Sadly, if there is a chance to gain more ground durning, and after a war, people tend to go for it. A crusade, which is the closest comparable thing, is after all both a religious war, and a political tactic. It would be especialy easy for the (at the time) human chantry to do so, if their feelings about the elves are any simular to how they are currently.
On the topic...there is only one thing I can say:
"Bow before your new herald, and be spared!"
Yeah, I know that. Typical human greed. 
Yeah, I know that. Typical human greed.
To be honest thou, humans arn't the only ones with flaws. Dwarfs, elves, qunari, everyone has good and bad people. "Saints and jerks, right?
Yeah, I know, but considering how everything has been turning out in DA, it seems like humans are mostly jerks. But then, I'm cynical towards humanity both irl and in RPGs, so maybe I'm just being a bit biased. * shrugs *
Yeah, I know, but considering how everything has been turning out in DA, it seems like humans are mostly jerks. But then, I'm cynical towards humanity both irl and in RPGs, so maybe I'm just being a bit biased. * shrugs *
Humans in DA may seem to be mostly jerks, but that can be attributed to them simply having the most jerks, which in turn is because they are the most numerous. But, even as there are jerks in seats of power (like the chantry leaders dismissing the Inquisitor, simply for being an elf), there are also good people who accept people of any race, and even show signs of respect (like Josephine, who greets a dalish Inquisitor in elvish, if I remember correctly). It's all a matter of the individual's.
tbh, the humans that seem to be the most agreeable and accepting are our companions and the NPCs that help us out in the games. Throw in the advisers too. Considering how many humans there are, that's a very small amount. I mean, I guess you can include the Grey Wardens too, tbh that's mostly because they're too pragmatic to care about race or mage vs. Templar or other stuff that tends to set regular people off. We've had a good deal of human NPCs that were all-around jerks (Vaughan, Howe, Loghain, Prosper, Arlange, Petrice, Loghain's messenger, Paeden, Meredith, Alrik, and plenty others). Not to mention the random NPCs that are jerks for no reason, and that's without getting into the books and comics.
Really, in terms of how much of the human population are jerks based on percentage, they'd still beat out the other races with little difficulty.
But then, like I said, I'm cynical towards humanity so that may be coloring my views a bit.
Sadly, if there is a chance to gain more ground durning, and after a war, people tend to go for it. A crusade, which is the closest comparable thing, is after all both a religious war, and a political tactic. It would be especialy easy for the (at the time) human chantry to do so, if their feelings about the elves are any simular to how they are currently.
On the topic...there is only one thing I can say:
"Bow before your new herald, and be spared!"
LOL. You've reminded me of all the "Holy Wars" I've declared while playing Crusader Kings II. Go on a holy crusade to fight them heretics... (real reason is expand territory and create more titles to give to my dynasty members and demanding nobles)
Guest_Faerunner_*
Exalted Marches are the only way to spread the Chant by force or to crush heathens. So no I don't think the Chantry's main shtick is that "heathens must be crushed!"
That's not what you said in the post before this one:
That's not what Chantry doctrine says. They don't see the need to spread the Chant by force and have never made a practice of calling an Exalted March exclusively for the purpose of crushing unbelievers to spread the Chant.
Now you're saying they do?
I've never made a point of getting in the face of the Chantry priestess at Ostagar, whether my Warden was Andrastian or not. She was offering a blessing, not asking you to accept the Maker. It just strikes me as kind of petulant for a Warden to get into an unprovoked argument with her about something unrelated to what she was doing.
Once again, you're contradicting yourself. I relayed the conversation verbatim. She offers a blessing, you can ask if she administers blessings to elves. She says she's merely passing on the Maker's blessing as the Maker "looks kindly on all those who will accept him." I think that's rather provoking to someone who lives under the heel or on the outskirts of human society because his or her people have no homeland of their own because humans took it.
And the elf can state the obvious: what happens to those who say "no"? Considering the Chantry tends to, by your very admission, spread the Chant by force and militaristically crush those that don't want to accept it, and the elves are living consequences of that (since centuries ago they refused conversion and the Chantry proselytized them), I think the Elven Warden's "petulance" at her pretending the People's subjugation under the Chantry never happened is rather justified.
That's why I really love the Revered Mother of Redcliffe. After an Elven Warden offers to stay and help Redcliffe, she'll remark that it's rather surprising/admirable (I forget since I haven't gotten to that part of the game yet) that an elf is willing to risk themselves to help a strange human village. She mentions that many elves would claim that humans wouldn't do the same for them were the situations reversed, and says while she would hope that's not the case, she also can't blame them for feeling the way they do and is glad the Elven Warden is willing to help them anyway. I like this woman because she acknowledges that elves get a bad deal from humans and would be justified feeling bitter, but she's so glad you're willing to put your bitterness aside to help them in their hour of need anyway.
