My Hawke don't think, he is crazy, he told about him that he is a hero in the eyes of many people. (True, my Hawke spared his life...)
Hawke can also not say that. So either (a) the popular opinion of the masses of Thedas turns on what Hawke says in a private conversation with a person, or (
Hawke is wrong.
Wait, I sided with the Templars, so ... what did Anders achieve again?
While I don't agree with the OP, in every single ending possible mages get better lives whether inside circles or college. The player can only change the scale of this, but its always an improvement to what mages had before.
Compare that to Templars who completely get the boot if Vivienne or Leliana are divine, and still get the boot if Cassandra is divine but you sides with mages. And by boot I mean their situation is worse the time before rebellion. Even if Cassandra is divine and you sided with Templars, the Templars still lose a lot of respect they used to have.
Fiona did try something, she just fails. Repeatedly. Come DAI, Fiona isn't an effective actor- every outcome she has is dependent on the allowances and permissiveness of other actors making and allowing choices for her.
That is just bad writing though? You have a mage that a dozen of veteran Wardens vouch and respect because of her abilities and determination. In DA:I she seems like a dumb milf. Sorry couldn't find a better word. There is literally nothing wrong with Fiona before that, many people accused her of being a mary sue, aka being perfect.
Anders certainly was stupid- just not as stupid as he'd be if you think his intended endstate was anything resembling the endstate of DAI.
By the end of DA2, Anders is, quite simply, crazy. He's obsessed, fixated, irrational, emotionally driven, not in total control of his own faculties, and fanatical, and that's on top of diving well into the sociopathic spectrum well after tending towards regular hyperbole. He is not a rational planner appealing to logic, popular support, and with a long-term agenda.
Anders' 'how' was Kirkwall itself- by provoking a massacre, and a resistance, to force people who didn't want a conflict to fight against the system he hated. The idea of the Mage Rebellion as it happened- Mages fighting against Templars after crackdowns and thus being led to fight for independence- was the extension of his plan.
But really, that's all there was too it. Anders didn't have a plan of how to 'win.' There was no interest in a mediation or moderate end-state either- Anders killed Elthina because he disavowed compromise entirely, not because he wanted a better one. Mages were either to win entirely, escaping the system without restriction, or be destroyed.
And at the end of DAI, the system returns and order is re-established. Changed, certainly, but Anders wasn't interested in changing the system. Not by the end. He wanted to end it.
True, at the end he lost the control over Justice/Vengeance, but still not stupid. Did he know that he can not win there and in that minute, and also horrified, what he did. But the process has started. Many mages freed. There will not be so, as it was before. That was his goal. No more. His long-term objectives (rather dreams) are larger. But as you also wrote: he was not a conspirator or politics, or rational planner, just a poossessed, fixated, irrational (and crazy?) dreamer. (Still not stupid!)
The question is not was that he managed to free all of the mages, nor that this was right or not.
The point, in any event, is that violent, murderous revolutionaries play JUST as much a role in bringing about positive changes to injustice as anyone else. Whether you like it or not, that's a fact of history. And one of the biggest ways they do it is exactly as did Anders: by giving reasonable people cause to step back and say "Hey, templars, you can't rise up and slaughter all the mages of every Circle in Thedas for the actions of one lone fanatic," which can quickly lead to "Hey, maybe part of the problem is that mages are being forced into desperate situations. We should rectify this."
This is not about the outcome itself, but enabling an outcome. Also it depends on how the character is viewed, Che Guevara was seen as a psychotic terrorist by the party he opposed. And he actually committed terrorism but he is a hero now. In fact chances are all our so called "war heroes" that exist in history of every single country and their epic struggle of independence were terrorist but because they won now they are war heroes.
The only scenario I see Anders being a hero is mages actually fighting all the none-mages then winning. In this scenario Anders could likely be called a hero/martyr depending on circumstance. Martyrs are people that die in backing their believes for the sake of backing them. In that sense Anders is a Martyr, since he is willing to commit a crime for which he will be punished with death, for his beliefs. So technically Anders is a martyr if he is dead.
