490 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

What Meredith was scared of was that mob of people trying to go and enact justice on the Circle by themselves. People are stupid and even though an apostate was responsible, someone would Fox News the crap out of that and imply that the Circle did it. Then you have a mob of people trying to kill mages and Templars trying to protect the city and the mages at the same time? The entire City would fall.

 

Meredith was trying to nip that in the bud. Right or wrong, it could be argued that she should've waited for that mob to show up first... but what if they couldn't be quelled once they rolled up to the gates?

 

As Xil says, I have a hard time seeing that. Meredith wanted to crack down on the mages, which she saw as a threat. We know that she asked for the ROA directly, and Elthina refused her. We know that she sent to the Divine for permission to perform the ROA over the protest of the Grand Cleric. 

 

With the Grand Cleric dead, Meredith simply pursued the policy she wanted from the start: ending the Kirkwall Circle. Plus, she was **** nuts crazy because of the red lyrium sword. I wouldn't use her judgement here as a sign of proper templar reasoning. 

[Steelcan]

The debate was whether or not Cullen could be tried for a crime. Cullen could be tried for a crime, as I explained. If you want to have some other debate, then have it with someone else, because that's all I'm debating with you: the possibility for Cullen to be tried and found guilty of an offence. 

And in this case, if someone like Xil wanted to try Cullen, it would be no different than what happened at Nuremberg. The whole conversation is about an IRL parallel. In-setting, Cullen will obviously be tried for nothing because the moral code that is even necessary for such a trial to be desired is impossible, and there will never be an interested party in power to actually create the legal framework to ever try him.

he could be tried for a crime irl, but not in setting, not because there is no framework for a trial, but because the Annulment was a legally allowed event.

[Xilizhra]

. Yeah and the Rachni will have massive impacts on not just the final battle with the Reapers but beyond as well.

Was that ever actually said, or just implied?

 

 

Problem is that you're trying to string up the Templars that stayed loyal to the Order and the Divine by NOT going to war with the mages.

Because that makes SO much sense.

 

*beep* Sarcasm self-test complete. *beep*

Only one of them that we know of.

[KBomb]

How lucky we are that we don't live in Thedas; you would not find a kind judge in me for that choice.

 

Also, the choice was completely false and made no sense, but eh.

You wouldn't be the one judging anyone. 

 

 

Words like "genocide" and "crime against humanity" have real meaning. In the same way that it is right to use the word "slavery" to refer to the condition of persons who are owned as property in Tevinter, it is correct to use the word "genocide" to describe the content of the ROA. 

 

 

No mages rebelled. Anders was a loon apostate, acting alone. There was no evidence of any connection with the Kirkwall Circle of Magi, no evidence that the Circle of Magi was complicit in the plot to kill Elthina. 

 

Meredith had the same case for an ROA the day before Anders nuked the Chantry that she did the moment after he did it. 

 

Who was there to commit a complete slaughter of Kirkwall? The last thing that Orisono says to Meredith is that he will agree to anything in return for her not killing every single person in the Circle. 

 

Then perhaps you should use those words in how they relate to Thedas and not bring up examples of real life. That is also a great way to get the tread closed. 

 

When Anders did what he did, it isn't like you had time to ponder the outcome. There had already been small fires brewing in the Circle. Anders just added enough fuel to let it blaze out of control. I didn't say mages did rebel, but it was inevitable-- at least in the face of what happened. Sometimes you have to make a call. I am not saying she made the right one. I am saying I understand why she did it. 

[In Exile]

he could be tried for a crime irl, but not in setting, not because there is no framework for a trial, but because the Annulment was a legally allowed event.

 

In setting, he could be tried if someone draws up a set of laws that makes him complicit. It's not that hard. 

[Steelcan]

Was that ever actually said, or just implied?
 
 
.

"Saving the Rachni Queen has huge consequences in the game, going even beyond the final battle with Reapers" -Mac Walters, pre-release interview with OXM

[LobselVith8]

The war can apparently be won conclusively in some manner in the Hinterlands. My hopes aren't so low.

 

A regional victory seems possible. Cameron Lee said, "You can bring an end to the conflict between the mages and the templars once and for all very early on in the game. You can align with one of those."

