4350 réponses à ce sujet

[Xilizhra]

Isn't blood magic explicitly free of the Fade?

[GavrielKay]

cobretti1818 wrote...

Thank god for Cullen and some sort of sanity in this mess.

And you know you're in trouble when Cullen passes for the voice of sanity in the end game.

[Xilizhra]

Especially when he doesn't even do it well.

[Rifneno]

GavrielKay wrote...

cobretti1818 wrote...

Thank god for Cullen and some sort of sanity in this mess.

And you know you're in trouble when Cullen passes for the voice of sanity in the end game.

QFT.  

[dragonflight288]

Hmm. 129 pages. I just started reading. Hard to catch up. So I'll just go off of impressions.

My impressions of the final decision in the game on who to support is quite frankly, tiring. By the time Anders/Justice blew up the Chantry, I knew Meredith was just looking for a legitimate excuse to throw me in the gallows. I thought she may have been a sympathetic character, especially when she cries out "Unless you can show me another way, don't brand me a tyrant!"

Thin veil, her iron grip, pride demons under the city, whatever the reason, blood magic and abominations WERE rampant throughout the city. That makes templars needed in Kirkwall.

But Meredith was also keeping power beyond her station. She was the acting viscount after Dumar's death. But for three years, she vetoed and denied any and all other people who stepped forward to be viscount (like Hawke). I got that information from Orsino while he was preaching in the street. She wasn't letting the nobles elect a viscount. Alistair and the steward both say whoever wishes to be viscount needs templar support-just why does the person with popular support need templar support? Is nothing allowed in Kirkwall if the templars don't have their fingers in it? That's far beyond the duties of Knight-Commander. Meredith kept political power in the city, to the point of commanding city guards when Hawke shows up in Kirkwall. She was power hungry and politically prominent beyond her station well before the deep roads expedition.

So yes, I do support mages having freedom, but honestly, templars are the best prepared for dealing with abominations and blood mages.

Somewhere in an earlier page of this thread, someone said the Chantry is neutral between the mages and templars. I have to disagree. The Chantry controls the lyrium trade with the dwarves. They have almost all of it on the surface. They use it to give templars their edge...so to speak. Which is proven wrong as Alistair can use his templar abilities without it. Templars are addicted to lyrium so they have to follow the chantry in order to get it.

All Elthina and the chantry would have to do was withdraw lyrium from the templars until they gave in. No need to interfere with the debate between security and freedom regarding mages, but unless the templars are blatantly not following the chantry teachings (Ser Alrik, Varnel), they should keep their lyrium access. But as I stated, there are templars abusing their power and should be removed from Kirkwall or cut off from the lyrium.

Mages are no better in Kirkwall. Orsino supports Quentin and his research which killed Leandra. Almost every mage turns to blood magic in the end, no matter who you support. The moderates either go insane or are killed by the insane. Both sides are corrupt, and both sides have logical points to support them.

But neither are right considering how extreme things have escalated by the end.

By the way, even if there was no glowing sword of doom, I still wouldn't support Meredith because she absolutely refuses to allow the nobles to elect a new viscount. She's afraid of losing power and saw danger everywhere. Those traits aren't worth following in leaders.

[Xilizhra]

Mages are no better in Kirkwall. Orsino supports Quentin and his research which killed Leandra. Almost every mage turns to blood magic in the end, no matter who you support. The moderates either go insane or are killed by the insane. Both sides are corrupt, and both sides have logical points to support them.

Altogether wrong. Orsino's support for Quentin's current research is unclear, and he only hides him to keep the Circle safe. Very few of the Circle's mages use blood magic if you side with the mages (there are only like three). There are plenty of moderates left in the Circle, especially if you let them live.

[Beerfish]

Xilizhra wrote...

Mages are no better in Kirkwall. Orsino supports Quentin and his research which killed Leandra. Almost every mage turns to blood magic in the end, no matter who you support. The moderates either go insane or are killed by the insane. Both sides are corrupt, and both sides have logical points to support them.

Altogether wrong. Orsino's support for Quentin's current research is unclear, and he only hides him to keep the Circle safe. Very few of the Circle's mages use blood magic if you side with the mages (there are only like three). There are plenty of moderates left in the Circle, especially if you let them live.

