Dragon Age 3 II: [This Thread Title Was Deemed Inappropriate By The Chantry]

[Avilan the Grey]

The thing that ruined the ending for me was Orsino. .

Which is a confirmed Executive Meddling. EA demanded "MOAR BOSSFIGHTZ" and so they got it.

[Rodin]

*sigh*

When will publishers learn not to cram boss fights into games that patently don't need them? Deus Ex: Human Revolution was actually worse in this regard, since it was entirely possible to go into the boss fight with no weapons that deal damage and no direct combat skills.

Then again, with all the complaints about the boss "Marauder Shields", maybe they know their fanbase will demand a boss battle no matter how out of place one would be.

Oh well.

At least the Meredith boss fight was suitably awesome (and justified).

[Seatbelt]

And when your Tank goes down and your other Damage Dealers follow because they're waiting for their potions to cool down, what did you do then? Just keep reloading till you got lucky? Waste valuable tactics spots putting 'Use Potion' onto one of them? I'm honestly curious.

I don't have a solution to your dilemma because it was never a problem. If the party got ganked Avaline was often the last one to go down. In fact I basically solo'd the high dragon as Avaline after my party got killed. But that's a big IF. The game on normal wasn't super hard for me.

I'm also super lazy about using the tactics. I let them auto-fill and if I needed something done by a specific party member I toggled them and did it myself.

[Avilan the Grey]

I don't have a solution to your dilemma because it was never a problem. If the party got ganked Avaline was often the last one to go down. In fact I basically solo'd the high dragon as Avaline after my party got killed. But that's a big IF. The game on normal wasn't super hard for me.

I'm also super lazy about using the tactics. I let them auto-fill and if I needed something done by a specific party member I toggled them and did it myself.

Soloing big enemies with her is something I did a lot. The first Ogre for example.

[Nerd-o-rama]

I don't have a solution to your dilemma because it was never a problem. If the party got ganked Avaline was often the last one to go down. In fact I basically solo'd the high dragon as Avaline after my party got killed. But that's a big IF. The game on normal wasn't super hard for me.

I'm also super lazy about using the tactics. I let them auto-fill and if I needed something done by a specific party member I toggled them and did it myself.

I played on Normal, admittedly, but I always felt like I had more Tactics slots than I needed, especially past level 10 or so.

[Psyren]

Hell, in witch hunt even Morrigan has reservations about anything this crazy, and Morrigan has always placed zero value on the lives of mages and templars. Rather than being suddenly glad that Anders is going to ruin everything she seems more like wearily resigned to the whole thing and hoping something can be gained from it.

Even other crazy mages don't approve of this.

You have no idea what Morrigan was talking about in Witch Hunt. She makes very oblique statements about how change is coming and people fear change so they will fight it. Extrapolating a critique of Anders specifically from her vague vatic ramblings rings pretty hollow to me.

What alternatives Anders may or may not have considered is not at all important to me. As I said at the beginning, what he did could never be acceptable. Nothing can ever make such an act justified.

Doing nothing is even more unacceptable and unjustified to me, so the only other option is to consider alternatives... and I'm just not seeing one with a decent chance of working.

Would I have rather he timed the blast so that only Elthina was inside? Yes. Would I have rathered that he found a way to assassinate Meredith instead? Also yes. But in lieu of both of those, he did the next best thing he could to get the revolution going.

As said above, it would be possible to kill non-innocents. We see Meredith out and walking about with no or minor escorts. Why not just fireball her in the face then? For example.

For starters, you're wrong, she doesn't "walk around." The only times she comes outside are for the Qunari invasion and Orsino's attempt to rabble-rouse the nobility. Remember that she's at least as paranoid as Anders is and very likely moreso. Worse, while we can't be sure exactly when she got the idol, considering that Bartrand sold it either before or during Act 2 she has had it for a very long time (years) prior to Act 3.

