Forum:The Anders Decision

Forums: Index > Game DiscussionThe Anders Decision

Note: This topic has been unedited for 4693 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not continue it unless it really needs a response.

Lots of debate about Anders at the end of DA2, whether to kill him or not. Personally, I felt a bit better letting him live, after chastising him of course. Killing him makes him a martyr. Letting him live forces him to live out the consequences of his actions. I imagine his life after the Chantry incident would be hell, far more deserving than giving him death, an easy way out.

Discuss :). Fat Barry (talk) 13:54, June 13, 2011 (UTC)

I applaud Anders and what he did. Somebody had to do SomeThing. There never was and never would be any consequences for the crimes that the templars/chantry does and did. Just look at what the europeans did to the indegenous peoples of the americas, all in the name of christianity ... and got away with it with no repercussions. 2 religions based on women who REALLY stuck to their story, then some men who wanted to stay in power came along and added to it, subtracted from it, revised it, and changed it ... all so they could STAY in power, all at the expense of the masses. Be it Justice or Vengeance that guided his hand, something HAD to be done, and sit-ins or stern talking to's just wouldn't cut it. M.Dragon (talk) 14:17, June 13, 2011 (UTC)

A few of my friends who haven't played Awakening liked what Anders did. Personally, having known how Anders was before he became Justified, I feel ambivalent. On one hand, there's what M.Dragon said. Something had to be done, and Orsino was content to sit back and argue it out. On the other hand, Anders was insistent there was no other way--in Kirkwall, at least. The relationship between Knight Commander Greagoir and First Enchanter Irving was very, very different compared to Orsino and Meredith. Heck, I'd say they bordered on friendship (the former pair). Talking it out would have been possible with Irving and Greagoir.

Meredith had her reasons, but one rule doesn't satisfy every instance. It was within her rule that idiots like Ser Alrik festered and gave Templars a bad name. Alistair was a Templar once, and even kept some of his training once he became a Warden, but didn't let ideology shackle him.

Yes, there wasn't justice for mages, but Anders proved exactly why there isn't. Magic is dangerous, and given the fact that every mage is susceptible to demonic possession, precautions MUST be taken. The Harrowing is conducted with Templar supervision for a reason.

That said, Elthina was at greater fault here. She was a fool blinded by her devotion to the Maker and did nothing when a simple word could have had Meredith back down enough to maintain stability in Kirkwall. Sebastian, Hawke, even Anders go to Elthina and ask her to do something. Anything to keep the peace between Templars and mages. Leliana (Exiled Prince DLC) advises Hawke and Sebastian to convince Elthina to leave Kirkwall--that's doing something. Some action to indicate whether she approves or disapproves of Meredith's actions. Did she deserve what she got? She was blown up in a second, felt no pain, as opposed to the mages who were dragged back to the Cirle or made Tranquil forcefully. Which is a better fate? I don't know. It is, however, my opinion that she got what she deserved. Death at the hands of a terrorist? No. Inaction isn't apathy, but it came close enough for the line to be blurred and that perception was what forced Anders' hand.

As for Anders, even though he says he and Justice are one, they are both two clearly different personalities. That's shown at least twice in the game: Anders' recruitment mission and his personal quest Dissent in Act II. Anders pre-DA2 was carefree and by his own admission more self-centered. It was Justice who drove Anders to question why he wasn't fighting for the freedom of all mages, so I like to think it was Vengeance who condoned terrorism to drive a point across.

As the OP said, would killing him have been justified? I don't know. As a gamer, I've known Anders for longer than Hawke. Is killing him the 'easy way out'? Once he blew up the chantry, there was no easy way out. He didn't cause the tensions but he was the catalyst. Killing him or letting him go wasn't the question anymore. The question became whether he truly recognized the scope of what he'd done. Would he regret his actions? More accurately, would he regret having started the war? If Hawke didn't help him, as a Grey Warden he could have gone to the Anderfels and started from there? He wanted immediate results without realizing that with something so big, there HAVE to be baby steps. Start small, go big. He wanted big and he went big. Was that better for Thedas? I don't think so. DA3 will tell.

