134 réponses à ce sujet

[Valus]

Was it intentional to provide absolutely no concrete evidence whatsoever that Templars were doing anything wrong?

Was it also intentional to post almost every single npc mage you interact with as a maleficar?

Regardless of the individual player's opinion on what drove certain people to certain actions these things are merely speculative. No evidence is ever given that Templars or the circle forced mages to resort to blood magic. No evidence is ever given that templars are misbehaving in any way. We see zealotry in respect to the Qunari situation but never against mages or the circle as a whole. On the other side we see nothing but mages blowing up churches, going Frankenstien on your mom, posessing young templar recruits, killing thier wives and turning into abominations. We are given much evidence to support that circle mages cannot police their own, neither can Templars effectively police mages within Kirkwall any longer. The right of annulement seems more than justified at this point...not to mention far more justified than the situation we are presented with in DA:O.

I'm not seeing where the 'hard choice' at the end comes into play. Unless you are roleplaying as a villian or a maleficar yourself...then I suppose I see the appeal of siding with the mages.

I doubt this was the intent of the storytellers however.

[Werrf]

Valus wrote...

Was it intentional to provide absolutely no concrete evidence whatsoever that Templars were doing anything wrong?

Probably.  If you had hard proof, you could probably have taken it to the High Cleric and required her to do something about it, or if she continue to refuse, you could have had it sent to the Divine to do something about it.  With the mages it didn't really matter as much what evidence we did or didn't have of blood magic, since the crackdown would be going on regardless.

I think it's also worth noting that I don't think the Templars were ever supposed to be doing much, if anything, truly legally wrong.  There are suggestions that mages who have passed their Harrowing are being tranquilised, but the main problem seems to be more that the Templars are being so aggressive and uncompromising in searching for corruption that they're driving the mages to breaking point.

As it is, the choice of mages vs Templars was very easy for me having seen how many innocent mages were driven to abomination in their fear of the Templars, and particularly Meredith's insanity and inability to consider the possibility of compromise.  Honestly, I don't see the hard choice here - which suggests Bioware did their job rather well.

[lx_theo]

Valus wrote...

Was it intentional to provide absolutely no concrete evidence whatsoever that Templars were doing anything wrong?

Was it also intentional to post almost every single npc mage you interact with as a maleficar?

Regardless of the individual player's opinion on what drove certain people to certain actions these things are merely speculative. No evidence is ever given that Templars or the circle forced mages to resort to blood magic. No evidence is ever given that templars are misbehaving in any way. We see zealotry in respect to the Qunari situation but never against mages or the circle as a whole. On the other side we see nothing but mages blowing up churches, going Frankenstien on your mom, posessing young templar recruits, killing thier wives and turning into abominations. We are given much evidence to support that circle mages cannot police their own, neither can Templars effectively police mages within Kirkwall any longer. The right of annulement seems more than justified at this point...not to mention far more justified than the situation we are presented with in DA:O.

I'm not seeing where the 'hard choice' at the end comes into play. Unless you are roleplaying as a villian or a maleficar yourself...then I suppose I see the appeal of siding with the mages.

I doubt this was the intent of the storytellers however.

Blatant oppression and tyranny doesn't do it for you?

[Valus]

lx_theo wrote...

Blatant oppression and tyranny doesn't do it for you?

I found no evidence to back Blatant opression and/or tyranny up. Examples?

[Lithuasil]

Valus wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

Blatant oppression and tyranny doesn't do it for you?

I found no evidence to back Blatant opression and/or tyranny up. Examples?

Depends - do you trust the words of every mage and every templar that ever openly speaks about it, like, in the entirety of the game?

[lx_theo]

Valus wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

Blatant oppression and tyranny doesn't do it for you?

I found no evidence to back Blatant opression and/or tyranny up. Examples?

