173 réponses à ce sujet

[NoForgiveness]

I don't have a problem with anyone believing in the Maker. Though I would say it's untrue because there isn't any proof. In general I judge chantry people on an individual basis. Some people I like(Leliana) and some are on my **** list(the divine). But I feel that the chantry as an organization should not be allowed to hold a single Templar or seeker or mage in their grasp. A theory should not be the reasoning for any blood to be spilt. If i can/have to I will burn that place to the ground to stop it... and yes I do know I sound a tad bit dramatic.

[Dean_the_Young]

That's an interesting take on the Chantry, although maybe a too sugary one. After all, the only known international organization that takes measures against common threats against the world are the Grey Wardens. The international coalitions organized by the Chantry were used twice in regional conflicts (Dales versus Orlais, Free Marches versus Tevinter), four times against a non-expanding power, just because they broke from the Orlesian Chantry (Exalted Marches against Tevinter) and only three against the Qunari invasion. "Common" means just "White Chantry Andrastians", and that as long as it doesn't hurt Orlesian interests.

 

However, the Circle argument is a sound one, and it was supposedly the reason the Inquisition disbanded in the first place, because they believed the Chantry could provide a better service.

 

To elaborate, the Chantry is a coalition organizer, rather than a purpose-built collective security organization. It's the functional deference between, say, the UN Security Council (which acts from a consensus of the major powers, no matter the topic, but only if consensus is available) and NATO (which, in theory, will always and automatically be involved when it's mandate is envoked). Chantry-organized coalitions are generally ad hoc, with the exception of when they become institutionalized (the Circle system, the lyrium monopoly).

 

I don't think you're quite giving the Exalted Marches the measure they deserve. Beside that all of them (and all major Thedasian conflicts) would be considered regional conflicts since Thedas is a modest continent, their envokation wasn't as flippant as your post here implies.

 

-The Dales-Orlais conflict wasn't simply a border dispute, but (from the Andrastian perspective, history, and belief, none of which we have reason to doubt the seriousness of) a major and unprovoked invasion that began with the sacking of major settlements and was nearly in reach of sacking the sitting head of the faith with no clear or remembered stopping point for the Dalish war aims. The Dales's international policy for some time had been such that it could with some merit be called a rogue state, and while a government's right to ban religion for its people rather than letting it be an individual decision is a matter of debate, there is no meaningful evidence about which side had the first major military campaign in the other's territory. While the Exalted March did internationalize a (currently) bilateral conflict, it was as much an international defense reaction as anything else.

 

-The Tevinter Exalted Marches need to be considered in the context of what the Black Divine schism was actually representing: not merely a religious dissention but nothing less the reappearance of the Magister mageocray and the return of Tevinter as a slaving, expansionist, and magic-abusing power that sought to break the Circle system. The entire narrative of the rise of Andrastianism was of the overthrowal of the Tevinter oligarchy, and the rise of the Black Divine was simultaneous with its re-assertion: it was beyond the question of if a man could be a Divine (a sexist conceit of the Chantry, but relatively minor), but if mages could rule. The overwhelming Andrastian consensus is 'no', based on the history of... Tevinter. The Black Devine schism argued yes- and then very quickly went back to many of its historical evils, including slavery, magic-powered domiance, and bouts of expansionism (most notably in various attempts in the Free Marches). The Tevinter Free Marches were functionally an attempt to roll back the rolling back of the clock by Tevinter that took direct aim at three of the founding points of the Andrastian revolt (mageocracy, slavery, and Tevinter expansionism).

 

-The Qunari argument is a bit silly. There were only three Exalted Marches against the Qunari because 'only three' were needed to get to the desired/acceptable status quo of Qunari containment a balance of powers. Ignoring that those three were exceptionally long and enduring (not all Exalted Marches are created equal- the Exalted March of the Dales was less than a decade), a fourth exalted march would have served no purpose militarily or politically. With the Accord that ended the Qunari Wars, the Andrastian nations were already secured, further rollback of the Qunari required military strength the Chantry largely did not have, and Thedas desperatly needed a period for economic recovery. The period subsequently showed that Qunari were apparently able and willing to honor their truce, and further mitigated the need for any more (unlike the Tevinter Exalted Marches, which were repeated failures in their objectives).

