FANDOM


This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Abomination article.
  • General discussions not pertaining to the improvement of the article should be held in Discussions instead.
  • Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
  • Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes! (~~~~)
  • Do not edit another editor's comment.

Hey, I removed the 'in game' picture of an abomination because that's a different demon type from the one pictured. If you go to the current demon page, you can see the critter you got an in-game shot of. Maria Caliban 06:11, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

David Gaider said only mages can become abominations Edit

David Gaider wrote:

"Regular people can be possessed by demons, and are still dangerous, but they are not abominations. Abominations have access to a mage's full power -- even a weak mage turned into an abomination is dangerous -- while a possessed human (or possessed anything) is only as dangerous as the demon that did the possessing."

Maybe the entry should be amended to reflect this. Lobsel Vith (talk) 14:26, January 4, 2011 (UTC)


More ideas out of their asses... if they don't explain it in the game then is not canon. --~jfdjf64.237.141.162 (talk)

Actually I always thought everyone realised this...it's relatively clear in game. 80.42.220.70 (talk) 23:09, May 22, 2011 (UTC)

I agree that it should be clarified and the info should be added. It is not evident from the article at all. Asherinka (talk) 16:13, February 6, 2012 (UTC)

Indeed. It implies anyone can become an abomination. --D. (talk · contr) 17:08, February 6, 2012 (UTC)
Fixed. Asherinka (talk) 09:02, February 7, 2012 (UTC)

Even if he said it, that's a lie, because undead, harvesters and sylvans are clasified as abominations. Sophia Dryden is also an abomination, he's an imperfect revenant.78.8.128.148 (talk) 05:33, June 20, 2013 (UTC)

'Tis why I watn to update the article, i.e. read beneath. The quote of Gaider's in question refers to rage abomination, the fleshy-melted thing. Whereas there are abominations that are simply possesed by demons or spirits. Henio0 (talk) 07:21, June 20, 2013 (UTC)

Reflecting the game better in the articleEdit

I was thinking of reorganisation of the article. Right now it seems to be both about this: Creature-Abomination and characters and whatnot possesed by a demon or spirit.

What I suggest is this: change the picture to the demonic possesion: Price of Power and then update the article accordingly. By that I mean that abomination is when a being from the Fade takes over a living thing, but specify that there are also these creatures who are also called Abominations, and they are specific abominations of a mage - the melted flesh creature from the current image. Henio0 (talk) 14:27, May 13, 2013 (UTC)

I think we need to create a new article with general information about all kinds of possession (including things like rock wraiths). This page should be about abominations = mages possessed by demons. The note that some people consider spirit healers etc abominations should be kept but it should be just that – a note – and not a commonly accepted definition. Harvesters and sylvans are not abominations and shouldn't be mentioned here at all.
New category "Possessed creatures" can be created that will contain Category:Abominations, Category:Corpses, harvesters, revenants, rock wraiths, sylvans etc. See also: World of Thedas, pp.170–172. – mostlyautumntalkcontribs • 09:03, June 20, 2013 (UTC)

Possessed healers and spirit warriors. Edit

We must finish this discussion once for all. For years spirit healers are debated about being abominations. I don't think their are abominations, they use spirits almost as blood mages use demons, but not all blood mages aren't clasified as a abominations. Why someone had an idea that spirit warrior is an abomination? Because of Justice? Warden can learn sh or sw, but isn't possessed at all.78.8.128.148 (talk) 05:42, June 20, 2013 (UTC)

Spirit warriors are described as "instead, they flirt with inhabitants of the Fade who agree to augment mortal abilities in exchange for a glimpse of the physical world. " Since warriors can't summon spirits or create tears in the Veil, the only way to use their power on command is to be grafted inside the body which is the technical definition of an abomination's possession. Likewise, the only way for the spirit to experience the physical world is to see through the eyes of mortals via possession. I don't see how a spirit warrior can be anything other than a possession thus an ambomination. (Sports72Xtrm (talk) 09:19, June 20, 2013 (UTC))
Why does possession equal abomination? Is this confirmed somewhere? David Gaider's quote, World of Thedas, codex entries about abominations and demonic possession all talk about abominations as specifically mages (alive or dead) possessed by demons. – mostlyautumntalkcontribs • 09:33, June 20, 2013 (UTC)
Abomination is a name of a being of obejct possessed by a demon or spirit. Besides Gaider is an epic lair. On page of spirit healers is a sentsence "While maleficarum summon and control demons from the Fade, some mages within the Circle of Magi seek to summon spirits that do not feed on the darker side of the psyche". That means they can summon spirits. Definition of a spirit warrior is understood by me like the spirits cast spell on the spirit warrior and come to see the material world a little. It's a deal with spirit not demon. 78.8.155.255 (talk) 09:49, June 20, 2013 (UTC)
"Abomination is a name of a being of obejct possessed by a demon or spirit". Do you have a source? Since my last reply I also looked in the official game guide and it also says that "abomination" applies to demonic possession of mages. That's four references versus zero. – mostlyautumntalkcontribs • 10:12, June 20, 2013 (UTC)
Do you have not your own reason? Demons can possess everything. Wilmod was no mage and he was turned into an abomination by Tarohne. That contradicts words of the game guide. Ash Wraiths are demons/spirits possessing ashes. Demons can possess dead and living, even trees and rocks.78.8.155.255 (talk) 10:34, June 20, 2013 (UTC)
I never disputed that spirits (including demons) can possess anything from rocks to humans. What I disputed was that all these possessed creatures are called abominations. As for Wilmod, even though templars do not have innate ability to use magic, they gain it through the consumption of lyrium, so there is no contradiction. Basically, it's not about having mage class, it's about having magic abilities. – mostlyautumntalkcontribs • 11:18, June 20, 2013 (UTC)
Correction, Wilmod was a recruit like Keran, they never took lyrium. Recruits are not thought anything yet.78.8.155.255 (talk) 11:27, June 20, 2013 (UTC)
According to David Gaider (I know, I know), templar recruits DO take lyrium. And we don't know what exactly blood mages were doing to these recruits. – mostlyautumntalkcontribs • 12:24, June 20, 2013 (UTC)

Question about the Baroness. Edit

Should we remove the Baroness from the list of abominations? Now that we know from Cole and the Avvar ceremony to replace their gods that spirits can take on others identities, it seems to me that Justice's dialogue better supports that interpretation of her nature. --User:Riverdaleswhiteflash (talk) 18:21, August 22, 2015 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.