- The knight-commander running the city for years, taking away any chance of it running itself.
- Disregard at people in positions of power executing such plans like the "tranquil solution"
-Meredith admitting herself that although its essentially tyranny, she
doesn't want to call it that because she doesn't know another way.
- The desperation of all the Mages
-When you speak to Mages that were at other Circle's or weren't in it
before, they often remark about how much worse it is, or how that its
everything they feared
- Ander's friend being made tranquil as an example
- How rare it was to come across a half decent templar like Thrask or Cullen (basically the only two)
- How the templars tried to take over the city guard

To name what I can remember off the top of my head. The point of the game is to make descisions very grey. If you come to believe the templars are in the right, then thats what the game has lead you to. I played it and felt more for the mages, only playing pro-templar to see the other ending and whatnot. There should be a split on opinions if the game was designed correctly.

Modifié par lx_theo, 21 mars 2011 - 12:53 .

[Valus]

Werrf wrote...

Valus wrote...

Was it intentional to provide absolutely no concrete evidence whatsoever that Templars were doing anything wrong?

Probably.  If you had hard proof, you could probably have taken it to the High Cleric and required her to do something about it, or if she continue to refuse, you could have had it sent to the Divine to do something about it.  With the mages it didn't really matter as much what evidence we did or didn't have of blood magic, since the crackdown would be going on regardless.

I think it's also worth noting that I don't think the Templars were ever supposed to be doing much, if anything, truly legally wrong.  There are suggestions that mages who have passed their Harrowing are being tranquilised, but the main problem seems to be more that the Templars are being so aggressive and uncompromising in searching for corruption that they're driving the mages to breaking point.

As it is, the choice of mages vs Templars was very easy for me having seen how many innocent mages were driven to abomination in their fear of the Templars, and particularly Meredith's insanity and inability to consider the possibility of compromise.  Honestly, I don't see the hard choice here - which suggests Bioware did their job rather well.

That's fine and well thought out but it's all speculative. You are speculating that presumably innocent mages are driven to become abominations out of fear of the Templars. We are given evidence to support that mages turn into abominations or conduct illegal activities without considering the Templars fairly often however we are never given any proof that Templars 'forced' them to do anything. You are speculating that Meredith's insanity was an instigator which is noteworthy however it does not excuse the actions conducted by mages years before she was possesed or whatever it was that was happening to her. Even during the time where she might have been under the influence of the idol/sword we see she does not support the 'tranquil solution'.

I can't disagree with speculation however I can disagree with a story built entirely around mounds of cold hard evidence versus vague assumptions.

Modifié par Valus, 21 mars 2011 - 12:56 .

[Wulfram]

The Templar in Anders' quest in act 2 is clearly doing something wrong.

[TJPags]

Werrf wrote...

Valus wrote...

Was it intentional to provide absolutely no concrete evidence whatsoever that Templars were doing anything wrong?

Probably.  If you had hard proof, you could probably have taken it to the High Cleric and required her to do something about it, or if she continue to refuse, you could have had it sent to the Divine to do something about it.  With the mages it didn't really matter as much what evidence we did or didn't have of blood magic, since the crackdown would be going on regardless.

I think it's also worth noting that I don't think the Templars were ever supposed to be doing much, if anything, truly legally wrong.  There are suggestions that mages who have passed their Harrowing are being tranquilised, but the main problem seems to be more that the Templars are being so aggressive and uncompromising in searching for corruption that they're driving the mages to breaking point.

As it is, the choice of mages vs Templars was very easy for me having seen how many innocent mages were driven to abomination in their fear of the Templars, and particularly Meredith's insanity and inability to consider the possibility of compromise.  Honestly, I don't see the hard choice here - which suggests Bioware did their job rather well.

Very good point there.

I've indicated before, that in my games so far, I've seen virtually no evidence to support the allegations.  I've heard lots of rumors, I've been told a lot of things by Anders, but I can't find these people (excepting Ser Alrik, of course).  As an example, I'm currently in Act 1 of a game.  There's the Quest to find the missing Templar recruit (Ser Keran, name of the quest escapes me).  When you talk to the recruits during this quest, you hear about some "secret" initiation Meredith is running, which tends to kill a lot of recruits, or Templars who don't agree with her.  Turns out, it's BS.  Sort of like the Tranquil Solution.  It was not in place.

