yup... if i cant win nobody can lolForever Stalemate? That seems about right. Now they shall wages eternal war against one another forever. XD
Let me grab on gun, sheriff. I will...oh dang RL duty calls. We have to do this another time. Sorry, monkey.
Sorry about double post.
i have the gall... but its so much work to type it... its 50+ words lol
oh gods no too much work... and MLA format confuses meYou may as well write an essay then. XD
I really don't get all this malarkey about Leliana allegedly being crazy. Why? Because her religious beliefs differ from the norm? Because she interpreted something in a hopeful religious light? I think people are taking her initial recruitment dialogue way too far... and honestly, as a religious person myself, I think it speaks ill of society that any semblance of religious belief is perceived as a mental illness.
agreedI really don't get all this malarkey about Leliana allegedly being crazy. Why? Because her religious beliefs differ from the norm? Because she interpreted something in a hopeful religious light? I think people are taking her initial recruitment dialogue way too far... and honestly, as a religious person myself, I think it speaks ill of society that any semblance of religious belief is perceived as a mental illness.
Apologies in advance for my reply being so long. Remember this is my opinion and is not meant to offend.
For the first few plays I chose Casandra as Divine. However I started to question my choice when Fiona said, “We cannot go back to way things were.” Even if Fiona did not say these words and someone else did, I still would have questioned my choice. Thus it is not the person who spoke it is the words.
These words are true.
In order to choose the best Divine it is not a matter of what is now, but how The Chantry came to the state they are in.
Going back a thousand years at the start is where the break-down began. The Chantry based its treatment on Mages on a quote from Andraste. The trouble is, we do not know the truth about Andraste nor do we even know she actually said this quote, let alone the same text and how she meant it to be interpreted. The Chantry chose to interrupt her words on how they chose too.
However it was not just Andraste’s words, it was also how The Chantry blamed Tevinter for her death. The fact is Andraste did die by the Tevinter’s hands, but she would not have done so if her husband did not betray her. Thus Andraste’s husband is to blame, not Tevinter, not the mages.
Sure, Andraste went to war with Tevinter, but that was based on how they ruled, how they treated people. Most wars happen when ideals do not mesh together.
Instead of The Chantry treating mages with respect and teaching others that mages are not the problem, they chose to instill fear into people. Fear of course is a good way to gain devotion and obedience.
Mages were locked away in towers and guarded by Templar overseers. This system no doubt worked for a while but every system breaks down if you do not maintain it. That is exactly what happened, The Chantry put on a grand show of maintaining The Circles, but did a poor job actually doing the deed.
Many Templars got away with far too much in how they treated their charges. If they were caught, the system would blame the mage involved. Of course their some situations to where the Templar is reprimanded but given no more than a slap on the wrist, in rare cases (such as Samson) the Templar is expelled from the Order.
Image if you will being a Mage and trapped in a Tower day in and day out. No matter how hard you study, no how you past your Harrowing, no matter if you use your magic to help people YOU are still evil in the eyes of The Chantry. That is like being convicted of a crime and being sentence to prison and no matter how hard you try to protest your innocence you will always be labeld guilty and a danger.
Some will say, "Well The Chantry is right, mages are a danger." No they are not. Mages are not dangerous, magic is the danger. But so is a man weilding a sword. A person who weilds whatever weapon they have be it a sword or magic can choose not to be a danger. Magic only becomes dangerous when a person chooses to use that power for purposes of evil.
Then we have the other side, "Well Mages can be possesed and turn into a demons." Yep they sure can. But we all learned in Dragon Age 2 it does not take a mage to be intisted by a demon's offer. Yes, they have a chance to become aboninations. But if every mage was that dangerous then every mage in Thedas would be an abomination. Not every Mage becomes a monster. Not every mage takes a demons offer. And The Harrowing is nothing more then a barbaric practice for The Chantry to show they have the power. Just because a mage passes his/her Harrowing does not mean they cannot become what The Chantry fears, what everyone in Thedas fears.
Thus it comes around to The Chantry being hypocrits. Blood magic is bad, but the Templars use it. Abominations are forbidden but Seekers are abominations. And there are many more issues that happen when The Chantry says it is forbidden.
