tbh, I'm not even remotely surprised that this thread turned out like this. As soon as blood magic and/or Merrill is brought up, odds are that flames will be spewed all over the place...
Anybody got popcorn?
Well to be honest thread was about merril and blood magic and well... 
about hawke but hawke is MiA again so not our fault. 
As i said i don't argue that anders wasn't an idiot becuase he merged with justice because i agree that he was.I don't think justice become a demon before merging with justice it is rarther because anders corrupted him.Im not sure but i think DG in one interview mentioned that or even that taint may have been involved in process.
He was a demon before the merging. In Awakening Justice tells Anders that only demons desire a human body. He made it clear that if he desired to take his body then he would be a demon. If anything the taint and being in Anders only made him worse than he already was. Overall, if I needed advice on demons and had absolutely no choice but to pick Anders or Merrill, I would pick Merrill. The only thing Anders can help me with is giving me a place to put my murder knife.
He was a demon before the merging. In Awakening Justice tells Anders that only demons desire a human body. He made it clear that if he desired to take his body then he would be a demon. If anything the taint and being in Anders only made him worse than he already was. Overall, if I needed advice on demons and had absolutely no choice but to pick Anders or Merrill, I would pick Merrill. The only thing Anders can help me with is giving me a place to put my murder knife.
We have no evidence of that he was demon before not mention anders apparently was who wanted that in first place in fact same was with wynne who still possessed her despite remaining spirit not mention pretty much huge diffrence between those possessed by demon and by justice.Also anders himself mentions that anders corrupted him and if i recall DG says the same.
Of course there is chance that at this point justice was indeed demon but as far everything points on anders influence.
Honestly, Hawke being a blood mage isn't even mentioned once in Dragon Age 2, which is extremely odd since you'd think that your companions or any of the templars in Kirkwall would, you know, find that the Champion being one something worth talking about. It's not as if blood magic was a central theme in that game or any thing, right.
I've just always figured that your spec in Dragon Age 2 was just a combat thing that didn't exist in the actually story.
That's actually why Blood Magic was removed - it didn't make sense to have as a specialization, story-wise, what with all the risks it poses and how most companions and characters have very strong opinions on it.
Necromancy was made to replace it, and the companions have strong opinions - mostly negative - on that as well.
You do realize she controlled him into doing what she wants to the point he don't know who he is i guess then using drugs to brainwash you into complete obedience don't make it slavery in your book
. What is quite funny considering that you have said circles are slavery because they kept mages closed but brainwashing individual into complete obedience with no chance freeing themselves isn't slavery but hey it isn't slavery unless it is mage.
.
That's one nice strawman, but let me be a fun-killer and correct what you managed to misunderstand: I said she didn't take away his will. He was still making decisions, though obviously he was making them based on an illusion rather than material world. She didn't take over his mid nor did she make her orders somehow final. He fought you believing to be protecting his children (who did not exist) and wife (who was her) but he fought of his own free will. That's the difference between being completely manipulated and being robbed of your free will by magical means.
I didn't refer to the slavery part here and, as You can easily confirm, I even (later in the same post) entertained the thought that she actually could consider him her "property" the same way someone can own a pet, showing different interpretation of "slavery", considering her possible approach to the subject. Treating a human the same way we would treat a pet animal would be something akin to slavery but we laugh at misunderstanding where Justice thinks of Anders' cat as "enslaved" - this shows that certain concepts might be difficult to grasp for spirits; if Justice thought of cat as enslaved, why couldn't another spirit have a pet human and never think about it as a slave of hers?
Was I clear enough this time?
Not mention there is no evidence that she cared as i said we have above and we know demons are great liars to the point almost every attempt of bargain ends poorly as demon had his own selfish benefit in it what as far we can say it is true.
There is no evidence either way, but you assume your interpretation. Interpretation based solely on her being called "desire demon" rather than, say "spirit of need" or something.
So in the end she brainwashed guy and had complete control over his mind without his approval.
In the end she found a miserable guy who hated his life and she comforted him with an illusion that finally made him happy, for once. It's not as nice and black-white as you would like to present it What she does might seem abhorrent, we might call it slavery and brainwashing or worse, but it doesn't really imply malice. People raise their children to think a certain way about many things - do they brainwash them? People make all the decisions for their pets - do they enslave them or are they malicious towards them? Spirits are fundamentally alien to people - and I do believe that much of what we may perceive as maliciousness might be them just being alien. After all if raising a child and even letting it believe in, say, Santa or Tooth Fairy (I know, our world but that was first thing that came to mind) is ok, why is what the Desire Demon did to Templar not ok? Common sense, you could say, but to what extent can common sense really apply to beings that have some abstract ideal or raw emotion as basis for their whole identity?