And I've been wondering why we don't get this evidence.  But as you point out, it would seem to have to give us an option to take it to the Grand Cleric, or the Cullen, or otherwise get Meredith tossed out of her position.  Which wouldn't fit the game, at all.

Now, I disagree with your conclusions, there, Werrf, as far as the innocent mages being pushed too far () but I can understand how you arrived at it.

[AlexXIV]

Hawke is an apostate or brother/sister of an apostate and the mages are treated rather harsh in Kirkwall. So my guess is Bioware thought if they don't paint the mages as 'uncontrollable and unrelieable' hardly anyone would side with the templars. So they have all the fine brave templars and the treacherous and unstable mages. I kinda hate what they did there. it seems writers spending too much on forums doesn't really help them staying neutral and objective in their stories. I mean playing the game at times felt like arguing with templar supporters on the forum.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 21 mars 2011 - 01:03 .

[Lithuasil]

Valus wrote...


I can't disagree with speculation however I can disagree with a story built entirely around mounds of cold hard evidence versus vague assumptions.

Would Templars conspire with mages to overthrow their own knight commander, if nothing was going on?

What we get to know about the mages treatment is that they're locked up in small, unlit cells pretty much 24/7 (Alaine), that the the templars resort to physical Violence for even minor offenses (banter from a mage in the gallows yard - 30 lashes for talking to a civillian), and that female mages run a high risk of templars forcing themselves upon them, or even of being made tranquil to make such things easier (Ser Alrik).
That hard enough proof for you?

[lx_theo]

Valus wrote...

Werrf wrote...

Valus wrote...

Was it intentional to provide absolutely no concrete evidence whatsoever that Templars were doing anything wrong?

Probably.  If you had hard proof, you could probably have taken it to the High Cleric and required her to do something about it, or if she continue to refuse, you could have had it sent to the Divine to do something about it.  With the mages it didn't really matter as much what evidence we did or didn't have of blood magic, since the crackdown would be going on regardless.

I think it's also worth noting that I don't think the Templars were ever supposed to be doing much, if anything, truly legally wrong.  There are suggestions that mages who have passed their Harrowing are being tranquilised, but the main problem seems to be more that the Templars are being so aggressive and uncompromising in searching for corruption that they're driving the mages to breaking point.

As it is, the choice of mages vs Templars was very easy for me having seen how many innocent mages were driven to abomination in their fear of the Templars, and particularly Meredith's insanity and inability to consider the possibility of compromise.  Honestly, I don't see the hard choice here - which suggests Bioware did their job rather well.

That's fine and well thought out but it's all speculative. You are speculating that presumably innocent mages are driven to become abominations out of fear of the Templars. We are given evidence to support that mages turn into abominations or conduct illegal activities without considering the Templars fairly often however we are never given any proof that Templars 'forced' them to do anything. You are speculating that Meredith's insanity was an instigator which is noteworthy however it does not excuse the actions conducted by mages years before she was possesed or whatever it was that was happening to her. Even during the time where she might have been under the influence of the idol/sword we see she does not support the 'tranquil solution'.

I can't disagree with speculation however I can disagree with a story built entirely around mounds of cold hard evidence versus vague assumptions.

Yet your willing to support the assumption that all mages are like that. Yes, there were mages that did horrible things, but not every mage is like that. Considering how many mages are out there, is it unreasonable that some may respond to a society that treats them as less than human in very extreme manners. To assume that most would do that, though, is assuming.

[Puzzlewell]

For my rogue LadyHawke, I took her motivation to be that she loves her sister and magic is in her family line. Yes she sees what bad mages can do (Leandra's fate), but she also knows that the Templars are no better (the Templar that captures the Qunari delegates and what he does to them). Neither side is right in their actions, but she wants to stand by her sister.

[Valus]

lx_theo wrote...

