137 réponses à ce sujet

[AtreiyaN7]

I've always been a mage supporter. They're oppressed, have no personal freedoms and are basically at the mercy of another group that has complete control to dictate everything that they do, including the power to decide whether or not mages live or die, or end up being made Tranquil. I think people probably identify more easily with a group that's being oppressed in the way that the mages have been. I doubt anyone wants another Tevinter Imperium, but I don't approve of the templars' behavior thus far. They certainly have their dark side - lyrium addiction, the willingness to abuse their power, etc. If Meredith hadn't been such a hardliner, maybe the situation in Kirkwall wouldn't have escalated. Also, what Anders said about templars using a mage's personal relationships as another means of control...that seemed pretty low. I do think there are templars who are good people - Trask wanted a middle way for example - but I just can't stomach the Order's policies.

[Beerfish]

ZombiePowered wrote...


The oppression is quite just. Yes, these are people. Yes, not all purposely seek to abuse those without magical ability. But all of them are at risk of becoming possessed and turning into mass-murdering machines whenever they have a moment of weakness. If that doesn't justify locking them up in a controlled, isolated fortress, I don't know what does.

That said, the mages are also a great asset to Thedas. They Exalted Marches only managed to push the Qunari back because they countered their advanced technology with magic. Thus, there is a line that needs to be walked. Mages need to be watched because they can become a great danger to all those around, but they need to be given enough room to breathe so they can continue developing arcane knowledge to give Thedas the edge it needs to resist future Qunari invasions. The Circle system is a good idea, it just needs to be executed in a more balanced, intelligent fashion.

Excellent post.

[LobselVith8]

Addai67 wrote...

LobselVith8 wrote...
I wrote the OP because I know that David Gaider has responded to templar and mage threads where this issue was addressed, and both sides provided reasons and arguments for why they sided with the mages or with the templars. Saying people sided with the mages as a default choice infers that it's automatically made, rather than an informed choice based on information. I found it to be an inaccurate statement.

I would agree that the templar siders are a minority, having participated in those threads myself.  There are people who argue the templar side and do so strenuously, but they're usually a lone voice here or there.

I imagine the thread title is perceived as angry because there have been so many troll threads calling the devs out by name.  It's.. a bit confrontational.  I know I would be sick of seeing my name in thread topics on everything under the sun.

I understand what you mean, Addai67. I didn't intend for the title to be confrontational, but I can see why some might think of it as such because of the recent postings some have made. I genuinely don't understand why the perception would be that fans would choose to side with the mages by default when I've read plenty of people provide in-depth explanations and analysis for the decisions they've made in siding with the mages, and not agreeing with the Chantry controlled Circles or the Order of Templars. It's a pretty ranged and broad scope of opinions on the issue, and I simply didn't think it was fair to say that one "need only glance at your average templar vs. mage thread (previous to DA2 coming out, in particular) to see that most people fall on the side of the mages almost by default."

I do have some issues with DA2, but I do love the characters, and I don't think it was a bad game. I know that it must have taken a lot of hard work to create it. I know people have their reasons to support either the templars or the mages. The comment Gaider wrote reads as though the issues and ideas that people brought forth in their reasoning behind their support for the mages is merely a decision based on "Western sensibilities" rather than an informed choice.

[Mahtisonni]

Until chantry makes templar training public, I'm siding with the mages.
The danger that mages could destroy an entire city is being allowed to exist by chantry itself.

If just 50% of the guards in town suddenly gained templar abilities don't you think that it would make mages think twice on turning to blood magic? Not to mention the random mercenary types who don't want to be collateral damage.

If there are so many people with templar abilities in a city that you can't go out without seeing at least 5 of them, then I honestly doubt that any mage would be dumb enough to cause trouble in such a city.



The reason why mages are feared is because people don't know how to fight them.
The chantry does know how to fight them, but it would rather have a private army, rather than keeping it's followers safe.

Modifié par Mahtisonni, 31 mars 2011 - 08:22 .

[Beerfish]

ClaomhScathach wrote...

Templars are brutal and cruel. Their rule resembles an autocratic theocracy, with mages constantly living under the threat of death.

The Templars frequently abuse their position of power.

Mages are mistreated appallingly, and as such, most people sympathise. I sided with the mages, for this very reason.

The obvious counter is the sheer number (and let's ignore the rather idiotic numbers) who become blood mages, abominations, etc. That's why the world needs Templars. But I still prefer mages.

Your comments about the Templars holds as much weight as those that say all Mages are blood mages that become abominations and kill ruthlessly. 

Despite multiple examples of some Templars being good and decent and some mages being terrible some of the pro mage forces completely ignore this.  Not to mention that pro mages supporters also totally ignore the fact that the actual majority of mages are not hard line freedomers that want to run from the circle at the very 1st chance.