Of course, we can say that demons we encountered were antagonistic and spirits were not. But... was it really the case? Or maybe we encountered some spirits and we just generally called those antagonistic "demons" and the rest "spirits"? Think about it - we usually have one-time encounters with those beings, perhaps in slightly different situations some of "demons" would seem more like "spirits" and "spirits" more like "demons"?
Also, even if we approach the subject from Chantry's wiewpoint (more or less), the distinction isn't always as clear as Anders would like it to describe. After all from DA:O codex entry, written by a Circle mage, we get statemets such as:
Typically, we misuse the term "spirit" to refer only to the benign, or at least less malevolent, creatures of the Fade, but in truth, all the denizens of the realm beyond the Veil are spirits.
and
In general, spirits are not complex. Or, rather, they are not complex as we understand such things. Each one seizes upon a single facet of human experience: Rage, hunger, compassion, hope, etc. This one idea becomes their identity. We classify as demons those spirits who identify themselves with darker human emotions and ideas.
Admittedly, the author then proceeds to the standard classification of kinds of demons, but in light of the rest of what he wrote doesn't it seem as if he considers the line dividing spirits and demons as quite arbitrary? And calling Spirits "less malevolent" creatures of the Fade definitely doesn't sound as if "malevolence" would be a defining quality... though, admittedly, Enchanter Mirdromel's opinion on the subject is a bit different from mine (he seems to consider all spirits more or less malevolent while I propose that only a few at worst are truly malevolent, most being dangerous just by being too alien to completely understand and put on our mortal moral scale).
That's one nice strawman, but let me be a fun-killer and correct what you managed to misunderstand: I said she didn't take away his will. He was still making decisions, though obviously he was making them based on an illusion rather than material world. She didn't take over his mid nor did she make her orders somehow final. He fought you believing to be protecting his children (who did not exist) and wife (who was her) but he fought of his own free will. That's the difference between being completely manipulated and being robbed of your free will by magical means.
I didn't refer to the slavery part here and, as You can easily confirm, I even (later in the same post) entertained the thought that she actually could consider him her "property" the same way someone can own a pet, showing different interpretation of "slavery", considering her possible approach to the subject. Treating a human the same way we would treat a pet animal would be something akin to slavery but we laugh at misunderstanding where Justice thinks of Anders' cat as "enslaved" - this shows that certain concepts might be difficult to grasp for spirits; if Justice thought of cat as enslaved, why couldn't another spirit have a pet human and never think about it as a slave of hers?
Was I clear enough this time?
There is no evidence either way, but you assume your interpretation. Interpretation based solely on her being called "desire demon" rather than, say "spirit of need" or something.
In the end she found a miserable guy who hated his life and she comforted him with an illusion that finally made him happy, for once. It's not as nice and black-white as you would like to present it
Of course, we can say that demons we encountered were antagonistic and spirits were not. But... was it really the case? Or maybe we encountered some spirits and we just generally called those antagonistic "demons" and the rest "spirits"? Think about it - we usually have one-time encounters with those beings, perhaps in slightly different situations some of "demons" would seem more like "spirits" and "spirits" more like "demons"?
Also, even if we approach the subject from Chantry's wiewpoint (more or less), the distinction isn't always as clear as Anders would like it to describe. After all from DA:O codex entry, written by a Circle mage, we get statemets such as:Typically, we misuse the term "spirit" to refer only to the benign, or at least less malevolent, creatures of the Fade, but in truth, all the denizens of the realm beyond the Veil are spirits.
and
In general, spirits are not complex. Or, rather, they are not complex as we understand such things. Each one seizes upon a single facet of human experience: Rage, hunger, compassion, hope, etc. This one idea becomes their identity. We classify as demons those spirits who identify themselves with darker human emotions and ideas.
Admittedly, the author then proceeds to the standard classification of kinds of demons, but in light of the rest of what he wrote doesn't it seem as if he considers the line dividing spirits and demons as quite arbitrary? And calling Spirits "less malevolent" creatures of the Fade definitely doesn't sound as if "malevolence" would be a defining quality... though, admittedly, Enchanter Mirdromel's opinion on the subject is a bit different from mine (he seems to consider all spirits more or less malevolent while I propose that only a few at worst are truly malevolent, most being dangerous just by being too alien to completely understand and put on our mortal moral scale).
Haha dude he didn't even remember who he was (templar) working in circle so how it isn't controll if demon practically washed away who he was into something she completly controlls as we see she can perfectly control him into attacking the warden my bet if he wasn't under demon influence he would kill her. Demon had complete control over him as she had complete control over his mind and was able shape his thinking in desired for its way.So yes she took away his will same way if i mind controlled him into thinking he is my servant (despite not being one) he could act as servant but don't make it free will.