- The knight-commander running the city for years, taking away any chance of it running itself.
- Disregard at people in positions of power executing such plans like the "tranquil solution"
-Meredith admitting herself that although its essentially tyranny, she
doesn't want to call it that because she doesn't know another way.
- The desperation of all the Mages
-When you speak to Mages that were at other Circle's or weren't in it
before, they often remark about how much worse it is, or how that its
everything they feared
- Ander's friend being made tranquil as an example
- How rare it was to come across a half decent templar like Thrask or Cullen (basically the only two)
- How the templars tried to take over the city guard

Hmm. All good examples of possible insitigators but no, none of that is factual evidence to support that mages were being opressed. Testimonial evidence has to be taken in context and every one of those mages could have been lying. All of those mages could have also been telling the truth however their version of opressed might not be the same as yours or mine. Meredith's admission of guilt is interesting but I don't recall her openly admitting to opressing mages, not to mention I am postive her definition of opression is different than ours. With the possible exception of Ander's friend (however even then we can only speculate what led to him becoming tranquil) I'm afraid I don't see any evidence to support your claims of opression or tyranny.

The Templar's attempt to take over the city gaurd has nothing, in and of itself, to do with mages. While it may be a related offense that could speak to intentions of the Templar overall it still isn't evidence.

[Oneiropolos]

Honestly, I felt like the Templars were wrong. And that was one of the things that made me the most fed up. If you import a save where Alistair became King, he talks to you in the Keep. You ask him what threats there are to Kirkwall, and he says if you ask him, the biggest one just walked out. It's in reference to Meredith. That's why I also felt like we should have been able to organize or even -fail- an assassination attempt on Meredith, though I guess Cassandra makes a big deal over the fact that she attacked Hawke first as opposed to what everyone had thought. It's still one of those, everyone gets that Meredith is the problem, why things progress the way they do for so long is purely because it was WRITTEN that way... not because any of our characters or even other NPCs would actually tolerate it that long.

All said, though, I usually side with the Templars at the end. Because the first time, I honestly hoped I could pull a Loghain-at-Ostagar... undermine them by acting within them. Which... turns out, when some mages ran up to me to beg for their lives, I gave the command to the templars to let them live, and Meredith tried to go against me and Cullen backed me up. The look in Meredith's eyes was priceless. So it's not agreeing with Meredith if you side against the mages, like Hawke can argue to Bethany, it's trying to find order in the city again. The mages overthrowing the templars has no chance to lead to order, and I thought it was pretty obvious early on that Meredith was going to go against you. From the minute she glared at you when she realized you saved Kirkwall from the Qunari. She was going to snap and attack you at one point. It was just when, and if you got to fight back.

Modifié par Oneiropolos, 21 mars 2011 - 01:14 .

[TJPags]

Valus wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

- The knight-commander running the city for years, taking away any chance of it running itself.
- Disregard at people in positions of power executing such plans like the "tranquil solution"
-Meredith admitting herself that although its essentially tyranny, she
doesn't want to call it that because she doesn't know another way.
- The desperation of all the Mages
-When you speak to Mages that were at other Circle's or weren't in it
before, they often remark about how much worse it is, or how that its
everything they feared
- Ander's friend being made tranquil as an example
- How rare it was to come across a half decent templar like Thrask or Cullen (basically the only two)
- How the templars tried to take over the city guard

Hmm. All good examples of possible insitigators but no, none of that is factual evidence to support that mages were being opressed. Testimonial evidence has to be taken in context and every one of those mages could have been lying. All of those mages could have also been telling the truth however their version of opressed might not be the same as yours or mine. Meredith's admission of guilt is interesting but I don't recall her openly admitting to opressing mages, not to mention I am postive her definition of opression is different than ours. With the possible exception of Ander's friend (however even then we can only speculate what led to him becoming tranquil) I'm afraid I don't see any evidence to support your claims of opression or tyranny.

The Templar's attempt to take over the city gaurd has nothing, in and of itself, to do with mages. While it may be a related offense that could speak to intentions of the Templar overall it still isn't evidence.

We are told, many times, by several sources (even Templars, IIRC) that mages are essentially under house arrest.  Cullen mentions that mages are treated worse in the Kirkwall Circle than at the Ferelden one.  I'd accept those things as fact.

However, we have precious little evidence of the other "abuses", outside of Ser Alrik, who is hardly representative of the Templars (and Cullen will tell you he was acting outside authority afetr you kill him).  We do have plenty of evidence of blood mages.

