There is literally no faith anywhere in Thedas that demands this. Sounds like the hateful one is you....
I think they may be speaking of the Chantry indifference to the Dalish.
Probably would prefer if they were treated with favoritism or some such rot.
I think they may be speaking of the Chantry indifference to the Dalish.
Probably would prefer if they were treated with favoritism or some such rot.
If the Chantry have a kill on sight order for the Dalish, they sure as hell did nothing for 7+ years. Somehow I doubt it. But you're right. Ignoring is pretty close to massacring.
There is literally no faith anywhere in Thedas that demands this. Sounds like the hateful one is you....
I don't want to start an argument but:
Arrvarad: "Like this mage, the Qun requires your death."
And we'd only just met too. Grumpy bugger.
Well that's the bloody Qunari.
They aren't the Chantry.
They are a cult of locusts that will try to spread that plague of a faith of theirs until they are all dead.
Well that's the bloody Qunari.
They aren't the Chantry.
They are a cult of locusts that will try to spread that plague of a faith of theirs until they are all dead.
I don't want to start an argument but:
Arrvarad: "Like this mage, the Qun requires your death."
And we'd only just met too. Grumpy bugger.
That was because that mage was separated from his handler and was therefore a disease. It wasn't a kill on sight order. It was a kill on association order.
And doesn't the Chantry have a kill policy on Maleficar? The only one I've ever heard of them attempting to rehabilitate was Idunna.
Templars hunt mages, not kill them. The problem is most aren't willing to go back. They attack first.
And doesn't the Chantry have a kill policy on Maleficar?
Blood Mages are evil and should die.
But they aren't Apostates, they are the evil ones that truck with demons and drain children of their life blood to make a slightly bigger fireball.
Blood Mages are an abomination in the sight of the Maker as well.
Guest_TrillClinton_*
My views on religion in game and out of the game are separate because they are two different ecosystems. I am agnostic in real life because I feel like we do not have enough data to process whether a higher diety exists or not. Lack of information does not equal a proof or disproof.
In relation to the game, I do not roleplay devouts. The last time I did roleplay such a character, was in fallout new vegas where I played a radical christian that murders everyone with a small hint of sin. In dragon age, I roleplay someone who realizes and respects the existence of the chantry but it is not really devout herself. The mage dynamics are too dangerous to go on unwatched without the chantry's supervision
Templars hunt mages, not kill them. The problem is most aren't willing to go back. They attack first.
From codex entry: apostates
"No matter how a mage has become apostate, the Chantry treats them alike: Templars begin a systematic hunt to bring the apostate to justice. In almost all cases, "justice" is execution."
Sounds like a kill policy to me which is the point the other poster was trying to make.
From codex entry: apostates
"No matter how a mage has become apostate, the Chantry treats them alike: Templars begin a systematic hunt to bring the apostate to justice. In almost all cases, "justice" is execution."
Sounds like a kill policy to me which was simply the point the other post was trying to make.
Anders. Escaped 6 times. Also Starkhaven mages and Feynriel.
They aren't there to kill. They just do because most mages attack them.
That was because that mage was separated from his handler and was therefore a disease. It wasn't a kill on sight order. It was a kill on association order.
No, he wanted to kill Hawke the second he found out he/she was a mage. Hence the special dialogue option.
Sounds like a kill policy to me which is the point the other poster was trying to make.
You would be wrong then.
If that was the case then all mages born out of the circle would simply be put to death.
No, he wanted to kill Hawke the second he found out he/she was a mage. Hence the special dialogue option.
I repeat, Qunari.
._.
Why does this surprise people?
No, he wanted to kill Hawke the second he found out he/she was a mage. Hence the special dialogue option.
He tries to kill Hawke even when s/he isn't a mage and wants to kill mage Hawke for the same reason he must kill the Saarebas. Hawke has no handler.
I repeat, Qunari.
._.
Why does this surprise people?
Br3admax said "There is literally no faith anywhere in Thedas that demands this. Sounds like the hateful one is you...."
I was pointing out the Qun requires the death of any mage outside a Karatoum, including humans. That is a kill on sight policy for a mage without a handler.
And I'm done.
Br3admax said "There is literally no faith anywhere in Thedas that demands this. Sounds like the hateful one is you...."
I was pointing out the Qun requires the death of any mage outside a Karatoum, including humans.
They didn't identify Hawke as a mage on sight. :\
Seriously, there are so many more valid reasons to hate the Chantry and the Qun than OPPRESSION™.
Guest_TheDarkKnightReturns_*
Well that's the bloody Qunari.
They aren't the Chantry.
They are a cult of locusts that will try to spread that plague of a faith of theirs until they are all dead.
Ignorant bas. I would pity you if not for your viper-like deceit. Maaras shokra.
They didn't identify Hawke as a mage on sight.
To be fair apparently no one in Kirkwall did ._.
Ignorant bas. I would pity you if not for your viper-like deceit. Maaras shokra.
Ashkost say hissra, bas. Vinek kathas.
Qunlat is disgusting.
It's interesting that you ask this of atheists, but had you ever considered that a Christian could just as easily have a problem with the Chantry? It's not like it's really much more than a superficial resemblance at best to a real world Christian sect. For some, it could even be considered heretical and thus something they can't stand, something that, for them, is as offensive if for a different reason as it is to you.
Spoiler
Of course! But here's the thing: I've seen quite a few people arguing that atheists who don't like the Chantry do so because they "hate religion", because we "can't let go of our real world bias" or because "it's cool to hate on the establishment". Those arguments usually pop up in every thread where peoples view of the Chantry is discussed or when someone voice their concern about their character being associated with the Chantry. I haven't really seen any Christian who dislike the Chantry get told that it's because s/he "hates every other religon" or something like that. People just accept that the person dislike the Chantry because of the reason s/he gives and not real world bias.
Retour en haut
