204 réponses à ce sujet

[wildfly]

the templars in kirkwall were forcing the mages hand. and then the mages would resort to the
last refuge of the incompetent they could actually unite and prove that they can do without blood magic but they always choose the wrong option. it's as if they were proving us they're incapable of doing anything else. the mages experiments in Tevinter on slaves also looked a bit extreme.
that's why i support supervision over them.
but still, i think in kirkwall the chantry should have intervened at the beginning to avoid escalation.
that chantry mother's duty, i think, is to watch over both, and maintain balance. she should have long ago replaced incompetent and to aggressive templars.

[TwistedComplex]

I've wanted to make a Templar Hawke and side with the Templars

Makes for nice drama with Bethany

[Nightfish103]

Well, it's kinda hard to be on the templars side the way they are written. There was a moment when Cullen (the zealot from DA:O) talks to his boss and is like "Erm, you're a bit too extreme, ya know?". At that point I could have seen myself supporting the templars if they were a little less "3rd Reich final solution" and a little more "let's try to make sure the abominations don't eat the faces of *all* of our citizens, mkay? Eating faces is bad, mkay?".

But no, we needed an obvious antagonist... So yea... I cannot in good conscience support the templars.

[MrWakka]

Hach1 wrote...

benreeder2431 wrote...

Everyone I know who plays Dragon Age adore the mages. I have not met one templar supporter other than one attempting to get all the achievements, trophies, etc. I'm curious if you guys are actually out there. Personally, I'm a huge mage supporter. I don't even mind blood magic to a degree.


So, are you a full on mage supporter like me, a mage supporter who still thinks order is needed and blood magic is bad, or a templar supporter?

It's nearly impossible to be a Templar supporter in Dragonage 2. Unless you're specifically selecting those choices just to see the outcome, or get the achievements.

There's a whole host of reasons why it's difficult to support them too.
Firstly, either; you're a mage or your sister is. Which puts you in the mage corner early on, unless you're trying to lower your standing with them. There's also the factor that many of the "templar choices" are considered "agressive", because their positions are so extreme in DA2, when you have three choices "friendly, charming or aggressive." 2/3 are anti-Templar, because their position is often so extreme.

Honestly after my pro-mage playthrough, even as a mage i'd have supported the templars, if it was possible to eliminate meredith. As mentioned countless times. the mages in kirkwall always resort to extremism as the first option. Certain actions at the end of the game were made to prevent compromise, rather than allow a peaceful solution, that was the mages forcing a war where peace may have prevailed.

Typically in my pro-templar playthrough i've not regretted my actions, I can't say I felt the same playing pro-mage.

[FellowerOfOdin]

Hach1 wrote...


It's nearly impossible to be a Templar supporter in Dragonage 2. Unless you're specifically selecting those choices just to see the outcome, or get the achievements.

I heavily disagree. You actually get double-crossed if you support the mages as the same guys who said that they deny blood magic and demons suddenly change minds and everyone of them becomes a traitor. 

[Steven83]

It wasn't a hard choice. Anyone who said that was swayed by the slam dunk near the end. It was unnecessary. Both factions have their faults, and the writing feels forced half the time.

In the end I didn't feel whatever Hawke did mattered. Kirkwall is still a horrible place to live.

[kevin cousland]

i think its someware inbetween both templars and mages are bad to some degree, so i support them both and let the chaos commence.

but in combat i usually hate mages because they do annoying things like paralyse you and make it so you cant do much.
and your ally mages use all their magic on pointless spells so when you need your team reviving you have to hope you still have lyrium potions

[Apechild]

Tirigon wrote...

@ Apechild: What annoyed the hell out of me is how lore and gameplay differ.

See, I remember in the mage origin Duncan told he saw a bloodmage wipe out an entire group of well-prepared templars. He died, but only cos he got sloppy and didn´t noticed one of the corpses was actually still alive and cut his head off.
And that´s against a party specifically out to hunt this bloodmage!!! And he was definitely not an exceptionally powerful one!!!

So, when you are to fight them, I was kinda scared because I thought it would be hard. But the truth was.... those bloodmages where freaking jokes. Seriously, every group of mabari or wolves were much, much more challenging, and I wasn´t even a templar character in the party.

