270 réponses à ce sujet

[Beaynid]

Minxie18 wrote...

With my mage Hawke I did both endings... I didn't want her to side with the mages after what happened to Leandra, but in the end I find myself preferring that side over choosing the Templars because killing every single mage in the Circle was just too extreme. I'd rather fight the army of well-trained warriors than systematically execute the mages who probably count children amongst their number.

I also like the mage ending where Hawke and everyone walks away from the city together better than becoming Viscount. I felt like my Hawke was just done with Kirkwall, something she'd been feeling ever since Leandra died.

that hits the nail on the head for me.  slaughtering innocents because of the FEAR that there may be some bad ones in there, is not justifiable for me.  Even playing a mage, i damn anders for blowing up the chantry with all the innocents inside, and protect the mages because most are innocents and shouldnt be condemned for the actions of a few.  playing a non mage i also do it to protect bethany.

Honestly though, it could have all been avoided if you just either got meredith and orsino to step down much sooner.   I actually found it funny that i could talk to the grand cleric with more options in act 2, and could only walk away or receive a blessing in act 3.  would have been easier to team up with her to remove them both and put in new people who were actually competant and not raving psychos.

Modifié par Beaynid, 25 mars 2011 - 05:15 .

[Emberwake]

It amazes me that so many people fail to see the very obvious allegory in Dragon Age 2. It's a game built upon a question that has no inherent "right answer", is very deeply dependant on your personal outlook/philosophy, and directy correlates to real world issues.

We live in a world of terrorism and violent crime. In our world, many people believe that extreme measures are needed to prevent these terrible events from occuring. Others believe that it is unjust to imprison people who have not yet commited a crime or to restrict the rights of the people due to fear that they might harm each other. Attempts to find compromise are met with hostility from both sides, as idealists on one extreme are always looking for ways to prevent tragedy and on the other are opposed to even minor limits on the freedom of the innocent.

From my point of view, imprisoning mages is simply wrong. *Any* person can be dangerous to those around them, and the fact that mages might become abominations does not justify (to me) persecuting them all "just in case". Anders was wrong for destroying the Chantry, and Orsino and a great many of the other mages were wrong for abondoning their principles to achieve their goal, but fundamentally, I simply do not believe that what the Chantry does is right.

[LobselVith8]

TobiTobsen wrote...
Meh... side with the templars and listen to Cullen. Meredith is doing the whole annulment wrong. The right never said: "Death to all mages!" it says "Death to all Blood Mages", at least thats what Cullen said.

Cullen doesn't specifically state that. He says they tried to save as many mages as possible in Ferelden, not that the Rite only targetted certain mages. According to the codex entry on the Rite of Annulment:

"Divine Galatea, responding to the catastrophe in Nevarra and hoping to prevent further incidents, granted all the Grand Clerics of the Chantry the power to purge a Circle entirely if they rule it irredeemable. This Rite of Annulment has been performed 17 times in the last 700 years."

I don't think the codex entry about the Rite of Annulment or Knight-Captain Cullen are contradicting each other. Cullen says that they tried to save as many as people, and that's true - Knight-Commander Greagoir never actually kills anyone in the Circle Tower, because he leaves their lives in the hands of the Grand Cleric, since he never officially received permission to conduct the Rite of Annulement from Denerim. I think it's in his personality. Even in the deleted scene where the Warden reveals he's a blood mage, Greagoir makes the unpredecented move of saying he'll vouch for you to the Grand Cleric if you accept arrest when the law stipulates that all maleficarum are to be killed, no exceptions.

TobiTobsen wrote...

He will even back you up, when you meet some mages who just want to give up and you protest against Meredith order to kill them. Every templar present will disobey her order and side with you and Cullen. In the end they even side with you against her when she finally goes nuts.

To bad most of the mages turn to blood magic the second Meredith calls for the anullment. Cullen and you coul've spared more otherwise.

Many of the mages actually flee the Gallows to spread word about what happened amongst the other Circles, and siding with Cullen only ends up sparing three mages who come forward asking for mercy. Considering there are hundreds or thousands of mages in a particular Circle, I doubt the few abominations we ran into constituted the majority of the Circle mages.

