190 réponses à ce sujet

[DeityDi]

Dude, I want to kill every Templar alive and will not be satisfied save unless Inquisition allows the order to be disbanded and its members put on trial.

 

Why can't I hold this position and believe Anders should die for both his sake and the sake of his crimes?

You can do whatever you like, of course. 

But the sad truth that a lot of people know close to nothing about characters and still hate or like them nonetheless. 

 

As for your second comment, well...

You have to keep in mind that BSN is not the majority, actually.

 

 The way he acts, talks and carries himself really turned a lot of posters off.

The way he acts is all about what happened in the Circle and in the Gallows. You can't break that circle.

[QueenofFereldan]

I grew to not like Anders (though I am torn with him currently) because he was a hypocrite when he wanted to diss Merrill and Fenris, and then goes to kill a building filled with innocent people just for his cause.

I think I may have my Inquisitor wanting his head for his crime.

[Grieving Natashina]

You can do whatever you like, of course. 

But the sad truth that a lot of people know close to nothing about characters and still hate or like them nonetheless. 

How can you say that on the official forums for the damned game?  Most of the people here do know the characters, do understand them.  Perhaps far better than you do, who knows.  Many posters on the forums, and folks on Tumblr, have spent hours (if not days) of not just playing the games, but reading the extended canon, scouring wiki's, writing fan fiction, and reading dev interviews about their favorite characters/places.  The folks here are here because they want to talk about and dissect the games, and generally learn every bit of information they can, especially with controversial characters like Anders.

 

I'm going to say this to you as well: You're being rude, and very condescending towards other posters.  They are allowed to disagree with you about the character.  Please stop. 

 

Sorry for the derail folks.  It won't happen in this thread again.

[AlexiaRevan]

 

Why can't I hold this position and believe Anders should die for both his sake and the sake of his crimes?

His crimes ...you mean blowing up the chantry ? not others crimes I never heard of right ? 

But if you were in the shoes of the oppressed....wouldn't you see the same 'innocent got blown chantry' having done crimes by their inaction? still in the shoes of the oppressed.....wouldn't that switch a point view ? as their inaction cost lifes . Anders actions cost life . Why anders actions are a crime and the lifes that it cost are 'innocent' . And the chantry inaction costing lifes and those life are not innocent . And if they were , why shouldn't be punished while Ander get killed and MUST be killed ? 

 

Explain this to me...please . 

[Colbyachi]

I grew to not like Anders (though I am torn with him currently) because he was a hypocrite when he wanted to diss Merrill and Fenris, and then goes to kill a building filled with innocent people just for his cause.

I think I may have my Inquisitor wanting his head for his crime.

This. I want to spare him just to see how he is presented in DAI and if I'm not satisfied with his character development from DAII he may not be long for Thedas   

[QueenofFereldan]

This. I want to spare him just to see how he is presented in DAI and if I'm not satisfied with his character development from DAII he may not be long for Thedas

If he shows up in Inquisition and hasn't changed much, my Mage Inquisitor may execute him. Even my soft hearted Warden may scold him for his actions.

[DeityDi]

How can you say that on the official forums for the damned game?  Most of the people here do know the characters, do understand them. 

Here. I wasn't talking about "here", I was talking about just people everywhere who discuss DA.

 

edited: removed non-constructive comment ~Mod03

[QueenofFereldan]

Here. I wasn't talking about "here", I was talking about just people everywhere who discuss DA.
Why can't you all just read before you write.

Well from your previous posts, you make it seem like none of us understand him.

[Grieving Natashina]

Well from your previous posts, you make it seem like none of us understand him.

It's probably best to just let this one go, for the sake of the thread topic.  

[Colbyachi]

Here. I wasn't talking about "here", I was talking about just people everywhere who discuss DA.

Why can't you all just read before you write.

Can you guys please take a moment to compose yourselves and either get back to the topic at hand, or please stop flooding the thread with issues not related to the discussion. 

[Willowhugger]

His crimes ...you mean blowing up the chantry ? not others crimes I never heard of right ? 

But if you were in the shoes of the oppressed....wouldn't you see the same 'innocent got blown chantry' having done crimes by their inaction? still in the shoes of the oppressed.....wouldn't that switch a point view ? as their inaction cost lifes . Anders actions cost life . Why anders actions are a crime and the lifes that it cost are 'innocent' . And the chantry inaction costing lifes and those life are not innocent . And if they were , why shouldn't be punished while Ander get killed and MUST be killed ? 

 

Explain this to me...please . 

 

It helps to know that my MageWardenHawkeQuisitor playthrough was always going to be the Goody-Two-Shoes one. I played a Diplomatic Hawke for my "canonical" Hawke going into Inquisition even if I think everyone agrees that Snarky Hawke should be the canonical one. He was, after all, meant to be my Paragon Warden after some Eluvian shenanigans.

