891 réponses à ce sujet

[LobselVith8]

I was referring to you calling the Inquisitor a ruler rather than something like leader, actually. Being led by an elf sounds more friendly than being ruled by an elf, which sounds more one-sided due to the nature of the term rule. 

 

Though I'm surprised your elf is still Dalish considering everything we learn in DAI about the religion. 

 

Given how Merrill talks about the Dalish knowing their limitations (as when she pointed out the Sabrae Clan didn't know whether the Arlathan elves or Tevinter mages summoned Audacity when the two sides fought at Sundermount) and the lack of their knowledge in certain areas (such as why the Creators and the Forgotten Ones were fighting against one another), I don't see why new discoveries would make my Dalish protagonist waiver. I think it's part of the appeal of playing as one of the People during this narrative. One of the main goals of the Dalish is to uncover the secrets of the past. 

 

If you meant it in reference to discovering that spirits appear to be more complex than the Chantry or the Dalish believe, I have to say that Revas Lavellan wasn't an orthodox Dalish mage. More atypical in the vein of Merrill; viewed spirits as complex beings, didn't see blood magic as evil, and wanted to uncover knowledge and learn more about the world and the Beyond.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Given how Merrill talks about the Dalish knowing their limitations (as when she pointed out the Sabrae Clan didn't know whether the Arlathan elves or Tevinter mages summoned Audacity when the two sides fought at Sundermount) and the lack of their knowledge in certain areas (such as why the Creators and the Forgotten Ones were fighting against one another), I don't see why new discoveries would make my Dalish protagonist waiver. I think it's part of the appeal of playing as one of the People during this narrative. One of the main goals of the Dalish is to uncover the secrets of the past. 

 

If you meant it in reference to discovering that spirits appear to be more complex than the Chantry or the Dalish believe, I have to say that Revas Lavellan wasn't an orthodox Dalish mage. More atypical in the vein of Merrill; viewed spirits as complex beings, didn't see blood magic as evil, and wanted to uncover knowledge and learn more about the world and the Beyond.

No, I meant more that a Dalish, and thus thinks a lot about freedom and not being oppressed, would continue to worship the Pantheon after learning they literally enslaved the elves. 

[myahele]

I wonder if the Dalish will stop abandoning mages to fend for themselves in the wild....to be killed by the elements or mercifully be taken into the circle ala what happened to Minaeve?

[Evamitchelle]

I wonder if the Dalish will stop abandoning mages to fend for themselves in the wild....to be killed by the elements or mercifully be taken into the circle ala what happened to Minaeve?

 

Depends which clan you're talking about. The Dalish aren't really a singular entity. Different clans have different customs. Clan Lavellan and Alerion don't do it for example. 

[TEWR]

Whatever clan that was, I would like to take them to task for that.

 

"Yes we'll send this child who's studied magic her whole life in the dark entirely regarding magic out into the wild with a few days of supplies and no wilderness survival. Also we don't care about how this might damage her psyche. Also we forgot that if we have more mages then we can carry, we give them to another clan".

[Roamingmachine]

My good man, the only one twisting fact here is you.

 

They invaded a nation, attacked a village (yes, entering the village and killing even one person there is an attack) and then ended killing a bunch of people.

 

You conviently ignored:

 

a - Humans attacked because they came across a bunch of armed Emerald Knight, who had killed one of their own. Their "attack" was obviously an attempt to defend their village and themselves from what was, to their mind, an invading force. They did NOTHING wrong.

b - The Elves were Emerald Knight, considered the finest of Elven warriors and armed. And you''re trying to tell me they could not have retreated? Instead no, they killed villagers of the town they invaded who had the temerity to defend themselves.

 

I love how you'll are trying to shift blame unto the villagers though.

 

#dalishlogic

 

Lets see...How about no. You either completely failed to read my post or you are strawmanning. Whatever. It's all i really expected from any responses.

[LightningPoodle]

I'm amazed this has reached 12 pages in 6 hours.

[WhatGoesHere]

Given how Merrill talks about the Dalish knowing their limitations (as when she pointed out the Sabrae Clan didn't know whether the Arlathan elves or Tevinter mages summoned Audacity when the two sides fought at Sundermount) and the lack of their knowledge in certain areas (such as why the Creators and the Forgotten Ones were fighting against one another), I don't see why new discoveries would make my Dalish protagonist waiver. I think it's part of the appeal of playing as one of the People during this narrative. One of the main goals of the Dalish is to uncover the secrets of the past. 

 

If you meant it in reference to discovering that spirits appear to be more complex than the Chantry or the Dalish believe, I have to say that Revas Lavellan wasn't an orthodox Dalish mage. More atypical in the vein of Merrill; viewed spirits as complex beings, didn't see blood magic as evil, and wanted to uncover knowledge and learn more about the world and the Beyond.