 

 

 

I don't see any particular sin or vice in the Chantry being an international institution for and only for the parts of Thedas that recognize and respect it as legitimate (in fact, I would see a far more valid complaint if the Chantry tried to take, say, the Dalish under its aegis of responsibility), and the lack of universality hardly makes common interests any less common- especially since Andrastian nations have comprised all but no more than two of the nations on the surface of Thedas since the organization of the Chantry system.

 

The closest criticism in your piece comes from the closeness of Orlais and Chantry interests- which is true, but only to a point. The two are not synonymous, and the Chantry does not serve as an arm of the Orlais state or vice versa. The Chantry's roll in, say, the Orlais conquest of Ferelden is not much different than their passivity when Orlais itself was the loser with its northern neighbor. Chantry interests, while often related, are not synonymous with Orlais interests, and Orlais has not been demonstrated to weild even veto influence at any point in the last several centuries.

[Mistic]

To elaborate, the Chantry is a coalition organizer, rather than a purpose-built collective security organization. It's the functional deference between, say, the UN Security Council (which acts from a consensus of the major powers, no matter the topic, but only if consensus is available) and NATO (which, in theory, will always and automatically be involved when it's mandate is envoked). Chantry-organized coalitions are generally ad hoc, with the exception of when they become institutionalized (the Circle system, the lyrium monopoly).

 

I find the NATO comparison actually more appropriate to the current situation of the Chantry in Thedas than the UN, since NATO's objetive is to defend their allies from external (from their point of view) aggression. That the Chantry-formed alliances are temporal and not a permanent treaty doesn't diminish that similarity, because I think the mission and objectives are more important than the methodology used by the organization. But of course, that's only from my point of view.

 

I don't think you're quite giving the Exalted Marches the measure they deserve. Beside that all of them (and all major Thedasian conflicts) would be considered regional conflicts since Thedas is a modest continent, their envokation wasn't as flippant as your post here implies.

 

-The Dales-Orlais conflict wasn't simply a border dispute, but (from the Andrastian perspective, history, and belief, none of which we have reason to doubt the seriousness of) a major and unprovoked invasion that began with the sacking of major settlements and was nearly in reach of sacking the sitting head of the faith with no clear or remembered stopping point for the Dalish war aims. The Dales's international policy for some time had been such that it could with some merit be called a rogue state, and while a government's right to ban religion for its people rather than letting it be an individual decision is a matter of debate, there is no meaningful evidence about which side had the first major military campaign in the other's territory. While the Exalted March did internationalize a (currently) bilateral conflict, it was as much an international defense reaction as anything else.

 

-The Tevinter Exalted Marches need to be considered in the context of what the Black Divine schism was actually representing: not merely a religious dissention but nothing less the reappearance of the Magister mageocray and the return of Tevinter as a slaving, expansionist, and magic-abusing power that sought to break the Circle system. The entire narrative of the rise of Andrastianism was of the overthrowal of the Tevinter oligarchy, and the rise of the Black Divine was simultaneous with its re-assertion: it was beyond the question of if a man could be a Divine (a sexist conceit of the Chantry, but relatively minor), but if mages could rule. The overwhelming Andrastian consensus is 'no', based on the history of... Tevinter. The Black Devine schism argued yes- and then very quickly went back to many of its historical evils, including slavery, magic-powered domiance, and bouts of expansionism (most notably in various attempts in the Free Marches). The Tevinter Free Marches were functionally an attempt to roll back the rolling back of the clock by Tevinter that took direct aim at three of the founding points of the Andrastian revolt (mageocracy, slavery, and Tevinter expansionism).

 

-The Qunari argument is a bit silly. There were only three Exalted Marches against the Qunari because 'only three' were needed to get to the desired/acceptable status quo of Qunari containment a balance of powers. Ignoring that those three were exceptionally long and enduring (not all Exalted Marches are created equal- the Exalted March of the Dales was less than a decade), a fourth exalted march would have served no purpose militarily or politically. With the Accord that ended the Qunari Wars, the Andrastian nations were already secured, further rollback of the Qunari required military strength the Chantry largely did not have, and Thedas desperatly needed a period for economic recovery. The period subsequently showed that Qunari were apparently able and willing to honor their truce, and further mitigated the need for any more (unlike the Tevinter Exalted Marches, which were repeated failures in their objectives).