That is just bad writing though? You have a mage that a dozen of veteran Wardens vouch and respect because of her abilities and determination. In DA:I she seems like a dumb milf. Sorry couldn't find a better word. There is literally nothing wrong with Fiona before that, many people accused her of being a mary sue, aka being perfect.
Which is the bad writing- the now or the before?
There's nothing unrealistic about a lucky leader who ambitiously goes for more than they can achieve and then fails. Or hubris to large to admit to personal failure. But Fiona's incompetence- particularly regarding the mage rebellion- was apparent even before DAI based on the books alone, when she repeatedly pressed for a revolution her people did not want and which she was not prepared to wage. That she relied more on luck than leadership was apparent in her backstory, and that she wasn't exactly big into creating solutions was apparent when she went '**** the Divine.'
What followed next, and the aftermath seen in Inquisition, was entirely predictable and in fact predicted: the rebellion failed for a lack of allies, a lack of preparation, a lack of experience, and would only be salvaged by the whims of others afterwards.
True, at the end he lost the control over Justice/Vengeance, but still not stupid. Did he know that he can not win there and in that minute, and also horrified, what he did. Ok, maybe he dont be martyr, but the process has started. Many mages freed. There will not be so, as it was before. That was his goal. No more. His long-term objectives (rather dreams) are larger. But as you wrote: he was not a conspirator or politics, or rational planner, just a poossessed, fixated, irrational (and crazy?) dreamer. (Still not stupid!)
The question is not was that he managed to free all of the mages, nor that this was right or not.
You're not being clear here. Are you agreeing that Anders failed to achieve his intended goals, or saying he did while talking smack about him at the same time? Right now the only thing you seem to be claiming was his goal was 'there will not be so, as it was before.' But Anders's position come Act 3 isn't to change the status quo for mage reforms.
By Anders' intentions, the only mages free after DAI are the ones who are dead or who haven't come back from hiding as apostates. Neither the Circles or the College were his desires, and the Circles and the Colleges both are in opposition to the hidden apostates.
The point, in any event, is that violent, murderous revolutionaries play JUST as much a role in bringing about positive changes to injustice as anyone else. Whether you like it or not, that's a fact of history. And one of the biggest ways they do it is exactly as did Anders: by giving reasonable people cause to step back and say "Hey, templars, you can't rise up and slaughter all the mages of every Circle in Thedas for the actions of one lone fanatic," which can quickly lead to "Hey, maybe part of the problem is that mages are being forced into desperate situations. We should rectify this."
This is not about the outcome itself, but enabling an outcome. Also it depends on how the character is viewed, Che Guevara was seen as a psychotic terrorist by the party he opposed. And he actually committed terrorism but he is a hero now. In fact chances are all our so called "war heroes" that exist in history of every single country and their epic struggle of independence were terrorist but because they won now they are war heroes.
None of this actually supports that Anders's efforts paid off to what he wanted. Anders didn't want a system of mage oversight and groupings they could live with- he didn't want any oversight at all.
I'm all for people taking advantage and validating terrorism, atrocity, incompetant bungling, and just plain luck... so long as they don't mind being judged by the same standard when their world is thrown into chaos by someone else with a pet priority. Also as long as they don't claim that fortunate fallouts of events that could have gone disastrously for the worse somehow imply competence and necessity for changes that they themselves frequently disrupt and prevent. For every 'violence was necessary for reformation', we can easily find even more cases where violence wasn't necessary, and didn't bring reform, making it merely banal increase of suffering.
And the comparison with Che isn't really apt. Che actually accomplished something he intended... and is mostly held as a hero by those who don't really care what his results actually were for the people who have to live with them. It certainly didn't stop the exploitation and oppression he nominally claimed to oppose, or protect the proletariat, or abolish disparity or bring prosperity and so on and so on.
The only scenario I see Anders being a hero is mages actually fighting all the none-mages then winning. In this scenario Anders could likely be called a hero/martyr depending on circumstance. Martyrs are people that die in backing their believes for the sake of backing them. In that sense Anders is a Martyr, since he is willing to commit a crime for which he will be punished with death, for his beliefs. So technically Anders is a martyr if he is dead.
'Technically,' martyrs have to be appreciated by the groups whose cause they stand for, or else they're just self-righteous dead people. The world is filled with self-righteous dead people, but being a martyr is a special sort of cultural context and appreciation.
