589 réponses à ce sujet

[Br3admax]

Political enemies will always act with self-preservation in mind (because what you try to gain is no good to you dead). Religious enemies potentially don't have this limitation, as they could believe death has its own rewards.
 

Yeah, this makes no sense at all. 

 

 

 
If you don't want to reform (which was the point), yes it does. Going against the established rules of the Chantry when you are the herald of Andraste would make you a reformer. Don't want to be a reformer? Better follow the rules.
 

This also make no sense. You could just as easily be a Herald by speaking of Andraste's return or sealing the Breach and the smaller Rifts. You're just pulling your opinion here, nothing more. 

 

 

 
When did I say they fear the Chantry? All I'm saying is that a vashoth child would have grown up with the stories of why his or her parents left the Qun, which could, if the player desires it, give their qunari inquisitor a good reason not to want anything to do with the Chantry at all.
 

 

The Qun is so unlike the Chantry that I'm not even sure why this is a point. The Tal-Vashoth obviously don't have as big a problem with the Chantry as you are implying. 

 

 

Well, yes (though the rest of the world was not exactly safe either). But they are the only nation that continues to openly resist them.

You agreed that Tevinter is holding back the Qunari. They obviously aren't. The Qunari are buying their time as they have been for centuries. The idea that Tevinter is the shield that's been doing this the entire time is ludicrous. 

[TTTX]

Your'e right. If they bring people to defend them, we must sack their cities. 

A couple of extremists can do a lot of harm as we saw with the sister in Kirkwall.

 

 

Spreading the Chant =/= killing Dalish. Honestly, the elves were just angry that humans came into "their" country. 

Well the Chantry have killed people who has refused to convert before, sooo.

[Br3admax]

If you violate border sovereignty with military incursions...

Do you know what that word means? Unless the Templars actively attacked the Dales, they weren't invading. They were guarding missionaries that tried to spread the Chant, which is as noble a goal as any in Thedas. Has it occurred to you that maybe the Dalish could be wrong in this one matter, ignoring the multitude of others. I as a supporter of the Chantry can tell you they botched this situation, but let's not pretend that the small band of Templars was somehow able to threaten the Dales when it took all of Thedas 10 years to crush them. 

[Keroko]

Spreading the Chant =/= killing Dalish. Honestly, the elves were just angry that humans came into "their" country.

Mind you, to the Chantry "spreading the chant" means "eliminate every trace of non-Chantry religion." People tend to take offence to others trying to eliminate their religion.

The codex entry on the Chantry's side contains claims that the elves were worshipping dark gods and practising sacrificial rituals. The Chantry was hardly blameless in stoking the fires of hostility.

The Chantry knows propaganda, and how to use it.

Yet by refounding the Inquisition, and helping the rebel Templars or rebel Mages. You have already made numerous enemies within the chantry.
The only difference is that by being the "Herald of Andraste" legitimacy is bestowed upon your cause making such reforms that you'll already be enacting easier and making it much more difficult for them to stand against you.

In the short term, yes. But in the long term someone who doesn't have the title of herald can only enact changes by convincing the people of the value of these changes. A herald can enact changes swiftly, but doesn't ensure that people will agree with these changes. Which can then loop back to accusations of lies and heresy and stake burning.

There are pros and cons to both sides, including the side that chooses to reject becoming the herald.

[Br3admax]

A couple of extremists can do a lot of harm as we saw with the sister in Kirkwall.

Except Kirkwall is a city, not a nation, and Petrice was actively attacking people, not just being present. 

 

 

Well the Chantry have killed people who has refused to convert before, sooo.

Citation needed. 

[Br3admax]

Mind you, to the Chantry "spreading the chant" means "eliminate every trace of non-Chantry religion." People tend to take offence to others trying to eliminate their religion.
 

No it doesn't. Honestly, if you're just going to spew propaganda that's backed up nowhere, I can go ahead and stop replying now. 

[LobselVith8]

A couple of extremists can do a lot of harm as we saw with the sister in Kirkwall.