 

not particularly pointed at this post, but in general i don't understand why you continue to inject the views of your specific inquisitor as debatable material. it's impossible for anybody to argue what your specific inquisitor does, or how your inquisitor views events that unfold in your game. there are tangible results that could be discussed, such as what happens when you return the red crossing evidence to the keeper, but other than that it's up to the player - the vast majority of whom aren't you

 

certainly, your opinions are valid, but you present them in a manner that asks for them to somehow be objectively discussed (see: dalish sovereignty over skyhold. unless i'm missing something, there was no point in the game where i was able to get on the throne and claim skyhold for the dalish - not the inquisition - forevermore). unless you're a bioware writer, what goes on in your had is fanfiction

[LightningPoodle]

Lets see...How about no. You either completely failed to read my post or you are strawmanning. Whatever. It's all i really expected from any responses.

 

[Roamingmachine]

No, I meant more that a Dalish, and thus thinks a lot about freedom and not being oppressed, would continue to worship the Pantheon after learning they literally enslaved the elves. 

 

The priests wore the Vallaslin. They looked horribly opressed. You should consider the sources before deciding what kind of 'slavery' we are talking about here. But whatever, i know i'm just talking to the wind here.

[ArvinDulku]

Lets see...How about no. You either completely failed to read my post or you are strawmanning. Whatever. It's all i really expected from any responses.

 

Oh I read of course, I just called it out for the bullshit that it was.

[myahele]

Still, to just abanadon a a potent Keeper of a Dalish clan seems severe. According to law the clans try to meet every 10yrs to exchange stories, trade, maybe even arrange marriages.

Merrill was given to the Sabras clan since the needed one. Wouldn't it be reasonable that in 10yrs the apprentice could then be given to a clan that needed a mage/1st?

[Evamitchelle]

Whatever clan that was, I would like to take them to task for that.

 

"Yes we'll send this child who's studied magic her whole life out into the wild with a few days of supplies and no wilderness survival. Also we don't care about how this might damage her psyche. Also we forgot that if we have more mages then we can carry, we give them to another clan".

 

It's even worse than that. Minaeve hadn't even studied magic by that point, they tossed her out as soon as she showed signs of magic. I don't know which clan she comes from but they were total a-holes. 

[Roamingmachine]

Oh I read of course, I just called it out for the bullshit that it was.

 

No, you just strawmanned it.  The op was surveillance of one of their own, not an attack on the humans. It escalated because of an accidental killing of a human. The humans reacted to what they percieved and the elves defended themselves. It still doesn't make it 'evil elves attack and massacre a village without cause'. Like i said the first time. But whatever strawman away, we're done.

[TEWR]

It's even worse than that. Minaeve hadn't even studied magic by that point, they tossed her out as soon as she showed signs of magic. I don't know which clan she comes from but they were total a-holes. 

 

**** I had forgotten she said that.

 

Yeah, I definitely want to kick their sorry excuse for Dalish asses.

[Evamitchelle]

Anyway, given what we know of Orlais and the Andrastian Chantry, I'm having trouble believing the events of Red Crossing were anything more than a convenient excuse to start a holy war on the Dalish, which makes the question of whether the Dalish were 100% to blame for Red Crossing ultimately irrelevant. One of the codex entries you find in DAI points towards this: "The likely truth is that the elves merely wished to maintain sovereignty over lands promised to them by Blessed Andraste herself, when the humans showed clear intent to undermine their autonomy." [...] "The Chantry's response to the elven aggression that resulted in the slaughter of hundreds was predictable. But in light of my thesis, perhaps we should reexamine the events of Red Crossing and wonder if the attack was truly unprovoked. Or whether it is possible that someone saw benefit in sacrificing an entire village to justify the subjugation of an entire people." Anonymous author, pamphlet published by the University of Orlais in 9:12 Dragon. And before you discount this entry on the basis that it's only a theory bear in mind that all codex entries are deliberately written in the game by the devs because they want us to read them. And unlike the differing Dalish/Human codex entries in DAO we don't get the author here, so no obvious hint that this entry is biased.

 

But even just looking at the history of Orlais and the Chantry is enough to support this. On one hand you have Orlais, who's replaced Tevinter as Thedas' #1 expansionist empire starting in the Divine Age. Among the list of kingdoms they've invaded (successfully or not) are well, pretty much all of them except Antiva, and only because Queen Asha Campana outplayed them by strategically marrying her children and grandchildren into all the important royal and noble families of Thedas, and Orzammar, the world's sole provider of lyrium.

