369 réponses à ce sujet

[Jester]

This is the guy with the patience to plan for several years, the brains to invent a bomb better than anything his peers have, ridiculous magical power due to being a merger of two Companion-level beings from Awakening, and the willingness to die for what he believes is right. The only thing stopping Anders/Justice from compassing Meredith's death and leaving the Circle in Cullen's relatively benevolent hands was Anders/Vengeance.

 

That wasn't Anders' plan. He didn't try to make life better for mages at all. 

He wanted to plunge ALL mages into a war, even those who just wanted to live in peace - like Bethany for example.

 

And doing that - making a vital decision that affected every mage and forced them to fight a war, many of them didn't want - is what's unforgivable.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

That was more a response to the first post I quoted in this thread. But no, I disagree that Anders is to blame for what happened to the mages. The templars were unreasonable, they did not explore the very viable alternatives before them, and they chose to kill the mages with questionable evidence and shaky reasoning as to why. I mean, Anders wouldn't be a catalyst to anything if Meredith hadn't chosen to annul the circle, so I don't see how he is to blame for what happened.

You know, thinking on it more completely I'm not sure Anders' plan demanded the Annulment per se. All he specifically wanted was for Meredith to be completely unreasonable, which he facilitated by assassinating the only person with the authority to make her be otherwise. However, if it weren't for Anders, Meredith would have been stuck. Maybe Anders didn't know the Annulment was coming, but he knew that Meredith wanted to push against the Circle in a way that it simply would not accept. So while maybe he didn't knowingly cause the Annulment (though he had to know it was a possibility, and his plan makes the most sense if he specifically hoped for it) he knowingly put the Templars everyone knew to be unreasonable in a position where nobody was making them be reasonable. I really don't see how the unreasonable acts of the Templars aren't to some degree his fault if he put them in a position where they no longer had reason forced upon them.

[Xilizhra]

The Circle system also meant that mages were taken someplace to learn how to properly use their abilities, and to turn into abominations surrounded by mages and templars if they were to turn at all. It also kept them away from the lynch mobs that seem to form to kill them whenever something bad happened around them, and whether or not the Chantry is responsible for that (I believe it is in part) leaving the Circles was a mistake on their part. (There's also the more minor bit of keeping mages under control so they couldn't use their powers against the populace, though frankly I think that could have been accomplished in other ways.)

That doesn't really answer the question of "Was there an alternative?"

 

 

As for the alternative, I still think that anyone clever enough to create a bomb capable of destroying the Chantry so utterly, who has as much magical power as Anders was supposed to, and who is willing to sell his life for a sufficiently big gain, could probably have cooked up some sort of plan to assassinate Meredith and leave the Circle in Cullen's relatively benevolent hands. It's not as much as you want to have, but the math as far as who benefits checks out a lot better, and only the potential Ser Alriks among the Templars really lose.

And this isn't it. The Circle is terrible regardless of whether or not Meredith runs it; Cullen, he who sees mages as not being people and favors making anyone who steps too far out of line Tranquil, would hardly be better in any case. And the issue extends far beyond Kirkwall.

[ManOfSteel]

Yes, and the only reason I'd ever keep him alive at the end of Dragon Age 2 is to give the Inquisition a chance to get their hands on him.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

That doesn't really answer the question of "Was there an alternative?"

 

 

And this isn't it. The Circle is terrible regardless of whether or not Meredith runs it; Cullen, he who sees mages as not being people and favors making anyone who steps too far out of line Tranquil, would hardly be better in any case. And the issue extends far beyond Kirkwall.

The point of the first paragraph is that I don't think you have an alternative to the Circle. And at any rate the answer you gave to that first paragraph was hardly necessary in the context of the second.

 

And I think you're underestimating the extent to which Cullen is better than Meredith. Don't forget that he's the one who favors sparing mages who surrender during the Annulment. As for the issue extending far beyond Kirkwall, you're right in that some of it does. Kirkwall, however, is supposed to be one of the worst of the Circles.