[allankles]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Many of the mages actually flee the Gallows to spread word about what happened amongst the other Circles, and siding with Cullen only ends up sparing three mages who come forward asking for mercy. Considering there are hundreds or thousands of mages in a particular Circle, I doubt the few abominations we ran into constituted the majority of the Circle mages.

True, you save more Mages by siding with the Mages. Radical concept huh?:happy:

It seems like the people who support the Templar purging didn't play through the pro Mage ending. More mages survive because Hawke cut a swath of blood through the Templars.

[LobselVith8]

Unichrone wrote...
This is utter garbage. He didn't die-- he transformed himself into an gnarled visage and tried to kill you-- AFTER you agreed to help him. Even if he "died" as you suggest, that in no way alleviates him of the responsibility. If I plant a bomb somewhere and then shoot myself in the head, does that mean I'm not responsible for the actions I've taken?

Orsino is responsible for his actions, but I wouldn't allow his mistakes or the actions of a few bad blood mages or abominations to cast blame on all of the Kirkwall mages.

Unichrone wrote...

The whole "The mage's backs are against the wall" argument is utterly ridiculous and ultimately self-defeating. It is exactly those extreme circumstances in which people would be tempted to use blood magic that the Templars and the general public are worried about.

All the Kirkwall mages are being condemned for execution for the actions of a man who is not a Circle mage, and out of hundreds or thousands of mages, we count only a handful of them even turned into abominations when all the mages became targetted with extermination, all of whom are dispatched by Hawke and his companions.

Since many mages leave to spread word to the other Circles about what happened, it's clear that even when faced with death, many Kirkwall mages did not made a deal with a demon.

Unichrone wrote..

I agree with the OP that siding with the Templars is both the logical and right choice. You can make a case for either, but a case for the mages just doesn't hold water.

I didn't realize genocide was ever the right choice.

Unichrone wrote...
I guess we may or may not be able to make a case that Merrill is not evil, but she certainly committed evil acts. And her people suffered because of her wickedness. Her own people thought she deserved to die- I agree with them.

Her people only suffer if they're stupid enough to try to attack her for taking down an abomination, because Hawke is standing between them and Merrill. Since the Keeper is an adult who was old enough to make her decisions, let's not cast blame on Merrill for what Marethari did. Nobody died because of Merrill's blood magic, with the exception of the criminals and antagonists trying to kill Hawke and her. I don't see how you can seriously claim Merrill did anything evil when everything she's done is her attempt to give something back to her people, and the only person who she's putting at risk is herself.

[TobiTobsen]

LobselVith8 wrote...

I don't think the codex entry about the Rite of Annulment or Knight-Captain Cullen are contradicting each other. Cullen says that they tried to save as many as people, and that's true - Knight-Commander Greagoir never actually kills anyone in the Circle Tower, because he leaves their lives in the hands of the Grand Cleric, since he never officially received permission to conduct the Rite of Annulement from Denerim. I think it's in his personality.

Oh right. I forgot that he was stil waiting for the permission. Hm... okay. Than I can't compare those two Annulments with each other.

LobselVith8 wrote...

Many of the mages actually flee the Gallows to spread word about what happened amongst the other Circles, and siding with Cullen only ends up sparing three mages who come forward asking for mercy. Considering there are hundreds or thousands of mages in a particular Circle, I doubt the few abominations we ran into constituted the majority of the Circle mages.

Another problem of the whole "Look! Mages are bad too! It's not black & white!" POV Bioware forces on us, so we don't side with the mages all the time. How many mages really are blood mages or abominations is not clear. Probably not the majority like you say, but since Kirkwall is one giant Tevinter altar and the veil is thin... who knows?

Just wanted to show that not all templars are as extrem as Meredith.

[Badger8126]

What we're supposed to take away from this is that it's not the mages but the circle that's bad.
The circle isolates mages from the general public, the mages want to be free and interact with the outside but the public outside the circle have been taught fear and mistrust of mages and are unfamiliar with magic.