[KaiserShep]

So it's legal, there is no law preventing it in any nation in Thedas, it is not applicable to irl treaties and agreements by virtue of the nature of the setting, yet you are still going to maintain that there is no defense for it?

Sounds a lot like taking real life baggage into the setting.


In the setting Meredith's call for the Rite was legal according to the laws of Thedas, end of discussion

 

Something being legal in and of itself isn't necessarily a compelling enough reason to go along with the action. Even within the setting of Thedas, a "legal action" could be opposed, violently if necessary, if it's considered to be wrong.

[Steelcan]

In setting, he could be tried if someone draws up a set of laws that makes him complicit. It's not that hard.

. Those laws would conflict with the laws established by the Chantry supposedly given to Andraste by the Maker. In this setting the Laws of the Church override the Laws of Secular Heads

[GVulture]

The debate was whether or not Cullen could be tried for a crime. Cullen could be tried for a crime, as I explained. If you want to have some other debate, then have it with someone else, because that's all I'm debating with you: the possibility for Cullen to be tried and found guilty of an offence. 

And in this case, if someone like Xil wanted to try Cullen, it would be no different than what happened at Nuremberg. The whole conversation is about an IRL parallel. In-setting, Cullen will obviously be tried for nothing because the moral code that is even necessary for such a trial to be desired is impossible, and there will never be an interested party in power to actually create the legal framework to ever try him. 

Which makes the argument moot.

 

Also, applying real world analogies to this situation ignores one important fact:

 

Mages can be dangerous even when they don't mean to be.

 

That's why genocide and concentration camps don't work here because jews couldn't burst into a huge massive monster and slaughter people because they had a funny dream about a talking mouse or found a pretty purple eyed cat.

[In Exile]

Then perhaps you should use those words in how they relate to Thedas and not bring up examples of real life. That is also a great way to get the tread closed. 

 

Having to debate the meaning of IRL terms might get the thread closed - using them wouldn't, so long as everyone is being polite. 

 

When Anders did what he did, it isn't like you had time to ponder the outcome. There had already been small fires brewing in the Circle. Anders just added enough fuel to let it blaze out of control. I didn't say mages did rebel, but it was inevitable-- at least in the face of what happened. Sometimes you have to make a call. I am not saying she made the right one. I am saying I understand why she did it. 

 

Anders didn't add any fire, because he wasn't a member of the Circle. As an outsider with no clear connection to the Circle, he couldn't possibly increase their crimes. Seeing as how Orsino was willing to have every mage in Kirkwall sequestered in their rooms and subject to massive and invasive searches, there was clearly time. Meredith would have every mage under her power and in a situation where they could be killed easily and quietly. 

 

Yet she chose to publicly declare they should all be exterminated, leading to a massacre in the streets of Kirkwall. Her actions were precisely what increased the danger. It wasn't just the wrong choice - it was the looney tunes choice, in complete contradiction to a great deal of evidence. 

[Xilizhra]

"Saving the Rachni Queen has huge consequences in the game, going even beyond the final battle with Reapers" -Mac Walters, pre-release interview with OXM

They actually do go beyond the final battle with the Reapers, but only if you sabotage the genophage cure.

 

 

. Those laws would conflict with the laws established by the Chantry supposedly given to Andraste by the Maker. In this setting the Laws of the Church override the Laws of Secular Heads

That rather depends on the Chantry's ability to actually enforce those laws, no?

[Steelcan]

A regional victory seems possible. Cameron Lee said, "You can bring an end to the conflict between the mages and the templars once and for all very early on in the game. You can align with one of those."

I still doubt that this means one side can be completely wiped out without some larger massively sweeping changes such as magic being cut off from the World, or the dissolution or complete restructuring of the Andrastian Chantry, which I don't see happening

[GVulture]

In setting, he could be tried if someone draws up a set of laws that makes him complicit. It's not that hard. 

*face palm* Except you can't be tried for a law you broke before it was a law.

[Ryzaki]

Not to mention "You can align with one of these." can easily translate to X side wins...til the next game where Y side pulls Deus Ex Machina out their ass and the two sides are deadlocked once again.

[Xilizhra]

I still doubt that this means one side can be completely wiped out without some larger massively sweeping changes such as magic being cut off from the World, or the dissolution or complete restructuring of the Andrastian Chantry, which I don't see happening

Set the next game in Tevinter, solve all import problems.

