inherit
∯ Oh Loredy...
455
0
26,678
gervaise21
10,797
August 2016
gervaise21
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by gervaise21 on Dec 28, 2016 18:45:20 GMT
Makes me feel even worse about Anders killing Karl in DA2 just because he asked him to. Not only might it have been possible to cure him permanently in the future but according to this book, he was making a request when his emotions were all over the place, his mind was irrational and as a consequence not in a suitable state for making such a decision.
|
|
inherit
Wanted Apostate
127
0
18,242
Catilina
11,030
August 2016
catilina
Top
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Catilina on Dec 28, 2016 18:56:55 GMT
Makes me feel even worse about Anders killing Karl in DA2 just because he asked him to. Not only might it have been possible to cure him permanently in the future but according to this book, he was making a request when his emotions were all over the place, his mind was irrational and as a consequence not in a suitable state for making such a decision. I was thinking about Karl, when Cassandra said, yes, this is very sad, but at that moment, it seemed a good decision, not just because Karl asked for it. Even Bethany thought so, and Bethany never was tranquil before. You saw: Karl was a puppet without will, and he remembered this, in the cleaner moment. He was confused, maybe even irrational, but he knew what he wanted. No one knew that it is reversible. Blame the Seekers and the Chantry. The question: they want to cure the tranquil? Or made public that this is reversible? |
|
Iakus
N7
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 20,884 Likes: 49,345
inherit
402
0
Dec 21, 2018 17:35:11 GMT
49,345
Iakus
20,884
August 2016
iakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Iakus on Dec 28, 2016 22:04:31 GMT
Makes me feel even worse about Anders killing Karl in DA2 just because he asked him to. Not only might it have been possible to cure him permanently in the future but according to this book, he was making a request when his emotions were all over the place, his mind was irrational and as a consequence not in a suitable state for making such a decision. I was thinking about Karl, when Cassandra said, yes, this is very sad, but at that moment, it seemed a good decision, not just because Karl asked for it. Even Bethany thought so, and Bethany never was tranquil before. You saw: Karl was a puppet without will, and he remembered this, in the cleaner moment. He was confused, maybe even irrational, but he knew what he wanted. No one knew that it is reversible. Blame the Seekers and the Chantry. The question: they want to cure the tranquil? Or made public that this is reversible? Cassandra indicated that she wants this emotional instability to be researched more, to determine if it is temporary or at least treatable, before making any announcement. But once they have an answer, she promises she will announce it herself. |
|
inherit
∯ Oh Loredy...
455
0
26,678
gervaise21
10,797
August 2016
gervaise21
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by gervaise21 on Dec 29, 2016 11:12:38 GMT
The tranquil are not "puppets without will". DG has confirmed repeatedly this not to be the case. Because they lack emotion, they lack the motivation (ambition) to indulge in tasks without being asked to do so by others but they can also refuse to do a task if the decision for doing so is based off logic rather than emotion. So if a Templar ordered a tranquil to kill themselves, they would refuse without a sufficiently good reason for obeying. Madox chose to remain loyal to Samson. That tranquil in Redcliffe (Clemence I think) specifically asked to leave with you. The problem with DA2 is that it made tranquil seem too much like automatons. The one serving Meredith even sounded like a robot. Rather you should think of them as more like a Vulcan - everything they do is based off pure logic.
What so incensed me about Divine Justinia getting Pharamond to do the research is that he wouldn't have had the motivation to do so without her asking him to. However, once embarked upon the mission, he pursued it with the obsessive focus of a tranquil. The reason it all went so disastrously wrong for the people of Adamant is that they wanted to help him for emotional reasons and he thought logically that he had put all the safeguards needed in place. Sadly he didn't have scope of imagination (for which you need emotions) to anticipate what could go wrong or ask himself why it might be good to have Templars on hand in case it did. The Divine controls the Templars, so if they were necessary would not she have sent them along? Clearly she didn't, so they are not necessary, etc. It wouldn't occur to him that may be the Divine was deliberately keeping it secret from the Templars. People tend to forget that originally the mages agreed to Circles and supervision by Templars so they could conduct more risky magical research and experimentation without risk to themselves or the wider community.
Even worse though, than the decision over Karl, is what happened with the tranquil in DAI. Dozens of them murdered to allow the Venatori to create some sort of magical divining rod and no one called to account specifically over it. Presumably the tranquil were the ones who latched on the mage rebels. These rebels not only should have cared for them but also knew that tranquillity could be reversed because that knowledge and its suppression was a major cause of the breakdown in relations at the White Spire. Yet apparently no one questioned where the tranquil were disappearing to or apparently assumed, like Clemence, that Alexius was sending them away because mages were uncomfortable with having them around. It was shameful not only on the part of the mages but also the writers that this was glossed over and then we were forced to use these awful objects if we wanted to undertake a major side quest that is recorded in the Keep.
Tranquil are people regardless of whether they have emotions or not, just as the modern races are people even though Solas sees them as tranquil because they do not have the same connection to the Fade that he does.