In Tervinter magic is as common as bread and openly practiced sometimes to extremes and without the consent of those subjected to it, like Fenris but mages are free and understood.

The Qunari imprint on their mages what their role is and how they should act, none of them are made tranquil or kept isolated from the general public, they have handlers who keep them in check but they are not feared by the people, they are also not respected.

The Dalish respect and honour their mages and they live among them as leaders and advisors.

The circle causes mages to become neurotic and desperate, the templars and chantry are to blame for this and the collapse of the circles but that doesn't mean these abused and traumatized mages should be let loose to cause havoc in the streets.

No magic is evil, it's just a tool people use and some abuse, it's the attitudes towards magic that create the problems that often demand an annulment, the Kirkwall circle was headed the same way as the Denerim circle, Meridith was just a bit more eager to prevent it from exploding into an abomination filled island of the damned.

The mages that fought were wrong, they could have just hidden in a closet and waited for the templars to cleans the circle of abominations and malificarum or surrendered without struggle.

[Revik]

Lochias WH wrote...

It amazes me that so many people fail to see the very obvious allegory in Dragon Age 2. It's a game built upon a question that has no inherent "right answer", is very deeply dependant on your personal outlook/philosophy, and directy correlates to real world issues.

We live in a world of terrorism and violent crime. In our world, many people believe that extreme measures are needed to prevent these terrible events from occuring. Others believe that it is unjust to imprison people who have not yet commited a crime or to restrict the rights of the people due to fear that they might harm each other. Attempts to find compromise are met with hostility from both sides, as idealists on one extreme are always looking for ways to prevent tragedy and on the other are opposed to even minor limits on the freedom of the innocent.

From my point of view, imprisoning mages is simply wrong. *Any* person can be dangerous to those around them, and the fact that mages might become abominations does not justify (to me) persecuting them all "just in case". Anders was wrong for destroying the Chantry, and Orsino and a great many of the other mages were wrong for abondoning their principles to achieve their goal, but fundamentally, I simply do not believe that what the Chantry does is right.

This person has it right.  Up until now Bioware has often made games where there was a clear 'good' or 'evil' path which has been a major criticism on some of their games.  I remember hearing that for Jade Empire and KotOR.  With each iteration Bioware has gotten closer and closer to neither is good or evil only a choices and points of view.

I have some hang ups with this game but I will admit this is the first game where I thought neither choice was good which I believe is what Bioware was shooting for. 

My point of view is that I could choose to slaughter innocent mages or innocent templars.  I mean sure I'll be slaughtering some bad ones on the way but innocents will be slaughtered on either side.  So then the next question is do I support the idea and the necessity of the circle.  And I do support the idea of the circle without a doubt.  Mages wield an extraordinary amount of power not to mention the possibility of surcombing to the temptations of demons.  It is clear that oversight must be in places of such powerful individuals.

People bring up the argument that you are killing innocent mages for the actions of a few.  As I mentioned above you'd be doing the same thing to the templars if you side with the mages.  Another argument is that you are punishing mages for the actions of a few but you'd also be doing the same of the templars if you side with the mages IE Meredith.  Another argument is that mages are pushed to desperation and are forced to resort to blood magic or dealing with demons but this could happen every where at any time.  It is better that this be contained then allowed to happen haphazardly among the public.  You could have instances, "I turned his roses down so he got offended and turned into a demon." "I told him to leave my store he got offended and turned into a demon", "I told him he couldn't have another piece of pie he got offended and turned into a demon."  This is hyperbole for sure but can you imagine instances say Virginia Tech shooting or Columbine and the shooters wielding destructive magic instead of guns total loss comes to mind.

[Wrathra]

Lochias WH wrote...

It amazes me that so many people fail to see the very obvious allegory in Dragon Age 2. It's a game built upon a question that has no inherent "right answer", is very deeply dependant on your personal outlook/philosophy, and directy correlates to real world issues.