I understand that you can´t make every single mage into an unstoppable powerhouse because that would make the game unplayable for everyone but a bloodmage mainchar. But instead of making them sissies they should be reserved for boss fights imo and not come for free with every pack of slavers....

I understand exactly where you are coming from there. I did not feel threatened by a single mage during the whole time I played DA2. They had ZERO utility and were no danger at all (on Hard mode). They cropped up in their groups of 4+ with such regularity that they were just another opponent. Their attacks were just a little more sparkly. Even the mini-boss mages were a walkover when I got to them. If they'd actually put my party in danger -then- I'd have been worried but they didn't knock my tanks back in the way I was able to fling mobs away with spells, they didn't put my healer in a crushing prison (as those demons did in DA:O) or cast quick AoE's (mages did cast 'Blizzard' & other AoEs in DA:O from memory). They didn't have healing spells or glyphs, or an actual shield that didn't 'CC' them, not to mention lacking basic spells such as Winters Touch! 

In that respect, gameplay wise, the mages were an absolute let down. I'd much rather have to take on a single apostate Blood mage, without waves of reinforcements if they themselves are a lot tougher, with more spells & better utility.
As it stands in DA2? I targeted them first to take them down as they were so easy to remove.

Modifié par Apechild, 16 mars 2011 - 11:11 .

[Brightassin]

If they exist I hope we'll have the opportunity to hunt them in DA 3. ^^

[Tirigon]

wikkedjoker wrote...
The Tevinter Imperium thought that way to, and look how that ended. . . Darkspawn. . .Blight.

Sucks, right?  But seriously, that was only because

a) apparently they didn´t actually beat the Maker but fail it and

because the Maker is kind of a douche, instead of just punishing those magisters he unleashes a race of monsters upon the world who quite nearly wipe out everyone, including all his believers (who actualy suffer much more than the mages since being in a Circle, in spite of all the disadvantages, serves as a sure way not to get eaten by Darkspawn, at least not before the entire rest of the world has been destroyedB))


That is, if it´s true at all. Personally I rather believe it´s chantry propaganda or, as Wynne puts it, at very best a fable meant to tell you "Don´t mess with things greater than you".

[Tirigon]

wikkedjoker wrote...

Holding a gun can only kill a dozen people, maybe. A stray thought from a Mage can level a city.

In fact your right, someone makes a choice to hold a gun. A Mage can kill 100's just by absently thinking  it.

The needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few, or the one. 

Now I don't like the way Mages are treated, Raped,  butchered, abused, treated like criminals, because of what they are. However Mages should be set away from everyone else in things like the circle. 

Now, that way of reasoning would be so much more convincing if mages were actually powerful in the game.

But since your feeling when facing 3 abominations and 2 bloodmages at once is not like "oh sh*t, we need all the templars of the world or the entire country will be destroyed" but more like"Fireball, crushing prison, cone of cold, sleep, those warrior skills I don´t know the name of, groupheal. What a boring fight." your argument is invalid:P


(that is, when playing mage, by the way. As rogue it´s much worse even: "backstab, backstab, knockdown-attack -> fight over")

[randName]

I found both sides to be silly; or how many mages actually turned into demons at the end?

But no matter if I play a hard bastard, or a kind paragon I always sided against the templars and the chantry in DA:O and so in DA2 as well.

Not saying that if I lived the life of a peon in DA I'd want Apostates running around without careful teaching, nor without some kind of special force that could deal with directly dangerous mages; but the chantry involvement in the templars and the oppression to everyone that brings makes me unable to support them in any sense that would make them stronger.

[Akka le Vil]

Okay, last warning before the report spam. Name of the forum :

"Dragon Age II General Discussion (No Spoilers allowed)"

ARE YOU ILLITERATE OR JUST STUPID ?

[Sjofn]

Far too many people around here take the "mages are entirely blameless" attitude of Anders for my tastes. The way they're treated in Kirkwall is not acceptable, I am not saying it is, but it's (obviously) not so black and white as "mages good, even when they're bad, because templars bad!" Mages show time and time again they can't have nice things.

Mages do need more freedom, especially in Kirkwall, but the Templars are doing a messy, thankless job. SOMEone needs to keep the bad mages in line ... they just need to not be so hair-trigger on what makes a mage "bad."