Even assuming she does walk outside and can be fireballed in the face, with just her Templar spell resistance (never mind whatever the hell the idol did to make her a boss-level encounter) that would be unlikely to take her out, and would instead likely be a death sentence for Anders, leaving no one alive to try and protect Kirkwall's mages. And the opinion of the nobles/templars had not gone against Meredith nearly enough for a larger scale effort - it wasn't until she tried to attack the Champion that Cullen even considered turning on her. (He was prepared to arrest you right up until the final battle even.)

Now, you could argue that maybe he could fireball just Elthina in the street instead, but that would hardly have the impact he needs to kick off the uprising. It wasn't just her death, but the huge and polarizing impact of the way she died that got people to wake up and take sides. Take that out of the equation, and the Templars would come after just him; and while the mages would likely be safe from the RoA, their current situation of being culled and lobotomized would not appreciably change either (except possibly to worsen.)

To sum up, no matter how he went on the offensive, he'd be throwing his life away and he knew it. Best to do it in the way that most guaranteed a full-scale uprising.

At least the Meredith boss fight was suitably awesome (and justified).

Justified sure, but I couldn't help but chortle at Super Saiyan Meredith. And when she animated those statues I really lost it. Hey Meredith, you know that bringing inanimate objects to life might count as magic, right? Never mind all the glowy airdashing.

[Giggling Ghast]

Which is a confirmed Executive Meddling. EA demanded "MOAR BOSSFIGHTZ" and so they got it.

No, it wasn't a directive from EA. It was the gameplay and combat designers at Bioware who felt another boss battle was needed.

EA can be blamed for a lot of things, but Orsino'd breakdown isn't one of them.

[Mx.Silver]

When will publishers learn not to cram boss fights into games that patently don't need them? Deus Ex: Human Revolution was actually worse in this regard, since it was entirely possible to go into the boss fight with no weapons that deal damage and no direct combat skills.

Yeah, it's a real shame. Not least because the game seems to have become more known for those than it is for all the many really good things about it.

Then again, with all the complaints about the boss "Marauder Shields", maybe they know their fanbase will demand a boss battle no matter how out of place one would be.

It does seem pretty likely at this point, sadly.

At least the Meredith boss fight was suitably awesome (and justified).

Justified maybe, but I found the whole super idol powers a bit ridiculous. Really, I'm not sure the decision to have her corrupted by the idol in the first place was the right one, it's not like her oppressive bent needed to be explained by it.

[Psyren]

Justified maybe, but I found the whole super idol powers a bit ridiculous. Really, I'm not sure the decision to have her corrupted by the idol in the first place was the right one, it's not like her oppressive bent needed to be explained by it.

My question is why she bought it in the first place. If she felt she needed it to stop a perceived mage uprising, she was already off the paranoia deep end and the idol didn't actually do anything. Or maybe she was just cracked out on lyrium and it looked to her like a giant cocaine rock would look to a junkie, and she came up with the sword idea later.

And Bioware has done boss fights well before. Death's Hand and Sun Li from Jade Empire were fantastic. The Human Reaper, while silly looking, was still fun to fight what with Harbinger's posse flying in every few minutes with free heavy weapon ammo. Hoverboard Saren was fun, though skele-Saren was meh.

[Zevox]

The biggest divider is if deliberately killing innnocents to provoke a reaction is the right way to go... Which it is not. Never. Ever.

On that much, Avilan, we completely agree.

Doing nothing is even more unacceptable and unjustified to me, so the only other option is to consider alternatives... and I'm just not seeing one with a decent chance of working.

It would be far better to do something with a lower chance of working than to decide that mass murder is ever an acceptable choice.

[Psyren]

It would be far better to do something with a lower chance of working than to decide that mass murder is ever an acceptable choice.

But if that something fails (which it almost surely will) then you will have caused mass murder anyway - or at the very least, allowed the already existing mass murder to continue.