 

That Thedas is only a continent means that it's impossible to have a "world war" in the setting, at least until more continents aren't shown. But "world war" and "interntional war" aren't the same thing, and I never suggested otherwise. What I said is that some Exalted Marches were not against an international threat (an enemy that threatens more than one nation), but implication in regional conflicts (a war between two countries in the same region).

 

-The Exalted March on the Dales can onle be bought on those terms ("unprovoked invasion", "rogue state") if we believe point by point the Andrastian version of the events. Nevertheless, I actually consider it acceptable because it was an effort made by the Chantry to protect itself from the advancing elven armies. That's fair. However, whether it was more to protect themselves than to protect the international Chantry community or not is another story.

 

-Actually, the Tevinter Imperium didn't "quickly went back to many of its historical evils". Lambert himself claims it was "slowly", "inch by inch" in Asunder. World of Thedas also states that the four Exalted Marches cemented the separation between them even more. To make things worse, the Tevinter Imperium denied help to the south in the Fourth Blight because of those wars. So in the end the Exalted Marches not only were counterproductive, but helped to make the word less safe. Also, expansionism can't be a sin here; the last time Tevinter tried to conquer other countries was during the Towers Age, before the Schism. Ironically, Tevinter caused more problems to other Andrastian countries when it was still White Chantry Andrastian.

 

In addition to that, I see that you forgot to mention the Exalted March for Starkhaven in 2:80, in a time when Tevinter was still White Chantry Andrastian.

 

-Ups, I think there was a misunderstanding here. I said "only" because, from my point of view, only 3 of 9 known Exalted Marches (Andraste's and Drakon's don't count when we are talking about the Chantry, since it didn't exist back then) were againt a clear international threat (the Qunari).

 

I don't see any particular sin or vice in the Chantry being an international institution for and only for the parts of Thedas that recognize and respect it as legitimate (in fact, I would see a far more valid complaint if the Chantry tried to take, say, the Dalish under its aegis of responsibility), and the lack of universality hardly makes common interests any less common- especially since Andrastian nations have comprised all but no more than two of the nations on the surface of Thedas since the organization of the Chantry system.

 

Again, as we have an organization that defends really common international interests (the Grey Wardens), "common" is an adjective that can only be used for the Andrastian community, not the international community itself. So, as I said before, that means I'm more in favour of comparing them to the NATO than to the UN.

 

The closest criticism in your piece comes from the closeness of Orlais and Chantry interests- which is true, but only to a point. The two are not synonymous, and the Chantry does not serve as an arm of the Orlais state or vice versa. The Chantry's roll in, say, the Orlais conquest of Ferelden is not much different than their passivity when Orlais itself was the loser with its northern neighbor. Chantry interests, while often related, are not synonymous with Orlais interests, and Orlais has not been demonstrated to weild even veto influence at any point in the last several centuries.

 

We don't know what the Chantry tried to do during the last Orlesian-Nevarran war, so declaring that there was "passivity" is just guessing. We do know that the Chantry supported Orlais in Ferelden, while Tevinter suffered an Exalted March for doing something similar to Starkhaven (again, when it was still considered White Chantry Andrastian), and that the Viscount of Kirkwall was pressured not to hurt Orlesian interests, until he snapped and everything ended badly.

 

I'm not saying that the Chantry is an Orlesian puppet, mind you. I'm saying that we have an organization that represents political neutrality and common international interests much better than the Chantry.

 

(By the way, even if we don't agree on some things, I love your well-thought posts )

[GeminiParadox]

Well, I sometimes RP characters who are more religious. My city elf is a faithful Andrastian who romances Leliana, for example. The Chantry puts women in a central role, which is obviously quite different than historical Judeo-Christian religions. I'm not hostile toward moderate religion and my lack of belief in RL doesn't mean I can't find a fictional religion interesting.

I would like to know whether the darkspawn actually do have much different origins than what the Chantry says.

[Eterna]

I'm not an atheist, I'm agnostic, but even if I was who cares?