A little acknowledgement. That's all I want.
I know all that, but my point is that The Chantry didn't order an Exalted March on the Dales just because the elves weren't Andrastian. There was already a war.
And how did the war get started? At the very least by elves refusing to convert to Andrasteism.
Both sides give different stories, but there is some overlap. The Dalish say that humans sent missionaries, then Templars when the missionaries were thrown out. The city elves say the humans were getting increasingly angry with elves for refusing their religion, then used the attack at Red Crossing (by a handful of elven bandits) as an excuse to jump at the chance to attack the elves, conquor and forcefully convert them. The humans claim the elves became "increasingly isolationist" (which seems to overlap with the Dalish version of kicking out Chantry missionaries), inspired "dark rumors" around the borders (that the Chantry themselves don't even bother to verify if there's any truth to), and the attack on Red Crossing.
Either way, tensions between elves and humans seemed to start when humans took issue with the elven religion, and the elves refused attempts at conversion. Then the border tensions from humans wanting to go into elven land to convert and trade while elves wanted humans to keep out. Then humans jumped at the first chance to attack, sent in an Exalted March, took the kingdom and forced the converted elves to live as servants and laborers in their own.
I get that, but the Exalted March was called on the Dales because the Chantry was under direct threat from the Dales. Once the elves were pushed back to the original Dales/Orlais border, the Chantry was no longer under threat, yet the Exalted March kept right on going.
Thank you, my thoughts exactly.
Guest_Faerunner_*
Humans in DA may seem to be mostly jerks, but that can be attributed to them simply having the most jerks, which in turn is because they are the most numerous. But, even as there are jerks in seats of power (like the chantry leaders dismissing the Inquisitor, simply for being an elf), there are also good people who accept people of any race, and even show signs of respect (like Josephine, who greets a dalish Inquisitor in elvish, if I remember correctly). It's all a matter of the individual's.
Yeah, the individuals that impose systematic subjugation of a whole race and magical class of people, and brutally crush those that try to resist with Annulment and Purges to keep them in line (without actually addressing the problem that caused them to rebel in the first place), and those "individuals" that don't actively support the system passively support it by looking the other way.
That's not what you said in the post before this one:
Now you're saying they do?
OK first of all, what I was saying was in response to the combination of Gamer072196 saying
Seriously, though, the Chantry doesn't have a whole "The heathens must be saved through the Chant!" thing. It's more along the lines of, "The heathens must be crushed!". They say that they want the Chant to be spread all across Thedas, but they never said that they had to do it peacefully.
and
I never said that they used Exalted Marches to spread their influence.
My point was that the only way to crush heathens to spread the Chant is via Exalted Marches. And since they have never called an Exalted March for no reason other than to crush and convert unbelievers who were minding their own business, the Chantry does not have "Infidels must be crushed" as it's doctrine.
I was NOT saying the Chantry has a tendency to crush unbelievers by force. I was saying the opposite.
Once again, you're contradicting yourself. I relayed the conversation verbatim. She offers a blessing, you can ask if she administers blessings to elves. She says she's merely passing on the Maker's blessing as the Maker "looks kindly on all those who will accept him." I that's rather provoking to someone who lives under the heel or on the outskirts of human society because his or her people have no homeland of their own. And the elf can state the obvious: what happens to those who say "no"? Considering the Chantry tends to, by your very admission, spread the Chant by force and militaristically crush those that don't want to accept it, and the elves are living consequences of that (since centuries ago they refused conversion and the Chantry proselytized them), I think the Elven Warden's "petulance" at her pretending the People's subjugation under the Chantry is rather justified.
I think it's petulant because you're starting an argument with someone who wasn't trying to get into a fight. A Warden who says that is just snidely changing the subject to an issue they are bitter about which was basically unrelated to what she was doing. Maybe they do have a right to be angry, but they're basically taking it out on someone who wasn't being hostile.
The priestess doesn't say "Haha! We crushed your pitiful race in a war! Now accept the Maker, loser!" She isn't trying to provoke you. She is trying to offer something she sees as nice. She's not asking you to convert. If she was, then she wouldn't offer the blessing after dialogue that makes it clear that you don't believe as she does.
And how did the war get started? At the very least by elves refusing to convert to Andrasteism.
Both sides give different stories, but there is some overlap. The Dalish say that humans sent missionaries, then Templars when the missionaries were thrown out. The city elves say the humans were getting increasingly angry with elves for refusing their religion, then used the attack at Red Crossing (by a handful of elven bandits) as an excuse to jump at the chance to attack the elves, conquor and forcefully convert them. The humans claim the elves became "increasingly isolationist" (which seems to overlap with the Dalish version of kicking out Chantry missionaries), inspired "dark rumors" around the borders (that the Chantry themselves don't even bother to verify if there's any truth to), and the attack on Red Crossing.