|
|
inherit
2106
0
Mar 22, 2017 11:04:48 GMT
962
javeart
621
Nov 16, 2016 10:21:58 GMT
November 2016
javeart
|
Post by javeart on Dec 29, 2016 11:47:22 GMT
The tranquil are not "puppets without will". DG has confirmed repeatedly this not to be the case. Because they lack emotion, they lack the motivation (ambition) to indulge in tasks without being asked to do so by others but they can also refuse to do a task if the decision for doing so is based off logic rather than emotion. So if a Templar ordered a tranquil to kill themselves, they would refuse without a sufficiently good reason for obeying. Madox chose to remain loyal to Samson. That tranquil in Redcliffe (Clemence I think) specifically asked to leave with you. The problem with DA2 is that it made tranquil seem too much like automatons. The one serving Meredith even sounded like a robot. Rather you should think of them as more like a Vulcan - everything they do is based off pure logic. What so incensed me about Divine Justinia getting Pharamond to do the research is that he wouldn't have had the motivation to do so without her asking him to. However, once embarked upon the mission, he pursued it with the obsessive focus of a tranquil. The reason it all went so disastrously wrong for the people of Adamant is that they wanted to help him for emotional reasons and he thought logically that he had put all the safeguards needed in place. Sadly he didn't have scope of imagination (for which you need emotions) to anticipate what could go wrong or ask himself why it might be good to have Templars on hand in case it did. The Divine controls the Templars, so if they were necessary would not she have sent them along? Clearly she didn't, so they are not necessary, etc. It wouldn't occur to him that may be the Divine was deliberately keeping it secret from the Templars. People tend to forget that originally the mages agreed to Circles and supervision by Templars so they could conduct more risky magical research and experimentation without risk to themselves or the wider community. Even worse though, than the decision over Karl, is what happened with the tranquil in DAI. Dozens of them murdered to allow the Venatori to create some sort of magical divining rod and no one called to account specifically over it. Presumably the tranquil were the ones who latched on the mage rebels. These rebels not only should have cared for them but also knew that tranquillity could be reversed because that knowledge and its suppression was a major cause of the breakdown in relations at the White Spire. Yet apparently no one questioned where the tranquil were disappearing to or apparently assumed, like Clemence, that Alexius was sending them away because mages were uncomfortable with having them around. It was shameful not only on the part of the mages but also the writers that this was glossed over and then we were forced to use these awful objects if we wanted to undertake a major side quest that is recorded in the Keep. Tranquil are people regardless of whether they have emotions or not, just as the modern races are people even though Solas sees them as tranquil because they do not have the same connection to the Fade that he does. [only slightly related to the topic, but not too long at least, rant  ] I agree so much with it all, tranquils are people, mutilated people, and it bothers me to no end when they're treated like they're not, as if they were husks or something... but still, other characters may do that, because that's maybe how Thedas is or how some people see it and that's not up to player, but I really hate that in Trespasser when Solas says "it was like walking through a world of tranquil" my Inquisitor's reply is "we aren't even people to you?" wtf was that?!  , my Inquisitor would have never implied that tranquils are not people... So if I don't want to hear her say that I have to skip a part of the dialogue that other than that is quite interesting :/ one of the many things that sounds OOC in that dialogue for my PC [rant over ] Personally, I still think that killing Karl in the context of DA2 is the right choice for my Hawke |
|
inherit
∯ Oh Loredy...
455
0
26,678
gervaise21
10,797
August 2016
gervaise21
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by gervaise21 on Dec 29, 2016 15:03:15 GMT
I quite agree that the decision was right in the context of what was known at that time. Mind you, I don't recall we can actually not let it happen. It is so long since I played it but do we even get he opportunity to object to killing him? Then Anders does it and of course you discover, if Hawke is male that Karl was not just his friend but his lover. Then in WoT2 it is made clear just how great an effect Karl had on Anders' life and he was the reason that Anders kept running away from the Circle and wanted to get to Kirkwall. So I get the feeling that it was after having to kill Karl that everything went downhill for Anders with his connection to Justice, regardless of how he felt about Hawke. Mind you the "rivers of blood" to protect you speech was somewhat disturbing.
Anyway, I wonder if the subject of reversing tranquility will come up again when we are in Tevinter. Dorian specifically quizzed Cassandra about the cure because he says that the majority of mages in Tevinter are made tranquil for political reasons and clearly he wonders if he can help them.
|
|
inherit
Wanted Apostate
127
0
18,242
Catilina
11,030
August 2016
catilina
Top
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Catilina on Dec 29, 2016 15:41:16 GMT
The tranquil are not "puppets without will". DG has confirmed repeatedly this not to be the case. Because they lack emotion, they lack the motivation (ambition) to indulge in tasks without being asked to do so by others but they can also refuse to do a task if the decision for doing so is based off logic rather than emotion. So if a Templar ordered a tranquil to kill themselves, they would refuse without a sufficiently good reason for obeying. Madox chose to remain loyal to Samson. That tranquil in Redcliffe (Clemence I think) specifically asked to leave with you. The problem with DA2 is that it made tranquil seem too much like automatons. The one serving Meredith even sounded like a robot. Rather you should think of them as more like a Vulcan - everything they do is based off pure logic. What so incensed me about Divine Justinia getting Pharamond to do the research is that he wouldn't have had the motivation to do so without her asking him to. However, once embarked upon the mission, he pursued it with the obsessive focus of a tranquil. The reason it all went so disastrously wrong for the people of Adamant is that they wanted to help him for emotional reasons and he thought logically that he had put all the safeguards needed in place. Sadly he didn't have scope of imagination (for which you need emotions) to anticipate what could go wrong or ask himself why it might be good to have Templars on hand in case it did. The Divine controls the Templars, so if they were necessary would not she have sent them along? Clearly she didn't, so they are not necessary, etc. It wouldn't occur to him that may be the Divine was deliberately keeping it secret from the Templars. People tend to forget that originally the mages agreed to Circles and supervision by Templars so they could conduct more risky magical research and experimentation without risk to themselves or the wider community. Even worse though, than the decision over Karl, is what happened with the tranquil in DAI. Dozens of them murdered to allow the Venatori to create some sort of magical divining rod and no one called to account specifically over it. Presumably the tranquil were the ones who latched on the mage rebels. These rebels not only should have cared for them but also knew that tranquillity could be reversed because that knowledge and its suppression was a major cause of the breakdown in relations at the White Spire. Yet apparently no one questioned where the tranquil were disappearing to or apparently assumed, like Clemence, that Alexius was sending them away because mages were uncomfortable with having them around. It was shameful not only on the part of the mages but also the writers that this was glossed over and then we were forced to use these awful objects if we wanted to undertake a major side quest that is recorded in the Keep. Tranquil are people regardless of whether they have emotions or not, just as the modern races are people even though Solas sees them as tranquil because they do not have the same connection to the Fade that he does. It's. They "free will" only extends to the usefulness (no matter who for) and some self-defense (in the DA:O tranquil prefers the life over death), this not really free will. Free will don't really exist without emotions. (How you want something, if you don't have motivation? How you have motivation without emotion?) Okay, let's see: they can refuse tasks, if this not logical. Then when the templars ask Karl for betray Anders, Karl find it totally acceptable and logical, this is, why he betrayed his best friend. I got it. BUT: why Maddox followed Samson's madness? Because this was the most logical way? I think rather because they followed the last instruction they received. (Maddox's suicide was also not logical. It was emotional decision. So: Maddox's character is tear-jerker, but not logical. Bioware's writers not too consistent... in DA2 they wanted to shown tranquils as puppets, so, they did it. In Inquisition they wanted to shown tranquil as not too bad thing, then they did it.) |
|
Norstaera
N3
Stealth Swooper
This morning my husband said I was evil like June Cleaver. I cried a single tear of wicked happiness
Games: Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
Posts: 385 Likes: 745
inherit
Stealth Swooper
1178
0
Apr 20, 2024 18:37:45 GMT
745
Norstaera
This morning my husband said I was evil like June Cleaver. I cried a single tear of wicked happiness
385
Aug 24, 2016 16:13:41 GMT
August 2016
norstaera
Bottom
http://www.mediafire.com/convkey/3ead/s5mkgfa593ihxkkzg.jpg
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition
|
Post by Norstaera on Dec 29, 2016 15:49:12 GMT
javeart
I never interpreted that line to mean my Inquisitor thought that way, but that she/he picked up on Solas thinking that way.