 

 

Does being an atheist mean you have to disagree and take a moral stance against all religions even fictional ones? It sounds pretty petty to be honest.  

[Steelcan]

I treat all fictional religions based on the merits of the world they are in

 

rather pointless to bother with what I think irl in games where the writers can make a deity if they choose so

[Lenimph]

I think compared to real world religions(especially the catholism it's based on) they're actually pretty decent if not kind of cool. I love how female centric it is.

But I'm agnostic.

[Dean_the_Young]

I find the NATO comparison actually more appropriate to the current situation of the Chantry in Thedas than the UN, since NATO's objetive is to defend their allies from external (from their point of view) aggression. That the Chantry-formed alliances are temporal and not a permanent treaty doesn't diminish that similarity, because I think the mission and objectives are more important than the methodology used by the organization. But of course, that's only from my point of view.

 

I'm working from a methodical process, so our use of the analogies are going to be inherently contradictory.

 

 

 

 

That Thedas is only a continent means that it's impossible to have a "world war" in the setting, at least until more continents aren't shown. But "world war" and "interntional war" aren't the same thing, and I never suggested otherwise. What I said is that some Exalted Marches were not against an international threat (an enemy that threatens more than one nation), but implication in regional conflicts (a war between two countries in the same region).

 

-The Exalted March on the Dales can onle be bought on those terms ("unprovoked invasion", "rogue state") if we believe point by point the Andrastian version of the events. Nevertheless, I actually consider it acceptable because it was an effort made by the Chantry to protect itself from the advancing elven armies. That's fair. However, whether it was more to protect themselves than to protect the international Chantry community or not is another story.

 

Short of a conspiracy theory in which the Andrastian history is a deliberate sham to hidden machinations and intentions, the Andrastian memory and understanding is the only relevant version of events. It's the Andrastian understanding, and not the Dalish, that the Andrastian politics and understandings are going to work on.

 

I'm also going to point out that attacking a single country does not prohibit something from being an international concern. Even ignoring the international institution in play (the threat to sacking the Chantry), bilateral conflicts can (and often are) matters of regional concern since the perpetrators and conflicts of one bilateral conflict can quickly and easily spread to affect more. The real world analog to this point would be the Iraqi invasion of Quwait: Saddam was widely considered an international threat and menace even though he was only fighting one nation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

-Actually, the Tevinter Imperium didn't "quickly went back to many of its historical evils". Lambert himself claims it was "slowly", "inch by inch" in Asunder. World of Thedas also states that the four Exalted Marches cemented the separation between them even more. To make things worse, the Tevinter Imperium denied help to the south in the Fourth Blight because of those wars. So in the end the Exalted Marches not only were counterproductive, but helped to make the word less safe. Also, expansionism can't be a sin here; the last time Tevinter tried to conquer other countries was during the Towers Age, before the Schism. Ironically, Tevinter caused more problems to other Andrastian countries when it was still White Chantry Andrastian.

 

 

In order-

 

-I'll agree I overstated the rapidity. Without a timeline of the rollback of reforms, it's hard to say what happened when- though the return of the mageocracy obviously was well before Lambert's lifetime and ability to observe.

-I don't look kindly on ex post facto judgements, so arguing the merits of the Tevinter Marches on the basis of unpredicted (and, in some respects, unpredictable) events significantly later isn't convincing. The rationality of a choice depends on what is, could be, and should be known at the time- the ultimate failure of the Exalted Marches and their impact on a subsequent Blight is not something that should be considered relevant to the decision at the time (or else they wouldn't bother to decide on an already known failure).

-The expansionism certainly can be a sin, especially if (and this is unprovable) the previous expansion attempts were linked or believed to be related to the rise of the mageocracy.

-I wouldn't necessarily agree on that. Most of the post-schism Tevinter history has been occupied by the Tevinter-Qunari conflict. Tevinter already does bad things, and if it weren't distracted it could certainly do far worse.

 

 

 

 

In addition to that, I see that you forgot to mention the Exalted March for Starkhaven in 2:80, in a time when Tevinter was still White Chantry Andrastian.