Again, just about every revolution in history involved a "mass murder." Should none of them have taken place? Would the world be better off with the Third Estate, or slavery, still extant? Would Thedas have been better off without Andraste's march, with slaves continuing to be fed into the woodchipper for greater magic from the magisters? And if you're okay with mass killing in those contexts, it is hypocritical to decry this one.

[Math_Mage]

Even assuming she does walk outside and can be fireballed in the face, with just her Templar spell resistance (never mind whatever the hell the idol did to make her a boss-level encounter) that would be unlikely to take her out, and would instead likely be a death sentence for Anders, leaving no one alive to try and protect Kirkwall's mages. And the opinion of the nobles/templars had not gone against Meredith nearly enough for a larger scale effort - it wasn't until she tried to attack the Champion that Cullen even considered turning on her. (He was prepared to arrest you right up until the final battle even.)

Now, you could argue that maybe he could fireball just Elthina in the street instead, but that would hardly have the impact he needs to kick off the uprising. It wasn't just her death, but the huge and polarizing impact of the way she died that got people to wake up and take sides. Take that out of the equation, and the Templars would come after just him; and while the mages would likely be safe from the RoA, their current situation of being culled and lobotomized would not appreciably change either (except possibly to worsen.)

To sum up, no matter how he went on the offensive, he'd be throwing his life away and he knew it. Best to do it in the way that most guaranteed a full-scale uprising.

1. "Anders will die" clearly isn't a problem with attacking Meredith if he is planning to die.
2. Yes, a mage fireballing the Grand Cleric or the Templar-commander-slash-Viscount in the street wouldn't have any polarizing impact whatsoever...wait, what? And why would Meredith be any less likely to enact inappropriate retribution in this case than she was in the actual event?
3. Except that in the actual story Anders (a) clearly didn't throw his life away in the attempt itself, and (b) didn't guarantee an uprising. He just blew up a lot of innocent people and then tried to commit Suicide By Hawke.

[Psyren]

1. "Anders will die" clearly isn't a problem with attacking Meredith if he is planning to die.

Not quite correct - He is planning to kick off the war, and whether he dies doing that is merely irrelevant. Simply failing to kill Meredith and getting butchered in the street would therefore be a waste because nothing larger would come of it. His chances of having the magical power to take down Meredith are already slim, and given her possession of the idol, even worse than that.

2. Yes, a mage fireballing the Grand Cleric or the Templar-commander-slash-Viscount in the street wouldn't have any polarizing impact whatsoever...wait, what? And why would Meredith be any less likely to enact inappropriate retribution in this case than she was in the actual event?

They know Anders is not part of the Circle - an isolated attack, even a successful one, on Elthina would not have sparked the Right of Annulment (and with it, the Circle Revolt.) Wiping out the Chantry itself on the other hand is a much stronger symbol. It showcases far more effectively than a single fireball the true destructive potential of mages once pressed. And that fear is what Anders was counting on evoking in Meredith, leading directly to the Right.

In short, you need both - Elthina's death, to remove the skirts behind which Orsino and Meredith hide and stick their tongues out at each other; and the Chantry's obliteration, to make it clear to the world that mages are too dangerous to keep locked up (one way or another.)

3. Except that in the actual story Anders (a) clearly didn't throw his life away in the attempt itself, and (b) didn't guarantee an uprising. He just blew up a lot of innocent people and then tried to commit Suicide By Hawke.

a) Why should it have to be during the attempt itself? He wanted to be around to stare them in the face,tell them what he'd done and tell them he wasn't sorry (non-Rival anyway.)

b) That's where I disagree, I think this did guarantee an uprising. When a single escaped mage can commit that kind of destruction, you're not going to convince any noble or divine that the Circle is working anymore. They will be forced to take sides, and once the Templars crack down the mages themselves will be forced to defend themselves. Until his nuke, the Libertarians were always the minority College; suddenly, the tide of opinion went the other way and the Loyalists ended up on the losing side. Just as planned.