We live in a world of terrorism and violent crime. In our world, many people believe that extreme measures are needed to prevent these terrible events from occuring. Others believe that it is unjust to imprison people who have not yet commited a crime or to restrict the rights of the people due to fear that they might harm each other. Attempts to find compromise are met with hostility from both sides, as idealists on one extreme are always looking for ways to prevent tragedy and on the other are opposed to even minor limits on the freedom of the innocent.

From my point of view, imprisoning mages is simply wrong. *Any* person can be dangerous to those around them, and the fact that mages might become abominations does not justify (to me) persecuting them all "just in case". Anders was wrong for destroying the Chantry, and Orsino and a great many of the other mages were wrong for abondoning their principles to achieve their goal, but fundamentally, I simply do not believe that what the Chantry does is right.

This this this. There are so many real world comparisons I can make to the ending of this game, but you said what I've been thinking more eloquently than I ever could.  There is no right answer here.

I got into a lengthly debate with a friend of mine when we both finished playing, where we wound up making the comparision to Bin Laden and the resulting American Iraq invasion. Bin Laden did something terrible, and the American response was to attack the wrong country.(I'm not bringing this up to get into a political debate - i swear!)  Who is more of a monster? Thousands have died either way.    Both sides are absolutely, without a doubt, wrong. 

As many flaws as this game has, and as much as I don' t like much of it, I applaud Bioware for giving us something that really made me think. As personally abhorrent as I found Anders's actions and Meredith's response, ultimately, my mage Hawke (who is not myself inserted into Thedas and by the end was a little bit cracked, anyway) sided with the mages and remained with Anders, but it was an extremely difficult decision for me, personally.

If I covered ground already  covered, I apologize. I didn't have time to read the entire thread.

edit: clarification

Modifié par Wrathra, 25 mars 2011 - 10:28 .

[LadyJaneGrey]

Lochias WH wrote...
It's a game built upon a question that has no inherent "right answer", is very deeply dependent on your personal outlook/philosophy, and directy correlates to real world issues.

Exactly.  Thank you.  While the different parallels may not be perfect, a person would have to sleep through all history classes, never read philosophy, and never read a news report not to see this.

The game also asks whether your beliefs/philosophy are more important to you than your personal relationships - which was great.

[3SG Sage]

Personally I prefer my heroic fantasy fiction (game or book or movie) to have a heroic win scenario. Not an everybody is a possessed loon ending. It doesn't matter who you side with in the end as either way Meredith and the leader of the mage both go psycho and attack you because the game designers wanted those fights to happen.

[Champion1]

Man, all this debate makes me feel weird that this choice was so clear-cut for me... If Bethany is in the Circle I always help the mages, if I'm romancing Merrill I usual help the mages unless Carver is a Templar, if neither applies I help the Templars. This is one of the only areas where the history of my playthroughs differs, since it's the only choice I really had to think about, so I just let roleplaying decide for me.

Modifié par Champion1, 25 mars 2011 - 09:55 .

[Lord Gremlin]

"Casting Virulent Walking bomb on OP"
Be still... There, enjoy. Templar lover, go hug them, and better hurry.

[Harcken]

I have a feeling it won't matter; this decision is too big to create two different worlds for a DA3 import. In all likelihood, killing the mages will result in mage outrage and rebellion across Thedas, and killing the Templars would result in the same outcome.

[Cismontane]

I read Cullen's comment as being that it is customary for Templars to grant surrendering mages mercy, not that the rite requires it. But the rite is only supposed to be used when all other hope is lost and that abominations have basically infested the entire circle, making mercy a little moot. Itis thus legally questionable for Meredith to invoke it. It's also not even clear she really even had the jurisdictions. The Grand Cleric does.. And being dead, it may even be necessary to escalate the matter up to some office of the Divine. If you follow the medeival European model, the death of an archbishop doesn't automatically put the inquisitor commander in charge. Usually the inquisitor commander was a Benedictine or Dominican monk, albeit one with military-like fighting monk forces to call upon. The acting bishrophric wouldn't fall to him, but rather to one of the junior attending bishops... At least until Rome could opine.

[Augustei]

Badger8126 wrote...