So we then come to the question as the title has asked.
Cassandra is a good person, but she has a flaw in which she tries to change The Chantry but also tries to keep what once was intact. You cannot put a bandaid on a mountain sized problem and expect things to be as they were. The Chantry needs a clean slate, not a half washed plate.
Vivienne is thee worst possiable person to become Divine. She is not interested in the betterment of the people, she is interested in the betterment of herself. Yes, she gives the mages more freedom. But at what cost? How much freedom are we talking here? Not to mention she leashes the Templars firmly to her. This is a very bad idea. The Chantry tried to do this to the mages and failed. All this will do is start a countdown until the next war breaks out. Not to mention again, The Chantry states, "Magic is meant to serve man not rule over him." Yet here is a mage doing just that.
Lilly is the best choice (Unharden of course). Because she is willing to do what no one else will do-wipe the slate clean and start anew. This is what The Chantry needs, what Thedas needs. The Chantry was so mired in tradtion it could not see past all the cracks in the foundation. If you want to save something that is almost gone, you start over.
Am I in favor of the mages? Of course. But I play my characters diffrent. (My) Hawke was a firm beleiver in the mage rebellion, (my) Inquisitor is all for it but does not agree with how the mages chose to rebel.
However in the end you have to choose who is best for your game not what is best for everyone.
**Sorry for my bad spelling. Spell Checker is not working today***
I really don't get all this malarkey about Leliana allegedly being crazy. Why? Because her religious beliefs differ from the norm? Because she interpreted something in a hopeful religious light? I think people are taking her initial recruitment dialogue way too far... and honestly, as a religious person myself, I think it speaks ill of society that any semblance of religious belief is perceived as a mental illness.
That's actually not the only reason people say that. In both games in which Leliana takes a prominent role, there's the option to "harden" her. The fact that more than once, Leliana's core convictions and principles can be reshaped by another person lends a lot to the accusation that there's some instability to her mindset and her personality. I say this as someone who likes Leliana very much.
Apologies in advance for my reply being so long. Remember this is my opinion and is not meant to offend.
For the first few plays I chose Casandra as Divine. However I started to question my choice when Fiona said, “We cannot go back to way things were.” Even if Fiona did not say these words and someone else did, I still would have questioned my choice. Thus it is not the person who spoke it is the words.
These words are true.
In order to choose the best Divine it is not a matter of what is now, but how The Chantry came to the state they are in.
Going back a thousand years at the start is where the break-down began. The Chantry based its treatment on Mages on a quote from Andraste. The trouble is, we do not know the truth about Andraste nor do we even know she actually said this quote, let alone the same text and how she meant it to be interpreted. The Chantry chose to interrupt her words on how they chose too.
However it was not just Andraste’s words, it was also how The Chantry blamed Tevinter for her death. The fact is Andraste did die by the Tevinter’s hands, but she would not have done so if her husband did not betray her. Thus Andraste’s husband is to blame, not Tevinter, not the mages.
Sure, Andraste went to war with Tevinter, but that was based on how they ruled, how they treated people. Most wars happen when ideals do not mesh together.
Instead of The Chantry treating mages with respect and teaching others that mages are not the problem, they chose to instill fear into people. Fear of course is a good way to gain devotion and obedience.
Mages were locked away in towers and guarded by Templar overseers. This system no doubt worked for a while but every system breaks down if you do not maintain it. That is exactly what happened, The Chantry put on a grand show of maintaining The Circles, but did a poor job actually doing the deed.
Many Templars got away with far too much in how they treated their charges. If they were caught, the system would blame the mage involved. Of course their some situations to where the Templar is reprimanded but given no more than a slap on the wrist, in rare cases (such as Samson) the Templar is expelled from the Order.
Image if you will being a Mage and trapped in a Tower day in and day out. No matter how hard you study, no how you past your Harrowing, no matter if you use your magic to help people YOU are still evil in the eyes of The Chantry. That is like being convicted of a crime and being sentence to prison and no matter how hard you try to protest your innocence you will always be labeld guilty and a danger.
