394 réponses à ce sujet

[Dean_the_Young]

Sorry, its tough to teach someone analytical skills and reading comprehension in 3 posts or less.  If the Tevinter alliance was just her bad decision making her followers just would have just been angry and upset, there wouldn't be commentary on how its completely out of character with everything she's ever done.

 

When you grow up you might learn to enjoy stories that aren't spoonfed to you.

 

Out of curiosity, are you older than twenty five?

[TK514]

Out of curiosity, are you older than twenty five?

 

It's like being carded.  At my age, every time it happens you just smile.

[Dean_the_Young]

It's like being carded.  At my age, every time it happens you just smile.

 

You realize that now you've implied that you are a full adult, she will likely just insinuate that age doesn't mean intelligence (or maturity)? Or that you clearly didn't learn anything on your way to adulthood?

 

 

(But yeah, maturity lets you enjoy such things.)

[Aimi]

If you want to take part in adult conversations, you'll need a thicker skin if someone calling you dude is of note.

I lack the plumbing to be a "dude". That's why it's of note.
 

And your argument is about how Fiona is terrible because of how she repaid Ferelden's offer of sanctuary.  And no, if her mind is being whammied then her actions would not be betrayal.  What is more, we know mind control is going on there considering the woman shows up as an enemy boss for no reason in the Haven quest.
 
And Asunder makes no such thing clear.  Fiona was elected to her position on that specific platform, and the treaty was broken by the Seekers and Templars when they dissolved the College of Enchanters.  Its funny how you bring up Varric, but the actual mages under her note that they can't believe she's doing this considering how she's very specifically given the Circle the opportunity to vote on matters no matter what.  Even when she has legal and moral justification to just screw it and have the libertarians force everyone their way.
 
What is more, you obviously have issues understanding the language of the source material since Fiona never defends the deal as a good idea.  She says it was the only option, despite you know, us having met her earlier before she got whammied and she was no where near such an opinion.  Its clear as day that the Tevinter usurper there magically screwed with her head.  Plus again, her appearance attacking Haven when the Circle has no reason for that.

These are a collection of words in English that do not appear to mean the same things they normally do - at least, that's what I hope, because otherwise they are utterly nonsensical.

You say that Fiona's decision to support foreign armed forces in a military coup on Fereldan soil is not a betrayal of the sanctuary Ferelden offered her because...of how she repaid them? What? The mages didn't repay squat. They supported the coup by selling themselves into effective slavery. Fiona made no meaningful effort to back out of the arrangement when it was clear she had lost all her bargaining power with Alexius. Then the Inquisition came in to save her and her followers, and the Fereldan government elected to remand the mages into Inquisition custody to be dealt with as the Herald saw fit.

There's no "repayment". That's playing a political game and comprehensively losing. Being accomplices to Alexius' coup against Arl Teagan is the definition of betrayal. That Fiona was too stupid, afraid, or overwhelmed to take other options seriously does not erase the betrayal. It doesn't matter even if she was mind-controlled into doing it: that just means she was mind-controlled into betraying Ferelden, not that she didn't betray Ferelden in the first place. I mean, this is basic vocabulary here. Arl Teagan used to be in charge of Redcliffe, and he sheltered Fiona and her mages there; then, Arl Teagan was gone, and Fiona and her mages are working for the guy who kicked Teagan out in a coup and replaced him. Intent has nothing to do with it.

---

But let's talk about intent anyway, since we're here. You claim that she was under some form of mind control, which is stretching the source material extremely far. Her own explanation back at Skyhold is...interesting. She initially blames Tevinter infiltrators in her followers' ranks, but then says that they did no more than spread rumors and make an alliance seem like a good idea. She mentions her desperation when searching for the alliance, but claims that it was a superior option to defeat at templar hands. Nowhere does she mention previously being mind controlled. She says that she's not proud of what happened, but then defends her decision by claiming that it might have been far worse.

For somebody who is throwing out some fairly insulting remarks about failing to take account of the source material, you seem to be doing a fairly shoddy job of that yourself. If anybody would want to justify Fiona's terrible actions at Redcliffe by blaming fear demons or mind control, it ought to be Fiona herself, once she is freed of that ostensible compulsion. But she doesn't. She simply claims mitigating circumstances, none of which actually excuses what she did, and even partially defends her decisions.

You claim that there is a whole passel of her followers who claim that her actions in Redcliffe were out of character for her. All right: who are they? What, specifically, do they say? And why are they more trustworthy than the testimony of others, including Fiona herself? Can their claims be explained perhaps by their own personal need to believe that Fiona is better than allying with Tevinter, because she is their leader and if she made such a decision it would break their trust in her...rather than a rational appraisal of Fiona's character and her history of decision-making?

