the Duke to surround himself with Chevaliers, especially when he is conducting a transaction with Qunari.

 

However, Dragon Age labels tend to be very acurate; they go so far as to distinguish between a tal-vashoth and an actual Qunari when their characters designs are identical. Therefore, I believe that fact not a single guard was labeled "Chevalier" and yet, they made a distinction for "Harlequins" raise some doubts regarding whether they are part of the order.

[Mister Gusty]

The whole point of him honourably contacting a bard to honourably take out Michel so he could honourably kill celene o her own was that she wouldn't be able to offer effective resistance. The fact that she famn near sets him on fire is a surprise. He expected it to go easier. And nom his proposition was not about sex. Neither is rape. They are both about power. Point is he got a woman alone, was confident he could physically dominate her and gave her the choice between marrying him or death. Defend that all you want.

 

You do realise that the only reason Celene took power was because she was party to the assassination of the previous emperor. Lady Mantillon was Emperor Florians mistress, and killed him so that Celene, could take power, and Celene was aware of that. So Gaspard doing essentially the same thing, except that he would be doing the deed himself is on par with what Celene did, if not slightly better as he is willing to act himself instead of using a third party.

 

Now I am not a Gaspard supporter, but I am not a Celene supporter either, the book really has me conflicted on who I like more. I see plenty of pros and cons for the both of them. Both Celene and Gaspard have done distasteful deeds to ensure their rise to power, and neither could be considered "innocent," but they both have the best interest of Orlais at heart, it is just that they have different opinions on what is actually the best course for Orlais.

 

You can dislike Gaspard all you want, but don't claim that he is some moustache twirling evil villain when Celene has done things that are just as bad as what he has done. That is how the Game is played in Orlais.