 

-Ups, I think there was a misunderstanding here. I said "only" because, from my point of view, only 3 of 9 known Exalted Marches (Andraste's and Drakon's don't count when we are talking about the Chantry, since it didn't exist back then) were againt a clear international threat (the Qunari).

 

 

Skipping this because points were largely addressed before. All I'd add is reiterating that Tevinter's prior expansionism is a valid international concern, and one that would only increase with political moves to usurping what Chantry restrictions there were.

 

 

 

Again, as we have an organization that defends really common international interests (the Grey Wardens), "common" is an adjective that can only be used for the Andrastian community, not the international community itself. So, as I said before, that means I'm more in favour of comparing them to the NATO than to the UN.

 

The vast majority of Thedas is Andrastian. All but two major cultural groups on the surface (Dalish and Qunari) identify as Andrastian, while there are only two unified surface nations that do not fall under the White Chantry (Qunari and Tevinter). The number of non-Andrastian states rises to a grand total of three if we include the two Dwarven city-states under the surface, and at least one of those follows the Chantry's international system through the Chantry's lyrium trade monopoly.

 

For all intents and purposes of mainland Thedas, the Andrastian Community is the international community. When the Chantry provides collective security and common goods for the groups under its aegis, these public goods also benefit others as well as free riders. Dalish clans benefit from the Circle's system's efforts to prevent abominations and reduce mage-mundane relations amongst humans that could be more volatile towards Keepers. Tevinter was a direct partner in anti-Qunari coalitions. The Qunari are going to be beneficiaries and possible partners in the Chantry-backed Inquisition and its addressing of the demonic invasion.

 

Absolute universality has never been a requirement for 'common' as an adjective. Even the UN would fail under such a stringent definition.

 

 

 

 

We don't know what the Chantry tried to do during the last Orlesian-Nevarran war, so declaring that there was "passivity" is just guessing. We do know that the Chantry supported Orlais in Ferelden, while Tevinter suffered an Exalted March for doing something similar to Starkhaven (again, when it was still considered White Chantry Andrastian), and that the Viscount of Kirkwall was pressured not to hurt Orlesian interests, until he snapped and everything ended badly.

 

 

We don't know what the Chantry did during the Orlesian-Nevarran War, but we know what it did not do (organize an international coalition against Nevarra) and we know what we have seen little evidence of (the Chantry trying to organize such a coalition via political leverage or rhetoric).

 

The Chantry's support for Orlais in Ferelden was pretty passive.

 

 

I'm not saying that the Chantry is an Orlesian puppet, mind you. I'm saying that we have an organization that represents political neutrality and common international interests much better than the Chantry.

 

Not really. The Wardens don't represent common international interests (which is itself a practice of balancing differing priorities to keep a general direction). The Wardens represent a hyper-focused international mandate. They exist for one thing, and only one thing, and are regarded as apolitical because the Wardens have learned that when they try to be a political actor, they frequently lose.

 

 

 

 

(By the way, even if we don't agree on some things, I love your well-thought posts )

 

Thank you. If I ever happen to accidentally make one, please let me know.

[EmissaryofLies]

I do not like the Chantry. I view it as an institution of disillusioned fools who are entirely too dangerous. Would you entrust posterity to people who believe that slaughtering, imprisoning and enslaving people that are different from themselves is the way to behave?

 

I view the Chantry and all similar religions, fictitious or no, as dangerous organizations that should be under scrutiny.

[Dean_the_Young]

I do not like the Chantry. I view it as an institution of disillusioned fools who are entirely too dangerous. Would you entrust posterity to people who believe that slaughtering, imprisoning and enslaving people that are different from themselves is the way to behave?

 

Would I believe in governments?

 

Sure, I guess. The alternative (and lack of them) hasn't been much better- you don't need a government to have huge amounts of slaughtering, imprisoning, and enslavement, so it's not like getting rid of institutions fixes the problem. The question is how much slaughtering, imprisoning, and enslaving (or should we say subjugation?) is appropriate in establishing and maintaining a culture so that there is less slaughtering, imprisoning, and enslaving (or, again, subjugation) as a whole.

[Cryptos]

I don't really mind the chantry, if i have the chance i always play a pro chantry in the dragon age games. its a fun to roleplay religious from time to time.

