350 réponses à ce sujet

[KnightofPhoenix]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

 there's the ending in a pro-mage playthrough

I still think he meant that Templar rebelled to hunt mages.

Not all devout Andrastian's will be blind to reason. People think very differently, as this thread shows. Some people on here justify Anders' actions, while others condemn them. Just as much, some devout andrastians will agree with Anders, and some will condemn him. All I said was that more people would sympathize, but I never said it would be a staggering number of people.

I don't think opinions here are going to be indicatives of opinions in Thedas. Especially not when they don't have that much info. All they will hear probably is: "the mages destroyed a Chantry and assassianted a grand cleric". O think the vast majority is going to side with Templars. Like they already do elsewhere already. The populace always collaborated with mages, except in Kirkwall before what Anders did. 

[TEWR]

I don't think opinions here are going to be indicatives of opinions in Thedas.

It's only to show that people think differently, not to draw an actual comparison on how people in Thedas would think. I'm not saying if I agreed with Anders, then my Thedas counterpart would.

Especially not when they don't have that much info. All they will hear probably is: "the mages destroyed a Chantry and assassianted a grand cleric". O think the vast majority is going to side with Templars. Like they already do elsewhere already. The populace always collaborated with mages, except in Kirkwall before what Anders did.

And how do you think they'll react when and if they find out the whole entire story behind Kirkwall? Why do you think Cassandra is interrogating Varric? Is she going to invite him over for a few pints at her place later so she can have some of that Paragon of Manliness for herself?

[AndreaDraco]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I still think he meant that Templar rebelled to hunt mages.

I think you're right. I think Varric is saying that Templars decided to go against the Chantry's will to independently hunt mages.

[Kyriani Agrivar]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
I still think he meant that Templar rebelled to hunt mages.

Um no... the templars rebelled to SIDE WITH THE MAGES. Hunting mages would never be "rebellion" to templars. By nature that is what they typically do.

The templars in kirkwall saw what meredith did. They spread word of it just as the mages of kirkwall spread word to the other circles.

The templars who rebel are siding with the mages... those that remain loyal to the chantry are hunting the mages. Templars serving the chantry would not sit idly by while all this is going on. The Chantry would never allow it.

Modifié par Kyriani Agrivar, 28 mars 2011 - 10:36 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Especially not when they don't have that much info. All they will hear probably is: "the mages destroyed a Chantry and assassianted a grand cleric". O think the vast majority is going to side with Templars. Like they already do elsewhere already. The populace always collaborated with mages, except in Kirkwall before what Anders did.

And how do you think they'll react when and if they find out the whole entire story behind Kirkwall? Why do you think Cassandra is interrogating Varric? Is she going to invite him over for a few pints at her place later so she can have some of that Paragon of Manliness for herself?

Unless Cassandra has an extensive mass media machine, I don't think she'll be able to spread the news, not before a lot of damage already occured.

And since we are talking about Anders' mindset, I dont' see how this affects his decision making unless he has the gift of foresight. He couldn't have possibly known that the Seekers were going to investigate and make the people know. Especially not when he think everything associated with the Chantry is bad. 

[TEWR]

at this point, what the Templars' rebellion from the Chantry actually means is ambiguous. It can mean just as much they're hunting mages with no regard for Chantry law as it can that they're siding with the mages.

I believe it's the latter, but for now it's not clear cut.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Kyriani Agrivar wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
I still think he meant that Templar rebelled to hunt mages.

Um no... the templars rebelled to SIDE WITH THE MAGES. Hunting mages would never be "rebellion" to templars. By nature that is what they typically do.

Going outside Chantry law and hunting mages by their own accords is rebellion.

[TEWR]

And since we are talking about Anders' mindset, I dont' see how this affects his decision making unless he has the gift of foresight. He couldn't have possibly known that the Seekers were going to investigate and make the people know. Especially not when he think everything associated with the Chantry is bad.

Where did I ever say Anders could predict the future and knew the Seekers would investigate?