Either way, tensions between elves and humans seemed to start when humans took issue with the elven religion, and the elves refused attempts at conversion. Then the border tensions from humans wanting to go into elven land to convert and trade while elves wanted humans to keep out. Then humans jumped at the first chance to attack, sent in an Exalted March, took the kingdom and forced the converted elves to live as servants and laborers in their own.
First of all, I say this whenever it gets brought up, but I don't think the dalish story says they sent in templars before the war. The dalish codex is so truncated that I can't see any way to interpret it other than saying templars were sent into the Dales during the Exalted March.
Secondly, we know that there are many factors involved in the war. It was never just about elves expelling missionaries. We don't know who started the border skirmishes (if anyone), but we do know the basic course of the war and many of the related issues. World of Thedas also mentions the Emerald Knights guarding the Dales' borders so we know the elves were isolationist and they did attack Red Crossing. I see no reason to think it was just an isolated handful of bandits if there was already years of skirmishes by that point. We also know that They did conquer a major city in Orlais and were marching on another. And we also know that the Chantry didn't get involved in the fighting until this point, when the elves had pierced the heart of Orlesian territory.
I think it's likely that the "dark rumors" were either exaggerated and completely fabricated and we also know that the Chantry was angry that the elves did not want to convert to Andrastianism. There was also some general anti-elven sentiment left over from their inaction during the Second Blight and Orlais may well have coveted the Dales for themselves. I'm not going to claim the Fall of the Dales was justified but my point is that there's no simple answer that paints one side as clearly innocent and the other as the villain.
Yeah, the individuals that impose systematic subjugation of a whole race and magical class of people, and brutally crush those that try to resist with Annulment and Purges to keep them in line (without actually addressing the problem that caused them to rebel in the first place), and those "individuals" that don't actively support the system passively support it by looking the other way.
I admit, the decisions made by the leaders of the chantry (who are indeed, individuals) have not been the best decisions. And, the same goes for the individuals that support it.
But, it is also important to not think of all people in one group as the same. While the actions made by the Chantry are at times horrible, it is good to keep in mind that it is not often that all followers of a religion agreed with every decison that the leaders of their faith have done, and even strongly disagree with certain parts of it.
The chantry as an organisation is in no way perfect, and that I agree on, but some of the people in Thedas don't care if you are an elf or a mage, and some that would have sympathy for their plights. It...may be a bit difficult for alot of the good people to do anything thou, considering the armies of Templars and whatnot. 
Have anyone else noticed that when Cassandra walks away after this litle conversation she says "I should help the HERALD she sshould'nt be alone at this" or somthing like that but she said HERALD even when we said in short answer "**** YOU I AM NOT THE HERALD OF ANDRASTE..."
I admit, the decisions made by the leaders of the chantry (who are indeed, individuals) have not been the best decisions. And, the same goes for the individuals that support it.
But, it is also important to not think of all people in one group as the same. While the actions made by the Chantry are at times horrible, it is good to keep in mind that it is not often that all followers of a religion agreed with every decison that the leaders of their faith have done, and even strongly disagree with certain parts of it.
The chantry as an organisation is in no way perfect, and that I agree on, but some of the people in Thedas don't care if you are an elf or a mage, and some that would have sympathy for their plights. It...may be a bit difficult for alot of the good people to do anything thou, considering the armies of Templars and whatnot.
I'm not saying that I think every single human is bad, I'm just saying that I'm not going to expect them to be nice considering their track record both irl and in DA. Also, I know that there are those who would prefer to see everyone as being equal, but those people aren't the ones that have enough power or influence to actually do anything to push doctrines and movements that support that. Most of those who are sympathetic to elves and mages are those who don't say anything to defend them, even if they're in a position of power. For them, it's their self-image that they're trying to preserve and defending the elves and mages will only harm their reputation, which is apparently more important to them than their own morals.
Humans often seek approval from their peers, sometimes doing things they wouldn't normally do to get that approval. It's this common part of human nature that prevents most people from speaking up against injustice when it's considered the norm in society. There are those who don't care what others think about their opinions, but they tend to be few and far between. There are examples of people throughout our history and the history of Thedas that stood up and fought for what they believed in, causing many people to rally behind them, but in modern days (both irl and in Thedas) there aren't any of those people. Alistair (if made king) is the only person in power in Thedas who believes everyone is equal and doesn't care what others think of him. He's the only one willing to speak out against all the mistreatment and injustices towards the elves and mages, but he can only change that in Ferelden. Unless other nobles in other countries rally behind him, I don't see any other countries in Thedas changing their policies on elves and mages.
Retour en haut
