185 réponses à ce sujet

[vertigomez]

Neither. Unless the protagonist will be from Tevinter/Seheron (and thus they would fight for patriotic reasons), I really have no idea why should I meddle in politics and play a soldier boy.
 
Besides, if either Tevinter or Qunari will NEED protagonist's help to WIN the war... it DESERVES to fall. Or is our protagonist only competent and responsible person in whole Thedas?

If only we could pull a Beckett and remain neutral.

Fenris, the trouble of what he states is colored by some by his missing memories, spending time as the servant of one of the more disturbed Magisters and his fanatical hatred which colors everything he sees and does to the point he was willing to murder his own kin who's freedom he had originally sought.

He was a slave, not a servant.

And if by "willing to murder his own kin" you mean he was willing to kill a woman who betrayed his trust and sold him out to a monster who kept him on a literal leash and abused and raped him for years, then sure.

[renfrees]

*snip*

 

More importantly, most in Tevinter aren't slaves. 

 

*snip*

What makes you think so? You know that owning slaves aren't limited to the magisters, right? There are state-owned slaves who do all the labor in the country, Soporati may also get slaves if they have the coin to buy them. You may say that their conditions might be better since those wouldn't be used as a magic's fuel, but what does it matter for a slave if he dies from whipping, working the mine or sacrificial knife?

 

If only we could pull a Beckett and remain neutral. 


He was a slave, not a servant.

And if by "willing to murder his own kin" you mean he was willing to kill a woman who betrayed his trust and sold him out to a monster who kept him on a literal leash and abused and raped him for years, then sure.

It's almost as "good" as "Fenris is the property of a tevinter and killed many tevinters trying to get him back including his sister."

[MortallyDead]

I don't think I'll be taking any further part in this discussion. We clearly have very different priorities. I believe a government/system that believes it can give people all the happiness they need is fundamentally dangerous and harmful, so there will be no agreement and these types of back and forth consume a lot of time I can't afford at the moment.

 

Just one comment here, is that I don't believe that The Qun gives a damn about the happiness of the Qunari, nor should it. Like Sten says "Happiness is fragile, nothing can be built upon it that will last. Only duty endures." At best you could argue that the Qun tries to promise some sort of contentment for its people. Protection, services, a purpose in life, no worry for poverty etc. To try and make everyone happy is impossible, and that should not be their goal, nor should it be for any government for that matter. 

 

The other thing I have noticed is the large number of people that are claiming that the problem with the Qun is that it is harder/impossible to change. To this I simply ask, why do so many assume that the Qun needs to change at all. The feeling I've been getting through the posts is "I could never live under the Qun/ I don't agree with the Qun, so it has to change." Not a great reason to insist there must be change in my mind. 

[The Baconer]

The other thing I have noticed is the large number of people that are claiming that the problem with the Qun is that it is harder/impossible to change. To this I simply ask, why do so many assume that the Qun needs to change at all. The feeling I've been getting through the posts is "I could never live under the Qun/ I don't agree with the Qun, so it has to change." Not a great reason to insist there must be change in my mind. 

 

Because I'd prefer it be changed internally, instead of the violence that would be required to contain it. 

[MortallyDead]

Because I'd prefer it be changed internally, instead of the violence that would be required to contain it. 

Fair point, I suppose internal change is likely to be less violent then imposing change. However this still doesn't answer why the Qun needs to change. The fact that it is unappealing to people on the outside looking in just isn't enough. What I want to know is why so many think that the Qun/Qunari need(s) to undergo such a change. 

[GoldenGail3]

Fair point, I suppose internal change is likely to be less violent then imposing change. However this still doesn't answer why the Qun needs to change. The fact that it is unappealing to people on the outside looking in just isn't enough. What I want to know is why so many think that the Qun/Qunari need(s) to undergo such a change.

To be honest, all the Qun does is prove people right, with them trying to take over the world constansly. Nah, I'll stick with Tevinter, cause at least Dorian is it. And that's all the reason I need to defend Tevinter, is becuase of Dorian.