gervaise21
Anders is prone to dramatic or overblown rhetoric  .
I suppose reversing tranquility might come up, but more as a sidenote, I think. I'd like to see Dorian or somebody do as Cullen does with the templars, in most playthroughs. Cullen establishes a haven for templars who want to break their addiction/retirement home for those too lyrium-addled to function. For the Tranquil, I think it would have to be in a remote-ish area. I think it only natural for their emotions to be unstable after being cut off from them for so long. They need a safe space for any magical accidents while they learn how to control their emotions and their abilities. And if the reversal doesn't work, a safe place to live if they can't return to a mainstream environment. Again, I doubt this would warrant more than a brief mention.
|
|
inherit
Wanted Apostate
127
0
18,242
Catilina
11,030
August 2016
catilina
Top
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Catilina on Dec 29, 2016 15:57:15 GMT
javeart
I never interpreted that line to mean my Inquisitor thought that way, but that she/he picked up on Solas thinking that way.
gervaise21
Anders is prone to dramatic or overblown rhetoric .
I suppose reversing tranquility might come up, but more as a sidenote, I think. I'd like to see Dorian or somebody do as Cullen does with the templars, in most playthroughs. Cullen establishes a haven for templars who want to break their addiction/retirement home for those too lyrium-addled to function. For the Tranquil, I think it would have to be in a remote-ish area. I think it only natural for their emotions to be unstable after being cut off from them for so long. They need a safe space for any magical accidents while they learn how to control their emotions and their abilities. And if the reversal doesn't work, a safe place to live if they can't return to a mainstream environment. Again, I doubt this would warrant more than a brief mention. In DA2 Karl spoke about tranquils' feeling, not just Anders. |
|
inherit
∯ Oh Loredy...
455
0
26,678
gervaise21
10,797
August 2016
gervaise21
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by gervaise21 on Dec 29, 2016 16:07:24 GMT
I never quite understood why Karl would betray Anders but I don't think it was simply because they ordered him to. More likely the Templars put it to him that Anders would be better off back in the safety of the Circle.
As for Madox, it would seem that there was a trust between him and Samson before Madox was made tranquil. He would know that it wasn't Samson who betrayed him. Then when everyone else had abandoned Madox, Samson helped him. So I can see how logic might inform his decision to give his loyalty to Samson because every memory of Samson would be of him doing something for Madox, of helping him, so it would seem sensible to continue to follow him and do as he asks because he will likely continue helping him. Madox may even reason that what Samson is doing is something that Madox should support. (Templars were controlled by the Chantry and then discarded when of no further use. The Templars have rebelled because the Divine was supporting mages having greater freedom. The Templars can no longer get their lyrium from the Chantry. Samson is supporting the Templars giving them a new source of lyrium that makes them better at doing their job.) Madox would not see it as madness or even evil, since that is an emotional response. The only question would be "is it reasonable", "does it make sense?"
Whatever the actual arguments used, destroying the sanctuary and killing himself would be logical if he wanted to prevent his opponents from discovering his secrets.
|
|
inherit
2106
0
Mar 22, 2017 11:04:48 GMT
962
javeart
621
Nov 16, 2016 10:21:58 GMT
November 2016
javeart
|
Post by javeart on Dec 29, 2016 16:13:42 GMT
javeart
I never interpreted that line to mean my Inquisitor thought that way, but that she/he picked up on Solas thinking that way.
don't want to derail this with my own little obsessions  , but why woud Solas say that, when he's always defending thar spirtis shoudn't be considered lesser creatures because they are intelligent and they have free will? I can believe though that it was Weekes intention to imply that it was Solas who was saying that consdering Cole line about Felassan, but to me none of it makes sense and I have a lot of trouble understanding why Solas would.think that modern thedas people is less than people, and I don't really see what does the Inquisitor to change his mind about it, tbh  But even if that was the case, my Inquisitor would have not played along, she'd say something like "no, we're not tranquil, and tranquils are still people anyway" or at the very least, she would have asked " is that your way of saying we're not people to you?" I hate hear her say that phrase just like that, because I feel rather strongly about this. But, yes, ignore my rants, I don't want to derail the thread further |
|
inherit
Wanted Apostate
127
0
18,242
Catilina
11,030
August 2016
catilina
Top
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Catilina on Dec 29, 2016 16:16:44 GMT
I never quite understood why Karl would betray Anders but I don't think it was simply because they ordered him to. More likely the Templars put it to him that Anders would be better off back in the safety of the Circle. As for Madox, it would seem that there was a trust between him and Samson before Madox was made tranquil. He would know that it wasn't Samson who betrayed him. Then when everyone else had abandoned Madox, Samson helped him. So I can see how logic might inform his decision to give his loyalty to Samson because every memory of Samson would be of him doing something for Madox, of helping him, so it would seem sensible to continue to follow him and do as he asks because he will likely continue helping him. Madox may even reason that what Samson is doing is something that Madox should support. (Templars were controlled by the Chantry and then discarded when of no further use. The Templars have rebelled because the Divine was supporting mages having greater freedom. The Templars can no longer get their lyrium from the Chantry. Samson is supporting the Templars giving them a new source of lyrium that makes them better at doing their job.) Madox would not see it as madness or even evil, since that is an emotional response. The only question would be "is it reasonable", "does it make sense?" Whatever the actual arguments used, destroying the sanctuary and killing himself would be logical if he wanted to prevent his opponents from discovering his secrets. Yes, these things are "logical" from someone's viewpoints. From one viewpoint. The tranquils are focused (as Meredith's tranquil said), but they able to focus only on that thing, what someone "programmed" into them. This is what you call free "will"? |
|
inherit
∯ Oh Loredy...