To answer the OPs question directly, whether to kill him or not, I say no. Stooping to his level makes us no better than he is, even if it means letting him go. Maybe the Wardens will come for him in force, maybe the Seekers will find him. It wasn't our place to mete out justice when, in actuality, we might just be looking for vengeance against the crime he committed. How's that so different from the being that merged with him in the first place? The transformation was faster for us than for it. I couldn't kill him in cold blood, even if he could. It's not my place. Quirkynature (talk) 15:51, June 13, 2011 (UTC)

Great post Quirkynature, you've certainly made me think. I let Anders live, I want him to see the consequences of his actions and deal with them. 202.45.119.22 (talk) 23:40, June 13, 2011 (UTC)

If nothing else, they'll have fun answering to The Warden (when/if he/she comes back). Quirkynature (talk) 02:02, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

I'm just wondering what would happen if, say, a real-life Christian who was angered by the injustices and abuses fostered by the Catholic Church or any mainline Christian denomination that went unanswered for too long ended up reacting like Anders did with the Andrastian Chantry in Kirkwall, deciding that blowing up a church was the way to get those issues finally out in the open for the general public to see that such things cannot continue to go on. Which is not saying that what Anders did was the right thing to do, nor is it an advocation for violence when it comes to what people of faith should do. People should be angry when too many injustices in the system take place and they should stand together in the effort to correct the problem regardless of what happens, but they shouldn't abandon the tenets of their belief system in order to effect change. (VicGeorge2K9 (talk) 17:05, June 13, 2011 (UTC))

Anders needed to be put down... His madness would have only grown stronger and more would have suffered because of his corruption. The Kirkwall Circle was rotten, if there was ever any doubt about the necessity of the Templars, Kirkwall should have shattered it. It saddens me that in the end it was the innocent that suffered in the culmination of all that insanity. In my humble opinion, the mess that situation devolved into, sparking a continent wide 'revolution', is a bullshit plot point. What cause did Anders martyr himself for in reality? The freedom of a circle full of closet Blood Mages that summoned demons left, right and center? Even the first enchanter was in bed with a blood mage that was capturing and murdering innocents for his own sick gains. The Mages needed to be saved from themselves more than any off the rails Templar. Anders did nothing good by destroying the Chantry, all he did was demonstrate further the corruption of Kirkwall's mages.

This is because in reality Elthina had no power over Meredith, it's a fallacy to believe otherwise, because Meredith was thoroughly mad. If Elthina had commanded Meredith to step down, Meredith would have been the one to put Elthina down and declare the mages' influence was the cause. Crowd control and mediation was the extent of the Grand Cleric's power, overstepping those bounds would have been the end of her simply because Meredith would not tolerate her authority being trampled on.

Anders was a fool blinded by his own dogma, just as bad as any of the corrupt Templars we meet during the course of the story. Meredith needed to die, not Elthina, and the Templars needed internal policing to root out their own corruption. Speaking of which... Why is this not done??? A Templar Internal Affairs Bureau would go a long way to protecting mages from the asswipes shirking their duty to protect the mages under their care. There must be a strict code of etiquette for Templars, action should have been taken, and I struggle to wrap my head around a reason as to why nothing was done.

I would have loved to have seen such an organization in the game, providing the third option I always wanted, to restore peace to Kirkwall in a proper manner. I'd have joined right up, and If I had been given the power, Meredith, the fallen Templars, Anders, and those consorting with demons would have all been put in their place by whatever means necessary, and order restored to the circle without the mass loss of innocent life. Michael Largness (talk) 20:29, June 13, 2011 (UTC)

The only thing that was close to a Templar Internal Affairs Bureau in the Dragon Age universe were the Seekers of Truth, but sadly they only came snooping around a few years after the Second Battle of Kirkwall looking for the Champion and the Warden. (VicGeorge2K9 (talk) 21:57, June 13, 2011 (UTC))

Too little, too late, though. All Divine Justinia thought prudent to send to Kirkwall was an assassin to warn Elthina of impending doom. The way I see it, everybody post-DA:O got their IQ slashed by 50. Quirkynature (talk) 22:33, June 13, 2011 (UTC)

I've only ever felt compelled to kill Anders for what he did. Sure, he's likely to be seen as a martyr because of it, but alive or dead he'd be the same symbol--unless there's a "keep him alive, but locked away and defeated" option that I've missed that prevents the other circles from rebelling. In which case I'd support keeping him alive. HELO (talk) 22:50, June 13, 2011 (UTC)

Seeing as the Anders and Justice I have known from Awakening turned out in DA2 and how they developed during the game I always put them at peace when I'm given the decision. I don't care whether that makes Anders a martyr or not, I just don't want to let those two gegenerate any further. Judging by the impression I had of both of them from Awakening, I'm confident that neither of them would have choosen to do something of that scale.--Tanis84 (talk) 01:00, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

Anders in Awakening was FUNNY. He used to LAUGH at every opportunity he got. And Justice marveled at the world, not merely "graah injustice here kill smash kill kill kill!!". Justice in Awakening was a deep character, having realized he was missing on a lot of things in the Fade. Would they have chosen to blow up the chantry? They did. I'm not convinced all of a sudden Anders decided "mages are oppressed graah kill templars!" I'm not satisfied with the explanation Anders gives. There HAS to be more. Quirkynature (talk) 02:02, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