[Kyriani Agrivar]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Kyriani Agrivar wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
I still think he meant that Templar rebelled to hunt mages.

Um no... the templars rebelled to SIDE WITH THE MAGES. Hunting mages would never be "rebellion" to templars. By nature that is what they typically do.

Going outside Chantry law and hunting mages by their own accords is rebellion.

And just where is it that you were able to read what the Chantry has ordered the templars to do or not do since the events in Kirkwall? You're assuming... with no logical basis... that the Chantry simply turned a blind eye to the death of a grand cleric and ordered their templars to sit idly by and watch what's happening.... that makes no sense at all....

[KnightofPhoenix]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

And since we are talking about Anders' mindset, I dont' see how this affects his decision making unless he has the gift of foresight. He couldn't have possibly known that the Seekers were going to investigate and make the people know. Especially not when he think everything associated with the Chantry is bad.

Where did I ever say Anders could predict the future and knew the Seekers would investigate?

I know you didn't. I am just restating my original point. That Anders started a war without thinking about their chances, how to prevent possessions...etc.

[TEWR]

ah ok. gotcha.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Kyriani Agrivar wrote...
And just where is it that you were able to read what the Chantry has ordered the templars to do or not do since the events in Kirkwall? You're assuming... with no logical basis... that the Chantry simply turned a blind eye to the death of a grand cleric and ordered their templars to sit idly by and watch what's happening.... that makes no sense at all....

I am not. They can still order the Templars to hunt mages, and they can still lose control of them. As Templars start doing things out of their own accords, without following any orders or having any respect for the law. That would be rebellion.

Or they  could decide on a rite of annulment without even recieving the ok from the Chantry. Even if they would have given it.

[Kyriani Agrivar]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Kyriani Agrivar wrote...
And just where is it that you were able to read what the Chantry has ordered the templars to do or not do since the events in Kirkwall? You're assuming... with no logical basis... that the Chantry simply turned a blind eye to the death of a grand cleric and ordered their templars to sit idly by and watch what's happening.... that makes no sense at all....

I am not. They can still order the Templars to hunt mages, and they can still lose control of them. As Templars start doing things out of their own accords, without following any orders or having any respect for the law. That would be rebellion.

Or they  could decide on a rite of annulment without even recieving the ok from the Chantry. Even if they would have given it.

I just don't understand the logic you're following to assume the templars are rebelling and hunting mages when it is far more logical that the chantry would ORDER them to hunt mages and if there was any rebelling going on it would be templars fighting alongside the mages.

[TEWR]

like I said KnightofPhoenix and Kyriani Agrivar...

at this point, what the Templars' rebellion from the Chantry actually means is ambiguous. It can mean just as much they're hunting mages with no regard for Chantry law as it can that they're siding with the mages.

I believe it's the latter, but for now it's not clear cut.

we don't have enough info to say that's WHAT they're doing, only enough to say what we believe they're doing.

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 28 mars 2011 - 10:49 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Kyriani Agrivar wrote...
I just don't understand the logic you're following to assume the templars are rebelling and hunting mages when it is far more logical that the chantry would ORDER them to hunt mages and if there was any rebelling going on it would be templars fighting alongside the mages.

Because again, the Chantry can lose control over them. Which is clearly something they'd hate to happen. We have no indication that the Chantry declared a massive right of annulment on all Circles. This could be something that the Templars decided on their own. Chantry elements might favor negotiation and Templars blocked them. Chantry officials might have been sent to monitor Templars and they were ignored. That would be rebellion, even if they are doing what they are supposed to do.

And why would the Templars side with mages? A group in Kirkwall did because of Meredith who was clearly an exception. Templars elsewhere are in a different context. Why would these fanatical devout Andrastrians side with mages after one of them blew up a Chantry?   That sounds much less logical to me.

But like Redux is saying. We need to wait for more info.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 28 mars 2011 - 10:52 .

[TEWR]

there is another thing we have to take into account regarding templars. Lyrium. It pretty much destroys their minds.