So it's a chicken-egg thing.  Did the mages turn because they were treated harshly, or are the mages being treated harshly because of the large number of apostates and malificar in Kirkwall?

I come down firmly on the side of "too many insane blood mages justifies harsh treatment".

[Valus]

lx_theo wrote...

Yet your willing to support the assumption that all mages are like that. Yes, there were mages that did horrible things, but not every mage is like that. Considering how many mages are out there, is it unreasonable that some may respond to a society that treats them as less than human in very extreme manners. To assume that most would do that, though, is assuming.

I am only going off what we know about the the rite of annulment

We are given very little information regarding it other than it's happened 17 times before, it is used when a Grand Cleric deems a circle irredeemable, and that the case used to support the enacting of the rite was (by use of pure body-count and total mages involved) far less severe than the one inflicted upon kirkwall.

I can only assume (and I don't like to assume) that since the Grand Cleric was assasinated along with whomever else was in the chantry at the time of the explosion it falls to the Knight Commander to fufill the role of ennacting the rite. While that IS speculation I think someone would have said something if that were not the case.

[haroldhardluck]

Valus wrote...
Was it intentional to provide absolutely no concrete evidence whatsoever that Templars were doing anything wrong?

It is not the templars but Meredith who is the problem. The narrative makes it clear that Meredith is using the templars to grab power and establish a tyranny using the oldest excuse in the book, keeping law and order and protecting the people from the "bad" mages. Of course, she is creating more bad mages as a consequence of her repression. In the final battle, when she pulls out the big red sword, Varric says "Now we know who bought that idol." indicating that Meredith has been made mad by the lyrium idol just like his brother.

Meredith is mad and must be stopped for the good of the world and doing so just happens to require siding with the mages. Basically both the templars and the mages are victims of Meredith's madness. The fact that the templars back off after the final battle shows that they realize that things were not as they were told. Meredith's dead broke totally her spell over them.

In the process the relationship between mages, the Chantry and the templars is also broken and that was a fundamental aspect of Thedan society under the Chantry. Hence the world is falling apart, setting the stage for DA3.

Harold

[AlexXIV]

Oneiropolos wrote...

Honestly, I felt like the Templars were wrong. And that was one of the things that made me the most fed up. If you import a save where Alistair became King, he talks to you in the Keep. You ask him what threats there are to Kirkwall, and he says if you ask him, the biggest one just walked out. It's in reference to Meredith. That's why I also felt like we should have been able to organize or even -fail- an assassination attempt on Meredith, though I guess Cassandra makes a big deal over the fact that she attacked Hawke first as opposed to what everyone had thought. It's still one of those, everyone gets that Meredith is the problem, why things progress the way they do for so long is purely because it was WRITTEN that way... not because any of our characters or even other NPCs would actually tolerate it that long.

All said, though, I usually side with the Templars at the end. Because the first time, I honestly hoped I could pull a Loghain-at-Ostagar... undermine them by acting within them. Which... turns out, when some mages ran up to me to beg for their lives, I gave the command to the templars to let them live, and Meredith tried to go against me and Cullen backed me up. The look in Meredith's eyes was priceless. So it's not agreeing with Meredith if you side against the mages, like Hawke can argue to Bethany, it's trying to find order in the city again. The mages overthrowing the templars has no chance to lead to order, and I thought it was pretty obvious early on that Meredith was going to go against you. From the minute she glared at you when she realized you saved Kirkwall from the Qunari. She was going to snap and attack you at one point. It was just when, and if you got to fight back.

I am more disappointed that you can't get Cullen on your side earlier. I mean he stands by her side all the time, even when she invokes the right of annullment without justification. Well the only justifications she does have is that the Grand Cleric is dead and can't stop her anymore. That's the point Cullen should have said no. Not after the mages are dead and Meredith wants to kill Hawke. That was too late.

