At the point where she requests Annulment, 'who is at fault' is irrelevant. You don't let a building burn down just because an arsonist started it. You try to put out the fire, then you punish the arsonist.
That would require a purgation of both Templars and mages there, including Meredith.
The fire was already out. The arsonist was Anders, the Chantry already destroyed.
The circle was not involved, and as such, is not the fire that needs to be extinguished.
What Meredith ought to have done is actually take Anders into custody, likely executed, see to the civilians and make sure no debris harmed or killed anyone, lock down the Gallows and search it thoroughly, work with the guard to keep a mob from forming, and be on the look out for Anders sympathizers and/or copycats, and punish them as they appear.
That would be reasonable measures to take in light of the attack with the authority she wields.
The fire was the Circle full of Blood Mages. Meredith and some of the Templars may have been the arsonists, but their punishment is a separate action to the real need to annul the Circle. Recall that Anders wasn't the reason she wanted to annul. He was just an excuse to do what she was already petitioning for. And regardless of how things got to that point, her reasons were valid.
The fire was the Circle full of Blood Mages. Meredith and some of the Templars may have been the arsonists, but their punishment is a separate action to the real need to annul the Circle.
No punishment was coming; by all accounts everybody in upper management was perfectly content to watch the Gallows sh*t the bed again and again. And so the cycle would continue, with the Annulment solving positively nothing in the long run.
The conditions that allowed the situation to devolve would live on, inevitably starting the next cataclysm.
No punishment was coming; by all accounts everybody in upper management was perfectly content to watch the Gallows sh*t the bed again and again. And so the cycle would continue, with the Annulment solving positively nothing in the long run.
The conditions that allowed the situation to devolve would live on, inevitably starting the next cataclysm.
So, because you can't catch the arsonist, you should just let the building burn down.
So, because you can't catch the arsonist, you should just let the building burn down.
Is that not what the Annulment would accomplish in the long run?
If people want to say that the Circle system is to the benefit of both mages and non-mages, let them see (and feel) what happens when it is run incorrectly.
Is that not what the Annulment would accomplish in the long run?
If people want to say that the Circle system is to the benefit of both mages and non-mages, let them see (and feel) what happens when it is run incorrectly.
Well, it WAS run incorrectly, and that resulted in Kirkwall's mess. Even the Seekers weren't actually doing the job they're supposed to do.
Before anyone says anything about Cassandra saying that Lambert and the Seekers felt that Meredith was justified in her excessively harsh actions in response to the mages and magical abuses, the secret book shows that the Seekers were a direct source of corruption in Chantry and templar and Seeker ranks, which is a problem when their very job is to seek and root out all corruption in the Chantry and Templars in the first place.
And it wasn't even limited to the Gallows either. It affected the entire populace, and the rippling effects of that went into the White Spire during the events of Asunder.
I think the largest problem with the whole situation was that people were not approaching the problem of how to handle magic with the knowledge that mages are people too.
Yes, this mage may have been discovered by accidentally killing her father at the age of 5, and while that is an example of how dangerous untrained magic is, people gloss over the fact that the emotional and psychological trauma the young mage has to deal with with the knowledge she killed her father by accident. It's not malicious as the mob in Asunder seem to think. That the mage who was discovered did this so they must be evil or meant to do it and completely disregard the impact it has on the mage in question.
Mages are people with very real emotions, and I think that sometimes gets overlooked in these debates. People see the danger and not how to help the individual.
Is that not what the Annulment would accomplish in the long run?
If people want to say that the Circle system is to the benefit of both mages and non-mages, let them see (and feel) what happens when it is run incorrectly.
You're not getting the analogy, so I'll try another.
A teacher abuses her students. It is so bad, the the students eventually turn to drugs and murder on their own. Sadly, the teacher has lunch with the governor, mayor, president, and pope every sunday, so she's pretty much untouchable. We can't get her, right now, for her crimes. Does that mean we should allow the students to go on with their own crimes?