Only  like 3?  Gee that's great.

Also the fact that every second non circle mage is a blood mage or abomination and the fact that the Starkhaven circle immediately went bonkers once they were on the loose points towards better control = safer for everyone.  Orsino knew the dude was up to no good, as you point out he keeps it quiet because he knows he is up to no good.  He just offers up all this helpful data to Quentin and does zero checking up on him.

Orsino was a horrible 1st enchanter and as much to blame as Meredith for the disaster.

[dragonflight288]

I'm not arguing the specifics of the help to Quentin. But the letter clearly states he is aware of what's going on and is offering books and such for his research. It isn't that hard to guess he is aware of some details. If that's the extent of his help, I can't say. There isn't enough evidence.

And yes, I see your point about the moderates in the circle, but they still are suffering under the leadership and infighting. Grace killed Thrask because she wanted to kill Hawke. All Thrask was doing was getting rid of Meredith and improving the lot for both sides. He managed to prove that mages and templars could work together for a common goal. With his death, we may have lost all chance of mages and templars working together.

IF there were any other templars and mages who could unite and stand strong against the corruption of the leaders, they weren't there. Or didn't have enough time to reorganize. Or we as players just didn't see them. The right of annulment kind of ruins any hope of compromise.

I disagree with Anders when he said there was no compromise because Thrask proved it could be done. Only he was killed by an insane mage then Cullen came in and arrested everyone who supported this union.

[Deztyn]

Xilizhra wrote...

And they are all dangerous in ways that are unique to mages.

Incorrect. Danarius and Hadriana are warlords who just use magic as another weapon. Quentin is a serial killer, ditto. Gascard doesn't actually hurt anyone unless Quentin lures him to his side. Orsino was pushed by the templars into actually using said research; in addition, you have no solid reasons to believe that Orsino was approving Quentin in any way beyond the minimum to not see the Circle Annulled. And along with Decimus and Grace, you have Huon who was pushed by the templars, or at least was sane before he entered the Circle and was insane when he left.

Oh, Tahrone's also motivated primarily by hatred of the templars, and presumably Idunna as well. Why? We never know.

"Another weapon" that only other mages can use. For example, a normal warlord would have to beat or threaten a recaptured slave into obedience. Danarius just wipes Fenris' mind and the man never even knew he'd been free.

Quentin may have been unhinged by his wife's death, even if he wasn't a mage. But if he didn't have a background in blood magic and/or necromancy he likely wouldn't have decided that piecing together parts of different women was a good idea.

Gascard still had a motive for his questionable acts beyond "the templars made me do it." and it was a motive that was rooted in his magical talents.

Orsino knew that Quentin's research was "too evil" and "too dangerous" to use, there's a strong implication that he had an idea of how it was being obtained. You're right, it isn't certain. But we know he was hiding him during Act II, possibly earlier, which as far as we know was before Meredith went total Kooky Brainsick and started looking for excuses to Annul the Circle. It's also worth mentioning that it was part of Orsino's job to keep dangerous mages reigned in.

Anyway, my point was that the mages were all pretty varied and you couldn't reduce most of them to "Templar Victims" or "Hellmouth Victims". That was something I thought Bioware did right. They did need a few more 'good' mages to balance it all out though.

GavrielKay wrote...

Deztyn wrote...

I've said it many times before, the decision to Annul the circle doesn't have to be based in the belief that the Right was correct. You just have to believe that allowing the mages total freedom is too risky. It doesn't matter at that point why there are abominations running around, all that matters is that they are.

Annuling the circle and believing mages should be completely free are two completely separate notions. 

Not really. When you fight against the Annulment you're doing so to help as many mages as you can escape. There's no accounting for who these mages are or how dangerous/innocent they might be. It pretty much requires a belief that mages should be free. There's no reasonable expectation that defending the mages has any other result.

The ones who've already escaped and turned into abominations are also a separate matter.  You don't have to believe in the total annihilation of the circle to believe in scouring Kirkwall to kill the loose abominations.