[Xilizhra]

The point of the first paragraph is that I don't think you have an alternative to the Circle. And at any rate the answer you gave to that first paragraph was hardly necessary in the context of the second.

 

And I think you're underestimating the extent to which Cullen is better than Meredith. Don't forget that he's the one who favors sparing mages who surrender during the Annulment. As for the issue extending far beyond Kirkwall, you're right in that some of it does. Kirkwall, however, is supposed to be one of the worst of the Circles.

Sparing them to be made Tranquil? And the fact that the White Spire doesn't seem to be much better than Kirkwall makes me think that Ferelden's Circle was more the exception than the rule.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

Sparing them to be made Tranquil? And the fact that the White Spire doesn't seem to be much better than Kirkwall makes me think that Ferelden's Circle was more the exception than the rule.

 

They'd only need to be made tranquil if the Right wasn't revoked and Cullen never wanted there to be one in the first place.

[Bigdoser]

They'd only need to be made tranquil if the Right wasn't revoked and Cullen never wanted there to be one in the first place.

David said that those who are spared during the annulment of da2 are made tranquil.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

David said that those who are spared during the annulment of da2 are made tranquil.

I remember coming across a quote like this from him. Unless you're thinking of a different one, I think he said that those spared during an Annulment for any reason are Tranquil, intending it to be a general rule. But an Annulment that's canceled might not fall under the same rules.

[Bigdoser]

I remember coming across a quote like this from him. Unless you're thinking of a different one, I think he said that those spared during an Annulment for any reason are Tranquil, intending it to be a general rule. But an Annulment that's canceled might not fall under the same rules.

Well I recall that answer was to a question to what happened to the mages that you spared in DA2 if you side with the templars so yeah they were made tranquil.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Well I recall that answer was to a question to what happened to the mages that you spared in DA2 if you side with the templars so yeah they were made tranquil.

I was able to find a quote by Gaider that said that the Annulment is just charge in and kill everything, and that the Knight-Commander can theoretically offer anyone who somehow survives Tranquility instead of death. It's not meant to specifically refer to the Kirkwall Annulment, however; the quote addresses properly justifiable Annulments in which the Veil really is turning itself inside out and there really are demons waltzing through the library and signing their names on the windows. (The reason given is that situations that are that bad preclude taking prisoners, which clearly doesn't apply here.) This might have still implied that the possible Blood Mages who Cullen saves are Tranquil'd, if Cullen didn't call the whole thing off as soon as he got the authority. But the quote you refer to, which responds specifically to this situation and which tells us for sure, I couldn't find.

 

If you weren't thinking of this one, and you remember any of the exact wording Gaider or his questioners used, you can try putting the bits of that conversation you're positive can remember word for word into quotes in a google search.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

The Chantry in general is responsible and Elthina was knowing it when she was joining the chantry. Its like saying a soldier is innocent because he didn't kill like his comrades. He shouldn't have join if he wanted to be 'innocent'. She was either very ignorant or very smart, seeming innocent while ignoring the suffering of Kirkwall and preaching all is well.

Also you compare a scene to general gameplay. Sure we see less people when walking around but what we see during scenes is fact, for example in Sebastian scene where he shoots an arrow to chanter's board the background is full of people, the same place has few people when we are controlling Hawke. So whoever the scene shows are in side the chantry is true, claiming otherwise is stretching.


Anders destroyed the chantry in a way that no one else could be blame for it but himself. He is standing there, declaring wars on Templars and destroys the chanty when he is done with that speech. Meredith does what you think is disgusting, the funny part is Anders is glowing and his voice has changed right in front of Meredith and other Templars yet they seem to ignore the abomination responsible in front of them and go for innocent mages of the circle. An order like this with chantry on its head totally deserves what Anders did. Provoking is irrelevant, if templars promote a damaged person who has become a monster as knight commander that is entirely their fault. You quoted first sentence of my post and ignored the rest which was the elaboration. Anders wants to overthrow the chantry and its leash on mages, if you call that 'evil' then that is your opinion because it is not a fact, he simply has a cause.