[In Exile]

Which makes the argument moot.

 

Also, applying real world analogies to this situation ignores one important fact:

 

Mages can be dangerous even when they don't mean to be.

 

That's why genocide and concentration camps don't work here because jews couldn't burst into a huge massive monster and slaughter people because they had a funny dream about a talking mouse or found a pretty purple eyed cat.

 

This is wordplay. Genocide is still the right term. The question is, would the threat of the mages actually justify conduct that amounts to genocide? 

The obvious problem for defenders of things like the ROA (rather than the Circle itself, which I think is defensible on moral grounds), is that the mages aren't a big enough threat to justify that. 

 

But let's focus on the darkspawn. Saving Thedas clealry requires a darkspawn genocide - eradicating every single one of them, exterminating their means of reproducing - basically wiping them out of existence. Whether or not some of them are Awakened, and therefore clearly sapient beings. 

 

Running away from the label, when it fits, is just playing a moral shell game. It's trying to minimize the moral gravity of the proposed solution to make it appear more palpable. That's my problem wth it. 

[Steelcan]

They actually do go beyond the final battle with the Reapers, but only if you sabotage the genophage cure.
 
 

That rather depends on the Chantry's ability to actually enforce those laws, no?

That was only revealed in the EC which came out months after the game

True, but all laws are like that, they are only as good as the ability to enforce them, and since the Chantry can still organize Exalted Marches, I'd say their ability to enforce them is fairly powerful

[Steelcan]

Set the next game in Tevinter, solve all import problems.

. And the game after that? Or after that? These solutions would need to come up again at some point

[In Exile]

*face palm* Except you can't be tried for a law you broke before it was a law.

 

Actually, you can. There are retroactive applications of the law even IRL today, just as there are reverse onuses (e.g. where you are the one that has to prove - typically at the civil burden of proof, balance of probabilities - that you did not do something). 

 

And the further back we go historically, i.e., the more medieval the laws, the more likely it is to stumble across a retroactive law. 

[Steelcan]

Not to mention "You can align with one of these." can easily translate to X side wins...til the next game where Y side pulls Deus Ex Machina out their ass and the two sides are deadlocked once again.

. It won't be a DA game until the after affects of it are retconned into Oblivion

[GVulture]

This is wordplay. Genocide is still the right term. The question is, would the threat of the mages actually justify conduct that amounts to genocide? 

The obvious problem for defenders of things like the ROA (rather than the Circle itself, which I think is defensible on moral grounds), is that the mages aren't a big enough threat to justify that. 

 

But let's focus on the darkspawn. Saving Thedas clealry requires a darkspawn genocide - eradicating every single one of them, exterminating their means of reproducing - basically wiping them out of existence. Whether or not some of them are Awakened, and therefore clearly sapient beings. 

 

Running away from the label, when it fits, is just playing a moral shell game. It's trying to minimize the moral gravity of the proposed solution to make it appear more palpable. That's my problem wth it. 

How about when Grey Wardens burninate a village to stop a Darkspawn advance.

String all those Wardens up after they save the rest of the country? Or acceptable losses?

[Xilizhra]

That was only revealed in the EC which came out months after the game

True, but all laws are like that, they are only as good as the ability to enforce them, and since the Chantry can still organize Exalted Marches, I'd say their ability to enforce them is fairly powerful

DAI had an extra year to fix problems like that. And if the Chantry could enforce its own laws, Cassandra would be with them still and not making the Inquisition.

 

 

. And the game after that? Or after that? These solutions would need to come up again at some point

Have the next game be some huge apocalypse where your chosen side becomes a war asset of some kind.

[Ryzaki]

. It won't be a DA game until the after affects of it are retconned into Oblivion

 

So sad but so true.

[In Exile]

How about when Grey Wardens burninate a village to stop a Darkspawn advance.

String all those Wardens up after they save the rest of the country? Or acceptable losses?

 

Well, it's not genocide (because it's not targeted - it fails the mental element of the offence). But it is a massacre. 

 

Of course, the moral justification is right there: those lives had to be sacrificed, massacred and burned alive in a brutal and terrible way, to save others. 

 

We don't justify it by somehow not calling their action a massacre, even if we think it is justified. That is my point.