 

Anyway, my Apostate Mage was a firm believer in Mage Liberation. He rivaled Fenris, Rivaled Aveline, Friendshiped Anders, Rivaled Carver (The Grey Warden), and Friendshiped Merrill. One quality that my Goody-Two-Shoes Fellow had about Mage politics was simple, though, that "If you are evil, you die."

 

And it became very-very problematic to watch mage-after-mage live up to the absolute WORST stereotypes the Templars used to justify their imprisonment. Murder of the innocent, selling your soul to demons, selling the souls of Templars, and performing unspeakable experiments on MY MOTHER.

 

Very-very reluctantly, my Hawke came to a simple conclusion.

Some mages are scum, just like some regular people are scum.

 

And Scum gotta be cleaned.

 

But in the Hawke's head there was always the little niggling detail that virtually every one of the scumbags he dispatched tended to claim that they were only doing all this evil because they were oppressed by the Templars. It all came to a head in Hawke's mind when he confronted Ser Thrask's group, one of the few Templar-Mage alliances ever, and the mages resorted to Blood Magic and demon worshiping.

 

Getting the Good Templars killed.

 

Clearly, Hawke realized, someone needed to lead by example. To show mages that you don't HAVE to be a monster because someone is a monster to you.

And, unfortunately, the first time Hawke had to test that philosophy was his best friend.

Tragic.

[QueenofFereldan]

I think with my Hawke, she began to believe some sacrifice had to be made in the end, and she knew how mages were treated. Plus, she couldn't bring herself to kill the man she loved either, especially when she understood his position.

My other two? Well...one lost good friends prior to the Breach because of his actions' consequences, and the other doesn't like the idea of sacrifice.

[AlexiaRevan]

It helps to know that my MageWardenHawkeQuisitor playthrough was always going to be the Goody-Two-Shoes one. I played a Diplomatic Hawke for my "canonical" Hawke going into Inquisition even if I think everyone agrees that Snarky Hawke should be the canonical one. He was, after all, meant to be my Paragon Warden after some Eluvian shenanigans.

 

Anyway, my Apostate Mage was a firm believer in Mage Liberation. He rivaled Fenris, Rivaled Aveline, Friendshiped Anders, Rivaled Carver (The Grey Warden), and Friendshiped Merrill. One quality that my Goody-Two-Shoes Fellow had about Mage politics was simple, though, that "If you are evil, you die."

 

And it became very-very problematic to watch mage-after-mage live up to the absolute WORST stereotypes the Templars used to justify their imprisonment. Murder of the innocent, selling your soul to demons, selling the souls of Templars, and performing unspeakable experiments on MY MOTHER.

 

Very-very reluctantly, my Hawke came to a simple conclusion.

Some mages are scum, just like some regular people are scum.

 

And Scum gotta be cleaned.

 

But in the Hawke's head there was always the little niggling detail that virtually every one of the scumbags he dispatched tended to claim that they were only doing all this evil because they were oppressed by the Templars. It all came to a head in Hawke's mind when he confronted Ser Thrask's group, one of the few Templar-Mage alliances ever, and the mages resorted to Blood Magic and demon worshiping.

 

Getting the Good Templars killed.

 

Clearly, Hawke realized, someone needed to lead by example. To show mages that you don't HAVE to be a monster because someone is a monster to you.

And, unfortunately, the first time Hawke had to test that philosophy was his best friend.

Tragic.

 what the....

I didn't ask you what your charachter though . I asked you to explain the difference between 'chantry peoples being blown are innocent' and how the rest of mage being killed are not innocent . 

 

As for Thrask death , it was one crazy mage who wanted revenge . The others didn't and probably would've ended dead . And one could say : we saw similar on the templar side . Whats his name ? that evil templar who wanted the tranquil solution ? That kinda even worse , cose he had other templar who agreed and were with him against 1 MAGE . 

 

As for your charachter how he think . I could give you the same summary toward the chantry/templar  from the point of view of my Warden City elf , dalish Elf and castless dwarf , and Hawke (played goodie as warrior , rogue blood mage ) . 

 

And I do get it . But that philosophy as beautiful as it is 'lead by exemple and you don't have to become a monster because one is' . I can come up with one of my own 'I follow a code a La Justicar . You do evil ...you die. It doesn't make me a monster because I do not enjoy it , and I own up to it . I shall be judged in the end for every kill . But right now , since the rules are made by mortals , its mortals that has to decide since the Gods are silent and don't meddle . ' . 