Her appearance at Haven doesn't really change this calculus. You claim that she has to have been mind-controlled in order to attack the Inquisition, but why is that the case? She's working for the Venatori, and the Inquisition is the enemy of the Venatori. It's perfectly possible to explain her presence without resorting to mind control. But even if she were being mind-controlled at Haven, that doesn't mean she was under the same compulsion at Redcliffe. You're making an argument from essentially nonexistent evidence.

---

What Asunder makes clear about Fiona is that she is reckless, and a poor planner. Dean did a good job of describing why earlier. Independent of the moral justification for launching the mage rebellion, actually doing it - and doing it in the way Fiona did - was sheer lunacy. She didn't prepare at all: no secret agreements with powerful allies, no fortified redoubts for defense against the templars, no underground mage network to help Circles escape their foes. She did not rely on moral purity to aid her cause, because (as Vivienne points out) by rebelling when they did, Fiona and her allies were effectively leaguing themselves with a mass murderer, Anders; the subsequent decision to take Alexius' deal further eroded her moral standing. She had no end game beyond "templars suck"; even at Skyhold, after the events of Redcliffe, she still hadn't figured out what a proper solution might be.

So she started a war with no plan, no means for fighting it, and no cause to use in an appeal to anybody beyond a relatively small group of her allies.

That's stupid.

---

Now, I don't hate Fiona. I don't think that the label of "Mary Sue" is useful. I have no particular interest in tearing her down. I simply believe that, based on the evidence of the books and this game, she is a poor leader who made a series of poor decisions that negatively impacted the welfare of her followers.

[thats1evildude]

Why would she suspect her fellow mages of manipulating her?

 

Because they were Tevinter. Y'know, the people who enslave elves and even their fellow mages in the north? And whose offer of support involves ten years of indentured servitude? The only worse allies you could find is the bloody darkspawn.

 

Worse, they were Tevinter who "conveniently" arrived just in time to lend a hand. Anyone with an iota of common sense would find the whole deal pretty suspicious.

 

Fiona can say they were desperate, but that just doesn't add up. Redcliffe Castle is nigh-unassailable. The bulk of the templars had withdrawn. I just think she realized that she couldn't win this war.

[TK514]

You realize that now you've implied that you are a full adult, she will likely just insinuate that age doesn't mean intelligence (or maturity)? Or that you clearly didn't learn anything on your way to adulthood?

 

 

(But yeah, maturity lets you enjoy such things.)

 

I feel like my self-esteem will weather the storm.

[myahele]

We also have to consider pro circle mages under Vivienne. Despite there no longer Circles Vivi and crew used their connections.

One can say Vivi would've been a better target, yet she was never manipulated.

[Medhia_Nox]

For me - Fiona is guilty by association with Adrian.  She allowed her toady to manipulate a war and I cannot see her being totally ignorant of the whole thing.

 

Then - the selling the mages to Tevinter because she was loosing (when I knew she would lose).

 

I really just have total disdain for her - I know nothing of her from The Calling.

 

I know where her son gets his idiocy from.

[myahele]

Let's also not forget the selling of tranquil mages to which were needed for Ocularums.

[celebrei]

Fiona isn't exactly the Joan of Arc of the mage cause.

[Mr.House]

Competence isn't what I would call murdering the monarch because of Orlesian conspiracy theories and then proceeding to insist "It's not a Blight!" and hunt Grey Wardens while the Blight ravages the kingdom.

 

I will say he *was* competent, but his paranoia about Orlais eventually rendered him incompetent. 

Except said theories where proven to be true....

[Mr.House]

Because they were Tevinter. Y'know, the people who enslave elves and even their fellow mages in the north? And whose offer of support involves ten years of indentured servitude? The only worse allies you could find is the bloody darkspawn.

 

Worse, they were Tevinter who "conveniently" arrived just in time to lend a hand. Anyone with an iota of common sense would find the whole deal pretty suspicious.

 

Fiona can say they were desperate, but that just doesn't add up. Redcliffe Castle is nigh-unassailable. The bulk of the templars had withdrawn. I just think she realized that she couldn't win this war.

Also if templars ever did attack Redcliffe and they killed Teagan, Alistair would have cause to raise arms against the templars, that's not something the templars could afford. The fact is the mages inside Redcliffe where safe, it was the deal that destroyed their safety because Fiona is a bloody idiot.

[Mr.House]

What?  There was never a conspiracy to take over Ferelden by letting in Orlesian Grey Wardens.  The most that could possibly be evidenced was talk of an alliance between Caelan and the empress, and that alliance was expressly to fight the darkspawn.  There was 0 evidence of any ulterior motive except Loghaine's suspicions.  

Yes there was.  Proven in Return of Ostagar where Eamon was planing to have Cailan marry Celene and thus Celene would have Orlais and Ferelden. Cailan went along with the plan. So yeah, Loghains fears where proven true.

 

Celene wanted Ferelden, she failed to get it and thus gave up on that plan.