... the whole point of fighting the Annulment is to help as many mages escape as possible. You're also defying the Templar Order and probably even the local laws to do it. There's a reason Hawke and friends have to make a run for it afterwards and a pro-mage Hawke can't become Viscount. This a predictable consequence of siding with the mages. I'm not sure it's fair for Hawke to expect to be around afterwards to do damage control.

Rifneno wrote...

To be fair, Deztyn is by far the best debater on the templar side. She makes thoughtful counterpoints instead of the usual "they're all evil because the ones I met were blood mages!" stuff.  Definitely the only pro-templar I came out of a debate having more respect for than when I went in.

Deztyn's Reaction: :blush:

I want to preen. But since I know your opinion of most people on the pro-templar side, I'm not really sure I'm being complimented!

But, it's nice to have a discussion with a pro-mager who can do the same and admit there was an angle they hadn't considered even if they don't ultimately agree. Some people are too focused on their side being right to even think about someone else's position. For me thinking about this stuff is the fun part.

(Note the slight edit to your post )

Modifié par Deztyn, 18 mai 2011 - 02:33 .

[Rifneno]

dragonflight288 wrote...

But the letter clearly states he is aware of what's going on and is offering books and such for his research.

<Sten> No. </Sten>

Deztyn wrote...

Quentin may have been unhinged by his wife's death, even if he wasn't a mage. But if he didn't have a background in blood magic and/or necromancy he likely wouldn't have decided that piecing together parts of different women was a good idea.

You'd think so, wouldn't you? I actually thought Quentin was based on a real case like how the Countress is. I'm hesitant to link the case (and honestly, I don't want to google it) but suffice to say the nutjob was trying to resurrect his dead lover. Oh, and he was having sex with her corpse. My point is, Quentin was a psycho. He used magic in his murders, but there's really no telling whether he would've killed people without it. He's clearly insane and he clearly doesn't value the lives of other people.

Orsino knew that Quentin's research was "too evil" and "too dangerous" to use, there's a strong implication that he had an idea of how it was being obtained. You're right, it isn't certain. But we know he was hiding him during Act II, possibly earlier, which as far as we know was before Meredith went total Kooky Brainsick and started looking for excuses to Annul the Circle. It's also worth mentioning that it was part of Orsino's job to keep dangerous mages reigned in.

Orsino, Meredith, and Elthina are all to blame IMO. Orsino says at a point where he has no reason to lie that he didn't turn in Quentin because he knew Meredith would use it as more ammunition against the Circle. Meredith is creating an environment that actively and harshly discourages good mages from turning in bad ones. Elthina is letting her do it. Orsino I have some sympathy for because it's a very tough position to be put in. Meredith should be boiled though.

Not really. When you fight against the Annulment you're doing so to help as many mages as you can escape. There's no accounting for who these mages are or how dangerous/innocent they might be. It pretty much requires a belief that mages should be free. There's no reasonable expectation that defending the mages has any other result.

But you say that you can support the RoA without believing it's just because you can believe it's just the lesser of two evils basically. Why can the same not hold true for opposing the RoA? That one doesn't believe mages should all be free, but letting the Circle go is a lesser evil than executing them all?

I want to preen. But since I know your opinion of most people on the pro-templar side, I'm not really sure I'm being complimented!

But, it's nice to have a discussion with a pro-mager who can do the same and admit there was an angle they hadn't considered even if they don't ultimately agree. Some people are too focused on their side being right to even think about someone else's position. For me thinking about this stuff is the fun part.

It's human nature. When people are confronted with an opposing viewpoint, their minds automatically go to "What do I say to counter this?" rather than "Might this person have a valid point?" People rarely consider that they might be in the wrong. Sadly, as amazing as the human brain is, it's wired pretty poorly.

And yes, it was a compliment. You made a good defense for a position I honestly thought was indefensible. The pro-templar side would do well to have more of your kind of debate and less of the "it's not genocide! ... lulz the source of that definition doesn't exist in Thedas!" bickering (which I'm partially responsible for, admittedly).

(Note the slight edit to your post )

Hehe. Sorry, the Thane avatar threw me.

[Xilizhra]

"Another weapon" that only other mages can use. For example, a normal warlord would have to beat or threaten a recaptured slave into obedience. Danarius just wipes Fenris' mind and the man never even knew he'd been free.