455
0
26,678
gervaise21
10,797
August 2016
gervaise21
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by gervaise21 on Dec 29, 2016 17:05:24 GMT
Like I say, DG always insisted that they did have free will. Clemence asks to leave with you. No one told him to do that, he just reasoned it would be better for him to do so rather than stay in a place where no one seemed to want him (clearly he doesn't know about what the Venatori did with the other tranquil).
May be they don't show it very well in game but I would ask again, do the Vulcan's have free will? Clearly they do. Yet they are always emphasising that decisions are made on the basis of what is logical. I am simply applying the same reasoning to tranquil.
I also point out above that I think DA2 didn't do a very good job in portraying tranquil and that tranquil of Meredith's did sound like a robot programmed to act in a certain way.
I work with people who often find it difficult to display emotion, sometimes even to feel emotion, certainly to empathise with other people's emotions, but they are most definitely people who have free will and can decide to do things for themselves. However, they are also vulnerable to being manipulated and once they latch onto a particular viewpoint, it can be very difficult to shift them from it. I am not going to put a label on what I am talking about but it is something that is present in the real world. This is why I am rather sensitive to the idea that tranquil are not real people or are unable to make decisions for themselves. I found it rather repulsive that they were used in the way they were for the oculara and it was never properly acknowledged just how horrific it was, both from the viewpoint of the tranquil being actual people (not robots) and the mechanics that were involved in the process.
I also think the Chantry are acting in direct contradiction to their prophet's words in cutting people off from the Fade, since the Maker specifically says that dreams are the method he gave to people so they can still contact him and more specifically REMEMBER him. If the Maker will only return when all people turn back to the Maker, then creating tranquil is in direct contradiction of that aim since they are being cut off from the Maker. Faith is an emotional response rather than a logical one.
If you want an example of people being turned into robots without any freewill, then look to the Qun and their use of Qamek. That does remove any element of free will and turns the victims into mindless drones. Plus it is non reversible. Like the Chantry and their use of tranquillity, the Qun apparently think this is a gentler path than just killing them, or may be it is simply a case that they think killing people is wasteful of resources.
|
|
inherit
Wanted Apostate
127
0
18,242
Catilina
11,030
August 2016
catilina
Top
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Catilina on Dec 29, 2016 17:52:24 GMT
Like I say, DG always insisted that they did have free will. Clemence asks to leave with you. No one told him to do that, he just reasoned it would be better for him to do so rather than stay in a place where no one seemed to want him (clearly he doesn't know about what the Venatori did with the other tranquil). May be they don't show it very well in game but I would ask again, do the Vulcan's have free will? Clearly they do. Yet they are always emphasising that decisions are made on the basis of what is logical. I am simply applying the same reasoning to tranquil. I also point out above that I think DA2 didn't do a very good job in portraying tranquil and that tranquil of Meredith's did sound like a robot programmed to act in a certain way. I work with people who often find it difficult to display emotion, sometimes even to feel emotion, certainly to empathise with other people's emotions, but they are most definitely people who have free will and can decide to do things for themselves. However, they are also vulnerable to being manipulated and once they latch onto a particular viewpoint, it can be very difficult to shift them from it. I am not going to put a label on what I am talking about but it is something that is present in the real world. This is why I am rather sensitive to the idea that tranquil are not real people or are unable to make decisions for themselves. I found it rather repulsive that they were used in the way they were for the oculara and it was never properly acknowledged just how horrific it was, both from the viewpoint of the tranquil being actual people (not robots) and the mechanics that were involved in the process. I also think the Chantry are acting in direct contradiction to their prophet's words in cutting people off from the Fade, since the Maker specifically says that dreams are the method he gave to people so they can still contact him and more specifically REMEMBER him. If the Maker will only return when all people turn back to the Maker, then creating tranquil is in direct contradiction of that aim since they are being cut off from the Maker. Faith is an emotional response rather than a logical one. If you want an example of people being turned into robots without any freewill, then look to the Qun and their use of Qamek. That does remove any element of free will and turns the victims into mindless drones. Plus it is non reversible. Like the Chantry and their use of tranquillity, the Qun apparently think this is a gentler path than just killing them, or may be it is simply a case that they think killing people is wasteful of resources. About Clemence: This is not contradiction. I said, they have some self-defense, as Clemence for example. Prefer the life over the death. The people, whom you talk, HAVE emotions, only have problems with to display emotion. Of course, they have free will. (And they are exist. Not fantasy creations. Ofc, the fantasy world understandable if you can parallels with the real world, and vice versa, but great mistake to mix up them. – For example: the mages in DA really able to hear the REAL spirit's whisper, not just imagining that they hear voices.) The tranquils are persons, without personality, if they DON'T have any emotions. You can imagine, that someone really don't have ANY emotions? As I see, if tranquils have free will, they HAVE emotions, if the don't have emotions, they haven't free will. The writers failed, and simply they realized, that is totally bullshit, and the story had been go too far with tranquils. They wanted to explain their mistake, and repair, because if the tranquils don't have emotions, they are puppets, without will, and the Chantry's fail questioned the necessity of the existence of the Chantry. The Chantry's practice to make people tranquil much more worse than the blood magic mind control. But the Inquisitor working for the Chantry's repair... Not mentioned, that in this case Anders' act against the Chantry was clearly right (Meredith tranquilized many mages without without a legitimate reason, Elthina's implied consent, and even the "legitimate" reason –failed Harrowing– questionable, because the "zombie-manufacture" is unacceptable), but the writers don't want to show Anders as a hero. This is an entertaining story. It raises a lot of interesting questions. But we like it not because it's logical. |
|
inherit
∯ Oh Loredy...
