Sorry , but it still doesn't change fact that order did it as an collective and organisation opposing to actions of the individual. Weishaupt branch doesn't need to be involved, entire branch of grey wardens and large portion of grey warden order is enough to deem it efforts of the organisation even if another branch of the organisation wasn't involved.
Say that to the Arigena and the Ariqun.
Eee, and what does that have to do with anything?To my knowledge all 3 leaders represent and lead qunari in different fields and if Arishok will throw war and lead qunari army it will still be qunari invasion not just actions of the single individual.
Eee, and what does that have to do with anything?To my knowledge all 3 leaders represent and lead qunari in different fields and if Arishok will throw war and lead qunari army it will still be qunari invasion not just actions of the single individual.
The Qunari attack of DA2 was the Arishocks (personal) doing, yes. But the Vaadash probaly was allowed to do what she did, because what else would she be allowed to caught a dragon? That requires some major rescourses, so I think she was allowed, despite totally disobeying the Qunari rules (feeding the Saarbass Lyrum, etc). But the Qunari disown her actions, though I don't think they would've blinked an eye if the Vaasdash succeeded in her plans.
It wasn't his personal doing, he had qunari army behind his back that followed him, and because of that it wasn't just his own actions after all it wasn't just Arishok that invaded kirkwall from what i recall he had hundreds qunari with him.In both cases we are talking about qunari claming they had nothing to do with it , but as you said in both cases if they succeeded would mean qunari invasion.So in the end if qunari actions fail "we had nothing to do with it" seems quite common tactic.
No, he acted against the Qun. He wasn't authorized to attack Kirkwall (the Qun didn't demand it). And it was his personal doing, after seeing the corruption of Kirkwall, he lost patience and attacked (they were there because of Isabela being an idiot and stealing their book). So did the Vaadash, whom actually had the support of the Qun (even though she was a bad, bad girl and gave Saarabas lots and lots of Lryum).It wasn't his personal doing, he had qunari army behind his back that followed him, and because of that it wasn't just his own actions after all it wasn't just Arishok that invaded kirkwall from what i recall he had hundreds qunari with him.In both cases we are talking about qunari claming they had nothing to do with it , but as you said in both cases if they succeeded would mean qunari invasion.So in the end if qunari actions fail "we had nothing to do with it" seems quite common tactic.
No, he acted against the Qun. He wasn't authorized to attack Kirkwall (the Qun didn't demand it). And it was his personal doing, after seeing the corruption of Kirkwall, he lost patience and attacked (they were there because of Isabela being an idiot and stealing their book). So did the Vaadash, whom actually had the support of the Qun (even though she was a bad, bad girl and gave Saarabas lots and lots of Lryum).
Eee, he is military leader of the qunari and holds control over entire military field so pretty much sure he had authority and pretty much did launch inavasion on Kirkwall.Also im pretty sure the qun demands to subjugate those who aren't qunari not that matters of course what matters that pretty much qunari military leader launched invasion and qunari followed his order of course invasion was thwarted before it did spread on another countries.
Eee, he is military leader of the qunari and holds control over entire military field so pretty much sure he had authority and pretty much did launch inavasion on Kirkwall.Also im pretty sure the qun demands to subjugate those who aren't qunari not that matters of course what matters that pretty much qunari military leader launched invasion and qunari followed his order of course invasion was thwarted before it did spread on another countries.
Yes, but it was becuase they were looking for a lost book. Stolen by Isabela! And the Arshock was killed whatever you do, because he wasn't allowed to attack Kirkwall, the Qun didn't demand it. I think Kirkwall drove him nuts, not surprising as Kirkwall is a crap whole once used by Tevinter Magisters, I believe Kirkwalls very presceses drives people insane, it has that effect on people.
True , but what of it he went to Kirkwall to find theif and book and it doesn't change still that qunari military leader launched an invasion and qunari followed him so it wasn't only his actions but actions of qunari military as i said he had a lot qunari attacking kirkwall and much more under his command.Also from what i recall it isn't mentioned that he was killed nor that he was removed from a position a specifically for launching inavasion rather than losing tome and thief.
On topic of kirkwall, i doubt that it was just ordinary criminal hive unless we are talking about mages then a thin veil definitely had part in quite high numbers of demons and abomnations.
Eee, and what does that have to do with anything?To my knowledge all 3 leaders represent and lead qunari in different fields and if Arishok will throw war and lead qunari army it will still be qunari invasion not just actions of the single individual.
