875 réponses à ce sujet

[thesuperdarkone2]

My problem is that there was no catalyst for annulment other then the breaking of a rule that no native Rivaini cared about. If a situation like the Ferelden Circle occurred, if apostates were killing random citizens like in the Hinterlands or if abominations were rampart in the streets of Dairsmuid, then I'd understand but from information that we know about the annulment the Seekers just decided to kill everyone after finding out about this tweaking of the typical mage policies.

 

Why alienate an entire country by destroying a status quo that they desired and worked in practice?

Apparently one of the reasons given is that Rivaini mages could freely interact with their families. If you support killing an entire group of people simply for speaking to their families, that says a lot about you.

[Steelcan]

 

The rules of the Circle in Rivain, and the laws pertaining to the Seers were Chantry law. The Seekers, at the time, were not affiliated with the Chantry and were operating in opposition to it in addition. Violent response to their incursion would, in turn, be justified.

I'm sure it was justified to fight back, lot of good it did them

[thesuperdarkone2]

And they live in huts, wear animal skins, their leader's throne is made of bare stone, etc. In one word, they are primitive.

How well has their "system" served them?

Considering that they can get spirits to train their mages and are able to get rid of possessions without killing the host. Imagine if that knowledge was available to the masses.

[Master Warder Z_]

I'm sure it was justified to fight back, lot of good it did them

Against a force trained to butcher them *nods*

They were foolish insurgents.

[MisterJB]

Ok, so occurring after the rebellion either way.

 

 

The rules of the Circle in Rivain, and the laws pertaining to the Seers were Chantry law. The Seekers, at the time, were not affiliated with the Chantry and were operating in opposition to it in addition. Violent response to their incursion would, in turn, be justified.

Occurring after the mages have fled. Neither the Circles nor the Accord had been declared void at the time. Technically, both groups were still under Chantry jurisdiction.

 

Now, considering the Lord Seeker is nearly as powerful as the Divine and the Seekers were unaware of the way things were done in Rivain, it follows that the Divine in Orlais had not approved of these changes to the Circle system. Therefore, they were acting against Chantry law.

Unless previous Divines kept it concealed from the Seekers for centuries.

Also, considering they declared a Right of Annulment, in accordance with procedure, they had to have obtained permission from the Grand Cleric of Rivain.

[The Baconer]

I'm sure it was justified to fight back, lot of good it did them

 

Might as well, they had no other options.

[Steelcan]

Considering that they can get spirits to train their mages and are able to get rid of possessions without killing the host. Imagine if that knowledge was available to the masses.

it is, as seen in DA:O its just horribly impractical, and doesn't always end well

[Master Warder Z_]

If the Divine had officially accepted the changes to the circle, I think the war would have started decades before it did.

At the very least a complete annulment of Rivain.

[MisterJB]

Considering that they can get spirits to train their mages and are able to get rid of possessions without killing the host. Imagine if that knowledge was available to the masses.

Because what "works" for a small tribe will work for nations composed of millions of people.

Right, just look at Tevinter. They're right on top of it.

Besides, why the hell should we have spirits train mages in the first place?

 

Also, Connor. Circle mages know how to remove demons without killing the host. It's just harder and more expensive hence, hardly used.

[Master Warder Z_]

Honestly Mettin should have been sent to Rivain to be it's knight commander.

[The Baconer]

Occurring after the mages have fled. Neither the Circles nor the Accord had been declared void at the time. Technically, both groups were still under Chantry jurisdiction.

 

Both groups were in breach of their contracts with the Chantry, it was already void. The official declarations just put it in writing.

 

 

Now, considering the Lord Seeker is nearly as powerful as the Divine and the Seekers were unaware of the way things were done in Rivain, it follows that the Divine in Orlais had not approved of these changes to the Circle system. Therefore, they were acting against Chantry law.

Unless previous Divines kept it concealed from the Seekers for centuries.

 

The Seekers didn't even know what actually happened in Kirkwall until... well, never, because that was an investigation conducted by Cassandra who had left them.

 

The Seekers don't know anything because they never actually did their jobs.

 

 

Also, considering they declared a Right of Annulment, in accordance with procedure, they had to have obtained permission from the Grand Cleric of Rivain.

 

The writer assumes they did.

[thesuperdarkone2]

Honestly Mettin should have been sent to Rivain to be it's knight commander.

So killing non-mages is OK? Somehow, I think I know the answer.