[Willowhugger]

 

I didn't ask you what your charachter though . I asked you to explain the difference between 'chantry peoples being blown are innocent' and how the rest of mage being killed are not innocent

 

Sorry, short version then.

 

Anders was right to want to stop the innocent suffering. How he gets to it, though it questionable.

 

1. Blow up a chantry
2. ???

3. Mage Freedom!

[Melca36]

is it just Alain ?!! I say if only it was just Alain !! 

 

Did you ever go by the Circle and listen to the screams and the whipping? There was alot of horrible stuff going on that should have NEVER occurred.

[riverbanks]

Once in a lifetime, just once, it would be nice to have a thread about anything at all in Dragon Age not descend into an argument about mages vs. templars, or Anders was right/Anders was wrong.

 

Alas, Sebastian thread, we hardly knew ye.

[ShadowLordXII]

Isn't the Templar hall basically inside the Circle?

 

Ander's Chantry bomb was small enough to be concealed, but powerful to destroy the Chantry and cause significant damage to the surrounding area. So I don't see how a few smaller bombs couldn't be strategically placed to cause massive damage to the templar quarters and minimizing harm to the mage quarters.

 

But that would likely be harder for Anders to pull off without help. So he chose a more publically accessible target.

[Melca36]

A lot of people never heard even about the major crimes that happened in the Gallows, some don't believe Fenris and dismiss all the hits about his former master abuses. Some keep asking "what was so bad about Ferelden circle, it looked like Hogwarts in DAO!"

I wouldn't think the majority of people "do get" even 1 character as a whole. 

 

Thats the thing. People assume it was like The Circle in Ferelden where Anders mentioned mages were raped there. He also mentioned the suicides.

 

The problem with DA2 was that it made the majority of people automatically assume that all mages were evil and wanted power when that was NOT the case.    Most only wanted to reform the Circle. They did not want to eradicated it.

 

The Chantry has grown very corrupt over 1000 years and I hope Inquisition exposes the fact that the Chantry is not the perfect institution that people assume it to be. 

[QueenofFereldan]

Well...back with Sebestian, I hope he comes back, especially if you did choose Anders. And since Inquisitor is a different person, he/she might talk him out of it.

[AlexiaRevan]

 

 

Anders was right to want to stop the innocent suffering. How he gets to it, though it questionable.



1. Blow up a chantry
2. ???

3. Mage Freedom!

If I recall (and I maybe wrong) but he said his action weren't to free the Mages . But to make sure there is no more 'lets discuss it while mages are still locked up' . If I recall...he did it in a way to force the Templar and Mage hands and there will be no turning back . He does say it when meredith and Orsino are arguing and he tell them that...then the chantry blow . 

[aTigerslunch]

I sided with mages a lot more than Templars, cause of their treatments of mages. But, as far as Anders is concerned, he was slain for his crime all but one time, regardless if Sebastion approves or not. I didn't bother with how Sebastion felt, it was how I felt. 

[Eveangaline]

I don't think he'll successfully take his throne back without Hawkes help.

[lane]

sigh....anyways i still hold on every word i said. if It came out rude, sorry. thats because i don't feel like  explaining with texts and texts like i did before cause this deserve more and i've already done it. Kill him if and hate him if you want ,i hold to my version of the story where i tried to trigger every possible smile out of him. but i will never regret defending him. Because as i said and will say again , i love him not inspite of but because of what he did and what he is. Am stayed civil dont worry (am over with this soon) Am satisfied enough with all the love am fed outside here. and most of all, am not trying to twist anyone's mind . if anyone want more well argumented and not hasted explanations i can help or they can go to search in my topic. if not ,feel free to disagree. i was here in the first place to show my gratitude for all the inspiration i felt and keep feeling about the one who created this character (and also for more gay stuff !) 

So yeah for me ? hawke will love Anders unconditionally with or without the revolution

[CENIC]

I don't think he'll successfully take his throne back without Hawkes help.

 

I kinda hope for this, though there's the question of which event triggers as "Hawke's help."

 

If 100% rivalry with Sebastian means a more capable and focused Sebastian, then whether Hawke kills Anders or not, I'd like for Sebastian to succeed in Starkhaven.

Likewise, if you gain 100% friendship with him I don't want Sebastian to succeed whether Hawke sides with him or not, because Hawke was influencing him to give up Starkhaven.

[Knight_47K]

Sebastian is a very polarizing character it seems.

What's got so many people up in arms about him?

 

 

I like Sebastian well enough, till the chantry blows up. That's when he screams... OMG... that is one of the most horrible screams ever. It just sounds fake and apathetic. Like there is no emotion behind it.

 

I really wanted to punch his face in when he starts ... " Oh noooo... Elethinnaa... Nooooooooo!!!..."

 

Just freaking irritating.