[Beowulf DW]

They know Anders is not part of the Circle - an isolated attack, even a successful one, on Elthina would not have sparked the Right of Annulment (and with it, the Circle Revolt.) Wiping out the Chantry itself on the other hand is a much stronger symbol. It showcases far more effectively than a single fireball the true destructive potential of mages once pressed. And that fear is what Anders was counting on evoking in Meredith, leading directly to the Right.

In short, you need both - Elthina's death, to remove the skirts behind which Orsino and Meredith hide and stick their tongues out at each other; and the Chantry's obliteration, to make it clear to the world that mages are too dangerous to keep locked up (one way or another.)

Do you recall what Mordin said to his student about supposition?

a) Why should it have to be during the attempt itself? He wanted to be around to stare them in the face,tell them what he'd done and tell them he wasn't sorry (non-Rival anyway.).

So he's egotistical on top of being an murdering zealot? Wonderful.

[Psyren]

Do you recall what Mordin said to his student about supposition?

I do - Mordin said that Maelon couldn't be sure that a resurgent Krogan would force the Alliance to beef up security around Eden Prime. That is indeed a big leap for Maelon to have made.

But expecting that people will consider the Circle a failure when even a lone disgruntled escaped mage is capable of mass destruction - that's a more logical conclusion to make. Some voices will call for executing them all, some will say to abolish the Circle and come up with something new, but both camps will be opposing the Circle system as it currently exists, which is the goal. Similarly, expecting that the remaining circle mages will chafe at being harshly punished for the actions of one and decide they have nothing left to lose is also a logical conclusion.

So he's egotistical on top of being an murdering zealot? Wonderful.

He wouldn't be telling them for himself. He would be telling them so they knew that what happened was no accident; that it was a deliberate consequence of the conditions for mages within Kirkwall.

[Avilan the Grey]

No, it wasn't a directive from EA. It was the gameplay and combat designers at Bioware who felt another boss battle was needed.

EA can be blamed for a lot of things, but Orsino'd breakdown isn't one of them.

Fine. It's still executive meddling, only worse since BIOWARE SHOULD KNOW BETTER.

[Mx.Silver]

My question is why she bought it in the first place.

That too.

And Bioware has done boss fights well before. Death's Hand and the final boss from Jade Empire were fantastic. The Human Reaper, while silly looking, was still fun to fight what with Harbinger's posse flying in every few minutes with free heavy weapon ammo.

I'm not saying it was a bad fight, just that the inclusion of said reaper was probably the stupidest thing to happen in that game. Similarly, the fight with Orsino makes no sense from a story perspective, but the actual fight isn't bad (certainly better than the anti-climax that caps off Merrill's arc*). Granted though, it does lack that opportunity for comedy you can get by equipping some of your characters with stun immunity in the fight with Meredith - which allows them to keep attacking her while she's monologuing.


* one of the reasons I have little sympathy for the keeper's side in that storyline is because of how trivial that last fight is. The first time I fought it I killed the pride demon in about 40 seconds. In my second playthrough, I don't think it even managed to get through its first cycle of attacks.

[Giggling Ghast]

My question is why she bought it in the first place. If she felt she needed it to stop a perceived mage uprising, she was already off the paranoia deep end and the idol didn't actually do anything.

Keep in mind that, because of the activities of Tarohne's cult during Enemies Among Us, Meredith came to suspect that her own templars had been compromised by blood mages and demons. This led her to close ranks and limit recruitment. Meredith would have eventually come around to the idea that the only person she could truly trust to protect Kirkwall was herself.

And keep in mind that templars consume lyrium to get their powers. (Before you mention that dialogue with Alistair about templar abilities, know that Bioware has retconned it away.) Here was a new type of lyrium that seemed even more potent than the regular stuff; she would have seen in the idol the potential for a weapon that would allow her to defend the city on her own, if need be.