Annulment is the result when a Circle is deemed unsaveable. Between Meredith, her cronies, Orsino, Elthina, the influx of Grace and her Starkhaven group, and the location itself, the Kirkwall Circle was, in my opinion, unsaveable. An apocalypse waiting to happen. It would be grossly irresponsible to put the Free Marches at risk by turning a blind eye to the Blood Mages simply because you couldn't also take down Meredith at the same time.
The fire was the Circle full of Blood Mages. Meredith and some of the Templars may have been the arsonists, but their punishment is a separate action to the real need to annul the Circle. Recall that Anders wasn't the reason she wanted to annul. He was just an excuse to do what she was already petitioning for. And regardless of how things got to that point, her reasons were valid.
Meredith creating the conditions to make her reasons valid just means she's not cut out of the job.
Meredith creating the conditions to make her reasons valid just means she's not cut out of the job.
Merdeith didn't create these conditions, there is tiny amount of blood mages shown being corrupted because of meredith or templars.Pretty much we had tons of blood mages and abomnations that didn't become them because templars made me do it.
To remind and show an example meredith didn't force in any way orisino to work with insane blood mage serial killer he chose to for his own reasons.
You're not getting the analogy, so I'll try another.
A teacher abuses her students. It is so bad, the the students eventually turn to drugs and murder on their own. Sadly, the teacher has lunch with the governor, mayor, president, and pope every sunday, so she's pretty much untouchable. We can't get her, right now, for her crimes. Does that mean we should allow the students to go on with their own crimes?
And the only way to mitigate their crimes, is to kill every single one of them? Yeah, I don't think so.
If you do want to force that binary dilemma, then yes. Let the populace at large experience the consequence of a system run poorly, so they will realize that the people in charge don't actually know what they're doing. Now the governor, mayor, president, and pope can't pretend that everything is fine.
Meredith creating the conditions to make her reasons valid just means she's not cut out of the job.
Irrelevant.
When she called for the annulment, the reasons were there for her call to be valid. Yes, she used Anders as an excuse, but that only speaks to the fact that official channels failed.
And the only way to mitigate their crimes, is to kill every single one of them? Yeah, I don't think so.
If you do want to force that binary dilemma, then yes. Let the populace at large experience the consequence of a system run poorly, so they will realize that the people in charge don't actually know what they're doing. Now the governor, mayor, president, and pope can't pretend that everything is fine.
So the few are more important than the many.
Realize that I am not saying that Meredith was blameless, or that she shouldn't have been punished, or that the system that led to that crossroads did not need serious examination and reform.
Only that at the time she called for Annulment, regardless of the excuse she used, it was the correct call. The Kirkwall Circle was already lost, and there was no way to save it.
The Right of Annulment is basically a right to commit indiscriminate murder against mages irrespective of the guilt or innocence of the individual mages in question. That is never acceptable...under any circumstances. For example, Cullen himself states that the situation in Ferelden was far worse and as we see the RoA was not needed. It's an atrocity, genocide enshrined as law.
The Right of Annulment is basically a right to commit indiscriminate murder against mages irrespective of the guilt or innocence of the individual mages in question. That is never acceptable...under any circumstances. For example, Cullen himself states that the situation in Ferelden was far worse and as we see the RoA was not needed. It's an atrocity, genocide enshrined as law.
It is , it is how world works in first place government is willing to do anything to mantain safety of its country including pretty nasty stuff of course people prefer to not think about it.
The Right of Annulment is basically a right to commit indiscriminate murder against mages irrespective of the guilt or innocence of the individual mages in question. That is never acceptable...under any circumstances. For example, Cullen himself states that the situation in Ferelden was far worse and as we see the RoA was not needed. It's an atrocity, genocide enshrined as law.
Except the lore of Dragon Age itself tells us that, however terrible, it is the only way they currently have. There are no tests for Blood Magic, and no reliable tests for Demonic possession, and the scale of the consequences for letting even one host or practitioner escape are considered unacceptable.