What wasn't his choice he was forced by demon with questionable motives at best as we don't know real intentions.
I was raised by my parents and hell you should see my parents and me because we disagree a lot i can tell you ultimately it was my choice and i chose not follow their vaules what is ridiculous comparison as here i have choice in demon scenario im completly mind controlled by demon and left on its mercy.And there is no mind control with pets as you don't control their mind and way they see the world pets are of course locked up but still have their own mind even if you treat them like s****.
And no as i said every spirit at least not changed wasn't malevolent in fact i would say they all were benevolent when demons were malevolent in almost every case and at best extremely questionable .
While yes technically you can call all beings in the fade as spirits term demon and spirits distinguish certain classification for "spirits" like mammals and reptiles do for animal.
He was a demon before the merging. In Awakening Justice tells Anders that only demons desire a human body. He made it clear that if he desired to take his body then he would be a demon. If anything the taint and being in Anders only made him worse than he already was. Overall, if I needed advice on demons and had absolutely no choice but to pick Anders or Merrill, I would pick Merrill. The only thing Anders can help me with is giving me a place to put my murder knife.
Yes but Nathaniel brings up to him that if he was helping do what one person couldn't do alone, he wouldn't be a Demon. Similarly, we can tell Justice that he is not a demon for desiring the things that Kristoff once cherished, like love, because he's not taking it away from him.
Third, look at Cole. Cole was able to become more human. If he could do it, then theoretically Justice could have as well had he not merged with Anders.
I think partially though a lot of what made Justice a Demon was Anders believing he was a Demon and trying to say "No he's a Spirit!" not just to convince others but convince himself. Partially. There's a slew of other things to take into account, like Anders' rage and the taint as you said, but also other things as well.
Haha dude he didn't even remember who he was (templar) working in circle so how it isn't controll if demon practically washed away who he was into something she completly controlls as we see she can perfectly control him into attacking the warden my bet if he wasn't under demon influence he would kill her. Demon had complete control over him as she had complete control over his mind and was able shape his thinking in desired for its way.So yes she took away his will same way if i mind controlled him into thinking he is my servant (despite not being one) he could act as servant but don't make it free will.
What wasn't his choice he was forced by demon with questionable motives at best as we don't know real intentions.
I was raised by my parents and hell you should see my parents and me because we disagree a lot i can tell you ultimately it was my choice and i chose not follow their vaules what is ridiculous comparison as here i have choice in demon scenario im completly mind controlled by demon and left on its mercy.And there is no mind control with pets as you don't control their mind and way they see the world pets are of course locked up but still have their own mind even if you treat them like s****.
And no as i said every spirit at least not changed wasn't malevolent in fact i would say they all were benevolent when demons were malevolent in almost every case and at best extremely questionable .
While yes technically you can call all beings in the fade as spirits term demon and spirits distinguish certain classification for "spirits" like mammals and reptiles do for animal.
I'm starting to wonder whether you purposefuly try to misinterpret anything I say? I say that people try to make other people things in particular ways (with no malice), as with parents raising their children - and you go on with how it's not effective, as if it has anything to do with it. I say that someone can have a pet animal, treat it as "slave", train it and it doesn't imply malice - and you go on to say that pets are not mind-controlled. What the hell does it have to do with anything?
And as for mind control, you being unable to see a difference between manipulation based on illusion and mind control doesn't mean the difference is not profound. Besides, you don't know anything about what the Templar does and does not remember, he could just as well believe himself to be ex-Templar, long after the happpenings in the Tower. After all, he remembers how to fight when he protects his "Family", right?
What you fail to grasp is that malevolence requires appropriate intention, not merely bad results. Unless the demon wants to hurt the Templar, it is not malevolent. And another thing you fail to see is that our labeling of things as "demons" is usually based on short encounter in which we learn nothing of the opponents motives or intentions. Something seems malevolent? We call it a demon. Remember how Solas mentioned that his friends - Wisdom and Purpose - for others could appear as Pride and Desire? He didn't say they would corrupt them, but that they would see the demons. Why would it even be possible if Demons and Spirits were so different? Some heavy-duty corrupting would be needed (like what ultimately happened to his Wisdom friend) to turn them against their nature, right? So why did he say what he said?
Also, as for spirits being nice and demons malevolent - there are all those wisps and "spirit wolves" in DA:O Mage Origin that attack you - are they demons then? Valor that challenges you to a duel in order to help you (but you can talk him out of it) and Sloth that offers to help you because you amuse him (or because you can beat him, or because you convince him that that's the best way to get rid of you). How malevolent is it, really? Oh, and then there is Mouse, seemingly a Pride Demon that pretty much congratulates you on not letting yourself be possessed (and warns him to always keep his guard up in the future). And that's it, he neither attacks you nor tries to force itself on you. So maybe it is a Wisdom spirit that was testing you or something? But wait, what about those previous mages that supposedly got eaten by the Rage Spirit (as Mouse calls him) with Mouse's permission and even help?