While I'm here, here's a new article on the Orlesian civil war and profiteering surface dwarves (mild spoilers for The Masked Empire):

http://www.dragonage.com/#!/en_US/ne...sian-civil-war

[Psyren]

The Orsino fight actually made perfect sense if you sided with the Templars. It's if you side with the mages where it isn't set up nearly as well. This is doubly the case since siding with the mages has Varric's epilogue state you saved many of them,

EDIT:

Keep in mind that, because of the activities of Tarohne's cult during Enemies Among Us, Meredith came to suspect that her own templars had been compromised by blood mages and demons. This led her to close ranks and limit recruitment. Meredith would have eventually come around to the idea that the only person she could truly trust to protect Kirkwall was herself.

And keep in mind that templars consume lyrium to get their powers. (Before you mention that dialogue with Alistair about templar abilities, know that Bioware has retconned it away.) Here was a new type of lyrium that seemed even more potent than the regular stuff; she would have seen in the idol the potential for a weapon that would allow her to defend the city on her own, if need be.

Yeah, that all makes sense to me - I could see Enemies Among Us being the catalyst for her initial interest in the idol. Good point.

[Calemyr]

The Orsino fight actually made perfect sense if you sided with the Templars. It's if you side with the mages where it isn't set up nearly as well. This is doubly the case since siding with the mages has Varric's epilogue state you saved many of them,

Once you realize that Orsino was instrumental in Leandra's death, his Harvester stunt makes more sense. Especially siding with the Templar, as that tips the scale against him (Hawke can't save anyone, but s/he's really good at killing everyone). It would, however, have made more sense on the mage's side if he'd initiated the change before learning that Hawke had sided with them, only to realize too late that he was making a horrific mistake.

Random Mage: "Orsino, you don't have to do this! Hawke is on our side! The Templar are already being pushed back!"
Orsino (struggling to stop the transformation): "Th-thank you Hawke... I-I'm sorry I di-didn't trust you to stand by us-s... Bu-but it's to-too late no-now... P-please, protect m-my people..."
Hawke: "Sure. It's been a busy day, but's what's a few more Templar?"
Orsino (losing the struggle): "No-not from the T-templar, I'm af-afraid. I m-mean from me!"

[Psyren]

If Bethany is around she'd be good in that "random mage" role.

Alternatively, give Meredith some particularly vicious toadies who butcher some younger mages in front of Orsino and corner him, pushing him over the edge. These would be killed by Orsino of course, leaving Meredith all alone in the courtyard for her own villainous breakdown.

[Zevox]

But if that something fails (which it almost surely will) then you will have caused mass murder anyway - or at the very least, allowed the already existing mass murder to continue.

I do not share that viewpoint in the slightest. Trying to stop something and failing is not equivalent to allowing it to continue.

Again, just about every revolution in history involved a "mass murder." Should none of them have taken place? Would the world be better off with the Third Estate, or slavery, still extant? Would Thedas have been better off without Andraste's march, with slaves continuing to be fed into the woodchipper for greater magic from the magisters? And if you're okay with mass killing in those contexts, it is hypocritical to decry this one.

I'm not going to comment on real-world events, since that skirts board rules, and I do not necessarily know the full history behind them. As for Andraste, I have little knowledge of what exactly she did besides lead a war - and as I've already said, a war I'm fine with here, given the cause is just. It's murdering innocents that's the line that I do not believe should ever be crossed.

[Grif]

*sigh*

When will publishers learn not to cram boss fights into games that patently don't need them? Deus Ex: Human Revolution was actually worse in this regard, since it was entirely possible to go into the boss fight with no weapons that deal damage and no direct combat skills.

A little off topic, but the Director's Cut version fixed that by adding non-lethal options to deal with the bosses. (Placing additional turrets and traps to be hacked, so technically you don't even need to use weapons) You still do have to kill the boss, but a true stealth run is now viable and can be completed without using a single gun.