455
0
26,678
gervaise21
10,797
August 2016
gervaise21
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by gervaise21 on Dec 29, 2016 20:15:24 GMT
I still don't understand why if you don't experience emotions you are considered incapable of choosing one action over another. If you are capable of choosing then you have free will. Do you always make every decision that you do on the basis of emotion? I doubt it.
I think you are confusing character and personality with the ability to make a decision for oneself. The tranquil may only do so in exceptional circumstances but as you agree, they would rather live than die, they would rather be comfortable and warm, than shivering with cold, will know they are hungry and need food. So no one needs to tell them to go indoors when it starts to snow or to find something to eat when they are hungry. Most of the time they won't embark on a task that doesn't affect their survival because they are not driven by the same ambition as people with emotions but they are capable of refusing to do a task for the same reason. They are not puppets through lack of emotions because a puppet will not eat, or dress, or move or sleep without someone pulling the strings.
I still think the process is a terrible thing to do to anyone and whilst it is possible to argue that they have had their humanity removed with their emotions, I simply find that a very dangerous view to take because by de-humanising them, you make it seem less horrific what the Venatori do to them. It is viewing them as simply objects to be used in that way that de-humanises them, not the fact that they are tranquil in the first place. Whilst they may be invisible to spirits through the Rite so that they are no more interested in them than a table, it doesn't mean that they are no better than a table.
What makes even less sense if the mechanism for creating a Seeker. If they have been emptied of all emotion like a tranquil, what is there to attract a faith spirit to them? So I think the terminology that Cassandra uses is wrong. If she was made tranquil, then she had no faith. Ego there was nothing to attract a faith spirit. If she had emptied her mind of everything but her faith in the Maker, then she was just focussed on her faith, not tranquil. (I think they were trying to equate Cassandra's experience to that of religious mystics who "empty themselves" or deny "self" to achieve a state of religious ecstasy and oneness with the Divine but that is something completely different to being devoid of all emotion)
|
|
inherit
∯ Oh Loredy...
455
0
26,678
gervaise21
10,797
August 2016
gervaise21
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by gervaise21 on Dec 29, 2016 20:40:41 GMT
Here's a related thought. What about spirits? Do they have emotions of their own or only those of the mortals they latch on to? Do they have free will or are they completely controlled by the sphere of interest as more of an instinctive reaction? Strangely enough they make a great deal of whether spirits are people or not through debate with Solas and to a lesser extent the decision over Cole. According to the Chant, when there was no material world and no mortals, the spirits were motivated to do nothing other than sing the praises of the Maker, which would suggest that in their natural state spirits have no free will.
Then the Maker specifically created mortals with the drive to do things, a spark of the divine so to speak. So if the tranquil do not have the motivation to do things for themselves, does that make them more like pure spirits? That would make a certain irony to the fact that in order to make tranquil less attract to spirits, they are actually more like them.
|
|
inherit
Wanted Apostate
127
0
18,242
Catilina
11,030
August 2016
catilina
Top
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Catilina on Dec 29, 2016 21:14:50 GMT
I still don't understand why if you don't experience emotions you are considered incapable of choosing one action over another. If you are capable of choosing then you have free will. Do you always make every decision that you do on the basis of emotion? I doubt it. I think you are confusing character and personality with the ability to make a decision for oneself. The tranquil may only do so in exceptional circumstances but as you agree, they would rather live than die, they would rather be comfortable and warm, than shivering with cold, will know they are hungry and need food. So no one needs to tell them to go indoors when it starts to snow or to find something to eat when they are hungry. Most of the time they won't embark on a task that doesn't affect their survival because they are not driven by the same ambition as people with emotions but they are capable of refusing to do a task for the same reason. They are not puppets through lack of emotions because a puppet will not eat, or dress, or move or sleep without someone pulling the strings. I still think the process is a terrible thing to do to anyone and whilst it is possible to argue that they have had their humanity removed with their emotions, I simply find that a very dangerous view to take because by de-humanising them, you make it seem less horrific what the Venatori do to them. It is viewing them as simply objects to be used in that way that de-humanises them, not the fact that they are tranquil in the first place. Whilst they may be invisible to spirits through the Rite so that they are no more interested in them than a table, it doesn't mean that they are no better than a table. What makes even less sense if the mechanism for creating a Seeker. If they have been emptied of all emotion like a tranquil, what is there to attract a faith spirit to them? So I think the terminology that Cassandra uses is wrong. If she was made tranquil, then she had no faith. Ego there was nothing to attract a faith spirit. If she had emptied her mind of everything but her faith in the Maker, then she was just focussed on her faith, not tranquil. (I think they were trying to equate Cassandra's experience to that of religious mystics who "empty themselves" or deny "self" to achieve a state of religious ecstasy and oneness with the Divine but that is something completely different to being devoid of all emotion) This is not same. If you don't have emotion, you don't have motivation, if you don't have motivation, you don't want anything. If you don't want anything, you don't have goals, you don't need anything. Interest for example also an emotion, as i see. The desire to satisfy the scientific interest, the enthusiasm toward this a very powerful emotion. Yes, the people make most decisions on the basis some kind emotion. You're right. They are able to feel for example pain, hunger, warm and cold. They know, that how can assure the basic living conditions, without commands. This would be the free will? They don't forget their life, and their knowledge. Just does not mean anything to them. Okay, this don't really true: they know, that their knowledge mean the life without pain, could and hungry. This would be the real free will? I not dehumanising them, I never said that the tranquils are not people. (They are far more people, than for example Elthina, who just watching passively that in a Chantry's institute can happens such a thing. I would add: I don't totally against the tranquility as tool, when used as the final solution, for example on Erimond, but JUST in such a serious cases) Probably Cassandra was wrong, what she did, that not same, I agree. |
|
inherit
Wanted Apostate
127
0
18,242
Catilina
11,030
August 2016
catilina
Top
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Catilina on Dec 29, 2016 21:49:39 GMT
Here's a related thought. What about spirits? Do they have emotions of their own or only those of the mortals they latch on to? Do they have free will or are they completely controlled by the sphere of interest as more of an instinctive reaction? Strangely enough they make a great deal of whether spirits are people or not through debate with Solas and to a lesser extent the decision over Cole. According to the Chant, when there was no material world and no mortals, the spirits were motivated to do nothing other than sing the praises of the Maker, which would suggest that in their natural state spirits have no free will. Then the Maker specifically created mortals with the drive to do things, a spark of the divine so to speak. So if the tranquil do not have the motivation to do things for themselves, does that make them more like pure spirits? That would make a certain irony to the fact that in order to make tranquil less attract to spirits, they are actually more like them. Exactly what I thought before. This is interest. According the Chantry, they lacked of soul. So: based on this, theoretically they dont have emotions. But (also according the Chantry): they have curiosity, jealousy, desire etc., depend on their nature. Perhaps they have some emotions, but rather only related their purpose. For example as I remember: Justice showed some kind anger, even in the Fade, in DAA. We know, that they are able to learn, for example from the host's memory (Justice, in Kristoff's corpse). They have free will: they able to leave the Fade for example, if they want and find anyone, who help them. |
|
inherit
∯ Oh Loredy...