Sure, we can call those nastier spirits "Demons" and those that seem nicer "Good Spirits" but that doesn't change the fact that distinction is arbitrary simplification of infinitely complicated world of spirits, about as precise as dividing people into categories of "good people" and "bad people" with the former being literal saints and the later - figurative demons. That's just a childish simplification.
I'm starting to wonder whether you purposefuly try to misinterpret anything I say? I say that people try to make other people things in particular ways (with no malice), as with parents raising their children - and you go on with how it's not effective, as if it has anything to do with it. I say that someone can have a pet animal, treat it as "slave", train it and it doesn't imply malice - and you go on to say that pets are not mind-controlled. What the hell does it have to do with anything?
And as for mind control, you being unable to see a difference between manipulation based on illusion and mind control doesn't mean the difference is not profound. Besides, you don't know anything about what the Templar does and does not remember, he could just as well believe himself to be ex-Templar, long after the happpenings in the Tower. After all, he remembers how to fight when he protects his "Family", right?
What you fail to grasp is that malevolence requires appropriate intention, not merely bad results. Unless the demon wants to hurt the Templar, it is not malevolent. And another thing you fail to see is that our labeling of things as "demons" is usually based on short encounter in which we learn nothing of the opponents motives or intentions. Something seems malevolent? We call it a demon. Remember how Solas mentioned that his friends - Wisdom and Purpose - for others could appear as Pride and Desire? He didn't say they would corrupt them, but that they would see the demons. Why would it even be possible if Demons and Spirits were so different? Some heavy-duty corrupting would be needed (like what ultimately happened to his Wisdom friend) to turn them against their nature, right? So why did he say what he said?
Also, as for spirits being nice and demons malevolent - there are all those wisps and "spirit wolves" in DA:O Mage Origin that attack you - are they demons then? Valor that challenges you to a duel in order to help you (but you can talk him out of it) and Sloth that offers to help you because you amuse him (or because you can beat him, or because you convince him that that's the best way to get rid of you). How malevolent is it, really? Oh, and then there is Mouse, seemingly a Pride Demon that pretty much congratulates you on not letting yourself be possessed (and warns him to always keep his guard up in the future). And that's it, he neither attacks you nor tries to force itself on you. So maybe it is a Wisdom spirit that was testing you or something? But wait, what about those previous mages that supposedly got eaten by the Rage Spirit (as Mouse calls him) with Mouse's permission and even help?
Sure, we can call those nastier spirits "Demons" and those that seem nicer "Good Spirits" but that doesn't change the fact that distinction is arbitrary simplification of infinitely complicated world of spirits, about as precise as dividing people into categories of "good people" and "bad people" with the former being literal saints and the later - figurative demons. That's just a childish simplification.
Trying to make people in certain ways isn't mind controling them your parents at best can try control your mind in some screwd up examples but doesn't mean they can do that your paretns only have influence on you not control over your mind that is diffrence between what demon what demon was doing and what your parents are doing... Same for pets... so yes it has a lot to do with anything it is like comparing paret forcing you to do homework to somone forcing you to be slave in mines...
Omg haha i rly ... demon mind controled that guy into thinking he loves her and loves his children (that don't exist) and that he is ready die for them please dude but she made decision for him that he loves her so yes she mind controlled him and took away his free will to decide for him who he loves. So at this point demon had comple control over his mind....
It first place stop making false assumptions because i never said that...
It wanted hurt him in fact as i said it harmed him already practically taking control over his mind despite he didn't agreed so yeah...
Omg haha short encounters most demons outright attack humans pretty much we fight most of them through series so yes they were malevolent. Then we have demons that we interaced with like uldred , connor , baroness ,kitty , ishmael solas friend that turned into demon ,demon in the fade in daa those pretty much all of them were malevolent despite they were ready to bargin.
Wisp in fact aren't spirits well even not demons (or are they? i would say they fit into demon category) wisps were demons that were killed or spend too much without body in "real" world.
Also sloth demon said he would pretty much possessed you if not that was too much effort for him. 
Yes post example of demon that wanted possess the warden and when he failed he said nice thing totally not malevolent...
so no it isn't oversimplification it is simple as i said classification of living things in the fade and it fits as far as it is shown in-universe.
Damn im tired i need some sleep 
The only difference is scope. Demon was able to shape Templar's mind to bigger extent than it's conceivably possible by raising the child, but the idea is the same - make the person think the way you believe it should think.Trying to make people in certain ways isn't mind controling them your parents at best can try control your mind in some screwd up examples but doesn't mean they can do that your paretns only have influence on you not control over your mind that is diffrence between what demon what demon was doing and what your parents are doing... Same for pets... so yes it has a lot to do with anything it is like comparing paret forcing you to do homework to somone forcing you to be slave in mines...
