171 réponses à ce sujet

[Steelcan]

Its pretty hard to wipe out religions entirely

 

and unless BioWare is planning on letting us completely sunder the order of the world, I doubt we will be able to do anything approaching the destruction of the Chantry

[Dean_the_Young]

Its pretty hard to wipe out religions entirely

 

and unless BioWare is planning on letting us completely sunder the order of the world, I doubt we will be able to do anything approaching the destruction of the Chantry

 

Or at least no more than, say, the Warden could remake Ferelden in the face of it's civil war and collapse to the Blight.

 

In DAO and DA2, the most vehemently anti-Chantry Warden or Hawke... what, didn't do some chantry board quests? Be pointlessly rude? Pro-mage and anti-Templar paths never involved subverting, sabotaging, or even deligitimizing the station of the Chantry: merely the Templars. The only Chantry person that we could directly oppose was a rogue actor.

[Spaghetti_Ninja]

Yup, and now that the Chantry and Templars/Seekers have separated, hurting the Templar Order won't even be an act against the Chantry at all. I doubt we will be doing anything to hurt it, besides making some derogatory comments as a Dalish elf or something. The religion will survive, no matter what happens to the Templars in the end.

[TheKomandorShepard]

Didn't devs said that we will be able find some dirty stuff on the chantry i don't renember if they said if we will be able expose that.

[Inquisitor7]

Well I'm not sure I like the chantry itself but I like who the believe in. I think they are corrupt but that doesn't mean they are the only ones allowed to be based off of the maker.

[CapivaRasgor]

Err.. does it imply somewhere that the Inquisition was Justinia's idea? As far as I can speculate the organization is going to be founded in the wake of the explosion at the peace talks as a response to the Breach. Does it says anywhere that it was the Divine's idea or is this just speculation?

On topic, I don't think that destroying or saving the Chantry will come into play, not in its purest form. Destruction of a thousand year religion in a short period of time is pretty much impossible and "saving" it.. well, if Petrice makes it into Act 3, she mentions talks about schism within the Chantry and regardless of her condition, the death of a Divine would further colaborate with the schism.

I think that the Chantry will break down into various sects and that we'll be given the choice regarding which of the bigger ones we'll support. But restoring or completly destroying the organisation? Doubtful.

[LobselVith8]

Err.. does it imply somewhere that the Inquisition was Justinia's idea? As far as I can speculate the organization is going to be founded in the wake of the explosion at the peace talks as a response to the Breach. Does it says anywhere that it was the Divine's idea or is this just speculation?

 

Yes, it's mentioned that the Inquisition was basically a "backup plan" (with Leliana and the soldiers at the end of Dragon Age II apparently wearing Inquisition armor), although the crisis with the Breach seems to have changed things. It explains the mainly Andrastian composition of the organization, especially given how the protagonist can be non-Andrastian.

 

On topic, I don't think that destroying or saving the Chantry will come into play, not in its purest form. Destruction of a thousand year religion in a short period of time is pretty much impossible and "saving" it.. well, if Petrice makes it into Act 3, she mentions talks about schism within the Chantry and regardless of her condition, the death of a Divine would further colaborate with the schism.

I think that the Chantry will break down into various sects and that we'll be given the choice regarding which of the bigger ones we'll support. But restoring or completly destroying the organisation? Doubtful.

 

I think most people mean the organization, rather than the religion itself. The Inquisition seems to be filling in the vacuum of power left in the wake of the Divine's (apparent) death, and the agency of the Inquisitor to side with either the mages or the templars (and bring their respective faction into the Inquisition) seems to leave the Andrastian Chantry a bit toothless, in comparison to how it once had templars and mages at their disposal.

 

Some players have no interest in having their Inquisitor do anything to directly aid the Chantry, nor have any inclination to support anyone in an organization that some of us find to be morally reprehensible.

[CapivaRasgor]

Yes, it's mentioned that the Inquisition was basically a "backup plan" (with Leliana and the soldiers at the end of Dragon Age II apparently wearing Inquisition armor), although the crisis with the Breach seems to have changed things. It explains the mainly Andrastian composition of the organization, especially given how the protagonist can be non-Andrastian.


I think most people mean the organization, rather than the religion itself. The Inquisition seems to be filling in the vacuum of power left in the wake of the Divine's (apparent) death, and the agency of the Inquisitor to side with either the mages or the templars (and bring their respective faction into the Inquisition) seems to leave the Andrastian Chantry a bit toothless, in comparison to how it once had templars and mages at their disposal.

Some players have no interest in having their Inquisitor do anything to directly aid the Chantry, nor have any inclination to support anyone in an organization that some of us find to be morally reprehensible.

Thanks for the information Lob

And I meant the organisation, I think there will be various sub Chantries broken from what was the Chantry.. that was my point. I meant religion as an organisation, in case it wasn't clear before.