 

Being a solider is not the same as being a clergy member. Meredith is guilty on murdering innocent people in the annulment. But so is Anders. He caused it to happen. If you can say Anders is damaged, Meredith is also suffering from the effects of the idol. If she was a danger to others, then he removed the only thing stopping her from becoming and unhinged and specifically made her angry by killing her friend. It happened because of him. And he intended it for it happen. But I don't consider Meredith to be innocent of her actions. She bears responsibly for the terrible choices she made, and so does Anders. He's a monster and she chose to burn down the world and damn the innocents who burn with it.

 

Having a cause and being evil are not mutually exclusive. Even if the cause is noble. And I don't even think his is. But what you said was "what he did cannot be classified as evil unless you are biased against mages" but it can. Absolutely 100%.

 

And it could have been the case that what he did would be all for nothing. That he would executed and that would be the end of it. He needed it to happen for his cause, but it didn't have to happen. The templars chose to annul the circle and they get the blame to me. Also, the whole chantry doesn't have to be in the church that night, and Elthina is quite responsible as she's Meredith's only real superior and she could have spoken up in favor of the mages and made Meredith back down a long time ago. She was also the one who put Meredith in power in the first place. Plus, most important, she's part of the institution that oppresses all mages in southern Thedas. She tactily agrees to all of it in accepting her position, and most importantly in doing nothing about it when she could or at least try to. And since we see one floor of the chantry, I'm going by what we see, and that's Elthina and templars. If there are other priests or other templars in the chantry that night, I really don't care. They aren't innocent either. Anders' attack wasn't a random bombming, it was an attack on chantry ideology on magic and the mistreatment of mages that has occured under it for a thousand years.

 

No Elthina could not have made Meredith back down sooner. Meredith mostly does what she pleases and listens to Elthina selectively. Elthina had only limited control over the templars. And declaring her and other priests guilty by association is wrong. Yeah I know it wasn't a random bombing, it was a ruthlessly calculated bombing, designed to cause as many people to die as possible. That's way worse. And he does more than tacitly approve the death of countless innocents, he's directly responsible.

[Bigdoser]

I was able to find a quote by Gaider that said that the Annulment is just charge in and kill everything, and that the Knight-Commander can theoretically offer anyone who somehow survives Tranquility instead of death. It's not meant to specifically refer to the Kirkwall Annulment, however; the quote addresses properly justifiable Annulments in which the Veil really is turning itself inside out and there really are demons waltzing through the library and signing their names on the windows. (The reason given is that situations that are that bad preclude taking prisoners, which clearly doesn't apply here.) This might have still implied that the possible Blood Mages who Cullen saves are Tranquil'd, if Cullen didn't call the whole thing off as soon as he got the authority. But the quote you refer to, which responds specifically to this situation and which tells us for sure, I couldn't find.

 

If you weren't thinking of this one, and you remember any of the exact wording Gaider or his questioners used, you can try putting the bits of that conversation you're positive can remember word for word into quotes in a google search.

Er where exactly in the game does it say cullen called it off when you side with the templars? You pretty much destroyed the circle Hawke even says as much in the game when talking to Meredith. I think its highly likely the surviving mages will be made tranquil going by the quote extract. Its the price for "keeping the peace". Hawke: "Is not helping destroy the cirlce not proof enough?"

 

What is there to call off when the act has been done? There is nothing to call off when the circle has been annuled. That is the price you pay for the choice just like if you side with mages you pretty much kinda become a "vilain" in the common man's eyes so to speak.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

Er where exactly in the game does it say cullen called it off when you side with the templars? You pretty much destroyed the circle Hawke even says as much in the game when talking to Meredith. I think its highly likely the surviving mages will be made tranquil going by the quote extract. Its the price for "keeping the peace". Hawke: "Is not helping destroy the cirlce not proof enough?"

 

What is there to call off when the act has been done? There is nothing to call off when the circle has been annuled. That is the price you pay for the choice just like if you side with mages you pretty much kinda become a "vilain" in the common man's eyes so to speak.