[Master Warder Z_]

So killing non-mages is OK? Somehow, I think I know the answer.

No, killing supporters of that moronic self destructive culture is okay.

Really your doing them a favor in the long run, a few decades later you may need to do it again, but well it's Rivain.

<.<

[ComedicSociopathy]

Yeah but the mortalitasi had the backing of wealth, names like Pentaghast and a nation powerful enough to rival Orlais.

Rivain is poor, isolated, weak, divided. The Seers never stood a chance.

 

That shouldn't matter though, the Seekers have their duty and the Chant is clear. Mages like Mortalitiasi shouldn't exist in any position of power outside the Circle let alone be allowed to raise families, right? Or perhaps the Seekers realized the Mortalitiasi weren't actually a threat to the common people and should be allowed to tend their mausoleums. 

 

According to Chantry law, which take precedence over everyone else in matter regarding mages except for the Right of Conscription, Abominations are killed on sight unless there is an option to remove only the demon.

Since the Rivaini mages refused to comply by the rules of the Circle, logic dictates they also refused to have their demons removed. Hence, by Chantry law, the Seekers had every right to kill them.

 

 

 

It's not a matter of official rulings, which is pretty hypocritical and constantly gets twisted or shrugged off whenever a mage happens to be a noble, but whether the Seers were such threat to the people that the rite of annulment was required in a pragmatic sense. The Rivani were from accounts fine with the Seers and even allowed them to lead their communities. Add that to the fact their relationship with the Templars was apparently, and don't see why they would bother using such an extreme measure such as the rite of annulment, when the Seers abominations weren't doing anything immediately dangerous. No demonic abominations running around, no Anders blowing up chantries, nothing worthy of the rite. 

 

Yes, they are savages without any civilization to speak of. Did you miss that?

 

They have a culture, religion, societal norms and a form of leadership. They aren't savages just because they wear animal hides for warmth and it doesn't marginalize the fact that they have rituals and knowledge that can increase the Circles information about possession and exorcism. Why not use that knowledge for the benefit of everyone?

[MisterJB]

 

Both groups were in breach of their contracts with the Chantry, it was already void. The official declarations just put it in writing.

In which case neither group had any rights protecting them.

Altough I still wouldn't call that the case.

The Seekers didn't even know what actually happened in Kirkwall until... well, never, because that was an investigation conducted by Cassandra who had left them.

 

The Seekers don't know anything because they never actually did their jobs.

There is a difference between not knowing the sole motivation for Hawke to be in the Deep Roads was coin and s/he just happened to stumble onto Red Lyrium and the Lord Seeker, second most important person in the Chantry, being unaware a succession of several Divines  have, for centuries, concealed the fact Abominations were ruling communities in Rivain.

 

 

The writer assumes they did.

That is fair.

 

[Master Warder Z_]

o_o you honestly are going to say the Avarr have something of worth.

[The Baconer]

There is a difference between not knowing the sole motivation for Hawke to be in the Deep Roads was coin and s/he just happened to stumble onto Red Lyrium and the Lord Seeker, second most important person in the Chantry, being unaware a succession of several Divines  have, for centuries, concealed the fact Abominations were ruling communities in Rivain.

 

Hawke's motivation for being there is actually really tangential regarding the state of Kirkwall, and how that lead to its Circle's annulment. I mean, Shep's quote from Mass Effect 2 really says it all:

 

"Turns out basic police work isn't so hard. You just have to leave the station."

[ComedicSociopathy]

o_o you honestly are going to say the Avarr have something of worth.

 

What is your problem, man? Look, Templars and Seekers don't like abominations killing people, right. Well, the Avvar have ways to separate a mage from a spirit/demon that doesn't involve a bunch of lyrium and several mages. Why wouldn't a templar want to learn about this method? They were willing to accept the Litany of Adrelle even though it was created by a Tevinter mage, so why not learn from the Avvar if they're are willing to teach? 

[MisterJB]

Hawke's motivation for being there is actually really tangential regarding the state of Kirkwall, and how that lead to its Circle's annulment. I mean, Shep's quote from Mass Effect 2 really says it all:

 

"Turns out basic police work isn't so hard. You just have to leave the station."

And that was the only piece of information they were lacking. They knew Hawke was either a mage or had a sister who was, they knew s/he had gone to the Deep Roads with Anders and/or through the use of maps provided by him, they knew the expedition had discovered Red Lyrium and it had ended up in the hands of Meredith. They were just seeing a conspiracy where there was none.