Some will say, "Well The Chantry is right, mages are a danger." No they are not. Mages are not dangerous, magic is the danger. But so is a man weilding a sword. A person who weilds whatever weapon they have be it a sword or magic can choose not to be a danger. Magic only becomes dangerous when a person chooses to use that power for purposes of evil.
Then we have the other side, "Well Mages can be possesed and turn into a demons." Yep they sure can. But we all learned in Dragon Age 2 it does not take a mage to be intisted by a demon's offer. Yes, they have a chance to become aboninations. But if every mage was that dangerous then every mage in Thedas would be an abomination. Not every Mage becomes a monster. Not every mage takes a demons offer. And The Harrowing is nothing more then a barbaric practice for The Chantry to show they have the power. Just because a mage passes his/her Harrowing does not mean they cannot become what The Chantry fears, what everyone in Thedas fears.
Thus it comes around to The Chantry being hypocrits. Blood magic is bad, but the Templars use it. Abominations are forbidden but Seekers are abominations. And there are many more issues that happen when The Chantry says it is forbidden.
So we then come to the question as the title has asked.
Cassandra is a good person, but she has a flaw in which she tries to change The Chantry but also tries to keep what once was intact. You cannot put a bandaid on a mountain sized problem and expect things to be as they were. The Chantry needs a clean slate, not a half washed plate.
Vivienne is thee worst possiable person to become Divine. She is not interested in the betterment of the people, she is interested in the betterment of herself. Yes, she gives the mages more freedom. But at what cost? How much freedom are we talking here? Not to mention she leashes the Templars firmly to her. This is a very bad idea. The Chantry tried to do this to the mages and failed. All this will do is start a countdown until the next war breaks out. Not to mention again, The Chantry states, "Magic is meant to serve man not rule over him." Yet here is a mage doing just that.
Lilly is the best choice (Unharden of course). Because she is willing to do what no one else will do-wipe the slate clean and start anew. This is what The Chantry needs, what Thedas needs. The Chantry was so mired in tradtion it could not see past all the cracks in the foundation. If you want to save something that is almost gone, you start over.
Am I in favor of the mages? Of course. But I play my characters diffrent. (My) Hawke was a firm beleiver in the mage rebellion, (my) Inquisitor is all for it but does not agree with how the mages chose to rebel.
However in the end you have to choose who is best for your game not what is best for everyone.
**Sorry for my bad spelling. Spell Checker is not working today***
Leliana: And mages always wonder why people fear them. No one should have this power.
By becoming Divine, Leliana is basically enabling unrestricted and unchecked use of magic, which results in all of the plot conflicts that take place in DA:O and the major plot conflict in DA:I, including the horrors that her alternate-future self faced.
Leliana: And mages always wonder why people fear them. No one should have this power.
By becoming Divine, Leliana is basically enabling unrestricted and unchecked use of magic, which results in all of the plot conflicts that take place in DA:O and the major plot conflict in DA:I, including the horrors that her alternate-future self faced.
And doesn't the Inquisitor tell her about that if they did that mission?
And doesn't the Inquisitor tell her about that if they did that mission?
I'm not sure.
I've only played In Hushed Whispers once. I may have forgotten to talk to her afterwards.
The problem is, "mages are free and are enjoying unprecedented acceptance and the Chantry welcomes everyone" is arguably the best ending. It's tolerant, it's kind, it's progressive, and it's looking forward.
And you can only achieve this ending by choosing a lying, manipulative character who was employed as a ruthless assassin and/or a seductress, engaged in blackmail and treachery, and is generally no Pope Francis. And there are personal issues of disliking a character - Leliana could be killed in Origins, after all, and she threatens an Exalted March in DA2.
In short, I didn't think it was handled well. In Origins, you could choose Alistair or Anora or Alistair and Anora or even your main character with one of those two, and in all cases, Ferelden flourished. In DAI, you can only reach the desired ending(mages are free) with the rather questionable option of Leliana(when more neutral options exist, like Mother Giselle). And I wasn't comfortable with that.
And doesn't the Inquisitor tell her about that if they did that mission?
My Inquisitor just mentioned her final stand, both gratefully and regretfully, and listened to her talk about she would always consider one life a good trade for the safety of the world.
