219 réponses à ce sujet

[Big Blue Car]

Literally every post I make these days I half expect the banhammer. Times are hard.

[atheelogos]

Apollo Starflare wrote...

Chalk me up as a neutral. Both sides can be equally atrocious from what I've seen, I'll be over there *points* drinking some coffee. Maybe I'll just go hang out with the Dwarves or the Dalish (or both? Party!)

You know the Dalish follow a Keeper right? The Keeper is always a mage btw....

[Bryy_Miller]

I'd do a playthrough of each.

[Apollo Starflare]

atheelogos wrote...

Apollo Starflare wrote...

Chalk me up as a neutral. Both sides can be equally atrocious from what I've seen, I'll be over there *points* drinking some coffee. Maybe I'll just go hang out with the Dwarves or the Dalish (or both? Party!)

You know the Dalish follow a Keeper right? The Keeper is always a mage btw....

Keepers do not consider themselves Mages in the Chantry sense though, and I don't see them joining up with the Mage rebellion against the Templars (or whatever happens). Regardless there is only one, easy enough to avoid.

[C-Gamer90]

I would side with the mages. I no that the templars do serve a purpose in keeping abominations under control but caging people in a tower and isolating them from the world seems a tad overboard.

[LobselVith8]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Sarcams Lobsel...sarcasm....

Sarcams, Lotion? I'm guessing that's templar for sarcasm?

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

silentassassin264 wrote...

I would side with the Mages. Not even lore wise does it make sense to confine them. The Tevinter Imperium and the Arlathan elves were able to build powerful societies with mages in control and or running around willy nilly. The Grey Warden without any special abomination fighting training or special training at all was able to plow through every abomination in the Circle Tower and the only one that remotely difficult was Abomination Uldred. The only other parts that were slightly difficult were the two desire demon fights (largely because the ambush was...well an ambush).

Tevinter has circles, just like Ferelden...mages are opressed there too..just by other mages.

Mages weren't enslaved or oppressed by the ancient civilization of Arlathan or the nation of the Dales. They aren't oppressed in Haven, Rivain, or the Dalish clans, either.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Or Arlathan we know nothing...

Except that it was a nation of powerful elven mages...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Broken Circle? Gameplay decision. The player has to win.

So let's write off canon because it's part of the game's storyline? If we did that, nothing would be canon.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 30 janvier 2011 - 01:19 .

[Alexia89]

Templers seem to have a point...any time there was magic in origins it seem to go terrible. The tower, the dalish keep doing what he did, red cliff...touching that mirror in dalish origin...

[tmp7704]

LobselVith8 wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

The incident happened because Uldred couldn't get things his way. Short of always getting things his way, what would prevent Uldred from repeating it, even if he wasn't locked up in the tower?

Uldred's way was being free of an oppressive system that denies mages rights and a voice. I'd say that the events of DA:O are proof enough that mistreating and imprisoning mages is always going to result in mages fighting against their oppressors. If Rivain, Haven, and the Dalish clans can have mages living with non-mages, and the pre-segregation era of the Andrastian societies had the same (see: History of the Circle codex) then I see no reason to segregate men, women, and children from the rest of the world merely because the Chantry wants to control them.

This doesn't answer my question. And as far as the examples you provide go, do we really need to go again through just how well the Dalish mages like Zathrian and Velanna co-existed with their non-mage neighbours?

Modifié par tmp7704, 29 janvier 2011 - 04:45 .

[LobselVith8]

tmp7704 wrote...

This doesn't answer my question. And as far as the examples you provide go, do we really need to go again through just how well the Dalish mages like Zathrian and Velanna co-existed with their non-mage neighbours?

We could go over how well humans and elves get along by citing the enslavement of the Arlathan elves or the Chantry sacking the Dales, which has lead to the anti-human views of Zathrian and Velanna, or how the Warden can change their views. You basically argue that bad things can happen - well, bad things happen to people all the time. We can look at the situation where Vaughan abducted elven women to rape them and ask if that means that nobody should ever be in a position of power, because it can be misused. Do you have any evidence that mages being unfairly locked up under the guard of armored drug addicts, and having no say over their lives to the extent that they can be killed or given a lobotomy based on heresay alone, is the answer? Evidently, from the codex entries and DA:O, it's the source of many, many problems.

[tmp7704]

LobselVith8 wrote...