The people of Thedas are the only ones whose opinion matters, and we've yet to see any significant appreciation for him from them. Not even from mages.
You're not being clear here. Are you agreeing that Anders failed to achieve his intended goals, or saying he did while talking smack about him at the same time? Right now the only thing you seem to be claiming was his goal was 'there will not be so, as it was before.' But Anders's position come Act 3 isn't to change the status quo for mage reforms.
By Anders' intentions, the only mages free after DAI are the ones who are dead or who haven't come back from hiding as apostates. Neither the Circles or the College were his desires, and the Circles and the Colleges both are in opposition to the hidden apostates.
His goal was not to "there will not be so, as it was before", rather that start the rebellion, and over time change everything. The rebellion started.
Once again: He told at the end (ofc, if he alive) “Ten years, a hundred years from now…" Then he not thinking about instant success.
His goal was not to "there will not be so, as it was before", rather that start the rebellion, and over time change everything. The rebellion started.
Once again: He told at the end (ofc, if he alive) “Ten years, a hundred years from now…" Then he not thinking about instant success.
Which doesn't make the outcome that does occur any more of a success for him just because the time limit isn't up yet. Anders making vague and indefinite goal posts that haven't occured yet doesn't make him any more accurate or successful than apacolypse-predictors who aren't disproven just because their prediction for the end of the world is still a century off.
Anders wants the abolition of the system in its entirety. The College doesn't represent that.
Saying Anders actions paid off is like commending Al Qaeda and 9-11 for the Islamic State. Different people realized different goals that are only vaguely related. Since Anders goals weren't a reformation, but an abolition, his standards would be that the outcome was a failure. Not only do Circles still exist, but there is still Chantry oversight (even if Leliana, for the moment, is hands off), legal differences (though now many favor the mages), and their future status is highly uncertain. Mages were neither totally freed from differences or totally eradicated, either of which were Anders' acceptable outcome as he wanted to eradicate his, not pro-mage advocates, perception of injustice.
In terms of causing reformation, Anders and those such as Fiona were themselves significant obstacle to such, and while the sequence of events that did happen obviously wouldn't have happened without them the events and outcomes that did occur were also neither planned or intended. As far as reforms go, we'll never know how many would have been made when they already had a sympathetic Divine, merely that the systems reforms were delayed for years before the independence rebellion failed at its own stated goals, at the costs of many innocent lives both mundane and mage whom never wanted the conflict, and contributed to an extreme risk to the entire world and all the people within.
And, of course, the viability and enduring virtue of said reforms for the long term is highly questionable, whether they get rolled back or lead to (yet another) mage elite class.
The point, in any event, is that violent, murderous revolutionaries play JUST as much a role in bringing about positive changes to injustice as anyone else. Whether you like it or not, that's a fact of history. And one of the biggest ways they do it is exactly as did Anders: by giving reasonable people cause to step back and say "Hey, templars, you can't rise up and slaughter all the mages of every Circle in Thedas for the actions of one lone fanatic," which can quickly lead to "Hey, maybe part of the problem is that mages are being forced into desperate situations. We should rectify this."
This is not about the outcome itself, but enabling an outcome. Also it depends on how the character is viewed, Che Guevara was seen as a psychotic terrorist by the party he opposed. And he actually committed terrorism but he is a hero now. In fact chances are all our so called "war heroes" that exist in history of every single country and their epic struggle of independence were terrorist but because they won now they are war heroes.
The only scenario I see Anders being a hero is mages actually fighting all the none-mages then winning. In this scenario Anders could likely be called a hero/martyr depending on circumstance. Martyrs are people that die in backing their believes for the sake of backing them. In that sense Anders is a Martyr, since he is willing to commit a crime for which he will be punished with death, for his beliefs. So technically Anders is a martyr if he is dead.
And... you think it is good that shitty human beings are painted as saints due to how history tends to forget the full truth?
I'm not trying to say Anders is a great guy, but that he accomplished something regardless.
Just not what he intended, or wanted, besides an immediate desire to see a lot of mages get killed.