That they pretty much whitewashed the Qun by disavowing the Arishok's actions (even when military matters are definitely not their business), so if the Qunari soothed the south with such card, making everything fault of a single individual who had the same hierarchy of the other two, then the Wardens could do the same since a Warden Commander's hierarchy is no match for Weishaupt's Wardens
Well , they couldn't because it wouldn't have worked, literally only reason why qunari excuse "worked" because pretty much no one can do anything about them.
Well , they couldn't because it wouldn't have worked, literally only reason why qunari excuse "worked" because pretty much no one can do anything with them.
My point is that it's almost the same, worth nothing the numbers, those craps are individual faults, difference is that they had power and influence over others, those minions didn't had to actually agree with their leader's actions, just had to believe the leader was doing the right thing, they had no way to know if their leaders had the other high ranks' approval, if they would go to question to someone with higher rank, and indeed a commander wasn't permitted to do that, they'll be fine, but if their leader had permission (which is more likely to happen), then it's martial court against them for questioning and disregarding a superior's order.
It is almost the same ,and no those aren't individual faults if army/organisation/country follows leader its leader it is fault of the army/organisation/country including leader not just leader.As i said Arishok is military leader of the qunari and he is one in charge of this field.Those who didn't follow aren't at fault for example Alistair/Loghain/Stroud don't take blame for other wardens actions because they washed their hands what doesn't change grey wardens did mess as collective and as an organisation and that is reason why grey wardens were kicked out off ferelden for 200 years and possibly later from orlais.
It is almost the same ,and no those aren't individual faults if army/organisation/country follows leader its leader it is fault of the army/organisation/country including leader not just leader.As i said Arishok is military leader of the qunari and he is one in charge of this field.Those who didn't follow aren't at fault for example Alistair/Loghain/Stroud don't take blame for other wardens actions because they washed their hands what doesn't change grey wardens did mess as collective and as an organisation and that is reason why grey wardens were kicked out off ferelden for 200 years and possibly later from orlais.
Real world works different, take Germans as example, you can't say the whole army was respectable just because Marshal Rommel was a nice guy, on Von Stauffenberg's failed coup, only those who had intellectual involvement on the plot were killed, the soldiers that screwed by following their orders were not harmed because they were unaware of what was going on, they just did what the soldiers must do and followed their leader's orders.
No i can't, but what i can do i can blame an army as well Marshal that send said army to attack my country. If King Alistair will send an army to attack my country that will mean war with Ferelden not just King Alistair.
That's different since Anora and/or Alistair are actually top leaders of the country.No i can't, but what i can do i can blame an army as well Marshal that send said army to attack my country. If King Alistair will send an army to attack my country that will mean war with Ferelden not just King Alistair.
You are not going to hang up every existent Fereldan soldier once their leader has been defeated (only those with high ranks at most) they had a sworn to their King/Queen but that doesn't mean they had a genuine wish to invade your country.
Eee, and who says something about hanging every single soldier (lol) that every person in country isn't butchered doesn't mean country won't suffer consequences and won't be blamed for mess country caused. Germany as country after all were punished for WWI not just its leaders.
Such invasion would require a main leader's approval, the involvement of such would paint things of another color, the "punishment" you say (I assume you were speaking of WWII because on WWI they were only charged for the debt of the war and not actually occupied) is something natural on any foreign occupation, have the invaders succeeded, same would happen and you can't say is a punishment for the invaded country, and again, we are speaking rather of a commander gone rogue, that is clearly not the same thing that the main leader calling war.Eee, and who says something about hanging every single soldier (lol) that every person in country isn't butchered doesn't mean country won't suffer consequences and won't be blamed for mess country caused. Germany as country after all were punished for WWI not just its leaders.
Such invasion would require a main leader's approval, the involvement of such would paint things of another color, the "punishment" you say (I assume you was speaking of WWII because on WWI they were only charged for the debt of the war and not actually occupied) is something natural on any foreign occupation, have the invaders succeeded, same would happen and you can't say is a punishment for the invaded country, and again, we are speaking rather of a commander gone rogue, that is clearly not the same thing that the main leader calling war.
Yes and no depending on the case.Germany were punished for WWI heavily they had to pay reparations and restrictions were put on them and that is only part of punishment, i wasn't talking anything about being occupied.I can say it is punishment because it was punishment for country (in that case Germany) doing something. Also in our case we talk about an organisation and leader of entire national branch of said organisation as well majority members of said organisation causing mess for what blame took said organisation.