I also have moral issues with the Chantry, personally I don't think I'll be helping them unless there is a very pratical gain in doing so(maybe for Cassandra if I'm romancing her xD) .

[Steelcan]

 

Some players have no interest in having their Inquisitor do anything to directly aid the Chantry, nor have any inclination to support anyone in an organization that some of us find to be morally reprehensible.

And many players in ME2/3 were disappointed that they had to work with the Alliance/Cerberus and had no interest in working with beurocrats/terrorists, but that didn't do much, some dialogue options and that's about it

[LobselVith8]

And many players in ME2/3 were disappointed that they had to work with the Alliance/Cerberus and had no interest in working with beurocrats/terrorists, but that didn't do much, some dialogue options and that's about it

 

While multiple developers have said that the player won't be forced to work for the Chantry, as well as saying the Inquisition is created "in opposition" to the Chantry, and that the Inquisitor isn't "a puppet of the church".

[Mistic]

While multiple developers have said that the player won't be forced to work for the Chantry, as well as saying the Inquisition is created "in opposition" to the Chantry, and that the Inquisitor isn't "a puppet of the church".

 

It doesn't mean that the Inquisitor won't work with the Chantry, or help it in one way or another.

 

I think I said it a long time ago, but those same lines could have been used to describe the Warden's job in DA:O related to Ferelden. Let's review: the Warden does his or her job "in opposition to Ferelden" (after Ostagar, Loghain is the real authority and the Wardens are declared outlaws), and of course the Warden isn't "a puppet of the kingdom" (in fact, the king or queen will end up owing their throne to you).

 

One thing is not having the Chantry as our boss, that was the prime concern after the name 'Inquisition' was revealed. It won't happen, I think we all agree on that. However, not having them as our boss doesn't mean that we won't help them in one way or another, even if it's just because we save the world they are in.

[Steelcan]

While multiple developers have said that the player won't be forced to work for the Chantry, as well as saying the Inquisition is created "in opposition" to the Chantry, and that the Inquisitor isn't "a puppet of the church".

that's a whole different beat then actively opposing them, two of our advisors are from the Chantry, Cassandra and Leliana work for the Divine, Cullen is a templar and a devout Andrastian, I imagine several others are as well.

 

To me it looks so far like we spring out of the Chantry as a seperate branch, I doubt we will be destroying Chantries and killing priestesses, but that doesn't mean we jump when the Chantry says so.

[DarthLaxian]

I think it's time for a new paradigm. The Chantry was tied too closely to the Orlesian Imperial throne for comfort, and too many of its actions happened to benefit Orlais above everything else. The nation-states are finally starting to come into their own, and really don't need a monolithic religious institution mucking things up. It's time for the Chantry to break up into smaller ones.

 

I'd rather have a time without any religion (much less ones that play politics (the game in Orlais for example, exalted marches etc.), have dogma that tells people to hate others (mages, elfs) and is a flawed dictatorship and sexist (no male priests), too!) following after the chantry is weakened!

 

I have no problem with the chantry helping and protecting people (as best as the remnants can and I will not go after them...but I will not have them reformed as they were before because firstly I do not like am (non-believer) and secondly because I am a mage (at least my canon Inquisitor will be))

 

greetings LAX

ps: I will not purge with fire, sword and magic if I don't have to, but I will not help them either...the opposite more likely!

[LobselVith8]

It doesn't mean that the Inquisitor won't work with the Chantry, or help it in one way or another.

 

I doubt the elven option would have been Dalish if the player was going to be forced to work with the Chantry; an Andrastian would have made more sense if that was the path the storyline would take. I also doubt multiple developers would be going out of their way to assure fans that the Inquisition wouldn't be beholden to the Chantry if the narrative was going to take this route, since so many developers did so given how some fans feel about the Chantry.

 

\I think I said it a long time ago, but those same lines could have been used to describe the Warden's job in DA:O related to Ferelden. Let's review: the Warden does his or her job "in opposition to Ferelden" (after Ostagar, Loghain is the real authority and the Wardens are declared outlaws), and of course the Warden isn't "a puppet of the kingdom" (in fact, the king or queen will end up owing their throne to you).

 

The basic premise of Origins was to save Ferelden from the Fifth Blight. Stopping the Breach necessitates closing the veil tears.

 

One thing is not having the Chantry as our boss, that was the prime concern after the name 'Inquisition' was revealed. It won't happen, I think we all agree on that. However, not having them as our boss doesn't mean that we won't help them in one way or another, even if it's just because we save the world they are in.

 

Frankly, I don't see the purpose in railroading players into helping the Chantry.

[Xilizhra]

Or at least no more than, say, the Warden could remake Ferelden in the face of it's civil war and collapse to the Blight.