Many things in this game feel so forced and like they don't really make sense. I mean if I compare to Loghain, I could understand Loghain's point of view. He was a practical man who didn't give much on myths and legends. And as we see in DA2 he was right about the Orlesians still wanting Ferelden back. Anyway, Cullen was like ... just saying that he doesn't like what Meredith is doing,but still supported her. And there is no way to convince him.

I think the game would have benefitted if it was actually Hawke who convinced Cullen. But as it is, Cullen decides at the end to stand against Meredith and with Hawke for no apparent reason. Well my Hawke is female so I guess he just had a crush on her. But what with the people who play a male Hawke?

Modifié par AlexXIV, 21 mars 2011 - 01:23 .

[lx_theo]

Valus wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

- The knight-commander running the city for years, taking away any chance of it running itself.
- Disregard at people in positions of power executing such plans like the "tranquil solution"
-Meredith admitting herself that although its essentially tyranny, she
doesn't want to call it that because she doesn't know another way.
- The desperation of all the Mages
-When you speak to Mages that were at other Circle's or weren't in it
before, they often remark about how much worse it is, or how that its
everything they feared
- Ander's friend being made tranquil as an example
- How rare it was to come across a half decent templar like Thrask or Cullen (basically the only two)
- How the templars tried to take over the city guard

Hmm. All good examples of possible insitigators but no, none of that is factual evidence to support that mages were being opressed. Testimonial evidence has to be taken in context and every one of those mages could have been lying. All of those mages could have also been telling the truth however their version of opressed might not be the same as yours or mine. Meredith's admission of guilt is interesting but I don't recall her openly admitting to opressing mages, not to mention I am postive her definition of opression is different than ours. With the possible exception of Ander's friend (however even then we can only speculate what led to him becoming tranquil) I'm afraid I don't see any evidence to support your claims of opression or tyranny.

The Templar's attempt to take over the city gaurd has nothing, in and of itself, to do with mages. While it may be a related offense that could speak to intentions of the Templar overall it still isn't evidence.

It does have to do with the Templar's use of Tyranny to get their way.

But it has about as much proof as the mage stuff.

[lx_theo]

Valus wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

Yet your willing to support the assumption that all mages are like that. Yes, there were mages that did horrible things, but not every mage is like that. Considering how many mages are out there, is it unreasonable that some may respond to a society that treats them as less than human in very extreme manners. To assume that most would do that, though, is assuming.

I am only going off what we know about the the rite of annulment

We are given very little information regarding it other than it's happened 17 times before, it is used when a Grand Cleric deems a circle irredeemable, and that the case used to support the enacting of the rite was (by use of pure body-count and total mages involved) far less severe than the one inflicted upon kirkwall.

I can only assume (and I don't like to assume) that since the Grand Cleric was assasinated along with whomever else was in the chantry at the time of the explosion it falls to the Knight Commander to fufill the role of ennacting the rite. While that IS speculation I think someone would have said something if that were not the case.

So your counter-argument is about an unrelated topic (or very minorly related)?

Modifié par lx_theo, 21 mars 2011 - 01:27 .

[Valus]

haroldhardluck wrote...

Valus wrote...
Was it intentional to provide absolutely no concrete evidence whatsoever that Templars were doing anything wrong?

It is not the templars but Meredith who is the problem. The narrative makes it clear that Meredith is using the templars to grab power and establish a tyranny using the oldest excuse in the book, keeping law and order and protecting the people from the "bad" mages. Of course, she is creating more bad mages as a consequence of her repression. In the final battle, when she pulls out the big red sword, Varric says "Now we know who bought that idol." indicating that Meredith has been made mad by the lyrium idol just like his brother.

Meredith is mad and must be stopped for the good of the world and doing so just happens to require siding with the mages. Basically both the templars and the mages are victims of Meredith's madness. The fact that the templars back off after the final battle shows that they realize that things were not as they were told. Meredith's dead broke totally her spell over them.

In the process the relationship between mages, the Chantry and the templars is also broken and that was a fundamental aspect of Thedan society under the Chantry. Hence the world is falling apart, setting the stage for DA3.

Harold

Yeah...I know...I played the game but thanks for the recap.