You basically argue that bad things can happen - well, bad things happen to people all the time.

Which is why we try to limit the extent of potential results as well as number of opportunities for these bad things to happen.

We can look at the situation where Vaughan abducted elven women to rape them and ask if that means that nobody should ever be in a position of power, because it can be misused.

There's a problem with this analogy -- Vaughan is a case where a person entrusted with power operates under system which is put in place to theoretically prevent such abuse and this system fails to function they way it was expected. Translating it onto situation of mages it'd become a question if a single circle mage getting possessed or otherwise going berserk should be all that's needed to turn all mages tranquil, since that's what "not putting anyone in position of power" effectively means in their case. I'm fairly sure you'd consider it over a top reaction, and such is your own example.

[bloodransom]

simply an exchange of power eventually it would be the imperium all over again until normal people got sick of being oppressed by mages, personally i would stay as far away from that conflict as possible.

[s0meguy6665]

Mages all the way... might be neutral depending on how the game unfolds.



Templars are a bunch of fascists. Maybe I'll play an evil character on their side once.

[smallNightmare]

Alexia89 wrote...

Templers seem to have a point...any time there was magic in origins it seem to go terrible. The tower, the dalish keep doing what he did, red cliff...touching that mirror in dalish origin...

no they don't have a point. the tower happened BECAUSE the templars treated the mages like trash. is it possible that Uldred could make a grab for power for another reason? yes, but many of his followers were helping only to be free and without so many followers he couldn't do sa much damage. also remember Loghain did a similar grab for power, with even more dire results, and he wasn't a mage. power-hungry people are the same every where, it has nothing to do with being a mage.

all Zathrian did was protecting his people who are like this BECAUSE of the chantry (remember the exalted march on the Dale?). and he took revenge on some ***hole rapists who, frankly, deserved it. he wasn't an abomination runnig around, I'd do the same in his shoes, and I'm sure any mage trained in the circle would have done the same.

redcliff also happened BECAUSE the mages are treated like trash. if that was not the case, if mages could hold titles and were treated equally, no one would ever think of hiding Connor's abilities which let to the events of Redcliff.

in general, mages need to be trained, the problem lies with leaving the training and treatment of mages to a fanatic religious bunch, specially one that claims "magic is made to serve man not to rule over him". a normal education system for mages will be enough and there is no reason to keep them locked up, forbid them from holding titles or take thier children away since "the child of a mage belongs to the chantry". that's just slavery. and all slavers are trash and trash needs to be killed (if possible!)

Modifié par smallNightmare, 29 janvier 2011 - 09:12 .

[themageguy]

im tempted to go neutral but id like to see both sides of the fence first.

Hey mr.epler, any news on the next mage companion or what force mages do?

[LobselVith8]

tmp7704 wrote...

Which is why we try to limit the extent of potential results as well as number of opportunities for these bad things to happen.

That's the argument made by the Chantry, but we have absolutely no evidence that segregating mages has accomplished that. Time and again we see from the storyline of A Broken Circle to the codex entries that the abominations arise as a direct result of the Chantry. I don't see how placing innocent people in a prison where they can be killed or given a lobotomy based on heresay alone is limiting the potential for bad things to happen, especially when our own history illustrates how time and again, people will always fight to be free from their oppressors. 

tmp7704 wrote...

There's a problem with this analogy -- Vaughan is a case where a person entrusted with power operates under system which is put in place to theoretically prevent such abuse and this system fails to function they way it was expected. Translating it onto situation of mages it'd become a question if a single circle mage getting possessed or otherwise going berserk should be all that's needed to turn all mages tranquil, since that's what "not putting anyone in position of power" effectively means in their case. I'm fairly sure you'd consider it over a top reaction, and such is your own example.

You're right - there is a problem with the analogy. Vaughan is a Ferelden noble who answers to the Crown, while the templars answer only to the Chantry. All done in the name of the Maker, and apparently with no oversight as an insane Cullen can become the new Knight-Commander of the Ferelden Circle. Even Alistair points out in Arl Howe's prison when confronted with an imprisoned templar. I fail to see how this is an appropriate situation for mages, especially when there are alternatives to the Andrastian societies where mages are living alongside non-mages, and even the Chantry's own history had mages with non-mages before a nonviolent protest lead to their segregation. If your claim is that mages are so dangerous that they must be segregated from the public, then why weren't they after the war with Tevinter? Why were the mages only segregated when they staged a nonviolent protest in a cathedral?