What we're supposed to take away from this is that it's not the mages but the circle that's bad.
The circle isolates mages from the general public, the mages want to be free and interact with the outside but the public outside the circle have been taught fear and mistrust of mages and are unfamiliar with magic.

In Tervinter magic is as common as bread and openly practiced sometimes to extremes and without the consent of those subjected to it, like Fenris but mages are free and understood.

The Qunari imprint on their mages what their role is and how they should act, none of them are made tranquil or kept isolated from the general public, they have handlers who keep them in check but they are not feared by the people, they are also not respected.

The Dalish respect and honour their mages and they live among them as leaders and advisors.

The circle causes mages to become neurotic and desperate, the templars and chantry are to blame for this and the collapse of the circles but that doesn't mean these abused and traumatized mages should be let loose to cause havoc in the streets.

No magic is evil, it's just a tool people use and some abuse, it's the attitudes towards magic that create the problems that often demand an annulment, the Kirkwall circle was headed the same way as the Denerim circle, Meridith was just a bit more eager to prevent it from exploding into an abomination filled island of the damned.

The mages that fought were wrong, they could have just hidden in a closet and waited for the templars to cleans the circle of abominations and malificarum or surrendered without struggle.

Qunari mages actually are greatly respected amongst their people for the burden they have to bare. They are also greatly feared hence the procautions of having to kill someone who the mage speaks to..

Modifié par XxDeonxX, 26 mars 2011 - 12:31 .

[Urazz]

TobiTobsen wrote...

shantisands wrote...

I have a very difficult time ultimately siding with the templars for one simple reason: they have *already* called for the right of the anulment, which means death to ALL mages, not just those suspected guilty.

Meh... side with the templars and listen to Cullen. Meredith is doing the whole annulment wrong. The right never said: "Death to all mages!" it says "Death to all Blood Mages", at least thats what Cullen said. He will even back you up, when you meet some mages who just want to give up and you protest against Meredith order to kill them. Every  templar present will disobey her order and side with you and Cullen. In the end they even side with you against her when she finally goes nuts.

To bad most of the mages turn to blood magic the second Meredith calls for the anullment. Cullen and you could've spared more otherwise.

My guess is that the policy on the Right of Annulment is potentially vague so it can be taken in several ways.  In DAO the Right of Annulment seemed like it was for killing all mages in the tower.  In DA2, Meredith was treating it the same way.  My guess is that some mages can be spared in the Right of Annulment but it's up to the templars to decide.

If the Right of Annulment can spare some circle mages then it does make it less crazy to side with the templars.  Problem is that there are corrupt templars as well and with Meredith leading the Right of Annulment (who was acting a bit bat**** crazy at that point), it definately will cause mages to think that they'll be killed regardless if they use blood magic or not.

Hell, if you side with the mages Orsino even offers to let her peform that search of the tower like she was originally wanting if she called off the Right of Annulment when you get to the Gallows.  Hell, I got the impression that Orsino never actually used blood magic until the end of the game and just read Quentin's research (whether he knew how Quentin acquired the research is another matter.) and was just using it out of desperation induced craziness to try to fight off the templars and kill Meredith.

[Badger8126]

XxDeonxX wrote...

Badger8126 wrote...

What we're supposed to take away from this is that it's not the mages but the circle that's bad.
The circle isolates mages from the general public, the mages want to be free and interact with the outside but the public outside the circle have been taught fear and mistrust of mages and are unfamiliar with magic.

In Tervinter magic is as common as bread and openly practiced sometimes to extremes and without the consent of those subjected to it, like Fenris but mages are free and understood.

The Qunari imprint on their mages what their role is and how they should act, none of them are made tranquil or kept isolated from the general public, they have handlers who keep them in check but they are not feared by the people, they are also not respected.

The Dalish respect and honour their mages and they live among them as leaders and advisors.

The circle causes mages to become neurotic and desperate, the templars and chantry are to blame for this and the collapse of the circles but that doesn't mean these abused and traumatized mages should be let loose to cause havoc in the streets.