[Kyriani Agrivar]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

like I said KnightofPhoenix and Kyriani Agrivar...

at this point, what the Templars' rebellion from the Chantry actually means is ambiguous. It can mean just as much they're hunting mages with no regard for Chantry law as it can that they're siding with the mages.

I believe it's the latter, but for now it's not clear cut.

we don't have enough info to say that's WHAT they're doing, only enough to say what we believe they're doing.

I agree we don't have enough information and I know I am making a fair number of assumptions myself but I'd like to believe I make those based on logic and the evidence given in game.

Whether you supported the mages or templars in the end the templars see Meredith for what she is.... You see them at first appear hostile to you but then back away.

It's logical (to me at least) to assume everything those templars believed and were taught by Meredith is now being questioned... questioned to the point where they might actually see the very oppression brought on by the templars/chantry actually fosters the turning to blood magic and demons that mages have felt forced into for their freedom. That their blind support of Meredith is responsible for what occured in Kirkwall.

Modifié par Kyriani Agrivar, 28 mars 2011 - 10:58 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Except even after Meredith, like Varric said, Templars went to Kirkwall to impose order. Furthermore, those who rebelled against Meredith definitely did not have circle rebellions in mind.

Rebellion against Meredith =/= siding with the mages against the Chantry and going against their Order.

Now I gtg. cheers.

EDIT: and Cassandra didn't even know the story of what happened in Kirkwall. How would the templars scattered accross the continent know?

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 28 mars 2011 - 11:03 .

[TEWR]

later Ser Knight

[Kotetsimaru]

Lot of talk going into Anders thinking and planning what is going to happen but i still believe what he did is just the Vengeance/Justice part of him finally doing something out in the open. I mean when he blows the chantry up he is fighting control with him.

[Urazz]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

AndreaDraco wrote...
Anyway, knight, you're right: the vast majority of people are Andastrians, but we must not forget that, even before the whole Chantry business, there were many people keen on helping the mages, for whatever reason. They are still the minority, I know, but I don't think mages will be entirely alone in this battle.

That was before Anders blew up a Chantry.
I think many of them will change their minds.

Those are the people he should have mobalized, but he didn't.

Or more will side with the mages even more thinking, 'why punish those that had no part to blowing up of the Chantry' when the templars start indiscriminately killing mages.

Personally, I'm putting a good chunk of the blame on Elthina.  She did nothing to stop the situation from escalating to that point.  She could've easily stopped Meredith from getting too harsh on the mages but she seemed too afraid that going against Meredith's actions would be going against the Chantry's laws for templars to watch over mages and deluded herself into thinking that the situation would resolve itself without her intervening.

Hell, that's a major theme with her throughout the game I think.  She never really acts at all or if she does it's too late.  I.E. in Act 2 with the Qunari, she should've stopped Petrice once she used her seal but instead she acts after Seamus gets murdered and things escalate to the boiling point.

Modifié par Urazz, 28 mars 2011 - 11:29 .

[TEWR]

Elthina definitely could've done more. She was witness to how out of control the conflict was escalating to. And even after the opening of Act 3 she still stays as a neutral party.

[Camenae]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Elthina definitely could've done more. She was witness to how out of control the conflict was escalating to. And even after the opening of Act 3 she still stays as a neutral party.

This.  And she was Meredith's boss for goodness' sake.  If I were having catfights with my co-worker every day, I don't think my boss would be like, oh I'm neutral.  He'd tell us both to cut that sh*t out.

[LobselVith8]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Varric said the Templars abandonned the Chantry to fight the mages.

Varric said the templars aren't taking orders anymore, and when he mentioned "hunting the mages," he seemed to be addressing the Seekers since the comment was directed at Cassandra.

[trembli0s]

LobselVith8 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Varric said the Templars abandonned the Chantry to fight the mages.

Varric said the templars aren't taking orders anymore, and when he mentioned "hunting the mages," he seemed to be addressing the Seekers since the comment was directed at Cassandra.

Think in one of the narrations Varric implies that Cassandra needs the Champion to bring the two sides to negotiate and she agrees that he would be the most likely one to accomplish that.