[Sauronych]

Mages. I always play as a mage in fantasy RPGs and if there is some organization oppressing us, they must be destroyed. Plus, I strongly dislike religion in real life.

Modifié par Sauronych, 29 janvier 2011 - 06:36 .

[Eternal Phoenix]

I hate mages. The only games where magic has been successful is Dragon Age and Two Worlds. Otherwise I like playing as a warrior with a two handed weapon - plated in heavy armour and following a righteous path. I disliked mages (apart from my own mage) in DA:O since they thought they were all epic.

Weak skinny elf female dirty mage: "Take another step warrior and I'll cast my LV99 fireball - explosive area effect with added lightning effect unto you!"
Warrior: "YARGHHHHHHH! DIEEEEEEEEEEEEE! *Charges*"
*Weak skinny elf female dirty mage gets raped."

I hated Morrigan mostly:

"I'm a mage and thus I'm more intelligent that you."

Yeah well:

"This is my sword and it's about to taste your blood b*tch!"

My Warrior's motto:

The only good mage is a dead mage apart from Gandalf, that guy who runs the circle tower and likes the templars and that mage who killed himself. I like them.

Modifié par Elton John is dead, 29 janvier 2011 - 06:43 .

[Gokuthegrate]

Mages... anything to screw the Chantry.

[Marco_Alberts]

Both...and then I'll let both sides destroy each other, creating a power vacuum for myself, MUAHAHAHA! But in all seriousness, I'll end up siding with both in the long run. Really depends on how I'm playing Hawke in that go.



For my idealist Hawke: Mages, seeing as every single person who has access to fantastic powers is inherently good and giving them this freedom certainly won't come back to bite us in the ass...right?



For my "realist" Hawke: Templars, as all civil unrest can be dealt with using a healthy dose of repression without any chance of this coming back to bite us in the ass somehow...right?

[moilami]

Big Blue Car wrote...

Literally every post I make these days I half expect the banhammer. Times are hard.

There is no reason to fear the inevitable.

[darrylzero]

I will certainly start as distrustful and resentful toward Templars, because of my sister. This will likely lead to my becoming involved in the illegal economy extensively. As for how I decide in the end, it's hard to be sure. My character will have no love for the Chantry, but just because I want my sister to be safe and free does not necessarily mean that I think that all mages should be unregulated. I may not really trust mages that much either (Bethany excepted, probably, depending on how she's written).



My hope is to play a character who begins as a distrustful, resentful sort, happy to break all kinds of laws in order to support myself and my family, but to redeem myself over time (though not necessarily within the bounds of the law). We'll see how possible that is to role-play. I'm excited about the possibilities within the framed narrative, though, for my Hawke to learn from the consequences of his actions and become a more responsible, heroic person.



In the end, I'll probably side with the mages, if that is indeed the central conflict. But it will depend on the contour of the story at that point.

[fighterchick]

Mages! Then a playthrough to see what would happen if you side with Templars.

[Balitant]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

silentassassin264 wrote...

I would side with the Mages. Not even lore wise does it make sense to confine them. The Tevinter Imperium and the Arlathan elves were able to build powerful societies with mages in control and or running around willy nilly. The Grey Warden without any special abomination fighting training or special training at all was able to plow through every abomination in the Circle Tower and the only one that remotely difficult was Abomination Uldred. The only other parts that were slightly difficult were the two desire demon fights (largely because the ambush was...well an ambush).

Tevinter has circles, just like Ferelden...mages are opressed there too..just by other mages.

Or Arlathan we know nothing...

Broken Circle? Gameplay decision. The player has to win.

The circles in Tevinter are likely to be very, very different to the one seen in Ferelden. After all, the "Black divine" is himself a mage.  In this case its more like people that are born with magic are taken to become the elite of the country, rather than the "tolerated" and "cursed" individuals as we see in DA:O.

As to who I side with, I may give the mages a chance.

Modifié par RiskyRannis, 29 janvier 2011 - 10:52 .

[alaska the 1st]

knowing me I'll mostly be with the Templars, but I may change my mind upon seeing whatever

[fighterchick]

I'd even side with the mages if they all turned blood mages and decided that they were going to rise up and mind control everyone and take over the all of Thedas being led by Flemeth.