No magic is evil, it's just a tool people use and some abuse, it's the attitudes towards magic that create the problems that often demand an annulment, the Kirkwall circle was headed the same way as the Denerim circle, Meridith was just a bit more eager to prevent it from exploding into an abomination filled island of the damned.

The mages that fought were wrong, they could have just hidden in a closet and waited for the templars to cleans the circle of abominations and malificarum or surrendered without struggle.

Qunari mages actually are greatly respected amongst their people for the burden they have to bare. They are also greatly feared hence the procautions of having to kill someone who the mage speaks to..

I guess, still a better system than the Chantry Circle.

[Urazz]

Badger8126 wrote...

XxDeonxX wrote...

Badger8126 wrote...

What we're supposed to take away from this is that it's not the mages but the circle that's bad.
The circle isolates mages from the general public, the mages want to be free and interact with the outside but the public outside the circle have been taught fear and mistrust of mages and are unfamiliar with magic.

In Tervinter magic is as common as bread and openly practiced sometimes to extremes and without the consent of those subjected to it, like Fenris but mages are free and understood.

The Qunari imprint on their mages what their role is and how they should act, none of them are made tranquil or kept isolated from the general public, they have handlers who keep them in check but they are not feared by the people, they are also not respected.

The Dalish respect and honour their mages and they live among them as leaders and advisors.

The circle causes mages to become neurotic and desperate, the templars and chantry are to blame for this and the collapse of the circles but that doesn't mean these abused and traumatized mages should be let loose to cause havoc in the streets.

No magic is evil, it's just a tool people use and some abuse, it's the attitudes towards magic that create the problems that often demand an annulment, the Kirkwall circle was headed the same way as the Denerim circle, Meridith was just a bit more eager to prevent it from exploding into an abomination filled island of the damned.

The mages that fought were wrong, they could have just hidden in a closet and waited for the templars to cleans the circle of abominations and malificarum or surrendered without struggle.

Qunari mages actually are greatly respected amongst their people for the burden they have to bare. They are also greatly feared hence the procautions of having to kill someone who the mage speaks to..

I guess, still a better system than the Chantry Circle.

It's fine for worshippers fo the Qun who are raised/wired differently but for everyone else it's worse.  They are collared basically and have their mouths sewn shut and are treated more like animals than anything else in my opinion.

[Badger8126]

Urazz wrote...

Badger8126 wrote...

XxDeonxX wrote...

Badger8126 wrote...

What we're supposed to take away from this is that it's not the mages but the circle that's bad.
The circle isolates mages from the general public, the mages want to be free and interact with the outside but the public outside the circle have been taught fear and mistrust of mages and are unfamiliar with magic.

In Tervinter magic is as common as bread and openly practiced sometimes to extremes and without the consent of those subjected to it, like Fenris but mages are free and understood.

The Qunari imprint on their mages what their role is and how they should act, none of them are made tranquil or kept isolated from the general public, they have handlers who keep them in check but they are not feared by the people, they are also not respected.

The Dalish respect and honour their mages and they live among them as leaders and advisors.

The circle causes mages to become neurotic and desperate, the templars and chantry are to blame for this and the collapse of the circles but that doesn't mean these abused and traumatized mages should be let loose to cause havoc in the streets.

No magic is evil, it's just a tool people use and some abuse, it's the attitudes towards magic that create the problems that often demand an annulment, the Kirkwall circle was headed the same way as the Denerim circle, Meridith was just a bit more eager to prevent it from exploding into an abomination filled island of the damned.

The mages that fought were wrong, they could have just hidden in a closet and waited for the templars to cleans the circle of abominations and malificarum or surrendered without struggle.

Qunari mages actually are greatly respected amongst their people for the burden they have to bare. They are also greatly feared hence the procautions of having to kill someone who the mage speaks to..

I guess, still a better system than the Chantry Circle.

It's fine for worshippers fo the Qun who are raised/wired differently but for everyone else it's worse.  They are collared basically and have their mouths sewn shut and are treated more like animals than anything else in my opinion.

Knowing your place is still better than being caught between being trapped and watched or hunted for life.