Which is only a threat to those already completely under his power.

Quentin may have been unhinged by his wife's death, even if he wasn't a mage. But if he didn't have a background in blood magic and/or necromancy he likely wouldn't have decided that piecing together parts of different women was a good idea.

He was crazy enough to kill, regardless. The end result doesn't matter as much.

Orsino knew that Quentin's research was "too evil" and "too dangerous" to use, there's a strong implication that he had an idea of how it was being obtained. You're right, it isn't certain. But we know he was hiding him during Act II, possibly earlier, which as far as we know was before Meredith went total Kooky Brainsick and started looking for excuses to Annul the Circle. It's also worth mentioning that it was part of Orsino's job to keep dangerous mages reigned in.

Meredith was always twisted and evil. I doubt the sword could add much to her that wasn't already there; she was a clear danger to the Circle even beforehand. And yes, that may have been Orsino's job; it was also Meredith's job, presumably, to prevent vicious templar abuses, and look how that turned out. Plain and simple, he didn't have the option.

Anyway, my point was that the mages were all pretty varied and you couldn't reduce most of them to "Templar Victims" or "Hellmouth Victims". That was something I thought Bioware did right. They did need a few more 'good' mages to balance it all out though.

One of those two is what most of them boil down to in the end, though, if you strip away the divisions.

Not really. When you fight against the Annulment you're doing so to help as many mages as you can escape. There's no accounting for who these mages are or how dangerous/innocent they might be. It pretty much requires a belief that mages should be free. There's no reasonable expectation that defending the mages has any other result.

All of the mages have to escape via the same route. Merrill and Anders both make checking for abomination status easy.

I'm not sure it's fair for Hawke to expect to be around afterwards to do damage control.

Good thing there's a ton of templar reinforcements heading this way, yes?

[Xilizhra]

Also the fact that every second non circle mage is a blood mage or abomination

The ones Hawke sees, and are thus causing trouble. The entire mage underground is made up of apostates and we only fight them when they, guess what, start causing trouble.

and the fact that the Starkhaven circle immediately went bonkers once they were on the loose points towards better control = safer for everyone.

Yes, the fact that they went bonkers after being in the Kirkwall Circle for six years clearly proves we need more of the same! Glorious!

Orsino knew the dude was up to no good, as you point out he keeps it quiet because he knows he is up to no good. He just offers up all this helpful data to Quentin and does zero checking up on him.

We never know when he offered said data. I'm almost positive it was years before you discover the letter.

And yes, it was a compliment. You made a good defense for a position I honestly thought was indefensible.

Every decision is defensible. This doesn't make any of it right.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 18 mai 2011 - 03:49 .

[Rifneno]

Xilizhra wrote...

And yes, it was a compliment. You made a good defense for a position I honestly thought was indefensible.

Every decision is defensible. This doesn't make any of it right.

I didn't say I agree with it. I just recognize it as an intelligent argument for the RoA causing less innocent casualties (including mages - a point completely lost on most pro-templars) than opposing it. It's refreshing to see a thought-out discussion for it after weeks of listening to barely-sentient ranting about blood magic.

[GavrielKay]

Rifneno wrote...

My biggest surprise was that there are people who think the Circle should be slaughtered because of Quentin.

That's a tough one too.  Quentin may prove that a mage who is a madman can do a lot of harm, but he doesn't prove that all circle mages are madmen.  A square is also a rectangle, but a rectangle is not a square.

Edit:  having trouble with spelling today

Modifié par GavrielKay, 18 mai 2011 - 05:16 .

[Ryzaki]

@TheOP: Siding with the templars and Meredith is fine.

It all depends on how you RP it. As this thread can attest.

[GavrielKay]

Deztyn wrote...

This I agree with. I understand they can't make a game catered to one of the three classes but a few lines of dialogue that indicate Hawke has dealt with the temptation would be nice. (And an actual scene and the possibility of a nonstandard game over would be even nicer. Maybe an extra 'bonus' for mage Hawkes who stupidly accept deals from demons. :innocent:)

The game has up to 4 mages in it.  I'd settle for having to help any one of the others fight off a demon even.  Then the only players who would miss the content are those who never travel with a mage.