[Bleachrude]

Yes there was.  Proven in Return of Ostagar where Eamon was planing to have Cailan marry Celene and thus Celene would have Orlais and Ferelden. Cailan went along with the plan. So yeah, Loghains fears where proven true.

 

Celene wanted Ferelden, she failed to get it and thus gave up on that plan.

 

I actually think such a marriage weakens Celene much more than it does Cailan. Celene's child AUTOMATICALLY becomes the defacto ruler of Orlais whereas the child of Cailan is NOT  automatically the ruler of Ferelden.

 

The scenario gives WAYU more power to Ferelden thn it does to Orlais since by marrying Cailan, Celene acknowledges that Ferelden is the equal to Orlais. If Cailan had been setup to marry some other orlesian noble, Loghain's objections make sense since any other orlesian noble lady would be int erms of stature less than Celene thus a marriage between said noble and Cailan would mean that Ferelden is nott he equal to orlais.

[Dave of Canada]

Maybe I'm misinterpreting the Fiona in Val Royeux thing but I always took it as the Envy Demon changing form and trying to lead you to Redcliffe so he has enough time to fully corrupt the Templar while you're walking straight into being erased from the timeline, rather than it actually being Fiona who somehow ended up in a completely different nation during a war against Templar while being holed up in Redcliffe.

[Mr.House]

Maybe I'm misinterpreting the Fiona in Val Royeux thing but I always took it as the Envy Demon changing form and trying to lead you to Redcliffe so he has enough time to fully corrupt the Templar while you're walking straight into being erased from the timeline, rather than it actually being Fiona who somehow ended up in a completely different nation during a war against Templar while being holed up in Redcliffe.

That's how I took it. Envy is not really happy if you come to Redoubt, more so when you came with a purpose. Kinda clear Envy wanted you as far away from Redoubt as possible.

[Dean_the_Young]

I feel like my self-esteem will weather the storm.

 

You have better than self-esteem, dude- you got self-respect.

 

Anyone can have esteem. Respect is mad chops, yo.

[thats1evildude]

Maybe I'm misinterpreting the Fiona in Val Royeux thing but I always took it as the Envy Demon changing form and trying to lead you to Redcliffe so he has enough time to fully corrupt the Templar while you're walking straight into being erased from the timeline, rather than it actually being Fiona who somehow ended up in a completely different nation during a war against Templar while being holed up in Redcliffe.

 

No, I think that was Fiona in Val Royeaux. However, time was altered around Redcliffe so that the Venatori arrived there before Fiona ever made the trip to the Orlesian capital, thus negating her memories of having ventured there; however, the Inquisitor and his party all remembered meeting her.

 

Envy wouldn't have been able to impersonate Fiona because it needs to study its subject before becoming them.

[Dean_the_Young]

Let's also not forget the selling of tranquil mages to which were needed for Ocularums.

 

You know, that's a very good point and I am ashamed I forgot about that.

[Steelcan]

Maybe I'm misinterpreting the Fiona in Val Royeux thing but I always took it as the Envy Demon changing form and trying to lead you to Redcliffe so he has enough time to fully corrupt the Templar while you're walking straight into being erased from the timeline, rather than it actually being Fiona who somehow ended up in a completely different nation during a war against Templar while being holed up in Redcliffe.

not possible since Fiona wasn't being held by it or under its control....

 

as far as we know......

[Steelcan]

You know, that's a very good point and I am ashamed I forgot about that.

wait, she sold them?  I thought there were just collateral damage as part of the war

[Dean_the_Young]

Maybe I'm misinterpreting the Fiona in Val Royeux thing but I always took it as the Envy Demon changing form and trying to lead you to Redcliffe so he has enough time to fully corrupt the Templar while you're walking straight into being erased from the timeline, rather than it actually being Fiona who somehow ended up in a completely different nation during a war against Templar while being holed up in Redcliffe.

 

Given that the Redcliffe plotline pretty explicitly indicates that it was intended as a trap for the Inquisitor, I never thought it was the actual Fiona herself. Especially since there was no other instance of the Inquisitor and friends remembering any time warp or alternate timeline except for the bad future itself.

 

Plus, doesn't the demon act surprised that you aren't going to Redcliffe if you go to the Templars?

[King Dragonlord]

She thought she was making a deal with a magister who would shelter their women and children in exchange for the men's participation in the army. At the time, it seemed like a a noble sacrifice to preserve her people. No one is arguing she was a good leader for the mage rebellion but compassion and context for the situation she was in. I'm just saying they were preparing for annihilation from a templar attack and the magister gave them a way out. They duped her with hope for survival for her people. She was put in a difficult position, and I'm sure that she at least regrets betraying Alistair but she made a tough choice.

 

Really? This is Dragon Age. Women and Men are equally capable in all respects. Yet Fiona ONLY presses the men into conscription? If thats true, then we can add sexism to the list. Did she consult these men I wonder? If its true, its once again Bioware forgetting things they set up and trying to have their cake and eat it too.