I'm talking about factual evidence in support of more than one point of view. I'm talking about real proof that is supposed to make me lean one way or the other in regards to this big decision. Does the narrative make it clear that Merridith is only grabbing at power? Maybe to you but, again, you are only speculating. I saw it as effectively acting like a desire demon. Taking her penultimate 'desire', that being safegaurding the city from mages, and twisting and exacerbating that desire.

Many people seem to be missing the point here that I don't care which side any players took or what drove you to it. I care about evidence to actually support your decisions. I only care about getting an answer to why the devs thought it was such a good idea to make 2 opposing cases and only supply one with factual evidence to back it up.

[Valus]

lx_theo wrote...

So your counter-argument is about an unrelated topic (or very minorly related)?

Considering that the 'big choice' is to side with the Templars as they ennact the rite or to side with the mages in opposition to it I think it is heavily related. Nice try though.

I'm not assuming anything. I'm going off the evidence presented to me by the story. If you care to assume that is your business, I'm not trying to discourage anyone from playing the game as they see fit. I'm just looking to get an answer as to why there is no evidence to support the mage side of things. If you could support your counter-argument with any factual evidence I would appreciate it, otherwise it is OT.

Modifié par Valus, 21 mars 2011 - 01:38 .

[lx_theo]

Valus wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

- The knight-commander running the city for years, taking away any chance of it running itself.
- Disregard at people in positions of power executing such plans like the "tranquil solution"
-Meredith admitting herself that although its essentially tyranny, she
doesn't want to call it that because she doesn't know another way.
- The desperation of all the Mages
-When you speak to Mages that were at other Circle's or weren't in it
before, they often remark about how much worse it is, or how that its
everything they feared
- Ander's friend being made tranquil as an example
- How rare it was to come across a half decent templar like Thrask or Cullen (basically the only two)
- How the templars tried to take over the city guard

Hmm. All good examples of possible insitigators but no, none of that is factual evidence to support that mages were being opressed. Testimonial evidence has to be taken in context and every one of those mages could have been lying. All of those mages could have also been telling the truth however their version of opressed might not be the same as yours or mine. Meredith's admission of guilt is interesting but I don't recall her openly admitting to opressing mages, not to mention I am postive her definition of opression is different than ours. With the possible exception of Ander's friend (however even then we can only speculate what led to him becoming tranquil) I'm afraid I don't see any evidence to support your claims of opression or tyranny.

The Templar's attempt to take over the city gaurd has nothing, in and of itself, to do with mages. While it may be a related offense that could speak to intentions of the Templar overall it still isn't evidence.

Actually, I'll respond to how these are not...

- Meredith IS ruling the city. How any assumptions are needed shocks me.
- Ander's quest in act 2, you directly see a Templar, and get his documents, on the plan to turn every Mage tranquil over the next few years.
- She says it. Don't know what assumption is need here. Adn it has to do with her tactics to get in a situation to fulfill her duty. Its not an assumption, its the only reason she could have for doing it.
- In a world where they are treated less than human... Yes, desperation will be seen worse in the worst of areas
- This is first hand evidense from many sources. This is often considered proof enough that it is happening to some degree. If you ignore that, then you don't know how evidense works.
- He said he was made it as an example. need for assumption where?
- Self-Explanitory
- Like said, it was an attempt to grab more power (if there could be another reason, i can think of one)

Its not all directly connected to the mages, especially the tyranny, which was an indirect way to fulfill their duties by having enough power.

[lx_theo]

Valus wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

So your counter-argument is about an unrelated topic (or very minorly related)?

Considering that the 'big choice' is to side with the Templars as they ennact the rite or to side with the mages in opposition to it I think it is heavily related. Nice try though.

I'm not assuming anything. I'm going off the evidence presented to me by the story. If you care to assume that is your business, I'm not trying to discourage anyone from playing the game as they see fit. I'm just looking to get an answer as to why there is no evidence to support the mage side of things. If you could support your counter-argument with any factual evidence I would appreciate it, otherwise it is OT.

Yes, you are. Your assuming that the Rite is even needed.

The big choice isn't whether to do the rite, its whether or not to slaughter innocents.