It can not being seen exactly as punishment, is a normal thing on war that losers have to pay winners' debts, even if the winners were the morons who started the whole mess. In our case you are speaking of the actions of commanders that dragged their branch with them as if they were the whole order, that already makes Teagan's point invalid since the Wardens he is speaking about are long dead Fereldan Grey Wardens and the ones the Inquisition can recruit are Orlesians, then again we have the point that when is the commander the one who goes rogue, there is little its subordinates can actually do, Loghain/Alistair/Stroud is not the only Warden who disagrees with Clarel, but many did not dare to question her and those who did were being executed, which undoubtedly would be a good reason to not argue on the matter.Yes and no depending on the case.Germany were punished for WWI heavily they had to pay reparations and restrictions were put on them and that is only part of punishment, i wasn't talking anything about being occupied.I can say it is punishment because it was punishment for country (in that case Germany) doing something. Also in our case we talk about an organisation and leader of entire national branch of said organisation as well majority members of said organisation causing mess for what blame took said organisation.
It can not beeing seen exactly as punishment, is a normal thing on war that losers have to pay winners' debts, even if the winners were the morons who started the whole mess. In our case you are speaking of the actions of commanders that dragged their branch with them as if they were the whole order, that already makes Teagan's point invalid since the Wardens he is speaking about are long dead Fereldan Grey Wardens and the ones the Inquisition can recruit are Orlesians, then again we have the point that when is the commander the one who goes rogue, there is little its subordinates can actually do, Loghain/Alistair/Stroud is not the only Warden who disagrees with Clarel, but many did not dare to question her and those who did were being executed, which undoubtedly would be a good reason to not argue on the matter.
It was punishment as well cause of punishment wasn't for losing war only for causing mess , losing war only made inflicting punishment possible.That absolutely doesn't matter in first place commander didn't dragged their branch with them entire branch followed them by their own will those who disagreed left both in Sophia and Clarel case to my knowledge all orlesian and ferelden wardens that didn't left decided to summon army of demons or attack Ferelden not only Clarel or Sophia.
It might be the that Ferelden is not a strong military power without the aid of "foreign" groups like the Grey Wardens and the Inquisition (which should be noted that according to Josephine that the Inquisition is seen by many in Ferelden as basically an another army from Orlais) and a country that values it's rugged independence this would be a major national disgrace. Also given that many of it citizens including many it's in military fled during the Blight to other countries The Warrior and Rouge Hawke, Carver, and Aveline are all technically disasters during a time of war that could mean they could be executed, now granted if you make Alistair king he does offer reinstatement and pardon to any officers that return to Ferelden after almost a decade in exile or hiding (which wouldn't be all that popular in some areas of the country). Also who knows how many of the refugees might have made successful lives for themselves in the Free Marches, Orlais, or wherever they went. They might not have Hawke or Aveline's level of success but they could be living nice lives and making good money. The Grey Wardens also now run Ammerathine which is a major city, port, and trading center in Ferelden.
With the Inquisition basically taking over Crestwood and it's Fort and how many people in Redcliffe might be more loyal to the Inquisition than they are to Teagan and/or the Royal family because the Inquisition stopped the Mage-Templar War and cleaned up the place (they got rid of demons, bandits, renegade Templars and mages, Carta thugs, and generally helped the people there) before Teagan and/or the Royal Family could do anything other than to tell the mages to basically "get out and stay out". With all that Teagan and by his association and/or family ties to the Royal Family of Ferelden's attitude towards the Inquisition could be seen as one of rival quickly becoming a potential threat their power. With a major army made up of many people from all over Thedas, a spy network that is almost unmatched in Southern Thedas, and the Inquisition has enough political and trading deals with other countries and companies, they have no real loyalty to any nation and no matter who gets to be Divine Victoria, the Divine coming from their ranks, gives the Inquisition a lot more power and influence than the Royal Family of Ferelden and with them and they handled the events in Trespasser was questionable at best. Having that much power, money, influence, and military might that the Inquisition already has and they're sitting on the border with Ferelden. I can understand some of Teagan's reasoning even if I think the way he presented it was wrong made him come off as an ungrateful jerk.
Most people become more cynical and bitter with age. Throw in a blight, demon possession and betrayal and that stuff will leave it's mark. I think Teagan has developed well as a character. A bit more spiteful and paranoid as is to be expected. Everyone changes. Not always for the better.