So the few are more important than the many.
So you think that means favoring the few over the many? Oh, my sweet summer child.
First of all, that is completely contrary to the Circle system's intent. Everyone matters. Everyone is supposed to benefit from its existence. If that's the stance the Chantry wants to take, they can't reduce lives to mere numbers as the cost of doing business. So, let it get ugly. Mages will die, non-mages will die, but people will wake up to the fact that the organization who claims responsibility for their safety has stopped caring. In that light, they'll be forced to work for a better long-term solution that means senseless death for all parties involved.
Supporting the Annulment out of base expedience is just a cover-up, absolutely corrupt and lazy.
The Right of Annulment is basically a right to commit indiscriminate murder against mages irrespective of the guilt or innocence of the individual mages in question. That is never acceptable...under any circumstances. For example, Cullen himself states that the situation in Ferelden was far worse and as we see the RoA was not needed. It's an atrocity, genocide enshrined as law.
The RoA was not needed in Ferelden because a PC involved himself. If that hadn't been the case... well, the situation in Ferelden is pretty much exactly what the RoA is designed for.
Kirkwall is a bit murkier. Orsino had to go (though it is worth noting that his argument for his own unacceptable actions was that Meredith drove him to them) as did large numbers of the mages. But I don't think the situation was so bad that the Templars had absolutely no control of the situation and had no easy way of getting it back, which is the situation the Annulment was designed for.
So you think that means favoring the few over the many? Oh, my sweet summer child.
First of all, that is completely contrary to the Circle system's intent. Everyone matters. Everyone is supposed to benefit from its existence. If that's the stance the Chantry wants to take, they can't reduce lives to mere numbers as the cost of doing business. So, let it get ugly. Mages will die, non-mages will die, but people will wake up to the fact that the organization who claims responsibility for their safety has stopped caring. In that light, they'll be forced to work for a better long-term solution that means senseless death for all parties involved.
Supporting the Annulment out of base expedience is just a cover-up, absolutely corrupt and lazy.
Not expedience, necessity. Annulment is an act of last resort, of desperation. When a Circle is deemed so far gone that no one within can be trusted not to be part of the corruption, and no other avenues short of demi-god PC intervention will suffice.
The fact of the matter is, even the PCs are only successful by pure luck. The HoF actually fails at preventing a possessed host from escaping. Had Wynne been host to a Pride Demon instead of a Spirit of Faith, the outcome of that part of the story would have been viewed very differently.
But the real question was if she was right because she forced the mages into a position where they had no choice but prove her right because they were desperate, or if they were truly rotten from the start.
I'll ask you a question I find startlingly relevant here.
Does it honestly matter? These mages became what people fear from mages, demon summoning, mind controlling, walking abominations. If the answer to that question to you is yes, then I'll ask another. Does what they endure justify that? If not, then what is was the purpose of it? How does using blood magic, summoning demons and alike actually gain them freedom?
How does vengeance become justice? If you will forgive that horrible pun.
If your answer to the first question is no then I'll simply conclude with this.
Kirkwall dug its own grave, regardless of what drove them to it, what justification they had.
By reacting as they did, they condemned themselves in the eyes of their own institution.
And when the Chantry leadership as a whole says that the Annulment was unjustified,
Oh you mean the ones who weren't murdered in cold blood by a mage?
Not expedience, necessity. Annulment is an act of last resort, of desperation. When a Circle is deemed so far gone that no one within can be trusted not to be part of the corruption, and no other avenues short of demi-god PC intervention will suffice.
No one inside? Given the context, that is in no way exclusive to the mages. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
The fact is, Meredith and the others at large didn't want an Annulment because it was right, or effective. They wanted it because it was easy, and they could feel vindicated on top of that. That is the perfect summation of the Chantry and Seekers approach to Kirkwall: minimum effort. They did a great job of letting everyone know that they were absolutely aware of the situation, and were beyond displeased, but Maker forbid they actually do anything about it.