 

In DAO and DA2, the most vehemently anti-Chantry Warden or Hawke... what, didn't do some chantry board quests? Be pointlessly rude? Pro-mage and anti-Templar paths never involved subverting, sabotaging, or even deligitimizing the station of the Chantry: merely the Templars. The only Chantry person that we could directly oppose was a rogue actor.

Defiled the Urn of Sacred Ashes in Origins. At least attempted to remove the Circle from Chantry control, also in Origins. Said they understood Anders blowing up the Chantry in 2. There's not all that much done directly because the Chantry hardly ever acts directly; anything violent that needs doing is done by the templars. But now, that's no longer the case, and the future should be interesting.

[Dean_the_Young]

Defiled the Urn of Sacred Ashes in Origins. At least attempted to remove the Circle from Chantry control, also in Origins. Said they understood Anders blowing up the Chantry in 2. There's not all that much done directly because the Chantry hardly ever acts directly; anything violent that needs doing is done by the templars. But now, that's no longer the case, and the future should be interesting.

 

The Urn of Sacred Ashes isn't a Chantry interest. The Chantry isn't even aware it exists when you do it, and suffers no harm to its standing or legitimacy as a result. Defiling the urn is an act of vandalism.

 

Circle liberation is a more credible line of argument... except that it still falls under the Templar-Mage issue. The Chantry neither profits nor particularly gains from the Circle system in any way that the Warden's attempt directly undermines.

 

Taken together, these are less impressive and courageous acts of defiance than Jon Oliver getting one of Assad's favorite artists to write and broadcast anti-Assad proproganda. Neither of them had either secrecy or a hero's reputation to hide behind in a far more blatant and personal affront.

[Xilizhra]

The Urn of Sacred Ashes isn't a Chantry interest. The Chantry isn't even aware it exists when you do it, and suffers no harm to its standing or legitimacy as a result. Defiling the urn is an act of vandalism.

 

Circle liberation is a more credible line of argument... except that it still falls under the Templar-Mage issue. The Chantry neither profits nor particularly gains from the Circle system in any way that the Warden's attempt directly undermines.

 

Taken together, these are less impressive and courageous acts of defiance than Jon Oliver getting one of Assad's favorite artists to write and broadcast anti-Assad proproganda. Neither of them had either secrecy or a hero's reputation to hide behind in a far more blatant and personal affront.

True, it's more of an opportunity cost... but it's a sizable one.

 

But I personally have no particular need to attack the Chantry, provided they don't interfere with any of what I try to do.

[Dean_the_Young]

True, it's more of an opportunity cost... but it's a sizable one.

 

Not really. It's not like the Urn would be mass-distributed, or that it's existence vindicates the Chantry dogma. The fact that Andraste existed and was associated with the supernatural isn't even in debate. Neither will the existence of the Urn or the Temple.

 

The real anti-Chantry ideologue would have recognized that it was the existence of the the Urn and the Spirits that could threaten the Chantry's dogma.

 

 

But I personally have no particular need to attack the Chantry, provided they don't interfere with any of what I try to do.

 

Which apparently includes attacking the Chantry and marching around in Andrastian lands dictating your preferences?

 

Well, whatever. You've claimed stranger basis of self-defense.

[Xilizhra]

Not really. It's not like the Urn would be mass-distributed, or that it's existence vindicates the Chantry dogma. The fact that Andraste existed and was associated with the supernatural isn't even in debate. Neither will the existence of the Urn or the Temple.

 

The real anti-Chantry ideologue would have recognized that it was the existence of the the Urn and the Spirits that could threaten the Chantry's dogma.

Well, my Warden's a Dalish who's not all that versed on what exactly would threaten Chantry dogma or not, so oh well.

I didn't defile the Urn anyway.

 

 

Which apparently includes attacking the Chantry and marching around in Andrastian lands dictating your preferences?

 

Well, whatever. You've claimed stranger basis of self-defense.

Er, no. I just said that I wasn't going to attack the Chantry. I will help the mages in their struggle against the templars and see if the Inquisition can help their government situation, and I will also (if possible) side with Briala to gain access to her Eluvian network for the Inquisition and to kick off elven emancipation in Orlais. If the Chantry doesn't try to undo either of those, I can't see us having too many problems.

[Wintersbreath]

First chantry doesn't spread hate and fear of mages peoples hated and fear mages long before chantry and they had and have good reason to do pretty much as leliana said in demo.Mages are source of endless disasters that touch peoples if you want argue i can point them all of the day so no wonder that peoples hate magic and they don't need chantry for that all they need is become victim one of many mages caused disasters.

 

Second if not mages Thedas would in much better shape why first as i said mages caused many disasters that societes have to deal most known and destructive is blight.So every country was vastly damaged because of mages and mess they cause.Then mages stop technological progress (and technology was proven to be superior to magic) so in the end humans could be much better prepared for qunari invasion.