455
0
26,678
gervaise21
10,797
August 2016
gervaise21
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by gervaise21 on Dec 29, 2016 23:08:46 GMT
The thing is that spirits seem to develop the emotions through their contact with mortals. Before mortals existed, they had no emotions. Cole also shows that when a spirit actually crosses over to the material world and identifies strongly with an occupant of the world, then they become more complex in their emotions and development of a personality. Which would account for why the greater demons, like Imshael, show a greater range of emotions than a simple rage demon.
So in theory, if spirits were completely blocked from contact with Thedas, they would lose any semblance of emotion and their motivation to do anything, just as when a person is completely cut off from the Fade, they lose their emotions and motivation. It is important to the development of both spirits and mortals that they have contact with each other or at least the plane of existence in which they live.
|
|
inherit
Wanted Apostate
127
0
18,242
Catilina
11,030
August 2016
catilina
Top
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Catilina on Dec 29, 2016 23:28:19 GMT
The thing is that spirits seem to develop the emotions through their contact with mortals. Before mortals existed, they had no emotions. Cole also shows that when a spirit actually crosses over to the material world and identifies strongly with an occupant of the world, then they become more complex in their emotions and development of a personality. Which would account for why the greater demons, like Imshael, show a greater range of emotions than a simple rage demon. So in theory, if spirits were completely blocked from contact with Thedas, they would lose any semblance of emotion and their motivation to do anything, just as when a person is completely cut off from the Fade, they lose their emotions and motivation. It is important to the development of both spirits and mortals that they have contact with each other or at least the plane of existence in which they live. I'm not sure about mortals, if we take the Andrastian doctrines: the soul of mortals come from the Maker, the spirits don't have their own. So according this the mortals don't need to contact with a spirit for the emotions, but the spirit needs to contact with a mortal. So: the Chantry's doctrines are contradictory... But what about the dwarfs? They have emotions, same as humans and elves, not weaker, but they have not so strong contact to the fade, true, don't completely barred out. If the emotions depend on the Fade, the dwarves would be less emotional, but this isn't true. |
|
inherit
Wanted Apostate
127
0
18,242
Catilina
11,030
August 2016
catilina
Top
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Catilina on Dec 30, 2016 0:11:21 GMT
Could there have been more going on with Karl then being Tranquil and convinced that turning Anders in was the right thing to do. I was thinking the Kirkwall circle was brutal, maybe more than say Ferelden.Ser Alrik was brutal to mages to force them to do his bidding. Many people will do things againts their better judgement when put in a bad prolonged abusive situation to protect themselves.In that situation they are so beaten down and their will lessened. Maybe that is what was happening with Karl. Because Karl didn't lose his memories of Anders and what they had. His emotions were gone but logically wouldn't he have known what they had and what they meant to each other. How could he voluntarily work with the templars to make Anders tranquil. He knows others have emotions. Anyways that's what I thought when doing the quest. Never thought Karl betrayed him in that sense. He remembered his life, but I think, only as a boring book. There is no emotion, love means nothing. It's impedimental and not logical. This is what happened with Karl, as I see. Yes, this is not betrayal, because –as gervaise21 wrote– Karl probably thought (the Templars convinced him), that Anders will be safety in the Circle (and possibly that Anders will be calmed and useful as tranquil). But yes, this is not that free will, but not because they tortured him, rather from the tranquility. Just remember, what Alrik said to Ella: if Ella become tranquil, she will do anything, what he want. Not because of command, because he can convince her, that that the obedience is useful. (Probably according the writers this is the free will.) |
|
inherit
Wanted Apostate
127
0
18,242
Catilina
11,030
August 2016
catilina
Top
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Catilina on Dec 30, 2016 0:51:03 GMT
He remembered his life, but I think, only as a boring book. There is no emotion, love means nothing. It is not logical and is hampered. This is what happened. Yes, this is not betrayal, because –as gervaise21 wrote– Karl probably thought (the Templars convinced him), that Anders will be safety in the Circle (and possibly that Anders will be calmed and useful as tranquil). But yes, this is not that free will, but not because they tortured him, rather from the tranquility. Just remember, what Alrik said to Ella: if Ella become tranquil, she will do anything, what he want. Not because of command, because he can convince her, that that the obedience is useful. (Probably according the writers this is the free will.) But using Gervaise21's example if being tranquil is similar to being Vulcan, Sarak knew he loved his wife and son. Logically Ella would know what Ser Alrik is doing is wrong even though she cannot stop him. And Karl would remember Anders even though he couldn't stop what Alrik told him to do.