The logic leap I can't make from the game is that if there are blood mages/abominiations in Kirkwall then all circle mages must be beyond salvage and it isn't even worth trying to sort them out.

[dragonflight288]

A mage Hawke goes years outside the circle, and the mercenaries/smugglers pretty much admit that the Circle has never controlled all the mages in Kirkwall. They admit to protecting several of them from the Templars. This goes to show that although we run into abominations left and right, that doesn't mean they all belong to the circle.

I've played pro-mage and pro-templar. I personally prefer pro-mage, but I think pro-templar is slightly more realistic in terms of storyline and gameplay. (rushed ending anyone?)

My sarcastic Hawke explained to Merrill that people would riot to kill the mages and avenge Elthina, so he would help the templars in order to limit casualties.

But I have to side with the mages simply because of Meredith. I explained further up that she is abusing her power as acting viscount in order to keep the templars in control of the city. It isn't her duty to command nobles or the city guard. Aveline has to constantly fight the templars who are trying to take control of the guard because she is loyal to the city, not the templars.

This debate goes beyond the standard mage vs templar, it shows abuse of power on every level. Political, magical, insane, and sane. We can't judge every mage based off what Quentin did, but we can't judge every templar based off of Meredith. I mean, Thrask is cool.

[Plaintiff]

GavrielKay wrote...

Deztyn wrote...

This I agree with. I understand they can't make a game catered to one of the three classes but a few lines of dialogue that indicate Hawke has dealt with the temptation would be nice. (And an actual scene and the possibility of a nonstandard game over would be even nicer. Maybe an extra 'bonus' for mage Hawkes who stupidly accept deals from demons. :innocent:)

The game has up to 4 mages in it.  I'd settle for having to help any one of the others fight off a demon even.  Then the only players who would miss the content are those who never travel with a mage.

The logic leap I can't make from the game is that if there are blood mages/abominiations in Kirkwall then all circle mages must be beyond salvage and it isn't even worth trying to sort them out.

Honestly, even if the majority of them are blood mages or abominations, and we were explicitly shown such, I would still be against annulling the circle. I think the Templars and Chantry grossly misrepresent the danger they pose, and it would be totally feasible to take them down without necessitating indiscriminate slaughter.

[Anchor5]

Everyone seems to have forgotten the original question of this thread. It's not about which decision had the best outcome. Hawke as a character couldn't possibly have known what the outcome would be when s/he had to make that decision. There was no way to tell that Orsino would become an abomination, or that Meridith was possessed by the idol.

The real question I'm asking is which choice was the right choice, based on the information you had at the time of making it.

Surely the mages didn't deserve to be slaughtered, but by helping them you were giving Anders the solution he hoped for, therefore justifying his act of terrorism. Even if you chose to kill anders, which was probably the hardest decision for me in the game, it wouldn't change the momentum of his actions.

[GavrielKay]

Rifneno wrote...

Deztyn wrote...

Not really. When you fight against the Annulment you're doing so to help as many mages as you can escape. There's no accounting for who these mages are or how dangerous/innocent they might be. It pretty much requires a belief that mages should be free. There's no reasonable expectation that defending the mages has any other result.

But you say that you can support the RoA without believing it's just
because you can believe it's just the lesser of two evils basically.
Why can the same not hold true for opposing the RoA? That one doesn't
believe mages should all be free, but letting the Circle go is a lesser
evil than executing them all?

Rifneno beat me to that answer.

The bigger point is that the RoA should never have been called.  If you believe Meredith had the authority that's fine, but I don't think she should have used it.  Even Cullen didn't seem to think that was the only option.  Only Meredith thinks it's necessary - and she was never objective and is even less so by the end.  It is Meredith who puts the city at more risk by challenging Hawke to either support the insupportable or simply help the mages escape.  If Hawke wasn't strapped down tight by plot rules, she'd have assassinated Meredith before that worthy managed to wreck the city.

I tend not to feel guilty when forced into a lousy decision by someone who by all rights should have been sent packing about 6 game years ago.  And anyway, the epilogue doesn't meantion abominations decimating the countryside, so perhaps once free, the mages were able to find their self control again.

[Silfren]

cobretti1818 wrote...