[AlexXIV]

I understand why David Gaider thinks people fall to the mages side. Obviously templars are religious zealots who like to oppress people. While they surely have an agenda of like minded people among the players, I guess (and hope) the majority would rather have the templars replaced by something more useful and humane.

What I don't understand is why all mages have to become bloodmages in order to 'balance' the sides. That's just one-sided story telling and really screws the whole franchise. I am not going to play a game that supports or encourages some sort fascist ideology.

[Ensgnblack]

keginkc wrote...

I'm guessing he thinks that because he "glance[ed] at your average templar vs. mage thread".

exactly.  He said in any given mage v templar thread that most responses seemed to be pro mage.   That statement could even  be boiled down to fact if one checked each thread and kept tally.

He didnt make a judgment call in the least, but simply said most ppl favored the mages, a statement which I agree with.   Most seemed to  have sided with the mages ideologically, if not in game.

[Zing Freelancer]

Maria Caliban wrote...

David thinks that people fall on the side of mages by default because they do. We live in a society that values personal freedom.

The Templars are the militant wing of a large, powerful religious origination. Mages are individuals who are taken from their families at an early age, locked-up, and feared by the regular populous all because of an accident of birth.

Gee, who's going to have the audience's sympathy in this situation?

This!

Because Bioware did such a good job painting Templars into bad guys, majority of the people would side with mages. Regardless of whom they kill.

On the other hand, I am extremely curious how Travinter Imperium makes by.
Considering they dont restrict research into blood magic nor do they forbid the use of blood magic. If we are to consider the events of Dragon Age 2, it is safe to assume that 99% of Travinter Imperium is run by demons and abominations. Right?

Modifié par Zing Freelancer, 31 mars 2011 - 08:34 .

[Mahtisonni]

Anybody who thinks the templars are the bad guys is just being silly.
Templars are soldiers, weapons.

You should not hate the weapon, you should hate the idiot that doesn't know how to stop swinging it around.
The chantry attitude to templars is at best like this "Oh, I'm sure they'll get bored of tormenting children who were torn from their parents sooner or later."

Some do, but the chance of it is that of a cointoss.
You best hope that it's a VEEERY small minority, or those kids will go blood mage just to spite the templars as soon as they hit puberty.

Modifié par Mahtisonni, 31 mars 2011 - 08:44 .

[Deztyn]

I'm posting from my phone and I haven't read the whole thread. So forgive me for repeating anything and general posting fail.

Yeah, I remember seeing that post and being a little offended. Agree with the templars or not the reasons to support them were already there in the lore. The question of whether security for the masses is worth the cost payed by a tiny powerful minority is a compelling one. Unfortunately, the storyline suffers from beating the players bloody with the Mages-Can-Be-Dangerous clue by four. Worse than that is the moral dilemma being cheapened by the fact that every major player is being influenced by an outside force.

Meredith- Crazy sword.
Anders - Justice.
Kirkwall mages - Kirkwall itself.

It left me feeling that whatever side I chose in the end was pointless because everyone in Kirkwall was completely nutters.

~Proud Templar Supporter Since Origins~

[Nighteye2]

People don't like discrimination - and mages are being discriminated against for what they are, not what they do. All the innocent mages also get imprisoned, along with the potential blood mages. That is just unfair.

[Ziggeh]

AlexXIV wrote...
I am not going to play a game that supports or encourages some sort fascist ideology.

Bioware clearly showing their grotesque bias against real life mages.

They won't get to me with their vicious propangda. Some of my best friends are mages.

[genocidal villain]

The thing I love about this game that I see mostly gray views instead of black and white. There really isn't good or bad, but reasons why they do the things they have to. For example, Meredith may be crazy before having the lyrium enchanted sword, but if you sided with the templars you learn her background that she had a sister, who was a mage, who turned into an abomination and killed everyone in her village and she had to kill her own sister. Does this make her bad? no, but paranoid about every mage. Although you can't blame her because of something traumatizing that happened.

[Sylvianus]

He is intelligent and knows well the thinking of players who only scratch the surface of things. It is so easy to see these wise men, just after a crushed spirit, the poor slaves.

The players have modern thought when they play, democracy, freedom, human rights, etc. etc. ....

It is much more complex than that. The Templars are an essential power-cons to the Magi. They are dangerous to themselves.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 31 mars 2011 - 11:19 .

[ZombiePowered]

AlexXIV wrote...

I understand why David Gaider thinks people fall to the mages side. Obviously templars are religious zealots who like to oppress people. While they surely have an agenda of like minded people among the players, I guess (and hope) the majority would rather have the templars replaced by something more useful and humane.

What I don't understand is why all mages have to become bloodmages in order to 'balance' the sides. That's just one-sided story telling and really screws the whole franchise. I am not going to play a game that supports or encourages some sort fascist ideology.