Without Corypheus, the Mage Rebellion died with a whimper, beaten across the vast majority of Thedas with the last holdouts taking refuge with (and becoming dependent on) the Ferelden crown for protection. It was a rebellion so badly failed their war-tested leader believed a fraction of the remnant Templar froce in the region could overwhelm and slaughter them all. Instead the Chantry called, and the Mages went back just years after having fucked the Divine's offer for negotitions.
Not quite the overthrowal of Chantry authority Anders was hoping for.
Nor after Corpyheus and the Conclave, a true upset that factored into nobody's plans as both Mages and Templar and Chantry political leadership were thrown into disaray. Even after this great upset, and the potential to hitch their fortunes to the force that would eventually save the world, the Mages gain the great independence of... once again having as much autonomy as the Divine in power cares to allow them.
Also not quite the overthrowal of Chantry authority Anders was hoping for. Fewer Templars, true, but if Anders just wanted to fight Templars he wouldn't have bombed a Chantry that didn't have any.
Well...there WAS no peace. I guess he did accomplish that.
A temporary condition. The Mage Rebellion only lasted, what, two, three years before being brought to the table?
Wait- according to the Dragon Age wiki, it didn't even laugh a year. (Asunder: 9:40. Conclave: 9:41)
What Anders did would set up a scenario that could shift things in the way he wanted, but ultimately whether that comes through or not depends a lot on the type of characters you play. Anders was an influential individual, but nobody is more influential than the PCs, as goes the way of such games. If you play pro-mage angles, then it's easy to believe that what he did aided the mages in coming out in a much better place than they started, with substantially more power and freedom. If you romanced Anders and approved of his actions, then Hawke speaks very positively of him and says they've helped to liberate Circles together since the original battle in Kirkwall. It seems clear from Hawke's commentary in my world state that Anders and Hawke are happy at that point. It all depends on how you play. I think, basically, as the PC you can help to justify his actions, or you can mostly nullify them. As with most things in this game, the tonal shift is on you to establish.
My Hawke don't think, he is crazy, he told about him that he is a hero in the eyes of many people. (True, my Hawke spared his life...)
Well of course other people's Hawles don't necessarily think he was crazy, but I was talking entirely in the context of my own playthrough where Hawke killed Anders and told the the templar allied Inquisitor "He was crazy. By the end there was nothing left in this insane need to start a war nobody could win."
In that world, Anders was killed and any rebel mages that that looked up to him were corrupted and/or defeated. While those he considered his enemies were hailed as heroes by nobles and commoners alike. If you're going to make a case that Anders actions actually paid off, it would have to be something that always happens in spite of all that.
I think you can rebuke Anders, but basically support the idea.
Or rather, Anders really wasn't ever wrong in my opinion. Only Justice was, for slaughtering people and being a douche in general.
Anders main point though is that it was actually more in the spirit of Andraste to fight. She fought slavers, and it's hypocritical for all her followers to continue as they were. I think Andrastians in general forget it was essentially an anti-slavery movement. That should have always been the guiding principle, in any subject. But when movements get institutionalized, they have a strange tendency to become about completely different things and concerns.
Not exactly because on the Champions of the Just route a very large number of mages are now dead and by the epilogue in Trespasser it would seem that no matter what you did, there are still Circles, run by Vivienne, and a College of Enchanters. The only scenario where the College is going to be stronger than the Circles is if Leliana is Divine off a Hushed Whispers play through. However, given how little difference there is really in the endings, I'm guessing they will use this as an excuse to put everything back pretty much as before in the future. Although, if Solas is successful in his endeavours, it is not going to make any difference anyway.
Unless I misunderstood, with Divine Lel it's implied mages are no longer forced by law to join the Circles, they can remain outside the circles and lead a semi-normal life should they so wish. The ones who do remain in the Circle are diehard traditionalists. The lack of freedom of choice was the main problem, not the very existence of the Circles themselves.
I don't know how well this distinction will be reflected in the story though. Probably not a lot. If DA:4 is set in Tevinter it won't really matter either, because their Circles never were prisons.
Anders was the catalyst though. Sure Corpheyus took advantage of the chaos (and surely contributed to it.) It was Anders actions that started a chain reaction to the reformation of the Circles.