Just finished it last - and the whole ending was a big WTF?

I sided with the Mages, yet on my way to fight Meredith, I am being attacked my other Mages? And then, just before our final stand, Orsino turns into an abomination and attacks me - ME, the one supporting his cause -and proves Meredith right!

After defeating Orsino, I was willing to offer Meredith a big apology and admit that she was right about all Mages being loony - but she was now possessed by the idol. Thank god for Cullen and some sort of sanity in this mess.

Orsino doesn't prove Meredith right.  The only thing he proves is that if you push people to desperation, you have no business being surprised when they resort to desperate measures.  And, as I've said before, you can't use a mage attacking you in self-defense as an excuse to retro-justify treating them like rabid animals.  It's akin to repeatedly kicking an animal every day for years on end, claiming that if you didn't do so, it would become aggressive and attack you...and then going "see?!"  when it finally loses its sh*t and does just that.  Add to that, it isn't as though Orsino turns and suddenly decides that his ally is the enemy.  When he became an abomination, he lost his ability to reason.  Harvester!Orsino doesn't know who you are when he attacks. 

Ditto on what everyone else said about Cullen.  He's not exactly a friend to mages, so you know you're in Crazyville when he starts sounding like the voice of reason.

[Ryzaki]

I loved Cullen.

He was pretty neutral in the end. Just the kind of person I'd expect to be a templar. Harsh in his condemnation of bloodmages but decent to normal mages.

And yeah I felt Orsino proved Meredith right as well. Helping a serial killer. Why what an example you set Orsino.

Kirkwall really is the one place I could nuke from orbit without regret.  

Modifié par Ryzaki, 18 mai 2011 - 04:59 .

[GavrielKay]

Anchor5 wrote...

Surely the mages didn't deserve to be slaughtered, but by helping them you were giving Anders the solution he hoped for, therefore justifying his act of terrorism. Even if you chose to kill anders, which was probably the hardest decision for me in the game, it wouldn't change the momentum of his actions.

If I'm reading that right, that's a new argument... 

You can support a cause without supporting everything that's ever been done by anyone else in support of that cause.  You could just as easily say why let Elthina's death be meaningless. 

Unless you want to say your Hawke was so disillusioned by Anders' lying etc. that you had to turn on him in revenge or something...?  I dunno.

[Plaintiff]

Anchor5 wrote...

Everyone seems to have forgotten the original question of this thread. It's not about which decision had the best outcome. Hawke as a character couldn't possibly have known what the outcome would be when s/he had to make that decision. There was no way to tell that Orsino would become an abomination, or that Meridith was possessed by the idol.

The real question I'm asking is which choice was the right choice, based on the information you had at the time of making it.

Surely the mages didn't deserve to be slaughtered, but by helping them you were giving Anders the solution he hoped for, therefore justifying his act of terrorism. Even if you chose to kill anders, which was probably the hardest decision for me in the game, it wouldn't change the momentum of his actions.

Still mages, in my opinion. I would not, under other circumstances, condone his actions,but personally, I feel Anders was justified. The Chantry is far from innocent in regards to this issue and the mages do not have the option of peaceful protest. Drastic measures were required to force both sides into action.

[Rifneno]

dragonflight288 wrote...

My sarcastic Hawke explained to Merrill that people would riot to kill the mages and avenge Elthina, so he would help the templars in order to limit casualties.

I always scratch my head when people use that argument. Why do rioters trying to kill people for something they didn't even do deserve mercy? If we ran into a lynch mob on the pro-mage ending, I wouldn't hesitate to open fire into the crowd.

Anchor5 wrote...

Surely the mages didn't deserve to be slaughtered, but by helping them you were giving Anders the solution he hoped for, therefore justifying his act of terrorism.

And? By helping the templars, you're giving Meredith the solution she hoped for, therefore justifying her acts of terrorism.

GavrielKay wrote...

If Hawke wasn't strapped down tight by plot rules, she'd have assassinated Meredith before that worthy managed to wreck the city.

So true. Honestly, I'd probably have taken out Elthina too, given the chance. She may not have been actively killing people with her own hands, but her inaction (<Justice> You have given in to sloth! </Justice>) to simply do her job cost many more lives.