Now you just make assumptions on top of assumptions. The demon created the fake family the Templar wanted. He pretty much loved this would-be family before it happened, that's what drove Desire to him in the first place. And once again, the demon merely manipulated the templar, not completely mind-controlled him.Omg haha i rly shouldn't even dicuss with you... demon mind controled that guy into thinking he loves her and loves his children (that don't exist) and that he is ready die for them please dude but she made decision for him that he loves her so yes she mind controlled him and took away his free will to decide for him who he loves. So at this point demon had comple control over his mind....
As I said, you mess up hurting somebody with wanting to hurt somebody. Easy example: parents trying to "cure" their child of... whatever, being homosexual, for example. Does the treatment hurt the child? Often, if not always. Is it malicious? No, usually not. And it pretty much comes down to an attempt to "control his mind" (by realistically available means, some psychiatric "treatment" or exorcism or whatever they come up with).It first place stop making false assumptions because i never said that...
It wanted hurt him in fact as i said it harmed him already practically taking control over his mind despite he didn't agreed so yeah...
How did you manage to not understand me, really? Ok, once more, slowly:Omg haha short encounters most demons outright attack humans pretty much we fight most of them through series so yes they were malevolent. Then we have demons that we interaced with like uldred , connor , baroness ,kitty , ishmael solas friend that turned into demon ,demon in the fade in daa those pretty much all of them were malevolent despite they were ready to bargin.
Wisps are also spirits, they're just severely crippled (generally by dying somewhere along the way). They can be dead spirits of any kind (demons included, obviously).Wisp in fact aren't spirits well even not demons (or are they? i would say they fit into demon category) wisps were demons that were killed or spend too much without body in "real" world.
Yet he doesn't make the slightest attempt to hinder you in any way. On the contrary, actually.Also sloth demon said he would pretty much possessed you if not that was too much effort for him.
And Valor tries to kill you. From what we know, for a Pride demon possessing an apprentice forcibly should really be just a breeze. He doesn't try it. He doesn't kill you even. He compliments and warns you and lets you be. You don't know anything about its motives, really.Yes post example of demon that wanted possess the warden and when he failed he said nice thing totally not malevolent...
It's repeatedly shown to be more complicated than this and we're many times told (in codexes and dialogues) that it's more complicated. Therefore it's an oversimplification because the classification is hardly as clear-cut as you would like to have it.so no it isn't oversimplification it is simple as i said classification of living things in the fade and it fits as far as it is shown in-universe.
The only difference is scope. Demon was able to shape Templar's mind to bigger extent than it's conceivably possible by raising the child, but the idea is the same - make the person think the way you believe it should think.
Now you just make assumptions on top of assumptions. The demon created the fake family the Templar wanted. He pretty much loved this would-be family before it happened, that's what drove Desire to him in the first place. And once again, the demon merely manipulated the templar, not completely mind-controlled him.
As I said, you mess up hurting somebody with wanting to hurt somebody. Easy example: parents trying to "cure" their child of... whatever, being homosexual, for example. Does the treatment hurt the child? Often, if not always. Is it malicious? No, usually not. And it pretty much comes down to an attempt to "control his mind" (by realistically available means, some psychiatric "treatment" or exorcism or whatever they come up with).
It's the intention that counts and your only clue as to the demon's intention is "it's ademon hurr-durr it's evil it wants to do harm".
How did you manage to not understand me, really? Ok, once more, slowly:
You meed spirits that attack you on sight and those that try to f*ck you up one way or another AND those that don't do any of the above. It's basically then that you decide whether you consider something a spirit or a demon and try to push it into one of those categories appropriate for "demons like this one". But when you try to make predictions, they fall flat. Sloth Demon in Magi Origin is actually helpful. How can you call something malevolent when you need to really pester him to make him do anything against you and even then, if beaten, it helps you?
Wisps are also spirits, they're just severely crippled (generally by dying somewhere along the way). They can be dead spirits of any kind (demons included, obviously).
Yet he doesn't make the slightest attempt to hinder you in any way. On the contrary, actually.
And Valor tries to kill you. From what we know, for a Pride demon possessing an apprentice forcibly should really be just a breeze. He doesn't try it. He doesn't kill you even. He compliments and warns you and lets you be. You don't know anything about its motives, really.
It's repeatedly shown to be more complicated than this and we're many times told (in codexes and dialogues) that it's more complicated. Therefore it's an oversimplification because the classification is hardly as clear-cut as you would like to have it.