[htisscrimbliv]

Qun, i like the way they handle sex

[Ashagar]

Fair point, I suppose internal change is likely to be less violent then imposing change. However this still doesn't answer why the Qun needs to change. The fact that it is unappealing to people on the outside looking in just isn't enough. What I want to know is why so many think that the Qun/Qunari need(s) to undergo such a change. 

 

they have a thought police that brainwash people into conformity and even permanently break people's minds if they can't be brainwashed, they forbid romantic and familial love(sex is not love), their treatment of mages make the worse Templar/southern chantry abuses look humane in comparison, they send death squads across out to kill people who's only crime are being inventive to try keep the locals from advancing, they seek to convert or die the world to the qun and other issues.

[Illegitimus]

Just one comment here, is that I don't believe that The Qun gives a damn about the happiness of the Qunari, nor should it. Like Sten says "Happiness is fragile, nothing can be built upon it that will last. Only duty endures." At best you could argue that the Qun tries to promise some sort of contentment for its people. Protection, services, a purpose in life, no worry for poverty etc. To try and make everyone happy is impossible, and that should not be their goal, nor should it be for any government for that matter. 

 

The other thing I have noticed is the large number of people that are claiming that the problem with the Qun is that it is harder/impossible to change. To this I simply ask, why do so many assume that the Qun needs to change at all. The feeling I've been getting through the posts is "I could never live under the Qun/ I don't agree with the Qun, so it has to change." Not a great reason to insist there must be change in my mind. 

 

Since the Qunari are going to conquer "us" all, (meaning the people of Thedas who we play in the game) that we do not welcome the prospect of living under such an oppressive tyranny seems like a good enough reason for me.  

 

Fair point, I suppose internal change is likely to be less violent then imposing change. However this still doesn't answer why the Qun needs to change. The fact that it is unappealing to people on the outside looking in just isn't enough. What I want to know is why so many think that the Qun/Qunari need(s) to undergo such a change. 

 

 

We're not on the outside looking in.  At least our characters aren't.  The Qunari are coming after our characters and their descendants.  

[MortallyDead]

they have a thought police that brainwash people into conformity and even permanently break people's minds if they can't be brainwashed, they forbid romantic and familial love(sex is not love), their treatment of mages make the worse Templar/southern chantry abuses look humane in comparison, they send death squads across out to kill people who's only crime are being inventive to try keep the locals from advancing, they seek to convert or die the world to the qun and other issues.

 

I'm not convinced that the treatment of the mages under the Qun is in fact worse than the Chantry's. A mage under the Qun can still lead a fulfilling life of honour and respect, whereas the tranquil (even those who choose it) are little more than well functioning husks, rather like those brainwashed/mind broken by the qunari. So I would say all if not most Saarebas do not in fact resent their treatment because they are adhering to the Qun. To say otherwise is to impose from the outside how one thinks they ought to be, think and do. 

 

As far as families are concerned, the backbone of the Qun is one of duty and a unified whole. If they were to allow romantic attachments and individual families, then the Qun would not be possible. It seems likely that even if (in a family) a husband was a loyal to the Qun, that when push comes to shove he would side with his family. By denying these individual ties, the Qun eliminates divided loyalties, they are unified because they share in all and have the same goals. 

 

When it comes to converting the world, my thinking is that they see the Qun as order, and the rest as chaos. So expanding and conquering to spread order to the world. Not really different from the aims of the original inquisition, and the founding of the chantry. Both having the idea to bring order to a world gone mad. The only problem is that the original inquisition wasn't willing to perhaps take it as far as the Qunari seem willing to do. 

[Illegitimus]

I'm not convinced that the treatment of the mages under the Qun is in fact worse than the Chantry's. A mage under the Qun can still lead a fulfilling life of honour and respect, 

 

Oh yes.  We all honor our beasts in the shape of men who perform tricks.