Modifié par Sjofn, 16 mars 2011 - 01:17 .

[Tirigon]

Sjofn wrote...

Far too many people around here take the "mages are entirely blameless" attitude of Anders for my tastes.

Sadly, I don´t remember any mages who ARE to blame.

Of course, many do a lot of sh!t, both in DA2 and DAO (Circle of Magi questline anyone?) BUT!!!!! they all act like assh*les when trying to fight off oppression.
You never see a mage who is left alone and not hunted down go like "Hey now I feel like killing you all and use your blood for insane rituals!" it´s always like "we MUST resort to bloodmagic because it´s the only way we have even the tiniest bit of a chance to be free".
And while part of that is probably only an excuse, let´s face it: All mages you actually TALK to are either pretty nice, like Merril, or do the sh*t they do with valid reasons, like Avernus in Warden´s Keep.

Point is, I get the feeling that there wouldn´t be half as many bloodmages in Kirkwall if the templars wouldn´t hunt them so oppressively.


And no matter whether you believe that mages need to be supervised or not, at least admit this: Taking them away without even telling the family about it (as it is done multiple times) is fascist crap. At least go visit the family at day. explain them why the child needs training in the Circle etc... and don´t just abduct them as if the templars were a bunch of f*cking terrorists.

[Jack of Wolves]

The templars? Necessary. Schools to teach Mages how to discpline themselves and prevent possession and handle their skills without abusing them? Necessary.

WHat needs to *go* is the Chantry having a *lick* of involvement. They're corrupt, hypocritical, and overstep any sane bounds a religious organisation should have. Yes, we've confirmed the Tevinter Imperium is a hellish, wicked, godsforsaken nightmare realm for anyone *not* a mage.. But when you steal someone away from their life, imprison them, threaten them with death at every turn if they step out of line, bludgeon them with guilt for existing, strip them of all rights, force them to face the very risks you claim to protect against to "prove" their right to exist as your chattel -- as someone puts it.. why not just take the next logical step and drown mages at birth?

Oh wait, then you'd not have slave-soldier artillerists and miracle medics to support your corrupt institution or a boogeyman to scare the populace with. You might have to make your slave-soldier drug-addicted "heroes" look bad!

The Templars are not the problem. It's the rabid doggerel the Chantry feeds them, and maybe with events that get hinted at in the epilogue we'll see an improvement... or it will get worse, which as this is Thedas, we're likely looking at the latter. TheTemplars are just as much victims as the Mages. The Chantry is the villain of this piece.

[Tirigon]

Jack of Wolves wrote...
The Chantry is the villain of this piece.

That is, with all my hate for templars, actually true. I´m still shocked from when, in DAO, you were told the Chantry makes templars lyrium-addicted to keep them in lane.

That´s freaking mafia methods....

[Grey21]

I like that both sides of the argument have a good point but that there isn't a clear solution. Putting mages into cages away from friends and family isn't nice, but letting them roam freely could lead to a world dominated by demons.

In DA2 however I think supporting the templars is the way to go. Most mages already seem to be blood mages. This is the fault of the knight commander but it still is a fact and when the time comes to decide you can decide to stand with the templars not with the commander herself.

[joriandrake]

benreeder2431 wrote...

Everyone I know who plays Dragon Age adore the mages. I have not met one templar supporter other than one attempting to get all the achievements, trophies, etc. I'm curious if you guys are actually out there. Personally, I'm a huge mage supporter. I don't even mind blood magic to a degree.


So, are you a full on mage supporter like me, a mage supporter who still thinks order is needed and blood magic is bad, or a templar supporter?

as it seems this game is basicly about showing how mages are mishandled by templars/others with power (although Fenris is an example of the opposite), and based on lots of Orlais related stuff I would say in the next game we will see more of the positive side of the Chantry (perhaps templars too), there are quite a good amount of references to Tevinter too so its a possibility Orlais and/or Tevinter will play a bigger part soon.

[Annarl]

For me its a tough choice. I totally see the need for mages to be supervised but don't like that they are virtually prisoners. Most templars are decent people just like mages. There are templars trying to help mages through out the game and there are mages (a lot of them) who turn to blood magic and deal making with demons in the game. So what's the answer, it depends on the character I'm playing.
In the world of Thedas, I would like to see more openness for mages but I can not ever see letting them go without supervision. It's about checks and balances.