I fully agree with what Anders did. Not just because I am a fangirl but I do believe that mages need more freedom. There can be no comprmise(sp?) because it would only work for a short time. Then after that we would be in the same situation as we are in DA2. Not only that but if Anders didn't do it I would have. Maybe blowing the Chantry sky high wasn't the best way but something had to be done.The chantry needs to be taken down. Elthina deserved it. All she needed to do was say something to either Orsino or Meredith and all this could have stopped. But she choose to keep her mouth shut and let things happen. Not only that but they punish whoever doesnt follow in thier way of the maker or do as they command. For example: Look at Seamus. He wanted to follow in the ways of the Qun and Petrice killed him for it...Didn't Varric make a comment to Cassandra that some of the Templars have now rebelled as well agaisnt the chantry and that Chantry is now falling to pieces? In my eyes maybe if the Chantry falls there can finally be peace between the mages and templars because they no longer have to follow the chantry's orders....So I applaud Anders for what he did. Emmalee (talk) 02:14, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

Grand Cleric Elthina scolded Petrice for misusing her position as an excuse for having Saemus killed and stripped her of her title, and given the possibility that Hawke supported the Qunari, Petrice was shortly killed afterward by a Qunari. (VicGeorge2K9 (talk) 10:48, June 14, 2011 (UTC))

(Spoiler) Does Anders deserve to die? Yes. It would be justice for the innocents that he killed. However, I always felt that if he is going to start this revolution, he might as well die fighting in it and it won't be by my hand. Also, to those who believe he is completely out of control, he can be broken. He can side with the Templars based on what you decide. There's more to it than that but, IT CAN BE DONE! Personally, Anders is one of my most favorite companions because he is one of the most complex and I respect him despite me not agreeing with his actions. Plus, he is a healer and that is most useful in many battles.--Fantasyeve87 03:29, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

To me, the choice was fairly easy. Letting him live (for however long that is, I mean, you'd think he'd be a pretty massive target) is a much tougher consequence than simply ending his life. Through all that he did, he seemed like the sort of guy who would still hate that he had to do what he had to do, because he would know not everyone who died in the Chantry was at fault, or even involved, perfectly innocent people, children even. Then there's everyone who died in the oncoming battle, no matter who you sided with there would be almost countless losses on both sides. I can see how it could be considered justice that he himself dies for what he did, avenging those who died, but it's not our (Hawke's) place to decide that in my opinion. While playing the game through on the Templars' side, with Meredith with you and the group at the end when you speak to Anders after he's done what he's done, it seems odd to me that Meredith wouldn't just kill him herself. She leaves it up to Hawke, which I don't think is really in line with how she acted throughout the story, or after that encounter.

I'm of the view that Anders was influenced by Justice/Vengeance more and more the further into the story we went. I think that even if Anders thought it were his own thoughts driving him to do what he did, it couldn't 100% have been. He says that not even the greatest scholar could say where he ends and Justice begins. To me, this means that slowly but surely he would become, and has become blurred, in his thoughts, in his actions, in his very identity. Note one thing I feel is very important. Throughout the story, whenever J/V comes through, it's as a completely different personality. When he flashes through in conversation it's because Anders' is feeling angry. When he breaks through after discovering Karl is now tranquil, it's in a fit of rage that allows Justice/Vengeance to take over. At the end of Ander's Dissent quest, there are two possible outcomes (that I know of/have seen). Either J/V tries to kill the girl and you interfere and stop him, saving her, or you don't, and she dies. This demonstrates that in this instance J/V is in total control. Anders would've had to just sit back and watch as J/V did whatever he was going to do, whether he watched as he planned to kill the girl only to have Hawke stop him, or he watched as J/V slaughtered her. This all seems to change by the time we get to the end where the Chantry building is destroyed, Anders and J/V seem to be of the same mindset, they appear to be talking as one, it's as if their thoughts, their actions, their identity is now all as one, fused, as if Anders and J/V are no longer 2 separate beings simply sharing the one mortal body, but now acting completely in sync with eachother. Which makes me wonder what has happened. Has Anders changed and is now agreeing with J/V that this has to be done? Or has J/V taken over to the point where Anders is in a way, lost? He can't be completely gone, as he speaks on his own accord after the fact, but is this Anders, truly Anders anymore? I feel the lines has been blurred even more than even Anders had thought earlier on, perhaps the lines now no longer even exist.

One aspect of this is, how cool would it be if Anders/J/V now had combat abilities that were now utterly fused and became an even stronger opponent? Of one mind at all times, but able to call upon all of their combined, devastating abilities at any time. If he was still fighting on your side, in the next installment etc.