 

Yeah, as we know from the towns of people who were wiped out during the New Exalted Marches because they followed the Qun, or when the Rivaini Chantry and nationalist forces started killing the Rivaini who had converted to the Qun because they wouldn't leave Rivain.

 

Well the Chantry have killed people who has refused to convert before, sooo.

 

Sending armed and armored soldiers into the Dales to force conversion will never end well, and the elven Warden's condemnation of the Chantry for invading the nation because the elves wouldn't convert makes it clear what the Dalish historical account is about.

 

I'm not certain why people want to downplay the Dalish historical account, except as a transparent means of blaming the Dalish no matter which historical account one talks about.

[raging_monkey]

Yeah, as we know from the towns of people who were wiped out during the New Exalted Marches because they followed the Qun, or when the Rivaini Chantry and nationalist forces started killing the Rivaini who had converted to the Qun because they wouldn't leave Rivain.  Sending armed and armored soldiers into the Dales to force conversion will never end well, and the elven Warden's condemnation of the Chantry for invading the nation because the elves wouldn't convert makes it clear what the Dalish historical account is about.  I'm not certain why people want to downplay the Dalish historical account, except as a transparent means of blaming the Dalish no matter which historical account one talks about.

the elves are a "lesser race" that have been beaten and subjugated by humans. So its natrual that players will develop certain veiws and history is written by the victors

[Steelcan]

 

I'm not certain why people want to downplay the Dalish historical account, except as a transparent means of blaming the Dalish no matter which historical account one talks about.

Because they have had a stick up their collective asses about it ever since

 

The Chantry sending in missionaries is not an act of war, sending in templars to protect those missionaries is not an act of war.  Now if you have proof that the templars went around forcibly converting elves or slaughtering them please share it.

 

Meanwhile we have the accounts of border skirmishes that culminated with the attack on Red Crossing.  We know that the attack there is what formally started the war despite tensions running high for a long time beforehand.  The attack on Red Crossing was aggressive action carried out by elves. 

 

They may have attacked it because there were missionaries and templars there, it may be understandable that the Dalish government viewed this as a threat but that does not excuse them attacking.  Furthermore, the Chantry was responsible for missionaries and tempalrs, the people of Orlais were not, yet its their homes burned.

[TTTX]

Except Kirkwall is a city, not a nation, and Petrice was actively attacking people, not just being present. 

So I'm guessing that Soviet Union and N-Germany never existed then (I'm being sarcastic).

Extremists can affect nations and even the world giving the right circumstances.

 

 

Citation needed. 

There were Qunari converts in Rivan that got killed off because they refused to convert to the Chantry.

[Steelcan]

If you violate border sovereignty with military incursions...

the Chantry has no borders, Orlais does, attacking innocent humans in retaliation for preaching is not only a horribly disproportionate use of force its a war crime

[LobselVith8]

the elves are a "lesser race" that have been beaten and subjugated by humans. So its natrual that players will develop certain veiws and history is written by the victors

 

Players aren't privy to which historical account is the correct one, but I see a shift from certain people claiming that WoT read that the Chantry version is the correct one (which was easily disproven by the actual entry I provided from WoT) to ignoring that the Dalish historical account reads that armed and armored soldiers were sent into their sovereign territory, and instead acting as though the Dalish started a war over missionaries, rather than an armed incursion into their kingdom.

[Willowhugger]

the Chantry has no borders, Orlais does, attacking innocent humans in retaliation for preaching is not only a horribly disproportionate use of force its a war crime

 

Yes, but in RL today, tresspassers can be shot.

[Steelcan]

Yes, but in RL today, tresspassers can be shot.

yeah but you don't then follow the survivors, find where they live and torch it, unless you want to be arrested

[Steelcan]

Players aren't privy to which historical account is the correct one, but I see a shift from certain people claiming that WoT read that the Chantry version is the correct one (which was easily disproven by the actual entry I provided from WoT) to ignoring that the Dalish historical account reads that armed and armored soldiers were sent into their sovereign territory, and instead acting as though the Dalish started a war over missionaries, rather than an armed incursion into their kingdom.

an armed incursion, that you have no proof did anything violent.  They could have been merely protecting the missionaries, they could have been torching villages, we don't know.