It's horrible, tranquility. Do you still have Anders kill Karl knowing after DAI that it is reversable? To know, that you loved someone, or feel that you loved someone not same. Karl was convinced, that the Circle will be good for Anders. Don't forget: they lived together in the Circle... He knew, that Anders wanted to leave, and escaped, but now, as tranquil, Karl dont saw too logical this: in the Circle they get security, peace of mind. This all for Anders! The templars can play with tranquils. So easy to find a "logical" reason for anything. For Karl did not meant anything that what Anders wanted before, and what he wanted before. Karl probably was smart, at least not stupid, despite he did not understand their own reasons after the Rite of Tranquility.Anders kill Karl, no matter, what Hawke said, I not once used the don't kill him answer, it depend on, how I imagined Hawke. My last Hawke voted on euthanasia, for example, because of Bethany. Hawke don't know, that Divine Justinia and the Seekers find a way to save reverse... (Vulcan? Sarek? I confused. From Star Trek? Why they are here: that's another world, the circumstances totally different, and the Vulcans have emotions, too much, in fact, therefore they suppress their emotions, willfully.) |
|
inherit
Wanted Apostate
127
0
18,242
Catilina
11,030
August 2016
catilina
Top
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Catilina on Dec 30, 2016 4:27:57 GMT
To know, that you loved someone, or feel that you loved someone not same. Karl was convinced, that the Circle will be good for Anders. Don't forget: they lived together in the Circle... He knew, that Anders wanted to leave, and escaped, but now, as tranquil, Karl dont saw too logical this: in the Circle they get security, peace of mind. This all for Anders! The templars can play with tranquils. So easy to find a "logical" reason for anything. For Karl did not meant anything that what Anders wanted before, and what he wanted before. Karl probably was smart, at least not stupid, despite he did not understand their own reasons after the Rite of Tranquility.Anders kill Karl, no matter, what Hawke said, I not once used the don't kill him answer, it depend on, how I imagined Hawke. My last Hawke voted on euthanasia, for example, because of Bethany. Hawke don't know, that Divine Justinia and the Seekers find a way to save reverse... (Vulcan? Sarek? I confused. From Star Trek? Why they are here: that's another world, the circumstances totally different, and the Vulcans have emotions, too much, in fact, therefore they suppress their emotions, willfully.) <May be they don't show it very well in game but I would ask again, do the Vulcan's have free will? Clearly they do. Yet they are always emphasising that decisions are made on the basis of what is logical. I am simply applying the same reasoning to tranquil.> I was refering to the above quote by Gervaise21. It made sense to me in explaining the tranquil. In that they remember but you are right they suppress their feelings not forget.
Karl as tranquil is a bit different than Owain and the others. Maybe cause Anders is involved. Its an interesting discussion you all are having. Owain was scary enough, as I see, Maddox and Clemence was different a bit (I think, the writers changed their minds, because the Inquisitor was forced to siding with the Chantry, no matter, what s/he wanted). I think, that if the tranquils would be "normal", just a bit more logical and focused, than the others, then the Mages would not so much to scared from this possibility. Even in Inquisition. The only thing, that break Erimond's overconfidence, it's the tranquilising . "I don't want to lose myself!" Not his power, himself. DA Wiki, Tranquil: "As a side effect, their emotional center is utterly removed"It was weird me too, when I thought about, what important the emotions. As mentioned before, the emotions are motivations. Without any motivation, the people able only to lie on a bed, and stare at the ceiling. Yes, they able to eat, if must, they are able to read as well, for example, but why would they do that? They dont feel any interest (emotion). They don't want anything. We can't speak about free will in this case. Who dont have emotion, don't want to get out of bed, because they don't have any reason for it, except the daily subsistence. Why they want to live? No. They don't want to live, but prefer the life over the death, because they dont know the death, and the people have survival instinct... What I don't see, that how the work satisfied them? This is not logical. The satisfaction is an emotion. When I finished a work, I'm happy with the result, or angry/discontented, if not well succeed, but in every case I feel something. Theoretically the tranquil don't feel anything, what not physical feeling. It seems, the writers failed in this. |
|
inherit
Wanted Apostate
127
0
18,242
Catilina
11,030
August 2016
catilina
Top
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Catilina on Dec 30, 2016 5:29:13 GMT
Owain was scary enough, as I see, Maddox and Clemence was different a bit (I think, the writers changed their minds, because the Inquisitor was forced to siding with the Chantry, no matter, what s/he wanted). I think, that if the tranquils would be "normal", just a bit more logical and focused, than the others, then the Mages would not so much to scared from this possibility. Even in Inquisition. The one thing, that break Erimond's overconfidence, it's the tranquilising . "I don't want to lose myself!" Not his magic, himself. DA Wiki, Tranquil: "As a side effect, their emotional center is utterly removed"It was weird me too, when I thought about, what important the emotions. As mentioned before, the emotions are motivations. Without any motivation, the people able only to lie on a bed, and stare at the ceiling. Yes, they able to eat, if must, they are able to read as well, for example, but why would they do that? They dont feel any interest (emotion). They don't want anything. We can't speak about free will in this case. Who dont have emotion, don't want to get out of bed, because they don't have any reason for it, except the daily subsistence. Why they want to live? No. They don't want to live, but prefer the life over the death, because they dont know the death, and the people have survival instinct... What I don't see, that how the work satisfied them? This is not logical. The satisfaction is an emotion. When I finished a work, I'm happy with the result, or angry/discontent, if not well succeed, but in every case I feel something. Theoretically the tranquil don't feel anything, what not physical feeling. It seems, the writers failed in this. Owain he seemed to weigh his choices and make a decision similar to Clemence. Owain though has absolutely no emotions. Clemence seemed relieved? to work with the Inquistion and seemed lost before. Maybe the devs thought the tranquil needed softening in DAI. For the story I liked the Owain and the tranquil in DA2 better as you could sympathize more with them and had more of an emotional affect on the player.