[Master Warder Z_]

I don't have a problem with anyone believing in the Maker. Though I would say it's untrue because there isn't any proof.

 

It's a fifty/fifty likelihood, better then most religions.

 

Bioware already said they will not confirm or deny the Maker several times over.

[Mistic]

I'm working from a methodical process, so our use of the analogies are going to be inherently contradictory.

 

Fair enough.

 

Short of a conspiracy theory in which the Andrastian history is a deliberate sham to hidden machinations and intentions, the Andrastian memory and understanding is the only relevant version of events. It's the Andrastian understanding, and not the Dalish, that the Andrastian politics and understandings are going to work on.

 

I'm also going to point out that attacking a single country does not prohibit something from being an international concern. Even ignoring the international institution in play (the threat to sacking the Chantry), bilateral conflicts can (and often are) matters of regional concern since the perpetrators and conflicts of one bilateral conflict can quickly and easily spread to affect more. The real world analog to this point would be the Iraqi invasion of Quwait: Saddam was widely considered an international threat and menace even though he was only fighting one nation.

 

True, but this time we are talking about judgements made from our perspective, not an in-universe opinion. After all, this discussion began with a comparison to the UN, and no Thedosian is capable of that since the UN doesn't exist in their world.

 

That is true. However, we don't know if in the end it became an international matter or not. After all, it's been claimed that only Orlesian troops took part in that first Exalted March, but I'd need to check the whole context.

 

In order-

 

-I'll agree I overstated the rapidity. Without a timeline of the rollback of reforms, it's hard to say what happened when- though the return of the mageocracy obviously was well before Lambert's lifetime and ability to observe.

-I don't look kindly on ex post facto judgements, so arguing the merits of the Tevinter Marches on the basis of unpredicted (and, in some respects, unpredictable) events significantly later isn't convincing. The rationality of a choice depends on what is, could be, and should be known at the time- the ultimate failure of the Exalted Marches and their impact on a subsequent Blight is not something that should be considered relevant to the decision at the time (or else they wouldn't bother to decide on an already known failure).

-The expansionism certainly can be a sin, especially if (and this is unprovable) the previous expansion attempts were linked or believed to be related to the rise of the mageocracy.

-I wouldn't necessarily agree on that. Most of the post-schism Tevinter history has been occupied by the Tevinter-Qunari conflict. Tevinter already does bad things, and if it weren't distracted it could certainly do far worse.

 

I know that ex post facto judgements are easy to make in hindsight and that we must take into account what was known at that time. However, I don't look kindly on dismissing those judgements only because of their nature, because that overlooks their real usefulness: hardly ever a decision is made without different alternatives and propositions. If the chosen action ended badly, the one who took the decision can't hide behind saying "it seemed the best option at the time", because 1) it clearly wasn't, so maybe the problem is in your analysis skills and 2) maybe another person suggested a different course of action that could have worked better.

 

And that's why the Wardens keep their political neutrality. Because they know that sooner or later a new Blight will appear. That's a prediction that has come true every time, so it's not as if anyone could claim it was unpredictable, and Wardens now that they have to be in the nations' good side to stop the darkspawn. Also, in any war plan, the possibility of failure and its consequences should be taken into consideration.

 

The vast majority of Thedas is Andrastian. All but two major cultural groups on the surface (Dalish and Qunari) identify as Andrastian, while there are only two unified surface nations that do not fall under the White Chantry (Qunari and Tevinter). The number of non-Andrastian states rises to a grand total of three if we include the two Dwarven city-states under the surface, and at least one of those follows the Chantry's international system through the Chantry's lyrium trade monopoly.

 

Completely aside, but I wonder how can the Chantry claim to have the monopoly on lyrium when Tevinter is supplied too. Maybe they get it from Kal-Sharok? Or being "Imperial Chantry" allows the Dwarves to claim that they follow the letter of the law?

 

We don't know what the Chantry did during the Orlesian-Nevarran War, but we know what it did not do (organize an international coalition against Nevarra) and we know what we have seen little evidence of (the Chantry trying to organize such a coalition via political leverage or rhetoric).

 

The Chantry's support for Orlais in Ferelden was pretty passive.