[MisterJB]

What is your problem, man? Look, Templars and Seekers don't like abominations killing people, right. Well, the Avvar have ways to separate a mage from a spirit/demon that doesn't involve a bunch of lyrium and several mages. Why wouldn't a templar want to learn about this method? They were willing to accept the Litany of Adrelle even though it was created by a Tevinter mage, so why not learn from the Avvar if they're are willing to teach? 

The apprentice who refused to be parted from her spirit had lyrium with her, tough. 

The fact it was a friendlish spirit rather than a demon probably assisted the ritual.

[The Baconer]

And that was the only piece of information they were lacking.

 

And the actual reason behind the Circle's annulment, and the gargantuan amount of factors that made it an inevitability (since they never bothered going there)

 

Hell, even if Hawke sides with Meredith they're still working with the assumption that Hawke worked to subvert the Chantry, and that it was the Templars who actually forced him to flee after becoming Viscount.

[MisterJB]

And the actual reason behind the Circle's annulment, and the gargantuan amount of factors that made it an inevitability (since they never bothered going there)

 

Hell, even if Hawke sides with Meredith they're still working with the assumption that Hawke worked to subvert the Chantry, and that it was the Templars who actually forced him to flee after becoming Viscount.

Cassandra will say in DAI that the Seekers knew what was going on, they just felt Meredith had things well in hand and that the situation justified her actions.

Besides, it's hardly a secret why the Circle was annulled. Either they knew about the Red Lyrium or they knew that a Circle that gave nothing but trouble was annulled for an apostate destroyed the Chantry.

[The Baconer]

Cassandra will say in DAI that the Seekers knew what was going on, they just felt Meredith had things well in hand and that the situation justified her actions.

 

Well, no, they didn't know what was going on (as DA 2 proved), they only made an assumption based on whatever hearsay reached them. What a good policy.

 

 

Besides, it's hardly a secret why the Circle was annulled. Either they knew about the Red Lyrium or they knew that a Circle that gave nothing but trouble was annulled for an apostate destroyed the Chantry.

 

They actually didn't know about that, really.

[MisterJB]

That shouldn't matter though, the Seekers have their duty and the Chant is clear. Mages like Mortalitiasi shouldn't exist in any position of power outside the Circle let alone be allowed to raise families, right? Or perhaps the Seekers realized the Mortalitiasi weren't actually a threat to the common people and should be allowed to tend their mausoleums. 

It shouldn't but it always does.

 

It's not a matter of official rulings, which is pretty hypocritical and constantly gets twisted or shrugged off whenever a mage happens to be a noble, but whether the Seers were such threat to the people that the rite of annulment was required in a pragmatic sense. The Rivani were from ACCOUNTS fine with the Seers and even allowed them to lead their communities. Add that to the fact their relationship with the Templars was apparently, and don't see why they would bother using such an extreme measure such as the rite of annulment, when the Seers abominations weren't doing anything immediately dangerous. No demonic abominations running around, no Anders blowing up chantries, nothing worthy of the rite. 

See, that is the other way of discussing the grounds upon which the Annulment was called that I was referring before.

I see your point. If they aren't harming anyone and the people actually want them ruling, what is the issue, right?
But I still stand on the other side. For one, we don't know how often a Seer goes bad and even if it's not very, they are a still a threat as Anders proves. And the simple fact that they are ruler should be grounds for Annulment regardless of how the people feel.

Still, I acknowledge that this can come off as arrogance. As in "I know what is better for you than you."

 

Anders would use the same argument.

But, then again, so would Fenris in relation to Orana.

 

 

They have a culture, religion, societal norms and a form of leadership. They aren't savages just because they wear animal hides for warmth and it doesn't marginalize the fact that they have rituals and knowledge that can increase the Circles information about possession and exorcism. Why not use that knowledge for the benefit of everyone?

They are in the stone age.

And I don't have any issue with learning something that can be useful. Only with the belief that just because a tribe of, what, a couple hundred people who worship spirits has managed to avoid being destroyed by an Abominations that means we can apply it in place of the Circle to nations of millions.

[MisterJB]

Well, no, they didn't know what was going on (as DA 2 proved), they only made an assumption based on whatever hearsay reached them. What a good policy.

How does DA2 proves it?

 

 

They actually didn't know about that, really.

Of course they knew about that. Everyone does, it's in Varric's book, Lambert and Fiona mention it in "Asunder".