Anders was the catalyst though. Sure Corpheyus took advantage of the chaos (and surely contributed to it.) It was Anders actions that started a chain reaction to the reformation of the Circles.
This implies that the Circles wouldn't have been reformed without it- a questionable proposition, especially considering the Divine at the time. Anders actions also started chains of reactions that compounded ills to require greater changes- but we rarely commend an arsonist for clearing the way for future development.
It also rests on the assumption that the reforms that do happen will themselves produce better results than the policies that were before. This remains highly in doubt, particularly in regards to the treatment and safety of mundanes.
And even that all rests on the assumption that the immense human suffering in the process of the new status quo don't actually outweigh the supposed benefits to the new status quo that could only have been achieved by violent action. Are mage reforms a net boon or loss to the mages killed by revolutionaries for the sin of not being revolutionary enough?
Which is the bad writing- the now or the before?
There's nothing unrealistic about a lucky leader who ambitiously goes for more than they can achieve and then fails. Or hubris to large to admit to personal failure. But Fiona's incompetence- particularly regarding the mage rebellion- was apparent even before DAI based on the books alone, when she repeatedly pressed for a revolution her people did not want and which she was not prepared to wage. That she relied more on luck than leadership was apparent in her backstory, and that she wasn't exactly big into creating solutions was apparent when she went '**** the Divine.'
What followed next, and the aftermath seen in Inquisition, was entirely predictable and in fact predicted: the rebellion failed for a lack of allies, a lack of preparation, a lack of experience, and would only be salvaged by the whims of others afterwards.
None of this actually supports that Anders's efforts paid off to what he wanted. Anders didn't want a system of mage oversight and groupings they could live with- he didn't want any oversight at all.
I'm all for people taking advantage and validating terrorism, atrocity, incompetant bungling, and just plain luck... so long as they don't mind being judged by the same standard when their world is thrown into chaos by someone else with a pet priority. Also as long as they don't claim that fortunate fallouts of events that could have gone disastrously for the worse somehow imply competence and necessity for changes that they themselves frequently disrupt and prevent. For every 'violence was necessary for reformation', we can easily find even more cases where violence wasn't necessary, and didn't bring reform, making it merely banal increase of suffering.
And the comparison with Che isn't really apt. Che actually accomplished something he intended... and is mostly held as a hero by those who don't really care what his results actually were for the people who have to live with them. It certainly didn't stop the exploitation and oppression he nominally claimed to oppose, or protect the proletariat, or abolish disparity or bring prosperity and so on and so on.
'Technically,' martyrs have to be appreciated by the groups whose cause they stand for, or else they're just self-righteous dead people. The world is filled with self-righteous dead people, but being a martyr is a special sort of cultural context and appreciation.
The people of Thedas are the only ones whose opinion matters, and we've yet to see any significant appreciation for him from them. Not even from mages.
We are not really disagreeing on anything here. As I said I don't agree that Anders got the outcome he wanted, but his actions enabled other outcomes which is true. And the names people are called are entirely dependent on result of conflicts and the winning side. So yes Anders is only technically a martyr, not actually. But as I said in the scenario that mages fought and won versus entire Thedas, he would be an actual martyr or hero depending on if he lives or not.
I always saw rebellion as justified but badly timed.
I'd conclude that one man's freedom fight is another man's terrorist.
As for bad writing about Fiona, its simply bad writing. She had mary sue signs, which is never good to begin with and her arc makes no sense in DA:I. Specially the fight with her in Haven. She is a spell casting doll with no reaction or emotion. Denam which is a literal monster had more human reaction than her when you sided with mages.
I think Fiona would have been fine, if they maintained the quality of Asunder. Instead they have ADD and decided the story should be about other things.
I'd conclude that one man's freedom fight is another man's terrorist.
Yeah, except Anders is a terrorist even to mages with exception perhaps of most extreme mages.
Anders actions didn't do anything good either for mages, templars or simply folks.Hell, he even didn't start a rebellion and had very little to do with start of rebelion.Even if he didn't blow up the chantry Libertarians would still push for independence and events in white spire would happen anyway as they weren't connected to the Anders in any way.