Screw PC intervention. Meredith asks for help in liquidating the mages, rationalizing that it would be best to get the chaos out of the streets as quickly as possible. Of course, there wouldn't be fighting on the streets in the first place, if she hadn't just told the mages they were going to be killed for a crime they didn't commit. So I'm perfectly content with no intervention at all. Let the chaos spill over without inhibition, and the horror be brought to the people's doorsteps. Let the blood flow indiscriminate.
The fact is, Meredith and the others at large didn't want an Annulment because it was right, or effective. They wanted it because it was easy, and they could feel vindicated on top of that.
I'd love to see a citable evidence for that rather...unique perspective.
I mean no one has ever accused Meredith of not working hard at her job. In fact in some ways you could argue she took her duties and job far too seriously.
I'd love to see a citable evidence for that rather...unique perspective.
I mean no one has ever accused Meredith of not working hard at her job. In fact in some ways you could argue she took her duties and job far too seriously.
Not at all to her credit. She had fervor, and nothing else, as was demonstrated by her predictable methods to solving very problem, and the chronically disorganized state of the Circle she commanded.
The RoA was not needed in Ferelden because a PC involved himself. If that hadn't been the case... well, the situation in Ferelden is pretty much exactly what the RoA is designed for.
Kirkwall is a bit murkier. Orsino had to go (though it is worth noting that his argument for his own unacceptable actions was that Meredith drove him to them) as did large numbers of the mages. But I don't think the situation was so bad that the Templars had absolutely no control of the situation and had no easy way of getting it back, which is the situation the Annulment was designed for.
What about those charming children with Wynne when you meet her? They are obviously no threat, but the templars would still butcher or tranquilize them if our heros hadn't arrived (Wynne says she'll fight you if you side with the Templars and propose the Right of Annulment because in addition to the innocent mages in the Tower, even the children would get killed).
Why not spare these mages and examine them after the battle is over, and then monitor them closely for some weeks? Is that too much work? I really can't think of a scenario where the right of annulment would be necessary.
Not at all to her credit. She had fervor, and nothing else, as was demonstrated by her predictable methods to solving very problem, and the chronically disorganized state of the Circle she commanded.
.-.
Point being: She never indicated she was a person who took the easy route for the sake of expediency in and of itself, she put up with stonewalling from the Chantry when she could have ignored it, she could have physically seized the office of the Viscount for herself before Dumar ever died, She had all the military might of the largest garrison outside of Orlais and yet she never overtly used her position in that manner until it was basically forced on her to do that.
So like I said earlier, would love to see evidence of this supposed behavior.
.-.
Point being: She never indicated she was a person who took the easy route for the sake of expediency in and of itself, she put up with stonewalling from the Chantry when she could have ignored it, she could have physically seized the office of the Viscount for herself before Dumar ever died, She had all the military might of the largest garrison outside of Orlais and yet she never overtly used her position in that manner until it was basically forced on her to do that.
So like I said earlier, would love to see evidence of this supposed behavior.
Wow, she had the biggest hammer and was only half-batsh*t most of the time. Applause.
Dumar's position as Viscount isn't even relevant. Him being a simple extension of her will is the worst-kept secret in the Free Marches.
What about those charming children with Wynne when you meet her? They are obviously no threat, but the templars would still butcher or tranquilize them if our heros hadn't arrived (Wynne says she'll fight you if you side with the Templars and propose the Right of Annulment because in addition to the innocent mages in the Tower, even the children would get killed).
Why not spare these mages and examine them after the battle is over, and then monitor them closely for some weeks? Is that too much work? I really can't think of a scenario where the right of annulment would be necessary.
^^ This. The Right of Annulment is an extreme action that sentences everyone in a Circle to death regardless of whether they actually committed any crime at all.
It's ridiculous, especially when we consider possible situations like Wynne's in Origins where she's actively attempting to kill the demons and abominations in Circle Tower or that hidden abominations will apparently reveal themselves immediately if you just as much as throw a rock at them.
Retour en haut