As i said not rly if you can't tell difference between total mind control that practically can tell you who you love between parents influence and that they can't force you to love somone at worst to marry somone but not love i don't think we can talk about it because you cleary have no idea what you are talking about.
Dude play the game it is game content not an assumption and yes that involves forcing him to love her and her children that don't exist in first place in first place he can't love her because he don't know her only demon forced him to love woman that don't exist plain and simple without his agreement thus making it an example of mind control and taking away his will.As i said i could as well mind-control him into thinking im his master and he is my servant and that he is absolutely loyal to me.
She wanted to mind control him and take away his free will not only did she wanted to no one forced her.And yes if they do such thing their intentions are malevolent same as fanatic that want to burn you on the stake so you can unite with god and in his twisted mind it isn't.
This is not what i have said what i have most demons pretty much proves that they are malevolent others try to bargin or are more sneaky while still malevolent.While spirits aren't plain and simple.And no as i said sloth would gladly as himself possess warden if not that it is too much trouble for him so yes his intentions were bad but he was too lazy to do anything about it.
And to prove you cleary have no idea about things you are talking about and yet speak as it is 100 % truth here catch codex entry outright classifies them as demons despite you say they are spirits any source pls i provided mine?
As i said he was way to lazy to do that but his intentions were bad as i said above also he was more than glad with idea consuming mouse that he tought was lost soul.
No he doesn't eee from what i remember he challenges you to a duel that you can refuse or simple acusee him that he tries to kill you on what he responds that he doesn't but you proved your will and gives you staff anyway.If you are talking about game over screen it isn't any prove because game over screen shows always even in situation it shouldn't for example like provings only exception cauthrien.He tried to possess you he failed lol... so yes i know about his motives as he tried to possess me...
No it isn't as i said and i have thousands fights with demons as prove and zero with spirits.
In my game, Hawke forgot her entire personality.
Now you just make assumptions on top of assumptions. The demon created the fake family the Templar wanted. He pretty much loved this would-be family before it happened, that's what drove Desire to him in the first place. And once again, the demon merely manipulated the templar, not completely mind-controlled him.
I'm not so sure about this. He clearly acts mind-controlled, and she's able to cause him to forget at the end of the conversation that the children have apparently been put to bed at the start of it. That seems to me to be symptomatic of not having a mind of your own anymore.
(...)
You know what? I'll leave it at that, as it's a serious offtop we've delved into. And I really don't have patience to talk with someone who spouts loads of nonsense and rather than actually discuss with me tries his best not to understand what I'm saying
Either that or you sincerely can't grasp the difference between intentions and effects (and the fact that malevolence is tied only to the former, not the latter). Which likely makes this discussion even more pointless.
I'll only respond to this one part
And to prove you cleary have no idea about things you are talking about and yet speak as it is 100 % truth here catch codex entry outright classifies them as demons despite you say they are spirits any source pls i provided mine?
I don't really feel like hunting all the referenced material, so I'll just lazily point you to this excerpt out of Wiki:
Wisps
Not all spirits represent a distinct virtue or vice. The weakest spirits, wisps, are shimmering orbs of light too simple and impressionable to be good or evil.[1][7][8] In some cases they appear to be benign, aiding mages who summon them in the mortal realm (by distracting foes[7] orboosting spellpower) or in the Fade (as guides).[8] Wisp wraiths, however, are known to attack anything in sight.
http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Spirit
Also, dead Mythal is described as a "wisp of an ancient being" and Cole speaks to Vivienne about her magic having some effects on spiritual plankton:
And then there is the fact that a mage has a spell that explicitly summons a helpful wisp that gives him a small boost to his power.
Basically, please, do get a clue of what you're talking about BEFORE accusing someone they don't have a clue. Otherwise you're just making a fool out of yourself.
You know what? I'll leave it at that, as it's a serious offtop we've delved into. And I really don't have patience to talk with someone who spouts loads of nonsense and rather than actually discuss with me tries his best not to understand what I'm saying
Either that or you sincerely can't grasp the difference between intentions and effects (and the fact that malevolence is tied only to the former, not the latter). Which likely makes this discussion even more pointless.
I'll only respond to this one partI don't really feel like hunting all the referenced material, so I'll just lazily point you to this excerpt out of Wiki:
Wisps
Not all spirits represent a distinct virtue or vice. The weakest spirits, wisps, are shimmering orbs of light too simple and impressionable to be good or evil.[1][7][8] In some cases they appear to be benign, aiding mages who summon them in the mortal realm (by distracting foes[7] orboosting spellpower) or in the Fade (as guides).[8] Wisp wraiths, however, are known to attack anything in sight.
http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Spirit
Also, dead Mythal is described as a "wisp of an ancient being" and Cole speaks to Vivienne about her magic having some effects on spiritual plankton:
Cole: Do you feel spirits when you cast a spell?Cole: Bits of them push through with your magic, tiny, a wisp of a wisp, free before falling back. They pool around you, water in a cup, defined, deafened, hearing only your song.Cole: They want to skate, scintillate on skin. You made them them. Their maker.Vivienne: Now. I need. A bath.