People tend to forget that she also does non-mage related things that make her a pretty good Divine. Like say opening up the Chantry so that elves, dwarves and qunari are allowed in and rededicating the Chantry towards the principle of charity.
People tend to forget that she also does non-mage related things that make her a pretty good Divine. Like say opening up the Chantry so that elves, dwarves and qunari are allowed in and rededicating the Chantry towards the principle of charity.
People tend to forget that she also does non-mage related things that make her a pretty good Divine. Like say opening up the Chantry so that elves, dwarves and qunari are allowed in and rededicating the Chantry towards the principle of charity.
Exactly. Which was part of my tangent.
When Lilly does this, I think it is awesome.
I remeber that Dwarf in Orzammar who wanted to open a Chantry. He was so happy when I helped him. Major Feels there. <nods>.
That's actually not the only reason people say that. In both games in which Leliana takes a prominent role, there's the option to "harden" her. The fact that more than once, Leliana's core convictions and principles can be reshaped by another person lends a lot to the accusation that there's some instability to her mindset and her personality. I say this as someone who likes Leliana very much.
Well consider that what she is being fickle about- whether kidnapping a rival grand cleric's nephew and torturing her enemies is fine. I mean, isn't doubting being a murdering sadistic psychopath something a mentally healthy person should be doing? Or at least questioning if it's necessary. It's not something easily reconcilable, I don't think it's something to detract from her character.
Besides, that's just humanity. People grow and change. And the PC whether for good or ill, has influence over that. They're not spirits, sometimes they doubt, sometimes they aren't consistent. Just like how the PC can influence Cassandra to not rebuild the seekers or Cullen to give up his lyrium sobriety.
Well consider that what she is being fickle about- whether kidnapping a rival grand cleric's nephew and torturing her enemies is fine. I mean, isn't doubting being a murdering sadistic psychopath something a mentally healthy person should be doing? It's not something easily reconcilable, I don't think it's something to detract from her character.
Besides, that's just humanity. People grow and change. And the PC whether for good or ill, has influence over that. They're not spirits, sometimes they doubt, sometimes they aren't consistent. Just like how the PC can influence Cassandra to not rebuild the seekers or Cullen to give up his lyrium sobriety.
You seem to be assuming that I'm criticizing Leliana's characterization. I assure you, that's not the case. I'm pointing out why she's often accused of being less mentally and emotionally stable than other characters.
Edit: Additionally, it doesn't necessarily follow that I'm calling her mentally unbalanced, just that there's a reason that other people do.
You seem to be assuming that I'm criticizing Leliana's characterization. I assure you, that's not the case. I'm pointing out why she's often accused of being less mentally and emotionally stable than other characters.
Such accusations doesn't seem very logical though to come to that conclusion.
hehe was that a serious statement... this is the bsnSuch accusations doesn't seem very logical though to come to that conclusion.
Such accusations doesn't seem very logical though to come to that conclusion.
Perhaps it isn't, when taken to extreme. I don't think it's terribly outlandish when you factor in the extremes Leliana can swing between depending on player choice. Leliana has a lot of compassion, intelligence, and faith, but not necessarily an inherently strong sense of conviction. In both Origins and Inquisition, she can be swayed into losing at least two of those qualities.
I'd argue this is absolutely intentional in terms of how she was written. There's a reason the Warden can suggest that she's either crazy or deluded more than once. The Bioware writers knew she could be interpreted this way, and like so many of their characters, they left that interpretation up to the player.
Perhaps it isn't, when taken to extreme. I don't think it's terribly outlandish when you factor in the extremes Leliana can swing between depending on player choice. Leliana has a lot of compassion, intelligence, and faith, but not necessarily an inherently strong sense of conviction.
I'd argue this is absolutely intentional in terms of how she was written. There's a reason the Warden can suggest that she's either crazy or deluded more than once. The Bioware writers knew she could be interpreted this way, and like so many of their characters, they left that interpretation up to the player.
That right there is the root of most of Leliana's problems. She is too easily influenced by people who are important to her. Marjolaine, Justinia, the Warden and now the Inquisitor.
Dependency issues. *nod nod*
Retour en haut