 

Then you have the Chantry, whose entire purpose is to spread the Chant of Light to all corners of the world so that the Maker can return to Thedas. Having a neighboring country worshipping “false gods” (the first sin according to the Chantry) must be a slap in the face. So they call an Exalted March on the Dales - the first one since the founding of the Chantry. In the Exalted Plains/Emerald Graves we get the following quotes from the memorials “but one last challenge came from the elves, who would not submit to the Maker” and “Sister Amity led the march to the river Tenasir, where stood shrines to the elven gods. These she struck down; standing upon the banks, she sang the Chant of Light. Andraste's Word had come to the Dales, and delivered them from wickedness”. Then Divine Renata I offers peace for the elves, but only if they choose to renounce their gods, embrace the Maker and segregate themselves in human cities. 

 

All of this paints a pretty clear picture of the reasons behind the Fall of the Dales: the Dales are a ripe target for Orlais' expansionist policy, especially since it also gives access to the Fereldan valley (the wiki also says that Emperor Kordillus Drakon I had to put a halt to his expansion into the Free Marches because of pressure from the Dales, but I can't find the source) and the Chantry can further their goal of forcing the Maker on everyone in Thedas.

 

Tl;DR: Who was at fault in Red Crossing isn't all that important when talking about the Fall of the Dales; Orlais and the Chantry's expansionist policies mean they would have eventually attacked regardless of what the Dalish did.

[ArvinDulku]

No, you just strawmanned it.  The op was surveillance of one of their own, not an attack on the humans. It escalated because of an accidental killing of a human. The humans reacted to what they percieved and the elves defended themselves. It still doesn't make it 'evil elves attack and massacre a village without cause'. Like i said the first time. But whatever strawman away, we're done.

 

And yet again you continue or rather conviently ignore the fact that without any offical sanctions or even rights, they disabused Orlais border rights, cross over into a foreign state that they have less than cordial relations with, to which an entire team of well armed Emerald Knights entered a village to which they then ended up killing innocent villagers who were perfectly within their right to defend themselves from a hostile invading force.

 

But hey, what the hell, #dalishlogic innit?

[ArvinDulku]

Tl;DR: Who was at fault in Red Crossing isn't all that important when talking about the Fall of the Dales; Orlais and the Chantry's expansionist policies mean they would have eventually attacked regardless of what the Dalish did.

 

So, you have proof that this fancy AU you sprouting would have happned?

 

Oh wait no, you don't.

 

What we do have is proof that a team of what is basically a team of elven commandoes illegally crossed a border, killed a bunch of people and for better or worse declared war on Orlais (and before you have a go at that, please note by this point original intentions, innocent or otherwise, have no bearing at all).

 

So lets stick to the facts eh?

[Evamitchelle]

So, you have proof that this fancy AU you sprouting would have happned?

 

Oh wait no, you don't.

 

What we do have is proof that a team of what is basically a team of elven commandoes illegally crossed a border, killed a bunch of people and for better or worse declared war on Orlais (and before you have a go at that, please note by this point original intentions, innocent or otherwise, have no bearing at all).

 

So lets stick to the facts eh?

 

I have a theory based on facts, one that's supported by an in-game codex entry. And I don't get why you keep trying to paint this as a black and white situation when it's clearly not. If the devs had wanted to paint the Dalish as 100% at fault for the Fall of the Dales they could have just said "the Dalish razed the town of RC completely unprovoked" instead of showing an escalating situation and including codex entries questioning what really happened. 

[ArvinDulku]

I have a theory based on facts, one that's supported by an in-game codex entry. And I don't get why you keep trying to paint this as a black and white situation when it's clearly not. If the devs had wanted to paint the Dalish as 100% at fault for the Fall of the Dales they could have just said "the Dalish razed the town of RC completely unprovoked" instead of showing an escalating situation and including codex entries questioning what really happened. 

 

Because a theory is simply that, a theory, not fact.

 

You seem to be implying that I do not acknowledge the fact that The Dales were on less than friendly terms with Orlais, which I do.

 

Problem is border skirmishes are the norm between two nations less than friendly with each other (India/Pakistan case to point) and truth be told it tends to be mostly either posturing or simply stabs to find weakness. But in the grand scale, it means nothing.

 

Illegaly crossing a soverign border with a armed unit, whom then kill a bunch of innocent villagers on said foreign soil on the other hand is definately an uavoidable declaration of war, intentions be damned.

 

That is in fact black and white, I don't have make it so.

[Evamitchelle]

Because a theory is simply that, a theory, not fact.

 

You seem to be implying that I do not acknowledge the fact that The Dales were on less than friendly terms with Orlais, which I do.