On topic: given that I haven't been following Inquisition news at all, I just have one question: When is it coming out?

[Psyren]

On topic: given that I haven't been following Inquisition news at all, I just have one question: When is it coming out?

October 7th in the US, October 10th in Europe.

I do not share that viewpoint in the slightest. Trying to stop something and failing is not equivalent to allowing it to continue.

And that is a valid interpretation of that ethical dilemma but not the only one. Clearly it is not the viewpoint held by Anders himself.

I'm not going to comment on real-world events, since that skirts board rules, and I do not necessarily know the full history behind them. As for Andraste, I have little knowledge of what exactly she did besides lead a war - and as I've already said, a war I'm fine with here, given the cause is just. It's murdering innocents that's the line that I do not believe should ever be crossed.

You don't have to comment on them (though for the record, few people know the "full history" of anything, even historians) but that doesn't remove them from context entirely. Andraste herself has parallels to historical events like Joan of Arc as well as clear religious parallels we can't discuss, This is therefore the mindset Bioware intended you to have, while playing these games, and attempting to divorce the two and then claim the game's narrative handling of the situation is lacking is doing it a disservice on your part.

Regardless, one thing is clear - they wrote that scene knowing that some people, perhaps even most people would absolutely condemn Anders for his actions and thus gave you the option to execute him on the spot. But the reverse is also true - they knew that some people, like myself, would consider him justified. So whereas you have no option to forgive and side with, say, Quentin, or Meredith - who have no redeeming value at all - the fact that they did so for Anders is itself proof that my perspective of his actions is every bit as valid as your own. And the above goes for Math_Mage, Jayngfet and all of my other detractors in this matter.

A little off topic, but the Director's Cut version fixed that by adding non-lethal options to deal with the bosses. (Placing additional turrets and traps to be hacked, so technically you don't even need to use weapons) You still do have to kill the boss, but a true stealth run is now viable and can be completed without using a single gun.

This is excellent news - I haven't actually played DEHR (it's queued in my backlog, ahead of Witcher 2 and the Dark Souls series, slated for some time after I tire of D3) but it's good to know I can do a stealthy-fisticuffs Adam and not get as thoroughly burned as the reviewers did. The system works!

[Mx.Silver]

Regardless, one thing is clear - they wrote that scene knowing that some people, perhaps even most people would absolutely condemn Anders for his actions and thus gave you the option to execute him on the spot. But the reverse is also true - they knew that some people, like myself, would consider him justified. So whereas you have no option to forgive and side with, say, Quentin, or Meredith - who have no redeeming value at all - the fact that they did so for Anders is itself proof that my perspective of his actions is every bit as valid as your own. And the above goes for Math_Mage, Jayngfet and all of my other detractors in this matter.

Given Bioware's history of including 'bad guy' options as part of their moral choices, I would be hesitant about assuming that just because you have the option to side with Anders it means that the decision to do so is 'equally valid' as condemning him for the mass murder of civilians.

[Psyren]

Given Bioware's history of including 'bad guy' options as part of their moral choices, I would be hesitant about assuming that just because you have the option to side with Anders it means that the decision to do so is 'equally valid' as condemning him for the mass murder of civilians.

I'm not hesitant at all. I've seen those "bad guy" choices in previous games - like poisoning the water dragon in Jade Empire, or siding with Morinth in ME2 - and even in this game, like allowing the Sloth demon to take over Feynriel. They involve your protagonist stooping to Captain Planet Villain levels of vileness and stupidity for short-term gain.

Sparing Anders had none of that. If they wanted that to portray it as a so-called "evil choice" it wouldn't have included dialogue like "I might have understood if you'd only told me," and "help me defend the mages." Can you picture yourself cackling and twirling a mustache while delivering lines like that? Because I sure can't. Hell, there are even musical queues for these bad choices to clue you in. None of the evidence backs up your assertion here.