You should consider that Kirkwall has some external circumstances influencing the amount of blood mages within the city. The veil was always thin there because of the immense suffering in the city, but the Magisters were thinning it even further by purposely slaughtering slaves. The very streets of the city are arranged in arcane glyphs, and the sewers themselves were designed to funnel any spilled blood into lakes underneath the city. The Magisters even bound ancient demons beneath the city, such as Xebenkeck, who is among the first demons to teach Blood Magic to mortals. It is no coincidence that the Circle in Kirkwall is so troubled, and so many mages turn to Blood Magic and demonic possession. While in the Circle Tower in Ferelden it took a well-planned group of blood mages to force demonic possession on their fellows and send the Circle into chaos, in Kirkwall demonic possession is all too often a spontaneous moment of weakness. It's why we so often see Mages being abused by Templars so quickly turn into abominations--the demons are quite literally just waiting for the slightest chance to force their way into a mages body, and the thinness of the veil makes it easy if a mage lets their guard down. The mages didn't become blood mages in order to "balance the sides", they became blood mages because Kirkwall puts mages at their weakest, their most vulnerable to demons of the Fade.

This information is told by The Enigma of Kirkwall entries, and is all available on the DragonAge Wiki, if you want to read it for yourself.

[Bayz]

[quote]AlexXIV wrote...

I understand why David Gaider thinks people fall to the mages side. Obviously templars are religious zealots who like to oppress people. While they surely have an agenda of like minded people among the players, I guess (and hope) the majority would rather have the templars replaced by something more useful and humane.

[/quote]

Yeah like let's say the even more social darwinistic and slavery promoting Tevinter Magister style...

[quote]AlexXIV wrote...

What I don't understand is why all mages have to become bloodmages in order to 'balance' the sides. That's just one-sided story telling and really screws the whole franchise. I am not going to play a game that supports or encourages some sort fascist ideology.[/quote]

[/quote]

I didn't knew Templars were about leader cults and corporativist economy and killing communists...I don't still actually. Not all mages become bloodmages, but even "spirit healers" like Anders end up well...killing dozens of people. Also Kirkwall's veil is already thin enough and the demons are more constantly whispering the mages than often...

My actual real reason for defending the Mages and going against the Chantry are Family Matters...in the other aspects of the game I tend to roleplay quite like I think humans are in Thedas (discriminating elves and not trusting qunari etc), I prefer my characters to be flawed for flavour.

[Peer of the Empire]

Double post

Modifié par Peer of the Empire, 01 avril 2011 - 02:03 .

[Peer of the Empire]

I haven't read much from the devs but interesting OP.

I certainly sided with the Templars.  They are necessary to curb the great evil that we see mages bring forth in the world of Thedas.

As far as the pleasantry of the local chapter of the Circle is concerned, it is only later that Meredith is mind controlled, and Bethany seems to enjoy her time in the Circle.  Though I have no doubt they are harsher than necessary even when the Knight Commander had a balanced mind

Gaider probably understands that many of the audience are teenagers or shut-ins, and we have a very PC culture these days.

Modifié par Peer of the Empire, 01 avril 2011 - 01:16 .

[Peer of the Empire]

Bayz wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

I understand why David Gaider thinks people fall to the mages side. Obviously templars are religious zealots who like to oppress people. While they surely have an agenda of like minded people among the players, I guess (and hope) the majority would rather have the templars replaced by something more useful and humane.

Yeah like let's say the even more social darwinistic and slavery promoting Tevinter Magister style...

Indeed, the Tevinter Imperium inspires me, but there is no escaping from the fact that they destroyed heaven, created the blight, and enslave my fellow good citizens.

There is the further matter that although there are criminals in the general population, mage criminals by virtue of their very power wreak much more devastation and havoc as we see all too well illustrated in the games.

Bayz wrote...

I didn't knew Templars were about leader cults and corporativist economy and killing communists...I don't still actually. Not all mages become bloodmages, but even "spirit healers" like Anders end up well...killing dozens of people. Also Kirkwall's veil is already thin enough and the demons are more constantly whispering the mages than often...

My actual real reason for defending the Mages and going against the Chantry are Family Matters...in the other aspects of the game I tend to roleplay quite like I think humans are in Thedas (discriminating elves and not trusting qunari etc), I prefer my characters to be flawed for flavour.

Yes, I only sided with the mages when my dear sister was in danger.  Anders is a vile mass murderer

Actually, there were those couple Blood Mages I let go.. who later attempted to murder me

Modifié par Peer of the Empire, 01 avril 2011 - 01:13 .

[Bayz]

Both sides are gray enough. I personally sided with the mages but I won't judge players as "religious zealots who like to oppress people" because they sided with the Templars.

[Dean_the_Young]

LobselVith8 wrote...