And then there is the fact that a mage has a spell that explicitly summons a helpful wisp that gives him a small boost to his power.
Basically, please, do get a clue of what you're talking about BEFORE accusing someone they don't have a clue. Otherwise you're just making a fool out of yourself.
Not rly as i said your problem if you don't see clear mind control i proved my point as i did with that circles aren't slavery.
And again depsite pretty much i already have explained that i don't you make that empty assumption.
From what i remember we were discussing wisp wraith as you deliberately pointed hostile wisps that attacked you and labeled it as spirit so it wasn't discussion about kind of wisp you have posted here and are in fact labeled as demon.In fact funnily those wisps that you have mentioned aren't hostile and are labeled as spirit what only confirms thing i was saying about demons and spirits.
So no i didn't make fool out of myself because as i said we were discussing dao one that are in fact as i said labeled as demons so changing topic of discussion won't make it better.
Not rly as i said your problem if you don't see clear mind control i proved my point as i did with that circles aren't slavery.
And again depsite pretty much i already have explained that i don't you make that empty assumption.
From what i remember we were discussing wisp wraith as you deliberately pointed hostile wisps that attacked you and labeled it as spirit so it wasn't discussion about kind of wisp you have posted here and are in fact labeled as demon.In fact funnily those whisps that you have mentioned aren't hostile and are labeled as spirit what only confirms thing i was saying about demons and spirits.
So no i didn't make fool out of myself because as i said we were discussing dao one that are in fact as i said labeled as demons so changing topic of discussion won't make it better.
You don't get the fact that we deal with alien minds and the fact that malice requires intention - not just activity that someone else deems harmful.
I initially mentioned wisps and you said that "wisps are demons" (not "wisp wraiths"). Also, the case of wisps is the clearest example of how your classification fails. There are some wisps, we can hardly differentiate them, really. Some are aggressive. Others are not. We encounter each wisp once (and if we encountered it again, we wouldn't really be able to recognize him. But those that - in this one encounter - were aggressive are relegated as "demons" while those that don't attack or can be used for something are spirits. If one of them were encountered at a later time again - and this time attacked for whatever reason, it would immediately be classified as demon despite complete lack of understanding of why it had attacked, what could've caused it etc.
That's why I don't want the Warden coming back or being voiced, they'll just give them a forced personality and attitude.
You don't get the fact that we deal with alien minds and the fact that malice requires intention - not just activity that someone else deems harmful.
I initially mentioned wisps and you said that "wisps are demons" (not "wisp wraiths"). Also, the case of wisps is the clearest example of how your classification fails. There are some wisps, we can hardly differentiate them, really. Some are aggressive. Others are not. We encounter each wisp once (and if we encountered it again, we wouldn't really be able to recognize him. But those that - in this one encounter - were aggressive are relegated as "demons" while those that don't attack or can be used for something are spirits. If one of them were encountered at a later time again - and this time attacked for whatever reason, it would immediately be classified as demon despite complete lack of understanding of why it had attacked, what could've caused it etc.
I do you ignored it (as many other things) and pretty much explained it (you ignored it too)
No you used wisp that attacked you in dao as example of malevolent spirit so cleary meant wisp wraith and those from dao i said wisp because pretty much we had clear target in terms what we were talking about backtracking won't help now as i said. Not rly again classification works and in fact you supported it by proving that classification as we have 2 kind of whisps in fact wisp wraith originate from demons so yes it works while another kind probably from spirits though we don't know in second case.
If you actually do understand it, you're really good in concealing this understanding because your whole "explanation" pretty much proves that you equate action you view as harmful with being malevolent. Here you even state it clearly:I do you ignored it (as many other things) and pretty much explained it (you ignored it too)
You equate action you see as harmful with malevolent intention. I don't know how possibly I could interpret this sentence differently.(...)And yes if they do such thing their intentions are malevolent same as fanatic that want to burn you on the stake so you can unite with god and in his twisted mind it isn't.