 

Wait, why are the only options you offer "the Chantry was passive" or "the Chantry organized an international coalition against Nevarra"? Aren't they pretty extreme? Why isn't anything in between? After all, we do know that the Chantry pushed actively for Orlesian interests in Kirkwall, yet they didn't organize an international coalition against the Free Marcher city.

 

And yes, the support for Orlais in Ferelden was passive. But it was support nonetheless.

 

Thank you. If I ever happen to accidentally make one, please let me know.

 

Too many to start counting right now

[Knight_47K]

I guess, atheist people would look at the Chantry the same way they look at other religion.

 

Its just sad to see people believing in fictional books than their own kind. That they waste their time listening to sermons when they could be doing something really productive. Why don't people have the same fervor for science and maths as they have for religion. That people do horrible things in the name of GOD, so that they get better privileges in afterlife.

 

Do people really need a book to tell them that they must do the right thing. And to force people to do the right thing, religious texts bribe them with future profits, like better apartments in heaven and what not. Isn't this one human life enough. Shouldn't we be making a difference here, than trying the easy way out.

 

Chantry is the same as any other religion. There are three major divisions, there are people who are zealots, people who believe in the chantry's ways (but are not zealots) and people who believe in the maker but do not support the chantry.

 

 The fact is that most religions are money sinks. They work on donations and don't really produce anything. They are seldom taxed or scrutnized and hold immense power over the population. They are a threat in themselves. Specially when a religious uprising reults in throwing out a legitimate government and results in anarchy. And when that happens all the minorities are rounded up and killed / culled and people claim its for the greater good.

 

Exalted Marches are a prime examples of such religious insanity. They work on the following principle "We must kill people, that we do not understand because we do not have the mental capacity to do so". Live and let live does not exist where there are religions like Chantry.

 

I think people must be allowed to do, or believe in whatever they like till it does any physical, mental, social, financial or any other kind of harm to any one else. You wish to pray to your maker, fine by me. You want to knock on my doorstep and ask me to pray to your maker, because the maker says so, not going to happen.

[Master Warder Z_]

 The fact is that most religions are money sinks. They work on donations and don't really produce anything.

 

The Chantry bankrolls the circles and don't get a single Orlesian penny out of it.

 

 

Exalted Marches are a prime examples of such religious insanity. They work on the following principle "We must kill people, that we do not understand because we do not have the mental capacity to do so". Live and let live does not exist where there are religions like Chantry.

 

 

All of those have been responses to threats to the Chantry it self either through direct violence or its beliefs and teachings.

 

Hence why i'd label them more or less all justified, the Dales started their war, The Imperium allowed their interpretation of the chant to reinstate the millennia old Magocracy and the Qunari arrived as conquerors.

[Neon Rising Winter]

The Chantry bankrolls the circles and don't get a single Orlesian penny out of it.

 

And maintaining a monopoly over access to a feared, powerful and highly sought after commodity is just a troublesome side effect which they regretfully endure, but has nothing to do with their decision. Control of the circles gives the Chantry power and influence that is in no way reliant on their belief system.

 

It provides a reason to maintain a standing army of Templars independent of any national entity. It gives them control over the majority of mages - which is giving them a near monopoly on advanced medical care, high tech weapon production, and further military force in the form of mages with combat abilities. It gives them popular grass roots support by protecting people from a perceived threat. The circles are a device that the Chantry has parlayed into rather a lot of political, military and technological influence.

[JeffZero]

It's fascinating.

 

I'm a cultural anth major, I mean, come on. It's a neat fantasy representative of something I study. From that kind of perspective I'm cool with plenty.

[Master Warder Z_]

And maintaining a monopoly over access to a feared, powerful and highly sought after commodity is just a troublesome side effect which they regretfully endure, but has nothing to do with their decision. Control of the circles gives the Chantry power and influence that is in no way reliant on their belief system.

 

It provides a reason to maintain a standing army of Templars independent of any national entity. It gives them control over the majority of mages - which is giving them a near monopoly on advanced medical care, high tech weapon production, and further military force in the form of mages with combat abilities. It gives them popular grass roots support by protecting people from a perceived threat. The circles are a device that the Chantry has parlayed into rather a lot of political, military and technological influence.

 

It's wonderful isn't it!