1. Magic has existed since long before the Chantry was established. During the centuries before that, people seem to be living just fine. I'm sure there are mage-caused disasters, which were the reason why the Chantry was established. But the point is, the Chantry exacerbated, and still is exacerbating, the hatred and ignorance among its followers, which is to say almost everyone. Without religious propaganda, I'm inclined to believe that people would be more rational.

 

2. You can't blame the blight on every mage. The problem with the blight and what caused it was the "hubris" of the corrupt Tevinter magisters. It wasn't magic per se. Thedas was destroyed because of the magisters, not mages as a whole. And you can't really say Thedas would be much better off without mages either. So much of the supposedly glorious elven empire and culture were built on the use of magic (just look at the marvels of the Eluvians). Just because a bunch of idiots had to go and turn everything to crap doesn't mean magic, a tool, is to blame. In the real world, scientists developed explosives and bombs, resulting in numerous wars and deaths. So science and technology are to blame for human conflict?

 

How has magic stopped technological advances? Most mages in Thedas are locked up in Circles, prohibited from taking up meaningful jobs in the outside world. There's no stopping ordinary folk from developing their tools and from experimenting. Magical advancement itself in most of Thedas is slow. The mages in Tevinter aren't sharing their results, hoping to get an edge over each other. Tell us, why is technology superior to magic? With magical advances so slow, and magical genes contained, it wouldn't be fair to compare the firepower of qunari explosives and that of a small "army" of mages.

 

Magic very often can do what people thought is unthinkable. Technology and magic can and should be used in tantem, to continue to inspire advances in each other, and to better the world.

[TheKomandorShepard]

1. Magic has existed since long before the Chantry was established. During the centuries before that, people seem to be living just fine. I'm sure there are mage-caused disasters, which were the reason why the Chantry was established. But the point is, the Chantry exacerbated, and still is exacerbating, the hatred and ignorance among its followers, which is to say almost everyone. Without religious propaganda, I'm inclined to believe that people would be more rational.

 

2. You can't blame the blight on every mage. The problem with the blight and what caused it was the "hubris" of the corrupt Tevinter magisters. It wasn't magic per se. Thedas was destroyed because of the magisters, not mages as a whole. And you can't really say Thedas would be much better off without mages either. So much of the supposedly glorious elven empire and culture were built on the use of magic (just look at the marvels of the Eluvians). Just because a bunch of idiots had to go and turn everything to crap doesn't mean magic, a tool, is to blame. In the real world, scientists developed explosives and bombs, resulting in numerous wars and deaths. So science and technology are to blame for human conflict?

 

How has magic stopped technological advances? Most mages in Thedas are locked up in Circles, prohibited from taking up meaningful jobs in the outside world. There's no stopping ordinary folk from developing their tools and from experimenting. Magical advancement itself in most of Thedas is slow. The mages in Tevinter aren't sharing their results, hoping to get an edge over each other. Tell us, why is technology superior to magic? With magical advances so slow, and magical genes contained, it wouldn't be fair to compare the firepower of qunari explosives and that of a small "army" of mages.

 

Magic very often can do what people thought is unthinkable. Technology and magic can and should be used in tantem, to continue to inspire advances in each other, and to better the world.

 

1.Define fine before was tevinter empire highly abusive magical society and before was arlathan another magical society as we know now not much better than tevinter was.We don't rly have informations about disasters then but pretty much it is safe to asume that it weren't pretty possible even worse than now.Since when peoples are rational do i have mention racism in our world that still exist peoples tend hate others because they are different in mages case it is more than that.Chantry in fact said nothing but truth about mages did they caused blight and went to the black city? They did.

 

2.It isn't matter of blame it is matter what mages can do and what they do blight is one of many disasters caused by mages.In a nutshell mages are humans and humans are corrupted and cruel species those both factors create explosive mix.Why i can't say that thedas would be better place without mages.I mean no blights already makes Thedas better place add to this huge numbers of disasters caused by mages what makes many lifes better , then remove most corrupted and vile society in the setting seems like better place.Of course thedas still would be crappy place but better.

 

3.Conversation between dwarf and hawke shows it at best when hawke says "why do you need gun powder when you can use mage" when dwarf says "you humans have mages we don't".In fact there is good reason why dwarves and qunari are only one who are instrested in technological progress so well... It is shown many times that magic play some role in society for example in things like lamps.

 

And as i said magic is too unstable and dangerous for safe use same for mages constant disasters and problems caused by magic and mages that we have to deal with it shows it at best.Magic can't be controled unlike technology.

[Urazz]

I'm thinking at the most you can cause a splintering of the Chantry much like the Catholic Church splintered into several different churches.