But we don't know where do "wisp wraiths" come from. They attack so they called them wisp wraiths to avoid having to explain aggressive spirit that wasn't a demon. We don't know why they attack. We don't know anything about them. Normal spirits are very difficult to tell apart, wisps are even more difficult than that! You see a wisp, it attacks you "oh, it must've been a demon before it was destroyed". That's an assumption. Some behavior is observed but is not understood (but thought about as deliberately malevolent) - so it's put on some inherent evilness of the thing.No you used wisp that attacked you in dao as example of malevolent spirit so cleary meant wisp wraith and those from dao i said wisp because pretty much we had clear target in terms what we were talking about backtracking won't help now as i said. Not rly again classification and in fact you supported it by proving that classification as we have 2 kind of whisps in fact wisp wraith originate from demons so yes it works while another kind probably from spirits though we don't know in second case.
If the HOF ever reappears, I suspect that they'll be full Warden supporters who love the Grey Wardens and hate anyone who hates Grey Wardens.
This is EXACTLY why I'd be content with never seeing the HOF again.
Edit: Also yeah I have to agree that the only protag being a bloodmage and having it make sense is the warden. It also justifies why most turn a blind eye.
If you actually do understand it, you're really good in concealing this understanding because your whole "explanation" pretty much proves that you equate action you view as harmful with being malevolent. Here you even state it clearly:
You equate action you see as harmful with malevolent intention. I don't know how possibly I could interpret this sentence differently.
But we don't know where do "wisp wraiths" come from. They attack so they called them wisp wraiths to avoid having to explain aggressive spirit that wasn't a demon. We don't know why they attack. We don't know anything about them. Normal spirits are very difficult to tell apart, wisps are even more difficult than that! You see a wisp, it attacks you "oh, it must've been a demon before it was destroyed". That's an assumption. Some behavior is observed but is not understood (but thought about as deliberately malevolent) - so it's put on some inherent evilness of the thing.
Besides, when I mentioned wisps, I recounted thing that were not labeled out of hand as demons - you proceeded to provide a codex entry refering to wisps as demons. Admittedly, I didn't remember that there were some attempts at calling some subset of them "wisp wraiths" to maintain the spirit-demon opposition while obviously not all wisps are hostile. Wisps are wisps, that's all we really know. Some attack you. Others can help you. We have no real way to tell them apart and judge whether the "others" are actually others or in fact the same, just interacted with in a different manner (as Solas says in regards to more powerful "benevolent" spirits that can be viewed as demons by other people interacting with them). Either way, if you care to remember, I mentioned "spirit wolves" - are they demons then?
Because it is? in fact it is both
Execpt we know (same link i gave you before...) those things as i said they originate from demons.
And as i said there is obvious classification with wisps one go to demons other spirits thus difference in names in fact as i said (many times) wisp wraith was demon (still is) that was killed or was too long in real world so in fact there are differences between two even outside being hostile or not.
Probably considering they attack you on sight but there is no more to say in fact those thing don't get even mention in-universe or codex.
Because it is? in fact it is both
Execpt we know (same link i gave you before...) those things as i said they originate from demons.
And as i said there is obvious classification with wisps one go to demons other spirits thus difference in names in fact as i said (many times) wisp wraith was demon (still is) that was killed or was too long in real world so in fact there are differences between two even outside being hostile or not.
Probably considering they attack you on sight but there is no more to say in fact those thing don't get even mention in-universe or codex.
Oh, great, so now you go to dig up an obscure, strongly associated with astrology, meaning of the word? Oh, yeah, you showed me. I admit defeat, that was definitely the most appropriate meaning of the word in this context.
Well to be honest thread was about merril and blood magic and well...
Actually, this thread was originally about Hawke only. Merrill was only mentioned since she related to the OP's argument.
Anyway, I already stated what I think about Hawke in DA:I. Not going to bother repeating it.
Oh, great, so now you go to dig up an obscure, strongly associated with astrology, meaning of the word? Oh, yeah, you showed me. I admit defeat, that was definitely the most appropriate meaning of the word in this context.
Well that is just another meaning i don't even know why you brought it up because those 2 others were important.
Actually, this thread was originally about Hawke only. Merrill was only mentioned since she related to the OP's argument.
Anyway, I already stated what I think about Hawke in DA:I. Not going to bother repeating it.
I know it was little joke that OP brought them up. 
Yes but Nathaniel brings up to him that if he was helping do what one person couldn't do alone, he wouldn't be a Demon. Similarly, we can tell Justice that he is not a demon for desiring the things that Kristoff once cherished, like love, because he's not taking it away from him.
Third, look at Cole. Cole was able to become more human. If he could do it, then theoretically Justice could have as well had he not merged with Anders.
I think partially though a lot of what made Justice a Demon was Anders believing he was a Demon and trying to say "No he's a Spirit!" not just to convince others but convince himself. Partially. There's a slew of other things to take into account, like Anders' rage and the taint as you said, but also other things as well.
I don't think Justice was a demon throughout Awakening, I believe that at some point between Awakening and DA2 he became a demon or perhaps more demon like which made him desire to possess Anders in the first place.
Retour en haut