Xilizhra was the one asserting that the surviving mages are going to be made Tranquil. What we're pointing out is that there's no direct proof either way. As for what there is to call off after most of the Circle is dead, there's still the "Tranquiling the survivors" thing which would have to be done in ordinary circumstances, and which as we're pointing out, is not strictly necessary here and which we don't know happened. Orion also adds that Cullen could be argued to be disinclined to, as he wasn't in favor of the actual Annulment in the first place.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Of course. Terrorism should not be tolerated EVEN if you support the cause it claims to work for.

[Cainhurst Crow]

Do not suffer a terrorist to live.

[Seboist]

The only good terrorist is a dead one. 

[Lulupab]

Of course. Terrorism should not be tolerated EVEN if you support the cause it claims to work for.

Neat little morality slogan. Terrorism has been always tolerated provided it was beneficial for the winning side. If we are to look at an example from recent ones, Americans used terrorism to win against Britain in order to become independent and not only it was tolerated the people behind them were branded heroes of war.

Truly nowadays such an act of terrorism is abhorrent, inexcusable and not an effective carrier of change. People react to exercises of strength or violence in a different manner and a non aggressive approach is much more plausible because most of our societies have democratic regimes or even before those at least in the past 3 centuries there was a diffusion of authority because of merchantile strength and the rise of the burgeois against the feudal system. Dragon Age is clearly a feudal society and not a particularly enlightened one politically.

The common people have no electoral power and very minor purchasing power. The feudal lords have very limited electoral power which is under the constant censure of military and religious power centers. Ferelden is perhaps further advanced because its existence is in opposition to Orlais; their nationalism is defined in opposition to Orlesian norms and it is well likely that the Orlesians could reclaim it at any moment. Kirkwall is much different. Its viscounts are presented to have ruled under the approval of the chantry and templars. If the common people rebelled against Meredith, she would simply put them down; in fact Leliana makes it pretty clear that the Divine might well put the entire city to the torch. In this balance, one should consider the choice made by Anders. Against ethnic cleansing and tyranny what Anders did is not any greater evil, in fact it pales in comparison.

Being a solider is not the same as being a clergy member. Meredith is guilty on murdering innocent people in the annulment. But so is Anders. He caused it to happen. If you can say Anders is damaged, Meredith is also suffering from the effects of the idol. If she was a danger to others, then he removed the only thing stopping her from becoming and unhinged and specifically made her angry by killing her friend. It happened because of him. And he intended it for it happen. But I don't consider Meredith to be innocent of her actions. She bears responsibly for the terrible choices she made, and so does Anders. He's a monster and she chose to burn down the world and damn the innocents who burn with it.

Having a cause and being evil are not mutually exclusive. Even if the cause is noble. And I don't even think his is. But what you said was "what he did cannot be classified as evil unless you are biased against mages" but it can. Absolutely 100%.

I pretty much answered this in response to admiral above so I suggest you read this comment. But to add to that: If Anders really knew how Meredith would react then one must consider what the hell is she doing at top of chain of command. She was quite damaged and biased before the idol because of what happened to her sister, she should never have become a Templar in first place. Based on this fact what's stopping other Templars from doing what Meredith did? It wouldn't be the first time whole mages get punished for something they absolutely had nothing to do with. That's precisely what Anders was trying to do. To show the mages they are never safe and are living with templar swords below their throat waiting to be slit at an offense they had nothing to do with. Kirkwall incident was the main motive all mages rebelled. The asunder characters played their part and made votes but it was the very anger at events of Kirkwall and unjust annulment of its circle that drew mages to rebel. Because they realized, clear as day, that they can and they will get punished for something that had absolutely nothing to do with.

So go on ahead and call Anders "evil", but the only thing which is 100% certain is he did that to oppose much greater "evils" such as ethnic cleansing.