[Neon Rising Winter]

It's wonderful isn't it!

But does imply it's not the Chantry bankrolling the Circles, but more the other way around. Or to be pedantic was the other way around before the Circles did a runner.

[Master Warder Z_]

But does imply it's not the Chantry bankrolling the Circles, but more the other way around. Or to be pedantic was the other way around before the Circles did a runner.

 

Considering that Templars and Mages for the most part rarely if at all impact the majority of people's lives i wouldn't view that way.

 

What i do however know is that the Chantry dumps a fortune into the circle, they are only moderately self sufficient and that comes from Enchanting, the reminder is paid by the Chantry, and yes that is for the occasional service here or there, but overall as i said most of those chantry resources aren't being used period.

 

Sure the occasional Noblemen is healed by a mage, and a few monarchs petition the circle to be granted a court adviser on the arcane, but in reality, none of those mages are going to be used one way or the other, apart from a few extreme situations here or there.

 

And i think Blights, Qunari and Exalted Marches tend to be called for all thedosians to defend against.

[Neon Rising Winter]

Considering that Templars and Mages for the most part rarely if at all impact the majority of people's lives i wouldn't view that way.

 

What i do however know is that the Chantry dumps a fortune into the circle, they are only moderately self sufficient and that comes from Enchanting, the reminder is paid by the Chantry, and yes that is for the occasional service here or there, but overall as i said most of those chantry resources aren't being used period.

 

Sure the occasional Noblemen is healed by a mage, and a few monarchs petition the circle to be granted a court adviser on the arcane, but in reality, none of those mages are going to be used one way or the other, apart from a few extreme situations here or there.

 

And i think Blights, Qunari and Exalted Marches tend to be called for all thedosians to defend against.

 

Remember the Chantry's been flogging the 'mages - powerful and dangerous' line for centuries. Now obviously opinions here will vary - noble effort or confidence trick - but either way irrelevant. These are societies have until recently been well and truly sold on the idea. The Chantry and their Templars are valiantly protecting them from this threat, noble and commoner alike, and that translates into more than goodwill.

 

On a purely financial side, look at the spending on Circles. There's the land for the physical buildings, plus construction and maintenance costs. Food or the resources to produce it. Manpower in the form of Templars to police them. Now I'm guessing you see these as the money the Chantry spends on the Circle, but that's to ignore how a religious organisation would come into possession of this kind of resource. And why. See paragraph 1, the goodwill of a grateful populace.

 

They are left with other costs. Templars need lyrium, so that they'll have to pay for. High end armour and weapons for them. Ingredients and resources for magical research and the like. But it's just going to be the specialised goods you can't extract from the locals. Whereas on the credit side of the books we have the tranquil churning out gear, and to dismiss the market for medical care as the odd noble is laughable.

 

No I reckon they are on to a very nice little earner with those Circles.

[twizbuck]

I consider myself agnostic, and I have the same feeling for the chantry as I do for RL religion:

 

It's BS.

 

Faith is one thing. Faith is fine, great, whatever. If you believe in higher existence(s) and/or being(s), great. There's enough about life that points that way where I can't argue or heck, I have some spirituality and faith as well.

 

But religion? Screw that.

 

Feel the same for the Chantry. There's good people involved for the most part, who truly believe what they preach, but the Chantry is all about power that's veiled with pretty words and glorious homes of worship. Wynne, Leliana, the Grand Cleric from DA2, Cullen, Sebastian, I believe they have strength in their faith, and that's awesome. But the church is corrupt. I see the need for Templars, but Mages deserve freedom with Templars on hand to help in need, not to rule over them. So on and so forth.

[Br3admax]

The.

Circle.

Rules.

Itself.

 

 

Ugh, Templars even answer to the First Enchanter in Origins. I'm not sure why I bother to continue saying this, since obviously it's in game facts versus your opinions, and we all know which one is superior. 

[twizbuck]

The.

Circle.

Rules.

Itself.

 

 

Ugh, Templars even answer to the First Enchanter in Origins. I'm not sure why I bother to continue saying this, since obviously it's in game facts versus your opinions, and we all know which one is superior. 

 

Settle down, Skippy.

 

Anyway, I'm basing my thoughts on my playthroughs.