I've gotten around to playing the first part of Trespasser twice now, with two different Inquisitors. One was a rogue Trevalyan who used mostly diplomacy at the war table. The other is my warrior Adar who mostly used force. But it made little difference in how I responded to Arl Teagan. The issue I have with Ferelden's position is that he's right. The Inquisition is an occupying force in a sovereign land. Despite the goodwill it has made that doesn't grant them permanent authority over that nation.
Playing as Inquisitor is to take the role of a warlord with a private militia. At best, you can say that we've assumed the role of a shogun granted emergency powers. The late Divine Justinia's writ grants us sanction in the eyes o the faithful, and that's probably the best advantage we have during the game. At worst, we're no better than any other warlord in the real world. Most warlords today are no better than murderers and bandits.
The point he brought up with the Grey Wardens relates to the rebellion led by Sophia Dryden. We get a hint of what happened in Origins DLC Warden's Keep. Grey Wardens are not supposed to get involved in another country's politics. Sophia Dryden, despite being from Ferelden nobility, broke that rule. What makes King Alistair and the Hero of Ferelden different is that they fought during an actual Blight, which is Grey Warden business. Sophia's rebellion was simply against a tyrant. She became a rebel warlord trying to overthrow a king.
By Arl Teagan's perspective, the role of the Inquisition was done after Corypheus was defeated. Continuing to occupy Ferelden soil is a threat to their sovereignty. We no longer have the right to patrol the roads, judge their criminals, and manipulate the economy. If you have the Grey Wardens as allies, it makes it worse because they add more military power to your force. Hence he brings up Dryden's rebellion. His argument isn't about what we've done to save Thedas, but why we still need to exist.
I've gotten around to playing the first part of Trespasser twice now, with two different Inquisitors. One was a rogue Trevalyan who used mostly diplomacy at the war table. The other is my warrior Adar who mostly used force. But it made little difference in how I responded to Arl Teagan. The issue I have with Ferelden's position is that he's right. The Inquisition is an occupying force in a sovereign land. Despite the goodwill it has made that doesn't grant them permanent authority over that nation.
Playing as Inquisitor is to take the role of a warlord with a private militia. At best, you can say that we've assumed the role of a shogun granted emergency powers. The late Divine Justinia's writ grants us sanction in the eyes o the faithful, and that's probably the best advantage we have during the game. At worst, we're no better than any other warlord in the real world. Most warlords today are no better than murderers and bandits.
The point he brought up with the Grey Wardens relates to the rebellion led by Sophia Dryden. We get a hint of what happened in Origins DLC Warden's Keep. Grey Wardens are not supposed to get involved in another country's politics. Sophia Dryden, despite being from Ferelden nobility, broke that rule. What makes King Alistair and the Hero of Ferelden different is that they fought during an actual Blight, which is Grey Warden business. Sophia's rebellion was simply against a tyrant. She became a rebel warlord trying to overthrow a king.
By Arl Teagan's perspective, the role of the Inquisition was done after Corypheus was defeated. Continuing to occupy Ferelden soil is a threat to their sovereignty. We no longer have the right to patrol the roads, judge their criminals, and manipulate the economy. If you have the Grey Wardens as allies, it makes it worse because they add more military power to your force. Hence he brings up Dryden's rebellion. His argument isn't about what we've done to save Thedas, but why we still need to exist.
He has a point, but he's not right. Not completely at least and his argumentation leaves much to be desired. Hence why I'd mark bringing up Dryden's rebellion and the wardens actually weakens his position for reasons that I've brought up before.
The Inquisition is headquarted in Skyhold which is in the Frostback Mountains which is outside of Ferelden Territory. Even the forces sent to Ferelden were sent with Chantry/Ferelden's permission and goodwill to fulfill their job. As I've said before, if Ferelden wants the Inquisition out of Ferelden then they need to just request it and then set bounds as to how the Inquisition may act within their territory without breaking sovereignty.
It makes no sense to demand the Inquisition's disbandment because they occupied an abandoned fort which was previously occupied by criminals. In that context, the Inquisition did Ferelden a huge favor and again, if they want the fort back then they shouldn't wait 2 years to bring up the subject. It's obvious that the real reason that Teagan wants to disband the Inquisition is to keep Orlais from getting it, but don't badmouth both the Inquisition and the Grey Wardens to make your point. That's putting up a cheaply dishonest front and the Bannhammer of Origins wasn't that type of individual and anyone whose played Origins would know that. Which gives more credit to the idea that Teagan was shoe-horned into the DLC just for the sake of either having a placeholder or cheap shock value.