Modifié par omearaee, 16 mars 2011 - 02:57 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Akka le Vil wrote...
Templar supporter here.

As David Gaider once pointed, it's easy to take the PoV of mage, because we play godawful powerful heroes, whose friends are mages and who have the all-mighty powers of :
- Being the center of the story, which means we're immune to the apocalyptic destruction mages can wreck (for example, we'll always have a way to get out of a deadly situation).
- Having the quickload power, which means if we fail at getting out of the deadly situation, we can do it again.
- Not actually living in the game world, which means threat to our lives tend to generate more a chuckle of "yeah, they all say that, and they all end up dead !", while in real life, having someone threatening your life is quite scary - and I'm not talking about someone who can mind-control you.

I'm a roleplayer, which means I immerse myself in the game and like to imagine I'm "really" the hero. Having people who can destroy a village out of the blue, or who can mind-control you and other, is deadly frightening - unless you're completely lacking in any kind of common sense.

Most templars are actually incredibly selfless, dedicating their live to guard people who can be deadly menace, at the risk of their own existence. A true repressive society would simply kill anyone show any talent for magic. That Thedas' society bother to dedicate so much ressources to keep people in check but alive is already quite an humanistic feat.

QFT.

That said, DA2 made choices diffucult, but the ends one were utterly stupid.

[joriandrake]

Grey21 wrote...

I like that both sides of the argument have a good point but that there isn't a clear solution. Putting mages into cages away from friends and family isn't nice, but letting them roam freely could lead to a world dominated by demons.

In DA2 however I think supporting the templars is the way to go. Most mages already seem to be blood mages. This is the fault of the knight commander but it still is a fact and when the time comes to decide you can decide to stand with the templars not with the commander herself.

hmm, I don't think so DA2 is especially weighted to the mage side, as either you or your sister are non-circle mages, but at the same time it seems there are a lot of blood mages of the worst kind among the mages so it isn't all about the "poor mistreated mages", many mages openly use blood magic gained from deals with demons or know of deals but do nothing against them (like the circle leader who knows about the murderer but doesn't just keep quiet about it he actually made deals with him) and summon demons a lot in Act 3


all in all I think both mage and templar leaders show the worst "stereotype" in the story: the templar one is a mad powermonger and dictator, and the mage one is a great intricant and acts all nice but harbors and protects blood magic users and he himself also uses the worst kind of researches which is even related to a loss in your own family

the best is if you make your choices perhaps somewhere in between on case by case, perhaps the middle road is the golden one although I still have to see the outcome of such a gameplay route

[Russalka]

I see a lot of spoilers.

[Sjofn]

Tirigon wrote...

Sjofn wrote...

Far too many people around here take the "mages are entirely blameless" attitude of Anders for my tastes.

Sadly, I don´t remember any mages who ARE to blame.

Of course, many do a lot of sh!t, both in DA2 and DAO (Circle of Magi questline anyone?) BUT!!!!! they all act like assh*les when trying to fight off oppression.
You never see a mage who is left alone and not hunted down go like "Hey now I feel like killing you all and use your blood for insane rituals!" it´s always like "we MUST resort to bloodmagic because it´s the only way we have even the tiniest bit of a chance to be free".
And while part of that is probably only an excuse, let´s face it: All mages you actually TALK to are either pretty nice, like Merril, or do the sh*t they do with valid reasons, like Avernus in Warden´s Keep.

Point is, I get the feeling that there wouldn´t be half as many bloodmages in Kirkwall if the templars wouldn´t hunt them so oppressively.

I can't really go into it in the spoiler-free forum, but there are definitely mages who are all mustache twirly in their embrace of blood magic, where it's not a last resort. And frankly, just because Merril is nice doesn't make what she actually does okay or less dangerous.

The fact you think Avernnus is totes justified in his situation, though, sort of proves my point. If it's a mage doing it, well gosh he totally had his reasons and yeah it's sort of icky but how could you blame him? The templars have their reasons too, and are often in a situation where they are justified, but they're not forgiven nearly as easily because they don't shoot fire out of their hands. It's silly.