[SetecAstronomy]

I let him live one time: the playthrough where he saved Bethany in the Deep Roads. Hawke and Anders' friendship was ruined after the Chantrypocalypse and Hawke "banished" him, but she spared him for that one reason.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Neat little morality slogan. Terrorism has been always tolerated provided it was beneficial for the winning side. If we are to look at an example from recent ones, Americans used terrorism to win against Britain in order to become independent and not only it was tolerated the people behind them were branded heroes of war.

 

 

Funny I don't think I made exceptions for anyone.

 

The fact that people have tolerated it if it benefits them doesn't make it right or morally defensible. A terrorist is deserving of destruction no matter their chosen cause.

[SmilesJA]

I see Anders more of a revolutionary than a terrorist.

[Riverdaleswhiteflash]

I see Anders more of a revolutionary than a terrorist.

I see my dinner as more of a potato than a potahto.

[Revan Reborn]

That's an oversimplification of the issue. I simultaneously acknowledge the concept of sacrificing for the greater good and condemn Anders. The thing is that mages, from all we can tell, are a slim minority of the populace, and there really is danger to allowing them to walk freely through the general population. I consider Anders to have knowingly caused an Annulment in order to start a war for the good of what from all I can tell is a slim minority, and in so doing to have sacrificed a sizable minority of that minority as well as who knows how many people from the population as a whole for the sake of the minority.

It's not an oversimplification at all. You merely lack context. Mages, for one, are not a slim minority of the populace. Take the Tevinter Imperium, for instance. It is a country ran by mages, and given their heightened status, there is a large concentration of mages there. They embrace magic rather than fearing it like the rest of Thedas.

 

You also have to consider there are quite a few circles, all of the apostates that are in hiding, the list goes on and on. There are a lot more mages than you think. Many are just concealing their identities or avoid being placed in situations where their talents could be revealed.

 

With that taken into consideration, Anders isn't just doing it for a "minority." He is doing this for a large part of the world and really the future of it. This doesn't just affect mages, but the entirety of Thedas as a whole. It needs to be addressed, as mages actually are only a small part of the actual problem.

[The dead fish]

Neat little morality slogan. Terrorism has been always tolerated provided it was beneficial for the winning side. If we are to look at an example from recent ones, Americans used terrorism to win against Britain in order to become independent and not only it was tolerated the people behind them were branded heroes of war.

Truly nowadays such an act of terrorism is abhorrent, inexcusable and not an effective carrier of change. People react to exercises of strength or violence in a different manner and a non aggressive approach is much more plausible because most of our societies have democratic regimes or even before those at least in the past 3 centuries there was a diffusion of authority because of merchantile strength and the rise of the burgeois against the feudal system. Dragon Age is clearly a feudal society and not a particularly enlightened one politically.
 

 

What kind of terrorism are you thinking about in this revolution ? Did they use terror for political purposes against civilians ? Murdering Hundred or thousand of them to upset or break any compromise ? Did they target willingly a lot of innocent folks ? or maybe rather soldiers like in a war ? Didn't you mean guerilla ? Military tactics used by the Patriots to adapt to their enemy stronger, because they were weaker militarily, fighting and flexible units engaged in a war of harassment, ambush, raids conducted by regular units or forces without frontline ? It seemed to me that they wanted to create a climate of insecurity for the military forces. This is still war between soldiers there to me. Unless, there are some things I should learn about this revolution and I'm ready to listen. 

 

Did you see something close to what Anders did ?  

[Lulupab]

Funny I don't think I made exceptions for anyone.
 
The fact that people have tolerated it if it benefits them doesn't make it right or morally defensible. A terrorist is deserving of destruction no matter their chosen cause.

So that was mere idealism of a fairy tale world. You are talking about a concept that doesn't exist. Whether you make any exceptions or not because its simply two sides of a conflict. It was either terrorism or allowing greater morally questionable matters to go unchallenged. Inb4 you try to defend Templars because you think they have the right to ethnically cleanse mages when they feel like it. See? You are on other side of the conflict and if ethnic cleansing of mages benefits that side you are more than willing to defend it. Also your answer lies with rest of my post which you seemingly ignored, I didn't want to go into real life examples but alas...