If people had reasons behind their choice, than they made an informed decision about the matter.

Nonsense. Reasons for a decision can be entirely mis-informed, illogical, and outright fallacies.

[Altima Darkspells]

Zing Freelancer wrote...

On the other hand, I am extremely curious how Travinter Imperium makes by.
Considering they dont restrict research into blood magic nor do they forbid the use of blood magic. If we are to consider the events of Dragon Age 2, it is safe to assume that 99% of Travinter Imperium is run by demons and abominations. Right?

Well, the Tevinter Empire remains entrenched in Tevinter (go figure).  Unlike everywhere else, Andraste's army never broke Tevinter's back there, so they weren't forced to accept the Chantry's entire view.

You have to remember, unlike everywhere else in Thedas, the mages in Tevinter aren't just random peasants.  They're the nobility and wealthy land owners of the land.  Tevinter spent generations breeding magic into their bloodlines, but in Kirkwall, having magic in your bloodline is considered a curse.

Basically, the Imperial Chantry eventually went from running like the Orlesian Chantry to what they are now.  Their first step was allowing the Circle to govern themselves.  Eventually, Tevinter returned to its roots, with the Magisters in control of everything once more.  There are still Templar in Tevinter, but they more or less only enforce the rule of law.

As for blood magic, Fenris states that, publically, blood magic is denied and disavowed as too dangerous, but behind closed doors, they all use it, as it's supposed to be power, and power means everything in Tevinter.

Of course, Fenris might be a tad bit biased.

[Xewaka]

Zing Freelancer wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...
David thinks that people fall on the side of mages by default because they do. We live in a society that values personal freedom.
The Templars are the militant wing of a large, powerful religious origination. Mages are individuals who are taken from their families at an early age, locked-up, and feared by the regular populous all because of an accident of birth.
Gee, who's going to have the audience's sympathy in this situation?

This!
Because Bioware did such a good job painting Templars into bad guys, majority of the people would side with mages. Regardless of whom they kill.
On the other hand, I am extremely curious how Travinter Imperium makes by.
Considering they dont restrict research into blood magic nor do they forbid the use of blood magic. If we are to consider the events of Dragon Age 2, it is safe to assume that 99% of Travinter Imperium is run by demons and abominations. Right?

Nah. They have slaves to sacrifice for the needed ritual blood.
I always find funny how people who argue about the mage freedom conviently forget that the only country that still has legal slavery is run by mages.
Keeping magi in check actually promotes personal freedom for the larger part of the population.

Modifié par Xewaka, 01 avril 2011 - 11:03 .

[MICHELLE7]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

I've always been a mage supporter. They're oppressed, have no personal freedoms and are basically at the mercy of another group that has complete control to dictate everything that they do, including the power to decide whether or not mages live or die, or end up being made Tranquil. I think people probably identify more easily with a group that's being oppressed in the way that the mages have been. I doubt anyone wants another Tevinter Imperium, but I don't approve of the templars' behavior thus far. They certainly have their dark side - lyrium addiction, the willingness to abuse their power, etc. If Meredith hadn't been such a hardliner, maybe the situation in Kirkwall wouldn't have escalated. Also, what Anders said about templars using a mage's personal relationships as another means of control...that seemed pretty low. I do think there are templars who are good people - Trask wanted a middle way for example - but I just can't stomach the Order's policies.

Agree with you totally.

Not sure what the comment about siding with the mages by default means...I don't think any of us can get inside another persons head but the part of your comment where you say that people identify more easily with a group being oppressed would be my guess as to the closest thing he meant. But in truth no matter what side you choose the game ends the same...war between the mages and templars.

I wanted the mages liberated in DAO so DA2 really feels like a game made just for me but personally I think the game was geared towards playing as a mage and being pro-mage. Once I heard that your father was suppossed to be a mage I made my decision right then to be a mage(though in times past I've usually played rogue on most rpg's). It just seeemed like the most natural storyline.

[Aldandil]

In this particular case I felt that the final showdown started with the templar side doing something completely unjustified, and that is coming from someone who thinks the whole Circle business is rather reasonable. Most of the stands you get to take all involve choices that, while being related to the mage/templar conflict, actually aren't really about it.

The first choice in act 3 is whether to agree with Orsino about mages having more freedom. It's not a choice between templars and mages, it's a choice between the level of oppression. The final choice isn't between mages and templars either, it's between helping the templars to kill mages for a crime that an apostate sitting next to us committed, or not. Considering the society we live in, most people will think that punishing people for something they didn't do is wrong, and not take part in it. If you want to call that an informed decision that isn't made by default, I suppose you could. I don't think David Gaider was making that nuance, though.

By the way, I don't think putting mages in the Circle in the first place is a form of punishment, considering that they haven't done anything. It's incarceration, but it's not punishment.