[Divayth Fyr]

Regardless, one thing is clear - they wrote that scene knowing that some people, perhaps even most people would absolutely condemn Anders for his actions and thus gave you the option to execute him on the spot. But the reverse is also true - they knew that some people, like myself, would consider him justified. So whereas you have no option to forgive and side with, say, Quentin, or Meredith - who have no redeeming value at all - the fact that they did so for Anders is itself proof that my perspective of his actions is every bit as valid as your own.

Throught the games you also have the option to allow several demons to roam the world. The option to do so doesn't mean that an interpratation in which having more demons in the world is a good thing becomes a "valid" one.

If they wanted that to portray it as a so-called "evil choice" it wouldn't have included dialogue like "I might have understood if you'd only told me," and "help me defend the mages." Can you picture yourself cackling and twirling a mustache while delivering lines like that? Because I sure can't. Hell, there are even musical queues for these bad choices to clue you in. None of the evidence backs up your assertion here.

And all evil choices must work with a mustache twirling, cackling maniacs? Really?

[Avilan the Grey]

I'm not hesitant at all. I've seen those "bad guy" choices in previous games - like poisoning the water dragon in Jade Empire, or siding with Morinth in ME2 - and even in this game, like allowing the Sloth demon to take over Feynriel. They involve your protagonist stooping to Captain Planet Villain levels of vileness and stupidity for short-term gain.

Sparing Anders had none of that. If they wanted that to portray it as a so-called "evil choice" it wouldn't have included dialogue like "I might have understood if you'd only told me," and "help me defend the mages." Can you picture yourself cackling and twirling a mustache while delivering lines like that? Because I sure can't. Hell, there are even musical queues for these bad choices to clue you in. None of the evidence backs up your assertion here.

I think we are arguing on too many levels here.
For me there were two questions:
The first question was not that sparing Anders is evil. For me it was a question of why, for Hawke, killing Anders was morally wrong.
The second question is wether during ANY circumstances Anders bombing can be seen as anything but henious.

[Psyren]

Throught the games you also have the option to allow several demons to roam the world. The option to do so doesn't mean that an interpratation in which having more demons in the world is a good thing becomes a "valid" one.

What? How on earth is sparing Anders equivalent to letting demons roam the world?

And all evil choices must work with a mustache twirling, cackling maniacs? Really?

The ones that involve butchering a man who is not a threat to you generally do, yeah.
The truth is that Bioware tells you what they think of your choices right when you make them. You simply have to be paying attention. Changes in music, changes in lighting and framing, the wording your protagonist uses to describe the decision your just made, your party members' reactions, all of it has to be taken into consideration. In a word, tone - and a lot of people who misconstrued the ME ending made the same mistake of ignoring it.

I think we are arguing on too many levels here.
For me there were two questions:
The first question was not that sparing Anders is evil. For me it was a question of why, for Hawke, killing Anders was morally wrong.
The second question is wether during ANY circumstances Anders bombing can be seen as anything but henious.

1) I consider it wrong because killing him serves no purpose. It in fact actively harms the mages around the world, who need as many champions as they can get now, and all it gets you is some cathartic, base need for vengeance. When Sebastian and Fenris call for his death, they have no rational reason why - they are merely bloodthirsty.

2) The bombing is indeed heinous. But I can condemn an act while still acknowledging it as necessary.

[Zevox]

You don't have to comment on them (though for the record, few people know the "full history" of anything, even historians) but that doesn't remove them from context entirely. Andraste herself has parallels to historical events like Joan of Arc as well as clear religious parallels we can't discuss, This is therefore the mindset Bioware intended you to have, while playing these games, and attempting to divorce the two and then claim the game's narrative handling of the situation is lacking is doing it a disservice on your part.

Okay, you've lost me. I have not the slightest idea what you mean by this paragraph. It seems to have gone off on some topic other than what our discussion thus far has been covering.