It's true that the Inquisition needs to come up with a new reason to exist, but nor should they be subject to political nonsense from Ferelden and Orlais. Their postering; the Qunari plot; and Solas' movement all prove why an organization like the Inquisition is needed and should not be downsized to a glorified honor guard. The corruption argument is moot and something of a double-standard because everyone has been infiltrated and just about everyone is/was somehow corrupt at this point so why aren't we calling for the disbandment of the Chantry; Orlais nobility; Ferelden's bannorn; or etc?
The most sensible thing to do is to let the Inquisition exist as it as a Chantry-aligned order while returning the keeps and connected lands to their proper countries and setting bounds on how the Inquisition may act without infringing on national sovereignty unless granted permission by those country's leaders or the Divine herself.
He has a point, but he's not right. Not completely at least and his argumentation leaves much to be desired. Hence why I'd mark bringing up Dryden's rebellion and the wardens actually weakens his position for reasons that I've brought up before.
The Inquisition is headquarted in Skyhold which is in the Frostback Mountains which is outside of Ferelden Territory. Even the forces sent to Ferelden were sent with Chantry/Ferelden's permission and goodwill to fulfill their job. As I've said before, if Ferelden wants the Inquisition out of Ferelden then they need to just request it and then set bounds as to how the Inquisition may act within their territory without breaking sovereignty.
It makes no sense to demand the Inquisition's disbandment because they occupied an abandoned fort which was previously occupied by criminals. In that context, the Inquisition did Ferelden a huge favor and again, if they want the fort back then they shouldn't wait 2 years to bring up the subject. It's obvious that the real reason that Teagan wants to disband the Inquisition is to keep Orlais from getting it, but don't badmouth both the Inquisition and the Grey Wardens to make your point. That's putting up a cheaply dishonest front and the Bannhammer of Origins wasn't that type of individual and anyone whose played Origins would know that. Which gives more credit to the idea that Teagan was shoe-horned into the DLC just for the sake of either having a placeholder or cheap shock value.
It's true that the Inquisition needs to come up with a new reason to exist, but nor should they be subject to political nonsense from Ferelden and Orlais. Their postering; the Qunari plot; and Solas' movement all prove why an organization like the Inquisition is needed and should not be downsized to a glorified honor guard. The corruption argument is moot and something of a double-standard because everyone has been infiltrated and just about everyone is/was somehow corrupt at this point so why aren't we calling for the disbandment of the Chantry; Orlais nobility; Ferelden's bannorn; or etc?
The most sensible thing to do is to let the Inquisition exist as it as a Chantry-aligned order while returning the keeps and connected lands to their proper countries and setting bounds on how the Inquisition may act without infringing on national sovereignty unless granted permission by those country's leaders or the Divine herself.
Not rly , just because you like grey warden's and he dears to say bad word about grey wardens and in fact something harmful to ferleden they did in the past doesn't mean his argument is invalid.
Cleary not considering Ferelden didn't want inquistion forces on its lands ,and of course then again you once again ignore facts i said that inquisition proved they didn't care about country laws so what it point with establishing laws if someone doesn't care about them...
It makes a lot of sense, avoiding fact you once again try make it as it was sole reason, foreign force seizing your lands without your consent pretty much in any case would be seen as hostile act and invasion by said country, hell let alone refusing to remove your military from territory of the country would have similar effect.Also i see once again i see you go with you argument "but he shouldn't wait 2 years" that i have repealed more than once , the only reason it took 2 years was because divine was delaying it as long she could.
And once again angry because he brought up uncomfortable fact about actions of grey wardens?
Not rly , it only shows that inquisition was nothing more but independent huge corrupted force that had zero respect for another country rules and authorities while considering themselves above them. Pretty much fact they seized control over not their lands as well they concealed danger from authorities instead informing them about threat should be enough to prove that. Because chantry doesn't threatens to said countries , it has no army nor another forces that would be threat for the country aside from that chantry doesn't seize control over lands nor takes ****** on authorities and their rules.While another part is ridiculous, why would Orlesian and Ferelden authorities would want to disband themselves?
I have already pointed what that would be solve almost nothing , simple fact that divine is friends with inquisitor and former member of the inquisition (hell just look at fact that she was delaying council in favor of inquisition as long she could to get bigger picture) and way inquisition acted would make it pointless solution, avoiding fact once again there was no point in maintaining Inquistion that had no real goal, so i don't see why Teagan would want inquisition to be around just because despite they are threat.
.
Retour en haut