 

Problem is border skirmishes are the norm between two nations less than friendly with each other (India/Pakistan case to point) and truth be told it tends to be mostly either posturing or simply stabs to find weakness. But in the grand scale, it means nothing.

 

Illegaly crossing a soverign border with a armed unit, whom then kill a bunch of innocent villagers on said foreign soil on the other hand is definately an uavoidable declaration of war, intentions be damned.

 

That is in fact black and white, I don't have make it so.

 

Well sure, it is black and white if you ignore the facts that show otherwise or argue that they "mean nothing". Siona's sister's murder and two centuries of religious tensions between Orlais and the Dales directly influenced the events of Red Crossing, arguing otherwise is just pointless. 

[ArvinDulku]

Well sure, it is black and white if you ignore the facts that show otherwise or argue that they "mean nothing". Siona's sister's murder and two centuries of religious tensions between Orlais and the Dales directly influenced the events of Red Crossing, arguing otherwise is just pointless. 

 

Firstly it's death, not murder, considering we utterly no documentation of an actual murder being commited. Suspicion is not a legal or factual means of conviction.

 

And yes, border disputes (unless actual countires in a state of war, which they were not) mean nothing. And moreso considering the Dalish have no actual hard evidence of things they accuse Orlais of pre-war, I have no incentive to believe them.

 

So yeah.

[Evamitchelle]

Firstly it's death, not murder, considering we utterly no documentation of an actual murder being commited. Suspicion is not a legal or factual means of conviction.

 

And yes, border disputes (unless actual countires in a state of war, which they were not) mean nothing. And moreso considering the Dalish have no actual hard evidence of things they accuse Orlais of pre-war, I have no incentive to believe them.

 

So yeah.

 

"Too often had we fought with humans along our borders until the beginning was lost to memory. Rumors of an abduction stirred. As always, their Chantry was swift to spread lies. In haste and anger, they killed Siona's sister for wandering too near the hunters' path."

 

This is taken from the exact same codex entry that details what happens in Red Crossing. You can't just cherry-pick the parts you like and ignore everything that doesn't fit. One codex-entry written by a Dalish elf found in an elven ruin centuries after the fact is "hard evidence" that the Dalish brought the war that nearly wiped them out on themselves, but when multiple codex entries indicate that the Chantry was trying to force conversion it's just the Dalish making stuff up. Good to know. 

[Addai]

The truth? Giving the scroll to Keeper Hawen makes mention of humans and elves committing different acts that culminated in the war between humans and elves, which is why Hawen's clan concedes that they were wrong to think the war was entirely the fault of the humans.

Which is what even Sarel, speaking generally, said of elven history- "I'm sure we participated in our own downfall." It's not a new concept in the series.

Not what I meant, for the longest time the pro-Dalish response to "elves started the war" was "no, the humans did by sending in templars after the missionaries to convert elves"
 
so where is the bloody proof?
 
If there is none we can safely assume it was a fabrication by the elves to justify their aggression, thus removing blame from the Orlesians, therefore making the conflict not the fault of both sides

Red Crossing didn't happen in a vacuum. The scroll even says that the female knight was outraged because her sister had been killed just for wandering too close to a path traveled by humans.

Propagandists look for simple solutions and slogans. Real history never works like that.

[ArvinDulku]

"Too often had we fought with humans along our borders until the beginning was lost to memory. Rumors of an abduction stirred. As always, their Chantry was swift to spread lies. In haste and anger, they killed Siona's sister for wandering too near the hunters' path."

 

This is taken from the exact same codex entry that details what happens in Red Crossing. You can't just cherry-pick the parts you like and ignore everything that doesn't fit. One codex-entry written by a Dalish elf found in an elven ruin centuries after the fact is "hard evidence" that the Dalish brought the war that nearly wiped them out on themselves, but when multiple codex entries indicate that the Chantry was trying to force conversion it's just the Dalish making stuff up. Good to know. 

 

Wow, Its like...again, not going there.

 

1) He claims they killed her, but does he offer any proof or eveidence to suggest that she was in fact murdered in cold blood? Oh wait, he doesn't. He only offers his suspicion, so yeah, not cherry picking but more like you reading into things that are not there.

2) And I already acknowledge border skirmishes, so no idea what you going on about there mate. 

3) Forced conversion? The chantry tried to send chanters, who were kicked out by the Elves...so I is confused here? Maybe I am misunderstanding? Care to eleborate?

4) People using propoganda againts what they consider a hostile force? What madnass, what horror! Yeah, I think you might be overstating it.

 

I love how you keep quoting a codex I happen to perfectly understand, and then somehow thinks it strengthens your argument, and then it doesn't.

 

Its interesting, I guess.