Funnily, Anders spoke against the Libertarians in DAA.
I just don't think he was that radical by himself. He wanted freedom, but it was for down to earth reasons. "All I want is a pretty girl, a decent meal, and the right to shoot lightning at fools."
All of his lousy behavior comes from Justice. And it starts with Justice in DAA. He doesn't belong here. And his act in DA2 is just another sign of that. He doesn't understand how to even fight injustices in this world.. he doesn't grasp the process of getting from point A to B. He's used to just getting what he wants, through sheer will. He's an idiot, from the Fade. It's not so much about Terrorism as it is just foolishness.
It might be our (and Bioware's) own fault for letting him into the world to begin with. Moreso Bioware, because he was railroaded that way.
We can argue that Justice did influenced Anders decisions, and maybe that is what happened, but was Anders hate on the Circles and the Templar Order that changed Justice's purpose into Vengance. And that is even foreshadowed in DA:OA, in many conversations with Anders.
My point is you cannot blame Justice for warping Anders's anger and hate, when was that anger and hate what warped Justice's purpose to begin with. This is even more clearly now that we know more about the spirits nature thanks to Solas explanations.
His dead no matter, and he was aware of what risk. As I wrote, the rebellion started, the system shaked. The mages have a martyr.
Funny, though, DA 2 epilogue says it was Hawke's name the one who inspired the rebel mages (in a pro-mage DA 2 world state). Not Anders name. Only Hawke can potentially believe he was a hero. But is the opinion of one person against the rest of the world. Even the rebel mages didn't liked him because he forced them to live as fugitives (according to dialogue with Varric, at least).
We can argue that Justice did influenced Anders decisions, and maybe that is what happened, but was Anders hate on the Circles and the Templar Order that changed Justice's purpose into Vengance. And that is even foreshadowed in DA:OA, in many conversations with Anders.
My point is you cannot blame Justice for warping Anders's anger and hate, when was that anger and hate what warped Justice's purpose to begin with. This is even more clearly now that we know more about the spirits nature thanks to Solas explanations.
Funny, though, DA 2 epilogue says it was Hawke's name the one who inspired the rebel mages (in a pro-mage DA 2 world state). Not Anders name. Only Hawke can potentially believe he was a hero. But is the opinion of one person against the rest of the world. Even the rebel mages didn't liked him because he forced them to live as fugitives (according to dialogue with Varric, at least).
I don't think he's necessarily wrong about being angry though.
I blame Justice because his methods suck. He's like the Valor spirit, who could bring weapons out of thin air through sheer will. Justice must've lived in a similar state...somehow. Like his ideas could be actualized with little effort. But in the real world, he's gimped. So he uses a bomb instead, like an *******. That's probably the closest thing he could think of, to actualize himself.. and bring attention to an issue.
But I can't blame Anders for thinking the Circles suck. Because they do. I'd hate to have people hover over me like that. What the hell kind of life is that? I'm not gonna be crass like Morrigan (she thinks the Circle mages should literally kill themselves), but it sucks. Even if you were treated nicely, it still sucks. If you have any concept of independence at least, then it'll eat at you.
Funnily, Anders spoke against the Libertarians in DAA.
I just don't think he was that radical by himself. He wanted freedom, but it was for down to earth reasons. "All I want is a pretty girl, a decent meal, and the right to shoot lightning at fools."
All of his lousy behavior comes from Justice. And it starts with Justice in DAA. He doesn't belong here. And his act in DA2 is just another sign of that. He doesn't understand how to even fight injustices in this world.. he doesn't grasp the process of getting from point A to B. He's used to just getting what he wants, through sheer will. He's an idiot, from the Fade. It's not so much about Terrorism as it is just foolishness.
It might be our (and Bioware's) own fault for letting him into the world to begin with. Moreso Bioware, because he was railroaded that way.
He was only a nice guy without strength and goals, and his anger was only frustration. He never believe before Justice's inspiration, that he can do anything for the mages' freedom.
But blaming only Justice are wrong way. At first Justice just inspired Anders, and gave him strength to free the Mages. But Anders extremely hated the Templars and the Circle from the beginning, and his hatred corrupted Justice.
Retour en haut