The simple decisions not really means free will in this cases, as I see. Karl also was able to decision, he helped to Templars to take Anders into the safe place... but this was from "free will"? Oh, yes, the templars not tortured or forced him, they convinced him. But this real free will? Celemence's will was the work for the Inquisition, because he want to live, and shaw, that Redcliffe not safe place. (And yes, you're right, he showed some emotion.) Owain similar as Clemence, without emotion. As I saw, Maddox has some loyality. This is weird. But it might be explained by logic... |
|
inherit
∯ Oh Loredy...
455
0
26,678
gervaise21
10,797
August 2016
gervaise21
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by gervaise21 on Dec 30, 2016 10:51:53 GMT
I suppose the problem is them trying to make some sort of mechanical means of achieving something that a person can actually do for themselves if they really want to or even if they don't, subconsciously. It is possible to supress your emotions to such an extent that to an outsider you appear unfeeling and this can be a protection mechanism against your inner demons. However, this is something internalised and controlled either consciously or sub-consciously by your own mind. This can be affected by external factors, such as drugs. However, a person is still capable of free will, even if seriously strong drugs can seriously affect your decision making process. To my mind, this internalised suppression of emotion is what Cassandra is describing. However, no one else made her tranquil, she did it to herself during her year long meditation. This is why when the faith spirit breaks this trance, she describes it as a wonderful, ecstatic awakening, the complete opposite to what a tranquil experiences.
Pharamond describes being a tranquil in Asunder. He says that considering it cuts you off from the land of dreams, ironically it feels like you are in a dream. You follow the course of the dream but nothing seems real and nothing has any meaning. "This isn't your home, this isn't your life, this isn't you." Yet when another character suggests that "Tranquil do nothing they are not asked to", he responds that they do have free will, they "just desire nothing, we strive for nothing". However, tranquil are described as being very focussed once they are given a task, so they have motivation, just not the reason for being motivated. I suppose a prime example is Owain in DAO. He keeps on tidying the place up even though the Circle is in chaos with demons running rampant. As such, having the place neat and tidy hardly seems a priority, but that is Owain's purpose in life so he keeps on doing it.
The whole explanation for how tranquil works is something that I don't think the writers were ever entirely sure about at the beginning and so that is why it seems so confusing and contradictory at times, because they were making it up as they went along. After all, emotions surely come from within you, so why does cutting you off from the Fade remove them? Why does lyrium both aid connection to the Fade and yet also prevent it? Why are dwarves apparently cut off from the Fade, have no magic of their own and do not dream, yet have normal emotions? Why does a spirit touching the mind restore the person's emotions when they still have the lyrium brand that prevented them in the first place?
It is almost as though the soul of a person is simultaneously within them and in the Fade, or needs contact with the sustenance of the Fade in order to operate normally. Otherwise it is simply dormant, in hibernation, dare I say it, in uthenera? Able to observe the events taking place around it, whilst not directly taking part. That still doesn't explain why dwarves have normal emotions and yet in other ways seem in the same state as tranquil, cut off from the Fade.
The assertion that the tranquil still has free will is the most difficult one to explain since I would agree with you, what is motivating that decision? If you are just a passive observer, as in a dream, then how are you exercising your free will? If you are making active decisions, then you are controlling the situation. If you are a passive observer, then you are not responsible for your actions and cannot be considered capable of betrayal; if you have free will then you have made an informed decision on the basis of the information available to you. If you do not have free will then your actions cannot be judged from a moral standpoint. If you do not have the emotional understanding of what friendship and loyalty entail, then is an action such as Karl's a betrayal of his former lover? Madox was not demonstrating loyalty to a person but just doing what was logical.
I think they probably did water down the horror of tranquillity in DAI because we are forced to be associated with an organisation and individuals who previously condoned it. Our only judgement on the matter is exactly that; when we pronounce sentence on various individuals. Strangely enough, though, you could only condemn someone to tranquillity if you were a mage yourself. Effectively you were taking the place of the First Enchanter who is meant to be the final endorser of the decision to carry it out, whereas in DA2 most of the rites were being carried out illegally, so by-passing Orsino altogether (at least I assume that is the case and he wasn't complicit). So whilst they didn't explain this in game, an Inquisitor could only legally carry out the sentence as a mage. Yet we had a former First Enchanter and Court Enchanter within our inner Circle (assuming you recruit Vivienne), so she could have endorsed the decision of a non-mage. I can't remember, does Vivienne approve/disapprove/make no comment on decisions to enforce tranquillity? Otherwise, the restricting of it to one class of Inquisitor only doesn't really make much sense.
|
|
] I agree so much with it all, tranquils are people, mutilated people, and it bothers me to no end when they're treated like they're not, as if they were husks or something... but still, other characters may do that, because that's maybe how Thedas is or how some people see it and that's not up to player, but I really hate that in Trespasser when Solas says "it was like walking through a world of tranquil" my Inquisitor's reply is "we aren't even people to you?" wtf was that?! 
, my Inquisitor would have never implied that tranquils are not people... So if I don't want to hear her say that I have to skip a part of the dialogue that other than that is quite interesting :/ one of the many things that sounds OOC in that dialogue for my PC [rant over 
. 
, but why woud Solas say that, when he's always defending thar spirtis shoudn't be considered lesser creatures because they are intelligent and they have free will? I can believe though that it was Weekes intention to imply that it was Solas who was saying that consdering Cole line about Felassan, but to me none of it makes sense and I have a lot of trouble understanding why Solas would.think that modern thedas people is less than people, and I don't really see what does the Inquisitor to change his mind about it, tbh 
But even if that was the case, my Inquisitor would have not played along, she'd say something like "no, we're not tranquil, and tranquils are still people anyway" or at the very least, she would have asked "is that your way of saying we're not people to you?" I hate hear her say that phrase just like that, because I feel rather strongly about this. But, yes, ignore my rants, 