 

We do know that the elves attacked Red Crossing

[raging_monkey]

Yes, but in RL today, tresspassers can be shot.

not when the tresspassers are uninational faith with the impliciat backing of nations lol. Dales v the world

[X Equestris]

There were Qunari converts in Rivan that got killed off because they refused to convert to the Chantry.

And the Rivaini Chantry acted without higher orders.

[Puppy Love]

Yes, but in RL today, tresspassers can be shot.

Be careful were you assume that statement's veracity.  There are lots of places and states where if you do that you're going away for murder.  That is far from a universal law.

[raging_monkey]

Players aren't privy to which historical account is the correct one, but I see a shift from certain people claiming that WoT read that the Chantry version is the correct one (which was easily disproven by the actual entry I provided from WoT) to ignoring that the Dalish historical account reads that armed and armored soldiers were sent into their sovereign territory, and instead acting as though the Dalish started a war over missionaries, rather than an armed incursion into their kingdom.

wars are messy so facts often get overlooked if you choose that as a comfert(not a snide ,rude or hostile remark)

[Steelcan]

not when the tresspassers are uninational faith with the impliciat backing of nations lol. Dales v the world

they have a right to defend themselves, but attacking human settlements ala Red Crossing, is not self defense, its offensive action, the fact that they then marched to Val Royeaux and sacked it confirms their militaristic inclinations

[LobselVith8]

There were Qunari converts in Rivan that got killed off because they refused to convert to the Chantry.

 

I believe I know which accounts you're referring to. At least one of the accounts is mentioned in the "Tales of Destruction: Chapter 3, The New Exalted Marches" written by Brother Genitivi, which reads, "As each year passed, the Chantry pushed further and further into the Qunari lines. Dealing with those of the local populace which had converted to the Qunari religion proved difficult, especially as some of these had lived under the qun now for generations, and the response by many armies was simply to exterminate all those who had converted. Officially the Chantry denies this, claiming most converts fled north into Rivain and Par Vollen, but the mass graves at Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell attest otherwise. Indeed, so many were slain at Marnus Pell that the Veil is said to be permanently sundered, the ruins still plagued by restless corpses to this day."

 

Another account can be read from the codex entry "The Llomerryn Accords", a historical entry from "The Exalted Marches: An Examination of Chantry Warfare" by Sister Petrine; it reads, "It's worth noting, however, that the Kingdom of Rivain immediately violated the treaty. Twice. Once, when the humans of northern Rivain - nearly all practitioners of the Qun and therefore by definition, "Qunari" - refused to leave their homes and go in exile to the islands. And again, when the Rivain Chantry and nationalist forces, unable to convert its people back to the worship of the Maker, tried a purge by the sword, slaughtering countless unarmed people and burying them in mass graves. It's a fortunate mystery that the leaders in Kont-aar did not alert their allies in the Northern Passage, or we'd still be fighting the giants now."

[raging_monkey]

Be careful were you assume that statement's veracity.  There are lots of places and states where if you do that you're going away for murder.  That is far from a universal law.

the us's stand your ground law is a testament to that statement

[LobselVith8]

wars are messy so facts often get overlooked if you choose that as a comfert(not a snide ,rude or hostile remark)

 

It's not an issue of being messy, it's a matter of certain people intentionally disregarding information from a contrasting historical account because it paints the Chantry in a bad light.

[Steelcan]

It's not an issue of being messy, it's a matter of certain people intentionally disregarding information from a contrasting historical account because it paints the Chantry in a bad light.

do you have proof of aggressive action before the attack on Red Crossing?

[raging_monkey]

they have a right to defend themselves, but attacking human settlements ala Red Crossing, is not self defense, its offensive action, the fact that they then marched to Val Royeaux and sacked it confirms their militaristic inclinations

oh i was being sarcastic , trying to lighten the mood. Militant or not the issue of first shot is a grey one imo