As to what Quirkynature was talking about with the Grey Wardens, I think it's highly possible that if Anders was allowed to live, he would be tracked down by them to the point where they have to either capture him or outright end him. Think about it, when/if Alistair is put on the throne it's alleged that the Grey Wardens may simply want one of their own there. So it's highly likely people would think that what Anders did was the will of the Grey Wardens, and that they are declaring themselves enemies of the Chantry. Notice how neither Varric nor Cassandra mention the Grey Wardens? That I remember anyway, correct me if I'm wrong. Which of course is completely incorrect, to our knowledge anyway. They don't get into politics, and if they did, in this case, it'd be the opposite, to eradicate tensions so that they had both the mages and Templars on their side to battle the Darkspawn/Blight.

Just my thoughts anyway. S13Kuro (talk) 04:31, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

Interesting to note that when Anders showed his Vengeance abomination side during his rant to Meredith and Orsino prior to the Chantry exploding, neither of them killed him outright, which only showed how far gone they both were in this dispute that led to the Second Battle of Kirkwall. (VicGeorge2K9 (talk) 10:53, June 14, 2011 (UTC))

Well, as the topic has already went off the rails as it is inevitable when Anders is involved, here's my contribution into derailment:

1)To "Waaaah terrorist!" crowd. Drop judging by double standards, will you? Sure, by modern values terrorism is bad, but you know what else is bad by modern values? Imprisoning groups of people without a reason and denying them their basic rights. You cannot go "Chantry's control is necessary because them be dark'n'dirty medieval ages and there's no other way" and then cry 9/11 at Anders (well, actually you can, but you'll look a bloody hypocrite).

2)"Ferelden's circle is okay because Greagoir is a decent guy". Sure he was a decent guy - for a prison warden. A nice warden doesn't make the phenomena of concentration camp chain itself right. 'sides, remember Wynne's child? The one that was taken from her to never be seen by her again? Happened in Ferelden circle.

3)"It's all Meredith's fault! If only she had been pink and fluffy, life in Kirkwall circle would've been sunshine and roses!" Hell no. Meredith was not a disease, but a mere symptom of one - the system of Chantry controlled Circles itself. Before possible arguments - no, I am not saying mages should run free and uncontrolled.

('sfunny, the more people pile on Anders, the more I like him. If this continues, soon he'll topple Varric off the top spot). Dorquemada (talk) 07:30, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

You make the thread sound so much worse than it is. Natural evolution of conversation rather than purposeful derailment? :P

I fully believe in the benefits that the circles offer to the mages of Thedas, and calling them prisons is a gross misnomer because they don't function like a typical prison. When the circles function the way they should, they should be a center for learning, they should offer mages an environment where they can live and work amongst their own kind instead of being subjected to the ignorance of the average village citizen, they can even venture outside the tower when their training is finished should they wish to do so. Yes the rules are harsh, but you've also got to think about why something like the circle became necessary in the first place. Neither the Tevinters of past or present sound like very nice places to live. Though I will be the first to admit that some things, especially the practices of taking newborn babies from their mothers and the rite of tranquility, need to change. Michael Largness (talk) 08:42, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

But that's the problem - it won't change while the Chantry has monopoly on mage control, and I doubt it would be willing to abandon their evil monopolist ways in favour of making mages' life more tolerable, because the Chantry is full-on power tripping and perfectly happy about it. Dorquemada (talk) 08:51, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

Ah, but there can always be voices for change, even inside the lumbering Chantry machine. We know the Divine is on her last legs for example. Whoever takes over as her successor could potentially be a Chantry Priestess that has witnessed first hand the injustices that Mages face in their daily lives and would love nothing more than to relax the restrictions placed on them. This could then be done without the need to completely abolish the Templar chapter attached to each circle, and they can continue to do their duty of protecting mages from the larger world that fears them, as well a protecting the world from the Mages who would abuse their power. It's my line of thinking that the Templars act as a great buffer between worlds, and the relationship between Mages and ordinary citizens would be worse off without them. Michael Largness (talk) 09:08, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

Here's where our opinions regarding Templars differ cardinally. As it seems to me, both Divine and Templars are nothing but mere tools of this scheming, plotting, bullying power addict called Orlais. Maker-Andrastianism is their main export goods, so to say, and Orlais would never do anything to compromise its steady flow. It is simply not in its interests to stop the Stanford Experiment'ish relationship betweeen templars and mages - precisely because a major part of Orlesian image and hold on political map of Thedas stems from having magic firmly squeezed in their grip. Dorquemada (talk) 09:28, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

I can see where you're coming from, but I guess I'm far too much of an idealist to see things being so dire and soulless. Happier Mages are only more likely to extoll the virtues of the Chantry to those they meet after all. Michael Largness (talk) 09:51, June 14, 2011 (UTC)

i agree anders decision was just rash but yeah killing him would have made him a martyr and inspired other mages to blow up their local chantry. but i applaud him i wanted to blow up the chantry in denerim for a while, but he had the guts to do itTheLastWarden (talk) 09:50, June 14, 2011 (UTC)TheLastWarden